Okay, Zach, all right,
okay, that sounds good.
All right, well I guess let's
start with, so describe the
group that you're a part of and when
you were formed, how you came
to be, and what you're looking to
do.
Okay, well there is a group,
and we call it Friends of the Yellow
River, and it's
an informal group and we
have just kind
of got together and
started talking and decided to
keep communicating.
And that's all it is in a
way, so it's not an organization
with officers or
treasury, we don't vote on
things, we just keep each other
informed. Informed
about the issues
protecting the environment.
And a lot of the impetus was
because of
the bend deposit mine exploration.
But we were really paying attention
to the environment in a bigger
sense because there's forestry
projects up there as well and
things that affect the wildlife
in the environment,
and it's
an important area.
It's 80% of the water flow
to a big recreational area.
We call it the Miller Dam area, the
Schwammigan flowage.
And so we
just keep communicating.
We have a lot of different
viewpoints, but we don't
vote on things.
People independently contact
the mining company, the DNR,
et cetera.
So when did the group coalesce?
Uh, it's about two years ago.
And was it directly related
to the green light metals in the
exploration or was it kind of
just, how did that percolate
up at that time?
No that's how it started.
I mean people knew that there was
exploratory mining
activity starting
there.
And so people concerned about the
environment.
Local people,
some literally in their backyard
and others in the
county here, wanted to
be proactive and protect that
area.
Does the group have a stance on
the exploratory drilling, pro or
con?
Well, in some ways, the group does
not.
There's a variety of opinions
in the group.
Some are not in my backyard
type of attitude, you know,
and not in the state.
And some of us are just
trying to be sure that there's
activity up there, that it's
monitored closely.
So mistakes are less likely
to happen, and maybe
more.
For responsible mining then
we are opposed to it or
against or in favor
of it.
And how have you found Greenlight to
work with in terms of being
open and communicating what's
going on and what their intents are
with the publisher?
It's been, sometimes, a challenge,
really, frankly.
Sometimes, they, uh,
have not gotten back to us very
quickly, but on the other hand,
they've been very open for the most
part, you know, so
welcoming us to come
by and snoop around
and see what they're doing,
answer most of our questions that we
have.
But the Greenlight Company
got off on
a bad foot, I think, a couple of
years ago, when the
CEO of the company, Matt Filgate,
stated to the stockholders that
there's no water concerns
four miles down from where we're
mining.
But they were wanting to
draw water out of
the North Fork of the Yellow River
there.
So it was a little bit
puzzling, and I think we got a lot
of that straightened out.
So overall they're good to work
with, but there's been
a few snags here and there.
Comes to the concerns do
you think that there are federal and
state rules that are strong enough
to protect the yellow river
if you know if the mining company
does everything up to the extent of
what they're permitted to do
Well, that's a really good question,
and I think we're really
eroding those regulations,
especially at the federal level.
I mean, for example,
there's endangered resources, some
species we're watching really
closely and going out there and
looking at them and saying, wow,
you know, this is dangerous, what
they're doing here for these
endangered threatened species.
And meanwhile, at the Federal level,
they're cutting the funding, so they
aren't even.
Doing surveys to see if they're
there or not anymore,
or it's drastically cut back.
Same with water concerns,
there's a
steady erosion, I would
say, of the regulations
that are.
You know, don't pay attention to
small pools of water.
These small pools a water in
the area are
important to the
ecosystem.
You know, they're scattered
throughout that area.
The Wisconsin DNR has been
doing their job and catching some
of these things.
When they first started
to explore the
area, they had
designated where the water concerns
are. Then we had a wet season.
And they were on top of it and they
identified some wet areas that
had not been identified before
and they had to change the mining
plans last
summer, kind of right in the middle
of the season.
So, I mean, that, you could look at
that as alarming, but I also think
it was a success because the DNR
was on top that.
Do you think or does your
group feel that mining
can be done safely in this
area without threatening the water?
Well, I think that there's
some people in our group that
think it's impossible.
I think it is really
difficult,
myself, and
I guess if it has to be done, we
want to be as careful as possible.
It's kind of ironic because
in some areas of the country,
there's very little water and...
They say because we have so little
water and mining requires water,
and we could contaminate the little
water we have, we wish mining
was done in a place
that had more water, not in
this arid area.
So it's hard to find a totally safe
place. I don't think there is such a
thing.
But yeah, here we have
a lot of water concerns, and right
now I think they're
maybe not being adequately
addressed, and we're trying to.
To see if the regulators can
be more careful than they are.
I mean, there's kind of two basic
scenarios.
There's one of, if they do
everything right, is there still
some damage to the environment?
Or if there's an accident, what is
the catastrophic fall up that could
come from that?
I mean, both areas are
a big concern.
You cannot do any kind
of activity without
some pollution and, you know,
it sort of has to be controlled.
I mean, that's just the way
it is.
Copper mining, for example, is 6,000
years old in this area.
And the evidence of the
copper mining is from the
pollution left over 6, 000 years
ago. Some amazing scientific
articles. We're not going to
avoid pollution, but we
can do...
We need stronger
regulations than we have.
And as far as disasters, I'm a
little bit
optimistic myself.
Some people are not.
I understand that, that we can
avoid the big tailing dam
failings and so forth.
I just went by a site that
45 years ago wiped out a whole
town of 300 people.
And 10.
Of the mining company engineers
and CEOs went to jail.
So nobody wants that.
I think in the last 40 years
there's been improvements.
So I'm just myself a
little bit optimistic we're gonna
avoid a big catastrophe.
But pollution is always gonna be a
problem.
When you think of where this
deposit's located, it's in
the ceded territory, so the
tribes have a right here.
It's in a national forest.
Exactly.
It's a watershed with
threatened species and a valuable
watershed for its natural resources
and recreation.
Do you think that there should
be any mining here at all, given the
location and all the other competing
aspects?
Well, I think there should
not be mining in this area for
a lot of those reasons.
That's my personal opinion, and
I think many of the friends of
Yellow River would feel that way.
If the law and regulations say
it's gonna be here, we're gonna
have to be on top of it as much as
we can to prevent damage.
But you mentioned the ceded
territory and the
American Indian tribes that ceded
that territory.
The current law is that
they have to be consulted.
And then what?
Ignored.
The law needs to be changed.
They have their equivalent
to the DNR,
but they have no real power,
it seems.
Or the courts overrule them, or
could overrule.
So that's one of the
issues.
And being in the national forest,
near threatened species.
I'm not against mining in the entire
state of Wisconsin,
but it's not a
good place to do it at the Bend
deposit.
When you hear that there's a
few different traditional arguments
supporting mining in Wisconsin,
and one of them is that it was a
miner on the flag.
It's part of our state's heritage.
What's your response to that?
Well, I think we need
to have mining.
Even the Amish need to have
the metals that they need.
We're not gonna go back to the Stone
Ages.
So I support the idea
of having mining somewhere,
somehow.
But it's just simply one of those
things that we have to.
And I don't think this is a good
place for it for reasons we
just talked about.
And if it has to happen, it has be
really monitored closely.
One of the newer arguments that
they're bringing forward is this is
about national security.
That there's so many precious metals
down there that instead of having to
go through China or get them from
Africa or some other place, we
should be securing that for here.
Yeah, I think they're
looking for a lot of reasons,
political reasons, to make it
sound better because there's
a lot rare earth and
other metals in Sweden and
Peru, and there's
a global market and
it's not really,
there's actually quite a bit of
mining in other parts of the country
here in the U.S.
Too.
Canada is another place, you know.
Canada, some people regard that as,
like China I guess nowadays,
but I really think it's
a global question and
it's very complicated.
So another thing that's really
interesting about the timing of this
is Tom Tiffany sponsored
and helped write the bill that
changed Wisconsin's mining laws to
make this even theoretically
possible.
He's under the old law.
It really wasn't ever going to
happen.
He's now running for governor.
What does that bring to
this race or to this topic
at this time? Does that
heighten all the things around it
that, you know, one of the leads?
Sponsors of this that created the
environment to allow this to happen
and make it realistic is now Running
to be this the top agent of the
state and obviously you know
to see mining here
Well, I think that's kind of an out
of control
type of approach to
mining.
Tom Tiffany is from northern
Wisconsin where all this
hunting and fishing and recreation
happen that he supposedly supports
and then to risk all
of that by
weakening the laws.
I think we have
mining and probably forestry
laws as well, environmental laws
that need strengthening at this
point. In time.
I don't think Tom Tiffany is one
that's going to head us in that
direction.
When I interviewed all of the
Democratic candidates for governor
last December and I asked each of
them about mining and about the Bend
deposit specifically, I got
a lot of blank stares, I had a lot
of reactions.
How much outside of this
immediate area, how much do people
know that this is happening?
That this is back on the radar?
I don't know how much they know and
I think it's good that we're,
that public media here
is covering it.
It's an important issue.
Some people say that because it's
just exploratory mining that,
well, it doesn't matter much.
And until a real
mine comes, then we'll start to
worry about it.
But I think there's
water issues,
one of these endangered species
we've been keeping an eye on.
I don't know if it's going to be
there next summer or the summer
after.
The activities with the increased
road traffic and so
forth, I mean, I've
seen...
You know, dangerous situations
already.
And, you know for the breeding
habitat and so forth.
I think it's something to
be concerned about
now and it should be
a political issue.
I understand the politicians trying
to cover both sides of
all issues,
but you know sustainability is
something I wish politicians would
talk about, you know that
would make sense.
You know, we can have.
Some mining in the state,
to go back to basically a
moratorium on all mining,
is probably not going to be
politically popular, I don't think,
but we need politicians
to lead the way and have
stronger environmental laws, for
sure.
How much of this is
known even around here immediately?
There's small communities and
there's pockets of communities, but
this is still happening out in a
very rural, isolated area.
Is it well known locally
that this is happening?
Or is it still like you run into
people and you're like, oh hey, did
you know this was going on?
Well, our local paper, the Star
News and
the Green Light Medals is putting on
some meetings, but of course they're
not talking too much about the
environmental hazards.
So I guess we're going to have
to try to make some effort.
We've been a private little group
ourselves, but
I think it might be
up to the media and up to people
like us to make people more
aware. I think we need to
do that.
Do you think there are people,
especially considering the political
environment we're in, that are
willing to listen, or will this
fall into the my
side, your side kind of camp?
That's a good question, but I don't
have a good answer, I must say.
I don't know. We have to just keep
trying, trying to educate.
What what do you think is the
benefit of your group coming to
exist in the first place?
I mean, is this something that even
if I mean the Bend deposit could
fizzle out on its own entirely I
mean it's been looked at a
hundred times over over the past
half century, and it's found
to be Non-economically
viable if that happens again.
Will your group still like find
other things to exist or we kind
of stand down because that one's
gone
I think it's made us environmentally
aware of
this area,
and there's forestry projects and
other projects, and I'm hoping
that...
Continued efforts to
protect the environment,
there's always going to be
challenges.
I'm hoping the group continues
to educate each other and
work on issues,
whatever they are.
One of the
things that
make me proud of the group
is that we just are existing
and making.
And making the DNR and
other people aware.
I know in the previous
mine, the last mine in Wisconsin,
in Ladysmith,
the complaint there from the
environmentalists is that Stream Sea
was contaminated.
Well, it turns out that nobody even
knew Stream Sea was there because it
was so dry when they
did the original inspection.
And there were no friends of Stream
Sea.
There are friends of the Yellow
River.
So just awareness is
important.
You said right now it's a private
group, and you're kind of keeping
each other aware.
Do you think that will change as
this goes on, that it'll be time to
be public, and even if there's
people that may not agree with you,
it's time to engage in a, outside of
just the like-minded people and
reach a broader audience?
I don't know, that'll be up to
people in the group.
I think other groups like
the Sierra Club and the
River Alliance are public
groups and they may take
the lead at a
more of a statewide basis
of awareness.
Same with the Great Lakes
Indian Fish and Wildlife Service,
Wisconsin Greenpeace.
So there's several public groups.
Personally, I kind of
like being kind of
a smaller group that just informs
each other.
Are you going to be at the meeting?
I think Monday night at a local
township.
Yeah, I think Wednesday night
right here in town,
but yeah,
I don't know about the
ones at the townships
and they'd probably
be good for, we
need to discuss that as
our own group, if anybody would
go to these other meetings.
I hope the townships are
aware. We don't need them.
With the challenges
in the environment,
concerned about
the townships doing road
improvements and all kinds of things
in a
sensitive environment.
I mean, it's interesting to see
that townships like how much of this
is about presence,
like having people that may come to
that meeting to learn more if they
only hear from Greenlight Metals,
and they just hear all the positive
things or how safe they are.
Like how much of it is, is there an
onus on you guys, whether you like
it or not, to be a presence
to say, well, you know, this is the
other point of view.
Well, yeah, I think there is onus
on us to
speak up at meetings.
And we've tried to do a little of
that. There was a meeting last
summer
and they had difficulty
with their microphones and so forth,
so the pointed environmental
questions, nobody could
hardly hear them. It was supposed to
be a town hall meeting
and it was
difficult to communicate.
The communication was.
Pretty much from Green Light Metals
about the wonderful
jobs and how much valuable
minerals there are.
And that was the gist of the
meeting.
So we need to come to those meetings
and speak up.
Well, if there was a question that
you would want asked of Greenlight,
what would you want?
Well,
in the environmental resource
review, there were
I think about
five different species plant
and animal that were
threatened and they had one
required action that
they were supposed to do to protect
them and they have about three
or four recommended actions
and and in the permit they
say you're required to do this
and I'd like to ask them.
In public,
are you doing any of the recommended
actions to protect threatened
species, or are you only doing the
minimum requirements?
As far as I can see,
they are just doing the
minimal needed.
There's certain things they could do
to protect these species,
and they're making
beyond what they're required.
One of the things, when I've talked
to them, that they've said is that
they're trying a new approach as
a mining company to be
more transparent,
to hold a town hall when they may
not have to allow people to come
onto the site and invite groups out
to look and...
Try and present a more
Wisconsin-focused face instead
of a foreign national face.
They say they're trying to learn
from the mistakes of past efforts,
where they have isolated and turned
off the locals by not being
open and making it sound scarier and
more threatening.
Do you think they've done
that? Have they fulfilled that?
And is there a, you know, can
they lull people past
the concerns by being like, we're
from Wisconsin, this is our backyard
too, and look how honest we're
being?
Downplaying the same concerns that
exist.
It's obvious to me they're making
efforts in that direction,
and it'll be interesting to
see in future meetings
how
that pans out.
But I'm
concerned that they're
make efforts as a PR ploy
and not as sincere
as I would have hoped.
But maybe I'm wrong, and
we'll continue to work with them.
There has been communication.
With them.
I've talked to Steve Donahue,
who is the local representative,
and and they've
made some effort,
but you know sometimes just, well
I'll get back to you later, and then
we don't hear anything too, so.
I'm sure you heard but
the cores that they sampled that
they brought up last summer and they
found gold Like visible
flexible, which they said were
actually quite rare I
mean as they find more and more
things in these cores that
have more value.
Does that just heighten the stakes?
Well, maybe for them.
I guess for the mining company,
something like 25-30%
of the expense is with
permitting and reclamation
and environmental concerns.
More profitable for them, the more
things they find there.
But my concern is
about the environment and
I don't care if their stockholders
make money or not as long as the
environment's protected.
But would you feel better if they
weren't finding all that valuable
stuff down there and then with
less incentive to try and go down
and get it in the first place?
Well, it'd be better for
this sensitive area if
they didn't mind, yeah,
so if economics mean that they
don't.
But, you know, at the national
level, there's all kinds of things
they can do to help incentivize
it.
They can provide
grants, they can do all
kinds of things, change the
economics.
That's not in my control.
You mentioned some of the threatened
and endangered species,
can you just list off a few that
we're talking about?
Well, it's really interesting
because the
threatened species are redacted
in the reports.
And as environmental people up
there with our boots
on the ground, so to speak,
we've figured out what they are and
we're watching them closely.
But it's not for public information.
Just think if they
publish to where the bald eagle
nests were or whatever.
You know, then
you're going to have...
The possibility of people
shooting them, capturing certain
species for pets,
or even just nature observers like
us bothering their breeding.
So they just don't
allow sharing that information.
One species that I can
talk about are the river
mussels because none of them are
endangered, so we can name them off.
There's the Three Ridge and
others up there.
And they're fascinating, and
they're...
There's quite a few in that area.
And they are cleaning
the water and making the water clean
downstream
and down through the flowages
and so forth where all the
recreation is.
But yeah, the others I'm not allowed
to speak of.
Makes it hard to protect them
sometimes.
That feels, it
feels at odds with trying to inform
the public of why something
needs to be saved to protect
when people don't know.
You hear the story about, oh, it's
one owl or it's this one snail.
Yeah, yeah.
Everyone shrugs their shoulders but
if it is bald eagles or something
that people find more value in as a
species, there's
a different collective sense of
worthiness there.
Yeah, yeah, yeah there
certainly is.
And I think what people have to
realize is that ecosystems are
complex systems and if
you find a
challenge to a threatened species,
you're protecting an environment and
an ecosystem.
You're not just protecting one owl.
You're protecting a whole system
and the parts
are.
Critical to the operation of
a complex system.
So, it doesn't matter if it's a
little snail or an insect or
what, if the environment is
protected, it's gonna stay whole
and function better.
When you're trying to pitch this to
the public and get people to
care, is it easier
to tell them like, well, Miller
Dam, all the fish are going to die
if there's a sulfide leak,
or you know, you won't be safe to
go in the river and use it for your
own uses?
I mean is there a different there's
almost like two different messages
and one to sell the average public
who may not care whether they Should
or not about you know the
individual species versus those that
already care about them They could
be persuaded with this message, but
the one over here about yeah
That's true, you know, in mining
there's the potential of
leaking mercury, arsenic,
and so forth.
We can talk to the public about the
warnings about how many fish
meals you can eat because of the
mercury in the fish.
And that's easier
salesmanship job
to the general public for sure.
But it's also true,
you know, that's a challenge.
We start polluting the environment.
Interesting thing is that the
rivers like the North Forcavilla
River.
Will clean themselves chemically as
you go downstream because they're
being filtered by the
bed of the river, just like a septic
system, you know, so the water gets
cleaner.
But these toxic metals
and things enter the food chain.
So there's been mining operations in
South America where they've
discovered mercury a thousand miles
away in penguin feathers because
these toxic metal have entered the
foodchain. It's not just a
simple water equation.
So people can be
convinced maybe, because it'll
affect me when I'm out there
fishing.
Anything else you want to add along
these lines?
Mm-hmm.
No, I don't think so.
Thank you
Can I get you to say and spell your
name, just so I have it correct?
Sure.
It's Scott Stahlheim
with two T's and Scott
S-T-A-L-H-E-I-M.
All right, and you are with Friends
of the Yellow River.
Help coordinate the messages and
the emails and so forth.
And there's a Facebook page.
How many members do you have?
About 35, yeah.
Great. Thank you.
OK.
What we were telling Kathy before is
what we're