Poison in Salmon Country

www.times.org
©2000 Cascadia Times

Poison in Salmon Country

Page 1, 2

Who let this happen?

Historically throughout the West, mines have been major polluters, but the mining industry claims to have made big strides in environmental protection at newer sites. That's why this spill is so troublesome. Grouse Creek was billed as a modern, open-pit mine using "state of the art" technology by its owner, Idaho politicians and even the EPA. Its main defense against a spill was a supposed to be plastic liner placed under the lake, and a 12-inch layer of compacted clay beneath that. The liners failed long ago.

Rick Johnson, executive director of the Idaho Conservation League, contends that the troubling situation at Grouse Creek demonstrates beyond doubt that open-pit cyanide mines, no matter how carefully constructed, pose unacceptable risks to the environment. "This is modern mining at its best - bleeding cyanide into the river," he said.

The events at Grouse Creek have disillusioned even some of the mine's boosters. "I used to hold this mine up as a mine run well," the EPA's Ceto said.

Cyanide-based gold mines dot the western U.S., and new ones are proposed in Montana and Washington state. Because of power granted to mining companies by the 1872 Mining Act, citizens, states and federal agencies are all but powerless to stop them. Montana voters in 1998 banned new cyanide heap-leach mines, but Canyon Resources, a mining company that wants to dig a huge mine next to the Blackfoot River east of Missoula, sued the state over its law in April. Montana will defend the law, but otherwise is among many states that, like Idaho, tend to welcome the big open-pit mines for the plentiful jobs they produce. Canyon's Kendall Mine in Lewiston, Mont., also leaks cyanide.

The state of Washington, meanwhile, has granted permits to Battle Mountain Gold Co. for an open-pit cyanide mine in Okanogan County. The Okanogan Highlands Alliance in Tonasket and the Center for Environmental Law and Policy in Seattle are fighting the permits in court.

The Mineral Policy Center in Washington, D.C., an environmental advocacy group, contends that the disaster demonstrates that, in some places, open-pit cyanide mines, no matter how carefully constructed, pose unacceptable risks to the environment. Said Alan Septoff, Reform Campaign Director of Mineral Policy Center, "This is not an isolated incident. So long as we build huge open-pit mines in environmentally sensitive areas, we risk environmental catastrophe: like the situation at the Grouse Creek Mine, like the 1998 tailings dam break at the Los Frailes mine in Spain which would have destroyed a world-reknowned wildlife refuge if not for the diversion of a major river, and like the Thompson Creek mine in Idaho where a tailings dam in a seismically active area risks a multi-million ton toxic tailings deluge if a quake should cause the dam to fail."

In its early days, the Grouse Creek mine had few critics, and few listened to them. Lynne Stone, director of the Boulder White Clouds Council, a conservation group based in nearby Ketchum, led a lonely fight against the mine since its construction. "From the beginning agencies seemed to be just as blinded by gold fever as the miners were. The Forest Service refused to let us participate in inter-agency meetings. Hecla called the shots. The Forest Service, state agencies, and politicians cowtowed to the mining company."

All the more appalling to some is the fact that the EPA, U.S. Forest Service, National Marine Fisheries Service and the state of Idaho granted permits allowing the Grouse Creek mine to be built on top of endangered salmon in the first place. One of the biggest boosters was former Idaho Gov. Cecil Andrus, who reacted to complaints about the mine in 1994 by proclaiming, "I can show you a thousands sins of the past we need to clean up, but modern-day mining in Idaho is a plus. The salmon problem isn't with mining in Idaho; it's with those eight blocks of concrete (federal dams) downstream."

While Stone agrees that dams are deadly to fish, she says: "This is all the more reason to have clean water and superb habitat for our surviving salmon and steelhead here in Salmon River country. Building mines in salmon habitat is insanity."

Jim Johnston, regional director for the Idaho Division of Environmental Quality, refused to comment when asked by Cascadia Times on whether the mine was a mistake. "I'm not going to comment on that, it was before my time. I really don't know whether it should or shouldn't have been built. I think they probably could have done a better job of permitting it. I don't think they foresaw the leaking pond."

But Kristen Boyles, a lawyer with the Earthjustice Legal Defense Fund in Seattle, agrees with Stone: "I firmly believe there is no way these mines should be operating in salmon critical habitat."

A polluter from the start

Even before it opened, the mine was already performing like just about every other open-pit gold mine in the West - as an environmental outlaw.

Hecla built the mine in 1993 and operated it for just three years before closing in 1997 after overestimating gold reserves. The company claimed to have good intentions from the start, although it destroyed a picturesque alpine wetlands, Pinyon Lake Basin, where it carved a deep pit for discarding waste. Hecla restored a half-mile of Jordan Creek, the largest of several small streams near the mine, improving aquatic habitat where it flows into the Yankee Fork. When Hecla arrived the area was far from pristine: both Jordan Creek and the Yankee Fork had been dredged by miners decades before, and remnants of that era are apparent. High piles of rubble and a mining dredge remain. Nevertheless, the Yankee Fork now supplies the Salmon River with clean, cold water year around, essential for a healthy salmon fishery.

The Idaho Department of Lands recognized Hecla in 1995 with an award for environmental excellence. Said Hecla CEO Arthur Brown at the mine's dedication on August 16, 1995, "Minimizing the environmental impact of Grouse Creek has been a major consideration for us." What he didn't say was the mine had been polluting the watershed since May 1994, according to the EPA.

The use of cyanide as a chemical to dissolve gold from finely crushed ore is almost universal in the gold mining industry. When it was running, Grouse Creek processed 6,000 tons of ore every day. The ore was crushed and placed in the five vats, where a dilute solution of sodium cyanide separated out the gold and silver. Some mines chemically destroy the excess cyanide, but at Grouse Creek cyanide was simply discharged into the lake.

The EPA required Hecla to install the two liners at the bottom of the lake to prevent leaks and spills, plus build a network of drains designed to collect any water that seeped through. The EPA also prohibited any cyanide leaks or spills.

The EPA required Hecla to get a permit under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES). With the permit, Hecla could legally spill some metals into Jordan Creek, but not cyanide. The state of Idaho gave Hecla a controversial loophole in its permit that let the company spill some metals at toxic levels into the river. This loophole is known as a "mixing zone."

From the beginning, oversight of Hecla's mixing zone was questionable. The Idaho DEQ failed to share with the EPA its evaluation of the physical, chemical and biological consequences of the mixing zone, if it indeed performed an evaluation, says the EPA's water quality permit writer, Patty McGrath.

"We don't have anything on file that shows how long that mixing zone is or whether the state did its evaluation," she said. "They might have done it, but they didn't send us a copy."

In May 1994, a landslide at the construction site buried 100 yards of Jordan Creek, in violation of the mine's water pollution permit. The National Marine Fisheries Service has designated Jordan Creek as critical habitat for salmon. In August 1994, elevated levels of cyanide were first detected in a groundwater monitoring well near the lake, even though the first gold wasn't produced until that December. In June 1995, cyanide was detected in Jordan Creek, again in violation of the water pollution permit.

On August 21, 1995, five days after the mine's dedication, and just as adult salmon were migrating into the area to spawn, a pipe broke at the mine, spilling cyanide solution for about 40 minutes. Cyanide was soon found in a creek at levels of 1.31 parts per million - 60 times greater than levels toxic to fish. One dead brook trout was found, according to a local newspaper.

In January 1996, another cyanide spill, this time 5,000 gallons, contaminated the mill yard. The EPA cited Hecla for 258 violations of the NPDES permit from May 1994 through June 30, 1996. Cyanide and mercury emissions exceeded limits by more than five times the allowed levels in one 13-month period.

"Hecla came crowing into central Idaho a few years ago promising first-rate environmental compliance," Mike Medberry of the Idaho Conservation League wrote in a letter to the EPA in 1996. "It broke that promise." Medberry demanded that the EPA show no leniency toward Hecla. Instead, the EPA reduced the $85,000 fine to $21,250.

Hecla suspended operations at the mine in April 1997, citing low gold prices and low-quality ore at Grouse Creek as the reasons. And yet, violations continued to became even more common. Monitors in June 1999 showed cyanide levels well above the point at which fish and other aquatic life can be harmed. Cyanide concentrations in the Jordan Creek reached 60 parts per billion, but measurements in springs next to the creek were nearly 1,000 times higher. Cyanide is deadly to aquatic life at levels above 5 parts per billion. Cyanide levels in the lake have ranged as high as 430 parts per million, but because cyanide breaks down over time, levels have dropped to around 20 parts per million.

Finally, in July 1999, the Forest Service ordered Hecla to begin a cleanup. Hecla installed sumps to capture cyanide bearing groundwater and a treatment plant to remove the pollutant. Over the winter monitors have shown a decrease in cyanide contamination in Jordan Creek.

Dumping pollution in the path of salmon

By the time salmon swim 900 miles from the Pacific Ocean to their spawning grounds in the Salmon River and the Yankee Fork, their bodies are depleted of energy. After enduring eight large dams, the last thing they want to face at the end of their journey is a toxic plume of cyanide and heavy metals.

Federal officials are nevertheless willing to risk some poisoning of salmon to avert a greater worry: the danger of a catastrophic spill. They say they will force Hecla to drain the lake directly into the Yankee Fork. Besides cyanide, the lake contains and several heavy metals, including arsenic, cadmium, chromium, copper, lead, mercury, nickel, selenium, silver and zinc.

In January, NOAA agreed to give Hecla permission to create a mixing zone in the Yankee Fork which will allow some release of all of these toxins except mercury and selenium. A letter to the EPA, signed by NOAA's Hillman, pointed out that any additional stress or delay, such as would be expected in a mixing zone, could be deadly to at least some fish. NOAA said the mixing zone could occupy no more than 25 percent of the river, providing "safe passage" for the fish as they swim past.

"Because these fish are in danger of becoming extinct, it is very important to NOAA that any discharge to the Yankee Fork not compromise the health of these fish," NOAA's letter said.

Salmon are sensitive to metals in water. They can sense minute changes in chemistry, a trait that enables them to locate good habitat and avoid pollution. Salmon are especially sensitive to copper, which damages its olfactory nerves, destroying the ability to smell and migrate. Silver is one of the metals most toxic to aquatic life, according to a 1997 study by EPA of 129 pollutants. These metals can also be toxic to humans. The consumption of mercury-tainted fish can cause trembling, paralysis and death. Mercury, selenium and silver bioaccumulate in fish and humans. That means that the amount of these metals that accumulate in fish can be a thousand times greater - or more - than the concentration of the metals in the water.

It's unlikely Hecla could remove all of the pollution. Said the EPA's McGrath, "To actually eliminate it - that's hard because you can only measure it to a certain level."

Even so, Gershon Cohen, a nationally recognized expert on mixing zones, said the plan raises serious questions about water quality in the Yankee Fork. "What will happen to the pollutants that are discharged? Will they all migrate downstream until they reach the Pacific? Will some pollutants settle out along the way? If so, considering opportunities for resuspension or contamination of benthic habitat, are the discharge limits based on dilution volumes that are truly available? How have they determined how such accumulation might affect the migration corridor? Are they looking at the cumulative effect of all of those metals and the cyanide?

"I think they are trying to make the best of a bad situation, keeping the company on the hook, hoping that the fish survive, and looking forward to having the water out of that pond so that the tailings can be dealt with. Whether or not it will work is another question that only time will answer.

Some questions may be answered in the final treatment plan, due out sometime in June. The plan will be subject to review by NOAA under Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act.

Federal officials, meanwhile, worry that Hecla will do what a number of other mining companies have done: declare bankruptcy and walk. The mining company responsible for the disaster at Summitville, for example, walked away from a $120 million cleanup bill. "Had we specified zero discharge from this, then the company would have walked away," said Iadanza of NMFS. "We think we've come up with something that poses very minimal risk for the fish."

The EPA's exasperation with Hecla is palpable. Speaking on the condition that he not be identified, one EPA official said, "They will cost the taxpayers more money because of their unwillingness to acknowledge their role in the contamination of the Coeur D'Alene Basin. They cause a lot of sleepless nights among staffers here, worried what trick they will use next."

"The company that now is avoiding any agreement of responsibility on this mine and in multiple other cases," said Tom Blanchard of the Boulder White Clouds Council. "The company who has denied the reality of its pollution will be given control of the testing for compliance as a reward for broken promises."

Charlie Ray, a river activist and fishing guide based in nearby McCall, Idaho, says the mixing zone designed by the federal agencies "is just a euphemism for a sacrifice zone. Hecla made a big P.R. effort about how they were rehabilitating the river. Now they want to dump this crap back into it."

Ray said the government should let Hecla go bankrupt rather than continue to appease the company. "All their assets should be seized to pay for this," he said. "I certainly don't think the taxpayers should shoulder the burden of cleaning up that river while Hecla retains a penny of assets."

For more information

Boulder White Clouds Council, Tom Blanchard 208-788-4450, tomblan@micron.net

Mineral Policy Center, www.mineralpolicy.org

Hecla Mining Company, www.hecla-mining.com