The Becker County Board of Commissioners voted on Dec. 31 to approve changes to the county's feedlot zoning ordinance that add site-specific requirements and an annual water-well monitoring program for newly permitted large feedlots.

Under the adopted language, new feedlots with more than 1,500 animal units (the threshold discussed at the hearing) will be required to install or identify an on-site monitoring well, obtain baseline water-quality data before operations begin, and submit annual samples for analysis to county and state agencies. The board also affirmed that the ordinance applies to new operations and does not retroactively require existing permitted feedlots to add monitoring wells.

Why it matters: Public commenters and planning commissioners spent substantial time debating setbacks, technical site review, soil and slope considerations, and who would pay for remediation if a feedlot polluted groundwater or surface water. County staff and the board included monitoring language and technical-review steps to address those concerns while preserving a conditional-use pathway for large operations so applications can be reviewed case-by-case.

Public comment and technical concerns: Multiple residents and environmental group representatives told commissioners the draft ordinance lacked sufficient site-specific requirements (for slope, soil, tile drainage and shore-impact areas) and requested baseline monitoring and clearer definitions of "shore impact zones." Farmers and the Becker County Farm Bureau argued that state regulations, NRCS/University of Minnesota best-management guidance, and existing permitting are already thorough and urged the county not to impose duplicative rules that would disadvantage local producers.

Specific provisions adopted at the meeting included: a requirement that monitoring wells be located on the feedlot property (recommended distance guidance discussed was 50'200 feet from primary confinement structures), baseline sampling prior to operation, annual sampling sent to state agencies and Becker County Soil and Water, and that any identified contamination be evaluated jointly by the Department of Agriculture, the MPCA, the DNR and county Soil and Water with recommendations returned to the Board of Commissioners. The board also discussed but did not finalize a numerical setback-from-residences standard; the record indicates that resident notification and conditional-use review are the primary mechanisms for neighbors to raise concerns.

Action taken: A motion to approve the feedlot ordinance amendments passed by voice vote. The motion was made and seconded by commissioners as recorded in the meeting minutes; the transcript indicates the board carried the motion by voice vote. The adopted language applies to new feedlots above the stated threshold and explicitly does not apply retroactively to existing permitted operations.

Next steps: County staff will incorporate the monitoring and baseline language into the published ordinance text and clarify placement and technical standards (including who will determine well placement and sampling frequency) in the administrative guidance accompanying the ordinance.