♪♪ >> CATHY: THE POSSIBILITY OF MINING NEAR THE BOUNDARY WATERS CANOE AREA WILDERNESS IS NOT A NEW ISSUE.

MINING RIGHTS IN NORTHERN MINNESOTA'S SUPERIOR NATIONAL FOREST HAVE LONG BEEN A CONTROVERSIAL TOPIC.

DECISIONS ON BANNING IT OR ALLOWING IT HAVE OFTEN HINGED ON WHO CONTROLS THE WHITE HOUSE.

WE'VE ROUNDED UP TWO DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVES ON MINING IN MINNESOTA.

CHRIS KNOPF IS WITH THE FRIENDS OF THE BOUNDARY WATERS AND A SUPPORTER OF THE BIDEN 20-YEAR BAN ON MINING IN THE REGION.

ALSO JOINING US, JULIE LUCAS OF MINING MINNESOTA WHO IS IN FAVOR OF THE TRUMP ADMINSTRATION'S DESIRE TO REVERSE THAT BAN AND ALLOW MINING.

GOOD TO HAVE YOU BOTH HERE.

THANKS SO MUCH.

>> THANK YOU.

>> Cathy: CHRIS, THE PRESIDENT SIGNED THIS EXECUTIVE ORDER, LIFTING UNDUE BURDENS ON MINES TO RESCIND THAT.

LOOKS LIKE YOU'RE BACK TO PLAYING DEFENSE AT THIS POINT.

IS THAT RIGHT?

>> FOR SURE, WE'RE VERY CONCERNED WITH WHAT THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION IS DOING.

SO THEY'RE DOING TWO THINGS.

ONE IS THEY'RE LOOKING TO REINSTATE THE EXPIRED MINERAL LEASES, THEY OWN THE TWIN METALS MINE.

AND THE SECOND THING IS TO REMOVE THE PROTECTIONS AT THE EDGE OF THE BOUNDARY WATERS THAT PROTECT WASTE WATER THAT WILL GO INTO THE BOUNDARIES WATERS.

SO, BOTH THOSE PROTECTIONS ARE AT RISK.

SO WE'RE VERY CONCERNED ABOUT WHAT THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION HAS SIGNALED TO DO.

>> Eric: WILL THERE BE EXECUTIVE ORDERS FROM THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION OR PETE STAUBER, THE EIGHTH DISTRICT CONGRESSMAN, UP THERE HAS A BILL THAT WOULD REVERSE THE 20-YEAR BAN.

HOW DO YOU EXPECT THIS TO PROCEED?

>> AT THE PRESENT TIME, WE'RE WAITING TO SEE -- AT THIS POINT, WE'RE WAITING TO SEE WHAT HAPPENS ITH HIS BILL, WHICH WILL IDEALLY REVERSE THE BAN AND ALLOW THE PROCESS TO GO FORWARD TO UNDERSTAND THE PROJECT.

THE PROJECT HASN'T GONE THROUGH ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW YET.

IT WOULD STILL HAVE THAT PROCESS AND PERMITTING, AND REVERSING THIS BAN ALLOWS THAT TO GO FORWARD, SO THAT WE CAN DO THAT DUE DILIGENCE AND UNDERSTAND THE PROJECT.

>> Eric: AND YOU NEED A STATE PARTNER, I GUESS.

>> ABSOLUTELY.

>> Eric: PCA, DNR, I SUPPOSE?

>> YES.

SO THERE'S A FEDERAL PROCESS, AND THEN WE HAVE OUR STATE PROCESS.

SO BOTH PROCESSES INVOLVE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW AND PERMITTING AND PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT.

AND WE REALLY WANT THE PUBLIC TO BE ENGAGED.

WE WANT TO HEAR THOSE CONCERNS.

WE WANT TO HEAR ALSO, THOUGH, WHAT SOLUTIONS ARE BEING PROPOSED.

AND THAT'S WHERE THOSE PROCESSES ARE SO IMPORTANT FOR NOT JUST MINING, BUT EVERYTHING WE DO THAT IMPACTS THE EARTH HAS THOSE PROCESSES.

>> Cathy: CHRIS, WHAT'S YOUR REJOINDER TO THAT?

>> SURE, YOU KNOW, AS A STARTING POINT, IT'S IMPORTANT TO UNDERSTAND THAT THIS IS A DIFFERENT TYPE OF MINING THAT HAS NEVER BEEN DONE IN MINNESOTA.

SO WE HAVE A PROUD TRADITION HERE IN MINNESOTA OF TACONITE MINING.

BUT COPPER NICKEL SULFIDE MINING IS VERY DIFFERENT.

YOU CAN SWIM IN AN OLD IRON PIT.

WITH THE COPPER AND NICKEL, YOU HAVE SULFIDE BOUND UP INTO THE ORE.

SO, WHEN YOU TRY TO GET AT THAT COPPER NICKEL, THAT SULFIDE GETS IN CONTACT WITH WATER, AND YOU CREATE BATTERY ACID, SULFUR IMRIC ACID.

THAT'S HOW IT'S DIFFERENT.

YOU WON'T BE ABLE TO TO SWIM IN A COPPER NICKEL SULFIDE PIT.

SO THIS POLLUTING INDUSTRY IS THE MOST POLLUTING INDUSTRY IN THE COUNTRY.

IT HAS A PERFECT TRACK RECORD OF POLLUTING WATER.

THAT'S WHY WE'RE IS HE CONCERNED.

IT'S NOT OUR FATHER'S, GRANDFATHER'S MINING.

IT'S A DIFFERENT TYPE OF MINING.

WE'RE CONCERNED ABOUT THE WATER POLLUTION.

>> Cathy: I'VE BEEN BE TO BIG BEE, ARIZONA, THEY DO COPPER MINING OUT THERE.

IT DOES LOOK IKE A BOMB BLEW UP OUT THERE.

IT LOOKS PRETTY DESOLATE, BARREN, JUST BECAUSE OF WHAT THE MINING HAS DONE TO THAT AREA.

BISBY.

>> YOU ARE CREATING A HOLE IN THE GROUND.

>> Cathy: SURE.

>> TWIN METALS WOULDN'T BE, IT WOULD BE UNDERGROUND, YOU HAVE ACCESS TO THE MINE, THE MINE UNDERGROUND, YOU HAVE THE PROCESSING FACILITY ON THE SURFACE, AND YOU DO HAVE A DRY STACK FACILITY, WHICH, STORY, IS A TAILING STORAGE FACILITY.

AND PEOPLE DO HAVE THOSE CONCERNS BECAUSE THEY HAVE SEEN THOSE MINING OPERATIONS.

AND IT IS A DIFFERENT TYPE OF MINING, WHICH MEANS YOU HAVE A DIFFERENT TYPE OF MANAGEMENT OF THE MATERIAL, DIFFERENT WAY TO MANAGE THE WATER THAT COULD COME INTO CONTACT, AND THOSE ARE REAL CONCERNS THAT OUR INDUSTRY IS TACKLING.

WE HAVE GUIDANCE ON ACID ROCK DRAINAGE.

WE HAVE DIFFERENT POLICIES AND PROCEDURES THAT E -- >> Cathy: HAVE THEY BEEN TESTED, DO THEY WORK IS THIS >> EAGLE MINE IN MICHIGAN, I RECOMMEND GOING TO, FLAMBEAU MINE IN WISCONSIN -- EXCUSE ME, WRONG STATE -- WISCONSIN HAD AN OPEN PIT, THESE THINGS ARE OCCURRING, CANADA HAS MINES.

ULTIMATELY, WE ARE ASKING FOR COPPER, NICKEL, WHICH ARE GOING TO BE FOUND WITH SULFIDE OREGONES.

WE HAVE TO FIND A WAY TO MINE THEM SO WE CAN BUILD THINGS, SO THAT WE CAN POWER THINGS.

SULFIDE ORES.

AND THESE ARE THE CHALLENGES WE HAVE TO WRESTLE WITH, THERE ARE CONCERNS, BUT THERE ARE ALSO SOLUTIONS.

WE WILL NOT GET TO THOSE WITHOUT THESE REALLY COMPLICATED CONVERSATIONS.

>> Eric: THERE IS A BILL, IS THERE NOT, THAT IS KIND OF THE SHOW ME BILL, YOU HAVE TO SHOW IT'S BEING DONE SAFELY SOMEWHERE BEFORE IT CAN PROCEED?

IS THAT STILL AROUND?

>> SURE.

THAT LEGISLATION IS STILL OUT THERE.

AND IT'S CALLED "PROVE IT FIRST."

AND, YOU KNOW, ERIC, SOMETIMES THOSE CHILD-LIKE QUESTIONS ARE SOMETIMES THE MOST PROFOUND.

AND THE QUESTION IS, YOU KNOW, THE BILL WOULD REQUIRE GLENCOE OR ANY OF THESE OTHER FOREIGN MINING COMPANIES THAT WANT TO DO THIS NEW TYPE OF MINING TO FIRST PROVE THAT THERE'S ONE EXAMPLE WHERE THIS TYPE OF MINING HAS BEEN DONE SAFELY OF ELSEWHERE IN THE UNITED STATES BEFORE DOING IT HERE.

SO, PROVE IT FIRST.

AND THE PROBLEM HERE, ERIC, THERE'S NOT AN EXAMPLE WHERE THIS HAS BEEN DONE SAFELY.

SO WE KNOW THAT WE WILL HAVE POLLUTION IN THE BOUNDARY WATERS, IF THIS MINE ERE TO GO FORWARD.

SO THEN WE COULD HAVE A DEBATE, IF WE WE -- GO FORWARD, IF THE COST IS WORTH THE BENEFITS.

BUT PROVE IT FIRST IS ASKING THE CHILD-LIKE QUESTION, BOY, HAS THIS EVER DONE SAFELY BEFORE?

AND IT HASN'T.

>> Cathy: JULIE, DO YOU KNOW WHAT THE LIFE OF THE DEPOSIT WOULD BE UP THERE?

HOW LONG MIGHT IT LAST?

>> IT WOULD DEPEND ON HOW LONG WE MINE AND IT WOULD DEPEND ON HOW MUCH WE WOULD PROSTATE.

BUT IT IS A SIGNIFICANT DEPOSIT.

IF IT WASN'T SIGNIFICANT ENOUGH DEPOSIT TO TALK ABOUT, WE WOULDN'T HAVE COMPANIES LOOKING TO INVEST IN IT.

AND HAVING SPENT HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS EVALUATING HOW MUCH IS THERE AND WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE.

IT IS A SIGNIFICANT DEPOSIT.

AND WE KNOW THAT BECAUSE OF THE INVESTORS.

>> Eric: ARE YOU SATISFIED WITH HOW THE WALZ ADMINISTRATION HAS HANDLED THIS?

>> NO, CANDIDLY.

BY AND LARGE, THE WALZ ADMINISTRATION HAS BEEN ON THE SHRINES -- SIDELINES FOR.

THIS SO WE WANT TO ENGAGE WITH THE WALZ ADMINISTRATION MORE DEEPLY ON THIS.

AND LOOK AT THE FUTURE WHERE WE CAN PROTECT THE BOUNDARY WATERS AND THE OTHER 10,000 LAKES THAT WE HAVE HERE IN MINNESOTA.

SO BY AND LARGE, THE WALZ ADMINISTRATION HAS BEEN N THE SIDELINES FOR THIS.

>> Cathy: SO THE NEXT STEPS WOULD BE WHAT?

DO WE KNOW?

>> NEXT STEP IS FOR THE BILL -- TO SEE WHAT HAPPENS WITH THE BILL ON HE EDERAL LEVEL.

>> Cathy: THE STAUBER BILL.

>> YUP.