Tweet
Just got an interesting letter back from Ol' Lucia Malin of the DOGM, thought I'd share what she says and what I say:
Dear Mr. Capps,
Thank you for your e-mail of August 7, 2008, in response to John
Baza’s e-mail to you.
The Abandoned Mine Reclamation Program (AMRP) follows a careful process
of cultural resource management in close partnership with the State
Historic Preservation Office.
The State Historic Preservation Office has concern only for that which is publicly accessible and visible, and cares nothing for the interior of the mines, where all the history actually is stored. Head frames and hoist equipment seem to be one of the few things they actually care about.
By doing this we take into account the
impacts of our work on cultural resources and we use avoidance as our
primary method of mitigation. We follow national legal and professional
guidelines and standards regarding documenting, recording, and
determining what is considered a historic site. However, not all
resources can be saved or preserved.
Coming out and stating that they do not care to protect all things related to history.
We strive to identify and preserve
the important elements of a site. In addition, we work to interpret
Utah mining history for the public by providing a mining heritage
curricula for fourth graders that includes an educational workbook and
Stay Out and Stay Alive DVD, installing interpretive plaques and kiosks
at mine sites, collecting oral histories, etc.
Educating children to stay out, which gives the DOGM a nationally better view, but also gives them an audience they know will not reject whats being taught, easily frightened, and easily brainwashed.
We have developed, in
partnership with the Utah Division of State History, through the Mining
Heritage Alliance, a web site that promotes tourism highlighting Utah
mining history: that is available on the web at
Commercialized tourism shows nothing for the real value held in untampered locations both in and out of the mines. Who wants to pay to enter a location anyways?
Mr. Milford, now retired, worked for the New Mexico program for many
years. He aimed, as we do, to make sure the historical documentation
work required to meet our NHPA Section 106 compliance is of the highest
caliber. Historical compliance is the largest single category of
expenditure for professional services we have after engineering; it
often costs close to 25% of the total cost of a project.
Your suggestion to close more mines with lockable gates is well taken.
Gates are one of our standard closures and appropriate for many
situations. However, because of the specialty steel used and the
skilled labor required, they are the most expensive closure. One reason
we do not install more gates with locks is because of the high rate of
vandalism.
If gates were locked and keys given out, with a notice at the site of how to obtain a key, would vandalism not stop, such as it is with many gated caves? We are asking for keys and the rights to administer the mines.
While the gates are vandal resistant, they are not
vandal-proof. Your own website once featured a vandalized gate in a
“Photo of the Day.†Backfilling is usually the least costly,
most permanent, and most vandal-proof method of mine closure. Because
of our limited funding we can only afford to visit a site once, so we
need to use the most efficient and durable methods available. No
general revenue tax dollars are used for mine closures. The AMRP is
funded by a fee paid by coal mine operators into a federal trust fund
dedicated to abandoned mine reclamation. We owe it to the mining
industry to spend their reclamation fees prudently.
Are these fees not reflected to the consumer derived from reflected costs of the fee? Are we, the consumer, not paying more for coal (power, fuel, etc) in the long run?
Normally we do not remove mining artifacts such as machinery, tools, or
rails.
Seems like a hint that they do remove artifacts on occasion, but it is not a "normal" practice...
By sealing mine openings, all the cultural objects and mineral
specimens that exist within the mines are protected from vandalism or
theft until such time as legitimate interests can re-enter the mines for
proper study.
Sealing a mine prevents natural air flow. By stopping the airflow, the mine becomes sick and dies. The good, clean air turns begins taking on high amounts of carbon dioxide, methane, and heat. Decay begins to progressively grow, support structures fail, the humid nature of the mine eats clothes, papers, wood, and many other artifacts inside, and eventually leads to a premature collapse. And who determines whether there is legitimate interest to reenter the mines, and what determines "proper study"?
Even though there is some loss to natural decay processes
over time, the professional archeological community prefers this
approach to that of leaving mines open for looting.
Why is it that you would appear to make any mine explorer a "looter"?
Your comparison of mines to natural hazards is flawed. They are not
the same. Mines are not natural hazards.
Never claimed them to be the same.
Ski slopes, whitewater rapids, and mountain climbing routes are all rated for user ability.
Novice skiers use the bunny slopes and avoid the double black diamond
runs. There is no comparable skill rating system for abandoned mines.
There are no signs saying, “You must be this tall to ride this rideâ€
at mine entrances. Even if common sense and basic safety precautions
alone were sufficient to safely explore mines, there is no way to
enforce even the minimal “common sense†standard. Anyone with (or
without) a flashlight can go underground.
Of course there is no skill rating in place. But why not put something in place? Or let us develop and implement a system that corresponds with the current DOGM procedures?
With respect to liability, abandoned mines are closer to swimming pools
than to beaches. Someone built them and someone owns them. The family
of a surfer drowned in the ocean or killed by a shark cannot sue the
ocean or the shark for damages. But the surfer’s family would quite
likely sue the community that owned the beach, the lifeguards, and any
other deep pocket an enterprising lawyer could identify. Both public
and private landowners of outdoor recreational lands understand this
exposure to liability and work to reduce their risk. For backcountry
winter sports enthusiasts, for instance, there is a sophisticated
infrastructure in place to monitor avalanche conditions, disseminate
warnings, artificially trigger avalanches, and educate the public about
avalanche safety. The ski industry invests heavily in safety
infrastructure (slope ratings, avalanche control, restricting access to
the terrain, etc.) because of liability concerns. They know that the
money spent on safety more than offsets the potential costs in damages
if they failed to do so. The AMRP fits into this strategy. The federal
government, through SMCRA, is investing in risk reduction where mine
owners have neglected to do their part.
Thats great! Everybody still gets to enjoy what they do, and are safer while they do it! Why don't we just illegalize access to back country sports then? Wouldn't that be easier? Cheaper? If you allow back county adventures, who are you to determine that there will be no "underground" adventures?
I am glad that you acknowledge that shafts are inherently hazardous and
that they pose a danger to people who may not willingly accept the risk,
such as ATV riders. Adits, however, can be just as hazardous since they
can contain winzes or declines that drop tens or even hundreds of feet.
These can be difficult or impossible to see in the darkness of a mine.
Just this past weekend a man was injured and trapped for two days in a
California abandoned mine after he fell down a winze. Adits can have
oxygen deficient atmospheres, unstable explosives, rotten roof support,
and other hazards. Mine rescues require specialized skills and mine
explorers who get into trouble put first responders at risk as well.
The Joshua Dennis incident in 1989 and the Jeremiah Etherington fatality
in 1996 endangered dozens of law enforcement, search and rescue, and
mine rescue personnel and occupied them for many days at great expense
to state and local taxpayers.
Joshua Dennis was in there with no light, no gear, and no partner. His father left him to take a blind kid out (of all people) and the other scouts left him behind. He was in an accessible place, but outside of immediate view. He heard the calls of his father and rescue workers, but refused to answer them. Rescue workers also refused John Skinner's help, who knew exactly where he was. I have been to where Etherington died, and it was absolute and complete stupidity and suicidal on his part. He dropped down a 1300' shaft with a tow rope tied around his waist... what could be expected... There is just as much as chance of walking off a cliff as there is into a mine shaft. Both these incidents were of great stupidity on each parties sides; Don't dare compare exploration of mines to these incidents.
We appreciate your offer to provide any assistance in project planning.
Frankly, making big changes will be difficult.
Admitting an unwillingness to change to accommodate those that are being affected most by the closures.
We have an
institutional mission that is mandated by Congress and defined by both
state and federal law. It is unrealistic to expect us to change our
mission substantially. On the other hand, it is much more realistic for
you to effect changes and influence decisions at the project level. In
fact, many laws, such as the National Environmental Policy Act,
encourage public input on project proposals. We embrace that idea, and
furthermore, we are always open to constructive comments and
suggestions. We have an open door policy and I encourage you to call
me, or anyone on the AMRP staff, and discuss issues or make an
appointment to come into our office and talk with us in person. We want
to hear what you have to say.
I invite you to meet with us in person. I look forward to meeting you.
Please call me at 801-538-5323 or e-mail me at luciamalin@utah.gov to
set up an appointment.
Sincerely,
Luci Malin
Administrator
Utah Abandoned Mine Program
1594 West North Temple Suite 1210
PO Box 145801
Salt Lake City, Utah 84114-5801
801-538-5323 office
801-440-3776 Blackberry
801-359-3940 fax
LUCIAMALIN@utah.gov
We'll see where things go
Dear Mr. Capps,
Thank you for your e-mail of August 7, 2008, in response to John
Baza’s e-mail to you.
The Abandoned Mine Reclamation Program (AMRP) follows a careful process
of cultural resource management in close partnership with the State
Historic Preservation Office.
The State Historic Preservation Office has concern only for that which is publicly accessible and visible, and cares nothing for the interior of the mines, where all the history actually is stored. Head frames and hoist equipment seem to be one of the few things they actually care about.
By doing this we take into account the
impacts of our work on cultural resources and we use avoidance as our
primary method of mitigation. We follow national legal and professional
guidelines and standards regarding documenting, recording, and
determining what is considered a historic site. However, not all
resources can be saved or preserved.
Coming out and stating that they do not care to protect all things related to history.
We strive to identify and preserve
the important elements of a site. In addition, we work to interpret
Utah mining history for the public by providing a mining heritage
curricula for fourth graders that includes an educational workbook and
Stay Out and Stay Alive DVD, installing interpretive plaques and kiosks
at mine sites, collecting oral histories, etc.
Educating children to stay out, which gives the DOGM a nationally better view, but also gives them an audience they know will not reject whats being taught, easily frightened, and easily brainwashed.
We have developed, in
partnership with the Utah Division of State History, through the Mining
Heritage Alliance, a web site that promotes tourism highlighting Utah
mining history: that is available on the web at
Commercialized tourism shows nothing for the real value held in untampered locations both in and out of the mines. Who wants to pay to enter a location anyways?
Mr. Milford, now retired, worked for the New Mexico program for many
years. He aimed, as we do, to make sure the historical documentation
work required to meet our NHPA Section 106 compliance is of the highest
caliber. Historical compliance is the largest single category of
expenditure for professional services we have after engineering; it
often costs close to 25% of the total cost of a project.
Your suggestion to close more mines with lockable gates is well taken.
Gates are one of our standard closures and appropriate for many
situations. However, because of the specialty steel used and the
skilled labor required, they are the most expensive closure. One reason
we do not install more gates with locks is because of the high rate of
vandalism.
If gates were locked and keys given out, with a notice at the site of how to obtain a key, would vandalism not stop, such as it is with many gated caves? We are asking for keys and the rights to administer the mines.
While the gates are vandal resistant, they are not
vandal-proof. Your own website once featured a vandalized gate in a
“Photo of the Day.†Backfilling is usually the least costly,
most permanent, and most vandal-proof method of mine closure. Because
of our limited funding we can only afford to visit a site once, so we
need to use the most efficient and durable methods available. No
general revenue tax dollars are used for mine closures. The AMRP is
funded by a fee paid by coal mine operators into a federal trust fund
dedicated to abandoned mine reclamation. We owe it to the mining
industry to spend their reclamation fees prudently.
Are these fees not reflected to the consumer derived from reflected costs of the fee? Are we, the consumer, not paying more for coal (power, fuel, etc) in the long run?
Normally we do not remove mining artifacts such as machinery, tools, or
rails.
Seems like a hint that they do remove artifacts on occasion, but it is not a "normal" practice...
By sealing mine openings, all the cultural objects and mineral
specimens that exist within the mines are protected from vandalism or
theft until such time as legitimate interests can re-enter the mines for
proper study.
Sealing a mine prevents natural air flow. By stopping the airflow, the mine becomes sick and dies. The good, clean air turns begins taking on high amounts of carbon dioxide, methane, and heat. Decay begins to progressively grow, support structures fail, the humid nature of the mine eats clothes, papers, wood, and many other artifacts inside, and eventually leads to a premature collapse. And who determines whether there is legitimate interest to reenter the mines, and what determines "proper study"?
Even though there is some loss to natural decay processes
over time, the professional archeological community prefers this
approach to that of leaving mines open for looting.
Why is it that you would appear to make any mine explorer a "looter"?
Your comparison of mines to natural hazards is flawed. They are not
the same. Mines are not natural hazards.
Never claimed them to be the same.
Ski slopes, whitewater rapids, and mountain climbing routes are all rated for user ability.
Novice skiers use the bunny slopes and avoid the double black diamond
runs. There is no comparable skill rating system for abandoned mines.
There are no signs saying, “You must be this tall to ride this rideâ€
at mine entrances. Even if common sense and basic safety precautions
alone were sufficient to safely explore mines, there is no way to
enforce even the minimal “common sense†standard. Anyone with (or
without) a flashlight can go underground.
Of course there is no skill rating in place. But why not put something in place? Or let us develop and implement a system that corresponds with the current DOGM procedures?
With respect to liability, abandoned mines are closer to swimming pools
than to beaches. Someone built them and someone owns them. The family
of a surfer drowned in the ocean or killed by a shark cannot sue the
ocean or the shark for damages. But the surfer’s family would quite
likely sue the community that owned the beach, the lifeguards, and any
other deep pocket an enterprising lawyer could identify. Both public
and private landowners of outdoor recreational lands understand this
exposure to liability and work to reduce their risk. For backcountry
winter sports enthusiasts, for instance, there is a sophisticated
infrastructure in place to monitor avalanche conditions, disseminate
warnings, artificially trigger avalanches, and educate the public about
avalanche safety. The ski industry invests heavily in safety
infrastructure (slope ratings, avalanche control, restricting access to
the terrain, etc.) because of liability concerns. They know that the
money spent on safety more than offsets the potential costs in damages
if they failed to do so. The AMRP fits into this strategy. The federal
government, through SMCRA, is investing in risk reduction where mine
owners have neglected to do their part.
Thats great! Everybody still gets to enjoy what they do, and are safer while they do it! Why don't we just illegalize access to back country sports then? Wouldn't that be easier? Cheaper? If you allow back county adventures, who are you to determine that there will be no "underground" adventures?
I am glad that you acknowledge that shafts are inherently hazardous and
that they pose a danger to people who may not willingly accept the risk,
such as ATV riders. Adits, however, can be just as hazardous since they
can contain winzes or declines that drop tens or even hundreds of feet.
These can be difficult or impossible to see in the darkness of a mine.
Just this past weekend a man was injured and trapped for two days in a
California abandoned mine after he fell down a winze. Adits can have
oxygen deficient atmospheres, unstable explosives, rotten roof support,
and other hazards. Mine rescues require specialized skills and mine
explorers who get into trouble put first responders at risk as well.
The Joshua Dennis incident in 1989 and the Jeremiah Etherington fatality
in 1996 endangered dozens of law enforcement, search and rescue, and
mine rescue personnel and occupied them for many days at great expense
to state and local taxpayers.
Joshua Dennis was in there with no light, no gear, and no partner. His father left him to take a blind kid out (of all people) and the other scouts left him behind. He was in an accessible place, but outside of immediate view. He heard the calls of his father and rescue workers, but refused to answer them. Rescue workers also refused John Skinner's help, who knew exactly where he was. I have been to where Etherington died, and it was absolute and complete stupidity and suicidal on his part. He dropped down a 1300' shaft with a tow rope tied around his waist... what could be expected... There is just as much as chance of walking off a cliff as there is into a mine shaft. Both these incidents were of great stupidity on each parties sides; Don't dare compare exploration of mines to these incidents.
We appreciate your offer to provide any assistance in project planning.
Frankly, making big changes will be difficult.
Admitting an unwillingness to change to accommodate those that are being affected most by the closures.
We have an
institutional mission that is mandated by Congress and defined by both
state and federal law. It is unrealistic to expect us to change our
mission substantially. On the other hand, it is much more realistic for
you to effect changes and influence decisions at the project level. In
fact, many laws, such as the National Environmental Policy Act,
encourage public input on project proposals. We embrace that idea, and
furthermore, we are always open to constructive comments and
suggestions. We have an open door policy and I encourage you to call
me, or anyone on the AMRP staff, and discuss issues or make an
appointment to come into our office and talk with us in person. We want
to hear what you have to say.
I invite you to meet with us in person. I look forward to meeting you.
Please call me at 801-538-5323 or e-mail me at luciamalin@utah.gov to
set up an appointment.
Sincerely,
Luci Malin
Administrator
Utah Abandoned Mine Program
1594 West North Temple Suite 1210
PO Box 145801
Salt Lake City, Utah 84114-5801
801-538-5323 office
801-440-3776 Blackberry
801-359-3940 fax
LUCIAMALIN@utah.gov
We'll see where things go
Comment