1. Minnesota BMP CHALLENGE SM & Water Quality Credit Trading (WQT) Workshop WELCOME!

2. THE MINNESOTA RIVER WATERSHED All or portions of 38 MN counties 13 major watershed management units ~92% in agriculture >15,000 miles 2 in MN, IA, ND, & SD 335 miles of flow Increases MS River flow by 50% Nutrient Issues? Impairments!

3. THE MINNESOTA RIVER WATERSHED Nutrient Impairments – Phosphorous Flow-weighted Mean Concentrations (mg/L) 0.58 0.42 0.47 0.45 0.41 EPA Desired Goal = 0.1 mg/L Algal Reduction = 0.26 mg/l 0.19 0.31 0.28 0.33 0.24 0.16

4. THE MINNESOTA RIVER WATERSHED Nutrient Impairments – Nitrates Flow-weighted Mean Concentrations (mg/L) Drinking Water Standard = 10 mg/L 5.0 10.0 11.4 11.2 1.5 20.5 2.0 10.3 5.2 8.4 8.6

5. THE MINNESOTA RIVER WATERSHED Who do we impact? Impacts – Phosphorous Drinking water quality – health/economics Freshwater eutrophication Toxic algae blooms Loss of recreational value Impairments – e.g., lower MN River DO Tied to sediment issues (e.g., Lake Pepin) Impacts – Nitrogen Drinking water quality – health/economics Blue Baby Syndrome Potential link to some cancers/birth defects Weight gain suppression in livestock Saltwater eutrophication Impairments – e.g., Gulf of Mexico hypoxia

6. THE MINNESOTA RIVER WATERSHED Who do we impact? ~1% of the Mississippi River Watershed IATP estimated Upper MS basin ~50% NO 3 USGS estimated MN ~6-9% NO 3 Up to 8,000 miles 2

7. THE MINNESOTA RIVER WATERSHED What Needs to be Done? EPA – 40% reduction in nitrate-nitrogen Voluntary measures FIRST Program Support (nutrient trading, BMPs) Mandated measures IF NECESSARY Farm Bill requirements Clean Water Act enforcement TMDL

8. Resident Perceptions of The Minnesota River Basin Results from a St. Cloud State University survey Sponsored by:

9. Minnesota River Survey – Why?

10. Counties with <20% of their land mass within the basin were excluded from the survey NS = Not Sampled Otter Tail NS Douglas 38 (6%) Grant 7 (1%) Big Stone 6 (1%) Stevens 6 (1%) Pope 12 (2%) Pipestone NS Swift 3 (<1%) Chippewa 22 (3%) Lac qui Parle 13 (2%) Kandiyohi 43 (6%) Yellow Medicine 9 (1%) Renville 19 (3%) Sibley 12 (2%) Traverse NS Brown 32 (5%) Scott 98 (15%) Carver 84 (12%) Murray NS Le Sueur 40 (6%) Nicollet 28 (4%) McLeod NS Watonwan 13 (2%) Blue Earth 53 (8%) Martin 17 (3%) Faribault 15 (2%) Freeborn 32 (5%) Jackson NS Ramsey NS Hennepin NS Rice NS Dakota NS Waseca 16 (2%) Lyon 21 (3%) Cottonwood 13 (2%) Redwood 14 (2%) Lincoln 7 (1%) Steele NS Stearns NS

11. Discussion points Not polluted: 1% Somewhat and Very polluted: 80%

12. How long do you think it will take to clean up the Minnesota River?  Less than 5 years  5-10 years  More than 10 years  Don’t Know N = 570

13. How long do you think it should take to clean up the Minnesota River?  Less than 5 years  5-10 years  More than 10 years  Don’t know N = 570

14. Discussion points 80% think clean-up will take >5 years Respondents want faster clean-up

15. Do you agree that you have a responsibility to protect water quality for future generations?  Strongly agree  Agree  Disagree  Strongly disagree  Don’t know N = 671

16. Discussion points >50% strongly agree 96% agree/strongly agree

17. What do you think is the single greatest source of pollution to the waters of the Minnesota river and nearby lakes/streams?  Agriculture  Industry  Shore land development  Municipal runoff  Wastewater  Untreated sewage  Something else N = 673

18. Discussion points Agriculture (20%) Industry (16%) Combinations of sources: 34%

19. THE MINNESOTA RIVER WATERSHED Progress is being made…..  State Funded BMPs include  Residue Management - 52,768 Acres  Nutrient Management - 26,977 Acres  Conservation Crop Rotation - 15,527 Acres  Critical or Sensitive Area Protection - 2,717 Acres  Wetland Restoration - 1,134 Acres  >227 miles - drainage, buffer, & windbreak improvements

20. THE MINNESOTA RIVER WATERSHED Opportunities for improvement…..  Alternative Crops – cellulosic ethanol production  Certified Crop Consultants – expertise  Field-specific applications  Soil Testing  Prudent manure mgmt  Crop rotations  Application timing  Nutrient Trading  Credit Trading (Point-Point trading)  Future for Non-Point – Point Trades?  Nutrient application reduction demonstrations  BMP Challenge  Minnesota Nutrient Management Initiative

21. Minnesota BMP CHALLENGE SM & Water Quality Credit Trading (WQT) Workshop You can make a difference!