Campaign asks feds to halt mining near Canyon

The years-long debate over uranium mining in the Grand Canyon has a new contender: A coalition of outdoor-recreation groups that on Monday launched a billboard campaign.

Two billboards went up in Phoenix shortly after 5 a.m. with the message, “Secretary Zinke: SAVE the Grand Canyon from uranium mining,” according to Arizona Wildlife Federation Conservation Director Scott Garlid.

It’s part of his group’s collaboration with Trout Unlimited dubbed “Protect Your Canyon,” which includes partners ranging from the Arizona Elk Society and Backcountry Hunters and Anglers to the Yuma Valley Rod and Gun Club. They hope it will bring attention to the public-land debate.

The billboards — one off Interstate 10 and Washington Street and another near I-17 in Anthem — will likely stay up for at least a month, Garlid said.

“The risks of doing uranium mining in this area really do outweigh the benefits,” Garlid said. “It just doesn’t make sense.”

It’s not a new debate — then-Interior Secretary Ken Salazar halted new claims near the Canyon in 2012 — but recent developments have sparked concerns that the current Interior secretary, Ryan Zinke, has his eyes set on reopening the area to uranium mining.

The U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in December upheld a 20-year ban on new uranium mining on public land near the Grand Canyon but struck down a challenge to an existing mine. That decision didn’t quell concerns. The Department of Interior in May published a list of critical minerals and included uranium on the list. The minerals are identified as “non-fuel” and are “considered critical to the economic and national security of the United States,” according to the U.S. Geological Survey.

Opponents took issue with the “nonfuel” classification, arguing that uranium is used in fuel production. Zinke’s office responded in a Federal Register notice by saying it has “important nonfuel uses.”

Garlid said uranium’s listing as a critical mineral is grounds for unease.

“Our campaign is really … to keep the withdrawal in place for new mining,” he said. “The withdrawal is really in the crosshairs, at least in our opinion.”

The debate has been dotted with concerns that the mines could contaminate water, cause permanent environmental damage and stick taxpayers with the cleanup bills. Proponents contend that mining will wean the U.S. off foreign energy and provide jobs.

For years, the debate has more or less along party lines, but Garlid hopes the new campaign’s wide-ranging partners will show the Trump administration that it isn’t “just a left-leaning effort.”