EAC-SC Agenda 06/27/2012 Agenda
Environmental Advisory Council LDC GMP Subcommittee
Wednesday,June 27, 2012, 9 a.m.
Conference Rooms 609/610, located at the Growth Management Division, 2800 North
Horseshoe Drive, Naples, FL, 34104
1. Welcome
2. Designate a Subcommittee member to take minutes
3. Signup sheet provided—please remind all attendees signup
4. Approval of Agenda
5. Approval of May 30, 2012 meeting minutes
6. Upcoming absences- Next Subcommittee meeting is scheduled for July 25, 2012
7. Roundtable discussion on items from minutes of last meeting
8. Other items for Discussion
9. Public comment
10.Adjournment
Environmental Advisory Council LDC GMP Subcommittee
Meeting minutes Wed. May 30, 2012
Meeting started at 9:05 am.
In attendance: Chairman Andrew Dickman, Vice chair Gina Downs, Judy Hushon.
Absent: David Bishof and Gary McNally
Also in attendance: Jeremy Franz, Conservancy; Brad Cornell, Audubon
Staff: Summer Araque, Jerry Kurtz
Motion to Approve Agenda made by Gina Downs, seconded by Judy Hushon.
Passed unanimously
Motion to Approve May 2, 2012 meeting minutes made by Andrew Dickman,
seconded by Gina Downs. Passed unanimously.
Upcoming absences: Judy Hushon may not be present at the June 26, 2012
scheduled subcommittee meeting
Andrew Dickman would like the process of the subcommittee to follow four
steps: 1-Topic; 2- Discussion; 3-Accompanying documentation; and 4- Make
bullet point recommendations or statements similar to white papers as a
summary of each topic. Input from all in attendance was encouraged.
Andrew Dickman was assigned Miami-Dade County for review. He looked at the
Southeast Regional Planning Council (identified as SFRPC). Compromises in
stormwater system and aging infrastructure problems related to the stormwater
system are identified by SFRPC. Eco-system problems and aquifer concerns.
Discussion ensued about the differences between east and west coast issues.
Brad Cornell suggested that the Everglades Plan to restore water flow will have a
minor impact on the Big Cypress area in Collier County but almost no impact
elsewhere in our county. Identifies Golden Gate Estates as the red flag area for
Collier County as buildup continues in that area. Concern that building criteria
addresses only a one in 10 year rain/flood occurrence.
Andrew agreed and suggested while the east coast is focusing on very expensive
and retroactive 'fixes' for their water, stormwater and related infrastructure
problems, Collier County has an opportunity to focus on prevention.
Judy Hushon focused her research on Charlotte County. Map series, quality and
timeliness in Charlotte County is outstanfding. The maps clearly show re-charge
areas. In an effort to preserve floodplain areas, wetlands and aquifer re-charge
areas, Charlotte limits development in those impacted areas.
Charlotte County development in western part of the county concentrates on
urban revitalization and infill ... encouraging development where stormwater
management IS in place.
Judy recommends adding groundwater recharge areas to the RLSA areas. Also
recommends updating Collier County maps. Suggests the challenge for Collier
County is how to limit or restrict growth in recharge areas. Increase density in
current areas will make expansion of water/sewer system less costly for the
entire county.
Brad Cornell discussed ASR wells. They could be a supplement to stormwater
strategy. As the wells could even out the water supply during peak and non-peak
times. All agreed it is better to harness the natural protection of the water by
preserving natural sheetflow than it will be to remedy problems that are certain
to impact the stormwater system as growth continues to move east.
Judy Hushon will investigate and bring more details to the next meeting re: new
regulations recently put in place by the Department of Agriculture.
Staff suggested looking at innovative programs in Martin County and getting
familiar with Florida Stormwater Association website and reports/publications.
Gina Downs covered Lee County. Compared GMP and LDC with Collier County
regarding stormwater strategies. Reports that both counties seem to be busy
complying with all regulations contained in MS4 and NPDES and therefore found
few differences regarding stormwater management between the two counties.
How they fund that stormwater management is different. Lee County is divided
into 'drainage district' and charges a stormwater fee according to impact within
these district.
Staff added that Sarasota also charges a stormwater fee countywide. It appears
eight to 10 counties have charges in place dedicated to improving and managing
stormwater. SFWMD was instrumental in determining the drainage districts and
appropriate charges for Lee County. SFWMD probably also worked with Sarasota
County to formulate appropriate planning and costing for stormwater
management.
Meeting adjourned at 11 am. Next meeting 9-11 am Wed. June 26, 2012 again
held in Room 609 at 2800 North Horseshoe Drive location for Growth Mgmt.
Andrew Dickman will put together and forward a word document form to help
focus our efforts. He invites comments and recommendations to the document.
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
TO: Collier County Board of County Commission (hereinafter"BCC")
FROM: Collier County Environmental Advisory Council (hereinafter"EAC")
RE: Stormwater Management(DRAFT)
Pursuant to Section 2-1193(a) of the Collier County Code of Ordinances, the EAC is
authorized to "Identify, study, evaluate, and provide technical recommendations to the
BCC on programs necessary for the conservation, management, and protection of air,
land, and water resources and environmental quality in the County."
The purpose of this memorandum is to address the above referenced topic from two
perspectives: proactive and big picture.
The EAC, through this brief memorandum, seeks to raise awareness to environmental
issues that should be assessed more thoroughly, but are not, and evaluated in comparison
with abutting counties listed below that may impact Collier County. The EAC hopes this
memorandum will stimulate additional public debate and inspire new policy for Collier
County.
[Summary of memo topic ...stormwater management]
Judy Hushon focused her research on Charlotte County. Map
series, quality and timeliness in Charlotte County is outstanding.
The mapt'clearly show re-charge areas. In an effort to preserve
floodplain areas, wetlands and aquifer re-charge areas, Charlotte
limits development in those impacted areas.
Charlotte County development in western part of the county
concentrates on urban revitalization and infill ... encouraging
Charlotte County development where stormwater management IS in place.
Judy recommends adding groundwater recharge areas to the
RLSA areas. Also recommends updating Collier County maps.
Suggests the challenge for Collier County is how to limit or
restrict growth in recharge areas. Increase density in current areas
will make expansion of water/sewer system less costly for the
entire county.
1
Brad Cornell discussed ASR wells. They could be a supplement
to stormwater strategy. As the wells could even out the water
supply during peak and non-peak times. All agreed it is better to
harness the natural protection of the water by preserving natural
sheetflow than it will be to remedy problems that are certain to
impact the stormwater system as growth continues to move east.
Judy Hushon will investigate and bring more details to the next
meeting re: new regulations recently put in place by the
Department of Agriculture.
Staff suggested looking at innovative programs in Martin County
and getting familiar with Florida Stormwater Association website
and reports/publications.
Gina Downs covered Lee County. Compared GMP and LDC
with Collier County regarding stormwater strategies. Reports that
both counties seem to be busy complying with all regulations
contained in MS4 and NPDES and therefore found few
differences regarding stormwater management between the two
counties.
How they fund that stormwater management is different. Lee
County is divided into `drainage district' and charges a
Lee County stormwater fee according to impact within these district.
Staff added that Sarasota also charges a stormwater fee
countywide. It appears eight to 10 counties have charges in place
dedicated to improving and managing stormwater. SFWMD was
instrumental in determining the drainage districts and appropriate
charges for Lee County. SFWMD probably also worked with
Sarasota County to formulate appropriate planning and costing for
stormwater management.
Andrew Dickman was assigned Miami-Dade County for review.
He looked at the Southeast Regional Planning Council (identified
as SFRPC). Compromises in stormwater system and aging
infrastructure problems related to the stormwater system are
identified by SFRPC. Eco-system problems and aquifer concerns.
Discussion ensued about the differences between east and west
Miami-Dade County coast issues. Brad Cornell suggested that the Everglades Plan to
restore water flow will have a minor impact on the Big Cypress
area in Collier County but almost no impact elsewhere in our
county. Identifies Golden Gate Estates as the red flag area for
Collier County as buildup continues in that area. Concern that
building criteria addresses only a one in 10 year rain/flood
occurrence.
2
Andrew agreed and suggested while the east coast is focusing on
very expensive and retroactive `fixes' for their water, stormwater
and related infrastructure problems, Collier County has an
opportunity to focus on prevention.
Monroe County
Recommendations:
• Adding groundwater recharge areas to the RLSA areas.
• Update County's maps of recharge areas.
• Restrict growth in recharge areas. Increase density in non-recharge areas with
existing stormwater management infrastructure will make expansion of water/sewer
system less costly for the entire county.
• Study ASR wells as supplement to stormwater strategy.
• Study innovative programs in Martin County and become familiar with Florida
Stormwater Association website and reports/publications.
• Investigate "drainage districts" to charge a stormwater fee according to impact within
districts.
• Avoid retrofitting stormwater management infrastructure by planning innovative
growth management strategies.
3
590- 1
NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION SERVICE
CONSERVATION PRACTICE STANDARD
NUTRIENT MANAGEMENT
(Ac.)
CODE 590
soil biological activity,commercial fertilizer, and
DEFINITION irrigation water.
Managing the amount(rate),s ource, placement Enhanced efficiency fertilizers, used in the State
(method of application), and timing of plant must be defined by the Association of American
nutrients and soil amendments. Plant Food Control Officials(AAPFCO)and be
accepted for use by the State fertilizer control
PURPOSE official, or similar authority,with responsibility for
verification of product guarantees, ingredients
• To budget, supply, and conserve nutrients (by AAPFCO definition)and label claims.
for plant production.
For nutrient risk assessment policy and
• To minimize agricultural nonpoint source procedures see Title 190, General Manual(GM),
pollution of surface and groundwater Part 402, Nutrient Management, and Title 190,
resources. National Instruction (NI), Part 302, Nutrient
To properly utilize manure or organic by- Management Policy Implementation.
• products as a plant nutrient source. To avoid salt damage,the rate and placement of
To protect air quality by reducing odors, applied nitrogen and potassium in starter
• fertilizer must be consistent with land-grant
nitrogen emissions (ammonia, oxides of
nitrogen),an d the formation of atmospheric university guidelines, or industry practice
particulates. recognized by the land-grant university.
To maintain or improve the physical, The NRCS-approved nutrient risk assessment
• for nitrogen must be completed on all sites
chemical, and biological condition of soil. unless the State NRCS,with the concurrence of
State water quality control authorities, has
CONDITIONS WHERE PRACTICE APPLIES determined specific conditions where nitrogen
This practice applies to all lands where plant leaching is not a risk to water quality, including
p pp p drinking water.
nutrients and soil amendments are applied.T his
standard does not apply to one-time nutrient The NRCS-approved nutrient risk assessment
applications to establish perennial crops. for phosphorus must be completed when:
• phosphorus application rate exceeds
CRITERIA land-grant university fertility rate
guidelines for the planned crop(s), or
General Criteria Applicable to All Purposes • the planned area is within a phosphorus-
A nutrient budget for nitrogen, phosphorus, and impaired watershed (contributes to
potassium must be developed that considers all 303d-listed water bodies), or
potential sources of nutrients including, but not the NRCS and State water quality
•limited to, green manures, legumes, crop control authority have not determined
residues, compost, animal manure, organic by- specific conditions where the risk of
products, biosolids,waste water, organic matter,
Conservation practice standards are reviewed periodically and updated if needed. To obtain NRCS, NHCP
the current version of this standard,contact your Natural Resources Conservation Service
State office or visit the Field Office Technical Guide. December 2011
590-2
phosphorus loss is low. Soil test analyses must be performed by
A phosphorus risk assessment will not be laboratories successfully meeting the
requirements and performance standards of the
required when the State NRCS,with
North American Proficiency Testing Program-
concurrence of the State water quality control
Performance Assessment Program (NAPT-PAP)
authority, has determined specific conditions under the auspices of the Soil Science Society of
where the risk of phosphorus loss is low.T hese America(SSSA)and NRCS,or other NRCS-
fields must have a documented agronomic need approved program that considers laboratory
for phosphorus; based on soil test phosphorus performance and proficiency to assure accuracy
(STP)and land-grant university nutrient of soil test results. Alternate proficiency testing
recommendations. programs must have solid stakeholder(e.g.,
water quality control entity, NRCS State staff,
On organic operations,the nutrient sources and growers, and others)support and be regional in
management must be consistent with the scope.
USDA's National Organic Program. Nutrient values of manure, organic by-products
Areas contained within minimum application and biosolids must be determined prior to land
setbacks(e.g., sinkholes,wellheads, gullies, application.
ditches, or surface inlets) must receive nutrients Manure analyses must include,at minimum,total
consistent with the setback restrictions. nitrogen (N), ammonium N,total phosphorus(P)
Applications of irrigation water must minimize the or P2O5,total potassium (K)or K2O, and percent
risk of nutrient loss to surface and groundwater. solids, or follow land-grant university guidance
Soil pH must be maintained in a range that regarding required analyses.
enhances an adequate level for crop nutrient Manure, organic by-products, and biosolids
availability and utilization. Refer to State land- samples must be collected and analyzed at least
grant university documentation for guidance. annually, or more frequently if needed to account
Soil, Manure,and Tissue Sampling and for operational changes (feed management,
animal type, manure handling strategy, etc.)
Laboratory Analyses(Testing). impacting manure nutrient concentrations. If no
Nutrient planning must be based on current soil, operational changes occur, less frequent
manure, and (where used as supplemental manure testing is allowable where operations
information)tissue test results developed in can document a stable level of nutrient
accordance with land-grant university guidance, concentrations for the preceding three
or industry practice,if recognized by the consecutive years, unless federal, State,or local
university. regulations require more frequent testing.
Current soil tests are those that are no older Samples must be collected,pr epared, stored,
than 3 years, but may be taken on an interval and shipped,following land-grant university
recommended by the land-grant university or as guidance or industry practice.
required by State code. The area represented by When planning for new or modified livestock
a soil test must be that acreage recommended operations, acceptable"book values" recognized
by the land-grant university. by the NRCS (e.g., NRCS Agricultural Waste
Where a conservation management unit(CMU) Management Field Handbook)and the land-
is used as the basis for a sampling unit, all grant university, or analyses from similar
acreage in the CMU must have similar soil type, operations in the geographical area,m ay be
cropping history,and management practice used if they accurately estimate nutrient output
treatment. from the proposed operation.
The soil and tissue tests must include analyses Manure testing analyses must be performed by
pertinent to monitoring or amending the annual laboratories successfully meeting the
nutrient budget, e.g.,pH ,electrical conductivity requirements and performance standards of the
(EC)and sodicity where salts are a concern, soil Manure Testing Laboratory Certification program
organic matter, phosphorus, potassium, or other (MTLCP) under the auspices of the Minnesota
nutrients and test for nitrogen where applicable. Department of Agriculture, or other NRCS-
Follow land-grant university guidelines regarding approved program that considers laboratory
required analyses.
NRCS, NHCP
December 2011
590-3
performance and proficiency to assure accurate drainage system, soil biology,an d nutrient risk
manure test results. assessment results.
Nutrient Application Rates. Nutrients must not be surface-applied if nutrient
Planned nutrient application rates for nitrogen, losses offsite are likely. This precludes
phosphorus, and potassium must not exceed spreading on:
land-grant university guidelines or industry • frozen and/or snow-covered soils, and
practice when recognized by the university. when the top 2 inches of soil are saturated
•At a minimum, determination of rate must be from rainfall or snow melt.
based on crop/cropping sequence, current soil Exceptions for the above criteria can be made
test results, realistic yield goals, and NRCS-
approved nutrient risk assessments. for surface-applied manure when specified
conditions are met and adequate conservation
If the land-grant university does not provide measures are installed to prevent the offsite
specific guidance that meets these criteria, delivery of nutrients. The adequate treatment
application rates must be based on plans that level and specified conditions for winter
consider realistic yield goals and associated applications of manure must be defined by
plant nutrient uptake rates. NRCS in concurrence with the water quality
Realistic yield goals must be established based control authority in the State.At a minimum,the
on historical yield data, soil productivity following site and management factors must be
information, climatic conditions, nutrient test considered:
results, level of management, and local research • slope,
results considering comparable production
conditions. • organic residue and living covers,
Estimates of yield response must consider • amount and form of nutrients to be applied,
factors such as poor soil quality, drainage, pH, and
salinity, etc., prior to assuming that nitrogen • adequate setback distances to protect local
and/or phosphorus are deficient. water quality.
For new crops or varieties, industry-
demonstrated yield, and nutrient utilization Additional Criteria to Minimize Agricultural
information may be used until land-grant Nonooint Source Pollution of Surface and
university information is available. Groundwater
Lower-than-recommended nutrient application
rates are permissible if the grower's objectives Planners must use the current NRCS-approved
are met. nitrogen, phosphorus, and soil erosion risk
Applications of biosolids, starter fertilizers, or assessment tools to assess the risk of nutrient
pop-up fertilizers must be accounted for in the and soil loss. Identified resource concerns must
nutrient budget. be addressed to meet current planning criteria
(quality criteria).Technical criteria for risk
Nutrient Sources. assessments can be found in NI-190-302.
Nutrient sources utilized must be compatible with When there is a high risk of transport of
the application timing,tillage and planting nutrients, conservation practices must be
system, soil properties, crop, crop rotation,soil coordinated to avoid, control,or trap manure and
organic content, and local climate to minimize nutrients before they can leave the field by
risk to the environment. surface or subsurface drainage(e.g., tile). The
Nutrient Application Timing and Placement. number of applications and the application rates
must also be considered to limit the transport of
Timing and placement of all nutrients must nutrients to tile.
correspond as closely as practical with plant Nutrients must be applied with the right
nutrient uptake (utilization by crops),an d
consider nutrient source, cropping system placement, in the right amount, at the right time,
limitations, soil properties,w eather conditions, and from the right source to minimize nutrient
losses to surface and groundwater.The
NRCS, NHCP
December 2011
590-4
following nutrient use efficiency strategies or For fields receiving manure,where phosphorus
technologies must be considered: risk assessment results equate to LOW risk,
• slow and controlled release fertilizers additional phosphorus and potassium can be
applied at rates greater than crop removal not to
• nitrification and urease inhibitors exceed the nitrogen requirement for the
succeeding crop. For fields receiving manure,
• enhanced efficiency fertilizers where phosphorus risk assessment results
• incorporation or injection equate to MODERATE risk, additional
phosphorus and potassium may be applied at a
• timing and number of applications phosphorus crop removal rate for the planned
• soil nitrate and organic N testing crops in the rotation.W hen phosphorus risk
assessment results equate to HIGH risk,
• coordinate nutrient applications with additional phosphorus and potassium may be
optimum crop nutrient uptake applied at phosphorus crop removal rates if the
following requirements are met:
• Corn Stalk Nitrate Test(CSNT), Pre-
Sidedress Nitrate Test(PSNT), and Pre- • a soil phosphorus drawdown strategy has
Plant Soil Nitrate Test(PPSN) been implemented, and
• tissue testing,chlorophyll meters, and • a site assessment for nutrients and soil loss
spectral analysis technologies has been conducted to determine if
mitigation practices are required to protect
• other land-grant university recommended water quality.
technologies that improve nutrient use
efficiency and minimize surface or • any deviation from these high risk
groundwater resource concerns. requirements must have the approval of the
Chief of the NRCS.
Additional Criteria Applicable to Properly Manure or organic by-products may be applied
Utilize Manure or Organic By-Products as a on legumes at rates equal to the estimated
Plant Nutrient Source removal of nitrogen in harvested plant biomass,
not to exceed land grant university
When manures are applied, and soil salinity is a
recommendations.
concern,salt concentrations must be monitored Manure may be applied at a rate equal to the
to prevent potential crop damage and/or reduced recommended phosphorus application, or
soil quality. estimated phosphorus removal in harvested
The plant biomass for the crop rotation,or multiple
he total single application of liquid manure:
years in the crop sequence at one time.When
• must not exceed the soil's infiltration or such applications are made,the application rate
water holding capacity must not exceed the acceptable phosphorus risk
assessment criteria, must not exceed the
• be based on crop rooting depth recommended nitrogen application rate during
• must be adjusted to avoid runoff or loss to the year of application or harvest cycle, and no
subsurface tile drains. additional phosphorus must be applied in the
current year and any additional years for which
Crop production activities and nutrient use the single application of phosphorus is supplying
efficiency technologies must be coordinated to nutrients.
take advantage of mineralized plant-available
nitrogen to minimize the potential for nitrogen Additional Criteria to Protect Air Quality by
losses due to denitrification or ammonia Reducing Odors, Nitrogen Emissions and the
volatilization. Formation of Atmospheric Particulates
Nitrogen and phosphorus application rates must
be planned based on risk assessment results as
determined by NRCS-approved nitrogen and To address air quality concerns caused by odor,
phosphorus risk assessment tools. nitrogen, sulfur, and/or particulate emissions;the
source,timing, amount, and placement of
nutrients must be adjusted to minimize the
NRCS, NHCP
December 2011
590-5
negative impact of these emissions on the Use nutrient management strategies such as
environment and human health. One or more of cover crops, crop rotations, and crop rotations
the following may be used: with perennials to improve nutrient cycling and
• slow or controlled release fertilizers reduce energy inputs.
• nitrification inhibitors Use variable-rate nitrogen application based on
expected crop yields, soil variability, soil nitrate
• urease inhibitors or organic N supply levels,or chlorophyll
concentration.
• nutrient enhancement technologies
Use variable-rate nitrogen, phosphorus, and
• incorporation potassium application rates based on site-
• injection specific variability in crop yield, soil
characteristics, soil test values,and other soil
• stabilized nitrogen fertilizers productivity factors.
• residue and tillage management Develop site-specific yield maps using a yield
monitoring system. Use the data to further
• no-till or strip-till diagnose low-and high-yield areas,or zones,
• other technologies that minimize the impact and make the necessary management changes.
of these emissions See Title 190,Agronomy Technical Note(TN)
Do not apply 190.AGR.3,Prec ision Nutrient Management
pp y poultry litter, manure, or organic by- Planning.
products of similar dryness/density when there is
a high probability that wind will blow the material Use manure management conservation
offsite. practices to manage manure nutrients to limit
losses prior to nutrient utilization.
Additional Criteria to Improve or Maintain the Apply manure at a rate that will result in an
Physical,Chemical,and Biological Condition "improving"Soil Conditioning Index(SCI)without
of the Soil to Enhance Soil Quality for Crop exceeding acceptable risk of nitrogen or
Production and Environmental Protection phosphorus loss.
Use legume crops and cover crops to provide
Time the application of nutrients to avoid periods nitrogen through biological fixation and nutrient
when field activities will result in soil compaction. recycling.
In areas where salinity is a concern, select Modify animal feed diets to reduce the nutrient
nutrient sources that minimize the buildup of soil content of manure following guidance contained
salts. in Conservation Practice Standard (CPS)Code
592, Feed Management.
CONSIDERATIONS Soil test information should be no older than 1
year when developing new plans.
Excessive levels of some nutrients can cause
Elevated soil test phosphorus levels are induced deficiencies of other nutrients, e.g., high
detrimental to soil biota. Soil test phosphorus soil test phosphorus levels can result in zinc
levels should not exceed State-approved soil test deficiency in corn.
thresholds established to protect the
environment. Use soil tests, plant tissue analyses, and field
observations to check for secondary plant
Use no-till/strip-till in combination with cover nutrient deficiencies or toxicity that may impact
crops to sequester nutrients, increase soil plant growth or availability of the primary
organic matter, increase aggregate stability, nutrients.
reduce compaction, improve infiltration, and
enhance soil biological activity to improve Use the adaptive nutrient management learning
nutrient use efficiency. process to improve nutrient use efficiency on
farms as outlined in the NRCS' National Nutrient
Policy in GM 190, Part 402, Nutrient
Management.
NRCS, NHCP
December 2011
590-6
Potassium should not be applied in situations Considerations to Protect Air Quality by
where an excess (greater than soil test Reducing Nitrogen and/or Particulate
potassium recommendation) causes nutrient Emissions to the Atmosphere.
imbalances in crops or forages.
Avoid applying manure and other by-products
Workers should be protected from and avoid upwind of inhabited areas.
unnecessary contact with plant nutrient sources.
Extra caution must be taken when handling Use high-efficiency irrigation technologies(e.g.,
anhydrous ammonia or when dealing with reduced-pressure drop nozzles for center pivots)
organic wastes stored in unventilated to reduce the potential for nutrient losses.
enclosures.
Material generated from cleaning nutrient PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS
application equipment should be utilized in an The following components must be included in
environmentally safe manner. Excess material the nutrient management plan:
should be collected and stored or field applied in
an appropriate manner. • aerial site photograph(s)/imagery or site
Nutrient containers should be recycled in
map(s), and a soil survey map of the site,
compliance with State and local guidelines or • soil information including: soil type surface
regulations. texture, pH, drainage class, permeability,
Considerations to Minimize Agricultural available water capacity, depth to water
table, restrictive features, and flooding
Nonpoint Source Pollution of Surface and and/or ponding frequency,
Groundwater.
• location of designated sensitive areas and
Use conservation practices that slow runoff, the associated nutrient application
reduce erosion,an d increase infiltration, e.g., restrictions and setbacks,
filter strip, contour farming, or contour buffer
strips. These practices can also reduce the loss • for manure applications, location of nearby
of nitrates or soluble phosphorus. residences, or other locations where
Use application methods and timing strategies humans may be present on a regular basis,
and any identified meteorological(e.g.,
that reduce the risk of nutrient transport by prevailing winds at different times of the
ground and surface waters, such as: year), or topographical influences that may
• split applications of nitrogen to deliver affect the transport of odors to those
nutrients during periods of maximum crop locations,
utilization, • results of approved risk assessment tools for
• banded applications of nitrogen and/or nitrogen, phosphorus, and erosion losses,
phosphorus to improve nutrient availability, • documentation establishing that the
• drainage water management to reduce application site presents low risk for
nutrient discharge through drainage phosphorus transport to local water when
systems, and phosphorus is applied in excess of crop
removal.
• incorporation of surface-applied manures or
organic by-products if precipitation capable • current and/or planned plant production
of producing runoff or erosion is forecast sequence or crop rotation,
within the time of planned application. • soil,water, compost, manure, organic by-
Use the agricultural chemical storage facility product, and plant tissue sample analyses
conservation practice to protect air, soil, and applicable to the plan,
water quality. • soil test phosphorus and/or risk assessment
Use bioreactors and multistage drainage levels at which the plan would require that no
strategies when approved by the land-grant phosphorus in any form be applied,
university. • when soil phosphorus levels are increasing,
include a discussion of the risk associated
NRCS, NHCP
December 2011
590-7
with phosphorus accumulation and a If increases in soil phosphorus levels are
proposed phosphorus draw-down strategy, expected (i.e., when N-based rates are used),
• realistic yield goals for the crops, the nutrient management plan must document:
• the soil phosphorus levels at which it is
• complete nutrient budget for nitrogen, desirable to convert to phosphorus based
phosphorus, and potassium for the plant planning and/or no further phosphorus
production sequence or crop rotation, application,
• listing and quantification of all nutrient • the potential plan for soil test phosphorus
sources and form, drawdown from the production and
• all enhanced efficiency fertilizer products harvesting of crops,and
that are planned for use, • management activities or techniques used to
• in accordance with the nitrogen and reduce the potential for phosphorus
phosphorus risk assessment tool(s), specify transport and loss,
the recommended nutrient application • for AFOs, a quantification of manure
source,timing, amount(except for produced in excess of crop nutrient
precision/variable rate applications specify requirements, and
method used to determine rate), and
placement of plant nutrients for each field or • a long-term strategy and proposed
management unit, and implementation timeline for reducing soil P
• guidance for implementation, operation and to levels that protect water quality and allow
maintenance, and recordkee P� 9•in for application of P at crop-removal rates,
• a rationale for P applications in excess of
In addition, the following components must be crop removal when the phosphorus risk
included in a precision/variable rate nutrient assessment equates to a low risk for P
management plan: transport to surface or groundwater.
• Document the geo-referenced field boundary
and data collected that was processed and OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE
analyzed as a GIS layer or layers to
generate nutrient or soil amendment Conduct periodic plan reviews to determine if
recommendations. adjustments or modifications to the plan are
needed. At a minimum, plans must be reviewed
• Document the nutrient recommendation and revised, as needed with each soil test cycle,
guidance and recommendation equations changes in manure volume or analysis,crops,or
used to convert the GIS base data layer or crop management.
layers to a nutrient source material Fields receiving animal manures and/or biosolids
recommendation GIS layer or layers. must be monitored for the accumulation of heavy
metals and phosphorus in accordance with land-
• Document if a variable rate nutrient or soil grant university guidance and State law.
amendment application was made. Significant changes in animal numbers,
management, and feed management will
• Provide application records per necessitate additional manure analyses to
management zone or as applied map within establish a revised average nutrient content.
individual field boundaries (or electronic
records)documenting source,timing, Calibrate application equipment to ensure
method, and rate of all applications that accurate distribution of material at planned rates.
resulted from use of the precision agriculture Document the nutrient application rate. When
process for nutrient or soil amendment the applied rate differs from the planned rate,
applications. provide appropriate documentation for the
change.
• Maintain the electronic records of the GIS Records must be maintained for at least 5 years
data layers and nutrient applications for at to document plan implementation and
least 5 years. maintenance. As applicable, records include:
NRCS, NHCP
December 2011
590-8
• soil, plant tissue,water, manure, and organic Stevenson, F.J. (ed.) 1982. Nitrogen in
by-product analyses resulting in agricultural soils.Agron. Series 22.ASA,
recommendations for nutrient application, CSSA, and SSSA, Madison,WI.
• quantities, analyses and sources of nutrients U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural
applied, Resources Conservation Service. 2010.
Agronomy Technical Note, (TN) 190-AGR-3,
• dates, and method(s)of nutrient Precision Nutrient Management Planning.
applications, source of nutrients, and rates Washington, DC.
ofap plication,
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural
• weather conditions and soil moisture at the Resources Conservation Service.2011.Title
time of application; lapsed time to manure 190, General Manual, (GM), Part 402,
incorporation; rainfall or irrigation event, Nutrient Management. Washington, DC.
• crops planted, planting and harvest dates, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural
yields, nutrient analyses of harvested Resources Conservation Service.2011, Title
biomass, and crop residues removed, 190, National Instruction (NI), Part 302,
• dates of plan review, name of reviewer, and Nutrient Management Policy
recommended changes resulting from the Implementation.Washington, DC.
review, and
• all enhanced efficiency fertilizer products
used.
Additional records for precision/variable rate
sites must include:
• maps identifying the variable application
source,timing, amount, and placement of all
plant nutrients applied, and
• GPS-based yield maps for crops where
yields can be digitally collected.
REFERENCES
Association of American Plant Food Control
Officials (AAPFCO). 2011.AAP FCO Official
Publication no. 64.AAPFCO Inc., Little
Rock,AR.
Follett, R.F. 2001. Nitrogen transformation and
transport processes. In Nitrogen in the
environment; sources,p roblems, and
solutions, (eds.) R.F. Follett and J. Hatfield,
pp. 17-44.EIse vier Science Publishers.The
Netherlands. 520 pp.
Schepers,J.S., and W.R. Ruan, (eds.)2008.
Nitrogen in agricultural systems.Agron.
Monogr. no.49,American Society of
Agronomy(ASA), Crop Science Society of
America (CSSA), Soil Science Society of
America(SSSA).Madis on,WI.
Sims,J.T. (ed.)2005. Phosphorus:Agriculture
and the environment.Agron. Monogr. no. 46.
ASA, CSSA, and SSSA, Madison, WI.
NRCS, NHCP
December 2011