By David Peterson Star Tribune

SEPTEMBER 26, 2017 — 9:19PM

DNR questions the science and warns of dire consequences from court's decision, including years of watering bans. 

The state of Minnesota will appeal a landmark ruling on the excessive pumping of groundwater around White Bear Lake, saying it is “not supported by scientific evidence” and would “immediately halt important development” within five miles of the lake.

In a written statement Tuesday underlining the ruling’s potential to reach all across Minnesota, DNR Commissioner Tom Landwehr said:

“The DNR is strongly committed to protecting Minnesota’s many precious water resources, including White Bear Lake and its surrounding aquifers. We take that responsibility very seriously. But responsible, effective water management must be supported by sound science.”

Katie Crosby Lehmann, lead attorney in a team of lawyers that worked the case over several years’ time, said in a statement late Tuesday:

“We stand by the detailed scientific evidence from the monthlong trial. As demonstrated by the [judge’s 140-page] opinion, the DNR has known of the problems caused by its permitting actions since issuing its own 1998 study and has concluded that the water use in the north and east metro area is not sustainable.”

The case stems from a long drought that turned much of White Bear Lake into a weedy mudhole, forcing lake owners to extend docks hundreds of feet in order to keep boating and causing the closure of a popular beach.

Heavy rains in recent years have pushed the lake several feet higher than the low point it reached in 2013. But the plaintiffs and Ramsey County District Judge Margaret Marrinan, now retired and moved to senior status, stressed that the case was not about short-term climate trends. Rather, it’s the principle of state officials acting as proper trustees of public resources, including aquifers.

The DNR counters that, under the terms of the ruling, “if water levels remain below 923.5 feet above sea level in White Bear Lake, new irrigation and development restrictions would be imposed on area residents and businesses.

“DNR data show, however, that White Bear Lake’s water levels have registered below this proposed 923.5-foot trigger level in 48 out of the past 58 years. And according to the best available science, the DNR has concluded these new restrictions would have little impact on raising or maintaining the court’s desired water levels in White Bear Lake.”

Watering concerns

The basis for the case was the DNR’s role in granting permits for high-capacity wells as suburbs sprawled in the area, with their heavy use of groundwater to irrigate lawns and the like. While some parts of the metro rely on water from the Mississippi River, the DNR itself chose the northeast metro as a staging ground for careful inspection of long-term water use because the area relies on aquifers.

Marrinan’s opinion suggests that the agency was caught between its own scientists’ concern for long-term sustainability of the water in the area and the fury of growth-minded suburbs at the prospect of suffering restrictions that would force brown lawns and dead gardens on suburbanites while choking off revenue that cities count on to pay for water infrastructure.

The DNR’s statement on Tuesday underscores its concern at what could happen with tough restrictions.

Unless the state Court of Appeals overturns the ruling, the agency said, “residential watering would be banned for 500,000 area residents by early 2018, and could not resume until the lake rises above 924 feet [and that] would remain in place for multiple years during dry periods, and would have likely been in place for the past 10 years had the court’s order been in effect.

“Additionally, all temporary water permits for construction within five miles of White Bear Lake would be immediately prohibited under the court’s ruling — a change that would stall road construction, utility, and residential development projects in area communities. In the last five years alone, 31 construction projects within five miles of the lake required such a permit.”

In her statement, Crosby Lehmann countered by saying that the issue is the protection of the underlying resource.

“The DNR is the steward of our water and is bound to follow the law,” she said. The judge “found that the DNR violated the law, and provides a road map as to how to hold the DNR accountable while protecting the lake and the underlying aquifer.”

The agency said that although it has until Oct. 30 to appeal, it is signaling its intent sooner “because many area communities are concerned with the ruling and want to know how the DNR will proceed. During the appeal process, the DNR will work with permit holders in the White Bear Lake area to implement some elements of the ruling.The agency will be talking soon with communities about how it will approach this in as collaborative a manner as possible.”

 

By Josephine Marcotty Star Tribune

SEPTEMBER 24, 2017 — 9:16AM

Judge Margaret Marrinan said the state has failed to protect the lake from excessive groundwater pumping and ordered the DNR to limit water use in the surrounding communities. 

It began four years ago as a lawsuit over water levels in White Bear Lake, a recreational jewel of the Twin Cities suburbs. But the ruling that emerged in a Ramsey County courtroom this month could have sweeping implications for water use across all of Minnesota, forcing the state to impose limits on everything from suburban sprawl to crop irrigation.

In a sharp rebuke to the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, Judge Margaret Marrinan said the state has failed to protect White Bear Lake from excessive groundwater pumping and ordered the agency to limit water use in the surrounding communities. The state, she ruled, has a broad duty to protect the lake and the groundwater as a public trust — in essence recognizing that despite being one of the most water-rich states in the nation, Minnesota doesn’t have an endless supply.

Conservationists and environmental lawyers say the ruling, if it stands, has implications for sectors as diverse as manufacturing, agriculture, mining and drinking water across the state.

“This is new,” said Alexandra Klass, who teaches environmental law at the University of Minnesota. “We are used to having as much water as we want.”

And while environmentalists see it as a critical victory for the lakes, rare fens, wetlands and rivers that the state is obligated to protect, the decision will intensify what are already fractious political fights over Minnesota’s water.

“The whole issue of water policy is in play,” said Sen. Chuck Wiger, co-chair of the Minnesota Legislative Commission on Water, whose district includes White Bear Lake. It’s possible, he said, that the Legislature will try to weaken or rewrite the strong environmental laws that underpin Marrinan’s ruling.

DNR officials haven’t said whether they plan to appeal the decision, but in a statement last week, they sharply disagreed with the judge’s findings.

“It’s fair to say there would be far less ground- and surface-water use permitted, ” if Marrinan’s ruling became the statewide standard, Barbara Naramore, DNR assistant commissioner, said in an e-mailed response to questions. Had the ruling been in place for the last decade, she said, “there would have been a complete residential watering ban” affecting some 500,000 residents in White Bear Lake and surrounding communities.

Naramore also said the ruling would reach “beyond what is needed to ensure water sustainability.” For example, she said, the judge’s order could halt any construction within 5 miles of White Bear Lake that requires groundwater use.

Local governments are already nervous.

“One thing we know is that it makes things really uncertain,” said Bryan Bear, city administrator in Hugo, a growing suburb north of White Bear Lake. “We have no idea what someone might do with this.”

Aquifer under stress

The 2013 lawsuit was filed by local residents and supporters around White Bear Lake, a St. Paul summertime landmark for decades. They sued after the lake shrank before their eyes, leaving docks and boats high and dry. In 2013, it dropped as low as 919 feet above sea level, then recovered to 923 feet, but only after recent heavy rainfalls.

The real long-term problem, they said, is excessive demand for groundwater by the growing and thirsty communities around the lake, coupled with the DNR’s reluctance to deny permits for large-volume pumping, which was draining an aquifer that sustains the lake and supplies many surrounding communities.

The judge’s decision hinged on a scientific study conducted by the U.S. Geological Survey and additional research by the DNR, which found the lake was exceptionally dependent on groundwater — specifically, the aquifer that lies beneath it. When pumping pulled out more groundwater than rainfall could replenish, the lake shrank.

In a strongly worded 140-page ruling, Marrinan said the DNR violated state environmental law by permitting excessive groundwater pumping. “This practice is not sustainable,” she wrote, “and is an unreasonable and irresponsible approach to managing groundwater.”

Taking the argument a step further, she said the state must consider the cumulative effects of groundwater use, and can’t issue permits when “it does not know the effect of its permitting actions.”

It was one of the few decisions in Minnesota that also invoked what is known as the public trust doctrine, the deeper legal obligation of state and federal governments to protect natural resources. “By failing to properly regulate the extraction of groundwater, the DNR was placing at risk the ability to use the surface water,” said Byron Starns, a former Minnesota deputy attorney general.

During the three-week trial in March and in response to questions this week, the DNR officials disputed that. The judge, Naramore said, seemed to use “very different standards” for scientific certainty and what represents harm to aquifers and surface water.

Nonetheless, if the decision compels the DNR to change its approach to groundwater, the implications are profound, said Naramore and several environmental advocates.

“What the judge did was give DNR a backbone,” said Rep. Jean Wagenius, DFL-Minneapolis, who’s made water issues a priority during her years at the Legislature. “It’s a real win for future generations.”

500K:  Area residents who might be affected by a watering ban.

75%:  The share of Minnesotans who get their drinking supply from groundwater.

But in a state where 75 percent of the citizens get their water from the ground, where agricultural irrigation is exploding, and economic development in both urban and rural areas also depend on water, the implications are unnerving, say others.

“We do have concerns,” said Perry Aasness, executive director of the Minnesota AgriGrowth Council, the lobbying arm for the state’s biggest agricultural and food companies. “Water availability varies widely” across the state, he said, and he worries that the DNR would adopt a one-size-fits-all approach to permitting. “These decisions are best handled locally,” he said.

Agricultural irrigation, which the DNR manages through water permits, is already a divisive issue across the state. The DNR has identified 16 “areas of concern,” which show signs that groundwater is under stress. They include the Straight River near Park Rapids, which has been affected by an explosion of irrigation for potatoes and other crops that grow in the sandy soils. The same is true of Little Rock Creek near St. Cloud and the Bonanza Valley north of Willmar.

Other major industries are not immune. In Hibbing, the city and a taconite company asked the DNR to intervene to resolve a dispute over draining a mine pit that affected the city’s drinking water supply; and in suburban Washington County, the water demand from growing communities has affected nearby trout streams.

Lawn watering limits?

The DNR has plans for managing and measuring groundwater use in some of those areas, including the Straight River and Bonanza Valley. Others are being developed.

Naramore said the agency’s research in those areas has already resulted in restricting permits, but Marrinan’s decision raises questions about whether the DNR is doing enough, fast enough. White Bear Lake, for example, lies within one of the DNR’s “areas of concern” and already has a water management plan. Yet the judge said that the agency has not followed that plan by requiring restrictions on lawn watering or by setting maximum withdrawal levels.

Naramore said the DNR is making progress on White Bear Lake, and has almost completed a model to manage groundwater use in the area. “We understand that people often wish agencies would move faster on complex management issues,” she said. “But it is equally important for those actions to be based on sound science and appropriate community engagement.”

By placing a priority on natural resource protection, Marrinan’s ruling could reach beyond groundwater use, and apply to water pollution and drinking water protection, which are managed by other state agencies.

Naramore and attorneys specializing in natural resource law said it could — and environmental advocates said they fervently hope it will.

“This is telling them they have to stand up for the resources because no one else will, and that is their job,” said Steve Morse, executive director of the Minnesota Environmental Partnership, which lobbies for more than 80 environmental groups in the state. “It’s a clear precedent.”

Reinders is proud to announce its partnership with Plant Food Company as the exclusive distributor in Wisconsin, Minnesota, Illinois and Kansas. Plant Food Company has a focus in professional turf including golf, sports turf, lawn and tree care. Their proven programs, research and services have established Plant Food Company as industry leaders in liquid fertilizers.

Plant Food Company invests in product and program research through professional studies at top universities by well-respected, independent researchers. Reinders and Plant Food Company are working with a reputable laboratory that supplies comprehensive and accurate soil and water analysis. This highly targeted process will determine the best solutions for your specific soil conditions.

Reinders is a 151-year-old 5^th generation company and Plant Food Company is a 71-year-old 3^rd generation company. Both Reinders and Plant Food Company are family-owned businesses passionate about helping our customers grow and succeed. You can explore Plant Food Company products on Reinders.com or to find a rep, please visit PlantFoodco.com. 

By Peter Callaghan at MINNPOST

Minneapolis seems to be losing its battle with the Emerald Ash Borer.

The metallic-green bug that burrows beneath ash bark began its invasion in 2010 in the Prospect Park neighborhood, but soon began to spread west across most of the city. Now, studies of the pest’s progress and lethality suggest that all of Minneapolis' ash trees will eventually be afflicted — and will need to be removed over the course of the next 15 years, according to an Ohio State University study cited in the annual report of the Minneapolis Tree Advisory Commission.

That mortality rate means the best response, according to the commission, is to remove the trees once they’re infested and replace them with different species of trees not susceptible to the bug. Of the 1 million trees in the city, 200,000 are varieties of ash. Of the 40,000 ash trees owned by the city and the Minneapolis Park & Recreation Board, 20,000 have already been removed, or will be by the end of this year.

Peggy Booth, co-chair of the tree advisory commission, complimented the park board and the city for moving aggressively to remove ash trees and replant, calling 2017 a “banner year.” The board staff has planted more than 10,000 trees this year alone, varieties that include Kentucky Coffeetree, Catalpa, Buckeye, River Birch, London Planetree, Bicolor Oak, Ginkgo, Ironwood, Alder and Corktree trees.

The park board has budgeted $3,570,686 for tree removals and $2,567,788 for plantings this year from both general fund and an eight-year levy meant to respond both to the Emerald Ash Borer losses and storm damage, said park board spokesperson Robin Smothers.

Booth cited the success in fending off Dutch Elm Disease, which hit the region in the 1960s and 1970s, as an example of how to respond to the latest infestation. Only 1,200 elms had to be removed in Minneapolis in 2016, and the city still has 25,000 elm trees left.

Burden shifts to private owners

With the public agencies responding so aggressively, more and more of the problem will fall on private property owners, Booth said. “One of the wake-up calls for us now is that most of the ash are in private yards and the responsibility for removing those does fall to residents,” Booth said.

State law requires the removal of infested trees at the owner’s expense. And failing to remove an infested tree triggers condemnation and removal by the park board staff — with the costs applied to the owner’s property tax assessments.

The advisory commission is recommending the city and park board put together a communications plan to let property owners know of their responsibility. Booth said owners need to first determine if their trees are ash trees, and then whether they are infested. Owners of affected ash trees have the option of removing them immediately, treating them to extend the life or setting aside money for eventual removal.

The advisory commission also made recommendations for preserving the trees the city already has by training groundskeeping staff to avoid harming the trees: not whipping the bark with weed trimmers or damaging roots during sidewalk and street repairs. The commission is also encouraging the undergrounding of utility wires to reduce conflict with branches and encouraging developers to find ways to keep mature trees during construction.

Minneapolis Tree Advisory Commission

“It is our concern that in projects, protection of large, mature trees is sometimes an afterthought,” Booth said. If developers include preservation in their request for bids, it will be easier to plan for it than if it comes up once construction has started, she said.

Minneapolis City Council Member Cam Gordon, the chair of the council’s Health, Environment and Community Engagement Committee, asked Booth for the tree commission’s position on the use of insecticides in the Emerald Ash Borer wars. For trees on public land, the commission doesn’t think it makes sense financially or environmentally to use chemicals, she said.

Use by private tree owners is up to them, she said. The owner of a large, mature tree that is well-located on their property might decide to try to save it or at least delay the death. “We have no position on private trees but we don’t think it should be used on public boulevard trees,” Booth said.

Aug 17, 2017 | Reg Chapman  | Originally posted on minnesota.cbslocal.com

A group of concerned citizens is preparing to fight the Minneapolis Park Board to keep Hiawatha Golf Course as an 18-hole course.

MDA places the county under quarantine St. Paul, MN: The Minnesota Department of Agriculture (MDA) has placed Martin County under an emergency quarantine after emerald ash borer (EAB) was found northeast of the city of Welcome. A United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) trap captured several insects in the area. Because this is the first time EAB has been identified in Martin County, the MDA is enacting an emergency quarantine to limit the movement of firewood and ash material out of the county. This will reduce the risk of further spreading the tree-killing insect. Currently 15 other Minnesota counties are under full or partial quarantine to prevent the spread of the emerald ash borer. “Since the nearest EAB infestation we know of in Minnesota or Iowa is several counties away, we can be certain that emerald ash borer was brought to Martin County by someone moving infested ash,” said Kimberly Thielen Cremers, Supervisor of MDA’s Pest Mitigation and Biocontrol Unit. “The only way to protect Minnesota’s ash trees is to stop moving firewood and other ash products around the state.” There are three easy steps Minnesotans can take to keep EAB from spreading: Don’t transport firewood. Buy firewood locally from approved vendors, and burn it where you buy it; Be aware of the quarantine restrictions. If you live in a quarantined county, be aware of the restrictions on movement of products such as ash trees, wood chips, and firewood; and, Watch your ash trees for infestation. If you think your ash tree is infested, go to www.mda.state.mn.us/eab and use the “Do I Have Emerald Ash Borer?” guide. Suspect infestations can be reported to MDA’s Arrest the Pest line at 1-888-545-6684 or arrest.the.pest@state.mn.us. Emerald ash borer larvae kill ash trees by tunneling under the bark and feeding on the part of the tree that moves nutrients up and down the trunk. The invasive insect was first discovered in Minnesota in 2009 and is now found in 30 states. Minnesota is highly susceptible to the destruction caused by EAB. The state has approximately one billion ash trees, the most of any state in the nation

GOLDEN VALLEY, MINNESOTA – Award-winning golf course architect and Golden Age golf course restoration expert, Keith Foster has been engaged to complete the golf course master planning project at the historic Golden Valley Country Club.

Golden Valley Country Club opened in 1914 and then in 1926 hired world-renowned golf course architect A.W. Tillinghast to renovate the course. Over the years, a number of modifications were made to accommodate the needs and desires of the membership, changing the original Tillinghast design.

“We are very excited to announce that Keith Foster has been commissioned to prepare a Master Plan for our golf course,” said Eduard Michel, president of Golden Valley Country Club. “With Foster’s guidance we will make our Tillinghast golf course a shining star among the wonderful golf courses that the Twin Cities and the state of Minnesota have to offer.”

Foster, armed with a deep appreciation of golf history and classic design has developed a strong national reputation for his work on Golden Age golf courses. His portfolio includes restoration or renovation work on golf courses that have hosted a total of forty National Championships. In 2013 he received Golfweek’s Best Course Renovation Project of the Year award for his work at Philadelphia Cricket Club. According to Bradley Klein, the golf architecture writer for Golfweek, Foster is “not into making headlines, just in bringing back creaky features that people thought were obsolete and that now prove to be fascinating and lovely.” Included in his long list of successful restorations, Foster has worked on three other prominent Tillinghast originals; Sands Point, Baltimore Country Club East, and the Philadelphia Cricket Club Wissahickon Course.

After touring the Golden Valley Country Club golf course earlier this season, and a subsequent visit with the Club’s Board of Directors and the Green & Grounds committee, Foster accepted the commission to develop a plan to improve the Club’s golf course in Tillinghast Fashion. Foster takes great pride in understanding Tillinghast’s design characteristics and intentions and tweaks them as Tillinghast would if he were able to be here today. According to Foster, his plan will provide the roadmap to “unveil the genius, spirit and boldness of Tilly and the uniqueness that is GVCC.” 

The end results of Foster’s work at the Tillinghast courses mentioned above, and at other Golden Age architect designed courses that he’s worked on, have been nothing short of exceptional, each garnering high praise from members, professional golfers, and the media alike.

The Minnesota Department of Agriculture is seeking public input on the draft best management practices (BMPs) for fertilizer and pesticide use on turfgrass.

View a copy of the draft turfgrass BMPs and learn how to provide written comment at: www.mda.state.mn.us/protecting/bmps

The comment period is open until September 29, 2017.

The draft practices were developed by the Minnesota Department of Agriculture and the University of Minnesota to protect water resources and to protect humans and non-target organisms including pollinators. Please review and share comments specific to practice content, format and ways to share the practices with primary audiences.

 

The finalized turfgrass best management practices will be the foundation documents for fertilizer and pesticide use on golf courses and for lawn care. In the coming months, two separate short guidance documents on fertilizer and pesticide use for lawn care will be developed primarily focused on homeowners.

 

Written comments and questions can be directed to:
Gurinderbir (G) Chahal

Pesticide and Fertilizer Management Division

Minnesota Department of Agriculture

625 Robert Street North

St. Paul, MN 55155

 

G.Chahal@state.mn.us

651-201-6237

Charles Erickson was hired away from the Minneapolis Park Board in 1899 to become the first head greenkeeper at The Minikahda Club, and by July of that year the first ball was hit from the first tee by the club president. Affectionately known as the “General” by the club membership, Erickson’s practical and innovative approach to the challenges of turf and arbor management is best captured in his summation to fellow greenkeepers, “We are doctors of the green.” Among his mechanical contributions to the industry developed during his early tenure at Minikahda, was “The Sea Serpent,” the first golf course irrigation system in the United States. In addition, Erickson cultivated bentgrass at Minikahda and was instrumental in converting many of the golf courses in Minnesota from sand to bentgrass greens.

Erickson was also very active in the formation of the Minnesota Golf Course Superintendents Association, and in 1928 was elected its first president. 

The Minnesota Golf Hall of Fame was established in 1987 to recognize Minnesotans for their outstanding contributions to the game of golf. A task force meets annually to determine nomitions. The Minnesota Golf Hall of Fame is housed at the Bunker Hills Golf Club in Coon Rapids, Minn., and is operated and supported by the Minnesota Golf Association and the Minnesota Section of the Professional Golfers' Association of America. For more information, contact Tom Ryan, MGA executive director, or Jon Tollette, PGA section executive director. 

by Government Affairs Team | Jul 17, 2017

The EPA has released drafts of its human health and ecological risk assessments of 2,4-D as part of its ongoing registration review process. A summary of the draft human assessment can be found on the 2,4-D website.

The 2,4-D Task Force will be preparing comments to EPA. Please join in and tell the EPA why 2,4-D is important to you and the benefits you derive from using it at your golf facility by the July 24 deadline.

Even brief comments help a lot. Click here to get to the right docket on the Regulations.gov website. On the website, click Comment Now, then type, or cut and paste, your supporting comments, and click Continue. It only takes a few minutes to complete.

It is important that the Agency hear from you concerning how useful this product is to managing your weed systems.  You might comment on:

• Managing weed resistance at your golf facility
• The breadth of control options that the product brings to your management system
• The economic benefit from using the herbicide
• Your professional experience in support of the product registration

We very much appreciate your partnership in maintaining the registration and uses of 2,4-D.

Background from the 2,4-D task force

The EPA's draft human health risk assessments states that the following risks are not of concern: dietary, residential, non-occupational, volatilization/residential bystander and aggregate risk estimates. Recent EPA review documents have noted that 2,4-D is not likely to be carcinogenic in humans. The task force is in full agreement with this portion of the EPA's assessment.

There are some points of difference. The EPA's draft human assessment identified occupational handler inhalation as a concern for some scenarios; however, there was no concern for occupational handler from dermal exposure. The task force will submit comments to demonstrate that occupational handlers enjoy significant margins of safety from inhalation exposure.

In addition, the EPA's draft ecological risk assessment identified the potential for effects on some non-target organisms. The task force's comments will explain that the EPA's models are based on very conservative assumptions; moreover, those effects decreased through typical exposure reduction measures, such as limitations on aerial application, boom heights and specification of the spray droplet spectrum.

The task force notes the EPA's overall finding of no human health concerns and supports continued product stewardship to reduce any calculated levels of concern for non-target organisms, in order to preserve 2,4-D's many beneficial uses.

Learn more at www.24D.org.