MINNESOTA CONSERVATION FEDERATION
ANNUAL MEETING
September 9, 2012
Resolution #4
Deerwood, Minnesota
Copper Nickel Mining
WHEREAS, northern Minnesota has rich deposits of minerals such as copper and nickel, and
WHEREAS, Minnesota has preserved and protected many areas with complex ecosystems
providing critical habitat for numerous species, and
WHEREAS, the Minnesota Conservation Federation passed a resolution concerning global
population growth in 2011, and
WHEREAS, the increase in global population and the large increase of people moving from
poverty to the middle class has created a demand for more raw materials, and
WHEREAS, these minerals have increased in value and provided large economic incentives for
companies to extract these minerals, and
WHEREAS, many of the corporations involved in the mining operations are based in foreign
countries where environmental regulations for the use of the minerals may be more harmful to
the environment, and
WHEREAS, many mining operations have posed serious environmental concerns in the past.
With pollution entering the soil, air and water system, and
WHEREAS, mining today is allowed up to the boarders of The BWCA Wilderness and
adjacent to (or under) water bodies that flow into the wilderness, and
WHEREAS, inadequate assurance has been provided to remediate and prevent these
environmental catastrophes as well as providing resources for the safe closure of mines, and
WHEREAS, mining corporations filing for bankruptcy leaves large financial burdens and
ecological damages for the public to deal with, and
WHEREAS, mining has harmful consequences to the strong tradition of hunting and fishing in
Minnesota, and
WHEREAS, increased mining creates more work and responsibilities for local, state and federal
employees, and
WHEREAS, the Minnesota Conservation Federation does not believe completely banning
mining is feasible, and
WHEREAS, Wisconsin has passed a “Prove It First Law” in 1997. The law states that before
opening a mine the company must be able to point to a similar mine to what it is proposing, that
(A) has operated for 10 years and (B) has been closed for 10 years without polluting.
Unable to point to such an example, no new mines have been proposed in Wisconsin, and
WHEREAS, examples from other states show the large costs taxpayers can be left with.
-Zortman-Landusky Mine, Montana $33 million and counting
-Grouse Creek Mine, Idaho $53 million
-Summitville Mine, Colorado $185 million and $1.5 million a year, and
WHEREAS, the Pollution Control Agency and Department of Management and Budget are not
currently involved in calculating the amount of financial assurance required. The Department of
Natural Resources makes this decision at their discretion and is not required to inform the public.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Minnesota Conservation Federation supports
stronger assurances and liabilities for mining corporations.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Minnesota Conservation Federation supports strict
protection of fish and wildlife corridors in mining areas.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that Minnesota Conservation Federation supports recycling and
efficient use of these minerals since we are not likely to change our consumption in the short
term.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Minnesota Conservation Federation supports a tax of
the extracted minerals to help cover the added public costs of mining.