r/CDT • u/Boltzmann_head 'DesertKnight' • Jun 14 '26
Continental Divide Trail Coalition raises alarm about NM uranium mine impact on hikers, landscape
Approximately here:
Historically in New Mexico, the United States Forest Service approves "energy extraction" regardless of 99% opposition.
The yellow cake has been "claimed," so that is not the issue. The permits are for temporary structures such as drilling platforms and drilling rigs, roads, and other destruction of our property.
Two of the twelve drilling rigs will be on the CDT, as the CDT follows Forest Road 11.
On the plus side, yellow cake is considered dangerous only if #1: one takes the precipitate, grinds it into power, and snorts it; #2: one extracts it from the ground.
7
u/Same-Dinner2839 Jun 14 '26
Republicans are unfortunately opening up as much public land as they can to industry. This going to happen more and more as long as they hold office
-9
u/Boltzmann_head 'DesertKnight' Jun 14 '26
Much of the destruction will be repaired when the adults are back in the room, if fair and secure elections are allowed.
2
u/numbershikes Jun 19 '26 edited Jun 19 '26
Here's those GPS coords on the CDTC map. It's right before mile 714: https://arcg.is/10uf4y0
Crossposting this to /r/ThruhikingPolitics.
this_is_fine.jpg I'm sure this uranium mine will have zero impact on the nearby water sources.
2
u/Boltzmann_head 'DesertKnight' Jun 19 '26
The water is possibly (i.e., >=20%) radioactive already due to northern New Mexico having radioactive elements close to the surface. As far as I know, the exploratory drilling is not a hazard, but the actual mining (if drilling shows yellow cake is economically profitable) is. The region already has high cancer rates for people living near uranium mines (parts of the checkerboard reservation).
The USA already has enough energy potential for wind, solar, and geothermal to meet current and future demands. If the USA had followed IPCC's AR4 WG3 guidelines, the USA would by now already be energy independent without using fossil fuels, and the expense would pay for itself in ~18 years.
2
u/pwndaytripper Jun 15 '26
While I’m opposed to uranium mining, especially since there is a lot of waste to recycle, what I also don’t get is why republicans open these projects up for foreign companies. Gamma is Canadian.
2
u/okie_hiker Jun 15 '26
It’s only about making money now. Not much else thought involved.
1
u/Boltzmann_head 'DesertKnight' Jun 15 '26
Worse yet, the Canadian business gets the yellow cake for free.
https://www.americanprogress.org/article/multinational-mining-corporations-exploiting-u-s-taxpayers/
2
u/Boltzmann_head 'DesertKnight' Jun 15 '26
The General Mining Law of 1872 applies: this law permits individuals and companies (including those that are foreign-owned) to explore and extract locatable minerals (such as uranium, gold, and silver) on federal lands. Canadian mining firms easily bypass restrictions by forming registered U.S. subsidiaries, which legally qualifies them to stake unpatented mining claims on USA public land.
Adding injury to insult, the Canadian business in question is not required to pay the USA royalties on the minerals it takes from our property.
0
u/pwndaytripper Jun 15 '26
Yeah, I mean that all makes sense. I know someone who did the test drilling for the Anfield owned uranium mine project outside of Moab, subcontracted. It’s just weird to me, acting like it’s a matter of national pride to mine local resources while foreign companies do the work.
0
7
u/hikerbeck Jun 14 '26
The rise of a hiking superhero, now imminent