Issue – Native Religions

Kennecott Eagle Minerals, the company behind the Eagle Mine project, submitted mining and other environmental permit requests along with an EIA to Michigan’s Department of Environmental Quality in 2006. According to Michigan law, in order to be granted a permit, the mining project’s EIA must analyze and mitigate the project’s potential impacts on cultural, historical, environmental, and archaeological resources. Although they claimed that they found that “no cultural resources were identified in the area of proposed construction,” a year later they ran into trouble with the National Historic Preservation Act because they needed permits from the EPA, thereby involving the federal government.¹

Under Section 106 of NHPA, Kennecott needed to investigate any Traditional Cultural Properties or archaeological sites potentially eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Properties. If any were found, Kennecott would have needed to take reasonable measures to attempt to mitigate the effects of the mining on the historic properties. Similarly, Michigan law also required that Kennecott assess and mitigate the effects on important cultural sites or places of worship.

In response, the KBIC submitted their assessment of cultural resources, specifically Eagle Rock, that would be affected by the mine. As described on the Religious and Cultural Significance page, Tribal Historic Preservation Officer Summer Cohen asserted in the assessment that Eagle Rock is a TCP eligible for listing in the National Register because of its historic and contemporary use as a ceremonial site and its spiritual significance. Cohen also reminded the EPA that some Native traditions are not often publicly discussed, so a record of them can only be found in oral traditions.²

Meanwhile, state archaeologists working with Kennecott concluded that even if Eagle Rock was determined to be a TCP, “drilling activity will be far below the ground surface, and will not disturb the pit feature on the surface of the outcrop. Consequently, the work planned for the Bedrock Outcrop area will avoid [Eagle Rock], and therefore will have no effect upon the site.”Anderson, Dean L. Letter to Jonathan C. Cherry. 19 July 2007.³ Kennecott appears to have mostly worked under this assumption that because their project would not physically harm the surface of the rock, the mining would not interfere with Native interests.

In August of 2008, Kennecott Mining submitted its own Section 106 assessment completed by professionals (an archaeologist, anthropologist, historian, and cultural resource specialist) to the EPA.

This Section 106 assessment found no Traditional Cultural Properties or archaeological resources in the area affected by mining. They backed this claim with evidence from several different sources, all generally casting doubt on the KBIC’s assertions that Eagle Rock has traditional and contemporary religious significance to the tribe. In interviews, miners and loggers who had worked in the area testified to to having seen traces of beer drinking, hunting and trapping, and blueberry picking, but no evidence of “cultural or ceremonial use.”⁴

Furthermore, although the authors found other local sites labelled Ojibwa place names on maps of traditional Ojibwa sites, Eagle Rock was not labelled. The assessment went on to assert that although the KBIC currently uses the area for foraging, they forage indistinguishably in surrounding areas, so this usage does not mark Eagle Rock as uniquely spiritually important. Finally, the report went through the four criteria used to assess a site’s eligibility for the National Register and determined that Eagle Rock met none of them. Although the authors of this report read the assessment submitted by the KBIC and testimony from tribe members, they did not communicate directly with the tribe because the KBIC had previously been opposed to any consultation with Kennecott and was involved in litigation regarding the mine at the time.⁵

Kennecott wanted to move on with the mining project, and was anxious for permit approval. The consultation, nevertheless, continued. Finally, in March, 2010, Kennecott reorganized their mining plans so that they didn’t need an Underground Injection Control Permit. This meant that they could dodge the EPA, and the mine no longer required Section 106 approval. Kennecott withdrew their application and the preparation for the mine continued, without any federal decision regarding potential Traditional Cultural Properties in the area.