Scare tactics won't help

[Lee Borgersen]

 
 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
10/9/2010 10:04:00 PM   
Scare tactics won't help Friends

Ely Echo Editorial

Here we go. The publicity show from the anti-mining crowd cried wolf with a news release that there was "Acid mine drainage discovered two miles from Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness."

This is not a news release; it is an attempt to influence public opinion against mining.

The Friends call this find "toxic soup" on a website and then say, "The Spruce Road site drainage is not acidic but the presence of the metals indicates acidity which would have leached the metals out of the rock before reaching the point at which sampling was possible. The acidity is apparently being neutralized before reaching the discharge point, but is likely responsible for the high levels of metals."

So we have "acid mine drainage" and "toxic soup." Scare tactics? Yes. Are those terms correct? If put in proper context, no.

The area the Friends cite was excavated by International Nickel Company (INCO) in 1974. But the comparisons are being made directly to Twin Metals in 2010.

Are the Friends saying Twin Metals should be held to 1974 standards? Or are the facts and circumstances being twisted and misused?

We'd like to hope the Twin Metals proposed project as well as any other mining project be held to 2010 standards. That includes proper monitoring.

To say what was done in 1974 is exactly the same way things will be done in 2010 flies in the face of reality and does the Friends no favors.

There will be a need to have public and governmental agency review of any proposed mining projects when and if they occur. That should be done on a factual level, without using words and scare tactics designed to incite people.

We'd point out that mining has been going on in the Ely area since the 1880s. There were mining operations scattered across the area in varying depths and sizes.

The history of Ely can be traced back to its roots and to the depths of the Pioneer Mine. This area has known underground mining, which, by the way, is what Duluth Metals is proposing and not what was conducted at the International Nickel bulk sample site.

We know that mining methods and applicable laws have changed mightily in the last 130 years. There was good reason for that. Safety of the workers was number one but how the mining is conducted and how waste rock is managed are nearly unrecognizable from 1974.

The focus of groups like the Friends seems to only be on what "could" happen. We understand those concerns, and share the belief that water quality needs to be a foremost goal.

But we won't fall for attempts from the anti-mining crowd to scare the public.

We are going to follow the developments of any reports of possible contamination of water. But we will stick with the facts.

A story in the Duluth News-Tribune last week included an interview with Richard Clark with the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. He said his recent inspections found "little or no runoff moving into nearby streams or rivers" and that he's been there "several times in recent years and not seen any environmental damage."

Knowing that we have trained professionals like the MPCA allows us to live peacefully without hitting the panic button. And if there is an area that needs to be looked at, the first phone call should be to the responsible agency.

And if groups like the Friends think people in the Ely area are not concerned about water quality and what will be left when mining days are over, they are sadly mistaken.

Here in Ely, our lakes and rivers are the envy of a nation for quality. When a group out of Minneapolis (where the news release came from) continues to tell people here what's good for them, the first response is obvious. What are you doing to clean up your own backyard?

Our response is this: We know that any mining done today in this area will be done in a manner that far exceeds the standards and laws of 1974.

A comparison that puts 1974 and 2010 on equal footing is misleading. To be honest, if the Friends want to go back and live under the laws of 1974 and ignore laws passed since that time, does this mean they'd like to do away with PL 95-495, the "Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness Act of 1978?"

We didn't think so.