HILLSBORO — Fewer than 100 people live year-round in this sleepy town nestled in the mountains southwest of Truth or Consequences. But more than that number showed up to a public hearing at the Hillsboro Community Center on Sept. 17 to express concerns about a copper mine in their backyards.

Permitting for the Copper Flat Mine has taken years — due to a recent design shift intended to reduce water use, the facility awaits financial assurance approval, a written determination from the state Environment Department and a sign-off from the federal Bureau of Land Management. That’s in addition to the decision on its Mining and Minerals Division permit based on the Sept. 17 hearing; the public comment period closes Oct. 16.

Its current application dates to 2010. And despite operating for four months in 1982 as a copper mine, New Mexico Copper Corp. must complete all required documentation for a “new mine” because it was not in operation long enough previously.

Since its beginnings, the mine has been mired in controversy. Multiple lawsuits have challenged its water rights, and community members question its feasibility as a mine with low-grade ore that would use about 360 million gallons of water per year and generate significant pollution.

“From the very beginning, even when we were not in a 15-year drought, the use of that water seemed obscene,” said Barbara Pearlman, a former teacher from New York City who has lived in Hillsboro for 34 years. “There’s a million reasons why [the mine] shouldn’t happen, and there’s quick money reasons why it probably will.”

In 1982, the mine had to close as copper prices fell and debt mounted — which opponents say is at risk of happening again.

New Mexico Copper Corp. — owned by the Australian investment dynasty, the Maloney family — defended the project, arguing the copper it produces could help with the transition away from fossil fuels.

“It’s probably one of the best times ever to be trying to develop a copper market. There’s a lot of interest around the world for projects like this,” CEO Andrew Maloney said in an interview. “We’re going to get all the copper we need for the electrification of everything, with what’s happening with the data centers, [which] use a lot of copper. You’ve got the electric vehicles. You’ve got solar and wind and everything to do with the U.S. electrical grid system.”

But residents and environmental advocates suggested the company has overestimated the water that can be saved in their new proposal and has not taken into account any disasters that could lead to its new system failing.

‘Coffee filter’ to cut water use

The mine would use almost 1 million gallons of water a day — which New Mexico Copper Corp. says is a decrease of 84% from its 2018 proposal.

The 2018 version would have implemented a different technique called wet tailing, a conventional means to dispose of the left-behind materials once the copper is extracted by creating a mud-like slurry of crushed rock and water that funnels into a big pond of liquid waste.

The Office of the State Engineer adjudicated the mine’s water rights in a 2023 hearing in the state’s 3rd Judicial District Court — which are approximately 1,100 acre-feet, or almost 360 million gallons, per year, according to Craig Cathey, their Las Cruces district manager.

Rajiv Srivastava, senior vice president at environmental consulting company WSP, called the new vision for the Copper Flat Mine “the most environmentally sound project we have worked on in the last decade” in an interview.

“It is a very good, simple little project. No nasty minerals in it that would be of environmental concern … no endangered species,” said Raymond Irwin, a geological consultant based in North Carolina who flew out for last month’s meeting. “It’s a very clean ore, very easy to process.”

The “dry stack” method New Mexico Copper Corp. is now proposing amounts to pouring the murky tailings liquid through what resembles a “coffee filter,” according to Srivastava, and then scooping the grounds into a pile. As most of the water gets squeezed out and recycled, the mine would reduce its overall water use.

Maloney said that although he has never worked on a project with dry stack tailings before, water issues that prompted the design shift are “everywhere. Whether it’s Peru, whether it’s Arizona … water has become such a precious resource all over the world.”

“I love working with the [Maloneys],” said Clay Hein, the only New Mexico Copper Corp. employee who works at the current site. His father was a miner during its brief stint in 1982. “But someone didn’t fill them in: Mining here is different than mining in Australia.”

Water cuts ‘not that simple’

Max Yeh, a retired professor who lives in Hillsboro, is a longtime opponent of the mine. His research for the Percha Animas Watershed Association has led to two lawsuits over the mine’s water claims.

“I’ve spent … the last 15 years doing this. Now, I guess, I do it by habit,” Yeh said in an interview. “I get up every morning and do something.”

Yeh said the “dry stacks” are not actually dry — if they were just dust, they would not be able to remain in the pile structure — meaning the corporation will use more water than they purport to.

Also, the only way to control the dust from the tailings is to spray water on it, Yeh added, which uses more of the water the mine is trying to save.

And as the water continues to be recycled, it “gets more and more concentrated with pollutants.”

“They’re going to have to purge that system regularly, and if they purge it, what are they going to do with the purge water?” Yeh asked.

Some experts who spoke at the Sept. 17 hearing said the mine would use more water than in the proposal and the corporation is not properly accounting for failure.

“Can filtered tailings facilities fail? Unfortunately, the answer is yes, and there are a number of examples of that happening,” said David Chambers, a geophysicist who works with the Center for Science and Public Participation.

If heavy rain or snowmelt soaks into the pile, it can fall, Chambers added — not to mention loosely packed tailings unraveling, earthquakes shaking a pile apart or the ground underneath giving way.

“It seems like you’re saving an awful lot of water … but it actually is not that simple,” said Steven Emerman, an author and academic specializing in mine tailings.

Emerman said it is impossible for the corporation’s 84% reduction to come to fruition, estimating the change to “dry stack” tailings would only reduce water consumption by 26%.

Company representatives pushed back on those doubts.

“We stand beside our water balance,” said Stephen Crosby, the corporation’s general manager. “It wasn’t a number we worked backwards to. It was the starting point.”

Reduced water rights

In other water-related roadblocks, the case is taking on increased significance given New Mexico’s requirement to reduce groundwater pumping in the Lower Rio Grande Basin under the terms of a U.S. Supreme Court consent decree issued in May.

“[The Mining and Minerals Division] must require that the company go back to the drawing board and use realistic assumptions for its proposal to switch to filtered tailings and fully account for sitewide water use such as watering for dust control, so that we have a true picture of the mine’s water use,” said Allyson Siwik, executive director of the GIla Resources Information Project, at the hearing. “Once that is done, the state engineer will need to evaluate the impacts of the mine’s water demand on downstream users and the Rio Grande, especially in light of the court’s decision on Texas v. New Mexico.”

Irwin said since the water rights are owned by the company, “they do not impact what’s going on in the Rio Grande from a legal point of view downstream, whether it be El Paso or wherever. There’s a lot of misstatements being made about that, and it’s very incorrect.”

Cathey said the Office of the State Engineer will not step in unless the company exceeds the water rights they were granted in 2023. But he acknowledged that if new Texas v. New Mexico mediation further reduces groundwater pumping, it could change water rights for any entity — including the mine.

Opponents argue the mine’s proposed water usage would endanger plant life in the Animas Valley.

The region boasts some of the oldest sycamores in the country, which “are starting to lose their leaves and die because they’re not getting enough water,” said Dallas Kent, a former miner who lives in Hillsboro. “And these guys are going to come in and use 1,100 acre-feet of water [per year]?”

Kent added that, after working at the Church Rock uranium mill in northwestern New Mexico and experiencing the largest radioactive spill in U.S. history in 1979, he does not trust mining companies.

“[The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency] has no hold over these people [out of the country],” Kent said. “They just go back home, and nobody can do anything about it. … I don’t understand why they’re even trying to do it, especially at this point in history, in the middle of a severe drought, in the middle of reduced water rights.”

After mining ends, the mine’s giant pit would be filled with fresh water to form a lake, according to its permit with the state Environment Department. State water quality rules wouldn’t apply to it as long as it stays on private land and loses water only through evaporation.

Yeh worries the lake will soak up groundwater for good and could turn acidic, since digging exposes rock that reacts with air and rain.

Economic opportunities

Kayson Best, a 20-year-old father from Silver City, was one of the few to speak in favor of the mine. He touted its economic promises, which he said would give him the chance to provide for his family.

“I love New Mexico; I’ve lived here practically my whole life, and I don’t want to be driven out just to chase a better opportunity in another state because I can’t find any opportunities here,” Best said. “The impact this has on younger generations is it brings opportunities, gives us a chance to learn new skills, gives us a chance to make money without a college degree.”

The company says the mine would create 1,156 construction jobs and 270 full-time operation jobs and would generate around $200 million in federal and state taxes, according to its website.

Employees could make about $50,000 a year in entry-level positions or $90,000 to $100,000 as skilled technicians, Crosby said at the hearing.

But even if Best does get hired at the site, he might not be working there for long.

Studies show the rock at the site contains a very small percentage of copper. In 1982, there was only 0.44% copper by weight. That number has since dropped to 0.23%, according to a 2013 study — significantly below the conventional characterization of low-grade ore as under 0.8% of copper by weight.

“There’s no market for copper,” Kent said. “It costs about $5 worth of water to get $5 worth of copper out of the ground and hold it in their hand. They’re not making pennies anymore, and everybody’s trying to shut down the data centers.”

But Maloney cited the fact that copper sits at an all-time high. He said while his Australian company would benefit from the mine’s reopening, so would Southern New Mexico.

“There’s a lot of downstream effects from it,” Maloney said. “I think that everyone’s a winner, from the state, to the community, to workers, to the families, to the local stores, to the local hotels … for grandchildren and people themselves to be able to be able to work locally is something valuable.”

Hein agreed, speaking from the site itself, where his only daily company is a cat named Pete-O.

“Truth or Consequences is losing people; I’ve seen that,” Hein said. “I don’t want to see Truth or Consequences or Hillsboro dwindle away to a ghost town. A change has got to be made.”

‘A bad, bad idea’

But many in the community are reticent about embracing the change Hein is proposing.

During public comment, attendees expressed concerns about whether the one-lane N.M. 152 would support the heavy machinery the mine requires.

Since Hillsboro is a food desert, the community relies on grocery deliveries once a month — the day before the hearing, food-carrying trucks were turned around because of the weight limit on the state road.

If the only road Hillsboro residents can take to exit their town cannot sustain the grocery trucks, “what are they going to do about ore? … If that road is blocked, or if there’s runoff from the mine … I’m worried,” Pearlman said.

Hillsboro resident Arnold Avery added that the noise from the mine is another issue that has “not been properly addressed.”

“I can hear a gunshot a mile away here. That’s how quiet it is. If they’re blasting, what is that going to do to the whole community?” Pearlman asked.

Hein had a different take: “There are so many hills between here and Hillsboro, I don’t know how you’re going to hear anything.”

One attendee, Dan Lorimier, has lived in Sierra County for 50 years. Lorimier, who worked in water conservation, said he has closely observed the mine’s operations and permitting processes since 1982.

“In the end, everything leaves Sierra County. The mineral resources, the profits and our water,” Lorimier said. “And so, I want to end by just telling you straight out, this project is a bad, bad idea for Sierra County.”

Julia Gentin is a reporter for The Las Cruces New Mexican, The Santa Fe New Mexican and Searchlight New Mexico through a partnership with Report for America, a national service program that places journalists into local newsrooms. She covers the Southern New Mexico region. Learn more about Report for America at reportforamerica.org.

Republish This Story

Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.