Comment on Enbridge Pipeline #3

Department of Natural Resources
Attn: Line 3 Pipeline Replacement Applications
500 Lafayette Road
St. Paul, MN 55155

May 8, 2019

 

Re: Comment on:

Utility Crossing License for State Land,

Utiliity Crossing License for Public Water,

Work in Public Waters for Public Water Wetlands on Private Land,

Work in Public Waters for Willow River Bridge,

Water Appropriation for Hydrostatic Testing and Horizontal Directional Drilling,

Water Appropriation for Trench and Construction Dewatering,

Water Appropriation for Dust Control, Water Appropriation for Construction near Gully 30,

Threatened and Endangered Species Taking Permit,

Calcareous Fen Management Plan (Gully 30)

 

To those this may concern:

(Corrected copy May 9, 2019 5:58pm)
As we move forward into a new era where the prospect of mining, transporting and use of fossil fuels bodes poorly for our long term survival, how do we transition to a new energy economy without destroying the natural resources life requires … like water? I believe the building and maintaining of oil pipelines in a water dependent ecosystem like that of Northern Minnesota is not the way; and, so, I object to the Enbridge pipeline #3.

The route for Enbridge’s oil pipeline, as proposed and approved, will cross 12 Minnesota counties and at least 68 lakes and rivers in this rich, biodiverse ecosystem:

Line 3 will travel through Kittson, Marshall, Pennington, Red Lake, Polk, Clearwater, Hubbard, Wadena, Cass, Crow Wing, Aitkin, Carlton counties in Minnesota. Line 3 will enter Minnesota by crossing the Red River entering Kittson and then move into Marshall County where it will cross the Tamarac River, Middle River and the Snake before entering Pennington County, where it will cross the Red Lake River. At this point it will move into Red Lake County where it will cross the Clearwater River before going into Polk County crossing at State Ditch Sixty One. With more tributaries to cross Line 3 will be heading into Clearwater County where it will cross, among others, Lost River, Silver Creek, West Four Legged Lake, the Mississippi River in Bear Creek Township and La Salle Creek in Itasca State Park. At this point, it will move through Paul Bunyan State Forest and south past many lakes and over the Straight River out of Park Rapids, over the Shell River and then in an easterly direction over Crow Wing River, then south into Wadena County and Huntersville State Forest where it will cross the Shell River again and the Crow Wing River within Huntersville State Forest. Once leaving Wadena, the line 3 pipeline will move through Cass County south of the Leech Lake Reservation through more water dependent areas, over Pine River and into Crow Wing County’s upper NW corner, at which point it reenters Cass County crossing water features and tributaries again before entering Aitkin County where it will cross the Mississippi once more, among others like the Sandy River, Willow River, a portion of the Mille Lacs Reservation, before moving into Carlton County. Once in Carlton County, Enbridge’s tar sands oil pipeline 3 will cross the West Branch of the Kettle River, Heikkila Creek, Kettle River, on the southerly border of Fond du Lac State Forest, the West Fork Moose Horn River, King Creek and Park Lake Creek. At the last leg of its journey through our land of 10,000 lakes, it will straddle the Willard Munger State Trail before crossing Highway 35, then south of Jay Cooke State Park and the St Louis River toward Superior in Douglas County, Wisconsin.

As history proves, there is no doubt that there will be leaks. No doubt, that there will be a degradation of the surrounding environment. This is all understood and accepted with what appears to be a token regard for the many hazards, since the permitting process moves forward in spite of these. The state of Minnesota knows what could go wrong. History has taught us. Will a short term jump in construction jobs cover the long term costs?

I ask that the licenses for the Enbridge pipeline #3, which continue to facilitate the extension of a policy toward fossil fuel extraction, transportation and utilization be denied.

Sincerely,

Anita Dedman-Tillemans

Advertisements