Boundary Waters Situation

[Newk]

Looking for thoughts on the boundary waters mining rights situation after the vote passed to revoke protections. Personally appalled.

 

[IdahoBeav]

So, the mining ban that was overturned was only enacted 20 years ago?

 

[Dos Perros]

Would the mine be inside or outside the Wilderness? Seen conflicting info.

 

[Poser]

So, the mining ban that was overturned was only enacted 20 years ago?

I believe it was a 20-year mining moratorium that was issued in 2023.

 

[Poser]

Would the mine be inside or outside the Wilderness? Seen conflicting info.

This is what I was able to turn up:

Mining is not allowed inside the Boundary Waters, nor in a small buffer zone around it. The moratorium banned mining within the watershed of the wilderness area. That’s critical, supporters argue, because any mining pollution in those 225,000 acres outside of the BWCA could flow directly into the protected wilderness area. And many of the region’s richest copper-nickel deposits lie within the watershed.

 

[Jimbuck]

I've been visiting the BWCA for the past 28 years and to see such a pristine & ecologically diverse area now face irreparable damage is infuriating to say the least. I'd urge anyone that hasn't been there to make a visit, it's truly something special.

 

[IdahoBeav]

I believe it was a 20-year mining moratorium that was issued in 2023.

So, there were no protections prior to 3 years ago? What kept the Boundary Waters safe prior to 2023?

Is there a real threat, or is this just virtue signaling by one administration and pecker measuring by another while public lands lobbyists and activists draw checks from 501(c)(3) organizations and monetized social media accounts?

 

[Dos Perros]

Is mining under any other federal regulation with regard to environmental impacts?

 

[Poser]

So, there were no protections prior to 3 years ago? What kept the Boundary Waters safe prior to 2023?

Is there a real threat, or is this just virtue signaling by one administration and pecker measuring by another while public lands lobbyists and activists draw checks from 501(c)(3) organizations and monetized social media accounts?

From what I can tell, there was no active mining operations in the BW watershed. Twin Metals had submitted formal plans for mines in the watershed in the past which had been rejected. and then, following a study of the Dept of the Interior, the 20 year moratorium was put in place. Obama had proposed a moratorium, the study was cancelled by Trump 1, the study was completed and the moratorium installed under Biden. Certainly appears to be politics at work: The 50-49 vote was across party lines with 2 republicans defecting.

 

[Poser]

Is mining under any other federal regulation with regard to environmental impacts?

Yes. Heavily so. Clean Water Act, there is a Reclamation Act of some sort, Haz Mat policies, Endangered Species Act, emissions, historic preservation etc. Dept of the Interior and the Dept of Energy handle quite a bit of that regulation.

 

[wind gypsy]

So, there were no protections prior to 3 years ago? What kept the Boundary Waters safe prior to 2023?

Is there a real threat, or is this just virtue signaling by one administration and pecker measuring by another while public lands lobbyists and activists draw checks from 501(c)(3) organizations and monetized social media accounts?

There has been new active mining development plans being kicked back and forth as a political football the last 10-15 years. Far as i know, they haven't permitted significant mining in this area previously.

Edit to add: A little further south is the MN "Iron Range" where communities exist the way they do largely because of a large mining industry in years past. I know of several folks who grew up in families supported by the mining industry that support bringing some mining jobs back to the region for this.

 

[roosterdown]

This is at its core a giveaway. The wealth generated from this mine goes to a Chilean company whose majority owner is a billionaire who is friends with our current president. The metal? Exported to China. Many of our senators cited "national security" when voting yes, ignoring these two inconvenient facts.

They (of course) have set up the mine under a subsidiary that can simply be bankrupted should their pollution mitigation attempts go sideways, thus avoiding the expense of a pesky cleanup. Since they all seem to leak, it would be nice if they could prove it won't before trying in this setting. Mines of this type have been in arid environments; in the BWCA watershed we have a vast resource of some of the cleanest fresh water in the world, and it would be a hell of a place to get it wrong. The pollution corridor would go west along the border through Rainy Lake, Lake of the Woods, lake Winnipeg and to Hudson's Bay...almost 1000 miles.

There will be wars fought over fresh water. Seems shortsighted to endanger this resource forever to get at another resource for 15-20 years.

There should be some (couple hundred) decent paying local jobs for half a generation or so, and this is certainly appealing for the local economy.

The last hope now lies at the state level (permitting, etc.).

We should not mine in this location. But if we are going to anyway...shouldn't it be an American company? Shouldn't we benefit?

PS: We have many generations of miners in the family. My son works for a mining company. We need to mine. That does not mean we mine anywhere and everywhere.

 

[RyanT26]

I loosely followed along with information that was put out about it. I couldn’t tell if it was going to be the total destruction of that area that some are portraying it to be or if it’s just the next Trump and the Republicans are the devil theory.

It has huntalk in full-blown meltdown mode, which is kind of funny. As long as a mine meets all the regulatory processes. Is what it is at this point.

 

[littlebigtine]

So, there were no protections prior to 3 years ago? What kept the Boundary Waters safe prior to 2023?

Is there a real threat, or is this just virtue signaling by one administration and pecker measuring by another while public lands lobbyists and activists draw checks from 501(c)(3) organizations and monetized social media accounts?

Do you honestly believe that somebody like Randy Newburg doesnt have the nations sportsman close to his heart.

Its real easy to sit back and call bullshit.

Its alot harder to stand up to the interests trying to dismantle the current conservation paradigm. They dont care about access, habitat quality/fragmentization, or herd health. They care about profit.

Im tired of reading your posts about non-profits abusing the system. Sure they make money but that is part of the deal. It is necessary because there are mining/energy interests, with much more power trying to impose their will.

And yes there is a Chilean mining consortium first in line to get a copper mine up and running. What do you know about copper mines? How do they typically affect watersheds down river?

The company’s called Antofagasta. Look em up. They are complete with a foreign billionaire at the helm. Probably has a orange man in his pocket

 

[Dos Perros]

Yes. Heavily so. Clean Water Act, there is a Reclamation Act of some sort, Haz Mat policies, Endangered Species Act, emissions, historic preservation etc. Dept of the Interior and the Dept of Energy handle quite a bit of that regulation.

Good to hear, thank you.

 

[IdahoBeav]

Do you honestly believe that somebody like Randy Newburg doesnt have the nations sportsman close to his heart.

Only as long as it puts money in his bank account. The guy has made a lot of money and been absolutely fine with creating a ton of point creep along the way. Public lands being "under attack" is good for his business. The more opportunity to get on podcasts and make Instagram reels, the better for him.

 

[Backyard]

Do you honestly believe that somebody like Randy Newburg doesnt have the nations sportsman close to his heart.

Its real easy to sit back and call bullshit.

Its alot harder to stand up to the interests trying to dismantle the current conservation paradigm. They dont care about access, habitat quality/fragmentization, or herd health. They care about profit.

Im tired of reading your posts about non-profits abusing the system. Sure they make money but that is part of the deal. It is necessary because there are mining/energy interests, with much more power trying to impose their will.

And yes there is a Chilean mining consortium first in line to get a copper mine up and running. What do you know about copper mines? How do they typically affect watersheds down river?

The company’s called Antofagasta. Look em up. They are complete with a foreign billionaire at the helm. Probably has a orange man in his pocket

The orange man and the Luksic family are close. They actually own the mansion that Ivanka and Jared lease in Washington.
This shows that nothing is off limits in the orange man’s playground.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[KurtR]

The permitting process is supposed to take years even decades it will go no where . This is just posturing at best

 

[Pony Soldier]

When it comes to mining -- the devil is in the details. This isn't the 1800s. Where (exactly)? What minerals? What mining methods? Are all critical elements. There are an endless number of rules and laws to be followed. Just because it is mining doesn't mean that pollution will come with it. Almost all of the mine pollution came from operations before we could even test for the problems. I would rather have a mine than a sub-division.

I have worked within the mining environment most of my life. From government, industry and the university. It's time to stop the panic and deal with reality.