Fort Belknap supports additional mining withdrawal

The president of Fort Belknap Indian Community's tribal council said the council is pleased about U.S. Bureau of Land Management announcing it plans to withdraw more land just south of Fort Belknap Indian Reservation from mining, but it is still looking for answers on some new mining claims filed in an area that had been banned from mining.

Fort Belknap Indian Community Council President Jeffrey "Jeff" Stiffarm said in replies to questions from Havre Daily News that if mining claims filed in 2020 are allowed to stand, "this will be unfettered permission from the secretary of interior for continued pollution of this sacred land."

" ... Future mining in the Zortman-Landusky reclamation area will only further pollute and poison our water and further desecrate our sacred tribal land," Stiffarm added.

Mining next to tribal land

U.S. Bureau of Land Management announced last week it was publishing a notice of intent to withdraw more than 900 acres of land from mining in addition to the land listed in a notice in 2020.

Mining in the area in question, near Zortman and Landusky in The Little Rocky Mountains just south of Fort Belknap, has led to environmental damage to the area, including on the reservation, and has cost the state and federal governments millions in cleanup and remediation so far.

The area has more than 100 years of history of mining for gold. The land where the Pegasus mine was originally sat within the boundaries of the Fort Belknap Indian Reservation when it was established in 1888. Then gold was discovered.

The federal government in the 1890s pressured the tribes on the reservation in 1896 to sell back land on the southern part of the reservation after gold was discovered there, and then mining began.

In 1979, Zortman Mining Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of Pegasus Gold Corp., started mining in the area, using heap leach mining. This process used chemicals, including cyanide to leach minerals like gold from ore from two open-pit mines totaling about 1,200 acres of land, half public and half private.

The Red Thunder Oral History site says that a grassroots group organization based near Lodge Pole began a legal campaign against the mining after people noticed wildlife dying and rumors began spreading about babies being born with birth defects.

Red Thunder began taking legal action against Pegasus, the site said.

Montana regulatory agencies in 1992 detected acid rock drainage from the exposed bedrock, a common problem in mining which typically occurs when water mixes with sulfides in exposed rock and forms acid. Montana, and later the federal Environmental Protection Agency, filed lawsuits against Pegasus claiming violations of Montana Water Quality Act and the U.S. Clean Water Act.

In 1996, Red Thunder Oral History reports, Pegasus settled out of court and was required to pay $37 million in civil penalties and provide other relief, but was to be able to continue mining.

But when gold prices reached record lows in 1997, the site says, Pegasus declared bankruptcy, reorganized under the name Apollo Gold and closed the Zortman-Landusky mines.

The bond posted by Pegasus and its settlement did not cover the costs of cleanup, and the state and federal government have spent millions on the cleanup so far with millions more to come in annual water treatment along with reclamation.

Approximately $83.7 million in reclamation bonds and state of Montana and BLM funding have been spent since 1999 to fund site reclamation and water treatment plant operations.

Acid mine drainage from abandoned sites can continue for generations or even, under certain conditions, thousands of years.

A two-day window to mining

Following the closure of the Pegasus mines, the federal government had withdrawn in 2000 the region from mining claims, with five-year withdrawals extended for five more years three times.

In 2020, under the Trump administration's interior secretary at that time, David Bernhardt, the Interior Department announced a 20-year withdrawal of most of that land - less about 900 acres - but did not post notice of the withdrawal for two days.

In that two-day window, Bozeman-based Blue Arc, a company owned by Luke Ployhar, who owns private land patchworked in the federal land where the Pegasus mine operated, filed multiple mining claims.

Ployhar has said he was watching the area for an opportunity to explore mining in the area, saying he intends to use traditional underground mining if the exploration finds minerals, and when the withdrawal lapsed he filed the claims.

Fort Belknap Indian Community has raised doubts on that.

"In October of 2020 while BLM napped for 48 hours, the withdrawal did not occur timely as it had the three prior times," Stiffarm said in the emailed responses sent to Havre Daily News. "During this very short window of time, Mr. Ployar filed his mining claims. The council has demanded answers with the secretary of interior and has demanded an Office of Inspector General audit. The council wants answers."

New withdrawal goes back to previous protections

While Stiffarm said he supports the additional land being withdrawn that BLM announced last week, he said it simply is going back to protections that were in place from 2000 to 2020.

"BLM's proposal merely reinstates the total acreage that the federal government has protected over the past 20 years," he said in the responses to the questions. "The secretary of interior's main job is to protect land and this withdrawal does that.

"The 912.33 acres represents acreage that the Trump Interior Department had removed - with no explanation - from its proposal in late 2020," he added. "Given the significant history of environmental and cultural consequences associated with mining at the site, withdrawal of the entire, original 3,600.46 acres, which includes the 912.33 acres, is necessary to protect against negative impacts, to air, water quality, and cultural resources."

Mine exploration permits and testimony

Blue Arc had applied for permits to do mining exploration on Ployhar's land in the Little Rockies, which go through the state Department of Environmental Quality because they are requests for exploration on private, not federal land.

Ployhar told Havre Daily News he has no intention to use heap leach mining if the exploration finds minerals to mine, but will instead use conventional underground mining.

DEQ had approved one of those permits, pending sufficient bonding, and was considering another, when Fort Belknap called for a hearing to collect public input on the idea.

Fort Belknap, Montana Environmental Information Center and Earthworks sued DEQ and Blue Arc over the first permit which was approved, saying the tribes had been left out of the process and the agency failed to adequately consider the impacts of new mining. That lawsuit still is pending, with Judge Yvonne Laird granting an unopposed motion from DEQ to stay the case.

When DEQ was considering the second permit request, at Fort Belknap Indian Community's request it held a public hearing to gather comments, which were always universally opposed to new mining in the area.

Following that hearing, DEQ said more study was needed and said a full environmental impact statement study - it originally used a less-extensive environmental assessment process - would be conducted.

Stiffarm also testified May 12 before the U.S. House Committee on Natural Resources' Subcommittee on Energy and Mineral Resources in support of the Clean Energy Mineral Reform Act of 2022, which would revise the U.S. mining laws that have been in place since 1872.

Stiffarm testified on the history of mining in The Little Rockies and its impact on Fort Belknap Indian Community, including the Pegasus heap leach mining and the proposed new mining exploration.

"Future mining at the site not only threatens the health and welfare of tribal members, it threatens to further desecrate sacred tribal land, including the potential to disturb the graves of relatives and ancestors of tribal members," he told the committee.

Stiffarm told Havre Daily News that his testimony on that bill may have helped lead BLM to propose withdrawing the extra 900 acres, back to the previous withdrawal, but he suspects the January hearing on the mining exploration permit probably had even more impact.

In that hearing, Stiffarm said, "there is a place in Hays that is important to many of us. It is the place we go to pray, to heal, to worship. It is our Sundance grounds. This place has been our Sundance grounds for many generations. We have done our best to protect this land.

"In 1977, when the federal government allowed cyanide mining, this all changed," he continued in the January hearing. "The crystal-clear sparkling creek that ran through the middle of our Sundance grounds now is an orangish brown color. Even though these mines have not been operational for almost 30 years the water is still damaged. This is why we stand against mining."

In his response to Havre Daily's questions, Stiffarm expanded on that.

"Had the federal government listened to our concerns decades ago, we may not now be facing perpetual water contamination on our reservation," he said. "Therefore, we believe that reform of U.S. mining laws must include meaningful consultation with tribes, and also the ability to say 'no' to mines that would harm other important land uses."