Stop rare earth mining in Black Hills National Forest
Bear Lodge Rare Earth Project
U.S. Forest Service· Black Hills National Forest, Wyoming, Bear Lodge MountainsU.S. Forest Service project page ↗
Forest ServiceWe track this on the agency’s own system of record, where most on-the-ground decisions live.
The groups on this fight
4 groups predicted likely to care in South Dakota and Wyoming
Predicted likely to care is a guess from footprint in South Dakota and Wyoming, by the same match the STAND matchmaker runs, with no link to this decision. Give straight to them; nothing routes through us.
- Badlands Natural History Association
Predicted likely to care · a guess
Works South Dakota: they work only in South Dakota.
- Wind Cave National Park Friends Group
Predicted likely to care · a guess
Works South Dakota: they work only in South Dakota.
- Wyoming Outdoor Council
Predicted likely to care · a guess
Works Wyoming: leading opposition to BLM's 2025 reopening of the just-finalized Rock Springs RMP, with program director Alec Underwood arguing the Golden Triangle and Big Sandy Foothills are too special to lease and develop.
- Wyoming Wilderness Association
Predicted likely to care · a guess
Works Wyoming: organized citizen outings at Skull Rim to build opposition to BLM lease parcels around Adobe Town Rim and has pressed the agency to shrink lease sales touching the WSA and surrounding lands with wilderness characteristics.
Every group above is on STAND for Public Lands, with its court record, its filings and who backs it.
A proposed mine in the Black Hills National Forest threatens wildlife habitat and natural resources on public land.
What’s at risk
Wildlife habitat and natural resources in the Black Hills National Forest face permanent damage from industrial rare earth mining operations. Missing the comment deadline strips citizens of their legal right to challenge this project later.
If this goes through
If approved, the mine moves forward with lasting damage to the Black Hills landscape and no path for public appeal by those who did not comment in time.
Our plain-English read of the official notice ↗. Check it against the agency’s own words below.
6 holes in the agency’s own analysis
What the public could have raised, from the agency’s own document
- I oppose this action as proposed, and I ask the agency to weigh the specific harms below.
- The Forest Service says it will not publish a draft environmental impact statement and will not conduct an objections process for this mine. This 30-day scoping window is therefore the only formal opportunity the public gets, and I am asking the agency to publish a draft EIS for comment before any decision.
- The notice states this project is not subject to the project-level objection procedures at 36 CFR 218, because the responsible official is the Under Secretary, and that his approval is the final administrative determination of the Department under 36 CFR 218.13(a). Removing the administrative review that every comparable mine receives is itself a decision the EIS should justify on the record.
- The proposal requires a project-specific forest plan amendment to exempt the mine from the Black Hills Forest Plan's scenic integrity standards. The agency should analyze whether the standards can be met rather than waived, and disclose what the waiver costs the viewshed this forest is managed for.
- The notice identifies northern long-eared bats, a species listed as endangered, among the wildlife that could be affected. The EIS should independently verify presence or absence through current surveys rather than rely on the proponent's characterization.
Show every point from the document
- The notice lists seven cooperating agencies, all federal, state or county, and not one Tribal Nation, while acknowledging that mining operations may impact cultural sites and historic properties important to Tribal Nations. Formal government-to-government consultation should be documented in the EIS before scoping closes.
- This is an open-pit mine on National Forest System lands with acknowledged risks to stream flows, water quality standards, and downstream beneficial uses. The EIS should quantify those effects on named streams rather than describe them in general terms.
- Say something only you can say. The law requires the agency to consider and respond to substantive comments, and specifics are what make a comment substantive.
In the agency’s own words
The Forest Service values public participation. Communications from the public regarding this project, including commenters' names and contact information, will become part of the public record. Comments, including anonymous comments, will be accepted at any time. However, comments posted after the close of a designated comment period may not be able to be given full consideration. Anonymous comments and comments submitted after the close of the final designated comment period will not provide the commenter standing for administrative review. Comments, or in some cases other expressions of interest, along with re…
The reporting behind this
From More Than Just ParksIt’s referred to as Unit 346 in the Twin Mountain II Timber Sale. On the ground, it’s some of the most spectacular old growth we’ve ever witnessed, and it’s marked for clearcutting.
To document and do our part to save America’s greatest old growth forest
More actions that need you
Go deeper, free
See how your members of Congress vote on public lands
Every representative, graded on the votes that decide the fate of parks, forests, and refuges.
Open ↗The mapSee the places under active threat
A live map of the parks, monuments, and wild country in the crosshairs right now.
Open ↗A wrong fact, a dead link, a form that wouldn’t take your letter: one tap and it comes to the people who build PLAN, with this fight attached.
Know an open comment period we are missing, or spotted a wrong deadline? .