The Northwoods. Picturesque lakes and crystal streams abound. Loons cry at dusk while brook trout rise for the evening mayfly hatch. This image is in danger of changing into a far grimmer reality. Giant trucks hauling away the spoils loosened by blasting will roll down county roads designed to handle sparse local traffic. Streams now teaming with fish could be poisoned by chemical leaching, making them fishless forever.
A 22 mile swath of land will strip mined for taconite, the natural form of iron ore. I am fully aware of the need for resource extraction. After all, I drive a 5500 pound truck made of steel. As a consuming, growing, driving economic nation, we all need iron and wood and aluminum and coal. However, the activities required to acquire these resources should not be allowed in all forms or in certain areas. This mine is analogous to harvest practices in forestry. Clear cutting is no longer considered an acceptable method of harvest. Nor is cutting on steep slopes prudent. The same is with mining. Done properly, mining provides us with valuable and necessary resources. However, the proposed mine up north would not be done in a manner that took into account the risks inherent with mining. The mine occurs within the Lake Superior basin, considered one of the last great unspoiled lakes in the world. Is risking the quality of Lake Superior, along with the affected tributaries, wildlife, and people worth 30 years worth of iron ore?
The main argument in this controversy is jobs vs. environment. Northern Wisconsin is known to be an economically depressed area save to industries; tourism and logging. The area has the highest unemployment rate in the state. A economic impact study performed by the proposed operator of the mine, Gogebic Taconite, says that building the mine will create 2000 jobs and operating the mine will produce 700 jobs over the 30 year life of the mine, in addition to a couple thousand indirectly related to the mine. That sounds fine and dandy, but what about the thousands of jobs that would be lost in the tourism industry, a sector that has sustained the area for 50 years? The area relies on the aesthetic beauty of the region to bring in tourism dollars. All that could be lost from a leeching from the mine. No one wants to fish in a river without any fish in it. After the 30 year life is over, what then? Some remediation that is never as good as the original and possibly leeching effects lasting the next several hundred years.
I am certainly not opposed to mining, but it must be done properly. The wealth of nations is built on the health of its land. Throughout the thousands of years of human history, wars have been fought chiefly because some other group has a natural resource that another one doesn't have and wants. Let us not foolishly squander what semi-pristine areas we have for a few years worth of iron ore. The 40 percent of western streams that are fishless from mine leeching should have taught us, but apparently hasn't. Let's not make the Northwoods mine another stop on the too long learning curve of proper resource extraction.
3 comments:
I found this a very interesting topic, very similar to what is currently happening back near my hometown with the silica sand mines. People have been up in arms against the proposed and ongoing mines, due to the possible health risks and degradation of the environment. Like the proposed mine in northern WI people are worried about the possible effect of the excessive use of groundwater and mine waste runoff into streams or groundwater recharge areas. I can defiantly see where the need for jobs in northern WI would be a welcoming sight but is it really worth it. I would have to say that this proposed mine isn’t worth it in the long run. From what you said that this iron mine is only a 30 year project, so is it really worth the destruction of 22 miles of natural environment that is found in this areas that so many tourists come to see every year. Also, in the long run once this mine is all mined out then what? There will be thousands of people who will be forced to leave to seek jobs elsewhere because prior to this iron mine the area was already in a job shortage. I would have to agree that we should be looking at prior mining incidents and possible effects that may face the area. These incidents should be avoided by making possible zoning and planning plans. I have nothing against mining and am a supporter, but only when it is done correctly. It will be interesting to see how the booming mining operations in Wisconsin turn out and what comes of this all.
A mine in the Lake Superior basin would be devestating not only for the environment but also the peple of Wisconsin. Though employment in the northwoods is lowest in the state, the mine project is only so long, ensuring people will once again become unemployed. I believe the people of Northern Wisconsin live their simply because they have a love for the outdoors. Stripping 22 miles of land would be devestating, keeping this area of the U.S. clean and preserved is the crucial, for wildlife and water resources.
It is topics like this that continue to encourage me to be a natural resource manager. Somewhere there is a good balancing point between developing/extracting resources and protecting them. I hope the right call is made on this one. The mining bill coming through the legislature is not a step in the right direction.
Post a Comment