Hercules 2

Some news about the Hercules Silver project on the Cecil Andrus Wildlife Management Area.

First, Hercules is hosting a “town hall meeting” about its project this Wednesday evening (Dec. 13) at 7 p.m. in the Cambridge Exhibit Hall (see photo below). If you’ve hunted down there, and can make the meeting, it would be a great opportunity to ask questions or express concern for the future of that area, its wildlife inhabitants, and your rights to use public land in Idaho.

Second, I’ve gotten a couple responses from organizations in Idaho that monitor mining, particularly Idaho Rivers United. I spoke with a conservation program manager at IRU, which was heartening in that he was motivated to find out more about this little-known project.

Although the Hercules project is mainly focused on the Andrus WMA, and thus Idaho State land, there are some questions that nobody I’ve talked to (which include USFS managers, F&G managers, and NGO conservation managers) seems to be able to answer, which I hope come up on Wednesday evening in Cambridge:

1) if the mining project is going full steam ahead because it’s on Idaho land (and not federal, which requires much more in-depth permitting and public comment periods, which are scant or non-existent on Idaho lands when it comes to mining), why were those high-voltage cables Peat and I repeatedly tripped over spread across huge swaths of NFS (federal) land in addition to the Andrus WMA? Did Hercules have to get permits for that? What would have happened if someone got electrocuted or injured by those?

2) Is it a fact that mining rights on state land supercede designation of a parcel as a “wildlife management area,” which is supposed to be managed by Idaho Fish and Game for wildlife habitat protection, which was the intent of the donation of this specific land by the “Richard King Mellon Foundation… in 1993.”

There’s also some confusion about mining rights, and what type of mine Hercules is trying to sell to investors. If it owns the mining rights, there’s no economic benefit to the state or local community; they keep all profits. If they’re leasing the rights, the lease agreement benefits taxpayers and the state. It’s unclear which type of mining rights Hercules has here.

The other question concerns surface rights and subsurface rights; the Fish & Game press release says Hercules has subsurface rights. The Hercules investor information claims they have surface rights. Which is it, and what difference does it make?

Another question that ranchers might be concerned to ask would be: if the Hercules project turns into its hoped-for open pit mine, what would happen to that significant acreage of public land grazing allotment? Anyone who’s been on that land has noticed cattle on it for at least half the calendar year. Idaho F&G prides itself on how it manages both wildlife and grazing on parcels like this: “Livestock grazing occurs on the WMA and the grazing program demonstrates compatible wildlife and livestock use of rangelands.” I would imagine they would all but eliminate access to that entire side of Highway 71, for miles.

Here are a couple of background information sources a friend of mine (thanks, Lisa!) dug up on this project. The first is an investor’s analysis of the project:

This next one is a podcast interview with the CEO of Hercules, Chris Paul, who shares his love of Idaho as an easy place to mine because of the lack of permitting and what he sees as a place where he doesn’t have to deal with the “brain death” of dealing with federal regulations:

There are of course lots of other questions and concerns I’m not aware of right now. If you can make the meeting this Wednesday, please consider a trip to Cambridge. I’ll try to post a follow-up soon afterward.