The killing of Appalachia

Harper's article on Appalachian mountaintop-removal mining causes outbreak of despair, depression

Posted by David Roberts at 1:41 PM on 11 Apr 2005

Read more about: mining | energy | coal

Its contents are not available online (as far as I can tell), but the recent issue of Harper's Magazine contains a piece that makes it worth buying on the newsstand. It's called "Death of a Mountain," by Erik Reece. The subtitle is "radical strip mining and the leveling of Appalachia," and apparently Reece is at work on a book on the subject. (For a quick primer on mountaintop-removal mining, go here.)

It is -- and I say this as someone who reads a lot of depressing stuff -- one of the most disheartening things I've ever come across. It is truly monstrous what's going on in Appalachia, difficult even to comprehend. I've been faintly cognizant of the issue, but Reece's piece really paints the picture. Some of the oldest and most diverse ecosystems in the country are simply being blown up, irrevocably destroyed. The poor surrounding communities suffer from polluted water and air, denuded landscapes, and showers of debris (last year a boulder dislodged by a mining explosion crushed and killed a three-year-old boy in his bed). The process has been aided and abetted by the Bush administration

Worse, the mines provide almost no jobs -- a crew of nine people can blow the top off a mountain and dig out the coal below -- and most of the coal is sold outside the state. Virtually none of the enormous profits benefit local communities. There's a reason those communities are, and remain, some of the poorest in the country. The presence of coal is an almost unmitigated curse for the region. But by and large, poor Appalachians view environmentalists as their enemies, people who want to steal their jobs and economic livelihoods, who care more about forest critters than about them.

The injustices involved -- both natural and socioeconomic -- are tragic on a scale that boggles understanding.

Compare the amount of attention this gets to the amount lavished on the Arctic Refuge. Why is that? At risk of offending some delicate sensibilities, I've come to think that the refuge plays the same role for the left that Terri Schiavo played for the right: It's almost an abstraction, distant and uncomplicated, a blank slate where we can project our own virtue. In contrast, Appalachia has a deep and complicated history and is populated by working class, culturally conservative whites -- the kind of people that upper-middle-class lefties refer to behind closed doors as "white trash."

But make no mistake, there's a huge crime taking place, the effects of which will be felt by our grandchildren, and theirs. Ecosystems are being wiped out, and vulnerable communities along with them. We need to force this stuff into the mainstream media. I can't imagine any human being with a heart or a brain remaining unaffected.

(If you'd like to do something to help, head over to Mountain Justice Summer and sign up. Thanks to them for the picture above.)

For story: The killing of Appalachia
6 Comments | Post a Comment

almost level ...

... West Virginia!

Sad. The Bush admin changed the rules on this, I believe, such that the buffer zone needed is much smaller than in the past.

by praktike at 2:42 PM on 11 Apr 2005

Horrible Crime Against All Life

When I was in school, group of classmates did a project showing the massive damage and loss of life due to failures of some sort of retaining walls built for coal mining waste in West Virginia. (Waste was dumped into rivers and streams, and the companies relied on these walls to keep the waste from getting downriver.) There is nothing new about the horrors of mining in general or coal mining in particular, it's just that mountaintop mining is even worse than what's gone on in the past. Mountaintop mining is an especially psychotic and disgusting attack on our Mother Earth.

While I fully agree with Dave that this is a particularly egregious environmental sin, I disagree with his statement that it has not been getting attention from environmentalists. Check out this column from the website of Lowbagger, a group made up mostly of old Earth First!ers, including a couple of co-founders: http://lowbagger.org/mountainjustice.html Maybe the well-heeled groups like Sierra Club and the even more conservative big groups haven't been giving it attention, but I assure you that many grassroots groups have.

I also have a couple of bones to pick with comments in Dave's column. First, as someone who fights for the air, water, land, plants, and non-human animals (i.e., a conservationsist as opposed to an environmentalist), I'm tired of being blamed for the lack of ecological or environmental morals in other people. For example, Dave's statement that "poor Appalachians view environmentalists as their enemies, people who want to steal their jobs and economic livelihoods, who care more about forest critters than about them" is an indictment of poor Appalachians, not of environmentalists. It's not our fault that some people choose to make their living by destroying the Earth! As conservationists, our job is to protect the Earth against harms done by humans. Concerning ourselves with jobs that are environmentally destructive would be contrary to our mission.

This is not to say that we shouldn't interact with these people, as the Mountain Justice Summer people will do (some of them are locals). Ideas for jobs that are not so ecologically destructive as mining should be offered. However, my experience with this tactic (which was trying to get loggers to become tree planters instead of tree killers) is that many people have an attachment to their livelihoods, however irrational and illogical that attachment is. Again, it's not our job as conservationists to protect the jobs of people who are destroying the Earth.

Also, Dave is wrong about why ANWR gets more attention from some environmentalists (though many of us have given plenty of attention to the mountaintop mining issue). ANWR is unspoiled wilderness, whereas Appalachia has very little, if any, wilderness of sustainable size (generally at least 50,000 acres) left. The mission of conservationists is to protect wilderness and wildlife, and the areas that get priority are those that are the least spoiled, because there just isn't much to save in spoiled areas.

Jeff Hoffman

by jdhlax at 3:00 PM on 11 Apr 2005

private ownership

While it is true that not much of Appalachia has been set aside for roadless status, and there are small towns dotting the entire map, there are still hundreds of square miles of (broken) wilderness that could easily be saved. The biggest problem here is that so much of the land is privately owned- landowners are frequently poor, so they sell their land rights to the paper mills or coal companies- these companies own more than the public does, and have the right to blow it up if they so choose. Bush has made it easier by handing down 'do not enforce' orders to the Corp of Engineers and making the rules into a joke.

But there is still a wealth of diversity to save here, and it could be done so easily- if only land owners and land destroyers could be convinced to preserve the land with tax breaks or government subsidies. Ironically, Bush just lowered the tax break for conservation status so it's hardly worth doing it.

Many groups are working to stop the destruction (see the Dogwood Alliance for one), but as long as private ownership gives the right to destroy the land, time is running out. These woods are special; the diversity puts northern forests to shame. The native peoples had no trouble living here- nut trees and wildlife abound. You could almost live on what you pick up as you walk through these forests.

The media could save the day here; images from helicopter flights show the extent of the damage, and should be telecasted. These guys are not fools; they hide their work by leaving a thin strip of trees beside the roads, so you drive by and never know its there. If we can't stop this, there's no hope for any place else.

a liberal in redsville

by birdboy at 5:41 PM on 11 Apr 2005

helpful tool for looking at earth from above

Just learned about the new Google Maps feature that lets you use satellite photos. Go to any location and click on "satellite" at top right. It's zoomable and draggable like the rest of Google Maps. Well, enough with the promotion. What you can see, almost at random, in West Virginia is a devastated landscape. It's not as sharp as the incredible photos delivered by the low-flying plane groups at sites like the one Dave linked to, but it is free, and might be useful in getting a handle on the impact of mountaintop removal mining and similarly destructive practices.

Here's a screen shot of a sample bit of the W. Va. landscape, a bit south of Charleston. I'm no expert in aerial analysis, but it looks nasty to me.

And Dave, I'm sure this can use much more discussion, but I'm just an average not-all-that-active environmentalist from Texas, and I've been hearing about mountaintop removal mining for years -- in mainstream news (NPR, primarily) and from mainstream environmental groups (Sierra Club and Audubon, mainly). I don't think it's been ignored.

by Michael Boydston at 9:01 PM on 11 Apr 2005

grew up there

from around 1975 to 85 i lived in a trailer on the side of a hill directly across from a strip mine, with only a creek, road and railroad in the divide. my father and grandfather, as well as guys i went to elementary school with all worked in the mines. ive seen the people, the equipment, and the damaging results up close.

the people there consider coal mining to be second nature- their very lifestyle for a hundred years or more, tradition. they see the damage, but see no other way to break the mold. luckily my family was an exception.

my grandparents live in a state park region in WV. as a boy i remember all the mountaintops being untouched- now it's rather blantant, many peaks are no longer there.

sometimes the mining companies give the land back to the owners, or the community. they build small airstrips, farming areas or even the odd golf course. but it in no way can repair the damage that has been done.

not only to the environment- you'd really have to visit and speak with the people. coal truck drivers are notorious for speed, both physical and ingested. drivers are usually paid by the load, so the more 'motivated' they are the more they earn. many of them are responsible for importing drugs into the very poor and ignorant communities deep in the hills there.

i used to be able to drink from the creek at my grandparents house. we'd swim, fish- whatever. now- the water is muddy, trashy.. and there are many floods during hard rains. the mountain tops are bare in many places, allowing rainwater to rush down into the valleys.

it's a big deal to me. i'm interested in finding out what more i can do to halt or at least slow these trends. if anyone has a tip - i hope they'll get in touch, and i hope this topic stays alive for awhile.

by cisco at 8:17 AM on 13 May 2005

Sprol also covers strip mining

Using the Google Maps tool referenced above, this site offers some commentary on strip mining:

http://www.sprol.com/

by automatt at 4:56 PM on 17 May 2005

ADVERTISING POLICY

You are not logged in. Thus, you cannot post a comment. If you have an account, log in. If you don't have an account, well, by all means go make one! Meet you back here in five.