The number of surface mining operations in Clark County could significantly increase in the coming years. The county received 22 requests, all but two from the same company, for surface mining zoning in northern and eastern rural areas of the county.
The site-specific requests were submitted as part of the county’s update of its 20-year comprehensive growth plan.
Surface mining includes strip mining and open pit mining. Strip mining is more commonly used for coal and silver deposits, while pit mining is used for gravel mining, like those in the Washougal, Yacolt and Chelatchie Bluff areas.
BRP LLC, a joint venture of Tennessee-based International Paper Co. and Texas-based Natural Resources Partners, submitted 20 of the 22 requests. In all, the requests encompass more than 1,200 acres, most of which is currently zoned for rural forest and agricultural use.
“NRP (Natural Resources Partners) is a land company, controlling about 13 million acres of mineral rights across the U.S. NRP is not an operating company. We do not mine or participate in operations, rather we partner with responsible miners and operators to develop our mineral ownership across the commodities spectrum,” Adam Clark, regional manager for Natural Resources Partners, said during a county council meeting Oct. 22.
None of the land is owned by BRP LLC or Natural Resources Partners. Rather, much of it is privately owned by individuals, although some parcels are owned by the state or corporations. The property owners may not even be aware their lands are being considered for mining.
“I have an email that states BRP is doing this without permission or notification to the landowners,” said Chelatchie resident John Nanney. “The law does not require a mineral rights owner to receive permission from a landowner to move forward with their plan to rezone.”
Nanney helped found the Chelatchie Prairie Coalition, a community group fighting against efforts to resume mining operations in the Chelatchie mineral lands, as well as Portland Vancouver Junction Railroad’s related plans to expand its operations to haul mined gravel.
BRP LLC’s zoning request in Chelatchie, which will be operated by Granite Construction Co., was approved in 2021. That approval was challenged by community environmental group the Friends of Clark County. The case is scheduled to be heard by the state Court of Appeals early next year.
Growing demand
With Clark County’s population expected to surge to nearly 720,000 people by 2045, an increase of nearly 38 percent from 2022’s population of 520,900, the availability of materials like gravel will become increasingly important. According to the state Department of Commerce, the county will need to add 100,000 new housing units — whether single-family houses, apartments or condos — by 2045.
Gravel isn’t used solely to build roads; it’s also used in building foundations to stabilize soil, prevent erosion and reduce moisture buildup. For landscaping, gravel is used for walkways, around trees and bushes, and in driveways.
“We are in dire need of commercial gravel. … If we don’t mine it here, we have to bring it in on barges and, yes, that will cost more money,” Nick Massie of Rotschy Inc. told the county council Oct. 22.
In all, the county has received about 136 site-specific requests to be included in the growth plan update. That number is far more than the three or four annual requests the county typically receives.
“Yes, it is a significant increase than what we would normally see. The difference is that there is no cost to submit a request,” said Jose Alvarez, program manager for the county’s planning department.
In September 2022, the county council suspended annual reviews for site-specific requests to avoid conflicts with the growth plan update. The county began accepting requests again July 1.
“I was shocked at the sheer number of site-specific requests,” Councilor Sue Marshall said Wednesday. “During the last comp plan update, there were no individual, site-specific requests. It was just not part of the process.”
Ridgefield attorney David McDonald, who is representing the Friends of Clark County, said a comprehensive and in-depth study of available resources and potential mining lands was done as part of the 2016 growth plan update, but that prior work is being ignored.
“Now, individual property owners and one national mineral company want to push through 1,200 acres of new designated land buried in the comprehensive plan without a countywide study, without notice to the residents of the county and without any hearings and work sessions specific to these lands,” McDonald said.
Update process
Marshall said she’s not sure how staff and the council can review so many requests with just over a year remaining before the updated growth plan is due to the state.
“I think it threatens to throw a monkey wrench into the process,” she said.
Marshall said decisions affecting natural resources lands could have extra challenges.
“There were requests to open up and examine and map aggregate resources, but the county has been waiting on the state to get updates on landslide risks,” she said. “That’s the information that, if we’re going to do this in a comprehensive way, we don’t have what we would need.”
Marshall said if the requests had been submitted outside of the update process, each one would have been closely examined. But that oversight would likely be missing now.
“I don’t think we can do it. I don’t think we should do it,” she said.
Council Chairman Gary Medvigy said a meeting with the building industry and county planners has been scheduled to address the issue of site-specific requests. He said it is possible the growth plan update process may be adjusted as a result.
Sensitive lands
The possibility of such a considerable expansion of mining operations in Clark County was certainly unwelcome news for those already working to repeal existing zoning approvals.
“Surface mining is much more damaging than the impacts of logging, yet the area is still recovering from a century-long irresponsible clear-cutting, logging roads, stream diversions and pollution caused by these industries,” Nanney said.
Local resident and retired Washington Fish and Wildlife Service biologist Jim Byrne said the county listens to applicants more than residents.
“Why does the county and staff only appear to consider the applicant’s evidence? Friends of Clark County has provided scientific evidence, maps, citations, etc., but it doesn’t seem to be recognized,” Byrne said.
He said zoning requests for surface mining are usually on lands recognized by the county as wetlands, fish and wildlife habitat, unstable slopes and geologically hazardous areas. Knowing that, he said it doesn’t make sense for the county to approve surface mining zoning on those sensitive lands.
“How can setting a mine up in such areas not be considered as having significant impacts? The county needs to follow its own land-use designations,” Byrne said.
Nanney agreed. He said it seems the county puts corporations first and residents’ concerns second.
“Citizens, scientific facts or any information slowing or blocking corporate desires are (considered) abhorrent,” Nanney said. “I can only pray that those who have built beautiful homes on beautiful properties, start waking up to what is planned.”
