A quick history lesson sheds light on why the 2015 passage of Minnesota's new "buffer" law — which requires strips of vegetation along waterways to filter runoff pollution — garnered widespread praise as a dramatic step in water quality improvement.
Since 1972, the nation's historic Clean Water Act has protected and rehabilitated rivers, streams and lakes polluted by decades of thoughtless industrial and municipal waste disposal. But the law signed by Republican President Richard Nixon carved out an exemption for agriculture.
The buffer law — championed by Gov. Mark Dayton — took an important step toward reining in sediment and fertilizer runoff. That's why the recent surprise agreement to weaken the law should be greeted with dismay.
The drinking water in Minnesota farm country is already at risk from agricultural fertilizer. Lake Pepin, the Mississippi's big river-lake, is choking on sediment carried there from the Minnesota River's southern prairie basin. The water crisis in Flint, Mich., also underscores that this is a time to move forward not backward.
Now at issue in Minnesota is whether the law covers both public and private ditches. A meeting between Dayton and Republican legislative leaders this year unfortunately led to an agreement that private ditches won't be mapped by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) when it develops a new "Buffer Protection Map."
There is no official estimate yet of how many acres or ditches will go unprotected, since some private ditches still may be subject to local buffer requirements by Soil and Water Conservation Districts. But private ditches are common. The respected Friends of the Mississippi River advocacy group estimates "hundreds of miles" of private ditches may continue to carry pollution downstream.
In explaining the disappointing agreement, Dayton has said that Republican leaders threatened to withhold legislative support for the governor's bonding bill unless the policy changed for private ditches. Republican House Speaker Kurt Daudt disputed that this week, saying that his party "doesn't operate that way."
Regardless of what was said, Dayton should not have yielded. His bonding bill would provide sorely needed financial assistance to upgrade many outstate water treatment systems. With the House and Senate up for election this fall, it would be foolish for a legislator of either party to oppose this. There was no need to give up anything in return for it.