DEADWOOD — Lawrence County Commissioners unanimously rejected issuing a conditional use permit for a proposed gold mine near the rim of Spearfish Canyon.
Tuesday, during a two-hour public hearing and a subsequent hour-long discussion, the public and mine officials discussed the proposal for a large-scale mineral mining conditional use permit
The request for the permit was made by VMC, LLC; G & L Properties now known as Limestone, LLC and the Ayes Family Trust, Atlas Development (Paul Bradsky), Nancy Bradsky, Keith Smith, and the Louise Chafee Revocable Trust.
Mark Nelson of VMC, LLC addressed the commission regarding the request, describing the proposed operation as a shallow quarry operation with no on-site mineral processing and reclamation that would maintain the natural character of the area.
“We’re talking about 14 small pits, ranging in size from half an acre to 5.2 acres,” Nelson said, later adding, “We are requesting that you authorize mining up there exactly as approved in (State) Permit #416.”
Following staff recommendation, commissioners cited the reason for denial as several significant questions remaining unanswered and were uncomfortable with the lack of detail displayed in the permit application.
“Generally, with regard to important specifics, the application is vague and indefinite,” wrote Planning and Zoning Administrator Amber Vogt in her staff recommendation. “Therefore, it is not clear exactly what the county is being asked to approve.”
Vogt’s report calls attention to three main areas of concern: access to development which would involve permission from the adjacent landowner, Coeur/Wharf, to cross their property for mining purposes and operations; the application submitted did not identify the means and location of ore processing nor the type and size of haul truck or haul route leaving the property, making it impossible to predict the impact; and applicant failing to provide a copy of a valid state permit for the operation proposed in the application.
“Information from the DENR (Department of Environmental and Natural Resources) is that the applicant does not have a valid state permit for the proposed operation,” Vogt wrote. “Similar to the county, it is understood that the DENR is lacking information related to a haul road within the proposed site.”
Commissioner Randy Deibert made the motion to deny the CUP, seconded by Commissioner Richard Sleep.
Prior to making his motion, Deibert pointed out several areas of concern including the outstanding DENR road issue, whether or not there would be onsite crushing and if so, the county’s requirement of a dust plan, overburden storage and removal and an accurate assessment of how long reclamation would take.
“It’s real hard to approve anything when you have outstanding issues,” Deibert said.
Sleep asked where the ore would be hauled.
Nelson said there isn’t a specific location right now.
“That’s an issue we would love to tackle, but we’re going to tackle it after we know whether or not we can mine up on that plateau,” Nelson.
When Deibert raised concerns with the proximity of proposed pits to the rim of Spearfish Canyon, Commissioner Daryl Johnson pointed out that when State Permit #416 was originally approved for Homestake, the company owned everything below it in the Canyon.
“So the concerns then aren’t what they are in today’s climate,” Johnson said. “There’s a difference there.”
Commissioner Brandon Flanagan said normally when the county receives CUPs, they contain a lot of detail.
“And they’re supposed to,” he said. “This one is just ‘permit what we got and we’ll figure out the rest as we go.’ I’ve got a problem with that … I think Commissioner Johnson said it perfectly. When Homestake owned the majority of private ground in the Canyon, that 80s permit was granted on a different set of conditions, a paradigm shift.”
Johnson said that the commission has approved a number of similar operations across the county.
“And I’m not sure if any one of them would’ve been at this location, that we would’ve passed it,” he said. “I think some of the same concerns would have been there.”
Deibert, Johnson, Sleep, and Flanagan all voiced their support for mining in general.
“But all those things being said, I don’t find enough detail in the conditional use permit as it was submitted to support this plan,” Deibert said.
The commission decision followed a two-hour public hearing attended by more than 40 people in person at the Lodge and nearly 50 online.
Four people spoke in favor of the mine. Joyce Nelson of Nemo presented the commission with a petition supporting the proposed mine, signed by 60 people.
“I think it’s just a very small mining operation, and I don’t see any reason why you should be objecting to this,” said Michael Olah.
“What I’m seeing is a well-thought-out, well-planned operation by local people … that will bring living wage jobs to the Black Hills,” said Randy Larson of Lead. “The area of reclamation has been well thought-out. I just don’t see why, with the history of mining, that you would have a problem with this small-scale of an operation.”
Terry Tyler of Lead said he has visited the project area and believes it could be developed responsibly.
“New mining methods, I think, address all the concerns,” he said.
Comments against the project were then taken from the 50 or so people attending the public hearing online, as well as around 10 in-person statements.
Concerns with a permit violation by VMC, LLC for drilling 800 feet deep test holes when the company was only permitted to drill down 100 feet, the sacredness of the Black Hills to the Lakota, potential abandonment of the site without reclamation being completed, and destruction of the pristine Spearfish Canyon were all common themes cited by opponents.
“I find it interesting that they want to keep harboring the idea that it’s a shallow dig,” said Margot Peters. “Then why did they need to drill 800 feet for gold that was worth the risk knowing you were violating the conditions of your permit? … You also spoke about trust. If that wasn’t in the agreement, I wonder why trust was an issue … this is the choice facing our commissioners today. Is it worth the risk to invest in a company that has already demonstrated a lack of ethics, if you will, versus the importance of Spearfish Canynon?”
Peters said VMC principals continue to say they will be 500-800 feet from the rim of Spearfish Canyon.
“Understand that this is about a half of a city block,” she said. “It is on the edge of the Canyon.”
Pat Simpson spoke on behalf of the Spearfish Canyon Owner’s Association (SCOA), citing water contamination of Spearfish Creek, the quantity and quality of the ore, the processing site, blasting, violations, and potential expansion as concerns of the Association.
“SCOA’s position is not to oppose new mining. We just want to see that it’s done while protecting Spearfish Canyon and Spearfish Creek,” she said.
Justin Stevens, owner of Spearfish Creek Fly Fishing Shop and Guide Service and High Mountain Outfitters said Spearfish Canyon has recently become a world-wide known place for blue ribbon stream trout fishing, rock climbing, camping, hiking, and biking.
“Tens of thousands of people come through Spearfish Canyon every year, and we hear comments all the time from people who go to Terry Peak and see the Wharf Mine and say, “Why are they letting them do this to the Black Hills?” he said. “There is an enormous influx of recreational people coming to the Black Hills and the economic development from that is massive.”
To read all of today’s stories, Click here or call 642-2761 to subscribe to our e-edition or home delivery.
Credit: Source link
