News & Articles

Can we trust our legislators when they claim that school trust land bills are in the best interests of our children? During the current session, legislation is being introduced to maximize revenue from school trust lands by expediting a land exchange (HF2207/SF1857) and creating a legislative commission to replace Department of Natural Resources (DNR) management of the trust lands (HF 2244/SF1889, HF1353/SF1152, HF0435/SF0810).

When Minnesota became a state in 1858, sections 16 and 36 of every township were set aside in trust for the benefit of schools. The state could use, lease, or sell the land to raise money for education. A  Permanent School Fund (PSF) was established, consisting of accumulated revenues from the land, with only the interest money to be used on a yearly basis.

Caption: Langley River is located near sulfide mining exploration and leasing in Lake County. -Photo credit: sosbluewaters.org

In 1858, Minnesota had a total population of 150,000 and was two-thirds rural. Much of the trust land was sold by the mid-1880s, mostly for agriculture and development. The same is true for other states in the eastern half of our country. Today approximately 2.5 million acres of trust lands remain in Minnesota, with a PSF of about $750 million. In an era of budget deficits, legislators are seeking to maximize revenue from our remaining trust lands to enhance funding for a public school system serving more than 840,000 students.

Conflicting values
of the trust lands

The remaining trust lands are located mainly in northeast Minnesota. Approximately 86,000 acres of state trust lands are currently locked within the borders of the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness (BWCAW). Lands within the wilderness cannot be logged, leased, or mined. Hence they are not generating money for the school trust, although states such as Montana have initiated user fees as a source of revenue on trust lands used for recreation.  About 22,000 of the above acres were added to the trust under swampland designation, and never intended to generate revenue.
 
These state land inholdings could be sold to the federal government, providing an immediate increase to the PSF.  Moneys for the sale are available through Land and Water Conservation Funds. Such a sale, which was supported by all of Minnesota’s federal legislators at the time, fell through in the 1990s because the Iron Range delegation wanted a land exchange instead. The idea was to trade the state lands within the BWCAW for federal land outside of the BWCAW, with the intention of generating money for the fund through more intensive logging. The failed plan is now resurfacing.

During the interim, a rush of exploration for copper-nickel and trace metals imbedded in sulfide ores has begun on lands bordering the BWCAW and underlying Superior National Forest. This time the Range delegation is promoting a land exchange in the hope of facilitating the opening of a sulfide mining district. Iron Range Representative Tom Rukavina, D-Virginia, has predicted that the PSF could more than double over the next decade if copper mining plans proceed on trust lands (Duluth News Tribune, “Battle is on over 2.5 million acres of forest land,” February 15, 2012).

During the most recent two year cycle, PSF interest money contributed about $55 million to supplement the $15 billion K-12 education budget. This amounts to $26 per student above the more than $9000 allotted from the general fund.  In other words, doubling the trust fund revenue over the next ten years by one-time mining of trust lands would only add another $26 per student while destroying the land for any other use.  

Representative Rukavina’s land exchange is backed by Denise Dittrich, R-Champlin, member of the House Education Finance Committee, who states that any increase in education funding would save on other taxes. Rep. Dittrich is promoting the creation of a new commission to replace the DNR and to manage school trust lands more aggressively, even though it would mean more bureaucracy and less sustainability.  While Rep. Dittrich states that she only supports mining if it can be done safely, she is co-author of HF 2095, providing for permitting efficiency and modifying environmental review requirements, which would speed up approval for contentious projects.
In the meantime, a bill to expedite a land exchange is working its way through the legislature.  The House Environment, Energy, and Natural Resources Policy and Finance Committee debated HF2207, Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness state land expedited exchange, condemnation, and private sale.  It was during this discussion that Rep. David Dill, D-Crane Lake, stated, “… we should mine, log, and lease the hell out of that land that we get in the [ex]change”  (MPR, “Disagreement threatens to derail plan to swap school trust lands,” March 7, 2012). The bill was tabled, only to re-emerge by the end of the day as an amendment to the House omnibus bill, Creation of the Children’s State Forest, expediting exchange of state-owned lands located within the BWCAW.  The Children’s State Forest is the land that we would “mine, log, and lease the hell out of.”  It passed out of committee on a 9-6 vote.

Meanwhile, 8th District U.S. Congressman Chip Cravaack has announced plans to introduce legislation on the federal level.  According to his press release dated December 9, 2011, such legislation would authorize the exchange of approximately 86,000 acres of state lands in the BWCAW for a to-be-determined amount of national forest land outside the wilderness boundary. Because land within the BWCAW is considered to be of high value, the ratio of exchange would be greater than 1:1; this would significantly reduce the size of Superior National Forest, as well as affect the watershed.  
Removing land from federal ownership removes restrictions regarding mining. These include prevention of open pit strip mining under the Weeks Act, adherence to the Endangered Species Act, and compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act process that includes public comment and environmental review.
Learning from the past

This photo shows acid mine drainage affecting a stream.

The mining of sulfide ores has a notorious history of leaving behind acid mine drainage and leaching of toxic heavy metals. Contamination of surface waters requires perpetual treatment, lasting hundreds to thousands of years.  According to Dr. David Blowes, researcher with the University of Waterloo in Canada, all sulfide mines contaminate the groundwater.

The mining of highly disseminated low-grade ores leaves a huge footprint on the landscape. Ninety-nine percent of the rock would end up as waste material. The scale of mining makes it virtually impossible to prevent contamination of the environment. Once mined, the resulting pits, waste rock piles, and tailings basins remain unusable.

Taconite mining is currently leaving its own footprint (25 percent iron, 75 percent waste rock), while polluting the waterways with mercury, sulfates and metals. Although there are no available solutions for clean-up of the St. Louis River watershed, the Range delegation continues to promote more mining.

Who is educating
our legislators?

Legislators press for maximizing revenues from school trust lands while ignoring the health impacts of the mining industry. Mercury, which is released from both taconite and power plants, affects fetal brain development. Pregnant women and young children are advised not to eat fish from waters where mercury has accumulated in the food chain. Dust and airborne fibers from mining contribute to asthma, allergies, and cancers. The health of the children and families of northeast Minnesota is being sacrificed in exchange for mining royalties.

Legislators are also ignoring history. The lands of Superior National Forest were set aside for watershed protection and the benefit of all citizens of this country. Superior National Forest and the BWCAW serve as a legacy of our nation’s past, and are areas of biodiversity, wildlife habitat, and recreational opportunity for all, including future generations.

Legislators are using their political influence to convince educators and school boards that it is in the best interest of our children to convert trust fund lands into a mining district. When those with good intentions fail to educate themselves beyond mining company propaganda, future generations pay the price—the loss of a healthy environment. Political and educational leaders are not modeling what we strive to teach our students:  to base their conclusions upon critical thinking.

 For the sake of
our children

Historically, our nation has valued education as the bedrock of society. If the state of Minnesota truly values public education, we need to prioritize educational spending within the general budget.

Logging and mining are cyclical industries. No one can accurately predict the economics of logging or mining over the next decades. Mining is dependent on controversial extraction of oil, gas, and coal resources, as well as fluctuations in demand. There is no clear indication that citizens of this state and country will allow turning Superior National Forest into a mining district.

How much time and energy has already been spent trying to identify land for an exchange, and preparing legislation to create a new commission that would only result in more bureaucracy and paperwork? There is a simpler solution:  a total land sale would immediately generate funds for the PSF, benefiting both the children of today and of the future, without harming the environment.

We cannot allow political rhetoric to use “for the sake of our children” as an excuse to sacrifice our health, our water, and our land. The school trust issue—seeking to turn parts of Superior National Forest over to the state to maximize logging and mining—destroys the natural inheritance entrusted to us by past generations.  Generating extra education moneys for one generation of children at the expense of future generations is a travesty of the trust our children place in us.



Contact Governor Dayton in opposition to an exchange of state lands within the BWCAW for federal lands in Superior National Forest.  Request a total sale of such lands to the federal government, which has money available to buy the lands through the Land and Water Conservation Fund.