Uranium

 by Amber Reimondo, Energy Director

“If you can’t fly, run; if you can’t run, walk; if you can’t walk, crawl; but by all means keep moving.”

–Martin Luther King Jr. 

For those of us who care deeply about the Grand Canyon, we know the journey to permanently protect it from the threats of nearby uranium mining is long and arduous and that we’re far from finished. We also know that’s no reason to stop. Positive change doesn’t come easily, but the Grand Canyon is too important to give up on. We’re in this to win it whether it’s in this Congress or the next.

A milestone for protecting the Grand Canyon

The long road ahead is also why right now, we’d like to pause and celebrate a milestone. Last week, the long fight to permanently protect Arizona’s worldwide wonder from the threats of new uranium mining saw a victorious step forward. After months of hard work by a broad community of Grand Canyon supporters and numerous tribal nations, the U.S. House of Representatives voted 236-185 to pass the Grand Canyon Centennial Protection Act! The bill, once passed by both houses of Congress and signed by the president, would make the current temporary ban on new uranium mines on about 1 million acres of public lands around the Grand Canyon permanent.

Arizona reps. speak up for permanent protection

On the House floor ahead of the vote, Arizona Reps. Raúl Grijalva, Tom O’Halleran, Ann Kirkpatrick, and Greg Stanton implored their colleagues to vote in favor of the bill. Between them, they cited the problem of unplanned mine flooding at the north rim Pinenut Mine and the south rim Canyon Mine, the threat that Canyon Mine may pose to the Havasupai Tribe, the extensive existing legacy of uranium mining contamination in the Southwest, particularly on Navajo lands, and the reality that mining never has been and never could be a primary economic driver in Northern Arizona. In opposition, Arizona Rep. Paul Gosar reiterated his misleading claim that mining uranium is actually good for the environment and the Grand Canyon. That argument grossly ignores the nuanced reality of uranium solubility and insolubility in water and the interconnected nature of ground and surface water in the Grand Canyon region. 

What don't we know about groundwater flow?

As a reminder, for uranium to be dissolvable in water, oxygen must be present, a condition that is inevitably created during the mining process as previously entombed uranium is exposed to the air and hauled to the surface. And scientific research has underscored that groundwater flow is extremely variable around the Grand Canyon, flowing in multiple directions, at varying speeds, and traveling many miles horizontally and thousands of feet vertically from where it started. Uranium mining in the Grand Canyon region is, in no uncertain terms, a gamble of a sacred landscape and a worldwide wonder, and it puts the primary driver of the northern Arizona economy — tourism — at risk.

In the end, 236 members of Congress, including nine Republicans, were persuaded that the risk of uranium mining near the Grand Canyon is simply too great and voted to advance the bill, placing its fate into the hands of the U.S. Senate. 

On to the Senate, then to the president's desk

As we wait to see whether the Senate will consider the bill, the president’s Nuclear Fuel Working Group continues to deliberate a list of recommendations which may include lifting the temporary Grand Canyon mining ban and creating taxpayer subsidies for uranium to cushion the bottom lines of mining companies.  

In a statement released last week by White House policy advisers, this administration states it “is strongly opposed to” the bill and that the president’s advisers “would recommend that he veto it.” We can’t be sure what will happen until we get there, but for now, we’ll focus on putting one foot in front of the other because the Grand Canyon is, and always will be, too precious to mine. 

Onward.

 by Amber Reimondo, Energy Director

More than a year after uranium miners asked the federal government to artificially boost uranium prices using trade measures, a working group stemming from that process and tasked by President Trump with finding other ways to overcome “challenges in producing uranium domestically” is expected to announce recommendations to that end in the next two weeks. The working group’s recommendations are likely to have implications for the Grand Canyon mining ban and the Canyon uranium mine near the Grand Canyon’s south rim. 

These recommendations, due October 10, 2019, will follow shortly on the heels of a request that the Grand Canyon Trust and others recently made to the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ). We asked ADEQ to close Canyon Mine and issue a different type of groundwater permit for the cleanup process than the more lenient one the mine currently has.

Stricter groundwater permit needed at Canyon Mine

As groundwater continues to inundate the mine shaft, there’s no denying that Canyon Mine poses more severe risks to groundwater than what ADEQ and the mine owner prepared for back in the 1980s when the mine was first permitted. For the past three decades, the state of Arizona has issued the mine’s operator a “general” permit on the assumption that little or no groundwater would flow into the mine each year and therefore “pose little environmental risk.” 

According to ADEQ’s own regulations, facilities that “could have a significant environmental impact are not eligible to operate under a general permit." Yet despite the mine operator’s early claims, recent records requests have turned up the full picture of water flooding into Canyon Mine.

Serious water problems at Canyon Mine

In the past six years, over 20 million gallons of groundwater have flowed into the mine shaft. Limited groundwater monitoring by the U.S. Geological Survey shows cleaner water from the same aquifer nearby, so it’s likely that elevated levels of uranium and arsenic found in the mine shaft water have come from the mine shaft itself and the newly exposed rock within it. If that water, today or a hundred years from now, finds its way beyond the mine shaft, we have a vehicle for contamination to spread, a risk that only worsens once mining begins and ore is exposed to oxygen and transported up the mine shaft. 

Here's a brief breakdown of the mine shaft’s construction and flooding: 

What will the working group recommend?

As the threat posed by Canyon Mine grows, the president’s working group seems poised to make matters worse for the Grand Canyon region. In a mid-August letter, the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) — a nuclear industry trade association — asked the working group to consider several measures that could impact the Grand Canyon region. Among the requests are lifting “current federal land withdrawal restrictions prohibiting access to high grade domestic uranium deposits pursuant to the Administration’s Federal Strategy to Ensure a Reliable Supply of Critical Minerals," and a call for uranium subsidies in the form of direct payments to U.S. utilities or domestic uranium producers. In other words, the NEI has asked not just for the Grand Canyon region to be reopened to new mining claims and mines, but for taxpayers to give uranium-mining companies money as a way to defray losses from their unprofitable operations. 

The Trust and our partners stand ready to defend the Grand Canyon mining ban and to hold mining companies accountable for the threats they pose to the region today and for generations to come. The Colorado Plateau has seen enough of uranium’s toxic legacy and we won’t be silent and allow that legacy to grow. 

Stay tuned as both the decision from ADEQ and the recommendations from the working group. 

 by Roger Clark, Grand Canyon Director

Since 2013, millions of gallons of contaminated water have inundated Canyon Mine, a uranium mine on the doorstep of Grand Canyon National Park. Hydrologists had long warned that flooding like this was possible, but mine owners claimed it would never happen. Once exposed during mining, previously stabilized uranium can pollute aquifers, seeps, springs, and surface waters.

As luck would have it, the permit that regulates pollutants that the mine discharges into groundwater just happens to be up for renewal this month, and the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) has the chance to permanently close and order the cleanup of the uranium mine, which sits less than 10 miles from our crown jewel national park.

Now is the time to ask Arizona regulators to stop risking the contamination of Grand Canyon waters and close Canyon Mine for good. Email ADEQ ›

What’s an aquifer protection permit?

The permit that’s up for renewal is called an aquifer protection permit. It’s required for mines since they can discharge harmful substances like dissolved uranium into the groundwater.

Original mine approvals dismissed flooding as a “remote” possibility. Clearly it’s not.

In 2013, the mine operator reported having removed more than a quarter million gallons of water from the mine shaft. And in 2016, mine-shaft drilling pierced shallow aquifers. The company pumped nearly 1 million gallons of groundwater out of the mine that year. Floodwaters surged up to 9 million gallons in 2017, and, lacking adequate wastewater storage, miners sprayed contaminated water into the air on Kaibab National Forest. In 2018, 10 million gallons of water flooded the mine, with dissolved uranium concentrations consistently exceeding federal limits by 3-4 times safe-drinking standards. The water that's flowing into the mine shaft comes from the Coconino Aquifer, which itself doesn't show these levels of uranium — at least at the single monitoring well (the Grand Canyon Trust believes there should be more) that samples from that formation.  

Canyon Mine’s current aquifer protection permit expires on August 31. Given the increasing volume of groundwater pouring into the mine during the last several years, federal and state regulators need to cancel current operating permits that are failing to prevent groundwater from flooding the mine and protect the underlying aquifer from permanent harm.

Why does mine-shaft flooding risk Grand Canyon waters?

Canyon Mine’s shaft cuts down through the Grand Canyon’s first five layers of rock, stopping above the underground aquifer that feeds hundreds of springs and seeps in the Grand Canyon. 

There isn’t adequate monitoring in place to ensure the contaminated floodwaters will not leak into the aquifer and the Grand Canyon springs and wells it feeds, including the sole source of drinking water for the Havasupai, and the springs that burst forth at the popular Indian Garden. If contamination did occur, it’s likely to be irreversible.

Springs and seeps in the Grand Canyon are lifelines for plants, animals, and people, supporting more than 500 times the species of surrounding desert lands.

READ: Threatened Waters: Grand Canyon’s Seeps and Springs

Early concerns about contamination 

In 1986, the Kaibab National Forest supervisor concluded there was a low possibility of encountering groundwater in the mine, and thus a low probability of the mine contaminating the underlying aquifer. 

But Gary Ullinsky, a state water quality specialist, sent an internal memo to his supervisor at the Arizona Department of Health Services a month later carefully outlining his concerns about Canyon Mine’s potential to pollute groundwater.

Ullinsky had asked for records of borehole testing to verify the company’s claim that the mining zone was dry to depths of 1,400 feet. He discovered that more than half of the 18 exploration holes “encountered saturated zones,” confirming the presence of perched aquifers above and within what would become the mine’s ore cavities, vertical shafts, and lateral tunnels.

Ullinsky’s memo notes that usable quantities of water had been found in the area at depths of fewer than 150 feet. In conclusion, he said, “I have developed a mistrust of the accuracy of the information supplied by EFN [Canyon Mine’s then owners].”

Other hydrologists have since echoed Ullinsky’s concerns about contamination.

Calling on ADEQ to Close Canyon Mine

The Grand Canyon Trust and allies recently submitted comments to ADEQ calling for the immediate closure of Canyon Mine. Meanwhile, a spokesperson for the mine reportedly said last week that nothing is wrong with the mine or the water flooding out of it.

If the company’s past tales about risk are any indication of the assurances they’re giving today, we don’t feel reassured. Do you?

Please join us in submitting your own comments to ADEQ at dunaway.david@azdeq.gov asking for the immediate closure of Canyon Mine.

Email ADEQ

Write a letter:

Misael Cabrera, P.E., Director
Trevor Baggiore, Water Quality Division Director
Arizona Department of Environmental Quality
1110 West Washington Street
Phoenix, AZ 85007

Want more background?

• Read our “Uranium Mining in the Grand Canyon Region” report
• Read the letter we sent to ADEQ
• Read tips on how to write a meaningful comment 

 by Amber Reimondo, Energy Director

Update! The Grand Canyon Centennial Protection Act passed the U.S. House of Representatives on October 30, 2019! 

Perhaps no place embodies the age-old adage "the whole is greater than the sum of its parts better" than the Grand Canyon. For its worth lies not in a single rock layer, but in the natural, scenic, cultural, and spiritual values embedded within the mile-deep canyon.

Local communities have long recognized that the benefits of protecting the Grand Canyon as a natural treasure far outweigh the wealth of minerals buried beneath the surface. Local governments, tribes, and businesses are speaking up in support of a bill called the Grand Canyon Centennial Protection Act, which would permanently ban mining on more than 1 million acres of public lands surrounding Grand Canyon National Park.

Tribes resolve to stop uranium mining

Long before the Grand Canyon was designated a national park, it was home to Native peoples. The Havasupai, who live deep within the folds of the Grand Canyon, have been outspoken opponents of uranium mining on their ancestral lands for decades. They are worried that a uranium mine near the south rim of the Grand Canyon will contaminate the aquifer that feeds their sole source of water for all life in Supai village.

This March, the Havasupai tribe passed a resolution in support of the Grand Canyon Centennial Protection Act, saying, “We, the Havasu ‘Baaja, will be the ones who suffer the consequences of not knowing the science and not knowing the effects of uranium mining around the Grand Canyon.”

In a recent resolution, the Hopi Tribe, which is still dealing with the legacy of uranium contamination from the last uranium boom, offers its enthusiastic support for the bill and for “laws that support life and not destruction and death.” The resolution further states, “The legacy of uranium mining has devastated the people and the land, and the 1872 mining law continues to destroy the land and lives of Hopisinom, Native Americans and Americans alike.”

Clark Tenakhongva, Vice Chairman of the Hopi Tribe, speaks in support of the Grand Canyon Centennial Protection Act at the bill's announcement in February 2019. AMY S. MARTIN

For similar reasons, the Inter Tribal Council of Arizona, which represents 21 Arizona tribes, has offered its support for permanently banning mining around Grand Canyon, stating, “the Colorado River and the major drainages which feed into the river are connected to ground water sources that would be affected by these mining operations.”

In order to protect lands sacred to tribes in the Southwest and protect waters that feed springs in the region, the National Congress of American Indians has also endorsed the bill.

Read: Tribal Leaders Call for Permanent Grand Canyon Mining Ban

Local governments and businesses unite

Grand Canyon National Park is an economic engine in northern Arizona, so it’s no surprise that gateway communities like Flagstaff, Arizona are champions of the bill. In testimony before Congress in June, Flagstaff Mayor Coral Evans told a subcommittee, “Grand Canyon National Park is the lifeblood of our community and economy and protecting it now and for future generations is of paramount interest. For this reason, we strongly support H.R. 1373, the Grand Canyon Centennial Act.”

Coral Evans, Mayor of Flagstaff (center), testifies in support of the bill at a House subcommittee meeting this June.  

The Flagstaff City Council and the Coconino County Board of Supervisors have passed resolutions in support of banning uranium mining around the Grand Canyon, acknowledging that the crown jewel national park plays an integral role to the tourism economy in Flagstaff and the county. 

Steve Finch, president and CEO of the Flagstaff Lodging, Restaurant & Tourism Association, says that without the Grand Canyon, Flagstaff’s tourism would be a third to 20 percent of what it is now. In a letter to the House Committee of Natural Resources on behalf of the association, Finch writes, “There’s one thing we can be certain of: uranium mining companies cannot be permitted to further risk the health and economic sustainability of our region’s communities.”

Simply put, uranium mining on the doorstep of our country’s most treasured national park isn’t good for business. The Conservation Alliance, a coalition of hundreds of outdoor and recreation businesses from across the country, supports the Grand Canyon Centennial Protection Act because the bill “adds economic certainty for our industry, protecting the rich cultural and historical values of the area. This thoughtful legislation also ensures that the myriad of other land uses, including hunting, camping, grazing, hiking, mountain biking, and off-road vehicle use, are permitted.”

Read: Grand Canyon Tourism Fuels Arizona's Economy

Join the community of supporters

Stand with local governments, business owners, Native American tribes, and Grand Canyon lovers around the world by supporting the Grand Canyon Centennial Protection Act. The bill is currently in Congress, awaiting the full House vote. Write your elected representatives today in support of permanently banning uranium mining around the Grand Canyon.

 by Amber Reimondo, Energy Director

Supporters of the Grand Canyon and Bears Ears enjoyed a victory late last week. To the disappointment of two uranium mining companies — one with a significant stake in mining claims around the Grand Canyon and Bears Ears — President Trump announced that he would not implement import quotas on uranium. Quotas could have substantially increased domestic uranium prices, incentivizing uranium mines to throttle forward from the Grand Canyon to Bears Ears and elsewhere on the Colorado Plateau. Without them, the uranium mining industry’s dreams of an artificial market boost won’t be coming, at least not yet. Stock prices for the two mining companies that requested the quotas plummeted precipitously in response to the president’s decision. But that’s not the end of the story. 

Between a yellow rock and a hard place

The proposed quotas put President Trump in the position of choosing between two industries he’s made promises to: the mining industry and the nuclear power industry. The latter strongly advocated against the mining companies’ proposed import quotas, estimating that forced domestic sourcing of uranium for nuclear power would drive up the industry’s costs by $500 to $800 million per year and result in the closure of nuclear power plants already struggling to compete with cheaper natural gas and increasingly cost-effective renewables like wind and solar power.

The majority of uranium imported to the United States comes from mines in Canada and Australia, where high quality ore makes uranium far cheaper than what U.S. mines can produce. In a recent interview with Utah Public Radio, a spokesman for the Ad Hoc Utilities Group, which includes the majority of nuclear energy generators in the U.S., stated “the only beneficiaries [of import quotas] would be the profit seekers at the two mining companies.” This collision of opinions may have led President Trump to temper his quota decision by establishing a new United States Nuclear Fuel Working Group. 

Another avenue for uranium mining on U.S. soil? 

The newly formed working group has until mid-October “to develop recommendations for reviving and expanding domestic nuclear fuel production.” It is co-chaired by the president’s national security and economic policy advisors and includes Secretary of the Interior David Bernhardt, among others. So while, for the time being, uranium mining companies won’t see restrictions on imports of uranium, including from allied countries like Canada and Australia, recommendations for “reviving and expanding” domestic nuclear fuel production could come with any number of implications for our treasured public lands around the Grand Canyon and Bears Ears. For a clue about what those implications might be, we need look no further than the newly released strategy to enhance access to uranium and other “critical minerals” as defined by the Trump administration.

Through the lens of the critical minerals strategy

While we don’t know for sure what will come out of this 90-day review by the working group, we’d be remiss not to view the possibilities through the administration’s already-stated priorities and strategies. In the beginning of June, the White House released its critical minerals strategy, which, among other things, recommends streamlining America’s most foundational environmental laws to allow uranium and other mines to go forward with less scrutiny. The critical minerals strategy also suggests reviewing and revising mining bans and other land designations, including national parks, wildlife refuges, and national monuments to allow for critical mineral mining. The administration has already slashed Bears Ears by 85 percent, at least in part due to lobbying efforts by one of the companies that requested quotas. The administration could also attempt to reverse a ban on new uranium claims around the Grand Canyon.   

Help us fight back

You can help us battle attempts by the uranium industry to mine our most treasured public lands by urging your representatives to support the Uranium Classification Act of 2019, which would remove uranium from the critical minerals list, something experts say is needed. You can urge your congressional representatives to support a permanent ban on mining near the Grand Canyon, including asking your senators for a companion bill in the Senate. You can also urge your member of Congress to co-sponsor the BEARS Act of 2019, which would restore and expand the boundaries of Bears Ears. 

Your support is invaluable, and your advocacy can really make a difference, please take action today ›

 by Amber Reimondo, Energy Director

Update! The Grand Canyon Centennial Protection Act passed the U.S. House of Representatives on October 30, 2019! 

As the battle to protect the Grand Canyon from uranium mining heats up with the summer sun, in June, congressional subcommittees heard testimony related to two bills that fight back against an administrative agenda that reads like a mining industry wish list. 

The Grand Canyon Centennial Protection Act would make the current temporary mining ban around Grand Canyon National Park permanent while the Uranium Classification Act of 2019 would remove uranium from a list that gives uranium mines priority over other interests, like protecting your public lands. As one of the expert witnesses invited to testify about just how dangerous uranium mining is, the Grand Canyon Trust had a front-row seat.

What we’re up against

As of last year, uranium is on the federal government’s list of “critical minerals” for the first time in history, and, in June, we saw the administration’s plan to “enhance access” to the minerals on that list. The plan includes a call to review all mining bans and land-use designations that prevent mining, including national monuments, wilderness areas, and national parks. In addition to its call to open some of America’s most treasured and important landscapes to mining, the plan also calls for streamlining environmental reviews for uranium and other critical mineral mines. 

And any day now, we expect to hear whether the president will impose trade measures that would artificially boost demand and prices for domestically mined uranium. These measures were proposed by two mining companies, one of which has a significant stake in mining claims around the Grand Canyon, as well as within the original boundaries of Bears Ears National Monument. The same company also owns the last operating U.S. mill capable of processing conventionally mined uranium ore.

Speaking truth to power

The subcommittee hearings highlighted the voices of tribal leaders, scientists, local elected officials, and national security experts who agree that efforts to enhance domestic uranium mining, particularly around the Grand Canyon, are misguided. America also got a good look at some of the most egregious misinformation being spread by those pushing to mine uranium near Grand Canyon National Park. 

No, uranium mining isn’t good for the environment

One of the most bizarre claims came from Arizona Congressman Paul Gosar, who suggested that mining uranium was actually good for the environment: this is abjectly false. 

One of the biggest risks of mining uranium comes from the high potential for it to dissolve in water and be transported into a drinking water aquifer, a surface stream, and/or seeps and springs inside the Grand Canyon via regional geologic systems that are not well understood. The key requirement for uranium’s solubility in water, however, is the presence of oxygen. The ore bodies that mining companies seek to mine exist precisely because the uranium has been stabilized — it has reached a point where oxygen is not present and therefore trace amounts of dissolved uranium, over thousands, even millions of years, have formed a concentrated ore deposit. Digging a mineshaft to get to the ore re-exposes that once stabilized ore to oxygen, allowing it to become mobile again, as does hauling the ore to the surface and storing it. Once out of the ground, anything from human error to extreme weather risks introducing uranium into surface or groundwater systems, despite any regulatory precautions.

Put plainly, mining uranium exposes the environment to the inherent risk of contamination, and in the Grand Canyon region, scientists, mining companies, and regulators alike lack the complete hydrologic understanding to honestly weigh that risk, let alone avert it.

The upshot

Mining companies and their supporters in Congress and the administration are doing everything they can to strip away important protections, from mining bans, to national monument designations, to environmental regulations. You can help stop them. Call your members of Congress today: 

• Ask your congressional representatives to support the Grand Canyon Centennial Protection Act (H.R. 1373) and the Uranium Classification Act of 2019 (H.R. 3405).
• Ask your senators to introduce or support a companion bill to H.R. 1373 and H.R. 3405.

 by Talia Boyd, Cultural Landscapes Manager

On a windy morning in southern Utah, members of the Ute Mountain Ute Tribe assembled in a parking lot in the reservation community of White Mesa, east of Bears Ears National Monument. In this quiet, high desert hamlet of about 300, elders arrived in traditional skirts and beadwork, teenagers rolled up on skateboards, children carried stuffed animals, and adults checked their cell phones. A young man unfurled a long canvas banner that flapped in the wind, painted with the words “No Uranium Protect Sacred Land” and the paw print of a bear.

It was the third Saturday in May in White Mesa, Utah, and tribal members were there to participate in the annual protest and spiritual walk to the town’s nearest neighbor: the White Mesa Mill, the last operating conventional uranium mill in America.

Living next-door to the last operating conventional uranium mill in America

The uranium mill has made headlines in recent years after it was revealed that its owner, Energy Fuels Resources, lobbied to reduce the size of Bears Ears National Monument. At one point, the company held dozens of mining claims inside the monument’s original boundaries. It also owns the Daneros uranium mine west of Bears Ears, as well as mines and claims around the Grand Canyon.

White Mesa community members are especially worried that pollution from the mill may contaminate the air they breathe and the water they drink.

“When the stacks are going, we can smell the sulfur down here,” community member Michael Badback told the crowd, which included advocates from other tribal communities and environmental groups across the Southwest and a handful of reporters.

“[S]ome days when the wind blows, when you come out, a lot of these kids like my grandson, they start to cough, and they never used to cough,” Badback explained, going on to share why protecting White Mesa matters. “We don’t have very much here,” he said, “but it is our beautiful reservation. We love where we’re at.”

The White Mesa uranium mill once processed uranium ore from mines across the Colorado Plateau, but now, with uranium prices low, it has stayed in business by processing vanadium from its waste ponds and from accepting and processing waste from toxic and radioactive sites across the country.

These wastes are accepted by the mill (sometimes, perhaps often, for a fee), the mill extracts leftover uranium, and then dumps whatever is left into giant ponds outside. There have been documented spills from trucks hauling these materials to the mill, something that also concerns community members.

What if toxic and radioactive waste spills?

“A lot of our people that don’t have vehicles, they hitchhike up the road and walk up the road to Blanding to buy stuff, and when trucks go by or if something happens, they’re going to be right on the side of the road when anything occurs. That’s very dangerous for our people,” Badback explained.

The ponds that hold the mill’s waste are lined, but the liners are decades old and have been in use much longer than they were designed for. There are documented plumes of contamination in the shallow aquifer beneath the mill, which sits above the tribe’s groundwater aquifer, although there is disagreement about whether the waste ponds are the source of this contamination. Regardless, community members worry about their water.

Ute Mountain Ute elder Thelma Whiskers addresses reporters before the spiritual walk. TIM PETERSON

“The reason why it’s bothering me is that we’ve got well water,” said Ute Mountain Ute tribal elder and famed basketmaker Thelma Whiskers, a founding member of the local White Mesa Concerned Community group. “The community members, they don’t drink the water. They always buy water. And they ask me:  ‘do you drink the water?’” She doesn’t. 

The only place to buy bottled water in White Mesa is the local gas station, where a gallon will set you back $1.79. 

“I care for my kids and my grandkids,” Whiskers explained. “That’s the reason why I’m standing here.”

With that, community members and their supporters set out for the mill, walking the five miles along the shoulder of Highway 191, southeastern Utah’s main thoroughfare, the road toxic and radioactive waste travels to the uranium mill along with tourists shuttling between Monument Valley and Canyonlands.

White Mesa Concerned Community members lead a spiritual walk to the White Mesa Mill. TIM PETERSON

“It’s really hard to do something like this in a small community, to stand up for what you think‘s right for your community,” said White Mesa Concerned Community organizer Yolanda Badback, once the group stood before the mill’s sign, the closest the public is allowed to go to the mill. A sulfurous smell tinged the air, bringing a metallic taste to the mouth. “I don’t know if you guys smelled that, when you walked up,” Badback told supporters. “That’s what we smell every evening in our community. And it’s an awful smell, and it’s hard to deal with.”

The uranium mill has recently applied for permission to expand its waste pits and the mill’s owner has asked for trade protections on uranium hoping to artificially inflate demand, and prices, for uranium mined in the United States. A decision is expected from President Trump by mid-July 2019.

Despite these hurdles, concerned citizens in White Mesa continue to demand clear air and water for their community. “Myself, I’ve been threatened in Blanding, in the grocery store, but I don’t let that get to me,” says Yolanda Badback. “I stand up for who I am and what I’m doing for my people.”

For its part, the Grand Canyon Trust is working to ensure that the mill operates safely and follows the law, challenging the Daneros Mine expansion, and carefully tracking efforts to prop up the domestic uranium industry.

Ready to help? Join our action alert network ›

 by Amber Reimondo, Energy Director

Update! The Grand Canyon Centennial Protection Act passed the U.S. House of Representatives on October 30, 2019! 

On February 26, 2019, the centennial anniversary of Grand Canyon National Park, Rep. Raúl Grijalva introduced the Grand Canyon Centennial Protection Act to permanently protect public lands around the park from new uranium mining.

Even before the bill was introduced, fictitious claims about it began circulating. To help you navigate these murky waters, here are the facts about the Grand Canyon Centennial Protection Act, and the temporary mining ban it would make it permanent.

MYTH: The Grand Canyon Centennial Protection Act is a land grab.

FACT: The act only affects public lands already managed by the federal government. 

In 2012, the secretary of the interior instituted a 20-year mineral withdrawal, temporarily banning new mining claims on about 1 million acres of federal public lands bordering Grand Canyon National Park. The ban affects federal lands only — mostly national forest and lands managed by the Bureau of Land Management. State lands and private inholdings within the withdrawal area are not affected by the ban. The Grand Canyon Centennial Protection Act simply makes that 2012 withdrawal permanent. It does not transfer ownership of any lands to the federal government. 

MYTH: The act would block off roads and close lands to hunters, campers, and off-road vehicles.

FACT: Mining is the only activity the act affects.

The act would not affect other existing uses, including:

• Hunting
• Grazing
• Camping
• Hiking
• Mountain biking
• Permitted use of off-road vehicles

One rumor circulating early on has been that the act, if passed, would close roads to off-road vehicle users and prevent future off-road-vehicle road construction. The only roads the act would stop from being built are roads leading to new mines and mining claims. The act aims to prevent one and only one activity around the Grand Canyon: mining.

MYTH: Extremist environmentalists are behind the mining ban.

FACT: There is broad bipartisan public support for the ban.

In August 2018, a bipartisan poll found that 63 percent of Arizonans supported continuing the existing ban on new uranium mines near the Grand Canyon, including the majority of Democrats, Republicans, and independents. Seventy-three percent of Arizonans polled said outdoor recreation and visitors to national parks and other public lands are more important to the future of Arizona’s economy than mining uranium and other minerals.

MYTH: It’s a violation of past agreements. The Arizona Wilderness Act of 1984 allowed uranium mining in this area in exchange for land protections.

FACT: The Arizona Wilderness Act of 1984 in no way precludes efforts to protect the Grand Canyon region from uranium mining. 

The Arizona Wilderness Act of 1984 was designed to protect wilderness around the Grand Canyon.  Protecting the region and its waters from mining contamination has been a separate but ongoing struggle. Mark Trautwein, a former staffer for the House Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests and Public Lands who was directly involved with the passage of the 1984 Arizona Wilderness Act, has testified before the same committee that the Arizona Wilderness Act was narrowly designed “to ensure that wilderness resources and values were protected.” His testimony also states that the committee’s former chairman, Mo Udall, “hoped for nothing less” than that others might someday add to his conservation legacy with legislation such as a bill that would permanently ban mining in the region. 

MYTH: The Grand Canyon mining ban kills jobs and hurts the economy.

FACT: The mining ban protects thousands of jobs and the northern Arizona economy.

Uranium mining around the Grand Canyon has never been, and never could be, a significant driver of the regional economy. That’s because mines are depleted relatively quickly and employ a relatively small number of people. The operator of Canyon Mine, near the South Rim, for instance, estimates that the mine will be depleted within 10 years and expects to employ approximately 60 people during peak operation. In the 2000s, including in 2007, when the price of uranium spiked to an all-time high, extraction of minerals including oil, gas, coal, nickel, zinc, copper, stone, iron, and uranium together provided an annual average of just 545 jobs in northern Arizona. Compare that to the more than 9,000 jobs supported by Grand Canyon National Park alone.

Finally, uranium mining is regulated under the antiquated General Mining Law of 1872, which means that while uranium mining companies still have to pay business taxes like any other business in the state of Arizona, they do not pay royalties on uranium extracted from public lands. Royalties paid by other extractive industries are split between the federal government and the state where the extractive operations take place and often help to support things like public education. 

MYTH: The mining ban undermines national security by limiting uranium supplies.

FACT: The U.S. already has access to enough uranium to meet its national security and energy security needs.

The U.S. has access to enough already mined uranium to meet the nation’s defense needs, supply its electrical grid, and insulate itself from disruptions in the supply chain. U.S. nuclear power companies have said that "buy American" requirements for uranium will drive up costs and force the closure of nuclear power plants. And finally, the Grand Canyon is hardly the linchpin to domestic uranium supply. Uranium deposits are common throughout the country and world, and the Grand Canyon region holds just 0.29 percent of known U.S. reserves of uranium.

MYTH: Modern uranium mines aren’t like mines of the past.

FACT: Modern uranium mines have contaminated land and water around the Grand Canyon.

Mining has left a toxic legacy in the Grand Canyon region that is still impacting human health and the environment today. Even more recent mines have experienced problems, demonstrating the dangerous lack of understanding about the complex interconnectivity of nearby groundwater and the Grand Canyon itself. 

To make matters worse, the temporary mining ban of 2012 was meant to allow time for more research to better understand the risks to groundwater, land, plants, animals, and people in and around the Grand Canyon. But that research has been severely underfunded by Congress. The Grand Canyon Centennial Protection Act cuts to the chase and protects the Grand Canyon and those who depend upon it from the risk of contamination by new uranium mining, forever. 

 by Roger Clark, Grand Canyon Director

Update! The Grand Canyon Centennial Protection Act passed the U.S. House of Representatives on October 30, 2019! Urge your senators to support the Act in the Senate ›

Grand Canyon National Park turns 100 years old today, February 26, 2019. What better way to commemorate the milestone than with a commitment to better protect our natural wonder?

Today, Arizona Rep. Raúl Grijalva introduced the Grand Canyon Centennial Protection Act, a piece of legislation aimed at protecting 1 million acres of public lands adjacent to Grand Canyon National Park from uranium mining.

The bottom line is that mining uranium near the Grand Canyon does more harm than good, it doesn’t serve the public interest, and we need to draw the line here... 

— Rep. Raúl Grijalva

We can’t undo the toxic legacy left behind by the park’s first century, but we can prevent new contamination in its second.

Wait, there’s uranium mining near the Grand Canyon?

Shocking, we know. Most park visitors are blissfully unaware that a uranium mine stood at Maricopa Point in the 1950s, that water downstream is radioactive, and that uranium mines continue operating outside park boundaries today. In fact, the uranium frenzy around the canyon reached such heights that, in 2012, the interior secretary enacted a 20-year "mineral withdrawal" — a temporary ban on new mining claims (which, at the time, numbered in the thousands). 

“This toxic legacy is present all around us. From the Orphan Mine, Canyon Mine, the mines on the North Rim, and the hundreds of abandoned mines on the Navajo Nation, we know how uranium affects the land, air, and waterways. So why should we continue to allow the poisoning of the places we have left?” asks Sarana Riggs.

What’s in the bill?

The Grand Canyon Centennial Protection Act would make the 2012 temporary ban permanent, which would eliminate speculative mining claims that mining companies and individuals have staked on public lands without having made a valid discovery of minerals. As of February 2018, there were over 800 active mining claims in the ban area. The Act would also prevent companies and individuals from staking new claims, although prior claims with valid existing rights could be developed.

This legislation is the most recent in a string of efforts to stop mining in the region, starting in 1893 when President Benjamin Harrison banned mining on 1.8 million acres in and around the Grand Canyon. The Navajo Nation banned uranium mining in 2005, and the Hualapai and Havasupai tribes also prohibit uranium mining on their lands adjacent to Grand Canyon National Park.

Building legislative support

A broad-based and growing coalition supports the Grand Canyon Centennial Protection Act. Last weekend, more than 100 people joined Rep. Grijalva at the legislation announcement celebration, including the bill’s co-sponsor, Rep. Tom O’Halleran, Native leaders, and others.

 We are just following in our ancestors' footsteps to protect this canyon. Please stand with us. Today is a very important day, a historical day, as we continue to work together to stop uranium mining in the canyon forever. Forever.”

— Carletta Tilousi, Havasupai Tribal Council

"The legacy of uranium mining has devastated the people and the land, and continues to destroy the land and lives of Hopisinom, Native Americans, and Americans alike," said Clark Tenakhongva, vice chairman of the Hopi Tribe. "If Americans are to live together in America in the 21st Century, we must call together for another way of living."

Rep. Grijalva with tribal leaders in support of the Grand Canyon Centennial Protection Act. AMY S. MARTIN

Ethan Aumack, executive director of the Grand Canyon Trust said, "It is truly an honor to gather together with leaders from the Havasupai, Hualapai, Hopi, Navajo, and other Native nations, with members of Congress, county and city officials, conservation groups, businesses, hunters and anglers, and people from across our state and beyond who care deeply about this place. We have the opportunity to change the course of the Grand Canyon’s next 100 years."

A bipartisan poll of Arizona voters found that three in five want to continue the existing ban on new uranium mining on public lands next to Grand Canyon National Park. 

A path forward

The bill closes the door on uranium mining within waterways draining directly into the Grand Canyon, but it’s not an easy path ahead.

As the chairman of the House Committee on Natural Resources, Rep. Grijalva will convene congressional hearings on the legislation during upcoming months. The U.S. House of Representatives could approve it within a year. 

A companion bill will also need to be introduced in the Senate. Passage will likely require leadership from both of Arizona’s senators, paired with a strong show of bipartisan support, as Cindy McCain and Mark Udall suggest in their recent op-ed in the Washington Post.

The congressionally approved bill will also need a president who is willing to sign it. 

Now is the time to protect the Grand Canyon’s sacred waters from permanent uranium-mining pollution. As we prepare to commemorate the 100th anniversary of Grand Canyon National Park, let’s remember that good stewardship, like good citizenship, strengthens and unites our nation.

— Cindy McCain and Mark Udall

 by Amber Reimondo, Energy Director

For years, uranium-mining companies eager to tap into coveted uranium deposits around the Grand Canyon have made promises — of job security, national security, and environmental security. They’ve promised jobs, thriving rural economies, a healthy environment, and clean energy. But what are the facts behind those promises? And who bears the risks if they can’t be fulfilled? A newly released Grand Canyon Trust report tackles these questions, challenging industry claims and uncovering who really stands to benefit and who bears the risks of mining for uranium near the Grand Canyon. 

Economic and national security

The global market for uranium has been saturated for years, especially after the Fukushima nuclear disaster, which has kept uranium prices low and made business less profitable for companies who want to mine the resource. But about a year ago, uranium was newly listed as a critical mineral by the Interior Department — a category reserved for minerals deemed important to economic and national security. 

At around the same time, two uranium mining companies, one with significant mining interests around the Grand Canyon, saw a political opportunity and submitted a petition under Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act — a law that allows trade actions on the basis of national security. This is the same law that was used by this administration to impose tariffs on steel and aluminum. In their petition, the companies — Energy Fuels and Ur-Energy — asked the federal government to implement measures to reserve a portion of the U.S. uranium market for uranium mined from U.S. soil. These measures — in the form of quotas and a “buy American” requirement — would be significant because they would force uranium buyers to purchase from U.S. mines. Doing so would likely drive up the domestic price of uranium and allow mining companies to open or ramp up activity at mines in the U.S. that haven’t been economically feasible in the present market environment. One of these mines is Energy Fuels’ Canyon Mine near the Grand Canyon’s south rim. 

The public has yet to see the recommendations that the Commerce Department sent to the president in late 2018 regarding critical minerals. Commerce is expected to send recommendations about uranium quotas to the president in April, and it’s likely we won’t learn of the federal government’s final decision on the matter until this summer.

In the meantime, we wanted a closer look at the facts for ourselves.

The findings

In a nutshell, the new report explains that, despite promises, mining in the Grand Canyon region can’t offer economic security, isn’t necessary for national security, and can’t guarantee safety for the public or the environment. In fact, the only security found in mining uranium in the Grand Canyon region is that of short-term profits for the mining industry itself. It’s the rest of us — Native American tribes who’ve called the Grand Canyon home since time immemorial, tourists and recreationists, wildlife enthusiasts, local business owners, gateway communities, and the canyon itself — who bear the risks of mining.

Breccia-pipe uranium mining involves relatively few and temporary jobs and could simultaneously jeopardize thousands of permanent jobs in the region that depend upon a healthy Grand Canyon. The U.S. has plenty of uranium for its energy and defense needs, and the Grand Canyon holds less than 1 percent of known unmined reserves throughout the country.

And despite industry claims that foreign suppliers have seized a “majority” of the U.S. market, mines in Russia, Kazakhstan, China, and Uzbekistan have most recently provided only about a third of U.S. supply, and that number has been declining since 2010. 

Read the full “Uranium Mining in the Grand Canyon Region” report ›

The Grand Canyon is too precious to mine 

On February 23, 2019, Arizona Rep. Raúl Grijalva cited the Trust’s report as one reason to introduce the Grand Canyon Centennial Protection Act, legislation to make the current temporary ban on new mining claims on about 1 million acres of federal lands surrounding the national park permanent.

“This is especially important now that the Grand Canyon Trust just put out a new report on how uranium mining is hurting this environment," Rep. Grijalva said. "The bottom line is that mining uranium near the Grand Canyon does more harm than good, it doesn’t serve the public interest, and we need to draw the line here. Anyone who cares about the Grand Canyon should read this report and share it with friends.”

We hope you’ll find the report useful too and that you’ll take a few minutes to write to your congressional representatives to say uranium mining near the Grand Canyon isn’t worth the risk and should be permanently banned.