Sen. Jim Carlson

Sen. Carlson expressed both excitement about the possibility of new jobs from mining and grave concerns about the industry’s track record elsewhere in the country, which includes toxic water pollution, abandoned mines, and using bankruptcy to get out of its financial and environmental obligations.

“It is disappointing that this legislation will not proceed at this time,” said Paul Danicic, executive director of the Friends of the Boundary Waters Wilderness. “This was a chance for our legislators to adopt some practical policies to ensure that, if this mining is going to be done in Minnesota, it is done as safely as possible and our clean water and our wallets are protected.”

Productive hearings

Despite the bill’s withdrawal, the hearings were a positive step toward addressing the risks of sulfide mining in Minnesota. After more than 10 hours of testimony about the issue during a series of three hearings this week, serious concerns about the possible negative impacts were finally heard by elected officials.

Legislators were particularly interested in the recent letter sent by the Environmental Protection Agency to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers about the PolyMet Draft Environmental Impact Statement. The EPA gave the PolyMet environmental review its lowest possible rating, which has been given out to only 0.3 percent of all EISes the agency has reviewed since 1987. The agency also said that the mine project cannot proceed as currently proposed.

Focus on EPA criticism

The EPA’s criticisms of the environmental review document and the mine proposal came up frequently during this week’s hearings. Department of Natural Resources staff that testified at the hearing stated they are currently working on setting up a meeting with the EPA to discuss the agency’s concerns, which include the lack of financial assurance discussion in the environmental impact statement, inadequate data, and unacceptable water pollution from the proposed mine.

Sen. Satveer Chaudhary, the chair of the Senate Environment and Natural Resources Committee, which heard the testimony, closed the hearing by stating his reservations about the PolyMet project, “My confidence has been shaken,” he said, adding that many of the concerns raised “are things that effect our children, our wildlife, even our jobs and they are not being looked at to the highest standard.”

The hearings will feature testimony from government agencies, mining industry proponents, scientists, citizen advocates, and experts in the field.

It is critically important that people who care about protecting our clean water from toxic pollution from proposed mines show up at the hearings to show support to the legislators who will make important decisions about the issue in the near future.

Details:

Monday, March 8

12:30 p.m. – Room 107, Minnesota State Capitol

• History of mining regulation and environmental review
• PolyMet presentation on NorthMet Project

6 p.m. – Room 15, Minnesota State Capitol

• PolyMet Draft EIS comments

Wednesday, March 10

6 p.m. – Room 107, Minnesota State Capitol

• Financial assurance (“damage deposit”) legislation

More details are coming soon, please sign up for our sulfide mining e-mail updates to receive an email later this week with additional information about attending these important hearings and being a visible, vocal supporter of Minnesota’s precious waters.

“The EPA’s rating of the draft EIS as unsatisfactory appears to have been based on the ‘proposed project’ without  consideration of alternatives or mitigations discussed in the document.”

This is false. In page two of the EPA’s letter, the agency states:

“This rating applies to the Proposed Action, the Mine Site Alternative and the Tailings Basin Alternative.”

In its comment letter to the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (the two lead government agencies on the environmental review), the EPA gave the DEIS the lowest rating possible.

In its comments, the EPA stated the all waste rock at the mine site would be acid generating, “and acidic water moving through the waste rock and tailings will mobilize metal and sulfates, leaching them into groundwater and surface water. The DEIS projects that water quality standards will be exceeded for sulfates and other contaminants…”

• Read the comments letter here for more details about the agencies concerns with the project.
• Minnesota Public Radio story about the criticisms.

The creation of Yellowstone as a park and the reservation from settlement of lands and water that now form the Boundary Waters began the American experiment in the preservation of wild places and wild animals. Both landscapes have been surrounded by controversy since their inception. Today Yellowstone and the BWCA face further challenges, some of which will alter their very natures. Many of these challenges will also affect generally the continued vitality of our national park and wilderness systems.

Brian O’Neill has been involved in the Boundary Waters and Yellowstone fights for more than 30 years. He has litigated over 50 cases on behalf of the environmental community ranging from the reintroduction of wolves into Yellowstone, to the constitutionality of the Boundary Waters Wilderness Act. He has handled cases dealing with wolves, bears, eagles, and fish. In 1994, Brian was the chief trial lawyer for fisherman and natives in the civil trial resulting from the Exxon Valdez disaster. He has argued in the U.S. Supreme Court.

Dates and locations:

University of Minnesota, St. Paul campus
203 Green Hall
Febuary 22 – 2:30p.m.

U of Minn. Law School
Walter Mondale Hall
Room 50
April 20 – 12:15 p.m.

Vermilion Community College Theater
Ely, MN
April 21 – 7 p.m.

You are cordially invited to the Friends of the Boundary Waters Wilderness 2010 Annual Event.

When:
Saturday, March 20, 2010
3–6 p.m.

Where:
The Metropolitan Ballroom & Clubroom
5418 Wayzata Boulevard
Golden Valley, MN 55416

Cost:
$35 per person or $105 for a table of 5 or $315 for a table of 10

Please R.S.V.P. by March 12, 2010 to 612-332-9630 or sacha@friends-bwca.org

Agenda
3:00 p.m.
Hors d’ourves

4:15 p.m.
State of the Wilderness Report:
Jim Sanders, Forest Supervisor, Superior National Forest

State of the Friends of the Boundary Waters Wilderness
Paul Danicic, Executive Director

5:00 p.m.
Annual Conservation Award winners presentation
Bob and Pat Tammen

5:15 p.m.
Keynote speaker, Doug Woods,
Author of Paddle Whispers and Old Turtle

As the result of numerous serious flaws in the environmental review process and the project proposal, the Friends recommends the “No Action” alternative until significant problems have been addressed.

“PolyMet says they want to do this the environmentally-responsible way,” said Paul Danicic, executive director of the Friends. “But the Draft EIS is full of unsupported assumptions, omissions of data, and over-reliance on modeling. The fact is that this mine as proposed will inevitably, unavoidably, pollute the waters of northeastern Minnesota.”

To help analyze the document, the Friends retained four noted scientists with decades of combined experience in fields such as mine engineering, geohydrology, wetlands, aquatic ecology, and other relevant areas. Significant flaws in the DEIS include, but are not limited to:

• Lack of financial assurance – Delaying such an important component until the permitting stage is a serious omission, making it impossible to fully assess the project’s potential environmental impacts, and putting Minnesota’s taxpayers and natural resources at risk. (Page 3)
• Inadequate data collection and disclosure – The DEIS is overly dependent on modeling when real-world data could have been easily obtained and would have provided far more useful and predictive information. (Page 9)
• Long-term water contamination from waste rock – The DEIS predicts that water leaching from waste rock piles will exceed Minnesota’s water quality standards for multiple metals and compounds for up to 2,000 years. (Page 16)
• Contaminated overflow from mine pit – Approximately 45 years after mine closure, the DEIS predicts that the mine’s West Pit will overflow and spill into the Partridge River. Water from the pit is expected to exceed water quality standards including likely mercury contamination, and pollution of the river will violate the Clean Water Act. (Page 16-17)
• Inaccurate wetland characterization – By mischaracterizing many wetlands as isolated from groundwater, rather than accurately as “fens” which have higher connectivity with groundwater, the DEIS fails to acknowledge the potential for these wetlands to spread contamination from the tailings basin and waste rock piles and to increase the production of methylmercury. (Pages 18-19)
• Overreliance on wetlands for water treatment – Despite acknowledging the wildly variable success of using wetlands for water treatment, the DEIS proposes to use wetlands as a primary tool for water treatment and relies heavily on the assumption that it will work. (Page 21)
• Unsafe tailings basins – The DEIS acknowledges that the tailings basins will have a “low margin of safety” because the underlying material—fine tailings from the LTV taconite mine—is unstable and poorly-constructed. Failure of the tailings basin would result in the release of a catastrophic amount of toxic mine waste. (Pages 25-26)
• Sulfate contamination and mercury methylation – High levels of sulfates discharged into surface and groundwater will increase the methylation of mercury, a biological process which can result in the bioaccumulation of mercury in fish and is toxic to wildlife and humans. Increased sulfate levels will also have negative impacts on wild rice beds in lakes and rivers downstream from the mine, seriously harming an important cultural resource of Ojibwa Band members in the region. (Pages 30-35)

“The flaws in this document are very real and very serious,” said Betsy Daub, policy director of the Friends. “Left unaddressed, these problems would mean enormous financial, environmental and health risks for the people of our state.”

In addition to describing the document’s flaws and the threats it poses to the region’s lakes, rivers, streams and groundwater, the Friends also provided substantive recommendations wherever possible, offering proactive solutions and measurable ways to improve the environmental review and the project. Recommendations include:

• Inclusion of financial assurance calculations in the EIS, accounting for costs of long-term water treatment. In his report, Dr. Chambers provided a rough calculation of $100 million for mine clean-up, closure and long-term water treatment.
• Basing the reclamation plan on a plan provided from another mine that includes details adequate to ensure full clean-up before the company is released from its permit conditions.
• Analysis of a centerline design for the tailings basin to increase stability.
• Additional data collection techniques to better understand groundwater flows, wetland types and behaviors, and other important information to inform predictions.

More than 750 individuals had submitted comments to the Minnesota DNR on the DEIS by Wednesday morning via the Friends’ sulfide mining website at www.preciouswaters.org. Commenters frequently echoed the above concerns, as well as expressing great concern over the possibility that this type of mining can even be done in the watery ecosystems of northeastern Minnesota without serious, long-term pollution.

“It is of critical importance that the environmental review process for PolyMet be done right,” said Danicic. “This is the first of several such mines that could open up in Minnesota, and precedents for what levels of risk are acceptable, and unacceptable, will be set during this process. PolyMet has a lot of work to do to convince the Minnesota public that they can mine this ore and protect our natural resources at the same time.”

Comments:

• Friends of the Boundary Waters Wilderness PolyMet NorthMet DEIS comments – PDF
• Press release (PDF)

###

The Friends of the Boundary Waters Wilderness works to protect the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness through advocacy and education. Founded in 1976 to help pass the legislation that permanently designated the Boundary Waters as federal Wilderness, the organization’s mission is to protect, preserve and restore the wilderness character of the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness and the Quetico-Superior ecosystem. Online at www.friends-bwca.org.

To make it as easy as possible, we’ve put together resource kits for either party. Each file includes:

1. A caucus guide which explains how caucuses work and how to introduce a resolution
2. A short sample speech you can give to introduce the resolution
3. The resolution itself, on each party’s standard form
4. A brief frequently asked questions document which addresses common questions

Here are the kits, in PDF form:

• Democrat (DFL)
• Republican

Good luck!

Below is a point-by-point response, and below that is an e-mail that Betsy has shared that she wrote back to an individual who contacted her for her side of the story after reading Kaiser’s article.

“Facts” vs. Truth

“Fact: PolyMet’s proposed mine — near Hoyt Lakes — is in a completely different watershed than the BWCA, and nowhere near “Hwy. 1, the scenic entryway into Ely and the wilderness beyond,” as Daub claims. Daub suggests that the BWCA could be affected, and this is completely false.”

Daub did NOT claim that the mine was in the BWCAW watershed. She clearly stated that, after PolyMet, all serious mining interest is located in the BWCAW watershed and thus the PolyMet environmental review process is important to watch and ensure it is done right.

“Fact: If any other mining company ever wanted to begin operation anywhere else up north, it would have to go through its own environmental review process. Daub suggests that permitting PolyMet to mine would automatically lead to mining next to the BWCA, which is false.”

“Suggest” is such a vague word. What Daub stated was that what happens with PolyMet will indeed be precedent-setting. See this statement from Duluth Metals, which last week announced a $227 million deal with a Chilean firm to advance its mine in the BWCAW watershed:

“During a conference call with investors, Duluth Metals leaders were quizzed over the company’s ability to pass Minnesota’s permitting maze. The answer was simple: follow PolyMet.

“Now in the final stages of the environmental impact statement (EIS) process, PolyMet has had the misfortune of being the first in line. After countless delays and $20 million spent on getting the EIS done, PolyMet has laid down a map for how to permit a copper-nickel mine in Minnesota.” Ely Echo, 1/16/2010

“Fact: PolyMet’s operation in Minnesota will be so environmentally and technologically cutting-edge that it will be a model for the world — far from the outdated gloom-and-doom image painted by Friends of the Boundary Waters. The state and federal governments’ environmental requirements for this mine will be unprecedented. In fact, this mine might even have a positive effect on the global environment. Indeed, the entire human race would benefit from PolyMet’s operation being established instead of a mine in some other, less environmentally conscientious country.”

Wow, the entire human race would benefit. And environmentalists are the ones that get accused of hyperbole. Two points:

1. Opening the PolyMet mine does not mean that another mine in another country will close. Mining companies will always seek to mine metals wherever they are found. They will do so as cheaply as possible to maximize their profits and will be subject to whatever laws apply where they wish to mine.
2. The PolyMet project is full of holes and serious flaws. Until mining boosters can point to specifics in the project’s Draft EIS that say otherwise, rhetoric about how cutting edge and environmentally safe it will be is nothing but words. The DEIS fails to discuss financial assurance–a glaring omission that puts our tax dollars at risk and which a conservative like Kaiser should be able to appreciate–, it predicts water pollution from waste rock piles for up to 2,000 years, it states that the tailings basin will have a “low margin of safety.” That is just the beginning.

“Fact: PolyMet will provide a domestic supply of metals that Americans use every day — nickel, copper, gold, platinum and palladium — in cell phones, computers, catalytic converters, electric cars, wind turbines and medical devices. The global environmental and domestic economic impact of producing these critical metals here, and having to import less from elsewhere, will be very positive.”

PolyMet’s metals will be sold on the global commodities market, to the highest bidder. The company has entered into a marketing agreement with Swiss firm Glencore AG and it is disingenuous to claim that this will reduce our import or transportation of metals.

“Fact: PolyMet’s operation will create 400 well-paying jobs directly, and there will be hundreds of spinoff jobs. This will add an estimated $240 million to the local economy and to the state’s tax base. The University of Minnesota Duluth has produced excellent analyses.”

The University of Minnesota-Duluth study was paid for by PolyMet, Mining Minnesota and other mining companies and it paints a predictably rosy picture for the project’s economic impacts. Not considered are the negative impacts of such a mine on the region, including the contamination of one Minnesota’s greatest resources: clean water.

“Fact: Our state’s leading policymakers, including U.S. Sens. Amy Klobuchar and Al Franken, U.S. Rep. James Oberstar and Gov. Tim Pawlenty support this new generation of mining in Minnesota.”

That is the last “fact” that Kaiser offers, and the only one that is unequivocal. Unfortunately, many of our state’s elected officials have indeed offered their support for PolyMet but one must wonder if they or even their staffs have actually read the Draft EIS or if they are voicing support for the potential jobs, and choosing to just ignore the serious negative impacts on public health, clean water, fish and wildlife habitat, and the region’s sustainable economy.

Civil Dialogue

An individual that read Kaiser’s piece contacted Betsy to ask her what she thought of Kaiser’s arguments. Her response is worth reading:

Thank you for contacting me and for your interest in this issue.  I do not agree with Mr. Kaiser’s characterization of my points or how he characterizes the mining issue in general.  I do agree with him on a few points – though (he might be surprised by that!): that we all use the metals that are sought and that this mine would extract; and that northern MN is in particular need of jobs.  But much of the rest of his article is filled with inaccuracies.  My article talked about safeguarding sustainable economies.  He talks of providing jobs – but he does not talk about jobs mining (and the scale of mining proposed) would jeopardize.  The MN Office of Tourism has found that tourism and recreation are a 1.6 billion dollar industry for northeastern MN.  The Superior National Forest brings in over $200 million to the region in recreation and tourism alone – and $30 million of that is from the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness.  This is not small potatoes.  Mining has played an important part of Minnesota’s economy – but it does no longer (about 1% of the state’s income) – and even in the counties where mining has dominated, it now is about 4 or 5% of the economic base.  I don’t say that to put down miners or the industry in terms of how important these jobs are to the communities that have mining.  But, some communities have found more sustainable ways to support themselves – and for many tourism and recreation play an important part of that.  Despite Mr. Kaiser’s points – a great many northern MN citizens are very, very concerned about what wide-spread mining operations may do to their way of life, their businesses, their communities.  This is not about Twin Cities folks demanding things of the north (although – I might point out that the areas in question are all public land – and belong to both the people up north and everyone else too!).

We all use the metals – yes.  I wish I had easy answers for solving our metal demands – but I will not pretend that I do.  But – just to correct the record – the metals that would be mined will be sold on the international market – mostly to feed China’s growth.  Not a domestic source of metals, as Mr. Kaiser notes.

Hope this helps clarify things some.  I do not believe it needs to be a jobs vs environment issue.  I very much think sustainable jobs should be protected and promoted – and that the environment benefits when we do.

All the best,
Betsy

Our annual event will feature a talk by the writer and illustrator Doug Woods, presentation of the Conservation Award to tireless advocates Bob and Pat Tammen, and “State of the Wilderness” and “State of the Friends” talks from Superior National Forest Supervisor Jim Sanders and Friends Executive Director Paul Danicic, respectively.

More details and R.S.V.P. information »

Sigurd Olson Lecture Series: A Political History of Two Landscapes

The 2010 Sigurd Olson Lecture Series will feature long-time wilderness advocate and attorney Brian O’Neill discussing Yellowstone National Park and The Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness and the history and evolution of wilderness law.

Dates and details »

Midwest Mountaineer Spring Adventure Expo – April 23-25

The Friends will have a booth at the Expo again this year to talk with visitors about the Boundary Waters and the work we do to protect it. We are also scheduling a talk about issues affecting the BWCAW as part of the Expo’s schedule of programs.

Visit the Expo website »

Spring Campsite and Portage Clearing Trip – April 30-May 2

Spend a couple days helping get the BWCAW ready for another season. Contact Kris Wegerson and John Ipsen at jkjl@clearwire.net if you are interested!

Gunflint Green-Up May 7-8

The Friends will travel north in May for the third year in a row to help with reforestation efforts in areas on the Gunflint Trail that were burned in the big wildfires of 2006 and 2007. This year’s efforts will focus on trimming vegetation around previously planted seedlings to help them grow. Visit www.gunflintgreenup.com for details and contact us at info@friends-bwca.org if you’re interested in participating.

Canoe the Mississippi River – May 22

Last September’s day trip down the Misssissippi between Minneapolis and St. Paul was such a hit that we’re doing it again! Travel down the beautiful Mississippi River gorge in 10-person voyageur canoes. Bring your kids and friends and enjoy some of the Twin Cities’ best paddling. Contact Sacha at sacha@friends-bwca.org to register.

Duluth expects development activities at Nokomis to proceed on an accelerated basis, and anticipates pre-feasibility and bankable feasibility studies to be completed within 36 months.

Although the mine is expected to be underground, as opposed to the PolyMet strip mine proposal, it also differs because it would be located much closer to and in the watershed of the  BWCAW where the South Kawishiwi flows into Birch Lake. The river ultimately flows out of Birch Lake, through the White Iron Chain of Lakes, and back into the BWCAW.

The arrival of a multinational mining corporation in northeastern Minnesota is being hailed as a victory for Duluth Metals, but environmental concerns should also deserve a fair hearing by the public, decision-makers and the media. Even mining industry spokesperson Frank Ongaro admitted in a Minnesota Public Radio story that Antofagasta represents an industry that has for a long time operated recklessly:

“There’s a perfect example of a company who’s currently mining copper the old way, strongly interested in investing in mining and processing copper the more, new, modern, environmentally responsible way,” Ongaro said.

While Ongaro claims that this is a sign Antofagasta wants to do things the right way for a change, there is no evidence of that except the sort of “trust us” arguments the industry has long used to silence opposition.

Make no mistake, interest in opening up sulfide mines in the BWCAW watershed is very intense and the PolyMet environmental review process which is currently underway will be extremely influential in determining standards and procedures for future projects, streamlining the permitting of subsequent mines. An editorial in the Ely Echo states:

During a conference call with investors, Duluth Metals leaders were quizzed over the company’s ability to pass Minnesota’s permitting maze. The answer was simple: follow PolyMet.

Now in the final stages of the environmental impact statement (EIS) process, PolyMet has had the misfortune of being the first in line. After countless delays and $20 million spent on getting the EIS done, PolyMet has laid down a map for how to permit a copper-nickel mine in Minnesota.

It is all the more important to speak up about PolyMet today–the public comment period on the project’s Draft Environmental Impact Statement closes on Feb. 3. Submit your comments using our handy online tool right now!