Tech students explore W.Va. mountaintop mining, one man's fight to stop it

Thursday, April, 1, 2010; 11:00 PM | 12 | | Print

A coal-loading silo is visible behind Marsh Fork Elementary, as well as an earthen dam holding back 2.8 billion gallons of coal sludge.

Share


TOPICS: mountaintop removal sustainability sga

Last weekend a group of Virginia Tech students and Blacksburg community members took a trip to the mountains of West Virginia. They were not there to camp or hike, but to hear from one man about the abuse he endured after refusing to sell his land to coal corporations.

Larry Gibson, a prominent anti-mountaintop removal activist and local landowner, spoke about his experiences. His family has lived on or near Kayford Mountain since the late 1700s. Since 1986 Gibson and his family have been witnesses to what he refers to as “the slow-motion destruction of Kayford Mountain.”

The event was the conclusion to the Bright Ideas weekend hosted by the Tech SGA Sustainability Committee, and it gave students a firsthand look at the process of mining coal and its effects on the environment and community.

According to Gibson, 18 years after the “mountaintop removal” project began on his property — once one of the lowest on the mountain — became the highest point in the region.

Gibson has turned the 50 acres he occupies atop Kayford into a park where groups, such as the one from Tech, can come and learn about mountaintop mining.

Mountaintop mining has become a widespread method of mining coal in central Appalachia, bringing in 131 million tons, or about 11 percent of the total U.S. coal production, in 2008. For many sites, mountaintop mining is the most efficient method either because of geology or topography and is used often because it is the method necessary to recover the resource.

Gibson takes every opportunity to educate people on mountaintop mining and shares his insight on how mountain top mining has affected the community.

“Do you know how many people we have lost since 1993?” Gibson asks. “Over 500 people — that’s a small town. They keep making reference to this as cheap energy, cheap energy. How cheap is that when you ask somebody who’s lost something?”

Gibson also discusses the environmental impacts of mountaintop mining, discussing how mountaintop mining has destroyed more than 1,500 minor streams.

The Environmental Protection Agency released new “comprehensive guidelines” to protect communities in Appalachia from harmful effects of mountaintop mining. The new measures include “improved guidance and clarity” for its regional offices that govern permitting for mountaintop mining, as well as the publication of scientific studies and an online permit database.

The EPA notes that, based on more than 1,200 stream segments impacted by mountaintop mining and valley fills, streams are sometimes covered up, forests may become fragmented and that “there may be social, economic and heritage issues” associated with mountaintop mining.

According to Gibson, his views and his refusal to sell his land often make him and others on his property the subject of violence and harassment, ranging from drive-by shootings to death threats. But for Gibson, the mountain is something worth fighting for.

“We have enough coal here (that) when they price this land it’s (worth) $650 million,” he said. “It’s no wonder they come at me.”

A version of this article appeared in the Apr 2 issue of the Collegiate Times.

Leave a comment 12 Comments Write a letter to the editor

Local Guy | # April 2, 2010 @ 8:46 AM — Flag Comment

Dig Baby Dig.

Reply to this Top


Anonymous | # April 2, 2010 @ 11:27 AM — Flag Comment

There are other, less destructive ways to mine coal. "Dig Baby Dig" in a different way

Reply to this Top


coal friendly | # April 2, 2010 @ 1:13 PM — Flag Comment

I guess the whole article forgot to mention all of the economic good that comes from Mountain Top Removal (such as people being able to build houses on flat land, not in a valley, thus they don't get flooded out every 5 years).

Has the author of this article ever been to a West Virginia town and talked to the residents, more than just this one person who makes an outcry about it. Doubtful. Most communities in WV average 80% of their residents supporting MTR.

And i like how all the pictures were conveniently taken to show the bad parts of MTR, but never to show the reclamation work (after the mountain is put back together, it looks the same way it did before mining).

And did anybody else catch that this guys property was worth 650 million dollars. JUST SELL IT, MOVE TO THE BAHAMAS, AND QUIT COMPLAINING

Reply to this Top


Jake | # April 2, 2010 @ 1:26 PM — Flag Comment

For the record, a majority of the Kayford Mountain site has already been "reclaimed" (the current mining operation is only visible on the left side of the image in the middle of the page of the printed edition). The damage caused to the water table in the area also means that many residents are flooded out regardless, as the path and depth of many streams and rivers are affected by MTR mining.

Reply to this Top


WV resident | # April 4, 2010 @ 10:29 PM — Flag Comment

@coal friendly: I'm curious where your "Most communities in WV average 80% of their residents supporting MTR" comes from. Can you cite the source for me? I'm not trying to be a jerk, I'm actually serious. The most recent poll I've seen shows about 2 out of 3 WV residents DISapprove of MTR: http://www.appalachian-center.org/poll_results/index.html

Reply to this Top


coal_friendly | # April 5, 2010 @ 11:17 AM — Flag Comment

@ WV resident - I've worked in WV for the past two summers and have family members living in the area. The polls I have seen are petitions in local gas stations and such, not ones official counted by organizations (where biases are present). I know those aren't official results you are looking for, but in my opinion, they are the most accurate results

@ Jake - for the record, the area behind him has not been reclaimed yet. They have temporarily laid down sod so that the dirt will not blow everywhere. After the area is completely mined, trees will be replanted there and the land will look the same as it did before mining...

Top


Anonymous | # April 6, 2010 @ 11:40 AM — Flag Comment

@ coal_friendly

As it stands now, only about 5% of Mtn. top removal sites have been developed in any way, the rest are either shoddily reclaimed, or the company declares bankruptcy and reneges on its responsibility to reclaim the site.

Even in the best of cases, how can you say the land looks exactly the same, at Kayford Mt, the elevation is 700 feet lower than the original peak. That kind of damage can not be undone.

Top


Anonymous | # October 7, 2010 @ 2:43 PM — Flag Comment

In response to coal friendly's comment on the economic good - did you realize that only 3% of reclaimed lands are developed? And of that 3%, the top three things developed on reclaimed lands are Wal-Marts, jails, and golf courses. I'm sure those things are bringing a lot of economic good to those communities

Reply to this Top


Anonymous | # April 6, 2010 @ 10:22 PM — Flag Comment

Marsh Fork? Enough said about Massey, safety and the respect for people

Reply to this Top


Anonymous | # April 6, 2010 @ 10:24 PM — Flag Comment

I just saw view on national news. Very unfortunate what occurred at Marsh Fork. Things need to get right.

Reply to this Top


Anonymous | # April 7, 2010 @ 12:45 PM — Flag Comment

I willing to bet more West Virginians are looking at strip mining more favorably.

Reply to this Top


Numir | # May 2, 2011 @ 3:37 PM — Flag Comment

<a href="http://www.pskiller.com/">Photoshopped</a>? People often claim that some picture has been photoshopped. I would like to learn about this photoshop. I am looking and looking and have two good eyes.... what exactly are you referring to and why? If you really would like to learn to recognize photoshopped pictures, pskiller.com can help you, it's free and has good coverage.

Reply to this Top