The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency will be hosting three open houses on the wild rice sulfate standard rulemaking in January 2017. The main purpose is to provide the interested public with an opportunity to learn more about the MPCA's proposed approach for revisions to its wild rice sulfate water quality standard before the proposed rule goes on public notice later in 2017. MPCA staff will be available to provide information about the agency's proposed approach to protect wild rice from sulfate, the list of proposed wild rice waters, the rulemaking schedule and upcoming opportunities for public comment.
Additional information about the wild rice sulfate water quality standard is available here.
Open house events are scheduled for:
Tuesday, Jan. 17, 6 – 8 p.m., Dakota Lodge, Thompson County Park, 1200 Stassen Lane, West St Paul
Wednesday, Jan. 25, 6:30 – 8:30 p.m., UM-Duluth, Kirby Student Center, Griggs Center, 2nd floor, 1120 Kirby Drive, Duluth
Tuesday, Jan. 31, 6 – 8 p.m., Northeast Service Cooperative Office, 5525 Emerald Drive, Mountain Iron
More information about the open houses is available here.
Scientists say high levels of sulfate in water damages wild rice by increasing sulfides and restricting plant growth. PCA officials — under pressure from mining companies, state lawmakers and environmental and tribal groups — are working to find out what levels of sulfate can be allowed and still protect wild rice beds.
Photo: Photo credit, University of Minnesota, National Center for Earth-Surface Dynamics.
Please donate! If you enjoy Bluestem's take on the news--and our investigative blogging--please consider throwing some spare change into our paypal account during our January contribution drive. Bluestem relies on reader contributions to continue publishing.
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@gmail.com as recipient.
Last Friday at a town hall meeting in Clinton, Minnesota, state senator Torrey Westrom, R-Elbow Lake, who chairs the Minnesota Senate Agriculture, Rural Development, and Housing Finance Committee, answered a question about pollinators, neonicotinoids and policy by buzzing about an invasive weed species in conservation seed mixes.
But he's not accurate about the situation that led to the weed's appearance in Minnesota nor its lack of appeal to pollinators.
What Westrom said
Answering a question about pollinator health asked by an Ortonville resident, Katie Laughlin, Westrom said (video below):
. . .Just on that issue, Katie, I just heard about it a couple of days ago when I talked to Senator Bill Weber, who's the Ag Policy Chair--I'm chairing the Finance side in the Senate. There's an issue with pollinators and some of the plants that are being brought in that are helpful to the pollinators.
This really isn't tied to the neonics that I know of but I don't know enough about it yet, I want to dig into it. But in Southwest Minnesota, they're finding there are some of the weeds that are coming that are good for pollinators but they're a weed that will take over a field in about three-four years and you will not be able to have good production on it. So that is another pollinator issue that I've been hearing about.
I need to know more about it. . . .
We could not agree that he needs to know more about it--and politely told him at the town hall that Palmer amaranth wasn't brought into the state on purpose, but had contaminated seed mixes. Nor were we alone in letting him know: two local soil and water service employees backed us up--while assuring the crowd of 60 that the mix they had wasn't contaminated.
Palmer amaranth not a favored bee forage
Moreover, Bluestem was under the impression that the plant--which is pollinated by the wind--wasn't a food source for pollinators. We decided to check with wild pollinator expert Daniel P Cariveau, an Assistant Professor in the University of Minnesota Department of Entomology/Bee Research Facility. His emailed reply:
Thanks for the email. Palmer amaranth is not purposely planted for pollinators. What has happened in some instances is that conservation seed mixes have been contaminated. This is species was not typically found in Minnesota and has likely come in, at least in part, through conservation mixes from southern states.
It is the case that some wind-pollinated plants are visited by pollinators. For example, there are records of pollinators visiting a number of wind pollinated grass species such as corn. However, these instances are rare and not a major part of their diet. So while there might be some record somewhere of a bee visiting palmer amaranth, it is not, to my knowledge, a forage plant for them. I would be surprised to collect a bee from it.
Short answer: Palmer amaranth is not intentionally planted and is rarely, if ever, visited by bees.
Fabian: Isn't it interesting on the terrestrial invasive species. . . where we get the Palmer amaranth--it comes in on some of the seed mixtures that were brought here to help out a problem and it created one. Representative Hansen.
Hansen: Thanks Mr. Chair, and I was thinking back to when we actually had passed a law to say that you had to use local seed mixes but that got repealed. That would have prevented the Palmer amaranth problem . ..
Why is it that we suspect bee champion Hansen wasn't among those repealing that law? And why do we suspect Republicans and some eager-to-please DFLers will try to make pollinator politics follow Westrom's inaccurate and ill-informed frame? It's almost as predictable as the same swarm wagging their fingers about the doubts they have of the science in the studies of neonics and pollinators by scientists not on the dole at Syngenta.
Here's the clip from Tuesday's Minnesota House Environment and Natural Resources Policy and Finance Committee meeting:
Please donate! If you enjoy Bluestem's take on the news--and our investigative blogging--please consider throwing some spare change into our paypal account during our January contribution drive. Bluestem relies on reader contributions to continue publishing.
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@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.
Talk about unbelievable corporate citizenship. On page 3 of the Agri-Growth Council's June Newsletter, in the article, Spotlight: Bayer SeedGrowth, we read this gem:
Bayer supports environmentally compatible practices company-wide, including recycling and green landscaping practices in all locations. As part of the SeedGrowth Equipment Innovation Center construction, planners worked with county conservationists to develop a native seed mix to plant in the no-mow areas that make up 85 percent of the outdoor area, and contractors installed drip irrigation in place of standard lawn sprinklers to save water. In addition, Bayer planted a pollinator seed mix around the facility to assist local beekeepers whose bees forage throughout the Shakopee area.
It's important for pollinators to have adequate forage. It's part of the matrix for bee health that University of Minnesota scientist Marla Spivak outlined in her MDA Pollinators Summit Presentation.
Yes, dear readers: while inside the SeedGrowth Equipment Innovation Center in Shakopee, Minnesota, Bayer toils to manufacture seed coating equipment with which to better coating seed with neonicotinoids and other insecticides, outside, bees and other pollinators will be supping on great pollinator forage.
The crops most likely to expose honeybees to harmful levels of imidacloprid are cotton and citrus, while "corn and leafy vegetables either do not produce nectar or have residues below the EPA identified level."
Screengrabs: slides from Marla Spivak's MDA Pollinators Summit Presentation. Spivak and her associates have discovered a matrix of factors that contribute to pollinator health. Look at the slideshow for more information.
Bluestem Prairie is conducting its summer fundraising drive. If you appreciate our 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:
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:
Registration opened on January 14; we registered for it that day when we spotted the Governor's press release* announcing that registration was open via a link in a legislator's email update--though not the update from our own House member. It's possible that he sent one, and we deleted an emailed legislative update from Rep. Miller informing constituents of the need to register.
Whatever the case, we didn't have advance notice of the registration before the general public. UPDATE: Apparently, neither did state legislators; the House member in whose update we saw the link learned about the announcement via twitter. [end update]
Last week, Gov. Mark Dayton announced his Water Summit. Registration filled up fairly quickly, but rest assured, the Minnesota Soybean Growers Association will have several directors in attendance. Tuesday, at a pre-summit discussion at the Governor’s mansion, MSGA along with several agriculture groups discussed the upcoming summit. We shared our concerns that registration filled up quickly. There were also concerns that a number of spots were filled before ag groups were informed about the sign-up.
The Governor’s office offered that the Water Summit will focus on 10 areas from urban environments, funding, aquatic invasive species, water quantity, to rural environments, among others. Essentially, the plan is for stakeholders to gather and help build a strategic plan to guide the legislature in the coming years.
MSGA will engage in the Water Summit process with integrity and will keep the best interests of soybean growers in mind every step of the way. If discussions become polarized, we may need to reassess what direction to take. For now the optimism of working with all groups to build consensus warrants full engagement. . . .
We've put a couple of phrases in bold in the passage above.
What strikes us is that citizens active in local lakes associations and the president of a commodity group are both concerned that individuals were not able to register and take part in the discussion that is to "help build a strategic plan to guide the legislature in the coming years."
But we're more struck by the president of an interest group-- a person who was at "a pre-summit discussion at the Governor’s mansion, MSGA along with several agriculture groups discuss[ing] the upcoming summit"--fretting about slots going to people who aren't members of ag groups. Clearly, they weren't handed out to the local lakes associations volunteers.
It's the fact of "pre-summit discussions" at the Governor's residence that's most concerning. The registration process created a scarcity for the ordinary lake dweller or soybean grower--while interest groups have access to the governor's residence.
Perhaps the closing of the state capitol building has illuminated an unpleasant fact about the current condition of our state-level representative republic--or representative democracy if that's your preferred frame. It's not for citizens to contact their state lawmakers about water quality policy; rather it's for interest groups (whether ag, environment, or lake property holders) to get a place in the governor's office or the summit.
Those observers who wonder why Americans are supporting outsiders for President--though Bluestem laughs to think that a pop culture billionaire or a United States senator are "outsiders"--might address their attention to this unfolding dog and pony show.
What might compel a freshman legislator like Tim Miller to see his constituents' opinion as equally deserving of his attention, when the process has become so weighted toward interest groups in these informal events?
Or when the legislature creates statutory boards and councils to advise on policy--and in some cases to direct spending?
Image: the logo for Governor's Water Summit, which you may or may not have heard about in time. Your interests might be safe if you're a member of an ag commodity group. We suppose that environmental and property owner groups have an invite to the governor's residence as well.
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:
*We're not on the communications' office press release distribution list, a situation that puzzles the dedicated professionals working there each time we ask to be put on as much as it does us. Some things are just mysteries that pass human understanding.
In last spring's legislative session, it seemed like the pro-pesticide special interests and the lawmakers who love them could not speak or move fast enough to remove any possibility that bee-lethal neonicotinoid treated seeds and plants might be prohibited in state-funded wildlife habitat restoration project.
Or Hastings Republican Rep. Denny McNamara's famous statement that "bees don't eat corn" so no worries about the use of neo-nics on corn seeds in livestock food plots that often accompany the conversion of land to wildlife habitat (while crops like corn and potatoes don't need pollinators to yield, their pollen is attractive to pollinators).
We wish they'd stop this and pay attention to the data.
It’s not just honeybees that are in trouble. Wild bees are disappearing from much of the nation’s farmland — especially in Minnesota and much of the Upper Midwest.
Overall, wild bees declined across nearly one-fourth of the country between 2008 and 2013. But some areas are now so inhospitable to wild bees that the nation’s crops, including soybeans in western Minnesota, are probably not getting the pollination they need for peak production, researchers at the University of Vermont found in the first nationwide study to map the abundance of wild bees.
“Those farmers are going to be looking at inconsistent yields,” said Taylor Ricketts, a professor at the University of Vermont, and one of the lead researchers on the study. . . .
Ricketts said that the research was designed to help figure out where conservation funds should be focused to protect and revive struggling insect populations.
“It’s not really a mystery how to help pollinators.” he said. “They need flowers, nesting sites, undisturbed soils and trees. And they need not to be poisoned by chemicals.”. . .
Minnesota has enacted numerous conservation projects with pollinators in mind, including on the 450 square miles of land managed by the Board of Soil and Water Resources, millions spent on research and land protection from lottery and legacy funds, and the state’s long-term plan to restore native prairie along the western edge of the state.
Let's stop using pollinator-lethal chemicals on those projects, shall we?
Map: From the University of Vermont study. Our stretch of the prairie has far too much red zone.
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:
We've just gotten surprising news that the request by Duininck for a variance was turned down by the Renville County Board of Adjustment and Appeals at this morning's hearing.
In an email to Bluestem, Clean Up the River Environment (CURE) Water Program Coordinator Ariel Herrod writes in part:
This morning, about 20 people attended the hearing, although only 4 landowners were notified. . . .
At the end of the hearing, and to everyone's surprise, the Renville County Board of Adjustment and Appeals denied the variance request, citing the arguments made throughout the morning that issuing the variance would not "maintain the essential character of the locality."
. . .[T]he option still remains that Duininck will sue in an attempt to overturn the decision. However, without such a lawsuit, this mining project has effectively been stopped in its tracks, because residents in the area were given the chance to speak up.
The site, on the floodplain, was close to the Minnesota River and about a half mile from the Joseph R. Brown Wayside Park. The Brown mansion was destroyed in the 1862 US Dakota War. We enjoy taking guests to the Upper Minnesota River Valley to the site, which is also a favorite of geocaching enthusiasts. Please thank the county by visiting its lovely riverside parks and spending some money on your way up or down the river valley.
The wayside park is also within easy driving distance of Upper Sioux Agency State Park and the Swedes Forest and Gneiss Outcrops Scientific and Nature Areas (SNA).
Photo: The Joseph R. Brown Wayside Park is home to the ruins of "Farther and Gay Castle," the Brown family mansion that was burned in the 1862 US-Dakota War. We love to tell the story of Indian agent and inventor Joseph Brown's role in renegotiating treaties (and those terms' impact on the run-up to war) and the courage and eloquence of his French and Dakota wife, Susan Frenier, whose Dakota name is Hinyajice-duta-win (Soft Scarlet Down), in securing the lives of her children and hired hands when they were captured in fleeing the fire.
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:
Our friends at Clean Up the River Environment (CURE) alerted Bluestem to a public hearing at 8:30 am on Thursday, August 27th, in Olivia regarding Duininck Inc.'s request for a variance to mine gravel less than 1000 ft from the Minnesota River in Renville County.
As the map shows, and CURE writes, the proposed pit is also near one of our favorite places to take friends visiting the Upper Minnesota River Valley:
Duininck Inc. controls a little less than 20 acres in the Sacred Heart South Township, and while they have ignored that particular parcel for years, they are now planning to reopen the gravel mine. Surrounding areas are Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program land vibrant with wildlife, and the historical Joseph R. Brown Wayside Park is only a half-mile away. The pit is also in the Minnesota River floodplain, and, according to locals in the area, floods frequently.
The Joseph R. Brown Wayside Park is home to the ruins of "Farther and Gay Castle," the Brown family mansion that was burned in the 1862 US-Dakota War. We love to tell the story of Indian agent and inventor Joseph Brown's role in renegotiating treaties (and those terms' impact on the run-up to war) and the courage and eloquence of his French and Dakota wife, Susan Frenier, whose Dakota name is Hinyajice-duta-win (Soft Scarlet Down), in securing the lives of her children and hired hands when they were captured in fleeing the fire.
Right now, it's a lovely and peaceful place, but given the way sound echoes in the valley, we're concerned about the proposed project. We'd rather be able to hear migrating wild swans each spring in the river bottoms than mining equipment.
According to Renville County Ordinance (Chapter Seven, Section 2.7), an Interim Use Permit for a new or expanded mining operation can only be granted if the property is at least 20 acres in size. As Duininck only owns or has a permanent easement on 16.98 acres, Duininck cannot reopen this gravel mine without receiving a variance from the County Board of Adjustment and Appeals. The meetings of the Renville County Board of Adjustment and Appeals are public, and interested persons can be heard during the meetings.
While the staff of the Board of Adjustment and Appeals have duly noted that the ordinance requiring that mining parcels be at least 20 acres was in place before Duininck bought the property, Duininck insists that they did not know about this provision. This sounds like a lack of due diligence and respect for the community where Duininck hopes to extract resources.
If you can join us at the meeting, please do. Even if you can’t, please share this news with friends and acquaintances in the area. It’s just not right that these decisions can be made with minimal citizen input.
Public Hearing Time and Location: Thursday, August 27th at 8:30 am Renville County Government Services Center 105 South 5th Street, Suites 312/313 Olivia, MN 56277
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:
UPDATE: Schultz withdrew her amendment after a passionate discussion of Torkelson working for pesticide companies. We'll have video as soon as it is available.
The House adopted the Poppe amendment to Kahn's monarch amendment, and passed the amendment itself. [end update]
Update: here's the video and transcript of Schultz's speech:
Here's the transcript:
This amendment does not allow the use of pesticides lethal to pollinators on land acquired with Legacy funds.
Like I said before, it's very important that we protect our pollinators. Over eighty percent of crops, plants, flowering plants are pollinated and need pollination, which is important for our food supply.
The biggest environmental concern when Americans are polled, after water, are pollinators, so people care about this issue.
Unfortunately Representative Torkelson has amended this amendment, and in that amendment, they drastically changed it, to protect chemical companies, the company that produced the pesticide lethal to pollinators like neonicotinoids. And these corporations are outside the US, countries like Germany and Switzerland.
So again, this is another example the majority in this House representing ther interests of corporations over the interests of Minnesotans.
So, unfortunately, I'm going to withdraw this amendment because of Representative Torkelson's secondary amendment. Thank you.
As readers know, there's been a tug-of-war struggle to secure pollinator-friendly language for projects funded with Legacy amendment dollars.
With HF303, the Omnibus Legacy finance bill coming to the floor Thursday afternoon, Minnesota's pollinator champions are trying to amend the bill to be more pollinator friendly, while those who are listening to the pesticide industry are trying to water down those efforts again. While both amendment authors are DFLers, the anti-butterfly and bee brigade is bi-partisan, drawing from the faction of the House that's identified with production agriculture.
Ever wonder why ag has a bad public image when it comes to environmental issues? Bone-headed, ag chemical industry-friendly lock-step moves like the Torkelson and Poppe amendments to the amendments are why.
This isn't an ag bill, it's Legacy bill, but heaven forbid we follow the will of Minnesota voters and make Legacy projects as friendly to these smallest of wild creatures.
Let's look at what Rep. Kahn (DFL,Minneapolis) and Rep. Schultz (DFL, Duluth) are trying to do with their pre-filed amendments--and what Rep. Torkelson (R, Hanska) and Rep. Poppe (DFl, Austin) are trying to undo with their amendments to those amendments.
.................... moves to amend H.F. No. 303, the third engrossment, as follows:Page 21, after line 29, insert:
1.3
"Subd. 11.Monarch Butterfly Habitat
When feasible, a recipient of funds appropriated in this section is encouraged to use conservation practices that promote monarch butterfly habitat, including planting and maintaining vegetation beneficial to monarchs and avoiding the use of pesticides."
How hard is that? Too harsh for Rep. Jeanne Poppe's special interest friends, who want Minnesota law to avoid the word "avoiding," even when it comes to our beloved monarchs, here's the Poppe H0303A48 amendment to the amendment:
moves to amend the ....... amendment (H0303A36) to H.F. No. 303 1.2as follows: 1.3Page 1, line 9, delete "avoiding" and insert "minimizing"
Can we just stop with the denial and minimizing of risk to butterflies (which are insects) to the herbicides that kill varieties and species of milkweed, their caterpillars' sole source of food, and avoid the use of insecticides that kill both butterflies and their larvae?
Ask your state representative to reject attempts to water down Kahn's language and keep a request that those receiving Legacy grants be encouraged to use conservation techniques that produce healthy monarch habitat.
Sheesh.
H0303A43 -The Schultz Amendment on Pollinator Lethal Insecticides
Kahn is one of two long-serving state representatives in the Minnesota House, but she's joined in seeking protection for pollinators by Duluth DFL freshman Jennifer Schultz, whose amendment
moves to amend H.F. No. 303, the third engrossment, as follows: after line 29, insert:
1.3
"Subd. 11.Pollinator Lethal Insecticides
1.4Land acquired in fee with money 1.5appropriated in this section shall not be 1.6planted or otherwise treated with a product 1.7that contains a pollinator lethal insecticide, 1.8as defined under Minnesota Statutes, section 1.918H.02, subdivision 28a." 1.10Page 41, after line 22, insert:
1.11
"Subd. 4.Pollinator Lethal Insecticides
1.12Land acquired in fee with money 1.13appropriated in this article shall not be 1.14planted or otherwise treated with a product 1.15that contains a pollinator lethal insecticide, 1.16as defined under Minnesota Statutes, section 1.1718H.02, subdivision 28a." 1.18Page 70, after line 8, insert:
1.19
"Subd. 4.Pollinator Lethal Insecticides
1.20Land acquired in fee with money 1.21appropriated in this article shall not be 1.22planted or otherwise treated with a product 1.23that contains a pollinator lethal insecticide, 1.24as defined under Minnesota Statutes, section 1.2518H.02, subdivision 28a.
The Torkelson amendment to the amendment, H0303A50 removes the word "insecticide" :
moves to amend the ....... amendment (H0303A43) to H.F. No. 303 1.2as follows: 1.3Page 1, line 3, delete "Lethal Insecticides" and insert "and Butterfly Habitat" 1.4Page 1, line 4, before "Land" insert "When appropriate," 1.5Page 1, line 5, delete "not" 1.6Page 1, line 6, delete everything after "planted" and insert "and maintained with 1.7vegetation beneficial to butterflies and other pollinators and the use of pesticides on the 1.8land must be minimized." 1.9Page 1, delete lines 7 to 9 1.10Page 1, line 11, delete "Lethal Insecticides" and insert "and Butterfly Habitat" 1.11Page 1, line 12, before "Land" insert "When appropriate," 1.12Page 1, line 13, delete "not" 1.13Page 1, line 14, delete everything after "planted" and insert "and maintained with 1.14vegetation beneficial to butterflies and other pollinators and the use of pesticides on the 1.15land must be minimized." 1.16Page 1, delete lines 15 to 17 1.17Page 1, line 19, delete "Lethal Insecticides" and insert "and Butterfly Habitat" 1.18Page 1, line 20, before "Land" insert "When appropriate," 1.19Page 1, line 21, delete "not" 1.20Page 1, line 22, delete everything after "planted" and insert "and maintained with 1.21vegetation beneficial to butterflies and other pollinators and the use of pesticides on the 1.22land must be minimized." 1.23Page 1, delete lines 23 to 25
And again picks up the "minimized" language.
Ask your representative to quit playing games on this one as well.
Photo: A monarch caterpillar on milkweed.
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:
Bluestem Prairie thought our readers might enjoy the anecdote as much as his colleagues did:
. . .I just gotta say, this bee stuff fascinates me. I got called by a local farmer in my district, a good friend of mine from growing up actually in the southern part of the state when we lived in Rochester, and I got conned into getting these bees and going and picking them up and putting them in my trunk.
Well, I had no idea they were actually like [pause] ...
[Committee member]: Like bees?
[Laughter]
They were. . .when you grabbed the box and it gets shaken, you get a little worried, especially when you realize that you don't have a truck, and the thing's sitting in your trunk and there's plenty of spots to get through. So I drove as fast as I could back home, within the perimeters of the law of course.
Here's the audio in YouTube format:
Metsa later learned that the hive did not survive the winter as they were "southern bees," and that "Russian bees" might have been better for Minnesota's winters.
Pollinators, like butterflies, moths and particularly honeybees, are integral members of the Minnesota River Basin, doing the part of fertilizing plants by transporting pollen. Hansen spoke of four detriments to health of pollinators - poor habitat, poor nutrition, parasites and pesticides. Pesticides weaken pollinator food sources and habitat, which weakens pollinators that are finished off when fighting parasites below full strength.
Metsa's "Russian bees" are a strategy beekeepers are adopting to cope with parasites as the strain is better able to fend off the varroa mite, according to the USDA's 1999 Agricultural Research Service article, Varroa-Tolerant Bees Keep Hives Buzzing.
While the strategy is new to Representative Metsa, researchers and beekeeper have looked kindly on Russian bees for many years. The strain was first imported by USDA researchers in 1997. Russian bee colonies are better able to survive cold weather in part because fewer bees winter over in the hives. They also emerge from the hive later than the Italian strains do, and thus are not so stressed by the relative lack of pollen of our later springs.
Obviously, researchers have years of work with Russian bees. The bill that was the subject of consideration when Metsa shared his hilarious education was a matter of tweaking language about consumer labeling for plants and seeds as pollinator friendly. It's mostly a provision for home gardeners who want to provide habitat for bees that won't inadvertently kill the bees.
Under a law passed last year in Minnesota, plants and seeds cannot be labeled as pollinator-friendly if they have been treated with a class of insecticides known as neonicotinoids, which are lethal to bees.
One point that the committee was trying to work out was which fund in the Minnesota Department of Agriculture would pay for spot testing of seeds and plants to make sure lots met the labeling requirements.
Photo: Not Jason Metsa's trunk, but bees in a trunk nonetheless.
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:
A young organizer at Clean Up the River Environment (CURE) has sent us this notice of a meeting with Minnesota Senate District 17 lawmakers in Willmar on Saturday, March 14:
Please join CURE and other conservationists for a District 17 Legislator Meeting with your elected officials, Senator Lyle Koenen, Representative Tim Miller and Representative Dave Baker. They have all confirmed with CURE that they will be able to join us and listen to our concerns about conservation during this meeting in Willmar.
Who: A face-to-face meeting with three of your elected officials, Senator Lyle Koenen, Representative Tim Miller and Representative Dave Baker.
What: A face-to-face meeting with three of your elected officials, Senator Lyle Koenen, Representative Tim Miller and Representative Dave Baker
When: Saturday, March 14th, 1:30 PM to 2:30 PM
Where: Executive Boardroom, Willmar Convention Center, 240 23rd St SE, Willmar, MN 56201. Follow signs once in building.
Why: This meeting will provide you with an opportunity to meet face-to-face with your elected officials to express your concerns and support for issues relating to agriculture, the environment, renewable energy and everything conservation related.
We're hoping that you will be able to join us and will let other concerned citizens know about this opportunity for their voices to be heard.
Share widely with your networks in the region. If you plan on attending, please let me [Kristian Nyberg CURE Energy Program Coordinator] know by simply responding to this email, or by calling the CURE office at 1-877-269-2873.
CURE is a grassroots, rural-based environmental group which works on clean water, clean energy and healthy soil in the Upper Minnesota River Valley.
Photo: A town hall in West Central Minnesota earlier this year.
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:
The Democrat from South Saint Paul has released a statement about Speaker Daudt's action:
Speaker Kurt Daudt (R-Crown) chose to disregard Minority Leader Paul Thissen’s (DFL-Minneapolis) recommendation that Rep. Rick Hansen (DFL-South St Paul) continue his service on the Lessard-Sams Outdoor Heritage Council (LSOHC). Speaker Daudt chose instead to remove Rep. Hansen from the council yesterday.
The LSOHC recommends spending more than a $100 million in Legacy funds to protect, restore and enhance prairies, wetlands, forests and fish, game and wildlife habitat each year. Rep. Hansen was an original co-author of the Legacy Amendment. He has served on the original council from 2008-2011 and again from 2013 until now. He was the chief author of Outdoor Heritage Fund bill last session, which passed 90 to 39 on a bipartisan basis.
Rep. Hansen was also removed from the council the last time Republicans were in the majority (2011-2012) by then Speaker Kurt Zellers. Rep. Hansen, an avid hunter and angler who owns a family farm with conservation practices, has been one of the few consistent voices asking tough questions of groups vying for the Legacy funds.
Rep. Hansen released the following statement:
“I’m disappointed to have been replaced again. As a suburban legislator with a rural background, I brought a science and practical habitat background to the table. I always worked to ensure these public projects got the proper vetting they require. We need to fully examine every proposal to make sure it is sound. Some special interests do not like that. However, I took this public responsibility seriously and am proud of my service on the council.”
“I look forward to protecting the outdoors, clean water and the public purse at the Legislature during the next two years. Setbacks occur, but we must move ahead and serve in other ways.”
Photo: Representative Rick Hansen (DFL-South St. Paul).
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:
Accompanied by excellent tweets by the Minnesota Center for Environmental Advocacy and Friends of the BWCAW, the testimony was split between its presentation by Rep. Carly Melin (DFL-Hibbing), testimony from supporters and opponents, and questions from the committee members.
Committee Chair Denny McNamara (R-Hastings) moved that the bill be considered for possible consideration for inclusion in a larger bill, while reserving the possibility of moving HF1000 forward on its own.
The committee adjourned after nearly two hours and will resume tomorrow at 8:15 a.m., although tomorrow's meeting, which will consistent of only member's questions and comments, will not be livestreamed.
Here's the video. Melin presents, followed by supportive statements from business and industry groups. Around the 48:50 minute mark, Paula Maccabee of Water Legacy led off the opposition testimony given by environmental groups and members of Anishinaabekwe (Ojibwe) bands. Wild rice lays an important part in indigenous culture and believe.
From this morning's post
Written by Hibbing Democrat Carly Melin, the bill would prohibit applying a wild rice water quality standard until the commissioner of the Pollution Control Agency adopts rules to establish criteria for designating waters subject the standard.
A bill for an act relating to environment; prohibiting application of wild rice quality standards until certain conditions are met.
BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA:
Section 1. WILD RICE WATER QUALITY STANDARDS.
(a) Until the commissioner of the Pollution Control Agency adopts the rules to establish criteria for designating waters subject to a wild rice water quality standard as required under Laws 2011, First Special Session chapter 2, article 4, section 32, paragraph (b), and adopts the rule as required under Laws 2011, First Special Session chapter 2, article 4, section 32, paragraph (a), designating waters containing natural beds of wild rice that are subject to a wild rice water quality standard and designating the specific times of year during which the standard applies, the commissioner shall not:
(1) apply the wild rice water quality standard for sulfate in class 4A waters to any waters, including incorporating the standard or any requirements based on the standard within any permits, compliance schedules, orders, or other control documents; or
(2) list waters containing natural beds of wild rice as impaired for sulfate under section 303(d) of the federal Clean Water Act, United States Code, title 33, section 1313.
(b) For the purposes of this section, "waters containing natural beds of wild rice" has the meaning given in Laws 2011, First Special Session chapter 2, article 4, section 32, paragraph (b).
Here's the language of HF853 (Wild rice water quality standard application prohibited until conditions are met) which has been referred to the Mining and Outdoor Wrecks committee:
A bill for an act relating to environment; prohibiting application of wild rice water quality standards until certain conditions are met.
BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA:
Section 1. WILD RICE WATER QUALITY STANDARDS.
(a) Until the commissioner of the Pollution Control Agency adopts the rules required under Laws 2011, First Special Session chapter 2, article 4, section 32, designating waters containing natural beds of wild rice that are subject to wild rice water quality standards, the commissioner shall not:
(1) apply the wild rice water quality standard for sulfate in class 4A waters to any waters, including incorporating the standard or any requirements based on the standard within any permits, compliance schedules, orders, or other control documents; or
(2) list waters containing natural beds of wild rice as impaired for sulfate under section 303(d) of the federal Clean Water Act, United States Code, title 33, section 1313.
(b) For the purposes of this section, "waters containing natural beds of wild rice" has the meaning given in Laws 2011, First Special Session chapter 2, article 4, section 32, paragraph (b).
The bill would prohibit the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency from listing wild rice waters and applying the state's 40-year-old sulfate standard for wild rice until that standard is upheld by a current scientific review and re-adopted by the agency.
The bill specifically prevents the PCA from including the 10 parts-per-million sulfate standard to protect wild rice in any industrial permit issued until the ongoing sulfate study and reassessment is complete.
The PCA is nearing the end of a multiyear effort to determine whether the sulfate standard is needed to protect wild rice and, if so, what lakes and rivers the standard should apply to.
Northern Minnesota lawmakers have complained in recent weeks that the PCA has been including the sulfate standard in draft permits for mining companies even though the evaluation of the standard, ordered by lawmakers in 2011, is not yet complete.
Some mining industry leaders recently told Iron Range lawmakers that their ability to compete with a glut of cheap, foreign iron ore and finished steel could be compromised if Minnesota enforces the sulfate standard.
But Steve Morse, executive director of the Minnesota Environmental Partnership, said the bill is an end run around scientific review of wild rice protections. Similar legislation proposed in 2011 was panned by the federal Environmental Protection Agency as a legislative overreach and a likely violation of the federal Clean Water Act. Lawmakers can't simply undo water quality regulations already adopted under the act, it was noted.
"This legislation would roll back current water quality standards,'' Morse said in a statement. "We think our wild rice and our water deserve better — rules based on fact, not suspended through power politics. Our wild rice legacy depends on it." . . . .
We'll have more about this story as it develops.
Screengrab: Wild rice harvester Winona LaDuke, an Anishinaabekwe (Ojibwe) enrolled member of the Mississippi Band Anishinaabeg who lives and works on the White Earth Reservations, testified against the bill.
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:
Email subscribers can contribute via this link to paypal; use email sally.jo.sorensen at gmail.com as recipient.
Written by Hibbing Democrat Carly Melin, the bill would prohibit applying a wild rice water quality standard until the commissioner of the Pollution Control Agency adopts rules to establish criteria for designating waters subject the standard.
A bill for an act relating to environment; prohibiting application of wild rice quality standards until certain conditions are met.
BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA:
Section 1. WILD RICE WATER QUALITY STANDARDS.
(a) Until the commissioner of the Pollution Control Agency adopts the rules to establish criteria for designating waters subject to a wild rice water quality standard as required under Laws 2011, First Special Session chapter 2, article 4, section 32, paragraph (b), and adopts the rule as required under Laws 2011, First Special Session chapter 2, article 4, section 32, paragraph (a), designating waters containing natural beds of wild rice that are subject to a wild rice water quality standard and designating the specific times of year during which the standard applies, the commissioner shall not:
(1) apply the wild rice water quality standard for sulfate in class 4A waters to any waters, including incorporating the standard or any requirements based on the standard within any permits, compliance schedules, orders, or other control documents; or
(2) list waters containing natural beds of wild rice as impaired for sulfate under section 303(d) of the federal Clean Water Act, United States Code, title 33, section 1313.
(b) For the purposes of this section, "waters containing natural beds of wild rice" has the meaning given in Laws 2011, First Special Session chapter 2, article 4, section 32, paragraph (b).
Here's the language of HF853 (Wild rice water quality standard application prohibited until conditions are met) which has been referred to the Mining and Outdoor Wrecks committee:
A bill for an act relating to environment; prohibiting application of wild rice water quality standards until certain conditions are met.
BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA:
Section 1. WILD RICE WATER QUALITY STANDARDS.
(a) Until the commissioner of the Pollution Control Agency adopts the rules required under Laws 2011, First Special Session chapter 2, article 4, section 32, designating waters containing natural beds of wild rice that are subject to wild rice water quality standards, the commissioner shall not:
(1) apply the wild rice water quality standard for sulfate in class 4A waters to any waters, including incorporating the standard or any requirements based on the standard within any permits, compliance schedules, orders, or other control documents; or
(2) list waters containing natural beds of wild rice as impaired for sulfate under section 303(d) of the federal Clean Water Act, United States Code, title 33, section 1313.
(b) For the purposes of this section, "waters containing natural beds of wild rice" has the meaning given in Laws 2011, First Special Session chapter 2, article 4, section 32, paragraph (b).
The bill would prohibit the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency from listing wild rice waters and applying the state's 40-year-old sulfate standard for wild rice until that standard is upheld by a current scientific review and re-adopted by the agency.
The bill specifically prevents the PCA from including the 10 parts-per-million sulfate standard to protect wild rice in any industrial permit issued until the ongoing sulfate study and reassessment is complete.
The PCA is nearing the end of a multiyear effort to determine whether the sulfate standard is needed to protect wild rice and, if so, what lakes and rivers the standard should apply to.
Northern Minnesota lawmakers have complained in recent weeks that the PCA has been including the sulfate standard in draft permits for mining companies even though the evaluation of the standard, ordered by lawmakers in 2011, is not yet complete.
Some mining industry leaders recently told Iron Range lawmakers that their ability to compete with a glut of cheap, foreign iron ore and finished steel could be compromised if Minnesota enforces the sulfate standard.
But Steve Morse, executive director of the Minnesota Environmental Partnership, said the bill is an end run around scientific review of wild rice protections. Similar legislation proposed in 2011 was panned by the federal Environmental Protection Agency as a legislative overreach and a likely violation of the federal Clean Water Act. Lawmakers can't simply undo water quality regulations already adopted under the act, it was noted.
"This legislation would roll back current water quality standards,'' Morse said in a statement. "We think our wild rice and our water deserve better — rules based on fact, not suspended through power politics. Our wild rice legacy depends on it." . . . .
Wild rice is not only delicious, but a significant part of Ojibwe culture.
Photo: A couple of canoes glide through beds of wild rice. Photo credit, University of Minnesota, National Center for Earth-Surface Dynamics.
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:
Back then, lobbyist McBeth was the Minnesota Agri-Growth Council's president, and he wanted to start a conversation about making photographing farms a felony via "ag gag" legislation.
Now a lobbyist for Crop Life America, McBeth is out to warn lawmakers against refraining from using seeds and plants treated with neonicotinoid insecticides on conservation acres purchased with money appropriated from the Environment and Natural Resources Trust Fund (aka lottery money).
Such pro-pollinator prudence might lead to things like banning GMOs or using only organic seeds on state projects.
McBeth also urges the use of neonicotinoid treated seeds in pollinator health and habitat programs.
The ag lobbyist made the statements Thursday in testimony against what had been considered a non-controversial amendment by Rep. Rick Hansen (DFL-South St. Paul) to HF390, an appropriation bill authored by Paul Torkelson (R-Hanska), that's co-sponsored by three DFL representatives.
As the business publication Food Navigator notes in Harvard study backs link between neonicotinoids and bee population collapse, research strongly suggests that use of long-lasting chemicals intended to kill insects will indeed kill insects. While this feature creates certain advantages for acreage intended for production agriculture, Hansen's amendment would prohibit their use on certain acres purchased with some of the appropriations allocated in HF390.
Crop Life America wants none of that bee-hugging. McBeth testified:
Crop Life America represents the crop protection industry, in crop protection, pesticide and crop protection and insecticide technology to help production agriculture and farmers while respecting the environment and occupational safety and food safety.
As you all have heard, probably in the papers, of the subject of seed treatments using neonicotinoids, an insecticide ingredient, has become controversial. . . .
[The audio system grows scratchy, and there are some remarks about it]
Seed treatments using neonicotinoid chemical have become controversial in how they may or may not affect pollinators or honeybee health, and other types of pollinators and different environmental and scientific reviews examining that topic are underway at the Environmental Protections Agency level and even with some direction from the legislature last year at the level of the Minnesota Department of Agriculture. . . .
Prejudging the outcomes of that and agricultural practices related to that I think is certainly premature and I maintain on behalf of Crop Life America, that this amendment is more about sending a message of affects on pollinators of the neonicotinoids than it is anything substantive and that is because treated seeds for crop protection purposes are miniscule in use on state lands that would be acquired under this provision.
I acknowledge that.
However, to make a broad statement to ban those uses in this way is akin to banning -- these crops uses on these types of lands could be for habitat, could be for food plots for wildlife etc-- so, but banning the use of these types of treatments would be akin to banning GMO seeds or requiring all crops on all state crops to be organic for instance, and that would be a policy of determination under your purview, but I think sends the wrong message from the State of Minnesota in supporting technologies and seeds that by the way are regulated by the EPA and USDA and the Federal Insecticide and Fungicide Regulatory Act (FIFRA), that it sends the wrong message.
. . .Ironically, I also think that for certain projects that the LCCMR funds on pollinator health and pollinator habitat, it may behoove those projects to actually use treated seeds and neonicotinoid products to better assess outcomes.
That's my position.
After committee chair Denny McNamara addresses some adjustments that are being made to address industry concerns, amendment author Rep. Rick Hansen notes that the motion to amend is for a session appropriation law, not a statutory law, adding:
I understand the canary in the coalmine, because I've just used that analogy, and the camel's nose under the tent, and all the other things that get used here at the capitol, but this is what it is. It's not dealing with GMOs, it's not dealing with other things. It's dealing with the land we buy with the lottery money, as the one yesterday as the one yesterday was the one with the land bought with the constitutional dollars and those have some very specific constitutional purposes.
So we're not talking about the 44 million acres that are treated with neonicotinoid-impacted products, we're talking about the land that the public is purchasing with their dollars that they've approved in the constitution, so I look forward to continuing the discussion.
Hansen has emerged as a champion of pollinator-friendly policy in the Minnesota legislature. He holds undergraduate and graduate degrees in soil management from Iowa State University and managed a pesticide-related program at the Minnesota Department of Agriculture when he was first elected to the House.
Concern for declining pollinator numbers has prompted Hansen and other policymakers to propose devising strategies that make state public wildlife and conservation lands pollinator-friendly habitat.
Here's the video clip of the moment from the committee hearing:
Bluestem looked at an earlier hearing and some bee-friendly bills in last week's post, A gentle buzz: pollinator-friendly legislation quietly moving through Minnesota House. After watching Mr. McBeth's testimony, we'd like to add that Big Ag is getting a bee in its bonnet over these common sense measures on land that's supposed to be friendly to wildlife--including pollinators.
Moreover, we have wonder why the slightest suggestion of criticism of ag practice (even on acres intended for wildlife and conservation) brings out such defensiveness. One would think that the industry was on its last legs, faltering like a downer cow, not the powerhouse that Minnesota Farmers Union president Doug Peterson described in Senate hearing last week.
Screenshot: Daryn McBeth as he shares his worry that banning seeds and plants treated with insecticides on land intended for wildlife and conservation and bees and such might lead to banning GMO seed and use of organic plants and stuff.
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:
Freshman Minnesota State Representative Tim Miller may think that free food for legislators is a good thing, but he tweeted today that Governor Dayton's proposal for beefing up buffer strips is "not good."
[House Environment and Natural Resources Committee] Committee chairman Denny McNamara, R-Hastings, was more optimistic [than Dan Fabian (R-Roseau)].
"I'm psyched," McNamara said. "Uniformity is a great idea. Buffer strips are great for the environment, and 50 feet is better than 16 feet. Yes, there's going to be pushback, and we're going to have to work together."
Since McNamara owns over 600 acres near Graceville in Big Stone County, Upper Minnesota River Valley nationalists, conservationists and hunters enthusiastically greeted his statement on Facebook.
Orrick also follows up on his earlier reporting about Minnesota Department of Agriculture Commissioner David Frederickson's remark at the Pheasant Summit in late 2014 that, if existing buffer strib laws aren't being enforced, perhaps they should be repealed. Conservationists, pollinator protectors, clean water advocates and pheasant hunters were dismayed by the approach.
Later Friday, Fredrickson issued a statement saying he supports the governor's plan.
Fredrickson also sought to clarify his previous statements.
"I have never stated, nor do I believe, that abandoning buffer laws and rules would be good public policy for Minnesota," he said. "However, it is well known that our buffer laws are not being enforced. In the end, we all want compliance. I continue to believe that the best strategy is an incentive-based approach." . . .
Perhaps the genial ag commissioner can salt a few buffer strips in Renville County with free appetizers and a dessert bar for legislators, and Miller will see the conservation practice as a good thing.
Photo: Rep. Tim Miller (R-Prinsburg), via Facebook.
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