Historical Minnesota environmental information, 1973-2016

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Public Policy Logo-one line.pngin Minnesota

BP-Initials-UPDATED.png This article does not contain the most recently published data on this subject. If you would like to help our coverage grow, consider donating to Ballotpedia.

Environmental Policy Logo on Ballotpedia.png
State environmental policy
U.S. environmental policy
Endangered species policy
State endangered species
Federal land policy
Environmental terms
Public Policy Logo-one line.png

The historical environmental information below applies to prior years. For more current information regarding environmental policy in Minnesota, see this article.

Land ownership

See also: Federal land policy and Federal land ownership by state

The federal government owned between 635 million and 640 million acres of land in 2012 (about 28 percent) of the 2.27 billion acres of land in the United States. Around 52 percent of federally owned acres were in 12 Western states—including Alaska, 61 percent of which was federally owned. In contrast, the federal government owned 4 percent of land in the other 38 states. Federal land policy is designed to manage minerals, oil and gas resources, timber, wildlife and fish, and other natural resources found on federal land. Land management policies are highly debated for their economic, environmental and social impacts. Additionally, the size of the federal estate and the acquisition of more federal land are major issues.[1][2]

According to the Congressional Research Service, Minnesota spans 51.2 million acres. Of that total, 6.78 percent, or 3.469 million acres, belonged to the federal government as of 2012. More than 47.7 million acres in Minnesota are not owned by the federal government, or 8.8 non-federal acres per capita. From 1990 to 2010, the federal government's land ownership in Minnesota decreased by 76,491 acres.[1]

The table below shows federal land ownership in Minnesota compared to two neighboring states. More than 81 percent of Minnesota's federal land was owned by the U.S. Forest Service; more than 2.8 million acres belonged to the U.S. Forest Service in Minnesota compared to 1.53 million acres in Wisconsin (the Forest Service owns no acres in Iowa). Around 483,787 acres in Minnesota (13.95 percent) were owned by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service compared to 200,210 acres in Wisconsin (10.73 percent) and only 70,564 acres in Iowa (57.55 percent).

Federal land ownership in Minnesota and other states by agency
State
Agency Minnesota Iowa Wisconsin
Acres owned Percentage owned Acres owned Percentage owned Acres owned Percentage owned
U.S. Forest Service 2,841,630 81.91% 0 0.00% 1,533,517 82.21%
U.S. National Park Service 139,570 4.02% 2,708 2.21% 61,744 3.31%
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 483,787 13.95% 70,564 57.55% 200,210 10.73%
U.S. Bureau of Land Management 1,447 0.04% 0 0.00% 2,364 0.13%
U.S. Department of Defense 2,777 0.08% 49,331 40.24% 67,540 3.62%
Total federal land 3,469,211 100% 122,603 100% 1,865,375 100.00%
Source: Congressional Research Service, "Federal Land Ownership: Overview and Data"

Land usage

Recreation

National parks in Minnesota

Minnesota has five National Park Service units, two national monuments, two national forests, three wilderness areas and one national recreation area. A study by the U.S. National Park Service found that 658,331 visitors attended Minnesota's national parks and monuments and generated $38.1 million in visitor spending in 2013.[3]

State recreation lands

The table below contains a list of all state parks in Minnesota.

Federal lands and Indian reservations in the state of Minnesota by government agency (click on the image to enlarge)

Economic activity on federal lands

Oil and gas activity

See also: BLM oil and gas leases by state

Private mining companies, including oil and natural gas companies, can apply for leases from the U.S. Bureau of Land Management (BLM) to explore and produce energy on federal land. The company seeking a lease must nominate the land for oil and gas exploration to the BLM, which evaluates and approves the lease. The BLM state offices make leasing decisions based on their land use plans, which contain information on the land's resources and the potential environmental impact of oil or gas exploration. If federal lands are approved for leasing, the BLM requires an application from the company containing information on how the exploration, drilling and production will be conducted. Afterward, the BLM will produce an environmental analysis and a list of requirements before work on the land can begin. The agency also inspects the companies' drilling and producing on the leased lands.[4]

In 2013, there were 47,427 active leases covering 36.09 million acres of federal land nationwide. Of that total, no leases were in Minnesota. In 2013, out of 3,773 new drilling leases approved nationwide by the BLM for oil and gas exploration, no leases were in Minnesota.[5][6][7][8][9]

The table below shows how Minnesota compared to neighboring states in oil and gas permits on BLM-managed lands in 2013. Minnesota had no active leases or acres under lease in 2013.

Oil and gas leasing on BLM lands by state
State Active permits on BLM lands (FY 2013) Total acres under lease (FY 2013) State percentage of total permits State percentage of total acres
Minnesota 0 0 0.00% 0.00%
North Dakota 2,061 1,024,007 4.35% 2.84%
South Dakota 303 162,902 0.64% 0.45%
Wisconsin 0 0 0.00% 0.00%
Total United States 47,427 permits 36,092,482 acres - -
Source: U.S. Bureau of Land Management, "Oil and Gas Statistics"

Payments in lieu of taxes

Jay Cooke State Park in northeastern Minnesota
See also: Payments in lieu of taxes

Since local governments cannot collect taxes on federally owned property, the U.S. Department of the Interior issues payments to local governments to replace lost property tax revenue from federal land. The payments, known as "Payments in Lieu of Taxes" (PILTs), are typically used for funding services such as fire departments, police protection, school construction and roads.[10]

The table below shows PILTs for Minnesota compared to neighboring states between 2011 and 2013. Minnesota received more PILTs in 2013 than North Dakota and Wisconsin but less than North Dakota.

Total PILTs for Minnesota and neighboring states
State FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 State's percentage of 2013 total
Minnesota $1,808,191 $1,944,085 $1,974,972 0.49%
North Dakota $1,452,758 $1,418,453 $1,374,438 0.34%
South Dakota $4,995,110 $5,363,811 $5,669,767 1.41%
Wisconsin $455,637 $466,912 $453,945 0.11%
Source: U.S. Department of the Interior, "PILT"

State trust lands

Map of state trust lands as of November 2014

The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources' School Trust Lands division manages 2.5 million acres of school trust lands intended to benefit public education. The division also manages 1 million acres of mineral rights. Revenues generated from these lands are given to the state's permanent school fund, which is managed by the State Board of Investment. Most school trust lands are found in northeastern Minnesota, though other trust lands are intermixed with privately and federally owned land. In fiscal year 2013, the Minnesota School Trust Lands generated $41,054,214 in net revenue. 78 percent of that was from mineral leases. Payments to the Permanent School Fund during fiscal year 2013 was $31,042,773.[11][12]


Legislation and regulation

Federal laws

Clean Air Act

The federal Clean Air Act requires each state to meet federal standards for air pollution. Under the act, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency oversees national air quality standards aimed at limiting pollutants from chemical plants, steel mills, utilities, and industrial factories. Individual states can enact stricter air standards if they choose, though each state must adhere to the EPA's minimum pollution standards. States implement federal air standards through a state implementation plan (SIP), which must be approved by the EPA.[13]

Clean Water Act

The federal Clean Water Act is meant to address and maintain the physical, chemical, and biological status of the waters of the United States. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulates water pollution sources and provides financial assistance to states and municipalities for water quality programs.[14]

According to research done by The New York Times using annual averages from 2004 to 2007, had 801.3 facilities that were regulated annually by the Clean Water Act. An average of 313.1 facilities violated the act annually from 2004 to 2007 in , and the EPA enforced the act an average of 38.8 times a year in the state. This information, published by the Times in 2009, was the most recent information on the subject as of October 2014.[15]

The table below shows how Minnesota compared to neighboring states in The New York Times study, including the number of regulated facilities, facility violations, and the annual average of enforcement actions against regulated facilities between 2004 and 2007. Minnesota had more regulated facilities and facility violations compared to neighboring states.

The New York Times Clean Water Act study (2004-2007)
State Number of facilities regulated Facility violations Annual average enforcement actions
Minnesota 801.3 313.1 38.8
North Dakota 126.50 25.90 0.00
South Dakota 378.00 146.40 2.70
Wisconsin 653.5 251.9 83.3
Source: The New York Times, "Clean Water Act Violations: The Enforcement Record"

Endangered Species Act

The federal Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973 provides for the identification, listing, and protection of both threatened and endangered species and their habitats. According to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the law was designed to prevent the extinction of vulnerable plant and animal species through the development of recovery plans and the protection of critical habitats. ESA administration and enforcement are the responsibility of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service.[16][17]

Federally listed species in Minnesota

There were 19 endangered and threatened animal and plant species believed to or known to occur in Minnesota as of July 2015.

The table below lists the 15 endangered and threatened animal species believed to or known to occur in the state. When an animal species has the word "Entire" after its name, that species will be found all throughout the state.[18]

Endangered animal species in Minnesota
Status Species
Threatened Bat, Northern long-eared (Myotis septentrionalis)
Endangered Butterfly, Karner blue Entire (Lycaeides melissa samuelis)
Endangered Higgins eye (pearlymussel) Entire (Lampsilis higginsii)
Threatened Knot, red (Calidris canutus rufa)
Threatened Lynx, Canada (Contiguous U.S. DPS) (Lynx canadensis)
Endangered Mapleleaf, winged Entire; except where listed as experimental populations (Quadrula fragosa)
Endangered Mussel, sheepnose (Plethobasus cyphyus)
Endangered Mussel, snuffbox (Epioblasma triquetra)
Threatened Plover, piping except Great Lakes watershed (Charadrius melodus)
Endangered Plover, piping Great Lakes watershed (Charadrius melodus)
Endangered Shiner, Topeka Entire (Notropis topeka (=tristis))
Threatened Skipper, Dakota (Hesperia dacotae)
Endangered skipperling, Poweshiek (Oarisma poweshiek)
Endangered Spectaclecase (mussel) (Cumberlandia monodonta)
Threatened Wolf, gray MN (Canis lupus)
Source: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, "Endangered and threatened species in Minnesota"

The table below lists the four endangered and threatened plant species believed to or known to occur in the state.[19]

Endangered plant species in Minnesota
Status Species
Threatened Bush-clover, prairie (Lespedeza leptostachya)
Endangered Lily, Minnesota dwarf trout (Erythronium propullans)
Threatened Orchid, western prairie fringed (Platanthera praeclara)
Threatened roseroot, Leedy's (Rhodiola integrifolia ssp. leedyi)
Source: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, "Endangered and threatened species in Minnesota"

State-listed species in Minnesota

The state of Minnesota maintains its own state list of endangered and threatened species managed by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. A complete list of all protected species in Minnesota (as of August 2013) can be found here.

Enforcement

See also: Enforcement at the EPA

Minnesota is part of the EPA's Region 5, which includes Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Ohio, and Wisconsin.

The EPA enforces federal standards on air, water and hazardous chemicals. The EPA can engage in its own administrative action against private industries, or it can bring civil and/or criminal lawsuits against them. The goal of environmental law enforcement is usually the collection of penalties and fines for violations of laws like the Clean Air Act and Clean Water Act. In 2013, the EPA estimated that 408.4 million pounds of pollution, which includes air pollution, water contaminants, and hazardous chemicals, were "reduced, treated or eliminated" and 4.9 million cubic yards of soil and water were cleaned in Region 5. Additionally, 298 enforcement cases were initiated, and 310 enforcement cases were concluded in fiscal year 2013. In fiscal year 2012, the EPA collected $252 million in criminal fines and civil penalties from the private sector nationwide. In fiscal year 2013, the EPA collected $1.1 billion in criminal fines and civil penalties from the private sector nationwide, primarily due to the $1 billion settlement from the Deepwater Horizon oil spill along the Gulf Coast in 2010. The EPA only publishes nationwide data and does not provide state or region-specific information on the amount of fines and penalties it collects during a fiscal year.[20][21][22][23]

Mercury and air toxics standards

See also: Mercury and air toxics standards
The EPA on mercury capture systems

The EPA enforces mercury and air toxics standards (MATS), which are national limits on mercury, chromium, nickel, arsenic and acidic gases from coal- and oil-fired power plants. Power plants are required to have certain technologies to limit these pollutants. In December 2011, the EPA issued greater restrictions on the amount of mercury and other toxic pollutants produced by power plants. As of 2014, approximately 580 power plants, including 1,400 oil- and coal-fired electric-generating units, fell under the federal rule. The EPA has claimed that power plants account for 50 percent of mercury emissions, 75 percent of acidic gases and around 20 to 60 percent of toxic metal emissions in the United States. All coal- and oil-fired power plants with a capacity of 25 megawatts or greater are subject to the standards. The EPA has claimed that the standards will prevent up to 150 premature deaths in Minnesota while creating up to $1.2 billion in health benefits in 2016.[24][25][26]

In 2014, the EPA released a study examining the economic, environmental, and health impacts of the MATS standards nationwide. Other organizations have released their own analyses about the effects of the MATS standards. Below is a summary of the studies on MATS and their effects as of November 2014.

EPA study
In 2014, the EPA reported that its MATS rule would prevent roughly 11,000 premature deaths and 130,000 asthma attacks nationwide. The agency also anticipated between $37 billion and $90 billion in "improved air quality benefits" annually. For the rule's cost, the EPA estimated that annual compliance fees for coal- and oil-fired power plants would reach $9.6 billion.[27]

NERA study
A 2012 study published by NERA Economic Consulting, a global consultancy group, reported that annual compliance costs in the electricity sector would total $10 billion in 2015 and nearly $100 billion cumulatively up through 2034. The same study found that the net impact of the MATS rule in 2015 would be the income equivalent of 180,000 fewer jobs. This net impact took into account the job gains associated with the building and refitting of power plants with new technology.[28]

Superfund sites

The EPA established the Superfund program as part of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act of 1980.The Superfund program focuses on uncontrolled or abandoned hazardous waste sites nationwide. The EPA inspects waste sites and establishes cleanup plans for them. The federal government can compel the private entities responsible for a waste site to clean the site or face penalties. If the federal government cleans a waste site, it can force the responsible party to reimburse the EPA or other federal agencies for the cleanup's cost. Superfund sites include oil refineries, smelting facilities, mines and other industrial areas. As of October 2014, there were 1,322 Superfund sites nationwide. There were 245 Superfund sites in Region 5, with an average of 40.8 sites per state. There were 25 Superfund sites in Minnesota as of October 2014.[29][30]

Economic impact
EPA studies
The Environmental Protection Agency publishes studies to evaluate the impact and benefits of its policies. Other studies may dispute the agency's findings or state the costs of its policies.

According to the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO), an independent federal agency, the Superfund program received an average of almost $1.2 billion annually in appropriated funds between the years 1981 and 2009, adjusted for inflation. The GAO estimated that the trust fund of the Superfund program decreased from $5 billion in 1997 to $137 million in 2009. The Superfund program received an additional $600 million in federal funding from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, also known as the stimulus bill.[31]

In March 2011, the EPA claimed that the agency's Superfund program produced economic benefits nationwide. Because Superfund sites are added and removed from a prioritized list on a regular basis, the total number of Superfund sites since the program's inception in 1980 is unknown. Based on a selective study of 373 Superfund sites cleaned up since the program's inception, the EPA estimated these economic benefits include the creation of 2,240 private businesses, $32.6 billion in annual sales from new businesses, 70,144 jobs and $4.9 billion in annual employment income.[32]

Other studies were published detailing the costs associated with the Superfund program. According to the Property and Environment Research Center, a free market-oriented policy group based in Montana, the EPA spent over $35 billion on the Superfund program between 1980 and 2005.[33][34]

Environmental impact

In March 2011, the EPA claimed that the Superfund program resulted in healthier environments surrounding former waste sites. An agency study analyzed the program's health and ecological benefits and focused on former landfills, mining areas, and abandoned dumps that were cleaned up and renovated. As of January 2009, out of the approximately 500 former Superfund sites used for the study, roughly 10 percent became recreational or commercial sites. Other former Superfund sites in the study became wetlands, meadows, streams, scenic trails, parks, and habitats for plants and animals.[35]


Carbon emissions

See also: Climate change, Greenhouse gas and Greenhouse gas emissions by state

In 2011, Minnesota ranked 23rd nationwide in carbon emissions. Generally, carbon emissions have steadily increased since 1990 in Minnesota. Emissions peaked in 2003 and 2005 at 101 million metric tons of CO2 before they declined to 91 million metric tons of CO2 in 2011. The transportation and electric power sectors in Minnesota were responsible for around two-thirds of the state's emissions, at 33.7 percent and 31.7 percent, respectively. The industrial, residential and commercial sectors accounted for the remainder.[36]

Carbon dioxide emissions in Minnesota (in million metric tons). Data was compiled by the U.S. Energy Information Administration.
Carbon dioxide emissions in Minnesota by sector

Pollution from energy use

Note: Annual data on nitrogen dioxide levels in the Upper Midwest between 2000 and 2014 are unavailable.

Pollution from energy use includes three common air pollutants: carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide and ozone. These and other pollutants are regulated by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) through the National Ambient Air Quality Standards, which are federal standards limiting pollutants that can harm human health in significant concentrations. Carbon dioxide, a greenhouse gas, is also regulated by the EPA, but it is excluded here since it is not one of the pollutants originally regulated under the Clean Air Act for its harm to human health.

Industries and motor vehicles emit carbon monoxide directly when they use energy. Nitrogen dioxide forms from the emissions of automobiles, power plants and other sources. Ground level ozone (also known as tropospheric ozone) is not emitted but is the product of chemical reactions between nitrogen dioxide and volatile organic chemicals. The EPA tracks these and other pollutants from monitoring sites across the United States. The data below shows nationwide and regional trends for carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide and ozone between 2000 and 2014. States with consistent climates and weather patterns were grouped together by the EPA to make up each region.[37][38]

Carbon monoxide (CO)

Carbon monoxide (CO) is a colorless, odorless gas produced from combustion processes (e.g., when gasoline reacts with oxygen to give off heat and releases exhaust). The majority of national CO emissions come from mobile sources like automobiles. When inhaled, CO can reduce the oxygen-carrying capacity of the blood and at very high levels can cause death. CO concentrations are measured in parts per million (ppm). Since 1994, federal law has prohibited CO concentrations from exceeding 9 ppm during an eight-hour period more than once per year.[39][40]

The chart below compares the annual average concentration of carbon monoxide (CO) in the Central and Upper Midwestern regions of the United States between 2000 and 2014. Carbon monoxide concentrations are measured in parts per million (ppm). States with consistent climates and weather patterns were grouped together by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), which collects these data, to make up each region. Each line represents the annual average of all the data collected from pollution monitoring sites in each region. In the Central region, there were 25 monitoring sites throughout the seven states. In the Upper Midwest, there were seven monitoring sites throughout the four states. In 2000, the average concentration of carbon monoxide was 3.5 ppm in the Central region, compared to 2.67 ppm in the Upper Midwest. In 2014, the average concentration of carbon monoxide was 1.34 ppm in the Central region, a decrease of 61.6 percent from 2000, compared to 0.96 ppm in the Upper Midwest, a decrease of 64.1 percent from 2000.[41]

Central Upper-Midwest Comparison.png

Ground-level ozone

Ground-level ozone is created by chemical reactions between nitrogen oxides (NOx) and volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in sunlight. Major sources of NOx and VOCs include industrial facilities, electric utilities, automobiles, gasoline vapors, and chemical solvents. Ground-level ozone can produce health problems for children, the elderly, and asthmatics. Since 2008, federal law has prohibited ozone concentrations from exceeding a daily eight-hour average of 75 parts per billion (ppb). Beginning in 2025, federal law will prohibit ground-level ozone concentrations from exceeding a daily eight-hour average of 70 ppb.[40][42]

The chart below compares the daily eight-hour average concentration of ground-level ozone in the Central and Upper Midwestern regions of the United States between 2000 and 2014. In the chart below, ozone concentrations are measured in parts per million (ppm), which can be converted to parts per billion (ppb). In the Central region, there were 159 monitoring sites throughout seven states, compared to 61 monitoring sites throughout four states in the Upper Midwest. In 2000, the daily eight-hour average concentration of ozone was 0.0821 ppm, or 82.1 ppb in the Central region, compared to 0.0752 ppm, or 75.2 ppb in the Upper Midwest. In 2014, the daily eight-hour average concentration of ozone was 0.0651 ppm, or 65.1 ppb in the Central region, a decrease of 20.6 percent since 2000, compared to 0.0667 ppm, or 66.7 ppb in the Upper Midwest, a decrease of 11.2 percent since 2000.[43]

Central Upper-Midwest Comparison.png


State laws

The Minnesota Environmental Policy Act of 1973 (MEPA) created the Environmental Quality Board (EQB), a state agency that oversees a formal environmental review process for the state. For example, if a development project is proposed, and the project may be large in size or involve a particular location, the project may require an environmental review by the Minnesota Environmental Quality Board.[44]

Enforcement

The logo of the Minnesota Environmental Quality Board.

Minnesota's Department of Natural Resources' major divisions implement state policy on natural resources, recreation and natural resource development, including the following:

  • The Division of Fish and Wildlife manages the state's fish and wildlife resources through fishing, hunting and wildlife-related regulations.[45]
  • The Division of Lands and Minerals manages mineral exploration and mine development on state-owned lands.[46]
  • The Division of Parks and Trails oversees the development, administration and management of the state's parks, trails, recreation areas and state forests.[47]
  • The Division of Forestry protects and manages the trees, woodlands, and forests in Minnesota through fire management programs, land supervision, regulation of timber sales, and strategic planning for forest management.[48]
  • The Minnesota Environmental Quality Board is a "multi-jurisdictional and multi-dimensional" board that ensures compliance with Minnesota environmental policy and coordinates with other agencies. The board consists of nine agency heads and five citizen members. The board provides an advisory role on environmental issues to the Minnesota and Minnesota legislature.[49]
  • The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency monitors environmental quality and enforces the state's regulations on air, water and waste management. The agency assists in cleaning up spills, leaks and other environmental hazards. The agency's staff provides education for the public on environmental issues.[50]

State environmental policy act

See also: State environmental policy acts

The Minnesota Environmental Policy Act was passed by the Minnesota State Legislature in 1973. The law requires that all proposed state actions, in addition to some private activities, be evaluated for their impact on the environment. The first step is for the state agency to complete an "Environmental Assessment Worksheet," which is a preliminary report used to judge whether an agency's action could potentially impact the environment. If the action does not result in any environmental impact, then nothing else is needed. If the action is likely to have an impact, state agencies must prepare an "Environmental Impact Statement," which contains the nature and extent of the environmental impacts.[51][52]

The environmental impact statement must be "an analytical rather than encyclopedia document" that describes how a state action will specifically impact the environment, discusses all alternatives to the state action and their impacts, and concludes with the methods to be used for mitigating the unavoidable adverse environmental impacts. The statement must also take into account the "economic, employment and sociological effects" of a state action.[51]

Unlike other states' environmental policy acts, Minnesota's law requires an Environmental Impact Statement for all major state government and all major private actions (which are defined as having more than just local significance) that may have an environmental impact. They include the following:[52]

  • all state and local agency actions
  • private actions involving new agricultural operations
  • actions of greater than local significance as a result of a citizen petition with at least 500 Minnesota voter signatures

Other projects are exempt from an environmental impact analysis, whether or not they affect the environment:[52]

  • feedlots
  • mixed-use residential and industrial commercial developments
  • campgrounds
  • highway projects
  • nonmetallic mineral mining
  • ethanol plants
  • sports facilities

Historical budget information

The table below shows state budget figures for Minnesota's environmental and natural resource departments compared to neighboring states.

Total state natural resource expenditures by state
State Departments/Divisions FY 2013 FY 2012 FY 2011
Minnesota Environmental Resources $157,085,000 $145,622,000 $162,974,000
North Dakota* Environmental Health - $50,524,632* $52,993,754*
South Dakota Environment and Natural Resources $21,983,105 $33,645,260 $33,742,880
Wisconsin Natural Resources $561,677,000 $467,043,600 $564,717,100
Sources: Minnesota Office of Management and Budget, North Dakota Office of Management of Budget, South Dakota Bureau of Management and Finance, Wisconsin State Budget Office
*Biennium budget.

Major groups

Below is a list of environmental advocacy organizations in Minnesota. A complete list of environmental groups by state can be accessed on the website Eco-USA.[53]

  • Minnesota Center for Environmental Advocacy
  • Minnesota Environmental Fund
  • Minnesota Land Trust
  • Protecting natural and scenic land right here in Minnesota
  • Minnesota Native Plant Society
  • Northeastern Minnesotans for Wilderness
  • Parks and Trails Council of Minnesota
  • Minnesota Waters
  • Sierra Club - Northstar Chapter

Ballot measures

Voting on the Environment
Environment.jpg
Ballot Measures
By state
By year
Not on ballot


Below is a list of ballot measures relating to environmental issues in Minnesota.

Recent news

The link below is to the most recent stories in a Google news search for the terms Minnesota environmental policy. These results are automatically generated from Google. Ballotpedia does not curate or endorse these articles.

Historical Minnesota environmental information, 1973-2016 - Google News

See also

External links

Footnotes

  1. ↑ 1.0 1.1 Congressional Research Service, "Federal Land Ownership: Overview and Data," accessed September 15, 2014
  2. ↑ U.S. Congressional Research Service, "Federal Lands and Natural Resources: Overview and Selected Issues for the 113th Congress," December 8, 2014
  3. ↑ U.S. National Park Service, "2013 National Park Visitor Spending Effects Report," accessed October 14, 2014
  4. ↑ U.S. Bureau of Land Management, "Oil and Gas Lease Sales," accessed October 20, 2014
  5. ↑ U.S. Bureau of Land Management, "Number of Acres Leased During the Fiscal Year," accessed October 20, 2014
  6. ↑ U.S. Bureau of Land Management, "Total Number of Leases in Effect," accessed October 20, 2014
  7. ↑ U.S. Bureau of Land Management, "Summary of Onshore Oil and Gas Statistics," accessed October 20, 2014
  8. ↑ U.S. Bureau of Land Management, "Number of Drilling Permits Approved by Fiscal Year on Federal Lands," accessed October 20, 2014
  9. ↑ U.S. Bureau of Land Management, "Total Number of Acres Under Lease As of the Last Day of the Fiscal Year," accessed October 22, 2014
  10. ↑ U.S. Department of the Interior, "PILT," accessed October 4, 2014
  11. ↑ Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, "School Trust Lands," accessed November 16, 2014
  12. ↑ Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Minnesota's School Trust Lands Biennial Report (2012-2013)," accessed November 16, 2014
  13. ↑ U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, "Understanding the Clean Air Act," accessed September 12, 2014
  14. ↑ U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, "Clean Water Act (CWA) Overview," accessed September 19, 2014
  15. ↑ The New York Times, "Clean Water Act Violations: The Enforcement Record," September 13, 2009
  16. ↑ U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, "Improving ESA Implementation," accessed May 15, 2015
  17. ↑ U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, "ESA Overview," accessed October 1, 2014
  18. ↑ U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, "Endangered and threatened species in Minnesota," accessed July 6, 2015
  19. ↑ U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, "Endangered and threatened species in STATE," accessed July 6, 2015
  20. ↑ U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, "Annual EPA Enforcement Results Highlight Focus on Major Environmental Violations," February 7, 2014
  21. ↑ Environmental Protection Agency, "Accomplishments by EPA Region (2013)," May 12, 2014
  22. ↑ U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, "Enforcement Annual Results for Fiscal Year 2012," accessed October 1, 2014
  23. ↑ U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, "EPA Enforcement in 2012 Protects Communities From Harmful Pollution," December 17, 2012
  24. ↑ U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, "Basic Information on Mercury and Air Toxics Standards," accessed January 5, 2015
  25. ↑ U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, "Cleaner Power Plants," accessed January 5, 2015
  26. ↑ U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, "Mercury and Air Toxics Standards in Minnesota," accessed September 9, 2014
  27. ↑ U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, "Benefits and Costs of Cleaning Up Toxic Air Pollution from Power Plants," accessed October 9, 2014
  28. ↑ NERA Economic Consulting, "An Economic Impact Analysis of EPA's Mercury and Air Toxics Standards Rule," March 1, 2012
  29. ↑ U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, "What is Superfund?" accessed September 9, 2014
  30. ↑ U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, "National Priorities List (NPL) of Superfund Sites," accessed October 7, 2014
  31. ↑ U.S. Government Accountability Office, "EPA's Estimated Costs to Remediate Existing Sites Exceed Current Funding Levels, and More Sites Are Expected to Be Added to the National Priorities List," accessed October 7, 2014
  32. ↑ U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, "Estimate of National Economic Impacts of Superfund Sites," accessed September 12, 2014
  33. ↑ Property and Environment Research Center, "Superfund Follies, Part II," accessed October 7, 2014
  34. ↑ Property and Environment Research Center, "Superfund: The Shortcut That Failed (1996)," accessed October 7, 2014
  35. ↑ U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, "Beneficial Effects of the Superfund Program," accessed September 12, 2014
  36. ↑ U.S. Energy Information Administration, "State Profiles and Energy Estimates," accessed October 13, 2014
  37. ↑ U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, "Air Trends," accessed October 30, 2015
  38. ↑ U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, "Basic Information - Ozone," accessed January 1, 2016
  39. ↑ U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, "Carbon Monoxide," accessed October 26, 2015
  40. ↑ 40.0 40.1 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, "National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)," accessed October 26, 2015
  41. ↑ U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, "Regional Trends in CO Levels," accessed October 23, 2015
  42. ↑ U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, "Ground Level Ozone," accessed October 26, 2015
  43. ↑ U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, "Regional Trends in Ozone Levels ," accessed October 26, 2015
  44. ↑ Minnesota Environmental Quality Board, "Environmental Review Program," accessed November 12, 2014
  45. ↑ Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, "Division of Fish and Wildlife," accessed November 12, 2014
  46. ↑ Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, "Division of Lands and Minerals," accessed November 12, 2014
  47. ↑ Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, "Parks and Trails Division," accessed November 13, 2014
  48. ↑ Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, "Division of Forestry," accessed November 12, 2014
  49. ↑ Minnesota Environmental Quality Board, "About," accessed November 12, 2014
  50. ↑ Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, "About MPCA," accessed November 12, 2014
  51. ↑ 51.0 51.1 Minnesota Office of the Reviser of Statutes, "Minnesota Statutes Chapter 116D: Environmental Policy," accessed April 7, 2015
  52. ↑ 52.0 52.1 52.2 Minnesota Environmental Quality Board, "Guide to Minnesota's Environmental Rules," accessed April 6, 2015
  53. ↑ Eco-USA.net, "Minnesota Environmental Organizations," accessed November 12, 2014
Retrieved from "https://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php?title=Historical_Minnesota_environmental_information,_1973-2016&oldid=10218208"