Bluestem Prairie: Wildlife

Wildlife

May 20, 2013

Senator Jeremy Miller's constituent not fooled by self-congratulory frac sand regs press release

There's something missing in recent news stories about the watered-down frac sand mining regulations heading to the governor's desk.

At Politics in Minnesota, Charley Shaw reports in Broadbased state regulations emerge for frac sand mining:

. . . Heading into conference committee, the Senate reached a deal to require frac sand operators to get a permit from the state Department of Natural Resources if the mine is within 1 mile of a trout stream. The permit approach was a compromise from an earlier proposal by Sen. Matt Schmit, DFL-Red Wing, to prohibit silica sand mining within 1 mile of a trout stream.

“I don’t want to say I’m 100 percent satisfied, but I think this gives us a lot of tools to make a difference in southeastern Minnesota,” Schmit said. “The trout stream setback language we agreed to earlier this week is going to make a big difference in protecting the most sensitive regions in southeastern Minnesota.”

The bill makes lays the groundwork for establishing protections for more than just trout streams. Rep. Rick Hansen, DFL-South St. Paul, contended the trout stream issue was too narrow of a focus. He successfully pushed for the establishment of a model ordinance for local governments that looks at setbacks for things like wellhead protection areas in addition to trout streams. The standards also call for air and water quality protections for frac sand that’s in temporary storage.

The breadth of conference report, Hansen said, goes farther than any other state that has faced frac sand mining controversies.

“It’s the first of its kind, to our knowledge, in the country for silica sand. It’s comprehensive so we’ve got air, water—the whole picture,” Hansen said. . . .

Shaw reports that the Environmental Quality Board (EQB) will be leading the effort across agencies to set the standards and to provide technical assistance to local government. It's something, since the industrial sand mining special interests and hostile legislators repeatedly tried to cut out the EBQ from the mix.

Meanwhile, the state Chamber of Commerce's lobbyist whined to Shaw that the industry is unfairly singled out for its water use. Orchards use water, he noted, and they're not being asked to apply for water permits.

Bluestem agrees: the next apple orchard that strips off hundreds of acres of soil, digs a ginormous hole in the earth that's open for years, and washes sand should so be required to apply for a permit with the DNR. Fair is fair.

So what's missing in Shaw's report? The name of Senator Jeremy Miller (R-Winona). In Miller's misleading frac sand statement, a letter published in the Sunday Winona Daily News, local activist Jane Cowgill writes:

I couldn’t believe it when I read Sen. Miller’s statement trying to take credit for the frac sand legislation that passed on Monday. Getting out a press release taking credit for something he had nothing to do with is almost the only initiative he has taken on the frac sand issue.

. . . Miller was the key vote in committee killing the state standards proposed by Sen. Matt Schmit of Red Wing and Trout Unlimited, and endorsed by the DNR. These standards were the result of work with experts and would have put the most sensitive areas of southeast Minnesota -- those near trout streams -- off limits to frac sand mines.

The provisions that did pass are not everything we wanted, but some will be very helpful. Again we have Matt Schmit of Red Wing to thank for this. Schmit worked all session and moved bills forward even when some leaders of his own party disagreed with him. That’s because he was representing and fighting for his district. I can’t say that about Miller. He carried water for the frac sand special interests all session. Now he wants us to think that he actually cared about what his constituents wanted.

We aren’t fooled.

It will be interested to see whether the impressive grassroots organizing by citizens in Southeastern Minnesota will carry forward into electoral politics. Neither party will be able to leverage it, given the way the DFLers on the Range rushed in to prattle about the frac sand mining industry creating "empathy" for their region. Schmit's a clear winner in his first term.

Photo: Jane Cowgill at the state capitol, promoting protection for trout stream and other living things. Photo by John Kaul.

If you appreciate reading posts on Bluestem Prairie, consider making a donation via paypal:

Posted by Sally Jo Sorensen on May 20, 2013 at 10:50 AM in Agriculture, Civic engagement, Energy , Environment, Fishing, Geology, Minnesota legislature, Politics, Rivers, Rural development, Water, Wildlife | Permalink | Comments (1)

May 17, 2013

Bee's knees or Republican buzzkill? Minority tried to sting DFL on pro-farming legislation

In April, the Minnesota House Republicans mocked efforts to fund bee habitat in the agriculture bill, seemingly ignorant of the vital role pollinators play in agriculture.

Minnesota Public Radio reports today in Bill would ensure habitat preservation for bees, pollinators:

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. . . .

Check out the whole article at MPR.

How big of a problem are bees and other pollinators facing in Minnesota? On Thursday, CBS-Minnesota reported in Minn. Farmer Blames Pesticides For Big Bee Die Off:

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 University of Minnesota Entomology Department website states:

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:

Posted by Sally Jo Sorensen on May 17, 2013 at 03:47 PM in Agriculture, Farming, Flora, Food and Drink, Gardening, Minnesota legislature, On the Farm, Postmoronic Politics, Rural development, Science, State Legislature, Sustainable Living, Wildlife | Permalink | Comments (0)

May 16, 2013

MN legislature to trout & citizens: drop dead; new report challenges WI happy mining job numbers

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.

Minnesota Public Radio first reported in DFL lawmaker: Compromise reached on frac sand regulations:

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.". ..

Read the rest of the article at MPR. The Star Tribune's Tony Kennedy reported in Compromise frac sand deal nixes effort to put trout stream areas off limits to mining:

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. . . .

Lovely. Read the whole sordid tale of corporate power over people at the Strib, where opponents try to put the best face on this deal. The Winona Daily News has more in Compromise reached to permit frac sand mines near trout streams.

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.

MPR's Stephanie Hemphill reports in Officials should investigate costs, benefits of frac mining, report says:

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

Read the rest at MPR. Here's the report:

Economics of Frac-Sand Mining Final

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:

Posted by Sally Jo Sorensen on May 16, 2013 at 12:06 PM in Civic engagement, Energy , Environment, Fishing, Geography, Geology, Governor Mark Dayton, Minnesota legislature, Politics, Rivers, Rural development, State Legislature, Water, Wildlife | Permalink | Comments (0)

May 14, 2013

CURE celebrates Minnesota River History Weekend & State Water Trails 50th Anniversary

Bluestem's world headquarters recently relocated to sunny Maynard in order to be closer to the upper Minnesota River, loveliest of prairie rivers.

The local watershed protectors, Clean Up the River Environment (CURE), will be hosting the Minnesota River History Weekend and Minnesota State Water Trails 50th Anniversary on Friday through Sunday. If you're a reader who wonders why the dirty hippies out here make such a fuss about threats to the upper valley's tranquility, consider checking this out:

Friday evening:

Grab some popcorn at Granite Falls' famous local Popcorn Stand and head over to watch a film and listen to great speakers!

Minnesota River History Exhibit Reception and Artist Talk with Dakota Author Gwen Westerman, KK Berge Building (6:30 - 9:00 PM). Read more about Gwen here.

Then walk over to the Granite Falls City Hall to watch a film and listen to some great

FILM.
River Revival: Working Together to Save the Minnesota River Video

with producers John Hickman and Jon Carlson (7 PM). This film tells the story of people from all walks of life - academics, farmers, natural resource professionals, anglers, homeowners, students, paddlers, politicians, and citizen activists - who are working together to solve the problems facing the Minnesota River. Read more about the film and speakers here.

PRESENTATION. Minnesota State Water Trails: Making History for 50 Years
with Erik Wrede, MN DNR Water Trails Coordinator and special guest Paul Ryberg (8 PM). Minnesota has the first and largest Water Trails system in the nation. Come learn about the early years of the system, and the trip planning resources and paddling opportunities that are now available. Plus, special guest Paul Ryberg will tell stories about growing up on the Minnesota River with his family that will be honored for their efforts to "unleash the recreational giant of canoeing." Read more about the presentation and speakers here. Read more about the presentation and speakers here.

PRESENTATION. Paddling from Minneapolis to the Hudson Bay with Natalie Warren (8:45 PM). Ann Raiho and Natalie Warren are the first women to paddle from Minneapolis to Hudson Bay. Read more about Natalie here.

PRESENTATION. Reconnecting the Minnesota River by Luther Aadland, River Scientist, MN DNR (9:30 PM). His work, research, and publications have included a wide variety of topics that integrate physical and biological processes of rivers and the design of river restoration, nature-like fish passage, dam removal, erosion control, and flood damage reduction projects. Read more about Luther here.

Saturday's events include Paddling Theater, with options for riding on large fur-trading style canoes or on your own craft. Sunday is a self-organized paddling on the Chippewa River, Hawk Creek, Minnesota River and Yellow Medicine River meet at Memorial Park.

Read more about both Saturday and Sunday here.

Photo: What a date! A voyageur who might just paddle your canoe. If this doesn't float your boat, we don't know what will.

If you appreciate reading posts on Bluestem Prairie, consider making a donation via paypal:

Posted by Sally Jo Sorensen on May 14, 2013 at 12:23 PM in Events , Fishing, History, Indigenous Minnesotans, Literature, Minnesota artists, Music, Prairie, Rivers, Theater, Tourism, Water, Wildlife | Permalink | Comments (0)

May 12, 2013

Schmit takes to skies to protect trout; no deal announced after Dayton's Thursday meeting

While the governor's private meeting on Thursday with industry representatives to work on a compromise on frac sand mining and trout stream protection was much reported in advance, only the most general outlines of the discussion are emerging in the media. No deal has been announced.

Senator Schmit's amendment to the game and fish bill was anticipated being heard in the Senate on Friday. It was not [Senate Information Office, "Unofficial" Session Highlights – Session_notes pdf file].

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:

Posted by Sally Jo Sorensen on May 12, 2013 at 04:50 PM in Civic engagement, Civil liberties, Energy , Environment, Fishing, Geography, Geology, Governor Mark Dayton, Industry, Labor, Minnesota legislature, Rivers, Rural development, State Legislature, Tourism, Water, Wildlife | Permalink | Comments (0)

May 09, 2013

Fish sticks: DFL controlled legislature caves in to industrial sand industry special interests

The DFL legislature is prepared to sell out Southeastern Minnesota to industrial sand mining interests, despite widespread grassroots appeals for relief.

The Star Tribune's Tony Kennedy reports in Dwindling frac sand legislation rests on trout stream setbacks:

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:

Posted by Sally Jo Sorensen on May 09, 2013 at 09:19 AM in Civic engagement, Energy , Environment, Fishing, Geography, Geology, Governor Mark Dayton, Industry, Labor, Minnesota legislature, Rivers, Rural development, State Legislature, Tourism, Water, Wildlife | Permalink | Comments (1)

Apr 29, 2013

Winona activists arrested in frac sand protests; Tomassoni sells out MN trout in committee

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.

The group staged earlier anti-sand mining protests, blocking traffic in February, 2012, and climbed on top a bus to protest a University of Minnesota frac sand mining conference in October, 2012. Seven people were arrested in the October direct action.

The Rochester Post Bulletin's John Weiss reports in Group takes silica protest to another level:

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:

Posted by Sally Jo Sorensen on Apr 29, 2013 at 11:09 PM in Civic engagement, Civil liberties, Energy , Environment, Fishing, Geology, Minnesota legislature, Religion, Rivers, Rural development, State Legislature, Water, Wildlife | Permalink | Comments (0)

Apr 23, 2013

Frac sand mining: trout stream protection language to face test in key senate committee

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.

From LSP's website:

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:

Posted by Sally Jo Sorensen on Apr 23, 2013 at 08:00 AM in Civic engagement, Fishing, Geology, Governor Mark Dayton, Minnesota legislature, Rivers, Rural development, State Legislature, Tourism, Water, Wildlife | Permalink | Comments (0)

Apr 07, 2013

Representative Hansen discusses silica sand mining in Save the Bluffs video update

One of the best-known (and liked) lobbyists at the Minnesota State capitol is John Kaul, whose candid photos capture the essence, drama and frequent exhaustion of the legislative process. He's also a pretty decent documentary filmmaker who explored the life of Minnesota's first woman state supreme court justice.

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:

Posted by Sally Jo Sorensen on Apr 07, 2013 at 01:03 PM in Civic engagement, Energy , Environment, Fishing, Minnesota legislature, Rivers, Rural development, State Legislature, Tourism, Water, Wildlife | Permalink | Comments (0)

Mar 23, 2013

Piles of unanswered questions about industrial sand mining: EQB issues report outlining issues

Governor Mark Dayton may have come out against a one-year moratorium on industrial sand mining while a Generic Environmental Impact Statement is conducted, but a story by Stephanie Hemphill at Minnesota Public Radio illustrates why grassroots citizen groups in Southeastern Minnesota are asking for both.

Hemphill writes in EQB report sums up frac sand mining issues:

. . .The EQB is a multi-agency oversight body that received a petition to do an in-depth study of the possible environmental effects of frac sand mining. . . .

That kind of study would take several years and cost a lot of money. In the meantime, the agency has produced a 90-page report that summarizes the issues.

So far the questions outnumber the answers regarding possible impacts on the environment, the economy and local communities, said EQB planner Jeff Smyser.

One of those questions involves a very scary thing: sinkholes. Probably not Florida-scale sinkholes--and the water quality concerns that are related to sinkhole-producing karst geology are a whole lot more vexsome:

The report includes . . .maps of southeastern Minnesota's unusual geology, known as karst geology, where rich deposits of silica sand are found. That makes it tricky to predict underground water flows, Smyser said. The limestone bedrock easily creates sinkholes and causes unpredictable groundwater flows.

"It's kind of difficult to know where the water's going to go, just what effects use of groundwater, discharge of processing water is going to have because of that karst geology out there," he said. "So that's a real tricky question that's real hard to answer at this point."

Check out Hemphill's entire article at MPR.

A number of silica-sand related bills are working their way through the Minnesota legislature. Senator Matt Schmit's SF786 provides for a GEIS and a one-year moratorium; Schmit has also introduced a bill that creates setbacks to protect fish and sensitive natural areas in the driftless region. Rep. Hansen's HF906 creates standard and a technical assistance team team to help local government regulate sand mining; he also has a bill to protect wellheads and natural areas in the region.

Here's the EQB report:

23 March 2013 Final Silica Sand Report

Image: It's karst, it's complex, it's more than just sinkholes. Read more here.

Donate: If you enjoy reading posts like this at Bluestem, consider throwing some coin in the plate at Paypal:

Posted by Sally Jo Sorensen on Mar 23, 2013 at 05:57 PM in Birds, Counties, Energy , Environment, Farming, Fishing, Flora, Governor Mark Dayton, Industry, Lakes, Minnesota legislature, Politics, Rivers, Rural development, Science, Steve Wilson, Tourism, Towns, Transportation, Water, Wildlife | Permalink | Comments (0)

Mar 21, 2013

Sand pile news: driftless area water resources bill, Highway 70 revisited, Unimin landscape

Working through the pile of news about industrial sand mining, three stories catch our eye.

SF796: Senator Schmit's Driftless Area Water Resources language

Politics in Minnesota's Charley Shaw reports in New frac sand proposal starts moving in the Senate that SF796 contains language that would restrict the areas where sand could be mined in six Minnesota counties known as the driftless region. He writes:

A new proposal to limit frac sand mining has surfaced in the state Senate. The Senate Environment and Energy Committee on Tuesday night passed a game and fish bill that would significantly restrict mining activities in southeastern Minnesota . . .
he point person on frac sand bills in the Senate, Matt Schmit, DFL-Red Wing, is carrying a game and fish bill that raises water-related concerns about frac sand mining. The bill would prohibit any industrial silica sand mining in an area that’s referred to as the Department of Natural Resources Paleozoic Plateau Ecological Section if its located “within one mile of any spring, groundwater seepage area, fen, designated trout stream, class 2a water as designated in the rules of the Pollution Control Agency, or any perennially flowing tributary of a designated trout stream of class 2a water.”
The Paleozoic Plateau encompasses much of southeastern Minnesota.

Schmit said the porous type of geology in southeastern Minnesota makes the region susceptible to water pollution that harm its unique cold water fishery.

“There is no guarantee that we are going to have any other bill on silica sand mining pass out of the Legislature this year, so this is I think an appropriate place for some standards regarding our waters and our trout fishing,” Schmit said.

Trout Unlimited has been particularly aggressive in testifying about the potential threat that unchecked industrial sand mining might posed to trout in southeastern Minnesota. Back in February, Star Tribune sand reporter Tony Kennedy reported in Trout group fears frac sand damage to streams:

. . .Besides holding vast reserves of the world's best frac sand, southeastern Minnesota also is home to an extensive network of ecologically fragile trout streams.

John Lenczewski, who heads the state chapter of Trout Unlimited, told a joint Senate and House hearing Tuesday that Minnesota's streams are spring-fed by the same drinking water that frac sand processing facilities want to pump out of the ground in huge volumes. Mining companies use the water to separate valuable silica sand from waste material. There are fears that the reserves will be depleted to the extent that stream flows are reduced, endangering fish habitat.

"The industry does not need to use our future drinking water to wash sand,'' Lenczewski said.

He also called on the Legislature to prohibit sand mines from digging within 25 feet of the water table. Some new frac sand mines in Wisconsin have been permitted to dig nearly all the way to ground water -- giving pollutants a direct path to aquifers.

In addition, Minnesota's trout anglers want the state to keep frac sand facilities far away from surface waters by writing new setback guidelines, Lenczewski said.

"The state does not have adequate regulation for our groundwater,'' Lenczewski said. . . .

Tim Faust Town Hall: Highway 70 Revisited

The Pine City Pioneer reports in Residents voice concerns, anger over Hwy. 70:

A crowd of around 80 residents and concerned neighbors came to the Rock Creek Town Hall on March 8 to hear an update on a proposed Highway 70 reconstruction project, and to share concerns about plans to use that road as a route for trucks bringing frac sand from Wisconsin to Minnesota.

State Representative Tim Faust introduced MnDOT District Engineer Duane Hill.

“I don’t think I need to tell anyone in this room how dangerous this stretch of highway has become,” Faust said.

How dangerous?

“On Highway 70, the accident rate is one accident per million vehicle miles,” Hill said. “That equals out to about one crash per month.”

He said the statewide average for roads like Highway 70 is half of a crash per month, or only half of the accident rate on Highway 70.

Before MNDOT begins to make the road safer, frac sand trucks will be traveling the crumbling road. Faust's constituents aren't happy. The Pioneer continues:

In response to questions, Hill said he did not know exactly how many of the 80,000 pound frac sand trucks would be traveling along Highway 70, but that he had heard it would be 12 trucks per hour. This would double the amount of heavy truck traffic currently on the highway. He asserted that the road is designed to handle those kinds of loads.

One resident at the meeting said that though the trucks are tarped, that doesn’t mean they don’t spread the sand through the air as they pass through.

“They come by with spillage all over them,” he said. “This sand, they’ve done studies on it ... silca sand. If there’s someone allergic to it, it can hurt them. Seal them up and wash these trucks off.” . . .

. . .Some residents expressed frustration and anger about the condition of Highway 70.

“In the spring, the water will boil up out of it and the pavement will move,” one man said.

“That road hasn’t been touched ... since I’ve been born,” another man said. “Nobody’s dug that swamp up. They don’t even know what’s down there. It’s been this way for 60 years, nothing changes. All of a sudden the fracking sand comes in.”

What could possibly go wrong?

Clarifying geology: Unimin mines in the Minnesota River Valley

Bluestem thinks that MPR listeners not familiar with the Minnesota River Valley between St. Peter and Le Sueur might be confused by something Minnesota's Chief Geologist Tony Runkel said in a Q & A about silica sand mining yesterday:

The largest active mining operation is located along the Minnesota River between Mankato and St Peter, not in a bluff landscape, but on a flat landscape. In that kind of setting the operators dig excavations below the surrounding mostly flat landscape.

Listeners would be forgiven if they came away with the idea that the Unimin mines weren't in the Minnesota River Valley, but "along" the way.

In fact, both mines are located on flat terraces below the bluffs. While the exact site of the mine is on the flat "prairies," the terraces are part of a valley landscape.

Photo: A brown trout taken from Whitewater State Park.

Donate: If you enjoy reading posts like this at Bluestem, consider throwing some coin in the plate at Paypal:

Posted by Sally Jo Sorensen on Mar 21, 2013 at 12:03 AM in Energy , Environment, Fishing, Minnesota legislature, Prairie, Rivers, Rural development, State Legislature, Transportation, Water, Wildlife | Permalink | Comments (0)

Mar 18, 2013

Rep. Tim Kelly signs on to HF906, as frac sand bill heads to key MN House finance committee

Following a couple of changes in the language of South St. Paul DFL Representative Rick Hansen's silica sand mining regulation bill, rival bill author --and more industry-friendly--representative Tim Kelly (R-Red Wing) signed on to HF906.

Hansen shared news of Kelly's approval as the Minnesota House Government Operations committee heard the amended bill on Friday, March 15.

In the amended bill, the Environmental Quality Board (EQB) retains responsibility for drawing up standards and selecting a seven-member technical assistance team for local government. Drawn largely from state agency personnel, the team will become involved in projects when local government requests the help. Making the request voluntary had been a sticking point in earlier iterations of the language.

Plans created by the team will not require review by the EQB. Also added: a EQB-maintained reference library of local permits and ordinances and the development of an air quality health advisory for silica sand by January 1, 2014.

The bill now heads to the House Environment, Natural Resources and Agriculture Finance Committee, chaired by environmental champion Rep. Jean Wagenius (DFL-Minneapolis).

Rep. Phyllis Kahn (DFL-Minneapolis) has also added her name as co-sponsor.

In Friday's Politics in Minnesota article, Sand in the gears, staff writer Charley Shaw took a closer look at the politics of the various house and senate bills. He reports:

. . .The frac sand issue illustrates the ingrained power struggle among DFL committee chairs with respect to the demands of environment and industry. The third prong of the power struggle is Gov. Mark Dayton, whose views on frac sand mining remain a mystery at this point. Dayton signaled his awareness of the issue before the session began when he told reporters that frac sand mining would be a “huge” issue. And on Thursday he sent another signal that he’s tuned into frac sand mining, releasing a revised budget that includes $1.9 million to pay for a team of six state agencies and boards that would provide technical assistance to local units of government related to silica sand mining. The funding would be supported by new fees on the extraction and processing of silica sand. . . .

Groundwater, sand mining and sinkholes

In other news, Pioneer Press outdoors columnist Dave Orrick links the paper's ongoing investigation into troubling groundwater use to potential demand on aquifers by the industrial sand mining industry. He reports in Sportsmen should pay attention to groundwater issues:

This week, my colleagues and I are writing on Minnesota groundwater. Aquifers. Water that invisibly flows through porous (sand), semi-porous (limestone) and surprisingly porous (fractured shale) layers of underground rock. The stories focus on public water supplies, conservation at home and whether we're stressing these subterranean sponges too much. But there are serious impacts for outdoors lovers and the places we love. . . .

It's also possible that a frac-sand mining operation that washes sand with well water and then returns that water to the same ground, could be conserving water and damaging the local stream trout populations at the same time. In fact, it's possible that more traditional limestone- and gravel-mining operations could do the same, said Steve Klotz, the Lanesboro-area fisheries supervisor for the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources.

"Some of the proposals out there are throwing around some big water appropriations," Klotz said. "We've got one that could potentially impact the big spring that supplies water to our hatchery."

Decades of shoreline protection and restoration projects in southeast Minnesota deserve credit for the area's outstanding stream trout fishery. But an essential facet of the trout's ability to reproduce naturally, as they are doing in most waters, is the constant temperature -- usually about 48 degrees -- that water flows, year-round, when it emerges from springs in the limestone bluffs of the Driftless Area. Browns and brookies aren't fans of wild temperature fluctuations. Water doesn't take long to get from the surface to aquifers in the porous earth, but it takes long enough to reach that temperature, either by cooling in the summer or warming in the winter.

But the area is prone to sinkholes, Klotz explained. Pull too much water out of an aquifer, and it can collapse. . . .

Check out the whole column at the PiPress. It's no wonder Trout Unlimited is paying close attention to the issue--and letters from informed citizens are peppering the region's newspapers.

Photo: Brown trout from Whitewater State Park. Via Everyday Family, Everything Outdoors.

If you appreciate reading posts on Bluestem Prairie, consider making a donation via paypal:

Posted by Sally Jo Sorensen on Mar 18, 2013 at 10:33 PM in Agriculture, Counties, Energy , Environment, Fishing, Industry, Labor, Minnesota legislature, Rivers, Rural development, State Legislature, Tourism, Towns, Water, Wildlife | Permalink | Comments (0)

Mar 16, 2013

What the frac: RACC swears it came up with totally original name for silica sand event

$Whatthefrac1$ A friend in Southeastern Minnesota sends along an email invitation from the Rochester Area Chamber of Commerce to a lunch event on Friday, March 22: "What the Frac?"

While the title of the gathering is by no means original, it's definitely an occasion to ask "What the Frac?"

Here's the text:

What the Frac?

Mining in Minnesota: Economic Opportunity, Environmental Challenge or Both?

What's the big deal about frac (silica) sand mining? Some see opportunity: we have the sand, companies want to mine it and people need jobs. Others worry it's a health hazard, damages the environment and leads to costly road repairs. Join us as we hear from the experts about this hot button issue and what it may mean for southeastern Minnesota, our communities, and you. We'll also weigh in on the intriguing debate over the potential new copper mine in northern Minnesota.

Panelists:
Vern Baker, President: Twin Metals
Dave Christianson, Project Manager: Minnesota Department of Transportation
Jeff Broberg, Geologist: McGhie & Betts
Dennis Egan, Exec. Director: Minnesota Industrial Sand Council

$Whatthefrac2$ Back in high school when Bluestem's editor was earningher double-ruby from the National Forensics League, she learned that debate involved two sides of an issue.

But perhaps, like the "new energy revolution" that involves digging up or breaking everything, we're playing by different rules--a "new debate revolution." Let's take a look at the players.

Vern Baker, we take it, is on the panel to build the sort of empathy that Rep. Carly Melin thought the Range and Southeastern Minnesota could share over mining, as we wrote in Looking for empathy in all the wrong places: Carly Melin thinks frac sand mining totally nice.

Oh good.

Dave Christianson famously participated an industrial sand mining "community" forum organized by Red Wing mayor Dennis Egan after the November election. As Rob Meyer wrote in his letter to the editor, Our voices silenced at frac forum:

. . .Unfortunately what the public received from the panel of “experts” was a lot of propaganda that was long on language and short on solid answers leaving little time for audience participation. Just another well-rehearsed play written by the oil and gas industry.
Dave Christianson, from Minnesota Department of Transportation, acted as the industry’s best sales rep as he jovially mentioned how much money his high school buddy is making off of sand mining. . . .

Next up? Jeff Broberg. Name ring a bell? Those who have been following the broad narrative of industrial sand mining here may recognize it from our October 2011 post, Fracking sand firm representative to Winona County citizens: "I have a higher level of rights":

It's no wonder that Rochester-based development company McGhie & Betts representative Jeff Broberg was booed by the crowd that packed the a Winona County Planning Commission meeting Thursday night.
The Winona Daily News reports in a Winona County Planning Commission meeting Thursday night:

Broberg’s time at the podium eventually caused contention, and after he was challenged to stick to the recommended two-minute time limit, he responded:

“As the applicant’s representative, I have a higher level of rights on these issues,” Broberg said.

The crowd booed.

With the event costing $25 for chamber members, and $25 for nonmembers, we doubt there will be any of that.

Speaking of higher level of rights, the mayor of Fracsandville himself is on the docket, though billed by his proper lobbyist title, although he's still Red Wing mayor until April 1st. Perhaps he'll mention the City of Red Wing's resolution supporting a GEIS and one-year moratorium. Or maybe discuss the ethics of mining.

And Egan will no stranger to the Rochester chamber members, for sure. After all he spent seven months as the organization's president back over eleven years ago.

What the frac, indeed.

Screengrab: The emailed invitation, in two parts.

If you appreciate reading posts on Bluestem Prairie, consider making a donation via paypal:

Posted by Sally Jo Sorensen on Mar 16, 2013 at 11:21 PM in Cities, Civic engagement, Energy , Environment, Events , Minnesota legislature, Postmoronic Politics, Rivers, Rural development, State Legislature, Towns, Transportation, Water, Wildlife | Permalink | Comments (1)

Sniping and skirmishes continue in southeastern Minnesota's industrial sand mining conflict

Reading around Southern Minnesota's newspapers this afternoon, it's clear--from Red Wing and Winona to Mankato--that the promise of legislative relief at the state capitol has not led to a ceasefire in the field.

Earlier in the week, the Red Wing Republican Eagle reported in Council accepts mayor's resignation:

Red Wing City Council voted 4-1 to accept the resignation letter of Mayor Dennis Egan Monday night.

Egan made no comment as the motion was brought up for discussion. . . .

Read the entire story at the RWRE. Egan resigned, effective April 1, after he was roundly criticized for accepting a position as the executive director of the Minnesota Industrial Sand Council to lobby for the industry. The city has frequently been at odds over mining, and the council has adopted a resolution supporting a statewide Generic Environmental Impact Statement (GEIS) and one-year moratorium.

In this weekend's paper, reader Michelle Meyer responds to Egan's defenders in Stop painting Egan as a martyr:

Lately, I've read a slurry of letters that attempt to diminish the severity of Mayor Dennis Egan’s ethical breech of conduct in accepting a lobbying position with the Minnesota Industrial Sand Council. The writers make inflated references to lynch mobs, freedom, shame, and disrespect. The most absurd is that he took his new position to simply “feed his family.”

Such exaggerated versions of Egan’s victimhood and innocence and Egan’s own exploitation of his political position for personal gain is the real shame here. Red Wing citizens reacted no differently than the rest of an appalled Minnesota at the news that our mayor took a job lobbying on behalf of a mining council whose mission directly conflicts with city ordinances . . .

Check out the rest at the Eagle. The Winona Daily News continues its slightly off coverage of the issue with Miller pitches frac sand bill alternative:

Winona state Sen. Jeremy Miller introduced legislation this week that he says will keep frac sand permitting decisions in the hands of local governments while giving them greater access to state resources.

Miller is proposing the formation of a Silica Sand Technical Advisory Council, which would bring together representatives from state agencies like the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, and the Minnesota Department of Health to provide guidance for local governments as they navigate permitting, environmental reviews, and other issues related to the frac sand industry. Rep. Tim Kelly, a Republican from Red Wing, has introduced companion legislation in the House, and both measures have gained early bipartisan support. . . .

The article doesn't supply a bill number, so readers would have to do a bit of digging, since Miller isn't the chief author of any bill related to silica sand mining, however heroic the Daily News wants to paint his portrait.

He did sign on to two bills that match the paper's description, however: SF1258 (chief author Kathy Sheran, DFL-Mankato) and SF1257 (chief author Matt Schmit, DFL-Red Wing). The latter bill, introduced by Schmit, is the companion bill to Kelly's HF1367.

Neither senate bill has received a hearing--while in the House, Rep. Rick Hansen's (DFL-South St. Paul) bill was heard and moved on Wednesday. It places technical assistance and some environmental review in the hands of the EBQ, but doesn't call for an GEIS or a state-wide moratorium on new projects, as we posted in First MN House committee hearing on industrial sand mining sends Hansen's HF906 forward.

Rather, a far different Schmit bill is making its way through the state senate:

Miller isn’t the only state senator to direct his attention to the issue this session. Sen. Matt Schmit, DFL-Red Wing, introduced a bill in February calling for a statewide environmental review of the frac sand industry, the formation of a regional council to oversee regulation and development, and enabling the taxation of sand at the local and state levels.

That bill has passed out of the Senate Environment and Energy Committee and the State and Local Government Committee, and will be forwarded to the Senate Finance Committee for further discussion. . . .

The bill that Schmit is shepherding through is favorably received by citizens across sand country, if letter sections are an accurate barometer. Vince Ready writes from St. Charles to the Winona Daily News to ask that the legislature Help protect our rural way of life by passing Schmit's bill.

In Red Wing, Larry Sonnek writes the Republican Eagle to chide Representative Kelly in Why won't House bill have moratorium?

In the Mankato Free Press, water quality expert and Lime Township resident Beth Proctor asks that we Urge legislators to protect drinking water by voting for SF786. From Waseca, 82-year-old Maynard Buland writes to say Water is more vital than gas or oil. Gary D. Rowles of North Mankato writes that The quality of our drinking water must be protected.

Meanwhile, back in the Rochester Post Bulletin, Brian Todd reported Wednesday that the St. Charles City Council vote derails silica sand project:

A unanimous vote from St. Charles' city council Tuesday night put the Minnesota Proppant silica-sand processing and transportation project on life support.

All that is needed now is for Winona County to officially pull the plug.

"On behalf of the Concerned Citizens, I thank you for adopting the resolution," said Travis Lange, spokesman for Concerned Citizens for St. Charles, a group that has worked to end the frac-sand project. "It's in the best interest of the city as a whole."

Stymied by the citizen resistance to their mammoth project, the group of investors has dissolved. The Star Tribune's Tony Kennedy reports in Collapse of St. Charles frac sand project causes split among investors:

The collapse of a major frac sand proposal in Winona County has caused a split among investors in the project, with one faction pulling out in frustration over Minnesota’s anti-frac sand sentiment.

“Me and my partners split up. They went to Wisconsin,” said Rick Frick, one of two remaining principals in Minnesota Proppant LLC. “Were they fed up? Yes, that had a lot to do with it.”

Read the rest at the Star Tribune.

Photo: Yes, it's a frac sand train wreck.

If you appreciate reading posts on Bluestem Prairie, consider making a donation via paypal:

Posted by Sally Jo Sorensen on Mar 16, 2013 at 07:59 PM in Cities, Civic engagement, Counties, Energy , Environment, Industry, Minnesota legislature, Politics, Rivers, Rural development, State Legislature, Tourism, Towns, Transportation, Water, Wildlife | Permalink | Comments (0)

Mar 15, 2013

Quarry quandary III: OAH judge identifies two issues in City of Ortonville annexation filings

Yet another Office of Administrative Hearings (OAH) document related to the denial of five petitions for annexation of land to the City of Ortonville in Big Stone County has been made available. Bluestem Prairie posts it below for the public interest.

As we noted in earlier "Quarry quandary" posts, Quarry quandary: OAH denies part of Ortonville annexation of land under township moratorium and Quarry quandary II: OAH denies 5 annexation petitions; fate of Big Stone County mine in limbo, the OAH decisions are the latest incidences in the attempt by Strata Corporation, a North Dakota mining company, to open a blast-and-crush granite quarry among granite outcrops in Ortonville Township.

After residents of the township brought concerns to the board, the township supervisors imposed a moratorium while they wrote zoning and planning ordinances. Big Stone County's commissioners voted to permit the quarry; to get around the moratorium, the landowner divided his property among relatives, then petitioned the City of Ortonville to annex the site.

While the denial and moratorium for the moment prevent the project from going forward, the long-term consequences of the OAH judge's decision are unknown to Bluestem at this time.

Headwaters of the Minnesota River, Big Stone County is on the Minnesota-South Dakota border, directly west of the Twin Cities.

The memorandum begins:

Two issues, scope of review and determination of property ownership, have arisen in the six matters comprising the City of Ortonville's (City) filings for annexation by ordinance under Minn. Stat. 414.033, Subd. 2(3). The factual background includes the ordinances passed by the City, the objection by Ortonville Township (Township), and the requested additional information received from the City and Petitioners.

It concludes:

CONCLUSION

The urban or suburban character of the Subject Area is outside the jurisdiction of the OAH in proceedings under annexation by ordinance. The OAH must determine that the jurisdictional requirements for an annexation by ordinance are met before an ordinance is approved. The OAH cannot conduct a hearing regarding disputes over the propriety of an annexation by ordinance. Where the presented facts show that there is a jurisdictional defect, the ordinance must be denied.

Docket No. A-7829 has been approved as there are no procedural defects present.

Dockets Nos. A-7830, A-7831, A-7832, A-7833, and A-7834 have been denied as the City did
not receive petitions for annexation from all of the property owners as required by Minn. Stat. 414.033, subd. 2(3).

Here's the document:

OAH 7829 --7834 Memorandum

Photo: Someone got their wish (for the moment): an anti-annexation sign in Ortonville, Fall 2012. Photo by Sally Jo Sorensen.

If you appreciate reading posts on Bluestem Prairie, consider making a donation via paypal:

Posted by Sally Jo Sorensen on Mar 15, 2013 at 02:16 PM in Cities, Civic engagement, Counties, Environment, Prairie, Rivers, Rural development, Tourism, Towns, Water, Wildlife | Permalink | Comments (0)

Quarry quandary II: OAH denies 5 annexation petitions; fate of Big Stone County mine in limbo

Late last night, in Quarry quandary: OAH denies part of Ortonville annexation of land under township moratorium, Bluestem posted about a property that had been

permitted by Big Stone County for a large blast-and-smash granite quarry that would destroy some of Big Stone County's namesake big stones

Learn more about the backstory here at the High Plains Reader.

After being approached by township residents and landowners concerned about property values, traffic, noise, water, dust and rare cacti, the Ortonville Board of Supervisors enacted a moratorium while they wrote land use ordinances. The moratorium was recently extend for a year.

In response the landowner, who had agreed to let his land be mined, divided his property into smallers parcels that touched on the city limits; the relatives then petitioned to have the parcels annexed into the city.

Only one ruling--a denial--of one of the petitions was posted online last night. Today, Bluestem has received and posted a copy of Assistant Chief Administrative Law Judge Timothy O'Malley's memo about all of the petitions. While that of Gayle Hedge was approved , the rest were denied.

Not beinga lawyer, Bluestem can't say with certainty what this means, but it appears that Ortonville Township still has jurisdiction over the properties where all of the proposed Strata Corporation's rock processing, storage and shipping was to have taken place, while the property where the hole was to be dug is now part of the City of Ortonville.

Since the land that remains in Ortonville Township is subject to a moratorium, the quarry project can't--for the moment--go forward. We don't know what recourse the landowners, the City of Ortonville and Strata Corporation have at this point, but this is a positive development for the many people who sought to preserve the working landscape just outside of town.

Headwaters of the Minnesota River, Big Stone County is on the Minnesota-South Dakota border, directly west of the Twin Cities.

From the memorandum:

The urban or suburban character of the Subject Area is outside the jurisdiction of the OAH in proceedings under annexation by ordinance. The OAH must determine that the jurisdictional requirements for an annexation by ordinance are met before an ordinance is approved. The OAH cannot conduct a hearing regarding disputes over the propriety of an annexation by ordinance. Where the presented facts show that there is a jurisdictional defect, the ordinance must be denied.

Docket No. A-7829 has been approved as there are no procedural defects present.

Dockets Nos. A-7830, A-7831, A-7832, A-7833, and A-7834 have been denied as the City did not receive petitions for annexation from all of the property owners as required by Minn. Stat. 5 414.033, subd. 2(3).

Here's a copy of Judge O'Malley's memorandum about his decision:

A-7832_Denial: MINNESOTA OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

Photo: Someone got their wish: an anti-annexation sign in Ortonville, Fall 2012. Photo by Sally Jo Sorensen.

If you appreciate reading posts on Bluestem Prairie, consider making a donation via paypal:

Posted by Sally Jo Sorensen on Mar 15, 2013 at 10:05 AM in Agriculture, Cities, Civic engagement, Counties, Environment, Prairie, Rivers, Rural development, Tourism, Towns, Water, Wildlife | Permalink | Comments (0)

Mar 14, 2013

Sacred Heart Township citizens resolve to oppose plan for Off Highway Vehicle park

Minnesota River rats are cheering Tuesday night's vote by citizens in Renville County's Sacred Heart Township to adopt a resolution opposing a proposed Off Highway Vehicle county park. The river enthusiasts had feared the project would disturb environmentally sensitive areas and the enjoyment of a remote stretch of the middle corridor of the Minnesota River Valley

West Central Tribune staff writer Tom Cherveny writes in Sacred Heart Township vote challenges Renville County proposal for OHV Park:

Sacred Heart Township residents attending the annual meeting on Tuesday evening voted 14 to 6 to adopt a resolution opposing the park.

The resolution rescinds a vote by the board of supervisors made last year supporting the park. It is proposed to be developed in the Minnesota River Valley in sections 22 and 23 of the township.

The resolution states that a majority of residents oppose the project, are concerned about how it would adversely affect land values, and charges that neighboring landowners and residents were not contacted or allowed to voice their concerns in advance of passage of the resolution last year supporting the park.

Landowners adjacent to the proposed site oppose the project, and they brought the resolution for a vote.

Dave Zaske, one of the affected landowners, said the resolution will be sent to the Renville County board of commissioners. He said the county board has said the fate of the park was up to the township. He is hopeful that this resolution will lead the board to stop pursuing the project.

The resolution raises the hopes of paddlers and anglers worried about plans to turn their stretch of the river into an ATV destination, with connected trails linking playgrounds for the snarly vehicles--and the use of legacy funds intended for preserving natural areas and water quality to create the recreation area. (Read a draft of a suggested bill--not yet introduced--here).

They fear the recreational use will not only echo down the valley corridor, but the opportunity to "mud" the bluffs will destroy natural habitat and promote erosion. Reducing the sediment load in the Minnesota River is crucial for the quality of downriver areas like Lake Pepin.

Bluestem applauds the decision of the citizens of Sacred Heart Township. One of our fondest memories is stopping on the township road that winds toward the Joseph Brown house ruins to watch a flock of 200 migrating Arctic Swans that paused in the flooded river bottoms. Their calls echoed in the valley, while another flock sang from a flooded field a half mile upstream.

Not likely to happen again if the bluffs echo with the sound of ATVs.

Photo: The ruins of an old barn that would be in the park. Phot by Tom Cherveny/West Central Tribune.

If you appreciate reading posts on Bluestem Prairie, consider making a donation via paypal:

Posted by Sally Jo Sorensen on Mar 14, 2013 at 08:22 AM in Birds, Counties, Environment, Fishing, Flora, Minnesota legislature, Prairie, Rivers, Rural development, Tourism, Towns, Wildlife | Permalink | Comments (0)

Mar 05, 2013

Southern Minnesota frac sand moratorium editorials: the good, the bad and the fugly

Wednesday at 3:00 p.m., the Minnesota senate State and Local Government committee will meet to consider the Family Child Care Providers Representation Act, and to take testimony on the parts of the frac sand mining bill, S.F. 786, related to state and local government.

The bill calls for a year-long Generic Environmental Impact Statement (GEIS), a statewide moratorium on new projects during the GEIS, the creation of a Southeastern Minnesota silica sand mining board and other measures.

What have editorial boards across Southern Minnesota written about the bill (others on the industry are on the way, we're told, and there's already a house bill introduced to protect wellheads and scientific and natural areas in the region).

In the heart of the sand lands, the Winona Daily News favors the bill. Speaking for the editorial board in Only one chance, Jerome Christenson writes:

We’ll only have one chance to get it right.

In testimony before his colleagues, Sen. Matt Schmit likened the sudden interest in silica sand mining to a new gold rush, but cautioned that while there may be gold in “them thar hills” how we go about getting it will shape those hills and the entire region for decades to come.

Schmit’s bill -- SF 786 -- will give the people ofMinnesotaa chance to get it right. It gives state agencies and local governments up to a year to develop and put in place uniform, statewide guidelines and regulations for silica sand mining inMinnesota. The bill passed its first hurdle Tuesday when it was approved by the Senate Environment and Energy committee on an 8 - 4 vote that split along party lines and now continues through the legislative gauntlet.

We urge support for Schmit’s bill -- and congratulate the rookie legislator for his work. . . .

Read the whole thing at the WDN. On the western edge of Minnesota's silica sand zone, the New Ulm Journal's board writes in Time for study of frac sand mining:

People who live in the region, though, are concerned about this boom. What effect will frac sand mining have on their land, on their air quality, on their roads and rail lines?

It is certainly time for the state to conduct a study on the issue, to determine what will be allowable mining practices, and what rules need to be in place to protect those who will live through the mining and its aftermath.

The state should undertake this study quickly and do a thorough, yet expeditious job of it.

Mining is important to the state, and so are Minnesota's natural resources. We can't afford risk the latter in a rush to feed the oil boom.

One of the strengths of Schmit's bill is that it outlines the "scoping" of the GEIS; earlier studies for the forest industry and livestock feedlots were not so well-defined and so lingered on.

Moving out of the sand belt to what Bluestem jokingly labels "the bad," we turn to the Journal's sister paper, the more conservative Fairmont Sentinel, home to Senator Julie "Rural Minnesota Should Smell Bad and Look Awful" Rosen.

In Don’t laws exist now to oversee these mines? the board writes:

It is horrifying to see the state of Minnesota ready to jump in to slow down, or stop, the sand mining taking place in the southeastern part of the state. A state Senate committee this week OK'd a one-year moratorium on new silica sand mines. . . .

. . Minnesota needs to make sure sand mines are operated safely. It also needs to make sure they are free to operate.

We find it horrifying to imagine Southern Minnesota's river bluffs and rolling hills ending up looking like Wisconsin's pillaged hills, lined by corrupted local officials, with rivers and groundwater threatened, while little return comes back to local communities.

And finally: the fugly.

The Mankato Free Press editorial board produced a piece that about as fugly as it gets. Six days after the state's first hearing on issues related to industrial February 25, 2013 Our View: Review sand mining regulation

— The mere term "frac sand" conjures danger in many people's minds. The reason is the concerns that have been raised about fracking, in which the sand and a mixture of chemicals are injected into oil wells to help draw more oil from the ground.

That's misleading to put it charitably. The issues being brought up about "frac sand" in Minnesota have little to do with fracking, although industrial sand mining advocates would love to make folks imagine that's the problem.

As Bluestem has noted repeatedly, happy sparkleponies could shoot from oil and gas fracking rigs bearing world peace and kittens for everyone, but the environmental, health, safety and long-term economic development issues related to industrial-scale sand mining will remain.

There is no fracking done in Minnesota but the fine, hard silica sand is abundant in many bluff regions of the state, including here in the Minnesota River valley and around Red Wing and Winona.

That means mining companies are eager to extract the valuable sand, which is in high demand. Locally, the Jordan Sands project is being considered north of Mankato in a former limestone quarry. Some neighbors in the area and some other residents oppose the project.

The mining of silica sand is hardly new to the area. Unimin in Ottawa has been mining silica for use in glass making and more recently for fracking for decades with little if any controversy.

This is simply historical revisionism. The Ottawa plant was called out by architects and historical preservationists for "endangering" the historic village. And then there's the backstory of the preservation of the Kasota Prairie--but the Free Press simply doesn't mention Unimin's other mine. While there is cooperation now, it took a court case to save just a part of a wild pasqueflower prairie.

Odd, given that it's the one just one river town away, unlike Ottawa.

But putting a moratorium on mining -- absent any credible evidence of negative effects -- unnecessarily harms economic development. Local governments are still best for deciding their local land-use rules and putting reasonable restrictions on companies. If they choose to permit a sand mining operation, any state standards that are developed can and will be applied to those operations.

It's easy to dismiss "credible evidence." Just pretend there's no local corruption, corporate bullying, permit violations or the other concerns attending the process.

We urge the committee to vote for Schmit's bill tomorrow--and for the Minnesota House to get moving on its version of the bill. This is the time to get it right.

Photo:A frac sand mine in Wisconsin.

If you appreciate reading posts on Bluestem Prairie, consider making a donation via paypal:

Posted by Sally Jo Sorensen on Mar 05, 2013 at 11:57 PM in Cities, Civic engagement, Energy , Environment, Industry, Minnesota legislature, Prairie, Rivers, Rural development, State Legislature, Water, Wildlife | Permalink | Comments (0)

Mar 03, 2013

Pretty neat small town learns frac sand trucks from next county may roll right over them

Minnesota's oldest Norwegian-American town, Houston County's Spring Grove, bills itself as a "pretty neat small town," and we've learned about its citizens' fondness for Norski street festivals and parades from watching a dear friend's Facebook page.

But Spring Grove's prettiness and neatness may be frayed if plans to haul 120 daily truck loads of frac sand from a mine proposed across the Fillmore County line come to fruition. The situation underscores why people from Southeastern Minnesota are asking for state help in regulating the industrial sand industry.

The Spring Grove Herald's Craig Moorhead reports in Frac sand route to go through downtown Spring Grove that the pretty neat small town is along the route for the sand's secondary destination, New Albin, Iowa. The route will be used when facilities at Winona are beyond capacity:

A Fillmore County frac sand mine could be sending hundreds of trucks through downtown Spring Grove, Houston County commissioners were told last week.

"The reason we're bringing this to you is because it's going to have an effect on residents in Houston County," environmental director Rick Frank told the board on Feb. 19.. . .

Traffic isn't the only potential problem for Houston County from the Fillmore County site. Moorhead reports:

"This mine is within about two miles of Houston County," Pogodzinski warned. "Impacts to groundwater sources are not just going to affect Fillmore (County)."

"Surface water drains down the Root River Valley. We don't want the Root River becoming any more polluted than it already is.

Probably not, although Houston County doesn't have any say in approving or denying the permit:

"Ultimately, it's up to them to approve or deny the EAW," Pogodzinski said. "We don't have a say in what they do."

Neighboring counties are still hammering out plans to address joint impacts, Frank added.

"We realize that a lot of these companies are going to utilize county roads and township roads maybe. We need to make sure that the applicant comes to the next county or city that they're affecting."

Commissioner Dana Kjome asked that the EAW address diesel fumes from trucks passing just a few feet [from] Spring Grove's public school. . . .

Oh, good. However, Spring Grove may have something of a reprieve because of the actions in Iowa's premier tourism destination county:

A letter from Allamakee County [Iowa] engineer Brian Ridenour was referenced for commissioners, stating that "mining, processing, trans-loading, stockpiling, etc. for frac sand has an 18-month moratorium in effect for Allamakee County."

The Allamakee County Board of Supervisors imposed the moratorium on February 4 after hearing citizen concerns about the industry, the Standard reports:

Allamakee County stakeholders will have additional time to explore the pros and cons of frac sand mining, following the passage of a moratorium on that mining process by the Allamakee County Board of Supervisors that will be in effect until July 1, 2014.

At its Monday, February 4 regular meeting, the Allamakee County Board of Supervisors unanimously voted to approve the moratorium, following a public hearing Thursday, January 31 which drew more than 40 people. . . .

. . .Jeff Abbas of Dorchester reminded the Supervisors frac sand mining is a “boom and bust” industry, which lasts from two to five years. “Once they’re done, they’re gone. We do not regain business we lose from hunting, fishing, hiking or camping,” said Abbas. “It’s time to put the laws of man aside and put the laws of God in place, because what we’re leaving behind is garbage.”

The Caledonia Argus reports about the county's dilemma in Frac sand mine just two miles from Houston County.

No wonder, then, that Houston County and other local governments support Senator Matt Schmit's bill to impose a one-year moratorium while conducting a GEIS. The Star Tribune's Tony Kennedy reported in

The scope of the GEIS is determined by the bill in order to avoid dragging out the process as was the state's experience in Southeastern Minnesota asks state for frac sand help:

Houston County’s Board of Commissioners, the Red Wing City Council, a city councilor from Wabasha and elected township officials from Fillmore and Goodhue counties all voiced support for more state study and a moratorium on the permitting of new frac sand mines and facilities.

On Tuesday, February 26, the Senate Environment and Energy Committee sent SF786 to the State and Local Government Committee, which will hear the bill Wednesday, March 6, at 3:00 p.m. Room 15 in the State Capitol.

Photo: Frac sand train wreck in Wisconsin, a metaphor for our times.

If you appreciate reading posts on Bluestem Prairie, consider making a donation via paypal:

Posted by Sally Jo Sorensen on Mar 03, 2013 at 02:07 AM in Cities, Civic engagement, Counties, Energy , Environment, Industry, Minnesota legislature, Politics, Public safety, Rivers, Rural development, State Legislature, Sustainable Living, Tourism, Towns, Transportation, Travel, Water, Wildlife | Permalink | Comments (0)

Mar 01, 2013

Lake Pepin Legacy Alliance posts MN River Basin local resource management scorecard

If you're one of those nincompoops who's been conned into believing that words like "buffer zone" and "watershed" are shibboleths of the Agenda 21 New World Order, a marvelous new online interactive tool from the Lake Pepin Legacy Alliance isn't for you.

In fact, Bluestem hopes you'll don your tinfoil hat and find somewhere as far away from the Minnesota River Basin as possible.

But if you're like the farmers, land owners, river rats and county commissioners up and down the river who've been working to make sure that Lake Pepin doesn't silt up--and dirt stays in your own pasture or field like any sane property owner would desire--the group's new Local Resource Management Scorecard is pretty nifty, packed with helpful information:

To view aggregate results from the counties in the Minnesota River Basin or to read about how the categories we chose relate to sediment, please visit our County Evaluation Overview Page. If you live in the Minnesota River Basin (in blue) you can click on your county . . .! The map also features the overlapping watersheds for every county in Minnesota; hover over your county to see.

...The mission of the Lake Pepin Legacy Alliance in developing this scorecard is to:

1) Recognize county successes in remediation of sedimentation and compliance with state and local regulations and best practices.

2) Recognize accountability in monitoring and enforcement of regulation.

3) Identify county specific obstacles to reducing soil erosion and keeping water on the land.

4) Identify specific opportunities and solutions to address these obstacles.

5) Encourage cooperation and collaboration among local units of government to plan and address the unifying water quality issues of the Minnesota River Basin, where appropriate.

6) Provide a means for counties to more easily share information on their processes, funding sources, success rates, and areas in need of attention.

Go check out the scorecard, which is chock-full of great information. Here's a video from the Alliance with more information about the project: