Managing resource conflicts in a gold mining paradise

The public lands in the West offer a gold mining paradise. Nevada, in particular, is experiencing a mining environment that never existed before in the United States. It is a place where you can develop a mine to production within one to three years’ time; a place where there is gold in abundant quantities in places never expected before in a state that is economically attractive and where the attitudes toward mining are friendly, and where there are open lands for exploration and development. This means public lands that have existing uses on them now have accelerated mining activity occurring.

Americans have become more and more aware of their public lands. Once almost forgotten by the public, they steadily have become the focus of ever-increasing awareness.

Things have been changing. Recreational use of the lands is increasing and becoming a year- round activity. Forgotten roads are being used by off-highway vehicles. Backpacking and camping have become family adventures across the West. By the mid-1970s that interest translated into a new law, the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (FLPMA). The American people mandated an inventory of their lands and more intensive management.

FLPMA was not an easy law for the West to absorb. The Federal Bureau of Land Management underwent some growing pains in making the adjustment. For many years few had been interested in what we did in managing the public lands. Suddenly a great many people had very strong feelings about land management — the multiple users of the public lands of the U.S. They had reached a tenuous state of equilibrium when the economics of the mining industry made the gold in the public lands attractive.

Then, there was a new player on the public lands. The major gold mining industry arrived. With it came people, jobs, families, the need for homes and schools and utilities and more. Counties and cities struggled to evaluate and keep up with the pace of mining activities.

Meanwhile, there was another new element to the modern gold rush. Mining always had meant portals and shafts, dumps and millsites. These were the familiar trappings of ghost towns. But the new gold rush involved mines that individually spread over thousands of acres. Development had not been without its problems within the industry, of course. Some of the multiple use issues that have developed have drawn widespread interest.

The issues and conflicts continue. Elimination of deer wintering areas, destruction of past land development and range improvements, concerns about threatened or endangered species, issues over public access to different areas — these are just a few of the continuing issues we face. The list goes on. There are longer-range issues such as how the local economy will handle the inevitable “bust” and what assurances there are that reclamation will occur. Let me assure you that the intensity of development that mining companies are conducting is paralleled by an intensity of concerns on the part of other users of the land and those affected by the activity.

There is also the broader question of the cumulative effects of numerous mining operations starting up in a protracted area.

There are problems and there are solutions. These solutions are relatively straight-forward and logical. There is a balance that can be achieved to let everybody win.

Through early up-front co-ordination with interested publics and with federal and state land managers, mining can become a leader in the multiple use partner concept. The initiative must lie first with the industry, and must address environmental concerns, not alone, but as a multiple use partner.

In addition to the up-front efforts to alleviate impacts, there is a lingering concern: What will be left when the mining concludes? Remnants from earlier mining periods occupy small areas of the landscape. The public has a valid concern when it asks if today’s miners also will walk away, but this time leaving thousands of acres disturbed.

Industry and government must work together to achieve timely and reasonably sound reclamation, and to avoid environmental degradation. Concurrent reclamation is one alternative. A concurrent effort will demonstrate industry’s environmental awareness and will reassure a nervous public that reclamation indeed can be accomplished. Today we see an industry in developme nt. The public can accept that. But soon the public will need to see an industry in its maturity, restoring lands in a reasonable manner to productivity for those who will remain when the mining industry’s work is done. Studies and research projects alone will not do the job.

As a partner, the mining industry must remain conscious of the other multiple use partners’ objectives and needs. This includes federal, state and private interest and mandates, including laws, litigation and so forth.

Industry must monitor and continue to evaluate progress of the plan of operations, the related objectives of its multiple use partners and the over-all changing times that affect the industry and others. Education is most important to everyone involved, and it can result in a better understanding all the way around.

Industry must never lose sight of the on-the-ground impacts — in short, it must be a good neighbor.

Working with the local communities and exerting maximum effort to support the social and environmental concerns, as well as economic interests, the mine can become a reality in a comfortable environment. There is a spirit of co-operation and co-ordination developing that will continue to facilitate this effort.003 Edward F. Spang is Nevada State Director of the Bureau of Land Management, Department of the Interior in Reno.

]]>