USFS land swap w/ PolyMet mine

[Lee Borgersen]

 Forest Service OKs land swap for proposed PolyMet mine

1/9/16

  ......
The Superior National Forest has approved a land exchange with PolyMet Mining, clearing the way for the development of the state's first copper, nickel and precious metals mine — provided the company receives other pending state and federal approvals it needs to begin construction.

According to the record of decision, the Forest Service will convey 6,650 acres of federal land to PolyMet that the company needs to build the mine. The company controls the mineral rights under that land, but did not own the surface property.

In exchange, the Forest Service will acquire 6,690 acres of non-federal lands scattered throughout the region.

  ...
PolyMet CEO Jon Cherry called it a big day for the Toronto-based company, comparable to its acquisition of the ore processing plant it plans to use near Hoyt Lakes and the issuance last year of the final Environmental Impact Statement that cleared the way for the company to seek permits.

"We've been working on this literally for almost 10 years," he said.

The land exchange settles a major difference of opinion between PolyMet and the Forest Service.

The Forest Service believed an open pit mine was not permissible on its land. But PolyMet argued its subsurface mineral rights gave it the ability to mine.

Superior National Forest Supervisor Connie Cummins said the disagreement would likely have gone to court.

"When we weighed it all we felt it was in the best interest to go ahead and exchange the land and not be put in the situation where we may end up with a surface mine on public land," she said.

Cummins said she weighed a complex mix of environmental and social factors in making the decision, including the potential economic benefits of a mine, and the government's trust responsibility to Indian tribes.

She said the lands the agency will acquire in the swap feature many acres of wetlands, including one area that will become a research natural area.

But there has been intense opposition to the exchange from Indian tribes and environmental groups. The Forest Service received over 22,000 objections to its draft decision to approve the exchange.

"The decision to transfer thousands of acres of Superior National Forest land to PolyMet right now is a bad deal," said Aaron Klemz, spokesman for Friends of the Boundary Waters Wilderness. "It's premature, and it's not in the public's interest."

Klemz argued that until PolyMet demonstrates it can meet federal and state law by receiving the permits it needs to operate, the land shouldn't be exchanged. And the pollution risks that PolyMet poses are the same, regardless of whether the mine is located on national forest land or private land, said Kevin Lee, staff attorney with the Minnesota Center for Environmental Advocacy.

"All those risks are still there, all those risks for clean water, the necessity for perpetual water treatment, and the risks that some of those costs are going to be shouldered by taxpayers," he said.

PolyMet argues that the project's lengthy environmental review already demonstrates it can meet air and water quality standards. That debate will continue in the mine's permitting process, with ample opportunity for public input, said company Vice President Brad Moore.

"In reality, that is not related to the actual function of the land exchange itself," he said.

PolyMet will need more than 20 federal, state and local permits before it can begin construction, including the major Permit to Mine from the state Department of Natural Resources. The company expects regulators to begin issuing draft permits around the middle of this year.

"But this shows in a large way for the PolyMet project that the state of Minnesota, with consent from the federal agencies, wants to attract investment to our state, not chase it away," said Frank Ongaro with the industry group Mining Minnesota.

The decision from the U.S. Forest Service opens the door for potential lawsuits.

Environmental groups said they're still reviewing the decision.

"We're certainly keeping all our options open, including legal options," said Klemz with the Friends of the Boundary Waters Wilderness, "as we look at this decision and the impact it would have on the Superior National Forest and downstream communities."



In this photo taken Feb. 10, 2016, the closed LTV Steel taconite plant is abandoned near Hoyt Lakes, Minn. The prospect remains of using the site as part of Minnesota's first copper-nickel mine owned by PolyMet.
 

[glenn57]

  good deal fer us hard working union guys!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Lee Borgersen]

good deal fer us hard working union guys!!!!!!!!!!!!! what da!

Congrats to your union brudders Let's hope The Donald can put da rest a da puzzle pieces ta-geder

[glenn57]

Yep, lotz of work for our trade when that gets going!

[Lee Borgersen]

                                   Update

  Forest Service files two-year timeout on mining

By John Myers 1/13/17 at 10:14 a.m.

  ......
The U.S. Forest Service on Friday made formal its proposal to call a two-year timeout on new mining around the edges of the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness.

The Forest Service plan, announced last month at the same time the federal government denied critical mineral leases to the Twin Metals copper project near Ely, will prevent any new mining projects or exploration on 234,328 acres in the Superior National Forest.

The proposal was published in the Federal Register.

The Forest Service says the land and water immediately around the BWCAW may be too fragile to withstand potential contamination from copper-nickel mining.

Friday’s action triggers a 90-day public comment period on agency’s plan to withdraw the land from the federal minerals leasing program.

Public comments made during the period may help sway the secretary of the interior, who oversees federal mining rules, on whether the mining prohibition should be extended for 20 years.

A public meeting to accept comments on the plan will be held March 16 at the Duluth Entertainment Convention Center.

Copper mining opponents and supporters on Friday urged their followers to get involved.

"Americans value the Wilderness for recreation, fishing, and hunting. It is a major economic driver for northeastern Minnesota," said Becky Rom, national chair of the Campaign to Save the Boundary Waters, in a statement. "Sulfide-ore copper mining near the Boundary Waters is a grave threat. For over a century, citizens from all walks of life have repeatedly worked together to address threats and challenges in an effort to gain permanent protection for the Boundary Waters. Thanks to today’s announcement, we have an opportunity to determine the fate of the Boundary Waters by ensuring that decisions are based on science, that the focus is on the Boundary Waters, and that Americans have a voice in the decision. We encourage everyone to participate in the environmental review process."

But copper industry officials said the agency move was unfounded.

“Twin Metals is strongly opposed to the federal government’s proposal to withdraw more than 230,000 acres of federal land and minerals in Northeast Minnesota from future leasing, exploration and development,” the company said in a statement. “The withdrawal of federal minerals from future development, and the related impacts of negating future development of state and private minerals, will have a devastating impact on the region’s economy, eliminating the promise of thousands of good-paying jobs and billions of dollars in local investment.”

U.S. Rep. Rick Nolan, D-Crosby, who represents the region, called the Forest Service proposal “misguided.”

“Make no mistake, this is an anti-mining tactic and waste of taxpayer dollars,” Nolan said in a statement Friday. “Without being able to assess an actual project, the Forest Service’s plan is harmful to the environmental review process and should be rejected by new U.S. Department of Agriculture leadership.”

Nolan said it will be “virtually impossible” for the government to measure the impact of any commercial activity, including mining, without knowing the full scope of technology or pollution abatement features that the mines might use to prevent damage.

The congressman also said he will work to reverse the agency decision.

“I will continue working with my colleagues in the new Congress and with the new Administration to ensure that we allow all mining initiatives to proceed through the proper rigorous and thorough process — using science, facts and technology to guide our decisions, while maintaining the BWCA’s water quality and the protection of its fish and wildlife,” Nolan said.

In addition to the public meeting, comments can be sent to: Connie Cummins, Forest Supervisor, Superior National Forest, 8901 Grand Avenue Place, Duluth, MN 55808-1122 or emailed to comments-eastern-superior@fs.fed.us or faxed to (218) 626-4398.

For more information, go to www.fs.usda.gov/projects/superior/landmanagement/projects and click on “developing proposal.”

[Lee Borgersen]

                  Rebuttal!

  .......
We strongly opposed to the federal government’s proposal to withdraw more than 230,000 acres of federal land and minerals in Northeast Minnesota from future leasing, exploration and development.

  .....
The addition of 68,000 acres to the Boundary Waters with the passage of 1978 BWCA Wilderness Act had an adverse affect on the region’s economy by banning logging in this area. These acres had previously been known as the portal zone or buffer to the Boundary Waters which allowed logging.

  .............
Withdrawal of nearly a quarter million acres from the Superior National Forest of future mining will have a devastating impact on the region’s economy, eliminating the promise of thousands of good-paying jobs and billions of dollars in local investment.

This action will not only affect copper/nickel mining, but taconite mining as well.

Such a withdrawal will cause the loss of billions of dollars in potential revenues to the Minnesota Permanent School Trust Fund, which supports K-12 education throughout the state.

This withdrawal would provide no additional environmental protections in the region. Waters of the region are already protected by strict state and federal environmental standards.

Mining is already prohibited within the Boundary Waters Canoe Area and Voyageurs National Park.　

Mining is restricted in the BWCA and in the 222,000-acre Mining Protection Area along the Echo Trail, Fernberg Trail and the Gunflint Trail.

Acreage to the southeast border of the Boundary Waters is a Mineral Management Area, which includes the Duluth Complex, rich in mineral deposits. This area allows mining.

Copper, nickel and other precious metals are needed to be mined here in the United States to protect our national security.

The U.S. economy and its national security are at risk because the domestic Strategic Materials industry is shrinking.

95 percent of HYPERLINK "http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2011/1042/"the mineralsHYPERLINK "http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2011/1042/" HYPERLINK "http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2011/1042/"needed by the Pentagon for our national defense HYPERLINK "http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2011/1042/"isHYPERLINK "http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2011/1042/" controlled by China.

China, Russia and other places around the world that mine these minerals do not have the pollution regulations to protect the environment that we have here in Minnesota.

Northeastern Minnesota has mined sulfate hard-rock ores for over 100 years and managed to protect our environment and watersheds.

New mining technology, environmental safeguards, as well as money put up front by mining companies to address any problems or closure of the mine, are in place.

In a recent poll:

More than 60 percent support the Twin Metals underground copper-nickel project.

60 percent oppose actions by the federal government to prohibit all future mining in the region's Superior National Forest.

66 percent oppose any actions by the Obama Administration to permanently withdraw federal lands and minerals in northeastern Minnesota from future development.

More than 80 percent of those surveyed support the process of allowing copper-nickel projects to be developed and submitted for 'rigorous state and federal environmental review.'

[Lee Borgersen]

                                             
                                                   

Copper mine supporters strike out at Rapala after executive's column!

  Today at 12:28 a.m.
 

Some supporters of copper mining in Northeastern Minnesota are back-lashing out against an opinion column published in the St. Cloud Times newspaper  by an official of the Rapala fishing lure company.

  ......
Gregg Wollner, executive vice president of the Minnetonka-based division of the Finnish parent company, wrote the article published on Jan. 7 that called for the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness to be protected against potential pollution from copper-nickel mines.

Wollner's column praised the December U.S. Forest Service decision not to renew mineral exploration leases to Twin Metals, the company that wants to build a massive underground mine southeast of Ely on the edge of the BWCAW.


  ....
The decision also included a two-year and possible 20-year moratorium on new mining on 234,000 acres around the BWCAW, with the Forest Service saying the BWCAW watershed may be too fragile to withstand possible pollution from adjacent mining.

Wollner wrote that the Forest Service action was "good news for hunters, anglers, those that love the outdoors and the many businesses like ours that depend on a thriving wilderness."

"Companies like Rapala rely on clean water and healthy fisheries to support world-class fishing opportunities" like the BWCAW, Wollner added.

But pro-mining forces struck quickly on social media.

"Mr. Wollner's opinion piece in the St. Cloud Times condemning mining in northern Minnesota is an activist tirade that threatens the livelihoods of those who live and work here. Does Mr. Wollner live in a home, use transportation, use a cell phone? Mining made these conveniences possible. Does he live what he preaches? 12,000 northern Minnesota miners and mining supporters say, 'Rapala is wrong!,' " Facebook user Cindy Omerza Stene posted on Rapala's Facebook page. "Wollner condemns Minnesota Mining. Rapala doesn't support miners; 12,000 MN miners/fishermen won't support you!"


"Still haven't heard an apology from #Rapala for an employee's views on mining in Northern Minnesota. If no apologies are given, no #Rapala," posted Roger Skraba, former Ely mayor and a fishing guide who has been prosecuted in both the U.S. and Canada for wilderness law violations.

The messages to Rapala appeared to be organized by the group We Support Minnesota Mining which claims to have 12,000 members in the state. It's Facebook page has 2,744 likes.


Rapala has since removed the negative posts from its Facebook page, but several angry posts are still found on the #Fight4MiningMN page.

"My days of buying Rapala, StrikeMaster, Marcum and any other product from this company are over with," wrote Greg Mosher of Ely on the St. Cloud Times website comments page. The companies he listed are now owned by Rapala. Mosher said Iron Rangers have been taking care of the region's environment for decades, and he called on all "true Iron Rangers to never again purchase ANY product from this company."

Neither a Rapala spokeswoman nor Wollner immediately responded to a News Tribune request Friday to comment on the fray.

It's not clear how many mining supporters might take Rapalas out of their tackle box, or if any Iron Range sporting goods stores will take the world's most popular lure off their shelves.

It's also not clear if any Iron Range backlash against Rapala might have any financial impact on the giant company. Rapala in Minnesota is the U.S. division of what is the world's largest manufacturer of fishing lures and other fishing related products. It was founded in Finland in the 1930s by Lauri Rapala and made famous in the 1960s when Duluth's Ron Weber introduced the family's balsa-wood lure to the U.S. market, causing an explosion of sales. Rapala now sells over 20 million lures each year in 140 different countries.

The company has 100 employees in Minnesota and has revenues of about $15 million annually. Rapala USA is a division of Helsinki-based RapalaVMC.

It's not the first time that copper mining supporters have tried to battle back against business that take a stand to oppose copper mining that might damage water quality.

Some Iron Range bars and liquor stores last year pulled Duluth-brewed Bent Paddle beer off their shelves after the company's leaders went public as part of the Downstream Coalition of Duluth-area businesses opposing the PolyMet copper mine proposed near Hoyt Lakes. Companies in the Downstream Coalition say the PolyMet project threatens the St. Louis River and Lake Superior water quality which they say is the backbone of Duluth's now-thriving economy.

Bent Paddle officials have said their sales continue to be strong.

Neither Rapala nor the Downstream Coalition have expressed any views opposing traditional iron ore mining in Minnesota.

[Lee Borgersen]

  Obama wants to take everyone down wit da ship.

                                                       
                                                       
                                  What Next Mr. Legacy


  Feds launch study of proposed 20-year mining ban near Boundary Waters.

 Duluth · Jan 15, 2017


  .....
The U.S. Forest Service has officially begun a process that could lead to a 20-year ban on new copper-nickel mines in the watershed of the Boundary Waters Canoe Area.

The move would be a major victory for environmental groups that have fought to keep new mines away from the crown jewel of Minnesota wilderness, but a blow to communities in northeast Minnesota hungry for the hundreds of new jobs mining could bring.

The action by the Forest Service opens up a 90-day comment period on the proposed "withdrawal of federal minerals" that would ban new mineral development over about 230,000 acres in the Rainy River watershed, which flows into the Boundary Waters, Voyageurs National Park and Quetico Provincial Park.

The Forest Service will then complete an environmental impact statement of the proposed mineral withdrawal, a process that's expected to last two years. No new mining activity in the region will be allowed while the study is underway. {After two yrs. they will need a three years extension}.

The Forest Service first called for the ban last month at the same time it decided against renewing the expired mineral leases of Twin Metals, a company that has been exploring near Ely to build a potential new underground copper-nickel mine.

Feds halt Twin Metals plan for Minn. copper mine near Boundary Waters

In proposing the moratorium, the Forest Service wrote that future potential mines in the Boundary Waters watershed "could lead to irreversible impacts upon natural resources," and also expressed concern over "the perpetual treatment of water discharge" that "would likely be required" at potential future mines.

"Sulfide-ore copper mining near the Boundary Waters is a grave threat," said Becky Rom, national chair of Campaign to Save the Boundary Waters, which has pushed for the federal mining ban near the wilderness area.

The scoping period will identify what issues the Forest Service should examine in its preparation of an environmental impact statement, Rom said.

The environmental review will then guide the decision by the next Interior Secretary on whether to approve the U.S. Forest Service's application for a 20-year withdrawal.

In a statement, Twin Metals Minnesota said the government's proposed mining moratorium in the BWCA watershed "will have a devastating impact on the region's economy, eliminating the promise of thousands of good-paying jobs and billions of dollars in local investment."

The company also argues the proposal runs counter to the Superior National Forest's long-running policy to allow mine development outside the Boundary Waters Canoe Area.

"Make no mistake, this is an anti-mining tactic and waste of taxpayer dollars," said DFL Rep. Rick Nolan, who represents the 8th District. "Without being able to assess an actual project, the Forest Service's plan is harmful to the environmental review process and should be rejected by new U.S. Department of Agriculture leadership."

The U.S. Forest Service will hold a public meeting in Duluth on March 16 to gather public comments on the proposed mineral withdrawal.

In a statement the agency also said it will hold additional meetings in "various regions of the state" during the 90-day period.