Back to StoriesOn Yellowstone’s Doorstep, Conservationists Want To Buy Out A Gold Mine
____
May 19, 2023
On Yellowstone’s Doorstep, Conservationists Want To Buy Out A Gold MineTo halt 'major tragedy,' Greater Yellowstone Coalition must raise $6.25 million by October
View overlooking the Black Canyon of the Yellowstone River, Blacktail Plateau and Crevice Lake in Yellowstone National Park. This photograph was taken from the edge of the proposed gold mine by the Crevice Mining Group. This is occupied grizzly bear habitat and at the heart of the renown Northern Range elk migration. Photo by William Campbell
by Joseph T. O'Connor
In Park County, just over the northern border of Yellowstone
National Park near Gardiner, Montana, the latest saga in a decades-long dogfight
over proposed hardrock mines at the park’s doorstep involves a rare occurrence:
a nonprofit conservation group wants to buy mineral rights from a mining
company in an attempt to protect the land, waterways and wildlife adjacent to
the park.
Bozeman-based conservation nonprofit Greater Yellowstone
Coalition announced in mid-May it had signed an agreement to secure the mineral
rights, leases and mining plans from Washington State-based Crevice Mining
Group, which has proposed a gold mining operation on more than 1,300 acres of Crevice
Mountain, just north of the park border and the Yellowstone River.
GYC Executive Director Scott Christensen says a gold mine on
Crevice would devastate an area near Yellowstone that carries critical ecological
value.
“The significance of this location can't be understated,”
Christensen said. “It's square in the heart of occupied grizzly bear habitat.
It's right in the middle of the Northern Range elk herd migration corridor,
[and] within the Northern Range bison tolerance zone. It's home to all of the
amazing tapestry of wildlife that exists in Yellowstone and throughout Greater
Yellowstone.”
To close the deal, GYC will need to meet a $6.25 million price
tag by October 1. Christensen says the nonprofit has raised $4 million of the
goal to date, and that while it’s an uphill battle, his group is up to the
task. After all, it’s not the first time GYC has fought for land over gold in
the Treasure State.
For decades, environmental groups and mining companies have gone
toe to toe over proposed mining operations near Yellowstone. In the 1990s, GYC
and allies grappled with Canadian mining company Noranda over an area known as
the New World Mining District, a 25,000-acre parcel containing what Noranda
claimed held more than $500 million in gold, silver and copper some five miles
from Cooke City and the northeast entrance to Yellowstone.
At that time, in 1994, Mike Clark had just started as
executive director of GYC following years of work fighting coal-mining
companies in Appalachia and heading the Washington, D.C.-based Environmental
Policy Institute, the first-ever environmental lobbying firm in the U.S.
Clark worked closely with then-superintendent of Yellowstone
Mike Finley to build public awareness, an effort that prompted President Bill
Clinton to visit the area and in 1996 announce that the federal government
would buy out the New World Mine to prevent the mining of gold. “Yellowstone is
more famous than gold,” Clinton famously declared.
“The significance of this location can't be understated. It's square in the heart of occupied grizzly bear habitat. It's right in the middle of the Northern Range elk herd migration corridor, [and] within the Northern Range bison tolerance zone. It's home to all of the amazing tapestry of wildlife that exists in Yellowstone and throughout Greater Yellowstone.” –Scott Christensen, executive director, Greater Yellowstone Coalition
The effort spearheaded by GYC is largely considered among
the greatest achievements in conservation history. The formidable list of other
groups that came together to fight New World included EarthJustice, the Sierra
Club, Beartooth Alliance, Gallatin Wildlife Association, National Parks
Conservation Association, Northern Plains Resource Council, American Rivers,
Trout Unlimited, Montana Wildlife Federation, Park County Environmental
Council, Wyoming Wildlife Federation, and Wyoming Outdoor Council.
“It was an easy sell to the public,” says Clark, who served GYC
for two terms as its executive director from 1994-2001 and again from 2009-2013.
“People were concerned and frightened and aroused. The biggest challenge was to
convince federal officials that they needed to act on the threat to national
park.”
The land where the New World Mine was proposed was public,
but by paying cash rather than swapping land the federal government was able to
circumvent what’s known as the General Mining Act of 1872, which President
Ulysses S. Grant signed into law just two months after signing legislation declaring
Yellowstone the nation’s first national park.
At the New World site, part of the land was brought into private
ownership through the patenting provision of the 1872 hardrock mining law that
allows prospectors to claim ownership if they could “prove up” on a claim by
developing it. The law is one of the highly contentious—some argue Draconian—provisions
of frontier-era natural resource laws that encouraged human settlement and mineral
development in the West.
A trail camera image of a sow grizzly bear and her two cubs taken during the winter of 2022 on a 14-acre parcel GYC owns on Crevice Mountain adjacent to the proposed mine site. Trail camera photo courtesy William Campbell
In order to develop the mine, the Canadian firm needed land
for access and enough infrastructure to sort ore from tailings, which would
then be stored in a vast and controversial tailings impoundment that
environmental groups and engineers said was vulnerable to failure by flooding
and seismic events. Moreover, concerns were raised about potential acid
drainage further polluting streams that had been contaminated by mining decades
earlier. For the mine to proceed, it needed approval from the U.S. Forest
Service and Montana Department of State Lands, which seemed poised to allow it
to proceed despite worries that it had potentially disastrous consequences for
streams draining into Yellowstone’s Lamar River or the headwaters of the Clark
Fork of the Yellowstone River.
In 2015, GYC was again involved in trying to halt mining proposals
after Crevice and Lucky Minerals each made gold-mining claims north of the Yellowstone
border. A grassroots effort led by GYC, Earthjustice and the Park County
Environmental Council prompted the Obama Administration to protect more than
30,000 acres of federally controlled land adjacent to the park from mining
development for two years. Then, in 2019, the Trump administration signed into
law a bill introduced by Montana Sen. Jon Tester called the Yellowstone Gateway
Protection Act, which shielded the public land from mining development in
perpetuity.
Mining proposals exist in Montana beyond Park County and are
seeing similar controversy. A proposed copper mine along the banks of Sheep
Creek at the headwaters of the Smith River could threaten drinking water and
streamflows on the Smith, the only permitted recreation river in the state and
one that historically suffers from low water levels in mid to late summer. Several
conservation groups sued the Montana
Department of Environmental Quality in 2020 after the DEQ cleared the way for Tintina
Montana, a subsidiary of Australian-based mining company Sandfire Resources, to
build the mine. The groups claim the Black Butte Project would leach sulfuric
acid and produce upwards of 13 million tons of toxic metals.
Michael Werner, co-owner of Crevice Mining Group, claims his mining operation would not negatively affect the water or lands near Yellowstone National Park. I asked him if gold mining is a destructive process to local waters or the land and its ecological value. “Well, it can be, but so are garbage dumps,” he said.
One bill currently in Congress could result in protecting the
Smith and other streams in Montana from mining operations built at river
headwaters. The Montana Headwaters Legacy Act, another of Tester’s bills, would
amend the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act and aims to expand federal protections
to some 377 miles of waterways across the state. The bill is an example of new
legislation that could undercut portions of laws like the General Mining Act of
1872 that are currently under fire from groups trying to protect public lands
and water in Montana.
Today’s Crevice proposal still operates under the 1872 mining
law since the land in question is privately owned, requiring a private buyout
and prompting GYC’s $6.25-million fundraising effort.
“The mining laws in our country are so antiquated and tilted
toward the mining industry and the development of minerals that it's almost
impossible to successfully challenge mining proposals so this is rare,” said
Christensen. “We're hopefully at a point of closing the final chapter on mining
near the boundary of Yellowstone.”
Aerial image of the southern portion of the proposed Crevice mine site (open meadows in the middle of the image). The northern boundary of the Yellowstone National Park runs across the middle of the photograph before the hill drops steeply into the Black Canyon of the Yellowstone River. Photo by William Campbell
Michael Werner, co-owner of Crevice Mining Group, first
obtained the mineral leases on Crevice Mountain in 2011. His proposal for a
gold mine, which would operate for eight years should GYC not raise the
necessary funding to buy him out, would pull some 300 tonnes of material from
the ground per day equating to 121 ounces of concentrated gold. Werner
estimates that the gold from Crevice is worth $1,900 per ounce. Using these
calculations, Werner’s group would stand to make approximately $82 million in
gross revenue per year before operating expenses.
“The margins on Crevice are large,” said Werner, an engineer
who was chief operating officer for TVX Gold, the mining group that operated
the Mineral Hill Mine in Jardine in the 1990s. “Crevice was once described as
the largest gold deposit mine not developed in Montana. I think it’s fair to
say that Crevice would just make a lot of money.”
But at 65 years old, Werner says he’s willing to take the
buyout option should GYC raise the funds. “I'm getting old enough that I really
don't want to go up and live on Crevice and make it work,” he said. “That does
not mean I'm not going to do that. That means if they can come up with the
money to make this 10 years worth something to me, then I'm willing to walk
away. They're motivated, I'm motivated, so if it works, it works. If it doesn't,
then I get on a plane and go make some money.”
Werner claims his mining operation would not negatively
affect the water or lands near Yellowstone National Park. I asked him if gold
mining is a destructive process to local waters or the land and its ecological
value.
“Well, it can be, but so are garbage dumps,” he said. “You
put garbage in landfills. Go out west of Bozeman you got a great big landfill
out there.”
Clark, the former head of GYC, doesn’t see these as comparable
arguments. “Gold mining inherently is an environmentally destructive process
that always destroys water and water resources. The Crevice plan is adjacent to
the park and would be a major tragedy if it went ahead. If it were to go in it
would be a disaster.”
The federal government under the 1872 mining law has little
say in the legality of mining on private land outside Yellowstone, however the
U.S. Government Accountability Office, the independent and nonpartisan agency that
informs Congress on best practices in government, says that while mining is important
to the economy, it also “disturbs the land and creates the
potential for serious public health, safety, and environmental hazards.”
Yellowstone National Park Superintendent Cam Sholly points
to the history of mining near the park boundary and says the past should inform
the present.
“Mining outside of the park, north of Yellowstone a century ago left a
legacy of toxic waste severely contaminating the Soda Butte Creek, making it
the most polluted stream entering Yellowstone National Park,” Sholly said in a
statement. “The impacts from this mine [Crevice] have the potential to
contaminate the surface and groundwater that feeds directly into the
Yellowstone River thereby displacing wildlife in the park and negatively
affecting the visitor experience.”
____
EDITOR’S NOTE: Read more here about the Greater Yellowstone Coalition and former
executive Director Mike Clark’s efforts to head off the New World Mine.