Ag runoff needs attention; mandated buffers won't help

• Even wider, well-managed buffer zones can't effectively filter chemical runoff in heavy rainfall
• Americans must stop relying on the mandate of 'law' and adopt the behavior of doing the right thing
• Mandated buffer zones that reduce production acreage are poor answer to agricultural runoff

Kudos to Gov. Mark Dayton for finally having the courage to publicly recognize the overwhelming adverse impact agricultural runoff has on Minnesota's lakes, rivers, streams and waterways.

A recent Minnesota Pollution Control Agency study showed that only three of 93 streams in agriculture-heavy southwest Minnesota fully support aquatic life. Only one is considered safe for swimming.

It's an example of how agricultural runoff affects our state's natural water resources.

Yet the solution the MPCA has proposed just heaps on more expensive mandates, regulation and enforcement when what's really needed is a societal change in attitude.

For decades, state and local environmental authorities, and lake advocates groups have known the majority of harmful nutrient loading into our lakes is from "nonpoint" agricultural runoff, yet they have consistently refused to address the problem.

In that same time, most "point source" contaminants have been identified and corrected. Poorly designed animal feedlots, faulty septic systems, inadequate municipal waste water treatment programs, lawn fertilizers, city storm sewer, industrial and manufacturing discharges, and other historic water pollution culprits have been cleaned up. However, their overall benefit to water quality still pales when compared to the massive adverse impact of agricultural runoff!

Today's agricultural practices require train loads of fertilizers, herbicides and pesticides on farm fieldsto ensure top production. When you add the millions of acres of shallow lakes and wetlands that have been drained and converted to tillable land, it's not difficult to understand why we have water quality issues!

The MPCA is proposing we address the problem by creating more and wider buffer strips along the state's waterways. About 125,000 acres of existing cropland that borders every stream, drainage ditch and river would be converted into a 50-foot buffer zone of "perennially rooted vegetation" instead of crops such as corn and soybeans.

On the surface it appears to be a very good start. Vegetative buffer strips that are three times the current requirements would seem logical to deter runoff and erosion. But before yet another environmental knee-jerk solution, further analysis is necessary to determine exactly what water quality benefits might accrue.

For example, sophisticated tiling and drainage systems today can shed excess rain water in record time, allowing the discharge to bypass any vegetative buffer zones . Recent chemical applications would be carried off in these below-grade drainage systems as well.

Limiting the rate of water discharge may realize better results.

Vegetative buffer strips only work well when they are mowed properly. Long grasses and suitable perennial vegetation bends in large rainfalls, diminishing the erosion control.

As long as archaic judicial rulings that protect the width and depth of agricultural drainage ditches remain, it's difficult to believe that converting 125,000 acres of cropland into wider zones will adequately address a problem created by draining millions of acres of natural water filtration areas.

Restoring all of these marginal acres into wetlands may see far better water quality results than taking more superior acres out of production.

Finally, and perhaps the most important consideration, is how to encourage better land and water stewardship among our farmer friends without rules, regulations, and the fear of penalties and enforcement measures.

During the 40 years I have spent pursuing environmental sanctions on up-stream farmlands, I have learned that force, intimidation, and the strong arm of the law are never the right tools to bring about constructive change. Abrogating the freedom of land ownership is contrary to what this country stands for.

Although public waters may flow through that land, it should never be our right nor our governmental prerogative to take that land away or to dictate how it must be used.

For nearly a century we have promoted over-production, obscene consumption and the shameless abuse of our natural resources. Those who were told to farm every last square inch of their property are now threatened with new laws that tell them to do otherwise, or else.

As Americans we need to find better ways to encourage positive and considerate actions among our neighbors. We need to distance ourselves from living our lives according to the mandate of "law" to a concept of behavior based upon doing the right things because they're the right things to do.

Given the choice of more governmental control versus doing the right thing for the sake of improving our natural water resources, I believe that farmers will voluntarily step up to the plate.

This is the opinion of Paul Bugbee, a Central Minnesota resort owner who has been actively involved in the AIS battle for several years. His column is published the fourth Monday of the month.