Superior national forest

Sounds like Pres trump is opening a can of worms. I love spending a week every fall with my dad up there i hate the idea of a mining corporation coming in and tearing up So much priceless land . Not too sound like a nature nut but i cant imagine there are too many positive effects mining can have on wildlife ,water quality and scenery

As long as our population grows and we continue to prosper I see no alternative to losing wild lands.

Its a proven fact that no large mining operation has ever done irreparable harm to the environment.

Drill Baby Drill!

We don’t have to touch the forest to keep growing. The rich just see a easy billion dollars to dig up

We hike in the superior forest every year do a 7 to 8 day hike 50 or 60 miles and change our points every trip. It’s so peacful and beautiful up there.

suzuki wrote:

As long as our population grows and we continue to prosper I see no alternative to losing wild lands.

Exploiting our National Parks and other wild public lands for natural resources is shameful. These lands are priceless natural national treasures that must be protected from man’s insatiable desire for more. I disagree that there are no alternatives. Investing in research to discover alternatives that protect our natural environment should be of highest priority for not only our government, but for all governments, whether it be alternative sources of energy or other natural resources. There is ample evidence throughout history that if enough people work together to find solutions, they can be found.

Yeah, but think of all the jobs….

suzuki wrote:

As long as our population grows and we continue to prosper I see no alternative to losing wild lands.

That’s a scary frame of mind if you ask me. You call it prospering I call it over-population. So much of this country has been urbanized or altered already. I think protecting the remaining natural earth should be important to all of us.
I’m not totally against the mining. The economy really needs jobs up there. It’s sad it has to happen to some of the best land in the state though.
My great grandad said when talking about superior national forest and voyaguers national park that “they don’t make land anymore, especially not like this, so do everything you can to protect it, if you own some of this land, never sell it”.

Karry Kyllo wrote:

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>suzuki wrote:</div>
As long as our population grows and we continue to prosper I see no alternative to losing wild lands.

Exploiting our National Parks and other wild public lands for natural resources is shameful. These lands are priceless natural national treasures that must be protected from man’s insatiable desire for more. I disagree that there are no alternatives. Investing in research to discover alternatives that protect our natural environment should be of highest priority for not only our government, but for all governments, whether it be alternative sources of energy or other natural resources. There is ample evidence throughout history that if enough people work together to find solutions, they can be found.

Excellent reply Karry and I agree 100%.

Tom Sawvell wrote:

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>Karry Kyllo wrote:</div>

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>suzuki wrote:</div>
As long as our population grows and we continue to prosper I see no alternative to losing wild lands.

Exploiting our National Parks and other wild public lands for natural resources is shameful. These lands are priceless natural national treasures that must be protected from man’s insatiable desire for more. I disagree that there are no alternatives. Investing in research to discover alternatives that protect our natural environment should be of highest priority for not only our government, but for all governments, whether it be alternative sources of energy or other natural resources. There is ample evidence throughout history that if enough people work together to find solutions, they can be found.

Excellent reply Karry and I agree 100%.

And to think some of these people moved land and built homes in the ever-growing, natural landscape that is the Driftless area…such beauty DESTROYED. Oh, the humanity. But I bought it already built?

Karry Kyllo wrote:

Exploiting our National Parks and other wild public lands for natural resources is shameful. These lands are priceless natural national treasures that must be protected from man’s insatiable desire for more. I disagree that there are no alternatives. Investing in research to discover alternatives that protect our natural environment should be of highest priority for not only our government, but for all governments, whether it be alternative sources of energy or other natural resources. There is ample evidence throughout history that if enough people work together to find solutions, they can be found.

As long as our political elections are based on bribery, corporations will run the country through political puppets. I’m not counting only anything earth shattering (no pun intended) in my lifetime. We’ll only see the teeter totter conservatism and liberalism.

I can agree with your statement on many topics. There’s a big problem when it comes to metal. Metals are and always will be vital to our civilization. There may be easy alternatives to 10% of the used, maybe difficult alternatives to 30%, but 60% there will never be an alternative.

Also understand that alternatives come at an environmental cost as well. Advancements usually come at costs that armrest only realized (in some cases intentionally ignored) decades later.

Tough topic fore sure but the one thing I do know is that environmental destruction is the cost of economic development. Always has been, always will be. And to quote a saying I heard a couple years ago about manufacturing business “If a company isn’t growing, it’s dying.”. The same can be said about a country. That’s a fact.

so just where to you guys think your TP, wood for your houses comes from, or the metal for your vehicles, or boats, or copper wire for that electricity for your house????

now i’m not advocating they destroy everything, as l believe there needs safegaurds, but really……………………..

glenn57 wrote:

so just where to you guys think your TP, wood for your houses comes from, or the metal for your vehicles, or boats, or copper wire for that electricity for your house????

now i’m not advocating they destroy everything, as l believe there needs safegaurds, but really……………………..

Most everything you listed is recyclable for those uses. Even with wood there are alternatives to cutting trees.

I know your comment comes from union support. Maybe unions should start supporting alternative methods of meeting a demand?

Tom Sawvell wrote:

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>glenn57 wrote:</div>
so just where to you guys think your TP, wood for your houses comes from, or the metal for your vehicles, or boats, or copper wire for that electricity for your house????

now i’m not advocating they destroy everything, as l believe there needs safegaurds, but really……………………..

Most everything you listed is recyclable for those uses. Even with wood there are alternatives to cutting trees.

I know your comment comes from union support. Maybe unions should start supporting alternative methods of meeting a demand?

have you not seen the article today about China’s response to there plastic recycling. there telling the world no more figure out what to do with your own garbage.

and sure i’ll admit it, some of my opinion is union based, especially since it directly affects our trade, but you cant seirously believe that there’s enough junk to recycle to actually keep up with demand????

and Tom, you recycle your TP???????

grubson wrote:

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>suzuki wrote:</div>
As long as our population grows and we continue to prosper I see no alternative to losing wild lands.

That’s a scary frame of mind if you ask me. You call it prospering I call it over-population. So much of this country has been urbanized or altered already. I think protecting the remaining natural earth should be important to all of us.
I’m not totally against the mining. The economy really needs jobs up there. It’s sad it has to happen to some of the best land in the state though.
My great grandad said when talking about superior national forest and voyaguers national park that “they don’t make land anymore, especially not like this, so do everything you can to protect it, if you own some of this land, never sell it”.

Dont misinterpret my statement. I hate it but see it as inevitable if people decide to breed us into oblivion.

I actually have a bit of a stake in this game. We have family property in an area that is of mining interest (copper, nickel, etc). The mineral rights were lost to state during the WWII era for a decent portion of the property. The state offered a 50 year lease to a mining company around the year 2000 for dirt cheap. Legally, there’s likely not a single thing we could do to keep them out of our property if they choose to mine.

If it came to mining I’m inclined to believe this is how it may go down:
1) The economy is generally depressed in those mining areas so that will likely be used as a selling point for an economic jump start to the area.
2) Most of the jobs will likely not be long enough to represent a career and will probably go to someone else from somewhere else.
3) Once the mining company does their thing they will leave along with the jobs for somebody else from somewhere else.
4) The economy in the local area will go back to being depressed.
5) The State will likely be on the hook for whatever environmental issues that may result from the mining.
6) Personally, we may have to sell and will likely not get a money value that could comparatively replace the property. Not to mention I could lose the 45-50 yrs of personal ties to the property along with the 100+ yrs of family nostalgia.

Obviously, my perspective is a little different. Any of us who have recreational, hunting property, lake cabins, etc. cross your fingers some future day the state/mining operation doesn’t toss a token amount of money at you and say “We’re taking it”.

glenn57 wrote:

so just where to you guys think your TP, wood for your houses comes from, or the metal for your vehicles, or boats, or copper wire for that electricity for your house????

now i’m not advocating they destroy everything, as l believe there needs safegaurds, but really……………………..

Its a stretch to compare logging and iron mining in mn to digging and building new copper and nickel mines. Logging is done to provide paper products but removing self replenishing trees is far less invasive than digging mines. Also logging is important for many other reasons and species including moose. The clearings that are created provide food. Much like wild fires did before we were here.
Iron mining has been a big deal for a long time but they are not digging new mines. They are now recycling the old tailing piles because they did research and realized a new way to aquire iron from the soil without digging new mines.
No matter how you look at it, new mines in northern mn will have a negative impact and change the face of the area for our lifetimes. Not saying it shouldn’t happen, but its a bit concerning that is for sure.

grubson wrote:

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>glenn57 wrote:</div>
so just where to you guys think your TP, wood for your houses comes from, or the metal for your vehicles, or boats, or copper wire for that electricity for your house????

now i’m not advocating they destroy everything, as l believe there needs safegaurds, but really……………………..

Its a stretch to compare logging and iron mining in mn to digging and building new copper and nickel mines. Logging is done to provide paper products but removing self replenishing trees is far less invasive than digging mines. Also logging is important for many other reasons and species including moose. The clearings that are created provide food. Much like wild fires did before we were here.
Iron mining has been a big deal for a long time but they are not digging new mines. They are now recycling the old tailing piles because they did research and realized a new way to aquire iron from the soil without digging new mines.
No matter how you look at it, new mines in northern mn will have a negative impact and change the face of the area for our lifetimes. Not saying it shouldn’t happen, but its a bit concerning that is for sure.

i agree its a stretch as you indicated, and yes they are recycling old taconite tailings because of new technology. our trade is dead in the middle of it. i do however disagree with them not digging new mines.

Dont misinterpret my statement. I hate it but see it as inevitable if people decide to breed us into oblivion.
[/quote]

Sorry, didn’t mean to call you out or anything. I agree with you I just hate to concede and accept that some day the land will be all gone.

/blockquote>
i agree its a stretch as you indicated, and yes they are recycling old taconite tailings because of new technology. our trade is dead in the middle of it. i do however disagree with them not digging new mines.
[/quote]

I’m definitely not an expert, just another a- hole with an opinion. If they are digging new iron mines that’s news to me. I watched a documentary recently that explained their new technology and i thought they said that no new mines were being dug. I definitely could be wrong.

no biggy, i’m enjoying this diologue and in no way intending to be arguementive.

i’m a union rep for the boilermakers, we deal with metal. i spent 28 years welding stainless steel, building vessels for the food dairy and pharmicutical industry. for the last 12 years representing members that build equipment for building structures, bridge gerters, power line poles, the paper and mining industry, ethonal plants, oil field tanks. the other half our local works in coal fired power plants, mines and refineries.

yea i care about this, in a safe and respectable way. i have a dog in this fight. hope this helps people understand my viewpoint.

tegg wrote:

If it came to mining I’m inclined to believe this is how it may go down:
1) The economy is generally depressed in those mining areas so that will likely be used as a selling point for an economic jump start to the area.
2) Most of the jobs will likely not be long enough to represent a career and will probably go to someone else from somewhere else.
3) Once the mining company does their thing they will leave along with the jobs for somebody else from somewhere else.
4) The economy in the local area will go back to being depressed.
5) The State will likely be on the hook for whatever environmental issues that may result from the mining.

Pretty much the way it will go if they can not expand to gobble more up.

I question that there is such a need for these resources to be dug in an area that should be protected to the last resort. I don’t believe were at the last resort stage right now. I believe were at the stage where a company sees money under thar ground and they want it and don’t care how they get that money..

“As long as our population grows and we continue to prosper I see no alternative to losing wild lands.”

I agree with Mike and that never happens!

Back up 50 years and look what’s now gone.
Red Wing. The McDonalds was on the edge of town.
Hutchinson. Our house was on the last block in town.
Dad duck hunted in our backyard when he was a kid.
Wetlands are drained. It goes on and on.

Attachments:

1. 

   I-do-know-the-story-behind-this-guy-1.jpg
   

2. 

   I-do-know-the-story-behind-this-guy.jpg
   

glenn57 wrote:

and Tom, you recycle your TP???????

Coming from someone who still uses his thumb.

In all honesty its not so much the mining that has me concerned, but the processing after the mining. And for what? The whole mining thing is based on un-knowns so I’d like to see it halted until more data is provided between both sides and I’d also like to see this put to a state-wide vote since I have zero trust our state legislature to make a decision regarding something of this magnitude. Let the people of Minnesota decide if this is a good thing.

Having property not far from where this is supposed to take place we hear both sides of this ballad. Everything up in that country hinges on unions and I will say that there are some very intelligent union people working up there but there are just as many who aren’t smart enough to loosen a lug nut. I’ve seen the scars left by loggers and mining, all union entities, and wonder which union is responsible for putting things back to normal after the crap is done? Maybe its those with lug nut problems. In the boundary waters the rule of thumb is to leave the campsites in better shape than what you found them. Will there be any legislation requiring this be done with this new type of mining and just who is going to be responsible to do it? Then who is going to double check this restoration work?

Too many things get rammed thru the permitting process today fed with money that simply doesn’t give a rip. Here in SE Minnesota an Iowa company wants to build a 4800 hog facility that will generate 3.8 million gallons of liquid schit a year. If this is such a great idea, why not build this in IOWA? So before this mining crap gets shoved down our throats I for one would like to know where the money originates….what country so I can ask them why they don’t spend it on their own home turf and support their own people. This mining is smelling bad of foreign money.

tegg wrote:

6) Personally, we may have to sell and will likely not get a money value that could comparatively replace the property. Not to mention I could lose the 45-50 yrs of personal ties to the property along with the 100+ yrs of family nostalgia.

I feel for you and can relate to what might happen and I sure hope things work out for the best for you or at the least get what you deserve.

Our familiy owns a cabin on the Canadian boarder in the arrowhead with the BWCA boarder is 30 ft from the back wall of the cabin.
In the 80’s we and others on the lake narrowly almost lost our cabins to the state to expand BWCA but we prevailed. We got another 25 years to enjoy that special place. Sadly we have to sell but it is our choice to sell so now another family can enjoy 50 some odd years of wilderness adventures.

Tom Sawvell wrote:

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>glenn57 wrote:</div>
and Tom, you recycle your TP???????

Coming from someone who still uses his thumb.

In all honesty its not so much the mining that has me concerned, but the processing after the mining. And for what? The whole mining thing is based on un-knowns so I’d like to see it halted until more data is provided between both sides and I’d also like to see this put to a state-wide vote since I have zero trust our state legislature to make a decision regarding something of this magnitude. Let the people of Minnesota decide if this is a good thing.

Having property not far from where this is supposed to take place we hear both sides of this ballad. Everything up in that country hinges on unions and I will say that there are some very intelligent union people working up there but there are just as many who aren’t smart enough to loosen a lug nut. I’ve seen the scars left by loggers and mining, all union entities, and wonder which union is responsible for putting things back to normal after the crap is done? Maybe its those with lug nut problems. In the boundary waters the rule of thumb is to leave the campsites in better shape than what you found them. Will there be any legislation requiring this be done with this new type of mining and just who is going to be responsible to do it? Then who is going to double check this restoration work?

Too many things get rammed thru the permitting process today fed with money that simply doesn’t give a rip. Here in SE Minnesota an Iowa company wants to build a 4800 hog facility that will generate 3.8 million gallons of liquid schit a year. If this is such a great idea, why not build this in IOWA? So before this mining crap gets shoved down our throats I for one would like to know where the money originates….what country so I can ask them why they don’t spend it on their own home turf and support their own people. This mining is smelling bad of foreign money.

i grew out of using my thumb. i dont think this is getting rammed down anyones throat to be honest. the permitting process has been going on for 3 years or more. matter of fact to get anything permitted in this state takes a 2nd coming of christ. out up nort rep has been talking about polymets process as well as essar steel for 6 years or better!

Just wish they would strategically log the forest to mimic fires some what.

Interesting how many different tentacles these things can have.

Many don’t want human intervention or anything that seems destructive going on in wild areas, yet fires are completely suppressed by human forces when they are completely natural. We want nature when it suits what we want. I’m not against fire suppression and understand it’s value, just as I see old growth forests as being not natural, with fire suppression. Logging is a renewable resource, somewhat similar to big ag, but better for wildlife. The superior nf is turning into a mono culture similar to the big ag country of sw mn. One extreme to the other, with not a drop of common sense.

1hl&sinker wrote:

I question that there is such a need for these resources to be dug in an area that should be protected to the last resort. I don’t believe were at the last resort stage right now. I believe were at the stage where a company sees money under thar ground and they want it and don’t care how they get that money..

That sums up my thoughts on this pretty well. I started an angry thread about trump shrinking national parks a while back. It was deleted (deserved it, I was being childish), but one of the questions I asked is, what’s next? Well, I guess we’re finding out.