Dennis Anderson: Minnesotans spoke loudly for conservation

Demonstrated again Tuesday when the Clean Water, Land and Legacy amendment was approved by more than 56 percent of voters was that --notwithstanding how much the demographics of Minnesota have changed in the past half-century, and particularly in the past 20 years -- most people who live here still have a closely held affinity for our natural resources.

And, if given a chance, they're willing to pay more to keep the state's lakes and rivers clean, its forests intact and the hope alive that at least some of its wetlands can be restored, its prairies replanted and its fish and wildlife kept healthy and plentiful.

That said, the 10-year-long struggle to place the amendment before voters ultimately never was about conservation. Power, control and money were the issues. Those who've held them, or controlled them, for more than a century in Minnesota -- lobbyists, legislators and governors, mostly -- were loathe to give them up, no matter the cost to the state's environment.

Put another way, Minnesota's resources are messed up because conservation in this state has been designed to fail from the outset.

How could it be otherwise when the commissioner of the Department of Natural Resources is appointed by, and must do the bidding of, the governor? Similarly, for funding, the DNR is at the mercy of the Legislature.

Which is in large part why, beginning in 1880, this state has been dredged, cut, polluted and, more recently, paved --with impunity. Money -- and the quest by all of us for it -- is the reason.

Historically, Minnesota officeholders have been more than willing to aid and abet mining, agriculture, development, forestry and other natural-resource-utilizing interests by keeping conservation professionals underfunded, and under thumb.

Missouri voters broke this fast ride to nowhere when they approved dedication of a fraction of their sales tax for conservation. But they went a step further than Minnesota voters did Tuesday: Missouri also placed power and control of its Department of Conservation in the sole hands of a citizens board. And it imbedded in its constitution a dictum that the agency must at all times act in the best interest of conservation.

In short, as much as possible, Missouri removed politics from conservation.

Doubtless, most of the 1.6 million Minnesota voters who approved the Clean Water, Land and Legacy amendment Tuesday weren't thinking such grand thoughts. Instead, most simply OK'd the idea of cleaning up the state.

But if it were that simple, opposition to the amendment plan wouldn't have been so entrenched the past 10 years. The state Chamber of Commerce opposed the amendment for a reason, after all. Ditto the Farm Bureau. Ditto also the state Republican Party (to the dismay of many Republicans).

Some of these outfits philosophically disagreed with use of the amendment process to fund conservation, and those arguments were not entirely off-base. And addition of the arts to an otherwise impressively constructed conservation amendment raised valid questions.

But by and large, such counterarguments were smokescreens.

What some people and their groups in Minnesota fear is a fair fight in the state over use of its resources -- "fair" in this case manifesting itself in the form of a citizens-legislative committee beholden not to a governor's whims or a legislator's threat of funding cuts but to conservation and conservation alone.

• • •

The argument all along by conservationists has been that a Minnesota that remains, to the greatest degree possible, a place of diverse and healthy landscapes is a state that in the future will be a highly attractive place to live.

Which will be good for everyone, business included.

Yet over time the Legislature has proved itself unwilling, if not unable, to consider the long-term welfare of the state's resources.

Tuesday, through persistence unknown elsewhere in Minnesota politics, and thanks to the volunteer efforts of legions of supporters (many of whom never will receive the public credit they're due), some power and some control changed hands.

Minnesota is a long way from achieving a Missouri-like conservation delivery system. The DNR commissioner here still works for the governor. Legislators still control the agency's purse strings, as well as those of the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency and the Board of Water and Soil Resources.

But what happened Tuesday was exactly what many conservationists believed would happen, if they could appeal directly to Minnesotans.

They voted in favor of the Minnesota they love, and want to keep.

• • •

Too many people played important roles passing the amendment to be listed here. But a handful deserve special mention.

First, Bob Lessard, the retired state senator from International Falls. An originator of the amendment idea, he never quit the fight. Also, Garry Leaf, who tirelessly crisscrossed the state promoting the idea. Dave Zentner. David Hartwell, Tom Abello, Paul Austin, Jim Cox, John Schroers. Lance Ness. Don McMillan. Kevin Auslund. Larry Redmond, Bud Grant. Ron Schara. And many others, including the leaders and staffs of countless conservation, wildlife, environmental and arts groups, including The Nature Conservancy, the Minnesota Environmental Partnership, the Minnesota Center for Environmental Advocacy, Viking Sportsmen's Club, the Minnesota Waterfowl Association, Ducks Unlimited, Minnesota Citizens for the Arts, Trout Unlimited, Muskies Inc., Conservation Minnesota, Pheasants Forever, the National Wild Turkey Federation, Delta Waterfowl, the Izaak Walton League, the Nicollet Conservation Club, the Ruffed Grouse Society, SportsmenForChange.org. The Minnesota Deer Hunters Association and the Trust for Public Land.

Credit is also due many past and present legislators, without whose efforts voters never would have been given a chance to weigh in on Tuesday. The late Sen. Dallas Sams especially should not be forgotten.

Special mention also is due Ken Martin, coordinator of Vote Yes, and all of his staff and volunteers, including Charlie Poster and Doug Niemela. A smart guy, Martin had a challenging job uniting disparate groups and people in a common cause. His plan and execution were on target.

Finally, arts proponents --uneasy allies at first with many wildlife groups -- did what they promised on Tuesday. They got out the vote among their supporters, and helped pass the amendment.

Dennis Anderson • danderson@startribune.com