Resolution Copper - Queen Creek Coalition: News Release

Resolution Copper and Queen Creek Coalition reach long-term license agreement

Pact allows rock climbing and hiking to continue on RCM property for QCC registrants and provides resources for future development to offset climbing opportunities lost to the mine’s development.

PHOENIX, Ariz., July 11, 2012 -- Resolution Copper Mining Limited and the Queen Creek Coalition have signed a long-term license agreement that allows rock climbers and hikers continued access to some of their favorite climbing and bouldering spots on RCM private land in Queen Creek and in and around Oak Flat.

Climbing and bouldering problems and off-highway access points covered in the agreement are primarily located on RCM private land and US Forest Service land located in the region of RCM’s proposed under-ground copper mine, near Superior, Ariz. When in full operation, the mine will be the largest in North America. The project is in the pre-feasibility stage and expected to begin production early next decade.

The agreement, which comes after eight years of negotiations, also provides funding to the Tempe-based group to develop other access points or climbing areas outside the mine zone to offset climbing and bouldering areas in the Oak Flat area that may be inaccessible or lost as a result of a pending legislative land exchange and mine development. QCC will act as the single point of contact with regard to rock climbing on RCM’s current and future lands to educate the public about RCM’s policies as land owner in return for those offsets. Persons desiring to access the routes for climbing should contact QCC for access rules and registration procedures.

Popular climbing areas including The Pond and Atlantis, which are located on RCM property and which are not currently expected to be affected by mining, will remain accessible to climbers under the agreement. It also gives rock climbers who register with QCC continued access to climbing areas in the Oak Flat area that are currently on US Forest Service land but are part of the pending land Exchange. In the event those lands transfer to RCM or are otherwise impacted by mining, QCC registrants will have access to them as long as it is safe to do so and does not interfere with mining operations. This includes access points to Upper Devil’s Canyon.

QCC also will work to maximize rock climbing on current rock climbing areas such as Apache Leap, Lower Devil’s Canyon and Tam O’Shanter, in addition to other current and potential rock climbing areas within the region. The agreement specifies that climbers must first register with QCC as a member or daily pass-holder to access the climbing areas. The access also may be terminated or restricted due to regulatory or safety concerns and is subject to certain other conditions to be managed by QCC.

Financial terms of the agreement and specifics of the business contract are protected by confidentiality arrangements, but in general the funds will be used to educate climbers on the acceptable and prohibited land uses covered by the license and to maximize climbing opportunities in the area through projects targeted at regional rock climbing.

RCM and QCC officials applauded the good working relationship they have achieved. “We look forward to a long and constructive relationship with our climbing friends,” said Jon Cherry, project manager. “We believe it’s a fair and reasonable long-term solution to a difficult and complex issue, said Paul Diefenderfer, QCC chairman.

About RCM
Resolution Copper Mining is a limited liability company whose members are a subsidiary of London-based Rio Tinto – the managing member – and a subsidiary of Australia-based BHP Billiton, to develop the third largest undeveloped copper resource in the world near Superior, Ariz. The project is currently in the pre-feasibility phase and production is not anticipated until the early 2020s. The project, which will mine ore using underground block-caving methods at depths of nearly 7,000 feet below surface, currently employs more than 500 RCM employees and contractors. When in full production, the mine will employ 1,400 workers directly and generate an additional 2,300 indirect and induced jobs. The mine will be North America’s largest copper producer when in full production, capable of producing more than 25 percent of the nation’s demand based on today’s usage.

About QCC
Queen Creek Coalition is a tax exempt non-profit organization based in Tempe, Ariz., whose mission is to maximize rock climbing opportunities in the Queen Creek region, east and south of Superior, Ariz. It is one of Arizona’s major rock climbing areas, with more than 700 roped climbing routes and 1,000 boulder problems. As part of its mission, Queen Creek Coalition seeks to promote safe and sustainable climbing in the region by serving as a source of information for climbers intending to visit the region. Queen Creek Coalition is the successor to Friends of Queen Creek, the original rock climber group who began negotiations with Resolution in 2004.

What are the social/legal incentives for RCM to not revoke the license? Licenses are freely revocable by the grantor. Did QCC pay consideration for the license?

Congratulations to the QCC for putting in years of work to gain a long term agreement with RCM. We applaud their efforts and thank them for dedicating themselves to what has been at many times a thankless job. It is also important to note that this agreement does not preclude the continued work of the Concerned Climbers of Arizona (CCA) and the Access Fund to advocate for land exchange legislation that is more favorable to climbers, other recreational interests, addresses environmental concerns, and protects the many other values of Oak Flat and the Queen Creek region. The Access Fund will continue to work with QCC, CCA, Congress, current and future Administrations, and RCM to achieve the best outcome for climbers.

Dief wrote:QCC also will work to maximize rock climbing on current rock climbing areas such as Apache Leap, Lower Devil’s Canyon and Tam O’Shanter, in addition to other current and potential rock climbing areas within the region. The agreement specifies that climbers must first register with QCC as a member or daily pass-holder to access the climbing areas. The access also may be terminated or restricted due to regulatory or safety concerns and is subject to certain other conditions to be managed by QCC. Financial terms of the agreement and specifics of the business contract are protected by confidentiality arrangements

Dief, I have a couple questions. It would be great if you would answer them and the ones you ignored in your last thread about this license agreement!
The above quote states that "climbers must first register with QCC as a member or daily pass-holder to access the climbing areas" within the region. It mentions Tamo, "in addition to other current and potential rock climbing areas within the region".
questions:
Why do climbers have to register with the QCC to climb at areas "in the region" that are nowhere near the property that is in the proposed land swap? (such as Tamo) Neither Resolution nor QCC has any authority or power to require such a thing for an area such as Tamo. Please explain why Resolution and QCC are trying to police land that they do not nor will ever own.
What are the boundaries of this "region"? How far East and how far South of Superior are you claiming stakes for?
Why are financial terms of the agreement and specifics of the business contract protected by confidentiality arrangements?
Aren't you claiming to be negotiating on my and all other climbers behalf? If so, we should be able to know all the details. If not, you're only negotiating on your and the QCC's behalf.

alexdavis wrote:What are the social/legal incentives for RCM to not revoke the license? Licenses are freely revocable by the grantor. Did QCC pay consideration for the license?

+1
Give us answers, QCC.

Hey Red

The license only applies to private land owned by Resolution, (Atlantis, Pond, etc) so registration will only be required for climbing on private land owned by Resolution. As part of the mitigation for loss of climbing areas directly impacted by the mine QCC will be looking at the region for ways to improve existing access or gain new access (ie Tamo). We will be seeking input from climbers on what access issues should be pursued. To be clear: If QCC (or anyone else for that matter) gains access to Tamo (or other non Resolution owned land) it would not be covered by this license.

Dief, thanks for answering that one question. It appears that your news release misspoke or at least is very unclear about what areas climbers need to be registered with the QCC to access.
"QCC also will work to maximize rock climbing on current rock climbing areas such as Apache Leap, Lower Devil’s Canyon and Tam O’Shanter, in addition to other current and potential rock climbing areas within the region. The agreement specifies that climbers must first register with QCC as a member or daily pass-holder to access the climbing areas."

If you could address the other questions I and others have on this and your last thread, that would be great! Thanks.

Yes, that part of the news release was a tad fuzzy - I hope I've cleared things up.

Why are the specifics of the agreement confidential? Because that is what the landowner requested.

You are not to accept a bribe,for the bribe blinds clear-sighted men and distorts the words of righteous men - Exodus, 23:8

Dief wrote:PHOENIX, Ariz., July 11, 2012 -- Resolution Copper Mining Limited and the Queen Creek Coalition have signed a long-term license agreement that allows rock climbers and hikers continued access to some of their favorite climbing and bouldering spots on RCM private land in Queen Creek and in and around Oak Flat.

Well, well, well... I do not think that today was much of a surprise to many, do you?

Dief wrote: Financial terms of the agreement and specifics of the business contract are protected by confidentiality arrangements

Was that an endorsement that Gosar mentioned in the hearing today from a few guys in the group the old Queen Creek Coalition?
How much money did he mention was paid for that?
Who else saw that today?

Hi Linda -

What did Gosar say exactly about climbers yesterday? I didn't catch the whole hearing but did see Gosar try to call Peralta a liar after she said Superior says "no" to the mine.

Bare with me, I'm just summarizing.
Maybe Dief or someone from the QCC could provide word for word

Gosar said: 'He has an endorsement of a local climbing group, the Queen Creek Coalition stating they support the land exchange.'

Please someone correct me if I'm wrong

BlueFrog wrote:Hi Linda - What did Gosar say exactly about climbers yesterday? I didn't catch the whole hearing but did see Gosar try to call Peralta a liar after she said Superior says "no" to the mine.

Blue Frog,

At approximately 59:23 of the archived committee hearing as posted on the House Subcommittee on Energy and Mineral Resources website, Representative Gosar submits for the record a document from a

"climbing recreation group from Queen Creek . . . that support this mine."

Whether this group as referenced is QCC, Inc., is not explicit.

Archive Video of HR 687 Hearing, Oak Flat Privatization Bill

Fred

What a pile of crap. Everyone concerned should contact Gosar and insist he stops insinuating that climbers broadly support this legislation. It would be great if the AF and CCA contacted him as we'll.

What about getting everyone fighting from a different angle?

It's a foreign company that's sweeping in to take advantage of our suffering economy, throwing around phrases like "local jobs" and "boost the economy"

Essentially they want to take advantage of us, force us to give up some prized land so they can bail and leave us high and dry when they're done mining, after destroying such a beautiful and unique area, and sending all the actual profits over to Europe...

This is also going to set a bad precedent for skirting around the policies that are in-place for land exchanges, too, that will hurt everyone in the long run.

Geir wrote:What a pile of crap. Everyone concerned should contact Gosar and insist he stops insinuating that climbers broadly support this legislation. It would be great if the AF and CCA contacted him as we'll.

The public can rest assure that the CCA in conjunction with the AF are in regular contact with all those involved along with informing them that a few guys in small group (QCC) do not represent the climbers in AZ as a whole.

Linda
Keep writing

feel free to email, fax or call
Committee on Natural Resources
United States House of Representatives
1324 Longworth House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515
Phone: (202) 225-2761
Fax: (202) 225-5929

Paul Gosar - Arizona, 4th District
ph: (202) 225-2315 | fx: (202) 226-9739
or sumit email:
gosar.house.gov/contact-me/…

Be sure to note to PUT ON RECORD:
In opposition to HR 687

stay tuned on the forum:
mountainproject.com/v/savin…

Last week the House voted to pass and favorably report H.R.687 to by a vote of 23 yeas to 19 nays

Congratulations to the Access Fund for contributing & encouraging the confusion of 'climbers supporting the land exchange' in Congress.

Exhibiting mixed messages and highlighting Paul Dief & Erik Filsinger's QCC,Inc. on the Access Fund website creates an appearance that climbers support the land exchange and the destruction of Oak Flat which in fact a majority of climbers do not.

The Access Fund endorsement here of QCC,Inc. 'license-agreement' *deal* is an insult to many who have spent countless hours with a consistent goal of keeping Oak Flat climbing & recreational use available for future generations. There has been great success for years in holding off the mine especially of late with Resolution Copper cutting jobs and the Town of Superior reversing their support. AF recent actions here seem somewhat internally defeating to the community after such progress.

For the record: Paul & Erik did not "retain the name QCC" they formed a conspiracy and "stole it" for political purposes now evident. The Queen Creek Coalition was created specifically as a group entity, by a group from the community -as representatives of the community, to represent the community as a whole. Due to the failure of Paul Dief who ruined the name and good reputation of the FOQC when he negotiated a deal with the AF and forget to to ask or tell anyone he was doing so (sound familiar?) -we had to start over. Typically, individuals who disagree with a group tend to leave the group and form another group -so why didn't this happen? How can the Access Fund support such actions of conspiracy & treason committed against their own community?

$$$ ?

QCC,Inc operates privately, accepting deals, dollars and contracts they say, are on behalf of the community. How can an organization claim to speak on behalf of a community when it holds no public meetings nor allows any membership from that community and only accepts comments & questions they personally agree with? Shame on the AF for endorsing any secret financial negotiations purported to be on our behalf regarding a public recreational area.

I personally give no such right to the Access Fund or QCC,Inc to negotiate any secret financial deal, agreement or exchange on my behalf.

Queen Creek Coalition was not created to be a formal voting entity, or was it ever designated or allowed to be a formal voting entity on matters that tie it to it's reason for creation -the mission statement which all members agreed to upon it's creation and the #1 item was- No subsidence. To date, there has been no mining plan produced so it is impossible to support legislation. The Queen Creek Coalition was created as an all or nothing informal consensus group. The group operated in this manner to insure the representation of all. Paul & Erik had no personal original ownership of the original group name 'QCC'. The original Queen Creek Coalition created by the group, for the group, for a specific mission & purpose, ended when Paul & Erik "forced a vote" to endorse the land exchange thus changing the main mission statement. Because of this they will always be referred to as QCC,Inc. The Original Queen Creek Coalition retains creative rights to it's original historical identity and also to display historical documents.. The creation of the mission statement and it's tie to the original group that created it of which I am one, remains intact. Despite QCC,Inc attempts to remove all historical references on the internet or other attempts to rewrite history, the Original QCC will always exist in it's original form and has every right to do so as part of public record and 1st Amendment rights.

With all due respects, unless the Access Fund can exhibit good faith toward the following 3 requests, I will have no choice but to ask for the return of my donation and proceed to lobby against the Access Fund. My requests will be copied to AF Board of directors.

I encourage all climbers serious about saving Oak Flat to take a firm stand at this time.

Request #1. Send out a press release or letter to Congress (especially Gosar) clarifying and discrediting 'climbing community' endorsements of this land exchange

Request #2. Remove QCC,Inc. from AF website area that promotes saving Oak Flat

Request #3. Divulge copies of all contracts and details of any financial arrangements made or amounts signed on behalf of the community with regards to the current Oak Flat land exchange

I never expected to see my $$$ used toward assisting a secret campaign that inevitability lead to the destruction of Oak Flat.

AccessFund HQ wrote:Congratulations to the QCC for putting in years of work to gain a long term agreement with RCM. We applaud their efforts and thank them for dedicating themselves to what has been at many times a thankless job. It is also important to note that this agreement does not preclude the continued work of the Concerned Climbers of Arizona (CCA) and the Access Fund to advocate for land exchange legislation that is more favorable to climbers, other recreational interests, addresses environmental concerns, and protects the many other values of Oak Flat and the Queen Creek region. The Access Fund will continue to work with QCC, CCA, Congress, current and future Administrations, and RCM to achieve the best outcome for climbers.

Access Fund, can you elaborate in further detail of the continued work you are doing or detail any actions recently executed that support climbers against the land exchange? (aside from signing the AzMining Reform sign-on letter)

What were the results of meetings recently held in D.C. Are there any suggestions, plans or strategies on hand to continue the fight against this bad legislation?

Why has the Oak Flat area of your website seemingly not been updated since the last session of Congress? Where are the Action Alerts, notices, updates or other emails that were usually sent out in a timely manner to encourage letter writing or contacting our representatives about the exchange?

Geir wrote:What a pile of crap. Everyone concerned should contact Gosar and insist he stops insinuating that climbers broadly support this legislation. It would be great if the AF and CCA contacted him as we'll.

Geir -Yes quite a pile and anyone who wants to save Oak Flat should be outraged. IMO a petition drive in front of Paul Dief's climbing gym would be in good order if folks have enough cojones.

Be well~ k

--- Invalid image id: 106771258 ---

kirra wrote:Last week the House voted to pass and favorably report H.R.687 to by a vote of 23 yeas to 19 nays Congratulations to the Access Fund for contributing & encouraging the confusion of 'climbers supporting the land exchange' in Congress. Exhibiting mixed messages and highlighting Paul Dief & Erik Filsinger's QCC,Inc. on the Access Fund website creates an appearance that climbers support the land exchange and the destruction of Oak Flat which in fact a majority of climbers do not. The Access Fund endorsement here of QCC,Inc. 'license-agreement' *deal* is an insult to many who have spent countless hours with a consistent goal of keeping Oak Flat climbing & recreational use available for future generations. There has been great success for years in holding off the mine especially of late with Resolution Copper cutting jobs and the Town of Superior reversing their support. AF recent actions here seem somewhat internally defeating to the community after such progress. For the record: Paul & Erik did not "retain the name QCC" they formed a conspiracy and "stole it" for political purposes now evident. The Queen Creek Coalition was created specifically as a group entity, by a group from the community -as representatives of the community, to represent the community as a whole. Due to the failure of Paul Dief who ruined the name and good reputation of the FOQC when he negotiated a deal with the AF and forget to to ask or tell anyone he was doing so (sound familiar?) -we had to start over. Typically, individuals who disagree with a group tend to leave the group and form another group -so why didn't this happen? How can the Access Fund support such actions of conspiracy & treason committed against their own community? $$$ ? QCC,Inc operates privately, accepting deals, dollars and contracts they say, are on behalf of the community. How can an organization claim to speak on behalf of a community when it holds no public meetings nor allows any membership from that community and only accepts comments & questions they personally agree with? Shame on the AF for endorsing any secret financial negotiations purported to be on our behalf regarding a public recreational area. I personally give no such right to the Access Fund or QCC,Inc to negotiate any secret financial deal, agreement or exchange on my behalf. Queen Creek Coalition was not created to be a formal voting entity, or was it ever designated or allowed to be a formal voting entity on matters that tie it to it's reason for creation -the mission statement which all members agreed to upon it's creation and the #1 item was- No subsidence. To date, there has been no mining plan produced so it is impossible to support legislation. The Queen Creek Coalition was created as an all or nothing informal consensus group. The group operated in this manner to insure the representation of all. Paul & Erik had no personal original ownership of the original group name 'QCC'. The original Queen Creek Coalition created by the group, for the group, for a specific mission & purpose, ended when Paul & Erik "forced a vote" to endorse the land exchange thus changing the main mission statement. Because of this they will always be referred to as QCC,Inc. The Original Queen Creek Coalition retains creative rights to it's original historical identity and also to display historical documents.. The creation of the mission statement and it's tie to the original group that created it of which I am one, remains intact. Despite QCC,Inc attempts to remove all historical references on the internet or other attempts to rewrite history, the Original QCC will always exist in it's original form and has every right to do so as part of public record and 1st Amendment rights. With all due respects, unless the Access Fund can exhibit good faith toward the following 3 requests, I will have no choice but to ask for the return of my donation and proceed to lobby against the Access Fund. My requests will be copied to AF Board of directors. I encourage all climbers serious about saving Oak Flat to take a firm stand at this time. Request #1. Send out a press release or letter to Congress (especially Gosar) clarifying and discrediting 'climbing community' endorsements of this land exchange Request #2. Remove QCC,Inc. from AF website area that promotes saving Oak Flat Request #3. Divulge copies of all contracts and details of any financial arrangements made or amounts signed on behalf of the community with regards to the current Oak Flat land exchange I never expected to see my $$$ used toward assisting a secret campaign that inevitability lead to the destruction of Oak Flat. Access Fund, can you elaborate in further detail of the continued work you are doing or detail any actions recently executed that support climbers against the land exchange? (aside from signing the AzMining Reform sign-on letter) What were the results of meetings recently held in D.C. Are there any suggestions, plans or strategies on hand to continue the fight against this bad legislation? Why has the Oak Flat area of your website seemingly not been updated since the last session of Congress? Where are the Action Alerts, notices, updates or other emails that were usually sent out in a timely manner to encourage letter writing or contacting our representatives about the exchange? Geir -Yes quite a pile and anyone who wants to save Oak Flat should be outraged. IMO a petition drive in front of Paul Dief's climbing gym would be in good order if folks have enough cojones. Be well~ k

OMG! This crap is what the Concerned Climbers have come to? Makes me glad I relocated out of state!

Rocky Climber wrote: OMG! This crap is what the Concerned Climbers have come to? Makes me glad I relocated out of state!

Hold on a minute ... I am not an expert in the CCA but I am pretty sure this is not an official statement.

Second, I thought Kirra made reasonable requests in #1 and #3. And this is coming from someone who has strongly disagreed with her in the past.