2011-08-04_ENFORCEMENT - C1981008 (4)

Home Browse Search

Discussion and Evaluation of the Approved Prime Farmland Yield Standard — OSM Findings The regulations [sections 2.06.6 and 4.25] describe the need to determine that the annual yield of the reclaimed prime farmland is at a minimum no less than the annual agricultural yield capability that existed prior to mining disturbance. For this determination, the approved permit specifies a standard that is limited to the first - cutting of alfalfa on a property that previously produced two to three cuttings annually, and for that first - cutting, has accepted a yield figure of 1.84 tons /acre as the standard for confirming that the annual yield potential has been restored on the reclaimed prime farmlands. Although there are multiple mentions of yields from differing sources within the permit, it is not apparent that these seemingly unconnected citations are used for constructing a justification for using a single alfalfa cutting as a measure of annual yield. To justify the success standard approach included within the permit would require accepting the presumption that a single alfalfa cutting is reasonably representative as a measurement of the annual agricultural yield. To the contrary, a first cutting is but one of two or three cuttings that could normally be expected for any given growing season; thus at best represents one -half (perhaps even one - third) of the annual yield measurement needed, presuming one accepts the unsupportable premise that each cutting would usually yield roughly the same production number. GSM's review finds technical fault with accepting such a presumption/premise. Acceptance of these presumptions and premises contravenes common and expert experience, as well as findings included within the scientific research literature It is common knowledge among practicing and academic agriculturalists that the first - cutting on irrigated alfalfa fields within the Intermountain West or the Great Plains often produces yields greater than the second cutting and frequently varies significantly from the third cutting as well. It is not technically supportable to accept that any single cutting (1s 2" or 3` could be relied upon as a true measure of annual production alone or as a multiplication factor in calculating an annual yield, as these cuttings frequently vary at times significantly from each other and from season to season for a variety of reasons. Using a yield standard based upon a single cutting, as well as using a singular 3 Including yields taken from acreages that did not contain `prime' soils, may not have been under a high level of management as required in the regulations, and /or included yields from crops other than alfalfa. 4 Personal communications on 18 April 2011 with Dr. Neil Hansen, Ph.D., Associate Professor, Colorado State University and with Dr. Calvin Pearson, Ph.D., Agricultural Experiment Station, Western Colorado Research Center /Colorado State University; on 17 Mar 2011 with Mr. Bob Hammon, CSU Extension Agent; on 25 Mar 2011 with Mr. Bob Jones, Agronomist with the Indiana Division of Reclamation; on 18 Apr 2011 with Dr. Steve Schroeder, Ph.D. Environmental Scientist, ND Public Service Commission; on 18 Apr 2011 with Richard Vincent, WY DEQ District 1 Vegetation Specialist, and with Samantha Gundlach, MT DEQ Vegetation Specialist; and others. 5 Colorado State University Crops Testing Program, alfalfa production studies available at: http: / /www.extsoilcrop. colostate .edu /CropVar /alfalfa.html and "Deficit Irrigation of Alfalfa for Water- Savings in the Great Plains and Intermountain West: A Review and Analysis of the Literature," by R. Bradley Lindenmayer, Neil C. Hansen, Joe Brummer, and James G. Pritchett published in Agronomy Journal, Vol. 103, Issue 1, pages 45 -50. 7