Last month, I wrote that the state of Michigan and the federal government would be donating approximately $12 million to the City of Adrian and its Downtown Development Authority (DDA). According to Senate Bill 844, Sec. 413, signed by Gov. Gretchen Whitmer on October 4, 2022, the funds “will be used to work with the city’s downtown development authorities to eliminate the epidemic; encourage new housing development; Create open spaces, trails, and other public facilities Provide river cleaning to improve recreation and drinking water.” Based on this issue, it proposed the possibility that the funds could be used to “provide river cleanup to improve recreation and drinking water.”
In an excellent collection of essays titled “Think Little” (Counterpoint, 2019), farmer and author Wendell Berry writes: His one of his enduring themes is the limit. It is to limit the consumption of natural resources without considering the consequences. Overspending, overspending, debt. and our commitment to stewardship. It is the antithesis of the 1970s mantra “go big or stay out”, in which taxpayers subsidize agriculture in line with centralization and economies of scale in manufacturing, mining and fossil fuel production. , is industrialized.
The biggest and cheapest isn’t always what it looks like.
In addition to Adrian’s $12 million, another $25 million will go to parts of Michigan’s West Lake Erie Basin here (mainly in Lennawee and Monroe counties) for Agricultural Best Management Practices (BMP), Reduce the amount of dissolved orthophosphate (DP) entering our farms. The Raisin and Bean Creek rivers and their tributaries. Last September, in his MAEAP program for the Michigan Department of Agriculture and Rural Development (MDARD), he wrote about the ineffectiveness of the comprehensive use of BMPs, which improved soil health, Developed to reduce erosion but not a solution to pollution. from dissolved nutrients. The currently recommended BMP is insufficient to achieve the planned 40% phosphorus reduction, and most other his BMPs have important tradeoffs and costs. It is because the models used to create programs to advocate for them and the indicators used to show improvement are deeply flawed. There is also the question of whether the taxpayer should pay.
There are better and more targeted options available to farmers in the form of interactive decision-making tools. Farmers can enter the exact details of each field and crop grown in a particular year into a database of stored field conditions. Watersheds like drainage tiles return the appropriate BMP for each field and the approximate amount of phosphorus not found in surface water for each scenario. This is very different from his current MAEAP program. Because that baseline indicator is not total registered acres equaling pounds of phosphorus removed, but locally measured improvement in water quality.
I hardly think about this. Look at a given situation, research your options, and choose the best one. Like most things, it’s the details.
Berry also wrote: We must elect them and go see them…. ”
Whether it’s cleaning up rivers to improve recreation and drinking water, or reducing dissolved orthophosphates from agriculture that run into the water, that’s the point. The money is coming now. Take a look at our state legislators and staff. Officers and commissions elected and appointed by counties, cities, townships and villages. and the state and local agencies and groups that pass through this funding. Observe what they do, what they don’t do, who gets the money and how it is spent. Pay attention to transparency, timetables and measurable improvements. Hold these individuals accountable. Their decisions will affect the water quality here for generations.
Pam Taylor is a retired Lenawi County teacher and environmental activist.she can be reached atptaylor001@msn.com.