The Friends of the Cloquet Valley State Forest is dedicated to the protection and preservation of the natural and cultural resources of The Cloquet Valley State Forest and promote responsible enjoyment of this unique treasure.
"That land is a community is the basic concept of ecology, but that land is tobe loved and respected is an extension of ethics.”Aldo Leopold
We support those timber and mining industries in NE Minnesota who abide by the highest standards of sustainable development and we support our state and federal government in their efforts to preserve and protect the land, water and air of our wonderful state.
To be a Friend of the CVSF simply send an email to friends@friendscvsf.org requesting information about how to help the forest, and we'll respond with several ways you can help and put you on our mailing list.
St. Louis County Board has recently heard from many citizens regarding the proposed non ferrous mining in the region
You may view all the videos here : http://www.northernmnnews.com
Commissioners Discuss the proposed Resolution in Favor of Non Ferrous Mining :
The first half hour is below :
Second half of the morning session : public comment is taken on the issue of non ferrous mining in NE Mn
More to follow
How another county is dealing with the issue of Non Ferrous Mining :
Representative Cravaak has sought to make the situation far worse, teaming up with his allies in the Minnesota Legislature in Northeastern Minnesota he proposes to make the exchange below ALL LAND and not any portion dollars. This represents a major land grab in the Duluth Complex in the least sustainable management.
The School Trust Committee advises the Legislature with regard to the management of School Trust lands in Minnesota. One section, section 16 and 36, in each township in Minnesota were granted for the maintenance of public schools in the township or territory. The law has gone through many changes. See : Auditor's Report
Presently the lands are managed by the State of Minnesota's DNR. The Minnesota DNR manages lands in accordance with principles of long term sustained managament as well as maximizing the value of the natural resources. They take a long term approach.
An exploration of possible lands for exhange between the Forest Service and the School Trust has been requested by the School Trust Committee and that request has been fulfilled by a Sub Committee which includes the DNR, Forest Service and representatives of industry and environmental groups as well as School Trust Committee members..
The proposed lands for consideration are shown as they relate to biological diversity in the map below. If you click HERE you will see other maps, some of which require significant download time.
Recent elections resulted in changes in the committee's membership, as new members came on board, former members with historical knowledge of management of lands left. One issue the committee faces is preservation of institutional memory. Additionally, new members are facing a time when returns from timber are low, and the committee is considering both other uses of land and other ways to manage the trust itself. However the lands are used, it is hoped that long term sustainable management will be paramount in the minds of those making decisions. There are some video and audio records online of recent meetings of the Committee. Here . It is hoped by many citizens that the committee will establish a strong working relationship with the DNR and go on to benefit from the scientific and other resources of our state's primary land management department.
With regard to the Land Exchange proposed presently with the BWCA /Federal Government and the School Trust, we feel strongly that all the school trust lands within the BWCAW should simply be sold to the Federal government and the School Trust reimbursed for the lands, rather than the hybrid plan which has been suggested. We are concerned about many factors regarding the lands which are being considered for change in management under this exchange, in particular the removal of Weeks Act protection will result in elmination of many protections to the surface property that exist under that act. The existing management of these lands has resulted in healthy areas and that is a gift the children of Minnesota will tresure for generation after generation.
The Weeks Act " Signed into law by President William Howard Taft, the Weeks Act permitted the federal government to purchase private land in order to protect the headwaters of rivers and watersheds in the eastern United States and called for fire protection efforts through federal, state, and private cooperation. It has been one of the most successful pieces of conservation legislation in U.S. history. To date, nearly 20 million acres of forestland have been protected by the Weeks Act, land that provides habitat for hundreds of plants and animals, recreation space for millions of visitors, and economic opportunities for countless local communities. As one historian has noted, "No single law has been more important in the return of the forests to the eastern United States" than the Weeks Act"
Listen : Executive Committee Meeting 10 5 2011 an MP3 file Property rights of surface property owners are at issue. Do centuries old laws make sense today? Do we as a people choose to place the needs of multinational corporations over the people who pay taxes on the lands and homes they own?
FYI : Music plays for the first couple of minutes, the meeting lasts over 2 hours. Get a cup of coffee and settle in!
The Governor and Executive Committee hear the voices of residents of Northern Minnesota raise concerns about the value of their property in the face of proposed Copper Nickel Mining. Many land owners expressed concern that big corporations will benefit but the people who have lived and or owned property in the area for generations, paying taxes and building communities are being placed in a very bad position. While the economic spotlight has been on jobs, little light has been shed on the impact the proposed mining has on property owners. Whether from an economic perspective, a quality of life perspective or protection of the plants and water and animals around us, those living or owning surface property in Northeastern Minnesota have a great deal at risk in the face of Copper Nickel Mining.
The Governor created an opportunity for those supporting and opposing the plan to approve the leases to speak to the Council. Commissioner Landwher stated that he has notified all the land owners that were impacted in light of the decision to do so at the last Council meeting. This is not a requirement under law now but Landwher suggested he might seek this.
Secretary of State Mark Ritchie states he has gotten lots of emails about violations of law in the exploration going on. he also inquired as to the revenues from leases as they compare to the expenses of the leasing program. Presently the leases are much less costly than surface taxes, but legally mineral estate rights take precidence over surface rights. Richie compares this situation to the School Trust issue in which some legislators are seeking to wrest more revenue from the lands with less regard to long term management principles. Governor Dayton stressed that the lease costs have not been raised for a long time and raising those lease costs would probably be to the benefit of the people of the state. Governor Dayton also indicated that other considerations than the inflation rate were important to consider in setting lease rates - and that the price of minerals changed so the leases might need to vary with that price also.
Rebecca Otto, State Auditor and Mark Richie both indicated they had recived letters of concern regarding mining company violations. There seemed to be an acknowledged lack of expertise regarding the law and the many complex factors that were being addressed. Otto inquired as to who people should report violations to, Landwher responded that they should report observed violations to the DNR or to the sheriff. (Note - if you report something to a DNR representative you can request that you remain anonymous - and it is important to consider that option carefully.)
Frank Ongaro spoke at the beginning and end of the testimony from land owners, he as always wants to have the mines go ahead as fast as possible. Mr. Ongaro is a paid Lobbyist for the mining industry. Ongaro Lobbyist Data He asked the Governor to send a "positive message to investor" in mining companies. He implied that if we don't hurry up and make the mining companies happy they will go elsewhere. Governor Dayton assured him and the room that the minerals were safe where they were, were not going anywhere and that we have time to get this right.
Legislative changes in the notification requirements to surface owner notification and of lease charges are suggested by DNR Commissioner Landwher, at one point one of the group said that there should be notice given of mineral estate rights and status in the deed when property is sold. A realtor testified and said he'd love to sell some School Trust Land and if laughter were the measure, no one seemed aware that large amounts of school trust land being sold to the public in the coming years might also put economic pressure on private land owners. In a related matter, School Trust Lands that are within the borders of t he BWCAW are being considered for exchange in ownership for lands outside the BWCAW so that they can be more agressively monetized. Some legislators feel the DNR is too careful in their management and want to see more money come out of the lands, faster. One of the unfortunate effects of the transfer is those thousands of acres of School Trust Lands will lose the protection of being in the BWCAW and will be available for extractive industry and development.
Landowners expressed concern that the reason no one has taken the matter to court is that the existing law is onerous and few have the resources to stand against goliath multinational mining companies.
Rebecca Otto and others warned land owners that taking the matter to the legislature could result in the situation becoming worse - that there is no guarantee that the many new legislators will understand the complexity or have surface property / tax payer needs held as most important.
Lt Governor Prettner Solon stated that she was worried they could be sued for being frivolous, she saw their role as seeing that all the process had been followed appropriately. Governor Dayton made it clear that surface property owner concerns were not frivolous and he meant to listen and act on what he heard.
The Governor moved that the leases be delayed 6 months and encouraged strongly that people inform themselves and that they inform the people around them about surface and mineral estate laws. The Governor urged that people concerned about the issue take the issue to the legislature and seek change.
Only a few property owners from the southern part of the region spoke, including Wendy Robertson who indicated that her property is very near a mining exploration site and that she has observed violations including a stream that was crossed with heavy equipment. She reminded the group that the mining sites are remote and difficult to get to. Wendy reported outside the meeting that in one case simply getting near the site was several miles through wetlands yet the exploration noise would indeed be audible from her home audible from her home.
Landowners are faced with the reality of drilling that can go on 24/7, there is a great deal of difficulty even finding the status of the mineral estate. Mineral Estates can have multiple surface owners and Surface Property can have multiple mineral estate owners. The complexity was evident in the difficulty the DNR expressed at the beginning of the meeting in contacting all the property owners. For a property buyer or seller to know the details of the mineral estate on their property is terribly difficult in many instances and can require special legal work.
At present surface property owners cannot buy the mineral estate. A few properties remain "undevided" but even if ones' own property is not vulnerable to mining, the property just next door may be and the noise, pollution and resulting devaluation and reduced quality of life exist. Leased land, "shack owners" are vulnerable to the same situation and have fewer rights than surface property owners.
Questions emerged from the discussion
Are land owners aware of the surface / mineral estate issue?
How will mining impact existing landowners?
Will pollution in the form of water and air pollution impact only those near by and near waterways that flow from the mines or will there be noise and other damages that impact both those near and far.
Can a surface property owner really say no? The law states that the state can condemn the surface property if they don't reach an agreement with the mining company, would any lawyer recommend her client go to court and spend tens of thousands of dollars or more to fight what is ultimately very clear law in favor of the mining companies?
If we are to rely on mining companies being good citizens, nice guys and not taking surface property from unwilling residents, can we find basis to do so in their past actions in other places?
What information has Mark Ritchie obtained that has led him to believe that Polymet can be done safely and without harm to the environment? The only public data at this point - the Draft EIS has been examined by federal authorities and found to be absolutely abyssmal - getting the lowest rating possible from the reviewers. What does Mark Ritchie know that the public does not?
There are lots of questions, and few answers seemed to be complete or completely accurate today. As Bob Tammen pointed out, on past occasions various parties involved have given misinformation to the legislature, to people in town meetings and to individuals seeking answers. Bob brought one such clearly documented instance to the fore. We need accurate information provided in a timely manner, the public needs the opportunity to hear details about how their communities and the communities around them will be impacted by the proposed mining. We need open mike public hearings on the matter so that people can educate themselves and their neighbors. We need them in Duluth and we need them in Ely. The people who are going to be affected by this do not even know about it.
We don't need to trade our state's beautiful body for money. In hard times we take care of the people and things we love.
PREFACE
The State of Minnesota faces a unique challenge. A major domestic resource of copper, nickel, and cobalt exists in northeastern Minnesota within the Superior National Forest and adjacent to the Boundary Waters Canoe Area. The exploitation of this resource could bring large economic and employment benefits to the state, but it could also bring widespread environmental damage to an environmentally sensitive region of the country.
The future of a region’s economy and a very unique environment will be determined by numerous federal, state, local and private actions taken over the next several years. In the past, such actions were based on limited knowledge of their possible consequences. Minnesota is now in the unique position of having a comprehensive compilation of information on this resource issue before any commercial development has occurred.
The Minnesota Environmental Quality Board’s Regional Copper-Nickel Study is a comprehensive technical examination of the environmental, social and economic impacts associated with the potential development of copper-nickel sulfide mineral resources of the Duluth Complex in northeastern Minnesota. This executive summary of the 5 volume, 36 chapter report represents some of the major findings associated with exploiting this valuable mineral resource, the entire document should be examined. In addition to this report over 180 technical reports, extensive environmental monitoring data files, special sample collections and other information resources were compiled by the Study.
P 31
Historically, the exploitation of base metal sulfide resources (such as copper-nickel resources) throughout the world has been accompanied by the significant degradation of the quality of water resources and the destruction of aquatic and terrestrial biota in the vicinity of such developments. Acid mine drainage, toxic heavy metals contamination, erosion, sedimentation, increased salinity, and other water pollution problems associated with mining were common. The non-ferrous minerals smelting industry (principally copper, lead and zinc) has also been a major source of manmade air pollutants. While new technology has been developed to minimize these impacts, adverse impacts of past practices continue to cause close scrutiny of new mining proposals. click here for the whole study
Private Exploration Activities Conducted in Minnesota for Calendar Year 2010
12/30/2010 Richard Ruhanen, Glenn Melchert and Dennis Martin
OVERVIEW
Mineral exploration activity in Minnesota is at a historic high level, with thirteen companies exploring for metallic minerals in Minnesota. Twelve companies hold state metallic mineral exploration leases. Eleven companies are actively working in Minnesota, with ten working on state mineral leases-- which is an increase of three companies year -on-year. One company, Western Metals, is working exclusively on private leases. One additional company from Australia has been here evaluating leasing opportunities, but has no state mineral leases yet. DNR approved 18 exploration plans this year on state mineral leases. In addition, at least three companies conducted airborne geophysical surveys this year.
The activities included exploration or mineral development for at least four separate deposit types: gold, titanium, copper +nickel + precious metals, and iron [on the technicality of drilling outside KeeTac’s permit- to- mine]. The exploration activities span the range from grass roots exploration in the search for a new deposit in areas not searched before to delineation drilling to refine the mine planning and economic evaluation of a future mine proposal. We present the public information about drilling as a proxy measure for the level of exploration activity. A gross estimate of the private investment in metallic mineral exploration in Minnesota during 2010 is $20 million, based upon the 3 airborne geophysical surveys and 211 drill holes completed [with a general rule of thumb of an investment of $100,000 per drill hole]. Private investment in exploration clearly has recovered to the pre-recession level (see bar graph).
SUMMARY DESCRIPTION BY COMPANY
PolyMet was busy with an EIS for a copper+nickel+precious metals deposit at NorthMet. PolyMet drilled 66 holes in the proposed pit area, and continues to work on the acquisition of surface rights. Duluth Metals completed another NI 43-101 report that defines the mineral reserves at their Nokomis deposit. Antofagasta has bought into the Nokomis ownership and a new company called Twin Metals Minnesota has been created. Drilling continued within the Nokomis Deposit with 50 more holes to refine the reserve estimate. Duluth Metals continues to operate as a separate entity from Twin Metals MN, and has begun the search for new deposits away from the Nokomis deposit. Franconia completed another NI 43-101 report that expands the reserves at the Birch Lake Deposit. The combination of 11 more drill holes and higher metal prices led to an expansion of the deposit area, and the tonnage to be increased. Duluth Metals and Antofagasta have made a proposal to buy out Franconia’s Birch Lake, Maturi, and Spruce Road deposits for ~$77 million. Kennecott completed 21 more drill holes in the intrusives that host the Tamarack deposit. More geophysical surveys were done. Teck worked on a large assay program on existing Mesaba Deposit drill core from the DNR Core Library. See PDF
The above is a map of the Mineral Leases as of May 2011- you can download the PDF Here
Almanac North Non-Ferrous Mining
Update on Permitting of Sulfide Mining in NE Mn
Proposed NorthMet Mining Project and Land Exchange
The US Forest Service, US Army Corps of Engineers, and Minnesota Department of Natural Resources took comments on the NorthMet Mining Project, which will be considered in the development of the Supplemental Draft Environmental Impact Statement.
The SDEIS is the next to final stage of the Environmental Impact Statement prepared by the DNR and Army Corps of Engineers on the project being done. It should be released in the Fall of 2011.
From the EPA Received by US Corps of Engineers February 18
The EPA's report : "Based on our review of the DEIS, EPA has rated the DEIS as Environmentally Unsatisfactory - Inadequate, or EU-3. Environmentally Unsatisfactory (EU) indicates that our review has identified adverse environmental impacts that are of sufficient magnitude that the EPA believes the proposed action must not proceed as proposed. " Read More Here
EPA's Ken Westlake describes the EPA Role in Permitting of Mining
You don't buy an untested car, you avoid medications that have not been approved for use.... do you want to buy an unproven mining method?
Mining has long been a cyclical portion of the Minnesota economy. A new kind of mining is proposed - copper nickel hardrock mining is proposed in the Duluth Complex.
The EPA has identified hardrock mining as the top polluting industry in our nation. Sulfide based Copper Nickel Mining ( hardrock/ non ferrous / copper nickel / precious metals/ sulfide ) mining is proposed at the Polymet Northmet Mine - it produces toxic waste throught releasing sulfuric acid into the wetlands and waters. We're told that we need to risk this kind of mining to have "jobs". would we swallow that hook line and sinker if we were told the truth - we need these jobs for corporate profit? What we don't hear about is the cost to individuals and society posed by harm to babies in utero, and of the expense of a superfund site.
That's the old way of thinking. We can have strong employment and diverse careers available for our families and a a healthy environment - and we should demand both. The time has not come to mine for precious minerals in the Duluth complex, to do so without harming the environment will be too expensive even at the high mineral prices currently in the market - too expensive for the profits the corporations planning to mine want to derive. The companies and their cooperating legislative advocates want to lower the standards Minnesota maintains for its environment. They are working to do so in the Minnesota Legislature in 2011.
The organizations in Minnesota that have been responsible for developing jobs in diverse industries, such as the IRRRB, have failed. We need to hold them accountable.
Protections in Minnesota are described by industry as sufficient to protect the people, however we need to read the fine print on all this. There are existing mines from which toxic waste is leaching now and the companies seek to reduce the standards.
Our lakes rivers and streams are very high in mercury already, we're working to reduce that with many programs at great expense to our citizens already. The mercury is made more harmful by the specific kind of pollution leaching from these mines, it becomes bioavailable. It accumulates as small organisims take it in when larger organisms eat them up the food chain and in humans we know the body preferentially passes it on to babies in the womb, where mercury harms the developing nervous system.
Is fishing in Minnesota going to be popular if the fish is inedible? Do we care about the effect on our youngest citizens? Common sense tells that we need scientific verification that what companies propose to do will work - we expect this in a car we buy, a medication we take - we ask that the company prove it's ability to perform before we buy.
Under what circumstances would you allow toxins to be put in your water? How much would you need to be paid?
Only a few areas of the Cloquet Valley State Forest have been designated for traditional forest use and are shown above encircled in orange, as natural areas for hunting and fishing. Not all of the areas are public lands, so be sure to check to avoid trespass. Hunters leave their trucks and motorcycles and atvs outside these areas and hunt in the traditional way our parents and their parents did, on foot. These areas are quieter and wildlife experience more natural habitat conditions with less risk of fire and contamination with invasive species. Most fires in Minnesota are caused by humans.
There are over 1500 miles trails and access roads, forest roads, minimum maintenance roads, roadside ditch trails and township roads and hundreds of thousands of acres of public lands open for those needing motorized assistance to hunt and info about those those can be found on the DNR website
If you need information contact the numbers below
Hunters on foot or those who use mobility devices all terrain vehicles to get around may inquire about specific details of interest to them.
Rich Staffon 879-0880 223 Area Wildlife Manger
Martha Minchak, 218 723-4768 224 Asst Area Wildlife Manager
Chris Balzer 879-0880 233 Asst. Area Wildlife Manger
Contact Rich for information or Martha for information about hunting in general and Chris for information about specific trails and areas in the region north of Duluth.
Released
1/09 Unfortunately despite wide opposition, the St. Louis County Board pressed the DNR for the open unless closed option - the least restrictive system legal in Minnesota. Open unless closed creates serious environmental problems and human use conflicts. Except for a few areas the entire forest is "managed" or "open unless posed closed" creating a situation ripe for abuse by motorized recreation users intent on access by motorized vehicle to every nook and cranny of the entire forest. Only a few areas are either limited or closed and these amount to less than 5% of the total acres of the forest! Too bad St.Louis County refuses to follow Aitkin's lead and go with the limited option which can lead to well planned and maintained trail systems for all types of users including those who do and do not prefer motorized equipment to hunt and fish and enjoy the forest!
http://www.co.aitkin.mn.us/Departments/Land/recreation.html Aitkin County chose the "limited" classification and as such can make much more diverse choices.
MINING Non Ferrous Mining In NE Mn
A foregone conclusion ... Jobs Jobs Jobs?
A threat to our ecosystem and every lake river and stream in MN?
We are smack in this issue in the CVSF and we need to be better informed as a community. Inform yourself, inform your friends, do the analysis you need to do to be sure our state chooses wisely.
Our legislators Bakk and Dill and most of the "Range Coalition" are behind this mining project. You have to be the one to be informed and speak your mind.
You are a resident, a constituent and a person who drinks this water.
This bill was put forth by legislators last session, with the strong support of the Minnesota Environmental Community. MEP member Friends of the Cloquet Valley State Forest supported those legislators' efforts. The legislation was not permitted to even get a hearing - it was blocked by the Range Deligation. It is unknown if any protection will be sought by any legislators in the coming session.
The range delegation controls many committees in the legislature due to their seniority. This is simply how the legislature works - senior members get to control committees.
In a 2003 Study the correlation between water quality and lake property values was established in a study by two Bemidji State University professors. Prof. Patrick Welle and Prof. Charles Parson examined 1,205 properties sold between 1996 and 2001 on 37 lakes in six regions in northern Minnesota: Aitkin, Brainerd, Grand Rapids, Walker, Park Rapids and Bemidji. They found water clarity was the most significant factor in determining the purchase price in every region. Read the study : Welle Parson Study from BSU
Methyl Mercury impacts cognition and the impact of it's harm can can be calculated. Methyl Mercury is increased by Sulfuric Acid Drainage from Non - Ferrous Mining
"The push for a new type of mining in Minnesota - sulfide or non-ferrous mining - has become stronger and stronger recently. While new sulfide mines proposed in northeastern Minnesota may produce a few hundred jobs, they would also threaten our lakes, rivers, and streams with centuries of toxic pollution. Recent actions at the Capitol reduce the chance that this mining will be done right in our state.
Last winter, PolyMet Mining's draft environmental review predicted water contamination from the mine's waste could last for up to 2,000 years, putting at risk the St. Louis River and rivers that flow into it. Similar mine proposals also threaten such iconic Minnesota treasures as the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness and Lake Superior. And in an area only a couple of miles from the BWCAW where a powerful foreign mining company (Antofagasta PLC) is proposing to develop a new mine, the Friends of the Boundary Waters Wilderness recently documented toxic acid mine drainage still leaching from a relatively tiny mining exploration that occurred 37 years ago. Yet the mining industry claims that acid mine drainage can't happen in Minnesota.
This new type of mining, vastly different from Minnesota's traditional iron or taconite mining, releases toxic sulfuric acid and heavy metals that can contaminate everything from fish to wild rice to drinking water. Clean-up of sulfide mines might require treatment for hundreds of years or longer even after the mines close". Read More Here :http://www.twincities.com/opinion/ci_17745900?nclick_check=1
What is theThe EPA... and why should I care?
Americans care about the EPA because it is the organization that works with those who undertake large projects which impact the water and air, it is their role to see those projects get off the ground in such a way as to prevent events as are unfolding in Japan right now. Many folks think that laws that govern air and water should stop at the state line, but neither air nor water do so - they flow across our nation - and what happens in one state affects all others who breathe the air downwind or drink the water downstream. Just as a disaster in Japan is detectable on our west coast within weeks, so does pollution from a mine that flows downstream into an international body of water, Lake Superior. Laws must be upheld that protect us from shortsighted efforts by politicians and companies like Tokyo Electric Power Co which manages the Fukushima nuclear power plant. The EPA is governed by strict laws that set down clearly what its powers are, and the EPA relies on peer reviewed scientific information to make decisions. 1.09
Recently there was a meeting with the major stakeholders with regard to the Polymet Northmet project that was held by Congressman Chip Cravaak, there was a press conference after that meeting.
A recent article in the Mesabi Daily News ( EPA could Trump State Law ) provided a characterization of the EPA's participation in a meeting with Congressman Chip Cravaak. The MDN stated that State Senator Tom Bakk "said an EPA official at the meeting did not indicate a willingness to work with state legislators and officials on the issue." Since that perception does not jive with either the stated mission or the explained role of the EPA we sought more information on precisely what the EPA's stand had been at that meeting. It would appear from the EPA's report that the statement by State Senator Bakk did not accurately reflect what went on at the meeting.
The EPA did not participate in the press conference following that meeting but there is a report on that meeting which is available to the public. It is linked here:
REPORT MADE BY KEN WESTLAKE, Region 5 NEPA Enforcement Coordinator of the USEPA TO THE EPA REGARDING THE MEETING ON 3 14 11
all Americans are protected from significant risks to human health and the environment where they live, learn and work;
national efforts to reduce environmental risk are based on the best available scientific information;
federal laws protecting human health and the environment are enforced fairly and effectively;
environmental protection is an integral consideration in U.S. policies concerning natural resources, human health, economic growth, energy, transportation, agriculture, industry, and international trade, and these factors are similarly considered in establishing environmental policy;
all parts of society -- communities, individuals, businesses, and state, local and tribal governments -- have access to accurate information sufficient to effectively participate in managing human health and environmental risks;
environmental protection contributes to making our communities and ecosystems diverse, sustainable and economically productive; and
the United States plays a leadership role in working with other nations to protect the global environment.
Recent Audio and Video regarding Non Ferrous Mining in Minnesota
Alert : Lawsuit dropped due to weakening of Environmental Protection laws by Governor Dayton and the Minnesota Legislature
A Lawsuit has been dropped that was Filed to Block Minnesota Agency's $4 Million Loan to PolyMet Mining Company
DULUTH, Minn.— Five conservation groups filed a lawsuit against Minnesota’s Iron Range Resources Board, challenging a $4 million loan to a company that is pursuing a large open-pit sulfide mine but has yet to get environmental approvals. The loan to PolyMet Mining Company was approved at the Board’s Dec. 16 meeting, and would be used by PolyMet to purchase lands required for a proposed land exchange with the U.S. Forest Service. Click here for more from CBD : http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/programs/public_lands/mining/pdfs/Complaint-PolyMet-2011.pdf
Marc Fink, Center for Biological Diversity, (218) 525-3884
The suit was dropped after the legislature passed and the Governor signed into law provisions that exempt the IRRRB from following laws that all other state agencies must follow requiring them to hold back public financing until projects have passed the requirements demonstrating that they will be safe.
Information and comments will be incorporated into PolyMet's supplemental EIS expected Fall 2011
"This scoping package will be sent to interested parties for a 45-day comment period, anticipated to occur in October and November of 2010. The USACE and the SNF will use these scoping comments to identify significant issues that will guide the analysis of impacts associated with the land exchange. The scoping package will also be available for review, along with supplemental large scale maps, on the internet at the following Web site: www.fs.usda.gov/goto/superior/projects.
The Supplemental DEIS is expected in the summer of 2011, with the final environmental impact statement anticipated six-to-nine months later."
Responsible Official and Nature of Decision To Be Made
The Responsible Official for the proposed land exchange is the Forest Supervisor for the Superior National Forest. The Responsible Official will decide in a Record of Decision whether to proceed with the proposed land exchange.
This scoping information describes a proposed land exchange between the United States of America, acting through the USDA Forest Service - Superior National Forest and PolyMet Mining, Inc.
(PolyMet). PolyMet has proposed the NorthMet Mine and Ore Processing Facilities Project (“NorthMet Project”) which would result in construction and operation of an open pit copper/nickel/cobalt/precious metals mine, an ore processing plant, and tailings basin 6 miles south of Babbitt in St. Louis County, Minnesota. As proposed, the NorthMet project would involve approximately 2,840 acres currently in federal ownership which are managed by the US Forest Service as part of the Superior National Forest.
The mining and processing portion of the NorthMet Project is described in detail in the Draft EIS developed by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MnDNR) and US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) and released to the public in November 2009.
The proposed land exchange is considered a “connected action” to the NorthMet project; meaning that it is part of the overall project proposal and therefore will be included in the analysis of environmental impacts. The purpose and need for the land exchange is to eliminate conflicts between federal land management responsibilities of the Forest Service and the private mineral estate, in which PolyMet holds an interest. In addition to national forest lands encompassed in the proposed NorthMet mine site, the Forest Service proposes to include an additional 3,810 acres of federal property in the land exchange as a means to avoid intermingled and inefficient ownership patterns and eliminate conflicts if minerals development were to expand in the future. Many of these federal lands are adjacent to lands extensively impacted by past and ongoing mining activities.
[Federal Register: October 13, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 197)]
[Notices]
[Page 62756-62758]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr13oc10-24]
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Department of the Army; Corps of Engineers
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service
Superior National Forest, Minnesota
Intent to prepare a supplemental draft environmental impact statement for the construction and operation of an open pit copper/nickel/cobalt/precious metals mine, an ore processing plant, and
tailings basin proposed by PolyMet Mining, Inc., near Babbitt and Hoyt Lakes in St. Louis County, Minnesota. The supplement will add an analysis of a land exchange between the proponant and the US Forest Service, Superior National Forest.
AGENCIES: Department of the Army, US Army Corps of Engineers, Department of Defense; Forest Service, USDA.
ACTION: Notice of intent (NOI) to prepare a supplemental draft environmental impact statement (SDEIS). (The original NOI to prepare a draft EIS for the proposed Polymet Mining, Inc. Northmet project was published by the US Army Corps of Engineers in Volume 70, Number 126 of the Federal Register, pages 38,122-38,123, July 1, 2005.)
SUMMARY: The SDEIS will supplement and supersede the Draft EIS of October 27, 2009 (DEIS), which was produced jointly by the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) and the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MNDNR), released for public comment on November 6, 2009. The
SDEIS will respond to concerns about wetlands and water quality issuesassociated with the NorthMet mining and ore processing proposal, located in Northeast Minnesota, as identified by the US Environmental Protection Agency and other commentors. The SDEIS will also incorporate potential effects from a proposed land exchange between the USDA Superior National Forest (SNF) and PolyMet Mining, Inc. (PolyMet). The SNF will join the USACE and MNDNR as a third lead agency responsible for EIS preparation because the land where the mine is proposed is owned by the SNF.
Cooperating Agencies for preparation of the SDEIS include Minnesota Bands of Chippewa/Ojibwe (Bois Forte and Fond du Lac). Others who have requested to become cooperating agencies include the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) and the Grand Portage Band of Chippewa/Ojibwe. Federal laws and policies, which the joint lead agencies are required to consider, will be outlined in the EIS for both mine permiting and land exchange processes.
DATES: The SNF is currently developing scoping materials for the land exchange portion of this project. This scoping package will be sent to interested parties for a 45-day comment period, anticipated to occur in October and November of 2010. The USACE and the SNF will use these scoping comments to identify significant issues that will guide the analysis of impacts associated with the land exchange. The scoping package will also be available for review, along with supplemental large scale maps, on the internet at the following Web site: www.fs.usda.gov/goto/superior/projects.
The Supplemental DEIS is expected in the summer of 2011, with the final environmental impact statement anticipated six-to-nine months later.
ADDRESSES: Mining and Ore Processing Proposal: No additional scoping requested. Land Exchange: Send written comments regarding the land exchange to James W. Sanders, Forest Supervisor, 8901 Grand Avenue Place, Duluth, MN 55808. Written comments may also be submitted electronically to:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mining and Ore Processing Proposal:
Contact Mr. Jon K. Ahlness for issues associated with the mining proposal, Section 404 Wetlands issues, and Clean Water Act questions; by letter at U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 180 Fifth Street East, Suite 700, St. Paul, MN 55101-1678, by telephone at 651-290-5381, or by e-mail at jon.k.ahlness@usace.army.mil.
Land Exchange: Contact Mark Hummel, SNF Deputy Forest Supervisor, for additional information or questions about the proposed land exchange, by letter at 8901 Grand Avenue Place, Duluth, MN 55808, by e-mail at mhummel@fs.fed.us, or by phone at 218-626-4303.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Mining and Processing Proposal
Purpose and Need for Action
The purpose and need of the NorthMet mining and ore processing project is to produce base and precious metals, precipitates, and flotation concentrates from ore mined at the NorthMet deposit by uninterrupted operation of the former LTVSMC processing plant site. The processed resources would help meet domestic and global demand by sale of these products to domestic and world markets.
Proposed Action
PolyMet has applied to the St. Paul District of the USACE for a permit to discharge fill material into waters of the United States, including jurisdictional wetlands, to facilitate the construction and operation of an open pit copper/nickel/cobalt/precious metals mine in the low grade poly-metallic disseminated magmatic sulfide NorthMet deposit in northeastern Minnesota, approximately 6 miles south of the town of Babbitt.
Responsible Official and Nature of Decision To Be Made The responsible official for the USACE, the District Engineer for the St. Paul District, will decide in a Record of Decision, whether to issue a Clean Water Act, Section 404 permit for the discharge of fill materials into the waters of the United States, including jurisdictional wetlands.
No Additional Scoping for Mining and Processing Proposal
USACE and SNF are not requesting scoping comments on the NorthMet mining and ore processing project at this time. Comments have already been received in response to the original scoping notice of October 25, 2005, and in response to the Draft EIS of October 27, 2009. The proposed mining and ore processing action still falls within the scope of analysis identifed in the October 25, 2005, Final Scoping Decision Document, produced jointly with the MNDNR. Scoping will be conducted for the land exchange.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Land Exchange
Purpose and Need for Action
The purpose and need for the land exchange is to eliminate conflicts between the United States and the private mineral estate.
(The SNF has concluded that the proponent does not have the right to remove the surface of public lands by operating an open pit mine unless the lands in question were exchanged into private ownership. PolyMet maintains that specific language in the mineral reservation allows open pit mining.)
Another purpose and need for the land exchange is to consolidate land ownership so as to improve management effectiveness, improve public access to federal lands and reduce boundary lines.
The proposal meets three Forest Service Strategic Plan Goals: (1) Provide and sustain benefits to the American people (desired outcome is forests with sufficient long-term multiple socioeconomic benefits to meet the needs of society); (2) conserve open space; and (3) sustain and enhance outdoor recreation opportunities.
Of the approximately 6,650 acres of land proposed for exchange to private ownership, the NorthMet mine site would encompass approximately 2,840 acres. The remaining federal property proposed for inclusion in the land exchange, approximately 3,810 acres, would improve intermingled and inefficient ownership patterns and eliminate conflicts if minerals development were to expand in the future. Many of these federal lands are adjacent to lands extensively impacted by past and ongoing mining activities.
The nonfederal lands offered for consideration by PolyMet are located throughout the SNF and compliment existing federal ownership by eliminating or reducing private inholdings. The non-federal tracts consist of forest and wetland habitat as well as some lake frontage, potentially enhancing public recreation opportunities.
Proposed Action
The proposed action is a land exchange between the United States of America, acting through the Forest Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture SNF and PolyMet. The land exchange would transfer approximately 6,650 acres of federal land from public to private ownership, and approximately 6,722 acres of land from private to public ownership. An in-depth analysis of this proposed exchange will be disclosed in the supplemental draft and final environmental impact statements for the NorthMet project. The NorthMet project is described in the October 27, 2009 Draft EIS developed by MNDNR and USACE.
This exchange is proposed under the authority of the Weeks Act of March 1, 1911 as amended; General Exchange Act of March 20, 1922; Federal Land Exchange Facilitation Act of 1988; and the Federal Land, Policy and Management Act of October 21, 1976.
The federal land consists of a single contiguous tract of mostly forested land, approximately 6,650 acres in size, located in the west/central part of the SNF on the Laurentian Ranger District in the historic Iron Range of Northeastern Minnesota. The tract lies immediately south of the SNF proclamation boundary and is bounded on the south by the former LTV Steel Mining Company (LTVSMC) railroad grade and the Dunka Road. The Dunka Road is a private road with sections owned and leased by Cliffs Erie, PolyMet and Minnesota Power.
Access is primarily via the Dunka Road and the LTVSMC railroad grade.Nonfederal properties to the north and west of the federal land have been extensively impacted over the years by open-pit mining, mine waste rock stockpiles, tailings basins, mine processing facilities, railroad grades, and general mining activities. The federal land encompasses many acres of the 100-mile Swamp, a large black spruce, tamarack and cedar wetland. Yelp Creek and the Partridge River flow through the tract. Mud Lake is also located on the federal land.
The nonfederal lands include five different tracts of land that total approximately 6,722 acres and include predominately forest and wetland habitat.
The largest nonfederal tract, identified as Tract 1, consists of approximately 4,650 acres (Hay Lake tract), located on the southeastern portion of the Laurentian Ranger District, west of and adjoining County Road 715 and north of the town of Biwabik in St. Louis County. The Hay Lake tract includes Hay Lake, identified as a Wild Rice Water by the MnDNR, and Little Rice Lake, which is used by trumpeter swans, a State Threatened species. Approximately eight miles of the upper Pike River flow through Tract 1.
Tract 2 (``Lake County lands'') consists of approximately 320 acres of land formerly owned by Lake County. The tract includes various 40-acre parcels on the Laurentian Ranger District southeast of Seven Beaver Lake that are mostly surrounded by National Forest lands and offer significant wetland habitat.
Tract 3 (``Wolf Lands'') consists of approximately 1,560 acres of land on the Laurentian and Tofte Ranger Districts, west and southwest of Isabella, MN. The tract includes four separate parcels that block in or compliment National Forest ownership and, like Tract 2, offer significant wetland habitat.
Tract 4 (``Hunting Club'' lands) consists of approximately 160 acres on the LaCroix Ranger District, 5 miles southwest of Crane Lake.
Two small unnamed lakes are partially included in the tract, as well as a large percentage of wetland habitats. Tract 4 is surrounded by National Forest, St. Louis County lands, and private ownership.
Tract 5 (``McFarland Lake'') consists of approximately 32 acres on the Gunflint Ranger District in northeastern Cook County. The tract blocks in National Forest ownership and includes lake-front property on McFarland Lake, an entry point to the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness. Access to the property is available by water from a landing off County Road 16 (Arrowhead Trail) approximately ten miles north of Hovland, MN. All tracts were assembled by PolyMet for the purpose of this proposed exchange.
Responsible Official and Nature of Decision to be Made
The Responsible Official for the proposed land exchange is the Forest Supervisor for the SNF. The Responsible Official will decide in a Record of Decision whether the proposed land exchange would result in an overall benefit to the public good.
Scoping Process
Public scoping for the proposed SNF and PolyMet land exchange will include notices in the newspaper of record, mailing of the scoping package (detailed information of the purpose and need for the project, the proposed action, description of the project area, maps, and proposed federal and non-federal lands involved in the proposed exchange) to interested and affected publics and posting of the project on the agency's project planning web pages and notice in the Forest Service quarterly Schedule of Proposed Actions.
Comment Requested
This notice of intent initiates the scoping process which guides the development and incorporation of the proposed land exchange into the Northmet Project environmental impact statement. Comments received, including the names and addresses of those who comment, will be considered part of the public record on this proposal and will be available for public inspection.
(Authority: 40 CFR 1501.7 and 1508.22; Forest Service Handbook
1909.15, Section 21).
Dated: September 29, 2010.
Tamara E. Cameron,
Chief, Regulatory Branch, St. Paul District, Corps of Engineers.
Non Ferrous Mining : See Save Our Sky Blue Waters the SOS Blue Waters group is a leader in our region with regard to non ferrous mining in Northeastern Minnesota.
Photos of Spotted Knapweed along Pequaywan Lake Road
Spotted Knapweed is an invasive species which is spreading rapidly across St. Louis County and the rest of Minnesota. It has been put on the state's primary invasive species list If you see Spotted Knapweed you should report it and you should avoid driving or walking through it. Spotted Knapweed exudes an allelopathic chemical thus inhibiting growth of other plants. It can also cause brain and liver problems for horses and other livestock.
To report Spotted Knapweed download this form and send it in. :
