August 21, 2014
Lake of the Woods Basin Water Quality Plan of Study Team
Canadian Section Office
International Joint Commission
234 Laurier Avenue W.
22nd Floor
Ottawa, ON
Canada K1P 6K6
United States Section Office
International Joint Commission
2000 L. Street NW, Suite 615
Washington, D.C. 20440
USA
Dear Lake of the Woods Basin Water Quality Plan of Study Team,
With this letter, we the undersigned organizations share our comments on the Draft Water
Quality Plan of Study (POS) for the Lake of the Woods Basin. Thank you for this
opportunity to review the Draft POS and to provide feedback. We appreciate the Study
Team’s attention to protecting the important water resources of this area.
As the Study Team is aware, the Basin encompasses a drainage area of 26,930 square miles
(69,750 square kilometers) and is important economically, ecologically, and recreationally.
While the Draft POS outlines many critical issues that warrant investigation, our feedback
is focused on issues regarding surface and groundwater contamination in Section 3.4.
Project 25 – Assessment Report on Contaminants in Water, Aquatic Sediment, and Fish
The Study Team has proposed a bi-national, coordinated assessment of contaminants in
water and fish. This is a much-needed assessment.
We recommend the effort include the following:
The POS assessment of contaminants within the Basin should:
 Focus on all contaminants with the potential to impact both human health and the
health of aquatic systems, including mercury and all heavy metals.
 Include sulfate concentrations and specifically address the effects of sulfate on
impairment of wild rice, mercury methylation, and release of phosphorus from
sediments contributing to eutrophication.
 Include assessments of specific conductance, analysis of ions that contribute to
conductivity, and the impacts on fish assemblages and aquatic macroinvertebrates.


Compare specific conductance findings with the 300 µS/cm aquatic life benchmark
value described in the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s 2010 report, A Fieldbased Aquatic Life Benchmark Conductivity in Central Appalachian Streams
Ensure all data sets that are used are made publicly available in an accessible format
Project 27 – Assess Vulnerability of Border Waters to Contamination from Mining,
Agriculture and Petroleum Transport
The Study Team has proposed an assessment of the vulnerability of the surface and
groundwater resources from mining, agriculture and petroleum transport which would
include: a detailed hydrogeological mapping of groundwater resources and flowpaths, an
inventory of locations and potential contaminants, analysis of key transport pathways and
dilution potential, an assessment of safeguards with recommendations for new safeguards,
and an assessment of the risks associated with climate variability. These are all important
aspects to understand better.
We recommend the following for this project:






In addition to assessing water impacts from mining, the POS should include an
assessment of cumulative effects from mineral exploration. The large-scale level of
mineral exploration taking place and anticipated in the Basin has the potential for
impacts on its own.
A broad cumulative effects analysis should be part of the POS, including assessments
of mining, petroleum product pipelines, related road building, associated power
plants, associated transmission lines, railroad lines, and the transportation of mine
products and wastes via trucks, pipelines and railroad cars.
The POS should reframe its consideration of contaminant transport pathways in the
Basin. Identification of discrete transport pathways may be meaningful in arid
regions of the Continent. However, in the Lake of the Woods Basin, given surface
and groundwater interaction and the extent of lakes, rivers and wetlands, it may be
more efficient and more consistent with hydrology to try and identify if there are
areas that are hydrologically isolated so that they would not serve as transport
pathways.
When addressing safeguards, the POS should ask the question of whether adequate
safeguards even exist. An examination of pollution containment and treatment
methods, scale and efficacy at similar mines in the U.S. and Canada should be
included.
The assessment should include discussion about the economic vulnerability from
mining, pipelines, and associated activities in a region that needs to retain its high
water quality for economic sustainability.
The POS should describe how hydrogeologic mapping of groundwater resources
and flowpaths will be conducted, given the scarcity of data. If additional drilling is
proposed to collect data, proposed drilling should be described and analyzed for
cumulative effects, given the high level of bedrock drilling that has already occurred
in some places within the Basin. The Study Team should recommend that any data

on flowpaths, fractures and groundwater resources gathered by the private sector
be made available to relevant state and federal regulatory agencies.
In analyzing climate variability within the Basin, the POS should consider potential
flooding of underground mines and surface impoundments, and the ecological
impact and economic costs of responding to such events.
Project 28 – Annual Mining Effects Science Workshop
The Draft POS recommends the creation of a diverse stakeholder group for the ongoing
exchange of scientific information on water quality effects related to mining activities
within the Basin. The stakeholder group as proposed would include scientists from the
mining industry, permit-review-authority agencies, non-regulatory earth science agencies,
universities, and scientists representing advocacy groups who are “opposed to mining.”
We believe exchanging information and evaluating relevant data is an important endeavor
in the effort to protect the Basin’s water, ecology and economies.
We recommend the following for this project:





We believe that tribal representation from all bands and First Nations with
interests in the Basin, including usufructuary rights in Ceded Territories should be
provided on the same terms as other interested government agencies. A map from
the 1854 Treaty Authority is attached for your reference.
The process for participation by scientists as “representatives” of advocacy groups
is problematic. The scientists with whom our groups work share their expertise,
rather than “representing” our advocacy organizations. In addition, the mission of
our groups is to protect water quality, natural resources and human health, not to
oppose mining. We recommend that the POS avoid characterizing advocacy
organizations as “opposed to mining” and allow groups to choose their own
representatives.
We also believe that scientists who represent mining companies are likely to lack
objectivity.
For the above reasons, we recommend that the POS design a study process that
engages objective scientists to provide research and analysis, with separate input
coming from interest groups, including mining interests and groups interested in
protecting water resources. Minnesota’s wild rice study process facilitated by the
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency may be a model to use in developing this
process. It is helpful for scientific inquiry and the reliability of results to focus on
gathering and using credible information from independent scientists.
The stakeholder group should include other interests such as recreation and human
health groups. To assist in evaluating financial risks and ability to respond to water
quality problems from mining activities, the stakeholder process should also
include representatives with financial expertise.
Other Recommendations and Questions



The POS should explain the role of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency in this
assessment and process. At the very least, we recommend close coordination with
the U.S. EPA as the POS moves forward.
We recommend that all bands and First Nations with interests in the Basin be
specifically consulted in developing and crafting the scope of this POS.
The Water Quality Plan of Study consists of 33 projects representing a wide range of
water quality-related inquiries. We welcome a better understanding of how the POS
will be presented to the International Joint Commission, and how funding and
implementation decisions will be made.
Thank you very much for this opportunity to comment on the International Joint
Commission Water Quality Plan of Study. We believe that this is an important project for
the future of water resources, habitats, human health and sustainable economic activity.
We look forward to learning more about this initiative and additional ways we can
participate, learn, and contribute to this process. If you have questions, please contact
Friends of the Boundary Waters Wilderness (612) 332-9630.
Sincerely,
Paul Danicic
Friends of the Boundary Waters Wilderness
Bob Baxter
Friends of Quetico Park
Scott Strand
Minnesota Center for Environmental Advocacy
Rebecca Rom
Northeastern Minnesotans for Wilderness
Robert DesJarlait
Protect Our Manoomin
Glenda McLachlan
Quetico Foundation
Elanne Palcich
Save Our Sky Blue Waters
Matthew Hollinshead
Sierra Club North Star Chapter
Christina Hausman
Voyageurs National Park Association
Paula Maccabee
WaterLegacy
Kevin Proescholdt
Wilderness Watch
Richard Staffon
W.J. McCabe (Duluth) Chapter of the Izaak Walton League of America