I went on a backpacking trip a few years ago in the wilderness of northern New Mexico with a group from my Boy Scout troop. The land had once been owned by an oil tycoon and was the site of mining and oil drilling, but the tract was donated to the BSA in the middle of the 20th century and is now preserved as wilderness. My trail map denoted all the abandoned mines on the property and we were advised against entering unmarked abandoned mine shafts due to risk of collapse and norovirus. In addition to these abandoned mines, the ranch had also preserved (and presumably deemed structurally sound) a couple of old mine shafts that were open for tours. A staff member acting as a 19th century prospector led my group down an old a mine shaft (Cypher's Mine), which stands out in my mind as one of the creepiest experiences I've had. I'm typically not claustrophobic, but once the tunnel became too low to stand upright and the light at the end of the shaft faded to a speck, I grabbed my buddy's shoulder a little tighter--which we had to do anyway to make sure that we didn't lose anyone. Looking at the map of Mineville in the Atlas and hearing about the 45 minute commute to the mining site each day in the reading, I couldn't imagine working in a mine for a living as so many immigrants did in the park.
The highlight of my trip was reaching the summit of Baldy Mountain, a 12,500 foot peak in the Sangre de Cristo Mountains in northern New Mexico. The most striking and beautiful part of the hike was the mile-long rock scramble to the top. It's a common misconception that the summit is bare because it's above tree line--however, this is not the case. The mountain was mined for copper in the 19th century, which left the summit devoid of any wildlife. I thought Ben's question about whether mining destroys wilderness was interesting and it made me think back to this experience. He pointed out that bats benefit from the newfound habitat in the form of abandoned mine shafts, and I would agree that there can be unintended benefits to mining based on the spectacular and uninhibited views from Baldy mountain.
My brother is a conservation biologist specializing in water who works in California and he has told me that the streams south of Yosemite are contaminated with mercury and arsenic from reckless gold mining in the 19th century. I get the impression that mining in the park has been conducted more responsibly than it had been in the west. I'd love to visit an old mine on our field trip to see how mining in the park compares to mining in the western United States.
My group, with the summit of Baldy Mountain in the background. |
Your comment about whether or not mining could have a positive effect on the Adirondacks and its community intrigues me. For a place that has been so historically impoverished, it seems like these people could really use the cash. At the same time, there is significant value in "nature" as it is. Of course, its status as "wild" benefits vacationers far more than it does locals. It's a difficult conflict... coming from a place of someone who loves the nature as a place to get away, I would rather the Adirondacks stay free of mining or keep it limited. But if I were a local who stood to gain wealth by more successful mining--if I had kids who I could send to college, if only I could make more money off the land... or if I could use that money to afford better food and pay for health insurance... then yes, I would absolutely support mining as a means to survive.
ReplyDeleteAnother comment that interests me is the idea that perhaps mining practices in the Adirondacks were/are more eco-friendly, which is why Adirondack waterways are not as contaminated as those in California. I think this can be attributed to the success in California mining. There was so much money to be made off the gold that people scrambled and extracted the metal in any way they could. On the flip side, there was not so much pressure to extract the metal in the Adirondacks quickly, because the process was generally less profitable.