From Deanna Erickson

May 12 event of the new Penokee Range Alliance.....

From: Carl Sack rediguana@riseup.net
Subject: [miningmoolah] Connecting Water, Connecting People presentation
To: miningmoolah@lists.riseup.net

Northwoods Wilderness Recovery presentation: "Connecting Water,Connecting People: Reflections on a 300-mile Trek from Lake Superior to Lake Michigan". Friday, May 12, 7:00 PM at the Bad River Casino Convention Center. NWR members Doug Cornett and Jackie Donoho will talk about their journey in August 2005 kayaking, hiking and canoeing from Marquette to Menominee, Michigan to raise awareness about the dangers of proposed metallic sulfide mining projects in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan. Refreshments will be provided. You can view a poster for this event at: Northwoods Wilderness Recovery Northwoods Wilderness Recovery


Ceremony to Celebrate Spring Urges Us to Protect Penokee Hills

Mellen WI- March 20th, the spring equinox, brought a rag tag group of Wisconsin northwoods residents to the forest land south of Mellen to celebrate spring and ask for guidance as we begin what could be a long struggle against the 21 mile long open-pit mine that would stretch across the Penokee range south of Mellen.

Residents of Ashland, Bayfield, Odanah, Herbster, and Red Cliff as well as other towns in the Northwestern region of Wisconsin have been gathering together each week on Friday evenings to discuss the proposed mine, share information and discuss possible strategies in resisting the La Pointe Iron Company's proposed development. With the approach of spring and the intensified interest in the iron ore in Southern Ashland and Iron counties, group members proposed a trip to the site to ask for guidance and help in protecting the headwaters of the Bad River watershed.

Members of the Bad River Chippewa, Northland college students from Ashland, and residents of all ages from the surrounding communities gathered in the sunny cold to drum, sing, and talk of their commitment to the land that provides for us all. Everyone expressed their gratitude for the company of the others and for our shared commitment to the water and the land. The gathering ended with hugs all around and a brief drive through the hills that rise over the top of the iron ore body.

Another gathering will be taking place in Bad River on April 15th, time and location to be announced.

Contact: Deanna Erickson
touchtheearth@ekit.com

 

Contact:
Deanna Erickson
Ashland WI, 54806
Phone: 608-234-1510
email: touchtheearth@ekit.com

 

ANOTHER NORTHWOODS MINE??

State Senators and Local Government Officials Tour Penokee Mountains with La Pointe Iron Company VP

Mellen, Wisconsin- Saturday felt nearly like spring along Highway 77 in southern Ashland County. Tall trees stood thick amid the snow where the largest open-pit mine Wisconsin has ever seen - 21 miles long, 500 feet deep- could be built in a soon as seven years. La Pointe Iron Company, a subsidiary of U S Steel whose national mineral rights were recently purchased by the Texas-based RGGS Land & Minerals Ltd., is in the process of seeking financial and political backing for the project. David Meineke, vice president of La Pointe, spent the afternoon presenting the proposed site to such state leaders as State Senator Dale Shultz (R-District 17), State Senator Dave Zien (R-District 23), and local leadership, including Mayor of Montreal Robert Morzenti , Ashland City Planner and Zoning Administrator Brea Lemke and Ashland City Administrator Brian Knapp, as well as local union and industry representatives. The meeting was not announced publicly, though a few community members did manage to attend.

After a parking lot tailgate presentation on the mines location and geology, discussion turned to political support for the potential mine. "We haven't met with the governor yet but we met with... his aid and we got a rather favorable response", Meineke said. Senator Shultz added "I think both political parties are way up to our project." The office of Governor Doyle has made no formal public comment on the project thus far.

The tour continued to a point along Highway 13, just south of Mellen and a few hundred feet north of Foley Road, where the ore body juts from the ground, and then on to the Penokee Mountain Lookout in the Chequamegon Nicolet National Forest, overlooking the Bad River gorge. Iron ore is oxidized 1000 feet from either side of the river and does not have marketable value, but valuable deposits continue for three to four miles to the west. The tour concluded in the town of Upson, where the eastern end of the ore body lies just a quarter mile south of Highway 77.

"You know, we're looking around the world, talking to all the big companies." said Meineke. The company is seeking anywhere from a half billion and to over a billion dollars in financial backing. Once such backing is secure, the company expects a minimum three year period before formally submitting a proposal to the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources. The acceptance or denial of a metallic mine proposal submitted to the WDNR typically takes at least 4 years, which does not account for the local zoning and permitting process.



Potential Environmental Impacts of a Penokee Mine

By Carl Sack,
1007 14th Ave W, Ashland, 
WI 54806, (715) 682-2210
email:rediguana@riseup.net

         Abstract: A consortium of mining companies has presented preliminary  plans for a new, open-pit iron mine in the western Penokee-Gogebic  Range of Ashland and Iron Counties, Wisconsin. The plans entail  removing magnetic iron ore from beneath approximately 200 meters (650  feet) of overburden, creating a narrow pit up to 280 meters (900 feet)  deep along a twenty-one mile stretch of land from Mellen to Upson.  They also call for development of infrastructure for an on-site  steelmaking industry. The economic viability of the proposal is in  debate, and financial backing is as yet unassured. Historically, shaft  mining and pit mining in the Lake Superior basin have each impacted  the surrounding ecosystems through deforestation, alteration of the  landscape, increased erosion and sedimentation, industrial and urban  development, and acid drainage from tailings dumps. The proposed mine  has potential environmental concerns which include transformation of  high-quality forest ecosystems to low-quality remediated fields,  alteration of landscape topography, aesthetic blight, altered  hydrology and contamination of waterways at the head of the Bad River  Watershed and Penokee aquifer, and impacts of new industrial  infrastructure including point and non-point source water pollution,  landscape alteration and deteriorating air quality.

Background ' Location, Geology and History
         The Penokee-Gogebic Range contains one of ten iron formations in the  Lake Superior region, which together occupy an area of approximately  3,800 square miles (Crowell & Murray 1927). The Penokee-Gogebic Range  stretches eighty miles from southeastern Bayfield County, Wisconsin to  eastern Gogebic County, Michigan. The Wisconsin section is commonly  referred to as the Penokee Hills, while the name 'Gogebic' more  frequently appears on geology maps. Both names''Gogebic' and  'Penokee'come from the Ojibwe word for iron, 'Pewabic,' which was  bestowed upon the hills by Colonel Charles W. Whittlesey in 1849  (Schultz 2004). For clarity the area will hereafter be referred to as  the Penokee-Gogebic Range, though the proposed mining project may be  referred to as the Penokee Mine proposal. The area of particular  interest to this proposal is located approximately twenty-five miles  southeast of Ashland, on the western end of the Range. It encompasses  twenty-one thousand acres in a twenty-one mile long swath of land  running northeast from Mellen to Upson (Lundgren and Moynihan 2006).     

         The Penokee-Gogebic consists of a narrow band of low hills, the  remnants of an ancient moutain-building episode known to Geologists at  the Penokean orogeny, which took place some 1.8 billion years ago  (Schultz 2004). The hills are the granite cores of mountains that once  reached heights as high as the modern Rockies; today the highest peak  is Mount Whittlesey, just south of Mellen, which tops out at 1,872  feet. The hills are bisected by rivers and streams flowing through  twenty-one water gaps. The surface cover is primarily mesic hardwood  forest, with scattered farms. The parallel lowland on the northwest  side of the range provides a transportation corridor in the form of  State Highway 77 and a rail line. It was on this rail line that iron  ore was historically shipped from mines near Hurley and Montreal to  Mellen; it then went north to Ashland, where it was loaded onto  eastbound ore boats (Schultz 2004).

         The Range is underlied by the Ironwood formation, a 200-meter-thick  deposit of iron ore and chert sandwiched between belts of slate and  quartzite, and fractured by faults and granitic dikes. The Penokean  orogeny, which built the hills, caused major folding and faulting of  the iron belt, so that now the entire formation is tilted at an angle  ranging from 55 to 70 degrees from horizontal (Crowell & Murray 1927).  Because of this tilt, all of the mining done in the Penokee-Gogebic to  date has been underground shaft mining, unlike the open pit-mined  Mesabi Range of northeastern Minnesota, which has a tilt of only a few  degrees. Shaft mines in the Penokee-Gogebic had depths ranging from  130 feet (Plymouth Mine) to 4,335 feet at the Montreal Mine, one of  the deepest iron mines in the world at the time it operated (Schultz  2004).

         Mining in the Wisconsin section of the Penokee-Gogebic began in 1884,  with the two leading mines'the Montreal and Cary Mines'opening in 1886  and closing in 1962 and 1965, respectively. During their operation,  these mines produced a total of over 71 million tons of ore, the most  of any part of the state but paltry compared to the Michigan section  of the Range, which is still producing. The mines were ultimately  doomed by the development of open-pit mining on the Mesabi range and  taconite pelleting technology, as well as a burgoening international  market with cheaper, higher-grade foreign imports (Zube 1963). Today,  the area is estimated to contain 15% of all recoverable iron ore in  the United States (Lundgren and Moynihan 2006).

Penokee Mine ' The New Proposal
         Proposals for re-opening the Penokee-Gogebic in Wisconsin for mining  have been floated off and on virtually since the last mine closed in  1965. They have primarily been stymied by the high cost and low return  from mining such deep, narrow deposits. Recently, there has been  renewed activity around the possibility of a new mine in the area.  Representatives of a consortium of mining companies have presented  local governments, non-profits and media outlets with a vision for a  large open-pit mining operation in the Penokee-Gogebic. The main  parties are RGGS Land and Minerals, Limited of Houston, Texas, which  is owned by oil magnate Russell Gordy, who purchased U.S. Steel  Corporation in 2004; and LaPointe Iron Company of Duluth, Minnesota,  which is owned by John P. Congdon and operates most of the mines on  the Mesabi Iron Range of northern Minnesota. Together, these companies  own about 21,000 acres of land along the Range from southwest of  Mellen to Upson. RGGS holds 62% of the land, LaPointe Iron owns 33%,  and a third entity called the Vilas Trust owns 5% (Lundgren and  Moynihan 2006).

         The recent proposal differs sharply from those that have been  introduced in the past. It would involve an open-pit mine 21 miles  long and up to 280 meters (900 feet) deep. Due to the depth of the  iron deposits in that part of the Range, it would entail removing 200  meters (650 feet) of overburden consisting mainly of granite and  greenstone with some volcanic minerals (Lahti 2006). The overburden  would be dumped in massive tailings piles along the northwest side of  the range. The proposal also includes development of a full processing  and steelmaking industry on site. This would include an iron pellet  production facility, which would pulverize the rock and extract the  iron ore'roughly 20% of the rock volume'using magnets, then reduce the  ore to make 97% pure iron nuggets. There would also be an on-site  steel mill, which would use electric arc furnaces to produce rolls of  steel. These would then be shipped via rail to existing ports (Olivio  2006). The development of this industry would entail a massive and  costly undertaking to build the necessary infrastructure, which would  include new railroads, roads, towns, processing plants, and a power  plant and/or large transmission lines.

Environmental Impacts ' Comparable Mines
          In order to assess the potential environmental impacts of an open-pit  Penokee mine, the closest possible analogs should be examined as  historical precedents for what would likely occur. Every iron range  has a unique geologic setting, so every situation is different. Since  there has never been an open pit mine in the Penokee-Gogebic, this  section will examine two precedents that each have bearing on a part  of the Penokee Mine proposal: impacts of the historic shaft mines in  the Penokee-Gogebic Range, and impacts of the vast open pits of the  Mesabi Range.      

         Because previous mines in the area were all underground, there was  not much direct landscape change from the mining itself. However,  there was a great deal of land use change concurrent and associated  with the mines. While much of this occurred as part of the great  cutover from around 1890 to around 1920, land was also cleared for  mine buildings and infrastructure, as well as development of new towns  and industry (Milbourne et al. 1977). In the vicinity of the Montreal  Mine, the area's largest, massive tailings piles have created an  artificial hill and plateau. This unconsolidated material remains  mostly unvegetated. These tailings piles, which sit on the bank of the  Montreal River, also may be impacting water quality, as runoff from  rain and snowmelt flows from them directly into the river. The steep  slope and lack of vegetation on the sides of the piles leaves little  to stop rapid erosion. Though most of the tailings are probably inert,  sulfide minerals have been found to be present (Ralph and Chau 2006).  Sulfide ores and heavy metals are responsible for acid rock drainage  from mine tailings, as discussed in the next section.   

      Visible impacts of an open pit mine in the Penokee-Gogebic would  probably be most comperable to mines currently operating in the Mesabi  Range of northern Minnesota. These mines are massive open pits,  similar in depth and length to the proposed mine but broader in width.  Open pit iron mines create large disturbances to the landscape,  clearing and re-shaping the topography of an area up to many square  miles (Milbourne et al. 1977). Because of the removal of overburden,  open pit mines produce much greater quantities of tailings than shaft  mines, which can be backfilled but are usually piled elsewhere so that  closed mines can be reopened for further extraction at a later date  (Erickson 2006; Ackermann et al. 1998). The moving of earth by heavy  equipment creates erosion, dust and fossil fuel emissions (Milbourne  et al. 1977). Large amounts of water are consumed in the processing of  ore, though most is returned with few impurities (Zube 1963). The  cleared land and development also causes less infiltration of water  and more runoff, affecting aquatic systems. Again, acid rock drainage  from tailings can be a problem depending on the mineral content of the  waste rock (Milbourne et al. 1977). Today, remediation is performed in  areas that have been mined out; while this improves the recreational  and ecological value of the mined area, it is usually insufficient to  return the landscape to a state similar to before the mining took place.

Environmental Impacts ' Penokee Mine
          With these considerations, a picture can be formulated of what the  impact of the proposed mine would be on its unique surroundings. The  mine would have numerous impacts on the land, water and air of not  only the Penokee-Gogebic Range, but potentially much of the Bad River  watershed.  

         The Penokee-Gogebic Range is part of a large tract of more or less  contiguous northern mesic forest. The unfragmented nature of this  forest makes it very ecologically valuable. Large blocks of forest  provide habitat for specialist species of wildlife, are more  hydrologically stable, resist invasive species, and are easier to  manage for wildlife than fragmented areas (Sapper 2002). The clearing  of land for mining and its associated development would fragment this  forest, degrading and homogenizing the ecosystems. Water from cleared  land would run off faster and snow would melt sooner, reducing the  capacity of the aquifer to recharge and increasing erosion and the  risk of flooding. Altering the landscape topography might destroy some  of the water gaps, with unknown consequences downstream.  Aesthetically, a line of open pits in the Penokee hills would be an  eyesore.    

         The water that flows off the Penokee-Gogebic Range currently feeds  the Penokee aquifer and the Bad River watershed. This watershed  contains 72 rare and endangered plants and animals in 28 different  plant communities. The Bad River empties into Chequamegon Bay through  the Kakagon Sloughs, a 16,000-acre complex of wetlands, woodlands and  sand dune ecosystems. This is one of the largest undeveloped  freshwater estuaries in the world, biologically important to  waterfowl, shorebirds, songbirds, and several species of fish. Wild  rice from the sloughs is important forage for wildlife and highly  valued as a food source and sacred plant by the Ojibwe people. Wild  rice is very sensitive to water contamination and fluctuations in  water level (Dallman et al. 1998). Water pollution from mining and  industry washed down through the watershed could have detrimental  effects on this important ecosystem.     

         Water pollution associated with new mines could come in several  forms. Erosion could add sediment to the river systems. If there were  industries developed that discharged effluent, persistent toxic  substances could be included in the discharge. If water collects in  the mine pits and infiltrates into the aquifer, there could also be a  concern for ground water contamination. The most concrete concern,  however, is runoff from the inevitably massive tailings piles. Since  sulfides such as pyrite, marcosite and galena may be present, the  potential exists for acid rock drainage from tailings. This process  involves sulfur in minerals, primarily pyrite (FeS) becoming oxidized  to create sulfurous acid and iron hydroxide. The acid can lower the pH  of water, making it unsuitable for wildlife, and possibly leaching  heavy metals from surrounding rock. The iron hydroxide precipitates,  coloring the water orange if there is enough of it; this precipitate  is colloquially known as 'yellow boy' (Schaetzl 2005).     

         There are some ways to mitigate water pollution from open pit mines.  Tailings piles can be constructed using a set of best practices that  reduce runoff. A series of benches contoured into the sides of the  tailings piles can trap runoff, limiting erosion (Zube 1963). Topsoil  from the mined areas should be carefully retained and spread over the  finished tailings piles, which then should be immediately revegetated  (Ackermann et al. 1998). Tailings may also be crushed and used for  road construction or industry. Mining pits are typically left to fill  in with water, and in fact the architects of the Penokee Mine proposal  have touted the 'chain of lakes' that would be created as a  recreational benefit (Olivio 2006). These can be made more useful for  recreation and wildlife by regrading the sides to a less than 30%  slope (Ackermann et al. 1998). Backfilling pits with tailings is an  option, but usually not practiced because it would preclude future  mining; even if done, however, only 2/3 of the tailings would fit  (Erickson 2006). In the end, the landscape would be permanently  altered, and the question of what remediation could accomplish would  hinge on what level of alteration is deemed acceptable in the first  place.    

         A third pollution concern regarding the proposed mine is air  pollution. With just a mine, sources of air pollution would include  exhaust emissions from heavy machinery and dust from digging  operations. The concern is much graver, however, given that the plan  involves the construction of an entire steelmaking industry.  Traditional blast furnaces used in metallurgy belch out tons of acid  rain and climate change-inducing chemical compounds, including sulfur  dioxide, carbon dioxide, and nitrogen oxides (Severson and Peterson  2006). Newer technologies, however, may combat this pollution. A new  iron refinery would likely rely on direct reduction technology, which  contains a closed loop for waste gasses, resulting in 40% less carbon  dioxide and only a fraction of the other pollutants being emitted  (Olivio 2006). New methods of steel production require less energy  than older technologies, though there would still be a need for either  new power generation or greatly increased power transmission coupled  with increased generation elsewhere. This would most likely entail  more burning of fossil fuels. Overall, predicting air pollution  resulting from the proposed mine is speculative without knowing the  scope of production and the technologies that would be implemented.

Proposal Status ' How Likely Is It'
         Having reviewed the potential environmental impacts of the proposed  iron mine in the Penokee-Gogebic Range, it is prudent to consider  whether such a mine and industry are even liable to be developed.  Though some mining company officials have been trying to drum up  support for a mine, there are still many unanswered questions as to  the mine's feasibility. While the mining companies that hold the land  are actively seeking an investor, none has yet stepped forward. There  are several possible reasons why this is the case.   

         Firstly, the mining companies interested in developing in the  Penokees have not proven that the mine would be a profit-making  venture. The cost of building the infrastructure necessary just to  start the mine is estimated at $1-1.5 billion, while some estimates  have placed the value of the extractable ore at less than $1 billion  (Lahti 2006). This latter figure could be changing, however. As the  Chinese economy booms, the rising demand for iron ore in that country  has caused the cost of ore on the world market to rise by 70% in 2005  alone. As a result, previously uneconomical iron deposits are now  being considered for exploitation in several U.S. states (Jorgenson  2006).     

         Northern Wisconsin has other issues that make it considered a poor  location for mining. The struggles that have occurred here over  metallic mining within the past three decades have resulted in the  state becoming well known as politically unfavorable to mining (Lahti  2006). That this climate is assumed is evident from the cautious  approach to public relations taken so far by LaPointe Iron executives.  The State of Wisconsin also has a long and involved permitting process  for mines, including requirements for public input, environmental  impact statements, remediation plans and a contingency trust fund (DNR  2003). The entire process takes at least five years.     

         Despite the apparent hurtles, somebody seems to think that a Penokee  Mine would be profitable enough to be worth pursuing. Whether this  profit lies in actual ore extraction within the next decade, or merely  in stock futures, it is too early to tell. Some observers have  suggested that the mine proposal is merely a ploy by a group with a  hidden agenda; if such is the case, it is already a rather elaborate  and expensive one. The seriousness of the proposal will only become  apparent once permit applications are filed. If and when this happens,  it will be up to the citizens of the Chequamegon Bay area to be  watchdogs and insure that all possible steps are being taken to avoid  adverse impacts to the area's ecosystems.