Review announced to determine if Minnesota’s nonferrous mining rules fail to protect the Boundary Waters

DNR will determine if existing state laws would protect the BWCAW from proposed copper-nickel mining in the Rainy River Watershed.

What happened?

On Oct 4th, 2021, the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) announced a process to review whether Minnesota’s nonferrous mining rules are inadequate to protect the Boundary Waters from proposed sulfide-ore copper mining. The review could result in a prohibition on such mining on lands next to the Wilderness.

The DNR process was directed by Ramsey County District Court court order in a lawsuit brought by Northeastern Minnesotans for Wilderness. The DNR will accept comments from the public on the adequacy of the rules to protect the Boundary Waters during a 30-day comment period that will commence on November 9. 

Background on the legal challenge

The review is a result of a lawsuit brought by Northeastern Minnesotans for Wilderness. Northeastern Minnesotans for Wilderness asserts that the DNR siting rule should be amended to prohibit nonferrous mining in the Rainy River Headwaters altogether as the only way to protect the Boundary Waters from pollution, damage, or destruction. 

The lawsuit alleges that the current mining rules – adopted 28 years ago – fail to protect the Boundary Waters and the Rainy River Headwaters. The current rules allow for sulfide-ore mining in the upstream half of the Rainy River Headwaters, next to and outside of the Boundary Waters. Polluted waters from sulfide-ore copper mining in the upstream half of the Rainy River Headwaters would flow directly into the Boundary Waters and also put at risk the downstream protected areas of the Quetico Provincial Park and Voyageurs National Park. 

What does this mean?

The review will allow Minnesotans to submit comments on whether or not the state’s current mining rules are adequate for protecting the BWCA, its watershed, and the surrounding lands from potential pollution from proposed copper-nickel mining in the wilderness area. 

A ban of nonferrous mining development in the watershed on state lands resulting from the DNR choosing to amend the current state mining rules is similar to a federal mineral withdrawal order that was recently announced by the Departments of Agriculture and Interior, respectively. Though the lands under question in the MERA lawsuit are state-held lands, the Biden Administration’s announcement involves federal lands and mineral rights. Both state and federal lands are necessary for the Twin Metals project to move forward. 

Take Action

You may submit a comment to the DNR through our petition page. DNR is seeking additional information that will assist it in deciding this issue; comments that merely support or oppose the Twin Metals Minnesota project or other proposed projects in the Rainy River Headwaters are not responsive.

Categorised in: Blog, Fishing, Hunting, News, Updates