MPCA takes away the most polluted (in MN) name from the MN River

  • gimruis
    Participant
    Plymouth, MN
    Posts: 13985
    #2137433

    I read that article yesterday in the news paper. And to be more specific, the primary section that creates the pollution is the south fork of the Crow River. I have seen this “line” of pollution as it enters the Mississippi near Dayton. At times it is very obvious. Stewards of the Land? More like Sewers of the Land in this case.

    Brian Klawitter
    Keymaster
    Minnesota/Wisconsin Mississippi River
    Posts: 59905
    #2137434

    Growing up in Hutchinson where the Crow goes through town, I spend many a summers fishing at the now defunked dam. There were clay pipes that came out of the bank right next to where we fished. Frequently “stuff” came out of those pipes. I’m pretty sure it was flush to the river.

    I was elated to hear about the Clean Water Act. I didn’t put 2 and 2 together to think ag would be excluded. (Kind of obvious now, after all we are a farming state)

    Stewards of the Land? If I was in farming, I would want to make the most profits I could from what land I owned. We can’t make any head way on the Minnesota River, I’m not sure why we would think we could on the Crow.

    BigWerm
    Participant
    SW Metro
    Posts: 9603
    #2137435

    Anyone want to post the article here? I can’t access the Star and Sickle.

    CaptainMusky
    Participant
    Posts: 17612
    #2137437

    I grew up in Hutch too and that river is just absolutely nasty. Since they eliminated the damn and did that water ladder or whatever they call it the water seems to have cleaned up a bit, but it just stunk down there and the fish you caught certainly looked suspect. There is so much top soil that has accumulated in the Crow over eons of years. If they dredged it out they could really have some rich farmland.

    gimruis
    Participant
    Plymouth, MN
    Posts: 13985
    #2137446

    Stewards of the Land? If I was in farming, I would want to make the most profits I could from what land I owned. We can’t make any head way on the Minnesota River, I’m not sure why we would think we could on the Crow.

    I hear ya. I am not in the farming business so I can’t comment on what the profit margins are but I have to imagine that its thin. There are good years and bad years based on weather, yield, and commodity prices. I think the younger, newer generation of farmers have more interest in the environment than the older fellas though.

    The city of Des Moines is considering installing a new large scale well for their primary water source because the water from the Des Moines and Raccoon Rivers are so polluted with nitrates upstream. Their water treatment facility removes the nitrates but it is extremely expensive and the nitrate load is only increasing.

    Here is the link for the article.

    https://www.startribune.com./how-minnesotas-little-polluted-crow-river-clouds-the-mississippi/600192566/

    FishBlood&RiverMud
    Participant
    Prescott
    Posts: 6689
    #2137450

    Ahh the profession of farming.

    Where you have zero control over the price of inputs and outputs.

    You can only control your efficiency that you operate and business decisions you make.

    The above is why I didn’t take over our family farm, despite wanting to… too high a ratio out of your control.

    Yeah I don’t blame any farmer for doing with their land and livestock how they wish. They’re trying to make a living for themselves and family like the rest of us. There’s just no W2 like most of us where we have no skin in the game but to show up as a laborer so to speak.

    Government funding of land water barriers are not profitable, they only make sense where farming the land causes you to lose more money than if you didn’t farm it.

    Increase funding/acre to reduce runoff to the point where it is silly not to take the money is the obvious solution… and do the same for the land we’re draining to farm.

    MX1825
    Participant
    Posts: 2735
    #2137460

    I don’t know how profitable farming is BUT good farm land around here is selling for 16 to 20k an acre. Has to be some profit somewhere to pay that for it. JMO

    gimruis
    Participant
    Plymouth, MN
    Posts: 13985
    #2137461

    Has to be some profit somewhere to pay that for it.

    Current price for a bushel of corn is $5.62. By historical standards, that’s quite high. For about a decade corn was hovering around the $3 mark.

    Soybeans are currently $14.33/bushel. Also very good in comparison to the past decade.

    JEREMY
    Participant
    BP
    Posts: 2581
    #2137507

    Is that good by historic standards if you figure the price of fuel, fertilizer and seed this year. Not to mention what its gonna cost to run the dryer.

    ajw
    Participant
    Posts: 511
    #2137509

    <div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>MX1825 wrote:</div>
    Has to be some profit somewhere to pay that for it.

    Current price for a bushel of corn is $5.62. By historical standards, that’s quite high. For about a decade corn was hovering around the $3 mark.

    Soybeans are currently $14.33/bushel. Also very good in comparison to the past decade.

    Gotta factor in insane prices for diesel fuel. Lots of diesel is used to put crops in, take them out, dry them, and get them to an elevator

    gimruis
    Participant
    Plymouth, MN
    Posts: 13985
    #2137512

    Gotta factor in insane prices for diesel fuel. Lots of diesel is used to put crops in, take them out, dry them, and get them to an elevator

    Oh I’m sure there are a lot of input prices too and right now they cost more than they used to. I know for a fact that fertilizer has really gone up in cost.

    I was simply posting the current commodity price of the two primary crops grown in the Midwest. Yields around here will probably be pretty good this season too.

    buckybadger
    Participant
    Upper Midwest
    Posts: 6762
    #2137550

    Agriculture is the enemy of fresh water in many instances. The only real alternative is to farm further from areas that are tributaries and use strategies that minimize run off and the excessive stacking of s*** on fields. Unfortunately these strategies generally are less efficient or don’t provide top dollar returns. Until the existing buffer laws are more closely enforced, and larger incentives are created to change farming habits…status quo is likely the best scenario.

    Here on the WI side, almost annually a few big farmers will get fined for breaches of their manure pits running into tributaries. It’s still economically cheaper to pay the small fines than to change practices for many.

    ^full disclaimer we are land owners, and have many relatives who farm or lease to farmers. It’s not completely their fault and isn’t always an easy way to make a living…but some small improvements by the masses would definitely benefit water quality.

Viewing 13 posts - 1 through 13 (of 13 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.