Why is land proposed to be sold from the Superior National Forest to Polymet?
The land presently proposed for sale to Polymet from the Superior National Forest prohibits the type of mining Polymet plans to do. The only way the project can go forth is if the land is stripped of the protections it has had as a National Forest. See Deed
Northern Minnesota law makers have taken a strong advocacy position for mining and this mine. They view the 400 jobs touted as being well worth the risks posed. They say they want to minimize environmental harm but at the same time Jim Oberstar is trying to push the sale of this land through congress, most likely in a large and unrelated bill. This is probably going to happen very fast. Amy Klobuchar is considering offering a similar bill in the Senate. Such laws will result in the sale being performed quite swiftly.
If you wish to write to your legislators on this issue, I urge you to take the time to become fully informed on the issue, and to write in your own words what you feel is important to you.
Our concerns are : why are the protections for the land are so significantly different from the Federal to the State and County lands.
What experience with non-ferrous mining do the Minnesota DNR and EPA have? Are our experts expert?
Where has non-ferrous mining been successfully accomplished in the past without leaching and contamination of surrounding areas?
Invasive Species
The timber industry is critical to our region and it is important to steward that industry long into the future. Invasive species are indeed a threat to the timber industry and that industry has taken great strides in protecting the resources it depends upon for livlihoods many generations into the future. Both the Forest Stewardship Council, that certifies the DNR maintained forests of our region and the SFI group that certifies St.Louis County lands (comparison here) are keenly aware of the issue.
It’s good for citizens to be informed about invasives species that are in our region are. Some of the ones currently of concern are Buckthorn, Spotted Knapweed, Leafy Spurge, Canada Thistle and Tansy. The DNR has great resources on this. One very good link is http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/invasives/index.html.
Emerald Ash Borer is another threat to our forest, this is an insect transported in firewood. A local retailer accidentally sold some that was from an infested area. Watch the video from the DNR to learn about how you can help control Emerald Ash Borer and why you should.
Spotted Knapweed is an invasive that looks pretty in bloom but not so when it's past that point. It crowds out other plants, actually exuding a chemical that makes it hard for other plants to grow, and is getting a real foothold in the area. Hay is a big agricultural product for our region and if this gets in a hay field or pasture it can make cattle sick, ruin the value of the hay and spoil the area for wild habitat. It can also make it difficult for new red pine to thrive.
So if you find the pretty green and yellow Leafy Spurge in your yard - pull it up. If you find Spotted Knapweed put some gloves on before you pull it, it can irritate skin. And best to start early, these weeds spread and can be a real pain to get rid of. Spotted Knapweed usually gets it's start in an area when gravel is trucked in or an area is left bare and open, you might think it looks like aster or chicory.
Our forest is lovely to play in, of benefit to the whole world as a resource. We can help keep it that way.
The Friends of the Cloquet Valley State Forest
Support the development of the
Vermillion State Park
The proposed park on Lake Vermillion reflects the kind of use for public lands that we support. It recognizes the value of the natural resources, strives to protect those natural resources and seeks to find ways to provide positive ways for the people of our region to enjoy the natural world.
Not everyone chooses or is able to enjoy the kind of experience the magnificent crown jewel of our county and state that the Boundary Waters provides. The park will provide cabins, camping and water access to untold numbers of Minnesotans who do not choose to maintain individual cabins. This planned and shared use of the land is much more sustainable.
We all know that a joyful camping trip or cabin venture can result in lots of spending and the nearby towns have an opportunity in this park's establishment that is clearly once in a blue moon. The thought of being able to be a kid biking from the park to town to get ice cream, or a teen going in to see a movie with the kid from the cabin down the path makes me want to shed 30 years real fast. For us grown ups what could be more fun than reserving a cabin or two for a week - and not having to maintain it the rest of the year! Whooopie!
We hope that St. Louis County realizes the significant benefits to having such an exciting and enjoyable park developed here. Pitching in with ways to make this park a "go" would go a long way towards St. Louis County being the kind of partner our state needs in this project. We need the county to recognize the terrific benefits of the park and find ways to make it as beneficial to the region as possible - with the same kind of sensitivity to natural resources and careful planning this park represents. Perhaps rather than seeking a specific land exchange to "make the county whole" the county and state could find ways to make the township's transition eased. Perhaps the county could get busy planning how to make "bug juice" for this great camp - those aren't lemons those are .
Lets pitch in St. Louis County! Lets make this happen!
Should the Minnesota Legislature OK money for a state park on Lake Vermilion? Yes
Duluth News Tribune
Published Thursday, May 15, 2008
Minnesota is a vast garden of natural resources. Our parks, trails, prairies, forests, lakes, rivers and streams define who we are as Minnesotans as much as they define our great state.
For more than 50 years, the Parks & Trails Council of Minnesota has worked with elected officials to create and protect some of our most treasured outdoor places. We have witnessed defining moments in our state’s history where our leaders triumphed over difficult challenges to protect the special places we Minnesotans love. We are on the brink of one of those defining moments right now. In a matter of days, the fate of the proposed Lake Vermilion State Park will be decided.
Located in Northeastern Minnesota on the eastern shores of Lake Vermilion, five miles of picture-postcard lakeshore and 3,000 pristine acres will either become the state’s newest and perhaps most spectacular park — or it will become a private, 150-unit luxury home development called Three Bays on Vermilion. It will be a place enjoyed by a few — or it will become a great Minnesota outdoor destination that will be able to be enjoyed by generations.
The park, combined with the adjacent Soudan Underground Mine State Park, would provide more than 10 miles of recreation shoreline, 40,000 acres of water, 365 islands and 3,700 acres of land for the public to enjoy on one of the state’s most breathtaking lakes.
But time is running out on the window of opportunity to save this state treasure. The current landowner, U.S. Steel Corp., agreed to put its development plans on hold for one year while lawmakers decide whether they are willing to make the necessary investment to protect this once-in-a-lifetime piece of land. That agreement ends Aug. 1, so the governor and legislators must come up with money for the park before the legislative session ends Monday.
Minnesotans have a long and rich history of doing the right thing for our great outdoors. Each one of our state’s 72 parks and recreation areas is a living legacy connecting past generations to current generations to future generations. With more than 8 million people using Minnesota’s state parks each year, and with the state’s population expected to grow by 1.2 million in the next 25 years, creating this park now is a smart investment in our future.
The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources’ park concept plan calls for a next-generation park that would provide a wide range of recreational opportunities for park visitors and would include facilities and programs designed to appeal to children and teenagers in an environment designed to reduce negative impacts on the natural, resource-rich land and lake.
For every person who has ever dreamed of having a place on Lake Vermilion, this is their best chance to do just that while also enjoying the renowned Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness experience without all of the extreme adventure challenges. But for that experience to happen, Gov. Tim Pawlenty and the Minnesota Legislature need to step up for all Minnesotans and make it happen.
Tim Farrellof St. Paul is president of the Parks & Trails Council of Minnesota.
The MN DNR has serious problems, leadership at the highest levels are biasing choices made all along the command lines of the organization.
In a letter dated January 26, 2008 Minnesota Senator Mary Olson, peaking to the issue of platform docks stated:
After my first meeting with the Commissioner, it was evident to me the permit was a foregone conclusion. The DNR's own web sit acknowledged that fact; the only question was how large these new platforms would be. Rep. HOwes told me, quite confidently last summer, that the outcome with regard to the permit would be exactly as it has turned out. (He was the one who apparently worked with the DNR to add a last minute amendment last session, requiring the 4 public meetings that were to be used to justify platforms. When the response was largely anti-platform, he invited half a dozen Republican legislators from outside our area to Pequot Lakes. I heard that even at this meeting, the public response was overwhelmingly anti-platform, although Rep. Howes disagrees. My belief is that Rep. Howes miscalculates this issue; I think most people off the lake do not want huge platforms dotting our public lakes every 50 to 100 feet, nor do most lakeshore owners (regardless of political persuasion) especially when they understand the potential for harm to the health of the lake.
I truly believe there was an attempt to stack the meetings and task force, to the extent possible, in order to support a predetermined agenda, not the other way around. (Although even then, as I said most of the pubic comment was NOT in favor of the platforms.) It sounds as though the same disregard occurred with regard to your task force recommendations. Also, we all know that once something is authorized on a lake for five years, there will be an expectation of "grandfathering in" any platforms in place. We will not go backward without a much tougher fight, and those who suggest otherwise are, frankly, so disingenuous they insult our intelligence.
Perhaps now you see why I was advised that the only way to address this is legislatively. You also are not being given the straight story if you think it is a "legislative or economic" reality that there is no longer a will to protect our natural resources. You are correct, however, that a few wealthy, loud and short sighted individuals are controlling DNR policy, with the blessing of the Commissioner and, apparently, the Governor. I firmy believe these policies (and the way they are manipulated into being in contrast to the very mission of the DNR) are not only NOT supportable from a natural resources standpoint, but also are against the wishes of the majority of the public in our area. While I respect your right to have faith in the Commissioner's intentions, my experiences are leading me to believe that it is not he who is attempting to stand up to other interests to the extent he can, but rather it is he who seems to be attempting to thwart the wishes of the majority by manipulating the process to enact policies that threaten our natural resources. He is very quickly taking huge steps away from the direction we've gone for years with shoreland regulation that will quickly change the appearance of Minnesota lakes as we've known them. (Wasn't he also the legislator who authored the legislation that gave us mudder trucks in state forests? I"ve heard that, but I'm not sure whether that's accurate.) Anyway, to the extent I can, I intend to bring my opinion regarding the way the DNR is addressing these issues to the attention of the public.
While I understand you had confidence in the DNR's ability to address these issues through rule making, under its present administration, the manner in which this process was handled has confirmed to me that this confidence is not warranted. I do ot mean this statement to take anything away from the great people in the field who care about our resources and do their best to accomplish their jobs, in spite of the politics of management decisions. Nevertheless, the political views of the commissioner and few at the top of an agency have the capacity to do much damage (think of, for example, the Depts. of Health, Transportation and others). Our legislature provide the opportunity to attempt to balance agency decision making, especially when it seems the agency's leadership is making political decisions that undermine the mission of the agency.
In addition to possible legislative action, I'm also hoping others who care will speak up and answer the "loud opinions" of those interests you mention until perhaps enough attention will be brought to bear that destructive policies will embarass those who are quietly supporting them. I think that is beginning to happen with respect to the attempt to circumvent legal protection of the Mississippi Headwaters State Forest, a National treasure that a few in our local area and certain DNR managers, following the lead of the DNR Commissioner, are willing to sacrifice.
If your feelings are now different than when we last spoke about introducing legislation, I'd be appreciative of your input and assistance with appropriate language.
Best regards,
Mary
Photos of Spotted Knapweed along Pequaywan Lake Road
VIDEO OF BACKCOUNTRY HUNTING IN IDAHO
Please enjoy viewing this well organized and
informative video (ORV Fly over Video - Protecting Backcountry Hunting in Southern Idaho
The Friends of CVSF asks that you take the time to study the issues
and participate in decision making
We support the Timber Industry,
and the efforts towards sustainability by that industry
We strongly recommend Sustainable Trails that have community support in their specific locations, with regard to Off Road Vehicles in the forest, including all trucks, atvs and motorcycles, we support environmental review of any trail that permits Off Road Vehicles.
Vermillion Park : discussion
The following organizations also support a limited classification.
