Did groups' concern about loon habitat generate HF2032 amendment about Loon Center?

In House passes $64 million in environmental trust fund appropriations, Erin Martin reports:

In what was likely the least contentious bill heard over the last nine days, the House approved a plan Wednesday to spend $64.3 million in appropriations from the Environment and Natural Resources Trust Fund.

As amended, HF2032, sponsored Rep. Rick Hansen (DFL-South St. Paul) directs how the dollars would be spent during the upcoming biennium for the “protection, conservation, preservation, and enhancement of the state's air, water, land, fish, wildlife, and other natural resources.” Following the 120-10 vote, the bill now moves to the Senate where Sen. Torrey Westrom (R-Elbow Lake) is the sponsor. . . .

Only one issue of contention arose during the House debate.

Hansen successfully offered an amendment that would require a planned loon educational center that would receive trust fund dollars to meet Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design certification or the Green Building Initiative Green Globes certification. The project would also be required to restore disturbed habitat along the shoreline due to dock construction.

The additions, he asserted, would help ensure the project met trust fund environmental requirements.

Rep. Josh Heintzeman (R-Nisswa) expressed concern over the possible impact those requirements could have on the project, potentially inhibiting the loon center’s educational mission.

Saying that energy efficiency was fundamental to any project in the state’s northern counties due to the cold climate, Rep. Dale Lueck (R-Aitkin) called the amendment, “unnecessary tinkering with a good project.”

The amendment amounted to unfairly singling out one project for the requirements, Lueck argued.

What gave rise to that? We suspect a recent article in the Star Tribune's Outdoors section answers the question. On April 23, Tony Kennedy reported in Non-profits toss cold water on proposed loon center:

A group of Minnesota nonprofits has come out against the proposed appropriation of $4 million in state lottery proceeds for the creation of a National Loon Center in Crosslake.

The eco-tourism project appeared to have few naysayers until Thomas Casey, chair of Friends of Minnesota Scientific and Natural Areas, took exception to state funding for a project that he says would have “no benefit to loons.’’

In an letter to the Legislature, he asked the Senate and House to delete the National Loon Center as the proposed recipient of $4 million from the Environment and Natural Resources Trust Fund.

The bills proposing funding wouldn’t allot all of the money unless the Loon Foundation negotiates a no-cost lease of lake frontage and raises $6 million outside of state government. The center is projected to cost $10 million to build.

Casey’s letter said the project would adversely impact the shoreline area and detract from loons migrating through or nesting in the area. Supporters say the center would protect the shoreline from current erosion and teach visitors the importance of habitat and clean water for sustaining loons.

But Casey’s letter says loon conservation is better served by direct protection of loon nesting habitat, enhancing water quality and stopping the use of lead ammunition and lead fishing tackle.

The letter also is signed by Austin Coalition for Environmental Sustainability; Clean Up The River Environment; Friends of the Mississippi River; League of Women Voters — Minnesota; Mankato Area Environmentalists; Save Our Sky Blue Waters; and Wilderness in the City.

The amendment appears to be related to the shoreline concerns raised by the letter. It's interesting how many of the non-profits concerned about the loons are rural: Austin, Mankato and Montvideo (CURE).

Here's the video of the floor debate on HF2032:

Photo: A loon on its nest.

If you appreciate our posts and original analysis, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 600 Maple Street, Summit SD 57266) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post. Those wishing to make a small ongoing monthly contribution should click on the  paypal subscription button.

Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email sally.jo.sorensen@gmail.com as recipient.

Comments

[Tom Casey, Chair, Friends of MN Scientific and Natural Areas]

Thank you, Bluestem Prairie, for reporting on the National Loon Center or "Loondoggle", as we call it.

To his credit, Rep. Hansen filed a floor amendment (approved by voice vote) to the ENRTF bill that deletes “boat docks, fishing docks, and native landscaping” and adds “native habitat restoration,” However, this is only a modest step in the right direction. The National Loon Center language remains unacceptable because:

1. Rep. Hansen’s amendment adds only soft language regarding the building, “The building must be environmentally and energy efficient. An effort must be made to build the center so that it is eligible to receive the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) certification or the Green Building Initiative Green Globes certification for environmental design." (Emphasis added.) In other words, neither certification is required. Instead, only “an effort must be made …”

2. Moreover, loons don’t need another building to assist their survival. This is especially true where the building plan includes offices for the Chamber of Commerce and Army Corps of Engineers.

3. The ENRTF bill still contains problematic language in lines 21.21 – 21.25: “Net income generated … as a result of trust fund contributions may be reinvested in the center’s long-term conservation efforts …” (Emphasis added.) Of course, “may” needs to be changed to “shall.”

4. I’m concerned that continued ENRTF funding of the building will enable other funds to be diverted to constructing the boat docks and fishing docks. The end result is the same; no money will assist loons.