Legislators seek repeal of Mississippi River Critical Area program
Friday, January 21, 2011 at 11:24 am
- 13 Comments
Legislators in the Minnesota House and Senate are proposing a repeal of a decades-old program to protect the Mississippi River. HF95/SF39 would eliminate the Mississippi River Critical Area (MRCA), a program that since the 1970s has provided planning and management for the 72-mile stretch of the Mississippi from Ramsey in northern Anoka County to Hastings in southern Dakota County. River advocates say the repeal of the program could have significant impacts on the environmental and aesthetic benefits of the river.
The bill itself is very simple — “Minnesota Statutes 2010, section 116G.15, is repealed” — but the consequences will be serious if the bill is signed into law, according to Whitney Clark of the Friends of the Mississippi River.
“It would be a huge blow to the long-standing state commitment to protecting the river,” Clark told the Minnesota Independent. “It’s something that has had bipartisan support since the 1970s, and it would eliminate protections that the river has enjoyed for years.”
The MRCA was created in 1976 by DFL Gov. Wendell Anderson, continued by Republican Gov. Al Quie, and made permanent by the Metropolitan Council and the Legislature in 1991. The program has five purposes: to protect a valuable state resource, prevent damage to the river, enhance its public use, protect it as a transportation system and preserve the biology and ecology of the river.
Most of the legislators who have introduced the bill are from the northern part of the MRCA zone: It was introduced in the Senate by Sens. Benjamin Kruse (R-Brooklyn Park), Michele Benson (R-Ham Lake), Roger Chamberlain (R-Lino Lakes), Mike Jungbauer (R-Anoka), and Bill Ingebrigtsen (R-Alexandria), and in the House by Reps. Melissa Hortman (DFL-Brooklyn Park), Peggy Scott (R-Andover), Denise Dittrich (DFL-Champlin), Brandon Petersen (R-Andover), and Jim Abeler (R-Anoka). A group of property owners from that area have recently launched a petition drive to get the MRCA repealed.
The Mississippi River Stewards, which says the MRCA infringes on members’ property rights, are circulating a petition urging “the Governor and the Minnesota Legislature to repeal Minnesota Statutes Section 116G.15 that grants [Department of Natural Resources] authority to generate the Critical Corridor rules.”
The DNR is wrapping up a process of making new rules for the MRCA under the direction of the Minnesota Legislature. In 2009, lawmakers said that the DNR needed to reevaluate the program. The proposal the DNR came up with, after weighing the needs of many stakeholders from industry, homeowners and city administrators to biologists, sportsmen and environmental groups, seems to have angered just about everyone.
The DNR doesn’t have any law enforcement authority over those rules, however. It merely sets standards, leaving riverfront communities to propose, pass and enforce ordinances related to building height, recreation areas and riverbank stabilization.
But, the Mississippi River Stewards and area legislators are saying they want to scrap the program altogether over disagreements about the rule-making process.
“We feel that there are aesthetic motivations behind [the rules] that go above and beyond an environmental or preservation benefit, and that these aesthetic goals should not supercede property owners’ rights to use their property in a reasonable manner that was lawful when they acquired the property,” the Stewards note. “Though this may seem at first to only affect a small group, once put in place, it threatens the rights of all Minnesota citizens, by setting a precedent that demotes property owners to mere inhabitants of government-controlled lands which are subject to de facto confiscation at any time via zoning and use regulations.”
Whitney at the Friends of the Mississippi River said his group is not happy with everything about the rule-making process either, but that is an issue when dealing with a diversity of stakeholders.
Still, he contends the MRCA remains important.
“It’s the first line of defense in protecting the river corridor,” said Clark. A repeal of the program “would eliminate the potential for the state to update common sense rules.”
He added, “What we want is a river that is as healthy or even healthier than it is today so that people eat the fish they catch or enjoy the scenery.”
The state so far has spent $500,000 in evaluating the program and the rule-making process.
Follow Andy Birkey on Twitter13 Comments
Comment posted January 21, 2011 @ 12:22 pm
This is more good stuff by republicans. I remember when I could walk to the river and pick up a floating fish that was almost dead. No license, no hook or line, no gubmint lisense tax. Just free barely alive food. Since this law, its hard to find a nearly dead fish.
Its not like anyone drinks water from the river, and as far as I no the river ends at the Ford Dam, so its not like other people are affected. Who would take water out of a river for drinking anyhow? Sheesh
Like the stewards said, this type of law is creepy, it starts creepin on you. Wen I bot my land, I could burn garbage and tires and now I cant. That just aint rite. Its all because of the “aesthetic” thing, cause some weenies dont like stink so they take away my rites.
Some of these river houses, they cant cut down all the trees so they have a great view. That aint right, plus I cant see into their windows from my jetski cause the trees are in the way. So its a win win.
God Bless America!
Comment posted January 21, 2011 @ 1:55 pm
I agree. So when can I start dumping my crap in the river again? Ain’t good for nothin else anyway. I’m an American! I can do whatever I want! The Bible says so and so does the Constitution. If you won’t let me dump my crap in the river, you’re un-American.
and a socialist too!!!!
Comment posted January 21, 2011 @ 7:26 pm
Yee Haw! Let’s just Kill EVERYTHING that lives in the river. Think about it!! If everything is DEAD….Who needs Regulation?? Ya just gotta LOVE these “Pro Life” Freaks.. They love fetus’s .. As soon as it comes to living breathing, Humans, Fish, Birds, Animals, Ecosystems and the Earth they really don’t give a damn…
Comment posted January 21, 2011 @ 10:21 pm
Where the hell did this come from? Who campaigned on this? Who in their right mind wants to go back to the 60′s in water quality? Republicans know the price of everything and the value of nothing.
Comment posted January 22, 2011 @ 6:57 am
“Most of the legislators who have introduced the bill are from the northern part of the MRCA zone: It was introduced in the Senate by Sens. Benjamin Kruse (R-Brooklyn Park), Michele Benson (R-Ham Lake), Roger Chamberlain (R-Lino Lakes), Mike Jungbauer (R-Anoka), and Bill Ingebrigtsen (R-Alexandria), and in the House by Reps. Melissa Hortman (DFL-Brooklyn Park), Peggy Scott (R-Andover), Denise Dittrich (DFL-Champlin), Brandon Petersen (R-Andover), and Jim Abeler (R-Anoka). A group of property owners from that area have recently launched a petition drive to get the MRCA repealed.”
Why a repeal? If there are outdated issues, how about a propose a replacement. I am really getting tired of the word repeal by these people. Also, why is Hortman still a DFLr? Why do the DFL keep endorsing her when she isnt on our side?
Comment posted January 22, 2011 @ 8:47 am
“We feel that there are aesthetic motivations behind [the rules] that go above and beyond an environmental or preservation benefit, and that these aesthetic goals should not supercede property owners’ rights to use their property in a reasonable manner that was lawful when they acquired the property,”
Another thing that separates republicans from the left is that we actually believe in private property rights, whereas you think everything belongs to the collective.
Comment posted January 22, 2011 @ 9:29 am
Dennis – Are you even aware of what the “Tragedy of the Commons” is? Or do you think it has something to do with communism?
We have entered a “Tragedy of the Commons” situation with the entire planet. Everyone thinks that if they just break things a LITTLE while no one’s looking, the system will absorb the damage – the problem is, EVERYBODY breaks things a little, and we’re in a heap of trouble.
What you do on your private property is my concern when it negatively affects me and will negatively effect my children and grandchildren for the next seven generations!
Comment posted January 22, 2011 @ 9:32 am
You betcha Dennis – The collective it be!! We’ll turn this country into the best run socialist state the world has ever known! Just watch us!
Now, let’s have a vote: What kind of uniforms should we all wear?
Muted green?
Gray?
(I personally like the green. It’s a bit more cheerful on these dull winter days)
Comment posted January 22, 2011 @ 1:19 pm
Katie, your “tragedy of the commons” analogy rings false because the phrase applies only to a limited or finite resource.
I don’t know of anyone predicting when the Mississippi river is scheduled to stop flowing.
Moreover, that argument is a common one used on the great unwashed to give omnipotent government the power to regulate and manage more and more of society. It’s for your own good, don’t you see. Free societies are bad. Managed societies are good, etc.
Comment posted January 22, 2011 @ 3:27 pm
Everything on earth is a finite resource, Dennis. We simply cannot continue fouling our nest.
Comment posted January 22, 2011 @ 6:40 pm
“Omnipotent government.” Really?
Our system of government is REACTIVE. We have a constant turnover of elected officials of varying competencies. Through these officials, we pass laws good or bad, if at all, to respond to negative circumstances that happened. And then with our collective ADHD, we forget so quickly the harm that whatever those negative circumstances caused that led to those laws being passed.
We should frown on those who resort to rabble-rousing to distract us from what really is. To do otherwise would be lazy and intellectually dishonest.
Comment posted January 23, 2011 @ 12:24 pm
Dennis is rite.
I remember how grate things was before all these polushun laws from the gubmint. Rivers wud stink but so did my burnin garbage so ya coodnt smell the river so bad. Gubmint made me stop burnin tires, then you smell the river stink. Then ya has to clean the river, its the creep. See how that happins?
I wood plow rite down to the river bank, then the rains would wash dirt into the river, wich is why they call it the Big Muddee. If I caint get rid of dirt by washin it into the river, that is wrong. Same with my manure pile, if ya dont let it go in the river it just gets bigger and bigger. I made alot of mony storing drums of pesticide right there next to the river, and when one rusted out, it ran in the river instead of my well. See? It aint rite to make my private well have pesticide when I kin just throw it in the river. I dont mind pesticide in my water that much, but it might have some floride in it.
God Bless America!!! and keep the Misisipi muddee!!!
Comment posted January 24, 2011 @ 7:41 am
Water is Pristine or should be Please visit http://www.sharonvaitkin.blogspot.com and http://www.sharon4anderson.org Northern Lake Issues http://www.sharonvbarbarmstrong.blogspot.com WOW
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
