Learn From Others to Prepare for Tighter Nutrient Restrictions
Travis Edwards j n g changes; provisions for moving manure from fields
Penn State Research Technologist having excessive P to fields needing additional nu-
On Sept. 4 and 5,1 had the opportunity to tour sev- trients; increased monitoring of record keeping: and
eral farms on the Delmarva Peninsula in Delaware mo re evaluations of the nutrient P.
and Maryland. My main interest when touring these
farms was to learn what they were doing to manage
farm waste, given the tough environmental restrictions
that farms in that area face.
While most farms have very effective manure treat
ment facilities in place, accompanied by very sound
nutrient management plans, they still need to develop
an emphasis on phosphorus (P) management. Most of
the herds have reduced ration levels of P, and overall,
are ahead of the original timeline for reducing nutrient
flow into the Chesapeake Bay region. However, many
producers in the area know that the land base they are
working with will not be able to handle the amount of
P contained in the manure. The land is already at the
limit of P concentration, so in the future manure will
have to be shipped off of the farm.
At the heart of the new restrictions and interest in
nutrient management is the Chesapeake Bay. The bay
is the largest estuary in the U.S. at 2300 square miles,
half of its water from the Atlantic, and the rest from
64,000 square miles of watershed, including areas in
six states and Washington, D.C.
In 1976, suspicions of declining water quality in the
bay and its tributaries led to a six-year study of water
quality of the bay. The EPA coordinated about 40 dif
ferent studies on declining water quality, and its ef
fects on wildlife and plant population. It was
concluded from these initial studies to set a goal of nu
trient reduction of about 40 percent, based on the 1985
status. Nutrients entering the bay would now be very
restricted.
In 1987. the states of Maryland, Virginia, Pennsyl
vania, and the District of Columbia, along with the
EPA and Chesapeake Bay Commission, formed the
Chesapeake Bay Agreement. This agreement set the
goal to achieve nutrient reduction in the bay by the
year 2000.
In 1989, the University of Maryland/Maryland Co
operative Extension, and the Maryland Department of
Agriculture drafted the Maryland Nutrient Manage
ment Program. The focus of this program was to unite
the 1.4 million acres of farmland in Maryland under
nutrient management plans by the year 2000. How
ever, in 1998, the Maryland government enacted the
Water Quality Improvement Act, which mandated
sweeping changes for the Maryland agricultural com
munity and land managers. This new act requires the
following: nitrogen and P based nutrient management
plans; reduction of the phosphorus in manure via feed
Some of the highlights of the new act are as follows
(source: University of Maryland Cooperative Exten
sion):
• An operator who uses biosolids or animal manure
in an agricultural operation shall develop a nutrient
management plan addressing nitrogen as the limiting
nutrient on that agricultural operation by December
31, 2001, and implement the plan by December 31,
2002.
• An operator who uses biosolids or animal manure
in an agricultural operation shall develop a nutrient
management plan addressing both nitrogen and phos
phorus as the limiting nutrients on that agricultural
operation by July 1, 2004, and implement the plan by
July 1,2005.
• An operator who uses a combination of chemical
fertilizer, biosolids, and animal manure in an agricul
tural operation shall comply with the deadlines above
if that operator uses biosolids or animal manure on a
minimum of 10 acres, or 50 percent of an agricultural
operation, whichever is less. Phosphorus application
rates under this subsection shall follow cooperative ex
tension recommendation rates on individual fields
where chemical fertilizer is the only nutrient source.
• The plans must be prepared by a certified nutrient
management consultant and according to the schedule
set forth in the new regulations. The most limiting nu
trient in the soil will be determined as an indicator for
potential pollution problems. If the sample scores less
than 150 on the phosphorus fertility index, nitrogen
will be the limiting factor. If it is 150 or greater, a P
index risk assessment method will be used to deter
mine the potential risk of P loss. If the risk scores low,
nitrogen needs may be used. If the risk is medium, ac
cording to the test, nitrogen may be used one out of
every three years. If the risk is high, P amounts will be
limited to those expected to be removed from the field
by the crop or harvest. If the site risk is very high, no
additional P may be applied.
While touring the Delmarva Peninsula, I had the
opportunity to tour large and small dairies, conventi
onal and grazing, and none of the farms visited were
ready for the new P restrictions as far as having a plan
in place. As I had mentioned, most had reduced the
ration level of P, but had not yet based the nutrient
management system on P. Those that seemed most
prepared were the farms that were equipped with sep
arator systems, and have made arrangements to sell
(Turn to Page 36)