By Warren Formo

Nov. 1 is the deadline to establish buffers along public ditches as required in the expanded buffer legislation passed in 2015.

If they have not already done so, farmland owners affected by this requirement should talk to their local drainage authority or soil and water conservation district if they have any questions about buffer needs on their property.

Minnesota ditch law has required 16.5-foot vegetative buffers since 1977, but with a gradual phase-in — as the requirement did not apply until the local ditch authority appointed viewers to determine or redetermine benefits and damages for a ditch system.

This process had resulted in a steady increase in buffered ditch miles. However, it had not yet reached all public ditch systems. A 2006 report from the Board of Soil and Water Resources indicated that 72% of public drainage ditches were known to have the required grass strip in place. The 2015 legislation had the effect of removing the redetermination trigger, stating simply that all public ditches must be buffered by Nov. 1 of this year.

In general, landowner reports align with BWSR statistics, showing that compliance with the new buffer law across both public ditches and public waters is generally going well. However, calls in recent months clearly point out ongoing frustration in some situations.

Landowner frustrations
Concerns about public waters designations by the Department of Natural Resources still top the list of issues voiced by landowners. Private ditches, even small swales in fields, have in some cases been deemed by the DNR to be public waters. I expect that this category of conflict will wind up in the courts or back at the Legislature at some point.

Compensation to landowners is also of major concern. Efforts to get even a very modest tax break for those affected by the loss of cropland converted to buffers were unsuccessful during the 2018 legislative session.

On public ditch buffers, state drainage law provides for compensation, in that all landowners on a given ditch system pay their share as determined by the drainage authority. Public waters buffers are a mixed bag, as some have successfully enrolled in programs — usually the Conservation Reserve Program — while others have received no compensation at all.

Landowners also report frustration with the process for implementing alternative practices in lieu of buffers, as allowed by the legislation. This provision was meant to provide flexibility for landowners, recognizing that in some situations, a fix other than a buffer could be a better solution than a buffer. Some landowners indicate that in their experience, the alternative practices option is being presented as “buffers plus,” not as a buffer alternative.

Poor communication is a common element in those few spots where these troubles persist. Most local authorities have good working relationships with local landowners and are helping them deal with the new law. Unfortunately, this is not the case everywhere.

If you are experiencing any challenges with the new buffer law, those listed above or otherwise, I would like to hear from you. I will compile your concerns with others to help identify ongoing issues. Contact me at 952-237-9822 or [email protected].

Once identified, the Minnesota Agricultural Water Resource Center and our member organizations can work on solutions.

And you may also find some relief in sharing your story with a sympathetic ear.

Formo is executive director of MAWRC.