Laserfiche WebLink
« i"^U lid «li..».i=»i ddd iddbdndrr piddlitB .nd iho« dp id 1Jd« buic tonm: <br />“ EnT^f h«/“SSrcS ffl ar« water bodies Lo.hering aquatic life, change the aquatic <br />en^Vonment by liiidng lifht penetration of the water, and result in the transmission of totdns to area <br />water bodies. <br />The Twin Cities Metropolitan Area is fortunate to have an abundance of lakes and rivers. Tb«e <br />^ter bodies provide the area with recreational, aesthetje and educat.onal beneftts envied by other <br />wr "of the United States. Prescrvau'on of these water bod,« and the associated wtidlife habitat n <br />J major component of the CounciTs planning framewort Measur« to preserve and enhance he <br />environment can be found in all of the Councils major system and policy plans. Policy 7 of the <br />MDIF states that the Metropolitan Council; <br />supports the maintenance of erMronmental quality throughout the region and will support <br />programs or strategies to maintain or improve the natural environment (page 16). <br />Reducing nonpoint source pollution to area water bodies has a number^ of positive outcom«. <br />Lduced nonpoint source pollution has an overall positive effect on the environment, mproves the <br />water quality in lakes, wetlands and floodplains and allows for flshable and swtmable water bodie-. <br />Water resource management has historically focused on point sources such as wastewater treat.ment <br />plants and industrial facilities. Efforts to reduce pollution from point sources has been <br />Nonpoint source pollution abatement is Lhe next challenge that must be ad-ressed to ensure that <br />water bodies in this metropolitan area arc protected. <br />Existing Legislative and Policy Structure For Addressing the Nonpoint Source Pollution Problem <br />The Minnesota Legislature <br />Two pieces of legislation have been passed in the lait decade that set a framework for addressing the <br />nonpoint source pollution issue. However, it will take several years to put this framework in place <br />and wiU require local governments to extensively revise their surface water management plans ana <br />• • •activmes. <br />Watershed planning legislation <br />In !982 legislation was passed recuiriog Watershed Management Organizations (WMO) to prepare <br />w'atc.'shcd plans that addressed water quality issues. Under this legislation each \VMO is to prepare <br />a pla.1 that states objectives and policies for water quality and identifies alternatives for irapro^g <br />water quality and methods of implementation. These plans are to be reviewed by the hietropo itan <br />Council "in the same manner and with the same authority and effect as provided <br />review of the comprehensive plans of local government um'ts" (Minnesota Statutri, section . <br />subd. 8 (1990)). The Council is required to determine whether the watc.'shed pian conforms witn ine <br />management objectives and target pollution loads stated in the Council’s water roources p an <br />prepared pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, section 473.157.