This is a 291-page raw data summary of comments downloaded from Survey Monkey, and published on the LSBF website. The pdf is undated. The LSBF website contains a short article about the survey, noting that the survey was open for public commentary from March 15 to July 31 2013, and that nearly 1,600 individuals provided comments. There were 45 questions posed to respondents. Some key findings relevant to mining and water resources are extracted and reproduced below. “When asked if there should be specific criteria to prohibit mining activities in environmentally or culturally sensitive areas, 64.9 % said yes, 18.8% said mining should not be restricted in any areas. “When asked ‘Which of the following statements best describes your opinion about mining operations in the Lake Superior basin?’ the most picked response was ‘I do not support any new mines in the Lake Superior basin,’ (38.8% response rate) followed by ‘I support mining operations that can be done using proven responsible management practices that minimize environmental damages’ (25.8% response rate). “When asked is there should there be a moratorium on new mining activity in the Lake Superior basin until it can be proven that new mines won’t pollute surface and groundwater, 63.4% said yes, and 31.8% said no.” Among other results, 68% felt that mining should be restricted in areas where culturally significant food is harvested or grown. 76% felt that mining should be restricted where wetlands have international significance or in locations with endangered plants or animals. 70% felt that mining should be restricted in areas with historic importance. 96% disagreed that taxpayers should pay for clean-up and restoration of damages; while 95% felt that mining companies should pay for these costs. 91% felt that open public meetings should be held to inform the public about mining company compliance. 89% want disclosure of chemicals used in the mining process.”
Lake Superior Binational Program.
Public Comment Form about Mining in the Lake Superior Basin.
Retrieved from the University of Minnesota Digital Conservancy,
Content distributed via the University of Minnesota's Digital Conservancy may be subject to additional license and use restrictions applied by the depositor.
Showing items related by title, author, creator and subject.
This very comprehensive document was reviewed and is felt to have significant content and analysis relevant to Minnesota’s coastal area and water resources. It also contains biophysical and watershed-related content directly ...
We used paired 2‐block street sections in the Amity Creek watershed (Duluth, MN) to demonstrate the effectiveness of homeowner BMPs to reduce residential stormwater flow to storm sewers in an older neighborhood in a cold ...
Arnott, Sigrid; Birk, Douglas A; Maki, David (Archaeo-Physics, LLC, 2013)
This study assessed 31 historic mill dam sites in Minnesota. Of these, one was located in the Sea Grant coastal area. The study discusses broader impacts of dams on tribal, cultural and environmental resources generally, ...