Animal waste compromise proposed

Months of work by a group of farmers and conservationists has produced a three-point plan for reducing phosphorus runoff in Marathon County that relies on a mix of winter spreading restrictions and promoting more buffer zones along waterways.

County conservationist Kirstie Heidenreich and conservation analyst Matt Repking presented the proposal to the Economic Resources Committee last week Tuesday. Heidenreich celebrated the fact that a group of people who were often at odds with each other was able to come up with a compromise.

“I think we’ve got it. I think we’re there,” she said with a smile. “It’s awesome.”

The working group of farmers from various- sized operations, from small farms to CAFOs, along with staff from the county and the Wisconsin DNR, was formed in response to a backlash against a proposal by Conservation, Planning and Zoning (CPZ) to ban manure spreading during the months of February and March.

Heidenreich said the group, which has about 25 members, has been on “quite a journey” since it was formed, with the members coming from very different backgrounds and holding strong opinions about how best to reduce phosphorus runoff in the Big Eau Pleine Watershed. In the end, however, she said a hand vote of the members allowed her to come back to the ERC with a proposal.

Repking said a consistent theme among the group’s discussions was the need for more nutrient management plans (NMPs), which advise farmers on the best time and place to spread manure and other fertilizer in order to maximize crop yields while minimizing runoff. As such, the first part of the proposal is to require a winter spreading permit for any farmer without an NMP who wants to spread liquid manure while the ground is frozen.

“If you already have a nutrient management plan, you don’t even have to worry about it. Nothing changes for you. You don’t have to get a permit,” Heidenreich said. “If you don’t want to monkey around with a permit, just get a nutrient management plan.”

The plan is to charge $200 for the permit, which would be good for four years at a time.

The second part of the proposal is to prohibit land spreading of liquid manure during the months of February and March – when the risk of runoff events is the highest. This prohibition would only apply to medium-sized farms, those with 300 to 999 animal units, since larger farms known as CAFOs (concentrated animal feeding operations) are already subject to this restriction.

Exceptions to this rule would be granted if the weather is unseasonably warm in February and March, allowing farmers to spread liquid manure on non-frozen ground.

Heidenreich said Marathon County has about 40 to 60 medium-sized farms, a majority of which have adequate longterm manure storage on-site that allows them to go 60 days or longer without spreading. For the six to 10 farms that don’t have enough storage on site and need to haul out their manure on a daily basis, Heidenreich said delaying implementation of the rules by three to five years should give them enough time to come up with a plan.

These farmers would not necessarily need to build expensive manure pits, as the county has plenty of unused storage facilities that could be rented, Heidenreich said.

When board chairman Kurt Gibbs asked about cost-sharing opportunities for farmers who need to build or rent manure storage, Heidenreich said “there would be funds available” through both the CPZ and the local NRCS office.

The third part of the proposal – and the one generating the most excitement – is to encourage the planting of vegetative buffer strips along streams and creeks that run through farmland. Planting a buffer strip of at least 35 feet in width would do a lot to slow down the flow of runoff and filter out phosphorus and sediment before it makes it into a waterway, Heidenreich said.

“I cannot begin to tell you how powerful it is to have some vegetation next to the stream bank to stop that runoff,” she told the committee.

Repking said he spoke to someone at the University of Wisconsin about using the the UW’s SnapPlus nutrient management software to optimize buffer strips so they take advantage of marginal land that does not generate a lot of profit for farmers, while also taking into account the slopes, soil composition and other factors unique to each field.

Well-placed buffers have the potential to reduce phosphorus runoff by 75 to 80 percent, he said, and they could also be useful for crop farmers.

Looking ahead, Heidenreich said CPZ staff would like to host additional open houses this fall to discuss the proposed changes with impacted farmers. With the ERC voting last Tuesday to have the CPZ proceed with a formal proposal, Heidenreich said the goal is to have suggested revisions to the county’s Animal Waste Ordinance available in October or November for review.

Once the ERC recommends approval of the draft ordinance changes, Heidenreich said the county will have to bring the proposal to either the Wisconsin DNR or the Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection for their permission to exceed state standards.

Heidenreich said CPZ has already discussed the proposals with these state agencies, and they have expressed support for what the county is proposing.

“We really do have an opportunity to do something special here in Marathon County and change it for the better for future generations,” she said. “To come up with something very simple and commonsense that we can do that’s going to reduce phosphorus by up to 90 percent off of crop fields is truly phenomenal.”

Zoning code update

Garrett Pagel, land use specialist for the CPZ, updated the committee on the department’s ongoing efforts to revise the county’s zoning code, Chapter 17, with input from the county’s towns.

Of the 18 towns currently under county zoning, only eight of them returned surveys regarding Chapter 17, but 87% of the respondents said the zoning code aligns with their town’s development goals. Similar percentages said they have a good or excellent working relationship with CPZ and are likely to continue with county zoning.

Nine of the county’s 12 towns who do their own zoning also responded to surveys, with all of them indicating that they would like to stay with town zoning in order to maintain local control. Respondents said they would also appreciate more communication from the county and assistance with road maintenance.

One of the issues raised by the towns was the desire for stricter regulations on wind and solar operations, though Pagel believes the county’s ordinances are already as restrictive as possible under state law. Other town recommendations included setbacks for trees along the boundaries of agriculture property, increasing the allowable size of accessory structures in residential zones and regulations on “tourist housing” (properties rented through Airbnb, etc).

Concerns have also been raised over Battery Emergency Storage Systems (BESS), leading the county to consider setbacks and storage requirements. BESS units are used for both private on-site power and on a commercial basis to send energy to the electrical grid.

Some of the revisions tentatively included in the draft amendment include an increase in accessory structure maximums from 2,000 to 2,500 square feet in Rural Residential zones, and an increase in allowable fence heights from six to height feet, with entryways and gates allowed for the first time. Another proposal would reduce the sign setbacks along rural roadways from 15 to five feet and double the size limits for signs from 32 to 64 square feet, to ensure that motorists can see the signs.

Pagel said a draft of zoning amendments will be provided to the town in September or October, with an open house to follow in November, with the goal of having the ERC and county board approve the changes in December so they can take effect in 2026.