By Dick Hagen
The Land Staff Writer
—
With 10,000-plus lakes, the headwaters of the mighty Mississippi River, the large watershed of the Minnesota River and hundreds of lesser watersheds across the state, water is a daily ingredient in the life of Minnesota citizens. Zero in on Minnesota agriculture, and water is the life of the entire industry.
To get a better perspective on the role of water check this Q & A with Warren Formo, Minnesota Agricultural Water Resources Coalition director.
Q: Explain the Minnesota watershed network.
A: Our purpose is to help farmers and their farm organizations be prepared for what is shaping up to be an evolution on how water is likely to be regulated in Minnesota. The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency is zeroing in on what they call a "watershed" approach, in which rather than looking at county boundaries, or river systems, they will instead be doing an overall evaluation each of the 81 watershed systems within Minnesota.
Q: How many water basins make up the Minnesota watershed system?
A: Minnesota has nine basins with the largest being the Mississippi, the Missouri, the Red River and the Minnesota River basin. But many are not aware that these are also broken down into smaller units, called major watersheds typically about the size of a county. This is a more manageable scale because it requires farmers to understand only their local area, not the whole basin. At this scale, water management will be more meaningful to people than when they try to figure out where they fit into, for example the entire Mississippi River Basin, which drains more than 40 percent of the United States.
Q: What is the MAWRC's purpose?
A: To better prepare farmers to participate in these local watersheds, whether it be developing a county water plan or addressing impaired waters through a TMDL report. Farmers have great local knowledge about soil and water resources. We want them to get engaged in local water activities right from the beginning so they can better represent themselves.
Q: You mentioned the acronym "TMDL" - what does that stand for?
A: It stands for "Total Maximum Daily Load" and is generated whenever a water body doesn't meet the water quality standards set by the state to comply with the Federal Clean Water Act. The TMDL is often described as a diet, how much can go into the river or lake without exceeding the standard. And if it doesn't meet this standard, then we explore why by identifying causes or sources of water pollution.
Q: Do you consider challenges to land use as a threat to farmers and their water resources?
A: In many instances, yes, because the discussion is so much more complicated than just characterizing the general land use. You often hear that ag must be a major contributor to water pollution because nearly half of the state's 52 million acres of land is used for agriculture. The problem with this approach is that it fails to recognize the tremendous diversity, and complexity, of modern ag systems. From my perspective farmers working the land today are the best this planet has ever seen, both in terms of production and protecting soil and water resources. And that's the message farmers and farm organizations need to preach and demonstrate.
Q: How does this effort translate to better working relations with the MPCA?
A: Generally, the more communication between and among various parties, the better the overall understanding. Once these regulators and agencies understand the dynamics of modern farming systems, they start to realize that improvements in water quality and maintenance of farming systems are not mutually exclusive. We can do both.
Q: Where and how does this start happening?
A: What we really need to do is get more farmers involved with water management discussions locally. This will help agency staff better understand ag while helping farmers understand what the MPCA is trying to accomplish. A lot of the past work has been based on estimates and guesses. But the reality is that the more data gathered about today's farming practices, the better farming looks in terms of the total water pollution issue.
Q: Is the Minnesota River cleaner today than it was 20 years ago?
A: Yes, in some ways; not necessarily in others. Some sensitive fish species, like the blue sucker and paddlefish can again be found in the Minnesota River basin. Also the bald eagle is becoming common again in the basin. You've got to accept that over time climate changes, hydrology changes, urban area changes, and of course changes in farming practices all have various impacts on the quality of water within any watershed, especially a river basin as large as the Minnesota River. But by most measurements, this river is now carrying less sediment, less phosphorous. And that tells me farmers are doing some good things on their land, and that wastewater treatment plants of the various communities along the Minnesota River are doing better jobs.
Q: Is the intensity of farmland drainage a contributing factor in water quality issues?
A: It's certainly the subject of much debate but the issue is very complicated and site specific. Because we've been in a relatively wet cycle, drainage is a hot topic and drainage technology is changing. Looking back many years, we basically had just one method of draining farmland, find the low spots and install tile inlets in those spots. Now we see much more sophisticated drainage systems laid out with laser technology, pattern tiling conversion of open inlets to blind inlets, even gated systems for storing soil water as needed.
I see a trend of drainage moving from just connecting and extending drainage networks to managing drainage better within each watershed. We very much understand how critical is the drainage of productive farmland. It's not a matter of whether drainage is good, or drainage is bad. Most farmers understand that drainage needs to be tailored to specific tracts of land.
Q: Do you see managed drainage systems as something that could impact water quality throughout Minnesota's major farming areas?
A: Yes, but understand that at this point the best results have been obtained on soils with very minimal grade. Down the road I think we'll see modifications that allow these system to fit on a wider variety of farmland. Farmer innovation, working with engineers and installers of tile systems, is already kicking into gear. But the real goal needs to be how does a particular drainage system complement that particular landscape.
Q: Did passage of the environment amendment providing additional tax revenue for the further development of Minnesota water resources fit OK with the objectives of the MAWRC?
A: It elevates the status of water among all Minnesotans. Our people mostly have a very good water ethic. We take pride in the tremendous water resources of our state. However, this vote signals that we need to dial that up a notch. But the proof is in the pudding. Will some of these monies be used to better determine the various sources of water pollution and to find ways to change both farming practices and urban development to reduce contaminations? We simply need to get better at these very key issues.
