Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Mining Environment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Daniel residents urge Wasatch County to oppose nearby Maverick mining proposal
Summary
Neighbors at the June 1 Daniel Town Council meeting urged Wasatch County to reject or tightly regulate a Maverick mining operation proposed in Daniel Canyon, saying the site threatens air quality, local springs and irrigation and asking residents to submit public comments by June 10.
Residents of Daniel used the public‑comment period at the June 1 town council meeting to press Wasatch County for action on a proposed Maverick mining operation in Daniel Canyon.
"Placing a mine so close to our town of Daniel is inherently dangerous and fundamentally incompatible with the safety of our town," said Lisa Dina, who said she has lived in Storm Haven for more than 20 years and lives close to the proposed site. She urged residents to write the county and submit public comments by June 10.
A different resident described the parcel as within the town's source‑protection zone and said a shipping container labeled "Maverick" had already appeared on site. The speaker told the council the site falls in a tier‑2 protection zone for Storm Haven drinking water and warned that mining could affect an "upper pond" fed by major springs and downstream irrigation supplies.
Speakers raised several technical concerns: commenters said county materials estimated the operation might excavate to deep strata (county estimate cited at about 6,000 feet to reach rock similar to material mined at Utah Lake), warned that cutting and crushing limestone produces respirable crystalline silica, and noted diesel emissions and heavy truck traffic could harm air quality and neighborhood livability.
Residents encouraged others to submit comments to the county planning portal (publiccomments@wasatchcounty.gov was provided in the meeting) before the June 10 deadline. One speaker said the planning commission hearing had proceeded with few in‑person opponents and urged greater public participation so the county will hear more opposition.
Council members present did not take a formal position during the meeting; the mayor closed the public‑comment item and moved to the next agenda and encouraged residents to file comments with Wasatch County. Wasatch County retains permitting authority for the parcel and any stream crossing or state‑level permits discussed in public remarks.
