In Minnesota, Farmers Break Law by Planting to the Water's Edge
The Minneapolis Star Tribune has an excellent story by Tom Meersmen. It centers on a local dentist and conservationist who rightly thinks farmers shouldn't be planting to the water's edge.
Farmers are thwarting the law by planting corn and soybeans to the edge of the river and its tributaries, Klampe said, violating pollution rules that require a 50-foot buffer of permanent vegetation to protect streams and lakes from soil and chemical runoff.The consequences ripple all the way to the Gulf of Mexico, where government scientists reported Monday that excessive fertilizers washing into the Mississippi River have created an oxygen-deprived "dead zone" that threatens marine life in about 3,000 square miles of ocean.
"I have nothing against farmers, but they need to respect the environment just like everyone else," Klampe said. "Rivers and streams belong to the public, not to the farmers."
Klampe's complaint -- complete with aerial photographs -- puts the spotlight on a widespread problem in rural Minnesota.
A state study estimated that more than 30 counties have 1,000 acres or more being cultivated within the required buffer area. The total acreage being farmed illegally is at least 300,000 acres and could be two or three times that much, said Tabor Hoek, a private lands specialist with the Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources.
The massive inequity in farm program payments -- billions and billions lavished on only five crops while conservation programs are chronically under-funded is part of the problem. Farmers have gov't check backed incentives to plant corn and soybeans anywhere they can, up to stream banks, on marginal and highly erodeable land, on the roof of Minneapolis's Metrodome...
But its conservation compliance and enforcement that is more the issue. Who is watching to ensure that farmers are not only not planting up to the river's edge, but what toxic fertilizers and pesticides are slathered on adjacent to a main water source?
Are these farmers receiving taxpayer funded subsidies to break the law?
Comments
If gov't subsidies included provisions for alternative and sustainable farming practices more farmers would utilize them. Farming is the most volatile career. Yes, monies need to flow not just to the top 5 crops, but to others as well. More regulatiton isn't the answer though - farmers have enough gov't agencies looking over their shoulder. IF there wasn't so much pressure on them to yield bumper crops, then maybe they wouldn't be farming to the water's edge. Some farmer's use high quantity of pesticides because that ensures the greatest rate of return. And when you're trying to pay off rediculous loans from rebuilding due to a recent tornado, you need all the profit you can get! The biggest problem is ...how does one produce a good yield without chemicals if the seed available is round-up ready?? Don't ask Monsanto.
Posted by: Audrey Weidenbach | August 28, 2009 1:00 PM