Tag Archives: Ken Salazar

Secretary Salazar Announces Decision to Withdraw Public Lands near Grand Canyon from New Mining Claims


   http://www.havasupai-nsn.gov/tourism.html

       http://www.nps.gov/features/grca/001/archeology/index.html

  

***************************************************************************************************************

Secretary Salazar Announces Decision to Withdraw Public Lands near Grand Canyon from New Mining Claims


Allows for monitoring to determine impact of uranium mining on vital watershed

01/09/2012

Contact: Adam Fetcher, (DOI) 202-208-6416

WASHINGTON – Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar today announced his decision to protect the iconic Grand Canyon and its vital watershed from the potential adverse effects of additional uranium and other hardrock mining on over 1 million acres of federal land for the next 20 years.

Secretary Salazar’s decision will provide adequate time for monitoring to inform future land use decisions in this treasured area, while allowing currently approved mining operations to continue as well as new operations on valid existing mining claims.

“A withdrawal is the right approach for this priceless American landscape,” Salazar said. “People from all over the country and around the world come to visit the Grand Canyon. Numerous American Indian tribes regard this magnificent icon as a sacred place and millions of people in the Colorado River Basin depend on the river for drinking water, irrigation, industrial and environmental use. We have been entrusted to care for and protect our precious environmental and cultural resources, and we have chosen a responsible path that makes sense for this and future generations.”

The Public Land Order to withdraw these acres for 20 years from new mining claims and sites under the 1872 Mining Law, subject to valid existing rights, is authorized by the Federal Land Policy and Management Act. A Record of Decision was signed by the Secretary today during a ceremony held at the National Geographic Museum in Washington, D.C.

The withdrawal does not prohibit previously approved uranium mining, new projects that could be approved on claims and sites with valid existing rights. The withdrawal would allow other natural resource development in the area, including mineral leasing, geothermal leasing and mineral materials sales, to the extent consistent with the applicable land use plans. Approximately 3,200 mining claims are currently located in the withdrawal area.

“The withdrawal maintains the pace of hardrock mining, particularly uranium, near the Grand Canyon,” said Bureau of Land Management Director Bob Abbey, “but also gives the Department a chance to monitor the impacts associated with uranium mining in this area. It preserves the ability of future decision-makers to make thoughtful decisions about managing this area of national environmental and cultural significance based on the best information available.”

During the withdrawal period, the BLM projects that up to 11 uranium mines, including four that are currently approved, could still be developed based on valid pre-existing rights – meaning the jobs supported by mining in the area would increase or remain flat as compared to the current level, according to the BLM’s analysis. By comparison, during the 1980s, nine uranium mines were developed on these lands and five were mined out. Without the withdrawal, there could be 30 uranium mines in the area over the next 20 years, including the four that are currently approved, with as many as six operating at one time, the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) estimates.

The withdrawn area includes 355,874 acres of U.S. Forest Service land on the Kaibab National Forest; 626,678 acres of Bureau of Land Management lands; and 23,993 acres of split estate – where surface lands are held by other owners while subsurface minerals are owned by the federal government. The affected lands, all in the vicinity of the Grand Canyon or Grand Canyon National Park, are located in Mohave and Coconino Counties of Northern Arizona.

“The decision made today by the Secretary will help ensure continued protection of the Grand Canyon watershed and World Heritage designated Grand Canyon National Park,” said National Park Service Director Jonathan B. Jarvis. “As stewards of our national parks, it is incumbent on all of us to continue to preserve our treasured landscapes, today and for future generations.”

Today’s decision is the culmination of more than two years of evaluation during which the BLM analyzed the proposed withdrawal in an EIS prepared in cooperation with the U.S. Forest Service, U.S. Geological Survey, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and the National Park Service.

Numerous cooperating agencies, tribes, counties and stakeholders were fully engaged in this process, which included an extensive public involvement period which generated more than 350,000 comments, including input from more than 90 countries. Substantive comments, including those on the economic impact discussion, were addressed in the Final EIS, released on October 27, 2011 for a final 30-day review period.

Information on the withdrawal is at http://www.blm.gov/az/st/en/prog/mining/timeout.html or can be obtained by calling (602) 417-9504.

Department of Interior responds to our comments


Forward this emailSign upDonate
Union of Concerned Scientists
Strengthening Science at the DOI
After receiving more than 10,000 comments from UCS supporters—Interior Secretary Ken Salazar issued a strong scientific integrity policy.

Read More

Department of Interior Responds to Our Comments

Last month, we asked UCS supporters like you to submit comments regarding the Department of the Interior’s (DOI’s) draft scientific integrity policy. The policy would have done little to prevent the kind of manipulation and distortion of science that has skewed decisions on everything from underwater oil drilling to endangered species.

Last Wednesday—after receiving more than ten thousand comments from UCS supporters—Interior Secretary Ken Salazar issued a radically different scientific integrity policy that addresses most of the issues we raised. Read our reaction here.

I heard personally from staff at the DOI that they relied heavily upon our input in shaping the new policy, and it’s clear that this public pressure convinced them to do the right thing. Together, we made sure the DOI heard loud and clear that the public supports strong actions to protect government science.

On the heels of this victory, we need to ensure strong scientific integrity standards like these are in place throughout the federal government.

In September, UCS released the results of a survey of government scientists who work on food safety—hundreds reported political interference in their work over the past year. These results clearly illustrate the need for better protection for whistleblowers, the right for scientists to speak publicly about their work, and other critical reforms to defend science from political interference.

In March 2009, President Obama asked the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy to create a detailed plan to protect the integrity of science throughout the federal government. In September, the president’s science advisor told us a plan would come by the end of 2010, and we intend to hold the White House to this promise. In the meantime, you can track the administration’s progress here.

Sincerely,

MichaelHalpern_jpg
Michael Halpern
National Field Organizer
UCS Scientific Integrity Program

Stop Liberty,BP’s Next Big Drilling Disaster


Latest news and action alert from Greenpeace

Urge Interior Secretary Salazar to stop BP‘s next drilling disaster before it even happens!

take action today

Right now the only thing standing between BP and its next big drilling disaster is the Secretary of the Interior, Ken Salazar. BP built a gravel drilling island three miles off Alaska’s north coast and classified the Liberty drilling project as “onshore,” thereby dodging the recent moratorium on offshore drilling in the arctic waters off Alaska. BP calls Liberty one of its “biggest challenges to date,” and if it moves forward, the company will push the limits of drilling in Alaska’s Arctic, just as it pushed the limits of deepwater drilling in the Gulf with the Deepwater Horizon.

What BP is proposing is crazy. The company’s current plan calls for a well to be drilled that extends two miles below the seabed and then six to eight miles sideways to get at the oil they believe lies below federal waters in Alaska’s Beaufort Sea. It’s a disaster waiting to happen in a place where it’s simply impossible to respond to and clean up a large oil spill.

Allowing the company responsible for the worst oil spill in US history to attempt such a risky drilling project in the ice-infested waters of Alaska is the true definition of insanity repeating the same mistakes yet expecting different results. Take action now and ask Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar to stop BP from moving forward with Liberty.

It took BP more than three months to end the gusher in the Gulf, and the region will be feeling the effects of the nearly 5 million barrels of oil that were spilled for decades to come. Alaska’s arctic marine environment is even more fragile than the Gulf of Mexico, and moreover, BP lacks adequate response assets in this remote part of the state where darkness, intense cold and storms, and solid or broken sea ice are the norm for much of the year. It’s no wonder the US Coast Guard called an oil spill in Arctic waters a “nightmare scenario.”

BP’s own analysis says there’s an eight percent chance of a large oil spill at Liberty. Would you get onto a plane if the pilot told you there was an eight percent chance of it crashing? Didn’t think so.

BP has already built Liberty Island and has received all of its permits except for one the federal government’s final sign off on BP’s “application for a permit to drill.” Secretary Salazar can deny this final permit, urge him to stop BP’s next big drilling disaster now.

Sincerely,
Melanie Duchin
Melanie Duchin
Arctic Program Director