click for larger image
By Ken Smith
Turnagain Times
|
click for larger image |
A 30-day public comment period ended Jan. 10 for a planned placer mining operation on Resurrection Creek in Hope. The operation would include three areas along the creek encompassing approximately 24 acres on U.S. Forest Land. The mining operation areas are designated as Areas 5A, 19 and 20A.
The project area is located on the west side of Resurrection Creek Road at approximately milepost three. Access to the mining claims would be from Resurrection Creek Road and from the existing roads within the mining claims.
The mining project is also located in the same area of the second phase of a proposed creek restoration project. Phase I of the creek restoration began in 2005 and was completed at the end of June 2006.
The Forest Service is working with Hope Mining Company to restore three miles of the Creek. The company would like to begin mining the three areas this summer before the planned Phase II restoration work gets underway.
The restoration could not be completed without the cooperation of Hope Mining Company, said Brian Bair, Fisheries Biologist for the U.S. Forest Service.
“We’re working to coordinate what areas they (Hope Mining Company) intends to mine in the future,” Bair said, “and we’re trying to structure a restoration corridor through their claims. By law, you’re not allowed to impede their ability to mine. I was surprised they were willing to entertain our doing restoration through there. This is unusual because it’s an active mining claim. But we have a long way to go.”
The first phase of restoration was completed three-quarters of a mile above Hope Mining Company claims, south of the foot bridge that crosses over the creek to the Resurrection Trailhead. One mile of the creek was restored, an effort to return the creek to it’s natural state before mining began on the creek in the late 1800’s. The creek has been heavily mined since that time into the early 1900’s when the first gold rush in the state took place. During that time Hope and Sunrise reached a population of about 3,000 residents, mainly to mine Resurrection Creek for its gold and silver.
“We were basically starting from scratch,” said Bair. “They used hydraulic mining back then and left the creek virtually a ditch. What we did is try to reconstruct the creek close to its original condition and rehabilitate the original channel patterns. By reconstructing the meander, curves and bumps, you’re able to rebuild the pools and side channels, which are especially critical for coho and chinook salmon.”
By all accounts, the response of the creek’s fishery to newly created habitats has been a success. Since the restoration project was completed, biologists have observed more spawning salmon, and all five species of salmon were observed spawning in newly created habitats.
In July through August 2005, chinook were counted in the range of 100 spawning adults, and pink salmon had over 2,000 spawners. In September though October of 2006 about 200 chinook were counted spawning and about 4,000 pinks—coho numbers are likely higher but exact counts were not taken of silvers which are more difficult to count because they spawn in late fall. (Note: Fishing for silvers and pinks are allowed in Resurrection Creek, but it’s illegal to fish for kings.)
With the excitement generated from the first restoration project, which cost $900,000, biologists are eager to begin the second phase, which would cost about $2 million and begin three quarter miles downstream from phase I and include two river miles.
“Restoring the creek is not only for the fish, but the bears and other creatures that rely on the creek,” Bair said. “It’s a way of repaying an old debt.”
However, Bair stated that the Forest Service will not embark upon another restoration project if it’s going to be torn up afterwards by mining activity.
And that is where the present situation leaves both Hope Mining Company and the Forest Service. It also pits conservationists and some concerned citizens in the area against the mining plan.
Hope resident Shawn DeFord has been a vocal critic of the mining activity on the creek. DeFord lives on the creek near the area to be mined, and his greatest concern is the impact to the environment. He objects to the heavy equipment that will be used in the placer mining process, which would include a D-8 or D-9 dozer, excavator, and pickups and ATV’s.
DeFord said such heavy equipment is too destructive to the environment and the creek.
“My biggest concern is the long-term impacts,” DeFord said. “We’re spending millions of dollars to restore the creek and then allowing mining of National Forest Land. The Forest Service has to decide if they’re going to restore it or allow mining.”
However, Al Johnson, President of Hope Mining Company, maintains that mining has a long history at Resurrection Creek. The first claim staked by the company’s founder was in 1895 in area 19, he said. Johnson bought the company in 1973 and has been mining the area since that time. Currently the company has 77 claims in Hope and surrounding areas.
“It’s not like it’s a new thing, we’ve been around here since 1910,” he said.
The mining law of 1872 allows for mining subsurface material and is the governing document for mining claims and activity, although it has been revised many times since that time, Johnson said. He also said the company is under close scrutiny by the Forest Service.
The Forest Service review is specific to all surface activities such as machinery used and structures like campsites, mobile homes or trailers, which will be used to house mine personnel. The mining activity must also take place 20 feet from the creek.
“It’s not a quick deal,” Johnson said. “Some operating plans took 10 years.”
Johnson also said the company is concerned about the environment and the salmon.
“We have to provide buffers and settling ponds,” he said. “We can’t mine if it’s going to be environmentally hazardous.” He added that “this isn’t virgin area, it’s all been heavily mined before.”
Johnson said placer mining is also less destructive to the environment compared to gold embedded in rock.
“Placer is gold in a free state,” he said, “which means it’s not necessary to crush the rock to get the mineral.”
This is not the first mining claim by Hope Mining Company, and it will certainly not be the last. Johnson said gold could be mined for decades in the area.
“It’s a big area,” he said. “The life of the mine has quite a few years in reserves and there’s decades of mining gold left.”
The mining law of 1872 pretty much guarantees that miners are allowed access to their claims and when it’s on National Forest Land, the role of the Forest Service is to review the plan and make sure all environmental impacts are addressed in a public process before mining begins. It’s then a matter of managing the surface activities while mining is underway.
“We do own the claims, but we don’t own the land,” Johnson said. “The mining claims give us the rights to mine that mineral; the subsurface rights.”
Karen Kromrey is the Acting District Ranger for the Seward Ranger District. She said that miners generally have the right to access their claims and that the responsibility of the Forest Service is to determine the appropriate surface camp.
“Miners have the right to reasonable access for mining purposes,” she said.
To date the review process involving Hope Mining Company’s supplemental mining plan for the three areas on Resurrection Creek has taken one year, said Kromrey. She expects a decision in mid-February.
That decision will likely clear the way for Hope Mining Company to begin mining in the proposed Phase II restoration area. When it’s mining activities are completed, the Forest Service can begin the restoration project. But that still awaits a draft Environmental Impact Statement expected to be completed at the end of the summer.
But for some people sentiments echoed by DeFord still is the pressing issue: Should mining be allowed in recreational and critical fish habitat areas like Resurrection Creek.
“We really need to decide what’s more important,” said Valerie Connor, Forest Conservation Director at Alaska Center for the Environment. “Are we going to restore it or mine it. It’s just a question to ask, ‘What do people value more?’ We either mine for gold or we protect the fishery and habitat. Because the two are not compatible.”