Bluestem Prairie

South Dakota's "nest predator" bounty program to continue despite opposition, weak science

Count me among the opposition to this program.

Partly because of the poor data and evidence supporting the program, and partly from the ethos I learned as a child in a hunting and trapping family that dictated against killing any non-aggressive wildlife when they were raising their young.

I share former GFP secretary John Cooper's concern  that "such a large and expensive program to catch and kill numerous species of animals over several months of the year will upset the balance of nature," as the authors report.

And I wasn't paid a bounty to learn about these past times or get outdoors.

From South Dakota News Watch.

South Dakota predator bounty program to continue despite opposition
By Bart Pfankuch and Abbey Stegenga

SD News Watch Note:  This story was first published in 2021 and has been updated

A state-sanctioned pheasant protection program that pays South Dakota youths and adults $10 for every raccoon, skunk and other predator they trap and kill will continue through 2026.

Known as the Nest Predator Bounty Program, the effort has led to the killing of more than 240,000 animals in the past five years with no scientific evidence that it is working to increase the state pheasant population. 

The effort to boost pheasant and duck populations by paying trappers to kill animals that eat the eggs and hatchlings of pheasants and ducks began in 2019. The program occurs for a few months during the spring pheasant nesting season.

Little common ground can be found in assessing the merits or methods of the program, which has been described as both a wildlife-management success and an inhumane, senseless killing of wild animals.

Some state officials, including Gov. Kristi Noem, who first implemented the program, and Game, Fish and Parks Secretary Kevin Robling, see the bounty program as an effective method to reduce predation on pheasants and encourage young people to get outside and take up trapping as a hobby.

Opponents argue the program is not based on science, needlessly kills animals and may upset the natural ecosystem, and improperly uses financial incentives for children and adults to trap and kill animals whose carcasses are discarded after the tails are turned in for a bounty.

In 2023, the program started in April and ended on June 29 when the limit on tail payments was reached. The 2023 program resulted in the killing of 50,800 animals – about 42,300 of them raccoons – by roughly 2,500 participants. Top counties for tail submissions were Minnehaha (5,600 tails) and Brookings (2,540), followed by Roberts (2,060), according to GFP data. The program set a record for youth participation rate with 46% of trappers aged 18 or under.

Program faces opposing viewpoints

“It’s really a success story when you look at enhancing our trapping traditions and outdoor heritage,” Robling said in 2021.

He acknowledges there is no data or concrete evidence to show that the bounty program has improved pheasant or duck numbers or enhanced successful nesting rates, but he remains convinced it is working.

“As far as quantifying pheasant abundance, we don’t have any research design set up for that,” Robling said. “But we are confident that this bounty program is enhancing nest success.”

Opponents of the program, including some influential members of the South Dakota wildlife management community, are less confident that paying youths and adults to kill five species of animals is a proper way to boost pheasant and duck populations.

When Gary Jensen, a Rapid City lawyer, served as chair of the GFP Commission in 2020, he voted against the resolution to extend the bounty program.

“There’s no science that supports it,” Jensen said. “The department can’t show any evidence on the bounty program and it doesn’t have any program in place to determine if it’s increasing pheasant numbers.”

Inside the Nest Predator Bounty Program

The bounty program was first implemented in 2019 by Noem as part of her Second Century Initiative, aimed at protecting and expanding pheasant habitat and populations in the state. In January, the South Dakota Game Fish & Parks Commission approved the program’s continuance. 

On a basic level, the program works like this: Adults licensed to trap or youths who want to participate bait traps from April through July to capture animals, which they then typically kill with a rifle. The tails of the animals are cut off, collected and submitted to the state at designated locations. Participants are then paid $10 for each qualifying tail.

Target animals include raccoons, the most frequently bountied animals, as well as skunks, opossums, red foxes and badgers. The carcasses of the animals, which are not good to eat, are discarded, though some may have pelts removed first. The state encourages participants to bury the carcasses but there are no requirements to do so, Robling said.

The program has an annual $500,000 maximum for the payment of collected tails. 

Trapping program draws backlash 

Public opposition to the program has grown over time. The state sanctioned a survey early on during the program that showed 78% of about 400 random respondents strongly or moderately approved of the program after questioners explained to them the rationale behind it. However, 62% of those respondents said they knew nothing about the program before being called.

In March 2020, before the GFP Commission was about to vote to extend the program, which it ultimately did, about 400 public comments were received regarding the bounty program, more than 90% of those in opposition.

Some public commenters called the program “brutal,” “cruel,” “senseless” and “inhumane.” Others argued that it was simply a waste of money, had no proven results in regard to propagation of pheasants or ducks, and had led to the killing of helpless animals by trappers, including children, seeking a payment.

The program has also come under criticism for how it was implemented. Critics say Noem initiated the program largely outside the typical process of review by the public and the GFP Commission, which sets policy. Noem’s office did not respond to inquiries from News Watch in 2021 and referred all questions to the GFP.

A program with a purpose

Robling said the two main goals of the predator bounty program are to strengthen pheasant and duck populations in the wild by reducing the number of prey animals and to get more South Dakota youth engaged in outdoor activities, specifically trapping.

Robling said he looks at successful propagation of the state’s pheasant population as a “three-legged stool” that relies on weather, habitat and predator management.

Stable weather patterns that aren’t too wet or too dry, especially in the spring hatching season, are positive for pheasants, Robling said.

But with the weather an unpredictable and uncontrollable force, Robling said the state focuses on the other two components of pheasant population management. Habitat management and the predator bounty program are key parts of those efforts, Robling said. 

The state lost one of its only measures to estimate the pheasant population when the GFP Commission voted to end its annual roadside brood count of young pheasants after 2019.

Robling said the bounty program has a proven track record of preserving the state’s hunting and trapping heritage by encouraging more young people to become active in the outdoors. 

In the first year, 11% of bounty program participants were under age 18. That percentage rose 13% the second year, and in 2021, 29% of the 2,800 participants in the bounty program were under 18, Robling said.

“We are absolutely seeing more engagement with your youth, so that’s a metric where we’re clearly seeing success,” he said.

Studies doubt success of predator-control programs

Predator control methods, and paid bounty programs in particular, are a controversial way of protecting desirable species of animals. The science regarding success of the programs is also murky at best. 

South Dakota’s program is unique in the number of species of animals targeted. However, bounty programs on coyotes are common throughout the American West. And Florida has an ongoing bounty program that pays trappers to remove invasive pythons from the Everglades.

One study published in 2016 in the scientific journal “Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment” reviewed 12 other studies of predator-control programs to protect livestock in North America and Europe. The review found that six predator-removal efforts (two lethal, four non-lethal) ultimately led to successful protection of livestock. Two led to a greater predation on livestock and four had no effect.

It is notable that the predator-control efforts reviewed in the study were performed under highly controlled conditions and did not include bounty programs involving members of the public.

In the end, the study authors recommended that only predator-control programs that are closely monitored and show scientifically proven results be continued.

“We recommend that policymakers suspend predator control efforts that lack evidence for functional effectiveness and that scientists focus on stringent standards of evidence in tests of predator control,” the study reported.

A more specific study reported in the journal “Wildlife Biology” that examined predator-control efforts to boost grouse populations also concluded that wide-scale, long-term, lightly regulated predator-control programs often do not have the intended effect of protecting a desired species.

“Our results suggest that predator control is likely to achieve short-term conservation benefits for grouse if well-designed and rigorously conducted. We suspect, however, that the majority of control programs conducted for conservation do not meet this standard,” the 2019 study said.

Research questions program’s success

Robling provided News Watch with links to two research articles indicating that predator control can be a successful component of protecting pheasants and boosting nesting success.

A 2001 article in the “Wildlife Society Bulletin” notes that pheasant breeding success has fallen as grasslands have been increasingly converted to row cropping, a historical land-use pattern common to South Dakota. 

That article also points out that while predator control can boost pheasant populations, the researchers raise questions about the cost and how long such efforts must continue in order to be effective.

“Predator reduction programs have the potential to increase survival and recruitment, but these parameters decrease once predator control ceases,” the article states.

The article also notes that “extensive application of predator reductions may be ethically questionable” and concludes that although predator-removal programs can be part of a larger effort to protect pheasants, the science around predator control is ultimately inconclusive and can have unanticipated consequences.

“The role of mammalian predators in midwestern pheasant population declines is complex and unclear,” the article says in its conclusion. “Previous research suggests that mammalian predators can cause a significant decrease in pheasant survival during periods of severe winter weather and during the nesting season. Reducing densities of one predator species, however, may only be compensated by other predator populations.”

Study unsure of program’s effectiveness 

Another research article suggested by Robling, a 2011 master’s thesis paper written by a student at South Dakota State University, compared pheasant and duck brood success on “control" plots of land where predator removal did not occur with brood success on “treatment” plots where predators, primarily coyotes, were removed by trapping. 

The results of the study of so-called block predator management in eastern South Dakota appeared to be inconclusive in regard to the effectiveness of wide-scale predator-removal efforts.

Statistical analysis of nest success “for both ducks and pheasants indicated that there was no difference … between control sites and treatment sites,” the paper concluded.

However, the student noted his belief that predator management “had positive effects in some blocks during some years.” But he ultimately found that “(in) areas where adequate habitat is present on the landscape and birds are capable of high production, a program like BPM is not necessary and funds would be better spent elsewhere.”

A 'small scale remedy' 

Pheasants Forever, the national group that supports pheasant hunting and protection of habitat, appears to take a lukewarm approach to wide-scale predator-removal programs.

In a position paper on its website that does not directly mention bounty programs, Pheasants Forever refers to predator-trapping programs as a “small scale remedy” that can show success in a limited geographic area. 

Instead, the organization supports habitat management, rather than trapping and killing, as a way to reduce or successfully manage predator populations.

The paper concludes, “While predator removal and exclusion methods can increase nesting success on small areas, these methods are too expensive for use on a landscape basis and do not significantly increase the number of nesting birds over the long term.”

Extensive research and reviews of previous predator-bounty programs have revealed a consistent pattern of failure, said Gilbert Proulx, director of science at Alpha Wildlife Research & Management, a consulting firm in Alberta, Canada, which does work in Canada and Western U.S. states.

Proulx, who has authored more than 450 research articles and studies over the past 45 years, said very few bounty programs have shown success, and only when the effort is concentrated in a small geographic area and a limited amount of time.

For example, he said, it may help a small population of desirable animals or waterfowl to kill or remove the predators that hunt them in a single isolated marsh or wetland.

“Bounties are not well understood and are not truly successful,” Proulx said. “If you look at the history of animal bounties across North America, they did not create the result we expected, and often, there are unexpected consequences.”

Bounty programs that target small to medium-size ground-dwelling predators, such as the South Dakota program, can lead to unwanted outbreaks of squirrels, rats, mice and insects, Proulx said.

Another potential outcome shown in numerous studies is that when a predator population is reduced through a bounty program, subsequent broods of those predators are larger than in the past and the resulting animals are hardier and more resistant to illness than before, Proulx said.

Shifting the focus to habitats

The most successful method of propagating a desired species is to expand habitat or enhance existing habitat, Proulx said.

In most cases, bounty programs in Canada and the United States have been done to make political gains or to give the appearance that governments are actively trying to manage a population of animals and satisfy demands of sportsmen’s groups and the hunting industry.

“Bounties are a joke, a solution often brought on by government agencies trying to satisfy an industry and by politicians trying to get votes,” Proulx said.

Hunting and trapping in a carefully managed way, and then using related license fees to create habitat, is a much more sensible way to support healthy populations of wildlife, Proulx said.

“In order to live with wildlife, we need to hunt and trap and manage habitat,” he said. “Populations of wildlife take care of themselves better when they are not being shot to death on a wide scale.”

Proulx further noted that bounty efforts do not work well when citizens are encouraged to remove or kill animals on a large scale. Rather, he said, wildlife management is best done by professionals or government employees who can closely monitor the targeted predator population and the population being protected.

“I never saw a bounty system work in the long term because there are just too many factors and situations where the bounties are not properly applied,” Proulx said.

Pheasant and waterfowl populations in the Great Plains have been hurt far more by loss of habitat and the too-wet or too-dry weather conditions caused by climate change than by predation by other animals, he said.

“It’s mostly a question of maintaining the habitats,” Proulx said. “If you provide species with good habitats, such as cover and food, that is the most effective way to protect the populations.”

Former GFP secretary opposes bounty program

Former GFP secretary John Cooper wrote a detailed letter to Noem and the GFP commission in March 2019 expressing opposition to the predator bounty program. In particular, he noted that the program and related expenditures were not put through the typical process of vetting and consideration by either the commission or the public.

“It is frankly disturbing that the details of the program, which comes with a large price tag, were not disclosed to the very people (GFP Commission) who have the responsibility for budget transparency and accountability in our state government,” he wrote in the letter that was endorsed by 11 wildlife groups and outdoor associations.

The letter also stated that license revenues could be better spent on habitat creation or protection and that there was no scientific evidence presented to support the rationale for the bounty program.

“The sportsmen of this state have strongly supported our wildlife management system and we expect and support wise, science-based, common-sense decisions impacting our valuable resources,” the letter said.

In a 2021 interview, Cooper said he never received a response from Noem to that letter or a subsequent letter he wrote to her with concerns about the bounty program.

Cooper said he was upset to learn that the bounty program was put in place without undergoing the typical public-hearing and discussion process conducted by the GFP Commission. Noem enacted the program before the commission or public had a chance to review, comment or alter it, Cooper said.

“This particular set of circumstances was really disheartening for me, that the commission was cut out of an extremely important decision-making process, and the clients, the sportsmen of South Dakota and the public, were also left out of the discussion,” Cooper said. “It was a bad mistake, and we called (Noem) out on it, and she didn’t like it.”

Program has political roots 

Cooper is somewhat of a legend in South Dakota wildlife circles. 

Now retired, he spent 23 years as a federal wildlife agent, served for 12 years as South Dakota GFP secretary under two Republican governors and after that was on the GFP Commission for six years. He has a wildlife-protection area named in honor of him and his wife, Vera.

He’s also concerned that such a large and expensive program to catch and kill numerous species of animals over several months of the year will upset the balance of nature. 

Cooper said the program is mostly based on political concerns and not on science, and he noted that other predator-removal programs in the U.S. had previously led to exactly the opposite outcome than wildlife managers sought.

“All animals have value, all plant life has value, and if you just all of a sudden place a group of critters into this place of having no value, that they are evil and they’re taking away my ability to shoot something, you villainize them,” Cooper said “You’re not being very astute or thoughtful about wildlife and nature as a whole.”

 

During previous extensive, high-level policy discussions on boosting pheasant populations in South Dakota, a predator-removal or predatory bounty program never received much if any support, Cooper said. It was almost universally seen as an unproven wildlife control method that was unlikely to work, he said.

"There’s a lot of sound science on pheasants, and South Dakota has been a leader in pheasant research, habitat and biology. The bottom line is that we would a hell of a lot more rather have time, money and research put into habitat than running around paying people to trap and kill raccoons,” Cooper said.

GFP commissioner sees anecdotal evidence of success

Robert Whitmyre, a lifelong South Dakotan who farms near Webster, was appointed to the GFP Commission in 2019, after the bounty program began. He has since voted to extend the program through at least 2026.

Raccoons are not native to South Dakota and are prevalent in rural areas where pheasants and waterfowl commonly nest and breed, Whitmyre said.

Climate change and agriculture, Whitmyre said, have changed the landscape of South Dakota and provided a perfect environment for raccoons and other nest predators to thrive. Corn farming has provided a consistent food source and suitable habitat for predators, he said.

“With agriculture, we have certainly changed the cropping and changed the diet for different animals, and corn is the No. 1 reason raccoons can persist so readily in the U.S. right now,” he said. 

Though he acknowledges that his evidence is entirely anecdotal, Whitmyre said he had seen more pheasants and waterfowl on his farm since the bounty program began. Whitmyre said that for the first time in nearly a decade, he had seen several successful pheasant broods on his property or nearby.

“In all honesty, I can’t definitely, absolutely say the program has contributed to an improved pheasant population,” Whitmyre said. “But I believe we do have an absolute linear relationship with predator-control numbers and pheasant-population numbers in this area.”

Program benefits public, youth and pheasants

Raccoons, skunks and other nest predators are highly prevalent on East River South Dakota farms and cause myriad problems for other species but also can bite and spread rabies to humans, Whitmyre said.

Whitmyre recalls that his mother encouraged him as a boy to kill ground squirrels on their farm and paid him a bounty of a penny per tail. He also was encouraged by his grandfather to trap and kill gophers that dig holes and cause problems for farmers.

“This program gives the view that we’re enabling young people to contribute to the improvement of habitat, and those seeds will continue to grow for many years,” he said.

Beyond controlling the predator population, Whitmyre said the bounty program has had measurable success in attracting young people to trapping and other outdoor activities, which he argues is critical to continue South Dakota’s outdoor heritage and develop the next generation of sportsmen and women who sustain habitat through the purchase of licenses and support of industries surrounding outdoor recreation.

“It gives them a chance to make a few dollars but also contribute to the pheasant population and of other nesting birds and get involved in habitat improvement,” Whitmyre said. “That’s been fun to see because when it comes to all the competition for the time that young people have, with electronic games, the outdoors just kind of falls by the wayside.”

Fewer miles lead to fewer eggs

Whitmyre said the reduction of raccoons and other nest predators over time will enable more pheasants and other nesting birds to thrive because there is statistically a lower chance that predators will stumble upon active nests during their hunt for food. 

“If you reduce the population of those predators, you can reduce the number of miles they’re putting on each night and reduce the incidental contact and destruction of those nests,” he said.

Female pheasants take about a month to lay and hatch all their eggs, which provides ample opportunity for predators to find and eat the eggs or hatchlings during the critical breeding period.

Whitmyre said he had also seen improvement of other species since the bounty program began, including avocets and other birds that rely on marshes and fields for breeding or for stopovers while migrating.

Animal advocate calls program ‘inhumane’

Sara Parker, a communications professional from Sioux Falls, S.D., is co-founder of South Dakotans Fighting Animal Cruelty Together, which strongly opposes the bounty program. 

Parker’s group was formed about a decade ago and successfully lobbied lawmakers to make animal cruelty a felony offense. The group now has more than 5,000 Facebook followers.

On several fronts, Parker and her group oppose the bounty program, which she has called “inhumane, wasteful and not based on science” in letters published in several South Dakota newspapers.

Parker said she was disappointed that it was implemented without input from the public or the scientific community. She also said the millions spent on the program could be better used to expand habitat or other wildlife-enhancement efforts.

Parker’s biggest concerns about the program, however, center on the widespread trapping and killing of thousands of animals.

Traps are indiscriminate and can mistakenly ensnare animals not targeted under the bounty program, trapped animals can suffer for days before being killed and the offspring of trapped adult animals are left to perish alone or starve without parental help, she said. 

Parker notes that animals killed under the bounty program are generally not used as food or for pelts but are left to rot after the tails are removed and collected for payment.

“This is killing for the sake of killing, because there (are) no scientific studies to support it,” she said.

Parker, who said she does not oppose hunting for food, also expressed concern that killing tens of thousands of certain species of animals will upset the balance of nature and may lead to unintended consequences that will be difficult to reverse.

“Every animal serves a purpose in that they eat a lot of mice and rats and ticks,” Parker said. “Ten years from now, we could be looking at some very negative environmental impacts from killing all those animals without any tracking.”

Parker also questions whether using money to entice children to trap and kill animals is an appropriate goal for a state-funded program.

“It’s disturbing and a little heartbreaking,” Parker said. “Of all the things to do outside, I’m not sure why this is the thing you would encourage kids to do in the outdoors. With that amount of money, there is a lot you could do to get kids outdoors.”

This South Dakota News Watch article is republished online with the permission of SDNW.

Photo: Raccoons are the animal targeted most under the South Dakota Nest Predator Bounty Program, which uses payments to encourage adults and children to trap and kill animals that prey on eggs and hatchlings of pheasants and ducks. (Photo: South Dakota News Watch stock image).

Related posts

• Noem invites California-based gun manufacturers to SD to escape new taxes
• ENRTF funds University of Minnesota and MN tribal communities CWD management plan
• Minnesota Reformer: Cost of managing Minnesota’s whitetails: 33 million bucks

If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, 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. 

Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email [email protected] as recipient.

I'm on Venmo for those who prefer to use this service: @Sally-Sorensen-6

LTE of the day: loons visit everywhere in Minnesota though not on finalist flags

While I no longer live in the state of Minnesota, I've followed the process the state is using to pick a new flag. Most puzzling were comments in the media by flag commission members about how it would be inappropriate to have a loon--the state bird--on Minnesota's new state flag because the real bird isn't found in the southern part of the state.

That was news to me.

As a child growing up on the shores of Le Sueur County's Lake Emily, I was thrilled whenever I heard or saw migrating loons on their way to and from their breeding grounds in Northern Minnesota.

Fortunately, a Star Tribune reader shared the same thought. In the latest letters to the editor section, Jason McGrath writes:

The chair of the State Emblems Redesign Commission says the loon "doesn't really represent the people of Minnesota everywhere in the state" ("Why the new flag won't have a loon on it," Nov. 29). Earlier, commission member Bjorn Olson, a state representative from Fairmont, said, "I've never seen a loon in southern Minnesota" ("Flag fans cry fowl over lack of loons," Nov. 23).

Maybe Rep. Olson isn't looking hard enough, as the eBird website shows multiple sightings of loons right there in Fairmont, on both Budd Lake and Hall Lake. In fact, during spring, loons can be seen all over Minnesota, including in the Twin Cities and south.

But beyond that, "not common in all parts of the state" is a ridiculous standard. Are grizzly bears a routine sight for residents across California? No. But it's one of the few American state flags that just about anyone across the country can bring to mind immediately. It represents all Californians not because they see bears daily but because it's on the state flag and it shows all Californians' regard for the state's natural heritage. How could that not be obvious?

Another rare state that has a flag known across the country? Texas. Memo to the Minnesota commission: There's already a Lone Star State.

The best design was a variation on the North Star design that had a beautiful profile of a loon in white between blue water below and a green background above (submission F590). The commission should reconsider its absurd and inaccurate "everywhere in the state" standard and go back to the pool instead of sticking with the mostly bland and repetitive designs it's now calling the finalists. I live in Minneapolis and don't see loons that often, but I never feel more Minnesotan than when I go to one of our many splendid state parks in summer and hear the cries of the loons across a tranquil lake.

Jason McGrath, Minneapolis

Jason is a friend, and when I saw his wife sharing on social media that the letter was being drafted, I asked him to check on eBird to see if the common loon still visits Lake Emily. I reprint the letter with his permission.

It's a number of counties east of Martin County, but indeed a loon had been spotted at Lake Emily on April 28, 2018 (I won't republish the screenshot McGrath sent me, since it contains the user's name; I have no desire to dox a stranger). 

It's likely other loons have passed through when no eBird member was there to witness them.

As for Bjorn Olson, I'll simply file his thoughts about loons in the same folder as his musings about ditch mowing Bluestem explored in the post In House transportation committee, Bjorn Olson hostile to state right-of-way & ditch mowing law.

Image: A loon and a star combine in submission F408 for Minnesota’s revised state flag. (Courtesy of the Minnesota Historical Society/ via St. Paul Pioneer Press, Here are some interesting and offbeat submissions for MN’s new flag and seal, by Molly Guthrey).This isn't the flag Jason recommends.

Related post

• Formal effort begins to replace ‘cluttered genocidal mess’ on Minnesota state flag and seal

If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, 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. 

Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email [email protected] as recipient.

I'm on Venmo for those who prefer to use this service: @Sally-Sorensen-6

PolyNot! news digest: OAH judge recommends denial of NewRange Copper Nickel mine permit

Another roadblock has been thrown up for what used to be known as the PolyMet project.

At the Duluth News Tribune, Jimmy Lovrien reports in Judge recommends DNR deny NorthMet permit to mine:

ST. PAUL — An administrative law judge recommended Minnesota regulators deny a permit to mine for the project vying to become the state's first copper-nickel mine because its planned method of storing a slurry of waste rock "is not a practical and workable reclamation technique," the judge wrote.

NewRange Copper Nickel's permit to mine required the company to line and cap the project’s tailings basin — a dam that would store waste rock left behind after processing out copper, nickel, cobalt and other metals — with bentonite, which swells when wet, to prevent oxygen from contacting the tailings and creating acid, the type of pollution environmentalists fear most with copper-nickel mining. Bentonite would also be mixed in with the tailings.

But in the 40-page non-binding opinion issued Tuesday, Judge James E. LaFave said the method did not meet the state law because it would not make the slurry of crushed-up waste rock nonreactive and wouldn't prevent water from flowing over or through the waste upon closure.

NewRange is a joint venture formed earlier this year between PolyMet and Teck to advance the NorthMet project. . . .

Read the rest of the article at the DulutHere's the OAH judge's opinion:

Administrative Law Judge op... uploaded by Duluth News Tribune

Reporting for Minnesota Public Radio, Dan Kraker wrote in Judge recommends against key permit for NewRange copper mine, formerly known as PolyMet:

A state administrative law judge has dealt another blow to the proposed NorthMet copper-nickel mine by recommending that the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources deny the key “Permit to Mine” the facility needs to operate.

In a 40-page ruling issued late Tuesday, Judge James E. LaFave found that the mine’s proposed method of storing reactive mine waste, by lining the mine’s tailings waste facility with a type of clay known as bentonite, “is not a practical and workable reclamation technique.”

It’s another in a string of setbacks for the proposed mining project in northeastern Minnesota formerly known as PolyMet, which was renamed NewRange Copper Nickel earlier this year after the company formed a 50-50 joint venture with the Canadian mining company Teck. PolyMet is now wholly owned by the Swiss mining and commodities giant Glencore.

The ruling from the administrative law judge, which followed a week-long contested case hearing held before the judge in March, is only a recommendation. The Minnesota DNR could still choose to issue the permit to mine, which was put on hold about two years ago by the Minnesota Supreme Court.

But two other major permits NewRange needs to open the mine also have been blocked by litigation. In August, the Minnesota Supreme Court sent a key water quality permit back to the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency for additional work.

And earlier this year, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers revoked a key federal wetlands permit over concerns the project would result in pollution downstream on the reservation of the Fond du Lac Band of Lake Superior Chippewa. 

“I think this is one of 1,000 cuts,” said Paula Maccabee, attorney and advocacy director for the nonprofit WaterLegacy, one of several environmental groups that along with the Fond du Lac Band challenged the permit to mine.

“It seems that every time anybody makes an independent evaluation of the PolyMet project, it comes up short. And so I think it’s time that the governor and Minnesota agencies should really step back and take a hard look at whether it's time to pull the plug on this project.”  . . .

Jeepers.

At the Associated Press, Steve Karnowski reports in Proposed NewRange copper-nickel mine in Minnesota suffers fresh setback on top of years of delays:

. . .Other environmental groups also welcomed the ruling. They say the risks of acid mine drainage from the sulfide-bearing ore under northeastern Minnesota pose unacceptable risks to the environment and human health.

The issue in this case was whether the bentonite clay liner that NewRange plans to use to seal its waste basin would adequately contain the reactive mine waste, known as tailings, and keep oxygen and water out. The judge concluded that it was not a “practical and workable” way to render the tailings nonreactive or to keep water out of them over time.

“The crux of the issue is simple: Will the method to contain the waste work? The evidence is clear, and the judge’s ruling is clear: No,” said Chris Knopf, executive director of Friends of the Boundary Waters Wilderness.

Several other major obstacles to the project also remain unresolved. The Minnesota Supreme Court ruled in August that the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency improperly granted the main water quality permit, saying state regulators not only ignored concerns from the federal Environmental Protection Agency but attempted to conceal EPA warnings from the public. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in June revoked a wetlands destruction permit, saying it did not comply with water quality standards set by a sovereign downstream tribe. Also in June, the state Supreme Court reinstated an appeal by environmentalists of the project’s air quality permit.

“This is yet another repudiation of the permits issued to PolyMet, and should be the final nail in the coffin of this failed proposal,” said Kathryn Hoffman, CEO of the Minnesota Center for Environmental Advocacy.

In Chloe Johnson's article at the Star Tribune, PolyMet mine faces new obstacle after judge recommends rejecting its permit, readers also learn:

The ruling comes after a five-day hearing this spring, in which a coalition of environmental groups, the Fond du Lac Band of Lake Superior Chippewa, the DNR and representatives for PolyMet all presented their sides in the case.

The issues covered were narrow: could the use of bentonite clay on the former LTV Steel tailings basin stop water from filtering through waste rock? If not, acid mine drainage could escape into the Lake Superior watershed. . . .

In a statement, Fond du Lac Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Chairman Kevin R. Dupuis Sr. wrote that the decision served to safeguard the natural resources that Native people rely on, and that treaty rights protect. Fond du Lac's reservation is downstream of PolyMet's planned mine.

"Today's decision by the ALJ would protect these resources for the Band and all Minnesotans," Dupuis wrote. "DNR must accept the ALJ's decision."

Read the full text of the articles at their place of publication.

Some reactions on social media:

BREAKING: Admin Law Judge recommends @mndnr deny PolyMet permit to mine that violates MN rules on reactive mine waste.

"This is yet another repudiation of the permits issued to PolyMet, and should be the final nail in the coffin of this failed proposal."

Read our release: pic.twitter.com/55mbmBA7E0

— @MCEA1974 (@MCEA1974) November 28, 2023

BREAKING: Yesterday, after five years of legal action following DNR’s flawed and short-sighted decision to issue PolyMet a Permit to Mine, an Administrative Law Judge recommended Minnesota DNR deny PolyMet’s Permit to Mine. This is a monumental decision! #mnleg 🧵1/5 pic.twitter.com/08x5IUDEGW

— Friends of the BWCAW (@FriendsBWCAW) November 29, 2023

BREAKING NEWS: Administrative Judge recommends DENIAL of PolyMet Permit to Mine!

Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) James LaFave concluded that PolyMet’s proposed bentonite amendment to control seepage from tailings did not comply with Minnesota statutes and rules because...(1/4) pic.twitter.com/h9IflYG7pT

— WaterLegacy (@WaterLegacy) November 29, 2023

What more could Bluestem add?

Photo: The closed LTC Taconite plant near Hoyt Lake. AP Photo/Jim Monie.

Related posts and prior media coverage

• MNDNR will let Twin Metals subsidiary drill boreholes around Birch Lake in Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness watershed 
• End risk of damage to Boundary Waters watershed: permanently ban sulfide-ore mining
• ‘Secrecy is unacceptable.’ Minnesota Supreme Court reverses NewRange mining permit after regulators shield federal criticisms
• MPCA was ‘arbitrary and capricious’ in granting PolyMet permit, Supreme Court rules, Minnesota Reformer
• Minnesota Supreme Court rules against disputed mine, says state pollution officials hid EPA warnings, Star Tribune
• Court says MPCA did not take 'hard look' at NorthMet permit, Duluth News Tribune
• MN Reformer: Public lands near MN BWCA Waters withdrawn from federal mining leases
• MN Reformer Commentary: Clean water is a winning issue. Why are politicians so against it?
• Interior Secretary Deb Haaland's father had Norwegian-American roots in New London, MN
• MN Reformer: Biden administration cancels mining leases near Minnesota’s Boundary Waters
• Appeals Court says Northeastern Minnesotans for Wilderness can challenge mine siting rules
• Water is life: Iron Range board legislators table new water system for Fond du Lac band

If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, 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. 

Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email [email protected] as recipient.

I'm on Venmo for those who prefer to use this service: @Sally-Sorensen-6

Ethanol carbon capture update: Lincoln could become 6th county to regulate carbon pipelines

While one ethanol carbon pipeline is off the table, Summit Carbon Solutions is regrouping after having its initial permit application turned down by South Dakota Public Utility Commission regulators in September.

That possibility spurs the Lincoln County Carbon Dioxide Transport and Storage Advisory Committee, South Dakota Searchlight reports. 

Lincoln could become sixth county to regulate location of carbon pipelines
By Joshua Haiar

CANTON — Lincoln County could become the sixth county in the state to enact regulations on the location of carbon dioxide pipelines. 

Brown, McPherson, Minnehaha, Moody and Spink counties already have “setback” ordinances that mandate minimum distances between pipelines and residential areas, livestock facilities, nursing homes and other existing features.

The Lincoln County Commission rejected a setback proposal earlier this year due to concerns about the county’s authority to enact such an ordinance. Since then, state regulators told county officials they do in fact have the authority, according to Eric Scott, who serves on the county’s new Carbon Dioxide Transport and Storage Advisory Committee, which is tasked with preparing an ordinance recommendation. 

In September, the state Public Utilities Commission denied permits for two companies seeking to build carbon pipelines in the state. Commissioners cited conflicts between the pipeline routes and county setback ordinances as a reason for the denials. Commissioners also declined to overrule the county setback ordinances.

One company, Navigator C02, has since withdrawn its plan. The other, Summit Carbon Solutions, plans to resubmit an application after modifying its route. The company aims to capture carbon dioxide emissions from ethanol plants and transport them in liquefied form for underground storage in North Dakota, thereby making the project eligible for federal tax credits that incentivize the removal of heat-trapping gasses from the atmosphere.

The Lincoln County pipeline committee held its second meeting Tuesday to discuss four proposals ranging from aggressive setback distances favored by pipeline opponents to lesser distances they oppose. 

County Commissioner Joel Arends suggested the committee should first hear from out-of-state carbon pipeline operators and regulators. He said that while the current proposals may be informed by other South Dakota county ordinances, he wants to “hear from people who have real-world experience regulating these things.” 

From there, the discussion pivoted from discussing the proposals on the table to discussing who should be at the table. Some members suggested South Dakota state and county officials would suffice. 

“I don’t know how many outside people we need to come in and tell us how to write our ordinance,” committee member Eric Scott said. 

Committee member Anthony Ventura said the listening sessions would only mean kicking discussion of the proposals — two of which he introduced — further down the road. 

“I think we’re dragging our heels here,” Ventura said.

The committee will continue discussing the issues at its next meeting.  

This South Dakota Searchlight article is published under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. 

Photo: Lincoln County residents and members of the county’s newly formed Carbon Dioxide Transport and Storage Advisory Committee attend a meeting Nov. 28, 2023, in Canton. (Joshua Haiar/South Dakota Searchlight).

Related posts

•  Final arguments for Summit ethanol carbon pipeline Iowa permit are due in January
• Critics allege CO2 pipelines ‘farm the government’ for climate $$ while helping oil industry; bills fuel debate over ethanol’s environmental impact, with climate implications
• Ethanol carbon pipeline update: Summit permit decision in Iowa not expected until next year
• If first you don't succeed: Summit's new route in North Dakota adds thirteen miles of pipeline
• Defying the odds: Meet the attorney for 1,000 clients who beat two pipeline companies
• Summit Carbon stands to benefit from Navigator's canceled pipeline, but IA opponents sue to block Summit Carbon water permit
•  Cancel culture: Navigator withdraws ethanol carbon pipeline permit application in Iowa 
• Navigator CO2 cancels multistate pipeline project
• Summit Carbon Solutions says ethanol carbon pipeline system won’t be operational until 2026
• Some Iowa landowners were confused by Summit Carbon Solution eminent domain process
• Navigator CO2 pulls its ethanol carbon pipeline permit application in Illinois
• Ethanol carbon pipeline news digest: Gevo aviation fuel needs Summit Carbon Solutions and more!
• Iowa Capital Dispatch: Summit pipeline hearing will resume on Tuesday; Navigator asks Iowa regulators to pause its pipeline permit request
• Iowa Capital Dispatch: Local officials in Iowa have potential to block carbon capture projects
• IA Capital Dispatch: Summit permit process in North Dakota has reached ‘uncharted waters
• North Dakota Public Service Commission votes 2-1 to reopen Summit Carbon pipeline case
• Navigator CO2 has not ‘taken any state off the map’ after SD pipeline permit rejection 
• Ethanol carbon pipeline digest: reaction to denial; water use in IA; rich guy resists subpoena
• Iowa utility regulators want to finish Summit pipeline permit hearing by month’s end
• State denies Summit permit; both ethanol carbon pipelines proposed in South Dakota now rejected
• Summit Carbon Solutions forges ahead despite SD PUC staff's motion to deny pipeline permit 
• SD PUC staff motion: non-mysterious portents in the air about potential denial of Summit Carbon Solution's pipeline permit application
• South Dakota Navigator pipeline decision might jeopardize Summit Carbon Solutions proposal
• Breaking: South Dakota Public Utilities Commission unanimously denies Navigator ethanol CO2 pipeline project permit

If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, 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. 

Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email [email protected] as recipient.

I'm on Venmo for those who prefer to use this service: @Sally-Sorensen-6

Star Tribune dives into MN nitrate pollution

At the Minnesota Star Tribune, Jeff Hargarten and Jennifer Bjorhus have done some powerful reporting in Nitrate contamination of Minnesota waters shows little sign of going away, despite years of effort; Farm pollution persists despite hundreds of millions spent to clean it up.

Here's the extended lede:

Minnesota has spent hundreds of millions of dollars and decades of effort to reduce nitrate that's contaminating drinking water and rivers. The progress so far: negligible.

The main source of the nitrate is nitrogen fertilizer, a pillar of production agriculture that includes animal manure and synthetic chemicals. Farmers apply tens of thousands of tons of fertilizers to their fields every year, and what isn't absorbed by crops can seep into aquifers and any runoff can end up in rivers.

Despite numerous programs designed to encourage farmers to change their ways, purchases of fertilizer keep growing. In many parts of Minnesota farm country, drinking water wells and streams carry that legacy: A decades-old state law limits how much nitrate is allowed in drinking water, although some researchers now say that level needs to be much stricter to protect people.

The three agencies tasked with keeping Minnesota waters clear of harmful levels of nitrate acknowledge that the situation isn't improving, particularly for private wells in the vulnerable topography of the state's hilly southeastern corner. In that region, frustrated residents have called for the federal government to intervene on what environmental groups call a public health emergency — and the EPA recently responded with a directive that Minnesota clean up its act.

A lack of progress

Nitrate levels of 10 milligrams per liter of water or higher have violated federal health standards since the 1960s, since those concentrations are known to cause the potentially life-threatening condition methemoglobinemia, or blue baby syndrome, that starves infants of oxygen.

But there's a push to reduce the state and federal nitrate standard from the 10 mg/l limit, given growing research around links to cancer and other damaging health impacts from drinking water with nitrate at half the legal maximum concentration, or even lower. . . .

Read the rest at the Strib. I anticipate this article will induce more howling fantods on the part of some legislators and agency staff suffering from acute regulatory capture.

Photo: Utica, Minn., a farm town of about 200 people in Winona County.

Related posts

• Land Stewardship Project applauds court’s support of Winona County; launches ‘Story Center Powerline’ initiative for rural residents
• Minnesota district court rules against Winona County dairy expansion; owner will appeal
• Agweek Special Report on Rural Health: 10% of MN private wells pose a health problem 
• Following emergency petition regarding nitrate contamination in SEMN karst region, EPA sees further action needed to protect public health
• On ‘Cancer Road,’ a group of southeastern MN families ask if nitrate exposure is to blame 
• Strib scrutinizes MN Department of Ag action on nitrate-related Groundwater Protection Rule
• Nitrates in Southwestern Minnesota water: 'Do not give the water to infants' in Ellsworth
• Commentary from MinnPost: Can the state control nitrates in Minnesota waters?
• Minnesota Department of Health isn’t properly enforcing drinking water law, and kids will suffer
• Jean Wagenius: For climate and clean water, state agencies need Walz to lead

If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, 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.

Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email [email protected] as recipient.

I'm on Venmo for those who prefer to use this service: @Sally-Sorensen-6

MN DNR press release: CWD detected in a wild deer near Wabasha in southeastern Minnesota

Bluestem is republishing this Minnesota Department of Natural Resources press release as part of its ongoing coverage of Chronic Wasting Disease in the region.

CWD detected in a wild deer near Wabasha in southeastern Minnesota

A deer harvested during the opening weekend of firearms season near Wabasha in southeastern Minnesota has tested positive for chronic wasting disease.

The hunter harvested the adult male deer in deer permit area (DPA) 342, within the southeastern Minnesota CWD surveillance zone where hunters were required to have their deer tested for CWD during the opening weekend of firearms season.

The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources had added DPA 342 to the CWD surveillance zone this year in response to detections of CWD in wild deer in bordering Buffalo County, Wisconsin in 2022.

“This discovery in southeastern Minnesota, while unwelcome news, highlights the importance and necessity of our disease surveillance efforts,” said Erik Hildebrand, Minnesota DNR wildlife health supervisor. “We truly appreciate hunters’ help in combatting CWD by getting their deer tested for CWD when required and complying with carcass movement restrictions. Results of these efforts help limit disease spread and protect the health of Minnesota’s white-tailed deer.”

With the new discovery, the DNR’s current CWD response plan calls for three years of mandatory testing to help determine the potential prevalence of the disease in DPA 342 and surrounding DPAs.

Much of southeastern Minnesota includes areas where CWD has been found in wild deer, or areas that are considered at risk for disease transmission. Statewide, the Minnesota DNR has tested more than 130,000 deer since 2002. As of Nov. 27, 236 have tested positive. Most of those cases occurred in southeastern Minnesota. These data indicate the disease remains relatively rare in Minnesota. 

Within DPAs where CWD has been detected, the DNR uses multiple management actions designed to help mitigate disease spread, including carcass movement restrictions, dumpsters, a deer feeding and attractants ban, and sometimes increased hunting opportunities with increased bag limits.

Complete CWD test results are available on the Minnesota DNR’s CWD test results webpage (mndnr.gov/cwdcheck). Any additional deer harvested during the 2023 deer seasons in Minnesota that test positive for CWD will be reported on this webpage. The DNR will directly notify any hunter who harvests a deer that tests positive.

CWD affects cervids, which include white-tailed deer, moose and elk, and has no known cure. It is found in more than half of the states in the U.S.

More information about CWD, what the DNR is doing to limit disease spread and protect the health of Minnesota’s white-tailed deer, and information for hunters about current and upcoming hunting seasons, is available on the Minnesota DNR website (mndnr.gov/cwd).

Photo: A wild Minnesota white-tailed buck.

Related posts

• Outdoor News: Minnesota DNR reports jump in CWD-positive test results in white-tailed deer
•  Minnesota DNR: Tribal Chronic Wasting Disease surveillance contributes to statewide effort 
• Session Daily: Bill targets deadly deer disease with tighter proposed restrictions on farms
• VIDEO: MN House environment committee passes most sweeping anti-CWD measure to date
• Update: wild CWD detection in Beltrami County possibly connected to deer farm dump site 
• DNR: Chronic wasting disease suspected in a wild deer in Bemidji area for the first time
• MN Chronic Wasting Disease dilemma: should new deer farms be blocked? The old bought out?
• Chronic Wasting Disease: St. Louis County permanently bans new or expanded cervid farms
• Todd Miller's deer farm was depopulated Tuesday,
• On Facebook, operator of CWD doomed Winona County deer farm wears Miller Scrap hat 
• MN Board of Animal Health: CWD confirmed in quarantined Winona County captive deer herd
• Update: More on Miller family deer farm interests
• Senate DFL Leader Franzen raises conflict-of-interest concerns in Republican leader's role overturning bipartisan vote to protect wild deer 

If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, 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.

Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email [email protected] as recipient.

I'm on Venmo for those who prefer to use this service: @Sally-Sorensen-6

66-year-old guy touted in September press release from SD governor’s office might not be best Freedom Works Here recruitment example

Bluestem last left off coverage of Freedom Works, the high-profile South Dakota worker recruitment pr campaign, with Work, We're On It: Freedom Works Here ads scrutinized, Ohio vendor swiped local idea.

Sioux Falls Live was first with that scoop.

Monday morning, South Dakota News Watch is out with more. That extended lede below inspired Bluestem's headline. More Governor Noem positive pants on fire?

'Freedom' not enough to fill South Dakota jobs: Local business leaders say there are hurdles with campaign
By Stu Whitney

SIOUX FALLS, S.D. – Bob Douglas, touted as a success story of Gov. Kristi Noem’s "Freedom Works Here” workforce recruitment campaign in South Dakota, confirmed a few things during a recent interview with News Watch.

The 66-year-old recreational vehicle salesman does enjoy freedom, it turns out. And he loves South Dakota. He plans to move to the Sioux Falls area once he sells his house in southern California, maybe as early as next spring. Douglas was referenced in a Sept. 21 press release from the governor’s office as having “recently moved to South Dakota.”

As for being heralded by the governor’s staff as an example of Noem’s $6.5 million ad campaign drawing new residents to the Mount Rushmore State, well, that’s not exactly true either.

“I wasn’t really aware of the campaign,” said Douglas, whose experience in the RV industry led to him being hired by Parkston-based Trailmanor as a West Coast representative in 2022. He was then named the company’s national sales and marketing director in April 2023, several months before the Governor’s Office of Economic Development (GOED) launched the Freedom Works Here effort.

Douglas told News Watch that politics played a role in his decision to take the Trailmanor job. He called Noem a “rock star” and added that his community of Tehachapi, about 100 miles from Los Angeles, holds rallies supporting former President Donald Trump that he and his wife, Jennifer, attend.

“Once you get out into the valley and mountains and away from the big cities, you’ll find a whole lot of people that think the way that my wife and I think,” said Douglas.

Finding younger workers a challenge in South Dakota

For economic development corporations and businesses in South Dakota, many of which contributed $10,000 to help fund the Freedom Works Here campaign, Douglas’ story is an oversimplification of workforce recruitment.

Politically motivated individuals, many of them at or near retirement age, have helped boost South Dakota’s population by seeking more lenient tax structures or escaping what they perceived as heavy-handed COVID-era policies in Democratic-controlled states such as Minnesota, California and Colorado.

Net migration between July 1, 2021, and July 1, 2022, was one of the main reasons South Dakota ranked fifth in percentage of population growth (1.5%) among U.S. states during that span, according to the U.S. Census Bureau.

For South Dakota businesses, however, skilled workers between the ages of 25 and 35 are the “sweet spot” they would like to attract as the state’s unemployment rate hovers at 1.9%, with about 20,000 open jobs. The process of trying to persuade younger workers to take a job in South Dakota is a painstaking process that goes beyond political platitudes, said Watertown Development Co. executive director Chris Clifton.

“I know when I was 25 to 35 years old, I was not going to fill out a form and make a conscious, life-changing decision after talking to somebody on the internet a few times,” said Clifton. “If you look at the content of 'Freedom Works Here,' I mean, you’re kind of celebrating motherhood, apple pie and Chevrolet, so to speak. For a lot of people it’s like, how can you be against it? But there’s a lot of decision-making that goes into the process.”

'We're in uncharted territory here'

Economic development corporations and some major employers were solicited for contributions by the Governor’s Office of Economic Development in August to help extend a national run of Noem’s TV and social media commercials. That helped fund a $1.5 million “phase two” of advertisements that GOED said will roll out soon.

The commercials so far have shown Noem acting as plumber, electrician, welder and dentist to illustrate the need for more workers in South Dakota. The governor’s office said that the ads have “been viewed over 800 million times," but GOED officials declined to share with News Watch the specific methodology or data used to arrive at that number.

"This is a combination of impressions – that is actual views – on both the TV ads and the digital ads," Sarah Ebeling, GOED's communications coordinator, wrote in an emailed response to requests for more information.

At a Nov. 13 meeting in Pierre, members of the Legislature’s Appropriations Committee pointed to the lack of hard data connecting new residents to the Freedom Works Here campaign, as opposed to those who made the decision for other reasons.

The legislative oversight is focused on more than $5 million in Future Fund dollars used to enlist the marketing and distribution services of Ohio-based Strategic Media Services and Tennessee-based Designsensory Inc. as part of the GOED initiative.

Economic development officials interviewed by News Watch said they are concerned about getting their money’s worth. As part of their investment, they received raw data of respondents who signed up or provided information through the Freedom Works Here website, a total of about 7,500 names and email addresses.

Noem's office and GOED claim that more than 1,800 applicants "are in the final stages" of moving to South Dakota. Ebeling told News Watch that number is based on how many people created an account on the South Dakota Works website through the Department of Labor and Regulation to explore employment options in the state. It's not clear how many will actually relocate.

"This campaign started June 21, 2023," Ebeling wrote in her response. "Five months is a fairly short turnaround time to pick up your life and move to a different state."

Economic development officials are sorting through data they received from GOED, trying to gauge which respondents to the Freedom Works Here campaign have serious interest in moving to South Dakota.

“We have not had anyone relocate yet, but I would qualify that to say that I didn’t expect it would happen this quickly,” said Michael Bokorny, CEO of the Aberdeen Development Corp. “We’re in uncharted territory here. There’s not really a technical manual on how to do this. We’re kind of making it up as we go.”

Concerns raised about compiling Freedom Works Here data

Several development officials said more work could have been done by GOED and the Department of Labor to filter data on the front end, such as itemizing by preference of community or profession. They also expressed surprise that they were asked to contribute to a campaign that they weren’t consulted on ahead of time and didn’t know much about until it launched.

“Before I made my way through the data, I wanted to know exactly what the Department of Labor did or what filtration they used,” said Clifton. “I got a bunch of gobbledygook that basically said, ‘We can’t tell you what we did, but we did all we could do.’ I’m a little suspicious about that because I’ve been involved in a lot of marketing campaigns that were very specific about impressions. There's going to be a lot of heavy lifting on the back end to get this into a net result of who actually makes the move and takes a job.”

Elevate Rapid City, which supports economic development in the Black Hills region, encountered problems with names and contact information being duplicated in the data. There was also no record of who had already been contacted and what those conversations entailed, pointing to the competitive nature of different communities promoting their job prospects and quality of life.

More statewide coordination could have helped alleviate those problems, said Tom Johnson, Elevate Rapid City’s president and CEO.

“I’m guessing a lot of folks on this list have been contacted in one form or another by more than a dozen groups and businesses in South Dakota,” Johnson told News Watch. “I could see that becoming overwhelming. We’ve had numerous people on the list who have interpreted these contacts from all the communities as spam, which impacts the effectiveness of the outreach. It’s every community and business for themselves, with multiple entities who paid into the program trying to make the most of the names that were given.”

'We take them one at a time'

Each community took its own approach to curating the data and chasing down leads. Beyond the initial names and addresses, there is a significant amount of follow-up recruitment – what several officials called “handholding” – necessary to persuade someone to uproot their life and move to another state.

The Aberdeen Development Corp. contacted all 7,500 names on the list through email and social media, whittling the group down to about 140 who might be interested in moving to northeast South Dakota.

“I’m surprised we got 140 people interested,” Bokorny said. “I did not think we would get that because this is kind of a crap shoot, and there’s a lot of work still to do. We also had to further qualify those 140 names by asking ourselves, 'Are we a good fit for these people? Do they make sense for us as well?'”

Bokorny and his staff worked with partners such as the city of Aberdeen, Northern State University and the local YMCA to put together a package of $5,000 worth of incentives for prospective employees and families who choose to relocate to Aberdeen.

As of mid-November, Bokorny said three individuals had agreed to visit the area to see if moving there makes sense for them, including an optometrist from a “blue state” who reached out primarily for political reasons tied to what his kids were being taught in school.

“If we get one family out of all these efforts to relocate to Aberdeen, to me that’s a win,” Bokorny said. “I mean, we take them one at a time in our neck of the woods.”

Strategies vary for recruiting workers

Tim Reed serves as a Republican state senator from Brookings and CEO of the community’s economic development group. He said he and other local officials were taken back when GOED director Chris Schilken requested money to extend the national ad campaign.

“It was a surprise, and it had to be weighed out whether each of our organizations thought it was worth the money,” Reed said. “In the end my board said basically, ‘Let’s do it,’ but there was some caution to it.”

Upon receiving the data, Reed and his staff sent a mass email to all 7,500 names, directing them to a local job board to find more information about employment options in the Brookings area.

“We had very good open rates,” said Reed, referencing the percentage of people who opened the email rather than ignoring it. “And we know that some of those people have clicked through to our job board. But it’s going to take a while. No one is going to move here in 30 days, right? We know that they’ve gone on a website and said they’re interested, but that’s all we know. Where are they? Are they really ready to move? These are things we need to find out.”

Elevate Rapid City took a similar approach and has seen encouraging response rates. Johnson said that 79 people applied for openings on the Black Hills job board, 66 signed up as job seekers on the Elevate Rapid City website and 30 resumes have been added to the job bank. His staff has conducted seven face-to-face meetings over Zoom.

“We were encouraged (by state officials) to send out emails about our communities and, if able, do a direct mail afterwards, which would be incredibly cost prohibitive,” Johnson said. “Aside from that, the ball was mostly in our court to do what we felt was best for our community.”

As for how many people he expected to relocate to Rapid City for employment, Johnson said: “It’s anyone’s guess. There’s a saying that cash ain’t cash until you collect. The same thing is true here. It’s not going to be real until someone has been hired and relocated here and working for one of our great businesses.”

'I was looking for a change'

People like Bob Douglas, the RV salesman who plans to move to South Dakota from California, don’t need a lot of persuading. South Dakota was in their sights because of Noem’s doctrine of limited government, whether that means lower taxes or fewer restrictions during a public health emergency.

South Dakota ranked third behind New Hampshire and Florida for policies impacting economic, social and personal freedoms in 2022, according to the Cato Institute, a Libertarian-leaning think tank, which factored COVID-19 responses into its formula.

Those principles resonated with Chad Armstrong, a 49-year-old U.S. Marine veteran and “hardcore conservative” who moved to Rapid City from Butte, Montana, in October with his wife, Natashja. Armstrong chose South Dakota over Missouri and Texas partly because of Noem's messaging as well as his connection to Bradley Cummings, a veterans employment representative with the Department of Labor.

“I was looking for a change in the way that states regulate themselves,” said Armstrong, who started in November as a substitute fourth-grade teacher at General Beadle Elementary in Rapid City. “I was looking for a place that isn’t under the government welfare system and a place where you can keep your money.”

Armstrong is considering pursuing an online doctorate degree from Liberty University in public policy and Chinese affairs, following up a master’s degree in cybersecurity from Southern New Hampshire University. He also said he might run for school board or sheriff.

Armstrong founded a nonprofit, the Forgotten Fifteen Foundation, with fellow Marines he served with during the 2006 Battle of Ramadi in the Iraq War. The goal is to provide support for veterans who are struggling to make the transition from military to civilian life.

Noem’s office said in a press release that the nonprofit would be headquartered in South Dakota, but the organization listed no revenue or expenses on its 2022 disclosure form.

“My dream would be to build a Forgotten Fifteen compound and the front of it would look just like the entrance to Mount Rushmore,” said Armstrong.

Asked if it would be built in South Dakota, he said it was more likely to be built in the state where most of his fellow Marines currently reside.

“That would be California,” he said.

This South Dakota New Watch article is republished online with the permission of SDNW.

Photo: Bob Douglas, shown during a visit to Mount Rushmore, plans to move to South Dakota after being hired by Parkston-based Trailmanor as national sales and marketing director for recreational vehicles. (Photo: Submitted to South Dakota News Watch).

If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, 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.

Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email [email protected] as recipient.

I'm on Venmo for those who prefer to use this service: @Sally-Sorensen-6

Outdoor News: Minnesota DNR reports jump in CWD-positive test results in white-tailed deer

At Outdoor News, Brian Mozey reports in CWD-positive test results jump from three to 20 in Minnesota:

The Minnesota DNR released new sampling test results on Wednesday, Nov. 22, for chronic wasting disease in white-tailed deer. The number of confirmed 2023 CWD-positive samples jumped from three to 20 in one day.

Out of the 20 confirmed CWD-positive samples, 15 of them were found in the state’s southeast where there are eight CWD management zones. The region contains most of Minnesota’s CWD-positive cases in wild deer.

The breakdown in each deer permit area includes eight in 648, one in 646, four in 647, one in 645, and one in 649. The others include three in 605, one in 679, and one in 661.

There also are currently 13 samples named as “suspect,” according to the DNR website on Nov. 22. A suspect sample is going through a second round of testing to confirm if CWD is found in the sample or not.

The number of CWD positive samples could potentially grow with 13 suspect samples and 1,342 samples pending test results. Out of the 11,534 samples, 10,459 samples have been found negative for CWD.

Since 2010, Minnesota has found 236 cases of CWD in wild deer, including the 20 positives today.

Consider subscribing to Outdoor News to keep up with CWD and other wildlife news.

Map: CWD Management and Surveillance zones.  Via Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Chronic wasting disease management webpage.

Related posts

•  Minnesota DNR: Tribal Chronic Wasting Disease surveillance contributes to statewide effort 
• Session Daily: Bill targets deadly deer disease with tighter proposed restrictions on farms
• VIDEO: MN House environment committee passes most sweeping anti-CWD measure to date
• Update: wild CWD detection in Beltrami County possibly connected to deer farm dump site 
• DNR: Chronic wasting disease suspected in a wild deer in Bemidji area for the first time
• MN Chronic Wasting Disease dilemma: should new deer farms be blocked? The old bought out?
• Chronic Wasting Disease: St. Louis County permanently bans new or expanded cervid farms
• Todd Miller's deer farm was depopulated Tuesday,
• On Facebook, operator of CWD doomed Winona County deer farm wears Miller Scrap hat 
• MN Board of Animal Health: CWD confirmed in quarantined Winona County captive deer herd
• Update: More on Miller family deer farm interests
• Senate DFL Leader Franzen raises conflict-of-interest concerns in Republican leader's role overturning bipartisan vote to protect wild deer 

If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, 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.

Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email [email protected] as recipient.

I'm on Venmo for those who prefer to use this service: @Sally-Sorensen-6

South Dakota’s $3 million Big Sioux River cleanup project is slow to catch on

An update on conservation and environmental action from the South Dakota Searchlight.

State’s $3 million Big Sioux cleanup project is slow to catch on
By Joshua Haiar

A $3 million program created by the state in 2021 to reduce agricultural pollution in the Big Sioux River has attracted two sign-ups, while drawing criticism for duplicating existing local projects.

Meanwhile, the state has doubled the financial incentives for landowners in an effort to attract more interest.

Rep. Chris Karr, R-Sioux Falls, introduced the 2021 bill that allocated the $3 million. He questions why the state Department of Agriculture and Natural Resources created a new program.

“What they’re doing makes no sense,” he said in an interview with South Dakota Searchlight. “When I pitched this bill, I suggested we put the money into existing programs.”

Department spokesperson Brian Walsh did not speak with South Dakota Searchlight but answered questions in writing via email. He said there isn’t a similar local program that covers the entire Big Sioux River watershed. Having multiple programs available as conservation tools, he wrote, “provides us with a great opportunity to implement on-the-ground practices to improve water quality throughout the watershed.”

Both the state and local programs offer payments to landowners who agree to grow and maintain grass strips along the river and its tributaries. That helps filter out livestock waste and runoff from farm fields before it enters the Big Sioux River. The river starts in northeast South Dakota and flows through cities including Sioux Falls before joining the Missouri River at Sioux City.

New state program

The new state program, called the Riparian Buffer Initiative, is managed by the Department of Agriculture and Natural Resources. The 2021 law that provided the $3 million of funding includes a deadline of June 30, 2025, to spend the money.

Participating landowners cannot cut the grass (to make hay, for example) during peak summer recreational months, nor can their livestock graze it until fall. Enrolled land must otherwise have at least 4-inch-high grass. Buffer strips must range from 50 to 120 feet wide, and participants must enroll for at least 10 years.

The program initially offered landowners annual payments ranging from $131 to $219 per acre of enrolled cropland and $36 to $53 for pastureland, depending on local land rental rates. 

“We found that was not enough to move the needle,” said Bill Smith, of the Department of Agriculture and Natural Resources, while speaking recently to the Legislature’s budget committee during a public meeting in Pierre. 

So the department increased annual payments. They’re now up to $575 per acre for cropland and up to $157 per acre for pastureland, depending on local land rental rates.

Smith said the program had two enrolled landowners — totaling 51 acres in Day County and costing $32,050 of the $3 million — as of Oct. 19. The department anticipates another three enrollments totaling 53 more acres by the end of 2023.

Smith said the program can be “stacked” on top of other conservation programs, like the federal Conservation Reserve Program and the Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program, both of which offer landowners payments to keep environmentally sensitive land out of agricultural production.

The department is also offering funding from the program to help farmers and ranchers create different water sources for livestock, because the buffer strips along the creek are fenced off during certain seasons. Funding can also be used to help small and medium livestock operations manage waste, up to $250,000 for each project.

The department said there is one waste management system in the later stages of design in Codington County that will use $63,000 of program funding.

Existing local programs

Meanwhile, there are already at least three similar local initiatives.

Two of them are the Seasonal Riparian Area Management program for pastureland created in 2013, and the Riparian Area Management program for cropland and pastureland created in 2008. They’re part of the Big Sioux River Project, sponsored by the East Dakota Water Development District and Minnehaha Conservation District.

The programs were created in response to Big Sioux River water quality concerns. They’ve enrolled over 100 landowners and nearly 3,600 acres, totaling almost 89 miles of stream protection. 

While similar to the new state program, there are differences, including contracts up to 15 years and a slightly different window of time for grazing livestock in the seasonal program. Money for the local programs comes from a combination of federal, state and local funds. The highest payments from those programs are less than the highest payments now offered by the state.

The Big Sioux River Project efforts cover all but the northeastern corner of the watershed. That corner has another similar effort by the Prairie Coteau Watershed Project, which administers a Riparian Area Management program. The project is sponsored by eight county conservation districts.

Cory Zirbel manages the Prairie Coteau project. He wasn’t sure how many of the acres and landowners the program has enrolled specifically in the Big Sioux River watershed, because the project also includes areas outside the watershed, but he felt confident saying dozens of landowners and hundreds of acres. 

Zirbel and Barry Berg, of the Big Sioux River Project, said they do not know why the state developed a new program rather than giving the $3 million to the existing programs and projects. They said they were not part of that discussion in Pierre.

Berg said his team and the state are currently working to figure out how the programs compare and the best way to administer them. He said one possibility is making landowners eligible for payments from both the state and local programs.

Karr is disappointed in what’s come of his bill and the new program. 

“The goal was to get the dollars out and start educating landowners on the importance of the program, and now we’ve lost two years,” Karr said. “There’s a timeline on this money. Why did we spend two years trying to do, essentially, what was already working?”

Charlie Johnson, an organic farmer just south of Madison with land in the Big Sioux River watershed, said he had never heard of the new state program. He said the doubled incentives are indicative of a struggling program.

“To me, it looks like a public official trying to save face for a program that’s fallen flat on its face,” Johnson said. He said that while the state’s updated offer is attractive, he’s curious how landowners enrolled in the older programs are going to feel about a new state program raising its rates.

“I’d be upset,” he said. 

At the recent public meeting of the Legislature’s Appropriations Committee, Smith said the department sent letters to 1,293 landowners about the upgraded program, which have resulted in 28 calls and emails. Plus, the department is planning to promote the program at some upcoming events. He said the department is also working with partners including the state Department of Game, Fish and Parks, Ducks Unlimited and Pheasants Forever to help promote the program. 

Smith said that beyond the payment amounts, losing flexibility and control over land is the primary thing keeping landowners from participating.

David Kruger is a conservation-focused farmer living near Twin Brooks. He said committing a piece of land to one purpose for a decade can prove a financial or land management mistake, and giving up that freedom and control makes people nervous. 

“You can’t know what the future holds,” Kruger said. However, he said the higher payments might encourage more enrollments. 

Pollution problems and enforcement

The nonprofit Friends of the Big Sioux River has water samples from one of the river’s tributaries showing E. coli levels almost 200 times higher than safe levels. The group has also identified livestock manure as the primary culprit. Heavy rainfall can wash manure from a ranch, fertilized field or feedlot into the river, especially if buffer strips are not in place. 

Smith showed the legislative committee an eastern South Dakota map with multiple dots representing small- to medium-sized cattle operations in the watershed. He elaborated on one that “had a drainage ditch that ran right near it that dumped into the Big Sioux. That’s one we’d like to get into the program.”

Sen. Jim Bolin, R-Canton, asked Smith if the department is considering using penalties in addition to incentives.

“Currently, you’re in the persuasion mode,” Bolin said. “Do you anticipate going into a different type of situation, like in states like Minnesota, where there are requirements that are brought forward?”

“Our intent is to be in persuasion mode,” Smith replied. “We don’t have anything as far as requiring people to do buffers.”

This South Dakota Searchlight article is republished online under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0.

Photo: Big Sioux River floodwaters flow over farm fields, sending sediment downstream toward Lake Kampeska and beyond on April 13, 2023. (Brad Johnson/For South Dakota Searchlight).

Related posts

• South Dakota river otter population recovers
• Big Sioux River news digest: CREP program grant and water quality issues downstream

If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, 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.

Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email [email protected] as recipient.

I'm on Venmo for those who prefer to use this service: @Sally-Sorensen-6

Some South Dakota consumers continue to enjoy locally-grown, organically-raised heritage turkeys

A Thanksgiving treat from South Dakota News Watch. I'm thankful that there's a demand for small producers' birds.

Demand remains high for 'heritage turkeys' grown in South Dakota
By Bart Pfankuch and Mark Andersen

STURGIS, S.D. – During the COVID-19 pandemic, disruptions in the food production supply chain and workforce sometimes led to empty grocery shelves, pushing some consumers to turn to locally grown organic meats and produce.

That trend included heightened interest in so-called heritage turkeys, ancient breeds of the big birds that were common in the early days of the United States but which dropped from consumer consciousness as producers turned toward the plump, big-breasted turkeys that are grown en masse and will appear on millions of American dining tables this Thanksgiving.

While the pandemic spike has leveled off, a number of people in South Dakota remain highly interested in eschewing the cheaper, bigger white turkeys sold at chain grocery stores in favor of the smaller heritage birds grown and sold on a handful of Rushmore State organic farms.

"We saw a big surge during COVID, but there's still an interest and a growing interest in our turkeys," said Michelle Grosek, who runs Bear Butte Gardens organic farm near Sturgis with her husband, Rick. "Some people went back to old ways of eating, but a percentage has decided to stick with buying locally grown products."

The Groseks raise Bourbon Red heritage turkeys, which not only make great table fare but are outstanding at keeping down grasshopper populations on the farm located west of state Highway 79 just north of Sturgis.

Many visitors to the farm across the highway from Bear Butte State Park seek a closer connection to how their food is raised. And they're willing to pay more for a turkey that is locally grown in free-range conditions on farms without giant warehouses where birds are raised by the thousands and never leave until being trucked to processing plants.

"It's a good market for us and growing all the time as there is more awareness of how your standard turkey or chicken is grown in a CAFO (concentrated animal feeding operation)," Michelle Grosek told News Watch.

In the run-up to Thanksgiving 2023, Grosek said she is butchering 10 of her own Bourbon Red turkeys and another 10 from another area farm. They range in finished weight from 10 to 17 pounds and are priced at $8 a pound, she said.

Grosek said she and her husband saw a jump in interest in their Bourbon Reds following a 2020 version of this News Watch story highlighting the increased interest in heritage turkeys. She not only heard from consumers interested in buying birds to eat but from other small producers looking for breeding stock to expand their flocks of Bourbon Beds.

"It was like a nice new community developed around that article, and I did not foresee that," she said.

Ancient breeds nearly went extinct

Known collectively as “heritage turkeys,” many of the ancient breeds almost went extinct in the late 1990s. But those colorful, playful and spritely bird breeds are on the rebound as a small group of niche farmers in South Dakota and beyond are once again breeding, raising and selling heritage turkeys as part of a growing farm-to-table agricultural movement.

The story of how heritage turkey breeds almost disappeared, how a genetically modified bird that cannot reproduce on its own became the nation’s preferred table fare, and how a few farmers are fostering the re-emergence of the ancient breeds is a tale that sheds light on how modern agriculture has used science and selective breeding to increase production and profits. Yet it is also a story about how some farmers are taking on the task of preserving the ancient breeds to meet an increasing demand by some consumers to know more about what they eat and how it is raised.

Breeding stock of heritage turkeys such as Auburn, Buff, Black, Bourbon Red, Narragansett, Royal Palm, Slate, Standard Bronze and Midget White totaled just 1,335 in 1997, according to a census taken by The Livestock Conservancy of Pittsboro, North Carolina.

Conservancy program manager Jeannette Beranger said in fall 2020 that the alarming decrease in birds sparked efforts to preserve heritage breed turkeys, whose total had climbed to 14,000 by 2016, the year the last census was taken. Specific breeds like Black turkeys remain rare; Chocolate turkeys have vanished.

The concern now is whether a new generation of farmers dedicated to preserving heritage breeds will step forward to replace those now retiring.

“Some of the old timers, the big-scale producers, have bowed out. The red flag is going up once again for (heritage) turkeys like in the ‘90s,” Beranger said. “We need more people breeding these birds.”

Only a handful of South Dakota producers raise heritage breed turkeys to sell. They do it out of a desire for preservation, to tap into a growing base of highly selective consumers, a preference for sustainable agriculture or because the heritage breeds are known for higher fat content and greater juiciness than the mass-produced birds.

The vast majority of the more than 200 million turkeys that Americans consume annually descend from a single breed — the Broad-Breasted White, a far different creature from turkeys of old.

$300 million industry

Modern Broad Breasted White turkeys reach market weight in 14 to 18 weeks, compared with 28 weeks for other breeds. In heritage breeds, the extra weeks allow for more skeletal development and greater fat production, affecting juiciness and flavor.

Raised in large indoor pens, today’s commercial turkeys cannot defend themselves from predators, rear their young or reproduce without artificial insemination. They are too top-heavy to mate without assistance, with up to 70 percent of the bird’s weight concentrated in the oversized breast. They have weaker immune systems.

South Dakota is a significant producer of Broad Breasted Whites, with about 5 million turkeys raised annually almost exclusively in concentrated animal feeding operations runs by Hutterite colonies in East River. The Hutterite-owned Dakota Provisions turkey plant in Huron processes about 200 million pounds of turkeys a year and makes up a significant portion of the state’s $300 million annual poultry industry.

Promoters of heritage breeds worry that over-reliance on just one heavily modified breed creates vulnerability, said Beranger, who raises heritage breed chickens, which have characteristics similar to heritage turkeys. The problem extends beyond poultry to include other species.

Preserving old-time farm breeds as a safeguard against future diseases and other threats is the conservancy’s mission.

“The point of what we do is the conservation of rare genes that at some point could be very important for agriculture,” Beranger said. “We’ve found some interesting things going on when doing genetic studies.”

DNA variations governing the immune systems of heritage chickens, for example, do not appear in commercial birds, she said. Nobody knows what these variations do, but they cannot be manufactured and could be critical to sustaining .

“We don’t have a crystal ball,” Beranger said. “We don’t know what agriculture will need in the future.”

Among turkeys, different heritage breeds vary in characteristics, but they typically weigh about 10 percent more than wild turkeys. The Aztecs first domesticated turkeys about 2,000 years ago, initiating the selective breeding process. Most of today’s heritage breeds were developed by Europeans starting in the 16th century.

To be a true heritage breed, turkeys must mate naturally, grow slowly and have long lifespans. The benefits of heritage breeds, say promoters, are better flavor and nutrition. The high cost of production is the biggest challenge. Heritage breed turkeys typically cost consumers about $7 to $8 per pound, bringing the price of a 10-pound bird to $70 or more. Grocers, meanwhile, sometimes give away commercial turkeys or sell them at very cheap per-pound prices as a holiday grocery sales loss-leader.

Heritage breed promoters say a growing number of consumers will pay more for slower-growing, free-ranging birds.

“There are two definitions of cheap,” Beranger said. “You get what you pay for. If you want a turkey loaded with water that you find at the bottom of the pan after cooking, that’s fine.”

Organic farmers in Sturgis tap consumer demand

Raising heritage turkeys comes with a learning curve and increased per-bird costs compared to mass production. Farm expertise that was once common generations ago has given way to modern farm practices that don’t always translate to raising heritage turkeys.

Inside a pen at Bear Butte Gardens, a few Bourbon Red turkeys stretched their copper-colored necks to parry attacks from other young males in the unending battle for farmyard dominance.

The turkeys freely roamed about, displaying their feathers and providing comic relief on the farm, said Michelle Grosek.

“They’re so enamored with themselves,” she said.

The Groseks settled on Bourbon Reds partly because of an unscientific taste test but also because of the breed’s puppy-like personality. The birds follow humans around without being aggressive.

“They’re nice birds to be around,” Michelle Grosek said.

Raising heritage turkeys to sell publicly wasn’t the goal when she first ordered Bourbon Red poults — hatchlings — from a small Iowa breeder in 2012, but plans sometimes change on the growing Grosek farm.

Michelle Grosek started her working life in an office, switched to home medical transcribing when her two children were young, then finished a business degree before starting the nonprofit Sturgis Center for the Arts. At the arts center, booming sweet corn sales, which had begun as a community service, led her to recognize the untapped market for locally grown produce.

Bear Butte Gardens became her next passion project.

Organic certification, Michelle Grosek said, made it easier to sell the farm’s produce to local schools, so couple embarked on the strict accounting of imported manure that proves it is free of chemicals.

Rick Grosek realized they were exporting carbon in the form of hay only to reimport carbon that required documentation. Raising a breadth of farm animals could simplify carbon conversion, leading to the addition of lamb, beef, goats, chickens and a few Bourbon Reds, at first just for the couple’s Thanksgiving table.

The farm continues to evolve, now offering an organic farming apprenticeship. The education center and commercial kitchen will open soon. The Groseks have also added Narragansett turkeys, a hardy bird with a flighty personality.

Chemicals replace turkeys as insect killers

Heritage breeds work well with old-school farming, where producers must manage manure for fertilizer, rotate crops and raise a variety of crops to balance the ecology. Historically, turkeys once filled the role now played by pesticides by consuming massive quantities of insects.

For the Groseks, the first year raising turkeys at Bear Butte Gardens came with sticker shock. Each poult costs $10, and expedited shipping added $25. Poults, meanwhile, are extremely susceptible to drafts until feathered. Some died in transit and more died soon afterward.

Eventually, heritage breeds become hardy, and some breeds can easily withstand harsh South Dakota winters, but those first weeks and months are critical.

To save money in 2013, Michelle Grosek kept a tom and a hen, then filled a borrowed incubator in her kitchen with 40 eggs, turning them three times daily. They all hatched.

“It was our most successful year ever,” she said.

The poults remained in a rubber tote in the kitchen, where she could adjust the lamp if they huddled beneath it for warmth or fled to the rim in search of shade. Eventually, the birds moved outside into heavy protective pens, which are open along the bottom so they can be pushed onto fresh dirt every few days. The pens are covered at night. Eventually, they are left outside to roam.

The turkeys always sell out, Michelle Grosek said. “We don’t go into anything there isn’t a market for,” she said.

At 28 weeks, most of the turkeys hit about 12 to 13 pounds and can generate income. Typically, about 15 birds get held over for another year. Those held over never get above 16 pounds, and there’s no profit on these birds because of extra feed costs.

Despite steady sales, Bear Butte Gardens didn’t offer turkeys for sale in 2019. Her breeding stock of a year earlier was disappointing, Michelle Grosek said. More eggs didn’t hatch, and the poults didn’t thrive as well as in years past. She reached out for new breeding stock but discovered late that her previous Iowa supplier had none to offer.

It drove home a lesson about the importance of breeding stock and maintaining connections. Michelle Grosek maintains a large database of contacts. In Meade County, she knows who has honey to sell and whose cucumbers have failed.

“Now we’re coming back into it (turkeys), and we’ll see how the hatching goes,” she said. “If we’re not happy, we’ll take a break until we get a good strong stock.”

Aberdeen farmer preserves rare breeds

April Waldner thinks it would have been nice to see a dodo, the flightless bird that went extinct in 1681.

“Of course, that’s impossible,” said Waldner, owner of Royal Tom Turkeys of Mansfield, located south of Aberdeen.

Her musings led to research on other animals facing extinction, which led her to the Livestock Conservancy and its mission to preserve critically endangered or threatened breeds. She had raised ducks and chickens in the past, so she figured it couldn’t be that hard.

Her farm started as a traditional Angus and Hereford cow-calf operation, Walder said.

Further research led her to select the Royal Palm turkey breed, a largely white bird with bands of metallic black. Royal Palms can fly to escape predators, but they don’t fly away, she said.

“They like human company,” she said. “They’re never aggressive.”

Waldner’s turkey venture has required some trial and error.

She had to start again after a mink wriggled into the pen and killed all but one tom. She had designed her pen considering the threats of raccoons, skunks and larger predators.

“I didn’t think about a mink,” Waldner said. “I need the smallest little squares of wire everywhere.”

She started with heritage turkeys but has since expanded to include Heritage Shorthorn beef, Coon Coon pigs, Orpington ducks, Pilgrim geese and Meishan pigs, which she said “are so ugly they’re cute.”

Her plan is to raise two types of each species, such as two different types of ducks, with a count of 20 ducks total. Currently, her turkey poults stay in her kitchen until old enough to go outside.

Sales from her 120-head cattle operation stabilize her income, and she said people are willing to pay more for slow-growing breeds, although the market isn’t necessarily local to her region of South Dakota.

“If you want to sell and buy your animals, you have to travel,” Waldner said. She typically visits North Dakota and sites in the West River region of South Dakota.

As for why she bothers raising such labor-intensive turkeys and other animals, Waldner said it is part of her small role in creating a better world by protecting species that may be in danger.

“Kids won’t see as many species as we have now if we don’t keep them alive,” she said. “Once that breed is gone, they’re gone and gone forever.”

She hopes that more farmers will see the intrinsic value of raising heritage breeds.

“You have to ignore the negative people and keep going with mindset of ‘they’ll learn,’ or they won’t, and you’ll go on agreeing to disagree,” she said. “If humans don’t do something, nature is probably not going to help.”

This South Dakota News Watch story is republished online with the permission of SDNW.

Photo: A fully grown Bourbon Red heritage tom turkey stands in a pasture at Bear Butte Gardens, a small organic farm operation located not far from Bear Butte State Park just east of Sturgis, S.D. (Photo: Courtesy Rick Grosek).

Related posts

• MN Board of Animal Health: HPAI confirmed in commercial Meeker County turkey flock 
• In America's turkey industry, SD producers hit hardest by highly pathogenic avian influenza
• Board of Animal Health: Minnesota poultry sales and exhibitions temporarily banned for 31 days
• Board of Animal Health: Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza confirmed in two Minnesota flocks 
• SD Game, Fish & Parks: Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza (HPAI) detected in South Dakota 
• Associated Press: Bird flu detected among commercial flock in southeastern South Dakota
• Minnesota Reformer: Menacing bird flu detected in western Iowa backyard chicken and duck flock
• Shocking photos in state vet's report to Midwest lawmakers reveal bird flu toll to farmers & flocks 

If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, 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. 

Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email [email protected] as recipient.

I'm on Venmo for those who prefer to use this service: @Sally-Sorensen-6

Land Stewardship Project applauds court’s support of Winona County; launches ‘Story Center Powerline’ initiative for rural residents

Minnesota District Court rules in favor of Winona County's right to regulate factory farm size. It's a good day for people and the land. #localdemocracy https://t.co/FsMdPxk9XB

— Land Stewardship Project (@LSPnow) November 22, 2023

I had just posted the Minnesota Reformer article Minnesota district court rules against Winona County dairy expansion; owner will appeal when I saw the post on X above,

Here's the announcement from Lanf Stewardship Project:

LSP Applauds Court’s Support of Winona County Decision on Factory Farm

LSP Launches ‘Story Center Powerline’ Initiative for Rural Residents Fighting Big Ag

LEWISTON, Minn. — Land Stewardship Project (LSP) members applauded today’s decision by the Minnesota District Court to deny Daley Farm’s latest attempt to circumvent Winona County’s rules related to the size of large livestock operations. (The Court’s decision is available here.) For the past four years, Daley Farm has sought a variance from the county’s 1,500-animal-unit cap in order to expand its Lewiston dairy operation to nearly 6,000 animal units (roughly 4,500 cows). The Winona County Board of Adjustment (BOA) has twice denied the variance, and, despite strong opposition from Winona County residents, Daley officials have repeatedly turned to legal and other tactics to bypass these local government decisions.

“This is bullying, just like it is for kids in school,” said LSP member Richard Ahrens, a retired beef and crop farmer from Lewiston. “Daley knows there is an animal cap and that there are rules, and that in our county we follow the rules. The rules were made to protect the people and the land. That’s the bottom line.”

Daley Farm’s proposal would concentrate the manure of approximately 4,500 dairy cows in a region where drinking water is already plagued by such high nitrate levels that the Environmental Protection Agency recently requested that state agencies take action to protect the health of residents. Because Winona County has had an animal unit cap in place for over 20 years, Daley Farm was required to request a variance (a permit allowing the operation to go above the limit) from the Board of Adjustment (BOA) in order to quadruple the size of its operation.

“Each community is unique,” said Kelley Stanage, an LSP member from Winona and former public official who was sued by Daley Farms last year, along with other public officials. “Minnesota law allows communities to decide for themselves how their land should be used. Because of its vulnerability to pollution due to karst geology, Winona County long ago placed a cap on the number of animal units farms can have in one operation. Exceptions cannot and should not be made to this cap simply because an operation wants to bring in more money.”

“Animal unit caps are commonsense avenues for protecting water resources while shielding local communities from the kind of unprecedented consolidation that is putting small and mid-sized farmers out of business and decimating Main Street economies,” said Sean Carroll, LSP’s Policy Director. “The Daley proposal, if it had gone through, would have made this concentrated animal feeding operation larger than 99% of all livestock operations in the state, according to the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency’s Feedlots in Minnesota database.”

“We need a farm economy that does not incentivize the endless expansion of our farms,” said Ridgeway, Minn., dairy farmer Mike Gilles. “The natural end result of this current system will lead to a Winona County with few farms, fewer farmers and fragile rural communities. We need a farm economy that works for Winona County, not for expansion.”

Daley, backed by supporters of industrialized livestock farming on the state level, has repeatedly attempted to circumvent local county government rulings through various means, including suing Winona County over its BOA decision. It also filed a separate lawsuit against individual citizens and LSP in an attempt to silence people who have spoken out against the proposal. That latter lawsuit, which is similar to SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation) strategies utilized by factory farm supporters in other parts of the Midwest, was dropped by Daley earlier this year.

Carroll said Daley’s multiple lawsuits are a waste of local public resources that could be better spent supporting a resilient farm economy.

“We have incredible opportunities to support numerous farmers who are building healthy soil and producing food in a way that supports and builds local wealth,” he said. “Allowing one special interest to utilize the legal system to gobble up public resources in an effort to advance their own growth isn’t good for the community, the economy or the land.”

During the past few years, LSP and its allies have learned of several communities in the Midwest that are facing similar intimidation tactics as factory farm proposers and their backers attempt to circumvent local democracy and the will of the people. As a result, LSP is launching a special initiative to collect the stories of rural residents who question the “get big or get out” narrative and the power and bullying tactics wielded by Big Ag. For the next 12 months, the “LSP Story Center Powerline” initiative is seeking reports and stories from rural residents across the Midwest who are being confronted with such intimidation and are fighting back, or seeking ways of fighting back.

“Through local organizing and by listening to people, LSP has learned that when we are given a chance to speak out about the kind of future we’d like to see on the landscape, it results in action to create healthy, resilient communities,” said Carroll. “Silence only benefits the ones who already have a powerful voice.”

Stories can be recorded at the LSP Story Center Powerline page: https://landstewardshipproject.org/powerline/.

Related posts

• Minnesota district court rules against Winona County dairy expansion; owner will appeal
• Agweek Special Report on Rural Health: 10% of MN private wells pose a health problem 
• Following emergency petition regarding nitrate contamination in SEMN karst region, EPA sees further action needed to protect public health
• On ‘Cancer Road,’ a group of southeastern MN families ask if nitrate exposure is to blame 
• Strib scrutinizes MN Department of Ag action on nitrate-related Groundwater Protection Rule
• Nitrates in Southwestern Minnesota water: 'Do not give the water to infants' in Ellsworth
• Commentary from MinnPost: Can the state control nitrates in Minnesota waters?
• Minnesota Department of Health isn’t properly enforcing drinking water law, and kids will suffer
• Jean Wagenius: For climate and clean water, state agencies need Walz to lead

If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, 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.

Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email [email protected] as recipient.

I'm on Venmo for those who prefer to use this service: @Sally-Sorensen-6

 

Minnesota district court rules against Winona County dairy expansion; owner will appeal

More coverage related to water quality in southeastern Minnesota, from the Minnesota Reformer.

Court rules against Winona county dairy expansion; owner will appeal
By Madison McVan

A Minnesota district court ruled against the proposed expansion of a Lewiston dairy Tuesday in the latest chapter of a years-long legal battle between the dairy’s owners, Winona County officials and local environmental groups.

The owners of Daley Farm, a dairy with about 1,700 cows in southeast Minnesota, first applied for an expansion in 2017. The owners are seeking a modification to the farm’s environmental permit that would raise the capacity to more than 4,600 cows.

The farm is located in an environmentally sensitive area of the state, where toxic nitrates from fertilizer and manure easily reach drinking water sources. This month, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency told three Minnesota state agencies that regulators must take further action to combat nitrate pollution in the area. 

The proposed expansion led to a winding legal battle involving the dairy owners, environmental groups, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency and the Winona County Board of Adjustment.

Tuesday’s ruling was a blow to the Daley family, said Ben Daley, one of the dairy’s owners. 

“We’re obviously disappointed, but we’re going to appeal,” Daley said. 

Winona County caps animal feedlots, including dairies, at 1,500 animal units. (Animal units are a legal unit of measurement used to define feedlot sizes across various species; a cow weighing more than 1,000 lbs is 1.4 animal units, while a large hog is .4 animal units.)

Daley Farm had a capacity of 2,275 animal units before the Winona County Zoning Ordinance introduced the 1,500-animal unit cap, so the Daley Farm was grandfathered in, allowed to keep its large herd. 

As part of the proposed expansion, Daley Farm’s owners had to apply for a variance from the county’s 1,500-animal unit cap. In 2019, the Winona County Board of Adjustment denied the variance application by a vote of 3-2. 

The dairy owners argued that the Board of Adjustments was biased against the dairy and appealed the ruling, kicking off a series of appeals, court orders and lawsuits. 

In November 2022, Daley Farm sued Winona County Board members and Land Stewardship Project members, alleging that county officials’ prior involvement with the environmental group denied the farm due process. The Daley family withdrew that case in March. 

Tuesday’s judgment was part of a separate lawsuit challenging the variance denial.

This Minnesota Reformer article is republished online under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0.

Photo:  A Wisconsin dairy operation. Getty Images.

Related posts

• Agweek Special Report on Rural Health: 10% of MN private wells pose a health problem 
• Following emergency petition regarding nitrate contamination in SEMN karst region, EPA sees further action needed to protect public health
• On ‘Cancer Road,’ a group of southeastern MN families ask if nitrate exposure is to blame 
• Strib scrutinizes MN Department of Ag action on nitrate-related Groundwater Protection Rule
• Nitrates in Southwestern Minnesota water: 'Do not give the water to infants' in Ellsworth
• Commentary from MinnPost: Can the state control nitrates in Minnesota waters?
• Minnesota Department of Health isn’t properly enforcing drinking water law, and kids will suffer
• Jean Wagenius: For climate and clean water, state agencies need Walz to lead

If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, 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.

Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email [email protected] as recipient.

I'm on Venmo for those who prefer to use this service: @Sally-Sorensen-6

Final arguments for Summit ethanol carbon pipeline Iowa permit are due in January

Another update on the Summit Carbon Solutions ethanol carbon saga, from the Iowa Capital Dispatch.

Final arguments for Summit pipeline permit are due in January
By Jared Strong

Hundreds of pages of written briefs that argue for and against a hazardous liquid pipeline permit for Summit Carbon Solutions in Iowa are due before the end of the year, with written replies to those arguments due Jan. 19, the Iowa Utilities Board recently ordered.

The three-member board will thereafter decide whether to issue or deny a permit to Summit to allow construction of its carbon dioxide pipeline system and whether the company can use eminent domain to obtain land easements for about a quarter of its route.

State law does not set a deadline for that decision, and the board has not estimated when its decision might come.

Summit proposes a five-state pipeline system spanning more than 680 miles to transport captured carbon dioxide from ethanol plants to North Dakota for underground sequestration.

The board’s evidentiary hearing for Summit’s proposal in Iowa ended Nov. 8. After the hearing’s conclusion, the board said it would allow a briefing schedule that is longer than normal “due to the voluminous record and the upcoming holiday season,” and would accept atypically long initial briefs of up to 150 pages, with some exceptions for even longer filings. It noted that the case file has tens of thousands of pages of testimony and exhibits.

Pipeline opponents sought to circumvent the laborious briefing process after the hearing concluded with a motion for the board to deny Summit’s permit application.

“From our point of view, Summit clearly has failed to show that this project is in the public convenience and necessity,” said Brian Jorde, an attorney for numerous landowners in several states, in reference to a state requirement for the permit to be issued. “Matter of fact, not a single witness of the public has showed up and said it is convenient. And maybe a handful of — maybe the ethanol plant gentleman or so from Iowa said it maybe was necessary, but no one else has. And they haven’t proven it.”

Bret Dublinske, an attorney for Summit, said Jorde and others can make those arguments in their written briefs and that seeking an abrupt decision from the board after the hearing is “factually and legally incorrect and premature,” according to a hearing transcript.

“This case has significant evidence about the benefits to the ethanol industry, to the corn economy, to the farm economy more broadly and how that supports land values and tax revenues and just generally the fabric of not only Iowa’s economy but Iowa as a while,” Dublinske said.

The board denied Jorde’s motion.

More than half of Iowa’s corn is used to produce ethanol, and Summit has argued that supporting the ethanol industry also supports higher corn prices.

The company has agreements with ethanol plants to share profits from federal tax credits that reward capturing carbon dioxide and producing low-carbon fuels, along with increased profits from selling those fuels in new markets. The specific details of the agreements have not been made public.

Pipeline opponents have argued that those profits will mostly benefit wealthy Summit investors. They further oppose the use of eminent domain to force construction of the pipeline system against landowners’ wishes and worry about damage to farmland and safety threats from potential pipeline breaches.

Summit’s permit application in North Dakota is under reconsideration and has no definitive timeline for completion. The state’s capital city of Bismarck recently sought to intervene in the process because of the pipeline’s proximity, according to documents filed with the state’s Public Service Commission.

Bismarck’s petition said it does not support or oppose the company’s proposal, but that it will be affected by it. Specifically, the city said the pipeline route might affect its future growth and the safety of its residents. The city’s fire department might also lead an emergency response to a pipeline rupture.

South Dakota rejected Summit’s initial route proposal for that state, and the company has said it plans to reapply with a modified route. The company has not indicated when that might happen.

Summit has delayed the projected operational date of its pipeline system by more than a year to 2026.

Strong also reported on Monday that a third ethanol carbon pipeline contender, Wolf asked to withdraw Illinois pipeline request and refile.

This Iowa Capital Dispatch article is republished online under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0.

Photo: Bret Dublinske, an attorney for Summit Carbon Solutions, said the company's pipeline project will benefit all Iowans. Opponents argue it will primarily benefit the company's investors. (Photo by Jared Strong/Iowa Capital Dispatch)

Related posts

• Critics allege CO2 pipelines ‘farm the government’ for climate $$ while helping oil industry; bills fuel debate over ethanol’s environmental impact, with climate implications
• Ethanol carbon pipeline update: Summit permit decision in Iowa not expected until next year
• If first you don't succeed: Summit's new route in North Dakota adds thirteen miles of pipeline
• Defying the odds: Meet the attorney for 1,000 clients who beat two pipeline companies
• Summit Carbon stands to benefit from Navigator's canceled pipeline, but IA opponents sue to block Summit Carbon water permit
•  Cancel culture: Navigator withdraws ethanol carbon pipeline permit application in Iowa 
• Navigator CO2 cancels multistate pipeline project
• Summit Carbon Solutions says ethanol carbon pipeline system won’t be operational until 2026
• Some Iowa landowners were confused by Summit Carbon Solution eminent domain process
• Navigator CO2 pulls its ethanol carbon pipeline permit application in Illinois
• Ethanol carbon pipeline news digest: Gevo aviation fuel needs Summit Carbon Solutions and more!
• Iowa Capital Dispatch: Summit pipeline hearing will resume on Tuesday; Navigator asks Iowa regulators to pause its pipeline permit request
• Iowa Capital Dispatch: Local officials in Iowa have potential to block carbon capture projects
• IA Capital Dispatch: Summit permit process in North Dakota has reached ‘uncharted waters
• North Dakota Public Service Commission votes 2-1 to reopen Summit Carbon pipeline case
• Navigator CO2 has not ‘taken any state off the map’ after SD pipeline permit rejection 
• Ethanol carbon pipeline digest: reaction to denial; water use in IA; rich guy resists subpoena
• Iowa utility regulators want to finish Summit pipeline permit hearing by month’s end
• State denies Summit permit; both ethanol carbon pipelines proposed in South Dakota now rejected
• Summit Carbon Solutions forges ahead despite SD PUC staff's motion to deny pipeline permit 
• SD PUC staff motion: non-mysterious portents in the air about potential denial of Summit Carbon Solution's pipeline permit application
• South Dakota Navigator pipeline decision might jeopardize Summit Carbon Solutions proposal
• Breaking: South Dakota Public Utilities Commission unanimously denies Navigator ethanol CO2 pipeline project permit

If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, 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. 

Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email [email protected] as recipient.

I'm on Venmo for those who prefer to use this service: @Sally-Sorensen-6

Buy this sweater to pay Rochester January 6 insurrectionist's debt to Architect of the Capitol

Bluestem last left Rochester resident, Lynd MN Havens Garden assistant, and January 6 insurrectionist Victoria White in August's post, Lynd's Havens Garden assistant Victoria White pleads guilty to felony count in Jan. 6 case.

Now she's been sentenced. At the Star Tribune Rochelle Olson reports in Rochester woman receives 10 days in prison, three months' home detention for Jan. 6 role:

A Rochester woman who pleaded guilty to one felony count of interfering with law enforcement on Jan. 6 was sentenced Monday to 10 days in prison, according to the U.S. Attorney's Office in Washington.

U.S. District Court Judge John D. Bates also sentenced Victoria C. White, 41, a receptionist, to three months of home confinement and two years of supervised release.

Prosecutors sought a four-month prison sentence for White followed by three years of supervised release, according to court documents. The defense asked for no prison time and three months of home detention.

On Jan. 6, 2021, White wore a red baseball cap with the slogan "Make America Great Again" in white letters as she, one of her daughters and friends boarded a Washington, D.C., metro train to attend former President Donald Trump's "Save America" rally on the Ellipse, a park just south of the White House. Trump falsely claimed he had won the presidential election in November and was trying to keep now-President Joe Biden from taking office.

At 3:30 p.m., White joined the mob on the west side of the Capitol building, pushing toward the tunnel where dozens of law enforcement were beaten and assaulted as they protected the entrance, the prosecution's sentencing memo read.

She looked on as rioters pushed against police and hoisted another rioter over the crowd as he used his feet to kick at police, the memo read. White pushed forcefully through a group of people, losing her jacket, hat, the flag tied around her shoulder and her shoes in the process, prosecutors wrote.

The prosecution memo also noted her "significant criminal history," including convictions for assault and disorderly conduct and drunken driving in 2008 and 2013.

She has a more recent disorderly conduct charge pending from December 2022. White also violated the conditions of her release by planning to travel to Washington, D.C., to meet with families of other Jan. 6 defendants and members of Congress. Prosecutors said she was ordered to stay out of D.C. unless she received specific permission to visit.

In their sentencing memo, defense attorneys said White took responsibility by pleading guilty in August. They said the charges against her were unusually tough compared with other defendants given that she didn't enter the Capitol building until caught by law enforcement nor did she destroy property, her attorneys wrote. . . .

There's more at the Strib, including the explication of this:

In seeking leniency, defense attorneys Zach Crowder and Brad Hansen detailed White's difficult childhood and life in their memo.

Read the woeful tale at the Strib.

Meanwhile, Lyon County's fellow January 6 traveler, Larvita McFarquhar is selling patriot sweaters via her establishment's Facebook page in order to help White pay the $2000 she needs to hand over to the Architect of the Capitol to pay for damages.

Because nothing says Peace, Faith and Love like interfering with law enforcement.

Images: Screenshot The sweater from Etsy that could help pay White's fine to the Architect of the Capitol.  Photo Charging documents against Victoria White included screenshots of videos showing her in front of the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6. U.S, District Court Documents via Star Tribune.

Related posts

• Lynd's Havens Garden assistant Victoria White pleads guilty to felony count in Jan. 6 case
• Small town MN freedom fighting restaurateur's anti-vaxx pals make us pause about her savvy
• Minnesota Court of Appeals affirms ruling against Havens Garden's anti-sovereignty motion
• Controversial Alexandria pastor Darryl Knappen visits Larvita Mcfarquhar's Havens Garden 
• McFarquhar: freedom fighter or attention addict?

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.

Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email [email protected] as recipient.

I'm on Venmo for those who prefer to use this service: @Sally-Sorensen-6

South Dakota river otter population recovers

One of the conservation success stories in these parts is the recovery of river otter populations, from Lac Qui Parle lake and the upper Minnesota River valley and here in Sioux Dakota's Big Sioux River watershed. It's something to be grateful for.

My romantic partner and I have seen them here in Roberts County. South Dakota Searchlight reports on the results of the 2023 trapping season; the otters were removed from the state’s threatened species list in 2020. While Mike's family on his father's side was once involved in the fur trade, he can't see himself trapping otters now. 

Only 20 otters can be harvested each year.

From threatened to managed population: Fourth river otter trapping season concludes
By Joshua Haiar

The state’s fourth river otter trapping season ended last weekend when the legal limit of 20 was reached. That season was unimaginable only a few decades ago when river otters were all but non-existent in South Dakota. 

The Game, Fish and Parks Department said Saturday that trappers holding a furbearer license had to report their otter catches to the department within 24 hours. The time window following the season’s end allows for the reporting of any last-minute catches, called  “incidental takes,” which must be handed over to the department.

The history of river otters in South Dakota is a story of decline and restoration. 

Before American settlement, river otters were widespread across the Great Plains, including South Dakota. However, by the late 20th century, their numbers had dwindled due to overharvesting, habitat loss and pollution. 

Trapping them became illegal in 1978 when the species was classified as “threatened” by GF&P.  

The Flandreau Santee Sioux Tribe reintroduced about 35 river otters into the Big Sioux River in the late 1990s. That, and better management of wetland and river habitats, played crucial roles in their recovery. 

The otters were removed from the state’s threatened species list in 2020, signifying a stabilized population. The delisting allowed for river otter trapping seasons to begin that same year.

The GF&P says the trapping season helps to prevent overpopulation and maintain ecological balance. The season also enables more detailed monitoring and research. Data gathered from harvested animals, including age, health and distribution help refine conservation strategies, according to the GF&P.

South Dakota State University researchers are conducting a study on the river otter population. The team has deployed trail cameras across eastern South Dakota’s riverbeds and wetlands and is using artificial intelligence to help process the large volume of images. 

This South Dakota Searchlight article is republished under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. 

Photo: Trail camera footage shows river otters swimming in the Big Sioux River watershed. (Courtesy: South Dakota State University).

If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, 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.

Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email [email protected] as recipient.

I'm on Venmo for those who prefer to use this service: @Sally-Sorensen-6

South Dakota tops nation in drunken driving-related fatalities over Thanksgiving weekend

All those admonitions from Mr. Erickson, my high school driver education teacher, to watch out for the other guy have come in handy here in South Dakota, where a certain percentage of motorists don't turn on their lights in fog or at night, don't use turn signals, and enjoy using their devices for video calls and YouTubes while driving.

Plus there are those who tell our local tow truck service that they can't understand why they ended up rolling in the ditch during a snowstorm since they were going the posted speed limit. One passed me on Highway 12 last winter and I saw the consequences.

But there's more, a new article from South Dakota News Watch reports. 

South Dakota tops nation in drunken driving-related fatalities over Thanksgiving weekend
By Jacob Boyko

The Jerry AllCar App has some sobering news for South Dakota drivers this Thanksgiving. The state ranks No. 1 for the percentage of fatal car accidents involving drunken drivers during the holiday.

Over recent Thanksgiving weekends, which begin 6 p.m. Wednesday and lasts until 6 a.m. Monday, the state saw an average of 0.79 drunken driving fatalities per 100,000 people.

That means 57% of the total fatal crashes involved drunken drivers.

The vehicle fatality report shows South Dakota far ahead of runners-up North Dakota and South Carolina at 0.55 and 10th-place Nebraska at 0.35 per 100,000 people between 2012 and 2021.

DSU prof knows consequences firsthand

The report is a blow to Chris Olson, an associate professor of computer science at Dakota State University in Madison. He's been warning people about the consequences of drunken driving since Good Friday 2001 when he found himself paralyzed on the side of a road near Madison after he and his fiancee got into a vehicle with an impaired driver.

"We were smart enough to know all of us shouldn't drive vehicles, so we all got into one vehicle," Olson recounted about the night. "It's a 13-and-a-half mile drive, we made it 12-and-a-half before entering the ditch and we hit an approach."

Olson, who was 23, wasn't wearing a seat belt. He was thrown from the backseat of the vehicle and broke his neck. His fiancee, 21-year-old Tana Thompson, was ejected from the passenger seat and killed.

"She was a DSU student going to school for teaching, and she loved kids and loved teaching," Olson said. "We had hoped to spend our lives together, have a family, help on the farm and have the American dream."

Though his crash was Easter weekend, the premise is the same, Olson said. People, especially young people, are coming home to hang out during the holiday weekend. And nobody thinks they will be the ones to get into an accident.

Arrests typically happen after driving impaired 80 times

In fact, the average drunken driver will have driven impaired about 80 times before his or her first arrest, said Rachel Martens, manager of victim services for the South Dakota chapter of Mothers Against Drunk Driving.

"The choice of an individual to take an impairing substance and then drive has long-lasting effects on every sphere of their life," she said. "Drunk and drugged driving is not an accident. It is a choice that can lead to a car crash, and that choice changes individuals' and families' lives forever."

A 2022 Forbes survey found 52% of South Dakota drivers have seen someone they know drive drunk after a holiday party, which is the highest in the country.

Crash changed Olson's life

Olson went on to graduate from DSU with bachelor's and master's degrees in information systems, earned his doctorate from Northcentral University and got married in 2016.

But the impact from choices made that night remains.

He's paralyzed from the shoulders down. He has some movement in his arms but none in his hands, so he types with plastic sticks or uses voice recognition software. He faces increasing health challenges related to the accident and can't walk, get out of bed on his own, feed himself, dress himself or do many of things he could before that night.

Drunken driving in South Dakota

Despite the troubling Thanksgiving statistics, South Dakota is making headway, said South Dakota Highway Patrol Capt. Robert Whisler.

"Our percentage of alcohol-related fatalities is at a five-year low," he said. "To this day, it's a 35% decrease from last year at this time."

Whisler said Highway Patrol and other law enforcement personnel will be out running sobriety checkpoints, which he hopes will be a deterrence for anyone considering taking the risk.

"South Dakota motorists are aware that we conduct sobriety checkpoints," he said. "And with that information, we hope the public makes a better decision before they decide to get behind the wheel."

South Dakota defines drunken driving as anyone operating a vehicle with a blood alcohol content greater than 0.08%, or while under the influence of alcohol, drugs or prescribed medication that renders them incapable of safely operating a vehicle.

Drivers operating commercial vehicles are held to stricter 0.04% limit, and anyone under 21 years old is held to a 0.02% limit.

According to Responsibility.org, South Dakota reported 5,522 drunken driving arrests in 2019, with 60 of those arrested being minors.

A first-time conviction for driving under the influence in South Dakota carries a maximum penalty of up to a year in jail, a $2,000 fine and a license suspension of at least 30 days.

Call your mom, even if it wakes her up

Despite the overall improvements, Olson said it's disheartening to learn that even after 20 years of trying to educate those around him, drunken driving is still so prevalent in South Dakota.

"I always said what I should have done is called my mother," Olson said. "It would have woke her up. But calling somebody else for a ride would be much, much better than having all of the consequences ... with somebody losing their life and then me being a quadriplegic for 22 years."

This South Dakota News Watch article is republished online with the permission of SDNW.

Photo: Authorities said the driver of this car was charged with driving under the influence after rolling it on a Lincoln County road in 2016. A 2022 Forbes survey found 52% of South Dakota drivers have seen someone they know drive drunk after a holiday party. (Photo: Lincoln County Sheriff's Office/ via South Dakota News Watch).

If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, 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.

Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email [email protected] as recipient.

I'm on Venmo for those who prefer to use this service: @Sally-Sorensen-6

Inside Minnesota’s massive, powerful sugar beet industry

As someone who lived in the Minnesota River Valley's own sugar beet area, I was struck by the fine reporting in this Minnesota Reformer article.

For a sweet pile of additional photos from Sugarland, click on the article title directly below.

Sugarland: Inside Minnesota’s massive, powerful sugar industry
By Madison McVan

This story was made possible by a grant from Center for Rural Strategies and Grist.

EAST GRAND FORKS — The sugar beets are scattered like gray, misshapen rocks on the shoulders of the roads leading to East Grand Forks. That’s the first sign that the October harvest is underway. 

Then there’s the smell — earthy, vegetal, sweet — drifting from the smokestacks at the American Crystal Sugar factory at the edge of town, where the beets are turned into crystallized sugar: the small packets served with diner coffee, four-pound bags for home bakers and entire rail cars destined for other factories, where it will be incorporated into the sweetened, processed foods that fill Americans’ grocery carts.

Inside the factory walls and at other storage sites around the Red River Valley, hundreds of seasonal workers weigh, tag, sample and pour the beets 24 hours per day for weeks, creating piles nearly three stories high and up to a quarter-mile long.

Light rain drifted onto workers’ hard hats under the bright lights of the American Crystal Sugar piling site in Alvarado, 19 miles north of the East Grand Forks factory. 

In the scale house, a one-room building at the site’s entrance, foreman José Contreras pulled a white rain suit over his work clothes. When he walked out of prison into the fall air two weeks prior, after finishing a six-year sentence, he knew exactly where to go to find good, hard work. 

“I got out on a Monday and was working on a Wednesday,” he said. “To me, it means a lot — the chance that they gave me to come back to society, get a job… some people don’t have that.”

Despite the rain and mud, he was grateful to be outside, among people he’d known for years, earning a paycheck he could give to his fiancée in return for supporting him during his incarceration.

He worked his first sugar beet harvest when he was freshly 18, joining his parents and grandparents in the long line of farmworkers who came before him. 

The money Contreras takes home is more than he’s earned in a long time, made possible by the huge sums the industry pulls in thanks to America’s insatiable demand for sweets.

The average American consumes three times the recommended daily limit of added sugars. Research shows that high sugar intake is correlated with increased risk factors for cardiovascular disease and diabetes, two of the leading causes of death in the U.S.

Sugar beets are an $11 billion industry supported by a protectionist federal program that raises the price of American sugar well above world levels by strictly limiting imports. The policy enriches the few thousand farmers who grow the crop, while also pushing food processors to use alternative sweeteners like high-fructose corn syrup or move operations to countries with cheaper sugar.

Moorhead-based American Crystal Sugar is the largest beet sugar producer in the U.S. Its 2,800 member farmers produce about 20% of the country’s sugar: more than 2 million tons per year.

The Red River Valley, which runs the length of the border between Minnesota and North Dakota, produces more sugar beets than any other region in the country. Around 44% of all U.S. sugar beets are grown here. Another 13% come from southern Minnesota; the rest come from Michigan and western states like Idaho and Wyoming.

‘We own the entire industry’

Outside of Ada, Minnesota, a long metal arm stretched out from a slow-moving harvester and poured beets into the back of a cargo truck as the vehicles drove side-by-side through the field. 

In the cab of the truck, farmer Neil Rockstad watched the harvester operator intently through the cracked window, pulling forward or drifting back based on the operator’s hand signals to evenly spread the beets in the truck bed.

Sugar beets are related to garden beets, though without much use as a raw vegetable. Instead, a sugar beet packs as much sugar into its cells as possible, up to 18% of its total weight. Because sugar beets are hardy and destined for processing, they don’t need to be hand-picked like leafy greens and berries; instead, much of the heavy lifting is done with machinery.

Rockstad usually operates the harvester himself, but he was short a truck driver. That afternoon, he took the vacant truck and handed over the harvester keys to his second-in-command, Kyle Kragnes, who also comes from a long line of sugar beet farmers.

On his farm, eight trucks — a combination of semis and smaller cargo vehicles — drive between the harvester and the closest piling site, an endless cycle of filling and emptying the truck beds. A button in the cab controls a hydraulic jack on one end of the truck bed, lifting it high to spill the beets out of the back and into the piler’s hopper. 

The piler separated the dirt from the beets and returned the dirt to Rockstad’s truck. As he reentered the field, he stopped, tilting the truck bed to return the dirt to the field, leaving behind a pile like a molehill.

For 12 hours — 2 p.m. to 2 a.m., in Rockstad’s case — he makes dozens of trips between the harvester and the piling site. He and other farmers have the option of running many trucks for these 12-hour shifts, or running half as many trucks 24 hours per day, in order to stagger deliveries to the piles without forming long lines. 

Rockstad doesn’t like to talk about how many acres he’s harvesting.

“That would be like telling you my salary,” he said.

Sugar beet farmers take home on average 54% more per acre than non-sugar farmers, and net income on farms that grow sugar beets is 7.2 times higher than the average non-sugar farm, according to the a recent U.S. Government Accountability Office report.

Two factors bolster this prosperity: The first is shrewd organization.

There’s not a corporate middleman taking a slice out of sugar beet profits.

In the livestock industry, by contrast, large corporations control the majority of the market. Companies like Tyson, JBS, Cargill and Hormel have been accused of using their market share to lowball farmers on livestock and upcharge consumers to maximize profits. 

American Crystal Sugar and other producer-owned cooperatives — like Southern Minnesota Beet Sugar Cooperative in Renville and Minn-Dak Farmers Cooperative in Wahpeton, N.D. — use the income from the sugar to pay employees, maintain and upgrade their facilities and cover other operating costs. 

Once all of the production expenses are paid, the rest is divided up among the farmers according to their contribution to the harvest.

“As cooperative members, we own the entire industry,” Rockstad said. “As an individual farmer, I own and operate the land that I raise the beets on. As a cooperative shareholder, I own a portion of the piling site… I own a portion of the factory, I own a portion of the entire business and I own the sugar from the time I plant the seed in the ground until somebody purchases it off of store shelves.”

Sugar beet farmers’ history of public policy victories is the other factor turbocharging sugar profits.

The co-ops’ success is reliant on a federal sugar program that props up domestic sugar prices by limiting the supply of sugar each year.

Sugar producers boast that the program does not use traditional farm subsidies.

“U.S. sugar policy has operated at zero cost to taxpayers 19 of the past 20 years and is expected to do so again this year,” Rockstad told members of the U.S. Senate Agriculture Committee during testimony earlier this year. (The one exception, he explained, came in 2015 when Mexico exported subsidized sugar to the U.S. in violation of trade agreements.)

For the two biggest cash crops in the U.S., corn and soybeans, the federal government guarantees a minimum price for each bushel and pays farmers if the market price drops too low. Farmers also purchase crop insurance to ensure they recoup their input costs if weather conditions prevent them from harvesting.

The subsidies — along with advances in genetic modification and farm technology — lead to massive production and cheap corn and soy products like high-fructose corn syrup, soybean oil and livestock feed.

Sugar is different — controlled by supply-side limits that raise sugar prices without direct subsidies. 

Even though Rockstad’s Senate testimony was technically accurate, consumers pay the price. The U.S. Government Accountability Office found that the U.S. sugar program results in an “estimated overall economic loss to the U.S. economy of $780 million to $1.6 billion per year.”

“Higher sugar prices created by the program cost consumers more than producers benefit,” the report states.

Unlike publicly traded companies, American Crystal Sugar doesn’t have to file shareholder reports with the Securities and Exchange Commission or disclose its revenue and expense information like nonprofits. 

That makes it hard to get a clear financial picture of the industry.

The U.S. sugar program raised farm income by about $100,000 to $190,000 per farm in 2022, with the benefits varying based on the size of the farm, the Government Accountability Office calculated.

The sugar market, like those of other agricultural commodities, is anything but free, resembling instead the kind of planned economy that Republicans often rail against.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture projects the total sugar consumption in the U.S., then allocates sugar production accordingly. Fifteen percent of the total is reserved for trade partners; the highest amounts come from the Dominican Republic, the Philippines, Brazil and Australia.

The remainder is split between the two sugar-producing crops: sugar beets and sugar cane. Sugar beets get 54% and sugar cane, 46%. Then, the USDA provides a “marketing allotment” — in other words, a quota — to all of the major sugar producers based on their processing capacity and geographic footprint.

This year, American Crystal Sugar got 2,132,371 tons. Minn-Dak Farmers Cooperative got 402,650 and Southern Minnesota Beet Sugar got 782,517.

But those aren’t strict limits on production, said Harrison Weber, president of the Red River Valley Sugarbeet Growers Association, a group that lobbies on behalf of sugar beet producers. 

“The federal government says how much we can sell but they don’t limit how much we can produce,” Weber said. 

Instead, the processing capacity of the sugar beet factories is the limiting factor for production, Weber said.

These public policy victories cost money. 

The company regularly donates to politicians and political action committees across the ideological spectrum. Since 2008, the company has spent $22.4 million on campaign contributions, split about 60/40 between Democrats and Republicans.

In the 2022 election cycle alone, American Crystal Sugar sent $3.3 million to politicians across the ideological spectrum.

The largest single contribution in the most recent cycle — $250,000 — went to a group backing North Dakota U.S. Sen. John Hoeven, who now sits on the Senate Agriculture Committee. 

The vast majority of other contributions in the 2022 cycle were between $2,500 and $10,000 to eight senators and 156 members of the U.S. House; recipients included Minnesota U.S. Reps. Michelle Fishbach and Brad Finstad, both Republicans.

With a new farm bill on the way — the most recent one expired in September — the company has already spent north of $3 million this year on lobbying Congress, the U.S. Department of Agriculture, the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative and the Environmental Protection Agency, according to lobbying reports.

On a national level, sugar beet farmers want better crop insurance options and to maintain the current level of sugar imports, Rockstad said. 

Weber frequently lobbies lawmakers at the Minnesota Capitol on behalf of sugar beet farmers in the Red River Valley. The sugar program is a federal issue, he said, so he works more on issues like fertilizer application and transportation, but he couldn’t recall any Minnesota legislation majorly impacting the sugar beet industry in recent years. 

American Crystal Sugar declined to respond to questions or to make its lobbyists available for an interview with the Reformer.

Building the pile

The piler, a machine that transfers beets from trucks to the pile, rumbled as it moved muddy beets to the top of the mound on its conveyor belt, stretching like an industrial brontosaurus over the growing hill at the far end of the site; in a matter of days, the pile would multiply in length several times over, fed by the endless stream of trucks, until it covered the full expanse of the dirt clearing. 

Dozens of piles like this dot the Red River Valley. The five American Crystal Sugar factories can only take in so many beets at a time, so the vegetables wait in these small mountains until the factory has capacity to process them. 

Building a beet pile is a feat of engineering. 

Even after their leafy tops are cut off and their roots severed by the harvester in the field, the beets are alive and respiring, taking in carbon dioxide and releasing oxygen, straining to regrow their leaves. The warmer the beet, the faster the respiration, and the more it degrades, said Mohamed Khan, sugar beet expert at North Dakota State University.

“When it’s respiring, it’s burning sugar,” Khan said. “You do not want that to happen.”

Warm temperatures quickly spoil the sugar beets, turning the solid, dense vegetables to stinky mush. It’s like the saying, “One bad apple spoils the whole bunch,” Khan said.

The best way to preserve sugar beets is to keep them cold, ideally below 52 degrees Fahrenheit. Starting in August, farmers harvest small amounts of beets — just enough to keep the factory running, but not so many that the beets are sitting around in the sun.

The average air temperature in the Midwest has increased by 1.5 degrees Fahrenheit over the past century and will continue to get warmer. 

On Oct. 1, the day the harvest was supposed to begin in earnest, the temperature in East Grand Forks reached 92 degrees — two degrees shy of the area’s October heat record. Pulling the beets from the cool dirt and piling them would quickly destroy millions of dollars of product. 

So farmers waited. By Oct. 3, temperatures had significantly cooled. That’s when the rain began, turning the fields to mud pits that clogged combines and sucked in truck tires. Finally, conditions turned for the better by Oct. 5, and farmers across the region took to the fields in massive numbers, beginning the nonstop flow of beets from field to pile and factory.

With the right winter weather conditions and a tarp, piles will last months after harvest without spoiling. But the factories can’t process all of the beets in the winter; some piles need to last until the spring and early summer. Those are “deep frozen” — built with large pipes evenly spaced throughout, which distribute cold air throughout the pile to fully freeze all the sugar beets.

The pile-building process is a dance between the piler operator, who controls the flow and placement of the beets, and the loader operators, who place the pipes a set distance apart. Timing mistakes mean the tumbling beets can displace the pipes; when the pipes are incorrectly spaced, hot spots can form in the pile, ruining swaths of valuable sugar beets.

Minnesota’s own Nomadland

As a foreman, 75-year-old Jhon Ward is responsible for choreographing the dance of the piler and loaders as they work in sync through the night.

Jhon is a soft-spoken retired Navy officer and a self-described jack of all trades — a handyman, carpenter and plumber. His wife, Colleen Ward, works in the lab at the East Grand Forks factory and is the social glue of the campground where they live during the harvest, introducing herself to other campers and organizing social events.

Colleen was a hospital X-ray technician when the 2008 financial crisis hit, which cut her pay and opportunities. At one of the couple’s regular visits to the Dollywood theme park in Pigeon Forge, Tennessee, she spotted an ad for the park’s workamper program.

“I jokingly said to my husband, ‘Honey, why don’t we buy an RV and go work at Dollywood,’” Colleen said. “He took me seriously, and since then, for almost 13 years, we’ve been going everywhere, doing many different things.”

They’ve worked for hotels, historic walking tours, Christmas tree farms, Amazon and many state parks and campgrounds. The past 10 years, they’ve also worked the beet harvest. 

They have an off-grid house in the mountains of North Carolina but prefer to be on the road. Their 13 grandchildren and five great-grandchildren are spread out across the country and their mobile lifestyle allows them to frequently visit family. 

They do not plan on slowing down.

For decades, generations of Mexican-American farm workers have traveled to the Red River Valley each summer and fall. Now, retirees like the Wards who live in RVs and take seasonal jobs also make up a significant portion of the workforce that American Crystal Sugar relies on — Minnesota’s own “Nomadland.”

Around half of the 1,400 temporary employees hired by Express Employment Professionals to work for American Crystal Sugar this year lived at campgrounds during the harvest, according to Alyssa Kaste, owner of Express Employment Professionals in Grand Forks. The worker-campers are known as “workampers.” 

Express Employment Professionals markets the beet harvest as an “unBEETable experience” on social media, drawing in workers with relatively high pay. The company offers a minimum wage of $17.70 per hour, plus overtime pay for the last four hours of each 12-hour shift and all day on Saturdays, double pay on Sundays and completion bonuses. When weather forces piling sites to close, workers get four hours of “stay pay.” 

The work can involve operating heavy machinery, shoveling beets and withstanding the elements.

Shifts are 12 hours long, every day for as long as the harvest lasts — anywhere from 10 days to over a month, depending on weather delays.

“It’s not for everybody,” Kaste said.

Around 60% of the workforce, however, comes back each year. 

Terri Malloy isn’t sure she’ll be one of them. 

Malloy and her greyhounds have been on the road for nine-and-a-half years, and Malloy figures it’s almost time for her to settle down — at least for a while.

Handmade textiles, paintings and ceramics fill her RV; she’s spent prior summers teaching craft and art classes. Her greyhound Gypsy splays out on a dog bed in front of the RV’s electric fireplace.

This year was her first sugar beet harvest, and she worked in the sampling lab at the American Crystal Sugar factory, where she used automated equipment to weigh, count and read the sugar content of samples brought in from the piles.

She’s had two hip replacements and her gallbladder out, all while she was living in the RV. Finding health care and affordable insurance is a challenge, she said. When she’s in the Southwest, purchasing medicine in Mexico is cheaper and allows her to bypass regular bloodwork. 

Malloy’s gotten more and more nervous on the road — she’s had a couple near-misses, and since she travels alone, she doesn’t have anyone to help out or watch Gypsy in case of an emergency.

“It’s been an adventure,” Malloy said. “I love traveling, and I still get an itch every five or six months.”

She’s now at a horse ranch in Arizona, and if she likes it, she’ll stay off the road for a while. 

About a dozen sugar beet workers interviewed by the Reformer described many of the same themes. The jobs are easy but they take a toll on the body. The hours are long but the paychecks are worth it. The people — the end-of-harvest potlucks, the campground friends, the extended family, the kind coworkers — are what keep the workers coming back each year, as much as the pay.

Maria Garcia can remember the beet harvest before the workampers arrived. When Garcia first started here 27 years ago, she began with a shovel, lifting loose beets back onto the pile, cleaning up the work area and filling bags with beets for sampling in the lab. Then she learned to operate heavy machinery, and for 15 or 16 years — she can’t remember exactly — she ran the loaders and the piler, the biggest machine of all.

Her children are now old enough to operate the machines, and she prefers to work in the scale house, where she can sit in a chair, and where other workers come to warm their hands or eat their meals during the grueling 12-hour shifts.

“Now, with my pains and everything, it’s better for me to stay in here,” she said in Spanish. Despite the elements, she misses working outside — the time passes faster. 

Across the room, Vanessa Lara took a slip of paper from an incoming driver and scanned it, loading the vehicle weight and information into the computer. She handed the slip back through the window and directed the driver to one of the two pilers at the far end of the site.

Her parents, aunts, siblings and cousins have all worked the harvest. She’s known Garcia for most of her life. 

The community of beet harvest workers is like a family, Lara said, even if it’s the money that keeps them coming back each year. 

“We’re migrants,” Lara said. 

Both women’s families live in Texas in the winter and spring, then travel to the Red River Valley in the summer and fall for the potato and sugar beet harvest. 

It’s the way their families have lived for generations.

This Minnesota Reformer article is republished online under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0.

Photo: A worker sits on a ventilation pipe at an American Crystal Sugar piling site near Ada, Minnesota, on Oct. 10, 2023. Photo by Madison McVan/Minnesota Reformer.

Related posts

•  Beet coop PAC pours sugar on Renville Co RPM; Renville Co RPM sweetens Tim Miller committee
•  MPCA reports fish kill in Renville County's West Fork Beaver Creek; sugar beet co-op wastewater release culprit 
•  Beets all: Twin Cities lawyers clean up on lockout; Greater MN workers, farmers pay price 
•  American Crystal Sugar lockout update: rally in the TC; former executive sees both sides now

If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, 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.

Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email [email protected] as recipient.

I'm on Venmo for those who prefer to use this service: @Sally-Sorensen-6

Work, We're On It: Freedom Works Here ads scrutinized, Ohio vendor swiped local idea

I'm so old I can remember Governor Kristi Noem's much-ridiculed "Meth, We're On It" anti-drug campaign.

Looks as if some elements of that mirth are being repeated with South Dakota's big media worker recruitment campaign, Freedom Works Here.

Apparently, part of that is the freedom for a politically connected vendor which got the contract to swipe ideas from South Dakotans.

Reporting for Sioux Falls Leve, Patrick Lalley writes in Noem-as-worker concept lifted from Sioux Falls advertising firm's proposal:

SIOUX FALLS – The theme of South Dakota’s Freedom Works Here marketing campaign is familiar now, Gov. Kristi Noem featured in various roles as a skilled worker inviting people to move to the state for a good job.

The idea for the campaign – Noem as the main pitch person in a series of ads – came out of a request for proposals issued by the Governor's Office of Economic Development in January. The company that produced and placed the ads was awarded the $5 million contract in a competitive bid process that compared proposals from seven firms.

You won’t find any reference to the governor as a welder or electrician or dentist in the winning proposal from Go West Media, however. No concepts – known as “the creative” in advertising and marketing circles – were included in the documents published on the state’s open records website.

It wasn’t Go West’s idea to begin with, based on documents and multiple interviews with sources close to the process.

The Noem-as-worker concept came from a different bidder, the Sioux Falls firm Lawrence & Schiller. 

Documents obtained by Sioux Falls Live detail the plan, including sketches showing the welder scene that mirror the final product. How the concept from one proposal ended up in the product of a different bidder isn’t known.

Ian Fury, Noem’s spokesman, denies there was any copying of ideas in the bidding process and Go West’s leadership says they always intended to have the governor involved with a humorous approach . . .

I'll be a blue-nosed gopher.  And who are these well-paid plagiarists? Lalley reports:

Go West Media is a “doing business as” entity in South Dakota of Strategic Media Placement, which is part of the political consulting firm The Strategy Group.

The Strategy Group is prominent in Republican political circles, working with candidates for president, Congress and governorships, including Noem’s 2022 reelection campaign. Yoho is also the CEO of Vivek Ramaswamy’s presidential campaign and is connected to Corey Lewandowski, an informal adviser to Noem.

The questions about how Noem’s political consultant won a taxpayer-funded contract has attracted attention of leaders in the South Dakota Legislature, who this week questioned GOED staff about the contract and authorized a formal letter asking for more details.

The absence of a creative concept from Go West follows a series of stories published by Sioux Falls Live raising questions about the contract, including that the Ohio firm’s presentation lacked any breakdown of how the $5 million would be spent, a key point of comparison between bids.

The similarities between Lawrence & Schiller’s submission and the final ads raise further questions about the bidding process. . . .

But sources familiar with the discussions and presentations during the bidding process for Freedom Works Here said that while there was discussion of putting the governor up front, it was never in the context of jobs or as a worker.

That came from Lawrence & Schiller, one source said. . . .

Read the whole article at Sioux Falls Live. Nothing rewards South Dakotans than paying people in Ohio for ideas generated in Sioux Falls.

As Lalley reported, there's more. At the Sioux Falls Argus Leader, Annie Todd reported in South Dakota's Freedom Works Here recruitment campaign starts new phase amidst scrutiny:

The Freedom Works Here campaign is set to roll into its second phase, according to a release Wednesday from Gov. Kristi Noem's office.

The next phase of the controversial workforce recruitment campaign is expected to cost $1.5 million, a fraction of the initial phase, which clocked in at $5 million. It's unclear when the next phase will start.

The workforce recruitment campaign, which has run since late-June, has come under intense scrutiny in the past few days as lawmakers asked the Governor's Office of Economic Development, which has administered the campaign, about the success of the campaign so far. 

Those details have been vague, with GOED Commissioner Chris Schilken explaining the campaign had had more than 800 million impressions, with more than 7,000 people having requested information about South Dakota and 1,900 people proceeding to the final stages of finding a career in the state.

But Schilken could not tell lawmakers Monday during a meeting of the Appropriations Committee how many people who had seen the workforce recruitment ads had actually moved to South Dakota.

On Tuesday, the legislative Executive Board voted to send a letter to GOED requesting more information about the marketing RFP for the campaign.

The letter would include "the RFP process that was administered, the companies that applied, the information requested, how submissions were compared, the criteria that was used to make a final determination, who determined that criteria, what was submitted and the individuals involved with the selection process," and must be returned by Dec. 18 to the E-Board.

The Ohio-based Strategic Media Placement won the RFP in April. The group has political connections to Republican presidential nominee Vivek Ramaswamy. . . .

Lovely.

Image: A photo of a page from Sioux Falls firm Lawrence & Schiller's proposal for the Freedom Works Here campaign that includes possible scenarios for advertisements. Patrick Lalley / Sioux Falls Live

Related posts

• The first step to recovery is admitting there's a problem; or, Meth, We're On It in South Dakota 
• KOTA: South Dakota teen meth use rates have actually declined over the past two decades

If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, 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.

Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email [email protected] as recipient.

I'm on Venmo for those who prefer to use this service: @Sally-Sorensen-6

 

Conservative groups lick wounds after Minnesota school board election loss, vow to continue

Keeping in line with Bluestem's posts about the weaponization of school board races, I find Michelle Griffith's latest Minnesota Reformer article to be a good update.

Conservative groups lick wounds after school board election loss, vow to continue fighting
By Michelle Griffith

The Minnesota Parents Alliance and its conservative allies spent thousands on school board races this year, predicting that their candidates who promoted “parental rights” would win big among suburbanites. 

But voters last week rejected the majority of the group’s candidates, electing 11 out of the 44 that MPA endorsed. Despite the losses, MPA did score victories in the state’s largest school district — Anoka-Hennepin — and in Hastings, with three of their four candidates gaining seats on the seven-member school board. 

MPA and its supporters met in Golden Valley Wednesday to absorb their election wins and losses and discuss what’s next. 

The group is “playing the long game,” said Cristine Trooien, executive director of the Minnesota Parents Alliance.

“We are in this for the long haul,” Trooien told a crowd of about 100 at a Golden Valley golf club. “The schools did not get like this overnight, and it’s going to take more than one election cycle to get it back, but the enormous amount of progress that we’ve seen over the 18 months that we’ve been doing this work should really give everybody a lot of cause for hope.”

MPA-backed candidates now have a 5-2 majority on the Hastings school board, according to the group. 

Unlike other right-leaning education advocacy groups — like Moms for Liberty — MPA has not highlighted culture war issues, like opposing rights for trans children or teaching students the role of race and white supremacy in American history.

Instead, MPA says its priority is to strengthen parent-teacher relationships and improve academic achievement. 

The school board victories could also prime candidates for bigger races. Trooien said she would not be surprised if some of the MPA’s newly elected school board candidates ran for state office in the future.

MPA, the Center of the American Experiment and the education advocacy group Opportunity for All Kids hosted the meeting, and they painted a bleak picture of Minnesota’s education system through chart-filled presentations.

Student progress in Minnesota has been affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. The latest state data show only about half of Minnesota’s public school students are meeting or exceeding grade level standards in reading and math. State officials say the scores indicate students are still recovering from pandemic learning loss.

But for these conservative groups, the key culprits are the state’s education system and the teachers union Education Minnesota.

Earlier this year the Minnesota Legislature passed nearly $2.3 billion in new spending for Minnesota schools, much of which will go toward the general education funding formula and directly to districts.

Devin Foley, executive director with the group Opportunity for All Kids, was critical of the state’s public education system and advocated for vouchers, or public dollars being spent to send kids to private schools.

“We can either look at it as we fund the public education system, or we fund the education of the public,” Foley said Wednesday.

He also criticized Education Minnesota, arguing that the teachers union has failed students.

“At the end of the day, there’s one group that is firmly in control of the education system, top to bottom — that’s Education Minnesota,” Foley said.

Denise Specht, president of Education Minnesota, in a statement criticized the groups and said their views are unpopular with Minnesotans.

“Nearly every Minnesotan wants the freedom to send their children to a safe, effective public school that welcomes all students, no matter what they look like, where they live, or who they love,” Specht said. “That’s why voters on Nov. 7 ignored the scare stories and conspiracies of anti-union groups and their millionaire funders and overwhelmingly elected candidates endorsed by local unions of educators.”

The state’s teachers union has long been an ally of DFL candidates and the state’s DFL Party.

This Minnesota Reformer article is republished online under  Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0.

Photo: Cristine Trooien, executive director of the Minnesota Parents Alliance, presented last week’s school board election results during an event at the Brookview Golf Course in Golden Valley on Nov. 16, 2023. Photo by Michelle Griffith/Minnesota Reformer.\\

Related posts

• Conservative candidates underwhelm in suburban school board races
• Will outside groups spending thousands influence the fate of MN school districts? 
• Training grounds for higher office? Partisanship is again at forefront of school board elections
• MN Private Business Council gave $47,600 to Common Sense MN's mailer campaign in Mankato School District Referendum Question #1
• MN Private Business Council's Schultz lays out 2024 state house targets to Lyon Co GOP faithful.
• Schultz campaign, MN for Freedom PAC, Republican Attorneys General Association turn to experienced hands at sketchy coordination

If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, 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.

Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email [email protected] as recipient.

I'm on Venmo for those who prefer to use this service: @Sally-Sorensen-6

$8.3 billion in crop insurance payouts to South Dakota farmers: A cost of climate change

A new article from South Dakota News Watch combines two of Bluestem's interests: farm policy and climate change.

$8.3 billion in crop insurance payouts to South Dakota farmers: A cost of climate change
By Bart Pfankuch

South Dakota farmers have received nearly $10 billion in payouts from the Federal Crop Insurance Corp. over roughly the past two decades, with payments specifically due to weather disasters rising significantly during that time.

Between 2001 and 2022, South Dakota was among the top states in the nation for receiving insurance payouts for crop losses due to weather disasters, a trend environmentalists have said reveals a hidden but rapidly rising cost of climate change that is increasing the frequency and severity of storms that damage crops.

Of the $9.6 billion sent to state farmers and ranchers in that time frame, more than $8.3 billion was claimed for weather-related losses due to excess moisture, drought, hail, wind or freezing temperatures, according to a new analysis by the nonprofit Environmental Working Group (EWG). The rest was for losses not related to weather.

Farmers who buy crop insurance can receive settlements anytime their crops are damaged or destroyed or when they are unable to plant, thereby eliminating anticipated income.

American taxpayers have funded a large portion of the payouts, as nearly 65% of the premiums for the crop insurance program run by the U.S. Department of Agriculture are subsidized with federal funding.

The Congressional Budget Office estimates the crop insurance program will cost taxpayers $16.3 billion in fiscal year 2023 when average U.S. farm incomes are at or near record highs. American farmers overall received $19.1 billion in crop insurance payouts in 2022, a record and far above the $3 billion paid out in 2002, according to EWG.

Critics of the USDA program, which include some environmental and tax watchdog groups, have said the crop insurance program needs reforms to reduce taxpayer support. That would increase transparency in regard to flow of funds and encourage farmers to make their operations more resilient against the long-term effects of climate change, they have said.

Renewal of the crop insurance program is part of the 2023 Farm Bill now under consideration by the U.S. Congress.

Climate change, extreme weather connected

Anne Schechinger, Midwest director for EWG and the author of the crop insurance analysis, said there is a strong correlation between rising crop insurance payouts and the increasing impacts of climate change.

"We know that these payments will keep going up, and that the program is going to be more and more expensive for taxpayers and farmers as this extreme weather gets worse," Schechinger said in an interview with News Watch.

"We’re very confident there’s a strong connection to climate change here because farms are some of the businesses most vulnerable to climate change purely because of the nature of farming."

While the USDA oversees the program, the insurance policies are sold and managed by private companies.

A previous analysis by the EWG found that a third of all crop insurance payout funds – about $33 billion over the past 10 years – have been absorbed by the dozen or so big insurance companies and their agents that sell policies and not to farmers who work the land and absorb the risk.

"The reality is that not that many U.S. farmers benefit from these programs and that the money is mostly going to these larger and wealthier farmers," Schechinger said. "And the insurers are definitely making billions of dollars every year under the crop insurance program … and that’s money coming from farmers and taxpayers that is not going to farmers."

Over the 22-year period examined by EWG, South Dakota farmers received the third-most payments among all states for losses due to drought ($4.1 billion) and excess moisture ($3.3 billion), and the sixth-most payments for hail damage ($620 million).

Though claim amounts varied by year and weather conditions, the overall payments to South Dakota farmers for crop losses have risen steadily over the past two decades, with sharp increases shown in the past decade: $180 million paid out in 2014, $188 million in 2015 and $1.3 billion in 2022.

Farmers rely on program for stability

Despite the rising costs and payouts, however, South Dakota Farm Bureau Federation president Scott VanderWal said the crop insurance program remains a critical component of the economic equation that allows agricultural producers to remain in business.

The need for the program remains great in South Dakota and across the country, Vanderwal said, as American farmers seek to feed the nation and world and take on great risk in an industry largely dependent on the weather for success.

"It’s so vitally important for the ability of farmers and ranchers to manage their risk," said VanderWal, who also serves as vice president of the American Farm Bureau, which is a certified agency allowed to sell crop insurance.

"When you’re so totally depending on the weather for your livelihood, with all these crops growing outside and subject to hail storms, floods and drought, you have to be able to manage that risk. And that is what crop insurance is all about."

VanderWal, who grows corn and soybeans and raises cattle near Volga, S.D., said his family has purchased crop insurance since the 1990s and received indemnity payments a few times over the years.

VanderWal said the program has saved family farms in South Dakota from financial devastation numerous times, most recently in 2019 when extreme wet weather prevented many row crop farmers from even planting a crop. USDA data show that South Dakota farmers received nearly $1 billion in crop insurance payments solely due to flooding that year.

"That was an absolutely disastrous year, and a lot of people would have failed financially if they didn’t have crop insurance," VanderWal said. "That kept us alive because the stakes are high, landlords still want to be paid, there's still overhead and machinery costs to be paid."

VanderWal said he is aware of criticisms of the crop insurance program and noted that one area of recent reform has been to crack down on potential fraud. He said the program continues to evolve, with a new pilot program underway to expand coverage of weaned calves for livestock producers.

As he travels the country in support of farming, VanderWal said he continues to defend the crop insurance program and battle back against misimpressions, including that some farmers are using crop insurance to fleece the federal government and taxpayers.

"They need to know that farmers and ranchers do have skin in the game, that we're paying premiums and it’s not a freebie," he said. "There’s a perception out there that farmers get rich taking in crop insurance payments. But I can tell you that if we have a crop insurance indemnity on a field, we don’t make any money on it. It just lessens the pain and keeps you in business for the next year."

VanderWal said taxpayer subsidization of the program, long supported by Congress, is important to ensure that American farmers can stay in business during hard times and keep domestic food production viable.

"That’s the investment the American public is making to ensure that the industry that raises our food, fiber and fuel remains viable and strong so we don’t find ourselves depending on other countries for our food like we do for energy a lot of the time," he said.

VanderWal said crop insurance keeps farmers financially stable so that despite any major market shift or global crisis, America will remain strong because the public can rely on farmers to produce their food.

"These are all upheavals that cause disruptions in markets, but because we can feed ourselves we don’t have to worry about getting our food from other countries," he said. "That’s so incredibly important and part of our national security in the United States."

Payouts support farms and farm communities

Beyond individual losses caused by extreme weather, crop insurance protects entire communities that rely on farm-related spending, said Jerry Schmitz, executive director of the South Dakota Soybean Association.

"If these folks have a tremendous loss, and they aren't able to pay their bills, the grocery stores, seed stores and other local business suffer, too," Schmitz said.

According to USDA data, South Dakota was joined by North Dakota and Iowa as other Great Plains states that were considered "hot spots" for high levels of crop insurance payouts over the past two decades.

The top South Dakota counties for drought payouts during that time period were Hutchinson, Edmunds and Sully. The top counties for excess moisture payouts were Brown, Spink and Marshall.

Other factors at play

While both VanderWal and Schmitz acknowledge that damaging weather events have been more frequent and severe in recent years, they point to other possible reasons that crop insurance payouts have risen.

While EWG said only about 20% of U.S. farmers carry crop insurance, USDA data reviewed by News Watch show that participation is far higher in South Dakota. Records show that 87% of the state's 16.6 million acres of crops are insured, including 89% of corn acres and 99% of soybean acres. In general, far fewer livestock producers purchase crop insurance when compared to two-crop farmers.

Beyond that, the value of crops has risen steadily in recent years, raising the level of insurance producers need to carry in order to cover losses in a disaster and consequently raising payouts when losses occur.

Furthermore, the cost of operating a farm has increased, causing a jump in both premiums and payouts. For example, Schmitz said an 80,000 kernel bag of seed corn cost $25 when he began farming around 1980 but runs up to $400 now. A basic tractor purchased at that time for $25,000 would easily top $250,000 in 2023, he said.

Schmitz added that in recent years, farmers have faced new forms of weather challenges, including the "derecho" storm and straight-line wind event that damaged buildings in Sioux Falls and crops across eastern South Dakota in July 2022.

Schmitz also said the crop insurance program is critical for young farmers, who will form the future of agriculture in America. While many experienced farmers have created more stability in their operation and are more able to absorb a loss, young farmers are not as well positioned financially, he said.

"It’s especially important for younger producers just getting into the business," he said. "The older guys have been through it and built up a little equity and understand the ups and downs and can balance that. But for a young person coming in, with the debt they’ve acquired just to get into the business and suddenly they have a loss of income, it’s pretty impactful."

Taxation group seeks limits on payouts

Taxpayers for Common Sense, a Washington budget watchdog group, is urging Congress to pass two measures aimed at tightening the rules of the crop insurance program to reduce costs and increase transparency.

The group supports both the Assisting Family Farmers through Insurance Reform Measures Act and the Crop Insurance Transparency Act.

Those measures would, among other things, put limits on the payouts individual farms could receive under the crop insurance program and eliminate taxpayer subsidies for the wealthiest farmers, those who own but do not operate a farm, or those of foreign residency.

The group argues that widespread use of the crop insurance program has led to increasing prices of farmland, consolidation of farms and reduced agricultural conservation and crop diversification.

The organization further noted that federal emergency disaster declarations, enacted separately and in addition to crop insurance policies, have provided $20 billion in payments to farmers since 2018, including those who already benefited from crop insurance policies.

"Common sense reforms to the federal crop insurance program can save taxpayers tens of billions of dollars, while also benefiting beginning farmers and the environment," the group said in a September 2023 position paper.

Extreme weather likely to continue

Schechinger said the data show that extreme weather is likely to continue, with disasters occurring with even greater uncertainty than in the past.

She noted that in some South Dakota counties, farmers received insurance payments for losses due to both drought and excess moisture in the same calendar year. Congress or the USDA could implement reforms to encourage farmers, for example, to reduce tillage or increase use of cover crops or use other "climate smart" practices to strengthen the land against the impacts of extreme weather caused by climate change, she said.

"We really think the crop insurance program needs to be reformed to help farmers increase their resiliency to extreme weather," Schechinger said. "The program itself is not bad. The issue is that it really promotes business as usual, which just is not going to work anymore with increasing intensity of extreme weather as the climate crisis worsens."

Schmitz counters that American farmers are known for being "some of the most sustainable farmers in the world," but he also acknowledges that more can be done to protect the land and water and increase resilience of farms to extreme weather events.

"Everybody agrees that the climate has been changing, and we're always looking to improve," he said. "For the most part, everybody recognizes that they better be taking care of what they have and making it better for the next generations."

This South Dakota News Watch article is republished online with the permission SDNW.

Photo: South Dakota farmers have received billions of dollars in crop insurance payments due to hail, drought and excessive moisture, a condition that flooded this farm near Herreid, S.D., in June 2022. (Photo: Stu Whitney / South Dakota News Watch).

Related posts

• Over the river & through the woulds: Decoding farm groups’ Thanksgiving messaging
• Agweek Special Report on Rural Health: 10% of MN private wells pose a health problem
• VIDEO: Agrigrowth's 2023 Distinguished Service Award winner emceed ARISE USA Resurrection Tour Minnesota stop near Redwood Falls
• Critics allege CO2 pipelines ‘farm the government’ for climate $$ while helping oil industry; bills fuel debate over ethanol’s environmental impact, with climate implications

If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, 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.

Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email [email protected] as recipient.

I'm on Venmo for those who prefer to use this service: @Sally-Sorensen-6