Lancaster farming. (Lancaster, Pa., etc.) 1955-current, March 18, 1995, Image 19

Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page. It is also available as plain text as well as XML.

(Continued front Pag* Al)
has been working with commis
sion staff to draft proposed
To date, there has been little that
has kept the board from working to
develop the regulations. Winter
storms during early 1994 caused
the board to cancel a meeting and
temporarily pressured staff to keep
the momentum. Also, despite a
drastic change in the administra
tion of state government and the
resulting uncertainty, the board
has continued to work to develop
A goal set in 1993 was to have
nutrient management regulations
proposed by last July, and final
ized by July this year.
As it appears, the advisory
board is expected to have a final
draftof proposed regulations ready
for the commission at least by the
end of May.
Discussion during Wednes
day’s meeting of the board resulted
in a rough estimation that a final
set of proposed regulations most
likely will be available for board
approval during its May meeting.
The next meeting of the advis
ory board is set for April 19, and
the possibility was held out during
Wednesday’s meeting that if mem
bers can get clean copies of the
draft to review, as well as agree
able definitions and wording in
two areas, the board could possibly
approve a draft Though that sce
nario is less likely.
Debate Wednesday was some
what controversial dealing with
the frequency of review of nutrient
management plans.
In effect a nutrient management
plan is nothing more than a plan for
Specializing In Free-Stall Barns!
Heifer Bams And Parlors
low Freestall Barn
Heifer & Beef
Barn Featuring
3 Row
601 Overly Grove Rd., New Holland, PA 17557
(717) 354-4740 • PhH Van Lieu Home: (717) 259-9077
Management Advisory Board Nears Final Draft
, using nutrients followed up with
an accounting system. The goal of
the plan is to control the flow of
nutrients, nitrogen in this case, so
as to nearly as possible prevent
abnormal losses from the farm into
the surrounding environment.
The proposal of the majority of
the board is to require an official
review of a nutrient management
plan once every three years. How
ever, an argument was made that
the mandatory review should be
annual because a nutrient manage
ment plan is dynamic and because
conditions and manure use can
vary widely every year.
The majority of the board, how
ever, expressed the opinion that a
three-year interval would- better
suit because current crop rotations
generally use a three-year cycle for
major crops, and it was also
expressed that requiring annual
reviews of all with plans would
create a nightmare for those trying
to keep track of who has complied
with the requirement.
Except for a handfull or less of
issues still needing to be resolved; -
the board has drafted language to
cover all the areas required under
the Act, and those which resulted
out of necessity to make the reg
ulations understandable, fair and
The regulations fall under Title
25, Environmental Resources,
State Conservation Commission,
Subchapter D, Chapter 83.
Regulations are created under
an outline systenrthat uses chap
ters. subchapters, and is futber bro
ken down through normal outline
procedures, depending on the
amount of clarity needed to cover
an issue.
8 ft. Deep Pit with Waffle
Slats & Rubber Dust Mattresses.
Under the working draft regula
tions. there are 18 different sub
chapters, which are relatively few
considering existing regulations
covering many other governed
Although the wording of the
proposed set of regulations is to be
completely redrafted to reflect the
inclusion of rules for voluntary
nutrient management plans, and
also to make the terms more con
cise and consistent, it may be help
ful to review the subchapter titles
for understanding what is the gen
eral range of issues being consid
ered under the draft regulations.
General Requirements: Defini
tions; Scope; Purpose and Appli
cability of Requirements.
Nutrient Managment Plans:
General Requirements; Identifica
tion of Concentrated Animal
Plan Content Requirements:
Scope of Plan; Content of Plans;
Identification of Farms and
Acreage; Summary of Nutrient
Management Plan.
Nutrient Application: Determi
nation of Available Nutrients;
Determination of Nutrients
Needed For Crop Production;
Determination of Nutrient Appli
cation Rates; Nutrient Application
Alternative Uses For Excess
Manure: Alternative Manure
Utilization Plans.
Manure Management: Manure
Storm Water Runoff Control:
Storm Water Runnoff Control.
Implementation Schedule:
Implementation Schedule.
Additional Plan Content
Requirements For CAOs:
Excess Manure Utilization Plans
For CAOs
Record Keeping and Informa
■'tional Requirements: Record
Keeping Relating to Application
of Nutrients; Alternative Manure
Utilization Record Keeping;
Exported Manure Informational
Additional Record Keeping and
Informational Requirements for
CAOS: Record Keeping for Man
ure Transfers from CAOs;
Exported Manure Informational
Packets for Distribution by CAOs.
Minimum Standards For Man
ure Storage Facilities.
Brown Swiss Calf Sale
Mid-Atlantic Brown Swiss Calf
sale has been set for Saturday,
April 29, at the Frederick Fair
grounds, and there’s still time to
consign a calf.
According to Cindy Warner, a
member of the sale committee, the
deadline to consign a calf is Fri
day, March 24, in order to com
plete the sale catalog in time for
potential buyers to review.
The sale is set to start at 10:30
a.m. and Warner said, “We are
looking for a strong group of
calves that combine a unique blend
of production and sound type. This
sale has been a great place to buy a
4-H project (calf) and has also pro
vided some top-pedigreed calves
for the merchandising and invest
ment buyer."
In other news, the Mid-Atlantic
Brown Swiss Association has
An odorless, colorless,
invisible-and costly--
forage thief!
You can't see it-and you can't stop it. Storage losses in forage can
steal your valuable crop-how much is lost depends upon how you
store your feed;
• Tower Silos have Up to 8% loss*
• Bunkers have Up to 45% loss**
If the average difference in feed lost between tower silos and
bunkers is 30%, then storage of 1000 tons will mean 300 tons
MORE lost in a bunker. If silage is valued at $3O per ton, the
additional losses from bunker storage would be $9OOO a year.
For information on losses for all types of crop storage methods,
contact the Crop Storage Institute for your free copy of" Methods
of Crop Storage" and "Know the Facts."
Crop Storage Institute
219 N. 4th St. P.0.80x 560
Lafayette, Indiana 47902-0560
*"Dry Matter Retention in Silage Storage Units,” Marshfield Exp. Station, 1983
** "Keeping Air Out of Bunkers Is The Key," Hoards Dairyman, March 2S, 1992
Lancaster Farming, Saturday, March 18,1995-Al9
Plan Review and Implementa
tion: Initial Plan Review and
Approval; Plan Implementation.
Plan Amendments and Trans
fers: Plan Amendments; Amend
ments Due to Unforseen Circum
stances; Plan Transfers.
Contagious Disease Emergen
cies: Manure Management In
Emergency Situations.
Financial Assistance: Applicant
Eligibility: Condition for Receipt
of Financial Assistance; Financial
Assistance Criteria; Application
Procedure; Eligible Costs; Loans;
Loan Guarantees; Grants; Grants
and Loans; Funding Limitations;
Implementation and Reporting;
Delegation of Financial
Delegation to Local Agencies
Other Planning Provisions:
Compliance Plans
scheduled its annual meeting for 7
p.m., March 25, at New Midway
fire hall, also in Frederick County.
An election of officers, a busi
ness meeting, a review of the calf
sale and a special guest speaker are
among the activities on the agenda. -
The guest speaker is to be
Donald Leishear, of Damascus,
Md., who is to talk about his trip to
Also, those interested in the
Mid-Atlantic Brown Swiss Futuri
ty, won last year by an entry by
Gary Mase, of Lebanon, Pa.,
should be aware that it is soon
For more information about the
calf sale, meeting, or futurity, call
•either Warner at (301) 371-5206;
Howard Flemming at (301)
475-3440; or Harold Long, (301)