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.
The Minnesota legislature passed language related to vegetative buffers on public waters and ditches in 2015, then clarified that language in the 2016 session.
Since that level of confusion abides around this issue, Bluestem recommends that readers check out the Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources (BWSR) Buffer Program website. BWSR (pronounced Bowser by most folks who talk about the agency) wants public to do so and comment on whether this dog will hunt (as we colorful rural folk say).
Here's the press release from BWSR:
The Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources (BWSR) is charged with overseeing program implementation of the buffer law. The agency is currently seeking public comment on key components of its Buffer program.
The Requests for Comment [link to pdf added by Bluestem] and supporting documents are available on the BWSR Buffer Program website. BWSR is looking for feedback on the following policies and model rules [Bluestem has added the links to the pdfs]:
Comments from stakeholders are a key part of the process, and will be considered during policy development. Anticipated action on these policies is expected at the January 2017 BWSR Board meeting.
Information and comments on the policies and model rules will be accepted until 4:30 p.m. on January 9, 2017. Comments may be submitted via email to buffers.bwsr@state.mn.us or via U.S. mail to David Weirens, Asst. Director for Programs and Policy, BWSR, 520 Lafayette Road, St. Paul, MN 55155.
All joking aside, Minnesotans who care about water quality should read and comment on these documents. We're all stakeholders when it comes to water quality and soil conservation.
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.
Bluestem's new home gets its electrical from an electrical cooperative, like the homes and businesses of many Greater Minnesotans. Some of our power as co-op members is in danger of dimming.
From our friends at Clean Up the River Environment (CURE), a grassroots rural environmental organization based in Montevideo, Minnesota:
Local control of electricity is under attack.
Basin Electric, an energy supplier for many co-ops across Minnesota and the Dakotas, is attempting take away co-op members ability to negotiate with local clean energy producers. This would put massive limitations on local control of clean energy in the future.
We can't let this happen.
Basin has attempted to keep their move under wraps from the general public and co-op members. They've given limited time for input and the little information made available is relatively inaccessible. Our local distribution cooperatives and Basin are responsible to us, co-op member owners. This action by Basin is not in the best interest of local co-op members, nor does it follow the cooperative principles for democratic control.
Tell Basin to follow the cooperative principles!
Questions: Questions can be directed to Erik Hatlestad, Energy Program Associate at CURE. Erik can be reached at erik@cureriver.org.
There's more here on the CURE website:
Electric cooperatives were founded in the spirit of America: democratic, local control. Since the early 1900’s rural Americans have bonded together in cooperative enterprise to address community and economic issues themselves and to wrest economic control from absentee corporate elites.
However, these democratic ideals have been sidelined.
In many states within Basin Electric’s service territory, electric cooperatives are subject to limited regulation. The assumption is that members self-regulate through the democratic control of their utilities. For some time now co-ops have moved in an undemocratic direction that marginalizes members in their own organizations. Not only has the flow of information been restricted so members cannot have meaningful input in the overall governance of their local cooperative, but the ability for members to participate in distributed clean energy generation has been strategically impeded.
There is no better example of the thwarting of member inclusion than the process surrounding the Joint PURPA Implementation Plan and the document itself.
The Cooperative Principles call for:
Voluntary and Open Membership
Democratic Member Control
Member's Economic Participation
Autonomy and Independence
Education, Training, and Information
Cooperation Among Cooperatives
Concern for Community
Many of Basin’s distribution co-ops have done little to educate their members on the implications of surrendering local control and their local co-op’s rights under PURPA. Many Basin co-ops have not published information on the action in their local monthly newsletters and the implementation plan has received virtually no media attention. Beyond educating member owners of the actions of the utility that they (in theory) are in control over, members have not been given a reasonable opportunity to provide input in this comment making process. . .
If you're a member of a power co-op, check out the rest at CURE.
Photo: A picture of modern power in Greater Minnesota, via CURE.
Help CURE do its great rural work: Ordinarily, Bluestem asks for donations for our work at the end of posts. Today, we'd like to encourage readers to support the work of a genuinely rural, grassroots group that works for our landscapes, water, quality or life and values.
Winona County commissioners voted Tuesday to ban the highly contentious industry of frac sand mining, making it the first county in the state to take such a stand.
After a 40-minute discussion in front of a roomful of community members, the ban passed, 3-2.
Commissioner Marie Kovecsi, who voted for the ban, said there are seven frac sand operations and an active mine in her district.
“These operations are literally in my constituents’ backyard,” Kovecsi said. “The direct implications of noise and dust and road safety are faced by my constituents.”
Sand mining in Minnesota and Wisconsin boomed and waned along with the oil and gas production practice known as hydrofracking.
The particular kind of sand found in parts of southeast Minnesota was in huge demand by exploration companies, which use it to prop open cracks in the underground shale formations that produce oil and natural gas. . .
[Frac sand] Opponents fear destruction of scenic bluffs along the Mississippi River, health problems from blowing silica sand dust, contamination of groundwater, and damage to roads and more accidents from the trucks that cart sand to and from transportation hubs. . . .
“People had their say and the local officials followed the will of the people,” she [Land Stewardship Project organizer Johanna Rupprecht] said. “They put the best interests of the citizens in the county and of the land of the county ahead of what’s best for the frac sand industry.”
Rupprecht had interned for the Land Stewardship Project's western Minnesota office earlier this decade, but went home to Winona County, where her family farms near Lewiston, to organize with her neighbors. Our stretch of the prairie's loss is Winona County's gain as this talented young person returned to her home county.
Supporters of the ban have been vocal for several years to move the process forward, citing concerns with water and air quality, health effects on county residents and reclamation possibilities, as well as the ability of the Winona County planning department staff to oversee the industry given its size, resources and workload.
Commissioner Greg Olson, the leading proponent of the ban from its first proposal, an issue that in some ways defined his successful re-election campaign, maintained that the majority of the people he heard from supported the ban.
“I’d put more weight on the public that had spoken … than I do a letter from an attorney from Minneapolis,” Olson said, addressing ongoing concerns that an outright ban could invite legal challenges to the county. “I think (the people) have been very unanimous.”
Maybe not all populism is anti-environment. [end update]
The Winona County Board of Commissioners voted tonight to pass a ban on any new frac sand mining, processing, storage or transport operations in the southeastern Minnesota county’s jurisdiction. This step comes after a 17-month grassroots organizing campaign by county residents calling for a ban, led by members of the Land Stewardship Project (LSP).
For years, Winona County has been heavily targeted by the oil, gas and frac sand industry’s attempts to extract silica sand for use in hydraulic fracturing. Thousands of residents have opposed frac sand development due to its harmful impacts on the land, as well as on public health, safety and quality of life in local communities.
In June 2015, LSP members and supporters from across the county, many from neighborhoods that began fighting frac sand proposals several years earlier, set a goal of banning the industry outright, working to get Winona County to become the first county to do so.
“We felt a ban was needed for the health and well-being of people and the environment,” said Warren Township resident Barb Nelson. “And the vast majority of residents in the county agreed. I hope other counties are encouraged by the step we’ve taken to take a firm stand against the frac sand industry.”
During Winona County’s process of considering the ban this summer and fall, an average of 80 percent of public comments received were in favor of the ban.
“The bluffs here are full of the kind of sand this industry wants,” said Joe Morse of Wilson Township. “We’ve seen what’s happened where the frac sand industry operates in Wisconsin — bluffs are leveled and the landscape is destroyed. Winona County residents love the natural beauty of this land and want to protect it.”
Members of LSP’s Winona County Organizing Committee applauded the passage of the ban as a major victory for people and the land and as an example of local democracy at its best.
“I feel grateful we have a County Board with the wisdom to listen to the people they were elected to serve, and make the decision to prioritize public health and safety over the profit of a few,” said Wiscoy Township resident Kelley Stanage.
The County Board passed the ban by a 3-2 vote in the form of an amendment to Winona County’s existing zoning ordinance. It prohibits any new operations for the production of industrial minerals, including the silica sand used in hydraulic fracturing.
“I am relieved that we have protected our water and our vulnerable populations from frac sand operations,” said Lynnea Pfohl, a resident of Homer Township. “As a mother of young children, it’s also important to me that we were able to take this step locally towards tackling climate change, by putting our sand off limits for oil and gas production.”
While the overwhelming majority of public input from Winona County residents consistently favored the ban, the measure was fiercely opposed by the Minnesota Industrial Sand Council and other representatives of the frac sand industry.
“The story here is one of local residents taking on outside corporate interests bent on exploiting our communities and the land,” said LSP organizer Johanna Rupprecht. In Winona County, we’ve shown that people power can defeat corporate power. People can win when we organize and work together.”
Congratulations to the many citizens in Winona County who worked so long to protect what they cherish.
Photo: A frac sand mine.
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.
But it's hard to pin down one story to let you know how valuable CURE (Clean Up The River Environment) is for those of us who live in the Upper Valley of the Minnesota and the rest of the state.
Does "the" story start with sitting in a Lutheran church in Granite Falls with hundreds of other local people while polar explorer Will Steger leads a discussion of climate change?
Or is it gathering in the CURE office while lawmakers field questions about pollinator policy from rural people ranging from farmers to sportsmen who've seen bee and butterfly populations drop?
Or breaking bread a big potluck at the Watson Town Hall where everybody from young, beginning farmers to a state legislator stress the need to save a practical sustainable food production education program at a community and technical college in the watershed? There was local music there and art, along with the local food and young families eager to farm.
Is it a discussion in a Renville County community center about what a water charter might look like, in which people who started the meeting as strangers bond over their shared concerns, regardless of their age or political persuasion?
Paddling down the LeSueur River to its confluence with the Blue Earth, after listening to farmers, residents and a county commissioner talk about their river? Or walking on a sandbar near Sacred Heart while a young Native American girl educates me about river mussels and river health?
There are more episodes that come to mind, but the common river that runs through my memory is conversation and a common belief that ordinary people can make a difference. We hear a lot these days about paying attention to rural folks. I feel blessed to have been in the room so many times when CURE has created a space for conversation and action meant to clean up the river environment.
Bluestem Prairie encourages our readers to give to Montevideo-based Clean Up The River Environment (CURE), a rural, grassroots nonprofit founded in 1992, with the goal to rescue and restore the Upper Valley of the Minnesota River. On its Give To The Max Day webpage, CURE describes itself:
CURE is a rural, grassroots nonprofit founded in 1992. Our mission is to protect and restore resilient rural landscapes by harnessing the power of citizens who care about them. We do this because we believe that robust human communities can only be sustained by healthy ecosystems, and robust natural environments can only be regained through vigorous stewardship.
Our work takes many forms, but always involves three core practices:
Awakening people’s bonds with the natural world around them
Inclusively, strategically and dialectically exploring issues and actions
Systematically building communities of change at critical intersections of ecological and social well-being
That sounds a bit abstract, but CURE's work is anything but that out here on the prairie and the watersheds that connect us to the rest of the world. Please give to this tremendous organization and its vital work with rural people and communities.
Little did representative Tony Cornish's colleagues and House staff know that this year, when they savored the delicious Rapidan Dam Store pies that the Vernon Center Republican shares on his birthday, they were participating in a campaign event.
Bluestem suspects that this tasty tradition is best listed as a non-campaign expense that reflects the cost of serving in the legislature. While Cornish didn't use campaign committee funds to buy those amazing, out-of-this-world pies in 2015, he did spend $240 for pies as a non-campaign expenditurein 2014 (page 10, year-end report).
That was the first and only other time the pie expense for his birthday pie was paid by campaign coffers.
While it's not clear from the House rules whether members can use the House floor for campaigning, the rule is clear for staff members. They can't use House equipment or working hours for campaigning. Let's hope no one employed by the House cut the pie, served it or cleaned up after the birthday treats--or if they did, the Cornish campaign amends its report, shifting this expense into the non-campaign expenditure category.
Here's a photo of House members and staff enjoying those pies in a past year:
Bluestem encourages readers to try the pie (and buy it with their own funds) at the Dam Store next time they're down south of Mankato, at the Rapidan Dam on the Blue Earth River.
Photos: Various pieces of the pie. Cornish in 2013 or 2014 (top); the dam store expense (middle); colleagues and staff having a little pie (bottom).
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 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.
Willmar residents are working together on another thoughtful response to last week's tragic drownings of 10-year-old Idris Hussein and 11-year-old Ahmed Hashi in Foot Lake.
"These two young children have to be the last, last, last, last," one man had said at their June 28 burial, yelling louder with each word.
Area groups like Willmar Community Education and Recreation and the YMCA have provided traditional swimming lessons to the Willmar community for years.
Pam Vruwink of WCER says there's a gap between what is currently offered and what is needed. She's working to fix it.
"I think it's really important that we are flexible and respond to the needs of the community," Vruwink said. "We need to reevaluate what we're currently providing."
Traditional swimming lessons aren't always the perfect fit for all, culturally or practically.
So WCER is in the preliminary stages of planning several introductory water safety sessions, with a goal to teach children and others common water hazards and how to help out if they see someone in trouble. . . .
With the sticker price for traditional swimming lessons through WCER ringing in at $45 per session, without scholarships, some are unable to participate.
Since last week's drowning, WCER has been approached by several businesses and groups wanting to contribute financially to the cause and help sponsor students.
"They say, 'We see the value in swimming lessons,'" Vruwink said.
Older students in the Willmar School District can receive swimming lessons through middle school gym classes, but some don't participate, for religious objections or otherwise.
"There are a number of girls that aren't participating, because of the clothing, religious beliefs," Vruwink said.
There, WCER saw another gap. It began offering a girls-only swimming lesson class this summer.
It's great to see the community rise to answer the cry from the heart by the man at the burial in a practical way. Readers who want to help financially provide or physically teach swimming lessons can call the WCER office at 320-231-8490, the West Central Tribune reports.
Photo: Mementos left by well-wishers last week near the spot where Idris Hussein and Ahmed Hashi drowned.
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 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.
On Thursday night, the Winona County Planning Commission heard public testimony on the county's proposed ordinance to ban the mining of frac sand (silica sand). News reports and social media shared during the event reveal overwhelming support for the ban.
About 200 people packed the rotunda of the Tau Center on the West Campus at Winona State University to answer Margaret Lambert's question: "To ban, or not to ban?"
Lambert, a Winona resident, was one 74 people to address the Winona County Planning Commission as it opened its public hearing Thursday on a proposed ban on silica sand mining for the industrial purpose of hydraulic fracturing. Of the 74 individuals who spoke during the public comment portion of the meeting, 15 opposed the ban and 59 supported the ban.
As for Lambert, she answered her own question by asking the commission where the funds for a mining expert to write regulations would come from and how much it would cost, and where the funds for enforcement of any regulations would come from and how much it might cost. "Who will pay for damage to the environment?" she asked. . . .
Reasons to support the ban ran a broad spectrum. From the costs of enforcing regulations to the damage caused, both financial and ecological. Some brought up the trustworthiness of the mining industry. . . .
The debate over whether to ban frac sand in Winona County took center stage Thursday in the city.
The Tau Center on Winona State University’s west campus — a venue selected specifically because of the interest in the issue, with the meeting moved from the small county government center — was filled Thursday night for the county planning commission’s first step in discussing the county’s proposed frac sand ban.
The public hearing was strictly to receive public comment, with any final decision left to the county board in late summer or early fall, but the groundswell of support for a ban was immediately evident Thursday. . . .
Dozens of people spoke in the meeting. The speakers for the ban outnumbered those against it by wide margins, but both were represented as the discussion moves forward toward a potential fall vote by the county board.
Those against the ban mostly spoke about the use of regulation, and about not using picking and choosing between uses of the fine, round sand that’s been favored for fracking operations in Texas and elsewhere in the country. . . .
Check out the rest at the WDN. Social media buzzed with the twitter hashtag #fracsandban(and without). Some representative tweets:
We'll have more on this story as it develops. Bluestem Prairie has been following Minnesota's frac sand mining debate since 2011.
Photo: The crowd at the hearing at the Tau Center. Photo by Bobby king, via twitter.
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 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.
Plan to attend the public hearing June 30 and help spread the word! It's particularly important for residents of rural areas of Winona County where frac sand operations have been proposed -- like the Saratoga Township and St. Charles area, The Arches, and Stockton -- to attend and make their voices heard.
The Winona County Planning Commission's public hearing on the frac sand ban will be Thursday, June 30th, 7:00-10:00 pm, at the Tau Center, 511 Hilbert St., according to the page.
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:
The Winona Daily News and Winona Post report that on Tuesday, the Winona County Board of Commissioners voted 4-1 on Tuesday to send the issue of banning most types of sand to the county planning commission.
The Winona County Board of Commissioners took a key step Tuesday toward a final decision on whether to ban most frac sand activity in the county.
The board voted 4-1 to send the issue to the county planning commission, which will have 60 days to hold a public hearing and make a recommendation to the county board. The county board will then be asked to make a final decision.
The vote followed similar lines as previous ones on the issue, including on April 26 when the board instructed planning staff and the county attorney to develop language for a ban on silica sand mining related to its use in fracking operations elsewhere in the county. . . .
The amendment’s language draws from several examples, including the Goodhue County Florence Township’s ban on silica sand mining for fracking, and the Land Stewardship Project’s proposed language for a ban.
The Winona County Planning Commission will have its hands full after Tuesday’s meeting. In a 4-1 vote, the County Board passed on a proposal to ban frac sand mining — defined as sand mining for industrial uses — to the Planning Commission. Jacob and Ward criticized the proposal as unfairly and illogically singling out frac sand from other sand mining industries. The proposal would allow construction sand mining.
Jacob said the proposal was “setting the table for a lawsuit,” but ultimately voted to pass the proposed ban on to the Planning Commission and a series of public hearings. The frac sand issue is an “open wound in the community,” Jacob said. There will never be closure unless the county goes through the process for considering this ban, he added. Ward voted against the proposal.
The Planning Commission will hold a public hearing on the proposed frac sand ban before forwarding its recommendation to the County Board for another public hearing and a final vote.
Winona County commissioner Steve Jacob misleads the public and his constituents when he suggests that he and Winona County's frac sand rules played an important role in stopping the Minnesota Proppant frac sand processing plant in St. Charles in 2013. Nothing could be further from the truth.
That plant was stopped by the uproar of hundreds and hundreds of St. Charles area citizens that convinced the St. Charles City Council to scuttle the proposal. The plant would have been the largest frac sand plant in the U.S.
Winona County's very weak frac sand rules had nothing to do with stopping the proposal. And commissioner Jacob wasn't any help either. He was silent on the project and did not oppose it. The only public record I know of regarding Jacob and the project is the financial contribution made to Jacob's 2012 election campaign (and reported to the county auditor on his own campaign financial report) by the spokeswoman for Minnesota Proppant.
Nopar is correct. We posted extensively about the fight against the proposed sand plant in St. Charles, drawing from coverage by the Rochester Bulletin, the Winona papers and other Minnesota media. Shame on the county commissioner for erasing the role of citizens working to preserve the quality of life in their community.
Photo: A frac sand mine.
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:
. . .For Broberg and others, the massive fish kill on the Whitewater was the latest sign of serious, widespread trouble in Minnesota's waters. Some 40 percent of the lakes and streams are polluted, with much of that centered in southern Minnesota's farm country. In six far southwestern Minnesota counties there are no lakes considered fishable and swimmable. . . .
At the Capitol, lawmakers are divided on how far to go to fix the problems. Gov. Mark Dayton has made water quality an issue central to his legacy. He's pushed to boost the number of buffer strips along Minnesota lakes and rivers to help trap farm runoff, although he stepped back from some of those efforts amid pressure from some lawmakers and farm groups.
Farming isn't the only pollution source, but there's no disputing the correlation between farming and water pollution, said Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Spokesperson Cathy Rofshus.
"Water quality is usually exceptionally high in the northeast part of the state and tends to degrade as you go to the south, [and] southwest," she said. . . .
The MPCA is examining all 80 major watersheds in Minnesota one-by-one to document water quality. Regulators used to study only water with known problems, said agency pollution control specialist Shaina Keseley. "We know more now than we've ever known about the conditions of our waterways."
Read the entire article, which focuses on the Whitewater River in Southeast Minnesota, which suffered a disturbing fish kill last summer.
Today, the MPCA released two studies of the Yellow Medicine River Watershed, the Yellow Medicine River Watershed Restoration and Protection Strategy (WRAPS) report and the Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) report, along with a request for public comment.
The Yellow Medicine River joins the Minnesota near the campground at Upper Sioux Agency State Park.
Here's the release:
The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA), the Yellow Medicine River Watershed District and local groups are recommending a number of actions to restore and protect water bodies in the Yellow Medicine River Watershed.
The watershed is located in southwestern Minnesota in major portions of three counties: Yellow Medicine, Lincoln, and Lyon, and smaller portions of Lac qui Parle and Redwood counties. The Yellow Medicine is a major tributary of the Minnesota River, entering about eight miles southeast of Granite Falls.
The Yellow Medicine River Watershed Restoration and Protection Strategy (WRAPS) report and Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) report are available for public comment through June 15.
Generally, most of the streams and lakes in the watershed do not safely or adequately support swimming or fishing. Stream bank erosion and stormwater runoff are having a negative effect on water quality. Agricultural activities in the watershed have resulted in runoff that carries excess phosphorus, sediment and bacteria into bodies of water.
These pollutants degrade water quality and are harmful to fish and other aquatic life. The TMDL report quantifies the pollutant levels, identifies the sources of the pollution, and proposes ways to bring water quality back to an acceptable level.
The WRAPS report identifies impaired water bodies and those in need of protection, and identifies the actions needed to achieve and maintain water quality. For example, installing plant buffers along shoreland, stabilizing stream banks, and implementing stormwater-control projects will help improve water quality in the watershed. Agricultural practices include greater use of cover crops, minimum or no tillage, temporary storage of water, and greater crop diversity.
Many groups are participating in restoration and protection efforts, including the Yellow Medicine River Watershed District, Soil and Water Conservation Districts, member cities and several state and local organizations. Individuals are always encouraged to get involved.
These reports are some of more than a dozen that have been completed under the state’s watershed approach, a holistic way of gauging the health of streams and lakes, and developing strategies to restore or protect their water quality.
The reports are available on the MPCA’s Yellow Medicine River Watershed webpage or at the MPCA’s St. Paul office, at 520 Lafayette Road N.
The MPCA encourages those interested in the Yellow Medicine River Watershed to review and provide feedback on the reports. Comments on the reports should be submitted in writing by June 15, 2016, to Michael Weckwerth, MPCA, 504 Fairgrounds Rd., Marshall, MN 56258, or sent by email to michael.weckwerth@state.mn.us. He is available to answer questions at 507-476-4267.
Written comments must specify which report you are commenting on, include a statement of your interest in the report, and the action you wish the MPCA to take, including specific references to sections of the draft report you believe should be changed. You must state the specific reasons for your position. More information is available on the MPCA’s Impaired waters and TMDLs webpage.
Photo: The Yellow Medicine River, Upper Sioux Agency State Park, April 2014. Photo by Sally Jo Sorensen.
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:
Why isn't Governor Dayton and his agencies talking about this? Water quality is actually improving, as many of us know. Read out state MPCA report here.
When the clean water evidence is different than the narrative those on the LEFT are projecting, they simply ignore the evidence and push for tougher standards.
The screenshot:
While Drakowski's friend and the former state senator deliver confident answers about the Dayton administration's motives, a quick review of the MPCA's website exposes a far different answer to Drazkowski's question.
Truth is, the agency is "talking about" the report. It's Drazkowski who's presented it out of context, as an orphaned document collecting cyberdust somewhere on the MPCA's website.
Minnesota’s water has come a long way from the days when raw sewage flowed untreated into rivers as a matter of course. However, there is still a lot of work to be done if we are going to restore the impaired lakes, rivers, and streams in the state. Land use is a major factor in our current water quality problems — agricultural drainage, urban and rural runoff, and erosion caused by removing vegetation from shorelines. It's not just the regulated facilities like wastewater treatment plants that need to do more, it's all of us — the citizens.
In general, Minnesota streams in the northeast part of the state are in better condition than elsewhere. Stream conditions — including the condition of fish and other organisms, and levels of nitrogen, phosphorus, and other pollutants — worsen as you move west and south in the state. The changes correspond to the type and intensity of land use in each ecoregion, due to the differences in soils, climate, and other factors.
Overall conditions
Good progress has been made — mostly through improved wastewater treatment by cities and businesses — in reducing the levels of several pollutants in Minnesota waterways, including phosphorus, ammonia, and bacteria.
The amount of organic matter — primarily sediment and algae — in the water has been reduced overall, which helps keep oxygen in the water at healthy levels.
Nitrogen is the key, high-volume pollutant in state rivers and streams and has been increasing over time. Chloride concentrations are also rising.
Current regulations and voluntary best management practices will not be sufficient to maintain healthy rivers and streams and shield impaired ones from additional pollution. Even if all existing laws were followed to the letter, waterways would still be subject to unacceptable levels of nutrients and other contaminants. Targeted action will be required to cut off unregulated sources of pollution.
Long-term trend analysis of seven different water pollutants measured at 80 locations across Minnesota for more than 30 years shows consistent reductions in five pollutants, but consistent increases in two pollutants. Concentrations of total suspended solids, phosphorus, ammonia, biochemical oxygen demand, and bacteria have significantly decreased, but nitrate and chloride concentrations have risen, according to data from the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency’s (MPCA) “Milestone” monitoring network. Recent, shorter-term trends are consistent with this pattern, but are less pronounced. Pollutant concentrations show distinct regional differences, with a general pattern across the state of lower levels in the northeast to higher levels in the southwest.
These trends reflect both the successes of cleaning up municipal and industrial pollutant discharges during this period, and the continuing challenge of controlling the more diffuse “nonpoint” polluted runoff sources and the impacts of increased water volumes from artificial drainage practices.
The report itself is linked on the bottom of this page, under the section title: Dive deeper: a more in-depth look at our rivers and streams. The agency is sharing this report. Indeed, it's used as the foundational document for "the bottom line on rivers and streams."
Moreover, the Environmental Quality Board's Beyond the Status Quo: 2015 EQB Water Policy Report focused one section on approaches to reducing chloride, one of the two pollutants that the 2014 report found to be increasing. At the Governor's Water Summit, much of the discussion about rural water quality centered around nitrates/nitrogen pollution in groundwater, as well as rivers and streams.
But there's more. The report notes that its data set ends at 2010, since a new framework for measuring water quality has been adopted following the approval by Minnesota voters of more tax dollars dedicated to water quality (among other things):
The Minnesota Milestone sites are a collection of 80 monitoring locations at rivers and streams across the state with good, long-term water quality data. The period of record is generally more than 30 years, through 2010, with monitoring at some sites going back to the 1950s.While the Milestone sites are not necessarily representative of Minnesota’s rivers and streams as a whole, they do provide a valuable and wide-spread historical record for many of the state’s waters.
Monitoring was done by MPCA staff for a standard set of key pollutants on a regular basis, usually monthly for 9 to 10 months of the year. Generally, sites were sampled each year through the mid-1990s, at which time the sampling frequency was reduced to two out of every five years on a rotating basis. In some cases and when appropriate for this report, data from the Milestone sites has been supplemented with data collected at the sites through other monitoring efforts. All water quality data is stored in the Environmental Quality Information System (EQuIS).
In 2010 the Minnesota Milestone program was superseded by the Minnesota Watershed Pollutant Load Monitoring Network, which will be used to evaluate water quality trends in the future. This new network has more than twice as many monitoring sites, much more frequent monitoring, and includes streamflow to document not only the concentration of pollutants, but also pollutant loads, flow weighted mean pollutant concentrations, and watershed pollutant yields.
Establishment of basin and major watershed monitoring sites within the network began in 2007 following the passage of Minnesota’s Clean Water Legacy Act with subsequent funding from the Clean Water Fund of the Minnesota Clean Water, Land and Legacy Amendment. Establishment of subwatershed monitoring sites began in 2011 with all sites scheduled to be operational by 2015.
Moreover, the watershed approach led to the addition of data from lakes, while the earlier report only gathered information from "80 monitoring locations at rivers and streams across the state with good, long-term water quality data," the new report included water quality data from lakes. The "swimmable" part of the report summary notes:
How are our watersheds? Water quality is a reflection of what happens on the surrounding land. So far, MPCA's monitoring and assessment work highlights the following themes:
In watersheds dominated by agricultural and urban land, half or fewer of the lakes fully support the standard for swimming because of phosphorus. Excess phosphorus is the main driver of harmful algae in lakes.
Watersheds that are heavily farmed tend to have high levels of nitrogen, phosphorus, and suspended solids in their waters. These pollutants hurt aquatic life and recreational opportunities.
Bacteria levels in streams are also a problem. Watersheds where fewer than half the streams fully support swimming because of bacteria levels are generally in areas with a higher density of people and livestock – the developed and agricultural portions of the state.
More lakes fully support the swimming standard in the more forested and wetland-rich areas of north-central and northern Minnesota. The same goes for streams in areas with lower populations and little animal agriculture.
The general pattern is that water quality is exceptionally good in the northeast part of the state and declines moving toward the southwest
It's worth remembering that report Draz imagines isn't part of the Governor and agencies' discussion (in reality, it is) noted that measured phosphorus levels dropped in the rivers and streams measured at the Minnesota Milestone sites because of stricter discharge standards for "point" pollution at wastewater facilities. Additionally, legislation Rep. Denny McNamara, R-Hastings, introduced and passed in 2005, banned the use fertilizers containing phosphorus for lawns by Minnesota homeowners excerpt under certain circumstances.
Remember, the earlier Minnesota Milestone sites monitoring also found nitrate pollution to be rising--and this comes from "non-point" sources like agricultural uses.
The broader framework allowed by the new system--brought about by a statewide popular--didn't result in a contradiction of the earlier data examined in the earlier report. Instead, the reports are complementary. Perhaps that's why Dayton's administration uses both of them at the MPCA. Draz and Al must have thought they had one heckova talking point there. Nope.
If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie's original 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:
After looking at a least one of the people listed in Elizabeth Dunbar's report Tuesday on Minnesota Public Radio, Dayton names 8 to new MPCA advisory committee,we can't help but suspect some activists are hoping for a strategic rewind.
Nathaniel Hultgren is the Agronomy Director for Meadow Star Dairy, where he serves as a liaison between the dairy development and local farmers. He is also the Chief Executive Officer of Hultgren Farms, a 5,000 acre specialty crop farm, and previously was the Chief Financial Officer of the Bird Island Bean Company. He is a member of the Heritage Bank Community Advisory Committee and a past member of the Hawk Creek Country Club Board of Directors and the Willmar Airport Planning Commission.
Not released by the Governor's Office? That Meadow Star Dairy is part of Riverview Dairy; the denial of a permit for Riverview's proposed Baker Dairy in late summer 2014 by the original Citizens Board is what led to the successful effort to axe the real board with real (if seldom exercised) power.
If getting Hultgren on this board isn't regulatory capture, we're not sure what is.
By the end of the special session, the real board was abolished, but environmental leaders held out hope for the new board. In August, the Star Tribune reported:
Steve Morse, executive director of the Minnesota Environmental Partnership, applauded Dayton for moving quickly to temper what groups like his saw as a blow to transparency and accountability.
"We hope we can come back at a later date, maybe 2017, and actually re-establish it in statute," Morse said. "This was a big mistake by the Legislature. They blew it and the governor is fixing what he can."
Despite the new group's lack of authority, those who fought the Citizens' Board's abolition said Dayton's move is a good first step.
"Really if we don't keep the infrastructure and keep it moving, we won't be able to reinstate it, so I think he did exactly the right thing," said Bobby King, an organizer at the Land Stewardship Project.
Oops. But the irony doesn't stop there.
Irony--or complete corn?
Yes: there's more. For practical purposes, the Minnesota Corn Growers Association has been one of the greatest adversaries for Governor Dayton's drive to establish vegetative buffers. The current head of the Corn Growers is Noah Hultgren.
Noah Hultgren is a family farmer in Raymond, Minn.
SHAKOPEE, Minn. (Oct. 6, 2015) – The Minnesota Corn Growers Association (MCGA) state board of directors recently elected Noah Hultgren as its new president for 2015-16. Hultgren grows corn, soybeans, sugar beets, edible beans and canning vegetables on his family farm near Raymond, Minn., in Kandiyohi County.
Hultgren is a fourth-generation family farmer and was elected to the MCGA board in 2011. He replaces Bruce Peterson from Northfield, whose one-year term as president ended on Sept. 30.
“MCGA has accomplished a lot in recent years on behalf of corn farmers, especially in the areas of research, environmental stewardship and ethanol,” Hultgren said. “The next step is to build on those achievements and leverage them in a way that connects with non-farming consumers. Corn farmers have an amazing story to tell. We need to make sure we’re telling it and making our voices heard outside of the farm community.” ...
Hultgren Farms also developed the concept and obtained the state permit in 2008-2009, we reported in Fehr factor? Strib story reports battle--that simply wasn't there--"ignited" over Willmar dairy, but dropped plans when the dairy industry crashed, selling the site to Riverview. Regardless of ownership, the Kandiyohi County Meadow Star site met with no significant opposition from neighbors, unlike the Baker Dairy.
Insiders Out?
Bluestem's readers may remember Noah Hultgren from the Pioneer Press article about this coming Saturday's Governor's Water Summit, Can we save Minnesota’s water? These 800 are going to try. The Raymond-area man decried how farmers were going to be outnumbered at that gathering:
. . .“My guess is farmers will be outnumbered at the summit, and if we have a lack of majority, we might feel on the defensive. But I know a lot of farmers look forward to the conversation about water quality. . . .
Poor baby. We're not sure how much more access to the Governor the Hultgren family could get at this point other than dog sitting or marrying an executive-level staff member. We can think of any number of Minnesotans who'd love to be this outnumbered as far as having Mark Dayton's attention.
Land Use Policy and Control
We doubt it's going to come up much at the Water Summit, but one of the battles suggested back at the 2014 gatherings of the Senate Rural Task force was the development of state control of permitting, including land use.
As Minnesota state law now stands, townships are able to drawn up land use ordinances; our vegetable garden in nearby Wang Township, Renville County, is able to be tended without the use of a gas mask because the township board enacted a restriction in number of animal units per feedlot back during the Hog Wars in the 1990s. The farmsteads in the township--and nearby Hawk Creek Township--are still mostly peopled. The area is close enough to regional centers like Marshall and Willmar--and the country air is still sweet--for the farmsteads to be desirable.
But Minnesota--with its publicly owned water and absence of water rights--is once again attracting attention as the giant livestock operations and dairies in the west grow less sustainable. That local control? A stumbling block for the meat and dairy industry.
As the screengrab from the On-Site Proceedings of the Minnesota Milk Producers' Dairy Management Workshops (above this section) illustrates, the Minnesota Milk Producers Association, having gotten rid of the board, now looks for "consistency" at every level. Heaven help those inconsistent townships (see the resolution on pages 2-3 of this pdf), but we doubt anyone will be encouraged to address land use zoning in St. Paul this Saturday.
A final thought
It's not for nothing that Bluestem is more grateful each day for our training at the Ozarks Famous Writers School. If we didn't understand the concept of irony we'd probably just shut down and sell insurance.
Photo: Aerial view of the Meadow Star Dairy, prior to when the cows came home, Via West Central Tribune.
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:
Minnesota Gov. Mark Dayton has ceded ground to farm interests and Republicans over a contentious aspect of his plan to require vegetative buffer strips to help protect water from agricultural runoff.
Privately owned drainage ditches are off the table, Dayon announced Friday morning.
This is more than just a Friday news dump, in a state fixated on the presidential caucus just across the Iowa border. By suspending the mapping project--which is in the statute--the governor has caved into those who believe that private landowners have no responsibility for prevention in protecting water quality.
It's the ultimate dump, period.
When combined with drinking water quality projects in the bonding bill that pay the cost of removing nitrates from drinking water, those whose practices pollute surface and groundwater are essentially being told: don't change, the public will pay for the damage to water (a public resource) that your business inflicts.
Here's the press release:
Statement from Governor Dayton on Water Quality Buffer Law
The following is a statement from Governor Mark Dayton.
“After meeting yesterday afternoon with House Republican leaders, I have, with great reluctance, instructed the Department of Natural Resources to stop its mapping of so-called ‘private ditches’ under last year’s buffer legislation. The Republican legislators insisted that they did not intend those ditches to be included in the scope of the legislation, even though its buffering requirements would not take effect until November 2018.
“Threats have been reported to me that DNR and BWSR’s bonding requests – which are urgently needed to address the state’s serious water quality and infrastructure challenges – would not be considered by House leadership, if private ditches were not retroactively exempted from the new buffer requirement. I will not put at risk the water quality improvements in my bonding proposal and other critical bonding measures over this dispute.
“I am deeply disappointed by this, because we should require all Minnesotans to take responsibility for the quality of the water that they pass on to their fellow citizens. I thought that we had achieved a modest agreement in the last legislative session about the urgent need to improve the quality of Minnesota’s waters by limiting their pollution from runoffs from private and public ditches. I consider this fierce opposition by the House Republican leadership, as evidence that we are a very long ways from bipartisan agreements even on the severity of our state’s water quality problems, much less on the need to take serious steps to improve it.
“I will not cease my efforts to impress upon all legislators and all Minnesotans the hard facts about the overall deterioration of our state’s water quality, and what we must do to reverse 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:
Representatives Dan Fabian, R-Roseau and Steve Green, R-Fosston will host Representative Denny McNamara,R-Hastings, Chair of the House Environment and Natural Resources Policy and Finance Committee, for listening sessions.
The schedule:
Morning
What: Environment Listening Session with Rep. Steve Green, Rep. Dave Hancock & Rep. Denny McNamara When: Wednesday, February 3rd from 9:00 PM to 11:00 PM Where: D & R Café, 27 Central St. W. Bagley, MN
Afternoon
What: Environment Listening Session with Rep. Dan Fabian and Rep. Denny McNamara When: Wednesday, February 3rd from 1:00 PM to 3:00 PM Where: Thief River Falls City Hall, Council Chambers 205 Third Street East Thief River Falls, MN
Fabian's press release:
On Wednesday February 3, 2016, Representative Dan Fabian (R-Roseau) will be hosting an Environment Listening Session with Representative Denny McNamara (R-Hastings), Chair of the House Environment and Natural Resources Policy and Finance Committee.
The listening session will cover numerous constituent concerns related to land, water and wildlife laws and regulations, including those set by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources and the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency.
"Folks in Northwest Minnesota, including landowners, businesses and local units of government are greatly affected by state government, and I have heard from a number of constituents concerned about everything from buffers to wildlife management," said Rep. Fabian. "I look forward to hosting this meeting, hearing first-hand about the concerns residents are facing so we can tackle these issues at the State Capitol."
Fabian strongly encourages area residents to attend the listening session to share their thoughts, opinions and questions about the State of Minnesota's environmental rules and regulations.
Here are the details:
What: Environment Listening Session with Rep. Dan Fabian and Rep. Denny McNamara When: Wednesday, February 3rd from 1:00 PM to 3:00 PM Where: Thief River Falls City Hall, Council Chambers 205 Third Street East Thief River Falls, MN
I am pleased to announce that I am hosting an environmental listening session in Bagley on Wednesday, February 3 at the D & R Café, 27 Central St. W., from 9:00 to 11:00 a.m.
Joining me at the event will be State Representative Dave Hancock and Chairman of the Environment and Natural Resources Policy and Finance Committee, Rep. Denny McNamara.
I encourage you to attend this event and share your thoughts, opinions, and questions about environmental rules and regulations in the State of Minnesota.
If you have any questions regarding this event or another legislative issue, please do not hesitate to contact me. I can be reached via phone at 651-296-9918 or by email at rep.steve.green@house.mn. I hope to see you there
Bluestem encourages everyone in the districts to attend the listening sessions to let your state representative and Chairman McNamara know your thoughts about clean water, soil health and wildlife.
Many citizens also find it useful to videotape listening sessions for future reference, as well as live tweet and Facebook about the meetings.
Photo: Representative Denny McNamara, R-Hastings.
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:
The DFA plant in Zumbrota has been fined more than $100,000 by the city since 2014 over a smelly wastewater discharge. The dispute between the city and DFA eventually landed in the Minnesota Court of Appeals. Repeated wastewater violations prompted the city to increase its fee and fine schedule for the third time since 2009, which led to the legal challenge by DFA.
Bauer said Saturday that the local dairy plant, which processes about 8 million pounds of milk each week, has continued to be fined in recent months, though the new fines pale in comparison to the $90,000 fine that was issued in the summer of 2014; exact totals were not available.
"It has been better," Bauer said of the city's relationship with the dairy plant. . . .
Zumbrota is located on the North Branch of the Zumbro River. A friend who grew up in the area said kids called it the Scumbrota River, so we're hoping they manage to talk to those stinky cheese guys and figure it out.
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:
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:
On July 28, a heavy rain poured down upon the fields, bluffs and valley surrounding the South Branch of the Whitewater River in southeastern Minnesota, one of the state's most heralded trout streams.
Later that day or the next, between 9,000 and 10,000 fish in a 6.5-mile stretch of the river in Olmsted County were killed suddenly. The event nearly wiped out the wild brown trout population in that stretch.
That's not disputed.
Following an unprecedented investigation by three state agencies to determine a cause, the verdict arrived last month in the form of a 367-page report: "unable to draw a clear conclusion."
No smoking gun. No deadbeat landowner dumping chemicals in the dark of night. No bungled sewage plant operation. No catastrophic failure of a manure tank at a dairy farm.
Maybe that's a relief.
Or maybe it's worse. .
Maybe, as the report concludes, nothing illegal was done. Maybe all the herbicides, pesticides and fungicides -- including some lethal to aquatic life -- that were sprayed on crops by helicopter days leading up to the kill were in compliance. And maybe all the manure -- some of it laden with copper sulfate and other heavy metals -- was applied to nearby fields in compliance with state statutes.
Maybe that combination was flushed by heavy rain . . .
And maybe that created a toxic stew that killed the fish.
That's the suspicion of Jeffrey Broberg, a geologist, environmental manager and president of the Minnesota Trout Association. . . .
If they can't find the cause, then it's the general conditions," said Broberg. "That's what killed the fish: the normal farming practices."
Broberg isn't alone. State Rep. Rick Hansen, DFL-South St. Paul, who has a penchant for criticizing agricultural practices and policies, said the state's report contains enough information to point the finger at a combination of ag-based contributors.
"There wasn't a smoking gun," Hansen said. "There was a smoking Gatling gun."
The state report -- "South Branch Whitewater River: Unified Fish Kill Response" -- was completed by the Minnesota Department of Agriculture, Pollution Control Agency and Department of Natural Resources.
Farmers along the South Branch of the Whitewater River went about their business in July, as did the fish in the river.
Then it rained.
And the fish died.
That shouldn't happen.
Read the entire article at the Pioneer Press.
Photo: Dead trout in the river.(Photo courtesy Minnesota Department of Natural Resources).
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:
Minnesota has bonded debt of over $8 billion on the books. It consumes $1.3 billion of taxpayer money each biennium (debt service). There is not a dime of spending in this borrow-and-spend proposal that we need. Not a dime. It's time to stop spending our kids' future, while trying to convince them that it's good for them.
That leaves us to wonder if Miller doesn't think the $3.2 million for flood mitigation in Montevideo in the governor's spreadsheet shouldn't be funded:
Or if Miller's praising the notion that "It's time to stop spending our kids' future" on bonding at all--for things like the proposed veterans' home in Montevideo. Miller didn't seem to share Draz's no borrowing values when he authored a bill last spring for bonding for veterans homes in Monte and Bemidji, so prepares he'll stop being such Draz fanboy on social media.
On the other hand, Draz's 2014 campaign finance report reveals that the veteran Mazeppa lawmaker contributed $4500 cash and $2,452 for a field worker for the Renville County RPM, so maybe it's just gratitude on Miller's part, however much he's forgetting promises to his constituents.
It seems that Miller might be as constant as the prairie wind in March--and as shifting. We'll keep an eye out on whether he changes his mind about the value of helping Montevideo out with its flooding.
Photo: Rep. Tim Miller, R-Prinsburg, via Facebook. He wants bonding for projects or maybe not.
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:
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