•••
I can't believe what I just read — that legislation to increase costs to farmers by $20 per year for better testing and analyses procedures for nitrate did not pass ("Legislator wants nitrate onus on farmers," Dec. 3). Also, I can't believe that state Sen. Steve Drazkowski made the ridiculous statement that potential and present homeowners need to take responsibility to ensure their water is safe. Of course they need to take that responsibility — because they have no other choice. However, the farming community does have responsibility to help identify and improve on the problem. Will $20 or even $100 per year as an added cost to the landowner who spreads nitrates in the form of fertilizer make the landowner go out of business or take huge losses? I think not. In fact instead of being a controversial issue I would think that the farm community would try to help improve the situation, because they live in the areas that have the problem. It shouldn't be a homeowner vs. landowner issue. Are rural legislators trying to help solve the problem, or are they buying votes by making such ridiculous statements?
Philip Vieth, Hastings
•••
I'm confused. State Sen. Drazkowski claims that private well owners are responsible for having wells that are contaminated with high nitrates and other groundwater poisons associated with fertilizers and overcrowded livestock farms. What magic well or "up to code" standards will keep my well from pumping up contaminated groundwater? Or perhaps that's just the price we pay to live in a rural area.
Brian Layer, Becker, Minn.
•••