Trending
A legislative audit of a Minnesota water quality program for agriculture producers found the state Department of Agriculture is certifying producers that violate the program's water quality standards.
The recent audit raised questions about the overall efficacy of the program, called the Minnesota Agricultural Water Quality Certification Program.
The program was created by the Minnesota Department of Agriculture in 2013 to give producers a certification that indicates they meet water quality standards. Certification lasts 10 years, and since the program was created, the department has certified more than 1,600 producers and 1.1 million acres of farmland.
Producers are allowed to receive a certification with "contingencies," meaning they are working toward getting their operation in compliance with the program's water quality standards.
But the Office of the Legislative Auditor found that multiple years after a producer was certified with contingencies, the producer had not changed their practices to get in compliance. The audit also found the program's effect on Minnesota's water quality was "unclear."
The audit underscores Minnesota's continuing struggle to improve water quality amid stiff resistance from powerful agriculture industry interest groups.
The audit made several recommendations to fix the problems, such as ending the contingency policy and addressing limitations in the data that MDA relies on for water pollutant estimates. The audit also suggested incorporating water quality monitoring systems into the operations of producers certified under the program.
In a letter responding to the report, MDA commissioner Thom Petersen said that the agency agreed with many of the recommendations outlined, but had "several points of clarification."
Petersen disagreed with discontinuing the contingency policy, arguing it allows MDA to still work with producers who are limited by different agricultural conditions -- like weather or the season -- when implementing water quality practices right away. He conceded that contingencies were "overutilized" during the period of time analyzed, and said the agency would try to limit their use.
He also disagreed with the recommendation to monitor certain producers' water quality, saying it would not provide a large enough data set to produce results with broad application to other producers.
"We acknowledge there are ways to improve this program and are incredibly proud of (the program) and all it has done to further our state's commitment to enhancing water quality and conservation," Petersen wrote.