Residents offer opinions on Montanore
Comments regarding the proposed Montanore Mine followed a loose theme during Thursday’s formal public hearing – locals support the mine, but only if it doesn’t cause unnecessary human disruption or environmental harm.
“Philosophically, I am against the mine, and philosophically I am against the timber industry,” Lynne Haley Rose said at the public forum. “But I know that trees grow back, and I know that Libby needs the jobs and the boost to its economy.”
About a dozen attendees offered their opinion on the proposed mine to a room of nearly 150 people. The most contentious issue was not about the mine itself, but the route that its accompanying power line will follow.
Rose and other landowners voiced their opposition to two proposed routes that would run massive power lines over private property.
“I’m for the mine,” landowner Joe Ginnaty said at the meeting, “but I’m going to fight it to the end if (the power line) runs through my house.”
The mine’s Draft Environmental Impact Statement, a document of 100-plus pages compiled by the Montana Department of Environmental Quality and Kootenai National Forest, outlined three mine alternatives and four transmission line alternatives, along with “no action” proposals.
Private property owners opposed Alternatives E and D, and Rose gave her support for Alternative C, a route across forest land.
“There’s miles and miles of public land up there and we just have a little piece of private property,” Rose said. “Alternative C seems to be the least expensive for Montanore and the most palatable for us private land owners up there.”
Montanore Mine Corp.’s original transmission line proposal, Alternative B, is the same plan that was approved for Noranda Minerals Corp. in 1992. However, Montanore now supports Alternative C, a proposal that follows essentially the same route as Alternative B but that is projected to cost less and have less of an environmental impact.
Alternative C calls for using wooden H-frame structures instead of Alternative B’s steel monopoles. The H-frames allow for longer spans and require building fewer structures and access roads. Alternative C also proposes using a helicopter to clear vegetation and build the structures to eliminate the need to build roads near grizzly bear habitat.
Officials from KNF, DEQ and other cooperating agencies were on hand for questions before and after the public comment section of the meeting. More than 20 displays lined City Hall’s Ponderosa Room, describing mine alternatives, environmental mitigation efforts and the mine’s potential effects on vegetation, grizzly bears, lynx, moose and mountain goats.
The agencies distributed the draft EIS in February, and will take comments on it until May 28. A record of decision for the mine is scheduled to be released by February 2010.