Most of us dig the notion of neighborliness—that friendly wave, those dog-walking chats, the sense that you belong, however loosely, to some sort of community.
This concept is not lost on those who tweak facts for a living. Indeed, when it comes to a potential strip mine in the Santa Rita Mountains, public-relations professionals have missed few opportunities to toy with simple truths.
They’ve packed public meetings with “mine supporters” who actually turned out to be poor schmucks who were promised a free meal, cheap T-shirts and hypothetical jobs.
The PR team behind Canadian-owned Rosemont Copper—which hopes to dig the Santa Rita pit and dump its tailings on the neighboring Coronado National Forest—has prodded economists to paint lipstick on their plan. They’ve also fashioned an image with a pigtailed little girl gazing toward the sky that’s eerily reminiscent of Lyndon Johnson’s 1964 “Daisy Girl” campaign ad that concluded with a mushroom cloud—and obliterated Barry Goldwater’s presidential bid.
If that weren’t enough, Rosemont officials have enjoyed ongoing, cozy confabs with folks from the Coronado itself—a pattern that recently sparked a lawsuit by mine opponents.
All said, this has been a heady performance for a mining company without a mine to its name, but with all the publicity that money can buy. Consider the card that company honchos hand out at public events, touting the potential pit and asking recipients to state their own feelings about it.
“Tell Us What You Think,” reads the card. Then folks are offered two choices.
Choice 1. “I support your plan to bring new jobs and an economic engine to Arizona.”
Choice 2. “I have comments or questions about your plan.”
Curiously, these cards offer no third option, such as, “I think your plan stinks.”
That omission irks Rosemont opponents such as Gayle Hartmann, president of Save the Scenic Santa Ritas. She presumes that results from the manipulated survey will eventually be tapped by Rosemont to proclaim its broad public support. “The card really didn’t give you any choices,” she says, “except that the mine is great, and I want to know more about it.”
But Pete Zimmerman, of Zimmerman Public Affairs, one of the agencies working for Rosemont, says the cards simply offer insight into community sentiments. “We’re not collecting the names of people who don’t support Rosemont. We are trying to make sure the issues are well-understood by everyone.”
Perhaps less well-understood are the letters generated by Rosemont that blanketed select parts of Tucson last fall. One such missive, dispatched to midtown’s Miramonte and Palo Verde neighborhoods, tapped a little trickery to make its case. This sleight-of-hand was compounded by the bumbling of its authors, who were PR people rather than mere residents, as the letter suggests.
“As your neighbors here in Miramonte and Palo Verde,” the letter begins, “we are reaching out to you to share some information about Rosemont Copper.
“After carefully reviewing the proposed project, we have all come to the same conclusion: Rosemont Copper will set high standards for resource protection, water conservation, and reclamation … .”
The letter ends with the names of nearly a dozen neighbors, along with their signatures. But there’s a catch: Though the names are real enough, nearly all of the signatures were faked by Rosemont. While the “signees” had apparently given permission, it’s a bit disconcerting to picture Rosemont employees huddled in their offices and tapping out a bogus letter filled with false signatures—and then peddling it as a friendly note from the neighbors.
Among the letter’s recipients was Brian Beck, whose wife happens to be a board member of Save the Scenic Santa Ritas. Even if he didn’t have a stake in this fight, Beck says he’d find the letter appalling. “It wasn’t a spontaneously generated, grassroots thing. (Rosemont) went out and found some people, and then did the work on it.
“I think that’s kind of representative of both sides in this issue,” Beck says. “A lot of opposition (to the mine) is coming up from the grassroots. And a lot of the support is coming top-down, from Rosemont.”
Hartmann calls the letter misleading, “because it speaks so glowingly of the mine and the 2,900 jobs it will bring. The real number of jobs it will bring is 400. I think they just keep exaggerating the good effects for Tucson, and forgetting about the negative impacts.”
Among a half-dozen Miramonte and Palo Verde letter “signers” contacted by the Weekly, all pledged support for the mine. But as it happens, at least two of them lived far beyond the boundaries of either neighborhood.
For instance, Frank Barreca’s home is on Tucson’s eastside, near Kolb Road. He says the mailing he originally approved didn’t even include specific neighborhoods. “The letter that had our names on it was unfortunately missing a paragraph that some of the other letters had. … I was under the impression that it would be just to the people in my area.”
So why all the flubs? To find out, we called Rosemont’s Tucson office, and we finally reached CEO Rod Pace, who immediately fell on his own sword. “We were working with some PR companies,” he says. “But ultimately, I reviewed the letter. It’s my responsibility, and when it goes out wrong, I’m the one to blame.”
Meanwhile, on Feb. 7, Save the Scenic Santa Ritas—in conjunction with the Center for Biological Diversity and the Sahuarita pecan company FICO—filed a lawsuit against the forest. They contend that the Coronado violated the Federal Advisory Committee Act, which mandates that all committees created by a federal agency must be open to the public.
It seems that the forest has been holding ongoing, closed-door meetings as it cobbles together an environmental impact statement for the mine. While mine opponents haven’t been invited to attend, those doors have been opened for Rosemont officials.
The forest contends that Rosemont staffers were invited solely to provide technical information. But when contacted by the Tucson Weekly, Coronado spokeswoman Heidi Schewel declined further comment, citing the ongoing litigation. However, she did say that those meetings with Rosemont staffers would continue.
To Hartmann, the issue is quite simple. “It’s really all about fairness,” she says. “A public agency should be treating a complicated project like this fairly. And if they’re going to allow mine proponents to sit in the room during most of the meetings, then they need to have people of other perspectives there as well.”
This article appears in Feb 17-23, 2011.
We FULLY expect Rosemont to be cheating on this. No question at all, they are out for the ore, and the mountains be damned. Hope the papers will keep up the observations; better yet, take sides.
I’m a proud Rosemont supporter. I haven’t been duped into anything. I’m not uneducated, I have a bachelor’s degree. I have no intentions of, or aspirations to, work for Rosemont. If you want to discuss one-sided, just read this article.
Most of the people opposed to the Rosemont project are just NIMBY’s (not in my back yard). People want copper, fossil fuels, and all the benefits of modern life, but don’t want to admit that mining provides the things they use every day. The opposition to the Rosemont mine consists mainly of pseudo-intellectual wannabe environmentalists, who want everyone else to lower their standard of living, but are unwilling to make any real changes in their own lives.
I spoke with a supporter of the “Save the Scenic Santa Ritas” movement in Sahuarita. They had a booth set up at Anamax Park (built by a copper mining company, I might add). This representative told me that they don’t oppose copper mining, they just want it done in third-world countries insteaad of anywhere in Arizona. Apparently its better to mine with no environmental oversight at all than a responsible project like Rosemont. As long as its out-of-sight, its fine.
People opposed to the mine often bring up water. I expect these same opponents to start picketing any construction in the area, as more houses means more domestic water use.
The Rosemont plan is good. It will provide jobs in the Tucson area. Rosemont will help property values. Rosemont will pay state and local taxes.
Arizona is known as the “Copper State” and has a long history of mining. There are three active copper mines within 40 miles of the proposed project. The town of Sahuarita was originally platted to provide housing for miners, and it was on mine land! We need mines, and we need well-planned projects like Rosemont.
Rosemont Copper’s opponents have always attempted to minimize the project’s benefits, while wildly exaggerating Rosemont’s negative impacts on our community. And yet, they present very little evidence to support their claims, which as far as I can discern are purely based on false, misleading and emotional arguments as opposed to factual information. Their only purpose is to confuse the public on these important issues in an effort to exploit’s the public’s fear of the unknown.
On the other hand, Rosemont Copper has provided numerous technical, scientific and economic reports, prepared by unbiased professionals, which fully support their claims. All of this information has been made available to the public, where it can be examined by all and verified for its accuracy.
I for one am thankful that Rosemont Copper has been able to successfully counter these efforts through their site tours program, public meetings and a well run PR campaign, which has gotten their message out to the public. Rosemont Copper’s efforts have also greatly benefitted by the work of numerous supporters, like myself, who have responded to “news articles” like the one above, which are nothing more than propaganda cloaked in the veil of journalism.
All the supporters of Rosemont support Rosemont’s claims. I for one am not a Rosemont supporter. I think the world has enough copper mines for the present. They are enjoying high copper prices and producing enough copper for the world apparently. This too will pass. Why should we destroy another scenic, pastoral area that is a reprieve from the hectic life of people in Southern Arizona for the profit of a Canadian company owned by an Australian company. If and when the time comes that copper becomes scarce in the world market this may be more acceptable. Hopefully, by then other products will be developed to make copper less in demand.
Although Rosemont promises much, I look at the miles and miles of tailing piles along the I 19 corridor and think, “is this what I want to see in the Rosemont area?”. I think not. Years ago I toured the mines along the I 19 corridor when replanting the tailing piles was in its infancy. A mining engineer scoffed at the idea of replanting the tailing piles. He was right if you look at them today as it doesn’t work, however his second comment was that it was only waste desert land that was good for nothing anyway. I find that utterly incomprehensible.
Water is another issue. We have yet to understand that it is in limited supply in southern Arizona. The mines use a lot of water as does agriculture. Furthermore mines leech chemicals into the aquifer that are harmful to healt. It many be inententional, but it happens. Cities use less water, and we are dependent on deep water wells in Tucson for the most part, and those are irreplaceable. Not too many years ago trees flourished along the washes in Tucson. No more, because of the unrestrained used. Label me an environmentalist, but in the end, people who speak out for the environment may actually have the answers that corporate interests do not.
All of the governmental entities in southern Arizona have spoken out in opposition to the development of the mine. Do you suppose they are wrong?
Don Wenig, Tucson.
Just a bunch of NIMBY’s? The only purpose is to confuse the public? Are you kidding me? You need to do a bit of research yourself. Unbiased reports from Rosemont? You guys are funny!
Rosemont has done everything in their power to prevent the public from learning about the negatives the mine will bring. They went as far as owning website URL’s like “stoprosemont.com” “savethescenicsantaritas.com”.
to learn about one of the many issues with Rosemont visit Youtube and take a tour of SR83.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=onsYq0ggUsw
You say property values will rise, I’m laughing. Nobody will want to live anywhere near this region with the traffic Rosemont proposes for SR83. Property values in the region are already suffering.
Good profitable businesses will suffer. Sonoita and Elgin are home to many wineries and tourist destinations. When SR83 is loaded with mine traffic do you believe their businesses will not be impacted. How much will it cost everyone in this region?
If you want propaganda, talk to Rosemont. They told me at one of their open houses that they would improve SR83 and make it safe before they would use it. At first I bought it, but reviewing some of these “technical reports” you speak so highly of, tell me, what are the proposing? I know for certain they assume all of their employees will be carpooling to work. Nice way to show that they will not generate the volume of traffic that would make these technical reports provide the results they want. Results that will save them money at the expense of the public. Rosemont’s PR is a joke. I trust them about as far as I can throw them!
The thing that disturbs me the most about this issue is that the people who we have put in charge of our national forrest want the mine. What ever happened to the forrests service conservation principles..??? It seems that their real concern is preservation of their jobs not preservation of our national forrests.
I may actually be ambivalent on the issue. The US does damn little ‘in-house’ anymore, and mining IS one of the few things we can’t outsource.
My problem is, why is a Canadian company spearheading this project, and reaping the benefits of our mountains? How responsible was foreign owned BP in safeguarding the drilling off the Gulf Coast? I’d feel immensely better about Rosemont if it was a US company. Would’ve been ridiculously easy to hide the fact this was funded by a non-American firm; another lapse of judgment? None of the miscalculations have done much to boost my confidence in Augusta.
The most amazing thing to me is that with copper at well over $4 per pound, why we don’t revisit defunct mines? Magma/BHP had only scratched the surface of the lower Kalamazoo ore body when poor commodity pricing shut down that mine 12 years ago. Trade the Santa Rita property with the San Manuel pit, and we don’t have to scar virgin land, and Rosemont can operate a viable mine without creating a new ‘hole’ and spending millions PR’ing us to death. Truly a win-win scenario.
Arizona’s ‘Copper Valley’ residents would embrace the project, and you wouldn’t have to spend a nickel to convince them that it’s a good idea.
The info card Ms. Hartmann complains doesn’t have a “I think your plan stinks”, but she could have entered that as a comment using Choice 2. “I have comments or questions about your plan.” What a lame excuse for something to be upset about.
This is all getting tiresome. Our state is busted broke with no viable sources of tax revenue. Perfectly decent people are out of work. Schools are having funding shortages and wondering how they are going to make it. One the basic resources we Arizonan’s can contribute to our nation’s wealth (and federal/state taxes) is our copper. It’s essential to modern life, the technology we enjoy like the internet and the “green economy”.
Please keep an open mind and study the information. Your lifestyle has a price..whether it supported by mines in Arizona or far out of sight in China, Indonesia, or Argentina. You have the opportunity to provide input for protection of the environmental/community/cultural/biology resources and to do everything we can to mitigate the downsides here in our beautiful state. What do you think is going on overseas? Think their “scenic Santa Ritas” aren’t important too?
A little historical information about San Manuel. BHP Copper temporarily suspended operations at San Manuel in June 1999, due to low copper prices and decided to permanently close and reclaim the facility in January 2002 in accordance to current environmental laws. Prior to the suspension of operations in mid-1999, they had completed a major smelter modernization program and a mine development program on the Kalamazoo ore body at an estimated cost of several hundred million dollars.
Copper ores at San Manuel occur in two ore bodies, known as San Manuel and Kalamazoo. It was primarily an underground mining operation with the upper portion of the shallower San Manuel deposit also being mined by open pit methods. The Kalamazoo ore body, where virtually all of the remaining resource occurs, is located at depth of 2,500 and 4,600 feet and is only mineable by underground mining methods.
Once BHP Copper had decided to permanently close the mine and processing facilities at San Manuel, they were required by law to reclaim the mine and plant site. At the mine, this involved removing all of the equipment from the underground mine, suspension of dewatering operations, permitting the underground workings to flood, filling in the shafts, and removing all of the surface infrastructure. At the plant site, the concentrator, smelter and refinery were torn down and sold for scrap and the tailings pond reclaimed.
Finally, even with the large copper resource that remains in the ground at Kalamazoo, the cost of re-entering the mine and re-establishing the mine and mill infrastructure at the site would not be economically feasible even at today’s prices. Re-entering the underground workings alone would not be technically feasible at any cost.
In hind site, BHP Copper’s decision to permanently close the San Manuel mine was a very bad business decision, particularly when you consider the nature of the operation, which makes it virtually impossible to re-enter the mine and resume operations. This decision ultimately cost BHP billions of dollars in lost profits. Had they waited for several years, San Manuel would still be producing approximately 200,000 tons of copper annually and would be making record profits.
Why are Canadian, Australian, Mexican, and British companies working here? It’s a global economy remember? They’re thinking in terms of resources to meet global needs and how to get the resources to all parts of the globe where demand, manufacturing, and energy needs exist. Plus the added bennies are that we have a stable government, well-understood environmental policies, general lack of corruption, disruption, kidnapping, beheadings, civil wars, epidemics, and other nasty features associated with the other parts of the world.
Why are ignoring the Spanish companies building solar facilities here in Arizona? Or is just mines that folks are complaining about and not the enviro impact related to vast solar fields or other manufacturing industries?
Wineries are a drop in the bucket. How many people does the average winery employ? How many people do all of the wineries in Arizona employ? How many people work in the mining industry in this area? There’s no comparison. I suppose that the wineries magically get water from nowhere, too.
The tourism is argument is a red herring. Green Valley is a “tourist” destination, yet it is backed up against 3 mines! According to you, one mine will stop all tourism, but it hasn’t hurt Green Valley.
Here’s an economics lesson for you all. When a commodity price is going up, that’s because that commodity is in demand. The first thing that happens is the producers of that commodity max out production to maximize profits. If the prices continues to rise, that indicates that more production capacity is needed, or someone is going to do without that commodity. So, to those of you against opening new mines, are you willing to do without copper? Are you willing to go without steel? No. But you continue to stand in the way of producing the goods that you consume. That’s not fair. It means someone else does without.
I just finished reading your story on Rosemont. It is hard to fathom why your publication would be content to publish one side of the debate only. Your piece is filled with speculation and very few facts.
One does not have to be an economist to understand that many families would be helped out of the economic slide if the mine is opened. The mine would make jobs available to the unemployed miners of our area. Copper is needed for a great many of the products we use. It is in DEMAND world wide. It is to Arizona’s benefit to meet that demand by releasing some of abundant copper we are lucky enogh to have under our ground. The best way to take advantage of this resource is to mine for it.
Copper mining processes have improved, so that in 2011 this area will not see silt-filled sights along I-19 if Rosemont gets the needed permits. Progress and prosperity come at a price. The people who complain ask us to quiet their unreasonable fears about lost scenery at the cost of tax money that could otherwise flow into state coffers, people who could move off welfare rolls and self-respect that restored to skilled miners and their families.
Gloria Kane
Tucson
Gloria: If you’d like to submit a letter to the editor or a guest commentary containing your side of the debate and, as you say, “facts,” e-mail me at TucsonWeekly.com. Thanks!
Remember the copper smelter in Douglas? Remember how the anti-copper smelter people were blaming the hazy air out here in Cochise county on the smelter? Remember how the copper smelter just had to go so “we” could have clean air? WELL…the copper smelter was torn down and guess what? Our air still has the same haze to it. Why? Because of the dust in the air that was here before the smelter and is still here after the smelter. In closing, not one of those people ever stepped forward and said; oh I guess we were wrong after all…
Interesting how Chris J. shows up at length on every comment section that has something to do with Rosemont. The Star or Weekly. Either he’s somehow paid by Rosemont, or probably one of their PR guys. Smells fishy. Honesty is everything.
On principal, as well as in defense against numerous other assaults, I am opposed to blasting a huge, destructive hole in the ground near thousands of people and other living thing’s homes. If I be a NIMBYS (sounds silly mostly to you), so be it—it’s my mountain in my backyard.
Standard of living? Huh… the whole country is stuffed to the gills. Let’s think about something higher than stuffing ourselves even more!
Another reason for us government retirees with money, pensions, and health plans to NOT retire in AZ. No wonder there are so many properties for sale, and low prices too.