Support a moratorium (11/20/2011)

From: Matthew Byrnes

Recent letters by opponents of the frac sand mining moratorium try to frame this important discussion simply in terms of economic and property rights. While frac sand mines might create jobs, most of those jobs would go to truckers and mine workers who probably wouldn’t live in Winona. Additionally, the mines could destroy the tourism industry and thus hurt the economy. Who wants to vacation or retire in an ugly county? Even if you assume that the mines will actually create more longterm jobs than they destroy, the mining would put the county in an awkward place: how do you decide what number of jobs are worth the increase in silicosis and other health concerns that result from frac sand mining? Fears about silica sand mining are downplayed by pro-frac folks saying “it’s only sand” and “we’ve mined sand for centuries.” The same people promoting mining have also said that our sand is so special and rare that the Saudis want it. Either our sand is “only sand” or it’s so rare that the Saudis want it, but it can’t be both. The potential frac mining operations are not the same as the small quarries that have operated in Winona for years. This is a specific type of silica sand mined for a specific purpose. Frac sand mining will hurt the quality of life here in the driftless region and will certainly destroy the quality of life for the folks living near the actual natural gas mining sites. Property rights have also been used to justify frac sand mining. The idea that the government shouldn’t tell people what to do with their land is used by frac supporters, but they don’t actually believe it. If you really believe that the government can’t tell you not to mine on your land, then you believe that the government can’t tell you not to shoot deer out of season on your land, store nuclear waste on your land, or build a giant skyscraper on your land. I’m fairly sure the most recent letter writer doesn’t actually take this stance; but rather, takes a pro-business stance masquerading as an anti-government stance. For the sake of argument, lets assume that the writer does in fact identify as a radical anarchist who believes the government shouldn’t have a say in what people do with their land. There’s still two problems with this land rights argument: First, even the anarchists believe that people are responsible for the ways their actions affect others. Second, I highly doubt that the current landowners’ ancestors were the ancient ancestral land holders; rather, our government forcibly took the land from the folks who used to live here and sold it back to the current owners ancestors (or to someone who bought it and later sold it to the current landowners) at a very low price. The landowner holds the land because of the government. If a landowner truly believes that the government has no say in what people do on their land then the landowner rejects the foundation for their own rights to the land. (But frac sand mining supporters don’t actually think this, they just use an anti-government/pro-landowner argument to promote their own financial interests…) If you’re going to make an anti-government argument, make an anti-government argument! If you’re going to make a pro-business argument make a pro-business argument. Just don’t conflate the two. Be honest in your reasons. I support a moratorium on frac sand mining in Winona county because I believe more research needs to be done into the potential health hazards of silica dust inhalation and because I am concerned about the extreme and irreversible damage frac mining is causing to the land aquifers in other parts of the country.

     Copyright © 2011, Winona Post, All Rights Reserved.