...them cullerd roks sher r perty tho ;-)

Historically they did just >leave< after the process...in which case there was always the risk of mineral poisoning. (whcih you pointed out in the post below) IIRC there are requirements that as much of the material removed be put back and relandscaped after the mining occurs.

But most of these streams cut through these seams naturally also...especially when they hit river size. Cheat River/lake is green for a reason. It cuts through a copper seam.

I know its more complicated than the >just dirt< argument I started with...but as you also pointed out in your other post...despite our best efforts to kill the place...WV is still a state with more natural beauty than nearly anywhere else I've ever been (Sedona AZ is #1). Over 100 years of mining hasn't caused any 'Love Canal' type events. And with the new relandscaping requirements...most of the mineral leaching is eliminated (not all).

There's your trade-off though...eliminate the ability of the state to capitalize on its most valuable commodity because someone sees a technicality in the law to exploit...and garnering the attention of all of the folks from outside the region...who can then fall over themselves to talk about how "this is the worst thing to happen to the clean water act since inception."...and the NERVE of that guy...he's from NEW JERSEY!!! Home of the 5 foot aquafer and toxic landfills.