. . . An existing lead shot ban in waterfowl hunting was legislated by state lawmakers in 1987 but the DNR wanted to expand that ban unilaterally, he said. And if the lead shot ban were to come before the Legislature, it would be voted down, he said.
"I don't think there's any support for it," he said. "I don't think even a lot of (DFL legislators) would be interested in that, if it came down to a vote."
"Lead is a naturally occurring mineral, it's in the soil, it's mined just like anything else," he added later.
The DNR's proposed non-toxic shot rule would expand the ban to all small-game hunting, but it would count only for shotgun shells with shot in them, not single-projectile loads—so rifle bullets and shotgun slugs could still be made of lead. It would also be limited to Minnesota wildlife management lands from Highway 210 in Brainerd to the southern border.
Note how Heintzeman frames the issue as a complete ban on lead shot, but the proposed restrictions are limited to Minnesota wildlife management lands in part of the state. Heintzeman fears the talking point, but not the well-known problems of lead poisoning. Kayser continues:
Animals like eagles and loons can be poisoned if they ingest lead shot, the DNR said.
Radon gas in your basement? Don't worry. Be happy. It's naturally occurring and it comes from the soil around you. Poisonous ivy? Don't sweat it; it's natural.
[Senator Carrie] Ruud[, R-Breezy Point] also had strong words for her Senate colleagues regarding a provision that would bar the Department of Natural Resources from issuing new rules restricting lead shot. Ruud chairs the Senate's environmental policy committee, and the lead shot bill never was run through her committee to receive scrutiny and discussion in a hearing. She said the "trickery" of fellow senators resulted in an end run around her committee.
"I think that's very dishonest," she said.
Another part of the bill appropriates $20,000 for a study on the effects of lead shot on wildlife that live in state lands. While Ruud supported the study—she said the existing data on lead shot is outdated—she opposed the Legislature banning the DNR from banning lead shot before the study was implemented.
Here are the members of the conference committee for HF888/SF0723. Click through on the hot links and let the members know your thoughts about lead policy. Be civil--no cussing or spitting on the floor:
If you need motivation to contact them, here's a short Youtube of an eagle afflicted with lead poisoning, via the Raptor Center's page on Lead Poisoning which notes "For the past 40 years lead exposure and lead poisoning have been major health issues for bald eagles received by or admitted to our clinic::
Let's hope that the guys will listen to the woman on the committee, and follow her lead on this issue. Quote the Brainerd Dispatch article--which frames the differences nicely--and mention the bills by name.
If you appreciate our posts and original analysis, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 33166 770th Ave, Ortonville, MN 56278) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post. Those wishing to make a small ongoing monthly contribution should click on the paypal subscription button.
Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email sally.jo.sorensen@gmail.com as recipient.
A year ago today, we posted Bee merry on Christmas & these happy holidays, sharing some charming folklore from the British Isles and Ireland in which bees hum the doxology at midnight as Christmas Eve becomes Christmas Day.
This year, we have a different pollinator-related matter that we hope will generate some buzz.
Unfortunately, we were told that the Pollinator Report was still in draft and that no recording was made, but we would be sent minutes of the meeting when they were available.
While Minnesota's open meeting law does not require meetings (other than official "legislative body" committee meetings) to be recorded and made available to the media and the public, Bluestem would think that the Governor's Office, the agencies, and the Environmental Quality Board would tape the meetings in the future.
Why tape the meetings of this executive committee? When the governor issued Executive Order 16-07, requiring the state to take specific actions to reverse the decline of bees and other pollinator populations back in late August, there was much wailing and gnashing of teeth on the part of Republicans, a few Democrats willing to front for the ag chemical industry like so-to-be-former state senator Vicki Jensen, DFL- Owatonna, some farm groups and the ag chemical industry.
The complaint? That they had not been consulted and that the process wasn't transparent. We posted in September about a special House hearing about the matter here--and included the list of those who attended the pollinator summit held last winter. A wide range of stakeholders were invited, including state legislators, farm groups and lobbyists. We sat at a table in conversation with a Monsanto guy, for instance, and recognized a number of other ag lobbyists at the summit from our years of watching Minnesota House ag and environmental hearings.
As far as we could discern, farm groups and pro-pollinator group were kept on a even footing throughout the process that led up to the executive order (and we're puzzled by those who don't think beekeepers aren't part of agriculture).
The governor's office announced the roster of those on the new committee on December 2. Members include beekeepers, farm group representatives like MN Farm Bureau president Kevin Papp, folks from pesticide skeptic and pro-pollinator organizations, bee scientists and other informed people. Taping their future meetings would not only make the process more transparent, but would also lessen the ability of any faction from playing the butt-hurt game.
The latter communication strategy could possibly emerge should the committee decide to follow a "consensus" model, rather that actually making decisions by voting on actions put before the committee. Under Minnesota's open meeting law, such votes must be recorded in minutes for nearly every meeting of an executive-level or agency committee:
Subd. 4.Votes to be kept in journal.
(a) The votes of the members of the state agency, board, commission, or department; or of the governing body, committee, subcommittee, board, department, or commission on an action taken in a meeting required by this section to be open to the public must be recorded in a journal kept for that purpose.
(b) The vote of each member must be recorded on each appropriation of money, except for payments of judgments, claims, and amounts fixed by statute.
Subd. 5.Public access to journal.
The journal must be open to the public during all normal business hours where records of the public body are kept.
A consensus model paired with no audio or video taped meetings is a recipe for mischief.
Let's nip the possibility of this nonsense at the bud. The Minnesota Department of Agriculture and the EQB should tape the meetings (audio is fine).
Looking over the statute also generated a question about the report that was under discussion at the first meeting. Were committee members provided with a copy of the draft? If so, the state open meeting law is suggestive about those documents being open to the public during a meeting:
Subd. 6.Public copy of members' materials.
(a) In any meeting which under subdivisions 1, 2, 4, and 5, and section 13D.02 must be open to the public, at least one copy of any printed materials relating to the agenda items of the meeting prepared or distributed by or at the direction of the governing body or its employees and:
(1) distributed at the meeting to all members of the governing body;
(2) distributed before the meeting to all members; or
(3) available in the meeting room to all members;
shall be available in the meeting room for inspection by the public while the governing body considers their subject matter.
Would such a document be available for review by an individual covering the issue (but who couldn't travel from greater Minnesota to attend the meeting)? Or do documents available to the public at a meeting magically become off limits for data practice requests following the meeting? It's not our area of expertise.
Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays to all our readers.
Clip art: What conversations will go on behind the curtain if meetings aren't taped?
If you appreciate our posts and original analysis, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 33166 770th Ave, Ortonville, MN 56278) 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 sally.jo.sorensen at gmail.com as recipient.
As global temperatures warm, Minnesota residents need to prepare for increases in catastrophic "mega-rains" and a greater spread of tick-borne illnesses such as Lyme disease, according to a draft environmental report card for the state.
The report card comes from the Environmental Quality Board, a coordinating body for state government agencies on environmental issues. The board will discuss the draft Dec. 21. The final version will provide a foundation for the Minnesota Environmental Congress in February.
The report card is organized around five key areas: water, land, air, energy and climate. Each section uses three metrics to assess how well Minnesota's environment is doing in those areas. It rates their current status as green, yellow and red to correspond with good, OK and poor. And it uses up arrows, flat arrows or down arrows to indicate recent trends.
"We're hoping it's pretty user-friendly. It's designed for a broad audience," Will Seuffert, the EQB's executive director, said Monday.
Bluestem has downloaded the EQB agenda packet for December 21, 2016, since we agree wth Seuffert's assessment about this document being designed for a broader audience and split out the document for our readers.
If you appreciate our posts and original analysis, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 33166 770th Ave, Ortonville, MN 56278) 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 sally.jo.sorensen at gmail.com as recipient.
Because of the effects on bees and other pollinators, which of the following should the legislature enact to restrict the use of pesticides containing neonicotinoids?
A) Totally ban the use of neonicotinoids for home and agriculture use 50.30% (2572)
B) Ban the use of neonicotinoids at the consumer level (home use and pretreating plants purchased for the home), while still allowing neonicotinoids to be used for agriculture purposes by those who are trained in their use 22.65% (1,158)
C) Maintain the current law requiring the proper labeling of neonicotinoid use on plants, but do not regulate the use of specific insecticides or products 14.73% (753)
D) Undecided/No opinion 12.32% (630)
We're talking the State Fair here, not a dirty hippie convention, so it's astonishing that so many poll takers at the Great Minnesota Get Together are willing to entertain complete or partial bans on neonic use in the North Star State.
Indeed, that slightly over half of those answering the question favor a complete ban of neonics puts the Ag Mafia's whining about Governor Mark's executive order in an entirely different light. Using the findings of a pollinators summit and a subsequent scientific study, the administration came to a more moderate conclusion and policy.
We learned today that the House Ag Policy committee plans an "Informational Hearing" on Tuesday, September 13 on Dayton's executive order. While the committee has posted the order and the Minnesota Department of Agriculture's summary of the study, it hasn't posted the list of those who attended the pollinators summit last February. The list of participants is included at the end of the MDA Pollinators Summit Outcomes report. Representatives from the Minnesota Corn Growers, Farm Bureau and other farm groups were there.
Perhaps this absence will make it easier for the Ag Mafia to whine about not being consulted about the policy making. If some members of the ag community couldn't bother to attend the summit, why are they to be afforded a special place at the table outside of the process? If they did attend, what's the basis of the claim that ag wasn't in the loop?
Or are they simply more equal than the rest of the stakeholders in pollinator policy?
For more information, check out our earlier posts:
Image: A poster about native bees. Bee City posts: "This poster from the Pollinator Partnership is one our best teaching tools. It illustrates some of the 4000 species of native bees in the United States."
If you appreciate our posts and original analysis, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 33166 770th Ave, Ortonville, MN 56278) 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 sally.jo.sorensen at gmail.com as recipient.
One ongoing frustration in following Minnesota's legislative debates over the outdoors is the summoning of the way things are remembered, the way things were, as far as public spending on and policy about the outdoor goes.
The state is changing demographically. How people want to recreate with nature is changing. The outdoors itself is changing, what with climate change and invasive species in the water and land (some of which, like buckthorn, oat crown rust and soybean aphids, create a collective meltdown).
Unfortunately, these changes don't seem to change the discussion at the state legislature. Near the end of the discussion of the Game and Fish Bill, Representative Rick Hansen, DFL-South St. Paul, raised these points:
The Game and Fish Bill always comes near the end of session, and I think we can all agree Minnesotans feel passionately about the outdoors. But one thing I’ve learned over the years here is that not all Minnesotans believe the same thing about the outdoors. When you look at this bill, you’re going to see a lot of things that are based on the way things were, or memory, or where people think people are.
Our state is changing. We’re in the midst of great change. And instead of looking at where we were, and what was, we could be looking at where we should be and where we could be and how we could move together toward that.
Spending time on blaze pink, spending time fighting old battles, spending those old discussions and those old debates, rather than looking at where we could go, even if it is near midnight, where we could go in the future.
At some point, the Legislature will have that discussion about game and fish, at some point Minnesota will engage in that discussion. It's not tonight.
I think we're going to have that discussion out on the campaign trail, we're going to have that conversation with our peers, we're going to have that conversation in our communities. Because nostalgia-based policy making isn’t going to cut it in the future. Looking at where we can go, and what we can do, is where we will need to be.
Here's the video of Hansen's remarks:
There was no further discussion, and the bill passed 84-42.
Here's the full debate:
Still: Rep. Hansen weighing judgment on nostalgia-based fish and game policy.
If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie's original reporting and analysis, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen P.O. Box 108, Maynard MN 56260) or use the paypal button below:
During Wednesday's meeting of the Minnesota House's Environment and Natural Resources Policy and Finance Committee, state representative Rick Hansen, DFL-South St. Paul, offered amendment H2611A26, designed to make sure that land acquired for wildlife habitat preservation in this year's Lessard Sams Outdoor Heritage bill not be planted or otherwise treated with a product that contains a pollinator lethal insecticide, as defined by Minnesota law.
Hansen, who managed a pesticide applicator program at the Minnesota Department of Agriculture before being elected to the House in 2004, holds a B.S. in biology, Upper Iowa University and an M.S, in soil management, Iowa State University. Minority lead on the environment committee, he has emerged as a champion for pollinators. Last month, he published It's time for action on Minnesota's pollinators in the Star Tribune.
Hansen: Thank you, Mr. Chair, just like with a couple of your amendments, I've passed this out of this committee last year, it is saying that land acquired with money in this section, so it's this bill, not previous bills or any future bills, that these [lands] shall not be planted or otherwise treated with a product that contains a pollinator lethal insecticide, and that is one that is on the label that it kills bees and other pollinators, so it is an enforceable choice that te land managers could make, on choosing not to use these insecticide.
I move the ...amendment and encourage its support. I think--I got a copy of the [state] Constitution here and it says that "funds deposited in the Outdoor Heritage Fund maybe spent only to restore, protect and enhance wetlands, prairies, forests and habitat for fish, game and wildlife."
When we talk about these funds we often talk about fish and game and we don't talk about wildlife and the wildlife can be things that you don't hunt or fish for. It can be the small wildlife, the little things, and we need to pay attention to the little things, the things that are at the beginning of the food, because then the things that we hunt may not be there if they don't have anything to eat.
So I think this is a reasonable step on the use of public funds. I think it would help meet the constitutional requirements to protect wildlife, and it's a small step that can be done to protect pollinators with our public resources.
McNamara recognizes Hanska Republican representative Paul Torkelson who raises this objection:
. . .I'd just like to speak against this amendment. While we certainly do have an issue with pollinators, including bees, this is not an appropriate response. There's no scientific proof that this will benefit them in any way and these [pesticides] are very useful tools for agriculture.
We're rather surprised that Torkelson would say this, since scientists at the Minnesota Department of Agriculture Pollinators Summit brought up concerns about the relationship between pesticide use, disease, parasites and quality habitat.
Indeed, the artwork at the top of this post is drawn from the presentation at the summit by internationally respected pollinator expert Dr. Marla Spivak, who's been honored by everyone from the MacArthur Foundation to our dear friends at the AgriGrowth Council. Laura Corcoran's charming drawing illustrates the point that foraging areas for bees and other pollinators help them detox and build their immune systems from damage by stressors like parasites, disease and pesticides.
Since Representative Torkelson is listed as having attended the Summit, according to a spreadsheet obtained from the Environmental Initiative, we're not sure how he missed this information.
In a blog post, Better Together for Bees, Greg Bohrer describes the process of small group meetings in which we passed along what we thought were the best ideas around each table. Our first group included a pollinator researcher from the Minnesota Zoo, a biologist from the DNR, a couple of beekeepers, a pesticide activist, and representatives from CHS and Monsanto.
Our top recommendation was "The Hansen Plan" outlined in his commentary, It's time for action on Minnesota's pollinators in the Star Tribune. The report back from the Summit isn't out yet, but it would certainly be helpful for the ongoing committee hearings.
Many species of wild bees, butterflies and other critters that pollinate plants are shrinking toward extinction, and the world needs to do something about it before our food supply suffers, a new United Nations scientific mega-report warns. . . .
One of the biggest problems, especially in the United States, is that giant swaths of farmland are devoted to just one crop, and wildflowers are disappearing, Potts and others said. Wild pollinators especially do well on grasslands, which are usually more than just grass, and 97 percent of Europe's grasslands have disappeared since World War II, Potts said.
England now pays farmers to plant wildflowers for bees in hedge rows, Watson said.
There are both general and specific problems with some pesticide use, according to the report.
"Pesticides, particularly insecticides, have been demonstrated to have a broad range of lethal and sub-lethal effects on pollinators in controlled experimental conditions," the report said. But it noted more study is needed on the effects on pollinators in the wild. Herbicides kill off weeds, which are useful for wild pollinators, the report added.
Hansen's proposal is indeed reasonable, removing pollinator-lethal pesticides from one year's worth of Outdoor Heritage Fund wildlife habitat project public lands. It does not ban all pesticides on the public lands, nor does it affect private landowners engaged in agriculture on their property.
Torkelson? We have to wonder if he slept through the morning lectures at the Summit. It's unfortunate that his cry from the heart persuaded his colleagues to reject Hansen's amendment.
Artwork: Drawing by Laura Corcoran, via Dr. Spivak's presentation at the MDA Pollinators Summit in mid-February.
If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie's posts and analysis, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen P.O. Box 108, Maynard MN 56260) or use the paypal button below:
A friend passed along a press release for an environmental listening session that Representative Tim Miller (R-Prinsburg) will be holding in Olivia on Thursday, February 4 in the basement of the Renville County Administration Building, 105 S. 5th St., from 2:00 to 4:00 p.m.
UPDATE: The Renville County SWCD just posted text from an email from Representative Miller that confirms that he's got a preferred sort of constituent for this meeting and an agenda that hasn't been shared in the press release below. There's also mention of the Governor's Water Summit--so Miller's trying to manipulate what he can report there as public opinion in his district.
Here's the text of the email that went out earlier in the week (giving some groups the advantage for notifying their members about the event):
On February 4 at 2:00 pm Chair Denny McNamara and a couple other members of the Environment Committee will be joining me for a listening session in Olivia in the basement of the Renville County admin building. The focus will be the DNR's involvement and actions concerning buffer mapping. However, if there are ANY other concerns, I will be welcoming those as well. This is a key chance to be heard, particularly in light of the Governor's Water Summit February 27, which I will also be attending. [emphasis added]
There will be a media release going out by the end of this week. If you would like a copy let me know. I ask you help me to encourage members of your organization to attend. Invite others as well. It is very important for Ag voices to be heard at this time.
Thank you. Let me know if you have any questions.
Tim Miller
MN House of Representatives 17A
651-296-4228
Miller is trying to stack his own meeting--and doing so in order to shape debate at the Governor's Water Summit. We also have to wonder how many members of the Environment committee can be invited before this becomes on an official House hearing.
[end update]
UPDATE #2: We've learned that Representative McNamara will also be attending a "listening session" in Chokio the same day. Will the "couple of other members" of the Environment committee also tag along? Who of the committee members were invited? How many of these are happening around the state--and which organizations got the heads-up from state representatives before the general public knew?
Jeff Backer is even more slanted in his take on for whom this "listening session" is for, a local radio station reports in Rep. Backer Holding Environmental Session:
“Since taking office, I have received countless phone calls from folks around the area expressing frustration with the DNR, MPCA, and other environmental regulatory agencies,” Backer said. “It is my hope that this listening session will give farmers, local officials, sportsmen, and other concerned citizens the opportunity to speak with Chair McNamara and ensure that their voices are heard.” [end update]
The press release below is a masterpiece of dog whistling to those who want to see environmental protection itself as the problem rather than preserving water quality, soil health and such essentials, since Miller lets folks know that he's been hearing from those " who were concerned about land, water, and wildlife laws and regulations."
Note the construction of that phrase: "land, water, and wildlife" modify "laws and regulations."
Bluestem urges our readers in West Central Minnesota who are concerned about water quality, wildlife habitat, soil health to attend and let Representative Miller and Minnesota House Environment and Natural Resources Policy and Finance Committee Chairman Denny McNamara.
We also hope that our readers in the audience will live tweet and Facebook the event using the hashtags #mnleg and #mnag.
The press release:
MINNESOTA HOUSE ENVIRONMENT CHAIR McNAMARA, REP. MILLER TO HOLD ENVIRONMENT LISTENING SESSION IN OLIVIA
ST. PAUL – After hearing from numerous constituents who were concerned about land, water, and wildlife laws and regulations, State Representative Tim Miller (R-Prinsburg) announces he will hold an environmental listening session in Olivia on Thursday, February 4 in the basement of the Renville County Administration Building, 105 S. 5th St., from 2:00 to 4:00 p.m.
Also attending will be Minnesota House Environment and Natural Resources Policy and Finance Committee Chairman Denny McNamara (R-Hastings).
Representative Miller said he invited McNamara to the listening session so he can hear firsthand from area landowners, hunters, and anglers.
“Whether its buffers, groundwater regulations or fish and deer management, I've heard consistently from residents in our area about environmental concerns,” Miller said. “By bringing the chairman of the environment committee to west-central Minnesota, residents can share their views with someone that directly tackles these issues at the State Capitol.”
Miller strongly encourages area residents to attend the listening session and share their thoughts, opinions, and questions about environmental rules and regulations in the State of Minnesota.
Photo: Representative Tim Miller, R-Prinsburg. via Facebook.
If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie's original reporting and analysis, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen P.O. Box 108, Maynard MN 56260) or use the paypal button below:
With the $1.5 billion Powerball fever heating up for Wednesday's drawing, an item in state representative Rick Hansen's legislative update caught our eye:
WHAT HAPPENS TO POWERBALL AND ENVIRONMENT?
I asked Legislative-Citizens Commission on MN Resources (LCCMR) staff this question. Here is the response:
When events like a large Powerball Jackpot reach record levels and results in a record number of tickets being sold, this increases the proceeds that go into the Environment and Natural Resources Trust Fund. Prior to the January 13th, 2016 drawing, the Powerball Jackpot that began November 7th, 2015 through January 9th will be contributing $3.2 million to the Trust Fund. The Trust Fund receives 40% of the net proceeds (after expenses) that go into the corpus of the fund. The ticket sales will increase the net proceeds (profits) and increase the amount of money in the fund. Trust Fund profits are then available for investment to further grow the fund and consequently future dollars available for project spending.
The Trust Fund is a permanent fund that works similar to an endowment. The Minnesota Constitution provides that up to 5.5%* of the market value of the fund can be utilized for projects each year. Proceeds from the Minnesota Lottery are contributed to the Trust Fund's principal balance and are then invested in a combination of stocks and bonds to further grow the market value of the fund. As the market value increases over time, the dollar amount made available for projects through the 5.5% designation also increases.
The lottery's sales figures represent the total dollars generated before expenses are deducted. Expenses include prizes and administration. While higher sales figures for the lottery generally mean greater contributions to the Trust Fund, the contributions are not based on lottery sales but on the lottery's net proceeds - the amount left over after all expenses are deducted. The Trust Fund is constitutionally designated to receive 40% of net proceeds from lottery sales. This is the equivalent of a little over 6 cents of every dollar of lottery sales. For every dollar spent on playing the lottery:
Approximately 62 cents is paid out in player prizes;
Approximately 14 cents goes toward administration expenses, vendor costs, and retailer commissions;
Approximately 5 cents goes back to the state in-lieu-of-sales tax and is split between the Game and Fish Fund and the Natural Resources Fund;
Approximately 19 cents accounts for the net proceeds, of which 60 percent (~13 cents) is contributed to the state's General Fund and 40 percent (~6 cents) is contributed to the Environment and Natural Resources Trust Fund.
Through the Minnesota Environment and Natural Resources Trust Fund, Lottery dollars have supported projects that benefit Minnesota’s environment in every one of Minnesota’s 87 counties. Here are five ways Lottery dollars have benefited everyone in Minnesota:
To help honeybees and other pollinators
In the fight against Emerald Ash Borers
To develop clean, renewable energy for Minnesota’s future
Protecting and improving Minnesota’s water quality
Minnesota’s state bird wins, too! The ENRTF-funded Minnesota DNR research of the impacts of the 2010 Deepwater Horizon oil spill on Minnesota loons is going to bring $39 million in settlement money to the state.
That final item may give the Mesabi Daily News' Orchids & Onions Killer Loons Warriors the fantods, but we'll leave that battle to Matt McNeil at AM950.
Artwork: The Minnesota Lottery helps fund Environment and Natural Resources Trust Fund.
If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie's posts and original analysis, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen P.O. Box 108, Maynard MN 56260) or use the paypal button below:
As an ardent vegetable gardener who raises and preserves much of our own food, we've been writing for years about the need to craft sound policy for pollinators, which help produce much of what people eat. We're all stakeholders in the health of our state's pollinator population.
With the decline of bees and other pollinators, we're always on the lookout for discussions about pollinator best practices and chances for our readers to participate in the exploration of policy. Thus, we're pleased to find news of (and a chance to register for) the Minnesota Department of Agriculture Pollinators Summit on Friday, February 12, 8:00 am--4:30 p.m., at the Wellstone Center in St. Paul.
With pollinator policy still a hot topic in the Minnesota legislature, we urge concerned readers to get to this day-long event, which is free and open to the public, since policy frameworks are often drafted in these sorts of informal events or by task forces before lawmakers formally convene. Likewise, agency personnel might not hear from concerned citizens unless an event like this is open to the public.
It is a day-long commitment, however, and so registration shouldn't be taken lightly, especially since space is limited. Come prepared to work.
The event is co-hosted by the Environmental Initiative, which has posted a link to information about the event under its Our Work/Environmental Policy drop down menu. Here's the post:
Pollinators are an irreplaceable public resource. Insect pollinators, such as bees, butterflies, wasps, flies, and beetles, are critical for the pollination and production of crops and the health of native flora and landscapes. Some are especially valued for their beauty and place in our culture, like the monarch butterfly and the honeybee.
The Minnesota Department of Agriculture (MDA) is convening the full spectrum of Minnesota’s insect pollinator experts and interested stakeholders—from beekeepers to landscapers to farmers—for a day of collaboration to identify solutions that will protect and support Minnesota’s insect pollinators. The goal of this summit is to identify challenges and propose broadly-supported solutions, particularly strategies that could be implemented by state agencies in the near term.
Participants should come prepared to discuss current efforts and offer specific policy and program ideas that will protect and support Minnesota’s insect pollinators. This summit, and its associated outcomes, will better position our community and state agencies to implement strategies that will reverse the decline of our insect pollinators, both domesticated and wild. [emphasis added]
REGISTRATION INFORMATION
The event is free and open to the public, but registration is required. Due to limited space and a desire to accommodate and engage the greatest possible range of interests and perspectives, we ask that organizations limit their attendance to no more than two individuals. Register »
Contact Greg Bohrer at 612-334-3388 ext. 111 with comments or questions.
Environmental Initiative is working on behalf of Minnesota Department of Agriculture to convene this summit. Per our contract with the State and Minnesota Statutes 13.04, Enviornmental Initiative will provide the names and contact information for all individuals participating in the summit to the Minnesota Department of Agriculture.
Here's a screengrab of the page:
The agenda is embedded below. The event is free and open to the public, as the Environmental Initiative notes, and we encourage all people who hope to learn and craft meaningful pollinator policy to register ASAP. Space is limited, and so only two people per organization. The agenda:
a nonprofit organization that builds partnerships to develop collaborative solutions to Minnesota's environmental problems. The organization:
Plans and hosts events for environmental leaders from businesses, nonprofits, and government agencies to share information, network, and learn from one another.
Facilitates environmental policy conversations between diverse stakeholders.
Takes action and implements on the ground environmental projects to improve our air, land, and water.
As a catalyst, convener, or implementer, Environmental Initiative develops creative solutions to environmental problems with our partners.
Among those listed on the group's Members and Sponsors page are Flint Hills Resources, Great River Energy, Xcel Energy, Aveda, Barr Engineering, Otter Tail Power, Enbridge, Minnesota Environmental Partnership, Tiller Corporation, Polymet Mining, Minnesota Agri-Growth Council, Minnesota Center for Environmental Advocacy, The Nature Conservancy, University of Minnesota Institute on the Environment and the Sustainable Farming Association. Check out the full list here.
Photo: A pollinator on a wild aster, via the Environmental Initiative page about the summit. It's great that the public is invited to this event, since we are all stakeholders in food. We have registered and urge all who are interested in pollinator policy to register ASAP (above); Screengrab of the page inviting the public (below).
If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie's posts and original analysis, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen P.O. Box 108, Maynard MN 56260) or use the paypal button below:
Continuing his focus on water quality throughout Minnesota's farmlands, Gov. Mark Dayton on Tuesday said the state is seeking federal approval for a nearly $800 million plan to permanently protect 100,000 acres across southern and western Minnesota.
The plan, which seeks a mix of state and federal funds, aims to purchase permanent conservation easements on privately owned wetlands, vegetative strips along waterways, and drinking water sources. Willing landowners would be paid a lump sum in exchange for the rights to farm or build on the land forever.
"These would be numerous small slices of land all over the landscape," said John Jaschke, executive director of the Minnesota Board of Soil and Water Resources, which would be tasked with overseeing the program. Wetlands would be restored, and farmed lands would be planted with natural grasses. . . .
For the past year, Dayton's administration has repeatedly underscored the connection between the state's most polluted waters and modern farming practices. For example, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency earlier this year examined 93 streams in southwestern Minnesota and found only three capable of supporting aquatic life and only one with clean enough water to be considered safe for swimming. The issue is also affecting drinking water sources, as nitrates from fertilizer percolate through soils into groundwater.
The Legislature approved a modified version of Dayton's plan to require buffer strips of vegetation along rivers, streams and ditches to reduce erosion and pollution from farm fertilizer and pesticide runoff.
Monday's proposal is related; federal subsidies through various programs are available to landowners to help them plant buffer strips and compensate them for the loss of lucrative crops like corn and soybeans. Dayton's plan would add to those options for landowners, Jaschke said. In addition to wetlands and buffers along streams, the plan would also seek to protect landscapes where underground drinking water wells can be tainted by pollution on the land above. . . .
Orrick reached powerful opponent of the plan, Dan Busselman, director of public policy for the Minnesota Farm Bureau, as well as an influential water quality champion in the Minnesota House, state representative Rick Hansen, DFL-South St. Paul, who also farms near Harmony. Read the piece at the Pioneer Press.
The Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program (CREP) is an offshoot of the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP), the country’s largest private-land conservation program. Administered by the Farm Service Agency (FSA), CREP targets high-priority conservation issues identified by local, state, or tribal governments or non-governmental organizations. In exchange for removing environmentally sensitive land from production and introducing conservation practices, farmers, ranchers, and agricultural land owners are paid an annual rental rate. Participation is voluntary, and the contract period is typically 10–15 years, along with other federal and state incentives as applicable per each CREP agreement.
This development appears to seek funding from an offshoot of a program that MN07 Congressman Collin Peterson had touted over the perceived mandatory taking of property in Dayton's original buffer proposal. Back in June, Brownfield Ag News reported that the ranking Democrat on the U.S. House Agriculture Committee pointed to CRP in buffer debate:
Congressman Collin Peterson’s solution to the buffer bill proposed by Minnesota Governor Mark Dayton lies in the federal Farm Bill.
Peterson, the ranking member of the House Agriculture Committee, says a widely used provision exists that provides federal funding for voluntary buffer strips.
“The continuous CRP. It is available year round. There’s acres available under that program. We’ve put in additional incentives, so we’re paying two to three times what we pay for normal CRP if people sign up in the continuous CRP buffer program.”
He tells Brownfield he thinks it’s dangerous to put any kind of set-in-stone number in place like Dayton did with the original buffer language. Peterson has spoken to the governor and some state legislators about promoting CRP instead of pushing a mandatory taking of property.
You may have read information about Continuous CRP and are wondering how it differs from CREP. While both programs focus on environmentally sensitive land, CREP is a partnership between state and/or tribal governments and the federal government. This partnership is in place to address a high priority environmental problem. Land cannot be enrolled in CREP if your state does not have a CREP agreement.
How Do I enroll?
Your state must have a CREP agreement in place with FSA. If there is an agreement, land can be enrolled in CREP on a continuous basis provided it meets the eligibility requirements for the program. Any land that meets basic CRP eligibility requirements, plus the additional requirements for a specific CREP project, is automatically eligible for enrollment. Most additional CREP land eligibility requirements apply to the location and characteristics of the land to be enrolled. All enrollment offers are processed through your local FSA office.
It will be curious to see how supportive Peterson will be of the Governor's proposal, as well as the reaction by members of the Minnesota legislature, which will convene on March 8.
Sources tell Bluestem that a tweet in late July by Minnesota House Ag Policy Vice Chair Mary Franson is accurate about the principle authors in the House of the final buffer bill language:
If you appreciate Bluestem's posts, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen P.O. Box 108, Maynard MN 56260) or use the paypal button below:
In Friday's Morning Take, we read about promotional activities for tomorrow's Governor's Pheasant Opener near Mankato. Lt. Governor Tina Smith
At 4:00pm, the Lt. Governor and the Nicollet Conservation Club will take a guided boat tour of Swan Lake, the largest prairie pothole marsh in the contiguous United States.
It's good to see the lake valued and we hope Smith enjoys the tour.
Back in the early 1970s, the shallow prairie lake was a candidate for becoming the cooling pond for a coal-fired power plant. In 2013, the New Ulm Journal reported in Swan Lake meeting draws a crowd:
A roomful of outdoors enthusiasts energetically told of their past and present experiences on Swan Lake at the Nicollet Conservation Club on Tuesday.
Hosted by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) and Nicollet County Historical Society (NHS), the event about one of the largest prairie pothole lakes in the lower 48 states included a wide array of information and story telling by DNR and NHS officials as well as area sports enthusiasts.
Once twice the size it is now, Swan Lake was Minnesota's largest marsh-wetland ecosystem before it was drained for more farmland decades ago. . . .
Swan Lake's water level is more stable than many other area lakes and sloughs. It's well vegetated," said Stein Innvaer of the Nicollet DNR office. "Northern States Power (NSP) was going to build a coal-fired power plant on the lake once.
[David Vesall, assistant game and fish director] and other officials of the DNR met with the Governor's Task Force on Power Plant Siting to explain the department's position on designation of the Lake. Swan Lake is one of seven sites proposed for development by Northern States Power Co. of a 1,600-megawatt fossil burning power plant.
It's possible, then, that Nicollet County could have going through the turmoil facing Sherburne County, rather than the tour today, had the fool-hardy choice to turn a duck-factory into an industrial site gone forward.
Yesterday, Bluestem Prairie watched the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency's Clean Power Plan Stakeholder meeting online, listening to representatives from utilities, environmental organizations and state legislators discuss the plan to reduce carbon emissions--and possibly slow climate change.
One legislator tweeted:
At Clean Power Plan mtg I am reminded/remember: Team work makes the Dream Work! Mn leadership works = problem solving.
What will happen in Becker as the two coal-fired units are phased out? Two Republican lawmakers fretted about that, but others, including an owner of a construction company, pointed out that clean energy also creates jobs.
. . . In 2023, Sherco Unit 2 will be shut down. In 2026, Sherco Unit 1 will be shut down and subsequently, Sherco Unit 2 will be converted to natural gas that same year.
Sherco’s larger, newer Unit 3, which has more modern pollution controls, would continue burning coal.
Xcel Energy said they are committed to continue to provide high pressure steam to Liberty Paper in Becker.
Newberger says the shutting down of Units 1 & 2 will eliminate about 150 full-time jobs.
“Xcel has informed me that many of these job eliminations will be by attrition and retirement,” Newberger said. “The rest will be reassigned to other areas within Xcel.”
Newberger also said he was relieved at the news that the currently employed will be able to remain employed if they do not retire.
“I am also relieved that creating a new gas plant will ensure some form of property tax base for the City of Becker,” he said.
But his frustration over the situation is still palpable.
“However, the fact remains that these 150 jobs will not be replaced with new workers as they would be if the plant were to continue its normal operation,” he said. “That means 150 fewer good-paying job opportunities for families in our area. The economic impact will be a staggering blow to Central Minnesota.” . ..
We'll be hearing a lot about those 150 local jobs at Xcel Energy, which will slowly be phased out as the workers filling them retire or move on to other opportunities as we move toward the shutdowns in 2023 and 2026.
We have to wonder, however, that Becker and Sherburne County might have something to dangle for companies looking to locate in Greater Minnesota. Skilled workers, quality housing, access to a freeway (and Highway 10), along with proximity to St. Cloud, the western suburbs, as well as natural amenities like the Mississippi River, the Sherburne National Wildlife Refuge, Sand Dune State Forest: all of these are assets.
Change is difficult--but part of leadership is to direct resources to toward the opportunities offered by it, rather than to exhaust resources and emotion in a rear-guard action against it.
If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen P.O. Box 108, Maynard MN 56260) or use the paypal button below:
At Minnesota Public Radio, Dan Gunderson cuts to the chase in Money, race, politics tangle northern Minnesota land deal, a report on the White Earth Band of Ojibwe's request to the Outdoor Heritage Council to buy 2,000 acres by the Wild Rice River using a $2 million Minnesota Legacy Amendment grant.
Here are the money graphs:
. . . "Let's take the race element out of it, let's take the natives owning property out of it," she said. "I'd like for everyone involved to look at not who's owning the property, just what will this do for conservation."
There doesn't seem to be any question the land, owned now by Potlach Corp., is worth conserving. The parcels totaling 2,034 acres, are nearly surrounded by state wildlife management areas. The land White Earth wants to buy would be open for public use, much like state wildlife areas. . . .
Protecting this land from development will help protect water and wildlife, Chris Knopf, major gifts officer with the Indian Land Tenure Foundation, said as he walked part of the property recently, a trail across a grassland surrounded by pines, poplar and aspen by the Wild Rice River.
White Earth, he added, is concerned about protecting water flowing into nearby Lower Rice Lake, a prolific wild rice lake where tribal members harvest thousands of pounds of rice every fall.
"The project stands on its own for its conservation merits. That's really gotta be the focus of the Outdoor Heritage Fund and the legislators as well," said Knopf, whose nonprofit works with tribes across the country to "help recover traditional lands." . . .
Susan Olson, who sits on the outdoor heritage council with McNamara, supported the White Earth project last year and will vote for it again this year.
She calls concerns about property taxes and non-state land ownership red herrings.
"If you put anybody else's name on this, if you just pretended that this was some county that was doing this ... everybody would be like, 'Oh my god, this is the best project ever,'" she said. "But it's all about who's asking for the money."
If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen P.O. Box 108, Maynard MN 56260) or use the paypal button below:
Next week, the DNR is expected to announced a pheasant action plan that is also a result of the summit and will likely include more suggestions for increasing the permanent acreage of natural grasslands in the state.
A friend sent us details of Monday's meeting, to which our reader had been invited as a participant in the 2015 Governor's Pheasant Opener in Blue Earth County:
From: Roemhildt, Scott (DNR) [address redacted] Sent: Friday, September 11, 2015 9:13 AM To: Undisclosed recipients: Subject: Governor at Nicollet Conservation Club on Monday, September 14, 2015
On behalf of Tom Landwehr, Commissioner, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources I have been asked to invite you to the Governor’s news conference next Monday, at the Nicollet Conservation Club. As a local landowner who is participating in the Governor’s Pheasant Hunting Opener, I encourage you to be part of this important event. Please RSVP to me if you are able to be there. Details on the event are below. Thanks. - Scott W. Roemhildt
Governor to present pheasant summit action plan in Mankato
WHAT: Gov. Mark Dayton and key administration officials will discuss an action plan designed to revitalize Minnesota’s pheasant hunting tradition and restore grassland habitat. Actions outlined in the plan grew out of citizen ideas offered during 2014’s Pheasant Summit in Marshall.
WHO: Gov. Mark Dayton
Tom Landwehr, commissioner, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources John Jaschke, executive director, Board of Soil and Water Resources
Matt Holland, director of grant development, Minnesota Pheasants Forever
WHEN: 2 p.m., Monday, Sept. 14
WHERE: Nicollet Conservation Club, 46045 471st Lane, Nicollet, MN 56074, 507-232-3366. Take U.S. Highway 14 west out of Nicollet for approximately ½ mile. Turn right (north) on to 471st Lane/Township Road 173 and travel approximately 0.8 miles. The club is located at the end of the road.
Kevin Lines, Pheasant Action Plan Coordinator . . .
Our reader notes that Highway 14 is under construction, so those attending should plan accordingly. We've occasionally bird watched on Swan Lake near the club; bring your binoculars if you're inclined to watch for waterfowl and migrating birds.
Photo: Swan Lake, via Nicollet County website. While pheasants won't be wading in the lake, conservation efforts surrounding the large but shallow prairie lake provide prime habitat for pheasants and other wildlife.
If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen P.O. Box 108, Maynard MN 56260) or use the paypal button below:
White Earth Nation has resubmitted its proposal, "Protecting Forest Wildlife Habitat in the Wild Rice River Watershed," for consideration for a grant by the Lessard-Sams Outdoor Heritage Council (LSOHC) for Fiscal Year 2017.
The Ojibwe band is requesting $2,188,000 to acquire the land and protect 2,034 acres of forestland, riparian corridors, and open meadows that are home to bald eagles, trumpeter swans, black bear, gray wolves, whitetail deer, grouse and "much more," according to the proposal (see fact sheet and proposal embedded below.
While Steve Green, R-Fosston, objected to the proposal over issues related to payment in lieu of taxes (PILT), the proposal has been opposed by those irate over Ojibwe bands prohibiting wolf hunting on tribal lands. Traditional Ojibwe religion and culture cherish the gray wolf.
According to the Indian Land Tenure Foundation's Chris Knopf, the Wild Rice River proposal wasn't the only proposal that raised PILT issues, but it was the only one shot down by the legislature because of the issue. In a phone interview, Knopf said that the legislature should address perceived PILT problems separately, rather than punishing one grant applicant over the matter.
The dynamics are already in play in published summaries of the council members' comments. Council member Jane Kingston commented: "No PILT for 2034ac/$2.1M," while frequent native sovereignty critic Ron Schara wrote, "Need to discuss this proposal about changes. Legislature already eliminated it???"
Representative Denny McNamara, R-Hastings, raised the question of using the concept in the proposal, but stripping it from the control of the indigenous nation: "Should consider as a DNR WMA or AMA."
Susan Olson welcomed the re-appearance of the proposal: "Thank you for bringing this project back to the Council, it should never have been removed by the legislature for the last funding cycle. Good job addressing all of the points of contention raised by legislators during discusions of the bill. **Note re: criteria #8 - phrasing is specific to only restoration or enhancements, so a straight acquisition will be penalized because it is not possible to award any points based on the criteria."
Another wild card in the Council's future? Outdoor advocate Dill's death created a vacancy. Bluestem will have more more when we learn about the recommendation of Minority Leader Paul Thissen, DFL-Minneapolis, to fill the seat on the Council.
Bluestem believes it's a fine conservation project, made more urgent because the timber company that currently owns the property is actively offering more than 1500 for sale and the land may slip from public access if these games continue.
The Lessard-Sams Outdoor Heritage Council was established by the legislature with the responsibility of providing annual funding recommendations to the legislature from the Outdoor Heritage Fund. The Outdoor Heritage Fund, one of four funds created by the Clean Water, Land and Legacy Amendment, receives one-third of the money raised by the tax increase.
Bluestem is conducting a mid-August contribution drive. Please give if you can.
If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, P.O. Box 108, Maynard MN 56260) or use the paypal button below:
Hormel Foods Corp. continued to post record profits over the past quarter despite a severe shortage in turkey livestock and decreasing international sales.
Hormel announced Wednesday $146.9 million in third-quarter net earnings, up 6 percent from $138 million. . .
The profits come even though one division of the meat-packing giant was set back because of the avian flu pandemic earlier this year, Mewes reports:
. . . Jennie-O Turkey Store reported a 45 percent decrease in its segment profits after avian flu outbreaks in Minnesota over the summer dramatically affected Hormel’s turkey stock. At one point, 55 farms which served Hormel had been closed because of the flu.
Despite what Ettinger called an “unprecedented shortage” in turkey supplies, Hormel has repopulated about two-thirds of its turkey supply at company farms and expects to operate at normal capacity by the end of the fall, barring further flu outbreaks. Still, Hormel expects turkey volume struggles through the beginning of 2016. . . .
Photo: The Jennie-O Turkey Store plant #4 located behind the Jennie-O headquarter in Willmar, pictured here in West Central Tribune file photo.
Bluestem is conducting a week-long, mid-August contribution drive. Please give if you can.
If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen P.O. Box 108, Maynard MN 56260) or use the paypal button below:
Even with the combined efforts of growers, the state Department of Agriculture and the Board of Animal Health, "Minnesota is the epicenter of the outbreak," as Representative David Bly (DFL-Northfield) say as he moved to suspend the rules and bring HF 2225 to a vote.
Bly, Jeanne Poppe (DFL-Austin), Clark Johnson (DFL-North Mankato), and Rick Hansen (DFL-South St. Paul) are the four authors of the anti-Turkeypocolypse.
The bill provides emergency assistance to fight the disease, which not only has killed birds, but limited the export market for Minnesota-grown turkey. For more information, check out MPR's Where it stands: The avian flu outbreak and Minnesota turkeys.
Here's the video of today's floor discussion of the motion to suspend the rules and vote for the bill. Both votes were unanimous:
Here's the video of the joint committee hearing about the crisis. Our favorite part is Representative Hansen's inquiry intended to quash rumors about the disease and cats.
Photo: Representative David Bly, Northfield's genial representative and champion of family farmers, and a supporter on a farm road.
Screengrab: Representative Denny McNamara. The MPCA commissioner is not impressed.
We're conducting our spring fundraising drive. If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen P.O. Box 108, Maynard MN 56260) or use the paypal button below:
Did Senator Gary Dahms (R-Redwood Falls) just kick a beehive?
One of the pro-pollinator policy victories of the 2014 legislative session was the inclusion of language defining pollinator-lethal insecticides in Minnesota statute and a ban on labeling and marketing plants and seeds treated with such chemicals as "bee friendly."
The law was hailed as a victory for consumers who want to be able to plant pollinator-friendly habitat without unknowingly killing bees, butterflies and other pollinators. As pollinator populations decline, many Minnesotans hope to create islands of habitat and food for these valuable insects and birds.
"This is loosely drawn language, it's very vague," Dahms said. ". . . This was passed in the House last year, and the concern I have is that we're going to start asking people when they apply for money through Legacy or LCCMR, we're going to insist they meet this and it's really going to be hard to do that because the terms and the facts just aren't there. . . " (We post the section of statute below).
But it's not just wildlife habitat will be affected. As a consequence of removing the language, greenhouses and garden stores could market bee-lethal, neonic-treated plants and seeds as "pollinator friendly" to the home gardener.
Here's the video--which we hope gets pollinator-friendly Minnesotans buzzing (and calling their legislators):
The pesticide industry's influence grew even more toxic on Wednesday with the senate committee's unanimous voice vote.
In 2008, Minnesota voters overwhelming voted to change the state constitution and tax themselves to fund clean water and wildlife habitat. People seeking to help pollinators--which are essentially for the propagation of many fruits and vegetables--have hoped to make Legacy lands rich in habitat for pollinators. They're not whitetails or ducks, but they are part of our non-game wildlife heritage.
The underlined language will be removed from statute if the bill becomes law:
CHAPTER 299--H.F.No. 2798
An act relating to environment; prohibiting plants treated with pollinator lethal insecticide from being labeled or advertised as beneficial to pollinators; amending Minnesota Statutes 2012, sections 18H.02, by adding a subdivision; 18H.14.
BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA: Section 1. Minnesota Statutes 2012, section 18H.02, is amended by adding a subdivision to read:
Subd. 28a. Pollinator lethal insecticide. "Pollinator lethal insecticide" means an insecticide absorbed by a plant that makes the plant lethal to pollinators. Pollinator lethal insecticide includes, but is not limited to, the neonicotinoid class of insecticides that affect the central nervous system of pollinators and may cause pollinator paralysis or death.
Sec. 2. Minnesota Statutes 2012, section 18H.14, is amended to read: 18H.14 LABELING AND ADVERTISING OF NURSERY STOCK. (a) Plants, plant materials, or nursery stock must not be labeled or advertised with false or misleading information including, but not limited to, scientific name, variety, place of origin, hardiness zone as defined by the United States Department of Agriculture, and growth habit.
(b) All nonhardy nursery stock as designated by the commissioner must be labeled "nonhardy" in Minnesota.
(c) A person may not offer for distribution plants, plant materials, or nursery stock, represented by some specific or special form of notation, including, but not limited to, "free from" or "grown free of," unless the plants are produced under a specific program approved by the commissioner to address the specific plant properties addressed in the special notation claim.
(d) Nursery stock collected from the wild state must be inspected and certified prior to sale and at the time of sale must be labeled "Collected from the Wild." The label must remain on each plant or clump of plants while it is offered for sale and during the distribution process. The collected stock may be grown in nursery rows at least two years, after which the plants may be sold without the labeling required by this paragraph.
(e) A person may not label or advertise an annual plant, bedding plant, or other plant, plant material, or nursery stock as beneficial to pollinators if the annual plant, bedding plant, plant material, or nursery stock has been treated with and has a detectable level of systemic insecticide that: (1) has a pollinator protection box on the label; or (2) has a pollinator, bee, or honey bee precautionary statement in the environmental hazards section of the insecticide product label. The commissioner shall enforce this paragraph as provided in chapter 18J. EFFECTIVE DATE.
This section is effective July 1, 2014.
Presented to the governor May 17, 2014
Signed by the governor May 21, 2014, 10:22 a.m.
We're not sure what's vague about that language.
Screenshot: Senator Dahms (left) discussing his amendment to kill bee-friendly language, while Senator Lyle Koenen (DFL-Clara City) gets ready to whack the insects himself.
If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen P.O. Box 108, Maynard MN 56260) or use the paypal button below:
In Monday's Minnesota House Legacy Funding Finance Committee meeting, Representative Denny McNamara (R-Hastings) claimed that since "bees don't eat corn," using neonicotinoid-treated seed corn in food plots on land purchased with Legacy funds wouldn't be an issue for pollinators.
But McNamara said during the hearing:
The letter from Pollinate Minnesota talks mostly about the need to be conscious of not having neonicotinoids plants planted that are going to kill bees when they're planted. My amendment, because it was so broad in the original adoption in so broad that it would stop the planting of certain crops that would be used temporarily to prepare the land to properly plant it with prairie plants such as corn seeds coated with the neonicotinoid, and bees don't eat corn, so it's not going to kill the bees. That's not the issue here. . .
As the photo at the top of the post illustrates, bees do gather and eat corn pollen from tassels (the flower of the corn plant), and researchers at Purdue and elsewhere have discovered that bees are exposed to neonicotinoids via pollen from corn grown from treated seeds; one study found worker bee counts to be lower at hives near corn fields. Talc dust from the seeds themselves can also be a problem.
Rep. Phyllis Kahn (DFL-Minneapolis) insisted that no neonicotinoids were safe for pollinators, while noting that non-treated seed corn, such as that used by organic farmers, was available.
Regardless, McNamara was successful in stripping language protecting pollinators from HF181, the outdoor heritage funding bill as it went through the Legacy Committee. Along the way, McNamara made an additional odd claim neonicotinoid pesticides that are playing a role in their decline.
He associated neonicotinoids with weed control, an odd notion given that herbicides, rather than insecticides, kill plants. Treating seeds with neonicotinoids is done to discourage insects, not weeds.
Here's a Youtube of the excerpts of committee discussion referenced above:
In 2008, Minnesotans voted to dedicate a three-eighths of one percent tax on themselves for 25 years, until 2034 for wildlife habitat, clean water and arts & culture. These funds are commonly called "Legacy" money.
Learn more about pollinators and neonicotinoid pesticides from the Xerces Society.
If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen P.O. Box 108, Maynard MN 56260) or use the paypal button below:
While the Star Tribune's Doug Smith reported back in December in Sunrise or sunset for pheasants? Summit seeks solutions that pheasant hunters, pollinator protectors and water quality advocates saw value in buffer strips, Representative Paul Torkelson (R-Hanska) dismissed the notion at a recent town hall in Sleepy Eye.
. . .As for Dayton’s proposal, both Torkelson and Dahms agreed that as it was presented, it doesn’t have much chance of becoming a regulation.
“We as farmers don’t want to be anti-buffer, but we want those buffers to do some good. We don’t need them everywhere and we have programs in place to help farmers put in buffers and we don’t want to mess up those programs. It is a complicated area to work in and I personally don’t think it makes very good sense for wildlife unless you are a coyote,” Torkelson commented.He went on to explain that when a public ditch gets reassessed, it is public requirement of a 16- foot buffer, which is a lot different than 50 feet and is there mostly for ditch maintenance so they have a place to pile dirt and clean out the ditches.
Well then. Perhaps someone needs to discuss water quality with the Hanska pork producer.
Only one legislator attended the summit, an absence noted by Tom Kalahar of Olivia, who works for the Renville County Soil and Water Conservation District. “It’s disheartening,’’ he said. “All of the legislators from the region should have been here.’’
Torkelson represents a sliver of Renville County.
Photo: A ditch in SW Minnesota where a farmer hasn't observed the one-rod rule.
If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen P.O. Box 108, Maynard MN 56260) or use the paypal button below:
Following his autocratic removal of Representative Jean Wagenius (DFL-Minneapolis) not just a minority lead on the Environment and Natural Resources Policy and Finance Committee, but as a member of the committee itself, Minnesota House Speaker Kurt Daudt (R-Crown) has replaced Rep. Rick Hansen (DFL – South St. Paul) on the Lessard-Sams Outdoor Heritage Council.
Minority Leader Paul Thissen had recommended both lawmakers for the respective bodies. Minnesota House custom has allowed minority caucuses to pick leads on committees.
It's not the first time the Republicans have sought to banish Hansen, a frequent critic of special interests who also farms and hunts, from the Council. In 2011 the Star Tribune reported in Hansen booted from Lessard Sams Council:
The ax has fallen on Rick Hansen, the legislator who had been a critic of Legacy money spending.
Hansen, a DFLer from South St. Paul, has been removed from the Lessard Sams Outdoor Heritage Council, which recommends spending from the so-called Legacy constitutional amendment for outdoors projects.
Although he was to serve until 2013, Hansen said last month that subtle changes in the law were made to shorten his term. On Tuesday, Hansen was replaced by House leaders.
A letter signed by House Speaker Kurt Zellers announced the changes. Hansen said he was informed by a fellow legislator of the move. “Rep. [Leon] Lillie told me,” said Hansen, referring to the Lillie, a DFLer from North St. Paul who was appointed to the council.
Hansen had complained that the legislative changes that shortened his term amounted to a “get rid of Rick Hansen amendment.” Council members who at times were at odds with Hansen denied there was an attempt to remove the DFLer, and one said that “Rick needs to just kind of put his paranoia to rest.”
But said Hansen of the council: “There’s not a strong tolerance for dissent.” Hansen had cast the only “no” vote during the past three years on the council’s funding recommendations.
Given that the Republicans have repeated their 2011 decision, Daudt's action suggests that it's not "paranoia" on Hansen's part, as the brave anonodem asserted at the time.
Bluestem has to wonder exactly what Daudt thinks he's achieving here, other than handing over more goodies to a Range DFLer to distribute to good old boys in exchange for a solid vote for trashing the state's environment. Certainly the corporate interests that funded the independent expenditure attacks on defeated rural DFLers in the 2014 elections will be getting their money's worth.
. . .“I think there are many outdoor groups, and some individuals who worked on the campaign (to establish the Outdoor Heritage Fund), who see this money as their money, rather than the people’s money,” said Hansen. “And I see it as the people’s money, and I believe there needs to be more accountability, transparency and effectiveness regarding the recommendations and use of these funds.”
. . .Although his time on the council is finished, Hansen said that he will continue working on conservation issues. “Whether I’m on the council or not, I still have a voice here at the capitol and want to make sure this (the use of money from the heritage fund) is done right,” said Hansen.
Passage of the Legacy Amendment also showed that Minnesotans take seriously their responsibility to our state's greatest assets.
Similarly, those who serve as stewards of the Legacy funds have an exceptional responsibility to spend the money with maximum transparency, accountability and wisdom.
Rep. Rick Hansen, DFL-South St. Paul, took this task seriously.
So much so that he became a controversial member of the Lessard-Sams Outdoor Heritage Council, which recommends expenditures for the portion of the fund dedicated to "restore, protect and enhance Minnesota's wetlands, prairies, forests and habitat for fish, game and wildlife."
Hansen asked the hard and uncomfortable questions about priorities and processes.
He clashed with some fellow board members over his perception that those who were instrumental in pushing for passage of the amendment were too influential in lobbying for its funds.
His skepticism was reflected in his Lessard Council voting record as well: He voted against the board's recommendations twice, and abstained once, over the three years there has been a vote.
No other member has opposed a funding recommendation during that period.
Last week Speaker of the House Kurt Zellers, R-Maple Grove, replaced Hansen on the board.
The new legislative members are Rep. Denny McNamara, R-Hastings, and Rep. Leon Lillie, DFL-North St. Paul. Zellers gets to name two elected and two citizen representatives to the 12-member board, as does Senate Majority Leader Amy Koch, R-Buffalo.
Gov. Mark Dayton appoints four citizen representatives.
The elected officials play a critical, dual role because the Lessard Council's funding recommendations need to be approved by the Legislature and signed by the governor.
Unlike the citizen appointees and those lobbying the Lessard Council for specific projects, these legislators are directly accountable to the public.
As our voice, they should speak as aggressively as Hansen did -- and ask difficult questions in order to avoid the potential of groupthink that can creep into a process that by its very nature can become insular.
Minnesota exceptionalism can be seen in the natural and artistic worlds that the Legacy Amendment is meant to protect.
And it can be seen in Minnesota voters, who bucked the national tax-slashing trend in order to leave a legacy.
More than ever, that same quality needs to be reflected in those who are responsible for protecting the public's extraordinary investment in the state's future.
Bluestem sees nothing different in the GOP's repeat of the 2011 action, other than a lot more money invested in getting rid of rural Democrats serving in the Minnesota House.
There's another dimension to Hansen's removal as well. In discussion of grants requests, Hansen has also defended the rights of Native American bands to ban wolf hunting on their own lands; many Ojibwe people object to hunting wolves because of the cultural importance of the animal to their heritage.
During Hansen's absence of the Council in 2011-2012, it turned down a request by the Fond Du Lac Band of Chippewa because of sovereignty questions. Dave Orrick reported in the Pioneer Press:
The proposal -- the first request to use Minnesota Legacy Amendment tax dollars to protect natural habitat on sovereign land -- tapped into a litany of touchy issues surrounding tribal relations, from wolf hunting to how tribal members pay taxes. . . .
Several Outdoor Heritage Council members, including state Rep. Dennis McNamara, R-Hastings, objected to the fact that tribal members would retain their hunting and fishing treaty rights, which are not subject to state laws. Such sentiments prompted Diver to send a letter accusing the council of being "punitive and discriminatory."
On Tuesday, McNamara proposed that if additional money became available this year, the project should be funded -- a reversal of his position. "I wish I had been better informed the first time," McNamara said. . . .
Council member Ron Schara said the Indian sovereignty of the land was a concern.
"The issue for me was never hunting and fishing rights," Schara said. "The issue was buying land (to be placed in Indian trust). To illustrate my point, the Fond du Lac closed tribal lands to the wolf hunt. I don't think people who pay sales tax in Minnesota would want us to buy land that could be closed to hunting."
Diver said the decision to close tribe-owned land to wolf hunting -- because wolves are regarded as "our brothers" -- was unique.
"I know of no other species where this would be so disagreeable to us," she said. "Other species are meant to be taken." . . .
House DFL Leader Paul Thissen expressed his disappointment today in House Speaker Kurt Daudt’s decision to replace Representative Rick Hansen (DFL – South St. Paul) on the Lessard-Sams Outdoor Heritage Council. Leader Thissen recommended Rep. Hansen to serve as the DFL House member on the council. Republicans also replaced Hansen on the committee the last time they held the majority in 2011. Rep. Hansen is in his 6th term and has served on the Outdoor Heritage Council for 4 years.
The move also comes after Republicans removed Rep. Jean Wagenius from her position as designated minority lead on the House Environment and Natural Resources Committee prior to session.
Rep. Thissen released the following statement:
“I am disappointed that Republicans are again playing games with qualified appointees to committees and councils. Rep. Hansen was a co-author of the Legacy Amendment that led to the creation of the Outdoor Heritage Council, was one of the original members of the council, and is a state leader on outdoor and environmental issues.
“Republicans and Speaker Daudt have talked a lot about wanting to work together to find solutions, but their words don’t match their actions. House Republicans continue to say one thing and do another.”
Photo: State Rep. Rick Hansen.
If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen P.O. Box 108, Maynard MN 56260) or use the paypal button below:
All of the statements, opinions, and views expressed on this site by Sally Jo Sorensen are solely her own, save when she attributes them to other sources.
The opinions, statements, and views of contributing writers are their own.
Sorensen, editor and proprietor of Bluestem Prairie, serves clients in the business and nonprofit sectors. While progressive in outlook, she does not caucus with any political party.
Recent Comments