In today's Winona Daily News, county soil and water conservation district boardchairman Jim Riddle lays out the reasons why the board recommended a moratorium on silica sand (fracking sand) mining in the Bluff Country county.
He explains in Why we support a sand mine moratorium:
- According to the Winona County ordinance, sensitive areas are to be protected. The proposed sites in Saratoga Township are designated by the Minnesota DNR’s Minnesota County Biological Survey to contain rare plants. They could also provide habitat for rare mammals, reptiles, amphibians, birds and insects. A comprehensive biological assessment cannot be conducted during winter months. The Saratoga sand prairies represent rare ecosystems, and an inventory of the resident species must be conducted during the growing season, in order to know what habitat and species would be destroyed by mining activities.
- The St. Peter Sandstone, where the silica sand is located, is directly above fractured limestone bedrock — karst formations subject to the formation of sinkholes. Removing the shale cap over the sandstone could have detrimental effects on the potential for sinkholes and groundwater contamination. The impacts on sinkhole formation and groundwater contamination need to be fully explored, before any permits are issued.
- The permit applications call for “reclaiming” the sites, leaving side slopes with 3:1 slopes. We have concerns that sandy soils cannot be stabilized, seeded and planted at such steep slopes.
- Given the potential for numerous other sand mines in our county and region, we are looking at the real possibility of drastic and permanent changes to the landscape and quality of life in this area. What is lost, in terms of biological diversity, rare species and unique landscapes, can never be re-created.
These are valid concerns, well within a soil and water board's mission.
Citizens are conducting due diligence in nearby Olmsted and Fillmore Counties as well. The Preston Republican Leader reports in Pilot Mound Township silica mining application now revised; another withdrawn to do EAS:
The issue of silica sand - also referred to as "frac sand" - mining made its first public appearance in Fillmore County when a topic involving two applications came before the Fillmore County Board.
County zoning administrator Chris Graves said, "I'm here to address what's become a hot button topic in our area and in a few other counties. I don't want to address merits of whether it's good or bad."
Graves noted that in talking to others about sand mining issues last week, he came to realize an environmental assessment worksheet (EAW) is required of sand, gravel and quarry operations proposed to be over 40 acres.
Both Fillmore County proposals would be that size. Graves said the county had not permitted anything to date that was 40 acres or more, so an EAW had never been required.
Withdrawing application
When Graves let the applicants know about this change, one said it would withdraw its application at this time and go ahead with an EAW.
In a sidebar article, the Republican Leader reports in Olmsted townships ruled for EIS in mine expansion:
Related to the frac sand issue, both Elmira and Orion townships in Olmsted County - which are adjacent to Fillmore County at Chatfield - last week voted to require further environmental review of a proposed sand mine expansion in the form of an environmental impact study (EIS).
The finding was related to the proposed expansion - including the mining of silica/frac sand - at the Griffin Construction sand operation 1 mile north of Chatfield on Highway 52. The operator would be White Diamond Frac Sand of Richardson, Texas. ...
Read the rest at the Republican Leader. Another Bluff Country Newpaper Group member, the Chatfield News, has more in Both mine applications in Fillmore County are on hold as environmental assessments will be done. Check it out.
Photo: A silica sand mine in Texas.
Related posts: Winona Co. soil & water board wants fracking sand moratorium; opposition spreads to Olmsted
Winona County fracking sand mining ops would spike truck traffic, engineer says
Fracking sand firm representative to Winona County citizens: "I have a higher level of rights"
Goodhue County commissioners unanimously pass fracking sand mining moratorium
No fracking way: Wabasha County places temporary moratorium on silica sand mining
Updated: Windsor Permian consultant spotted at Goodhue County planning commission meeting
Connecting the dots on fracking sand: from Hay Creek Township's citizens to the New York Times
Editor's note: An interesting comment. As I've noted a number of times (including this post : http://www.bluestemprairie.com/bluestemprairie/2011/06/connecting-the-dots-on-fracking-sand-from-hay-creek-townships-citizens-to-the-new-york-times.html), I grew up near St. Peter and am familiar with the battles over Ottawa and Kasota. See the post for satellite photos of the Ottawa and Kasota mines.
The comments:
With very few exceptions sand is silica (quartz) sand. Fracking sand is valuable to oil and gas companies because of the size of the sand particles (large) which allow mysterious chemicals (mysterious because the oil and gas people do not want to reveal just what they are pumping into the ground) to penetrate the sand and, when pressure is applied, to fracture the surrounding rock. This, in turn, allows the gas or oil to flow through the fractured rock and be extracted (usually both gas and oil are extracted and often the gas is just flared off). One “byproduct” of the process is the used fracking fluid and another may be very salty water (much oil and gas being associated with salt deposits). This combination of salt water and franking fluid is then “disposed of” as inexpensively as possible. This may mean, for just one example, that large areas of eastern Wyoming are being devastated (out of sight out of mind to most of us). Western Pennsylvania is currently in the midst of a fracking versus the local population and the environment. So far the franking faction seems to be winning (surprise). Energy companies have never (that’s an absolute) been responsible citizens (now that the Supreme Court has ruled that they are citizens).
It is therefore remarkable that back in the 1970s when Unimin was planning a big sand mining pit at Kasota (just southeast of St. Peter) a band of really dedicated local environmentalists managed to wring a concession from Unimin that we today know as Kasota Prairie, one of the best prairie sites in southern Minnesota.
The point being that organized opposition can make a difference. The St. Peter Formation underlies much of the area and is the source of the sand so perfect for fracking operations. The Oil and gas companies will not give up and will eventually find a spot where opposition is not organized and local politicians can enticed and influenced by the money. Oil and gas has no shortage of that commodity. But opposition can be effective. Landscape matters. Thousands of tons of sand require thousands of truckloads. Try that in your quiet countryside.
There is a very good article in the April 25th issue of the New Yorker on oil development in western North Dakota which explains in detail the process of fracking which out there is creating an oil boom. The demand for sand will only increase as new drilling technologies come increasingly to rely on it. Fight it now.
Michael Scullin (formerly of Mankato)
Posted by: Michael Scullin | Nov 13, 2011 at 12:34 PM