Sierra Club Releases the Top 13 Falsehoods Used To Justify the Mining Give-Away Bill

Despite this opposition to the bill and many reasons to be opposed, the proposed legislation has been supported, partly as a result of so many falsehoods, misleading statements, and flawed logic.  This is particularly egregious considering this bill is about metallic mining, the most destructive industrial activity proposed for the state and generates toxic wastes that must be managed safely forever to avoid poisoning air and water resources.    Sulfide mining almost always produces acid mine drainage which is toxic to fish and wildlife due to dissolved metals and contaminants such as mercury, lead, arsenic, cadmium, zinc, copper, and many others that damage surface water and groundwater resources. 

The Mining Give-Away Bill remains poor public policy designed to benefit an industry with a failed track record.  It specifically appears to benefit a single company, Aquila Resources, which collaborated on the development of the bill.  The Sierra Club urges legislators to reject this special interest giveaway bill that is unlikely to create economic development while endangering our sustainable and thriving tourism and agriculture economies. 

The paper addresses the following falsehoods:

MYTH #1: Mining technology is better than in the past so the Prove It First law is unnecessary.  Proponents offer no examples of pollution control technology that has made metallic sulfide safer.  This assertion is no substitute for actual examples of successful operations elsewhere using modern technology – examples that could be used to satisfy the law if there were any available.

MYTH #2 SB 395 maintains environmental protections because no “numeric” changes are made. This is dangerously misleading for two reasons: SB 395 makes it less likely a mining operation will meet our numeric standards and there are important environmental and health protections that are not numeric standards.

MYTH #3: Current mining law is a ban or moratorium.  The Prove It First law –  often called the Mining Moratorium – is only a permit requirement that an applicant mining company demonstrate successful examples of sulfide mining elsewhere in North America.   By letting the mining industry off the hook, SB 395 proves the industry either can’t find an example to meet the standards or are they are unwilling to defend the poor track record for their operations.

MYTH #4: The example mines submitted by Nicolet Minerals in 1999 could have met the law.   The research done by both the DNR and independently demonstrated that the mines would not qualify. 

MYTH #5: Mining companies are unable to conduct exploration here due to the law.   As recently as 2012-13, Aquila Resources was conducting exploration drilling at two deposits it either owns or controls in Wisconsin. 

MYTH #6: The Flambeau mine was successful so the law should be repealed and “The DNR gave the mine a clean bill of health.” The Flambeau mine fails the requirements of the law for several reasons, including a polluted stream and a lack of reclamation.

MYTH #7: Wisconsin has “world-class” potential for mining.   This statement is highly speculative and not supported by facts, including any known economic or viable deposits waiting for a company to exploit them. 

MYTH #8: Mining in Wisconsin could be a billion-dollar industry.  The only support for this statement is the speculation that there might be economic ore deposits that have yet to be discovered (see above discussion of “world class” potential).  But there has been recent exploration and still no significant new deposit has been identified in the state for decades.

MYTH #9: Tourism is “not a bread and butter industry”.  The sustainable tourism economy supports thousands of jobs and reached $20 billion in 2016, up $700 million from 2015 as reported by the State Dept. of Tourism.  One in twelve jobs in the state is sustained by tourism. 

MYTH #10: The Flambeau mine was an economic success:  There is no evidence that the mine created any lasting positive economic impact in Rusk County.  

MYTH #11: We should mine in Wisconsin with its great environmental laws instead of other countries with less regulations.   Beyond the sheer irony of the statement when used to justify weakening our protections, this slogan simply defies logic.

MYTH #12: Modern society relies on metals so we must mine in WI.  This slogan is a transparent attempt to gain public acceptance for a controversial and destructive industrial activity for profit.  No one is disputing the fact that modern society is dependent on abundant metals but there is no shortage of base metals.

MYTH #13: Mining in Wisconsin will supply companies like Foxconn.   This is another highly misleading slogan that ignores the reality that the global economy and markets control the flow of minerals from mining to manufacturing.

For full details and references these falsehoods, read the full paper here.  

Make sure you contact your Senator today and ask them to oppose SB395 or the Mining Give-Away Bill.