|
|
Copper mining proposed for the south kawishiwi river along the spruce road and near gabbro lake will, if allowed, have profound effects on the wilderness experience. Even now the core drilling/sampling going on in the exploration stages are having a negative impact - the outward bound school on the south kawishiwi is already experiencing noise from drilling rigs, heavy equipment and lots of traffic from trucks speeding up and down the spruce road.
I would like to hear:
- what people think about this
- what sort of information, if any, avid paddlers have about the issue
- what folks plan to do about
I grew up in a taconite mining town near ely with a large open pit mine approximately 10 miles away and can tell you that the noise from heavy equipment, blasting and other mining activities could be heard distinctly 24 hours a day, 365 days a year. With the way sound carries over the lakes in the bwcaw you can expect to hear this intrusive noise from the copper mining far into the wilderness. This of course is just the impact from noise. The hard rock (copper) mining industry is the largest polluter in the United States and this proposed mining will be the first time it will be in a water intensive environment. The toxins will go directly into the kawishiwi watershed which feeds into the rainy river watershed. All of these lakes will be affected and they are low buffer lakes - meaning they cannot handle much if any changes in ph before ALL fish species die off and they have no neutralizing effects on the sulfides either. Sulfuric acids, arsenic and other heavy metals will be deposited into this watershed. The proposals by the mining companies themselves state that the effects of the toxicity will be around and must be contained for a minimum of 500 years! If you take an objective look at the record of hard rock mining facilities, even under current regulations using state of the art facilities and technology, the number of toxic incidents is overwhelming. In fact, the industry itself cannot point to one facility on the face of the earth that is operating without incident. Hard rock mining is responsible for over 150 superfund sites in the u.s. and in most cases the company declared bankruptcy and left the locals to deal with it.
I think this issue affects anyone who is interested in continuing to paddle the bwcaw. This is a forum for lovers of the wilderness. What do you think?
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Thanks: 95 times
Was thanked: 159 time(s) in 140 post(s)
|
First of all, since this can be a controversial topic, I want to point out our forum guidelines - "Healthy debate and the exchange of ideas are encouraged; threats, abuse, hate-speech, personal attacks, and harassment will not be tolerated." If you respond to this topic, please keep this in mind. You can express your views, but make sure that you are not being degrading or condescending. As long as these guidelines are followed, this topic will be allowed. If not, I will have to delete it. Please be civil when discussing it. Now for my views on the topic... I recognize that many people's livelihoods depend on the mining industry. I, too, grew up on the Iron Range. However, neither my family's nor my livelihood have ever depended on it. Because of this, I often forget that this is a personal issue for many people. I need to remind myself of this when talking about it. That being said, I do not and cannot support this type of mining. The Iron Range has depended on iron for many years. We are used to it. We know how it works. We know the potential risks and rewards. Sulfide mining, though, is very different. It is not an iron mine. It is much riskier to the environment. It is much more toxic than the mining we are used to. In this delicate region, we cannot afford to have even one "mistake." It would permanently damage the area. Even if everything goes according to plan, we (meaning us and the next 20 generations) would be cleaning it up for 500 years. 20 generations! All of this so one generation can reap the benefits. The risks far, far outweigh the rewards. I might be more willing to consider an iron mine. (Well, maybe not so close to the BWCA, but iron would be better than copper-sulfide.) Sulfide mining is a very different, and much more dangerous, beast.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks Ben, I'm sure the users of your site will appreciate a civil discussion of this topic. It seems to me the most appropriate place to talk about this is here as we are people with a love for the wilderness and have a vested interest. For my part I intend for all comments to be polite and in keeping with the house rules.
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Thanks: 6 times
Was thanked: 28 time(s) in 22 post(s)
|
A few questions:
If there were no further mining, how badly would the local residents have it? How badly would the company owners and shareholders have it? How bad would the local flora and fauna have it?
Ask the same questions about conditions during mining operations.
Then ask the same questions about after mining operations are over.
I think you'll find that:
- Those few locals who get jobs will have them only a limited period of time.
- Company owners and shareholders will benefit financially.
- Flora and fauna get screwed.
Make your own choice.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The fact is there are mining operations in northeastern Minnesota at the present time but it is taconite mining, not copper. The taconite operations are in various locations - not close to ely or the bwcaw at this time.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Users browsing this topic |
|
Guest
|
Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.
