Workshops dig into regional mining issues
By Charlie Otto Rasmussen, Staff Writer
Oodenaang (Odanah), Wis.— Mining science, industry and regulatory experts from across the United States took 
center stage at the “Understanding the Impacts of Mining in the Western Lake Superior Region” conference September12-14. Geared for ecosystem managers and resource agency staff, the event held at the Bad River Convention Center commanded high interest with an overflow professional audience.
“The unique feature of this workshop is the diversity of the attendees,” said Naomi Tillison, a conference organizer and water resource specialist for the Bad River Band. “We’ve got tribal, state, federal, and local governments, non-profit organizations, universities and industry all represented. There’s a lot of concern about inadequate information regarding current and future mining operations in the Lake Superior region. I think the technical information shared here goes a long way to providing accurate information to everyone involved.”
Bad River partnered with the US Geological Service (USGS) to spearhead the three-day conference that included a field trip to the Mellen area to examine rock formations and nearby streams. Co-hosts GLIFWC and the Fond du Lac Band also participated in workshop development.
Among the dozen presenters from federal agencies, the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Carol Russell covered regulations and general risks of mining in the United States. She said one of the most significant issues with mining are inaccurate estimates relating to water usage risk assessments.
“All recent Superfund mining sites had water balance issues,” she said. Superfund is an EPA program to clean up polluted sites. 
One of the difficulties in assessing how mining would negatively impact water and the environment is delayed contamination, said presenter Chuck Brumleve, Keweenaw Bay Indian Community mining specialist. It may take decades for harmful pollution like acid mine drainage to leach into fresh water.
“Everybody here in this room, we may be dead before the degradation really kicks in,” Brumleve said. “That’s a lot of responsibility.”
While the event focused heavily on the technical information, Bad River elders Joe Rose Sr. and Sylvia Cloud addressed the gathering, sharing traditional Ojibwe perspectives related to mining and its impacts.
“The success of this workshop is attributable to the many people dedicated to planning and coordinating, and to the excellent group of presenters,” said organizer, Tillison.
Tribes review sulfide mining
One week after the “Understanding Impacts” conference, regional tribes gathered in Odanah for “Dazhindandaa-Gidakiiminaan: Let’s Talk About Our Land.” With support from a Charles Stewart Mott Foundation grant, tribal leaders and technical staff met September 20-21 to learn about the mining environmental review and permitting process. The workshop featured several speakers and a series of breakout sessions.
Changes to WI mining laws subject of hearing
Concern for manoomin, clean water voiced
By Jennifer Burnett, GLIFWC Great Lakes Outreach Specialist
Hurley, Wis.—Well over 400 hundred people packed into the auditorium of Hurley High School to listen to and offer testimony about the possibility of changing current mining laws in Wisconsin. Sponsored by the Wisconsin Assembly Committee on Jobs, Economy and Small Business, the October 27 public meeting began with a brief summary of current laws before allowing various industry and local officials and then the public to testify on whether or not the laws should be changed.
Proponents for changes, like Tim Sullivan of the Wisconsin Mining Association and Bill Williams of Gogebic Taconite, agreed that new Wisconsin mining laws should distinguish ferrous (iron/taconite) mining from other types, such as sand and sulfide mining. They also asserted that adding specific timelines for the mine permitting would allow Wisconsin to become more competive with Minnesota and Michigan's iron mining.
Opposition to proposed changes in the mining law were expressed by Mike Wiggins, Jr., Bad River Tribal Chairman. Accompanied by Tribal Attorney Glenn Stoddard, Wiggins offered testimony explaining the Bad River Band's opposition to both the proposed Penokee mine project and to the "phenomenal speed" with which the mining legislation may be changed. Concerns about potential water pollution and damage to the wild rice beds were high on his list. Wiggins concluded his tes
timony with 10 principles for the Committee to follow to ensure that any changes to the law are founded in science, not politics.
Mic Isham, GLIFWC Board of Commissioners Chairman and Lac Courte Oreilles Tribal Council member, accompanied by GLIFWC Executive Director Jim Zorn, testified about GLIFWC's experience working on various mining proposals in Michigan, Minnesota and Wisconsin. In particular GLIFWC reminded the Committee that consultation with treaty tribes was necessary if planned actions would impact treaty resources in the ceded territories.
"As you are aware, the State does not have unfettered discretion to exercise its management prerogatives to the detriment of the tribes' treaty rights and in ways that would be contrary to the requirements of the Lac Courte Oreilles v. Wisconsin, commonly known as the Voigt case. The State may not legislate away the tribes' treaty rights; similarly, legislating the destruction of treaty resources through destruction of their habitat may not be used to accomplish the same end. Whatever legislation the State may consider, it may not trample on the tribes' treaty rights, and the tribes will be watchful in ensuring that they are protected," Isham stated.
He also pointed out that both ferrous and non-ferrous mines have had, and continue to have, significant environmental impacts, and that weakening of regulations, including environmental reviews and permitting processes, would not dismiss the necessity of protecting treaty resources. Opposition to the weakening of mining regulations Isham said, "stems from deeply held commitments to the protection of tribal lifeways that depend on high quality and abundant natural resources."
GLIFWC also told the Committee that it would make itself available for consultation due to its expertise relating to mining impacts on treaty resources in the ceded territories.
