AUGUSTA, Maine — A proposed bill in the Legislature to change the state’s mining laws generated significant public comment Friday, with support for the legislation mainly coming from Aroostook County business and economic development leaders and residents.
Members of the Legislature’s Environment and Natural Resources Committee spent close to five hours hearing testimony on LD 1853, An Act To Improve Environmental Oversight and Streamline Permitting for Mining in Maine. The hearing brought out a good mix of proponents and opponents.
Rep. John Martin, D-Eagle Lake, submitted the bill in early March, saying he was prompted to introduce it because of the increasing price of minerals and the potential for mining gold, silver, copper and zinc on Bald Mountain in Aroostook County.
Bald Mountain is located northwest of Ashland and Portage. J.D. Irving owns the land with Prentiss & Carlisle.
Under the bill the state Department of Environmental Protection would be in charge of permitting and regulating such operations.
Martin said that reports indicate that mining development at Bald Mountain could create up to 300 direct, well-paying jobs and hundreds of indirect jobs. There also would be an excise tax on the minerals there, so the result would be more than $600 million in employment income and more than $120 million in state and local taxes, he said.
Patricia Aho, commissioner of the state Department of Environmental Protection, said her agency supported the bill and would be proposing a metallic mining fund using existing money to hire experts for the rulemaking process. The required rulemaking by the DEP likely would not begin until at least January 2014.
Town officials from County communities such as Ashland, Portage and Caribou testified in support of the bill as long as it was environmentally sound because it would lead to job creation. Rep. Ken Theriault, D-Madawaska, did the same.
Some people, however, said they didn’t believe the 300 jobs figure and pointed out instances where such jobs were promised in other states but did not materialize. They also thought that the bill was moving through the Legislature too quickly.
Rep. Ralph Chapman, D-Brooksville, was opposed to the bill. He said that his district includes the location of the Kerramerican Mine in Blue Hill and the Callahan Mine in Brooksville. Minerals such as zinc and copper were mined in each. He said that surface water was contaminated at Kerramerican and that $10 million was spent to install a geosynthetic cover system and initiate a five-year monitoring program that is under way.
Chapman added that the Callahan Mine is an Environmental Protection Agency Superfund cleanup site. The total cleanup cost is estimated to be $23 million. He acknowledged that times have changed and that the mining operations in his district would not be allowed under today’s regulations. Chapman told the committee that he did not believe that mine operators at the time intended to contaminate the groundwater, contaminate the surface waters or render the areas unacceptable for recreation or residential use, but they did.
“Forty years from now, how will the situation be any different?” he asked. “Why do we think that the rules we put in place today will be adequate for the needs of society 40 years from now?”
Environmental and conservation groups maintained their stance that lakes, streams and groundwater could be poisoned near Bald Mountain if there is not adequate public scrutiny or debate.
Tom Abello, senior policy adviser for The Nature Conservancy in Maine, said that his organization was opposed to the bill. He said the science-based international nonprofit organization dedicated to conservation of lands and waters would support mining in appropriate places and if the right processes are taken to ensure effective permitting with the right safeguards. The group suggested a number of amendments around water quality and inspection and maintenance.
Several speakers said that they did not want to leave their children or grandchildren another superfund site to cleanup.
Representatives from J.D Irving were in The County last week educating residents about the bill. They said that the company is committed to pursuing the project and could strike a balance between completing the project and keeping the environment pristine.
The committee, which has been gathering information and testimony on the bill for about two weeks, will begin weighing a decision on Monday.
Quit saying the County supports this. Not all County residents do. This will only benefit Mr. Martin and Irving. Anyone whom says differently is in their pockets. Once again our politicians fleece the public because they know best. Bull doo doo!
What about the people that get jobs? they won’t benefit? Someone usually gets rich off business adventures. deal with it.
We have all benefited from the economic improvements in the standard of living we inherited, but that isn’t the justification for personal ambition and success. A belief that only a few might benefit from something is not a justification for opposing and snarling at it with resentment and envy.
Wanna buy a bridge?
Why the lack of mentioning the indebtedness by John Martin to Irving of $250,000? He was prompted to introduce the bill, that is for sure. Yellow journalism by the BDN.
Short term gain for long term problems — ask the folks down in the Blue Hill area about toxic mining waste, decades after the mines closed.
Hence the word “decades”. Did you not read about the new regulations?
If John Martin is for it, I probably ain’t.
Being wary over something one doesn’t know much about which Martin favors, based on his reputation, is understandable, but opposing everything that someone says because of who he is would be just as dependent on him as following him blindly.
The viros also have a reputation: for opposing all industry that is practical on principle, especially natural resources like logging and mining. Their opposition has no credibility. They are more predictably wrong than Martin because of their misanthropic preservationism opposed to economic prosperity for humans on principle. Daring to dig in the earth is to them worse than leaving “footprints”.
I have a long history of being opposed to what he tells us.
Well that’s ok……..but let’s reflect on how many jobs bills the republican controlled legislature and the governor have implimented?, that would be ….none.
Be careful of anything that is done, once they’ve begun it can’t be undone, and you have to live with any of the consequences of the choice made.
We also have to live with the progressively increasing social controls imposed by viros out to control and restrict everything around them. The destruction they have caused is irreversible for those already hurt by it, and practically impossible to politically reverse in the foreseeable future.
Be careful what you wish for— None of these “GOOD PAYING JOBS” until 2020 when this thing gets in gear, and least we forget that mining get a lot of toxic by products! I think that my water in my state is still my concern. Show me that if you get it ditry you will clean it up—and not just a promise to do that, back your promises with collateral (put that money in a bank where the clean-up fund is the only ones that can get to it)!!!!
Yah right that’s going to happen and the mining company will stick to the agreement? Noone has even mentioned the longterm health issues of the the 300 job seekers who work in that toxic environment and die from them.
As a former student of geology and one who was engaged in mineral exploration in
Northern Maine in 1960, I invite you to visit the site of a former mine. If you
wish to devastate an area, mining is the way to go. The best mine in the world
provides only temporary employment with an economic disaster following the
closing of a mine. Doubt what I say? Then take a ride to Butte, Montana or Ahu,
Arizona. You’ll likely not want to believe your eyes. PS: Beware of John “Ballotgate” Martin.
http://forkartjunkie.hubpages.com/hub/How-Does-Mining-Affect-The-Environment
we really need to think about what will happen as the result of the Bald Mountain Project and at what cost to environment and landscape as the result of the destruction.
….
I find it amazing how much John Martin looks like Raymond Teller of the Las Vegas act Penn and Teller. To bad he doesn’t act like him.
From a miner I learned that even at today’s prices a mine needs to assay at at least 4% and according to him Bald Mtn (which has been explored before) assays at 1%. If those figures are accurate it would be suggest the project is not as described. The only way to make money at low assay rates is to do mass production aka mountaintop removal.
What’s in it for John