Legislation concerning to regional sportsmen introduced by Rep. Pete Stauber (R-Minn., 8th) passed the House of Representatives last week. H.J. 140 is a bill that seeks to undo a 20-year mining moratorium in the Rainy River Watershed, upstream from the Boundary Waters.
This move came after years of pressure from Rep. Stauber to permit a sulfide-ore copper mine proposed by Twin Metals Minnesota near the shores of Birch Lake, between Ely and Babbitt.
Under the current administration’s push for critical mineral dominance in the United States, proponents of this project have been pointing to how Twin Metals is essential to national security by reducing our dependency on foreign adversaries like China.
After spending the better part of last week in Washington D.C. working around the clock to oppose this bill, I feel relatively confident in saying that energy production and national security have little to do with passing this legislation.
Bolstering national security and energy independence are worthy considerations when weighing the decision to move forward with a project, sometimes even in the face of environmental degradation, but this project wouldn’t accomplish either of those things.
MORE COVERAGE FROM MINNESOTA OUTDOOR NEWS:
Public comment sought as Minnesota reviews groundwater protection
Professor’s CWD prevalence model closely predicts this year’s rate in Minnesota
Just how good is your hunting dog’s nose?
In a rules committee hearing prior to the full floor vote on H.J. 140, Rep. Stauber, Twin Metals’ biggest congressional proponent, was asked about where the company that owns Twin Metals is from and where the minerals would end up after being extracted. Chuckling and maybe even embarrassed, he admitted that Twin Metals is owned by a Chilean company and that the minerals would be processed overseas.
What he’s referring to is a penned processing agreement between Antofagasta, Twin Metals parent company, and China, where smelting can be done cheaply.
In a disappointing but unsurprising move, Rep. Ryan Zinke (R-Mont., 1st) spoke in overwhelming support of the bill and project. This comes just months after Zinke co-founded the “Public Lands Caucus” where he helped shut down a massive public lands sell-off and was recognized by a number of conservation organizations for doing so.
As it turned out, representatives Zinke and Stauber had been whipping up members of the House of Representatives in the days leading up to the vote to ensure the bill’s successful passage, despite a letter of opposition signed by over 20 national hunting and fishing organizations.
To put that into perspective, a purported conservationist and outdoorsman, along with 214 U.S. representatives are on record supporting a bill that uses the Congressional Review Act (CRA) for the first time since its inception, to undo a public land order with the explicit purpose of supporting a foreign-owned mining conglomerate who wants to extract, quite possibly, the most important minerals in the world from Minnesota. Then ship them to China, thereby risking polluting the most visited wilderness area in the country, against overwhelming opposition from Minnesotans and sporting groups around the country.
That’s all for the promise of inherently temporary jobs, a temporary influx of economic stimulation, and the opportunity to buy back our own minerals on the global market.
Along the way, this sets a dangerous precedent of using the CRA in the future to undo past PLOs with a simple majority in Congress.
As a civically involved American, as a veteran, as an outdoorsman, or just as someone who looks forward to taking their kids paddling in the Boundary Waters someday, I can’t seem to find an upside to removing this moratorium. Ensuring places like the Boundary Waters remain pristine is an objective good for every American and visitor to our country. Anything that could threaten that needs a better argument than what I’ve seen so far.
Here’s to hoping the U.S. Senate is a little less cavalier about selling-out one of America’s most cherished landscapes. I strongly encourage you to reach out to your senators and ask them to vote against legislation that removes Public Land Order 7917, the federal moratorium on mining in Superior National Forest directly upstream from the Boundary Waters.
Minnesota’s senators likely will vote our way on this legislation, so if you have friends and family in other states, please ask them to contact their senators, too. The U.S. Senate switchboard phone number is (202) 224-3121.
Commentary written by Matthew Schultz / Program Manager Sportsmen for the Boundary Waters.



4 thoughts on “Commentary: Fight back against legislation that threatens Minnesota’s Boundary Waters”
This administration is hell bent on undoing most of the environmental regulations passed the last 50 years. Using the case as critical to our protection and advancing the nation is a crock of bear dung. We, as sportspeople, need to make sure our voices are heard.
Worth noting that Iván Arriagada, the Chief Executive of Antofagasta Minerals, purchased a residence in Washington D.C. early in Trump’s first term. Given the obviously very poor cost-benefit profile of the proposed mining complex for Minnesotans, outdoor enthusiasts, and Americans, this sure looks like a quid pro quo for this CEO’s patronage.
Also worth noting that, if the senate sells out this wilderness, it opens the door to undoing any other ban on extraction by using the CRA.
On January 19th, I’m listening to a podcast (Cal of the Wild) where CEO of BHA Ryan Callaghan interviews Zinke and all Zinke can talk about is his work protecting public lands while prioritizing “best use”. The next thing I see, he’s whipping votes to strip protections for the BWCA where the “best use” justification for mining seems glaringly short-sighted. I’d like to hear his explanation.
Do not open Boundary Waters to mining!