Minnesota Rep. Todd Lippert (DFL) knows the state’s divided political environment could halt significant climate legislation, but he is pushing forward anyway because he says his Northfield community has seen the impact of climate change firsthand.

“Flooding is an intensifying concern,” says Lippert, who also serves the community as a minister. “Northfield is just one example. In just the last 10 years, the Cannon River has damaged the community with three 500-year floods.”

Lippert is chief author of the “100% Soil Healthy Farming” bill, designed to “protect soil and water, save farmers money and help us meet our climate goals as a state.”

The bill (HF 701), spearheaded by the Land Stewardship Project (LSP), seeks to have 50% of the state’s farmers implementing soil healthy practices by 2030 and 100% of farmers using such practices on some of their fields by 2035. It also sets a goal by 2040 for 100% of the state’s grazable and tillable acres utilizing such practices.

Luke Peterson, a Dawson, Minnesota, farmer and LSP member, endorsed the bill at a hearing of the House Agriculture Finance and Policy Committee last month.

“This legislation will help farmers diversify their crop rotations and cover crops, which will keep our soil protected in the winter,” Peterson said. “These practices create ecosystem services that promote habitat for wildlife and improve our water quality, while retaining nutrients, moisture and organic matter in our soil.”

Farmer John Snyder discussed healthy soil practices and passing his farm on to the next generation. | Land Stewardship Project

The bill easily moved out of the committee with an 11-1 bipartisan vote on Feb. 17. Though he supported the bill and said its intentions were commendable, Rep. Paul Anderson (R) said he believes individual farmers will move forward on their own without new policies or incentives.

“Your goals are laudable,” Anderson said. “But a lot of these things farmers are already doing. Establishing cover crops in this part of the country [northern Minnesota] can be quite challenging.”

More Republican opposition surfaced nine days later when the House Judiciary Finance and Civil Law Committee re-referred the bill to the agriculture committee on a 9-4 vote.

Rep. Peggy Scott (R) voiced the budget-conscious Republican consensus in not recommending the Lippert bill.

“I’ll be encouraging my members to vote no on this bill today,” she said during the hearing. “Farmers are already doing this sort of thing through precision agriculture.”

First-term Rep. Brian Pfarr (R), a community bank president, agreed.

“I’ve got a lot of farmers already doing this on their own,” Pfarr said, adding he doesn’t like government telling farmers what to do. Lippert reminded legislators that the program is voluntary, can save farmers production costs and has a limited price tag.

The bill seeks $2.75 million for each of the first two years, and it caps payments to individual farmers at $17,500 over the five-year trial period. The program would be administered by the Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources and the state’s soil and water conservation districts.

Rep. Brian Johnson (R) was more direct in his opposition, citing an unlikely scenario in Minnesota: “I don’t think those goals are sustainable unless we get rid of corn and beans.”

Lippert believes the bill has a solid chance of making it through the DFL-controlled Minnesota House with his party’s 70-64 edge over Republicans.

“We need solutions that increase our resilience in the face of our climate challenges,” Lippert said. “We also need solutions that can help us find the difference we can make in this shared struggle. I hear farmers talking with one another about the contribution they can make. It gives me hope.”

The same can’t be said in the Minnesota Senate, where Republicans hold a 36-31 edge, including two former DFLers now listed as independents and caucusing with the GOP. Lippert’s companion bill, carried by Sen. Kent Eken (DFL), remains stalled in the Senate Agriculture Rural Development Finance and Policy Committee. And with the week of March 8 the midpoint of the 2021 Minnesota legislative session, the clock is ticking.

Water Storage Bill Brings Farmers, Environmentalists Together

Water storage bills sponsored by a diverse set of organizations, including SF 81 and HF 518, appear to have more bipartisan support. And they have farm groups, wildlife conservationists and environmentalists working together.

Scott Sparlin is no farmer. But the veteran New Ulm, Minnesota, organizer understands the complex ties between agricultural forces and the environment.

For 33 years, Sparlin has been a vocal activist on issues regarding the Minnesota River and has seen water quality issues mount. But he also appreciates the economic significance and clout of rural Minnesota’s farming community, often cited as a culprit because of phosphorus and nitrogen runoff in the state’s waterways.

Tying those two critical state issues together brought Sparlin to the state Capitol in St. Paul three times this legislative session to testify for SF 81, which is designed to slow water flow through the Minnesota River Basin by encouraging partnerships with landowners along the 335-mile stretch of waterway.

“Over and over, from every part of the basin we heard water storage has to be addressed if we are going to be serious about protecting our infrastructure and improving our surface water,” Sparlin said during his testimony Feb. 22. “The good news is it can be achieved without adversely affecting agri-business or community development.”

Sparlin’s grasp of the sensitive ties between Minnesota River water quality issues and farming practices seems to be paying benefits. But it’s been a slow process for Sparlin, who has served three years as facilitator and coordinator of a loosely organized group, the Minnesota River Congress, which held 25 basin-wide meetings to gather input on such a bill.

“Diverse water storage practices, such as replacing historically drained lakes and wetlands and increasing soil health, will all help to achieve this goal,” Sparlin says. “The climatic trend and future prediction of increased rainfalls in short periods of time will only exacerbate the issue.”

The Minnesota River Basin consists of 13 watersheds and encompasses nearly 15,000 square miles, roughly 11 million acres, impacting 37 of the state’s 87 counties. Agricultural activities account for more than 92% of land use in the basin, according to the Minnesota River Basin Data Center.

The program advocates using cover crops to better hold water. DFL Gov. Tim Walz’s 2022-23 budget request calls for $1.5 million each year to implement such a water quality and storage program. Funding would be dedicated to the water and soil resources board and soil and water conservation districts.

Agriculture accounts for about 25% of Minnesota’s greenhouse emissions, according to the state Pollution Control Agency (PCA), which says 25 acres of cover crops remove as much atmospheric carbon as taking one car off the road.

After a January PCA report card gave the state’s agricultural sector a D+ grade in addressing current climate challenges, former state Sen. Ellen Anderson, now program director at the Minnesota Center for Environmental Advocacy, penned a blistering guest commentary in the Minneapolis Star Tribune.

In it, Anderson wrote: “Minnesota’s agricultural sector is a big contributor to greenhouse gas pollution, nearly on par with transportation and electricity. It is also the sector most at risk from the impacts of climate change, and an industry that could make progress quickly.”