Boundary Water News!

[Landrover]

Somewhat political but more about the place, the BOUNDARY WATER's are special. Numbers #5 and #6 where interesting in the article. Personally, it is apparent that the "mine" can be placed OFF THE WATER so I am not sure why it would even be attempted. Full disclosure I have fished & camped there 7 times and plan to continue going. I was born and raised in "cancer alley USA"! I am also a capitalist and very pleased we are focusing on being energy efficient in the USA!
Where is the line?
No oversight!
No EPA!
So who monitors the process of extracting nickel?

https://www.outdoorlife.com/what-sportsmen-need-to-know-about-boundary-waters-mine?CMPID=ene011818&spMailingID=32678787&spUserID=ODY3OTEyNzQwMDgS1&spJobID=1202351276&spReportId=MTIwMjM1MTI3NgS2

[flywise]

It does seem that the last sentence on number 5 is accurate. Both Obama and Trump should have allow the permitting process be a data driven decision.
I know nothing about mines but I'm certain there will always be some negative environmental impact with any mine regardless of type. That said we absolutely need these types of mines and we need to figure out how much neg. environmental impact we are willing to accept.
Givin strict parameters I believe this twin metals company or any other company would work hard to adhere to those parameters because ultamitly it's in their best interest, long and short term.

So, studies need to be done by several different entities in order to find the most accurate results somewhere in the middle of the biased based studies that will certainly be found by each side.
In the end I hope the mine becomes reality and the environmental impact minimal

[rattler03]

I spent 2 weeks paddling and portaging across the boundary waters when I was 20 years old ... it is a truly awesome place with some great fishing. If the mine is profitable enough, I'm confident they can find a way to operate it in an environmentally sensitive manner that will allow future generations to enjoy an "unspoiled" boundary waters adventure. It'd be a great place to take my kids someday.

I'm a capitalist, but I realize our wild places are disappearing as our country and society expands. Growing up in the Texas hill country between Austin and San Antonio, I've seen a lot of changes in my 33 short years. My family and most of the people I grew up with have made a living off of that growth, either directly or indirectly. But, when you have a place as unique as the boundary waters, IMO you need to find a way to protect it. I hope that in regards to this mine, they can find a way to environmentally responsibly continue to operate the mine and create jobs. There is no need to rush this process ... let the studies conclude and use them to find a suitable solution to mining in the area.

[Razrbk89]

This one and the Pebble mine in Alaska need to be stopped! They’re horrible for water quality just about any way you slice em, especially in such sensitive areas.

[texansfan]

If the mine is profitable enough...

What happens when the mine is no longer profitable (ie it's HBP)?

[texansfan]

... let the studies conclude and use them to find a suitable solution to mining in the area.

What if all studies show that there is no way for this mine to operate without substantial damage to the surrounding environment?

Trump's EPA will never conduct a study like that in the 1st place (or at least publish the results)

[rattler03]

What if all studies show that there is no way for this mine to operate without substantial damage to the surrounding environment?

Trump's EPA will never conduct a study like that in the 1st place (or at least publish the results)

If the studies show that the mine will cause "substantial damage to the surrounding environment" then the mine will get shutdown for good. There are laws that prohibit that, the clean air and clean water acts are probably the main ones that would apply here. The boundary waters are protected as a national wilderness area, so I highly doubt anybody is going to get away with operating a highly pollutant mine in their backyard.

But, I understood the link to say that the mines had already been in operation for some time, and the Obama administration refused to renew their permits as a parting gesture to his 8 year assault on the mining industry. If the mine had already been operating, I'd assume that at one point in time it was determined that it was, in fact, not causing "substantial damage to the surrounding environment" and would likely be allowed to reopen. There's probably just a bunch of red tape to jump through now that the permits have already been officially revoked via executive action.

As far as the comment about Trump's EPA ... I believe the studies are already underway. However, I'm confident that someone at the EPA will link the findings if their superiors try to prevent their release because the findings come out against their desired plans. The leaker would then be celebrated as a courageous whistle-blower ... that's the way our government works these days.

[Landrover]

Good points all around. Going to be interesting to follow over the next few years. Back it up 10 miles and get after it...lol. Watch for stream runoff and watch for excessive flare burn offs once the process begins.
There is room for everyone but obviously mining nickel, or copper, or plutonium or even gold/silver has a horrible history of tearing crap up!
I understand the lease is on the rights to the land/nickel. The plant has not been built, thus the need for an environmental impact study.

[rattler03]

I understand the lease is on the rights to the land/nickel. The plant has not been built, thus the need for an environmental impact study.

I didn't catch that detail, but it makes a big difference in my above calculus