Sun editorial:

Protecting the Colorado River

Moratorium on new uranium mining claims near Grand Canyon makes sense

Thursday, July 23, 2009 | 2:06 a.m.

One negative image that the mining industry has failed to shed is that of poor environmental stewardship. Many parts of the U.S. where precious metals have been extracted have suffered from contamination of streams and other water resources from toxic runoff from mines.

Some mining outfits are good about cleaning their excavation sites, but other companies continue to disregard nearby water supplies, threatening the environment.

That is why environmental groups have had good cause to challenge future uranium mining in the vicinity of Grand Canyon National Park. The canyon is along the path of the Colorado River, which supplies drinking water to residents of Southern Nevada, Arizona and Southern California.

The Obama administration’s Interior Department made a prudent decision Monday to place a two-year moratorium on the issuance of new uranium mining permits on nearly 1 million acres near the canyon. The moratorium, which doesn’t affect existing mining claims, will give the department time to study whether the temporary ban should be extended to protect the canyon’s environment.

The possibility of uranium exposure cannot be taken lightly. As a radioactive metallic element, it can be highly toxic to humans and wildlife if ingested in large enough quantities. Chemicals used to extract uranium are also toxic.

Congress is even considering a bill by Rep. Raul Grijalva, D-Ariz., to permanently ban new mining claims along both sides of the canyon. The Associated Press reported that UNLV hydrology professor David Kreamer and Kay Brothers, deputy general manager of the Southern Nevada Water Authority, both expressed concerns about potential Colorado River contamination in testimony Tuesday before a House Natural Resources subcommittee.

Kreamer said he has found uranium levels from past mining activity to be three times that allowed by the Environmental Protection Agency for a canyon creek.

We hope to learn more about the potential for contamination of the river and would urge Congress to do what’s best to protect the environment.

Discussion: 2 comments so far…

Comments are moderated by Las Vegas Sun editors. Our goal is not to limit the discussion, but rather to elevate it. Comments should be relevant and contain no abusive language. Comments that are off-topic, vulgar, profane or include personal attacks will be removed. Full comments policy.

By SgtRock

July 23, 2009

2:55 a.m.

Suggest removal

Biden once said the Obama adminstration will be all about a 3 letter word ----Jobs, Jobs, Jobs (Biden is about as smart as a light blub but that would be unfair to light bulbs).

I thought that meant that they were be trying to create jobs.

Now I see that the 3 letter word of Jobs, Jobs, Jobs really meant to kill jobs, jobs, jobs.

From tax increases, multi-trillion dollar annual deficits, cap-n-trade, health care reform, new regulations, union reform (like Card Check) and now to direct suppression of business activity, the Obama adminstration is one of the most unfriendly anti-business adminstrations ever.

Even though according to Obama's calculator he has saved over 132,892 ka-trillion jobs, he is doing is best on preventing job growth.

Obama focused on the economy like a LASER.....a high beam destruction laser.
By oneinfinity

Aug. 1, 2009

5:26 p.m.

Suggest removal

Since you're so busy Obama-bashing that you actually failed to comment on the content of the article, let me sum it up for you. Uranium in drinking water is bad. "The moratorium, which doesn't affect existing mining claims, will give the department time to study whether the temporary ban should be extended to protect the canyon's environment," is good, since it will give time to assess whether the drinking water is protected. I'm sorry, but I'd rather there be fewer jobs than toxic chemicals in the water supply.