Three Mines, One State: Inside Sulfide Mining’s Push Across Minnesota
Author: Sarah Horner, MCEA Public Relations Director
Stay up to date on our mining cases
Two years into the second Trump administration, Minnesota is experiencing a newfound push to advance sulfide mining proposals across all three of the state’s most iconic watersheds.
The stakes are high. Sulfide mining is incredibly toxic, especially in water-rich areas, and the watersheds on the line — Lake Superior, the Mississippi River, and the Boundary Waters — are treasured wilderness areas that supply drinking water and critical habitat for wild rice and a plethora of other wildlife. With multiple threats coming at once, and political winds potentially shifting in November, the coming years will bring both major challenges and new opportunities to protect Minnesota from the notorious industry.
"We are seeing a kind of coordinated push that we’ve never seen before,” MCEA Executive Director Kathryn Hoffman said recently.
The flurry of activity – called “flooding the zone” – is by design, Hoffman said.
It’s the same strategy the federal administration deployed when President Trump began his second term and released a firehose of consecutive executive orders: distract and overwhelm.
When multinational mining companies push multiple proposals simultaneously, it strains the media's investigative capacity and environmental organizations' ability to respond effectively.
It's still years before any proposal could break ground, and MCEA and allies are rising to the challenge. But the landscape for protecting our environment has shifted, and the strain on resources is real. Here's what you need to know about what's happening, where things are headed, and how you can help.
TAKING ADVANTAGE OF A PRO-INDUSTRY LANDSCAPE
Sulfide mining companies are trying to catch the tailwind created by a pro-industry federal government that has unleashed a deluge of environmental rollbacks since President Trump resumed office.
"It's created an opening for the world's most toxic industries to move forward without effective federal oversight," Hoffman said. “If there was ever a time for the state to step up and protect our water, it’s now.”
The effects reached Minnesota in April, when the US Senate overturned a mining ban in the Boundary Waters watershed, giving new hope to Twin Metals, an international mining conglomerate that has long sought to open a sulfide mine in the watershed that drains into the iconic wilderness area. Then, in July, the public comment period began on the Talon proposal, a sulfide mine proposed two hours north of the Twin Cities in the Mississippi River watershed. Weeks later, after two years of relative silence, the company behind PolyMet, now rebranded as NewRange, announced it was relaunching with an updated plan.
In the past, MCEA and partner organizations have worked to protect Minnesota's water and people from the risks posed by each proposal. Now, we're facing three at once.
THREE PROPOSALS, THREE WATERSHEDS
Lake Superior: PolyMet first applied for a permit to construct an open-pit sulfide mine upstream of Lake Superior in 2016. The proposal lacked key environmental protections and stalled in the early 2020s after a series of legal setbacks, including a finding that its plan for handling reactive mine waste — one of the riskiest parts of any sulfide mine — violated Minnesota law. It also lost its wetland destruction permit when the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers determined the mine’s location would violate the Fond du Lac Band of Lake Superior Chippewa’s water quality standards.
- The latest: PolyMet/NewRange announced its intent to start advancing a revised proposal in July. Details are still high-level, but it includes a new tailings storage plan for reactive mine waste and the destruction of even more wetlands than its original proposal. The company hopes to avoid a full environmental study and has asked the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) whether it can instead supplement the old one. Taking a shortcut through environmental review of a project that poses grave risks to Minnesota and our water is dangerous, and MCEA and allied groups are calling for a full study. PolyMet/NewRange also recently applied for a new federal wetland destruction permit, which the Army Corps of Engineers will review. Given the gutting of federal wetland protections since Trump resumed office, far fewer wetlands will be protected under federal law, despite the project's unchanged threat to the Fond du Lac Band's water quality.
- What's next: The Minnesota DNR will decide whether the revised proposal needs to go through supplemental or full environmental review. After that review, state agencies will consider multiple permits for the project, including the permit to mine, water pollution permit, and air pollution permit. At the same time, the wetlands destruction permit will move forward at the federal level. The entire process is likely to take several years.
Mississippi River: Talon Metals in 2023 filed its application to build an underground nickel mine two hours north of the Twin Cities near Tamarack, Minn. and the Mille Lacs Band of Ojibwe reservation. The company says it will process the ore it extracts out of state, but it will still leave waste rock onsite. That poses serious risks to waters and communities in the Mississippi River watershed and downstream.
- The latest: The first public comment period on the proposal concluded September 14th. It asked the public to weigh in on what should be included in the scope of the proposal's upcoming environmental review.
- What's next: Environmental review, at least two more public comment periods, and permitting. The process is expected to take at least two to three years.
Boundary Waters: Twin Metals first started pursuing a copper-nickel mine in the Boundary Waters watershed in 2010. It had a series of fits and starts before hitting a wall in 2023, when the Biden administration announced a 20-year moratorium on mining of all federally leased land in the watershed.
- The latest: The proposal is back in play after the US Senate overturned the federal mining ban this past April. Minnesota Governor Tim Walz responded by issuing an order in August that uses state authority to try to protect the BWCA. The order, which expires 90 days after Walz leaves office, sets up barriers to mining in the BWCA’s watershed and asks the Minnesota Legislature to pass a permanent ban this coming session.
- What's next: This proposal has the longest and most speculative road ahead. First, Twin Metals would need to reacquire the federal leases necessary to operate its proposed mine. If it gets them, the next step would be environmental review and then permitting.
THE THROUGH-LINE: RISKS TO WATER; MCEA’S COMMITMENT
Each of the three proposals is distinct and on its own timeline, but they all pose significant risks to Minnesota's water and people.
Sulfide mining has an unbroken track record of polluting water worldwide, meaning no company has figured out how to do it safely.
MCEA has been deeply engaged on all three proposals, and we’re in it for the long haul. Our strategy is the same across projects: build a comprehensive record, use the law and science to push for strong environmental protections during permitting, and be prepared to go to court if the company and state agencies try to advance an unsafe project. Our work is underway. We’re reviewing scoping documents and consulting outside experts on Talon, pushing DNR toward a full environmental review of PolyMet/NewRange, and tracking how the Twin Metals fight plays out as we head to the next Legislative session. The work will only intensify in the months and years ahead.
"Sulfide mining companies have been trying to build risky mines in our state for decades, and none have broken ground,” Hoffman said. “Yes, the push is different now, but MCEA and our allies have also amassed incredible experience and expertise over the years to meet this moment.”
WHAT’S AT STAKE IN 2027
With the potential for a Democratic trifecta in the Minnesota Legislature after the midterm elections, the state has a real shot at taking historic action to protect our water and people from the risks posed by this notorious industry.
The next Governor will also play a decisive role, given that at least two of the three project proposers — Talon and PolyMet/NewRange — are likely to apply for permits in the next four years.
Industry will be pushing hard for deregulation, though, so any win for environmentally sound mining reform will require strong advocacy and a loud electorate.
WHAT WE’RE ASKING OF YOU
None of these fights will be decided quickly, and complicated twists and turns are ahead. That's the point of flooding the zone: to make defending Minnesota's water feel like too much to keep up with. It isn't.
MCEA will bring the lawyers and the experts; you will need to bring your voice. We will need you for the fight ahead. Watch for updates on each of these proposals in the coming months, and know that when we ask for your help, it will matter.
We've protected Minnesota's water before. Together, we can do it again.
"I'm not discouraged. We’re here for the fight,” Hoffman said.
###