In August of 2019, Walker Orenstein of MinnPost conducted a thorough interview on sulfide mining in northern Minnesota with our relatively new governor, Gov. Tim Walz. The governor, to his credit, was knowledgeable, forthright, and firm declaring, “The people have to know the process is solid, verifiable and trustworthy.”
This was a bold and vital commitment because mining sulfide rock in search of copper and nickel is precarious in that the process releases acid and toxic metals including arsenic, mercury, lead, asbestos and cadmium into the water and they remain there for centuries. Hence, it is reassuring that the governor was fully determined to “do things right” and willing to exercise leadership declaring, “It’s my job to make sure we do.”
Orenstein appropriately pressed the governor on the issue of the mining laws governing the permitting process, which clearly were not designed for sulfide mining in that they do not consider issues of health, economics or quality of life of affected communities.
Walz fully acknowledged this saying, “We need to modernize them.”
The governor further made it clear that since Glencore owned PolyMet he would insist Glencore’s name be on the permit “as a show of good faith and to ensure the corporation is financially liable for cleanup.”
And the final promise was that this would be done with unprecedented transparency trumpeting, “I will stand by that we’re as transparent as any administration, if not the most Minnesota has ever seen.”
Now, that is leadership at its best. Or so we thought.
Some four years later, a new reality has emerged: the old mining laws are fully intact; Glencore is not named on the permit, Glencore is not assuming liability and the governor and Legislature have shrouded this entire matter in darkness.
Additionally, DNR consultants have severely criticized the storage basin designed by Glencore to hold the toxic waste and prevent it from flowing into adjacent BWCA and Lake Superior waters. They determined the safety system to be “inherently unstable and irresponsible” and concluded that it “will inherently fail.” For further emphasis they called it a Hail Mary and that it gave them “indigestion.”
Interestingly, 17 DFL legislators led by Sen. John Marty of Roseville wrote the governor a letter a month before the Orenstein interview outlining the very same concerns and determining that the process was so “flawed” that the a moratorium should be imposed until the laws are updated.
Yet, nothing happened; absolutely nothing. And the secrecy that surrounds this whole matter is alarming. For five straight legislative sessions, leaders of both parties in the Legislature and the governor have refused to change the mining laws or even conduct a hearing on this matter or anything related to Glencore and its global illegalities.
However, the Department of Natural Resources did hire a Denver pro-mining law firm at a cost in excess of $6.4 million to represent the interests of Glencore, a foreign mining conglomerate, against those of the people of Minnesota.
This protection of Glencore continued even after the U.S. Department of Justice in May of last year publicly condemned Glencore after the company pled guilty to charges of bribery of public officials and market manipulation and settled for $1.1 billion saying, “The scope of the criminal bribery scheme is staggering. Glencore paid bribes to secure oil contracts. Glencore paid bribes to avoid government audits. Glencore bribed judges to make lawsuits disappear. At bottom, Glencore paid bribes to make money – hundreds of millions of dollars. And it did so with the approval, and even encouragement of its top executives.”
Now legislators take umbrage at the suggestion that they are influenced by moneyed interests. However, that is the conclusion of a May, 2021 study by the Humphrey School of Public Affairs, which found that moneyed interests were permitted to “shape” legislation.
And, the undersigned, released a report in August of 2021 outlining the enormity of the fundraising by the legislative caucuses. For the 2020 elections, they amassed more than $26.5 million or some $130,000 per incumbent and enjoyed the services of 317 partisan staffers who work at the direction of partisan caucus leaders. This is by far the largest political operation in the state and it is paid for by the taxpayers.
[image_credit]MinnPost file photo by James Nord[/image_credit][image_caption]Former Gov. Arne Carlson[/image_caption]
Well, if our elected officials are not influenced by “big money,” then they should tell us why Glencore is receiving such extraordinary special treatment. After all, they are entrusting this corrupt foreign conglomerate with our drinking water, the BWCA, Lake Superior and so much of our access to the great outdoors, including fishing, hunting, camping and vacationing.
And will these same privileges of mining with shoddy technology and protection from liability be made available to other foreign mining conglomerates? Will that also be kept from the public? Please tell everyone why?
Arne H. Carlson served as the Governor of Minnesota from 1991-1999, Tom Berkelman is a former Minnesota State Representative, DFL, from Duluth, Janet Entzel is a former Minnesota State Representative, DFL, Minneapolis, Chris Knopf is executive director of Friends of the Boundary Waters and Duke Skorich is president of Zenith Research, Duluth.
We need to recognize that Greater Minnesota is not a huge park for those who live in our state’s metropolitan areas, and that those of us of my, and former Gov Carlson’s, generation should not expect, after retirement, to move there and tell those, who have lived there and provided for their families for generations, how the land they depend on should now be used. Tourism is a valuable resource for many in Greater Minnesota, but it does not provide the long term, reliable and higher paying jobs that agriculture, forestry and mining, does, and has in the past. Ironically, these activities also provide the food, materials and minerals that do, and will be needed, for the good life our fellow metropolitan citizens desire; and we can manage these activities, here, rather than importing them from some other place in the world with no control over how they may impact the planet that we all depend on.
The recent bonding bill provides 9 MILLION dollars for flood remediation due to an abandoned mine to protect the town of Bovey.
But yeah, we should let corrupt foreign mine operators put the name of a shell corporation on mining permits, and not believe that it’s attorneys will race to shutter said shell company as soon as the mine is economically obsolete.
I was born at night, but it wasn’t last night. (Hat tip to Jim Hightower)
This comment is responsive to exactly none of the authors’ concerns about mining or governmental operations. And thanks to them for trying to tell people the actual situation.
Apparently it will be up to the federal government to protect the waters of Northern Minnesota. Appalling.
Exposing sulfide rock to oxygen results in formation of sulfuric acid which in turn causes acid mine drainage that will kill the microorganisms that sustain fisheries. In a wet environment the pollution follows the riversheds and into the groundwater that supplies people with fresh water.
Telling the local people about the threats to their water is completely responsible, and has nothing to do with “metro people thinking the North Country is their ‘park'”. It should be offensive to all Minnesotans who see the need to preserve what this state has as its most precious resource.
The article not only explains the costs to the environment and the people who live, work, or visit there, but it also tells you what kind of track record Glencore and its other aliased liability-avoiding holding companies. These are not solid citizens of the north. They’re extractors and polluters of the worst kind.
Thank you Gov. Carlson, for staying on this case. The DNR hiring of the Colorado expert raises some big issues the journalists should track down.
Mr. Pilacinski, you should research the problems of Acid Mine Drainage from hard rock mining.
One generation’s mining for ten+ generations cleanup?
Banana’s, Republic.
As far as Glencore is concerned Northern Minnesota is, to paraphrase our recent president, just another shit hole country.
Lefties need a new playbook. I heard the exposing sulfide rock to air and water was going to ruin the Range way back when they transitioned from iron ore to taconite. That was over 60 years ago, still waiting. 60 years ago I heard about tourism taking over from mining. Do the math, not even comparable. Lefties cry “mining scars Mother Earth” and ruins our beautiful country. I now grouse hunt on old mine areas and the hunting is fantastic.
I hear the same nonsense from anti logging folks too. You can mine and log safely here in USA and not be held hostage for wood and precious minerals from foreign countries. It is just the NIMBY factor, not facts, that stop it here in Minnesota.
You did not hear anything like that “over 60 years ago” because organized concerns for the environment did not then exist, nor did any meaningful laws to protect the environment. Not to mention the fact that you were likely a child at the time.
And however fantastic your grouse hunting forays on “old mine areas” today, they are irrelevant to the issue under discussion. In any event, better wildlife management practices and regulations has likely had much to do with your grouse success. You’re welcome!
BK a final FYI, grouse like new forest growth because of the edible plants that grow on ground. Old forest growth doesn’t allow sunlight to forest floor, causing a lack of edible plants and won’t hold many animals of any type. Grouse populations fluctuate but will always thrive more in new growth. That is why some of old folks who still hunt go to newly logged land and old mine dump sites. Has little to do with wildlife practices, because today’s practices are to make logging harder. Mother Nature burned the forest for thousands of years to get new growth for the animals without wildlife practices…. Amazing huh??
Right, the earth’s old growth forests were mostly devoid of wildlife and were all frequently burned to crisps in the natural climate. That’s why actual “old growth” forests had/have trees hundreds of years old, and why loggers and lumber Barons were (and still are) wild to cut them all down.
So logging is great for grouse hunters (like you). Not sure that’s the greatest argument for more logging, when mature forests are essential to mitigating global warming in the 21st Century. But I’m happy for the grouse.
Recently heard an item on BBC news, about a long-time seriously lead-polluted community in France. Who’s the current owner of the culprit enterprise? I believe it’s Glencore, and no help comes from them.
Thank you to former Governor Carlson for bringing attention to the political and environmental mining issues in NE Minnesota. I lived there for 45 years and have seen that
mining isn’t easy work, and it changes the landscape. But I hope Minnesotans don’t think the environmental disruption caused by mining iron ore will be of the same magnitude as PolyMet/ Glencore’s operation. After over a century of mining iron ore, the Iron Range’s water is still clean and supportive of life. In this world of water shortage, it just might be the areas’ most valuable asset.
Is there a place where copper/nickel mining waste hasn’t left “forever” toxins in the water supply? Shouldn’t this place and information about how wastes were handled at that site be available on an internet search? I’m still looking.