Commissioners discuss possible enforcement of buffer law

Published 10:02 am Monday, March 30, 2009

Ross Hoffman has the ignominious distinction of being yelled at by landowners in every county in southeast Minnesota.

“They say ‘You’re stealing my land,’ when I talk to them about shoreland buffers,” Hoffman said.

There could be more yelling to come this spring, when farmers plant their crops.

Email newsletter signup

A possible clash between farmers and environmentalists lurks on the horizon.

Hoffman is the director of the Cannon River Watershed Partnership.

He addressed the Mower County Board of Commissioners recently (March 24) about the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency’s plans for enforcement of existing shoreland buffer laws.

Manure no closer to a public waterway than 100 feet. Atrazine no closer than 60 feet. Nothing closer than 50 feet. It’s the law.

Angie Knish, director of Mower County Environmental Services, and Justin Hanson, resource specialist for the Mower County Soil and Water Conservation District, were also a part of the presentation.

There was, to be sure, no yelling, but a frank discussion took place of shoreland regulations and how their enforcement is necessary.

From the regulators’ point of view, they are seeing farmers “creep” into shoreland buffer zones for agricultural purposes and they want it to stop.

A buffer or “shore impact zone” on a public stream, river, lake or wetland is a strip of land usually extending 50-feet from the high water mark.

It is planted with perennial vegetation to reduce sediment and pollutants from entering the waterway.

Having no buffer is an open door to sediment and pollutants, allowing some of the chemicals put on cropland (manure, pesticides, etc.) to come off the field and enter surface water.

A perennial vegetative buffer slows runoff down, allows sediment to drop off and allows plant absorption of pollutants.

This all leads to fewer pollutants in the surface water, fewer problems downstream and far better water quality.

The environment wins with buffers.

Knish: Law

isn’t new

According to Knish, the shoreland buffer rule is not new, but “It seems to be getting heightened attention.”

“It is my belief that you (the county commissioners) may be asked to enforce what currently is in rule, and I want to bring it to your attention,” she told the county board members.

According to Knish, only two counties are currently enforcing the shoreland buffer rule: Grant and Dodge.

In the case of Mower County’s neighbor, Dodge County, an enforcement officer has been hired to informed the buffer and other zoning rules, including feedlots.

Knish had no recommendation to make to the county commissioners about how the county should enforce the buffer rule, but she asked that discussions on how that will be done begin immediately.

The Mower County SWCD’s Hanson saw no reason for alarm, but indicated education and awareness could help.

“We have to get the word out to landowners,” Hanson said. “The SWCD offers cost-sharing buffer programs they can use.”

Critical to Mower County is the fact the county has the least amount of wildlife habitat and buffers supply that.

Hanson stopped short of suggesting landowners are insensitive to the issue. Far from that notion, in fact, according to the SWCD resource specialist. “Farmers are doing a pretty good job with buffers now,” he said. “We haven’t seen too many problems in that area.”

David Hillier, 3rd District county commissioner and current temporary chairman of the county board, inquired how Dodge County was handling the buffer rule enforcement.

Knish said the county had made the enforcement officer’s job a full-time position.

“We don’t currently have the staff to do that in environmental services,” she said.

Mower County’s feedlot enforcement officer, Lowell Franzen, was summarily terminated from employment with Mower County last year, and Knish took over his duties.

Mower County is currently in the midst of an examination of county programs and services, as well as jobs, due to anticipated deep cuts in the County Aid Program money it receives from the state.

In addition, the commissioners are finalizing plans for a new $30.7-million jail and justice center project and finding ways to fund its operations and maintenance when open.

Raising property taxes to do that is expected to be one of the commissioners’ recommendations.

Thus, the prospect of being asked to enforce an existing environmental rule at a time when it is already short-staffed in environmental services creates a dilemma.

“The budget climate we’re currently in precludes adding any personnel at this time,” Hillier said.

There is help available for farmers wanting to install buffers. The Natural Resources Conservation Service offers that help, according to Hanson.

The SWCD and NRCS could be rescues to be tapped to create more buffer strips.

NRCS programs, such as the popular Conservation Reserve Program, could help people reduce soil erosion, enhance water supplies, improve water quality, increase wildlife habitat, and reduce damages caused by floods and other natural disasters. Public benefits include enhanced natural resources that help sustain agricultural productivity and environmental quality.

Hoffman takes

alarmist view

Hoffman followed the presentation by Knish and Hanson with his own, more alarming, words.

“We need buffers in ag land area,” he said.

He was quick to point out public drainage ditches have their own rules and are not part of the new effort to enforce the 50-foot shoreland buffer rule.

“We do have agricultural creeping up a little too close to public waters,” he warned. “What should stay in the field is coming off and flowing into public waterways.”

The list of field runoff dangers was long: atrazine and manure, nitrogen, sulfur, phosphorous and other pollutants, Hoffman said.

He was unequivocal in his belief buffers work. “Absolutely,” he told the commissioners. “They reduce the pollutant runoffs.”

He was also realistic.

“Buffers alone won’t solve surface water problems,” he said, “but they help.”

There is also the possible confrontations between farmers and environmentalists in the wake of the Clean Water Act’s far-reaching implications and the new Legacy Amendment monies going to environmental problems.

Bottom line: Farmers farm to support their families. Agriculture drives the local economy.

That caused Hoffman to admit, “Buffers are not popular among farmers. They feel they are an invasion of privacy on their lands.”

“I hold the distinction of being yelled at by a landowner in every county in this region, when I come to talk about buffers between ag land and public waters,” he said.

“All I’m looking for from you is a commitment to helping solve the problem,” Hoffman challenged the commissioners.

The Cannon River Watershed Partnership is offering all counties the Southeast Minnesota Land Mapping resources to take a close look at possible encroachment into public waterways unprotected by buffers.

“Shoreland mapping will help,” Hoffman predicted.

Craig Oscarson, county coordinator, warned any plans to strictly enforce the state’s shoreland buffer rule will run the risk of antagonizing landowners, who already have the perception “The MPCA are the water cops.”