Balancing Industry and the Environment in Wisconsin

Look, I'm no mining or environmental expert. I've read reports and opinions by experts on both sides reaching opposite conclusions about the proposed mine and mining legislation in Wisconsin, and I still don't have a good idea of how bad or beneficial both are.  I don't know which are better appraisals of the specific situation in the Gogebic range.

But what I do know is that laws should strike a balance between industry and the environment. We can't let people and companies do whatever they want, or resources will be exploited with no eye toward long-term sustainability. But neither can we stop all industry, or we'll regress to subsistence farming. (Hey, those impoverished African countries have really low carbon footprints, right?) The law should create a happy medium between the two, encouraging growth while preserving our future.

As far as mining in Wisconsin, the the balance in Wisconsin is clearly shifted too far towards the environment. 

Like our neighboring states, we are metal-rich, yet there are no metallic mines currently operating in Wisconsin. The same deposits that stretch across Minnesota and the U.P. exist in Wisconsin, yet unlike those states, we aren't mining it.  In 1976, a government study estimated that as many as 20 viable metallic mines could begin operations within the next 10-20 years. Yet only one mine ever opened, the Flambeau mine near Ladysmith, and that mine closed 15 years ago. 

Metallic mining used to dominate Wisconsin industry — so much so that it is represented on our state flag and coat of arms. Now, it has completely disappeared, despite substantial remaining deposits. That vacuum signals a regulatory environment so daunting that no mining company is attracted to Wisconsin despite its abundant resources. 

That needs to change.