balmm currents
Basin
BALMM Meeting:
There will be no regular BALMM meeting in May. However,
a small group will be meeting on May 21,
COWS AND TROUT: It was a sunny Tuesday afternoon. Larry Gates of the Minnesota DNR waded upstream in Sugarloaf Creek, scanning the stream bed with an electroshocker with the left hand, netting the occasional fish with the right. The mid-section of the stream that runs through Ralph Lentz's pasture had narrowed over the years, and deepened to 2-3 feet, thanks to a rotational grazing system that allows cows access to the stream only once every two years - just enough to manage the grass cover. "Disturbance is good," emphasized Lentz, pointing to the grassy stream corridor sloping down to the water's edge, a stark contrast to the segment just downstream, where a tree canopy kept the ground bare next to the stream.
"We've got a brook trout," announced Gates, climbing
up the bank to show the specimen to a small group which had gathered to learn
how cows and trout go hand-in-hand through rotational grazing. That was more
evidence that the native species was now naturally reproducing - the ultimate
goal of trout stream management in southeast
Instead of partying, we hopped in the back of his pickup and stopped at several winter feeding sites to show the MPCA (that would be me) that a quasi manure pack (some grass poked through here and there) isn't always such a bad thing - can be good, in fact. Lentz deliberately moves the winter feeding sites around the pastures to distribute the manure, which improves soil quality and provides nutrients to the estimated 50 species of grass that feed his cattle during the growing season.
Manure from pasture-fed cattle is completely different than the pit manure produced by cattle fed a grain/hay mix in confinement, Lentz emphasized. While the latter tends to be fluid, manure produced from cattle on a pasture feeding site leaves a mat of cellulose on the soil surface which, when dry, acts as a sponge to absorb rainfall. "Very, very little manure actually runs off this site," Lentz emphasized. To prove his point, he pointed to where dark green grass, fed by manure nitrogen, gave way to lighter green grass.
The main point of the tour, which Lentz and Gates made again and again, was that the small amount of manure runoff that might reach the stream from a well-managed rotationally grazed pasture pales in comparison to the runoff that would result under conventional grazing or, still worse, conventional row-cropping. The drive to the Lentz farm, along County Road 9 and 15, through Goodhue to Lake City, drove home the point. Expansive fields newly planted to corn showed nary a shred of soybean residue from last year's crop to hold back soil erosion, waterways were few and far between and often seemed to have been tilled thinner and shorter over the years. There were also fields where erosion was being held in check by conservation structures and reduced or no-till -- but they seemed to be in the minority along this particular route.
The result of excessive tillage stared us in the face toward the end of the tour, as Lentz drove us to his property line. A gully cut deep into the field of newly seeded barley was the cumulative result, Lentz said, of the shift from grass-based livestock farming to corn and soybean production in the watershed upstream of his valley farm. Years ago, the milk hauler made 40 stops at small dairy farms in the area - now, not a single dairy farm is left along the route. As it often does, the conversation turned to farm bill incentives favoring row crops, the lack of conservation compliance enforcement, etc. Yet the sun shone on the May-green leaves of the chestnut tree in the farm yard, the shaggy dog leaped out of the pickup smiling and hope pranced like a spring calf on the teeming hills.
WATCH WISCONSIN: A co-worker in the office here has farmland across the river near Galesville, Wisconsin. A couple of weeks he announced that the farmer who rents his extremely erosive land had given up the moldboard plow and had shifted to no-till, or reduced till, this year. The county must have passed a law banning the plow, he thought.
Not quite, but almost. It turns out that this incident - and many like it - resulted from implementation of Wisconsin's new Agricultural Nonpoint Performance Standards and Prohibitions. (There are also urban and construction nonpoint performance standards.) Details can be found on the Wisconsin DNR website: <http://www.dnr.state.wi.us/org/water/wm/nps/pdf/ag/strategy151.pdf>
The agricultural performance standards are intended to protect water quality by minimizing the amount of soil erosion, nutrients from manure and croplands, and other nonpoint source pollutants that enter waterways.
o Sheet, rill and wind erosion: All cropped fields must meet the tolerable (T) soil erosion rate established for that soil, using RUSLE2 to estimate soil loss.
o Manure Storage Facilities: Existing facilities that are failing or leading and that pose an imminent threat to public health, fish and aquatic life must be upgraded, replaced, or properly abandoned.
o Clean Water Diversions: Runoff must be diverted away from contacting feedlots, manure storage areas, and barnyards located in water quality management areas (300 feet from a stream 1,000 feet from a lake, or area sensitive to groundwater contamination) or areas upgradient of private wells.
o Nutrient Management: Agricultural operations applying nutrient to agricultural fields must do so according to a manure management plan.
o Manure Management Prohibitions include no overflow of storage facilities, no unconfined manure piles in a water quality management area, no direct runoff from feedlots or stored manure into state waters, and no unlimited livestock access to waters of the state in locations where high concentrations of animals prevent the maintenance of adequate or self-sustaining sod cover.
Authors of the legislation intend that local units of government (Land Conservation Committees and Departments) will take the lead role by identifying implementation and compliance strategies in their Land and Water Resource Management Plans. The statewide implementation strategy also includes information and education activities, and procedures fore determining compliance, and for securing funding and technical assistance to help farmers to meet performance standards.
If any cropland is meeting a cropland performance standard on or after the effective date of the standard, it must continue to be met by the current and subsequent owners and operators of the land, regardless of whether cost-sharing is available.
A landowner or operator of "existing" cropland (currently cropped, not in compliance with standards), must comply with pertinent performance standards, provided that 70% cost-sharing has been made available to implement needed improvements (except where BMPs and corrective measures do not involve eligible costs).
If a landowner refuses to comply, a notice of violation letter is sent to initiate enforcement, which may be undertaken by the state, through county ordinances which have incorporated the standards, through financial sanctions available through state programs, or through the local District Attorney.
CROP RESIDUE TRANSECT SURVEY TIPS:
-- Brad Carlson, Regional Extension Educator, Faribault. 507-332-6165
As a co-coordinator of the Karst Campaign I would like to spend a minute discussing the Tillage Transect Survey. The Karst Campaign has the overall objective of the improvement of water resources in Southeast Minnesota through the promotion and adoption of best management practices. As with all publicly funded projects, this project comes with the expectation of showing results. That is where the tillage transect survey comes in. We need to be collecting some data if we are to ever show results. I know that there are some shortcomings of the tillage transect survey, but it is still valuable because we have a baseline of data already established, and it is one of the only efforts of its kind to comprehensively evaluate the whole of the Southeast, even if it is only for the issue of tillage practices.
There are several quality control items that are encouraged if the survey is to have good data. First, a team should be conducting the survey. A minimum of two people, preferably three, provides extra sets of eyes to keep evaluations more accurate. It is important that the team does the entire survey (as opposed to having multiple groups each take part of the county) so that there is consistency of data and evaluations. Next, the team should make a few physical measurements throughout the survey to make sure your assessments haven't "drifted."
Here are a couple of tips for making the survey go faster and easier. First, plan a route that takes you on lightly traveled, obscure roads. Heavy traffic does not mix well with this survey, which requires a stop every half-mile, and will lead to high stress levels. Second, GPS your points. This will not save time this year, but in following years you will be able to print out your stops on a map which can be read by the navigator. You may not think so, but this really speeds things up. Last, have a copy of last year's results. The navigator can read these and let the driver know when non-points are coming up, as well as double-checking last years crop to ensure you are at the right spot.
Depending on how the weather is in the next week or so crops may be out of the ground so that the survey can begin by late in the week of the 19th. The Karst Campaign will be providing some analysis and maps of the data when things are summarized. If you have questions, or anticipate problems in getting your counties survey completed please contact me and I would be happy to discuss it with you and help if I can.
FARM PROGRAM DEVELOPMENTS: Bill Hunt and Paul Flynn of the NRCS addressed the Grazing Lands Conservation Initiative in late April, outlining several interesting new conservation provisions of the federal farm program.
Technical Service Providers: Qualified individuals will be able to register on the internet if they have a 4-year degree plus one year experience, or equivalent experience. Individuals who are already certified for technical service delivery through the American Society of Agronomy, and other organizations, may already qualify to serve as Technical Service Providers through organizational agreements with NRCS. Interested? Just get on the internet site at
<http://www.nrcs.usda.gov>
and look under the Quick Access column on the left. At the bottom, click on Technical Service Provider Registry.
Allocating EQIP Funds: Two procedures will be used to distribute $14 million of EQIP funds in Minnesota before a September 30, 2003 deadline. Half this amount will be distributed through a local review process led by soil and water conservation districts who hold public meetings to determine priority issues. The other half will be distributed by area conservationists, who may also consult with regional organizations to establish priorities.
Feedlots and the Open Lot Agreement: Smaller feedlots now can use EQIP to fund a combination of filter strip and small manure storage structure, rather than total reliance on manure storage throughout the year to control runoff. This new provision could allow EQIP funds to be used for so-called "partial fixes" in the Open Lot Agreement.
NRCS CONSERVATION PRACTICE STANDARDS UNDER REVISION:
Loni Kemp, Senior Policy Analyst for the Minnesota Project, brings to our attention an opportunity to comment on conservation practice standards currently under revision. Some of them are particularly applicable to the BALMM area: sinkholes and sinkhole protection areas (Andy Hartman: 423-855-6605); Stream Crossings, Treatment of Poultry Litter with Alum (sounds interesting); Well Water Testing, Anaerobic Digesters, and Pasture and Hayland Planting.
A table listing the status of all conservation practice standards currently undergoing revision is located at <ftp://ftp.ftw.nrcs.usda.gov/pub/nhcp/status/>.
Every month a number of draft conservation practice standards are posted for NRCS review and comment. (See Federal Register Review, below, for draft practice standards that are available for review and comment by the general public.) Practice standards currently posted are located at <ftp://ftp.ftw.nrcs.usda.gov/pub/nhcp/stddevel/draft/>. These files are in Word for Windows 6.0/95 format.
Before revised or new conservation practice standards are added to the National Handbook of Conservation Practices, they are advertised in the Federal Register for review and comment by the general public. All standards currently under Federal Register review are located at <ftp://ftp.ftw.nrcs.usda.gov/pub/nhcp/fedregister/>.
Notice of Proposed Changes in the National Handbook of Conservation Practices --complete announcement at <http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/14mar20010800/edocket.access.gpo.gov/2003/03-10546.htm>
Summary: Notice is hereby given of the intention of the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) to issue a series of new or revised conservation practice standards in its National Handbook of Conservation Practices. These standards include: Constructed Wetland; Hedgerow Planting; Irrigation Water Management; Land Clearing; Land Reconstruction, Currently and Abandoned Mined Land; Pasture and Hayland Planting; Residue Management; Riparian Forest Buffer; Stream Habitat Improvement and Management; Tree/Shrub Establishment and Pruning; Upland Wildlife Habitat Management; Wetland Creation; Wetland Enhancement; Wetland Restoration; Wetland Wildlife Habitat Management; Windbreak/Shelterbelt Establishment; and Windbreak/Shelterbelt Renovation. These standards are used to convey national guidance in developing Field Office Technical Guide Standards used in the States and the Pacific Basin and Caribbean areas. NRCS State Conservationists and Directors for the Pacific Basin and Caribbean areas who choose to adopt these practices for use within their States/areas will incorporate them into Section IV of their Field Office Technical Guide. These practices may be used in resource management systems that treat highly erodible land, or on land determined to be wetland.
Effective Dates: Comments will be received on or before May 29, 2003. This series of new or revised conservation practice standards will be adopted after the close of the 30-day period.
UPPER MIDWEST GRAZING CONFERENCE: Coming to La Crosse July 29-31 is the Upper Midwest Grazing Conference, sponsored by Extension in the four-state area (Iowa, Illinois, Wisconsin, and Minnesota). Among the topics: "Remodeled Low-cost Parlour Tour", "Grazing Dairy Heifers", "Grazing around the World"; "Low-Cost Housing and Feeding Facilities", "Designing the Cow of the Future". Location is Best Western Midway Hotel. Conference web site is located at: <http://www.wisc.edu.cias.uppermidwest>
CREP APPLICATION AVAILABLE ONLINE: The Southeast Minnesota CREP application is now available online through the Upper Mississippi Basin Stakeholder Alliance at: http://www.umbsn.org/news/balmm_updates.shtml in pdf and doc(zip).
CLOUDS OF UNKNOWING: Pause to consider three views of the known -- and unknown.
The Unknown (from Slate.com, by Hart Seely)
- D.H. Rumsfeld
As we know,
There are known knowns.
There are things we know we know.
We also know
There are known unknowns.
That is to say
We know there are some things
We do not know.
But there are also unknown unknowns,
The ones we don't know
We don't know.
Will Rogers Aphorism:
"It's not what we don't know that hurts. It's what we know that ain't so."
John Milton's Paradise Lost
Sleep on, blest pair, and O yet happiest if ye seek no happier state, And know to know no more.
Send comments and items for future editions to:
balmm currents editor: Norman Senjem, MPCA
Phone: 507/280-3592
Fax: 507/280-5513
norman.senjem@pca.state.mn.us