The Boundary Waters region is downstream from portions of the Rainy River Headwaters watershed.
By Penny Langford
ST. PAUL, Minn. : Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz signed an executive order Tuesday directing state agencies to halt environmental review, permitting and new leasing for nonferrous mineral mining in the Rainy River Headwaters Watershed, a move designed to strengthen protection for the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness.
The order blocks state action on proposed copper-nickel, sulfide and other nonferrous mining projects in the watershed while litigation over Minnesota’s mine-siting rules remains unresolved. It also directs the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources to review existing state mineral leases and draft legislation that would permanently prohibit nonferrous mining in the region.
The decision follows Congress’s recent cancellation of a 20-year federal mineral withdrawal covering more than 225,000 acres of Superior National Forest upstream from the Boundary Waters. That reversal reopened debate over possible copper-nickel development in the region and renewed scrutiny of the proposed Twin Metals project.
The order, Executive Order 26-10, was signed and filed on Aug. 18. It becomes effective 15 days after publication in the Minnesota State Register and filing with the secretary of state.
What the executive order does
The order applies to the Rainy River Headwaters Watershed, which drains toward the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness. It does not establish a permanent statutory ban by itself. Instead, it uses the governor’s authority to suspend or prevent several state actions needed to advance a mining project.
| Area | Effect of Executive Order 26-10 |
|---|---|
| Environmental review | The DNR and Minnesota Pollution Control Agency cannot undertake environmental review for proposed nonferrous mines in the watershed while the litigation and related rulemaking remain unresolved. |
| State permits | The DNR and MPCA must halt permitting work associated with proposed nonferrous mining projects. |
| New mineral leases | The DNR cannot offer new state nonferrous mineral leases in the Rainy River Headwaters Watershed. |
| Surface leases | The state cannot offer new surface leases for nonferrous mining operations, including tailings or other mine-waste storage. |
| Existing leases | The DNR must review existing state nonferrous mineral leases and enforce their terms to the fullest extent allowed by law. |
| Federal reviews | The DNR cannot participate as a cooperating agency in federal environmental reviews of proposed nonferrous mining projects in the watershed. |
| Permanent legislation | The DNR must draft legislative language that would prohibit nonferrous mining in the watershed. |
The practical impact is significant for any company seeking to move from exploration to mine development. A project may still hold existing mineral rights or leases, but moving forward would generally require environmental review, permits and other state approvals. Those processes are now frozen for qualifying proposals.
The order does not cover iron ore mining, and it does not automatically cancel existing leases or determine the validity of federal mineral rights. Its immediate reach is focused on state agency action in the defined watershed.
Why the Rainy River watershed matters
The Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness is a network of more than 1,000 lakes and waterways in northeastern Minnesota. Portions of the Rainy River Headwaters lie upstream from the wilderness, creating a direct hydrological connection between potential mine sites and protected waters.
That connection has made the watershed the center of a long-running dispute over sulfide-ore mining. Opponents argue that pollution from a mine outside the wilderness boundary could move downstream through interconnected lakes and rivers. Mining supporters contend that modern mine designs, water treatment systems and regulatory controls can manage those risks.
The Rainy River Headwaters connect upstream mining areas with downstream wilderness waters.
Walz’s order describes the Rainy River Headwaters as an area with high-quality fisheries and some of the lowest pollutant levels in Minnesota. It also points to the watershed’s importance to Tribal Nations and Ojibwe communities, as well as to outfitters, guides, resorts and other businesses tied to the Boundary Waters economy.
The governor’s office said the region’s outdoor recreation economy is worth nearly $1 billion. That figure has been cited by state officials and conservation groups in arguing that the economic consequences of water contamination could extend well beyond mining royalties and construction jobs.
Twin Metals remains central to the debate
The proposed Twin Metals Minnesota copper-nickel mine has been the most prominent development proposal associated with the watershed. The project would be located outside the Boundary Waters but within its broader watershed.
Twin Metals submitted a mine plan to state and federal agencies in December 2019. The Minnesota DNR began reviewing the proposal, but the agency later found the initial environmental review submission incomplete. The project has not received state operating permits, and no copper-nickel mine is operating in the Rainy River Headwaters region.
Exploration has continued to draw regulatory attention. In 2023, the DNR approved exploratory drilling by Franconia Minerals, a Twin Metals subsidiary, near Birch Lake on private land where the company held state mineral leases.
The new order could constrain future advancement of exploration projects in the watershed, particularly where work would require new state leases, surface leases or agency approvals. It also removes the DNR from cooperating in federal environmental reviews, potentially reducing state involvement in any future federal project process.
Litigation is a key trigger
The order is closely tied to Northeastern Minnesotans for Wilderness v. DNR, a case brought under the Minnesota Environmental Rights Act.
The conservation group argues that Minnesota’s nonferrous mine-siting rule, Minnesota Rule 6132.2000, does not adequately protect the Boundary Waters from mining-related pollution and other impacts. The existing rule prohibits mining in the wilderness itself and restricts surface disturbance in the Boundary Waters Mineral Management Corridor. The plaintiffs have argued that protection should extend across the Rainy River Headwaters Watershed.
The DNR conducted an extensive administrative review. According to the agency’s public project page, the department received more than 4,000 public comments during the process.
In April, an independent decision-maker issued a final agency decision. The DNR said the decision found the existing rule largely protective when considered alongside other state and federal environmental requirements, but identified potential gaps involving mining-related noise and light.
Both Northeastern Minnesotans for Wilderness and Twin Metals Minnesota requested review by the Second District Court in June. The DNR has said it will not begin related rulemaking until the appeal process is complete and the case’s outcome is determined.
Walz’s order now instructs the DNR and MPCA to pause environmental review and permitting work until the litigation and any subsequent rulemaking are fully resolved.
Reactions split along familiar lines
Conservation groups welcomed the order as a state response to the loss of federal protections.
In a statement reported by WTIP, Ingrid Lyons, executive director of Save the Boundary Waters, said the governor had acted to protect Minnesota and the Boundary Waters after federal safeguards were removed. Other advocates described the order as a necessary state-level backstop while the legal and political dispute continues.
State DNR Commissioner Sarah Strommen said the action would strengthen long-term protections for the wilderness. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Commissioner Katrina Kessler said the state was stepping forward at a time when federal environmental protections had been weakened.
Mining supporters and some elected officials criticized the decision as executive overreach. State Sen. Grant Hauschild said the policy should have been considered through the legislative process rather than imposed by a governor who is nearing the end of his term, according to WTIP.
Mining advocates have also argued that the region’s copper and nickel resources could contribute to domestic supply chains for electric vehicles, power systems, electronics and defense equipment. Their position is that rigorous permitting and modern water-management technology can allow mining while protecting the environment.
The dispute reflects a broader challenge for North American critical-minerals policy: the need to expand domestic supplies of energy-transition metals while managing projects in environmentally sensitive regions. Skillings has previously examined the supply-side pressures affecting nickel markets and the factors shaping the copper price outlook.
What happens next
The order creates an immediate procedural barrier, but it does not end the wider legal or legislative fight.
First, the litigation challenging Minnesota’s mine-siting rule must proceed through the courts. The outcome could determine whether the state must revise its regulations and how broad any rulemaking process becomes.
Second, the DNR must review existing state nonferrous mineral leases in the watershed. The order calls for strict enforcement of lease terms but does not state that all existing leases will be terminated.
Copper-nickel exploration in the region has continued to face heightened regulatory scrutiny.
Third, the DNR is expected to prepare legislative language for a permanent prohibition. Any statutory ban would require action by the Minnesota Legislature and could face opposition from lawmakers, mining companies and communities that support mineral development.
The order also leaves questions about how state restrictions will interact with federal land decisions and private mineral rights. Congress’s cancellation of the federal withdrawal changed the national framework, but it did not authorize a specific mine. Any future project would still need to navigate state and federal permits, environmental review, land access and potential litigation.
For mining companies and investors, the immediate consequence is increased permitting and jurisdictional uncertainty in one of North America’s most contested copper-nickel districts. For state officials and conservation groups, the order establishes a stronger protective position while they pursue a permanent legal solution.
The Boundary Waters debate is therefore moving into its next phase: from a contest over individual mine proposals to a broader question of whether nonferrous mining is compatible with the ecological, cultural and economic values of the entire Rainy River Headwaters Watershed.
State agencies will review existing leases while environmental permitting remains on hold.
Key documents and reporting
- Minnesota Executive Order 26-10
- Minnesota Governor’s executive order archive
- Minnesota DNR review of the nonferrous mine-siting rule
- WTIP: Walz takes executive action on copper-nickel mining near Boundary Waters
- WDIO: Governor Walz issues executive order to stop permitting work on certain copper-nickel projects