October 2001

Marketing

Aggregate Mining--Not In My Backyard

Aggregate Mining--Not In My Backyard

By Michael C. Stanley and Josef E. Marlow

Editor’s Note: This article is the sixth of a seven-part series on the aggregate industry and land-use issues.

During a year-end speech to his employees, the CEO of one of the nation’s largest mining companies related a funny, but poignant story. Two passengers were engaged in casual conversation when one asked the other “What do you do for a living?” His fellow passenger seemed to flinch, quickly cupped his hand over his mouth as if to suppress a cough, and mumbled “he-hum…I’m in…mining.” The CEO implored his employees to stand in the aisle and declare “I work in the mining industry, I produce aggregates that better our standard of living, my industry is essential and creates wealth.” The employees listening to this speech sat quietly, as if to concede that mining is no longer viewed as a relevant industry in modern society.
Increasingly, there are conflicts between mineral industries and alternative land-uses. In many of these conflicts, decisions are made that seem irrational from an industry perspective. Not surprisingly, many within the industry express exasperation at policy makers who no longer value the contribution of mineral resources in every day life. Regulatory policies seem to bear ever more heavily on the resource industry, discouraging new development and leading to the sunset of many existing operations. All the while, the value placed on habitat preservation or protection of open space becomes sublime, escalating independently of the total amount of habitat already protected or open space available. In such a world, construction aggregate struggles to compete as land-use planners zone away resource lands from future development.
Some argue that such statements are alarmist thinking, that the aggregate industry is operating unencumbered by comprehensive land-use planning policies. Otherwise, shortages would be resulting in states in which the most restrictive regulations have been in place.
In a Sept. 11, 2001, news release detailing aggregate shortages in California, Jim King, president of Applied Development Economics, states “The New Economy firms that are the engines of economic growth in California cannot compete in the global marketplace if the state’s basic infrastructure is not world class.” In his report to the Construction Materials Association of California, he notes that looming sand and gravel shortages threaten California’s future and that policymakers and planners have failed to consider whether local supplies of construction aggregates will be available to meet the state’s urgent need of upgrading, maintaining and building new infrastructure.

While this is a stinging condemnation of a land-use planning gone awry, it is certainly not new. Across the country, aggregate producer associations have urged local and county jurisdictions to give greater consideration to aggregates in their land-use planning and policies, and provide for the development of these resources at the local level.
If left unchecked, aggregates shortages lead to under-investment in essential infrastructure, leading to critical deficiencies in roads, schools, bridges, power plants and other supporting infrastructure. In California, King notes that a failure to invest in new public projects threatens California’s quality of life, public safety and competitiveness in the global economy. It is perhaps ironic that policy makers will now need to find creative solutions to aggregates shortages after a decade of promoting policies aimed at restricting this industry.

A portion of a geologic map showing potential sources of aggregate along the Front Range in Colorado, published in U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 97-477. The light yellow indicates areas where deposits are likely to contain sand and gravel that will meet most uses. The dark yellow indicates areas where deposits are likely to contain sand and gravel that may not meet some uses or may meet uses only with extensive processing.

The Silent Decline

Throughout the 1990s, a number of industry-focused organizations sought to better educate the public by promoting that resource extraction is a necessary activity for the continued improvement in a community’s standard of living. Programs were put in place to demonstrate minerals at use in homes, schools and at work. Largely, these campaigns have been effective and successful. It is, therefore, more confounding that new municipal and county comprehensive plans continue to ignore the contribution to be made from mining of aggregates. The construction aggregates industry is caught in the crossfire of a social change, during which traditional value systems based on economic contributions are being replaced by systems having a philosophical underpinning rooted in environmental protection.
In a general sense, sustainable development encompasses many of the initiatives directed toward habitat preservation. This presents a potential conundrum— sustainable development is to be embraced by the industry, providing a vehicle through which companies can better coordinate some of their community-based programs. The potential conundrum stems from some agencies taking over the planning process to drive through prohibitive land-use policies—in the name of sustainable development.
It is the responsibility of the industry to define its role within sustainable development, using constructs that the public will understand. To this end, some have argued that sustainable development is a conservation-oriented measure for renewable resources. If so, they postulate that non-renewable mineral development is out of sync with the very foundations of this movement. In the next and final installment of this series, a model of sustainable development will be presented that casts the industry as an essential cornerstone. To set the stage for that discussion, we begin with a discussion of comprehensive land-use planning—undoubtedly the battleground for many aggregate producers in this regard.

How Well Do You Know Your Neighbor?

In an informal survey of various land-use plans across the country, there is a wide array of rules and regulations for aggregate mining. In many jurisdictions, the industry has been zoned away—a term that describes policies that restrict current operations and all but ensure that expansions or new plants will not take place. Without question, this is the greatest threat to the construction aggregates industry. Without the opportunity to sustain or expand businesses, there is no incentive for investors. Given the gravity of the situation, few in the industry are aware of changes to their comprehensive land-use plans. As a simple test, consider the adjoining questions to ascertain your level of understanding of the land-use planning process.

The Sonoran Desert Conservation Plan is a blueprint for preserving habitat in Pima County, Ariz., targeted towards riparian, historic, cultural and habitat preservation. When implemented, the plan will place the existing aggregate industry in the crosshairs of environmental objectives. Resulting zoning will greatly restrict future aggregate supplies from existing resources.

Zoned Away

A recent example of a comprehensive land-use planning process devoid of consideration for aggregate resources comes from Pima County, Ariz. (the authors’ home).
Under a Growing Smarter Initiative, the state of Arizona mandated that all communities write comprehensive plans to better manage future urban growth. In response, Pima County considered current zoning and how it might be revised to improve residential planning and add open-spaces within the Tucson metropolitan area. Unlike many jurisdictions, the County Board of Supervisors elected to harmonize their urban planing efforts with those directed towards habitat preservation. “Conservation should focus on protective management of key resources (e.g. riparian and aquatic habitats, cactus ferruginous pygmy-owl habitat) and the provision of corridors and connections between more appropriate and feasible conservation areas” (“The Role of Adaptive Management,” January 2001, Sonoran Desert Conservation Plan, p. 14). Within the plan, washes and streambeds represent open spaces to connect a patchwork of flora and fauna habitats. This is an environmental effort having broad public support. However, greater than 90 percent of aggregate production is located within these same corridors, placing the industry in the crosshairs of environmental initiatives.
Although a thorough inventory had been made of flora and fauna, no inventory was made of mineral resources as a part of the planning process. This was not an omission, both individuals and companies appealed to the planners without prevail. On a value basis, connectivity of habitat takes precedence over commercial interests. The cost to implement the plan has become almost staggering, currently estimated at $500 million and growing. Nonetheless, the county is pressing forward, looking for funding alternatives to ensure that these corridors become public lands shielded from development. Whereas the public seems stunned at the potential cost of the program, it appears to accept statements by officials that these fragile environments need protection from the threat of mining. The aggregate industry is implicitly being dismissed as incompatible with new ideals of long-range planning. Should the Sonoran Desert Conservation Plan be implemented in its current form, these lands will be zoned away from future aggregate development. One can expect looming aggregates shortages once existing operations begin to decline in output.

An Industry Being Heard

At the other end of the land-use planning spectrum, consider what is happening along the Front Range of the Rocky Mountains in the Denver area. The Front Range Infrastructure Resources Project (FRIRP) was initiated by the U.S. Geological Survey to examine the availability of aggregates, water and energy resources for use in infrastructure rehabilitation and development, needed because of urban expansion.
The project brought together a wide array of stakeholders, including Federal, state, county and municipal government departments, the National Stone Association (now the National Stone, Sand and Gravel Association) and the Colorado Rock Products Association. As stated in the FRIRP overview document, the main goals of the project are “to develop information, define tools and demonstrate ways to 1) implement a multidisciplinary evaluation of the distribution and quality of a region’s infrastructure resources, 2) identify issues that may affect availability of resources, and 3) provide (by working with cooperators) decision makers with tools to evaluate alternatives so as to enhance decision making.”
One very useful product of the project is a map of potential sources of aggregate along the Front Range in Colorado, published in U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 97-477. This map contains very helpful information for county planning authorities in the region in their development of comprehensive plans that include consideration of aggregate resources.
In the Denver region, some counties have explicit provisions for aggregate resources in their master plans. Two good examples are Larimer County and Boulder County. The Larimer County Master Plan includes a section on mineral resources that states: “The mineral extraction plan is to facilitate preservation and protection of the county’s commercial mineral deposits from encroachment by incompatible land uses that would limit the options of future decision makers in considering the demand for aggregate resources.” The master plan designates specific portions of the county where the Colorado Geological Survey has mapped commercial aggregate mineral resources as Aggregate Resource Areas.
In Boulder County, the comprehensive plan contains nearly identical provisions, but also include the statements: “Nor is it intended that extractive land uses shall be denied outside the Aggregate Resource Areas. Rather, it is reemphasized that the extraction master plan shall insure the availability of and adequate supply of quality aggregate over the next 30 years so far as can be reasonably estimated.”

The Last Word

Throughout this series, we have presented analytical tools that arm the industry with the capability to demonstrate the need for, and value of, the construction aggregate industry in public forums. In the next and final article, we culminate with a model of sustainable economic development, placing the production of aggregate front and center. This is not without controversy. Some see sustainable development as a tool used by environmental groups to withdraw lands from future development. Others view it as the latest in a string of concepts to be subsequently replaced by ever-greener environmental objectives. Neither of these perspectives are entirely incorrect. Sustainable development is a policy having broad public support and forms the basis for much of the long-range comprehensive planning being implemented. The industry needs to demonstrate its relevancy within existing sustainable development models or the long-run consequences will be great. It is for this reason we state that policies and decisions made today impact companies and communities for generations to come. 

Josef E. Marlow is president and Michael C. Stanley is mineral economist and vice president with Resource Science, Inc. Resource Science is located on the web at www.resourcescience.com.