COLORADO STILL OPEN FOR MINERAL DEVELOPMENT

MINING PROHIBITIONS FAIL TO GAIN STATEWIDE SUPPORT

 

By Stuart A. Sanderson

President

Colorado Mining Association

 

Colorado has joined Montana as a battleground state for legislative and regulatory efforts to ban modern gold mining. Montana voters will reconsider the approval of a measure to ban modern gold mining in this November's election, while the Colorado Mining Association (CMA), thanks to the support of MMSA and its members, presses forward with litigation challenging mining prohibitions in Summit County.

 

And that county virtually stands alone in its ill-advised effort to ban mineral development. Colorado legislators and nearly all of Colorado's 64 counties have refused to adopt any prohibitions on modern gold mining. Colorado has a stable state regulatory program, a strong industry association, and an active, diverse mining industry. Perceptions linger, nonetheless, about Colorado's investment potential, as recorded by the Fraser Report's most recent survey of mining executives in the metals industry. Because these perceptions are based, at least in part, on state and county initiatives to prohibit modern gold mining, it is important to outline the success of the Colorado mining industry in preventing their enactment.

 

Buoyed by voter approval in Montana in 1998 of a measure to ban modern gold mining, anti-mining special interests launched their next salvo in Colorado with an identical proposed ballot initiative in late 1999. The CMA and its members formed a coalition, challenged the measure in court, succeeded in removing much of the misleading language, and sent the proponents back to the drawing board to correct the errors. Ultimately, the initiative campaign ran out of steam and the measure failed to reach the ballot.

 

In 2002, anti-mining forces unsuccessfully sought to introduce the same measure in the Colorado General Assembly. CMA and its member companies worked continuously to persuade legislators not to allow such a measure to see the light of day. We wrote letters to more than 100 legislators and other public officials and responded to numerous media inquiries in an effort to educate the public about the implications of imposing a preemptive ban on mining or any other lawful business. No bill was introduced.

 

In 2003, the Senate considered, and quickly killed in committee, a measure to ban modern gold mining. The mining industry turned out en masse to oppose the bill. The strong turnout also demonstrated to the members of the Senate committee the strength of the state's mining industry, whose sales exceeded $1.2 billion in 2003. According to the National Mining Association's study of the industry, Colorado's mining industry has a total positive economic impact of more than $7 billion.

 

The industry also enjoys support from its elected and appointed leaders in the Executive Branch. Colorado's Attorney General (and now Senate candidate) Ken Salazar announced his opposition to a statewide ban on gold mining at the CMA's 106^th National Western Mining Conference this past February. Russell George, Executive Director of the Colorado Department of Natural Resources, rejected any concept that government should dictate or prescribe technologies employed by mining operators. In remarks to CMA's 106^th National Western Mining Conference, George stated the following:

 

"Colorado has a strong and fair state regulatory program for mining that is administered by experienced professionals... For mining; this is done in a performance rather than prescriptive manner by the Division of Minerals and Geology. Therefore, the state statutes and corresponding rules and regulations guide performance on the ground, rather than dictating the method to achieve those standards."

 

Given the industry's success in continuously defeating all statewide anti-mining measures over the past five years, it is somewhat surprising that Colorado does not rate higher in investment potential. The state's diverse mining industry includes substantial, even record level, production of coal, metals, industrial and construction minerals. Colorado has a strong infrastructure to support mineral development, due to the strong history of mining in the state.

 

Some within the mining industry have expressed concern about the few Colorado counties, four out of 64 to be exact, which have banned modern gold mining. Many of these counties do not have any gold production and have simply allowed themselves to be swept up in what has been, to date, a failed political agenda to stop mineral development in Colorado. It is true that the industry faces well funded opposition, but the fact that these groups are pursuing initiatives at the county level attests to their complete failure to gain any statewide support.

 

The industry should be concerned about these anti-mining initiatives. We know that their goal is to try to enlist the support of the counties in an effort to build credibility for another statewide anti-mining campaign. In fact, the CMA has been working with the counties since early 2001 in an effort to educate commissioners and citizens about mining and its concern for the environment. We have corresponded with each of the nearly 200 county commissioners statewide, encouraging them to contact us if they are approached by activists bearing petitions for a ban on modern mining. We have met with many commissioners and have appeared before county governments and numerous groups in Colorado. As a result, the Associated Governments of Northwest Colorado, Club 20, Colorado Counties, Inc., and other county organizations have adopted resolutions supporting CMA's position or opposed legislation that would impose a preemptive ban on mineral development.

 

In February, the Summit County Board of Commissioners adopted a prohibition on modern mining practices using cyanide and other chemical reagents. The Commissioners did so notwithstanding the recommendations of their own Planning Commission, which had voted in November, 2003 not to recommend such a ban. CMA has filed suit challenging the Commissioners' unlawful actions as violating state law, which specifically authorizes the use of chemical reagents in mining and preempts county land use restrictions to the contrary. Our challenge is a narrow one; we do not challenge county land use authority in general over local impacts such as noise and traffic. This is entirely consistent with our cooperative, good neighbor approach to local land use regulation.

 

No county, to the best of my knowledge, has attempted to impose such a prohibition on mining since the filing of the lawsuit last February. We expect a decision later this year, after the court sorts through various procedural matters, including a motion by the Sierra Club and others to intervene in the case, which CMA strongly opposes. CMA specifically thanks the MMSA for its very generous contribution to support this litigation effort, which will help clarify the law and the limits of state and county authority to set standards for mining.

 

Colorado remains open for business and that includes mining. The state's coal and gold industry achieved production records last year; mineral commodity prices are up; and we are looking forward to a good year. CMA will host sessions devoted to the battle over mining prohibitions at the 107^th National Western Mining Conference & Exhibition, to be held February 2-4, 2005 at the Hyatt Regency Denver (see our web site for further details www.coloradomining.org). Key state officials will make presentations about the effectiveness of the state program and Colorado's support for responsible mineral resource development. Hopefully, by next year, we will have good news to report in both Colorado and Montana.