WAC BMP Prioritization Explained

By Mary A. Crisafulli

HAMDEN - Watershed Agricultural Council (WAC) Agricultural Program Manager Connor Young provided the board of directors with an overview of BMP (Best Management Practices) prioritization.

BMPs are adequate methods for preventing and reducing pollution from operations and enhancing water quality. WACs program is voluntary and involves the development of a Whole Farm Plan that outlines an approach for BMPs which could include the reconstruction of facilities, movement of crop fields, and stream buffer installation, among other improvement projects.

The first step, explained Young, is working with participants to identify water quality issues and determine BMPs. Then BMPs are placed in prioritization categories. Classes are first determined by pollutant categories or items that most significantly impact water quality.

Young emphasized that most farms have more than one BMPs and sometimes those BMPs are connected. For example, he said, a farm might have a barnyard waste storage facility buildout, a BMP that would be placed in prioritization category one and to complete that project several other BMPs are needed - fencing, animal walkways, underground outlet, access roads, etc. While those secondary BMPs are in lower priorities, they are considered with the initial project and thus grouped, Young explained.

On a larger scale, the Project Planning Group works to organize funding levels for implementation areas annually. Items considered in order include rollover projects (formally prioritized BMPs not implemented yet), buffer protection projects, repair, replacement of existing BMPs or emergency projects, and new BMPs.

Finally, each farm is issued a Farm Ranking, a formula that calculates the risk of off-farm movement of nutrients and pathogens. The ranking is typically used as a "tie-breaker" or when two farms meet all the same priority requirements, explained Young, adding that this is rarely needed.

Once the full cumulative list is developed which includes all farms it is sorted into priority based on pollutant category, BMP grouping, farm ranking, farmer readiness, and BMP viability. Finally, the annual workload is approved with another review of farmer readiness, BMP viability, implementation areas, and capacity (budget and construction).

Because the the list's length and time in between initial Whole Farm Plan development, Young stressed that by the final annual approval and then implementation some of these variables change due to farmer adjustments, needs, construction issues, weather, or other unknown factors. These items make it difficult to adequately predict the timeline on which BMPs will be implemented and when, he said, and the list is reevaluated as things shift. With that said, WAC reached its goal of completing 50% of backlogged BMP project implementation in June.

Young opened the floor to questions where the budget was discussed. A rough estimate of $40 to $50 million has been budgeted to complete the full cumulative list. Annually, WAC has budgeted around $1 million based on staff resources and construction schedules. WAC Director Ryan Naatz presented the goal to increase BMP output over the next five years.

Colm Ryan, a member of the public, asked how New York City - the primary funder of BMP implementation - can adequately determine budget needs if cost estimates in some cases are outdated by over a decade. Naatz and Young explained that while those numbers are used as estimates to help negotiate, most capital improvement projects are reviewed on a two to three year basis.

Ryan further stated how WAC can rely on participant engagement in whole farm plans when implementation of BMPs could be 15 to 20 years away. He asked if WAC had considered communication efforts to ensure farmers were engaged and understood prioritization.

Young explained that one of the most frequent topics discussed with participants is potential timelines and they are spoken as truthfully as they can be. He added that many WAC relationships go beyond BMPs and are symbiotic.

In other business, several reappointments were made for the board of directors for three-year terms. Also discussed was the potential opening of two director spots and the need to fill those.

Directors entered an executive session to hear the Director's report.

The next WAC meeting is scheduled Tuesday, Jan. 28 at 10 a.m.