Minnesota Nutrient Reduction Strategy 2025 update

Comment From: Benjamin Maas

9/10/25 @ 11:19 PM

Attachments:

Download

Comment From: Richard Biske

9/10/25 @ 5:27 PM

Attachments:

Download

Comment From: Jamie Beyer

9/10/25 @ 5:27 PM

Please see the attached file for cover letter and comments.

Attachments:

Download

Comment From: Nicholas Jordan

9/10/25 @ 4:29 PM

See attached letter.

Attachments:

Download

Comment From: Hunter Pederson

9/10/25 @ 4:22 PM

On behalf of Minnesota Farm Bureau Federation, please see the attached document with our comments on the Nutrient Reduction Strategy 2025 update. Thank you for the opportunity to comment.

Attachments:

Download

Comment From: Jake Kundert

9/10/25 @ 4:16 PM

Attachments:

Download

Comment From: Matt Doll

9/10/25 @ 3:57 PM

Minnesota Environmental Partnership appreciates the opportunity to comment on this update to the state's Nutrient Reduction Strategy. Our comment, submitted on behalf of our coalition of members and 16 organizations signing on in support, is attached...↓

Attachments:

Download

Comment From: Amy Bacigalupo

9/10/25 @ 3:50 PM

Attachments:

Download

Comment From: Sierra Club (Peter Wagenius)

9/10/25 @ 3:46 PM

The attached comments on the proposed Nutrient Reduction Strategy 2025 Update are submitted by the Sierra Club North Star Chapter

Attachments:

Download

Comment From: Adam Birr

9/10/25 @ 2:55 PM

Minnesota Corn, comprised of both the Minnesota Corn Growers Association (MCGA) and the Minnesota Corn Research & Promotion Council (MCR&PC), appreciates the opportunity to submit the attached comments on the Draft 2025 Minnesota Nutrient Reduction S...↓

Attachments:

Download

Comment From: Bob Guthrie

9/10/25 @ 2:29 PM

Missing Information
Historical information about fertilizer application rates in relation to current recommendations will be instructive and should be included in the update. This information is available from the University of Minnesota Extension (H...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Elizabeth Wefel

9/10/25 @ 11:25 AM

Attached please find the comments of the Coalition of Greater Minnesota Cities.

Attachments:

Download

Comment From: Paula Maccabee

9/10/25 @ 10:46 AM

The attached comment is submitted on behalf of WaterLegacy. Thank you, Paula G. Maccabee

Attachments:

Download

Comment From: Sam Paske

9/10/25 @ 10:37 AM

Attachments:

Download

Comment From: Mirae Guenther

9/10/25 @ 9:47 AM

Please see attached comments on the Minnesota Nutrient Reduction Strategy 2025 update.

Attachments:

Download

Comment From: Amelia Kroeger

9/10/25 @ 9:35 AM

Since 1979 I have been a resident in Minnesota, relocating here with my husband and three sons from a five year VISTA project on the Standing Rock Reservation in North Dakota. We soon recognized Minnesota's awareness of and work toward clean, safe wa...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Cooper Silburn

9/10/25 @ 8:46 AM

On behalf of MESERB, please see the attached comments. Thank you.

Attachments:

Download

Comment From: Caroline van Schaik

9/09/25 @ 10:30 PM

We have a ridge top farm in southern Winona County where we did 2 things at the start of our stewardship of this 100 acres: we planted all the row crop strips to pasture and remain to this day a grass farm for grazing livestock, and we installed an R...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Bonnie Haugen

9/09/25 @ 8:29 PM

Thank you for taking comments on updating our Minnesota Nutrient Reduction Strategy 2025.

Comment: We do need to reduce the phosphorus and nitrate levels in our soils and ground water, especially in any karst regions.

Rationale: There ha...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Catherine M Dolan

9/09/25 @ 7:01 PM

I strongly agree with the findings of the Updated Nutrient Reduction Strategies that align with the recommendations from the Southeastern Minnesota Nitrate Strategies Work Group to accelerate a transition to perennial crops, pasture, small grains and...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Tom Wolner

9/09/25 @ 5:26 PM

My comment is concerning agricultural or crop land nutrient reduction strategies. From what I understand, the proposed reduction strategies are voluntary on these lands. Although a voluntary approach may be desirable, it thus far has not been signifi...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Paul Burck

9/09/25 @ 4:58 PM

I am interested in the Minnesota Nutrient Reduction Strategies draft report.
I encourage MPCA to:
o Strengthen data collection and reporting requirements for fertilizer retailers by the Minnesota Department of Agriculture (MDA) and documentation of...↓

No attachments

Comment From: kim bartmann

9/09/25 @ 4:38 PM

I'm hoping the MPCA prioritizes clean drinking water for everyone, and a big part of that is supporting farmers in changing and or improving some practices. Please adopt the suggestions made by the Land Stewardship Project to that end.

No attachments

Comment From: Ben Lilliston

9/09/25 @ 2:48 PM

Thanks to MPCA for the opportunity to submit comments on an updated Nutrient Reduction Strategy. I'm happy to submit the attached comments on behalf of the Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy.

Attachments:

Download

Comment From: Lisa Tilman

9/09/25 @ 1:09 PM

Please see attached comments submitted on behalf of the Minnesota Cities Stormwater Coalition

Attachments:

Download

Comment From: Steven Mayer

9/09/25 @ 1:08 PM

Please do everything you can to preserve and improve the quality of Minnesota's water, soil nutrients, and air, and to keep our food and food crops safe from the increasing pressure to add dangerous chemicals to everything.

No attachments

Comment From: Jennifer Valentine

9/09/25 @ 1:07 PM

Strengthen data collection and reporting requirements for fertilizer retailers by the Minnesota Department of Agriculture (MDA) and documentation of nitrogen fertilizer application rates by responsible parties (e.g. crop retailers).
Build a Small Gra...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Peggy Knapp

9/09/25 @ 12:55 PM

I worked with Freshwater for over a decade. The organization was deeply involved in the issue of nutrient contamination in MN rivers, lakes and groundwater. We knew then, and know still, that the vast majority of nutrient pollution comes from, or i...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Ariel Kagan

9/09/25 @ 12:14 PM

Please find comments from Minnesota Farmers Union attached. Thank you for the opportunity to provide input.

Attachments:

Download

Comment From: Lori Haak

9/09/25 @ 11:20 AM

Attachments:

Download

Comment From: Freshwater Society

9/09/25 @ 11:11 AM

Attachments:

Download

Comment From: Marshall Erickson

9/09/25 @ 9:54 AM

The comments presented in the attached document are from Clear Water Nitrate Reduction. We are a MN based environmental services company who designs and deploys engineered water quality solutions removing pollutants from ag/urban runoff and impaired...↓

Attachments:

Download

Comment From: Meghan Anderson

9/09/25 @ 9:13 AM

Attachments:

Download

Comment From: Robert Sip

9/08/25 @ 2:32 PM

Attachments:

Download

Comment From: Maya Korb

9/08/25 @ 11:25 AM

Attachments:

Download

Comment From: Renee Keezer

9/08/25 @ 8:37 AM

Renee Keezer submitting on behalf of White Earth Nation

Attachments:

Download

Comment From: Gary Dukes

9/07/25 @ 2:42 PM

Subject: Strengthening the 2025 Nutrient Reduction Strategy

Dear MPCA Nutrient Reduction Strategy Team,

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the draft 2025 Minnesota Nutrient Reduction Strategy. I appreciate the agency's continued commitment...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Kelley Stanage

9/06/25 @ 5:44 AM

Attachments:

Download

Comment From: Lee Helgen

9/05/25 @ 11:34 AM

Minnesota Crop Production Retailers (MCPR) Comment on Draft Nutrient Reduction Strategy

On behalf of the Minnesota Crop Production Retailers, thank you for the opportunity to comment on the draft Nutrient Reduction Strategy. Our members share the st...↓ate's commitment to improving water quality while maintaining farm profitability. We believe the most effective path forward is through voluntary, incentive-based approaches that encourage continuous improvement.

We respectfully offer the following points for consideration:

1. Recognize Farmer Progress – Many farmers are already implementing split applications, cover crops, reduced tillage, precision nutrient technologies, and improved nutrient timing. Recognizing this progress helps build trust, confidence, and momentum for future adoption.

2. Promote Flexibility – Nutrient management must remain adaptable to soils, weather patterns, and crop rotations. Flexibility allows farmers and retailers to tailor practices to local conditions and maximize both environmental and agronomic outcomes.

3. Invest in Research and Demonstration – Minnesota-based research and on-farm trials are essential to refine recommendations. Ag retailers are willing partners in hosting demonstrations and helping transfer results directly to farmers.

4. Partner with Ag Retailers – Retailers are the trusted first point of contact for most farmers. Explicitly involving them in education, technical support, and BMP adoption can help scale conservation practices more effectively and rapidly.

5. Expand Incentives and Risk Protection – Programs that reduce economic risk, such as cost-share opportunities, crop insurance flexibility, and indemnity options, will encourage broader and faster adoption of nutrient management practices.

6. Encourage Continuous Improvement – The strategy should reward progress and innovation over time rather than relying on one-size-fits-all requirements. A collaborative, incentive-based approach will deliver better results than additional regulation.

In closing, agricultural retailers stand ready to partner with the state, farmers, and conservation organizations to advance best management practices and achieve nutrient reduction goals. With the right tools, incentives, and collaborative framework, Minnesota can continue to make measurable progress while sustaining profitable farming systems.

Thank you for the opportunity to provide input.

No attachments

Comment From: Thomas Hanson

9/04/25 @ 2:42 PM

I am a homeowner on Goodners lake in Stearns County. I have observed the quality of the water in this lake deteriorate to a point where it's obviously toxic. The farm fields around this lake are green, bountiful, and weed free. Our lake is NOT! I...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Amy Amy

9/04/25 @ 8:13 AM

Strengthen data collection and reporting requirements for fertilizer retailers by MDA and documentation of nitrogen fertilizer application rates by responsible parties (e.g. crop retailers to MDA).
Build a Small Grain Initiative and a safety net for ...↓

No attachments

Comment From: William Lytle

9/03/25 @ 12:39 PM

Attachments:

Download

Comment From: Kelsey Fitzgerald

8/29/25 @ 12:43 PM

As a small vegetable farmer who lives next to a giant corporate farm in Southeast Minnesota I have several concerns about our nations push for the industrial Ag model that bigger is better. A model that puts even medium-size farmers in a ever sinkin...↓g hole of relying and paying big companies for seeds, chemicals, machinery and more all the while knowing and hoping the subsidies cover all their costs. Though many are ready to blame farmers, it's actually the way our government runs the Agriculture industry. I watch all summer as my neighbors, without warning, spray their corn and alfalfa with drones and helicopters several times a season and then spread their cow manure whenever they want regardless of neighbors, water quality, seasonal temperatures, rain, snow, frozen ground. They would never voluntarily do any sort of conservation practices. Their practices effect all my neighbors with their constant tractors, smell, runoff, chemical drift and more, but yet, it's legal and their is nothing we can do about. I do not sign up to live in the country and grow organic food only to die from breathing in toxic chemicals and drinking tainted water. Our counties hands are tied and we need real change. Something that sets regulations they have to follow. Something that encourages change and supports it as well.

I'm a small farmer. I don't get subsidies, I don't get crop insurance. I have two to three other part-time jobs to subsidize my farm and I work with mostly volunteers to run my farm. I don't ask for mercy or complain about not making ends meet because I'm better off than many who have the dream to run their own small farm and don't have the means.

Now is the time, as almost all farmers are aging out and we need more younger farmers. No one can afford it and unless a farm is passed down to a generation, the land prices are so high and the loans so ridiculous no one want's to farm. Our only chance to better our earth, world, farmer's worth and the land is to change our farming practices. We've never been sustainable the way we farm and it doesn't work. We are fighting large corporations who have lots of power and money and we need to stand up and say NO to them and change the game.

Another item to bring up is also the use of fertilizers and other chemicals on lawns, put down drains, stuff running into town storm drains. We can't just blame farmers. Especially here in Winona, which was built on a wetland and I know several people whose basements flood in huge rains. We need better systems for handling big rains like more permeable surfaces, rain gardens, roof gardens, rain catchment systems for watering city plants, encouraging native bee and butterfly gardens in yards instead of mowing and chemicals. We need more green spaces for people to grow their own food and have nature therapy after a hard day.

Minnesota does a lot of things right when it comes to preserving the environment and caring about natural resources. We need to do more and lead the way in creating a different type of agriculture system.

To that point, we need to change our Ag policies and not support this type of large-scale farming any more. We need to support those who do conservation or grow food in a manner that benefits the rivers and lakes, but also all of the environment including animals and people. We need to create avenues for farmers to sell the different products they grow and encourage diversification, but doing so.

No attachments

Comment From: Madeline Neenan

8/25/25 @ 12:01 PM

I want to see two main things in the MPCA's revision. First, we need to strengthen reporting requirements. It shouldn't be easy to get away with irresponsible nitrogen runoff and I want the MN government to protect our drinking water by closely monit...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Mary Voight

8/22/25 @ 4:08 PM

Safe drinking water is an essential human need.

Please strengthen data collection and reporting requirements for fertilizer retailers by MDA and documentation of nitrogen fertilizer application rates by responsible parties (e.g. crop retailers t...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Angela Anderson

8/22/25 @ 10:19 AM

The revision of policies is long overdue. Much has changed in Minnesota since the early 2000s. I live in the watershed of the nationally protected Wild and Scenic St. Croix River. This watershed covers a relatively large area of Wisconsin and Minneso...↓ta. Any fouling of this river affects thousands of people in Wisconsin and Minnesota, as well as all the other living organisms, who call this river their home. In order to protect our precious natural resources, we must strive to practice a more sustainable form of agriculture, one that is place-based, dependent on the carrying capacity of the natural resources of a given area. This is true for all of Minnesota. The number of CAFO's has increased much since the early 2000's. It is time for a major careful revison.

I believe, as the Department of Natural Resources, your paramount responsibility must be the protection of land, water, and air, and to prevent the building of giant manure lagoons, which are emptied several times each year and spread across designated fields. As we know of CAFO's in other areas of the state and the country, these fields become oversaturated with liquid manure, which is toxic and laced with E. coli as well as growth hormones and antibiotics administered to animals packed tightly in confined holding pens. In addition these liquid manure lagoons emit a significant amount of methane gas, which is a much more potent greenhouse gas than CO2. This overabundance of manure promotes run-off and groundwater pollution when spread on dead soil,(alive soil needs to be nurtured carefully to maintain its biological health)heavily compromised through compaction by machinery endless monoculture practices and oversaturated by poisonous manure.
In order to protect our precious natural resources, we must strive to practice a more sustainable form of agriculture, one that is place-based, dependent on recognizing the carrying capacity of the natural resources of a given area.
We are desperately trying to save our local, sustainable farming practices and protect the health and wellbeing of our communities.
All life needs clean water to drink and clean air to breathe. Our local natural resources and the health of our communities should not be sacrificed for the profits of large agricultural enterprises, exploiting our resources only to export their product to countries like China. This unfair, unethical market competition destroys all sustainable practices in service of global enterprise. This 'robbing-Peter-to-pay-Paul' form of resource management is unacceptable and to our communities' detriment.

Thank you
Angela Anderson

No attachments

Comment From: Elizabeth Jarrett Andrew

8/21/25 @ 2:03 PM

As an urban homesteader and CSA subscriber, I'm a firm advocate for clean water and the farming practices that support it. Small and mid-sized regenerative farmers are leading the way in their rural communities, advancing solutions to nitrate pollut...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Jane Dow

8/20/25 @ 4:04 PM

I am impressed that you emphasize using cover crops, no till, diversification, rotational grazing to reduce nitrogen and phosphorous run off in section xxiv (water shed based strategies). I hope you are giving incentives to farmers to make the transi...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Ian Radtke-Rosen

8/20/25 @ 3:25 PM

The goal of achieving clean water for all Minnesotans requires reductions of 42% of phosphorus on average in lakes and rivers and 40% of nitrates in rivers and vulnerable groundwaters by 2040 (based on recent conditions). High levels of nitrates is o...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Heather Casper

8/20/25 @ 1:34 PM

I am not a farmer, but a mother and community member of Winona. I feel ashamed of the planet that we are leaving our kids. We must take action now re: agricultural drainage, and nitrogen fertilizers. We know there are technological and regulatory s...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Anthony Stans

8/14/25 @ 2:13 PM

I live in Rochester township and drink/use water from a shared well. Past testing of wells in SE MN demonstrated elevated levels of nitrates and other nutrients. In addition, I enjoy flyfishing in SE MN streams. In the past several years there hav...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Pat Pawlowski

8/07/25 @ 4:53 PM

Nice layout. Hopefully, staff will be working with AG Water Task Force for gneral improvements.

Would offer that for stream bank improvements working with DNR and TU would facilitate efforts as DNR and TU have and acquire easements which commonly i...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Neil Trygestad

8/04/25 @ 10:39 AM

See Below in attached file- NXTGEN PCA MDA August 2025.docx

Attachments:

Download

Comment From: Cherie Hales

7/26/25 @ 5:12 PM

Our state agencies have known for 40 years that our ground and surface waters here in the Driftless are contaminated with nitrates and ag chemicals. Obviously, continuous cover crops would help. More small grains and alternative crops would be a ben...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Amelia Narigon

7/26/25 @ 4:28 PM

I strongly support the proposal to integrate continuous living cover into Minnesota's agricultural practices.

No attachments

Comment From: Barbara Possin

7/26/25 @ 1:51 PM

I fully support the plan to increase CLC crops along the Mississippi River to reduce runoff of nutrients downstream, are environmentally friendly, and can be profitable as well.

No attachments

Comment From: Brian Wagenaar

7/22/25 @ 11:14 PM

The fact that the Minnesota River has made the American Rivers list of the most endangered rivers on multiple occasions should make all Minnesotans deeply ashamed. Minnesota is blessed with incredible natural resources and biodiversity, including uni...↓que glacial geology and the remnants of a once-great prairie ecosystem. We have a duty to ourselves and to our descendants to protect our watersheds, our drinking water, and our wildlife.

In practice, that means we must make significant strides on the issue of agricultural drainage, which plays a large role in polluting rivers in Minnesota. Increased tiling and drainage for corn and soybean farming carry sediments and nutrients right off of agricultural fields into our waterways. This comes with a serious cost: worsened erosion and flooding, impaired drinking water, and an increased need for costly dredging and well-drilling projects.

The good news is that we know there are technological and regulatory solutions available. The cumulative impacts of agricultural drainage must be considered on a more holistic basis.

Additionally, we must use a mixture of education, incentives and regulations to engage farmers in a variety of practices, including conservation tilling, using cover crops and buffer strips, and deploying detention basins. In certain cases, implementing solutions from a list of best management practices (including those just listed) should be required by the MPCA. This requirement could fall under a general permit system for agricultural drainage, which is within the MPCA's statutory authority and scope to implement.

But to really get at the heart of the issue, we must restore wetlands and their vital ecosystem functions on the landscape. Unlike in the late 1800s, when the foundation of our state's current drainage code was written, we now know that wetlands are critical to slowing and cleaning water, fostering biodiversity, and absorbing and storing carbon dioxide. Armed with this knowledge, MPCA should invest in programs that create and restore wetlands in areas that are heavily impacted by agricultural drainage pollution.

We cannot continue to undervalue our state's precious natural resources. Coming together as Minnesotans, we can do better to clean up our watersheds while maintaining our farming legacy.

No attachments

Comment From: DALE STEVERMER

7/22/25 @ 4:21 PM

As changes are being made to the Nutrient Reduction Strategy, I need to add a couple comments. First, I understand the pressure and requirements you face, but please continue to keep some agronomic and business factors in mind.

I have been producing...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Teresa Peterson

7/16/25 @ 1:46 PM

I attended a session on Safeguarding the MN River as a concerned citizen living on the bluff of the Minnesota River valley. I have been concerned for sometime on the amount of tiling that has occurred and its impact on water quality, flooding downstr...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Teresa Whitman

7/16/25 @ 10:34 AM

Residential use of chemical fertilizers on lawns, especially next to lakes and rivers, should be banned. So should most pesticides. Educate residents. Algae and toxic algal blooms have increased. Our groundwater is contaminated. Fertilizers and pesti...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Bruce Hall

7/16/25 @ 8:16 AM

I live on a small central MN lake that is the head of a small watershed draining to the Mississippi river. The area is heavy in crop agriculture, but also feed lot dairy and beef. Field application and field injection use of animial manure goes on ...↓

No attachments