Voluntary Stewardship Program Workgroup

Transcription

1 Voluntary Stewardship Program Workgroup VSP Workgroup Meeting #6 Thursday, September 8th Location: St Mary of the Rosary Catholic Church (Event Room), Chewelah Attendees: 21 (including 4 VSP Staff), Attendance List attached Facilitators: Debra Hansen, Adam Cares Time Notes Action Items 10 mins Introductions There were 8 Voting Committee Members present out of 12 active members (see attached attendance list). 30 mins Presentation on Colville River Water Quality Issues Dean Hellie Dean Hellie, District Administrator for Stevens County Conservation District, presented some water quality data collected from on the Colville River. This particular data had been referenced several times in past VSP meetings in discussions about clean water and livestock access to the Colville River. - Data was accessed through The Department of Ecology s EIM database. EIM has water quality sampling information for the whole state, accessed at: - Data was collected from as part of Colville River TMDL Implementation Grant #G Years sampling 35 sites in WRIA 59, May through October every 2 weeks, Fecal Coliform - Lab test. water temperature, conductivity, dissolved oxygen, ph, flow also tested. - The data showed a decrease in fecal coliform between sites where the river flowed through grazing land with unrestricted livestock access. Cause of this decrease can t be concluded some have suggested that the decrease is from increased sunlight hitting the water, but also could be because river is deeper and slower in this section. - Hoffman Creek Wetland (on Colville River): developed in 2003 as part of Wetlands Reserve Program. o o 2 main ponds, approximately 21 acres total. Sampled Upstream and downstream sample sites approximately 1300 feet apart. o Fecal Coliform: average (arithmetic mean) went from 3673 to 157 cu/100ml between upstream and downstream sites. - Photos of enhancement projects completed locally: o o o Off channel watering Bank stabilization Exclusionary Fencing Discussion: Attendee questioned why sampling was not done in winter months, when bacteria die off. Suggested that year round sampling would lower overall average and show that stream resets each year. Disagreement over this suggestion others noted that not all bacteria die off in winter, and that standards still must be met in warmer months- just because bacteria will decrease in winter doesn t mean they should be able to reach unsafe levels in summer.

2 30 mins Discussion of Ag Viability / Critical Area Interaction (#5): Crop Production in Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas. This discussion was guided by a worksheet: Agriculture/Critical Area Interaction Matrix 5 (attached). - Group needs more information on the priority habitats and species in Stevens County. Many people feel they don t know much about them and thus are unsure what protection measures are needed. - Research and organize further information on fish & wildlife habitats and species in Stevens County. 30 mins Discussion of Agriculture / Critical Area Interaction (#5): Crop Production in or near Wetlands. - Concern was raised over legal definition/ designation of wetlands, and whether or not wetlands exist in Stevens County, and if the group should have discussions or make any decisions regarding wetlands when it may not have the legal authority to do so. Voting committee member René Holaday made a motion to table the discussion of wetlands until further evidence can be established that wetlands exist in Stevens County. The motion did not receive a second. The county is required under the Growth Management Act to protect critical areas, which include wetlands. As a result, the county has defined wetlands within its Critical Areas Ordinance- Chapter : Protection Regulations, Section : Wetlands. Our VSP Work Plan is required to protect wetlands as they are defined in this section of the Critical Area Ordinance, and there are wetlands in Stevens County that meet this definition. The role of the Workgroup is simply to identify voluntary practices that can be implemented to protect wetlands in areas where they might intersect with ag activities. The VSP Work Group has no authority to designate or delineate where any of wetlands exist within the county. If the Work Group decides to use any maps or other descriptions of where wetlands exist, there should be clear disclaimers that note that these depictions do not serve to designate, delineate, or otherwise determine actual locations of wetlands or other critical areas, and cannot be used for regulatory purposes in any way. - Discussion of crop production in or near wetlands was guided by a worksheet: Agriculture/Critical Area Interaction Matrix 3 (attached) mins Public Comment Period. - Skagit County VSP Work Plan Draft would be very negative for ag industry and is a scary document. - Farmers know how to manage their land better than anyone else, and we should be wary of any program that tells us we need to come up with any more rules for them to follow.

3 Meeting Attendance List (Based on Sign-In Sheet) Voting Committee Members Present (8/12): Merritt Acheson Merritt Acheson Lorren Hagen Lorren Hagen René Holaday René Holaday Julie Loveall Julie Loveall Lorna Mackowiak Eleanor Mattice Bob Mackowiak Hillary Ohm Eleanor Mattice Amanda Parrish Mike McClellan Krista Stauffer Kathy Murbach Hillary Ohm Amanda Parrish Not Present: Tammy Petty Andrew Engell Patti Playfair Bill Lacy Gary Plotts Jim Paladin Krista Stauffer Owen Pullen Kelly Tacoma Ann Van Dielen Adam Cares (staff) Debra Hansen(staff) Dean Hellie (staff) Nils Johnson (staff)

4 Stevens County Agriculture and Critical Area Interactions DRAFT The following are goals for agricultural viability and critical area protection. These goals are used to guide suggested management practices in subsequent Ag/ Critical Area interaction matrices. The idea is to draw clear connections between listed interactions and management practices and the viability and protection goals below. Down the road, this will back up the fact that any voluntary practices we include in our plan are in line with the VSP requirements to a) promote ag viability, and b) protect critical areas. General Agricultural Viability Goals (Based on Ag Viability Questionnaire Responses) 1. Increase the ability of agricultural operators to achieve profitable use of the land. 2. Maximize the availability of land for agricultural use. 3. Promote a simpler, more stable regulatory environment 4. Increase flexibility for agricultural operators in managing their land. 5. Focus and maximize existing voluntary incentive programs for protecting critical areas. Critical Area Protection Goals (Based on RCW 36.70A.700 (2)) 1. Protect 1 functions and values existing as of July 22, 2011 for the following five critical areas: - Fish and Wildlife Priority Habitats and Species - Critical Aquifer Recharge Areas - Wetlands - Geologically Hazardous Areas - Frequently Flooded Areas 1 RCW 36.70A.703 (8) definition of protect or protecting

5 Critical Area Interaction Matrices The following matrices are intended to document interactions that exist between agriculture and critical areas in Stevens County, and to show clear connections between those interactions, potential management practices, and pre-established goals. The following six matrices are listed: 1. Crop Production in Frequently Flooded Areas 2. Livestock Production in Frequently Flooded Areas 3. Crop Production in Wetlands 4. Livestock Production in Wetlands 5. Crop Production and Fish and Wildlife Conservation Areas 6. Livestock Production and Fish and Wildlife Conservation Areas 7. Livestock Production in Geologically Hazardous Areas (Steep Slopes) 8. Crop Production in Geologically Hazardous Areas (Steep Slopes Interaction Matrix 1: Crop Production in Frequently Flooded Areas Loss of farmable ground October May. Damage or loss of existing crops in flooded areas. Erosion of soil and washout of nutrients. - If flooding gets worse, remove obstructions from the stream (dredge). - Streambank Stabilization. - Tile, Drainage practices. Impacts on water quality due to chemical and nutrient runoff during flooding events. - Intermittent dredging with buffers in between, to direct floodwaters to specific areas.

6 Interaction Matrix 2: Livestock Production in Frequently Flooded Areas

7 Interaction Matrix 3: Crop Production in or near Wetlands Our VSP team shall refrain from defining any areas as Wetlands. Our farming practices around wet lands, are based on the definition of Wetlands as defined in the GMA and County Critical Area Ordinance. Wetlands can improve water quality by decreasing fecal coliform bacteria levels Some crops are favored by wet ground and some that aren t Runoff from higher areas can contain fertilizers, pesticides and other substances Erosion can occur in wet areas in different ways than dry areas Saturated soils are typically cooler and have a shorter growing season Drain tiling to remove undesirable water from crop land o Keep that water clean and fertilizer levels low o Ties in with agronomic use rates When using tiles to drain wet ground, discharge water into a vegetated saturated buffer before it goes into a stream to help filter out more nutrients. Using Wetland Reserve programs for existing crop land o Educational resources through the Conservation Service to help landowners build conservation areas that serve the same function as a reserve program but don t give up usage rights Encourage planting of crops that use lots of nitrogen, ex: triticale. - Fertilizers and pesticides from agricultural production can affect ecological character of wetlands and impact quality of groundwater.

8 Interaction Matrix 4: Livestock Production in or near Wetlands

9 Interaction Matrix 5: Crop Production in Fish & Wildlife Conservation Areas, i.e riparian habitats Lots of intersection between ag and other sectors Pesticide and Herbicides Farmers have to use chemicals to manage weeds, sometimes at risk to beneficials Flooding affects ability to do Ag Erosion problems decrease ag land in production Colville river (since it s dredged) bank collapse is a reality Colville River Valley flood plain farm land is created land through dredging in the 30s & 40s Choice of trees in Ag areas could be problematic when time to harvest those trees Encourage adequate vegetation next to waterways o Crop rotation as a tool to manage vegetation o Broad range of vegetation options including woody vegetation and other deep rooted plants o Cover-cropping o No-till & minimum-till processes o Precision Farming though very expensive Bank stabilization practices to decrease natural and humancaused erosion due to water flow in streams o Rip-rap/rock o Root-ball stabilization Integrated pest management Soil sampling for agronomic application of fertilizers Control wild species on Ag land Targeted manual removal of undesirable plants Habitat enhancement (ie, raptor poles) Herbicide and Pesticide contamination issues Bacteria from wildlife and waterfowl Bacteria levels cycle naturally with seasons Water temperature affected by lack of shade beside waterways Wasting of some banks increases sediment levels in water

10 Interaction Matrix 6: Livestock Production in Fish & Wildlife Conservation Areas, i.e riparian habitats Livestock waste interfaces with riparian habitats Waste transport and distribution into the water body Livestock need access to water (streams) Livestock have a historical legal riparian right Everything is well-kept in Stevens County, it looks gorgeous Majority of our farms were directly built on or near creeks/streams critical areas and we can t move our farms Pasture ground to feed animals has created more opportunities for wildlife habitat and feed source Not all streams are created equal in terms of fish habitat there should be some mechanism for stream classifications Currently the fish are not endangered Designated improved stream crossings Implement grazing practices that increase the stubble height in riparian areas (educational resources available to land owners) Look at the number of head per acre where you have livestock interacting with riparian areas Off-creek watering & salt away Not fencing in specific areas to Buffer riparian areas Ways to keep livestock out of the water (rubble, angular rock?) Allow full livestock drinking for site specific areas During wet times of year livestock will disturb the soil which may move into the water Degraded stream banks

11 Interaction Matrix 7: Livestock Production in Geologically Hazardous Areas (Steep Slopes). A lot of the slopes only have grass on them for a short part of the year Implement ag practices that help filter run off from the slopes Site specific grazing plans to assure adequate stubble height There isn t that much runoff here. Currently the grass remains not many producers run until bare Grass here is adapted to the steep slopes we have. Seasonally we have a lot of problem of moving top soil where we don t want it to be. Many cattle don t use steep slopes, but other livestock may varies on livestock and area Maintain some trees on steeper slope; grazing within the trees; increase native plant species Stocking rates (head per acre) Walkways and pathways (NRCS) Do planning on where your gates are for entry/exit to direct cattle away from certain slopes Watering option (spring box?) on a slope to reduce travel livestock Huge reduction in ladder fuels with grazing reduce fire danger Livestock provide fertilization for plants. Site specific impacts Soil moves with the weather Agriculture on flat areas are catching and filtering run off from slopes Fertilization could be too much in some areas Livestock create trails that contour the hillside and decrease erosion

12 Interaction Matrix 8: Crop Production in Geologically Hazardous Areas (Steep Slopes). Not a lot of crop farming on steep slopes in Stevens County. - Contour farming - Precision Ag (too costly for many farmers in Stevens County) - Long term crops/ cover crops - Minimum tillage -