Category: Conservation

In 2004, Conservationists with Common Sense (CWCS) was involved in a federal court case related to permit quotas for motorized access on chains of lakes within the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness (BWCAW).

Summary Judgment Hearing

On February 11, 2004, U.S. District Court Judge John Tunheim held a hearing in Minneapolis to review motions for summary judgment. The case focused on how the U.S. Forest Service recalculated motor permit quotas in response to changes in federal law and previous exemptions.

Betsy Schmiesing of the Faegre Law Firm represented the Friends of the Boundary Waters. She argued that the Forest Service used inflated numbers when increasing permit quotas, which allegedly led to more motor use within the BWCAW. Schmiesing also stated that property owners and resort guests still hold exempt permits for accessing the lakes where they reside. However, she did not address new permit requirements for extended travel beyond the first lake.

David Oberstar of the Fryberger Law Firm represented CWCS. He argued that the Forest Service used conservative estimates, failing to account for property owners who sold their land due to the 1978 BWCAW restrictions. He also stated that restoring permits to users previously excluded by legal changes did not result in more motor use overall.

Joan Humes, from the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Minneapolis, represented the Forest Service. She explained that the agency used the best available data, based on limited resources, to determine permit use during the cap years of 1976–1978. Following an appeals court ruling, the Forest Service was required to revise the quota to include users who had been exempted previously.

Court Decision (August 26, 2004)

Judge Tunheim ruled that the Forest Service must reduce motor permits on three chains of lakes by two-thirds. The court concluded that Congress had set a clear permit cap in the 1978 BWCAW Act. The Forest Service was found to have overstepped its authority by recalculating that cap. Judge Tunheim described the agency’s permit increase as “arbitrary and capricious.”

Forest Service Appeals the Decision

The Forest Service later appealed the ruling. Kawishiwi District Ranger Mark Van Every stated that the agency believed the previous court decision overlooked important aspects of the issue.

Appeals Court Decision (Eighth Circuit)

The U.S. Court of Appeals reversed the lower court ruling. The court confirmed that the Forest Service had the authority to revise base-period data to address legal errors identified in prior rulings. It ruled that recalculating permit quotas was a valid part of the agency’s management responsibilities under the BWCAW Act. CWCS issued a press release and summary highlighting the key points of the appellate ruling.

Note: This summary presents legal events and agency actions from 2004 and 2005. Current BWCAW permit rules, court interpretations, and Forest Service policies may differ from those described here.

Responsible Land Use and Mining Near the Boundary Waters

In 2017, a viewpoint published in the Duluth News Tribune by Nancy McReady explored how environmental protection and mining access could coexist near the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness (BWCAW). The article focused on land withdrawals, local government roles, and natural resource management in northeastern Minnesota.

Federal Land Withdrawal and Local Government Input

In late 2016, the federal government proposed a 20-year mineral withdrawal for over 400,000 acres near the BWCAW. This triggered a new environmental review that could last up to two years. Despite legal requirements under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the process excluded direct participation from state and county officials.

A public notice from the U.S. Department of the Interior listed an incorrect withdrawal date of “Jan. 21, 2017.” The date remained uncorrected at the time of publication.

Northern Minnesota’s Wetlands and Land Stewardship

Northeastern Minnesota holds about 75% of the state’s remaining wetlands. While Minnesota has lost roughly half of its original wetlands, northern counties have maintained much of theirs. In contrast, central Minnesota has seen 82% of its wetlands affected by invasive species. Southern and western regions have lost up to 95% due to drainage and agriculture.

These preserved wetlands play a critical role in maintaining the region’s high water quality.

Mining’s Role in Education Funding

Mining has long contributed to Minnesota’s economy. The Dunka Pit, located in the same watershed as the proposed withdrawal area, has operated under monitoring for over 40 years. No harm to the BWCAW has been recorded.

School Trust Lands, established to fund public education, now total 2.5 million acres—down from more than 8 million. About 92% of these lands lie in ten northern counties. Mining revenue from these areas continues to support Minnesota schools. Without it, funding from these lands would decline significantly.

Changes in Tourism and Recreation Access

Federal actions over several decades have restricted tourism-related activities in the BWCAW:

• The 1949 floatplane ban ended many remote resorts.
• The 1964 Wilderness Act led to the removal of additional resorts.
• The 1978 BWCAW Act introduced permit quotas that many resorts could not meet.
• Later policies banned snowmobiling and limited motorized towboats.

These changes aimed to preserve wilderness conditions while controlling human impact.

Managing Access Through Regulation

Regulations now shape how people visit the BWCAW. These include quotas, motor size limits, a ban on bottles and cans, and leave-no-trace practices. While designed to protect the area, these rules also reflect the evolving balance between conservation and access.

The original article suggested that the same regulatory approach could guide responsible mining.

---

Note: This summary presents perspectives from 2017 and references land use policies in effect or under discussion at that time. Current conditions or government practices may differ.

In 2000, Conservationists with Common Sense (CWCS) participated in several issues involving land management, motorized access, and recreational use.
Below is a summary of four key advocacy positions from that year.

Support for Little East Creek Access

On November 7, 2000, CWCS wrote to U.S. Forest Service Chief Mike Dombeck requesting emergency access to St. Louis County lands. These lands were within the Superior National Forest, affected by the July 4, 1999, windstorm. The storm flattened over 400,000 acres around the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness.

CWCS cited Forest Service data: fuel loads rose from 12–20 to 80–150 tons per acre. They emphasized the need for quick access to remove downed timber and protect public safety. CWCS argued that protecting lives and property should take priority over wilderness preservation.

Note: This position reflects CWCS’s advocacy in 2000 following the 1999 windstorm and may not reflect current forest management policies or access needs.

Letter of Support for Isle Royale Boaters Association

Also on November 7, 2000, CWCS expressed support for the Isle Royale Boaters Association’s legal efforts to maintain multiple-use access. They referenced shared legal experiences, including truck access restoration to BWCAW motorized portages. In 1999, trucks were returned after their removal in 1992.

Support came from Senator Rod Grams and Congressman James Oberstar, both active at that time. CWCS offered to be publicly listed as a supporting organization alongside IRBA.

Note: This reflects CWCS’s 2000 support during a legal dispute over Isle Royale access. References to lawsuits and legislation relate to past actions.

Voyageurs National Park Management Plan Position

On October 6, 2000, CWCS opposed parts of a draft Voyageurs National Park Management Plan. They supported more campsites but opposed new permit systems, citing low visitor use.

CWCS objected to vague houseboat definitions and bans on biking and sled dog use. They noted these activities were allowed in the adjacent BWCAW. CWCS also opposed a blanket jetski ban, which they said lacked public input and impact studies.

Note: These comments reflect CWCS’s views in 2000. Park rules and management plans may have changed since that time.

Opposition to National Park Snowmobile Ban

Also on October 6, 2000, CWCS wrote to Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott about a proposed National Park snowmobile ban. They argued it lacked public input and proper environmental review. CWCS supported Senator Rod Grams’s proposal to preserve snowmobile access based on January 1, 2000, rules.

They also highlighted Minnesota-based companies Polaris and Arctic Cat, which were working on cleaner snowmobile engines. CWCS supported environmental studies before any permanent restrictions.

Note: This statement reflects CWCS’s advocacy efforts in 2000 regarding snowmobile use in National Parks. National Park regulations may have changed since.

CWCS Position on Tilbury Trail Reroute

Note: The following content reflects CWCS’s position as of December 2005 and references policy discussions and trail development proposals active at that time.

Historical Context

The Tilbury Trail was built in the 1960s. Cabin owners on McFarland Lake used it to access South Fowl Lake. The 1978 BWCA Wilderness Act expanded the Boundary Waters, placing the trail within the designated wilderness. The Forest Service did not act to address its new status.

Trail Oversight and Community Knowledge

CWCS stated that locals had always known about the trail. They believed environmental groups only learned of it recently. The group criticized the Forest Service for not recognizing the trail’s presence earlier.

Snowmobiling and Cultural Significance

Snowmobiles became popular in northern Minnesota during the 1960s and 1970s. Many families used them for recreation and winter ice fishing. CWCS emphasized that snowmobiling was part of local culture. They argued that its ban in the BWCA occurred without an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS).

Legislative Mandates and Unfulfilled Commitments

Section 18 of the 1978 BWCA Wilderness Act required new trails outside the BWCAW to replace those lost to wilderness designation. CWCS claimed this commitment was never met. One trail near Ely—from Stub Lake to Moose Lake—was partially developed but never completed.

Reroute and Funding Recommendations

In 2005, CWCS maintained that the Forest Service should fund the Tilbury Trail reroute. This would fulfill the 1978 law’s requirements. CWCS also supported federal funding for a snowmobile trail between Ely and Crane Lake, a project once proposed by Senator Paul Wellstone.

Preferred Route and Legislative Interpretation

CWCS stated that the reroute should follow the original trail’s path. They opposed choosing a route based only on distance from the BWCA. The group favored the North Route for being shorter, safer, and needing less new construction. They noted the 1978 law did not establish a buffer zone. It only required new trails to be outside the BWCAW.

CWCS Advocacy Position

As of 2005, CWCS supported land use decisions that respected legal mandates, honored historic use, and met community needs in northern Minnesota.