Let’s Not Mine Uranium in the Grand Canyon

Ticker

Monika Bauerlein,
CEO

Dear Reader,

The next few months are make-or-break for Mother Jones’ fundraising, and we need more online readers to pitch in than have been of late. In "It's Not a Crisis. This Is the New Normal," we take a level-headed look at the brutal economics of journalism, why investigative reporting like you get from us matters, and why we're optimistic we can grow our base of support in a big way—starting with hitting a huge $300,000 goal in just three weeks. Please learn more and donate if you can right now.

The next few months are make-or-break for Mother Jones’ fundraising. We need to raise $300,000 quickly, and we need more online readers to pitch in than have been. Please learn more in "It's Not a Crisis. This Is the New Normal," where we go into the brutal economics of journalism, and what makes Mother Jones unique and worth supporting if you can right now.

<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/rosengrant/2977674446/sizes/m/in/photostream/">B Rosen</a>/Flickr

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.

The Bureau of Land Management issued a determination on Wednesday that turning the Grand Canyon into a giant uranium mine would be a bad idea.

Interior Secretary Ken Salazar said earlier this year that he thought there should be a 20-year moratorium on mining in the iconic canyon, so the decision isn’t really a surprise. The Final Environmental Impact Statement called for extending the moratorium on mining on the 1 million acres land under the management of the US Forest Service and BLM. Here’s what BLM had to say in a statement:

“The Grand Canyon is an iconic place for all Americans and visitors from around the world,” said BLM Director Bob Abbey. “Uranium remains an important part of our nation’s comprehensive energy resources, but it is appropriate to pause, identify what the predicted level of mining and its impacts on the Grand Canyon would be, and decide what level of risk is acceptable to take with this national treasure. The preferred alternative would allow for cautious, continued development with strong oversight that could help us fill critical gaps in our knowledge about water quality and environmental impacts of uranium mining in the area.”

But it’s sure to annoy the Republicans in the House and Senate who have been gunning to open it up. For now they’ll have to wait. At least until the Perry/Bachmann administration reverses the decision in a few years.