WSP11270

• File Number: 8273.500
• Description: Colorado River Basin Salinity Control - Federal Agencies - EPA
• Basin: Colorado Mainstem
• Water Division: 5
• Date: 1/1/1990
• Title: EPA - Rural Clean Water Program - RCWP
• Water Supply Pro - Doc Type: Report/Study

make every effort to use and maintain the BMP to accomplish the water
quality objectives:for which it was designed.

......
ca
c')
0)

III Regulatory allthorlty can be an Incentive In voluntary programs:
The Oregon project reported that two large fines the Department of Environ-
mental Quality aS$essed dairy opi;lrations in other counties encouraged live-
stock producers to manage manure properly. This regulatory role increased
producer interest!in the RCWP. Regulatory pressures also stimulated par-
ticipation in the FlOrida project.

III Technical assistance and education are key to successful voluntary
programs: The information and education program in the Alabama RCWP
established five pre-project objectives for creating farmer and general public
awareness of the efforts, importance, and benefits of the project. Training
sessions, group meetings, letters, demonstrations, media coverage, and
personal contacts have been part of the educational program. These ac-
tivities paid off in a high level of participation.
Demonstration farms have been used in Nebraska as information and
education tools for RCWP activities. Two separate monthly newsletters
report integrated pest management (IPM) and RCWP information. Weekly
field scouting and a radio broadcast of insect activity support the IPM pro-
gram. Extension programs are gathering yield data to show the benefits of
fertilizer and pesticide management. The project's activities and progress
are also being videotaped.
The nutrient budgeting technique is the basis of a computer program
developed and used by Pennsylvania State University to assist the Pen-
nsylvania RCWP'make nutrient management decisions for farm and field
application of manure. A model for the country, the program has been
demonstrated at 'several national water quality workshops and training
sessions.

11II Voluntary projects have a down side - targeting Is difficult: Some
of the worst pollut~rs may refuse to participate, and many contracts may be
written with farms, considered only minimal sources of pollution. Such inef-
, fective targeting constrains improvements in water quality.

III Problem ownllrshlp and favorable publicity can boost participa-
tion: Citizens -'and farmers - need to understand that their actions
contribute to the problem: all share the responsibility. The South Dakota
RCWP, for example, has found that public meetings, media releases, on-
site demonstrations, and newsletters effectively communicate information
on the project to participating farmers and the general public. Well-
defined educatioi1lal procedures make all area landowners aware of the
project's benefits, Efforts have focused on technical assistance for fer-
tilizer and pesticide management, including personal contact, soil sam-
pling information, and pest scouting, as well as overall presentations of
the project's accomplishments.
The Oregon, UJah, Florida, Iowa, and Vermont projects achieved a high
level of farmer participation because agricultural and water quality person-
nel worked togeth'er to design and publicize the program.
The Pennsylvania project promotes water quality and project objectives
through public rT]eetings, mass media, experimental nutrient manage-
ment, no-till and fertilizer management field plots, and project newsletters.

BMPs and Cost-sharing

\

Best management practices are,
systems of well-known resource
management practices employed /0
reduce pollutant loading to surface and
ground waters. Among thein are
systems to recycle animal waste,
control soil erosion. conserve water,
and reduce nutrient and pesticide
losses.
BMPs can benefit society more
than the individual landowner, and for
that reason federalcost-sha;;ng is a
major component of the Rural Clean
Water Program.
Cost-shares encouraged farll'lers to
participate in the voluntary 8CWP.
Through contractual agreements
between the farmer and USDA, the
government could pay up to 75 percent
of the cost of BMP implementation (with
a limn of $50,000 per partlclpanQ.

.
~;

;1

"1

,.
.

.
';...

J
. ~!
q

11

j
1

.5i

,~
j
"'I
,

,
'i!
~

\~
',J
,

I
)
<~

.c;

.
'1
'!

:1
ij
"1

,
"
.'1
,
;j

,'-J

;':j

<

5