Maybe you’d like to better understand the media landscape on the Iron Range as it relates to the ongoing debate between supporters and opponents of proposed copper-nickel mines in the region?
Last week, opponents of the mining projects announced that a group would canoe from the BWCA to St. Paul using various waterways to protest the environmental risk of this form of mining. This was event was lightly reported around the state, mostly drawing attention in environmental circles.
It was intially ignored by the Mesabi Daily News, the largest daily paper on the Range and home to a voraciously pro-mining editorial stance. But it finally got front-page treatment this morning.
Headline: “Anti-copper/nickel canoeist effort had to change plans to launch near the Polymet site“
Apparently a group of about 50 pro-mining people showed up to make sure the canoeists didn’t step on private property.
“We showed what can happen when we work together and finally have the courage to publicly push back on these types of groups. We need more of that from across the Range and from our leaders in Minnesota and Washington,” Lislegard said.
I must stress, this is a quote by a supporter of large, multi-national mining companies in opposition to half a dozen people in canoes. Welcome to Iron Range 2012, not to be confused with Iron Range 1912.
The argument for sulfide mining is frustrating. Most folks live in a post-industrial society. Many of us learned to reduce our cost of living rather than depend on higher wages. We actually do seem to live closer to a 1912 version of life. Plenty of us don’t own motors. Transportation requires physical effort and planning. We are intimately familiar with local topography.
The desire for status symbols and luxury items seems to be why pro-mining groups say the Range “Needs” new mines. A lack of material possessions is not oppression. That is why this argument is frustrating. The rest of us learned to live cheap and simple lifestyles, often times out of necessity.
We believe in shared public water and land. It is something we can all have. We love our state. We love the natural portions of our state. Minnesota has an opportunity for long-term visions that are successful. The new mines are a short-term plan that allows current generations to live like baby boomers. Those days are gone. No more cars for everyone. No more air conditioners for everyone, etc.
Burning calories rather than fossil fuels matters. I see it now. I see the differences in people. Those burning more fossil fuels than calories are unhappy. Those still “wanting” are unhappy. There is a difference in wellness of all kinds, including: spiritual, intellectual, emotional, and physical.
Hopefully there is a way to reach millennials still on the Range that looking to our parents and their example is troublesome. Look back people. Look to your grandma and grandpa, and older than that. That’s what the rest of us are doing. The traditions are still there. The survival tactics are pertinent. Maybe the younger millennials don’t remember the 1980s life of Iron Rangers. It made a lasting impression on many of us. So, make yourself immune. We can’t depend on external circumstances.
There are a quite a few DFL party activists that continue to not accept the big picture. The main effect of this last publicity stunt was to draw attention to the continued lack of understanding or caring for the needs of the people who reside in the 8th district. I don’t worry about people in canoes, it is the people funding the extremist approach and the Democratic acceptance of those dollars that concerns me to the demise of any economy here. Rather than take this bait I’ll switch to someone who does get it.
Bud, I continue to argue that the economic problems in northern Minnesota will not be solved by these new mining projects, nor do the people expressing (sometimes misguided, but sometimes reasonable) environmental concerns represent any kind of threat. You can get 50 people to show up to intimidate some canoe protesters, but can we get 50 people to show up to plan something other than what’s served up by outside developers?
Who should we trust more, those dependent on outside mining dollars or those dependent on outside environmental lobby dollars?
It’s a trick question. We are in a world of trouble if we have to depend on either one.
I believe that you promote diversification of the economy which no one would argue is a bad thing. The problem I see existing today are the people and funding behind those media stunts. I believe the threat to our natural based resource industry is real and it is called the EPA and its rulings which are bypassing Congress. Follow the path backwards and it reaches the national democratic party and special interests currently. If we hinder the mining industry which has a 3.1 billion dollar impact on the regional economy things will be hurting a lot more than we all think with the trickle down effect. I’m all for diversification but to ignore potential jobs even if they aren’t diversified is to ignore the reality being felt throughout the 8th district and in its communities and schools.Schools continue to consolidate, no one enjoys that type of thing if you’ve been through the process. I have no argument that more needs to be done to diversify and improve with the devil being in the details for sure. Regarding the mining supporters, they weren’t in place to intimidate, it is to counteract the media bias that exists now (Examples: Star tribune, MPR, activist and environmental site blogs, you name it.) and simply to show that we do support mining here. The vote this season will determine what the state of mind actually is in the 8th. No predictions on that yet. We all have our guesses, as always, looking forward to yours.
Bud’s kinda right. I never watched the link to that video until tonight. I see Bud’s point. My discussion points were about daily life, not canoeing.
I am on Bud’s side regarding outside influences and all that. I think Bud and me are similar in opinions. My only point is that the mining companies are outside influences the same as Democratic environmental organizations.
I was actually trying to communicate about the general laziness of people. People of a particular neighborhood, region, or whatever should work together to improve circumstances. Picking one outside influence over the other and then arguing about it is wrong.
I can sum up what I perceive to be actual circumstances. One guy I know finally got a mining job. Then, he got a couch you plug in. Apparently it is an electric couch. That’s what I was talking about. I’m talking about electric couches.
Range kids buy electric couches when they have money. It makes more sense to me to walk to work for less money. We don’t need electric couches. I am not promoting the agenda in the video. I can’t change the world. I don’t want to change the world. I don’t even like people trying to change the world.
I don’t like the way my words look when weighed against the propaganda video from the link. I’m just promoting physical effort over modern technology. I think people should use their bodies more and cars or electric couches less. That way we can have the land and some spending money. That’s all I’m advocating.