Illinois
Using a different framework and programming, Illinois implements several standards similar to those adopted in Wisconsin. In addition to implementing a phosphorus index for large livestock operations, Illinois encourages voluntary participation in nutrient management for small and medium operations and only requires the use of the PI in areas draining to impaired waterbodies.
While Illinois has a statewide farmland preservation program in which landowners may restrict the use of their land to agricultural or related uses in exchange for tax credits, the program does not include conservation compliance requirements.
Iowa
Like Illinois, Iowa requires that manure management plans for livestock operations of 500 or more animal units be based on the phosphorus index. Iowa nutrient management planning includes a nitrogen leaching index and, like Wisconsin, includes restrictions on manure applications near surface water, groundwater conduits, and frozen soil. See Iowa’s website at: http://www.iowadnr.gov/portals/idnr/uploads/afo/fs_desncriteria_medcafo.pdf While Iowa operates a county-based statewide farmland preservation program in which landowners may restrict the use of their land to agricultural or related uses in exchange for tax credits, the program does not include conservation compliance requirements.
Michigan
Michigan relies on GAAMPs [see Generally Accepted Agricultural and Management Practices for Manure Management and Utilization (January 2012)] to support the Michigan Agriculture Environmental Assurance Program (“MAEAP”), which includes a compliance verification process that ensures nuisance protection to farmers under Michigan’s Right to Farm law. GAAMPs covers standards similar to those in Wisconsin including standards for nutrient management. These standards are implemented as part of the state’s right to farm law and its complaint investigation program. The state assesses problems identified through complaints, and farmers must take corrective action to earn nuisance protection under the right to farm law. Michigan uses a risk assessment formula to rank a field’s risk for runoff and allows farms to use conservation practices to reduce the risk for those fields, thereby allowing farmers to apply manure in the winter.
While Michigan has a statewide farmland preservation program in which landowners may restrict the use of their land to agricultural or related uses in exchange for tax credits, the program does not include conservation compliance requirements
Minnesota
Minnesota requires a manure management plan for farms greater than 100 animal units if the farm requests a permit for one of several state programs. Like Wisconsin, the plans do not need to be submitted annually but need to be available upon request. Minnesota also utilizes setback from surface and groundwater features to reduce the risk of nonpoint contamination.
Under its feedlot program, Minnesota imposes mandatory requirements on about 25,000 registered feedlots. This program requires feedlot owners, ranging in size from small farms to large-scale commercial livestock operations, to “register with the MPCA, and meet the requirements for runoff discharge, manure application and storage, and processed wastewater.”
While Minnesota has a statewide farmland preservation program by which landowners may restrict the use of their land to agricultural or related uses in exchange for tax credits, the program does not include conservation compliance requirements.
Summary of Factual Data and Analytical Methodologies
The Department participated in the Wisconsin USDA NRCS development of the 2015 version of the Wisconsin 590 Nutrient Management Standard with technical assistance from agronomists, farmers, UW scientists, and agency staff. In Wisconsin, the 590 Standard uses the current 2012 version of UW Pub. A2809 Nutrient Application Guidelines for Field, Vegetable and Fruit Crops to determine the crop’s nutrient needs and includes other restrictions required of NM plans developed for: DNR – Notice of Discharge or Wisconsin Pollution Discharge Elimination System permits for >1000 animal unit operations; Ordinances for manure storage or livestock siting; Department cost share or Farmland Preservation; DNR cost share; USDA cost share; or voluntary reasons. Currently, about 2.9 million acres are implementing nutrient management plans, which leaves 6.27 million acres yet to have plans developed. The cost share rates of $7 per acre increased to $10 per acre due to the additional costs and spreading restrictions. With 6.27 million acres yet to have a NM plan, at $3 per acre, an additional $19 million estimate for the cost of full implementation or $1.9 million annually for the next ten years. If these landowners are offered 70% cost-sharing, they would be responsible for paying 30% of the $10 cost per acre or about $2.7 million annually.
Analysis and Supporting Documents Used to Determine Effect on Small Business or in Preparation of an Economic Impact Analysis
The Department worked with all federal and state agencies and stakeholders, including farmers, agronomists, and conservation staff to update the current federal standard, which resulted in the 2015-590 Nutrient Management Standard. Adopting the 2015-590 Standard was recommended based on the desire for one standard to apply to farms rather than varying federal and state standards. The changes from the 2005-590 to the 2015-590 were compared for cost of implementation.
Effects on Small Business
Most impacts of this rule will be on farmers, a great majority of whom qualify as “small businesses.” The analysis of the impacts on farms takes into consideration the following factors:
• Most farmers will be insulated from some of the costs of implementation by the state’s cost share requirement and the limited state funding available to provide cost-sharing.
• For farmers receiving farmland preservation tax credits, this rule provides farmers flexibility to minimize the financial impacts related to compliance (which range from $8 to $12 million state-wide), including a delay in the effective date for compliance with the 2011 DNR standards, the use of performance schedules, pursuit of cost-sharing for which they are eligible, use of a tax credit to offset some implementation costs, or if needed, withdrawal from the farmland preservation program to avoid unmanageable costs.
The rule changes will have small, but positive impacts on businesses other than farmers. Those businesses include nutrient management planners, soil testing laboratories, farm supply organizations, agricultural engineering practitioners, and contractors installing farm conservation practices. The Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis, which will be filed with this rule, provides a more complete analysis of this issue.
Department Contact
Sara Walling
Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection
P.O. Box 8911
Madison, WI 53718-8911
Telephone (608) 224-4501
Place Where Comments Were Submitted
Questions and comments related to this rule may be directed to:
Sue Porter
Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection
P.O. Box 8911
Madison, WI 53718-8911
Telephone (608) 224-4605
Rule comments were accepted through February 9, 2017.
SOIL AND WATER RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
SECTION 1. ATCP 50.04 (1) is amended to read:
(1) NONPOINT SOURCE POLLUTION CONTROL. A landowner shall implement conservation practices that achieve compliance with DNR performance standards under ss. NR 151.02 to 151.08, in effect on May 1, 2014. A nutrient management plan developed in accordance with sub. (3) may be used to demonstrate compliance with s. NR 151.04. SECTION 2. ATCP 50.04 (3) (a) (Note) is repealed.
SECTION 3. ATCP 50.04 (3) (dm) 1. is amended to read:
1. Standard values specified in NRCS Wisconsin Conservation Planning Technical Note WI-1 (November, 2008), companion document to Nutrient Application Guidelines for Field, Vegetable and Fruit Crops, UWEX publication A2809 referenced in the NRCS technical guide standard 590.
SECTION 4. ATCP 50.04 (3) (e) and (Note) are amended to read:
(e) The plan shall comply with the NRCS technical guide nutrient management standard 590 (September, 2005 December, 2015) except for sections IV. D., IV. E., and VI., and shall also comply with the Wisconsin Conservation Planning Technical Note WI-1 (November, 2008 February, 2016).
Note: The NRCS technical guide standard 590 (December, 2015) and the companion document Wisconsin Conservation Planning Technical Note WI-1 (February, 2016) are on file with the department and the legislative reference bureau. Copies are available from a county land conservation department, a NRCS field office, the national NRCS website at: http://www.nrcs.usda.gov, the Wisconsin NRCS website at: www.wi.nrcs.usda.gov, or the department website at: https://datcp.wi.gov/Pages/Programs_Services/ATCP50.aspx. The NRCS technical guide standard 590 (December, 2015) includes the options for the development of a P management strategy when manure or organic by-products are applied during the crop rotation using either the Phosphorus Index (PI) or Soil Test Phosphorus Management Strategy. A person may obtain a checklist to gather information for a nutrient management plan by visiting the department’s website at: https://datcp.wi.gov/Pages/Programs_Services/ATCP50.aspx. SECTION 5. ATCP 50.04 (3) (f) is amended to read:
The plan may not recommend nutrient applications that exceed the amounts required to achieve applicable crop fertility levels recommended by the University of Wisconsin-Extension in the 2006 2012 edition of Nutrient Application Guidelines for Field, Vegetable and Fruit Crops, UWEX publication A2809, or in the latest edition of that publication if preferred by the landowner, unless the nutrient management planner can show that one or more of the following circumstances justifies the recommended application:
SECTION 6. ATCP 50.04 (3) (g) is amended to read:
