Potato industry urges local water districts to fix gaps in Michigan screening tool

Kelly Turner, representing the Michigan Potato Industry Commission, told the House Agriculture Committee that Michigan’s potato sector is facing growing tension with the state’s water‑assessment system and proposed locally governed "water districts" to fill data and process gaps.

Turner said Michigan grows nearly 2,000,000,000 pounds of potatoes across categories and that the industry contributes about $2.5 billion annually and supports roughly 22,000 jobs. "We are Michigan's second largest commodity, so we grow 1.9, almost 2,000,000,000 pounds of potatoes in all categories," Turner said, using those figures to underscore the economic stakes for growers and processors.

The nut graf: Industry witnesses argued the Michigan Water Withdrawal Assessment Tool (MiWAT) functions as intended as a statewide screening system but lacks the local monitoring data and modeling capacity needed for site‑level regulatory decisions. They proposed creating water districts that would pool grower monitoring data, fund third‑party hydrogeologists to build local models and establish an arbitrationlike appeals board to reduce costly litigation and site‑specific review expenses.

Turner described how MiWAT was designed "as an early warning system" and that it flags areas for site‑specific review, but does not currently incorporate locally collected data. "The screening tool does not use local data," she said, and growers who opt for a site‑specific review can spend "80 to a $120,000" to collect additional information only to have EGLE evaluate it using the same system and sometimes deny the withdrawal with no administrative appeal other than going to court.

The industry witnesses said that lack of local monitoring has created a "checkbook" dynamic in MiWAT: the tool logs withdrawals but has no mechanism to add new recharge data or other local inputs, which can make previously permitted users appear to be withdrawing from a depleted account. Turner said Michigan now has almost 7,000 irrigation wells but only about 30 monitoring wells in agricultural areas, a shortfall that hampers accurate local assessment.

To address the gap, Turner proposed water districts where local users would collect and pool monitoring data, work with independent hydrogeologists to build local models, and include EGLE on the coordinating board. "EGLE also sits on that board and has input from day 1, and EGLE retains the ability to make the final decision," Turner said. She added the plan would include a third‑party appeals board that could review disputed decisions and act as an arbitration mechanism to avoid court.

Committee members pressed technical and policy details. One committee member disputed the "checkbook" analogy by noting the Great Lakes Compact allows in‑watershed returns (for example, discharges), and Turner replied that those returns are not reflected in the screening model. Another member raised the economic and infrastructure consequences, citing municipalities that have had to build pipelines after the tool indicated insufficient local capacity.

Growers also raised related threats to productive farmland. Dennis, president of Potato Growers of Michigan, said large‑scale solar leases can be "locally very disruptive" because growers often rent land and have substantial investments in storage facilities. "We've got several million dollars invested in the storage facility that's not paid for, and if it's not full, it's not gonna get paid for," Dennis said, adding processors may refuse potatoes grown on formerly solarized ground because of foreign objects left in soil after solar installations are removed.

The witnesses raised labor concerns as well. They described increased reliance on the H‑2A guest‑worker system for surge labor during harvests, noting the program is costly and administratively complex but increasingly necessary because many local applicants do not respond to postings.

Turner said the industry has presented the water‑district concept to commodity groups, environmental organizations, EGLE and the state Water Use Advisory Council (in early February), and that feedback has been largely constructive. The team plans "lunch and learn" sessions in Lansing and three on‑farm visits over the summer to demonstrate how local monitoring and models would work.

No formal action was taken by the committee during the meeting. Turner and growers invited lawmakers to follow the outreach sessions and on‑farm demonstrations to see the proposed approach in practice.

Ending: The committee adjourned with the chair excusing absent members; industry representatives invited members to a post‑meeting reception.