A conference committee has approved a plan to improve habitat for bees and other pollinators.
Pollinators around the country are
suffering from a complex set of problems that is causing their numbers
to plummet. This could hurt agriculture, which relies on insects to
pollinate crops.
Rep. Jeanne Poppe, DFL-Austin,
sponsored a bill that requires the Department of Natural Resources and
the Department of Agriculture to ensure they keep pollinators in mind as
they are restoring habitat.
One way to help is by choosing plants to ensure there is always something blooming.
"We have bees that have colony
collapse. We have bees that are impacted by pesticides. We have just a
reduction in the number of pollinators, so this is an attempt to say
throughout the state we have the right habitat," Poppe said. . . .
As farmers get underway with their spring planting, some bee farmers in Minnesota are already counting their losses.
In the last couple days one major producer reported that thousands of honey bees suddenly died.
In 2005, Minnesota was the sixth largest honey producer in the
nation. But since 2006, millions of bee colonies have died off in
Minnesota and across the nation. ...
The
service that bees and other pollinators provide allows nearly 70 percent
of all flowering plants to reproduce; the fruits and seeds from insect
pollinated plants account for over 30 percent of the foods and beverages
that we consume. Beyond agriculture, pollinators are keystone species in
most terrestrial ecosystems. Fruits and seeds derived from insect
pollination are a major part of the diet of approximately 25 percent of
all birds, and of mammals ranging from red-backed voles to grizzly
bears. However, many of our native bee pollinators are at risk, and the
status of many more is unknown. Habitat loss, alteration, and
fragmentation, pesticide use, and introduced diseases all contribute to
declines of bees.
Republicans joked about a "buzzkill" in their tweets about the legislation written by the Austin-based chair of the Ag Policy committee. Apparently, they had no idea about the job-killing consequences of bee loss as they droned on to themselves.
Here's the CBS-MN clip:
Photo: A honeybee helping out an apple grower.
If you appreciate reading posts on Bluestem Prairie, consider making a donation via paypal:
An frac sand industry-friendly compromise has been reached in the Minnesota legislature over mining near trout streams. Meanwhile, a new report commissioned and published by the Wisconsin Farmers Union, the Wisconsin Towns Association and the Minneapolis-based IATP suggests that industrial sand mining falls short as an engine of job creation.
The lawmaker who has pushed this year for tougher state regulation of
the frac sand mining industry said DFL legislative leaders have reached
a compromise on the legislation.
Lawmakers agreed Tuesday to create a
new Department of Natural Resources permit for companies hoping to mine
silica sand in certain sensitive areas in southeastern Minnesota, said
Sen. Matt Schmit, DFL-Red Wing. Schmit said the regulations will be part
of the spending bill that covers natural resources, the environment and
agriculture.
Schmit and DNR Commissioner Tom
Landwehr had been pushing to prohibit sand mining within one mile of a
trout stream or spring in the "Paleozoic Plateau Ecological Section" of
the state, which includes Dakota, Goodhue, Houston, Fillmore, Olmsted,
Wabasha and Winona counties. The compromise expected to gain conference
committee approval would instead require a hydrological study and DNR
permit for any mine within a mile of a trout stream but not springs,
Schmit said.
"What this gives us is stricter
scrutiny in the most sensitive regions of southeastern Minnesota,"
Schmit said. "If that study proves that mining will have no or limited
impact on our waters, then we can move forward with the DNR permit, so I
think this is a good compromise. I do think it gives notice that the
areas around our trout streams are going to be watched very closely and
creates an incentive for mining to take place elsewhere.". ..
In a retreat from tough language that would have put much of
southeastern Minnesota off limits to frac sand mining, state officials
have reached a compromise that will allow mines near the region’s trout
streams, but only if companies follow new permitting rules.
As part of a deal announced Tuesday, Sen. Matt Schmit,
DFL-Red Wing, said he’ll drop his effort to ban frac sand mining within a
mile of any trout stream in the southeast corner of the state. The ban
was embraced by Gov. Mark Dayton until a compromise emerged at a recent
meeting with Schmit, industry lobbyists, three state agency heads and
organized labor.
If the deal goes as expected, the 2013 legislative
session will end without sweeping statewide environmental protections
sought by a throng of “fractivists” from areas around Red Wing, Wabasha,
Winona and other parts of the bluff country known as Minnesota’s
Paleozoic Plateau. . . .
New report challenges industry gospel on job creation
Those cheerleading the strip mining of Minnesota's Bluff Country carry on about jobs, usually citing figures promotedby the Heartland Institute, but those projections have their critics. Yesterday, the WFU and other organizations released a new report about the economics of Wisconsin's industrial sand mining.
The study, conducted by Thomas
Power, a retired University of Montana economist and an expert on the
economics of mining, concluded that the economic effects of silica sand
production used in mining is likely to be quite small.
Drawing from data collected by the
federal government and the state of Wisconsin, production could create
about 2,300 jobs, but that's less than one percent of total employment
statewide. The frac sand region creates about the same number of jobs in
all categories every two months, Power said.
Power cites the following as reasons
for mining's poor performance in creating healthy economies:
• Fluctuations in demand
• Increasing mechanization
• Mines depleted more quickly
• Workers commute long distances, families live elsewhere
• Small local economies can't supply mines
• Impacts on the environment make the region a less attractive place to live and visit
• Can discourage other businesses by paying high wages and degrading the environment
Photo: Citizens seeking legislative relief for themselves and trout were disappointed by a compromise with weak protections for trout and other living things.
If you appreciate reading posts on Bluestem Prairie, consider making a donation via paypal:
Meanwhile, Schmit lanuched an air war, the Red Wing Republican Eagle's Michael Brun reports in A bird’s-eye view of mining:
While debate over mining policy continues in St. Paul, Sen. Matt
Schmit chartered flights out of Red Wing Regional Airport Friday for
reporters to get a bird’s-eye view of the impact frac sand mines are
having across the river in Wisconsin.
The roughly hourlong flight,
piloted by Jim McIlrath from Frontenac in his homemade, single-engine
plane, toured more than a dozen mines dotting the Wisconsin countryside
around Menomonie and Eau Claire. . . .
. . .The Red Wing Democrat has been an active proponent in the Senate for increased regulation for frac sand mining in Minnesota.
He
has been involved with a number of mining-related bills in his
inaugural legislative session, including sponsoring an amendment to an
environmental bill that would prohibit frac sand mining within a mile of
state trout streams in southeastern Minnesota.
Read the rest at the Red Wing Republican Eagle. Meanwhile, in the Fillmore County, rural Houston resident Joan Redig noted in a Letter about Senator Miller and sand mining:
Sen. Matt Schmit of Red Wing, working with Trout Unlimited, has proposed provisions to protect trout streams in Southeast Minnesota from damage resulting from frac sand mining. He wanted these provisions included in the Game and Fish Policy Bill, Senate File 796. Pristine cold water springs in our karst area create some of the best trout streams in the United States. Frac sand mining threatens to pollute this water, and disrupt the flow of springs in ways that would raise the water temperature. Death for our trout. Our state has invested millions in stocking and protecting these streams. Trout fishing has provided over a billion dollars in economic activity in the Driftless Area. These special provisions in SF 796 only apply to the Paleozoic Plateau, which is our part of the Driftless Area.
We live within a mile of an old quarry being considered for frac sand mining. It is at the head of a drainage system which feeds our springs and a stream which flows into Money Creek, a tributary of Root River. All of this is threatened because we have no state level standards to protect our region’s trout streams. Sen. Schmit proposed: a mile setback from trout streams; a limit on how much groundwater frac sand facilities could use; and limiting mining to within 25 feet of the water table. DNR Commissioner Landwehr testified we need all of these provisions to protect the trout streams and groundwater. Despite this knowledge, Sen. Miller cast the deciding vote to kill these provisions. . . .
Finish reading the letter at the Journal. Bluestem understands that there's been discussion in the environment, natural resources and ag bill conference committee, but audio archives have yet to be posted. We'll listen to see what of interest was said and report back as they become available.
Photo: A silica sand mine near Menomonie, Wis. Aerial photo by Michael
Brun/Republican Eagle.
If you appreciate reading posts on Bluestem Prairie, consider making a donation via paypal:
Today the Star Tribune newspaper ran an editorial in support of strong regulation of the frac sand industry. The editorial, entitled "Minnesota Legislature must protect trout streams," says in part:
“Schmit’s common-sense legislation, which
will likely face a critical Senate floor vote today, proposes a
reasonable 5,000-foot-setback for sand mines from trout streams and the
springs that feed them. Mining also couldn’t occur within 25 feet of the
water table. The aim is straightforward: to protect the flow of the
cold, clear waters that are the lifeblood of the region’s renowned trout
fishery and, by extension, the jobs dependent on angling tourism.
Cutting off springs or groundwater flow through careless excavation
could reduce stream flows and increase water temperature to levels
lethal to trout...The setbacks called for in the legislation are based
on the best available research and would significantly reduce the risk
of environmental damage. Waiting years to gather data for a more
tailored approach isn’t practical. The damage to critical trout habitat
may already have been done by then."
This vote is happening today on the Senate floor as early as
mid-morning. Sen. Matt Schmit of Red Wing will offer his amendment on
the Senate floor to the Omnibus Game and Fish Bill (Senate File 796) to
protect southeast Minnesota trout streams from frac sand mining and
processing.
Take Action. Contact your Senator immediately and
urge them to support Sen. Schmit’s amendment. You can find your state
Senator's name and contact information onlinehere, or by calling 651-296-0504 or 888-234-1112.
Suggested message: “Today Sen. Matt Schmit will
offer an amendment on the Senate floor to protect southeast Minnesota
trout streams from frac sand mining. I strongly encourage you to support
this amendment, which will include a setback from trout streams for
frac sand mines. The Star Tribune editorial had it right today
when it said that these setbacks "are based on the best available
research and would significantly reduce the rise of environmental
damage." I will check back in tomorrow to see how you voted on this
amendment."
You can watch the debate on the Senate floor online here.
The DFL legislature is prepared to sell out Southeastern Minnesota to industrial sand mining interests, despite widespread grassroots appeals for relief.
Environmental activists who pushed ambitious legislation to slow the advance of frac sand mining in Minnesota have been soundly defeated on their central proposals and, with less than two weeks left in the 2013 legislative session, are clinging to a fragile game and fish amendment as their last hope for a substantial breakthrough.
The amendment, which would block excavation within a mile of any trout stream in southeastern Minnesota, is strongly backed by Gov. Mark Dayton as a way to prevent an explosion of sand mining in a region where the state has invested millions of dollars over decades to nurture a blue-ribbon fishery.
But as the session winds down, even that idea is meeting resistance in a Legislature that has been largely receptive to the industry’s message that more regulation is unnecessary and will only kill jobs and economic growth.
“It’s the only substantial [frac sand] standard left this session,’’ said John Lenczewski, executive director of Minnesota Trout Unlimited.
“Everything else is just fluff,’’ said Amy Nelson, a frac sand opponent from the Red Wing area. The trout stream language, which could face a critical vote on the Senate floor as early as Thursday, has been painted by opponents as a de-facto mining ban in southeastern Minnesota. Industry supporters also say the measure is a “slippery slope’’ that could potentially hurt taconite mining on the Iron Range and even the construction aggregate business.
Another factor that the article doesn't take up is that few of the state's major environmental groups issued public
policy statements or provided testimony on the proposed legislation.
With the exception of Trout Unlimited and Land Stewardship Project, the
citizens were largely on their own. (It will be curious to see which groups that stood silent will use this issue for fundraising--we'll let you know).
Kennedy reports that the governor will meet with industry reps today to push for the pro-trout legislation:
But Dayton told reporters Wednesday that he is cautiously optimistic the legislation will move forward.
“I strongly support that position and will do everything I can in conference committee to get it enacted,’’ he said.
Meanwhile, the governor scheduled a private meeting for Thursday with industry representatives, labor leaders and the commissioners of the Department of Natural Resources, Pollution Control Agency and Department of Health.
Bluestem hopes that he'll succeed in swaying the legislature where thousands of concerned citizens have failed. Praise goes to freshman senator Matt Schmit for listening to his constituents, unlike Winona area senator Jeremy Miller, who cast a deciding committee vote to kill Schmit's trout stream protection.
Photo: On Tuesday, St. Mary's prof Jane Cowgill, who favors Schmit's bill, held up a "fishstick." The legislature favors Mrs. Paul's over Southeastern Minnesota's trout. Photo by John Kaul.
If you appreciate reading posts on Bluestem Prairie, consider making a donation via paypal:
In St. Paul, the state legislature's picking sand mining lobbyists over trout, while back in greater Minnesota, conflict continues to flare as citizens scrutinize the industry.
Despite a series of political defeats, a Red Wing lawmaker vows to keep fighting for legislation to protect trout streams from silica sand mining.
Sen. Matt Schmit, DFL-Red Wing, said he will keep pushing to prohibit silica sand mining within a mile of trout streams, springs and fens in southeastern Minnesota.
"Hopefully, people realize that we are not asking for the world here. All we're asking for is to be proactive and to give our agencies the tools they need to do their job and give our local decision makers the assurance that we are getting this right," he said.
But the first-term senator faces a tough fight. Republicans and Iron Range Democrats have teamed up to defeat the proposal. Last week, the measure was stripped out of the Senate's game and fish bill. On Tuesday, an attempt by Schmit put the regulations back into the bill failed by one vote in the Senate Finance Committee.
Sen. Jeremy Miller, R-Winona, was among those voting against the trout stream language. He said he wants to protect trout streams but believes other legislation will address the issue by helping set model standards and making agency experts available to help local governments. Local officials he talked to said Schmit's proposal goes too far and would amount to a de facto moratorium on mining in Fillmore and Houston counties.
"That would eliminate just about any opportunity for industrial sand mining in those two counties," he said. . . .
Twin Cities bicyclists will be among those gathering at an event tonight to raise concerns about frac sand mining.
Several silica sand mines close to
the Mississippi River in western Wisconsin are near areas where cyclists
like to ride and stay in bed-and-breakfasts. Some of the proposed mines
in southeastern Minnesota are also located in scenic areas where
cycling is popular. . .
"Bicyclists care about frac sand
mining for the same reasons that I've heard a lot of southeast Minnesota
residents testify at the State Capitol, and that's health, safety and
scenery," [Tracy] Sides said. "Degraded scenery undermines the cycling and
tourism. I've visited mining locations in Wisconsin, and industrial frac
sand mines look like open sores on the land."
Sides said increased truck traffic
from sand mining threatens a resource on both sides of the river. . . .
Can the pristine St. Croix River experience and the silica sand mining operations expected to proliferate near the riverway, co-exist? As industrial silica sand mining expands in this region, that’s ripe with geologic formations that support silica sand deposits; will local officials be prepared for this vastly more intensive form of mining?
Leaders from towns and counties all along the Wisconsin-Minnesota border and in the St. Croix watershed came together last weekend to learn about what’s being done to regulate silica or “frac sand” mining. Some who have been involved in this issue for several years came to share their personal experiences with this industry. The conference was hosted by the St. Croix River Scenic Byway, and River Coalition and was held in St. Croix Falls’ Public Library. Frac sand or silica sand mining is causing concerns for local zoning authorities, public health officials and for citizens suddenly finding their farms, homes or cabins on the edge of a sand mine. . .
Residents in Winona County have asked the Minnesota Court of Appeals
to reverse a decision that would allow a proposed frac sand mine to move
forward without an in-depth environmental review.
The Winona County board voted last
month that the proposed Nisbit frac sand mine in Saratoga Township does
not need to complete an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS).
But 12 residents backed by the Land Stewardship Project say the county
failed to address concerns about the mine's potential impact. They say
the county needs to take into account the potential cumulative effect of
several mines opening nearby. . . .
Here's the Land Stewardship Project press release:
The Environment, Natural Resources and Agriculture conference committee meets at 1:00 p.m., and Bluestem hopes that the House conferees--Jean Wagenius, David Dill, Jeanne Poppe, Rick Hansen, and Andrew Falk--can prevail on keeping $190,000 for the Sustainable Agriculture Demonstration Grant Program in the final conference report.
Competitive grants for up to $25,000 are awarded to individuals or
groups for on-farm sustainable agriculture research or demonstration
projects in Minnesota. The purpose of the Grant Program is to fund
practices that promote environmental stewardship and conservation of
resources as well as improve profitability and quality of life on farms
and in rural areas. . . .
Eligible recipients include Minnesota farmers, individuals at Minnesota
educational institutions, non-profit organizations, and local natural
resource agencies. Priority is given to projects that are farmer
initiated. All non-farmer initiated projects must show significant
collaboration with farmers. . . .
The program objectives are to research and demonstrate the
profitability, energy efficiency, and benefits of sustainable
agriculture practices and systems from production through marketing.
Grants are available to fund on-farm research and demonstrations and may include, but are not limited to:
enterprise diversification and organic production using traditional and non-traditional crops and livestock;
cover crops and crop rotations to increase nitrogen uptake, reduce erosion, or control pests;
conservation tillage and weed management;
cropping systems to implement integrated pest management systems for insects, weeds, and diseases;
nutrient and pesticide management including prevention of entry into water bodies;
energy production such as wind, methane, or biomass.
The program does not fund projects that duplicate previously funded projects. . . .
It's not a big program, but one that's useful for farmers, especially those in fast-growing sectors like community supported agriculture (CSA). It's not as if traditional production agriculture is starved in either chamber's bill, so the omission of the program in the Senate bill seems a casual error that can be easily corrected.
Here's the Land Stewardship Project's position on the project (via LSP's lobbyist Bobby King:
Funding for the Sustainable Agriculture Demonstration Grant Program. LSP
supports the House position that provides $190,000/ year funding for
this program. (HF 976 lines 6.7 – 6.20) There is no dedicated funding
in the Senate position.
Here's the House staff comparison and contrast chart. Perhaps the greater problem with the Senate bill is the absence of funding for the Minnesota Agricultural Water Quality Program, which would be developed by the Minnesota Department of Ag and a board composed mostly of farmers and local soil and water commissioners. Oddly, Republicans have objected that farmers would not have a voice in establishing the program's policies. The program is a priority of the Minnesota Farmers Union.
With the suspension of the sustainable food production diploma program at M State-Fergus Falls, a peculiar hostility to toward small-scale, innovative agriculture seems to be gaining steam among some state lawmakers and bureaucrats. This is unfortunate, as the local food movement has been a boon for small business and job creation for those who seek to serve consumer demand.
Update: Those who support fostering our state's sustainable farming sector might consider contact the senators on the conference committee to ask them to agree with the House bill and fund this modest program. Be polite to the legislative aides who answer the phones and listen to the voicemail messages.
David Tomassoni: 651-296-8017
Tom Saxhaug: 651-296-4136
Dan Sparks: 651-296-9248
Jim Metzen: 651-296-4370
Torrey Westrom: 651-296-3826
Photo: Sexy buffer strips, via MnDA.
If you enjoy reading posts like this on Bluestem Prairie, consider throwing some coin in the tip jar:
One of our favorite poems is Wendell Berry's "The Peace of Wild Things." A lifelong Baptist, man of letters, academic, cultural and economic critic, and farmer, Berry has been a strong moral voice for traditional agrarian values and the environment for many years.
Thursday's Winona Daily News includes a letter from Berry to John Heid, Right and wrong:
The following letter was written by Wendell Berry, author, farmer and environmentalist, to John Heid (formerly of Winona), in support of the Catholic Worker campaign against frac sand mining.
Dear John,
You have offered me the privilege of joining by letter with you and your friends in Winona in opposition to "frac sand mining." and I am happy to accept.
I will say, first, that there is never, for any reason, a justification for doing long-term or permanent damage to the ecosphere. We did not create the world, we do not own it, and we have no right to destroy any part of it.
Second, most of our politicians and their corporate employers are measuring their work by the standards of profitability and mechanical efficiency. Those standards are wrong. There is one standard that is right: the health of living creatures and the living earth.
Third, we must give our need to eat, drink, and breathe and absolute precedence over our need for mined fuels.
I wish you well.
Sincerely,
Wendell Berry
It's not likely this will discourage those looking to loot a piece of wild things, but the gesture may give grassroots activists courage.
In a recent radio interview broadcast by KDIO, Ortonville mayor Steve Berkner inveighed against "intimidation tactics" that had supposedly by used by "special interest" opponents of the Strata Mining Corporation's plan to open a granite quarry in a cow pasture that contains some of Big Stone County's namesake granite outcroppings.
Those tactics? "Busing in" people, carrying signs, chanting, swearing, pounding on tables, grandstanding. For this, Berkner cautions that the city attorney and Ortonville police have been ordered to prevent "intimidation" at the next hearing about Stata, on May 7. Berkner encouraged citizens to submit written remarks, since apparently speaking in public at hearings can be confrontational.
Now, Bluestem attended a number of the zoning and county board hearings on the matter last year, and doesn't remember seeing anyone being "bused in." As for the signs, those carrying them in February 2012 did sing on their way from the Land Stewardship Project's office in Clinton to a zoning meeting about a block and a half away, but set them outside before entering the hearing.
Law enforcement officials were present at that meeting and others, but that's not unusual for large public meetings. Berkner was accusing outside "special interests" (apparently Land Stewardship Project, which maintains a local foods program in Western Minnesota and Clean Up the River Environment, an Upper Minnesota River Valley watershed restoration group based in Montevideo, MN) of using "intimidation tactics," although he doesn't name names.
Since the singing sign carriers and those speaking at the meetings all seemed rather decorous, Bluestem contacted Big Stone County Sheriff John Haukos to see if his department had received complaints or reports of bad behavior. After reviewing his records, Haukos returned our call. No complaints or reports had been filed, although the presence of deputies at meetings were duly recorded.
Indeed, Sheriff Haukos, who had attended many of the meetings, thought that they could be models of public discussion of an issue. He had not observed swearing, pounding of fists, or any such behavior that could be charactized as "intimidation," although he did watch one confrontational exchange after a zoning meeting in Clinton between a citizen and a county commissioner. He determined that the exchange wasn't going to escalate and moved on.
Since Bluestem was there, we too observed that verbal jousting between Dakota scholar Waziyata Win, who lives in the Yellow Medicine Dakota community near Granite Falls and Big Stone County Commissioner Brent Olson. In light of Minnesota history, Bluestem hesitates to call her or the two other Dakota scholars from Marshall and South Dakota who spoke at another meeting "outsiders," however outspoken Waz might be.
Clinton resident Rebecca Terk dropped by both the Ortonville Police department and Big Stone Sheriff's office with the same question. She was told that no complaints or reports of intimidation had been made to either office during the 2012 hearing process.
It's curious that the mayor is inclined to declare opposition to a project by a North Dakota corporation to somehow be a product of "outside special interests," when signs objecting to the annexation of the pasture--since the local township where it had been situated originally enacted a moratorium on the development after residents objected--still grace lawns in his fair community. (To circumvent the township moratorium, the landowner divided his property among relatives, who petitioned to become part of the City of Ortonville; an MPR report here includes remarks by Berkner. An OAH judge ruled that only one parcel could be annexed.).
Also curious in the interview: the host's declaration that if one side doesn't want to speak about a controversy, it's best not to cover an issue at all. Bluestem was under the impression that journalistic convention held that one reported that folks were given an opportunity to present their side, but declined comment.
Indeed, the edited remarks below are characterized by a barely contained hostility toward those who might object to Strata's designs--while insisting that the public has the right to make "respectful" comments. His bar for "respectful" appears to be quite high--with no singing or signs allowed. Indeed, if only people could just write their comments down. That would be so much nicer. Want to speak up in Ortonville? Better meet Mayor Berkner's guidelines for form, presentation and content.
And if Strata Corporation decides to never comment to the press, why the nice respectful radio lady simply wouldn't have to report on anything that happens at all.
Here's the selected audio about the idea of order in Ortonville, drawn from a longer 20-minute interview.. Short fades mark the edits and photo is of Berkner, then a city council member, at a public information hearing held in Ortonville by the Ortonville Township board of supervisors.
Photo: Signs wait outside a Big Stone County planning and zoning board hearing in Clinton, Minnesota in February 2012. Ortonville Mayor Steve Berkner has labeled these signs an "intimidation tactic." Bluestem doesn't find the message "Outcrops Mean Tourism $" to be all that scary, but perhaps the mayor has a much different comfort zone than Bluestem and local law enforcement. (Photo by Rebecca Terk) Below: an anti-annexation sign in an Ortonville lawn last fall.
If you enjoy reading posts like this on Bluestem Prairie, consider throwing some coin in the tip jar:
While the Minnesota legislature considers the creation of standards for silica sand mining and a Senate committee guts provisions for the protection of trout streams, members of the Catholic Worker movement have taken much more radical direct action to address their concerns about industrial sand mining in the driftless area.
Dan Wilson was one of about 20 people arrested Monday for misdemeanor trespassing after blocking trucks loaded with silica sand from getting to a Mississippi River loading dock in Winona. But he believes the wrong group was taken into custody.
As far as the Winona man is concerned, police should have arrested those who own the facility for trespassing on the city with their sand, which can cause medial and economic problems.
"We are not the ones trespassing on the industry, they are trespassing on us," he said after he was booked and released. About 20 others were arrested at another site in the city. . .
Protesters have written letters to the editor, talked with local officials and did other things but to no avail, Wilson said. "We decided we needed to start making sacrifices," he said. . . .
Eileen Hanson, a member of the Winona Catholic Worker community, said the weekend seminar attracted about 100 people from several Midwest states. Those arrested at the CD Corp. site and another 20 or so at a sand-processing plant on the outskirts of Winona, were both local and from other states, she said.
"We're saying no to this dangerous and destructive industry," she said."This was just one more way of saying, 'Hey we have really strong concerns about this.'" . . .
Their concerns aren't completely groundless. Read on.
Trout fishery protections stripped from Fish and Game bill
On April 24, in an unconnected action back at the state capitol, the Senate Finance - Environment, Economic Development and Agriculture Division stripped out the provisions in SF 786 that would have helped preserve Southeastern Minnesota's trout streams.
The testimony begins around 1:15 here. Department of Natural Resources Commissioner Landwehr offered compelled testimony in support of the provisions, as did John Lenczewski from Trout Unlimited.
Before the roll call vote, committee chair David Tomassoni (DFL-Chisholm) said that these provisions were not
appropriate for a Game and Fish bill--and that there are trout on the Iron
Range and his area might be next for trout protection.
Tom Saxhaug (DFL-Grand Rapids) agreed but Bev Scalze (DFL-Little Canada), who sits on the policy committee,
rightly brought up that as a finance committee they should not be
undoing major policy provisions.
Here are the roll call votes that gutted the pro-fishery provisions. The first vote is to remove section 50 of the bill
requiring setbacks from trout streams, the second vote is on section 51 limiting groundwater usage and prohibiting mining within 25 foot of the
water table.
Tomassoni YES YES
Dibble NO NO
Dziedzic NO NO
Hawj NO NO
Ingebrigtsen PASS YES
Osmek YES YES
Ruud YES YES
Saxhaug YES YES
Scalze NO NO
Schmit NO NO
Sparks YES NO
Weber YES YES
Westrom YES YES
Listen to the testimony and discussion. It's enough to make Baby Jesus cry.
Photos: protesters in Winona (top, via Winona Daily News); brown trout in Southeastern Minnesota (bottom).
If you enjoy reading posts like this on Bluestem Prairie, consider throwing some coin in the tip jar:
The chief refrain repeated by the sorrowful violins of the lobbyists for Minnesota's sand mining industry and its allies is that if the state legislator puts additional safeguards in place for our water and communities, the industry will fail to thrive in Minnesota as it has in Wisconsin.
We'll miss out on the new energy revolution.
A story broadcast Monday by Wisconsin Public Radio about a Preferred Sands mine in Trempealeau County near Blair suggests that there may be worse fates than starting the revolution without us--or dead trout.
.. . Last May, however, a heavy rainstorm liquefied one of the site's
waste piles, sending it crashing through an Amish home. DNR Enforcement
Specialist Deb Dix says their suggestions were ignored.
“With
this particular instance it was apparent that there were no best
management practices around this sand pile to attempt to hold it back if
rain was to occur.”
Dix
says the DNR referred Preferred Sands to the Department of Justice for
prosecution. Even then, she says the company continued to allow runoff
to leave the property. Trempealeau County conservationist Kevin Lien
says frac sand companies can afford to ignore the rules.
“So,
we’ve learned that citations are pretty much ineffective for this
industry. This industry has very deep pockets and a wealth of
resources.”
The DNR’s Deb Dix says more than a year later, Preferred Sands still hasn’t fixed the leaking sediment.
“At
this point in time we’re again having some runoff issues due to open
areas [and] unvegetated open soils, where the soils are being carried
offsite from the frequent rains and the snowmelt.”
Preferred
Sands didn't agree to an interview for this story. They emailed a
statement saying they've resolved some of the issues, but remaining
problems are exacerbated by the spring thaw.
Here's what people who visit Preferred Sands of Minnesota's web page read (and it's easy to understand why the less-than-curious members of the Minnesota Legislature might think that everything is totally copaceptic in this industry). Pay no attention Trempealeau County--and for pete's sake, don't worry about Southeast Minnesota's water or trout:
Maintain & Sustain.
Preferred Sands of Minnesota is dedicated to maintaining and sustaining, and when it comes to that, we’ll let our employees do the speaking for us:
“...Sand saved my farm. Excavating the sand deposits on my farm has allowed me to keep my land and home. I’ve been able to buy back the dairy cows I once had to sell off, who again graze on the hills that have been restored because of environmentally sound mine reclamation projects. When you choose to support the local sand industry, you are supporting the economic future of Western Wisconsin.” — Sam LaGesse
With locations in Woodbury, MN, and Bloomer, WI, Preferred Sands of Minnesota provides the much sought-after Jordan and Northern white frac sand.
Our Woodbury and Bloomer facilities have in excess of 40 million tons of high quality Northern White silica sand, and have the capacity to produce approximately 500,000 tons annually of our natural sand.
Our white sand deposits are strategically located near major forms of rail transportation: Union Pacific, Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad, Canadian National, and Canadian Pacific. Preferred Sands of Minnesota is unit train accessible and has convenient barge access along the Mississippi River, providing service to the Southern Mississippi and into Ohio and Pennsylvania.
Improving Best Practices
Preferred Sands of Minnesota is teamed up with the town of Cooks Valley and the town of Auburn to fund local recycling programs and we are actively involved in a 5-year Chippewa County, WI DNR ground water modeling program implemented to track any potential environmental impacts and gather data to advance best practices for mining and production.
The Wisconsin Chapter of Trout Unlimited
has not made any official statements on frac sand mining but has worked
behind the scenes. Duke Welter, who represents Trout Unlimited in
Wisconsin and the Midwest, says they are participating in a Chippewa
County study on sand mining's effects on groundwater and trout stream
levels.
He says they have also suggested a state run study of the industry’s environmental impacts.
“So
far I haven’t heard [a] positive response from most of the legislators
that I’ve talked to because they think that existing tools are just
fine, or they think it’s not important enough to try and put that effort
together.”
Welter says Trout Unlimited will
continue to advocate for scientific study of frac sand mining to better
inform policy and regulations.
No wonder Preferred Sands of Minnesota's webpage is talking about Chippewa County and not that other place. (In Wisconsin, Senator Vinehout is an exception with regard to the sand mining industry).
Is this the model pro-mining Minnesota legislators are touting? Really? For more information on language making its way in the Minnesota legislature that would protect water and trout streams in Minnesota's driftless region, please see our post from earlier this week, Frac sand mining: trout stream protection language to face test in key senate committee.
Photo: Sandslide in Trempealeau County. Credit: Wisconsin DNR (top); Preferred Sands of Minnesota's webpage. There's a lot more text there than for the new operation in Blair, where run-off continues to be an issue.
If you enjoy reading posts like these on Bluestem Prairie, consider throwing some coin in the tip jar:
Our friends at Clean Up the River Environment asked people from the Upper Minnesota River Valley and West Central Minnesota to travel to the state capitol for an Earth Day rally for clean energy. A group of enthusiastic MPIRG students road in from U of M Morris; hundreds of passionate high school students turned out to join them.
In addition to those rallying in the rotunda, over 300 citizens showed up to lobby for solar and other clean energy on a day graced by another spring snowstorm and difficult driving in greater Minnesota.
Renewable energy advocates on Monday afternoon rallied in the state
Capitol rotunda in support of energy policy legislation that seeks to
boost solar energy in Minnesota. Gov. Mark Dayton and House Speaker Paul Thissen
were among the officials who rallied a couple hundred activists to
support bills in the House and Senate that would call for utilities to
generate 4 percent of their electricity from solar energy by 2030. The
bills sponsored by Rep. Melissa Hortman, DFL-Brooklyn Park, and Sen. John Marty, DFL-Roseville, had committee hearings on Monday with neither being voted on.
Dayton said the nation’s energy policy “has been to hang on to the
status quo for a long as possible.” He said he hopes Minnesota someday
runs on 100 percent renewable fuels. . . .
. . .“We need your help,” Hortman said. “Because as you know, the energy
lobbyists are here. The folks who like coal are here. The folks who like
natural gas are here. …You need to make sure you let your senator and
your representative know: Minnesota is ready for solar.”
The legislation is controversial, however, and was laid over on
Monday night in the Senate Environment, Economic Development and Energy
Finance Division in order to find a compromise in the next couple days.
Here's a video of several high points in the rally: Paul Bunyan puts in an appearance, as do labor environmentalist Javier Morillo-Alicea, polar explorer Will Steger and Governor Dayton.
Bluestem will swap out the Youtube with a higher quality video when we return to our fast prairie connection.
Photo: A few of the University of Minnesota Morris students who braved slippery roads to rally for clean energy.
If you enjoy reading posts like these on Bluestem Prairie, consider throwing some coin in the tip jar:
The Land Stewardship Project has sent out an action alert about the next step facing language in Senate File 796 protecting southeast Minnesota trout streams from frac sand mining and processing. LSP has been working with Trout Unlimited to carry the water for the prized game fish in southeastern Minnesota.
The bill may be heard in the Senate Environment Finance Committeeas early as Wednesday, April 24.
SF 796 is the Omnibus Game and Fish Policy Bill and Sen. Schmit is
the author. The provisions in the bill say that in southeast Minnesota:
• No frac sand mining is allowed within a mile of any spring, groundwater seepage area, fen, designated trout stream, class 2a water or any tributary of class 2a water or designate trout stream.
• The DNR cannot issue groundwater appropriation permits for frac sand-related activity, including frac sand processing.
• Mining frac sand within 25 feet of the water table is prohibited.
The bill applies these provisions in an area defined by the DNR as
the Paleozoic Plateau (222) Ecological Section. This area generally
encompasses Minnesota's five southeast counties. A detailed map is on
the DNR’s website HERE.
These provisions protecting trout streams would help dramatically in
limiting the harm frac sand mining can do in southeast Minnesota and
would go into effect immediately. As reported in a Rochester Post-Bulletin
article, Gov. Mark Dayton has weighed in against supporting a
moratorium at this time. Without a moratorium, we need standards in
place NOW before any more frac sand mines or processing facilities are
established in southeast Minnesota. The provisions in Senate File 796
are a good step in that direction.
LSP and Trout Unlimited provide recommended action steps. Check them out here and act.
Photo: A trout caught in a Southeastern Minnesota trout stream.
If you appreciate reading posts on Bluestem Prairie, consider making a donation via paypal:
A divorced single mother in St. Charles, who supports the freedom to marry, received a mailer yesterday from Minnesota for Marriage that she shared via Facebook.
Both sides of the M4M mail piece appeal to fear: one image features a startled blonde toddler and the text: "Which parent do I not need, my mom or my dad?," while the other carries an injunction: "Don't let the metro area force gay 'marriage' on the rest of the state," along with the command to tell Senator Matt Schmit to vote against the Dibble bill.
The quote echoes a statement by 11-year-old Grace Evans in testimony to the state legislature. (However sincere Evans was in asking the question, Bluestem believes it's a red herring, since marriage equality will not change Grace's own family).
A standard trope of the right, the metro v. rural trope roughly reflects the division of the no and yes votes on the marriage amendment, although a number of non-metro counties with larger and younger populations--Cook, St. Louis, Blue Earth, Nicollet, Olmsted, Rice, and Winona counties--voted no.
Bluestem has seen the divisive urban/rural split invoked to spook Greater Minnesota voters into picking Republicans in the past; however, the election of pro-marriage equality DFLers like Vicki Jensen in pro-amendment Steele County suggests that the issue isn't quite the 2014 or 2016 deal breaker that some are suggesting a yes vote might be.
Nor have M4M rallies drawn throngs in rural Minnesota, as we noted in Greater MN leaves M4M road trip out in the cold. Another is planned for this weekend, including a stop in Montevideo. Now that we've relocated to Maynard, Bluestem will be asking our new state senator and representative to vote "yes" in honor of the RV's visit.
Our friend in St. Charles was unmoved by the appeal, and planned to call Matt Schmit to vote yes on the Dibble bill. On Facebook, she writes of the absurdity of the logic in the mailer:
Definitely--the conclusion is that if gay marriage passes, a lot of us will adopt the lifestyle, leave our heterosexual partners and establish same-sex parented households. It's ridiculous. It's a virus..wha, ha, ha. But why do they care, and who appointed them the arbiters and judges of what society should look like? Take the stye outta your own eye...your neighbor is none of your business. And a lot of those rural folk may have gay sons or daughters--big blind spot for the marriage crowd.
Another sign that a "yes" vote might not be a death knell? Tim Kelly, who had introduced a bill that would allow recognition of civil unions, now is revising the language so that it will be civil unions for everyone, PIM's Briana Bierschbach reports in New civil unions bill would remove word ‘marriage’ from law:
Kelly is revamping his proposal to allow civil unions in the state,
which previously inserted “civil unions” alongside any instance of the
word “marriage” in state statute. The bill got a cold reception from
gay marriage advocates earlier this month, but his new bill would
eliminate “marriage” from lawbooks and enshrine “civil unions” in its
place.
“The arguments [from critics] have been that I’ve created a separate
but equal definition,” Kelly said. “Over the last week and a half, that
has been the only real kickback. People said, ‘We understand what you
are trying to do, but what you haven’t done is you don’t call it the
same thing.’ By removing marriage from statute we have the same rights
for everyone.”
Gov. Mark Dayton made an impassioned case Thursday that same-sex couples should be allowed to marry in Minnesota, kicking off a frigid outdoor Capitol rally that intensified pressure on legislators to pass a marriage measure.
“Yes to marriage, yes to same-sex marriage, yes to the constitutional right, the American right, to marry the person you love,” Dayton told hundreds of cheering supporters.
The DFL-controlled Legislature is weeks away from voting on a measure that would make Minnesota the 10th state to legalize same-sex marriage. Legislators are grappling with the issue as the U.S. Supreme Court takes a closer look at restrictions on same-sex marriage.
Dayton dismissed a last-ditch proposal by opponents of same-sex marriage to offer gay and lesbian couples the protection of civil unions.
“People don’t want to be civil unioned, they want to be married,” Dayton said.
The governor urged supporters to meet with legislators and “be respectful, but be persuasive.”
Right now, neither side is declaring victory, and those involved believe the margin will be only a couple votes. That has both sides frantically meeting with undecided legislators.
Perhaps the most encouraging cameo at yesterday's rally was put in by undecided state representative Tim Faust. On Saturday, KARE-11 reported in Anti-gay marriage rally held in Hinckley:
. . .State Representative Tim Faust of Hinckley told the crowd that he was
not entirely sure why he was speaking to them since he had not decided
yet how to vote on the gay marriage bills moving through the
legislature.
"I will always, always give you the opportunity to convince me that
you're right. Always. and the problem is that I also will give the other
side the opportunity to convince me that they're right too. It goes
both ways," said Faust.
He invited those assembled to write and call him with their opinions. . . .
Rep. Tim Faust, DFL-Hinckley, has been one of the most watched members of the House on the marriage issue. He’s an undecided DFLer from a largely rural area that voted overwhelmingly for an amendment in November that would have banned same-sex marriage in the state Constitution.
A week ago, Faust had told a group of gay marriage opponents that he was unsure how he would vote.
On Thursday, Faust said for the first time that he is leaning toward legalizing same-sex marriage — even if many of his constituents disagree.
Faust stood to the side of the rally Thursday, unprotected from the sleet and rain. He said nearly all the arguments against same-sex marriage are biblical but noted that many devoted people view it the other way.
“Then the question becomes, do we have the right to impose our religious belief on others?” Faust asked. “If the reason we are arguing we shouldn’t be doing this is because of religious beliefs, it’s pretty hard to make that argument.”
Moments later, state Rep. Karen Clark walked up to Faust. The Minneapolis DFLer is a lead sponsor of the same-sex marriage legislation.
She locked arms with Faust and smiled. Then the two walked though the driving sleet back to the Capitol.
Perhaps Faust had noticed that in much worse weather than a week ago, far more people from across the state came out to speak respectfully of Minnesota values like fairness and civility than to listen to Colorado resident Glenn Stanton talked about debunked anthropology. KSTP-TV reports in Rain, Sleet, Snow Doesn't Stop Gay Marriage Rally:
When supporters of a bill legalizing gay marriage planned an outdoor
rally at the Minnesota State Capitol for April 18, they probably thought
they had a good chance for decent weather.
It turns out, they couldn't have been more wrong. Of course, no one
was predicting "spring" weather featuring rain, sleet and snow on an
almost daily basis. Despite the weather, hundreds of people showed up
to hear Governor Dayton and gay marriage bill authors voice their
support for the legislation.
Meanwhile, opponents of the gay marriage bill continue a "Minnesota for
Marriage Road Trip" across the state. This weekend a bus caravan will
make stops in Montevideo, Eden Prairie, Owatonna, Austin and Rochester . . .
Some things are just better parked by the side of the road of history.
Photos: One side of the M4M mailer (top) and the anti-gay travel route for this weekend (bottom). Call your state senator and representative and ask them to vote "Yes" for the freedom to marry.
If you appreciate reading posts on Bluestem Prairie, consider making a donation via paypal:
Remember when Rod Hamilton and House Republicans got the fantods over an urban, earth-friendly woman chairing the House Environment, Natural Resource and Agricultural Finance Committee? Because she would so not understand farmers?
From December 2012 through January2013, one could scarcely pick up a paper in a swing rural district won by a DFLer in the November 2012 election and not read an example of the collective Republican butthurt.
Looks like Hamilton was just acting like that frienemy who really doesn't wish us well with our new date, despite all the concern trolling.
Both the House and Senate are moving their versions of the omnibus agriculture and environment finance bills authored respectively by Rep. Jean Wagenius and Sen. David Tomassoni. The House version also carries agricultural policy provisions the Senate version does not at this point. The House version has a strong budget for agriculture including full funding for the AGRI fund, and other MFU priorities including sustainable agriculture, dairy development, county fairs, AURI, and Board of Animal Health. Members can track House bill progress here: House Finance bill the Senate version will be released later today. The bill also addresses water usage fees and reduces fees for irrigators from .35 cents to .22 cents per million gallons pumped as originally proposed by Rep. Wagenius. The Senate is not likely to include water usage fees in their bill.
Last year's Farm Bill stalled in the House when Tea Party Republicans decided not feeding the poor was a winning meal ticket in the 2012 elections. That worked well for folks like Allen Quist, sent him back to his rural Nicollet County farm instead of the big hotdish contest in the Beltway.
. . .Some House Republicans, often from the rural Midwest, began proposing
putting food stamps—which make up more than 70 percent of the
Agriculture Department budget—into a separate bill. This would be a way
to reduce food-stamp spending or get the program turned over to the
states. These members seem to have forgotten that Congress created food
stamps as part of the farm bill in the 1960s, when the declining rural
population translated into fewer rural representatives in the House and
fewer votes for the farm bill, and that the number of rural
representatives continues to decline. . . .
. . . The participation in food stamps appears to remain higher than
anticipated, however, because wage rates are so low. Agriculture
Secretary Tom Vilsack has suggested that the way to resolve the problem
is to help food-stamp beneficiaries improve their skills and get better
jobs.
Meanwhile, House Republicans press for cuts and most
Democrats resist. House Agriculture Committee ranking member Collin
Peterson, D-Minn., said he has told his panel’s chairman, Rep. Frank
Lucas, R-Okla., that he wants to be part of any decision-making on
food-stamp cuts. Peterson also defended food stamps with a statement
that is sure to raise hackles in farm circles: “There is less fraud in
food stamps than in any government program. There is five times as much
fraud in crop insurance than in food stamps.”
Even an old Blue Dog can stay on point when the scent's strong even.
Leaders of congressional ag committees from both parties
seem optimistic that there will be a farm bill this year, but tough negotiating
remains, especially if committees have to trim spending even more than they did
when putting together bills in 2012. . . .
The House ag committee's ranking Democrat, Collin Peterson of Minnesota,
seems to be a strong supporter as well. But he is hearing complaints
from some of his farmer constituents about insurance not being limited
for very large farms. . . .
Just as a year ago, negotiating changes to the commodity
title of the farm bill and the spending level for the nutrition title remain
difficult.
Peterson said that more money
could be saved from SNAP, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, if the
federal government and not states, determined the income level for eligibility
for what used to be called food stamps.
The federal threshold for food stamp eligibility is 130% of
the poverty level, Peterson said, but in red states, it's actually higher--200%
in North Dakota, 165% in Texas and 185% in Arizona, versus 130% in Peterson's
state of Minnesota.
"The states that you would think would use this (the
lower, federal level) are not," he said.
Peterson said he's urging his committee colleagues "we
should be looking at policy here, instead of a number."
A good point, dawg.
Photo: Minnesota Seventh District Congressman Collin Peterson.
If you appreciate reading posts on Bluestem Prairie, consider making a donation via paypal:
Elections matter, and residents of the old Mike Parry district are seeing a clear difference in their new senator, Vicki Jensen (DFL-Owatonna). Whereas Parry's caustic tweets and abrasive personality used to draw statewide attention, Jensen's workhorse effectiveness is gathering a following.
. . .Sen. Vicki Jensen, DFL-Owatonna, proposed a broader plan she said
would not only bring in new jobs, but also will help businesses stay in
greater Minnesota and retain jobs. It would replace the Job Opportunity
Building Zone program.
Jensen would give rural Minnesota
businesses some sales and property tax exemptions when they expand or
come to the state and offer income tax credits based on pay and the
number of employees, encouraging new hires.
“We need tools in greater Minnesota,” President Barry Wilfahrt of the Grand Forks and East Grand Forks Chamber of Commerce said.
He said there are business incentives in neighboring North Dakota that can draw companies away.
Jensen
said while there are other job and economic development programs in the
state, she wants some specifically focused outside the Twin Cities
metropolitan area.
“I’m not willing to just sit back and cross my fingers this (other) legislation will work in rural Minnesota,” Jensen said. . . .
Jensen said program such as angel investment credits, which provide a
break for those who give money to startup companies, work well in the
metropolitan area. But she said more than 90 percent of that funding
goes there rather than to rural Minnesota.
“Greater Minnesota needs different tools,” Ahlgren said.
. . .I recognize that being an effective legislator involves listening
to constituents, translating their concerns into workable proposals,
and building bipartisan consensus to implement bills into law.
Some here at the Capitol
have advised me that freshman often hold back on questions and may be
more inclined to vote along party lines. However, when I ran to be your
senator, I promised all of you I would do my homework, ask tough
questions, and make legislative decisions to the best of my abilities in
representing all of you.
To that end, I was
especially honored to be recognized in the Capitol Report publication as
one of three majority party freshmen who have made an immediate impact.
They reported that in each new class of lawmakers, there is a small
group of standouts — “freshmen who arrive at the Capitol with a knack
for the job.” Freshmen making major strides by the middle of their first
year on the job, tackling major pieces of legislation, forging
relationships across the aisle and even bucking their caucuses on
occasion. . ..
Jensen quotes the Briana Bierschbach article in PIM, adding:
I share this with all of you not because I want any further recognition,
but rather I want you all to know that lawmakers in St. Paul are
hearing from District 24 and I will do my best to ensure they keep
hearing from our district.
Jensen has scheduled regular in-district meetings with her constituents in Waseca, Owatonna and Faribault.
Photo: It's not the sort of negative attention that Mike Parry brought to the district. From the Grand Forks Herald: "Barry Wilfahrt, Grand Forks and East Grand Forks Chamber of Commerce
president, tells Minnesota senators Monday, April 8, 2013, that a
program to give greater Minnesota businesses tax incentives would help
rural cities attract and keep companies. Beside him is bill sponsor Sen.
Vicki Jensen of Owatonna." (Forum News Service photo by Danielle Killey).
If you appreciate reading posts on Bluestem Prairie, consider making a donation via paypal:
Kaul is lobbying for Save the Bluffs, a grassroots citizens frac sand activism group in the Red Wing area. He's put together a video update. Representative Rick Hansen--whose sand mining bills do not include the one-year moratorium and Generic Environmental Impact Statement the group advocates--talks about the issue in the second part of the video.
While Save the Bluff differs with Hansen in those key elements, they--like the frac sand mining industry--appreciate the work Hansen is doing on this issue. While not a show horse, there's no one who plows forward more diligently on soil, water and natural resource issues as the South St. Paul (and SE Minnesota native) as Hansen.
If you appreciate reading posts on Bluestem Prairie, consider making a donation via paypal:
With several bills relating to frac sand mining working their way through the legislative process, plainly grassroots citizen activism in Southeastern Minnesota has been effective in making their concerns heard at the state legislature.
Now the governor has promised to visit Houston County after the session ends.
More than 250 people gathered Thursday at the
Heintz Center on the Rochester Community and Technical College campus to
hear Gov. Mark Dayton speak on the final stop of his "Meetings with
Mark" events that have been held across the state in recent weeks. . . .
After receiving a video
about frac sand from a Houston County woman, Dayton promised to make a
personal visit to the area after the current legislative session is
complete. The governor expressed continued concerns about road impacts
and water consumption related to the hot-button industry, which is the
subject of several different bills being considered at the state level.
We/re not sure of this, but we suspect the video is "The Price of Sand," and we hope the governor and his staff watch it.
The senator pushing for tougher regulations on silica sand mining
says the state needs to take extra steps to protect drinking water from
the booming industry.
Sen. Matt Schmit is asking the state to fund
easements that would bar sand mines from being built where they could
affect groundwater quality. Schmit hasn't set a dollar amount yet, but
says the amount of easements would go up as the state's contribution
increases.
The Senate Environment, Economic Development and
Agriculture finance committee considered Schmit's proposal Wednesday as
one of several infrastructure and construction projects to possibly
include in a state bonding bill. . . .
Certain parts of the comparison were picked up by pro-status quo mining folks as evidence that were Minnesota to enact some of the industrial sand mining regulatory bills moving through the state legislature, potential added costs would cause the sandmen to pick up their dump trucks and leave.
Dunbar noted the difference in permit fees:
Permit Fees: Industry officials say environmental permit fees are
generally higher in Minnesota, and sometimes Minnesota bills companies
for the time it takes to evaluate a permit request. For example,
Mankato-based Unamin Corp. said it paid Minnesota officials $150,000 to
evaluate a water use permit, and the water use fees were about 10 times
the cost of Wisconsin's.
Well, that's certainly scary.
Dunbar had noted that Minnesota's review is more stringent, but two new reports from Wisconsin Public Radio suggest that even the Badger State's more lax regulation is a burden to counties. Rick Kremer reports in Even With Hikes, Frac Sand Permit Fees Often Don't Cover Public Cost:
Some counties in western Wisconsin are increasing frac sand permit fees
to keep taxpayers from subsidizing the industry; however, the additional
revenue still is not covering the costs in some cases. . . .
Chase Cummings is the Pepin County land conservationist. He says they
only have one frac sand mine operating, but their permit fee has not
come close to covering the cost: “We spent probably, over 2011 and 2012,
almost 800 hours just on one mine site in our office on a $900 plan
review fee.”
This year, a number of counties in western Wisconsin
have changed their permit review fees including Pepin County, which
increased it to more than $7,000 for large mines. Barron County’s permit
review fee was $750 but now can go as high as $10,000.
Even so,
County Zoning Administrator David Gifford says they are not breaking
even: “I would say at this time we are not covering 100 percent of the
time that is invested into non-metallic mining.”
Also striking is
the difference in permit fees between counties. Last week, a frac sand
mining company in Trempealeau County paid $25,000 to have its permit
reviewed, but just next door in Jackson County, companies need only pay
$350. A 2008 Department of Natural Resources report showed that 13
Wisconsin Counties were operating their reclamation programs at a
deficit. . . .
County conservation officials say keeping tabs on frac sand mining is
taking up nearly all of their time, leaving issues of manure runoff and
farmland preservation on the back burner.
Chippewa County land conservationist Dan Masterpole says since 2008,
his office has been hammered with permit applications for 10 frac sand
mines and at least three processing facilities.He says even with extra
temporary help, other responsibilities like grant-writing and helping
farmers enroll in land conservation programs have taken a back seat.
Even more serious, Masterpole says the sand mining rush has taken away from efforts to manage farm runoff.
“We
curtailed response to public complaints, principally feedlot discharges
and manure runoff. We simply have not been able to work on some of the
worst barnyards in the county, whereas traditionally we always had one
or two of the most serious dischargers putting in best management
practices.”
In Barron County, 13 frac sand operations have been permitted with other applications pending. . . .
It's not just frac sand mining activists and Minnesota local government officials' imagination. Local government in Western Wisconsin is being overwhelmed by the sand rush. The demand for legislative relief before the industry digs up Southeastern Minnesota was triggered by the experience of local citizens sounding an alarm and local government asking for help as the industry eyes Minnesota's silicia sand.
Photo: We don't really want a Wisconsin-style sand train wreck here. A recent sand train wreck near Hatfield, Wisconsin.
If you appreciate reading posts on Bluestem Prairie, consider making a donation via paypal:
All of the statements, opinions, and views expressed on this site by Sally Jo Sorensen are solely her own, save when she attributes them to other sources.
The opinions, statements, and views of contributing writers are their own.
Sorensen, editor and proprietor of Bluestem Prairie, served as a New Media training and strategy consultant for the Minnesota Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party from October 2009 through mid-April 2010. She now serves clients in the business and nonprofit sectors.
Recent Comments