Woes for Wildcat Mining
California mining company stumbles in the La Platas

SideStory: Court overturns ban on heap-leach

Snow piles up outside a covered mine adit in the La Plata Mountains in the file photo. The Wildcat Mining Corp. is proping to re-open the Mayday and Idaho mines and mill site in the La Platas but failed to post a $35,000 reclamation bond in roder to do so. Furthermore, the cosnturcion of an access road on Wildcat property could constitute an infraction for operation a mine without a permit../Photo by David Halterman

by Missy Votel

Instead of hitting pay dirt, the latest gold rush in the La Platas appears to have hit a snag.

California-based Wildcat Mining Corp., which had planned to reopen the Idaho Mine and mill near Mayday, recently ran afoul of state regulations, which could cost the company several thousand dollars in fines and derail county and state operating permits.

There are two main issues of concern regarding the operation, according to Dave Berry, director of the Colorado Office of Mined Land Reclamation, which administers reclamation laws for the state. For starters, Wildcat failed to make good on a $35,000 bond required by the state before mining activity can begin. Berry said the money is used to offset reclamation costs associated with mining operations.

Wildcat, whose permit application was approved by the state Mining Reclamation Board in the fall of 2007 had 365 days to post the bond. However, failure to do so has resulted in an expiration of the permit as well as a possible increase in any future bond.

“By law, any permit previously approved by the board must go back to the drawing board after 365 days,” said Berry. In addition, he said his office will recommend the board increase the bond to $44,000 due to rising costs associated with reclamation and weed control.

The second, and possibly more egregious issue, stems from construction of an access road that violates not only Mined Land Rec rules, but also county and possibly state water-quality standards as well.

According to Berry, late last October, his office was notified by the San Juan Basin Health Department of an unauthorized road, built on Wildcat property. Since Wildcat had neglected to post its bond, the road constituted mining without a permit. It also likely was in violation of the state’s stormwater treatment regulations as per the Clean Water Act.

“San Juan Basin contacted us with worries about sediment from the road impacting wetlands below, which is a concern to all of us,” said Berry.

As a result, on Nov. 3, the Mined Land Rec representative in Durango, Kate Pickford, as well as representatives from the La Plata County Planning Department and San Juan Basin conducted an inspection of the property. Berry said Pickford found that the road, which was several hundred feet long, was an attempt at a short cut that “clearly was not permitted” by the office. He said the road was possibly cut in response to Wildcat being denied access across U.S. Forest Service land without first conducting an environmental impact statement.

On Nov. 20, Berry’s office sent Wildcat a “reason to believe a violation exists” letter, giving operators 30 days to respond. The topic was originally slated for the Reclamation Board’s January meeting last week in Denver but was postponed until Feb. 11 to give the operators more time to respond.

As a result of the unauthorized road construction, Berry said civil penalties may be levied. Berry’s staff is recommending fines of $50 to $200 per day, retroactive to Pickford’s Nov. 3 inspection if Wildcat is found in violation. In addition, Berry will recommend a separate $31,000 bond to reclaim the area disturbed by the road.

“We’ll make our recommendations to the Board, and they’ll take action on the violations and make the final ruling. Enforcement will be between us and the operator.”

Despite this, Berry said the public is invited to weigh in on the re-issuance of Wildcat’s operating permit on Feb. 11-12. He said arrangements are being made for people to comment via phone after complaints from local citizens over having to drive to Denver to testify. “We want them to know that this part of the meeting is very open to the public, and we understand that it is difficult to get to Denver,” he said.

In the meantime, Wildcat’s problems may only be beginning. Whether or not it gets approval from the Office of Mined Land Reclamation, it will still need a commercial permit from La Plata County. However, such approval currently hinges on approval of an access road. According to county planning engineer Victoria Schmitt, the county has concerns with the steep grade of the current access road as well as erosion control. Her office was poised to recommend denial of the commercial permit to county commissioners in December. However, at the request of Wildcat, the decision was postponed indefinitely. “The county is currently reviewing whether there is adequate drainage and erosion control,” she said. “The road was constructed with a permit that doesn’t exist.”

In addition to coming into compliance with La Plata County, Wildcat could also be facing repercussions from the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment’s Water Quality Division. According to Chad Engelhardt, an environmental specialist with San Juan Basin Health, which conducts site compliance visits on behalf of the state, there are several problems with the newly built road. Engelhardt, who was also present at the Nov. 3 inspection, found the area disturbed by the road to be more than an acre, despite Wildcat claims to the contrary. As such, Wildcat is required to submit a stormwater management plan under state law. “The area of disturbance is over the 1-acre threshold, and therefore they are required by the state to get a stormwater permit through the (Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment),” he said.

Immediate concerns for Engelhardt are the stability of the slope on which the road is built and its close proximity to wetlands, and ultimately, the La Plata River. Toxic or heavy-metal run-off from the mine could impact fish in nearby waterways as well as the surrounding ecosystem. He said coming into compliance with county code may only increase the impact. “I think it’s going to be really difficult to decrease the grade of the road, with limiting factors such as slope, geology, etc.,” he said. “I don’t know how they could do that without increasing the footprint which would impact wetlands even more.”

Engelhardt has filed a report with the Water Quality Division, which may assess civil penalties on Wildcat as well. The Army Corps of Engineers may also have a say in mitigation measures if wetlands are impacted by the development.

A call Tuesday seeking comment from Wildcat Mining was not returned.

As for Engelhardt, he said all signs point back to square one: an environmental impact statement. “We recommended in the beginning they do an EIS because the mine had the potential for significant impacts,” he said. “Had they done that, and not tried to circumvent the proper channels, they would not be in the position they’re in now.”