Search our Library

Given the realities we're now facing with fires and drought, Barbara Raymond asks why we would take even the slightest chance of destabilizing our own water table. Today there was a fire at Idaho Maryland and Brunswick roads. Fortunately our amazing response team was able to put it out quickly and save our community. But as I listened to the air attack team flying hard overhead and anxiously refreshed my phone for updates, I had a sudden sharp thought: oh my gosh – a mine would make this so much worse. There are many reasons why all of us in Nevada County should rigorously investigate the question of a new mine, but doesn’t this recent fire tell us the only thing we need to know? Read more in The Union. Barbara Raymond lives in Grass Valley

Precious Headwaters: Potential Impacts of the Idaho Maryland Mine to the Plants, Animals and Aquatic Habitats of the Wolf Creek Watershed This virtual community meeting was hosted by CEA Foundation and community partners - including the Redbud Chapter of the California Native Plant Society - on June 24, 2021. Special guest speakers for this session were Gary Griffith, Wolf Creek Community Alliance, and Jeanne Wilson, Redbud Chapter of the California Native Plant Society. The Brunswick and Centennial sites of the proposed Idaho Maryland Mine project encompass ten native plant communities, from montane hardwood and Sierra mixed conifer to annual grasslands, from marsh wetlands to chaparral. Far from being a wasteland despoiled by over 100 years of mining, these sites demonstrate the resilience and critical ecological functions of the native plant communities, wildlife, and aquatic habitat of the Wolf Creek headwaters. Topics covered: Potential impacts of the mine on stream ecology and on avian and other wildlife species. Why native plant communities are essential to the health and survival of the Wolf Creek watershed What YOU can do to STOP the Mine.

A little over a decade ago, a company named Emgold tried to reopen the Idaho-Maryland Mine and failed. The consultant who authored the Draft Environmental Impact Report wrote: “The analysis conducted in this EIR has determined that the applicant’s proposed measures (APMs) do not adequately reduce the impact of potential well dewatering to a less than significant impact level.” A second draft was never written. Emgold pulled out.

In a column by The Union’s publisher (Jan. 21), Rise Gold opponents were compared to anti-vaxxers — both groups are probably insulted. Is Don Rogers implying that we are a small group spouting “baloney” by “scientific” standards? Quite the opposite. Members of our groups include scientists, engineers, teachers, doctors, lawyers, and many other caring residents. Of course, Don says he didn’t mean those who carefully read Rise Gold’s project documents such as the draft environmental impact report. He meant those “unhinged from the science.” The Union publisher disparages the importance of local groups opposing the mine. Is it because of a financial comparison to Rise Gold Inc. (RYES), which continues to add investment capital to its war chest via a securities sale worth $2.2 million? We don’t have that budget, especially for full-page ads in The Union or very expensive mailers. But we are composed of numerous organizations, mostly nonprofit, over 3,000 individuals, and local business owners who have stated their opposition in writing. One organization is the Unitarian Universalist Community of the Mountains in Grass Valley. We voted unanimously to oppose the mine and form the Stop the Mine Task Force. We embrace faith and science. We are not political or interested in profit. We observe that the mine proposal is a violation of our moral and our ethical values, which include “do no harm.” Rise Gold’s supposedly “scientific” findings are convoluted, deceptive, and serve one goal: profit. Science is not an algorithm where information gets plugged in and out comes truth. Values must be applied. Consider that science mastered nuclear fission, but values led to the bomb. So, while Rise Gold has produced an overwhelming amount of data they declare to be “scientific analysis,” in the end their misuse of science violates our values. The inaccurate conclusions demand this project be stopped because it will harm people (“Why Don’t We Trust Rise Gold,“ The Union, Dec. 7, 2020, and others). There have been over 110 letters/articles published in The Union describing the unacceptable harms and dangers of the proposed mine. Any one of the articles causes many of us ask, “Why would the county even consider Rise Gold’s proposal?” Rise Gold claims that they can “mitigate negative impacts” ranging from loss of water to cancer-causing pollution, but the draft environmental impact report details do not support their conclusions. One of the most dangerous impacts is air pollution, which can hurt people miles from mining activity. Our investigation reveals that the respiratory damage from airborne toxins such as asbestos can increase mortality in Nevada County. Outdoor airborne asbestos fibers are extremely small, lethal, and cause lung cancer. Air pollution alone is sufficient reason to reject the mine proposal (Dr. Jeff Kane’s “Enjoy breathing? Consider the proposed mine,” The Union, Feb. 14). Rise Gold claims that airborne pollutants including massive increases in diesel exhaust are significant but acceptable. They are not: Just one additional death from lung cancer is totally unacceptable. Rise Gold’s marketing also makes false and deceptive claims. For example, in a recent full-page ad in this newspaper (Jan. 7), they claimed “no significant impacts,” a blatant disregard for the report! Even county publications state that there are three draft environmental impact report areas of significant and unavoidable negative impacts that cannot be feasibly mitigated. More disturbing is the unscientific and self-serving “survey” funded by Rise Gold. A number of those called who responded with, “I’m against the mine,” had the call canceled. Several letters in The Union call out this egregious marketing ploy, including Daniel Desmond’s “Mine survey flawed,” Oct. 20, 2021, and Darrell Berkheimer’s “Mine snow job fails,” July 9, 2021. We understand that “scientific” data can be interpreted in different ways. But the self-serving bias in Rise Gold’s claims is being called out in our comments and letters. Join with us in commenting on the draft report before April 4. The county has done an excellent job making all the documentation available on http://www.mynevadacounty.com. Don’t be intimidated by these documents. A bit of study can cut through the jargon and catch the inadequacies. This a crucial step to making your voice clear and independent. Jim Bair is the leader of Stop the Mine Task Force of The Unitarian Universalist Community of the Mountains in Grass Valley, a representative of The Elders Action Network of Northern California, a former Grass Valley planning commissioner, and a scientist at Stanford, USAF Labs, and Bell-Northern Labs. He lives in Grass Valley. This opinion piece was originally published in The Union.

The other day, I opened up my mailbox to find, as you probably did, a piece of fancy propaganda from Rise Grass Valley urging us to return prepaid postcards to them to give to the Nevada County Board of Supervisors to show our support for their mine. Curious about the contradiction of an image on the cover of a riverbed covered by some kind of foamy gas accompanied by the words “The Science is Clear,” I read on, struck by the lack of verifiable science in this pamphlet and the reckless use of language. “Green gold?” Do they mean the mine would be good for the environment? Who knows of even one mine that is “safe, modern, well-regulated and environmentally sound?” They write that their “plan to reopen the mine is safe and responsible.” Their plan could be anything at all, but what about the mine itself? Resource extraction in a populated area is neither safe nor responsible. They promise greater prosperity in the local economy. Is that because the profits from the gold they extract will be invested in our community rather than deposited into their investors’ bank accounts wherever they are? Where will the profits go? “Good jobs?” Maybe they are referring to the estimated 312 mine employees they propose to hire, of whom they predict 205 will be recruited from current residents. Those jobs are estimated, not guaranteed, and “recruited” does not mean hired. But do you want to work in a mine? Do you want your children to work in a mine? Is working underground in a mine shaft a “safe and satisfying career” with “exceptional opportunity”? “Economic benefits?” How can they claim “new local spending of $50 million a year,” much less 300 jobs that it would create? What are those imaginary jobs and why only 300? What are they talking about? When it comes to extracting minerals from the earth, what does “green-friendly” really mean? “Minimizing the impacts to neighbors?” Tell that to the real estate agent who tries to sell the ex-neighbors’ houses when they move away. Neighboring properties will lose their value. With all the careful research recently cited in the articles in these pages, it is absurd to state that mining will have “no significant impacts on air, water or traffic,” and who is to say what ”significant“ means? Of course, everyone who lives here may be impacted by the increased traffic, dust, noise, air and water pollution. Do you want to reduce the quality of our lives here even a “minimally, not significant” amount? I don’t. And for whose profit? Disregard the gold miner nostalgia, the promise of riches and defeat this rip-off project. Let your supervisors know that you don’t support Rise Grass Valley, and send back those prepaid postcards marked “No Support!” Yasha Aginsky is a documentary filmmaker and resident of Nevada City. This opinion piece was originally published in The Union.

View the Pacific Wild video about the Banks Island Mine disaster and how it triggered a call to reform B.C.’s environmental assessment process.

Listen to Pam Heard, Respiratory Therapist, talk about the significant dangers the Idaho-Maryland Mine poses to the air we breathe during a CEA Foundation virtual community meeting in November 2021. The transcript is below. Well at first I'd like to say hello to everyone tonight and thank you for joining us. Please take a moment to go grab your preferred adult beverage because this presentation is pretty dry, but necessary. My name is Pam Heard. I'm a respiratory therapist. We specialize in lung and heart health and I hope that you never need one. But the consulting report on air quality is 1,305 pages total. That's a pretty big deal to the Mine and it's a huge deal for our community. We must breathe to live. And the quality, or purity of the air that we breathe impacts our health. The lungs are the only organs in constant contact with the external environment and you just can't go to the corner store to buy a bottle of air. Rise Gold wants to start a hard rock mining operation that will operate 24 hours per day 365 days per year for 80 years. This operation requires the use of heavy industrial equipment that will blast rock, extract the rock to build underground tunnels, crush it to a 6 inch diameter, create engineered filled by mixing the blast rock with sand tailings, and then transport that fill to various sites. One given estimate is 365,000 tons per year just for the Centennial Site. So how will this impact our community and environment? Well, first we need to consider the current health of our residents and our existing air quality. What are our baselines? In Nevada County, the mortality rate from chronic lung disease is double the rate in California statewide - 69 versus 35 deaths per 100,000 people respectively. The American Lung Association has given Nevada County a failing grade for air quality in both ozone and particulate matter categories. So why is our air so bad? Well, it's the three W's: Weather, wildfire, and Wind. Auto emissions flow in westerly from Sacramento, then local patterns change based on topography. The weather model data from our own Nevada County Airpark shows that Grass Valley winds are from the south for 7.4 months (corrected) and then from the east for the remaining 4.6 months of the year. The Brunswick site is just a half mile southeast of the city limits all pollutants will funnel directly into the Brunswick basin in the city of Grass Valley. So what are these pollutants and their health effects? Let's start with diesel fuel, the primary fuel to power those large engines needed for mining operations. These engines emit a complex mix of air pollutants including both gaseous and solid material. The gas portion contains carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide, nitric oxide, nitrogen dioxide, sulfur oxides, and hydrocarbons. including polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons. Reactive organic gases and nitrogen oxide compounds then react with air and UV light from the sun to form ozone. All of these gases cause irritation and inflammation to the respiratory tract and can cause shortness of breath trigger allergy or asthma symptoms, and result in decreased lung function. In addition to ozone concerns, nitrogen and sulfur oxides are captured by moisture to form acid rain, which has devastating effects on terrestrial and aquatic environments. The solid material in diesel fuel belongs to a class of compounds called toxic air contaminants. A substance is considered toxic if it has the potential to cause adverse health effects in humans… like increasing your risk for cancer or developing acute and or chronic health problems. The term “dust” or “fugitive dust” describes the waste particles from mineral mining processes. Dust is defined as fine particles of matter in a size range from 1 to 100 microns which settle slowly under the influence of gravity. The unaided human eye can only see down to a particle size of about 50 microns. Imagine one grain of powdered sugar. The solid material in the exhaust is called diesel particulate matter or DPM. Diesel exhaust contains more than 40 cancer-causing substance, most of which are readily absorbed onto these soot particles. More than 90% of DPM is less than 1 micron in diameter. The smaller the particle, the deeper it penetrates into your lungs to where the air sacs are located and gas exchange occurs in contact with the blood stream. The California Air Resources Board estimates that about 70% of the cancer risk that the average Californian faces from breathing toxic air contaminants stems from these diesel exhaust particles. Asbestos is another toxic air contaminant. Naturally occurring asbestos is found throughout California most commonly where ultramafic or serpentinite rock is present. Asbestos fibers can become airborne and be inhaled causing chronic local inflammation disrupting orderly cell division, possibly leading to the development of asbestosis and mesothelioma. The particle size for exposure is measured at just 5 microns, invisible to the naked eye. Or as my 4 year old grandson would say… “teeny-tiny”. It's so “teeny-tiny” that you need a microscope to see it. The report given to investors in the IMM technical report focuses on the location of the gold deposits and has over 50 references to serpentine or serpentinite. It states that quote the whole package of rocks exhibits a region foliation and is interpreted as a s serpentinite matrix tectonic melange. Here's another example the Rose Garden deposit as hosted solely in serpentinite. Wow, French, roses, and gold… they make it sound so poetic. Translation: what they're saying is that a lot of the gold they know about is surrounded by serpentine type rocks. The serpentine rock areas are the same areas most likely to contain asbestos Rise Gold declares in this same report that they will decide what areas are feasible to mine: trust me, their decisions will be based on gold assays not on asbestos content. Once the gold ore is mined, it will then be pulverized and create yet another toxic air contaminant: crystalline silica. The gold deposits are primarily found in quartz veins, silicon dioxide. This quartz will be ground down below a hundred micron size and the gold will be separated out by gravity flotation. Rise has stated that 12% of the sand tailings from this process screens down to 44 microns, again, invisible to the naked eye. Respirable crystalline silica has a diameter of 4 microns. It is unknown what portion of those twelve percent tailings will be less than forty-four microns in size. Crystalline silica is hazardous when inhaled. Chronic exposure is associated with bronchitis, emphysema, small airways disease, and silicosis... the fibrotic scarring of lung tissue. Who will be affected by these pollutants? We will all be affected. But children, the elderly, and people with existing health conditions will suffer most. Children spend twice as much time outdoors as adults and they inhale more pollutants per pound of body weight. Children, teens, and adults who exercise or work outdoors are at the greatest risk for exposure. And let's not forget our elderly folks. The quadrant just north of the Brunswick and Centennial sites are home to our hospital, skilled nursing facilities, assisted living facilities, the Chapa De Indian Health Center, doctors offices, senior apartment complexes… along with our homeless shelter and the proposed homeless housing project. Our supportive services are located here too: Pride Industries, Freed, the regional center, dialysis center, public Health Department offices, and the ambulance service. So are you ready to follow me down the rabbit hole? I question whether Rise Gold is revealing the whole truth. In reality, they will be working through serpentinite to extract the gold ore. The serpentinite will contaminate all of their equipment and all the other types of rock. The skips, crushers, conveyor belts, front end loaders and trucks will be dusted with asbestos. Can rinsing the truck tires before they exit the site, or covering the truck bed with a tarp… control community exposure? The asbestos and crystalline silica particles are invisible. When airborne and released, they cannot be measured or tracked in the environment. And there is no safe amount of exposure to asbestos. The list of pollutants is long: noxious gases that cause irritation and inflammation, which makes you more susceptible to infection and illness from pathogens like influenza and covid-19. Inhaled particles, such as diesel particulate matter, asbestos and crystalline silica will deposit deep into the lung tissue leading to fibrosis, decreased lung function, and premature death. Rise Gold has declared that each of these pollutants will have a quote, “less than significant effect” on our community. They maintain that they will be able to mitigate or diminish the effects with strategies such as using tier 4 diesel engines, placing filters on their ventilation fans, and wetting down the dust. How can spewing pollutants from thousands of gallons of diesel fuel daily; trucking rock and sand tailings laden with asbestos and silica around town 16 hours per day; building two sites with these materials layer by layer; plus the day and night operations of the Mine for 80 years have a quote “less than significant effect” on our community? Today, we've only touched on the impact to air quality. There are so many other considerations like water, property values noise, and quality of life - just to name a few. In my opinion, the Rise Gold operation will constitute a public health crisis, as well as an environmental health crisis. Thank you for your time and attention tonight, and please join with CEA to stop the Idaho-Maryland Mine.

By Cory Fisher - The Union The American Lung Association’s 20th annual State of the Air report revealed that once again California counties top the list of most polluted in the country, and Nevada County is no exception. Reflecting the same grades as the 2018 report, Nevada County received an “F” when it came to the number of high ozone days, and a “B” for particle pollution. While ozone and particle pollution threaten the health of everyone, children, seniors, low income families and people with respiratory and cardiac illness are at an increased risk, the report states. Read the full article in The Union, here.

Nevada City resident Ray Bryars spells out the health risks we already face with our "F" rated air quality and makes a great case for why exposing the community to even more insults from a mining operation is unthinkable. You can also read this in The Union. Instead of doing the ordinary things that an electronics engineer would be doing in his retirement years, I find that attempting to ensure that Grass Valley remains a healthy, vibrant community is taking over a number of hours each week. This involves working with other concerned residents who are looking into the issues that would result if Rise Gold is allowed to reopen the Idaho Maryland Mine. It would be really nice if we could keep mining as a historic component of this area without having to constantly battle to maintain a healthy environment. The challenge is that Rise Gold sells a lot of shares and take out a lot of loans to keep funding its organization and to hire experts to make it appear that reopening the mine would be a wonderful thing for Grass Valley and the County. Meanwhile an overloaded county staff can do little more than juggle the required environmental impact documents with no funding or permission to do a critical analysis. Local property owners and concerned residents are scrambling to understand the process and to digest the hundred of pages of documents that make up the environmental impact report. This is a David-and-Goliath battle that is going to require significant local support not only for expertise, but for funding the legal experts who will ultimately make the difference between retaining our current environment or risk being overtaken by the air pollution, noise, water and safety issues if this mine opens. One of the areas that I have been looking into is air pollution. As some of you may know. Nevada County has been one of the most polluted counties in California. Air quality is rated F for ozone and 24 hour particle pollution by the American Lung Association. Measurements of air pollution generally cover the following: PM 2.5 = Fine particulate matter less than or equal to 2.5 microns. Penetrates deeply into the lungs and bloodstream. Is known to cause premature death in people with heart or lung diseases. PM 10 = Coarse particulate matter less than or equal to 10 microns. Penetrates deeply into lungs causes bronchial issues. Can result in high blood pressure, heart attack and strokes. O3 = Ozone. Corrosive gas that acts like sunburn on lungs. Causes asthma attacks and has other respiratory impacts. NO2 = Nitrogen dioxide. Causes inflammation of the airways, reduced lung function, coughing, wheezing. SO2 = Sulphur dioxide. Causes irritation of the skin and mucous membranes of the eyes, nose, throat and lungs. Data for Grass Valley is monitored from the Litton Building. Unfortunately, only PM 2.5 and O3 is measured locally, but it can checked on line at: https://aqicn.org/city/california/nevada/grass-valley-litton-building/ Historic data shows that there are many months during the year when we greatly exceed what is considered “good” for most monitored pollutants. Much of this pollution is not locally generated, but is carried in from the Sacramento Valley and environs. As this population grows, we become more impacted by pollution blowing up the hill. We are also subject to air pollution produced by the many fires that occur around the Sierra foothills. Given that we are already subject to exceedingly high air pollution, it seems inconceivable that we would consider allowing a mining company to add significantly more pollutants to the toxic stew that we already breath. Data from the Litton building: Federal maximum 24 hour concentration for PM 2.5 for a 24 hour period over the 2016, 2017, 2018 period was exceeded 13 times. In 2018 the concentration was measured as four times what is considered “ambient.” For the record, 2020 was even worse. Think about putting your hand in a bowl of 90 degree water. Now knowing that boiling point is 212 degrees, would you feel comfortable putting your hand in 360 degree water? We are effectively burning our lungs. Federal maximum 8-hour concentration for O3 over the 2016, 2017, 2018 period was exceeded 139 times. In this case the maximum to ambient ratio is 1.4 times. The bottom line here is that we are already subject to some of the worst air quality in California. It seems unthinkable to expose the residents of Nevada County to a mining operation that would significantly worsen this situation. To educate yourself more and to find out how you can help our community, please check the Community Environmental Advocates Foundation website: http://www.cea-nc.org.

The American West’s megadrought deepened so much last year that it is now the driest in at least 1,200 years and is a worst-case climate change scenario playing out live, a new study finds. A dramatic drying in 2021 — about as dry as 2002 and one of the driest years ever recorded for the region — pushed the 22-year drought past the previous record-holder for megadroughts in the late 1500s and shows no signs of easing in the near future, according to a study Monday in the journal Nature Climate Change. The study calculated that 42% of this megadrought can be attributed to human-caused climate change. “Climate change is changing the baseline conditions toward a drier, gradually drier state in the West and that means the worst-case scenario keeps getting worse,” said study lead author Park Williams, a climate hydrologist at UCLA. “This is right in line with what people were thinking of in the 1900s as a worst-case scenario. But today I think we need to be even preparing for conditions in the future that are far worse than this.” Williams studied soil moisture levels in the West — a box that includes California, Wyoming, Utah, Nevada, Arizona, most of Oregon and Idaho, much of New Mexico, western Colorado, northern Mexico, and the southwest corners of Montana and Texas — using modern measurements and tree rings for estimates that go back to the year 800. That’s about as far back as estimates can reliably go with tree rings. A few years ago, Williams studied the current drought and said it qualified as a lengthy and deep “megadrought” and that the only worse one was in the 1500s. He figured the current drought wouldn’t surpass that one because megadroughts tended to peter out after 20 years. And, he said, 2019 was a wet year so it looked like the western drought might be coming to an end. But the region dried up in late 2020 and 2021. All of California was considered in official drought from mid-May until the end of 2021, and at least three-quarters of the state was at the highest two drought levels from June through Christmas, according to the U.S. drought monitor. “For this drought to have just cranked up back to maximum drought intensity in late 2020 through 2021 is a quite emphatic statement by this 2000s drought saying that we’re nowhere close to the end,” Williams said. This drought is now 5% drier than the old record from the 1500s, he said. The drought monitor says 55% of the U.S. West is in drought with 13% experiencing the two highest drought levels. This megadrought really kicked off in 2002 — one of the driest years ever, based on humidity and tree rings, Williams said. “I was wondering if we’d ever see a year like 2002 again in my life and in fact, we saw it 20 years later, within the same drought,” Williams said. The drought levels in 2002 and 2021 were a statistical tie, though still behind 1580 for the worst single year. Climate change from the burning of fossil fuels is bringing hotter temperatures and increasing evaporation in the air, scientists say. Williams used 29 models to create a hypothetical world with no human-caused warming then compared it to what happened in real life — the scientifically accepted way to check if an extreme weather event is due to climate change. He found that 42% of the drought conditions are directly from human-caused warming. Without climate change, he said, the megadrought would have ended early on because 2005 and 2006 would have been wet enough to break it. The study “is an important wake-up call,” said Jonathan Overpeck, dean of environment at the University of Michigan, who wasn’t part of the study. “Climate change is literally baking the water supply and forests of the Southwest, and it could get a whole lot worse if we don’t halt climate change soon.” Williams said there is a direct link between drought and heat and the increased wildfires that have been devastating the West for years. Fires need dry fuel that drought and heat promote. Eventually, this megadrought will end by sheer luck of a few good rainy years, Williams said. But then another one will start. Daniel Swain, a UCLA climate scientist who wasn’t involved in the study, said climate change is likely to make megadrought “a permanent feature of the climate of the Colorado River watershed during the 21st century.” Published by AP

CEA Foundation/MineWatch to request extension for public comments, hold community webinar The Union spoke with CEA Foundation President, Ralph Silberstein about the release of the Draft Environmental Impact Report for the proposed Idaho-Maryland Mine. He notes "the environmentally superior alternative would be to forgo the project entirely." He also notes that community members reviewing the massive number of technical documents have “a lot of catching up to do” as they review any changes from the versions of the documents which were released last year. Community Environmental Advocates Foundation and MineWatch, a campaign which the foundation sponsors, will submit a formal request to Nevada County asking that it extend the public comment period for the county’s recently released draft Environmental Impact Report on the Idaho-Maryland Mine project, CEA Foundation president Ralph Silberstein said Friday. Upon releasing the draft EIR on the county’s website this week, as well as making the document available for review in a handful of locations, Nevada County staff stated in a news release that public comment on it was was invited for a 60-day period, which started Tuesday and will end March 4. CEA Foundation has publicly opposed the proposed reopening of the Idaho-Maryland Mine, with Silberstein stating in September that the only safe approach when it comes to the reopening the mine is to shut it down altogether. Read the rest in The Union

By Jonathan Keehn, Wolf Creek Community Alliance June 12, 2020 Read this article on Yubanet or The Union. Once again, a junior mining company from Canada has arrived in town with an eye to re-open the Idaho-Maryland Mine. So far, RISE Gold Corp. has not made a good impression. If you’re new to the area, or your memory fades on the subject, here’s a quick refresher: Every 5 or 10 years, gold mine investors get excited about the idea of re-opening an abandoned mine. These investment companies are often from out of state. In particular, “junior” mining companies from Canada operate in California because they enjoy funding loopholes that encourage speculation. The last such company, Emgold, threw in the towel after it was unable to complete the permitting process in 2012. RISE is the latest case, and has been behaving as these companies often do. So far, RISE has not complied with some of the most basic Nevada County land use regulations. In 2017, at their site off East Bennett Road, they began by removing a healthy stand of trees without a Timber Harvest Plan. CalFire issued two citations for this infraction – one to the property owner and one to the logging company. Then they started construction of an equipment storage pad. However, South Fork Wolf Creek, a perennial tributary of Wolf Creek, runs close by, and RISE neglected to follow the simple minimum 100’ riparian setback requirement for streams in Nevada County. This is not a complicated rule: one simply needs a measuring tape, some wooden stakes, and a hammer. Start at the “Ordinary High Water Mark” of the stream, measure 100’, and drive some stakes. To be safe, add 5’. Connect the dots and you have a line showing the non-disturbance zone: no construction, no equipment, no disturbance is allowed. Nevertheless, RISE’s newly-graded pad was clearly located on the wrong side of the line by 10’ or 20’, and they encroached even farther with heavy equipment, a large pile of logs, and stacks of brush and small trees. For these violations, the County required RISE to file a Management Plan, which told them to remove the logs and clean up the worst of the thrashed non-disturbance zone. When this was done, the company moved in their big exploratory drilling equipment. Apparently, still no one had pulled out a measuring tape; the equipment was set down on the wrong side of the line. This time the County insisted on a second, much more comprehensive Management Plan. Eventually, they installed the stakes correctly and relocated the equipment once more to protect South Fork Wolf Creek. All of this took about a year, and then RISE fired up their heavy equipment. That’s when the neighbors really started to complain. You probably know the area around the intersection of Brunswick, East Bennett, and Greenhorn Roads. Since the last of the Grass Valley mines closed in the 1950s, this has become a quiet, highly desirable, rural-residential neighborhood. Most lots are 1 to 5 acres, with easy access to both downtown Grass Valley and Glenbrook. The homes are on private wells and septic tanks. The exploratory equipment operated by RISE for 16 months was essentially a super-sized well-drilling rig. It could go a mile deep and was multi-directional, so it could “explore” under neighboring properties. There was no county or state oversight on damage it might do to local aquifers or water wells. And it operated 24/7. The neighbors, being subjected to continuous loud noise and bright lights, had to call the sheriff in the middle of the night and file complaints; eventually RISE constructed a 20’ tall canvas “sound barrier”, to almost no effect. One County Supervisor visited a neighboring house and was astounded by the noise impacting a residential area. Then, in November 2019, in spite of their history of repeated violations, RISE submitted an application to the County to reopen the Idaho-Maryland mine. This is a company that has never actually operated a mine of any kind; like the previous two attempts to reopen the Idaho-Maryland Mine, they will be spending millions of investors’ money to learn, once again, that it is still a bad idea.

This is NOT the job locals want. The CEO of the company who wants to open the Idaho-Maryland Mine has a questionable history. The safety manager at his previous mine said “It’s only because of God’s grace that some one was not killed there while they were operating.” Two years after the Ministry of Environment ordered Banks Island Gold Mine to shut down its operations for environmental infractions, the province is now taking the company’s ex-president, mine manager and aquatic biologist to court. One of the first witnesses to take the stand was former safety manager of the site, Brent Edmunds. With 40 years in the mining industry, Edmunds was hired in April 2015 and once on site, he said he saw many labour issues and he was alerted about uncontained spillage. In May 2015, he toured the site and took photos of liquid discharge from the mine. “All these tailings were all over the place,” he said to the Northern View, a day after his testimony. He took photos of mill tailings, waste product from the mine, leaking into a creek at one site, and flowing into a swamp and lake area at another site. Edmunds said he made an anonymous tip regarding concerns he had over the health and safety of many of the Indigenous employees. Read the rest here. Article by Shannon Lough of The Northern View.

Retired Nevada County Supervisor, Jim Weir, blasted Rise Gold’s recently published, privately-funded survey in an opinion piece in the Union and concluded that “This survey smacks of the inmates writing the business plan for the asylum.” Here's how Mr. Weir came to that conclusion: "My Probability and Statistics class in college was taught by a cantankerous old geezer. One day we got off onto a tangent about surveys. His advice: 'If you want a survey to come out a particular way, just pick your data from folks that don’t have a dog in the fight.' Certainly Rise Gold must have had a teacher like that in the way they picked their folks to come out with a 'strong support' for the Idaho-Maryland Mine project. Consider this: They picked 100 folks in each of the county’s five supervisorial districts to formulate their data. Think about it. District 1 is mostly Nevada City, Banner Mountain, and the area around. They will have little, if any, impact on their homes or businesses. Not much of a dog in the fight, is there? District 2 ..." continue reading in The Union. Jim Weir is a retired Nevada County supervisor for District 3. He is vice president of engineering for RST Engineering in Grass Valley.

Local resident Brandon Butrick is NOT opposed to the gold mining as an industry, but after reading about the track record of the principals involved, he decided that he IS opposed to the Idaho-Maryland Mine project. In his own words: While many people have quickly chosen sides in the debate over reopening the Idaho-Maryland Mine, I decided to study both sides. Jobs are nice, and the promise of ecologically sound mining practices sounds great, while it appears all sides agree that our water resources and environment must be protected. What has made up my mind is looking into the track record of the principals involved in Rise Gold to consider how their promises will play out. Read further in The Union. Brandon Butrick is a Grass Valley resident.

In what is quite possibly the most illuminating critique yet of Rise Gold's poll claiming majority support for mine, Union columnist Jeff Kane shows exactly how the words were used to manipulate the answers, and offers spot-on examples of how the opposition could write an equally manipulative poll to get the opposite result. Jeff Kane states that the CEO of the polling company, Justin Walling, "doesn’t advertise himself to potential clients as a pollster, but as a marketer." Mr. Kane provides a link to the poll script to show how the questions posed are basically "leading the witness." As he puts it: "The script goes on to describe the reopened mine as the finest gift to humankind since the opposable thumb, outdoing even Rise Gold’s own hyperbole. Each glowing description of its harmlessness is followed by, 'Does knowing this make you more likely or less likely to support re-opening the Idaho-Maryland Mine?'” His first counter example brings home exactly the kind of manipulation that is employed: "Dewatering the mine may not only bring buried heavy metal toxins to the surface, but contaminate waterways between here and the Sacramento River. That much pumping might lower the water table, drying up the wells of hundreds of homeowners. Does knowing this make you more likely or less likely to support reopening the Idaho-Maryland Mine?” Read the full article in The Union. Jeff Kane lives in Nevada City.

Based on Rise Gold's latest quarterly SEC filing in June 2021 and the status of their outstanding loan, former U.S. Bankruptcy judge Randall J. Newsome believes it is unlikely the company will be able to follow through with reopening the mine. Mr. Newsome states: "A lot of print has been devoted to the pros and cons of Rise Gold Corp.’s reopening of the Idaho-Maryland Mine. The opponents have focused on various environmental impacts of the mine. Proponents point to the potential for as many as 300 new jobs, and urge that the company and its CEO, Benjamin Mossman, be given a chance to prove themselves. Putting aside whether reopening the mine is a good or bad idea, there has been little discussion of whether Rise Gold has, or ever will have, the financial wherewithal to carry out its business plan. My experience as a U.S. bankruptcy judge for 28 years leads me to believe that this company is destined for financial failure." To find out why, read the rest in The Union. Randall J. Newsome lives in Nevada City.

Nevada County needs more jobs, right? Well, Resident Richard Blair suggests we ride the broadband wave instead of putting an industrial project in the middle of our community. My wife and I have lived in the area for 20 years, raising a family and enjoying the beautiful natural setting. We received a marketing piece from Rise Gold and are so concerned for the probable negative impacts to our roads, water and lifestyle. I wanted to give another perspective with respect to jobs. We moved here purposely from Sacramento looking for a place to raise our children. I needed to be within reasonable distance from an airport for my job with Pfizer Medical Affairs. Grass Valley fit the bill and we love it here. Nevada City/Grass Valley is a perfect community to attract Bay Area/Sacramento (and beyond) workers who have flexibility to live where they want. This is now enhanced by the evolution of the COVID-19 effect of more workers now able to work remotely. I plead the case that we embrace the idea of attracting remote workers through the beauty and lifestyle of the area as the selling point. Read the rest in The Union. Richard Bair is a resident of Grass Valley

Rise Gold's survey claiming the community supports the mine was a failure. "Residents here are well educated, well informed and not easily fooled", says Darrell Berkheimer, a columnist for the Union. Rise Gold CEO Ben Mossman and J. Wallin Opinion Research have failed in their attempt to hoodwink Nevada County folks into thinking the reopening of Idaho-Maryland Mine would be good for the community. They simply have been unable to snow the residents here with all the claims, promises and biased survey presentation. Instead, they learned that many residents here are well educated, well informed and not easily fooled. That statement is well supported by the multitude of letters and other voices that poured into The Union from its readers during the past several weeks. Those strongly worded missiles from readers have provided a long list of good reasons for shooting down the mine proposal. Read on in The Union. Darrell Berkheimer lives in Grass Valley.

Rise Gold's recent mailer amazed Tom Behlmer with the long list of facts they never mentioned, like truck traffic, Mossman's history, risk to wells, silica dust, poor financials, and risk of car/truck accidents. What could go wrong? Residents of the area have or will receive a mailer from Rise Gold Corp. It asks the recipient to return the self-addressed reply card if they support the mine, which presumably will be used to lobby the Nevada County Board of Supervisors. I was amazed at what was left out. The mailer makes it sound as if Grass Valley is being blessed with the mine opportunity. If Rise Gold is permitted to operate for 80 years, for which they asked, can they be trusted to operate safely and honestly. The mailer does not inspire confidence. Here is the whole truth that was not mentioned. Read on in The Union. Tom J. Behlmer lives in Grass Valley.

Read longtime Union columnist, Darrell Berkheimer’s analysis of Rise Gold’s recently published, privately funded survey. He criticizes both the methodology and the writing - saying that “any skilled writer knows how to phrase questions to get the desired result”. His conclusion? “It lacks credibility and the conclusions announced are not justified.” Mr. Berkheimer further states that: "I have read and analyzed each of the 23 questions that comprise the survey by the J. Wallin Opinion Research company. I have concluded it is written to obtain the best results possible in favor of the mine reopening. Any skilled writer knows how to phrase questions to obtain the desired results. The wording of the survey questions are designed to do just that, to falsely indicate there is strong support throughout the county for the reopening of the mine." Read the rest in The Union. Darrell Berkheimer lives in Grass Valley.

It's not over for the indigenous people affected by the abandoned mine and toxic spill left behind by Rise Gold CEO’s former company, Banks Island Gold. The toxic spill is still there and Mossman's trial is still pending. This week, the Gitxaala Nation took further action to sue for changes in mining law in BC Canada. Apparently, dozens of mining claims have been staked on ‘sacred’ territorial lands, but the Nation has never been notified. A First Nation on B.C.’s north coast is suing the province over what it describes as unauthorized mining on its traditional territory. The Gitxaała Nation, which has 1,800 members, 500 of whom live on-reserve on the nation’s traditional territory, filed a legal challenge Monday against the province’s mineral claim staking system. The system does not align with reconciliation efforts or B.C.’s commitment to the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, the claim says. “The free-entry mineral claim staking needs to change,” Chief Coun. Linda Innes said during the announcement today. The system allows anyone to pay a fee and stake mining claims in most of the province without notification to First Nations or property owners. The nation called on the province to immediately suspend all mineral claims granted for the territory between 2018 and 2020. “Under their own laws, they have the obligation to set aside all existing mineral claims that are a part of the court proceeding and to suspend staking in Gitxaała territory until they can fulfill commitments to both their own constitutional duties and the promises made by the commitment to reconciliation and the declaration of Indigenous peoples,” Innes said. Read the rest in The Tyee. Amanda Follett Hosgood is The Tyee’s northern B.C. reporter. She lives in Wet’suwet’en territory.

The long awaited draft Environmental Impact Report has been released, beginning a 60-day public comment period, according to Victoria Penate at The Union. She outlines what this report entails and provides details on a special public comment meeting on February 23 as well as how to submit comments by the March 4 deadline. She also summarizes Rise Grass Valley's response to the report with various claims about how impacts will be mitigated. After months of waiting, it’s finally here. Nevada County staff this week released a draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Idaho-Maryland Mine project, stating in a news release that public agencies and the public will be able to give comments on the EIR’s adequacy at a special public meeting before the Nevada County Planning Commission on Feb. 23. The county has published the draft EIR on its website. According to the release, printed copies of the document are also available for public review at a handful of locations. Nevada County senior planner Matt Kelley said last year that projects of any scale require some form of environmental review by law, and that the Idaho-Maryland Mine project required an EIR “because one or more impacts would be considered potentially significant, so therefore CEQA would be (enacted).” A section of CEQA, or the California Environmental Quality Act, charges public agencies “with the duty to avoid or minimize environmental damage where feasible,” according to the draft EIR. “The basic requirements for an EIR include discussions of the environmental setting, environmental impacts, mitigation measures, alternatives, growth-inducing impacts, and cumulative impacts,” the document states. The draft EIR was prepared by Sacramento-based firm Raney Planning and Management, and states that its purpose is to be “circulated for public and agency review and comment,” followed by the county’s preparation of a final EIR, which will include responses to these comments. County officials must certify the final EIR prior to making project approval decisions, the document states. According to the document, after a notice of preparation was circulated from July 17 to Aug. 17, 2020, comment letters were received from over 750 interested parties, including “representatives of public agencies and groups, as well as individual members of the general public,” during that review period. The draft EIR summarizes the concerns brought up in these comment letters — which ranged within 13 areas, including aesthetics; agriculture, forestry, and other resources; air quality, greenhouse gas emissions, and energy; hazards and hazardous materials; and transportation — and subsequently includes a chapter addressing each environmental issue area. Once it became available, the draft EIR began a 60-day public comment period to end March 4, [2022] according to the county’s news release. Public comments must be received in writing by the county no later than 5 p.m. March 4, the release states, whether in hard copy or by email. These can be mailed to Kelley, or emailed to Idaho.MMEIR@co.nevada.ca.us. The special meeting before the Nevada County Planning Commission on Feb. 23 to receive comments from public agencies and the public on the adequacy of the draft EIR will begin at 9:30 a.m. and take place in the county’s Board of Supervisors chambers at the Eric Rood Administrative Center, 950 Maidu Ave., Nevada City, according to the release. Read the rest (Rise Grass Valley Responds) in The Union Victoria Penate is a staff writer with The Union. She can be reached at vpenate@theunion.com

Rather than reopening the Idaho-Maryland mine, Grass Valley resident Eric Zibbel proposes purchasing the mine property using state funds and turning it into a year-round, sustainable green waste business, along with a park. This letter is in response to Paul S. Schwartz’s Jan. 7 commentary, “Better uses for the Idaho-Maryland Mine property.” Like Mr. Schwartz, I also have an idea for a better use for the Idaho-Maryland Mine property. I propose a facility that will expand the Nevada County Fire Safe Council’s free green waste drop-off in the springtime to a year-round service. More than just a free green waste drop-off location for county residents, the facility would be operated as a sustainable business enterprise. PG&E contractors, tree companies and landscapers would have to pay a fee to bring waste to the facility. Green waste would be processed on site to make wood chips, compost and other products to be sold to the public. The facility would still provide a job engine for county residents with heavy equipment operators, truck drivers, mechanics and technicians being central to daily operations. Read the rest in The Union Eric Zibbel resides in Grass Valley.

Janet Weaver recalls the Lava Cap Mine disaster of January 1997, when winter storm conditions caused a 60-foot high dam containing arsenic tailings to burst loose. She implies that Grass Valley could face a similar disaster one day. As Nevada County reviews the reopening of the Idaho-Maryland Mine, I reflect on the fact that it was 25 years ago, this month, that approximately 20,000 cubic yards of tailings broke loose from a 60-foot-high old log containment dam and arsenic tailings floated from the Lava Cap Mine down three miles into the Little Clipper Creek and into Lost Lake. During the years that followed, the properties around the Little Clipper have been deemed an EPA Superfund site. They installed a containment system over the remaining arsenic-contaminated tailings, installed drainage channels, replaced the dam, decontaminated mine buildings and excavated contaminated soil from along the creek. EPA constructed an 8-inch pipeline to run approximately 1.5 miles with service lines to connect residences in the area to clean water. Read the rest in The Union Janet Weaver resides in Grass Valley