It's interesting you mentioned that the Canadian investors, because in speaking with the people
that are fronting Greenlight, they're talking about how local they are. They're all from
Wisconsin, they have Wisconsin connections. I mean, is that just happy to speak again or trying
to make it look like, hey, we're local here? Yeah, well, certainly it's a way
putting Wisconsin mining experts on your board of directors is a way to try to sort of generate
Astrid turf in a way that makes you look like you're a Wisconsin company. So, you know, Greenlight
Metals has a Wisconsin corporate office. It's a pole barn in rural Medford, in rural Taylor County.
None of their limited staff, which is basically their CEO and I think their CFO
are paid. You know, everybody else is taking stock options in the company
and sitting on the board of directors. So, it's artificial. They're not a Wisconsin company.
This is a Canadian company. They're organized and headquartered in Toronto.
They are listed on the Toronto Stock Venture Exchange, which is where all the junior mining
companies, the hundreds of junior mining companies, go to try to attract outside investment
in their schemes to try to develop mines someplace or to buy up property with hopes of being bought
up themselves or merged with an actual mining company. Greenlight Metals isn't a mining company.
It's never mined anything. You know, they exist to, you know, attract money to speculate on
potential mine developments. So, is it just happy talk? No, there's, you know, there's a there's a
method behind the madness, which is to make it look more like you're a Wisconsin company when,
in fact, you're not, you know, not really fooling anybody who's paying attention.
But for the public who's unaware, it may make a difference if it looks like, you know,
if it looks like these guys are more from Wisconsin than they are from Canada.
Good. So, looking ahead towards the gubernatorial election, it's interesting. Tom Tiffany was one
of the lead sponsors of the mining bill. He's a front runner for the Republican nominee.
There's also this potential that Democrats could flip the control of the legislature.
Right. They could actually regain control. So, would you say that mining could or should be an issue
this fall in the election? Is this something that warrants more attention simply because,
you know, the lead nominee obviously is very much in proposal of not drill baby drill, but dig
mine baby mine versus, you know, the potential for Democrats to actually come back in and would you,
would you want a Democratic legislature and governor to change the mining law that exists
currently? Well, that's a big if, you know, whether Democrats could, you know, flip both houses and
retain the governor's seat. And to be clear, the CR club is nonpartisan. What we would like to see
is some of the reversals in, you know, protections from mining in state law reversed.
We had a relatively solid comprehensive mining law in years past that's just been eroded repeatedly
over time. And so, reenacting some of those protections I think would be a priority for us.
Should mining become an issue for the gubernatorial election and or the legislature?
I think so. You know, I think the public is wary of mining developments in the first place.
I think if they understand more that, you know, Tom Tiffany was, you know, a strong sponsor and
supporter of the legislation in 2017 that repealed the proof at first law.
You know, if they understand that and what it did to, to support potential destructive mining,
you know, I think that they, you know, I think that it's important for the public to know and
understand that it won't be the big, you know, big driving issue by any, you know, stretch of
the imagination. But folks should know that, you know, that somebody like Tom Tiffany is more
supportive of an industry that is potentially quite damaging to Wisconsin's environment
with very limited payoff for taxpayers and even for local units of government.
You know, you know, for an industry that's inherently unsustainable and is, is boom and bust in nature.
So these, you know, wouldn't generate long-term jobs or long-term income or long-term
quality of life in Northern Wisconsin.
You, you, you, you talked about the, it won't be the driving issue. Is this something that you will
promote to members or is this something that I mean, because there's a lot of people that don't
they know this exists. I mean, some of the gubernatorial candidates I've talked to, like,
you can see a kind of a red button in terms of mining. Well, let me talk about mining more.
Yeah. Yeah. Well, arguably, you know, issues like climate change and support for, you know,
renewable energy, you know, things that maybe have a little bit more direct impact for voters,
you know, I think are going to be issues that stand out.
You know, mining developments have, you know, a limited, limited impact on, you know,
you know, generally smaller groups, smaller, you know, population groups in the state. So,
we will, we'll certainly ask candidates, potential candidates about it. We do,
we do endorse candidates for, for racism. We will, for governor. We will, for the legislature.
We try to work in every legislative district, both in the Senate and the assembly,
looking forward. So, you know, we'll ask those questions of the candidates,
because, you know, it's a priority for us. It's a goal to
try to, you know, roll back some of the loss of protections that we've seen over the last 20 years.
Ultimately, would you want to see, prove it first, put back in place?
I think so. I think a strengthened prove it first
would be, would, is still a useful tool. And I think the 2023 study that was commissioned in
Minnesota by supporters of their version of prove it first, that found that current minds
even proposed by the mining industry itself to meet their version of the law are having problems.
I think that's really an important valid point to bring up with the public, is to show that
this industry really has a horrific track record. And it has a failed track record,
you know, a track record of extensive environmental damage. Even so-called example minds have issues.
So, what, what I would love to see here, and you know, what I think is
important is to, to strengthen a prove it first law and make it require an actual,
a single mine, for example, that has both operated and closed safely, you know, over an extended
period of time. Not some little small mine, like a flambo mine that only operated for three years,
you know, something that is, you know, relatively significant in scope, to give us a good sense
of whether or not this industry actually has a good handle on protecting the environment.
And to be clear, the flambo mine did, if that had run the full 10 and closed, would that
meet the examples? Did, or did they have issues as well?
So, they never operated for 10 years, so they couldn't have met that tenant of the law.
It's been more than 10 years since they closed, but the company has an ongoing surface water
contamination issue at the site where a stream, a stream flowing from the site is listed on
EPA's, shoot, what's the list called?
So, at the flambo site, there is a stream that, that flows through the mine site and then down
into the flambo river that is, has been listed by both our DNR and US EPA for impairment due to
zinc and copper contamination. So, waters running from the mine site have impaired and damaged a
stream that flows into the flambo river. So, despite being closed for more than 10 years,
the flambo mine would not satisfy the requirement of a mine that had been closed safely,
closed and reclaimed safely for 10 years. Okay. Anything else that you want to add that we might
have missed in this conversation? No, you let me squeeze just about everything on.
Then before we turn off, can I get you to say and spell your name and give your title
just so I am all correct. Sure. I'm Dave Bluhan. My last name is spelled Bluhan, B-L-O-U-I-N.
I am the state mining committee chair for the Sierra Club. What's the worst mispronunciation
of your last name occurred? Oh, Bluhan. Bluhan? Yeah, oh yeah.
Yeah, oh yeah.