HAMILTON — Hundreds of people packed into a Hamilton public meeting Monday on the Sheep Creek Project, a controversial proposal to mine rare earth elements south of Darby.
Following a few hours of hearing comments, the Ravalli County commissioners voted unanimously to draft a letter opposing the project’s placement on the list to be “fast-tracked” for federal permit review.
Watch to hear more from Monday night's meeting:
“It is one of the issues that is clearly bringing people from, it doesn't matter what stripe, all together in one place,” Kierstin Schmitt of Corvallis said in her public comment.
U.S. Critical Materials, the company behind the proposal, said the Sheep Creek area is one of the purest spots in North America to mine rare earth elements. These minerals are used in high-tech devices, like smartphones and electric vehicles. Right now, the U.S. imports most of its supply of rare earth elements.
“The unique nature of Sheep Creek and the geology that's there allows us to easily support environmental conservation, while supporting national security and resource responsibility,” said Scott Osrerman, a senior advisor for U.S. Critical Materials who spoke at Monday’s meeting.
Many in the Bitterroot have expressed concerns over the project, especially as the proposed site is near the headwaters of the West Fork of the Bitterroot River.
“We recognize that rare earth minerals play a role in national security, clean energy and technology,” said Heather Barber, executive director of the Bitterroot Water Partnership. “But, the speculative minerals that may or may not be extracted from Sheep Creek are not worth risking the Bitterroot.”
Recently, the project was added to the Federal Permitting Council’s list of “Current FAST-41 Transparency Projects,” part of a program intended to streamline federal review of infrastructure projects. For many, this heightened concerns, leading to Monday's meeting with the Ravalli County Commissioners.
Osterman, with U.S. Critical Materials, began his speech at the meeting with an apology to the community. He went on to answer questions from the commissioners about the FAST program and the mine proposal.
“First of all, we have been somewhat negligent in responding to criticisms and questions, and that's simply because we have not had what we believe to be a full understanding of what our operation there might be and so for that, we apologize. But also now, since we've filed the FAST-41 agreement, or transparency portal, it's time for us to tell you what the plan is,” he said.
The FAST program aims to streamline the process of reviewing federal permits. According to the permitting council’s website, it does not change any of the regulatory requirements, including environmental reviews. But many Bitterrooters, from the commissioners to the public, said they did not feel comfortable with the project’s inclusion in the FAST Program, especially given the company’s lack of communication previously.
“We don't want to be fast-tracking anything on something so critical to the Bitterroot River,” one commissioner said.
At Monday’s meeting, the line to give public comment stretched far back from the podium. As they got to the microphone, many spoke of unanswered questions, distrust of U.S. Critical Materials and concerns over environmental and health impacts.
Many also cited concerns over the type of mining being explored. U.S. Critical Materials said that Sheep Creek would look different from most mines, using minimal water in the exploratory and mining process.
“Another concern is will Sheep Creek water be used, and will the watershed of the Bitterroot be impacted? And the answer is no,” Osterman said. “Our plan is not to draw any water from Sheep Creek, nor discharge any water. The mine of the future is far different than the mine of the past. Future mining uses water and recycles it and cleans it and, if water is ever put back into the environment, it’s usually cleaner than the water that exists there. And that’s something that we’re totally committed to.”
Both the commissioners and the public showed skepticism of these claims, asking about the impacts on the watershed and the use of different mining techniques.
“We are being used as a guinea pig,” Schmitt said.
“They said so themselves today, this is not tested. This is ‘future mining,’” Barber said.
“We are the only state in the nation to whose citizens clean air, land and water is guaranteed by the Constitution,” said Noah Thompson, a high school student who lives near the proposed mine site. “And we're talking about giving that up.”
Following a few hours of comments, the commissioners voted unanimously to send a letter to state and federal leaders opposing the project's inclusion in the FAST program, citing unanswered questions and a lack of local control.
In response to the letter, Senator Tim Sheehy and Representative Ryan Zinke released statements urging the project’s removal from the FAST program:
“I strongly support unleashing Montana’s resource economy and mining industry. I also believe local voices must be heard loudest when considering public lands policy. Regarding the Sheep Creek Mine, local Montanans have made their opposition clear; therefore, I oppose efforts to approve the proposed Sheep Creek Mine and encourage the Permitting Council to remove it from their fast-track list,” said Senator Sheehy.
“Montana knows better than anyone there’s a right and wrong way to mine. Fast-tracking a mine with overwhelming public opposition and bypassing the mechanisms that allow for transparency and accountability is the wrong way to do it. Ravalli County officials and residents have been clear in their concerns and opposition to this project. It has fallen on deaf ears and they have received no communication from the company. I urge the council to remove Sheep Creek from the FAST 41 process,” said Representative Zinke.
