HomeMy WebLinkAboutChapter 7
Chapter 7
Agriculture and Water Quality
7.1 Animal Operations
In 1992, the Environmental Management Commission (EMC) adopted a rule modification (15A
NCAC 2H.0217) establishing procedures for managing and reusing animal wastes from intensive
livestock operations. The rule applies to new, expanding or existing feedlots with animal waste
management systems designed to serve animal populations of at least the following size: 100
head of cattle, 75 horses, 250 swine, 1,000 sheep or 30,000 birds (chickens and turkeys) with a
liquid waste system. There are no facilities meeting these specifications in the Savannah basin.
Key Animal Operation Legislation (1995-2003)
1995 Senate Bill 974 requires owners of swine facilities with 250 or more animals to hire a certified operator.
Operators are required to attend a six-hour training course and pass an examination for certification. Senate Bill
1080 established buffer requirements for swine houses, lagoons and land application areas for farms sited after
October 1, 1995.
1996 Senate Bill 1217 required all facilities (above threshold populations) to obtain coverage under a general permit,
beginning in January 1997, for all new and expanding facilities. DWQ was directed to conduct annual
inspections of all animal waste management facilities. Poultry facilities with 30,000+ birds and a liquid waste
management system were required to hire a certified operator by January 1997 and facilities with dry litter
animal waste management systems were required to develop an animal waste management plan by January
1998. The plan must address three specific items: 1) periodic testing of soils where waste is applied; 2)
development of waste utilization plans; and 3) completion and maintenance of records on-site for three years.
Additionally, anyone wishing to construct a new, or expand an existing, swine farm must notify all adjoining
property owners.
1997 House Bill 515 placed a moratorium on new or existing swine farm operations and allows counties to adopt
zoning ordinances for swine farms with a design capacity of 600,000 pounds (SSLW) or more. In addition,
owners of potential new and expanding operations are required to notify the county (manager or chair of
commission) and local health department, as well as adjoining landowners. NCDENR was required to develop
and adopt economically feasible odor control standards by March 1, 1999.
1998 House Bill 1480 extended the moratorium on construction or expansion of swine farms. The bill also requires
owners of swine operations to register with DWQ any contractual relationship with an integrator.
1999 House Bill 1160 extended (again) the moratorium on new construction or expansion of swine farms, required
NCDENR to develop an inventory of inactive lagoons. The Bill requires owners/operators of an animal waste
treatment system to notify the public in the event of a discharge to surface waters of the state of 1,000 gallons or
more of untreated wastewater.
2000 Attorney General Easley reached a landmark agreement with Smithfield Foods, Inc. to phase out hog lagoons
and implement new technologies that will substantially reduce pollutants from hog farms. The agreement
commits Smith field to phase out all anaerobic lagoon systems on 276 company-owned farms. Legislation will
be required to phase out the remaining systems statewide within a 5-year period (State of Environment Report
2000).
2001 House Bill 1216 extended (again) the moratorium on new construction or expansion of swine farms.
Chapter 7 – Agriculture and Water Quality 75
7.2 Impacted Streams in Agricultural Areas
There is little agricultural activity in the Savannah Basin. However, impacts to streams from
even very small agricultural operations can include excessive nutrient loading, pesticide and
herbicide contamination, bacterial contamination, and sedimentation.
Based on the most recent information from the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service
(NRCS) National Resources Inventory (NRI), agricultural land use in the Savannah River basin
is less than one percent of the total land area. Refer to Appendix III for more information related
to land use changes in the Savannah River basin.
2007 Recommendations
DWQ will identify streams where agricultural land use may be impacting water quality and
aquatic habitat. Local Soil and Water Conservation District (SWCD) and NRCS staff should
investigate these streams to assess agricultural impacts and recommend best management
practices (BMPs) to reduce the impacts. DWQ recommends that funding and technical support
for agricultural BMPs continue and increase. Refer to Appendix VII for agricultural nonpoint
source agency contact information.
7.3 Working Land Conservation Benefits
Working Lands are those used for agriculture, forestry or other natural resource industries. Well-
managed working lands provide important non-market goods and services. For example, farms,
ranches, and forestlands provide food and cover for wildlife, help control flooding, protect
wetlands and watersheds, and maintain air quality. They can absorb and filter wastewater,
runoff, and provide groundwater recharge.
Rapid urbanization is forcing the conversion of
working land to developed land at an astonishing
rate in North Carolina. From1992-1997, over
170,000 acres of agricultural land was converted to
developed land. That was the 12th highest rate in
the nation. The figures for Prime Farmland, the
best land for growing crops, are even more
disturbing. North Carolina is losing prime farmland
at the fourth fastest rate in the nation (USDA,
2001). The 1997 U.S. Census of Agriculture shows
that a large percentage of cropland is in urban-
influenced areas, making them prime targets for
development. It is well established that developed
land negatively impacts water quality (See Section
5.1). Therefore, preserving North Carolina’s
working lands should be a priority.
The value of specific working lands can be calculated for any watershed by performing a Cost of
Community Services (COCS) study. COCS studies are a case study approach used to determine
a community's public service costs versus revenues based on current land use. Their particular
niche is to evaluate the overall contribution of agricultural and other open lands on equal ground
with residential, commercial and industrial development.
76 Chapter 7 – Agriculture and Water Quality
As of January 2002, 83 COCS studies conducted in 19 states found that tax and other revenues
collected from farm, ranch and forest landowners more than covered the public service costs
these lands incur. COCS studies show that on average, residential development generates
significant tax revenue but requires costly public services that typically are subsidized by
revenues from commercial and industrial land uses. The special contribution of COCS studies is
that they show that farm, ranch, and forestlands are important commercial land uses that help
balance community budgets. Working lands are not just vacant land waiting to be developed
(Freedgood et.al., 2002)
A recent analysis of the fiscal impact of different land uses in Macon County, NC demonstrates
the cost-saving benefits to the county of maintaining farmland and open space. Using county
budget data and tax data from fiscal year 2000, the study indicates that typical residential and
commercial properties cost the county budget by demanding more in tax-supported services than
they contribute in property tax revenues. Such services include schools, roads, water and sewer
lines, fire and police protection, and social and administrative services. On the other hand, the
typical farmland/open-space parcel contributed more property tax to the county budget than it
demanded in expenditures for county services. Analyzing a scenario of a 30-acre parcel of
farmland/open-space, the study estimated that the county budget would gain $290 if the land
remained as farmland, but would lose a net $532 if converted to ten 3-acre lots with houses on
them (Jones and Kask, 2001).
The opportunities for private landowners to protect working lands are growing. North Carolina
cities and counties have now begun to use the new set of farmland protection tools authorized by
Chapter 7 – Agriculture and Water Quality 77
the General Assembly in 2005 through Session Law 2005-390. Along with an expanded
definition of agriculture and a revamped Agricultural Development and Farmland Preservation
Trust Fund, this legislation authorized a new category for localities to promote the stability of
their agricultural sectors. Counties and municipalities now have the authority to create an
Enhanced Voluntary Agricultural District (EVAD) option, which offers an increased set of
incentives for landowners to restrict development over a ten-year period. Polk County in the
mountains and Wentworth in the Piedmont are amongst the first jurisdictions in the state to
utilize this new tool, with the recent adoption of local EVAD ordinances. Landowners interested
in working land protection should contact their local land trust; NRCS field representative, or
Soil and Water Conservation District. The Farmland Information Center is also an excellent
online resource: http://www.farmlandinfo.org/. Local government officials interested in the
value of working land conservation should visit the Land Trust Alliance’s Economic Benefits of
Open Space Protection web page at: http://www.lta.org/resources/economic_benefits.htm.
7.4 Agricultural Best Management Practices and Funding Opportunities
7.4.1 USDA – NRCS Environmental Quality Improvement Program (EQIP)
The Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP) is a voluntary program that provides
assistance to farmers and ranchers who face threats to soil, water, air, and related natural
resources on their land. Through EQIP, the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS)
provides assistance to agricultural producers in a manner that will promote agricultural
production and environmental quality as compatible goals, optimize environmental benefits, and
help farmers and ranchers meet Federal, State, Tribal, and local environmental requirements.
The 2002 Farm Bill reauthorized national EQIP funding at $6.16 billion over the six-year period
of FY 2002 through FY 2007. Program priorities are as follows:
• Reduction of nonpoint source pollution including nutrients, sediment, pesticides, and
excess salinity in impaired watersheds consistent with TMDLs where available;
reduction of groundwater contamination; reduction of point source pollution
including contamination from confined animal feeding operations
• Conservation of ground and surface water resources
• Reduction of emissions including particulate matter, nitrogen oxides (NOx), volatile
organic compounds, and ozone precursors and depleters that contribute to air quality
impairment violations of National Ambient Air Quality Standards
• Reduction in soil erosion and sedimentation from unacceptable levels on agricultural
land
• Promotion of at-risk species habitat
conservation. North Carolina EQIP Funding 2000-2005
2000: $1.1 Million
2001: $3.5 Million
2002: $7.1 Million
2003: $10.0 Million
2004: $13.2 Million
2005: $14.3 Million
EQIP offers contracts with a minimum term that
ends one year after the implementation of the
last scheduled practices and a maximum term of
ten years. These contracts provide incentive
payments and cost-shares to implement
conservation practices. Persons who are
engaged in livestock or agricultural production
on eligible land may participate in the EQIP
78 Chapter 7 – Agriculture and Water Quality
program. EQIP activities are carried out according to an environmental quality incentives
program plan of operations developed in conjunction with the producer that identifies the
appropriate conservation practice or practices to address the resource concerns. The practices are
subject to NRCS technical standards adapted for local conditions. The local conservation district
approves the plan.
EQIP may cost-share up to 75 percent of the costs of certain conservation practices. Incentive
payments may be provided for up to three years to encourage producers to carry out management
practices they may not otherwise use without the incentive. However, limited resource producers
and beginning farmers and ranchers may be eligible for cost-shares up to 90 percent. Farmers
and ranchers may elect to use a certified third-party provider for technical assistance. An
individual or entity may not receive, directly or indirectly, cost-share or incentive payments that,
in the aggregate, exceed $450,000 for all EQIP contracts entered during the term of the Farm
Bill.
NRCS district contacts for the Savannah River basin are provided in Appendix VII, and EQIP
signup information can be found on NRCS website at
http://www.nc.nrcs.usda.gov/programs/EQIP/index.html.
7.4.2 NC Agriculture Cost Share Program
The NC Agricultural Cost Share Program (NCACSP) was established in 1984 to help reduce
agricultural nonpoint runoff into the state’s waters. The program helps owners and renters of
established agricultural operations improve their on-farm management by using best
management practices. These BMPs include vegetative, structural or management systems that
can improve the efficiency of farming operations while reducing the potential for surface and
groundwater pollution. The NCACSP is implemented by the Division of Soil and Water
(DSWC), which divides the approved BMPs into five main purposes or categories.
Erosion Reduction/Nutrient Loss Reduction in Fields
Erosion/nutrient management measures include planned systems for reducing soil erosion
and nutrient runoff from cropland into streams to improve water quality. Practices include:
critical area planting, cropland conversion, water diversion, long-term no-till, pastureland
conversion, sod-based rotation, stripcropping, terraces, and Christmas tree conservation
cover.
Sediment/Nutrient Delivery Reduction from Fields
Sediment/nutrient management measures include planned systems that prevent sediment and
nutrient runoff from fields into streams. Practices include: field borders, filter strips,
grassed waterways, nutrient management strategies, riparian buffers, water control
structures, streambank stabilization, and road repair/stabilization.
Stream Protection from Animals
Stream protection management measures are planned systems for protecting streams and
streambanks. Such measures eliminate livestock access to streams by providing an alternate
watering source away from the stream itself. Other benefits include reduced soil erosion,
sedimentation, pathogen contamination, and pollution from dissolved, particulate, and
sediment-attached substances. Practices include: heavy use area protection, livestock
Chapter 7 – Agriculture and Water Quality 79
exclusion (i.e., fencing), spring development, stream crossings, trough or watering tanks,
wells, and livestock feeding areas.
Proper Animal Waste Management
A waste management system is a planned system in which all necessary components are
installed for managed liquid and solid waste to prevent or minimize degradation of soil and
water resources. Practices include: animal waste lagoon closures, constructed wetlands,
controlled livestock lounging area, dry manure stacks, heavy use area protection, insect and
odor control, stormwater management, waste storage ponds/lagoons, compost, and waste
application system.
Agricultural Chemical (agrichemical) Pollution Prevention
Agrichemical pollution prevention measures involve a planned system to prevent chemical
runoff to streams for water quality improvement. Practices include: agrichemical handling
facilities and fertigation/chemigation back flow prevention systems.
The NCACSP is a voluntary program that reimburses farmers up to 75% of the cost of installing
an approved BMP. The cost share funds are paid to the farmer once the planned BMP is
completed, inspected and certified to be installed according to NCACSP standards. The annual
statewide budget for BMP cost sharing is approximately $6.9 million. From 2002 to 2007, there
were no projects in the Savannah River basin.
County Soil and Water Conservation District (SWCD) contacts for the Savannah River basin are
included in Appendix VII. BMP definitions and DSWC contact information can be found online
at www.enr.state.nc.us/DSWC/pages/agcostshareprogram.html.
80 Chapter 7 – Agriculture and Water Quality