On May 20, 2014, the Minnesota Legislature created an Aquatic Invasive Species (AIS) fund to help communities battle invasive species in their waterways.

 

The fund distributes $10 million a year at the county level. The bill specifically states the proceeds must be used to prevent the introduction or limit the spread of AIS at all access sites within the county.

 

The amount of funding each county receives is based on a formula using the number of public accesses and the number of boat parking spaces at those public accesses.

 

Sherburne County’s funding for 2015 is $72,960, based on 16 trailer launches and 142 trailer parking spaces at those launches. The county received its first half payment July 20 and will receive the second payment Dec. 26.

 

Last November, Sherburne Soil & Water Conservation District (SWCD) began developing a plan to use those funds to prevent and control AIS in the county.

county board during a  meeting in early July. 

 

The plan lists a number of water bodies that were designated as infested by the DNR last October. The Mississippi River and Rum River both have Zebra Mussels.

 

Eurasian Milfoil has been found in Big Lake, Eagle Lake, Little Elk Lake, Mitchell Lake and Rush Lake.

 

In order to deal with AIS, the plan has been broken down into specific categories: Public Awareness/ Education, Early Detection and Rapid Response, and Inspection/Enforcement.

 

The education aspect will involve developing an informational webpage, inventorying and increasing signage at boat launches, implementing K-12 programming, hosting AIS identification and management workshops for lake associations and building relationships with lake service providers.

 

Early detection and rapid response will be phased in over time and subject to change. Initial goals will be developing a contact list for reporting new infestations, establishment of a zebra mussel monitoring program, hiring Conservation Corps Minnesota (CCM) to monitor for Eurasian Water Milfoil, developing a training program for field staff and interested parties for identifying native and AIS plants, and forming partnerships with local colleges for monitoring. SWCD will encourage volunteers to monitor for Zebra Mussels and attend required training sessions.

 

The plan will phase in inspections as the budget allows. Inspectors would be hired via a local company that has the capacity to cover hiring, training, equipment, coordinating and insurance for inspectors. The SWCD will encourage local interested parties to apply with the company.

 

For enforcement, Sherburne County currently has one water patrol deputy who spends approximately 15-20 hours a week on area lakes. Lakes with the most complaints get more coverage: Big Lake, Mitchell Lake, Eagle Lake and the Briggs Lake Chain. The main focus of the patrol is not AIS, but water safety and to ensure compliance with laws and ordinances.

 

The AIS plan recommends educating sheriff’s staff and trying to incorporate AIS inspections into existing patrol time. The water patrol could conduct  spot checks at launching and docking, and make periodic stops at lakes that do not get many complaints.

 

The proposed 2015 budget for the plan is $54,302, which includes $12,309 for program development, $21,620 for education and outreach; $5,400 for early detection and rapid response, $8,800 for inspections and enforcement and $3,000 for special projects.

 

Commissioner Ewald Petersen said he was approached by a two people who questioned whether AIS grant money should be used for water patrol.

 

“Both parties were very negative about it,” he said. “One of them suggested it was against the grant terms.”

 

He said the county already receives a Boat & Water grant to fund the water patrol.

 

“So the people that talked to me may be right that this would be double-dipping,” he said.

 

Commissioner Bruce Anderson said the Boat & Water Grant doesn’t cover AIS enforcement. But it’s an important part of the plan.

 

“Enforcement is going to be an issue at some point and these funds are given towards the enforcement end of it too,” he said. “Even with the amount you’ve proposed here, it’s not going to cover it. They’re not going to be at these accesses at all times. The fact is, when it’s not enforced there’s going to be reports to the sheriff’s office that people are not following the process. Who are they going to call? They’re going to call the sheriff’s office and they’re going to have to respond.”

 

Determan acknowledged there was a lot of discussion in the task force about that aspect of the plan.

 

“Everyone agreed there had to be some type of enforcement, but how it was funded, there was some disagreement,” she said. “At this point in our work plan we’re not funding any additional sheriff time to do inspections or enforcement because it was so controversial. But we do feel further discussions should be had on how that’s going to look in the future.”

 

She said some counties actually delegate all the money to the sheriff’s department for enforcement and inspections. 

 

Commissioner Felix Schmiesing said the bulk of the funding up-front isn’t for enforcement.

 

“I think initially, the process is going to be more about education, and eventually it will probably move more towards enforcement,” he said.

 

Determan agreed.

 

“The plan will be quite dynamic  because we will be learning,” she said. “We’ve never been involved with AIS before, so things will likely change over the years.”