Setting the Wall Street Journal straight about mining around the Grand Canyon

Lauren Pagel's avatar
By Lauren Pagel

October 5, 2011

Last month, the Wall Street Journal editorialized in favor of uranium mining around the Grand Canyon, criticizing the Obama administration for favoring a 20-year withdrawal that would put some of the forests around the Canyon off limits to mineral development.

The editors fell blindly into the false choice of jobs versus the environment, and grossly understated the potential impacts 30 uranium mines could have on such a sensitive ecosystem.

Today, Earthworks and our partners at the Environmental Working Group and the National Parks Conservation Association responded to the editorial to set the record straight about the potential damage that could be caused to water by uranium mining, and the jobs that could be lost if the area around one of our national treasures is marred by development.

300,000 people spoke out in favor of the withdrawal earlier this year, and we expect the Obama administration to make their final decision before the end of the year. 

Please add your voice to this debate by commenting on the Wall Street Journal's website -- and sharing this blog with your friends via Facebook or Twitter.


Tagged with: withdrawal, wall street journal, uranium mining, ken salazar, interior department, grand canyon

comments powered by Disqus

On Twitter

@ValerieVolco Those job creation figures will be disputed because they've been proven false. #NoKXL
Perhaps even "arbitrarily and capriciously"…

On Facebook