Site search
sponsored by
News
Sports
The Colorado Supreme Court Monday essentially overturned Summit County’s ban on cyanide “heap-leach” mining, ruling that the state has a “dominant interest” in ensuring orderly regulation of mining activities.
Summit County adopted the regulations in 2004. The case was widely watched around the state as precedent-setting. Several other counties adopted similar regulations.
Joined by environmental groups, Summit County had argued that the practice of drizzling a diluted cyanide solution over piles of low-grade ore posed a serious threat to water quality.
The worst-case scenario unfolded in the early 1990s, when cyanide draining from the Summitville mine in southern Colorado poisoned 17 miles of the Alamosa River. According to estimates by University of Colorado researchers, Summitville cleanup costs already had exceeded $165 million several years ago.
The county commissioners and county attorney Jeff Huntley said all along their goal was to prevent a similar disaster in Summit County.
Huntley said the Supreme Court ruling did leave the door open for some adjustments to county regulations that could still protect local waters from threats, while stopping short of an outright ban.
County planners may soon begin working on tweaking local land-use codes to establish a permitting process that would closely regulate cyanide heap-leach mining.
The Colorado Mining Association fought the ban through several court levels and won its first appeal in Summit County District Court. A subsequent Colorado Court of Appeals decision reinstated the local ban, leading to the Colorado Supreme Court.
Mining association president Stuart Sanderson said the likelihood of another Summitville is minimal, considering advances in mining technology. Since then, Colorado’s statewide mining regulations have been revamped to protect against similar accidents.
Sanderson said Monday’s Supreme Court decision was consistent with the industry’s position that an outright ban is not consistent with the Colorado Mined Land Reclamation Act.
The association expressed concern that the Summit County regulations could set a precedent for a “patchwork” of rules that would make it tough for the mining industry to do business across the state.
Attorney Jeff Parsons, who represented environmental groups arguing alongside the county, said he was disappointed by the decision.
“The court said the ban across all mining districts (in the county) went too far,” Parsons said.
But a careful reading of the opinions suggests that the court did acknowledge that local governments have “considerable authority” to protect themselves from the environmental risks associated with cyanide-based mining, he said.
Incoming Summit County Commissioner Karn Stiegelmeier said she is concerned that simply adjusting local regulations might not be enough, considering the economic clout wielded by the mining industry.
“It’s a billion-dollar industry. They have enough money to fight local regulations,” she said, advocating for the strongest protection possible.
Parsons said the decision could spur a statewide ballot initiative to ban cyanide mining. A similar ban was twice approved by voters in Montana.
The state Legislature might also take another look at the issue, Parsons added.
Stiegelmeier said a statewide solution might be the best route, given the industry’s ability to lobby and to fight legal battles against local regulations.
Bob Berwyn can be reached at (970) 331-5996, or at bberwyn@summitdaily.com.
Summit County adopted the regulations in 2004. The case was widely watched around the state as precedent-setting. Several other counties adopted similar regulations.
Joined by environmental groups, Summit County had argued that the practice of drizzling a diluted cyanide solution over piles of low-grade ore posed a serious threat to water quality.
The worst-case scenario unfolded in the early 1990s, when cyanide draining from the Summitville mine in southern Colorado poisoned 17 miles of the Alamosa River. According to estimates by University of Colorado researchers, Summitville cleanup costs already had exceeded $165 million several years ago.
The county commissioners and county attorney Jeff Huntley said all along their goal was to prevent a similar disaster in Summit County.
Huntley said the Supreme Court ruling did leave the door open for some adjustments to county regulations that could still protect local waters from threats, while stopping short of an outright ban.
County planners may soon begin working on tweaking local land-use codes to establish a permitting process that would closely regulate cyanide heap-leach mining.
The Colorado Mining Association fought the ban through several court levels and won its first appeal in Summit County District Court. A subsequent Colorado Court of Appeals decision reinstated the local ban, leading to the Colorado Supreme Court.
Mining association president Stuart Sanderson said the likelihood of another Summitville is minimal, considering advances in mining technology. Since then, Colorado’s statewide mining regulations have been revamped to protect against similar accidents.
Sanderson said Monday’s Supreme Court decision was consistent with the industry’s position that an outright ban is not consistent with the Colorado Mined Land Reclamation Act.
The association expressed concern that the Summit County regulations could set a precedent for a “patchwork” of rules that would make it tough for the mining industry to do business across the state.
Attorney Jeff Parsons, who represented environmental groups arguing alongside the county, said he was disappointed by the decision.
“The court said the ban across all mining districts (in the county) went too far,” Parsons said.
But a careful reading of the opinions suggests that the court did acknowledge that local governments have “considerable authority” to protect themselves from the environmental risks associated with cyanide-based mining, he said.
Incoming Summit County Commissioner Karn Stiegelmeier said she is concerned that simply adjusting local regulations might not be enough, considering the economic clout wielded by the mining industry.
“It’s a billion-dollar industry. They have enough money to fight local regulations,” she said, advocating for the strongest protection possible.
Parsons said the decision could spur a statewide ballot initiative to ban cyanide mining. A similar ban was twice approved by voters in Montana.
The state Legislature might also take another look at the issue, Parsons added.
Stiegelmeier said a statewide solution might be the best route, given the industry’s ability to lobby and to fight legal battles against local regulations.
Bob Berwyn can be reached at (970) 331-5996, or at bberwyn@summitdaily.com.
