Categories

A sample text widget

Etiam pulvinar consectetur dolor sed malesuada. Ut convallis euismod dolor nec pretium. Nunc ut tristique massa.

Nam sodales mi vitae dolor ullamcorper et vulputate enim accumsan. Morbi orci magna, tincidunt vitae molestie nec, molestie at mi. Nulla nulla lorem, suscipit in posuere in, interdum non magna.

Latest Labovitz Report-He who pays for the report pays for the results-don’t expect “fair and balanced.”

Just a little white lie-benefits analysis rather than cost benefits analysis

Benefits ONLY! We forgot Costs.

The latest report from the UMD Labovitz School of Business and Economics (as reported on by the News Tribune in the Feb. 7 story, “UMD report underscores value of iron ore mining, potential for copper”), is business as usual in the world of mining in Minnesota.

Once again we get a promotional brochure for the mining industry masquerading as an economic report.

To make judgments about proposed industrial developments, the civilized world usually agrees that a cost-benefit analysis is required. But all we get from the University of Minnesota Duluth is a list of benefits. There was no apparent discussion of costs, of elevated sulfates in Lake Vermilion or of heavy metals leaching from the Dunka pit. I noticed no hint of the dead zone for wild rice in the St. Louis River, no analysis of the blighted communities along the length of the Mesabi Range and no acknowledgement of the poverty rate in Virginia, the heart of the Mesabi Range.

“Regulatory capture” refers to the industry domination of agencies meant to regulate them. “Deep capture” occurs when the industry dominates the media, academia and popular culture. It seems to me the state of Minnesota has been captured by the mining industry.

The editorial pages of the Duluth News Tribune and the publications of the Labovitz School of Business and Economics should be

Who pays-dictate the results!

adequate proof of Minnesota’s subjugation to mining interests.

Robert Tammen

Soudan

Published February 25, 2013, 12:00 AM
Reader’s view: Business as usual for Minnesota mining
The latest report from the UMD Labovitz School of Business and Economics (as reported on by the News Tribune in the Feb. 7 story, “UMD report underscores value of iron ore mining, potential for copper”), is business as usual in the world of mining in Minnesota.

Are we making any progress? Not really! We’re fighting the same battle begun many years ago, as recently as 1990.

The greatest freshwater eco-system in the U.S. is STILL threatened by state policy and mining greed.  Heart Warrior was sounding the alarm in 1990.

Our wells are running dry and the State of Minnesota has yet to realize the value of water. Hibbing in the cross-hairs.

We can not exist without clean water*DNR water officials say it’s time for local communities to start making decisions on water, rather than the state, because the current rates of use are not sustainable.*

*Nature can’t keep up with demand, prompting disputes in some cities.* (Can you say Hibbing?)

It didn’t take Daniel Damm long to figure out why the water from his faucets suddenly turned black. His well was running dry because the turkey farm up the road near Willmar had sucked down the local aquifer.

In Hibbing, where one of three city wells has dried up, local officials have quietly asked the state to help resolve a water dispute with a taconite company that is one of the town’s biggest employers.

And along the shores of White Bear Lake, homeowners found themselves mowing beyond the end of their docks last summer because one of the Twin Cities’ premier lakes is shrinking. They filed suit, charging the state government with failing to manage its most precious resource — water.

Minnesotans have always prided themselves on their more than 10,000 lakes, great rivers and the deep underground reservoirs that supply three-fourths of the state’s residents with naturally clean drinking water.

But many regions in the state have reached the point where people are using water — and then sending it downstream — faster than the rain and snow can replenish it.

Last year, Minnesotans used a record amount of water, fueling a rising number of conflicts from the Iron Range to Pipestone.

Now state regulators, who have never said no to a water permit, for the first time are planning to experiment with more stringent rules that will require some local communities to allocate scarce water.

“It’s scary,” said Dennis Healy, who runs the Pipestone Rural Water System in southwest Minnesota. “The time is coming that there is going to have to be some rationing.”

In the short term, that means farmers and businesses may have to share water with competitors, or even leave the state. Eventually, homeowners may face higher water bills and routine watering bans.The prolonged drought that scorched Minnesota last summer is not to blame, but it provides a glimpse into how climate change, with its weather extremes, could make matters even worse. From now on droughts may be more severe. And then when it rains, it often rains so hard that much of the water runs off the land before it can soak into the ground.

In Minnesota, how the rain falls and the snow melts is crucial because virtually all the state’s water comes from the sky. Over the centuries, water accumulated below the surface, slowly seeping into the ground and the aquifers that store many billions of gallons between grains of sand and fissures in the rock. Today that groundwater and the aquifers supply most of the homes, ethanol plants, millions of irrigated acres, swimming pools and golf courses across the state.

And the 800 pound gorilla in the room is Copper Mining in Northeastern MinnesotaRising demand (and not even mentioned in this article is the tremendous demand for water by Copper Nickel Sulfide mining and exploraion and its effects on our lakes, rivers, and wetlands, yes and wells in Northeastern Minnesota.)

It all works fine as long as water is not used faster than the rain and snow can replace it. But now rising demand — from farm irrigation, a growing ethanol industry, a rising population — is pumping more water out of the ground than ever before.

And once it leaves the aquifer, it’s gone — routed through storm sewers or water treatment plants and into streams, rivers, and sooner or later, out of the state altogether.“We are not running out of water,” said Jim Stark, head of the Minnesota office of the U.S. Geological Survey. “But we are depleting it.”

The most visible example is White Bear Lake.Since 1980, nearby communities have more than doubled the volume of water they pump from the Prairie du Chien aquifer they share with the lake, primarily because of higher residential demand. Now, the lake drops even during wet periods.

Once neighbors use that water — for showers, cooking, watering lawns — it becomes wastewater and is sent to the Pig’s Eye treatment plant near St. Paul, where it is cleaned and released into the Mississippi River — short-circuiting the natural system that keeps water in the lake.The U.S. Geological Survey found recently that it would take annual rainfall that is 4 inches above normal just to keep White Bear Lake where it is now.

“We move it downstream,” said Stark. “We don’t recycle it.”

Last year the White Bear Lake Restoration Association filed suit against the DNR, alleging that it violated environmental standards by allowing local communities to take more water than is sustainable for the lake and aquifer. It asked the court to establish protected water levels for both.

DNR officials declined to comment on the pending complaint.

Soon, the problem could spread beyond White Bear Lake. If the Twin Cities metro area grows by half a million people over the next two decades, at current rates of water use, whole sections of the Twin Cities’ aquifers will drop by half, even with normal rainfall, hydrologists say. At that point, state regulators would shut down the pumps to protect what’s left. Even if water use drops by 30 percent over the next decade, there would still be problems in some parts of the metro area, said Ali Elhassan, water supply manager for the Metropolitan Council.

“People plan for the future,” he said. “Well, the future is now.”

The future arrived some time ago in the perennially dry southwest corner of Minnesota, where the geology is not well designed for holding water underground. Healy, of the Pipestone Rural Water System, has had to tell badly needed businesses to find somewhere else to set up shop because the rural water system couldn’t give them enough water — including a large dairy operation that recently took 15 jobs to South Dakota. “In the last year or so we’ve had a lot more requests from people whose wells are failing,” he said. “People are hauling water.”

The demands of agriculture are especially worrisome, he said. Pattern tiling, which drains precipitation off agricultural fields and into ditches, is on the rise, he said.“While I understand the need and benefit, the idea of discharging that water into the nearest stream and rushing it to the Gulf of Mexico as fast as we can does not makes much sense to me,” he said.

High-capacity irrigation wells are also sprouting all over central and western Minnesota. In 2010, only 2 to 3 percent of the state’s cropland was irrigated, but that alone used 29 percent of water pumped out of Minnesota’s ground that year. But in 2012, the state received nearly 200 irrigation permit requests, with another 200 expected this year — two to three times the norm, DNR officials said.

Alan Peterson, head of the Minnesota Irrigators Association and a farmer near Clear Lake, said irrigation is a better form of crop insurance than crop insurance. Lately, the number of irrigated acres in Minnesota has risen steadily with the price of food and commodities. Because when prices are at record highs, the hundreds of thousands it costs for an irrigation system pays off.

“I can double my yield with irrigation,” Peterson said.

 

Increasingly, however, agricultural water use is driving up disputes. In 2007, when Dan Damm complained to the DNR about the neighboring turkey farm, his was one of just a handful of complaints filed with the state.

“We turned on the water and couldn’t figure out why it was black,” he said. But as a heavy-equipment operator, he knew a lot about the local hydrology, and he figured that the turkey farm had dropped the top of the aquifer below the bottom of his well. The pump was sending up black gunk from the bottom. Once verified, the farm operation paid to replace it, a requirement of state law.

“People have to realize, it’s humans before turkeys,” Damm said.

Last year, the number of well interference complaints spiked at 12 — most of them related to irrigation — compared to a previous yearly average of two. DNR officials say that greatly underrepresents the problem because people often resolve disputes themselves, don’t file a complaint for fear of creating conflicts, or don’t know that they can. The state is also being asked to resolve much bigger problems.

This year, the city of Hibbing finally asked the DNR to weigh in on its ongoing dispute with Hibbing Taconite. For years, the company has been draining the water that collects in one of its massive pits in order to get to the ore that’s below — and then sending the water into a nearby river and eventually Lake Superior. But a side effect is to lower the area’s entire water table; now the level of the aquifer is low enough that one of the city’s primary wells has dried up. The other two are running at capacity, said Gary Myers, general manager of the Hibbing Public Utilities Commission.

He said the city has found a new water source in a different aquifer, but it’s 2½ miles away from town, adding considerably to the $1.2 million cost. Now the question is who should pay.

“That’s an awful lot for us,” Healy said. “But it’s hard to put pressure on them. ”

Officials at Hibbing Taconite declined to comment but said in a statement that negotiations are underway.

Train wreck?

DNR water officials say it’s time for local communities to start making decisions on water, rather than the state, because the current rates of use are not sustainable.

 

“If you fail to make a choice, then at some point the aquifer will do that for you,” said Jason Moeckel, a water manager for the DNR.

This year the DNR will ask one or two water-strapped communities to bring in their biggest water users — cities, farmers, ethanol plants and others — to negotiate conflicts among themselves. It’s never been done in Minnesota, and though many may like the idea of “local control,” the reality may be much more contentious, officials say.

“Everyone likes [it] until they have to be a bad guy to their neighbor,” said Jim Sehl, a DNR water manager. “That’s going to be the toughest selling point — getting people to accept responsibility for making those tough decisions.”

Such choices may come as a shock to to Minnesotans’ assumptions about water, said Deborah Swackhamer, co-director of the Water Resources Center at the University of Minnesota.Elsewhere in the country per-capita water use is declining, but not in the Land of 10,000 Lakes. That, she said, could require hard adjustments. Higher prices for water could result, or more water recycling, or the controversial idea of allowing cities to re-inject treated water back into aquifers.

And the state may have to start saying no.

“Because they can’t keep giving out permits and waiting for the train to crash,” she said.

Even IF

There are many serious and legitimate reasons why environmentalists, resort owners, and local residents are worried about the prospect of multiple copper/nickel mines here.  I can’t understand why our elected representatives for the most part just give lip service to our concerns while working to expedite a hasty permitting process.

But, EVEN IF there were a foolproof guarantee of no toxic acid leakage… and EVEN IF the mining corporations were to promise that at least half of their hires would be folks with local roots… and EVEN IF the extracted precious metals were not exported to foreign buyers but were guaranteed to be kept locally and in the US, for value-added new industries and jobs… and EVEN IF the mining corporations were truly committed to correcting infractions rather than simply paying fines as part of the cost of doing business their way…

EVEN THEN many of us fear the consequences of letting the genie out of the bottle!  Why?  Because once the precedent is set, there will be constant pressure to expand, to sell off more mineral rights, to permit new mining operations.  Because there are no guarantees against human error (think Exxon Valdez) or the consequences of ever-increasing natural disasters (as in the devastating flooding in Duluth last year).  Because the huge electric power needed to operate these mines may require new coal-burning plants that will threaten our air quality.  Because many thousands of acres would be lost for wildlife habitat, berry picking, hiking, hunting, birdwatching.  Because the noise, the trucks, the lights at night, the heavy industry of multiple mining operations just southeast of Ely would change the character of this place.

This is the edge of the BWCAW!  We are stewards of a national treasure, a hugely popular destination, a rare place where lives are changed.  Ely is on a roll (compared to other small towns!) precisely because of the creation of the BWCAW:  the pristine lakes and fresh air, the quiet and beauty, the rich variety of outdoor activities in all seasons.  Our community is bustling with festivals, concerts, special events, and tourists.  The Ely Elementary School is experiencing a growth in enrollment.  These are some of the reasons more and more of us, young and old, are choosing to settle here, to spend locally, to support our community and school.  Our envious friends from noisy, congested places come to visit us; we take them on memorable adventures, show them the stars; they take us out to supper, purchase lures and winter clothing and local art — and buy gas for the long drive back to their cities…

Non-ferrous mining presents a very real threat to the way of life many of us love.  Just because precious metals have been discovered under this precious landscape doesn’t mean that we are obliged to let (foreign-owned) corporations make big profits by digging them up.

The Bible harshly criticizes Esau, who, because he was hungry, traded his birthright, his inheritance, for a single meal (Genesis 25:29-34; Hebrews 12:16).  Let’s not make the same mistake of selling out our future for the sake of short-term economic gain!

— Elton Brown, Morse Township

 

Science and facts show a need for tight regulation of taconite mining

Science and facts show a need for tight regulation of taconite miningHow is it possible that the Wisconsin legislature is ready to pass legislation to create fast-tracked, less-protective ferrous (iron) mining laws for what promises be the largest open-pit iron mine in the world with no scientific evidence to justify treating iron mining differently than other metallic mining?

If Gogebic Taconite proceeds with a proposal, its first phase of mining alone would be larger than the acknowledged largest iron mine in the world, the Hull Rust Mahoning Mine in Hibbing. The taconite ore body in northern Wisconsin is known to run 22 miles, meaning the expansion of mining after phase one could result in an even larger mine with more potential to destroy rivers, streams, wetlands and groundwater.

The main proponents of an iron mining bill in Wisconsin — including Gogebic Taconite, Wisconsin Manufacturers and Commerce and the Wisconsin Mining Association — have misled legislators with claims that the iron ore in Ashland and Iron counties is more environmentally safe compared to metallic sulfide mining and thus requires separate regulations.

Mining proponents claim taconite ores do not contain sulfide minerals such as pyrite, which can produce acid mine drainage and poison local water supplies with dissolved toxic metals such as mercury, arsenic and lead. This claim is false. The Wisconsin Geological Survey reported as long ago as 1929 that pyrite is associated with the ore and waste rock. The United States Geological Survey reported the same thing in 2009. Huge amounts of sulfide-bearing minerals must be extracted to get to the deposit and would be discarded as waste.

Gogebic Taconite has yet to release information on the geochemical content of the ore it hopes to mine. Mike Wiggins, tribal chairman of the Bad River Band of Lake Superior Chippewa, recently called on Gogebic Taconite to release this information so we can publicly discuss whether the projected 910 million tons of waste over

35 years of phase one, stored at the headwaters of the Bad River watershed, could produce the same acid mine drainage that resulted in fish advisories for mercury and a wild rice dead zone for 100 miles downstream from Minnesota’s Mesabi Iron Range in the St. Louis River watershed.

While proponents claim taconite mining in neighboring Minnesota and Michigan has clean track records, the facts suggest otherwise. A survey of compliance records from 2004 to 2012 for taconite mines and related production facilities in Minnesota and Michigan shows all 10 modern taconite mines and processors are chronic polluters with fines and stipulations of more than $2.1 million (see wisconsin.sierraclub.org/

PenokeeMine.asp). A Minnesota DNR report in 2003 found taconite mining to be the second-largest source of mercury emissions after coal power plants. The study also reported that no suitable technology has been found to curtail taconite mercury emissions.

Gogebic Taconite’s claim that ferrous (iron) mining should be regulated separately seems based on an artificial distinction without scientific merit. Legislators who voted in support had to have been deliberately misled by Gogebic Taconite, Wisconsin Manufacturers and Commerce and the Wisconsin Mining Association about the safety of taconite mining. Their votes had to have been based on unproven mining industry rhetoric over scientific fact.

The failure to admit the presence of sulfide minerals in the waste rock also has reinforced an attitude among some legislators that the concerns of the Bad River Band do not have to be taken into account in the legislative debate. These legislators need to be reminded that the treaties between the Lake Superior Chippewa and the federal government affirm tribal rights to hunt, fish and gather wild rice in the ceded territory of Wisconsin, Michigan and Minnesota. The Bad River Band also has sovereign authority, under the Clean Water Act, to protect its wild rice from mining pollution. Legislation that conflicts with the treaties or the tribe’s sovereign authority will be subject to lengthy court challenges and grassroots resistance from an Indian, environmental, sport-fishing and conservation alliance that defeated the Crandon mine in 2003.

By: Al Gedicks and Dave Blouin, for the Duluth News Tribune

Al Gedicks of La Crosse, Wis., is executive secretary of the Wisconsin Resources Protection Council and the author of “Resource Rebels: Native Challenges to Mining and Oil Corporations.” Dave Blouin of Madison is the Mining Committee chairman for the Sierra Club-John Muir Chapter of Wisconsin and is co-founder of the Mining Impact Coalition of Wisconsin.  

Sulfide mining in Upper Great Lakes

St. Louis County Board rushes past Citizen involvement…if they can. Legal? It shouldn’t be!

Iron Range Politicians for Copper

Fealty Demanded

Iron Range Politicians demand fealty* from St. Louis County Board regarding a BWCA and Superior Nation Forest land swap to benefit Copper mining in Northeastern Minnesota, all their subterfuge aside.

* (An oath of fealty  was a fundamental element of the  the feudal system in medieval Europe . It was sworn between two people, the obliged person (vassal) and a person of rank (liege lord).

In a meeting intended for business so urgent that it cannot be delayed till the next meeting on January 8th, St. Louis County Commissioners passed a resolution that weighs in on an issue that has been highly controversial to citizens in St. Louis County, Minnesota and indeed the entire nation for more than 30 years. The only urgency was to avoid the voices of the public weighing in on an issue that has kept public policy makers from taking action for decades.

This version is “only” 30 minutes long and was condensed from the original 2 hour 15 minute segment dedicated to the Land Swap.  It doesn’t take a professional psychologist to see the distinct split between fact finders and fact avoiders, between those stuck in a 19th Century industrial revolution model of economic development and those desiring a cleaner healthier existence with their jobs.  Enjoy!  This is pure Iron Range Politics and coercion as only someone who has lived on the Iron Range can understand.  But, if you delve into this video, you also will understand a major part of Iron Range Politics.  We have included the full version also, should you want to see EVERY nuance of the event.

 

 

Full version of the BWCA Land Swap session

In reality less money would be made for Minnesota’s schools with the politicians plan than a plan proposed by citizens at this meeting. A proposal that was completely ignored by the board.

Yes Virginia! Some people believe Copper Sulfide mining IS Santa Claus.

Copper Sulfide Mining Supports Us?

Sulfie the We Support Mining Fish

“Sulfie” the We Support Mining Mascot

Yes Virginia, some only see the meager gifts this Santa brings. They over look the arsenic, mercury, and acid mine drainage that comes with this type of mining. They over look the “resource curse,” the bad behavior of the industry, and the propaganda fed them by their elected officials. Yes, this blind neglect of fact and reality, is quite strange human behavior. But, so is an adult believing in Santa Claus. Sulfie, and the wild rice he used to swim in KNOW!

Good Example of Bad Results from Exposed Sulfur Containing Rock

Vermilion Community College (VCC) in Ely, MN offers an excellent example of the bad results from water runoff of exposed rocks containing sulfur.  A very thin band of exposed sulfur containing rock in the Greenstone outcropping in the VCC courtyard has produced a dead zone “downstream.”  As you approach the massive Greenstone outcropping from the front of the courtyard you see what we would expect in Northern Minnesota, bright green vegetation, flowers, a healthy Birch Tree and a huge rock outcropping.  Hidden from view, on the backside of this larger outcropping, is a smaller outcropping that contains a small thin band of exposed crumbly sulfurous rock that has, with rain running off and “downstream” from this rock, a dead zone where nothing lives, except the rocks.   Although this is not the same kind of rock that will be mined for copper, sulfur in what ever form when exposed to air and water will produce acid mine drainage and release of arsenic and mercury and other heavy metals into the watershed and that DOES include the type of rock that contains sulfur in the form of sulfides  that may be mined for copper in our region.

VCC Ely Greenstone Outcropping

What we want to see

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

VCC Ely Greenstone Outcropping with Sulfurous Rock Exposed

First View of the Problem

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

You will notice, below, that a small pine tree is able to grow on slightly higher ground where the rain runoff doesn’t reach.

VCC Ely Greenstone Outcropping with Sulfurous Rock Exposed-The Sulfurous Vein

The Sulfurous Culprit

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

VCC Ely Greenstone Outcropping with Sulfurous Rock Exposed

View of the Sulfurous rock runoff zone

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

VCC Ely Greenstone Outcropping with Sulfurous Rock Exposed

Closeup of the Dead Zone caused by runoff from the Sulfurous Rock

Prove it first! Make mining companies show that their technologies won’t pollute!

ely-mn-lake bwca without mining pollutionELY, Minn. — A pro-mining stance combined with a pro-environment stance, which everyone claims they desire, demands nothing less than a “prove it first” law in Minnesota. “Prove it first” is the obvious and only conclusion that permits mining and saves the clean air and water we all love and need.

For Minnesota politicians or residents to accept or promote anything less than “prove it first” with parameters similar to the Wisconsin law in regard to non-ferrous sulfide mining in Minnesota is to be one of the following (or perhaps all three):

MisinformedMany still don’t know the difference between iron mining and non-ferrous sulfide mining. Why do politicians rarely distinguish between the two entirely different processes? Many believe in the hype and promises of this non-ferrous mining industry with a significantly less-than-stellar reputation. They believe in the myth of “strong regulations” of the mining industry in Minnesota. Some co-opted politicians believe the existing wild rice protective limits for sulfates were “arbitrarily” chosen, when in fact the research establishing the existing limits was performed by one of our DNR’s best scientists, who had the absolute respect of his colleagues. That field research was done when our waters were less polluted than they are now; therefore it was more reliable than if done today in more polluted waters or in a laboratory.

Disingenuous: This includes those claiming to be for clean water but doing nothing to guarantee such. And, there is no guarantee in promises, inadequate financial assurances or unproven new technology.

Intellectually dishonest: Do we not have enough polluted water (and increasing at every count)?  Have we not coddled the mining industry sufficiently, to our own detriment? My research indicates that Minnesota is not protecting Minnesotans and our water, partly because of inadequate regulations but more often because of inadequate enforcement. Those of us who have been labeled hard-headed environmentalists by U.S. Rep. Chip Cravaack and state Rep. Tom Rukavina are at odds with the intellectually dishonest who are demanding faster tracking to disaster and land swaps that are blatantly unfair to Minnesotans. Why would we trade lands that are protected by the Weeks Act for unprotected lands? The claim that the BWCA land swap bill H.R. 5544 is for the poor children is intellectually dishonest. If it were so important, you would think these stalwart politicians would have demanded  to settle this land issue for the children years ago. But now that Polymet Mining and other mining interests want these lands, the children’s interests surface more prominently.

Iron Range politicians and mining companies dislike the analysis brought to the current situation by the researched and documented “resource curse.” In essence, if mining is so great and supposedly we are in record times for taconite production, why are Iron Range communities in such bad economic shape?  You would think communities would benefit along with the mining companies, but the research indicates that communities are worse off with mining than without.

An article from Mining Watch Canada shows how the mining industry is questioning the “resource curse.” The International Council on Minerals and Metals has determined the problem is with poor governance of host countries. First mining companies co-opt all levels of governance for minimum regulations, favoritism at all levels and the best terms and taxation, then they blame the host country for not striking a better deal, not managing revenues and not investing in social causes or benefit sharing, particularly at the local level (the ICMM’s words, not mine). So, mining companies are responsible for nothing except their profits. And in part that is true. In the U.S. they are legally bound to maximize shareholders profits. If they decide to become socially conscious and that costs money, shareholders could sue them for not maximizing profits. It should therefore fall on governments, the supposed representative in the service of the people, to demand the best possible “deal” for their citizens, in this case the residents of Minnesota.

THEREFORE: Prove it first! If mining companies prove their technologies will not pollute Minnesota air and water, let them have the minerals they desire. And, to Minnesota politicians at all levels of governance: Strike the best deal you can for all the residents of Minnesota, for the health and wealth of Minnesota. Be informed, and more important, keep us informed.

Be genuine in your dealings with us; we see right through the disingenuous. We don’t need any more governmental “listening sessions”; we need dialogue and governmental transparency.

Richard Watson is a resident of Ely. He writes the Threatened Waters Blog.  

This article was first published in MinnPost  Monday, September 10, 2012