Debate has been growing in Minnesota about the role agricultural practices play in the overall quality of the state’s surface waters (i.e. rivers, streams, and lakes) and, if farming is found to have a harmful impact, what can be done about that. Much of these debates are beginning to resemble debates about climate change: argued more from bases in deeply held beliefs rather than appeal to arguments grounded in “facts.” Sometimes even what is a “fact” can be debated. The Minneapolis Star Tribune wrote recently about the costs incurred by state agencies to try to clean water of pollutants most likely associated with agriculture, about the system of agricultural subsidies that contributes to existing farming practices, and how the logjam connecting rewards, incentives, practices, and unanticipated harmful side effects might be broken.
In Minnesota’s Farm Country, Clean Water is Costly
