IDiot
Member
- Joined
- Sep 11, 2025
- Messages
- 30
https://www.themeateater.com/conser...ssional-action-could-strip-boundary-waters-of
Contact your senators.
Contact your senators.
Boundary waters under attack
- Thread starter IDiot
- Start date
Will Steve and Ole Cal get off their knees long enough to point out how Congressman Zinke voted?
And before anyone asks, yes I did contact my legislators.
IDiot
Member
- Joined
- Sep 11, 2025
- Messages
- 30
IDiot
Member
- Joined
- Sep 11, 2025
- Messages
- 30
Op Ed from both those guys voicing opposition, I don't think they call any individual out specifically.
Dougfirtree
Well-known member
It shouldn't be a partisan issue. But if you have Republican Senators, it's especially important that you call!
Gellar
Well-known member
Boundary Waters Mine Vote Highlights Ryan Zinke’s Hypocrisy On Public Lands
Montana Congressperson whipping votes in support of toxic mine that threatens nation’s most popular Wilderness
wessiler.substack.com
elkduds
Well-known member
Called Sens Hick and Bennet to oppose. You can call yours as well.
Once again it's all in the project 2025 playbook. 
Introduction
Increasing fossil fuel production on public lands. Gutting federal agencies that oversee national parks and forests. Removing protections for Alaska’s lands and waters. Limiting environmental reviews and undermining the Endangered Species Act. These are just a few of the extremely unpopular actions called for in the Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025 “Mandate for Leadership” report. They are also all actions taken by the Trump administration in 2025—one of the worst years on record for national public lands.
Introduction
Increasing fossil fuel production on public lands. Gutting federal agencies that oversee national parks and forests. Removing protections for Alaska’s lands and waters. Limiting environmental reviews and undermining the Endangered Species Act. These are just a few of the extremely unpopular actions called for in the Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025 “Mandate for Leadership” report. They are also all actions taken by the Trump administration in 2025—one of the worst years on record for national public lands.
Conclusion
The lion’s share of Project 2025’s plan for public lands was authored by William Perry Pendley, a man who does not believe public lands should exist. Perry Pendley served illegally as acting director of the Bureau of Land Management under President Trump during his first term. His vision for the Interior department is to strip it down to the studs—keeping just enough staff to rubber-stamp mining and drilling permits—while letting private companies and ranchers run roughshod over our public lands in perpetuity. Notably, Perry Pendley stopped short of calling for the privatization, or sale, of public lands in Project 2025, likely because even he knew it was too politically unpopular.
Northwoods
Well-known member
I’m going to speak on this as someone that loves and frequently uses the BWCA multiple times per year and I’m also familiar with the Polymet and Twin Metals projects. I’ve mined on the very property of the proposed Polymet project. Ultimately folks need to decide for themselves how they feel about non-Ferris mining in northeast Minnesota, but please be away of all the fake news and propaganda being pushed. Even this article is littered with it.
There is no proposed mining in the BWCA. The Twin Metals project would be underground and tailings would be dry stacked. This article really highlights the great hunting in the BWCA. Each year there are 50 bear tags issued for the million acre BW zone and right around 5 bears are killed each year. Tough tag to draw and a harder tag to fill. Should be an over the counter tag. Deer hunting is fun but very spotty and super low densities of deer. Moose hunting is a used to be. Minnesota will never bring the season back even though populations would support a limited harvest of bulls. The Fond Du Lac Band of Lake Superior Chippewa does exercise their 1894 treaty rights and shoot a few moose each year.
I love the Boundary Waters. Currently I support the Polymet project but I’m not fully behind the Twin Metals project, I do support some mineral exploration though. Again, the BW will not be mined. I’ve posted this a few times before. Here is my 2006 bull moose shot in the middle of the BW.
There is no proposed mining in the BWCA. The Twin Metals project would be underground and tailings would be dry stacked. This article really highlights the great hunting in the BWCA. Each year there are 50 bear tags issued for the million acre BW zone and right around 5 bears are killed each year. Tough tag to draw and a harder tag to fill. Should be an over the counter tag. Deer hunting is fun but very spotty and super low densities of deer. Moose hunting is a used to be. Minnesota will never bring the season back even though populations would support a limited harvest of bulls. The Fond Du Lac Band of Lake Superior Chippewa does exercise their 1894 treaty rights and shoot a few moose each year.
I love the Boundary Waters. Currently I support the Polymet project but I’m not fully behind the Twin Metals project, I do support some mineral exploration though. Again, the BW will not be mined. I’ve posted this a few times before. Here is my 2006 bull moose shot in the middle of the BW.
Attachments
Dougfirtree
Well-known member
I respect your opinion, though to be fair, no one is claiming that the BWCA is going to be mined (to my knowledge). The concern is that the mine will be "upstream" of the BWCA in terms of watershed, so that contamination that happens (theoretically), could end up in the waters and wildlife of the BWCA.
Gellar
Well-known member
I know the economics of the area rely heavily on tourism and mining would bring in much needed jobs to the area to the residents who are not involved in that industry. The more I think about it, I am much like you and can see both sides of the story. The last few days it’s been urking me that it’s a foreign company and not one from the United States who would be getting the lions share of the profits. How do you feel about it being a foreign company that would be reaping all the rewards?
Gellar
Well-known member
I have seen people on different bwca forums and face book groups say it’d be in the boundary waters. (I know it’s upstream, in the watershed.)
As a lover of the bwca and northeast Minnesota it is also fair to point out that the bwca does not resemble wilderness like some of you may know out west. There are designated campsites, pit latrines, areas where motorized vehicles are allowed, and almost every lake has remnants of the past resorts and lodges that were forced to close when the area became “wilderness.”
Northwoods
Well-known member
The jobs would be filled by local workers. Plus all the additional construction jobs done by local companies. Communities would benefit, schools would benefit, and other local businesses would benefit. Money paid for mineral rights would benefit the area communities. There would be a select few foreign workers with specialized skills. Are there any U.S. based companies that are skilled and knowledgeable in these types of projects? Mining is very messy, I understand the concerns, just don’t like the propaganda campaign.
Gellar
Well-known member
I guess that was exactly the point I was trying to make. The locals (all those entities you stated) will get enough benefit to be comfortable and not bitch during the development and the operating life of the mine. The real wealth and the materials will be going overseas to Chile and China. If we are going to mine in the U.S., and I’m all for it, why don’t we provide reasons for U.S. Companies to be the major stakeholders and keep everything here?
From twin metals website:
$550,000\16 years=$34,375 per year back to the community! I know individuals who give that much every year to community organizations out of the goodness of their hearts not because they are trying to impress people and build a multibillion mine in their backyard natural playground.
Similar threads
