Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutNatural Resources July 21 19982 3 4 5 6 7 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL Natural Resources Committee Special Meeting July 21, 1998 The meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Committee Chair Connie Hoag at the Lynden Community Center, 401 Grover Street, Lynden, Washington. Also Present: Tom Brown Absent: Kathy Sutter DISCUSSION REGARDING THE DRAFTING OF A MANURE MANAGEMENT ORDINANCE (AB98 -254) Hoag thanked everyone for showing up and made introductions. 19 George Boggs, Whatcom Conservation District Coordinator, stated that in August 1997 20 the State Department of Health (DOH) downgraded a portion of Portage Bay, due to excess fecal 21 coliform for safe shellfish consumption. That triggered events to develop a response strategy. 22 Farmers were identified as a source of fecal coliform. The Conservation District was asked to 23 facilitate a solution. They called together all involved parties. At the first meeting, the attendees 24 agreed that no one source of fecal coliform would take precedence. They sought to identify the 25 most significant sources and the sources that they would have a chance of doing something 26 about. They identified dairy waste, stormwater runoff, sewage treatment plants, and failing 27 onsite septic systems. Strategies were developed to deal with each source. Each agency took 28 action to address the sources. As a consequence of the strategic development, they will address 29 certain practices that are the most risky for potential contribution of fecal coliform in order to 30 develop an ordinance that is not punitive, but cooperative to lower levels. Hearings were held on 31 Portage Bay and Drayton Harbor strategies and districts. Ordinances were adopted. This 32 ordinance arises out of that recommendation that came forward from the response team. The 33 County Council asked the Conservation District to bring back the Closure Response Team to 34 create an ordinance to address the problems. 35 36 John Gillies, Natural Resources Conservation Services (MRCS), gave technical 37 background and a "photo tour" of the County. The focus is on application of manure on bare 38 ground and corn stubble in the fall through spring, following harvest. He presented a slide show 39 of areas in the County. They are not just focusing on big gun sprinklers, but on all application 40 methods. The application of manure under these conditions is considered non - agronomic. Some 41 of the photographs were aerial. They are dealing with a lot of fallow corn ground. Corn is not 42 the only crop that can create problems. There is over twenty years' worth of data regarding corn 43 land. In 1982, census of agriculture showed 2500 acres planted to silage corn in Whatcom 44 County. This year there are 15,000 acres. They are dealing with soils that are unsuited for Special Natural Resources Committee, 7/21/98, Page 1 I heavy applications of water or manure. There is a shallow groundwater table. Even if they try to 2 apply upland or by other means, there are adverse soil limitations preventing good agronomic 3 use of manure in the wintertime. Puddling and run -off occurs and runs into the watershed. 4 Conditions carry lots of bacteria, nutrients, and sediment that contaminate Portage Bay. Even if 5 it is not bare ground in adverse conditions, there can be run -off. A very flat field with good 6 cover still runs off into the ditch. Heavy enough rains will exceed the infiltration amount and 7 result in runoff. There are high -risk areas, such as flood plains, that flood annually. Cover crops 8 will need the nutrients that the applied nitrogen will supply. They would have to look at a soil 9 test to determine whether nitrates are needed in the soil, particularly for corn ground. For 10 residual nitrate nitrogen, corn crops are not efficient users of nitrogen. Some newer equipment, 11 such as manure injector would be acceptable for use in applying manure. It gets nutrients in 12 place and they are absorbed within an hour. However, there is the same issue of whether or not 13 the crop needs the nutrients. Areas north of Lynden are on glaciated terraces with an unconfined 14 aquifer groundwater at 30 feet to 10 feet to the surface are not set up for too much nitrates. If 15 they apply excess nitrogen in the fall, then it will end up in the groundwater. That has been 16 proven over and over. He advocates adequate storage, use of a cover crop, and staying off the 17 ground in the winter months. He could not advocate the agronomic use of applying manure in 18 the fall. 19 20 Gillies presented overhead projector information. He presented an example of a schedule 21 of a field crop nutrient management plan. They try to account for the use of nutrients by the crop 22 with a "nutrient budget." Organic matter in the soil is going to provide about, on average, 100 23 lbs. It may be as high as 200 lbs. if the application has been heavy in the past. The problem 24 with dairy manure application is excess potassium. Potassium doesn't leach like nitrogen. 25 Excess potassium is not an environmental problem, it is a feed value concern. They must budget 26 nutrients. To do that, they can create a liquid manure application schedule. More manure would 27 be applied earlier in the year. Most of the cover crop grass growth is in the first few cuttings. 28 That's when a farmer should apply the manure. The same thing goes with corn. He displayed a 29 sample schedule management plan. The hope is that manure goes out prior to planting, then at 30 sidedress time, they would take a nitrate test to determine what is there. Corn sucks up nitrogen 31 in July. That's when the nitrogen should be available. There is no sense to apply earlier or after 32 the crop has been cut. He showed a graphic table that is a preliminary tool to determine the fate 33 of nitrogen. It is approximately called Nitrate Leaching Economic Evaluation Program 34 (NLEAP). It is based on a well- documented model and is used at field level. Months' 35 precipitation minus runoff minus consumptive use is expressed in inches. Soil has an available 36 water holding capacity (AWHC) of almost 6 inches in the 30 -inch root zone. The root zone is in 37 terms of nutrients moving through zone. He gave figures for nutrients in the root zone through 38 the different months of the year. Precipitation drops off in March. They are not out of the root 39 zone until November. In the late fall months, the nutrients are out of the soil the same month 40 they are put in the ground. This is the problem with injecting manure on corn stubble to avert 41 the run off condition. It is difficult for technicians to advocate fall application on bare ground. 42 43 Richard Grout, State Department of Ecology (DOE), stated that the evidence is clear 44 about nitrates in groundwater. The DOE has found increasing nitrate levels in wells near Sumas. Special Natural Resources Committee, 7/21/98, Page 2 I The nitrate level is going up faster. It is significant for a public water system. The State law 2 allows 10 mg per liter of nitrate. When it exceeds that level of contaminants, a public water 3 system can't distribute water. The DOE did a study and found that 53 of 248 (21 %) were over 4 the 10 mg /liter level and another 98 (39 %) were over 5 mg /liter. In most of the wells that exceed 5 10 grams per liter, the up- gradient land use was associated with dairy or raspberry. This is 6 consistent with results from sampling being done by DOE and others, and it is consistent with 7 sampling for the EDB contamination area west of Lynden. They just completed a year's worth 8 of sampling on the Nooksack River. Creeks and tributaries in the areas of agricultural areas that 9 drain into the Nooksack River have high fecal coliform levels. 10 11 Bob Wiesen, 3314 Douglas Road, Ferndale, questioned whether there has been any 12 seasonal testing scheduled and whether there have been variations in the nitrates. Grout stated 13 that some of the sampling that has been done is one -time sampling and some has been on going. 14 Even one -time sampling looks at work from other researchers. There is an increasing trend in 15 too many areas. 16 17 Gillies, stated that there are four years of data on residual nitrates in the soil. There is 18 variability due to weather conditions. 19 20 Grout took the position that this ordinance is not enough to protect the water. It may 21 show some improvement. They are willing to try and continue to do monitoring to see if it 22 makes a difference. 23 24 Hoag stated that there are three main problems. One is increasing nitrate contamination 25 in the ground water. Sumas is approaching its legal limit on its supply. The SPLASH study in 26 Nebraska has high levels of nitrates in every well. Farmers have to measure the nitrates in the 27 water and add that to the nitrates in the manure to figure their accounts before they apply 28 anything. Whatcom County wants to address the problem now, before things get that extreme. 29 The second problem is that the law requires the County Council to do something about the 30 shellfish bed closures, to have a strategy response team, to put together a clean water district, and 31 begin activities that will solve the problem. This is only one of many things to do to try and 32 solve the problem with the shellfish beds. The manure ordinance was one item that came 33 forward. The third problem is with the Endangered Species Act (ESA). There is a proposed 34 listing for the Chinook. The County has 12 or 18 months to prove that the County can handle 35 this on a local level, or the National Marine Fisheries Services (NMFS) will step in with 300- 36 foot buffers on streams. The County is trying to go for 50 -foot buffers before the winter season, 37 to show through winter that the counts have dropped. Those are the three things motivating the 38 creation of this ordinance. WE 40 Boggs went through the ordinance. The Portage Bay Closure Response Team went 41 through the ordinance. The Department of Ecology has conducted a Total Maximum Daily Load 42 (TMDL) study over the past year. It has sampled both the main stem of the river and tributaries. 43 Every month showed levels of bacteria in excess of what are permitted by the clean water law. 44 The two highest loading times were in November and March. This ordinance tries to address Special Natural Resources Committee, 7/21/98, Page 3 I that without creating difficulty for farmers. The first section of ordinance requires 50 -foot 2 buffers of drainage ditches. The Critical Areas Ordinance (CAO) already addresses rivers and 3 streams. This includes ditches. The ordinance requires buffer of 50 feet or a provision to come 4 up with a management plan with the Conservation District, so that a management plan could be 5 developed to take into account unique circumstances. The Conservation District would look at 6 application method, soils, and slope. Flexibility is built in. 7 8 Boggs continued to state that the next item is to not spread liquid manure on corn or bare 9 ground from September 1 through March 15. If liquid manure is applied during that time period, 10 it would be washed off and end up in the beds or carried with the rainfall and leached into the 11 groundwater. The most significant impact is on the load of bacteria in the shellfish beds. 12 13 (Clerk's Note: End of tape one, side A.) 14 15 The third item would enforce the same penalty as the CAO, up to a $1,000 fine per 16 incident. Repeated incidents would be assessed successive fines. A cease and desist order 17 would also be issued. A violation of that would have a penalty as well. The penalty mechanism 18 provides that the producer could appeal to the County. The County could set policy with regard 19 to the handling of any fines. 20 21 Hoag commented that this meeting is because Council Members want input from 22 farmers. They have a problem that needs help to solve in a way that is not unduly burdensome to 23 farmers. She asked that they please submit suggestions and concerns. 24 25 Brown had two questions. He questioned how many farmers apply to bare ground or 26 corn stubble in the winter. (No one responded.) He also questioned how many farmers have 27 facilities capable of holding manure through the winter if they enact the ordinance. He wanted 28 to know what the effects to the farmers would be. 29 30 Boggs stated that the grass crop would have to be vigorously growing by September 1. If 31 there was a cover crop and a farmer wanted to apply manure, then he could get a management 32 plan that looked at different aspects of the farm to get an exception from the ordinance. 33 34 Dick Benjung, citizen, questioned whether a cover crop counts as bare ground, and if it 35 doesn't, then he assumed that any ground with corn cannot have manure applied to it after 36 September 1. 37 38 Gillies responded that if there is a vigorous crop of grass, then data shows that there is 39 plenty of nitrogen in the ground to grow the crop out. The ordinance provides for an exemption 40 to prohibition if there is a management plan. The farmer would bring a soil test showing a 41 deficiency of nutrients for that crop. 42 43 Brown questioned how many farmers have the ability to store manure through the winter. 44 Special Natural Resources Committee, 7/21/98, Page 4 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 (Clerk's Note: Less than half to half of those present responded that they would have the capability to store through the winter.) Hoag stated that the definitions outline corn ground. She read the definition into the record. Roger Bajema, citizen, stated that the application of a fine layer of manure would not get in the run-off. A fine layer of manure promotes greener grass in February and March. There is a difference between a fine application and a heavy application. The problem is in a late harvest, the lagoon builds up and they have to apply a heavy layer of manure to get it on fast. This year it won't be a problem. The issue should be testing parts per million or billion, then they should talk about how much manure would be allowed on. Hoag stated that if they are putting on manure after the corn is taken out, then it will go to groundwater. If one can convince NRCS that it will not cause a problem, then it will be acceptable in the management plan. Bajema stated that NRCS already said that they will not allow any application. Gillies stated that they are not specifically targeting grass. They are targeting corn stubble. If a farmer puts out manure and excess nitrogen, then it is not an agronomic practice. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) expects nutrients to be used in an agronomic method. The plan should address the storage required. They should be applying manure in a pre - planned manner in March, April, and maybe May. Bajema stated that later months could be a good time for cover crops. Gillies stated that the data shows that there were 300 lbs. of nitrate nitrogen per acre after the corn was harvested. There were too many fields that had high nitrate levels. Corn is the culprit. Bajema questioned what would happen if grass grows all summer, then they cut the corn crop. Gillies stated that is a catch crop and is a good practice. But they don't need extra nitrogen to do that. Bajema stated that nitrogen happens naturally without application. Gillies stated that the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) looked at many sources of nitrogen. He is talking about what is put on by man. Hoag stated that they are not trying to eliminate nitrogen in the groundwater, they are trying to keep it down to safe drinking water levels. They are trying to stop the application of nitrogen where there is already too much in the soil. Percy Hoekema, 7448 Emerson Road, Everson, questioned where the March 15 date came from. He wanted his new seeding in by February. Canadian friends have a problem Special Natural Resources Committee, 7/21/98, Page 5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 because they couldn't apply manure. There was an early spring this year. The date should be flexible. Also, he questioned the amount of historical groundwater that exists in the County. Gillies stated that his is talking about the indicators of water quality problems. There are more cows on less acreage. The shellfish beds are dead. That is an indicator of bacteria getting in the water. One cow produces as much waste as 25 people. With 60,000 cows in the County, that creates a problem. Even if 90% of the manure is treated well, the 10% is still a big problem. Hoekema stated that the ordinance eliminates the small producer who doesn't have storage capacity. Gillies stated that if there is a management plan, they could make an exemption. The ordinance allows for exceptions for small dairies. Their cows don't produce enough to cause a problem. It will allow for them to spread the manure. Hoag stated that the majority of the very small producers don't grow much corn, so this wouldn't affect them very much. Dwayne Molendyk, 1214 Hampton Road, Lynden, stated that the EPA should not check up on the farmers. He was concerned how long it would take to receive the management plan. Hoag stated that DOE will be the enforcement agency. Also, the Portage Bay Response mentioned County enforcement. Gillies stated that there are too many plans submitted recently to approve all of the plans. Hoag stated that there are farms that have gone out of business that have available lagoons. They may be able to truck manure to other lagoons. That is better than getting fined. Sharon Deming stated that her family well was contaminated and became ill with serious illnesses. They couldn't find the source of contamination and had to give up the farm and they lost everything. Illnesses can happen very quickly. When the EPA determines maximum contamination levels for drinking water, it's because they've done studies and a certain percentage of the population has serious illnesses. They are not contamination levels that are set randomly. Coliform bacteria are only tracer bacteria, and their presence means that there is something else in the water. Boiling water with high coliform could poison water. 15th. Hoekema stated that the dates should be flexible. He liked to seed grass on February Hoag asked for Gillies' input. Gillies stated that the risk factor is less to apply in March than in February. March is a dryer month. There may be an out, which may fit under an approved plan. A formula called T Sum 200 looks at the climate for the specific year. The formula for the growing season could be written in. Special Natural Resources Committee, 7/21/98, Page 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 Hoag pointed out that these provisions apply if there is not an approved plan. Gillies stated that there is a performance requirement in the management plan. Molendyk questioned why they don't follow what the bill that was signed by the governor would require. Gillies stated that SB 6161 is not specific enough. In addition, they don't have to be in place until the year 2003, which is not close enough to save shellfish beds. He suggested targeting bad behavior. Hoag questioned whether it would work with an exemption clause to approve if weather is good on approval of NRCS. Gillies stated that this could be discussed. There is a provision in the plan to tailor to be site specific. Mid - February is an early time. Mid -March is average. Brown stated that they could advertisement an adjustment of the dates. Also, he questioned whether it was possibility to not have a full management plan, but a quick plan. Gillies stated yes, they can do quick plan that is site specific. Hoag questioned whether an exemption would be better in the ordinance or through the management plan. Gillies stated that it would be better to be in the ordinance with a reference to T sum 200. Deming stated that groundwater contamination is not isolated to the property that is not doing best management practices. There is not enough farmland and too many cows. There are other populations in the County besides farmers that are getting sick. John Feenstra, citizen, stated that no one is intentionally polluting the groundwater. They cannot count on the weather. Lagoons fill up if there is a lot of rain. to do. Hoag stated that there is a problem that needs to be solved and that is what they are trying (Clerk's Note: End of tape one, side B) Brown questioned the process and cost of building a lagoon. Gilles stated that it would cost approximately $7,000, which is on the low side. It is around $22 per 1,000 gallons of storage. The permitting process timeframe is approximately 4 -5 weeks if the farmer works through the NRCS. There is a lot of regulation and standards have tightened. Casey Lankhaar questioned whether the 50 -foot buffer is for corn or grass ground. Boggs stated that the CAO requires 50 -foot buffers along non - salmonid bearing streams. The proposed buffer would require a buffer 50 away from drainage ditches. There are provisions to get closer with a management plan. Special Natural Resources Committee, 7/21/98, Page 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 Lankhaar questioned whether the Council would be willing to lower the tax on the portion of the property within a buffer. 50 feet. Hoag stated that they can still farm in the buffer, they just can't apply manure within the Lankhaar stated that grass does not grow without manure. Hoag clarified that the ordinance only applies if there is not a management plan. Brown stated that if the ground can't be used, then lowering the tax is a legitimate request. However, there are already enough nitrate nutrients in the ground to not have to apply anything in the winter. They have to keep it out of the streams. Hoag stated that she was in favor of lower taxes for farmland because farmland uses far fewer services. However, fecal coliform is in the water, which is an illegal pollution on the part of the farmer. They will not lower property taxes to keep them in compliance with the law. Brown stated there are plans that recommend other crops be planted adjacent to critical areas. Lankhaar questioned what DOE wants. Grout stated that DOE recommended an outright prohibition of application in November and December, in addition to the provision on corn ground and bare ground. They will go along with this, do monitoring, and see what happens. Brown stated that an injector system would be acceptable to use and there are methods to apply manure that would be acceptable. There are a lot of variables. The farmers should try to get a site - specific plan. His concern is that there is not enough holding space and farmers have not had enough notification. Gillies stated that the buffer is the last resort to capture nutrients. If there are the right conditions, they can get pretty close to the ditch. They don't want a gun throwing manure into the ditch. The purpose is to make specific plans that work for the farmer and the environment. Bob VanWeerdhuizen, 7026 Noon Road, Everson, questioned whether the Conservation District would be renting the land that is in the buffers. Boggs responded that they might be able to rent the buffer land. They are talking to the legislature and need to address those issues. The Conservation Commission was able to get the legislature to put up money to lease ground adjacent to streams, ditches, and rivers for 150% - 170% of the rental values. They encourage and help subsidize that sort of activity. If they are asking the farmer to bear the burden for the benefit of society, then they have to deal with that aspect. Special Natural Resources Committee, 7/21/98, Page 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 VanWeerdhuizen stated that they don't want to do that because it reduces the amount of land to put manure on. There is already not enough land to apply all of the manure. He would support being exempt from the tax role of they lose that land. Bajema stated that they are not trying to pollute the land. They know that if they over apply the manure, then they won't get a good crop. Farmers don't like hard and fast numbers. He questioned the application period in grassland. His concern is that there must be a working relationship between government and the farmers. It needs to be variable. Hoag stated that is the purpose, to get a management plan. This ordinance is not talking about applying to grass. The biggest problem is manure application to corn stubble and bare ground. Gillies stated that they want to operate so that the plans are site specific. He fought hard to make a rule to not pump manure on corn stubble. All studies say not to apply manure on corn or bare ground in the fall. There will not be any support in the scientific community for doing this. Sherm Polinder, 670 Polinder Road, Lynden, assured the audience that the County Council members are not against farming and dairymen. The Council came here willingly. They should thank them for coming out and listening to farmers. Larry Stap, 9710 Assink Road, Lynden, questioned whether there was a memorandum of agreement (MOA) for enforcement through DOE. Hoag stated that they do not have one at this time. There is talk of pursuing that, but nothing has been done. Stap stated that the Council is trying to fix a problem that another government agency created. He began dairying in 1979. Milk prices are same as twenty years ago, which is why there are fewer farms and more cows. Hoag stated that SB 6161 assigned funding for two inspectors for DOE for Whatcom County. Price fixing on milk does not work. The County Council can't do anything about that. Brown stated that the preliminary data about the influx of dairies relocating to eastern Washington and Idaho shows that problems are arising in those areas and limitations will soon be put in. It is not the Council's intent to create a hardship, but this must be figured out or buffers will be wider than 50 feet. Management plans must be in place. That is the key. Hoag stated that documents are available on the Portage Bay Closure Response Strategy, the CAO, and the TMDL study. ADJOURN Special Natural Resources Committee, 7/21/98, Page 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 The meeting was adjourned at 9:00 p.m. Jill Nixon, Minutes Transcription ATTEST: Dana Brown- Davis, Council Clerk WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON Connie Hoag, Council Member Special Natural Resources Committee, 7/21/98, Page 10