In fall of 2023, Macalester held its inagural Generating the Policy of Tomorrow challenge, asking teams of four students to develop a policy in eight hours addressing the challenge of SDG 6, Clean Water and Sanitation. In response, my team drew on pilot programs from Wisconsin and existing Minnesota legislation to create the Agricultural Water Preservation Act, an act designed to support farmers in strategically planning to reduce fertilizer runoff, erosion and water table depletion. We were honored with third place in the competition for our attention to detail and strategic consideration.
The team consisted of (from left) Stellah Marienthal-LeGendre, myself, Cecilia Gomez Jimenez, and Maggie Wang.
Policy Memo
Mac GPT: Generating the Policy for Tomorrow
Team 9: Farmer’s Assurance
Minnesota’s Agricultural Water Preservation Act
DEVELOPMENT OF A WATER PROTECTION PLAN (WWP)
Under this policy, farmers in the state of Minnesota will be required to create and report a Water Protection Plan (WPP) analyzing their irrigation, nutrient management, and conservation strategies. The policy does not require compliance with any specific standards, but hopes to incentivize a shift to more sustainable behavior based on education and data availability. Farmers are responsible for reporting plans to their local county officials, who will be enforcing compliance in conjunction with the state. Resources will be made available through partnerships with state Extension agencies and local governments to incentivize farmers to adjust farming practices so that they are cost-effective and help decrease water consumption and contamination. More efficient irrigation and fertilizer plans will reduce costs to farmers.
MORE THAN 70% OF NITRATE POLLUTION COMES FROM FERTILIZERS
Based on the data from Minnesota Center of Environmental Advocacy, 40% of lakes, rivers and streams are polluted, and the number is growing. More than 70% of nitrate pollutants, a major pollutant in Minnesota waters, come from cropland. Agricultural runoff plays an important role in state water quality. This not only affects the clean water that people can access, but it further negatively influences the whole ecosystem in the state, the food system, and even people’s health conditions. To ensure the state citizens’ health and also reach the Sustainable Development Goals from the United Nations for global people, the state must help solve this water quality issue.
MONITORING OF IRRIGATION TECHNOLOGY
Part (1) of the WPP requires a plan for irrigation and water management, including data and estimates for water use. This section includes an analysis of currently used irrigation technologies to prompt reflection on the most efficient water use strategy given soil, plant needs, and growing conditions. Water use projections for a non-drought scenario should be in line with current Minnesota regulations on aquifer use.
ADOPTION OF A NUTRIENT MANAGEMENT PLAN
Part (2) of the WPP requires a Nutrient Management Plan similar to the Clean Water Act for Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs). The requirement of Nutrient Management Plans, even without associated pollution reduction requirements, has been proven to decrease short-term nutrient pollution in Wisconsin, a state with a similar agricultural and ecological system to Minnesota. A Nutrient Management Plan will include yield goals, regular soil testing, nutrient input projections, and compliance with nutrient limits according to state and federal laws. For reference, see WI guidelines on the creation of Nutrient Management Plans.
MITIGATION OF RUNOFF WATER
Part (3) of the WPP provides farmers with resources to implement additional conservation strategies that may mitigate pollution runoff, including the addition of a forested “buffer zone” or a prairie strip to filter water and reduce runoff. While these practices are optional within this policy, farmers have the opportunity to access resources about the benefits of conservation strategies and funding to help implement them if so desired.
THE WWP REDUCES COSTS FOR FARMERS AND FOR THE STATE
We anticipate that by reducing the amount of runoff water, ecosystems in the State of Minnesota will thrive since there will be a reduction in nutrient-rich pesticides entering water systems. This benefits communities that heavily rely on water, such as Indigenous communities that use water systems to grow wild rice. By reducing the amount of pesticides in the water by addressing the source, the state will spend less funds on water purification. Additionally, using estimates taken from past implemented policies, we project that farmers will save money by reducing costly inputs, such as fertilizer and chemical pesticides.