Following Montana’s administrative laws and regulations, department staff did their job and rejected Arch Coal’s application in early April of this year, sending a 41-page deficiency notice to the company.

Mike Rowland, Arch Coal’s Montana Director speaking in Lame Deer, MT at a public hearing on the proposed Otter Creek coal mine.

Words and phrases used over and over again in the deficiency notice include: must be submitted, inadequate, misleading, mis-represented, contradictory, not acceptable, unacceptable, inconsistencies, missing CAD data, correct this information, incorrect, discrepancy, unclear, correct this statement, confusion, does not adequately address, resubmit, inappropriate, insufficient, error, improper, missing, DEQ does not agree and cannot be verified. I’m not taking these words out of context. Read it for yourself. These phrases and words were used consistently in the document referring to Arch Coal’s data or analysis of the data.

Arch Coal will argue that it is common for mining permit applications to be returned to the company for more details or for minor reworking of the document. This is true.

What isn’t common, in Montana at least, is for a mining company to change the language of the laws and administrative rules in their permit application to “lessen their commitment.”

Yeah, they did that.

Rewriting Montana laws

Now, either Arch Coal has people working for them that are not qualified to produce a permit application or they intentionally changed the language of the regulations to see if they could slip one by the state of Montana and lessen their responsibilities to the land, water, air and citizens. Arch is used to working in Wyoming so my hunch is it’s the latter of the two.

On page 24 of the deficiency notice, Department staff write,

It appears that in some instances, OCC (Otter Creek Coal Co.) recites the applicable rule verbatim, and in other instances, modifies or omits rule language.

Then again on page 24, DEQ states,

OCC has again added the qualifier, “where feasible” to the permit language in the following paragraph (17.24.631(3)(b). OCC’s version of ARM 17.24.631 is not acceptable and must be modified: there is no ‘where feasible’ provision in the rule.

And on the final page there is one last sentence from Environmental Quality staff,

DEQ has noted that OCC has changed the language of the rules throughout the application to lessen the commitment required by the rules. As a reminder, OCC will be held to the standards set forth in the ARM l7.24.XXXX first and foremost, before the commitments in the permit application.

Where Feasible?

I think it is important to take a moment and think about what they did. It is something that takes a level of arrogance that is almost unimaginable to the average person. But then again, when you are acting on behalf of a large corporation like Arch Coal — with its numerous subsidiary companies — and no individual has to actually take responsibility for the actions of said corporation, I guess any discomfort at breaking rules gets dispersed among enough people that it is no big deal.

Wouldn’t it be great if you could just follow laws “where feasible.” Oh, I’m sorry officer, I was speeding through a school zone because slowing down just didn’t seem feasible.

What else is mind-boggling is that the small article in the Montana newspapers about the deficiency notice stated that Montana regulators were just asking for more information about the mine. The article completely ignored that Arch Coal didn’t submit entire required sections of the permit and rewrote Montana’s administrative rules.

It is understandable that Arch Coal is in a hurry. Port proposals to export coal to Asia on the west coast are dropping like flies and they don’t have a domestic market for their coal. They are in a race against time, history and the citizens of southeastern Montana, and Arch Coal is losing.

Thank the Montana Department of Environmental Quality staff

If you have a moment go ahead and send a thank you to the staff at the DEQ who did such a great job reviewing Arch Coal’s permit application.

DEQCoal@mt.gov

Last week, during a three-day meeting in Lame Deer, Montana, hosted by the Surface Transportation Board (STB) concerning the proposed Tongue River Railroad, I came to the unsettling conclusion that the public process is broken. A system, ostensibly meant to gather the public’s input in order to make good policy decisions, ignores the most important questions: questions of right and wrong, of profit at the expense of people, of justice. Bring those questions up in a meeting and watch people squirm in their seats.

But those are the questions that define the fight over the proposed Tongue River coal train. It’s simple.

Consultation in Lame Deer

Rosebud Creek valley looking out from Deer Medicine Rocks. Photo by Alexis Bonogofsky

To say that southeastern Montana is rich in cultural and historic sites is an understatement. You can’t walk a foot without seeing a place recorded in the oral and written histories of dozens of Tribes. Representatives from the Northern Cheyenne, Oglala Lakota Sioux, Yankton Sioux, Rosebud Sioux, Crow Creek Sioux, Cheyenne River Sioux, Standing Rock, Spirit Lake and Crow were in attendance.Tribal Historic Preservation Officers asked many good questions of the STB, but let me summarize for you.

Q: Does it matter that almost 100% of the directly impacted citizens of southeastern Montana do not want the Tongue River Railroad built? Answer: We are just at the beginning of the process.

Q: Does it matter that digging up the coal will only benefit a few at the expense of the many? Answer: We are just at the beginning of the process.

Q: Does it matter that this coal will exacerbate climate change, destroy aquifers and cultural sites forever and degrade water and air quality? Answer: We are just at the beginning of the process.

Real answers to these questions will never be answered because the Surface Transportation Board, their third-party contractors and the coal companies are indifferent, at best, to the moral questions of the Tongue River Railroad. The methodology used to measure impacts and mitigation has no room for questions of right and wrong. That is irrelevant to the process.

What the Surface Transportation Board should be doing 

I think most citizens accept that our government is supposed to protect individuals from the unreasonable actions of others, especially those with more money, resources, and power. The government must level the playing field. This is to ensure that the interests of the powerful do not trample on the rights, property and lives of the citizens. The government must act as the neutral broker that regulates both the relationship between the individual and the corporation and most importantly, the application of power. It should not act as the agent of industry.

I know, kind of naïve right? But that is standard that our government should be held to, both elected and non-elected representatives, from Senators to Surface Transportation Board staff, and we should demand that they live up to their responsibilities.

Rancher Clint McRae addresses Tribal THPO officers about the important cultural and historic sites on his property during the STB Tongue River Railroad site tour. Photo by Beth Raboin.

What about the No-Action Alternative? (i.e. The “coal train to Asia” doesn’t get built option)

All of us who attended the meeting heard the staff of the Surface Transportation Board say numerous times, “the alternative that receives a permit.” Wait a minute, someone said, but there is an “alternative” that is the “No Action” alternative that the STB is required to analyze and consider…right? They quickly backtracked, “Oh yes, there is the no action alternative.” Huh, funny, cause you never really mention that alternative as being a viable option.

BNSF and Tongue River Railroad representatives did not disappoint. They, as usual, sat quiet in a corner of the room checking their phones occasionally but otherwise seemed completely uninterested in the proceedings, besides the short little, “we are excited to be working together” pep talk from BNSF’s Public Affairs guy that is.

They never tell the gathered community, landowners and THPO officers why we should support their coal train. Like Vanessa Braided Hair said in her essay, Why the Otter Creek Coal Mine Will Never be Built, they are confident in our government’s disinterest in questions of right or wrong and the ability of the process to deliver them a permit.

Amish farmers move hay during a recent wintery day in southeastern Montana. The Tongue River Railroad is slated to go directly between their barn and their house. Photo credit: Alexis Bonogofsky

The situation reminds me of a quote by the Cat in Alice in Wonderland, “In that direction,” the Cat said, waving its right paw round, “lives a Hatter: and in that direction,” waving the other paw, “lives the March Hare. Visit either you like: they’re both mad.”

The process doesn’t have a memory, but we do (i.e. The Tongue River Railroad Co. has been bad news for over 30 years)

There is no room in the Surface Transportation Board process for memory.  The tribal citizens and ranchers who have been fighting this coal train for over 30 years do remember though. They remember a lot. Just ask them.

Bison bone pile, dug up by a coal company paid archeologist, exposed to the elements for 1 year on the Crow Reservation – photo by Mike Scott

As Jeannie Alderson, a Tongue River rancher said at a recent public hearing,

“The coal companies always tell you what they are going to bring, but they never tell you what they will take away.”

Hundreds of generations of Native Americans have been protecting this land and this is the second generation of ranchers that are fighting this coal train. If I was a betting person, I know which side I’d put my money on.

Here’s something that the Surface Transportation Board staff should consider if they haven’t already. People in Montana have spent decades of their lives fighting this ill-conceived railroad. A railroad that was a bad idea when they first proposed it and is a bad idea now. They have sacrificed their health, time with their friends and family and experienced increased stress worrying that their livelihoods, history, culture and environment will be damaged irreversibly.

And yet, the STB is asking them to participate in another decade long process because Arch Coal’s stocks are in the tank and they need to look like they are expanding for their investors.  Tribes and landowners are being asked to participate in the same process that has never worked for them or treated them as equal to the railroad.

If you are opposed to the project entirely, it is interpreted as a refusal to participate in their process. To them, it is irrational and so they trivialize those who criticize the process or say no from outside the power structure.

If the public process worked, this proposal would have been dead and buried long ago.

The process asks the wrong questions of the wrong people (i.e. the people of southeastern Montana are the real experts)

We are told over and over that the process will lead to the best decision for everyone, the public and the coal companies. One big happy family. How sweet.

Conrad Fisher, Northern Cheyenne Tribe’s Tribal Historic Preservation Officer testifies at the Otter Creek coal mine scoping hearings last winter. Photo credit: Alexis Bonogofsky

I will be the first to admit that the Surface Transportation Board staff and the experts they have hired know some things. In fact, they know a lot and they also seem like very nice people. People who, on some level, probably know that what is happening is wrong. But their personal views on this matter are irrelevant to what they are paid to produce.

How the experts report what they develop for the EIS will use neither common sense nor the experiences of the people who have lived in the valleys their whole life and whose ancestors lived there as well. A non-rancher doesn’t understand why and how cattle are moved. A non-Cheyenne doesn’t understand why the Greenleaf area is important.

We are told through the process that the experts know best. Without anyone actually saying so, the citizen is eliminated as a participant.  We are there to be managed, to be dealt with, another problem that needs to be solved, possibly consulted, but ultimately ignored.

The questions that we need to answer (i.e. Is this right?) 

They refuse to ask the question, is it right, is it moral, is it ethical for a private corporation to seize Montanan’s private property, destroy sacred cultural sites of the tribal nations, exacerbate climate change, damage important water resources for wildlife, crop production and livestock, wildlife habitat and air quality?

Not only do they refuse to ask the question, they refuse to admit the question is worth asking. The public process doesn’t allow for moral balance, experiential knowledge, common sense, memory or a social view of the world. Instead, we watch as these important human values wither away.

What is encouraged to flourish is competitiveness, amorality and an extreme aggressiveness when questioned or criticized.  Above all, what is encouraged is a growth of an undisciplined corporate self-interest.

What Voice Do We Have? 

The people of southeastern Montana, those most directly impacted, say no. No, we don’t want the Tongue River Railroad, the Otter Creek coal mine or your process.

Surface Transportation Board staff tell us it isn’t your decision; that we need to trust the process. A process without memory or morality.

The people ask, whose decision is it? They tell us, it is the decision of three unelected political appointees in Washington D.C. who have never been to the Tongue River Valley. They have never ranched. They have never felt the way the land in southeastern Montana digs in to your soul. They have never experienced the epic beauty of the Tongue River and Otter Creek Valleys.

But, they tell us, don’t worry. We’ll relay your concerns to them and they will be reflected in a 2,000 page Environmental Impact Statement.

That makes all of us out here sleep better at night.

For more background on the Tongue River railroad, please see my series on the Tongue River railroad public hearings at blog.nwf.org/bonogofsky.

From left: Vanessa Braided Hair, Waylon Roger and Paulee Small. NWF photo by Alexis Bonogofsky.

Cheyenne’s Speak Out

Otter Creek rally in Lame Deer, Montana. (r) Tom Mexican Cheyenne (c) Otto Braided Hair (l) Martin Braided Hair Photo credit: Alexis Bonogofsky

“We believe our community will bear the brunt of the negative impacts from the Otter Creek mine. Sacrificing the land, water, animal and plant life for mining and money is not worth what our ancestors fought and gave their life. Our group is worried about the crime, accidents, drugs and other social issues that come along with boomtowns that our Tribe is not equipped to handle. We are being asked to deal with this so that a transnational corporation can make billions of dollars shipping coal to Asia,” said Tom Mexican Cheyenne.

The proposed mine’s proximity to the border of the reservation is of particular concern to Northern Cheyenne tribal members. Otter Creek Valley, used for thousands of years by tribal peoples, contains cultural, historic and burial sites important to the Cheyenne people and many other Plains Tribes and serves as important habitat for hundreds of wildlife species.

“To preserve language culture and identity you must protect air, land, and water, that’s who we are.  Without language and land we are not who we say we are,” said Phillip Whiteman Jr., Northern Cheyenne Sweet Medicine Chief.

People have watched as North Dakota reservations have experienced dramatic increases in crime, traffic accidents and cultural conflict from nearby oil development. When coupled with environmental impacts of air pollution, water pollution and decreased wildlife populations, many tribal members now are opposing the development of the mine.

Tribal Renewable Energy Alternatives

Henry Red Cloud with Northern Cheyenne tribal members Jeff King and Kale Means at a solar photovoltaic training last month. Photo credit: Mark Andrew Boyer Photography

A couple of the trainees will then go on to work in Colorado on a large scale solar installation this summer with the goal of starting their own renewable energy business on the Northern Cheyenne Reservation.

“We want a different future for our children. Coal is a dead end for us,” said Vanessa Braided Hair, Northern Cheyenne wildlands firefighter and community organizer. “We will fight this till the end.”

The wildlife that live in this valley need your voice.

Otter Creek Photo credit: Kestrel Air Services (MEIC)

Why Otter Creek and Its Wildlife Need You

Take a minute and look at the above photo of the Otter Creek valley in southeastern Montana. The creek meanders down from Custer National Forest mountains and eventually drains into the Tongue River. A Northern Cheyenne friend of mine told me that all the names of the creeks and valleys are descriptive names and that Otter Creek was most likely named after the river otters that used to live there.

Bull Elk. Photo Credit Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks.

Now imagine if the state of Montana allows Arch Coal to mine the valley.  Arch will blast the land with dynamite to loosen the top soil and then bring in massive drag lines and heavy equipment to remove it. This equipment will be loud. The earth will shake with cast blasting, sometimes causing toxic orange clouds to form. They will build new roads, fragmenting intact habitat. Wildlife-vehicle collisions will increase due to the thousands of additional vehicles and trucks that will be on the rural highways in southeastern Montana. They will dig the coal up, put it in trucks and then load it on to a train to ship it to Asia.

Wildlife will be displaced from the valley, impacted by the noise, pollution and traffic. Streams and springs will be destroyed or depleted leaving wildlife with fewer options for a water source. Groundwater will be depleted which will impact agricultural wells, perennial springs and instream flows into the Tongue River. Invasive weeds will be introduced leaving less forage for wildlife. Habitat will be fragmented. There will be more wildfires due to sparks from coal trains. Poaching will increase due to increased access from new roads. Sacred sites and burial sites of Native American Tribes will be destroyed.

We also know that the mining and burning of this coal will contribute billions of tons of carbon into our atmosphere, harming wildlife and people.

These impacts are not just possible if a mine is built, they are inevitable.

Map of Otter Creek coal tracts

How you can help

Currently, the Montana Department of Environmental Quality is accepting public comments on what should be included in their draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS).  We need many voices, from around the country, to speak for the wildlife. It is imperative that we keep this coal in the ground.

You can tell the state of Montana what you think they should include in their study of this proposed mine.

1.  You can submit your comments to the state of Montana.

OtterCreekEIS@mt.gov

or

2. You can help NWF keep this coal in the ground.

Become a member or donate today.

3. You can join us online in our efforts to spread the word about NWF’s Tribal Lands Partnerships Program. 

Here’s our Facebook page, or follow us on Twitter @NWFTribalLands to keep up on the lastest news.

If you need help submitting comments or want more information about the the proposed Otter Creek mine and its impacts on wildlife, please contact me at bonogofsky@nwf.org.

Tongue River Railroad Colstrip Alternative

This new route, what they call the Colstrip Alternative, would travel up the Tongue River and then veer northwest over ranch land and block management land open to hunters and then on to Colstrip, Montana where it would meet up with a rail spur that joins with the northern Burlington Northern Santa Fe line.

And yet, even though there is a route change with new maps, new impacted landowners and new environmental and cultural impacts, the STB still has the scoping public comment period due on January 11, 2012.

How to Build a Coal Train: Tongue River Railroad style

For those of you not up to speed on railroad regulations, I don’t blame you. If you are having trouble sleeping, just open up the Surface Transportation Board website, go to their Environmental Rules page, and start reading. The regulations governing the construction and operation of a railroad are complicated and long. However, if you’re all caught up on your sleep, and just want a quick primer on how to get a permit to build a railroad, keep reading. I’ll define terms to help you out along the way.

Pretend that you are the head of TRRC. This is how it goes. It’s easier than it seems.

Step 1 – Submit a permit application to the STB: This step is easy. It is important to use decades old environmental data, lie about where you plan to sell your coal, act as if your industry isn’t dying, and make sweeping generalizations about the need for a railroad that aren’t backed up by any facts. It’s also good to have numerous different versions of your maps and routes to confuse the public. In addition, after the public hearings are over, make an announcement about a new route.

Step 2 – Obtain Eminent Domain Authority from STB: In order to construct and operate this rail line, you’ll need eminent domain authority.

This authority is necessary since you want to cross land currently owned and in use by ranchers and farmers and over extremely important tribal cultural and historic sites. This will hurt their businesses, but it’s OK since you know that it will really benefit everyone in the long-run. And by everyone, I mean you and only you.

You also plan on taking the train through an Amish community (a community that doesn’t use electricity), and have tracks running through one of their hand-raised and built barns. What are some barns in comparison to the billions of dollars you will be making selling this coal to China? Can’t they just build a new one?

However, in order to obtain eminent domain authority, you have to convince the STB that your project is in the “public convenience and necessity.” Oh…that’s gonna be a hard sell, right? I mean, how would the public benefit from our natural resources being shipped to Asia?

Step 3: Convince government bureaucrats that your project is in the public interest and necessity. You’ve seen the writing on the wall. Your industry is dying. You can’t compete with wind and natural gas. You keep trying to blame it on the government, the environmentalists, and the wind industry, but those arguments are less and less convincing over time. Climate change is wrecking havoc on the environment and causing extreme weather.

“But,” you think, “if I can convince politicians and bureaucrats that my railroad will benefit the public, I have a chance.” How do you explain to the STB that your project is in the best interest of the public? Let’s see what you say in your application.

“Given the explicit need for transportation of coal from the Otter Creek area and the fact that the TRRC rail line is the only viable means by which to transport such coal to market, it would clearly serve the public convenience and necessity to authorize the construction and operation of the TRRC rail line. This is not a rail line that is being proposed for construction based on speculation or with only a thin public interest need. The fact that BNSF and Arch have invested in the TRRC rail line and are prepared to expend substantial resources to build it underscores the need for the rail line. Indeed, the market is the best governor of the demand for a new reail line and here market foreces are coalescing behind a determination that the coal resource at Otter Creek should be developed and transported. Where industry players are prepared to dedicate resources to a significant mine and the railroad needed to to transport the mine’s product to market, the STB has no grounds for finding that construction and operation are inconsistent with the public convenience and necessity.” Page 21 TRR Application to the STB. 12/14/2012

I’ll get rid of some of the industry jargon and restate it for the layman.

Given that we have sunk millions of dollars into leasing the Otter Creek coal tracts and the fact that in order to make billions of dollars in profit we need a way to get it to Asia (because no one will buy it in the U.S.), and the Tongue River Railroad is the only way to get this coal to the Asian market, this rail line is clearly in the public convenience and necessity. And by the way, we have invested a ton of money into this so that shows that the coal mine should be developed because if it isn’t, we will lose our money. And, that would make us really sad. So, the conclusion is clear and irrefutable: that this coal train will benefit the public. Case closed.

Step 4: Sit back and wait for the STB to give you a permit.

At this point in the process, you have done everything you need to ensure that you will obtain a permit. You have submitted an application and then you let the government bureaucrats, who end up bearing the brunt of the public anger, become your agents.

Instead of the government looking out for the interests of the public, they end up being a broker in your business deal, making sure that you end up with the right to take away someone else’s livelihood and private property, destroy the aquifers and cultural sites, pollute the land, air and water, so that you can make money.

It’s a good racket that you’ve got going.

Too bad you’re going to lose.

Help us stop the Tongue River coal train

Submit Comments

You can send your comments to: Ken Blodgett, Surface Transportation Board, 395 E Street, SW, Washington, D.C. 20423-0001, Environmental filing, Docket No. FD 30186. The STB also provides an online comment form.

Support National Wildlife Federation

Become a member or donate today.

Join us online in our efforts to spread the word about NWF’s Tribal Lands Partnerships

Here’s our Facebook page, or follow us on Twitter @NWFTribalLands to keep up on the lastest news.

If you need help submitting comments or want more information about the Tongue River Railroad and its impacts on wildlife, please contact me at bonogofsky@nwf.org.

Northern Cheyenne group that traveled 1200 miles roundtrip to Spokane, WA to a coal port hearing. From (l) to (r) – Mike Scott (Sierra Club), Burdette Birdingground, Vanessa Braided Hair, Kale Means, Alexis Medicine Horse, Jeff King, Alexis Bonogofsky (National Wildlife Federation), Kaden Walks Nice, Adriann Killsnight – Photo by Jack McNeel

Why would someone care about a coal port facility being proposed over 1,000 miles away?

Black Thunder Coal Mine – Powder River Basin – photo by Ecoflight

If these ports are permitted and constructed, southeastern Montana will become a sacrifice zone for coal development and the Northern Cheyenne will bear the brunt of impacts to their land, water, air, and cultural sites.

Since the Army Corp of Engineers did not schedule any public hearings in Montana, over 60 Montanans decided to head to Washington to tell the Corp that they must analyze the impacts that this coal port facility will have on southeastern Montana and all of the rail communities that will have to deal with the exhaust, coal dust, train noise, traffic delays, air and water pollution, destruction of cultural sites, and the myriads of other impacts from coal mining in southeastern Montana.

Army Corp of Engineers needs to analyze all impacted communities – from the prairies to the ports

The basic message that people from Montana brought to Spokane is that impacts to ALL of the communities, from the existing and proposed mines in the Powder River Basin to the ports on the West coast and all the rail communities in between, must be analyzed.

By agreeing with the conservation community that citizens in Spokane will be impacted by new coal port terminals they implicitly admit that all rail communities will be impacted. If Spokane residents have a right to be a part of the coal port scoping hearings then Montana rail communities should also have the opportunity to attend a public hearing in their own community, instead of travelling over 1,000 miles.

If the rail communities are impacted, then the people who live near the massive new coal mines that are being proposed to feed these ports will be impacted exponentially more and deserve their own hearing.

Northern Cheyenne and Crow tribal member testimony

Even though only 75 people were allowed to speak, and the coal companies paid temporary workers to hold spots, the Power Past Coal coalition was able to secure spots for four of the Northern Cheyenne speakers and one of Crow speakers. Below you will find short 2 minute videos of their testimony.

Click here to view the embedded video.

Click here to view the embedded video.

Click here to view the embedded video.

Click here to view the embedded video.

How you can help

You can comment on the proposed coal port Gateway Pacific Terminal online or by email at comments@eisgatewaypacificwa.gov.

Tell the Army Corp of Engineers that they MUST analyze impacts from these coal ports in all communities, from the mines to the ports, from the prairies to the ocean.

You can also join or donate to NWF’s efforts to stop coal exports.

Become of fan of NWF’s Tribal Lands Partnerships Program on facebook and follow us on Twitter @NWFTribalLands

Protesters outside the Montana Capitol building in 2010, protesting the leasing of the Otter Creek coal tracts

If you have been reading my blogs about the effort of the Tongue River Railroad company to acquire a permit to construct and operate an 80 mile rail line along the pristine Tongue River valley, then you know that the consensus in eastern Montana, among the landowners, tribal citizens and hunters is that we don’t want it.

At each public scoping hearing, in Lame Deer, Forsyth, and Ashland, and Miles City, person after person rose in front of their community members, their families, the STB staff and industry representatives, and said in no uncertain terms, that they opposed the Tongue River Railroad and would protect their land, community and culture.

Jeannie Alderson, long time Northern Plains Resource Council member and rancher said, “The coal companies always tell you what they are going to bring, but they never tell you what they are going to take away.”

For five days straight, liberals and conservatives, cowboys and Indians, the young and our elders told STB to deny the Tongue River Railroad Company a permit.

Watch the Northern Cheyenne and their neighbors stand up to Big Coal and the Tongue River Railroad

Lucky for you, my friend Jeff King, a Northern Cheyenne tribal member and solar air heater trainee, was able to capture some of the testimony from the final Lame Deer hearing. So, instead of me telling you what people had to say, I want you to hear it for yourself. I tried to boil three hours of testimony down to about 20 minutes.

That means that a lot of heartfelt testimony was left out and unfortunately, the battery ran out so not every person that spoke is represented.

Believe me, this is 20 minutes that you don’t want to miss.

Click here to view the embedded video.

And watch it till the end…..

Clint and Wally McRae, ranchers whose land would be crossed by the Tongue River Railroad. Photo courtesy Sierra Club

And, just a side note, two representatives from Arch Coal sat in the corner during this hearing. Never once did they get up and defend their project or  speak to the people whose lives they intend to upend. In fact, during one man’s testimony, as he spoke of his grandmother’s death, they stood up and walked out.

As Arch Coal representatives told one Ashland man, “we are just here to open a coal mine.”

Join us in stopping the Tongue River Railroad

Submit Comments

You can send your comments to: Ken Blodgett, Surface Transportation Board, 395 E Street, SW, Washington, D.C. 20423-0001, Environmental filing, Docket No. FD 30186. The STB also provides an online comment form.

Support National Wildlife Federation

Become a member or donate today.

Join us online in our efforts to spread the word about NWF’s Tribal Lands Partnerships

Here’s our Facebook page, or follow us on Twitter @NWFTribalLands to keep up on the lastest news.

If you need help submitting comments or want more information about the Tongue River Railroad and its impacts on wildlife, please contact me at bonogofsky@nwf.org.

To put these hearings in perspective for those of you who don’t live in eastern Montana, they are being held in very small and rural communities and the economy is primarily based on family-owned farms and ranches and wildlife-based recreation, mostly hunting.

When 75 people turn out to a public hearing on a cold Montana night in a small town, that’s a big deal.

What was the consensus in Ashland last night?

Ashland is the community that is closest to the proposed Otter Creek coal mine and would also bear the extra burden of the proposed Tongue River Railroad. This community has the most to lose from the industrialization of this quite and pristine valley.

Well, if last night was any indication, the residents in Ashland don’t want the railroad running through their community. In the packed auditorium, over 20 citizens spoke against the railroad and not ONE person stood up to support it. After every speaker, the auditorium erupted in applause.

A “Travesty”

Walter Archer, chair of the Northern Plains Resource Council, kicked the night off with the first public comment calling the whole situation a travesty. Right on his heals came Henry Coffin, a local rancher.  He read the part of the Montana Constitution that says Montanan’s have a right to a “clean and healthful environment” and also a “right to defend our property.” He told them to leave the Tongue River “dead alone”. Kenneth Medicine Bull, a tribal member called it an “American tragedy.”

You can imagine where the night went from there.

This is an environmental justice issue

Golder Ranch – Photo take by Alexis Bonogofsky

He said that ultimately what the Tongue River Railroad proposal boiled down to was an environmental justice issue, for both the Northern Cheyenne Tribe and the local farmers and ranchers.

As Brad pointed out, and what most American’s don’t know, he is part of the 1% of the population in the United States that produces food for the rest of the 99%. One farmer called the Tongue River Valley, the “San Joaquin of the Plains,” with amazingly long growing season and plentiful and clean water from the Tongue. In addition, the tribal communities in southeastern Montana have some of the highest poverty rates in the nation. These two groups of people will have to deal with immense impacts of this mine and rail line.

The truth comes out

These proposals have nothing to do with national energy security or economic development. This isn’t about jobs for the poor, helping Montana’s tax base or helping local schools.

This is about money. But not money for Montanans, the Northern Cheyenne or local farmers and ranchers. And the last time I checked, mule deer and elk don’t know the first thing about using money to buy food. They rely on the plentiful forage in the Tongue River Valley.

A couple of things are important to know about the Tongue River Railroad and the Otter Creek mine:

1. The companies that are proposing the Tongue River Railroad and the Otter Creek Coal Mine are owned by some of the richest men in America.  A handful of  people will become very rich off Montana’s natural resources while;

Phillip Whiteman and Lynette Two Bulls speak at an environmental justice meeting in Lame Deer earlier this year

2. The 1% of the population who grow and raise food for the rest of the population and Native Americans will bear the brunt of the water, air, social and environmental impacts from the TRR and Otter Creek coal mine.

It’s pretty simple.  A BLM study conducted during a statewide oil and gas environmental impact statement showed that historically, energy development that occurred off the reservation, although was promised to bring the Cheyenne people out of poverty, actually worsened economic conditions on the Reservation.

Closing statement

At the end of the evening, a man who came with his wife stood up and walked slowly to the front of the auditorium. He hadn’t planned on speaking and obviously just finished doing chores for the evening. His jeans were tucked into his mud boots, dirt smeared on his sweatshirt and his voice shaking slightly from nervousness.

He stood up and looked at the government bureaucrats sitting at the table in the front of the room, white lights beating down on their face and said,

“What voice do we have?”

Indeed.

What you can do to help:

Submit Comments

You can send your comments to: Ken Blodgett, Surface Transportation Board, 395 E Street, SW, Washington, D.C. 20423-0001, Environmental filing, Docket No. FD 30186. The STB also provides an online comment form.

Support National Wildlife Federation

Become a member or donate today.

Join us online in our efforts to spread the word about NWF’s Tribal Lands Partnerships

Here’s our Facebook page, or follow us on Twitter @NWFTribalLands to keep up on the lastest news.

If you need help submitting comments or want more information about the Tongue River Railroad and its impacts on wildlife, please contact me at bonogofsky@nwf.org. Stay tuned for updates about the public scoping hearings and more about the Tongue River Railroad in Part II and III.

They met a similar level of opposition to the railroad as they did in Lame Deer as ranchers whose land would be crossed by the proposed Tongue River Railroad, ranchers who already have a railroad on their land and citizens worried about increased rail traffic stood up and told the STB staff that they were against the Tongue River Railroad. Citizens laid out a litany of issues that the STB must analyze in the Environmental Impact Statement. Over 20 people stood up and spoke out against the rail line with only one person speaking in favor of it.

Clint and Wally McRae, ranchers whose land would be crossed by the Tongue River Railroad. Photo courtesy Sierra Club

Ranching for dummies

How do you explain to a non-rancher why trains and cows don’t mix? It’s not as easy as you’d think. Take for instance the Tongue River Railroad Company’s original proposal to the ranchers along the route for cattle crossings. Instead of an overpass, they proposed metal culverts about 11 feet wide running underneath the rail line.

Cows and tin tubes

Culvert – photo courtesy Federal Highway Administration

“A cows not the smartest animal in the world. And she looks at the tin culvert and thinks, I might fit in this side but that far side is only about this big (Wally put his hands up in a tiny circle) and I’m not gonna fit in it, (crowd laughs) and if she finally decides that she can make it through there, her calf is smarter than she is and he/she won’t go….”

Wally then explained to the STB that he had tried to tell this to their Office of Environmental Analysis years ago when he was trying to protect his ranch. He wanted them to put in a bridge and wrote the STB. The STB wrote him back and said,

“Cattle will learn to go through a cattle pass.”

Wally wrote them back and said,

“Apparently you aren’t acquainted with our cattle, the first time you try to mash Rocker 6 cows through a tin tube, that they don’t think is big enough, I want you all to show up on your best horse to help us because we are going to need all the help we can get.”

Wally got no response. Either they don’t have very good cow horses out there at STB Headquarters or they don’t have a sense of humor, or maybe both.

Cows on the train tracks

Cow standing on train tracks – courtesy photo

“[Union Pacific] would rather pay for dead cows than maintain the fences,” Topham tells us. “It’s an economic decision.”

As all ranchers know, fencing is one of the largest expenses they have. One mile of fence is costing around $8,000/ mile. So, although the Tongue River Railroad company maintains that they would put a fence up along the entire route to keep livestock from hanging out on the tracks, we know that it is inevitable that fences will fail and cows will be killed. It will be cheaper for them to pay for dead cows than to maintain expensive fence. It is 83 miles of rough and rugged country, with many places having no access. How often will the TRR Co check the fence line to make sure it is ok?

There are more examples of trains hitting cows here and the whole train derailed, and here, and here.

Wildlife concerns raised

Besides the litany of issues related to ranching and trains that the public brought up, ranchers also brought up wildlife issues.

Bull Elk – photo courtesy USFWS

“The river bottom is the restaurant, the hills are the motel”

He pointed out that the train would go right between the restaurant and the motel, preventing the elk, deer and myriads of other critters from having an undisturbed migratory path. He was extremely concerned about how the rail line would impact the wildlife on his ranch that he works to protect and conserve. He told the STB that the Tongue River is one of the most pristine river valleys in the United States and is the most rich wildlife ecosystems in Montana.

He went on,

“There are a lot of jobs in the construction, manufacturing, marketing and distribution of the poison pill that will kill America. That poison pill is the export of our natural resources. The state of Montana, Arch Coal, and BNSF will all make a lot of money, but it will be at the expense of the best places we have left.”

A Public Good?

One of the most consistent themes of the night from almost every person that spoke was that a private corporation is asking to condemn and confiscate private property for corporate profits and yet the railroad company is trying to portray this a “public good.”

In order for the Tongue River Railroad to be granted the powers of eminent domain by the government and be able to take private property for their coal train they have to show that what they are proposing to do is in the interest of the the public.

I don’t know about you, but I don’t think a coal company making billions of dollars in profit, condemning land and shipping Montana’s coal to Asian countries is a “public good.”

Is the STB willing to actually consider the “no action” alternative?

At the end of the evening, after listening to two hours of people telling the STB staff what impacts they will see on their land, their health and their communities, I decided to stand up and ask them one question that I think all of us deserve to know the answer to.

Is the STB willing to say no to the Tongue River Railroad Company? What amount of environmental impacts do they need to see and hear about before they are willing to say, you know what, this railroad has too many problems, will destroy too much land, will harm too much wildlife, will cause too much destruction,  and we aren’t going to give the Tongue River Railroad Company a permit to do this damage.

Are we just going through the motions or will the three members of the Surface Transportation Board have the political courage to say no?

Over 90% of citizens who spoke at the meeting expressed opposition to the proposed rail line, with almost 100% of Northern Cheyenne who testified opposing the rail line and expressing grave concerns.

Northern Cheyenne Tipi – Photo by Alexis Bonogofsky

This proposed rail line, if authorized, would be devastating to wildlife, tribal cultural resources, local ranchers, hunting opportunities and the uniquely clean air and water enjoyed in this part of Montana.

What is a “Scoping” Process and why is the STB conducting one for the Tongue River Railroad?

STB’s Tongue River Railroad “Alternatives” Map

A scoping hearing is when a government agency (in this case the STB) meets with members of the public to discuss the wide variety of issues related to a certain project (in this case the TRR rail line). They ask what the public believes should be addressed in the draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS).  The intent of the process is for the STB to learn about the concerns of impacted citizens and further define the issues, feasible alternatives and potential mitigation measures that may warrant in-depth analysis in the environmental review process.

What are they analyzing? The Tongue River Railroad “Alternatives”

One extremely important issue to note is that the STB must analyze various “alternatives.” Such “alternatives” include the different routes that the rail line could take but it also includes a “no-action” alternative. Let me do some bureaucratic language translation for you. I speak it fairly well. When they say the “no-action” alternative, they mean that the STB has the power and the ability to deny the Tongue River Railroad company a permit to construct and operate this rail line. 

The map provided at yesterday’s scoping meeting showed the “alternatives” and yet, the STB did not have a map that showed no rail line. The STB seemed reluctant to discuss the “no-action” alternative in their presentation or expressly tell the audience that this was even a possibility. It seemed as if the agency’s representatives thought the “no-action” alternative was not even a possibility.

Check out the Tongue River Railroad “Alternatives” Map here.

At 7:20 p.m., after a one-hour open house and a 15 minute presentation by the STB contractors, the STB informed the crowd that each person had 5 minutes to speak.

Northern Cheyenne tribal members have something to say about it

Sign on the Northern Cheyenne Reservation

One woman, who had seen the destruction of the bison bone bed on the Crow Reservation, expressed great concern for the hundreds of cultural sites along the Tongue River and Otter Creek drainages. She asked the STB, “who is going to protect these site from destruction?” She was the first of many to raise concerns about the potential destruction of cultural and historic resources. As many stated, the Northern Cheyenne are deeply connected to this region and they want the STB to tell them how this rail line will impact the plants they use, the wildlife they harvest and the sites that are important to their tribe.

Vanessa Braided Hair, a young Northern Cheyenne woman, spoke out strongly against the proposed rail line. She was adamant that “no-good” would come from the line.

Another woman—who lives off wild game such as deer and elk—also spoke out against the rail line and asked the STB how this train would affect her ability to hunt and gather along the Tongue River. She knew that wildlife would be impacted and therefore her ability to make a living would be too.

A young man, William Wilson, also known as Possum, stood up and told the STB that his people “fought and died for this land” and he is not willing to see it destroyed.

Local rancher, Clint McRae, told the STB that one of the alternatives went directly through ranches whose owners have never been notified that it was even a possibility? How can people comment on a plan if they have never been notified of the existence of this plan?

Who does the STB represent?

Person after person stood and spoke up for their people and their land.  They asked about increased road traffic and the safety of their kids. They asked how this mine and railroad would affect their Class I Airshed, something the Tribe is fiercely proud of. They asked how the new railroad would  affect the water quality of Tongue River.

Tribal members told the STB how it would impact their land, resources and cultural heritage, which their people fought and died to protect. They talked about the need for renewable energy projects. They talked about the impacts of climate change.

Wally McRae, rancher and cowboy poet, stood up and asked whether the Surface Transportation Board represented the people sitting in that room or a for-profit coal and railroad company?

I think the STB needs to answer that question first before it answers anything else.