Final Report from the Workgroup to Develop Residential Fertilizer Use Guidelines For the Tampa Bay Region. Submitted by the Tampa Bay Estuary Program

Transcription

1 Final Report from the Workgroup to Develop Residential Fertilizer Use Guidelines For the Tampa Bay Region Submitted by the Tampa Bay Estuary Program August 2008

2 Final Report from the Workgroup to Develop Residential Fertilizer Use Guidelines for the Tampa Bay Region Table of Contents Executive Summary....2 Introduction...5 Summary of Workshop #1..7 Summary of Workshop #2 10 Summary of Workshop #3 14 Summary of Workshop #4 18 References..24 APPENDICES A. List of Participating Organizations 26 B. Comparison of Fertilizer Use Guidelines...28 C. Straw Man Recommendations from TBEP Staff..32 D. Straw Man Recommendations as Revised by Workgroup 35 E. Regional Rainfall Data.41 F. Technical Memorandum: Estimation of Nitrogen Loading from Residential Irrigation..52 G. Inventory of Existing Fertilizer Education Materials..63 H. Model Ordinances and Guidance Documents Related to Landscape Design and Development.65 I. Additional Comments and Submissions

3 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY At the request of its Policy Board, the Tampa Bay Estuary Program coordinated four workshops on residential fertilizer use guidelines from April 8 June 10, The intent was to develop regionally appropriate guidelines that could be incorporated into a local ordinance, should a local government elect to do so. Each workshop lasted three hours. These workshops were well attended, with strong representation from local government stormwater and environmental managers, environmentalists, water quality and red tide researchers, the extension/horticultural research community, and members of the lawn care industry. A total of 42 organizations were represented during the workshop process. A list of participating entities or organizations is contained in Appendix A. At the initial workshop, participants selected four key topic areas for development of regional guidelines: Licensing and Certification of Commercial Fertilizer Applicators; Buffer Zones Adjacent to Waterways; Application Timing; and Recommendations for Fertilization when Reclaimed Water is used for Irrigation. A consensus-building process was used to facilitate agreement on the specific recommendations within each general topic. Discussion on the guideline topics began at the first meeting and continued through the next two workshops. Because of the strong emphasis placed by the entire group on the need to educate the public and other key audiences about proper fertilizer use, a fourth and final workshop was devoted entirely to brainstorming regional education strategies. The key recommendations of the workshop participants are as follows: Licensing/Certification of Fertilizer Applicators All site supervisors and managers of professional lawn care companies should be required to attain certification in the Florida Green Industries Best Management Practices (BMPs) for Protection of Water Resources in Florida training coordinated by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection and taught by professionals with the University of Florida s Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences.. Other employees of lawn and landscape maintenance companies should be required to complete less intensive, task-specific training (i.e., proper mowing, proper fertilization, mulching, debris cleanup, etc) within 90 days of hiring. This less intensive training could be provided by BMP-certified trainers within the company and provided annually or whenever an update is needed due to changes in the state-approved BMPs or local ordinances. Certification of additional Spanish-speaking BMP trainers and BMP courses taught in Spanish should be strongly encouraged. 2

4 A baywide or Tampa Bay region license or certificate should be created, encompassing Hillsborough, Manatee and Pinellas counties, so that commercial fertilizer applicators would not have to obtain separate BMP certification in each community in which they do business. Reciprocity should be strongly encouraged so that any Tampa Bay community with a fertilizer ordinance recognizes and accepts the regional certification. A special decal denoting this regional certification should be created, and all lawn care/landscape companies who have obtained BMP certification should be required to display this decal on their service vehicles. Buffer Zones Fertilizer should not be applied by either professional applicators or homeowners within 10 feet of a waterway (defined as a bay, river, lake, stream, pond, canal, wetland or any other water body), unless a deflector shield is used. With a deflector shield, fertilizer may be applied as close as 3 feet from a water body. Waterfront property owners should be encouraged to establish a 6-foot lowmaintenance or no mow zone of plants instead of turfgrass adjacent to waterways to reduce the potential for fertilizer residues entering bodies of water. Application Timing This was the one area for which consensus could not be reached. A variety of options were discussed at length and finally reduced to two. A straw vote was taken on these two options with each organization, company or government entity in attendance asked to choose one representative to vote. The results are as follows: There were 17 votes in favor of a complete ban on application of Nitrogen fertilizer to residential lawns from June 1-Sept. 30. There were 11 votes in favor of allowing a one-time application of slow-release Nitrogen from June 1-Sept. 30 with a professional determination of a Nitrogen deficiency in turfgrass. Reclaimed Water Educational information about the amount of Nitrogen contained in reclaimed water (treated wastewater) should be provided to homeowners in communities where reclaimed water is provided for irrigation of residential lawns. Additional Consensus Items In addition to those key topics, workshop participants were given the opportunity to present additional recommendations for consideration. As a result, the workgroup identified 11 additional consensus items, as follows: Education about proper fertilizer use is critically needed. 3

5 Education about slow-release Nitrogen fertilizer is important to make homeowners aware that use of these products may not produce an immediate greening response in their lawns. Proper irrigation management is critical and inextricably linked to proper fertilization. Controlling spillage of fertilizer and organic debris on non-vegetated areas (including impervious surfaces) is critical to protecting water quality. Use of deflector shields is an important element of fertilizer BMPs. No Phosphorous fertilizer should be applied at any time of year in the Tampa Bay region without a soil test showing a Phosphorous deficiency. This recommendation is a recognition of the extensive natural Phosphorous already present in soils in the region that make supplemental Phosphorous applications largely unnecessary. No Nitrogen fertilizer should be applied on newly established turf for the first 30 days. Consistent guidelines for fertilizer application are needed for the Tampa Bay region to encourage compliance and successful education of the public. Adequate enforcement is a key issue that needs to be addressed by any local government that adopts a fertilizer use ordinance. Fertilizer guidelines should encourage the use of trained, certified professionals to apply fertilizer. All landscape maintenance contracts should specify compliance with the DEP Florida Green Industries Best Management Practices. Education As mentioned previously, one entire workshop was devoted to a discussion of possible educational programs and strategies to educate key groups about proper fertilization of lawns in general, and the recommended regional guidelines in particular. Workshop participants identified the following target audiences in need of educational outreach: Homeowners Condominium/Neighborhood Associations Retail Fertilizer Sales Outlets (Lowe s, Home Depot, Wal-Mart, etc) Lawn Care Professionals Municipal Landscape Maintenance Personnel A detailed listing of the recommendations from this session is contained in the summary of Workshop #4 (Brainstorming Session on Education) in the body of this report. Potential funding sources for educational programs also are identified in that section. 4

6 INTRODUCTION At its February 29, 2008 meeting, the Tampa Bay Estuary Program s Policy Board authorized TBEP staff to facilitate a series of workshops to develop technically-based guidelines for residential fertilizer use. The intent was to develop regionally appropriate guidelines that could be incorporated into a local ordinance, should a local government elect to do so. Consistent guidelines will ensure that citizens throughout the Tampa Bay area are given the same advice and information about appropriate use of fertilizer for turf grass, ultimately leading to greater compliance whether an ordinance is adopted or a strictly voluntary approach is preferred. Consistent guidelines will allow for common educational materials to be developed, spreading the cost among many governments and organizations, and resulting in potentially significant cost-savings. Regional guidelines also may improve compliance by lawn care professionals. Because lawn care companies traverse the entire Bay Area servicing customers, the use of consistent guidelines by the many local governments within the bay watershed will avoid confusion among lawn care professionals about what rules apply in which community. TBEP staff was asked to involve a diverse group of stakeholders in the development of the regional guidelines, and to communicate to members of the Policy Board the results of this effort. This report summarizes the discussions that took place during the four workshops on this topic that were held from April 8-June 10, Background: In recent years, concerns about the impacts of excess nutrients on the health of the state s waterways and increased regulatory pressure to reduce those nutrients has led to the adoption of local ordinances regulating use of residential fertilizers as one potential tool for controlling nutrient pollution. St. Johns County, the city of Sanibel and Sarasota County were among the first local governments to enact local fertilizer ordinances. Additionally, in 2007, the state Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services adopted a rule simplifying the labeling on fertilizer bags to make the recommended application directions and rates easier to understand, as well as to restrict the nitrogen and phosphorous content of urban fertilizers sold in Florida. In January 2008, the statewide Consumer Fertilizer Task Force, established by the Florida Legislature, issued draft guidelines for residential use of fertilizer including a model ordinance. Subsequent legislation that would have prevented local governments from adopting stricter fertilizer guidelines than the model ordinance, except under certain circumstances, failed to garner widespread support and was not passed during the 2008 legislative session. 5

7 Concurrently, several citizen groups in the Tampa Bay region began to lobby local elected officials to enact local ordinances, leading to the request to TBEP to coordinate development of regional fertilizer use guidelines. It is hoped that implementation of fertilizer application guidelines specific for this region may reduce stormwater runoff pollutant loads to Tampa Bay a key goal of TBEP s overall nitrogen reduction strategy. This would support local government efforts to meet regulatory requirements to reduce nutrient loading in designated Impaired Waters. 6

8 Summary of First Workshop to Develop Guidelines for Residential Fertilizer Use April 8, 2008 Facilitators: Holly Greening and Nanette O Hara, Tampa Bay Estuary Program A total of 67 people signed the attendance sheets. Welcome and Introduction Participants introduced themselves. TBEP Director Holly Greening explained that TBEP is holding these workshops at the request of its Management and Policy Board to develop technically-based, regional guidelines for fertilizer use that could be incorporated into local government ordinances and used to develop regional education programs. TBEP Outreach Coordinator Nanette O Hara then provided a brief summary of proposed state legislation to regulate residential use of fertilizer, including requiring adoption of a statewide model ordinance created by the Consumer Fertilizer Task Force and mandating licensing and certification of commercial fertilizer applicators. Presentations Two presentations were provided to familiarize participants with key initiatives already underway or completed related to fertilizer use and labeling. Dr. Laurie Trenholm of the University of Florida s Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences presented an overview of the Green Industry BMP Training Program for lawn care professionals; the DACS Fertilizer Labeling Rule passed last year; the expansion of local ordinances restricting fertilizer use; and the recommendations of the Consumer Fertilizer Task Force. Jack Merriam of Sarasota County presented an overview of the local fertilizer ordinance passed last year by his county. His presentation included information about the stakeholder process used to develop the ordinance, as well as an explanation of key provisions of the ordinance. Facilitated Discussion of Guideline Topics Audience members were engaged in a facilitated discussion to develop a list of guideline topics for which they might create specific recommendations in upcoming workshops. Topics suggested have been consolidated here for convenience, and are as follows: Licensing and Certification of Fertilizer Applicators (with a note that this licensing already is required in the bills currently being consider by the state Legislature) Education of Homeowners, including: o information about proper fertilization (such as keeping fertilizer off driveways, sidewalks and other impervious surfaces) 7

9 o alternatives to fertilizer use (Florida-friendly landscaping, use of native plants) o availability of summer blends of fertilizer (without nitrogen) that will keep grass green without promoting growth during the rainy season o simple labeling that is easy to understand o specific education to homeowners irrigating with reclaimed water, informing them that they may not need as much, or any, supplemental fertilization on their lawns because reclaimed water may contain sufficient nutrients. Need to know more about the amount of nitrogen in reclaimed water. o education at retail outlets where most residents purchase fertilizer o identification of possible funding sources for educational programs and materials o development of monitoring/assessment tools to determine the success and effectiveness of educational efforts o model landscape contracts that can help homeowners choose lawn care companies who practice responsible landscape management as expressed in the Green Industry BMPs Application Timing o Should a blackout period be recommended where residents and lawn care professionals are not permitted to apply lawn fertilizers with nitrogen? If so, what is appropriate and scientifically sound? (The Sarasota ordinance prohibits fertilizer application from June-September, while the Jacksonville ordinance has no blackout period at all but follows the recommendations of the statewide model ordinance) o Is slow release nitrogen really better for the environment? Does it provide adequate feeding throughout a blackout period? Need to evaluate whether slow release fertilizer can provide adequate nitrogen to turf over a lengthy blackout period, using a 1 pound per 1,000 square foot application rate o Research is needed on effectiveness/longevity of slow release Nitrogen fertilizer products Design and Development Standards o Require new development to incorporate Florida-friendly landscape design o Provide incentives for existing development to convert to Florida-friendly landscapes o Encourage proper irrigation maintenance and management Buffer Zones (fertilizer-free zones adjacent to water bodies) o Are buffer zones needed? How big should they be? o Science is unclear on how wide buffer zones should be to protect adjacent waters o Buffer zone width may depend upon slope of property 8

10 o Should alternative landscaping be encouraged in buffer zones (ie. Native groundcovers) Enforcement o Should be equally enforced for both homeowners and lawn care professionals General Suggestions/Conclusions A suggestion was made that, for each issue, workshop participants consider whether the topic could be more effectively addressed at the state or local level Participants also discussed whether the overall focus of this effort should be narrowly targeted to residential fertilizer use, or more broadly to reducing nitrogen runoff from residential landscapes. The consensus of the group was to take the broader view, and concentrate on overall landscape management. Next Steps: The next workshop will be held Thursday, May 1 from 1:30-4:30 p.m. at the Tampa Bay Regional Planning Council. 9

11 Summary of Second Workshop to Develop Guidelines for Residential Fertilizer Use May 1, 2008 Facilitators: Holly Greening and Nanette O Hara, Tampa Bay Estuary Program A total of 37 people signed the attendance sheets. This workshop resulted in consensus recommendations on the first two issues selected by the group: Licensing and Certification of Commercial Fertilizer Applicators, and Buffer Zones adjacent to waterways. Participants also began discussion of a third issue, Application Timing, which was continued to the third workshop because of time constraints. To begin the meeting, TBEP facilitators distributed a table showing fertilizer use restrictions or recommendations as specified in various local ordinances, the state BMPs, and the statewide Consumer Fertilizer Task Force. Workshop participants made corrections or clarifications to the comparison table. This table is contained in Appendix B. TBEP staff also handed out a Straw Man document with preliminary staff recommendations for the issues selected by the group. Staff emphasized that this Straw Man was only intended to serve as a starting point for the discussion and that staff fully expected the workgroup to revise the recommendations. The Straw Man recommendations from TBEP staff are contained in Appendix C. The Straw Man recommendations, as revised by the workgroup, are contained in Appendix D. Licensing/Certification of Commercial Applicators On this issue, the workgroup debated many options, from requiring all lawn care professionals to obtain full certification in the state-approved Best Management Practices (BMPs) training provided by personnel with UF s Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences (IFAS), to requiring certification only for those applying fertilizer. The workgroup acknowledged the challenge of asking IFAS, with limited resources, to provide this training to a potentially large group of employees in a short time frame, and supported a recommendation to allow lawn care professionals who have been certified as BMP instructors to provide the training within their own companies. Workgroup participants did not believe that all employees of a lawn care company needed to take the complete BMP course, as long as fertilizer applicators were supervised by someone with training and certification in that area. But participants did feel strongly that all employees should receive some training for their specific job duties, especially with regards to cleaning up fertilizer granules, grass clippings and other lawn debris deposited inadvertently on sidewalks, streets and other impervious surfaces. 10

12 Participants also acknowledged a need for more Spanish-speaking BMP instructors to provide training. Finally, the group discussed at length the need for a regional certification program, so training received in one county or city would be recognized throughout the Tampa Bay region. This was an important issue for the lawn care industry, since most companies routinely service communities in different counties. Participants also noted that a standard decal displayed on vehicles signifying regional BMP certification would be useful to homeowners as a quick way to assess which companies adhere to environmentally friendly practices. While recognizing that achieving this regional reciprocity would entail significant cooperation among multiple governments, all participants felt that creation of a regional certificate would be a major beneficial outcome of this workgroup process. They workgroup s final recommendation regarding Licensing and Certification of Commercial Fertilizer Applicators was as follows: Require full BMP certification for all site supervisors and managers of landscape maintenance companies. Require less intensive, task-specific BMP training for all employees within 90 days of hiring. This less intensive training could be provided by BMP-certified trainers within the company and provided annually or whenever an update is needed due to changes in the BMPs or local ordinances. Encourage certification of Spanish-speaking BMP trainers and BMP courses taught in Spanish. Encourage creation of a baywide or Tampa Bay region license/certificate (encompassing Hillsborough, Manatee and Pinellas counties), so that commercial fertilizer applicators would not have to obtain separate BMP certification in each community in which they do business. Encourage reciprocity so that any Tampa Bay community with a fertilizer ordinance recognizes and accepts the regional certification. Buffer Zones This discussion centered on the appropriate width for a fertilizer-free buffer area adjacent to waterways; who, if anyone, should be allowed to apply fertilizer inside the buffer zone; and under what conditions fertilizer may be applied. After much debate, the group agreed to a 10-foot fertilizer-free buffer zone near waterways, acknowledging that there is sparse scientific research on exactly how wide a buffer zone should be to prevent runoff, but opting for 10 feet as being consistent with most other ordinances and with the recommendations of the state Consumer Fertilizer Task Force. Participants agreed that drop spreaders or deflector shields should be used if applying fertilizer within this zone, but rejected the staff recommendation that only certified fertilizer applicators be allowed to apply fertilizer inside the buffer zone, believing that restriction to be unfair to homeowners who do their own fertilizing. They acknowledged 11

13 that deflector shields are not widely available in most retail nursery outlets at this time, but expect the shields to be more prevalent in the near future as equipment manufacturers respond to the increasing number of laws requiring use of shields near water bodies. In addition to the 10-foot fertilizer-free zone, participants also endorsed the concept of a 6-foot no-mow or low-maintenance zone adjacent to waterways. Representatives of the environmental community, in particular, urged support for these areas, which may contain ground covers, shrubs or other landscape plants in lieu of turfgrass, helping to filter runoff from pesticides or fertilizer resides before it reaches the water. There was very strong agreement from all participants for requiring homeowners as well as lawn care professionals to remove fertilizer granules, clippings, etc from impervious surfaces, and for concentrated educational messages emphasizing the importance of this practice for water quality protection. They workgroup s final recommendation regarding Buffer Zones was as follows: Fertilizer should not be applied by either professional applicators or homeowners within 10 feet of a waterway (defined as a bay, river, lake, stream, pond, canal, wetland or any other water body), unless a deflector shield is used. With a deflector shield, fertilizer may be applied up to 3 feet from a water body. Encourage a 6-foot low maintenance zone of ground covers, shrubs or other non-turf landscape plants. Require any fertilizer granules, grass clippings or landscape debris deposited on impervious surfaces to be cleaned up to minimize runoff into waterways Application Timing Participants began discussion of this issue, but could not reach agreement before the scheduled end of the workshop. They did develop five alternatives for further examination at the next workshop. These alternatives are: Allow commercial applicators to apply 0.5 pounds of Nitrogen per 1000 square feet one time during the rainy season. Set an overall annual Nitrogen budget (a maximum amount of Nitrogen that can be applied in a year) and allow applicators to decide when to apply as long as they do not exceed the yearly Nitrogen limit. Prohibit application of Nitrogen or Phosphorous to landscape plants and turf between June 15-September 15 (TBEP Staff recommendation). Summer blends that do not contain N or P could be applied during this time period. Prohibit application of Nitrogen or Phosphorous to landscape plants and turf between June 1-September 30 (same blackout period as Sarasota ordinance). 12

14 Allow a summer blend of fertilizer with very low amounts of Nitrogen to be applied during the June 15-Sept. 15 blackout period. Design and Development Standards The workgroup concurred with the TBEP staff recommendation to consult with the Program s Policy Board to gauge interest in adopting landscape design standards through local land use codes or regulations. Since several model landscape and irrigation ordinances already exist, this issue may be beyond the scope of TBEP s charge through this workshop process which is focused exclusively on fertilizer use. At a minimum, TBEP staff will provide links to the existing reports and model ordinances relating to overall landscape design and management in the final report to be prepared upon completion of the fertilizer workshops. Reclaimed Water The workgroup concurred with the TBEP staff recommendation to convene a smaller technical workgroup to develop specific guidelines for fertilizer use by community. Participants interested in being on this smaller group were asked to contact TBEP staff so they could be notified of meetings. The workgroup also suggested that a representative of the golf course industry be invited to participate, along with wastewater treatment personnel from the local governments. Next Steps: The next meeting of the full workgroup was scheduled for May 30, 2008 from 9 a.m.-noon. 13

15 Summary of Third Workshop to Develop Guidelines for Residential Fertilizer Use May 30, 2008 Facilitators: Holly Greening and Nanette O Hara, Tampa Bay Estuary Program A total of 57 people signed the attendance sheets. The workshop focused on the following issues: Timing of Fertilizer Applications and Guidelines for Fertilization if Reclaimed Water is used to irrigate lawns. Application Timing This issue proved to be the most contentious addressed by the workgroup. Representatives of environmental advocacy groups and many local government officials supported a complete ban on Nitrogen fertilizer application during the summer rainy season to reduce the potential for fertilizer runoff and to improve the potential for compliance by homeowners. Lawn care professionals and the horticultural research and extension community generally advocated for at least a one-time application of Nitrogen by a trained professional based upon an observed Nitrogen deficiency in the turfgrass. Another option supported by these participants would allow lawn care professionals to follow the fertilization guidelines specified in the Green Industries BMP manual. They argued that turfgrass might be most in need of additional nutrients during the summer, when grass is growing most rapidly. Discussion began with the options developed at the previous workshop. Additionally, researchers with the University of Florida s Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences submitted a proposal and technical background information prior to this workshop that was added to the list of options (see Appendix I). The following refined list of alternatives was presented to the group as a starting point for discussion. Similar suggestions with only slight variations were consolidated for efficiency, thus the first bullet contains three similar recommendations: Allow commercial applicators to apply 0.5 pounds of Nitrogen per 1000 square feet one time during the rainy season. Allow a summer blend of fertilizer with very low amounts of Nitrogen to be applied during the June 15-Sept. 15 blackout period. Allow a one-time application of controlled-release nitrogen fertilizer, not to exceed 1.0 lb N per 1000 sq. ft., during the rainy-season period to correct a professionally (county agent or BMP-trained turf professional) diagnosed nitrogen deficiency in the turf. This approach is consistent with the UF-IFAS turf fertilization recommendations, based on more than 20 years of research. Nitrogen diagnosis would be by a standard, commonly used research color/quality rating scale from1 (poorest growth) to 9, with 5.5 being the lower limit of the acceptable 14

16 quality, leading to decline of turf coverage. (IFAS recommendation submitted prior to workshop) Set an overall annual Nitrogen budget (a maximum amount of Nitrogen that can be applied in a year) and allow applicators to decide when to apply as long as they do not exceed the yearly Nitrogen limit. Prohibit application of Nitrogen or Phosphorous to landscape plants and turf between June 15-September 15. Summer blends that do not contain N or P could be applied during this time period. Prohibit application of Nitrogen or Phosphorous to landscape plants and turf between June 1-September 30. Extensive discussion narrowed the list of alternatives to two: 1. Prohibit Nitrogen or Phosphorous fertilizer application from June 1-September Allow a one-time application of slow-release Nitrogen during the June 1-Sept. 30 time frame, if a trained professional diagnoses a Nitrogen deficiency in the lawn. There was additional lengthy discussion, particularly of Option 2, with considerable debate over the definition of a trained professional and the scientific validity of methods to visually assess Nitrogen deficiency. There also was lengthy discussion of enforcement of the various options. Everyone acknowledged that enforcement, especially among homeowners, will be difficult. Some participants felt a total ban on Nitrogen fertilizers during the rainy season would be the simplest message to give and the most protective of the environment, resulting in the best compliance among homeowners. Others felt that a total ban would encourage homeowners to overfertilize earlier in the year to beat the ban. One option mentioned to boost compliance with a rainy season ban is to prohibit sales of Nitrogen-containing fertilizers during the restricted period, much as some communities ban the sale of fireworks. Participants also discussed what time frame constitutes the rainy season in Tampa Bay, reviewed regional rainfall data compiled by TBEP (Appendix E) and considered seasonal bans imposed by other communities who have enacted fertilizer ordinances. When consensus could not be reached on either of the two final options, a straw vote was taken. Each organization, business or government entity represented at the meeting was asked to designate one person to vote. The vote was tallied as follows: 17 votes in favor of Option 1 (a ban on Nitrogen application from June 1-Sept. 30) 11 votes in favor of Option 2 (allowing a one-time application of slow-release Nitrogen with a professional determination of deficiency) 15

17 Additionally, the group identified 11 points of consensus, as follows: Education about proper fertilizer use is critically needed Education about slow-release Nitrogen fertilizer is important to make homeowners aware that use of these products may not produce an immediate response in their lawns Proper irrigation management is critical and inextricably linked to proper fertilization Controlling spillage of fertilizer and organic debris on non-vegetated areas (including impervious surfaces) is critical Use of deflector shields is an important element of fertilizer BMPs No Phosphorous fertilizer should be applied at any time of year in the Tampa Bay region without a soil test showing a Phosphorous deficiency No Nitrogen fertilizer should be applied on newly established turf for the first 30 days Consistent guidelines for fertilizer application are needed for the Tampa Bay region Adequate enforcement is a key issue that needs to be addressed Guidelines should encourage the use of trained, certified professionals to apply fertilizer All landscape maintenance contracts should specify compliance with the DEP Green Industries Best Management Practices Reclaimed Water A technical report prepared by Janicki Environmental Services under contract to TBEP was distributed. (Appendix F). The key findings of the report were summarized for the group. The consultants obtained data on total Nitrogen concentrations in reclaimed water from all utilities in the region that produce reclaimed water. The amount of nitrogen in reclaimed water varies widely by community, according to the treatment process used. The consultants grouped the reclaimed water sources by community according to nitrogen levels contained in the reclaimed effluent and then calculated how much, if any, additional nitrogen would be needed to achieve the fertilization regime recommended by IFAS for various types of turfgrass. (IFAS guidelines call for anywhere from 2-6 pounds of nitrogen per year depending on the type of turfgrass and the desired maintenance level). They based their calculations on irrigating 2 or 3 times a week with ¾ of an inch of water each time. These calculations indicate little or no additional fertilizer may be needed in some communities, while as much as one pound of Nitrogen fertilizer may be needed in other communities. There was discussion of the methodology used in the report, along with the use of Total N as opposed to nitrates in the calculations. There was also discussion about how this information could best be conveyed to the public, given the wide variation in Nitrogen content in reclaimed water from one community to another. The workgroup agreed that 16

18 each community should be responsible for developing specific educational messages about appropriate fertilization for their reclaimed water customers. Although the group left the details of those messages to individual communities, there was a strong consensus among the participants that reclaimed water should be an important component of education about fertilizer use in communities where reclaimed water is provided to homeowners. Next Steps: The final meeting of the workgroup will be held June 10 from 1:30-4:30 p.m. and will be devoted to developing educational strategies. 17

19 Summary of Fourth Workshop to Develop Guidelines for Residential Fertilizer Use June 10, 2008 Facilitator: Nanette O Hara, Tampa Bay Estuary Program A total of 27 people signed the attendance sheets. This workshop was devoted to brainstorming potential educational strategies to communicate the recommended fertilizer guidelines to key groups. Participants also identified potential funding sources for education projects and programs. Participants had been asked prior to the workshops to submit information about existing educational materials and programs to TBEP. Staff compiled an inventory of these submissions (Appendix G) and distributed it to the group, along with samples of some products and relevant reports assessing consumer knowledge of appropriate fertilizer use. Participants added the following to the list of existing educational materials: Model landscape contracts (Sarasota, SWFWMD have developed these) A Your Florida Lawn website now in development by the University of Florida The Green Industries website The Gardening in a Minute radio clips produced by IFAS for broadcast on radio stations The Yard Work segment featuring a horticulturist from the Pinellas County Extension Service Restaurant placemats and beverage coasters that highlight stormwater runoff and how to prevent it Do It Yourself lawn sprinkler check-ups Power Point presentations produced by Sierra Club, Florida Native Plant Society and other groups for use by Speaker s Bureaus The Southwest Florida Water Management District s Citizen s Guide to Stormwater Ponds Following are a few of the key recommendations listed (at the group s request), by target audience, according to their potential for monitoring to assess success: Homeowners and Condominium/Neighborhood Associations: Continue (and expand if possible) the existing Florida Yards & Neighborhoods program through the county extension services. This program provides individual assistance to homeowners in creating Florida-friendly landscapes. In some counties, special funding supports FY&N agents who work with builders and property managers for condominiums or apartment complexes. All FY&N specialists promote the nine basic principles of Florida-friendly landscaping, 18

20 including appropriate use of fertilizer. This program already has extensive monitoring protocols that allow for measurement of success. Similarly, continue and/or expand the Adopt-A-Pond program piloted by Hillsborough County, which also works directly with homeowner groups to improve water quality in their stormwater ponds with eco-friendly lawn care as a key component. This program has a proven track record and solid measurements of success. Conduct neighborhood or community contests to recognize homeowners who convert their yards to Florida-friendly landscaping (similar to program sponsored by SWFWMD a few years ago). Work with corporate sponsors to provide substantial big-ticket prizes as incentives for participating, such as kayaks, gift certificates, etc. Several categories could be offered. Monitoring could measure rate of participation over time and acres of lawn converted to Florida-friendly landscaping. Substantial advertising of this program would be needed to encourage entries. Utilize government access channels to provide information and programming about proper lawn care. A Public Service Announcement or short program created by one government access station could be adapted and provided to all government stations for cost-efficiency and consistency. Piggyback educational messages about any rainy season ban on nitrogen fertilizers adopted by a local government to outreach campaigns associated with the June 1 start of hurricane season. Buy advertising in movie theaters (ads run in theaters prior to movie starts) along with general media buys (radio, TV, newspapers). Distribute information in neighborhood association newsletters, county and city newsletters, and county and city listserves. Distribute educational materials through city/county water meter readers or code enforcement personnel. This could be an especially useful way to distribute information about seasonal restrictions on fertilizer application in communities that enact ordinances containing such bans. Include a special inset about fertilizer in water bills mailed to residents. Purchase advertising on public buses. Place magnetic decals with simple educational messages on county vehicles (i.e stormwater dept. fleets) or even on garbage trucks (St. Petersburg has decals asking residents to keep Clam Bayou clean on some garbage trucks). 19

21 Create demonstration landscapes at high-profile location with companion educational signs (such as the Florida-friendly landscaping at Tropicana Field) Distribute educational materials to homeowners through their lawn care service Promote the use of native plants at retail nursery outlets. Provide information about alternatives to synthetic Nitrogen fertilizers, such as summer blends that contain iron instead of Nitrogen; organic sources of Nitrogen, which generally have lower potential for leaching; and composting as a source of natural fertilizer. Recruit and train community volunteers for a Speakers Bureau of knowledgeable people who can give presentations to schools, neighborhoods, clubs, gardening clubs, etc promoting the regional fertilizer guidelines and any related ordinances. Provide free educational downloads (activities, lesson plans, etc) that can used in classrooms, since kids can be very effective agents of behavior change for their parents and other adults. For example, an activity such as calculating nitrogen levels applied to yards from fertilizer applied at various rates could be added to the existing Water Atlas curriculum. Distribute sample model landscape contracts to homeowner associations and property managers. Retail Fertilizer Sales Outlets: Contract with a horticultural expert to visit each major retail outlet in the Tampa Bay region to discuss the regional fertilizer use guidelines (or ordinances, if enacted) with store or nursery center managers, provide posters and other info about the guidelines or ordinances for display at the stores, and work with the stores to promote responsible customer use of fertilizers as a marketing tool. Number of participating stores, and extent of participation, could be tracked as a measurement of success. Provide instructors to give Saturday morning Do It Yourself workshops for customers on appropriate fertilizer use highlighting the regional guidelines. Store discount coupons could be offered to participants who sign up to participate in a follow-up survey to assess what info they retained after the workshop and whether they followed the fertilizer recommendations. Offer the Green Industries BMP training as part of the in-store training required of new employees working in the nursery centers of the Big Box outlets. Monitoring could include number of employees who complete training. These employees also could serve as instructors for the Saturday morning lawn care workshops. 20

22 Create a certification program or other award mechanism to recognize retail outlets that promote fertilizer and other lawn care BMPs. Stores can use this recognition as a marketing tool to tout their greenness. Enlist the aid of regional fertilizer sales representatives (from corporations such as Scott s or Lesco, for example) to provide information about fertilizer guidelines and related ordinances when making their sales calls to retail centers. Lawn Care Professionals: Distribute information regarding regional guidelines, and especially BMP certification requirements, through professional associations such as the Florida Turfgrass Association, Florida Certified Pest Control Operators Association, Florida Nurserymen and Growers Association. These associations may be able to assist in tracking the number of members who obtain regional BMP certification. Institute a regional Train the Trainers program to expand the number of certified BMP instructors and ensure that all lawn care companies have appropriately trained personnel for various lawn care maintenance tasks. Monitoring could include the number of trainers certified each year, number of Spanish-speaking instructors, and number of personnel trained in at least one aspect of the BMPs. The group also identified several messages, caveats or examples they believe deserve special emphasis in educational programming, including: o Reminders that slow-release Nitrogen fertilizers will not have an immediate greening effect on lawns. o Similarly, the public should be reminded that changes made today to benefit water bodies, such as large-scale stormwater treatment projects or widespread reductions in fertilizer applications, may not produce visible benefits for several years. o Government should serve as a role model for appropriate use of fertilizers. Public properties should use fertilizer appropriately, install Florida-friendly landscaping wherever possible, and train city or county landscape maintenance personnel in Best Management Practices. o Educational messaging should be kept as simple and focused as possible and customized for specific audiences to achieve maximum success. o Positive, rather than punitive, reinforcement, is preferred to foster behavior change. o The link between proper lawn care and healthy waters should be emphasized. 21

23 Monitoring success The following general methods of monitoring success from educational strategies were suggested: The amount of alum needed to treat lakes where excess nutrients from urban fertilizer has been identified as a major problem (such as Lake Tarpon and Lake Seminole) should decline over time with reductions in fertilizer use. Tracking alum injections over time would provide a solid measurement of the success of fertilizer education efforts. Surveys of neighborhoods to assess changes in behavior regarding fertilizer use can provide valuable assessment information. Reduction in consumer fertilizer sales (or shifts to slow-release, organic or summer blends) can be an indication of success in educating citizens. The Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services (DACS) tracks fertilizer sales and is now in the process of revising its reporting protocols to provide more accurate statistic on sales of residential/turf grass fertilizers by category and county. Funding Sources The workgroup identified the following grants, user fees or other funding sources that could be used to finance educational programs: Florida Lake Management Society Love Your Lake and Shoreline Restoration grants (could fund demonstration low maintenance zones as well as removal of invasive plants) Pinellas County Environmental Fund (for regional BMP training?) User fees tied to fertilizer purchases Florida Department of Environmental Protection 319 Stormwater Grants Southwest Florida Water Management District community education grants and cooperative basin board funding Tampa Bay Estuary Program Mini-Grants Dixon Fund grants (administered by FDACS) DOT Stormwater Education grants Fines from citations issued if fertilizer ordinances are adopted could be dedicated to fertilizer education Pollution Recovery Trust Fund grants administered by Hillsborough EPC Private sector partnerships/corporate sponsorship Sportfishing grants (emphasize connection between reducing stormwater runoff to provide clean water for enhanced fisheries) Special assessments 22

24 Next Steps: The workgroup conclude its duties with this workshop. TBEP staff will prepare and distribute a final report for the workgroup s review prior to submitting it to the TBEP Policy Board in August. 23

25 References Barth, C. A Nutrient Movement from the Lawn to the Stream? Watershed Protection Techniques. Vol. 2, no. 1: Carpenter, S., N.F. Caraco, D.L. Correll, R.W. Howarth, A.N. Sharpley, and V.H. Smith Non-point pollution of surface waters with phosphorus and nitrogen. Issues in Ecology 3: Cisar, J.L. and Snyder, G.H Documenting the Florida Yard Concept for Reducing Nitrogen Runoff and Leaching. Prepared for the Florida Department of Environmental Protection. Clear, J.L. and Snyder, G.H An Evaluation of the Effect of Excess Nitrogen Fertilization and Irrigation no Nitrogen Leaching in St. Augustinegrass Lawns. Prepared for the Southwest Florida Water Management District. Erickson, J.E., Cisar, J.L., Volin, J.C. and Snyder, G.H Comparing Nitrogen Runoff and Leaching between Newly Established St. Augustinegrass Turf and an Alternative Residential Landscape. Crop Science 41: Florida Department of Community Affairs, Florida Coastal Management Program Florida assessment of coastal trends. Kennish, M.J Barnegat Bay-Little Egg Harbor, New Jersey: Estuary and Watershed assessment. Journal of Coastal Research, Special Issue 32. Leggette, Brashears and Graham, Inc Lake Tarpon Groundwater Nutrient Study prepared for the Pinellas County Department of Environmental Management. Morton, T.G., A.J. Gold and W.M. Sullivan Influence of overwatering and fertilization on nitrogen losses from home lawns. Journal of Environmental Quality. 17: Nixon, S.W. and M.E.Q. Pilson Nitrogen in estuarine and coastal marine ecosystems. In: Nitrogen in 24

26 the Marine Environment, E.J. Carpenter and D.G. Capone, eds. Academic Press. New York. 900 pp. Petrovic, A.M The fate of nitrogenous fertilizers applied to turfgrass. Journal of Environmental Quality. 19:1-14. Rabalais, N.N., W.J. Wiseman, Jr., R.E. Turner, D. Justic, B.K. Sen Gupta, and O. Dortch Nutrient changes in the Mississippi River and system responses on the adjacent continental shelf. Estuaries 19: Roeder, Eberhard Revised Estimates of Nitrogen Input and Nitrogen Loading in the Wekiva Study Area. Submitted by the Florida Department of Health to the Governor of Florida. Schueler, T.R Urban Pesticides: From Lawn to Stream. Watershed Protection Techniques, vol.2, no. 1, p.252. Southwest Florida Water Management District Issue Paper: Springs -- A Unique Water Resource. United States Geological Survey The quality of our nations waters - nutrients and pesticides. United States Geological Survey Circular pp Vitousek, P.M., J. Aber, R.W. Howarth, G.E. Likens, P.A. Matson, D.W. Schindler, W.H. Schlesinger, and G.D. Tilman Human alteration of the global nitrogen cycle: causes and consequences. Ecological Applications 7: Williams, S.J., D. Dodd, and K.K. Gohm Coasts in crisis. United States Geological Survey Circular pp. 25

27 Appendix A LIST OF ENTITIES/ORGANIZATIONS ATTENDING ONE OR MORE WORKSHOPS Local/State Government Agencies City of Clearwater City of St. Petersburg City of Tampa Environmental Protection Commission of Hillsborough County Florida Department of Environmental Protection Hillsborough County Specialized Services Manatee County Environmental Management Pinellas County Environmental Management Southwest Florida Water Management District Research/Extension Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission/ Fish and Wildlife Research Institute University of Florida Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences/Gainesville Hillsborough County Extension Service Pinellas County Extension Service Manatee County Extension Service Industry (Individual Businesses, Trade Groups) ABC Pest Control Arrow Environmental Services Certified Pest Control Operators Commercial Lawn Care Services Florida Fertilizer and Agrichemical Association Florida Pest Management Association Howard Fertilizer High Tech Pest Management Holsinger Horticultural Services Hulett Environmental John Deere Landscapes Marshall Pest Control Massey Services Middleton Pest Control Nutrilawn Scott s Lawn Service Sorganics TruGreen-LandCare TruGreen Tampa Bay Wholesale Growers Valley Crest Landscape Management 26