Follow us on:
We are losing the full recreational and economic value of our Minnesota lakes and rivers in many different ways. The MN COLA membership met in early 2019 to update the issues of highest priority for immediate action. The issues are organized into 3 areas—AIS prevention and control, protecting the water, and safer boating and better fishing—with detail issues within each. The logic behind acting on each issue now is also included.
We do not have a paid staff so we depend on you, as an individual, to educate your fellow citizens and your leaders from the township level on up to include township supervisors, city council members and staff, county commissioners and staff, state leadership, legislators, and agency and department staff.
Thank you for your support!!
A. Better AIS Prevention and Control
Let's pass Minnesota's unrivaled legacy of fishing and boating on to the next generation by stopping the spread of AIS.
Here are the important initiatives that will make a difference in Minnesota's prevention and control of AIS
➸ 1. Help discover solutions to our AIS challenges with more sustained and longer-term funding for the University of Minnesota AIS Research Center (MAISRC).
Scientific research takes a relatively long time, but it is a vital component in stopping the spread of AIS. Since it was established, MAISRC funding from the state legislature has been short-term (1 or 2 years). Longer-term funding models should be adopted by the legislative session to keep the research moving and to avoid any potential brain drain.
Action: Educate yourself on the exciting work going on at MAISRC by picking one or two research areas that are of particular interest to you.
Then, educate your legislators about the vitally important research being carried out at the AIS Research Center and to indicate that there must be a long-term funding stream so that the best talent can be attracted and retained.
➸2. Increase boater AIS compliance through fines that are at parity with well respected fines for hunting and fishing— complimented with consistent local enforcement.
Currently, there is a larger fine for taking a deer out of season than for bringing AIS to a lake. And yet the recreational value and the economic fallout are much, much greater. Studies have shown that AIS can reduce property values by 8 - 17%. As an example, a lake with 200 properties, each valued at $200,000 could suffer a reduction in combined property value of $3 million to nearly $7 million from the conscious actions of a single boater on a single entry into that lake. It can be a significant loss of realized value for property owners desiring to sell, and it can change county property taxes for everyone in the county due to the loss of the higher-end tax base..
Action: Work with your county, city and township units of government to get their licensed police officers trained on the AIS laws that they can enforce now. Fining (not just issuing warnings) for offenses of AIS laws will change behavior to protect your area lakes.
Then, educate your legislators about the vital need to protect water bodies by enacting laws that have as much impact on changing behaviors as we have done for hunting and fishing.
➸ 3. Help local groups with their AIS prevention and control efforts through increased grants and expedited permitting.
Communities including Mille Lacs have already undergone severe economic contraction with the crash of their fisheries brought on in significant part by the ravages of AIS. It is estimated that zebra mussels and spiny waterfleas now filter every gallon of water in Mille Lacs every day
Yet, the last few years have brought significant reductions in the DNR grant monies made available to LGU's and lake associations. This reduction was coincident with the $10 million in AIS program now flowing to the counties from the state legislature. As a result, many water bodies are no longer able to get DNR grant funds for AIS control efforts.
The permitting process for these AIS control efforts also needs streamlining, especially for control efforts that are repeated year after year.
Action: Talk to your legislators about the need to restore and increase the DNR AIS management grants, and to establish multi-year control permits.
➸ 4. Allow the AIS Prevention Aid funding to go farther:
a. Optional distribution by watersheds versus counties
b. Require lake association involvement in allocations
c. Increase the annual distribution from $10 million to $20 million.
Starting in 2015, the state provides $10 million annually to the counties to be used solely to prevent or limit the spread of AIS at water access points. The aid is allocated to the counties based on a formula: 50 percent based on each county's share of watercraft trailer launches and 50 percent based on each county's share of watercraft trailer parking spaces.
Action: Talk to your legislators about enhancing the funding allocation model to be more sensitive to watersheds so they can be better protected.
Talk to them about requiring lake and river associations in determining the use of the money.
And, talk to them about allocating more money for this tremendously valuable program that has kindled citizen action at a level never seen before for protecting Minnesota's public waters from AIS.
➸ 5. Halt the import of AIS from, and the export of AIS to other states, by inspecting and stopping AIS at Minnesota's borders.
We can't afford to have any more AIS coming into the state so there must be decontamination at the state borders. And we certainly don't want to be an "exporter" of AIS to other states. This border protection model is already used with great success by several western states.
Action: It is imperative that Minnesotans talk to their legislators about getting started on this concept. DNR and DOT are required by state statute to begin the dialog to see how this could be done. This is doable and must be pushed forward.
➸6. Buy time for research with enhanced AIS inspection and decontamination.
More and more local governance units (LGU's) are taking on delegation agreements with the DNR (with lake association help) to carry out boat inspections. This means that there is much greater need for high quality training of an army of new inspectors.
However, inspection and decontamination training is not uniform across the state and protocols need to be enhanced to further reduce the risk of spread of AIS.
Action: Communicate your support for the MN COLA enhancements to the DNR so that every inspector is consistently as good as the best inspector.
➸ 7. Provide funding for innovative field trials to control AIS coupled with more flexibility for local solutions.
Grant programs from the DNR for AIS control have virtually dried up, and no new projects can be funded through the Initiative Foundation grant program for innovative pilot projects to prevent the spread of AIS. Yet there is still exciting, innovative work being driven at the local level that must be funded, and there are existing projects that must be allowed to continue so that we can learn what works and what does not.
Some of these projects are pushing the DNR beyond their comfort level but are not precluded by statute. These projects must be allowed to move ahead as pilots in order to learn what works and what does not.
Action: Ask your elected representatives to support bills that provide additional funds for local AIS grant programs. And request that they remove unnecessary and delaying DNR "approvals" for work that is allowed by state statutes.
➸ 8. Be smart about containing any new problems.
There is no economic justification for keeping access open to a lake that becomes infested with a new AIS species that we do not know how to control (i.e., starry stonewort). Containment must be complete (all DNR, LGU and private accesses).
Action: Talk to your legislators and local elected officials about the need to rethink the policies around public accesses in light of the recreational and economic costs of AIS.
➸ 9. Use experts on citizen advisory boards to guide policy.
Too often AIS policy is set by well-meaning, but uninformed advisory boards where the result is policy that is not based on science. This happens at the state and local unit of government levels.
In other cases, the policy is set so it will not aggravate some group(s) of users. While these policies may make people feel good (or not as offended), they will likely not make the situation improve, and may make the situation worse as they are not addressing the underlying problem.
Action: Talk to your legislators and local elected officials about the need to have experts on policy-setting boards so that science can be brought to bear as AIS problems and potential solutions are being decided.
B. Better Protection for our Water
➸ 1. Keep the Boundary Waters and St. Louis River watersheds free from potential release of sulfuric acid by rethinking the risk from copper/nickel mining proposals.
Photo: Sierra Club
The mining industry does not have a good track record for copper/nickel mining around the globe, nor in the US. The disasters are significant when they occur. Processing the copper/nickel ore creates wastewater that cannot be discharged but must be contained and treated for hundreds of years. As Wikipedia notes: the chemical processes involved in acid mine drainage are common around the world: where subsurface mining exposes metal sulfide minerals such as pyrite to water and air, this water must be carefully managed to prevent harm to riparian ecology.
Action: Talk to everyone you can at every level of government to let them know that you don't think the environmental risks are worth taking.
➸ 2. Protect our sensitive watersheds by rerouting new and replacement oil and tar sand pipelines toward lower risk routes.
Map provided by Enbridge to State of Minnesota in their Route Permit Application (April 24, 2015)
While there is a clear movement towards sustainable energy, the US still relies on petroleum to power most of our vehicles and to heat many of our homes and businesses. The pipes that carry crude oil from Alberta, Canada to Superior, Wisconsin are just a part of an old infrastructure that has reached the end of its life. Enbridge, a Canadian oil company, owns and operated these pipes and they want to replace them. This is known as the Line 3 pipeline project that has been in the news for many years.
Action: Talk to everyone you can at every level of government in the state to let them know that you don't think the environmental risks are worth taking and that the proposed pipeline should be rerouted to a lower risk route.
➸ 3. Let's reduce our impaired and unhealthy waters by having the Department of Agriculture, the MN Pollution Control Agency, the Department of Natural Resources and the Department of Health working together towards a common goal
Despite spending hundreds of millions of dollars from Minnesota's Clean Water, Land and Legacy Amendment to clean up our impaired waters about 40% of Minnesota's lakes and streams are impaired for conventional pollutants
As MPCA notes on their website under the heading: "Why you should care about water quality: Minnesota's lakes, rivers, streams, wetlands, and groundwater are valuable public resources. In addition to being powerful symbols of our state, they provide drinking water, recreational and tourism opportunities, wildlife habitat, water for agriculture and industrial uses, and more. Protecting our water resources will also protect human health, our ecosystems, and Minnesota's economy."
Action: Tell your state legislators that the time has come to make a significant positive difference in the number of impaired waters in the state. Tell them it is time to get our reality aligned with the image of Minnesota's pristine waters. Tell them that we should be focused on getting the number of impaired waters down from 40% to 5%. Tell them it's time to remove the patchwork of controls and regulations caused by government silos and replace them with reorganized departments and a comprehensive model focused on making those 40% fishable and swimmable again.
And also tell your county and local leaders that it is time.
➸ 4. Support efforts for natural filtration (vegetative cover, buffers, etc.):
Over time, humans have altered the natural landscape from trees, shrubs and native grasses to a landscape that includes pavement, gravel, turf grass, and open soil. In doing so, we have increased the amount of sediment, nutrients and other pollutants that enter our lakes and streams every time it rains. These pollutants cloud our water and increase the growth of algae and aquatic plants to nuisance levels.
Native plants have longer root structures, so they hold the soil together better and increase infiltration.
Action: Contact your county Soil and Water Conservation District to publish recommendations to increase the native vegetation along shorelines.
Learn more about your city or town's stormwater management program. Is your city or town just barely meeting stormwater regulation requirements, or is there a way your community can do more?
➸ 5. Require compliant and effective septic systems.
An unknown number of family cabins or older homes near our lakes and streams have faulty septic systems. Other systems may become faulty as the cabin or home's use patter changes from seasonal or weekend use to accommodating a full family or retired couple year-round. Faulty systems can leach harmful bacteria as well as nutrients and other pollutants into our waters. Often, the only way a faulty system is discovered is through an unsightly incident or through a required inspection that might occur with a point of sale or when a building permit is pulled..
Action: It is imperative that Minnesotans talk to their legislators about getting started on this concept. DNR and DOT are required by state statute to begin the dialog to see how this could be done. This is doable and must be pushed forward.
Encourage your County Board to increase the frequency of septic inspections. Further actions might include requirements for regular inspections on aging systems, required inspections on a regular basis for systems located near waterbodies, etc.
➸6. Reassess variances and adding ordinances where needed incorporating best practices from Soil and Water Conservation professionals
Ordinances are created by state and local government in order to protect our resources, ensure reasonable privacy, and encourage safety in our communities.
Upon a property owner's request, a governing agency may examine a variance request to an ordinance and approve the request if it meets certain criteria. When variances are approved, stipulations can be established to reduce the impact of this variance.
We know that it is very difficult to restore water once it is impaired. So, in order to continue to protect our lakes and streams, it is important that water related ordinances are enforced, variances on ordinances are heavily scrutinized and minimally allowed, and best management practices are incorporated to the variance plans to reduce impact on nearby lakes and streams.
Action: Approach your County Board and ask them to support shoreland ordinances that protect our waters, and to have expert Soil and Water Conservation District staff advise on proposed ordinances and variances.
➸ 7. Allow for alternative shoreland solutions that meet or exceed existing shoreline rules
Often there are several ways to achieve the desired outcomes for protecting our waters and shorelines. As good stewards of the water, we should support any and all approaches that achieve or exceed the desired outcomes.
Action: Approach your County Board and ask them to formally support variances that meet or exceed ordinance and rulebased protection of our waters and shorelines.
C. Safer Boating and Better Fishing
➸ 1. Let's establish regulations for watercraft causing shoreline erosion and excessive turbulence, disruption of fish spawning beds, large-wave impacts to other boaters, and excessive noise.
In 2017, an attorney in Michigan highlighted the challenges with wake boats and these are the exact issues we face in Minnesota. He noted that "as wake boarding has steadily increased in popularity over the past decade, statewide sales of recreational boats designed to create large, high energy wakes have also increased dramatically. Intense competition among wake boat manufacturers has led to the development of new technologies to improve the ability of their boats to create increasingly high energy wakes".
He noted there at least three problems associated with such watercraft.
Action: Get this topic on the agenda at your next lake association meeting to see if it is a common concern and assess if there is sufficient interest in pushing for a local solution, like a surface water restriction. Then push the issue with your local government officials.
You might consider requesting a surface water restriction at a regional or county level. You can talk with your Minnesota Representative and Senator about getting consistent regulation on a state-wide level. You can talk with the local marine dealers who sell the wake/surf boats and equipment to push the best practices with their customers.
At a minimum, you can work with your local and county governments for communication of the shoreline concern and the best practices for wake/surf boaters to reduce the impacts on shorelines.
➸ 2. Let's keep Minnesota's fish and waters healthy with Freshwater Conservation Areas (FCA's).
There is a continuous complex balancing act going on under the surface of any lake and everything there must be in balance for the lake to remain healthy enough to maintain its recreational and economic value. When things get out of balance, it is nearly impossible to get it back to its original state.
Action: Talk to your legislators about the need to start this new program aimed at preserving the tourism importance of one of the biggest and most iconic lakes in Minnesota—Lake Itasca.
➸ 3Let's keep our fisheries strong by learning to live with, not mess with, Mother Nature. We should not be stocking Muskie's except in native Muskie lakes.
Muskies are native to about 44 Minnesota lakes and 8 major rivers. However, for many years, the DNR Muskie stocking program has artificially greatly expanded this natural distribution to another 60 plus lakes that did not have a native Muskie population.
The DNR and the Muskie anglers may want Minnesota to become the Muskie fishing capital of North America, but the scientific impacts to the ecology and the economic considerations are missing. The decisions for expansion in the numbers of Muskie lakes have been made without lake associations at the table, and lake association input collected during the public comment period has been routinely ignored.
There is insufficient science-based evidence to show that Muskie stocking in non-native lakes does not harm the biological balance of the lake.
Action: Approach your legislators and local officials with the Muskie facts pertinent to your ecological concerns and long-term economic well-being of your area. Acknowledgement of the views from all sides of these issues are critical to finding a solution. And importantly, request that lake associations have a seat at the table when Muskie stocking recommendations are being considered.
➸ 4. Let's make the lakes and rivers safer for everyone with a watercraft operator license program
As with driving a car, boating is not a right to Minnesotans. It is a privilege that comes with responsibilities. Doing everything one can to protect lakes from AIS is one of those responsibilities. Boating responsibly, safely, and especially not under the influence of alcohol, are other responsibilities. Driving a car requires a license; therefore, it is logical that driving a boat should also require a license.
Action: Discuss the benefits of requiring a boating license with your legislators and let's get it put into effect as fast as possible
➸ 5. Let's mirror Minnesota's state park strong environmental and commonsense rules and regulations on all lakes in the state
Minnesota state parks have a plethora of rules and regulations including things like annual and/or daily use fees, hours of operation, hours of quiet time, parking rules, and no pets unless on a leash. Special fees are required to ride a horse, rock climb, cross country ski, and snowmobile. Funds from state park vehicle permits and fees are used to help manage park resources and facilities.
It should be noted that many county parks also follow this same model.
Action: Talk to your US Representatives and Senators to remove any real or perceived handcuffs from funding lake management with usage fees at DNR accesses as the simpler times are long gone.
Talk to your county, township, and city officials about funding lake management with usage fees at non-DNR accesses as the simpler times are long gone. And let's get the same kinds of logical regulations in place for all lakes as we do for state parks.
Talk to your MN legislative members to evaluate the Federal oversite to our jointly funded lake accesses and/or instruct the MN DNR to revise their "open access despite the risks" attitude.
MN COLA serves to coordinate the efforts of all lake, river, and watershed associations in Minnesota, related to shoreline preservation and restoration, water quality, prevention of aquatic invasive species (AIS), and sustainable uses and development for bodies of water in all counties, which include: Aitkin, Anoka, Becker, Beltrami, Benton, Big Stone, Blue Earth, Brown, Carlton, Carver, Cass, Chippewa, Chisago, Clay, Clearwater, Cook, Cottonwood, Crow Wing, Dakota, Dodge, Douglas, Faribault, Fillmore, Freeborn, Goodhue, Grant, Hennepin, Houston, Hubbard, Isanti, Itasca, Jackson, Kanabec, Kandiyohi, Kittson, Koochiching, Lac Qui Parle, Lake, Lake Of The Wood, Le Sueur, Lincoln, Lyon, Mahnomen, Marshall, Martin, McLeod, Meeker, Mille Lacs, Morrison, Mower, Murray, Nicollet, Nobles, Norman, Olmsted, Otter Tail, Pennington, Pine, Pipestone, Polk, Pope, Ramsey, Red Lake, Redwood, Renville, Rice, Rock, Roseau, St. Louis, Scott, Sherburne, Sibley, Stearns, Steele, Stevens, Swift, Todd, Traverse, Wabasha, Wadena, Waseca, Washington, Watonwan, Wilkin, Winona, Wright, and Yellow Medicine.
Not a member but wish to be on our email list? Tell us here.
