Public ideas for reclamation topic of Iron County Mining Impact meeting

HURLEY - More questions were raised than ideas presented during a reclamation-themed meeting of the Iron County Mining Impact Committee Thursday.

About 20 people attended.

The overall purpose was to discuss community-submitted ideas regarding reclamation of Iron County land on the proposed iron mine site near Upson.

First, the committee discussed ideas submitted to county clerk's office, then opened up the meeting to public comment, specifically regarding reclamation.

Public comment is normally not permitted at committee meetings, but Thursday was an exception. Committee chair Leslie Kolesar said comments would be allowed only pertaining to reclamation ideas, and the floor would be open to Iron County residents first, followed by other attendees.

Only six ideas were submitted from the community. Kolesar said she appreciated the "hard work" people put into the ideas, but many weren't descriptive enough as to how to make reclamation work.

Gogebic Taconite president Bill Williams gave a brief update of what's been happening at the site, including continuation of bulk sampling inspections by G-Tac staff and the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources.

According to Williams, the geological and grade model has been updated with previous drilling results and field observations, and the mine design and planning sequences are being generated.

State law is being used as the "primary guiding factor" in the design criteria, which states wetlands should first be avoided, secondly wetland disruption should be minimized and lastly mitigated.

After the update, Kolesar asked about G-Tac possibly moving some buildings from the north side of the pit to the south side and how it would affect reclamation ideas. Williams said the location is "another option" the company is looking at, and all options have to be documented for the state as to why the locations would or wouldn't work.

Because of the possible change, many residents commented during the public speaking portion that the county should "keep its options open."

Tom Podlesny, of Gurney, said discussing reclamation without knowing where something is going to be seems a "bit premature.

"If the refinery plant is not built where it was originally planned, the waste rock pile might not be where it was originally planned, either," Podlesny said. "Discussing reclamation may be a bit premature, and we seem to be putting in a lot of effort into something where it might not be in the future."

Tracy Benzel, of Mercer, said the county needs to be flexible in its reclamation plan and look at all options.

One concern is the county has to include a reclamation plan in with G-Tac's official mining application submitted to the state.

"We can't wait for the permit to know what reclamation plan we want, because that is too late," Benzel said. "I don't know how we can do it, but we need to try and keep our options open."

Montreal resident Steve Schurtter commented on possibly having the property go back into reforestation. "It's the natural way to go, and as a resident, I feel it's the most comfortable option," he said.

Other options included a mountain bike trail, RV or camper park and hiking trails.

No official action was taken, but Kolesar said she would like to see a "tentative framework" discussed at the next committee meeting in early December. A date has not been set.