Stay Curious. Stay Connected.
MailNewsletters♡Donate Now
Sign up
*Password must be at least 8 characters and contain one uppercase letter, one lowercase letter, one number and one symbol.
Already have an account?
By submitting, you consent that you are at least 18 years of age and to receive information about MPR's or APMG entities' programs and offerings. The personally identifying information you provide will not be sold, shared, or used for purposes other than to communicate with you about MPR, APMG entities, and its sponsors. You may opt-out at any time clicking the unsubscribe link at the bottom of any email communication. View our Privacy Policy.
Sign in to your profile
Forgot Password?
New to MPR News?
Welcome back
to news
for you
Reset Password

Enter the username on file and we'll send you a code to reset your password.

Still require assistance or not sure what your User Name is?
Welcome back
to news
for you
Email Verification

A verification code has been emailed to

Still awaiting the code?
Ground Level Blog
Dave Peters

Just how clear should central Minnesota lakes get?

Go Deeper.

Create an account or log in to save stories.

Log inCreate a free Account

Like this?

Thanks for liking this story! We have added it to a list of your favorite stories.

Show me!

When a group of central Minnesota residents got together in December to talk about the future, most agreed they wanted to see economic growth, particularly in manufacturing, tourism, agriculture and several other sectors.

They also agreed they wanted the quality of the region's abundant lakes to improve.

Interestingly, they divided on how much.

And that seems like a pretty central question for anyone trying to decide what Todd, Crow Wing, Cass, Wadena and Morrison counties should look like in 2035.

When 130 residents were asked at a meeting in Brainerd to choose between several scenarios regarding the region's 1,263 lakes, they were almost evenly divided between these two:

--A future involving investment in lake quality to achieve "significant" improvement in water clarity. Some 60 percent of lakes would improve.

-- A future in which lake clarity improved "slightly" and in which investments in water quality would be made in order to maintain economic activity.

Is there a trade-off between economic development and lake quality?

To Vicki Chepulis, a rural arts and culture consultant near Wadena, the environment takes precedent. She says in a Ground Level forum, "Economic gain for the short term, at the expense of our natural environment, will have long term costs that go far beyond profits."

In the same forum, Dave Johnson, retired from the construction industry, is nuanced. "Once we are able to articulate what is most important it should be easier to determine how we can accommodate growth and economic development. With give and take there should be room for both without violating what we've established as priorities."

So what IS most important to preserve and how does a region that clearly has a lot to protect accommodate development?

If you have thoughts, join the conversation here.