Utah is growing fast, and with growth comes inevitable development. That leads us to the recently introduced S.B. 172 Protection Areas Revisions by Senator David Hinkins (Emery County), which is eerily similar to last year’s H.B. 527 Mining Operations Amendments. While perhaps a well-intentioned bill meant to create more aggregate material for development, it’s hard to ignore how wide-reaching and disastrous the consequences of this bill would be, intended or not.

The bill would allow mining operations to expand with little restriction or oversight from local governments, stripping our communities of the right to protect our quality of life and marring the beautiful landscapes we call home. Here are some of the most important changes the bill makes: 

CHANGES TO VESTED MINING RIGHTS

Simply put, S.B. 172 would make it easier for property owners to establish a “vested mining right,” or an unconditional right to use their land for mining purposes. Not only would property owners with a “vested mining right” be able to bypass local land use authority, they would be able to expand their vested right to any neighboring property they own or acquire. What’s more concerning is that this bill doesn’t just apply to land where a “mining use” is currently established. It would apply to land with a historical mining use, as well. 

The map above is the Utah Division of Oil, Gas and Mining's "Utah Mineral Mine Map", which can be found here.

This bill would impact over tens of thousands of open mining claims throughout the state.

The bill also imposes significant hurdles to challenging a vested mining right. Parties would have one year to challenge, after which the right would be “conclusively established for all purposes.” Disputes would be resolved by the Board of the Department of Oil, Gas and Mining and if the challenge is unsuccessful, the challenging party can be ordered to pay the defendant’s legal fees.

CREATION OF VESTED CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE MATERIALS OPERATIONS

While mining activities involve minerals and other precious metals, critical infrastructure materials operations involve sand, gravel, and rock aggregate. S.B. 172 codifies “vested critical infrastructure materials operations,” or an unconditional right to use land for obtaining materials like gravel (AKA gravel pits). Similar to its treatment of vested mining rights, the bill allows vested critical infrastructure materials operations to automatically expand to neighboring properties and allows property owners to bypass local government regulations. 

DIRECT IMPACT ON THE PROPOSED GRAVEL PIT IN PARLEY'S CANYON

S.B. 172 modifies provisions of state statute that are part of a pending lawsuit between the developers of the proposed Parley’s gravel pit and Salt Lake County. This bill is a way for Tree Farm and Granite Construction (the developers) to retroactively apply a “vested right” to their property in Parley’s Canyon, allowing them to legislate their way to victory in the lawsuit and bypass Salt Lake County’s ordinance protecting the Wasatch Mountains, our air, and watersheds from mining uses.

At 634 acres, Tree Farm's originally proposed gravel pit would be the largest mining operation in the Wasatch since the “Point of the Mountain Quarry”. With this bill’s expansion of “vested use,” Tree Farm could easily expand the gravel pit to its adjacent properties, totaling over 1,000 acres in Parley’s Canyon. 

OTHER REASONS WE OPPOSE S.B. 172

• Local governments would be greatly limited in their ability to regulate mining operations within their borders, stripping them of their discretion to make decisions for the health and safety of their communities. 
• Mining operations use a lot of water, namely for dust mitigation. There's no telling what the exact impact of the bill would be on our water supply, only that it would require immense amounts of a resource we don't have, when our efforts should be focused on saving the Great Salt Lake. 
• Air quality would be severely compromised by dust and emissions, on top of Salt Lake Valley’s already poor air quality, especially during winter inversions. 

Beginning a mining operation should warrant careful consideration of the impacts on affected communities, wildlife, and the environment. It shouldn't be as straightforward as starting a mine at a site simply because the land has been mined before, or is adjacent to another mine. 

This is a complicated issue for the Wasatch Mountains and the entire state of Utah. Save Our Canyons opposes S.B. 172 and continues to work with government officials and community members to answer important questions about this bill.

WE URGE YOU TO CONTACT THE SENATE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND WORKFORCE SERVICES COMMITTEE, AND YOUR ELECTED OFFICIALS TO LET THEM KNOW YOU OPPOSE S.B. 172 PROTECTION AREAS REVISIONS.