I was hoping to keep out of this particular aspect of the fight over the Oak Flat campground area, because John Sherman has been a good friend of mine for 20 years, and I am also a Director and founder of The Friends of Queen Creek.

John Sherman has indeed been hired by the Western Land Group, a group that consults and helps other entities structure land exchanges. In this case, the "other entity" is Resolution Copper Company. While there is nothing factually incorrect in the post by "Chippy" above, I think the tone is a bit harsh. Sherman genuinely believes that this new copper mine is going to be built, exactly the way Resolution Copper Company says it will be built--and that there is absolutely nothing we climbers can do to alter Resolution's approach, which will involve permanent loss of the Oak Flat climbing and bouldering area. That being his belief, he thinks he is doing the AZ climbing community a service by locating some alternative areas for us to climb, when Oak Flat is closed.

Unfortunately, what John does not appreciate is that the mine is far from being a "slam-dunk" for Resolution Copper. And, by helping Resolution Copper demonstrate that there may be other areas where we can climb near Phoenix, he is indeed making our task of saving Oak Flat more difficult. I totally reject the premise that Sherman is not doing this with good intentions, however. I merely think he got suckered into the wrong side of this issue.

Curt

[rant]

In response to myrmidon post:

Have they? Define good. If you mean by mining hard rocks on Federal Land such as gold and then shipping them out of country without paying fees as has been allowed since the 1872 Mining Law which results in an estimated loss to the Treasury of 500,000,000 per year! If you also mean by causing heavy metals such as arsenic and cynaide to leak from tailings ponds into river systems, than ya, you're right. Yea for mines.

[/rant]

In response to the original post, I think that is called slander in most places. Show me the proof.

just a point of accuracy: if youre going to villify the mining industry, at least be aware of what it is youre berating, Cyanide is a CN triple bond and not a heavy metal, and yes it is toxic. Im a dick, but i try to post with accuracy none the less. I encourage you to do so also.

Minus the superpowers? But Curt is on the good side! :lol:

[rant]

In response to myrmidon post:

Have they? Define good. If you mean by mining hard rocks on Federal Land such as gold and then shipping them out of country without paying fees as has been allowed since the 1872 Mining Law which results in an estimated loss to the Treasury of 500,000,000 per year! If you also mean by causing heavy metals such as arsenic and cynaide to leak from tailings ponds into river systems, than ya, you're right. Yea for mines.

[/rant]

In response to the original post, I think that is called slander in most places. Show me the proof.

So, whether you think Sherman is right or wrong in helping out Resolution Copper Company--please say so here.
Curt

Current civilization can easily exist without climbing. I do not think it could be maintained without mining.

Last time I checked, the aluminum used to make climbing gear came from bauxite, which I do not think grows on trees....ropes, made from petroleum products, etc.....

Ontario: Please....I do not say mining is angelic. Only that it serves the greater good of far more people than does climbing. I am sorry that I do not share your demonstrated ability of looking at everything through a monochromatic lens. Perhaps life is less stressful when everything is a black or white issue?

I think the better question is what impact Sherman's involvement will have on the final outcome of this access crisis.

Are there not other, more expensive ways of mining the ore that would be less destructive to the surface? If so, the place can be saved by making it more expensive for the company to choose the cheaper mining option than to announce a plan that will leave a majority of the surface available for bouldering. I would only advocate legal means of resisting development.

I think it sounds like Sherman is just being pragmatic. I've worked for a lot of mines all over the world and have seen the lengths that folks go through to try to stop them from starting, and the idea that a small group of climbers can stop a very large mine from going in just strikes me as very unlikely to the point of being quixotic.

Yes, it will certainly be interesting to see the final outcome and I truly hope I am wrong. However, from Curt's silence to this point and his note that he disagrees with Sherman's position on the issue, things don't look all that promising.

Can you explain how a person who is simply being pragmatic and being paid by Resolution would benefit the climbing community? Forgive us for being so romantic in our endeavors, perhaps we should just roll over and shut up.

Its pragmatic because this is most likely a lost cause. If he can get the mining company to purchase some private land with climbing on it and do a land swap, that would at least be something when you lose your current climbing when the mine starts.

Its pragmatic because this is most likely a lost cause. If he can get the mining company to purchase some private land with climbing on it and do a land swap, that would at least be something when you lose your current climbing when the mine starts.

Keep fighting the good fight

Curt,

Not going to happen. It would set too severe a precedent. You, of all people, should know that mining corps are some of the most powerful entities in this country. They will all band together to prevent this from happeneing. They and the railroads companies still hold rights to more land and resources in this country than people could possibly imagine. And, it is their right and priviledge that they have paid for to use the land in the fashion they are choosing to do.

I never said they owned the land. They own the rights to what is under the land.

According to most recent court fights revolving around this very issue in other areas, the courts have unanimously sided with mining companies when it can be shown that the mining is for "greater good" of the community, and those rights trump those federal laws set forth by Eisenhower.

I guess I will ask this again. This has probably already been hashed out, but would the destruction of Oak Flats by the Mutli-National Death Corporations have any impact on access to Upper and Lower Devil's Canyon?

As a worst guess, how much time does oak flat have left? I kinda wanted to go check it out, if not at pbb, on my own.

I hope you can save Oak Flat, and if not, invest in Resolution mining. :)

On Saturday, BHP gave up control of its Superior mining interests to Resolution Copper Co., controlled by Rio Tinto.

According to public records in AZ, subsurface rights were granted to Resolution Copper by Magma Mine (a previous owner of the rights AND the land), if and only if, substantial amnounts of copper were to be found.

Also seems like the public could be for it in the local area because most governemnetales are pushing the job development aspect.


From AZ public records:

Rio Tinto (Resolution Copper) owns 55 percent controlling interest in the property. Resolution is a joint venture company that bought out all rights held by Magma Mines, through a company called BHP Billiton, which incxludes all "underground mine, concentrater, and smelter"


All from public records, curt.

I met him and we toured the Rock Tank area.

There are two types of mineral claims open to miners: lode claims and placer claims. A lode claim is the classic vein of valuable mineral in a defined boundary of rock. Placer claims are all claims not confined in a lode such as loose sand or gravel. The maximum size for a placer claim is 20 acres.

Once a mining claim has been approved the claimant gains the right to develop and extract minerals. No other use of the land is permissible. In the pursuit of minerals the claimant can construct fences, build houses for full-time employees, and use as much timber as is necessary for the mining operation. Mining claims are considered real property and as such can be bought, sold, transferred, leased, rented, willed or inherited.

Lode claims allow the rights holder to get at all the lode, regardless of location. According to AZ public records, The copper company holds a lode claim. Therefore, it has everything to do with the area you speak about because that is where the copper is located.


bold emphasis mine.

Quote source: US Federal Mining law.

Well, here is the thing about this particular mine site. Resolution Copper does not own the land--we do.

Our mining laws are SO messed up it isn't even funny. I think its criminal to allow foreign owned companies to mine US resources, but what do I know, I'm just a climber.

Also, anyone who voted Republican in the last go-round is, in reality, just as culpable as Sherman is in this. If YOU fit this description, you should have the courage of your convictions, and voice your support for the Bush administration's anti-environmental policies on this thread. Short-term economic gain at the expense of the environment is what YOU voted for, Remember? IT'S A LITTLE LATE TO COMPLAIN NOW.

[rant]

In response to myrmidon post:

Have they? Define good. If you mean by mining hard rocks on Federal Land such as gold and then shipping them out of country without paying fees as has been allowed since the 1872 Mining Law which results in an estimated loss to the Treasury of 500,000,000 per year! If you also mean by causing heavy metals such as arsenic and cynaide to leak from tailings ponds into river systems, than ya, you're right. Yea for mines.

[/rant]

......

Bravo.

Big bucks always lies as it needs to get more bigger bucks....John's a smart fellow, he will figure it out.

Sign me: the guy with the climbing tree in Massachusetts

Also, I think that little town there (Superior) has come to appreciate the climbing communities business, which may be more than that from a few additional miners.

but turning one of the U.S.'s premier bouldering areas into a mining pit is OK. Sounds like Union Carbide could use a man like him in Bishop...

that there is absolutely nothing we climbers can do

'queen creek' and 'premier bouldering' in the same sentence? WTF? have you ever climbed there? i like queen creek and all, but talk about a misnomer...

anyway, back on topic.

i had a conversation w/ a friend about this whole sherman thing while bouldering in the mcdowells this morning.

queen creek is pretty much gone:

1. there is no legal precedence or argument against the mining
2. resolution has the mineral rights
3. huge tax revenues will be generated
4. lots of business, jobs, and $$$ for the region (which is depressed)
5. finally, lets face it, climbers are not some powerful lobby

now, that's not to say the fight should be given up, but i think sherman's taking a realistic approach to the issue. might as well get something out of this in the way of a land swap for some other climbing. it's better than nothing.

....do your part to cut down on copper use! quit using electricity, electronics, computers, climbing gear, etc. if there isn't a market for copper, the mine won't open.

Chipper and all the other Sherman bashers- listen up.

I have known John for over 20 years. I know him better than anybody posting on this thread. I have talked with and helped him extensively on this project. He genuinely believes that this is a chance to get something for climbers from a mine that is going to happen no matter what climbers do. He is working very hard to scour the hills to find something worth developing not some choss heap. He lived and climbed in Tucson and Flagstaff but does not owe us anything. He is not interested in developing some new area in AZ personally. He makes enough money with his day job that he doesn't need to work for RCC. He hopes to find some great stuff and turn it over to you and go play golf somewhere.

One of the things I've always admired about John is that he does what he believes is in the best interest of climbing (not himself) even when it pisses some people off (and makes his life harder). His climbing style and opinions are uncompromising. His life is devoted to climbing. He once told me that climbing saved his life and he believes he has a debt to give back to the sport. You know all those books he wrote? He isn't getting rich off them. I know he does not make enough from all of them to pay his health insurance. He wrote thenm for the love of the sport and lifestyle of climbing. To call John Sherman a sell out or worse as some of you have done is to prove you do not know the man and are not trying to solve the problem just venting on somebody who is.


There will be no replcement for Oak Flat that will be exactly the same. And even if there was a climbing area that was a mirror image of Oak Flat some of you would still cry foul. The hope here is to mitigate the loss of one resource by opening up another similar area (or possibly more than one) that was not available or developed. There are many things going on here and many decisions to be made.

Going to the table with the mining company with a proactive attitude and a plan will get you something. They have lots of money and motivation to make this thing work for them. RCC even offered to sponsor the bouldering contest for at least 5 more years while new areas are being developed. I believe their offer was turned down even while Jim W. is always threatening to cancel it for lack of sponsors.

The mining company doesn't have a clue about rock climbing so they hired the best guy they could to tell them what they need. John's qualifications are unquestionable. He is the only human to have climbed in all 50 states. He has done more boulder problems and first ascents than anybody and has probably climbed in more good and bad areas than anybody. His perspective on what makes a good climbing/bouldering area is unparalleled and his uncompromising nature is working for you. RCC went out of their way to find him for these reasons. By the way, he was recommended to them by Royal Robbins.

I started climbing in the Phoenix area in 1976. I've seen areas come and go. If the local climbers would unite and help John find good areas and put together a proposal you might be surprised how much you can get. You may have the first recreation area in the state (country?) designed and built with climbing in mind. You might end up with the best sport climbing crag in the state (I've seen it) You might end up with climbing areas on both the east side and west side of the valley. You might end up with all kinds of things if you go to John and say this is what we want in return for losing some bouldering. Sure access to SOME of the Queen Creek areas will be lost but much of it will be preserved. In addition you might find yourself looking at some great new area(s). To fight to save Oak Flat without compromise might just come back to bite you because you will either get nothing or have no say in what you do get. There are choices out there and they will be made with your input or without it. My biggest fear is that local climbers will sabotage a great deal and screw everybody.

John knew going into this that he would become the enemy in some peoples eyes but he believes this is a chance to get something for everybody from a wealthy multinational mining company. He's talked with Jim W. and Curt and many other locals. He would rather have had one of them take the job. It was offered to Jim. He will make enough money off this to buy some new golf clubs and play a few rounds at the Biltmore. During all of his exploration so far he's not even done any climbing. At this moment he's nursing an injured back sustained by exploring another wild area.

Believe me he's not being bought off, he's giving back. You'd be wise to help him out or at least tell him what you want in return. RCC is not trying to divide and conquer as some suggest. They asked Jim W. and others for input and were rebuffed. So, who is the bad guy? At least Sherman is trying to get you something. If the climbing community would unite and say, "This is what we want." You have a much better chance at getting it than b---- about it here.

Get on the bus or watch the video later.


P.S. I know somebody will flame me for not posting my name but with some of you threatening to shoot Sherman why would I.

My intention for posting here is to defend John from attacks made against him personally by people who either don't know him or at least haven't talked to him about this project. Curt excepted. And to hopefully get some of you to give constructive input. I'm not here to defend RCC or say that you should be happy about losing some climbing. I think losing any public land is sad but in this case we might get something back at least.

Yes Curt I know John better than you do. And if you think I am his "yes man" you should have seen the 2 hour argument we got into just two days ago!

I don't see what the big deal is. It's not even that great of a climbing area and there are tons more near it as well as scattered around AZ. I think the big deal with it isn't about climbing at all. QCC is the local climber's hide out where they have big parties and the once-a-year bouldering comp. So I think it's about booze and money, not climbing. Not that I disagree (the PBB is certainly a blast) but, of course, those arguments won't win over any State Reps. I say the locals would be spending their time more efficiently if they were looking for a new (and better) climbing area then sitting around trying to get that choss pile back.

Stephen

I don't see what the big deal is. It's not even that great of a climbing area and there are tons more near it as well as scattered around AZ. I think the big deal with it isn't about climbing at all. QCC is the local climber's hide out where they have big parties and the once-a-year bouldering comp. So I think it's about booze and money, not climbing. Not that I disagree (the PBB is certainly a blast) but, of course, those arguments won't win over any State Reps. I say the locals would be spending their time more efficiently if they were looking for a new (and better) climbing area then sitting around trying to get that choss pile back.

Stephen

Are you as stupid as you sound?

I have known John for over 20 years

You know Sherman better than I do? I doubt it.

read his profile, his "local crag" is about 150 miles from where he lives. :lol:

ha! pffffft! get real!! you guys are posuers. i know sherman better than both of you two guys put together. i'm the king of the "i know sherman" club. me. bvb.

you two johnny-cum-latelys can sukit.

That's odd, he doesn't seem to know you. Hahahaha.

Curt

waitaminnit goddammit...then just who the hell is this ugly assed burned-out oldskool rummy who keeps showing up at our houses unannounced, drinking our liquor, groping our wives, fondling his dog in a 'these-two-are-way-too-familiar' fashion, and flailing on our warm-ups???

John Sherman knows what he is doing. If the AF and FOQC take a no-compromise stance on what appears to be inevitable, they are sure shooting themselves in the foot on future access issues. Seems like AF is good at that already.

I must admit...I read the first couple of posts and the last couple. Was what I said addressed?