NR 120.14(19)(b)8.e.
e. Cutting of trees or shrubs may be done only to prevent safety hazards, or to remove undesirable competitive species, and shall be approved by the project sponsor.
NR 120.14(19)(b)8.f.
f. The forest floor duff layer and leaf litter shall remain intact to provide a continuous ground cover and meet the habitat functions of this practice.
NR 120.14(19)(b)8.g.
g. Lawn mowing is permitted in the viewing and access corridors. Elsewhere, mowing is prohibited except in established prairie buffer areas, and in accordance with a mowing plan approved by the project sponsor. In viewing and access corridors, mowing is allowed to a minimum height of 10 inches, and only as needed to reduce competition from undesirable species. Mowing may occur only between August 1 and September 1 to avoid disturbance of nesting birds and allow regrowth before winter.
NR 120.14(19)(b)8.h.
h. Vehicles, boats, docks or other equipment storage shall be excluded from the restoration area to prevent soil compaction and damage to the buffer vegetation. Boats and docks may be temporarily stored during non-growing seasons as long as vegetative cover is unaffected.
NR 120.14(19)(b)8.i.
i. The access corridor may not channel runoff to the waterbody and shall be located to avoid areas of high runoff or erodible soils. Grass or other cover that will hold the soil is required for the access corridor.
NR 120.14(19)(b)8.j.
j. Except for areas waterward of the access corridor, areas waterward of the buffer shall be managed as zones where vegetation removal and land-disturbing activity are prohibited after buffer establishment.
NR 120.14(19)(c)
(c)
Standards. UW Extension Publication GWQ014,
Shoreline Plants and Landscaping, DNR Publication PUBL-WM-228,
Home on the Range — Restoring and Maintaining Grasslands for Wildlife, which is incorporated by reference for this chapter, or similar publications as approved by the project sponsor.
NR 120.14 Note
Note: Copies of these publications may be inspected at the offices of the department, 101 S. Webster Street, Madison; the Secretary of State, 30 W. Mifflin, Madison; and the Legislative Reference Bureau, One E. Main Street, Suite 200, Madison.
NR 120.14(20)(a)(a)
Description. Barnyard runoff management is the use of structural measures to contain, divert, retard, treat, collect, convey, store or otherwise control the discharge of surface runoff from outdoor areas of concentrated livestock activity. Measures include, gutters, downspouts and diversions to intercept and redirect runoff around the barnyard, feeding area or farmstead. This practice shall be implemented using one or more of the standards in
par. (c).
NR 120.14(20)(b)1.a.
a. The operator intentionally aggravated a pollution discharge for the purpose of receiving cost-sharing.
NR 120.14(20)(b)1.b.
b. The discharge could be prevented through improved management practices at significantly lower costs than for a barnyard runoff system.
NR 120.14(20)(b)1.c.
c. The operator could have prevented the discharge by means of a previously agreed operations and maintenance plan with the department, the department of agriculture, trade and consumer protection, the county land conservation committee or the natural resources conservation service.
NR 120.14(20)(b)2.b.
b. Costs to construct or modify a building. This subdivision paragraph does not apply to a modification that is essential for the installation of a barnyard runoff control system or to the construction of a roof system pursuant to
sub. (26).
NR 120.14(20)(b)2.d.
d. Costs resulting from anticipated changes in livestock numbers, housing or management.
NR 120.14(20)(b)3.a.
a. Diversions, gutters, downspouts, collection basins, infiltration areas, filter strips, waterway outlet structures, piping, land shaping and filter walls needed to manage runoff from areas where livestock manure accumulates.
NR 120.14(20)(b)3.b.
b. Concrete paving of portions of yards necessary to support walls, necessary to enable proper yard scraping and used as a settling basin.
NR 120.14(20)(b)3.c.
c. Concrete paving of all or portions of the yard required to protect groundwater when specified in the approved priority watershed plan, priority lake plan,
ch. NR 243 project or other project grant application.
NR 120.14(21)(a)(a) Description. Animal lot relocation is relocation of an animal lot from a site such as a floodway to a suitable site to minimize the amount of pollutants from the animal lot to surface or ground waters. This practice does not include the purchase of land. This practice shall be implemented using one or more of the standards in
par. (c).
NR 120.14(21)(b)1.a.
a. Stabilization and abandonment of a site, which does or does not include relocation to a different site owned, operated or controlled by the cost-share recipient. For abandonment of a site which does not include relocation, the site shall either have been in existence for a minimum of 3 years and found to be a significant nonpoint source of pollution, have been issued a notice of discharge under
ch. NR 243, or have been identified during a watershed inventory as being a nonpoint source of pollution and listed as eligible in the approved priority watershed plan, priority lake plan or project grant application.
NR 120.14(21)(b)1.b.
b. Reconstruction or replacement of buildings and other structures necessary for the relocation of the animal lot.
NR 120.14(21)(b)1.c.
c. Proper abandonment of wells required as a result of the relocation of the animal lot.
NR 120.14(21)(b)1.e.
e. Stabilization and abandonment of a previously used earthen animal lot which has either been in existence for a minimum of 3 years and is found to be a significant nonpoint source of pollution or has been identified during a watershed inventory as being a nonpoint source of pollution and is listed as eligible in the approved priority watershed plan, priority lake plan or project grant application.
NR 120.14(21)(b)3.
3. The landowner agrees to abandon the existing site permanently for livestock use and agrees to record a restrictive covenant to this effect in the office of the register of deeds for each county in which the property is located. The restrictive covenant shall permanently exclude the use of the property by livestock. A maximum of 10 animals may be kept on the site, provided that no more than 4 individual animals exceed a live weight of 200 pounds and the desired level of pollutant control for the site is maintained.
NR 120.14(21)(b)4.
4. A plan for relocation shall be approved by the governmental unit, in writing, prior to initiation of relocation. The project grant application shall list criteria for relocation plan approval. At a minimum, these criteria shall include the following:
NR 120.14(21)(b)4.a.
a. The site is identified as eligible in the approved priority watershed plan, priority lake plan or project grant application.
NR 120.14(21)(b)4.b.
b. The relocation to a site owned, operated or controlled by the cost-share recipient is cost-effective provided the cost-sharing for repairing, reconstructing or replacement of buildings and other structures at the relocation site does not exceed the appraised values of the buildings and other structures to be abandoned which have utility for livestock operations.
NR 120.14(21)(b)4.c.
c. The relocated lot will not significantly contribute to a water quality problem.
NR 120.14(21)(b)5.
5. If the cost-share recipient has received state cost-share funding at the site to be abandoned for practices listed in this paragraph, the amount of cost-sharing received shall be deducted from the relocation cost-share payment.
NR 120.14(21)(b)6.
6. In cases of abandonment which does not include relocation to a different site owned, operated or controlled by the cost-share recipient, livestock may not be relocated to a site which will significantly contribute to surface water or groundwater quality degradation. A written plan shall be submitted to the governmental unit for approval detailing the disbursement of the animals.
NR 120.14(21)(b)7.
7. The abandonment of a site without relocation to a site owned, operated or controlled by the cost-share recipient is cost-effective provided the cost-share grant does not exceed the estimated cost-share grant of the best management practices which would have been installed at the abandoned site. The best management practice cost-effective requirement may be waived by the department if the site to be abandoned has a significant water quality impact and the proposed best management practice cannot ensure an acceptable level of water quality protection when compared to relocation.
NR 120.14(21)(c)
(c)
Standards. Standards from the NRCS field office technical guide are as follows:
NR 120.14(22)(a)(a)
Description. Well abandonment is the proper filling and sealing of a well to prevent it from acting as a channel for contaminants to reach the groundwater or as a channel for the vertical movement of surface water to groundwater. This practice shall be implemented using one or more of the standards in
par. (c).
NR 120.14(22)(b)1.a.
a. The removal of the pump, pump piping, debris or other obstacles that interfere with the proper sealing of the well.
NR 120.14(22)(b)1.b.
b. The sand-cement grout, sodium bentonite, clay slurry, chipped bentonite or concrete used for the well sealing.
NR 120.14(22)(b)2.a.
a. The abandonment of wells at an oil or gas drilling site or wells that produced gas or oil.
NR 120.14(22)(b)2.c.
c. The abandonment of mine shafts, drill holes or air vents associated with the mining industry.
NR 120.14(22)(c)1.1. NRCS field office technical standard 351 — Well Decommissioning; April, 1999.
