Huber Engineered Woods would build what’s called “oriented strand board” at the facility, which is a type of engineered wood used as construction material for roofs, walls and subfloors.
Huber Engineered Woods would build what’s called “oriented strand board” at the facility, which is a type of engineered wood used as construction material for roofs, walls and subfloors. Credit: Huber Engineered Woods

Out of the Deep South, a lumber company, Huber Manufacturing, is proposing what may be the largest oriented strand board (plywood) plant in the country. The Frontier plant would be built in Cohasset, just east of Grand Rapids, and on Minnesota Power’s land, where the Boswell Energy Facility is located.

The era of coal is ending in a time of climate chaos and major innovations in renewables. Replacing the big polluter and employer, the Huber plant would go up less than a mile from the Leech Lake reservation. But no one in the Walz administration thought to call Leech Lake and ask what they thought. The Leech Lake Tribal government learned about the project from a press release.

That’s not the way it’s supposed to be in Minnesota. To be clear, Gov. Tim Walz signed the 2019 Executive Order l9-24 “affirming government to government relationship between Minnesota and Minnesota tribal nations, providing for consultation, coordination and cooperation.” The executive order is intended “to establish mutually respectful and beneficial relationships between the state and Minnesota tribal nations.” 

Well, throw that one out the window.  

What’s amazingly clear is that Walz did not conduct any consultation as required by his own executive order. Instead, the governor and the Legislature just started the cannonball rolling toward the forests of the north.

Huber Manufacturing hopes to build a 750,000-square foot facility, where 150 people could work and make industrial-sized construction panels. Sounds simple? Well, the Minnesota Legislature thought it sounded like a really good idea, so it gave $80 million in subsidies to this North Carolina-based company, told the City of Cohasset that it should be the responsible government unit, then gave the company an exemption from an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), saying that a simple Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) might be just fine. Minnesota’s hoping the deal would be sweet enough that Huber would pick Cohasset over competitors in other states.  Kind of sounds like Minnesota has become a very cheap date. And, for that much in state subsidies, it might be worth some vetting — like a proper EIS.

OSB = Healthy?

Oriented Strand Board, or OSB, is some important stuff to fast building. It’s sort of a sticky mess and has some toxic materials to hold the world together.  Basically, since Paul Bunyan logged our massive pine forests, we now just mush up little stuff and glue it together with petrochemicals. That’s the Minnesota way.

The first oriented strand board was made by Blandin in Grand Rapids. There was also an OSB plant in Deerwood, which made joists, operated initially by MacMillan Bloedel and then by Weyerhaeuser. Deerwood’s Trus Joist had a number of health-related concerns before the plant was closed, and the industry is generally pretty toxic to worker health. It turns out that chemicals like formaldehyde and others, combined with wood dust, aren’t good for you. OSB facilities closed during the financial collapse in 2008, and facing more changes and shrinking forests, the pulp and paper mills also experienced hard times. Tough sledding in the logging industry.  

What about the trees?

At the heart of this development, it’s about the trees and the forests. A forest is a living ecosystem, timber resources are inanimate materials. Those are profoundly two different world views which have been colliding in the forests of the north since before the l855 treaty. What’s clear is that Minnesota does not manage the forests sustainably.  Even the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) knows that. Twenty-eight DNR staff outlined their ecological concerns in a 2019 letter to Commissioner Sarah Strommen. According to an MPR report, “the  authors do not believe it is scientifically honest or transparent to say that the 10-year timber plan is ‘beneficial to wildlife.’” 

The fact is that Minnesota’s forests are managed for aspen and deer. That’s not a diverse forest, that’s a monocrop. Loss of old growth and clearcutting destroys habitat for larger animals and destroys ecosystems. The DNR wildlife scientists felt the proposed 8.75 percent increase in harvest from state-managed lands would cut out biodiversity and habitat. There’s just not enough forests left to support mega projects like this one.  

That 2019 information was before the Huber Plant proposal, which will be fed by these same forests. The Frontier OSB plant needs an estimated 400,000 cords of wood annually to sustain a 24-hour assembly.  Huber wants to get that within a l00-mile radius from the project. By comparison, the Minnesota DNR in 2019 offered 875,000 cords from all state land. That logging impact circle includes the entire Leech Lake reservation, the Chippewa National Forest and a good portion of the White Earth and Red Lake reservations.

There are already two separate lumber plants on either side of the Leech Lake reservation. Recently the Leech Lake Nation voiced concerns about the lack of information provided in the EAW, noting in their initial comments, “most of the wood for this project will necessarily be harvested from the Leech Lake reservation or the l855 treaty territory. The failure to analyze the woodshed based on feedstock quantities necessary sets the State upon a dangerous trajectory for forest health.” 

“We find our medicines in mature forests, not early in the succession,”  explained Ben Benoit with the Environmental Program for Leech Lake. “Protecting and restoring forest diversity is critical to preserving Anishinaabe lifeways in an ever-changing climate and world … tribal citizens rely on the forest as our teachings and culture is tied to natural cycles and diversity that is disrupted with timber industry focused management.”  In other words, you can’t make maple syrup in a clearcut.  

Then there’s the little guys, like the long-eared bat or Myotis septentrionalis.  They are endangered. There’s a long-eared bat nesting site right there by Cohasset, that is going to get creamed in construction. Bapakwaanaajiinh, the bat, is an epic character in Anishinaabe mythology, illustrating that mysterious and small creatures can change the world. This specific bat species also was impacted by the Line 3 project. That was one of the primary endangered species the pipeline rolled over.  There’s only so many times you can knock out an endangered species and expect it to live. 

The United Nations has reiterated that biodiversity matters to not only planetary health, but also human health. The reality is that mega projects are fragmenting forests and creating ecological havoc. Those same clearcuts make the forest damage more at risk in windstorms, which increase with climate change. It’s easy to see the wind shears along corridors like highways and pipelines.  Protecting the integrity of the forest protects us all.  Besides that, the Lorax lives in the forest.

 Paul Bunyan was already here. There were once 75 million acres of contiguous forest in the region; most of them have been cut to build railroads, the cities of St. Paul, Duluth and more. The northern forests created empires — from the Congdon to the Pillsbury, Weyerhaeuser and more — all those empires born from these forests. Those companies are the actual names of the fictional Paul Bunyan.  In the least, Bunyan needs to do something epic to reverse his legacy.

There is no sustainable harvest in the north woods,  only a lot of aspen monocultures being cultivated by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. But that’s not a forest and that’s what the DNR Wildlife concerns are about. The Leech Lake tribal government has been working for decades on forest restoration outlining “desired vegetative conditions” and facing all of these logging interests, as well as a Chippewa National Forest which was carved out of the reservation, all impacting Indigenous land knowledge and care.

The time of Paul Bunyan is over. 

Walz’s bad gambles — hemp’s saving grace?

“Very few opportunities come along where someone is looking to build a new plant,” Rep. Tom Bakk said, as he went to bat for $28.5 million in state subsidies for Huber. That may be because it’s a bad idea. But that didn’t stop them.

“You have a company coming into Minnesota looking at our environmental laws and telling everyone, telling Minnesota Power, telling the Legislature, we’ll come in as long as you get rid of this one law for us,” noted Evan Mulholland, senior staff attorney for the environmental policy group MCEA. “And that just doesn’t sit right with us.”

As the Glasgow Climate conference came to an end in November, there was a greater than ever call to keep forests intact and cut carbon emissions. The Walz administration talked about the new plans for cars, but neglected to mention the big tar sands pipeline, and the new plans to clearcut the north for an out of state corporation. This fall, Walz talked about the clean car initiative, his new council on climate change, and then proposed to give away the northern forests with $80 million in subsidies from the state.

This administration could do a lot better, in fact, they could change the future.

Winona LaDuke
[image_credit]Photo by Keri Pickett[/image_credit][image_caption]Winona LaDuke[/image_caption]
Our Anishinaabe prophecies speak of this time and the choice of paths. It’s time for a real green path in Minnesota, not a scorched path. It’s time to grow back full forests, a wild rice economy and restore the north, not tear it further apart. That’s long-term sustainability. The Walz administration could learn from the Leech Lake Environmental program, and other tribes like Red Lake, about their world-class work to restore ecosystems and create green economies.

It may also be time for hemp wood  —  that’s all sorts of wood made from compressed hemp, stuck together with, well, soybeans. Can’t eat it, but you can make a lot out of it, including joists and something like OSB, made with hemp and soybeans. Besides that, hemp sequesters carbon faster than a forest, and has great adaptability. It takes about four months for hemp stalks to reach maturity, while it takes trees at least 20 years. Let’s take a break from the southern charm of Huber and look across the forests. That’s where the wild things are and that’s where the bats live. And the Anishinaabe.

 This is the only place we have, Huber can go find another forest.   

Winona LaDuke is a Harvard-educated economist, environmental activist, author, hemp farmer, grandmother, and a two-time former Green Party vice presidential candidate with Ralph Nader. She is also the executive director of the nonprofit, Indigenous-led environmental justice organization, Honor the Earth. She is the author of seven books, including her latest book, “To Be a Water Protector: Rise of the Wiindigoo Slayers” (Fernwood Press/Columbia University), an expansive, provocative engagement with issues that have been central to her many years of activism, including seven years battling Line 3 — an Enbridge tar sands oil pipeline in northern Minnesota.

Join the Conversation

32 Comments

  1. Never forget that Winona LaDuke was Ralph Nader’s running mate in 2000, when Nader sought to take down the most environmentally-minded candidate the Democrats had ever nominated.

    1. I loved her acceptance speech at the convention where she told the left-wing radicals, in essence, that just because she was an Indian didn’t mean she was one of them. We are not a monolith.

    2. Oh yeah, that was the election when the Democratic nominee failed to win his home state and it’s 5 electoral votes.

      1. Tennessee actually had 11 electoral votes. But my point wasn’t about Gore, who may have run a poor campaign, but was an environmentalist.

        No, it was about LaDuke, who was the running mate of a union-busting millionaire candidate whose stated goal was being a spoiler to help elect an anti-environment Republican as president. The point is that when LaDuke talks about environmental advocacy, he reveals herself as a massive hypocrite.

  2. So, in a capitalist society, a company wants to build a plant that’s near a reservation and that’s somehow…wrong? There’s no reason to discuss this with a tribe if it’s not built on reservation land. Even LaDuke herself states it will provide 150 jobs to rural Minnesota. It will benefit both Minnesotans and the nearby Leech Lake tribe. Win-win.

    This will be a better contribution to the area than the 3(!) Leech Lake casinos that take advantage of those with gambling addictions and give nothing back to the state.

  3. “…Recently the Leech Lake Nation voiced concerns about the lack of information provided in the EAW, noting in their initial comments, “most of the wood for this project will necessarily be harvested from the Leech Lake reservation or the l855 treaty territory. The failure to analyze the woodshed based on feedstock quantities necessary sets the State upon a dangerous trajectory for forest health.”

    I confess I’m confused. I have zero expertise on the 1855 treaty, but doesn’t the Leech Lake tribe control/own the forest on its reservation? Whether the strandboard factory is a good idea or not in environmental terms, why would the wood necessary for its operation “necessarily” come from Leech Lake lands – or ANY tribal lands – if the affected reservation residents didn’t want to sell it to Huber Manufacturing? If selling the forest to Huber is a bad idea – and it might be – wouldn’t it be a bad idea belonging to the tribe? The Governor may simply be trying to bring jobs to an area that has relatively few of them outside of outdoor recreation (Whether those jobs are “sustainable” in an environmental sense is a whole separate issue).

  4. Not sure what part of Northern Minnesota you are talking about but there are thousands of acres with mature Red and White pine up here. As for Red/White pine not being sustainable, you couldn’t be more wrong. We logged a mature stand of pine, about 150 acres, it held no deer, grouse, rabbits or wildlife. We replanted with Red/White pine and 20 years later, the trees are now 20+ feet tall. My grandchildren will be able to log that same plot when they get older. Forest animals need new growth to survive. Mother Nature will always find a way to get new growth on the forest floor, it is called a forest fire.
    Potlatch, a particle board manufacturing company, did replant with a fast growing poplar tree up here on the Range. Those areas have only poplar trees growing and hopefully after next round of logging they will replant with a variety of trees. I will give the author one point on mature Maple trees, they are hard to find.
    Logging has always been sustainable, always will be. Drive from Chisholm to International Falls and you will see beautiful stands of mature pine. That area has been logged and has 100+ foot pine trees everywhere.

    1. Well that would depend Joe. That it held no grouse, deer, or squirrels would NOT be indicative of not holding ANY wildlife, just not those edge species, as it’s not their preferred habitat. OTHER species (mainly those we killed off the FIRST time logged off the area) would be right at home. You do realize “wildlife” means more that “those animals I can shoot and eat” yes?

      1. Matt, the animals I like to shoot and eat are the same animals that Fox, coyote, wolf and most predators like to eat also. When the trees gets mature, they shade the forest floor which stops growth of small plants, without those edible plants no small animals…. No small animals no other animals. So it really isn’t about what I like to shoot but rather mature stands of forest do not hold and feed wildlife. That has always been the case and is why Mother Nature refreshes the forest floor with fire. Sorry.

        1. Hmm, I guess elk, moose, caribou, warblers, owls, fisher, marten, bears, none of those exist? You might want to let folks out west know, I’m sure they’ll be disappointed to learn their multi-billion dollar hunting industry is kaput. It’s always more fun when you’re hilariously wrong, it’s fun to watch you twist and squirm to maintain that unearned superiority.

        2. Alert the media!!!

          Both Matt and Joe are simultaneously correct!

          The best conservation practices have a forest that includes mature stands of pine and fast growing new trees. Ain’t it great when we all agree!

          1. I might dispute that. It depends what and who it is one’s managing FOR. The BEST management practice, from the natural world’s point of view, is to let nature take it’s course and exclude we interloping humans from the equation. Things managed themselves quite nicely for the overwhelming majority of this planets existence, the relative eyeblink of time we’ve been around, not so much. Arguing for one artificially maintained result over another is kinda the point of the piece, I think it’s rather humorous for Joe to try to claim that his desire is in any way more “natural” than another. As to your concern over vast fields of hemp, I should think an annual might be able to produce a lot more product in a smaller area than the standard red pine farming taking place now, simply as a function of time. How many hemp fields might be harvested while waiting for a single stand of pine to mature? Aspen grows fast, but not that fast. Is it a panacea? Probably not, but I would say if the potential is there, it’s worth a look.

            1. “The BEST management practice, from the natural world’s point of view, is to let nature take it’s course and exclude we interloping humans from the equation.”

              How are humans intruders in the natural world? The Dakota and the Ojibwe had a significant impact upon the land as well.

              1. Their impact was negligible in relation to that which has occurred in thw post-Industrial age. That’s just reaching for what are less than scraps to try and formulate a “What-about” opinion. Humans ceased being a part of the “natural world” when our evolution permitted us to transform nature to our needs rather than compelling our species to evolve to adapt to nature. Would that our intelligence as it pertains to tool use remain more in line with our intelligence as it pertains deciding what to use those tools for.

                1. What-about? You mentioned humans. I cited humans. Also, you’re willfully attempting to diminish preindustrial Native Americans’ ability to change and alter the land. They weren’t people who merely wandered through an Edenic landscape who picked and gathered things.

                  “Humans ceased being a part of the “natural world” when our evolution permitted us to transform nature to our needs rather than compelling our species to evolve to adapt to nature.”

                  This is sophistry. Evolving into a species that can transform its environment to suit its needs is the very essence of adapting to nature (I can only imagine your ideas on ants and beavers). Nature has no rules. Nature has no interest in what some critter thinks its place in the natural world is. Your argument is based in undergraduate Romanticism at best and is completely lacking any sort of objectivity.

                  1. The only undergraduate reasoning I can find is your hamfisted attempt to deflect human caused environmental destruction with literally silly analogies. Please detail for me the time indigenous populations clear cut the ENTIRE Southern boreal forest, literally eliminating a biome from planet earth. Please let me know when a Beaver, or an Ant fabricated an entirely new compound, from mineral deposits thousands of feet below ground, whose use contributed to the artificially induced temperature increase of the entire planet. But no, we’re just fellow animals, bumbling along. How utterly daft.

                    1. Matt, first relax! All of that is true. I am not denying the destruction you speak of. That is not what I am arguing. I am not defending any of that. There is no reason to call me daft. Despite strip mining, clear cutting, and advances in chemistry, we are still part of nature no matter how much you believe it to be so.

  5. “It may also be time for hemp wood — that’s all sorts of wood made from compressed hemp, stuck together with, well, soybeans.”

    Welcome to buzz word nation. For some reason we can glue hemp fibers together with soybean residue but not aspen fibers? Legitimate issues that deserve consideration abound, being offended by 150 jobs doing things that we have done for 100 years and suggesting crazy alternatives is not helpful.

    Look at all the environmental progress we have made in the last few years: like replacing a leaky, 60 year old petroleum pipeline that crossed native lands without their prior permission with a safe new one that only crossed native lands with their permission. Small accomplishments we all can agree on, I guess…

      1. My belief is that early harvest of fast growing aspen is the best resource for fiber for paper making: a fast biomass generator. A while back it was also talked about as a much better solution for ethanol feedstock than corn.

        Not sure how it shakes out against hemp fiber.

        Does Ms LaDuke favor vast hemp fields in Northern Minnesota?

        There must be something about smoking a lot of pot that causes those folks to see derivations of cannabis as the being the solution to virtually every problem we encounter.

  6. It’s news to me that the Pillsbury family had much, if anything, to do with the logging of Minnesota forests. I think they did not.

  7. Thank you Ms. LaDuke, for your commitment to our land and waters and indigenous peoples of Minnesota.

    The Legislature and the Governor should not only talk to the Leech Lake Band, but find out the environmental history of this Huber company and make sure our resource4s are protected and utilized in a sustainable way.

    1. You have to remember that few people have sold out the environmental movement as much as LaDuke. This hypocrite has no credibility.

        1. Not exactly on point with Richard’s question, but it is important to note that Ms. LaDuke’s primary source of income is political activism and the folks near the Huber plant need forest products for their income unless she has 150 openings in her political shop.

          “Let them eat wood chips”

          1. folks near the Huber plant need forest products for their income

            Really? There’s literally NOTHING else they’re capable of? I always get a kick out of these sorts of defenses of the rural population, assuming they are so devoid of personal agency that they must be provided opportunity in exactly one type of industry, lest they sink into utter dereliction and despair. I’m pretty sure they aren’t androids, programmed only to fell trees.

        2. See my comments above. She was Nader’s running made when he tried to take down Al Gore and help elect Bush.

          1. Your comments above are not any different from ad hominum attacks on Al Gore as a hypocrite because he owns a big house, drives SUV’s and travels on jets. Nor is it any different from a lot of the “both siderism” comments from the right on MinnPost. Al Gore deserves a great deal of respect for his leadership on bringing climate change into public consciousness and discussion even if he doesn’t travel by sailboat like Greta Thuneberg. I think the same kind of respect is due Ms. La Duke. Her involvement with Ralph Nader in 2000 doesn’t make her criticism of Walz and the environmental problems of a Huber plant less valid.

            Anyway, I wouldn’t be surprised if Ms. LaDuke didn’t agree with you about her alliance with Nader in 2000. But she doesn’t strike me as a person who dwells on the past or is paralyzed by regret over past mistakes.

            Her points about learning from indigenous cultures about sustainability and respecting biodiversity also seem to be misunderstood or overlooked by ther other commenters. A forest ecosystem is more than the trees and the wildlife people like to hunt. It’s about the soil, the rocks, all of the plantlife, the insects (including mosquitos), microbes, bats and all other things that form it. I think Ms. LaDuke’s point is that we need to learn from the mistakes of the early settlers who depleted and destroyed these ecosystems leaving us poorer today in terms of sustainable practices and a healthy environment.

            1. I agree that Ms. LaDuke is unlikely to be paralyzed with regret for past mistakes. But, her past does not reflect well on her. She will never be forgiven by some people that would otherwise be open to her message. It’s not that the Leech Lake Tribe doesn’t have a legitimate gripe. They might (and, quite frankly, I think we as a nation and a state owe the Indigenous People quite a lot–more than just a few trees and a promise of clean water). Unfortunately, Winona LaDuke’s voice does not lend the credibility to their cause that will sway the right people because she’s viewed as an opportunist who blew her credibility years ago (and hemp–yeah, she’s an /industrial/ hemp grower, not just a “hemp farmer.” She’s definitely got her own motivations). The Tribe would be much better served by having someone less politically motivated speak up and telling LaDuke to butt out. I could be sympathetic to the Tribe’s view, but this piece actually made me think otherwise. Not necessarily because of LaDuke herself, but because it was so combative, overly wrought, and condescending that I had a viscerally negative reaction to the message. It laid out a fact pattern that she assumed was persuasive (it wasn’t), and then instead of trying to make it persuasive, she went on a tangent.

              And tried to sell us on HER money-maker, hemp. By the way, hemp needs to be grown somewhere–it’s notoriously sun-hungry, so UNDER mature trees isn’t gonna work. You can eat some parts of it, but not the plant as a whole, so arable land that already exists would have to be converted from food crops to hemp. Further, I suspect we’ll find that hemp isn’t all that environmentally friendly with relation to our insect populations. Although there are not a lot of articles on it, hemp and cannabis are nectar poor, which means that insects that survive on nectar as a food source can’t survive on hemp alone (a good article here: https://thehempmag.com/2019/12/hemp-and-the-honeybee/). In addition, hemp contains natural insecticides (and is NOT native to North America), so some insects that eat it will not do well. Of course, I imagine that one might be able to mitigate this by planting native plants interspersed between stands of hemp. But I don’t think that’s happening. All the pictures I’ve seen look pretty much like our other mono-cropping approaches.

  8. I like Ms LaDuke. I have had conversations with her twice at meetings we both attended. She comes across as intelligent and seeking the common good. I also think she makes some good points about the different options that are available for managing the state’s forests.

    In central Minnesota a few years ago, many acres of marginal farmland were planted to hybrid poplar to provide fast growing trees for the wood industry. This increased the wood supply but is a monoculture.

    Most foresters, wildlife managers, and ecologists recognize that managing woodlands for a variety of species and age classes is healthier for the environment in the long run (and produces the greatest variety of products). The wild card in all of this is the shift in what grows where due to climate change. I live on the North Shore and we also have a few acres of woodlands inland in the highlands. The changing climate means that white spruce and balsam fir are fading out due to disease and insect pests. Birch is also having problems in some areas. Oak trees can now grow in this area, and are being planted. I also planted several black walnut seedlings three years ago and they are doing well.

    My point is that Ms. Laduke is correct that we need to not make every issue a choice between jobs and the health of the environment that we all depend upon for life. We need to wake up and think about what we are doing. Especially if we are offering to bend rules and use taxpayer money. 80 million dollars for 150 jobs is about $533,000 per job created. Isn’t there some other option?

Leave a comment