Good!
Two Wisconsin lawmakers on Thursday introduced a controversial proposal to repeal state law requiring mining companies to demonstrate that they have operated without polluting before they are permitted to extract metals here.
“People want to make things in America again,” said Sen. Tom Tiffany, R-Hazelhurst. “Our neighbors, Minnesota and Michigan, have placed their shovels in the dirt of America’s future. It is Wisconsin’s turn to do the same.”
Tiffany, who was instrumental in a 2013 law relaxing state iron mining regulations, has been talking for months about lifting the so-called “moratorium” on mining for sulfide metals such as copper and gold.
By its very nature, mining is an intrusive process. But it can be done in a way that minimizes the long term damage. As long as we humans insist on using natural resources, I would rather mine it in Wisconsin where Wisconsinites can enjoy the economic benefit while also ensuring it is done as safely as possible.
Let’s not forget that we are the “badger” state. Our state was founded on the mining industry and the badger referred to the miners living in the tunnels they dug for a living.
What is interesting is that MI has more stringent mining regulations and yet the Back 40 Mine north of Menominee is still moving forward. If there were economically viable mineral resources in WI they would be developed. G-TAC should be a lesson in why we should be cautious.
Nobody cares, white nationalist troll.
I agree with Rep Gannon. With so many laws in place to protect every imaginable thing combined with the grievance industry’s seemingly endless string of protests and lawsuits, taking the moratorium off the books appears to be a baby step in the direction of a balanced playing field.
bill:
You dodged the issue: MI has more stringent mining laws that WI, yet they can figure out a way to get the Back 40 proposal in the permitting pipeline. I’ll wager that Gannon’s proposal is ripe for a big donation , G-TAC style.
Figures that the white nationalist troll wants to emulate Michigan. After all, there are more white supremacists there than Wisconsin.
1997 Wisconsin Act 71 – SECTION 2. 293.50 of the statutes is created to read:
293.50 Moratorium on issuance of permits for mining of sulfide ore bodies.
mor·a·to·ri·um – a temporary prohibition of an activity.
I agree with Owen’s original statement “By its very nature, mining is an intrusive process. But it can be done in a way that minimizes the long term damage. As long as we humans insist on using natural resources, I would rather mine it in Wisconsin where Wisconsinites can enjoy the economic benefit while also ensuring it is done as safely as possible.”
I guess a moratorium is less restrictive in a child’s mind…
?????
Read the rest of the mining law, then compare to MI. Cherry picking is easy, comprehension for you guys isn’t.
You’re not in a position to criticize anyone on cherry picking and reading comprehension, white supremacist troll.
“comprehension for you guys isn’t.” but name calling is. Sorry but no one is interested in the troll bait. Please skip the vague comments “compare to MI.” Do your homework and contribute something to the discussion.
Sorry guys, but I didn’t call anybody names, just pointed out your poor reading skills.
If you read the article Owen attached you would see your error. And Owen even referenced the key part you omitted in your comment. I did my homework, do yours.
And you still haven’t addressed how MI, with more stringent mining regulations (you can look those up as well), can get the Back 40 project moving along.
Nobody cares what you have to say, Nazi.