Warning sign outside Cameco's Crow Butte uranium mine, in Nebraska; Photo courtesy of the Lakota Media Project of Owe Aku
“technically aniquated, sloppy and equivalent to high school level work,” Native Americans insist that it violates their internationally-recognized treaty rights, and 10,000 citizens in this sparsely-populated area signed a petition opposing it. Yet, citizens of Michigan’s Upper Peninsula would be hard-pressed to name a single county or state elected official opposed to Rio Tinto’s proposed metallic sulfide Eagle Mine, in northern Marquette County.
Even the prospect of uranium mining, well known for its toxic and radioactive legacy in areas not far from Michigan, in Ontario and Nebraska, are welcomed with open arms by eager officials. Last year, the Gogebic County Commissioner expressed full support of uranium exploration and mining activities on public land.
A more informed understanding of uranium mining is taking place thirteen-hundred miles from Marquette County. In Colorado, elected officials in a number of cities and towns are passing resolutions against a proposed in situ uranium mine that many fear could contaminate their water supply.
Colorado is also looking to pass rules that would implement a law requiring in situ uranium mines to return groundwater at the site to pre-mine quality. To further protect public health and water, the law would require mining companies to cite at least five examples of similar uranium mines that did not harm groundwater.
LSMN
Eve Divine
doncorvette
