PR, I sympathize with the Apache, and understand something of their history, as well as that of their "cousins", the Yavapai. I also understand the land use issues in the Superior area from various perspectives. For instance, I helped put together the head of a rock climbing group with leaders of Resolution - via my personal network, not that I really know anyone at Resolution. This was to negotiate a settlement over climber objections to what was to be a permanent closure of choice climbing areas at "Apache Leap" (overlooking Superior). That issue was put to bed amicablly, but could have become contentious.

As to the Apache, their claims to "Apache Leap" are based entirly on legend with no basis in fact. [I am an amature historian and history writer, and I know well the milirary and mining history of this area from the time of the Indian Wars.] Further, "Apache Leap" is part of the Tonto National Forest, and was never part of tribal lands, so I don't see much to be concerned about here.

In regards to someone finding "block caving" objectionable for environmental reasons, I don't understand. It takes place underground. It will produce far less of a scar on the landscape than open cast mining, and it is also likely to produce far less waste to be disposed of above ground.

Of course, there are some reasonable (for now) other objections, but there are always things to complain about. In my opinion, the mine (which is under constrution) will go into production. Hundreds of millions have already been spent. Who's going to walk away from that?

Finally, I don't see any direct relationship between what is going on at Superior and what may happen at Tombstone.

Hope this helps.

VP