To the Michigan Legislature:
The signatories of this letter urge you to reject the SOAR grant to Highland Copper, Inc., and the identical Legislatively Directed Spending Request to Wakefield Township, both of which would serve to enable the proposed Copperwood Project. Our concerns include the following:
I. THE PROPOSED MINE POSES SIGNIFICANT RISKS TO FRESHWATER; SPECIFICALLY TO LAKE SUPERIOR
Because Copperwood’s ore grade is only 1.45%, the remaining 98.55% of extracted material would be waste, comprising 30+ million tons, containing arsenic, mercury, cadmium, and other constituents of concern, requiring on-site storage in a 323-acre Tailings Disposal Facility in unprecedented proximity to Lake Superior, no less than 10% of the world’s surface freshwater.
A model released by the Great Lakes Indian Fish & Wildlife Commission shows that, in the event of a dam rupture mine, waste meters in depth would surge into Lake Superior in as fast as 21 minutes, as well as potentially into Porcupine Mountains State Park and the Presque Isle River.1
The likelihood of such an occurrence is incalculable but must be seriously considered for these reasons:
Research shows that, despite technological advances, serious tailings dam ruptures are increasing in frequency.2
Copperwood’s facility would be designed to anticipate only 1-in-100 year storm events despite the occurrence of two 1-in-1000 year storm events in the immediate area in just the last decade.3, 4
The Association of State Dam Safety Officials has described Michigan’s Dam Safety Program as “extremely understaffed to perform the mission of dam safety as mandated by rules, legislation, and best practice.”5
Even assuming the dam holds, the research is clear that all copper sulfide mines contaminate water through other means.6 Subsidizing such an operation in a water-rich environment in unprecedented proximity to the largest freshwater lake on Earth is not in keeping with Michigan’s Healthy Climate goal of conserving 30% of land and water by 2030.
II. THE PROPOSED MINE IS A THREAT TO OLD GROWTH ECOLOGY
Porcupine Mountains State Park contains the largest remaining mixed coniferous-deciduous old growth forest in the Midwest. Proud Michiganders fought for decades to see the area protected from mining and logging interests, leading the famous naturalist Aldo Leopold to name it, “the Great Uncut.” Given that approximately 98% of this nation’s original forest has been eradicated, the Porkies are no less than a living museum of tremendous collective value, both to the humans who visit as tourists, hikers, hunters, fishers, gatherers, and scientists, and to the sensitive lifeforms who call it home, many of which are listed as threatened or endangered.7
The proposed mine site would share a border on two sides with the State Park, and ecologically disruptive influences would not politely halt at map lines: noise pollution, light pollution, air and water contamination, subterranean blasting, and heavy industrial traffic, all in the buffer zone of mainland Michigan’s largest old growth Wilderness Area.
Additionally, the proposed mine would require a 25-mile power grid extension, as well as other preliminary infrastructural developments, none of which will evaporate when the project boards up shop in 10.7 years. Beyond the direct influences of the mine, this “preliminary” infrastructure would outlive the operation itself and lay the foundation for ongoing human development for centuries to come, thus forever altering the wilderness character of this beloved area.
III. THE PROPOSED MINE IS A THREAT TO OUTDOOR RECREATION
In addition to bordering Porcupine Mountains State Park — recently ranked as the most beautiful State Park in the country8 — the proposed mine would be directly adjacent to the North Country Trail,9 longest of all national hiking trails and a cornerstone of North Woods natural heritage. Outdoor recreation is vital to the spiritual, mental, and physical well-being of countless individuals. The introduction of noise, light, water and air pollution — and thus the introduction of the fear to fish and to forage — into the heart of this cherished area should not be funded by taxpayers.
Moreover, outdoor recreation is a significant industry in itself, contributing over $12 billion10 to Michigan’s economy annually; mining contributes less than 10% of that total. Why would the State fund the smaller boom-and-bust industry to endanger the larger, which is strong, sustained, and does not endanger freshwater?
IV. THE PROPOSED MINE IS MORE LIKELY TO HARM THE ECONOMY THAN HELP IT
Proponents seek to justify the project with a single word: “jobs.” It’s true that the mines of the early twentieth century employed tens of thousands, but towards the end of the century, the White Pine Mine employed fewer than 3,000 — still a significant number, but clearly diminishing returns, a trend which continues: now, Eagle Mine in Marquette County directly employs fewer than 100 individuals.11
In 2018 the mining company projected 250 direct mining jobs12 at Copperwood; but in 2024 — shortly before requesting a State subsidy — the company projected 380 jobs13. How did that sum suddenly increase by over 50%? We must acknowledge that speculative projections often have no basis in reality, and that the Copperwood Project would very likely succumb to the same pattern which defines extractive industries: “over-promise, under-deliver.”
The grant text states that a “new job” would be defined as “lasting for at least six months,” with many positions going to “specialized non-residents,” and indeed, the text says explicitly that the project hopes to coincide with the closure of Eagle Mine, so that many skilled jobs could be transferred over from another county.13 Lateral job transfer from another county is not the same as job creation.
And will any short-term job growth be followed by long-term prosperity? The most comprehensive study ever conducted on the economic impacts of mining on nonmetropolitan communities found that nearly half of outcomes were negative; only 29% were positive, and most of those occurred before 1982.14
More recent research shows the harms to be especially pronounced in outdoor recreation areas.15 The author of the study, Harvard Professor James Stock, former advisor to President Obama, summarizes the research: “In 89% of cases, copper mining ends up being a negative for jobs and a negative for incomes.”16
We must recognize that the prospect of funding a foreign company to mine in a sensitive and beloved area, to ship the minerals out of country with no promise of return, board up shop in 10.7 years, and leave behind the waste and contamination, is to fund the perpetuation of the Upper Peninsula’s marginal status as a resource colony — that is, as a land to be exploited by financial interests based hundreds miles away, which have no long-term stake in the fate of the local ecology or economy. More directly, it might be said that, rather than this area being poor and thus needing a mine, this area is poor precisely because of mining. The State must not fund the renewal of this vicious cycle.
V. THE PROPOSED MINE JEOPARDIZES INDIGENOUS TREATY RESOURCES
The mine, along with its potential for contamination and catastrophe, would be in the heart of 1842 Treaty Territory. The Treaty text guarantees Tribal Nations the right to hunt, fish, gather, and interact with the land as they have since time immemorial.17 The presence of such an operation risks compromising the health of the lands and waters to the extent that they would no longer be a source of clean and nourishing food; this would constitute a failure of the State to fulfill the terms of the Treaty.
Beyond the 1842 Treaty Territory, Gichigami (Lake Superior) is held sacred by Native people throughout the region, as demonstrated by the September 14th Water Walk, in which members of six Tribal Nations carried water 31 miles on foot in response to the Copperwood Project.18 Subsidizing a threat of this magnitude would be culturally insensitive in the extreme.
______________________
We have outlined multiple significant risks which we believe vastly outweigh any urgency to fund a foreign company’s mine in a water-rich, ecologically unique, and culturally important area, all for the sake of copper, which, as stated, would be shipped out of country with no promise of return, and is not even designated as a “critical mineral.”19
The signatories of this letter represent diverse perspectives and missions, and each may prioritize these points differently. The signatories may not be uniformly opposed to the Copperwood Project in principle, nor to its manifestation through the forces of the free market; we are, however, united in our position that the project constitutes an extremely inappropriate use of Michigan taxpayer dollars. Surely there exist less controversial and divisive candidates for your generous subsidies?
We urge you to reject both grants. Thank you for your consideration.
Signed,
Michigan Organizations
Upper Peninsula Environmental Coalition
Citizens for a Safe and Clean Lake Superior
Friends of the Land of Keweenaw
Michigan League of Women Voters
Michigan Environmental Council
Michigan Citizens for Water Conservation
Michigan League of Conservation Voters
Superior Watershed Partnership
Keweenaw Youth for Climate Action
Sierra Club Chapter, Michigan
Spartan Sierra Club
Economic Development Responsibility Alliance of Michigan
Freshwater Future
Northern Vegans
Arboretum Detroit
Yellow Dog Watershed Preserve, Inc.
VegMichigan
Title Track
For Love of Water (FLOW)
Chicken Tramper Gear
Superior Wilderness Designs LLC
Great Lakes Creatives
Clean Water Action
Detroit Bird Alliance
Kal-Haven Outpost
Miss's Salon
The Watershed Center Grand Traverse Bay
City Chapel — Grand Rapids
Joyful Wildcrafting LLC
Flint Innovative Solutions
Northern Climate Network of NMU
MichCamo
Bodega Marquette
NMU Conservation Crew
Green Party of Michigan
The Tin Can
Rosemarine Textiles
West Michigan Conservation Network
Newaygo County Environmental Coalition
Timelesshealing.org
Grand Valley State University
Laughing Whitefish Bird Alliance
Michigan Institute for Progressive Policy
BigGoat Farm
VMD & Associates LLC
Up North Advocacy
Sympathetic Lightning Productions
The Information Factory
North Woods Native Plant Society
Ban Michigan Fracking
U.P. Land Conservancy
Protect the Porkies
Mother Farmer
Michigan Botanical Society
Superior Sprouts
Mud Creek Warblers
Rewildings
Shiner Technologies LLC
Save Lake Superior Association
Applied EcoSystems, Inc.
Izaak Walton League of America, Michigan’s Dwight Lydell Chapter
Dee's Green Cleaning
PawAnRepeat Media LLC
Margaret Levasseur MSW LLC
Hidden Expressions LLC
SJB Partners
Citizens for Alternatives to Chemical Contamination
Droi Media
I Green of Jeannies gardening and permaculture
Hauschild Design
S&A Liquor
Indigenous Organizations
Menikanaehkem — Wisconsin
Mukwa Miikana — MN, WI, MI
Waadookawaad Amikwag (Those Who Help Beaver)
Midwest Alliance of Sovereign Tribes — Upper Midwest
Indigenous Environmental Network — Turtle Island / North America
Thečhíȟila Collective — Detroit, Michigan / Anishinaabe Nation
Waub Ajijaak Press & Foundation — Michigan / Anishinaabe Nation
Indian Law Resource Center — Washington D.C. / Montana
Sacred America — North America
United Native Americans — North America
Regional Organizations
Center for Biological Diversity (National)
WaterLegacy (MN)
Mining Impact Coalition of Wisconsin (WI)
Wisconsin Resources Protection Council (WI)
Echo Valley Hope Inc (WI)
Deer Tail Scientific (MN)
Clean Water Action Council of NE WI (WI)
Family Farm Defenders (WI)
Friends of the Boundary Waters Wilderness (MN)
Esperanza’s Acres, LLC (WI)
Sierra Club - Wisconsin Chapter (WI)
My Sistas KeepHer (WI)
Milwaukee Riverkeeper (WI)
Mother's Tongue (WA)
Save Our Sky Blue Waters
Save Lake Superior Association
Bowe Photo LLC (MN)
GT Environmental (OH)
Inspired North Collective, LLC (WI)
Penokee Mountain Forest products (WI)
Medicinal Arts, LLC (WI)
Flying Colors Trapeze (MN)
Save the Great Lakes
Friends of the Forest Preserves (IL)
Water Watchers (CA)
