Well, Folks, I wanted to take this week to talk about Signal Peak’s Mine and the visit of their facilities and property a couple weeks back, AND all the BS that is surrounding the lawsuits and groups that filed them. In addition, due to judges legislating from the bench (as they call it), Signal Peak can’t mine on federal lands now (when they were previously approved), but other mines can continue to mine while updating their EIS (Environmental Impact Study). I’m told the lawsuits are the same lawsuits but the only difference is the judge. I’m going to help you navigate and connect some of the dots here.
Initially, Signal Peak Energy which is located just north of Shepherd and extends into Musselshell County, has come on our radar since we first received some information from Steve Charter about his claims and the problems he is having with Signal Peak Energy.
He claims Signal Peak is devaluing his land, destroying his land and property for his cattle because of mining operations that are going on in that area. Furthermore, he and these groups claim that Signal Peak is taking over his land and not reclaiming it. We ran that story in our newspaper about his claims and Signal Peak’s short response in our October 20thedition of YCN. Our reporter did another story follow up in our paper about the issues that are at hand which includes Charter’s claim that the surface water is being affected in regards to the local ponds, wells, and springs. (Signal Peak has a ton of monitoring wells all over, and they monitor them regularly.) Our story pointed out that Signal Peak is talking and speaking out now that the lawsuit is over and feel they are not getting equal treatment and being treated fairly under the law.
At first glance, it seems that Steve Charter is completely and truly a victim of Signal Peak’s decisions and the whole ordeal of reclamation being done and such as trying to run him off his family property. Charter and these groups file the complaints with outdated pictures, unsupported facts, but then still contend that Signal Peak does not care about the environment, neighbors, farmers and ranchers, and such. Could that possibly be true? It appears at first glance that it is perceived that way…
However, after diving into the big issues at hand and reviewing the complaints Steve Charter and the groups filed, while also personally visiting the ponds, cracks in the ground, natural springs and such, I’m convinced that Steve Charter seems inept or deliberately misleading and choosing to be used as a “pawn” and associate himself with liberal likeminded groups like the Northern Plains Resource Council and others in a personal agenda and vendetta that he and his family have against Signal Peak Mine and natural resource development.
I went and personally looked at the springs in November that were still running in that area. I looked at the ground that Signal Peak reclaimed once it was brought to their attention even though they had up to two years to allow the ground to settle (but reclaimed it in a very reasonable amount of time in some instances). I understand better the method in how the underground mining is done at Signal Peak Energy. The topsoil and vegetation are hardly even affected. Signal Peak showed us numerous locations on their property where they had the ground all dug up due to work, trucks and material that was being used, but now one can’t even tell that anything was displaced. In fact, the areas that were reclaimed seemed to be better and with more abundance of vegetation in those areas than before. In fact, DEQ contends it’s better to let the soil heal itself naturally than to tear up the ground in trying to fix the temporary subsistence crack.
Signal Peak is just starting to exercise their part of the long-term agreement that was signed some 30+ years ago, and it seems that Steve Charter, for example, is not happy about it now as it’s not as beneficial to him as it was for him and his family for the last 30 some years. And what about the cows getting hurt because of the subsidence cracks in the ground? I learned that Signal Peak does not allow animals on the surface while actively mining underground so as to not affect any animals. The Charters and local ranchers could lease the inactive mine property at the same rate that the mine is leasing their land when the operations get to the rancher’s property.
I wanted to wait to write my own meanderings column until I saw the release of the DEQ’s response to the October 16th complaint by these four groups that associate with Steve Charter and his like-mindedness. The response is 11 pages long and too much for me to include in this column (Not even one of the claims by the environmental groups is supported in the document from what I understand.) However, here is the DEQ’s response and conclusion to the federal complaint that was submitted by these four groups and Steve Charter’s land. (I will include the full letter online with this column as it’s too long to publish the whole thing.)
The conclusion reads:
“In closing, DEQ, finds complainants’ allegation unsupported by the facts, predicated on outdated and misleading photos, conclusory statements, its own prior unsupported citizen’s complaints, and omissions, and misstatements of applicable law. The only evidentiary support — supplied herein — indicates that OSMRE approves of SPE’s reclamation plan; that DEQ is continuing to appropriately monitor SPE’s operation to ensure compliance with MSUMRA and its permit obligations. As always DEQ intends to continue with this regular ongoing compliance oversight of SPE, including monthly compliance inspections, and the review of periodic reports. But DEQ strongly disagrees that any federal inspection is required or that a cessation order is appropriate.”
It seems that this feud with Signal Peak Energy and Steve Charter and environmental groups is nearing a peak for a number of reasons. I guess this issue has been going on for years now, and it’s just getting more absurd with time. It seems, though, that one just keeps throwing out information to see if it will stick to the wall. But even if Steve Charter is trying to sell some 3,000 acres, it seems that it would be easier to catch flies with honey than it would with vinegar, right? At least one would think so. Would it surprise you if Steve Charter wanted an outrageous amount like $12 million for some 3,000 acres? Would that be reasonable? What about $6 million or even $5 million or even $2 million? It also seems that Charter and his family have taken advantage of the terms of their contract with Signal Peak Energy for some 30 years, but now that the advantage falls to the mine, he wants to push the company now and make it as miserable as possible for them?
Let’s be honest! Let’s call a spade a spade! Signal Peak has demonstrated through the DEQ’s and other agencies’ processes that they are being a good steward of the land while responsibly developing the natural resources in the area. Are they perfect? No! AND we’ve also reported that in previous stories we’ve published here in this newspaper before. However, I’m convinced that Signal Peak is not being treated fairly under the law, and it’s politics at its finest. How is it that two mines get to continue to operate while updating their EIS under one judge, but Signal Peak can’t continue to mine because another judge out of Missoula thinks differently? Did these groups strategically file these complaints knowing how the judge would decide? Are these environmental groups just trying to hinder any progress against natural resource development but yet it’s going to require $12 million dollars to move equipment each time? Does that reduce greenhouse gases any more efficiently by forcing a mine to move all their equipment to another unnecessary location? (That’s another story for another time.) A story called “Signal Peak Breaks Its Silence” found on page 17, column 2, paragraph 2 of YCN dated 11/17/23.
In my opinion, this is the epitome of “legislating from the bench” from a judge, and these environmental groups know how to navigate the law and legal system by weaponizing government agencies against one another to support their agenda. AND, I haven’t even touched the revenue aspect to the state and federal government which the taxpayers are ultimately paying for. But I’ll address the money issue in my next column as that’s another whole can of worms to open up, and it’s coming out of your pocket in the meantime.
Until then, see you in the paper.
JDM
