Paul Austin

Paul Austin is the director of Conservation Minnesota, a statewide non-profit. In that role, he gets to hear and share Minnesotan’s stories about our lakes, lands and way of life. Paul’s past lives include election as a small town mayor, serving at the US Agency for International Development, and managing a small marketing firm. He lives in Minneapolis with his wife, two small children and one very large dog.

resize text
subscribe via RSS

Minnesota Running Out of Water?

Posted by: Paul Austin Updated: April 24, 2013 - 9:39 AM

Tweet
share

email
Email share

your name

your email

recipients email

+ add a comment add a comment

While it may be hard to fathom with all this recent snow, Minnesota has a serious groundwater issue. The images of pontoon boats sitting high and dry on White Bear Lake last summer should have been all the reminder we needed that groundwater is a limited resource and we need to be taking steps now to ensure that we remain the land of 10,000 lakes.

A recent study by the Freshwater Society of Minnesota looked at the groundwater issues Minnesota is currently facing. From their research, they came up with a plan for reducing the strain we currently place on our aquifers. The plan will take some personal responsibility and some political leadership to attain.

The basic thrust of their report was that we cannot maintain our current trajectory when it comes to water usage and not expect to run out of water in certain places. Their analysis indicated that the state’s water usage increased 31 percent between 1988 and 2011. To cut that number, we need to start looking at ways each and every one of us can decrease our personal usage, and work with the various levels of government to ensure that where voluntary reductions are not working, mandatory backstops are in place to help protect this valuable resource.

One way the Freshwater Society proposed getting into a more sustainable water usage pattern was to support DNR initiatives to create groundwater management areas in our most critically threatened areas, and to step up their ability to enforce existing laws that regulate water appropriations that exceed 10,000 gallons a day or a million gallons a year. Currently enforcement is lacking when it comes to major water appropriations, and even in cases where it occurs, the penalty is a misdemeanor that few county attorneys are excited to prosecute. The DNR needs to be given the resources it needs to effectively enforce the rules, as well as the power to extend civil fines against those found to be in violation.

Governor Dayton has suggested in his proposed budget that he would like to see additional state dollars dedicated to increasing the monitoring and research of Minnesota’s groundwater as well as lakes, streams and wetlands to see what can be done to preserve our current resources.

As we shovel what will hopefully be the final sloppy wet snow off the season, it is hard to think about our state’s groundwater needs. But since this is when the budget is coming together, this is when we need to be reminding our elected officials that preserving our groundwater needs to be a high priority moving forward.

A copy of the Freshwater Society report is available at www.freshwater.org.

Progress on the Poplar River

Posted by: Paul Austin Updated: March 7, 2013 - 1:11 PM

Tweet
share

email
Email share

your name

your email

recipients email

+ add a comment add a comment

When the Poplar River made its way onto the state’s impaired waters list in 2004, local residents became greatly concerned.

Long popular with the state’s anglers, the river flows out of the Sawtooth Mountains, through the Lutsen Ski area and dumps into Lake Superior near the resort’s main lodge on the lake. Each spring salmon gather at its mouth to spawn, and each fall, trout move further upstream to do the same. In 1989, a 33-pound Chinook salmon was pulled from its waters, setting a state record that stands to this day.

With its inclusion on the impaired waters list, a whole battery of tests were conducted to determine the source of the rapid change in water quality. Initial results found that nearly two-thirds of the sediment in the water was there as the result of natural causes, but since it was on the list, a plan was needed to bring the river back into compliance.

In 2006, the river’s sediment load peaked at 1,000 tons per year. Since that time, management and conservation practices have made significant progress in decreasing the amount of sediment found in the river. In a report just released earlier this month by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, river sediment has been reduced by nearly 35 percent from those peak readings. And with active sediment sequestration plans in place for future developments, it is believed that the number may continue heading even further in the right direction.

In 2013, efforts included in three Lutsen developments, Caribou Highlands Flow Path, Lower Eagle Mountain Road project and the Mystery Mountain Flow Path, are expected to reduce sediment by an additional 185 tons a year. All told, the Poplar River Management Board, in conjunction with the Cook County Soil and Water Conservation District, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, Lutsen and other stakeholders have implemented $1.7 million in sediment reduction projects within the Poplar River watershed.

The work on this river is being done quietly, and there is more to do. But the partners in the cleanup deserve recognition for progress to date, and for their continued commitment to this important natural resource.

Help Stop Asian Carp!

Posted by: Paul Austin Updated: February 27, 2013 - 11:03 AM

Tweet
share

email
Email share

your name

your email

recipients email

+ add a comment add a comment

Conservation Minnesota has been working with a broad coalition of organizations to stop the spread of Asian Carp through the waterways of our state. We must stop Asian carp now – before they swim further north into Minnesota and cause irreparable harm to our rivers, lakes and streams that support the $11.6 billion a year recreation and tourism industry. Delay would be catastrophic for the people who depend on Minnesota’s waters for their jobs and for all of us who love our lakes, rivers and way of life.

Together, we are pushing hard for practical measures including the closure of two underutilized locks on the upper Mississippi. It is clear that lock closure is the only 100% effective method of prevention. But it is just one of several steps that must be taken to address this threat.

Please take a look at the letter our coalition has sent to legislative leaders this week. Then click here to send your own message to your legislators and ask them to help address this serious problem.

Protecting Children from Toxic Chemicals

Posted by: Paul Austin Updated: February 21, 2013 - 10:42 AM

Tweet
share

email
Email share

your name

your email

recipients email

+ add a comment add a comment

Today, the Minnesota Senate will begin debating legislation that seeks to build on previous work to get harmful chemicals out of the products our kids use daily.

In 2009, the legislature passed the Toxic Free Kids Act, which directed the Minnesota Department of Health and the Pollution Control Agency to create a list of chemicals used in manufacturing that should be of high concern to parents. The resulting list included formaldehyde, BPA, lead, cadmium, three phthalates and two flame-retardants.

This year, the groups that helped push the initial research into the chemicals are asking for the next logical step from the legislature, a plan for how to remove these chemicals from local store shelves. In many cases, safe alternative compounds are readily available, but manufacturers need some incentive to make the switch.

So, the Toxic Free Kids Act of 2013 (SF466/HF605) will require all manufacturers to list the inclusion of these chemicals in their products, and will give the state the authority to require gradual phase-out of the chemicals. A second bill, TheFormaldehyde in Children’s Personal Care Products Act (SF357/HF458) will require personal care products intended for children under 12 to be formaldehyde-free within a year. And finally, the BPA in Children’s Food Packaging Act (SF379/HF459) will require manufacturers to stop using BPA in all food packaging intended for children less than 12 years old within a year.

While this may all seem like common sense, it is amazing how many types of baby food jars, soup cans and kids shampoos still contain chemical compounds that the state has identified as being potentially toxic.

I am interested in hearing what you think. Is removing toxic chemicals from children’s products an important issue for Minnesota to address? Let me know what you think about this and other issues being debated this year by taking Conservation Minnesota's Two Minute Survey.

Empty A Can, Fulfill a Promise

Posted by: Paul Austin Updated: February 19, 2013 - 9:51 AM

Tweet
share

email
Email share

your name

your email

recipients email

+ add a comment add a comment

Its a different approach to running a business.

"Minnetonka natives Chad Mayes, Jason Landstrom and Ryan Johnson love beer. They also love our lakes. They put the two together to establish the Tonka Beer Co., a craft brewery that donates 100 percent of its profits to Save-Our-Lakes to battle the onslaught of lake-choking invasive species like zebra mussels." That was an excerpt from a company profile in the latest issue of Lake Minnetonka Magazine.

In their first year as a start up company, Tonka Beer and its associated Save-The-Lakes Foundation have already raised $10,000 for their cause. The first grant was given out last month to fund invasive species research at the University of Minnesota. Its a win-win for all of us who care about Minnesota's lakes.

No Raids, No Shifts, No Gimmicks

Posted by: Paul Austin Updated: February 7, 2013 - 12:45 PM

Tweet
share

email
Email share

your name

your email

recipients email

+ add a comment add a comment

Today Conservation Minnesota released a report that analyzed the governor’s recently released budget proposal, and found a refreshing amount of transparency in the proposal.

For each of the past ten years, Conservation Minnesota has issued similar reports on gubernatorial budget proposals as well as follow-up reports on final budget actions and bonding packages. In doing so, the organization has become accustomed to uncovering gimmicks and shifts that have masked the real impact of decreasing funding to conservation issues.

But with this budget, the organization found that the shifts and gimmicks of the past are absent. When the organization issued its first report in 2002, support for conservation was on a steady decline, reaching just 1% of general fund spending by 2008. Since then, shifts and cuts have decreased that percent by nearly one third. The governor’s current budget proposal stabilizes funding and does not rely on raids, shifts or budgeting gimmicks.

I am encouraged by the fact that the Governor stuck to his word, delivering a straightforward budget proposal. There are cuts to conservation and areas that require increased funding, but the Governor’s proposal stops the bleeding and starts an honest discussion about how to protect Minnesota’s lakes, lands, and way of life.

This year’s report, which is available at http://www.conservationminnesota.org/nogimmicks/, analyzes the budget and provides recommendations for how the legislature should work to strengthen the proposal .