AgTalk Home
AgTalk Home
Search Forums | Classifieds (50) | Skins | Language
You are logged in as a guest. ( logon | register )

Ohio fertilizer proposal
View previous thread :: View next thread
   Forums List -> Crop TalkMessage format
 
Ed Winkle
Posted 3/30/2013 20:56 (#3002841 - in reply to #2999481)
Subject: "Fertilizer will be labeled as a pollutant"


Martinsville, Ohio

"

It would give Ohio Department of Agriculture rule-making authority to develop a fertilizer application certification program, and require anyone who applies fertilizer for ag production on areas of more than 10 acres, to be certified by ODA.

It also would expand ODNR’s authority through the Division of Soil and Water Resources, to develop operation and nutrient management plans for commercial fertilizer, in addition to manure, sediment and materials attached to sediment.

These plans would address the “methods, amount, form, placement and timing” of all nutrient applications.

Fertilizer as ‘pollutant’?

The proposal also effectively classifies nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium as “agricultural pollutants,” according to the OFBF summary.

Antosch said the question with fertilizer is always, “when does it become a pollutant?” He said it must be remembered there are many factors affecting fertilizer and where it ends up, as well as naturally occurring levels of nitrogen, potassium and phosphorus from plant decay.

Two watersheds.

The proposal also allows the ODNR to classify two types of watersheds.One type, the “critical natural resources area,” would result in the following actions:

• An analysis by ODNR of the watershed, to identify sources and causes of ag pollution.

• A watershed management plan that would address the causes and sources of ag pollution, which may include requirements for storage, handling and land application of manure and fertilizer, as well as erosion control.

• Encourage all farmers to voluntarily develop and operate under an approved operation and nutrient management plan.

A second type of watershed, the “watershed in distress,” would result in most of the same actions, except there would be more emphasis on “requirements.”

Farmers would be required to follow an approved operation and nutrient management plan, and to establish a schedule for implementing this plan."

Ed

Top of the page Bottom of the page


Jump to forum :
Search this forum
Printer friendly version
E-mail a link to this thread

(Delete cookies)