Agriculture is an essential industry on the Eastern Shore of Virginia, and should be encouraged to continue to grow in such a way that it is sustainable and compatible with the high caliber water quality associated with the Eastern Shore, and essential to the burgeoning Aquaculture, Tourism, and Coastal Research industries in the region.  Proper design and maintenance of drainage ditching and storm water retention ponds is an essential component of sustainable agriculture practices.

The creation of properly designed and maintained storm water management and drainage systems is not a cost prohibitive undertaking for our farmers, and is particularly relevant on the large scale corporate farms that have developed within the plasticulture tomato industry.  Regulations are necessary in order to ensure that best management practices are being followed, and that the storm water conveyances are constructed in such a way that they do not discharge water into the coastal creeks, streams, bays, and lagoons of the Eastern Shore.

Without proper oversight, ditches and ponds have been and will continue to be developed in such a way that they serve the needs of the farm without recognizing the impact on the surrounding waterways, and the businesses that depend on them.  With proper design and maintenance encouraged and enforced through effective regulation, these ditches can benefit all parties by  protecting our invaluable coastal water quality, and providing additional irrigation waters for the farms, thus reducing the pressure on our single source aquifer.

While there has already been documented impact from poorly designed and maintained ditches, ponds, and retention systems, it is essential that the commonwealth recognize the potential impact of this threat before it is realized and enact regulations that get ahead of the problem rather than chase it.  I support the petition submitted by Mr. Terry, and encourage the State Water Control Board to pursue this matter.

Sincerely,

Dave Burden

Virginia Eastern Shorekeeper

I support this petition wholeheartedly. Approximately two years ago I began the process of restoring native oyster beds in Westerhouse Creek. Small clusters and individual oysters that survived the depredations of disease suggested that resistant strains of native oysters remained. In an effort to build to strength (using the simple notion of natural selection), I consolidated oysters in cages and in a reconstructed rock. The result at the end of the first year was impressive. From a small number of oysters, I was able to recruit spat on average of 400-500 per square meter. I achieved recruitment in cages and mesh bags and in the form of so-called "brush" oysters. Viability in terms of natural increase is not the problem.

What I also observed was the degree to which the creek bottom was incredibly unstable--and there are two major contributing causes that are immediately apparent. First, intensive agricultural practices produce soil run-off with the result of excessive silting. Second, bulkheading forces sand and silt along an increasingly dynamic bottom. The culprit in terms of oyster population degradation in Westerhouse Creek is loss of bottom through silting and shoaling. The effects of both are readily visible--and reversible. Strong legislation that preserves all "farm" lands--including those that are intertidal and marine is essential. The benefits would be economic and environmental. 

I live on a farm outside of the town of  Eastville on the Eastern Shore. Having moved here 15 years ago from another rural area across the Bay, I have observed local farmers using environmentally sound BMP's. The local agricultural community generally does have a true regard for their surrounding watershed and their neighbors with one large exception.

The Large Scale Agricultural Plasticulture Industry moved onto my neck about 8-10 years ago. I have watched the full scale deterioration of my creek (The Gulf) almost from year one. The runoff from these tomato farms flows directly into this marine estuary from at least three direct sources, without any buffers or retention ponds. Unfortunately, I am not aware of any regulation prohibiting this practice. Consequently, the Gulf has become a nitrogen choked algae pond in a matter of years.

These industrial plasticulture operations are generally owned by out of state operators. Most have operations in other states also and use migrant labor with local foremen. The Greenbriar Farm tract of which 200 acres was sold to a tomato farmer, looks like a nuclear fallout zone. The practice of growing on impermeable plastics with drip irrigation severely reduces the need for any overhead irrigation. As long as the irrigation pond has adaquate supply (which unfortunately could be pulling from our stressed groundwater aquifer) , no rain is optimal. Surface water must drain quickly and directly off of the fields or the equipment cannot work and the irrigation cannot be controlled. Overhead spraying of fungicides, insecticides and who knows what else, is done on a daily basis. All of these chemicals are washing directly into adjoining watersheds. What chemicals are they using? Nobody will tell me.

Strong regulations must be implemented on the Plasticulture Industry. Storm water conveyances, retention ponds and buffers need to be designed for each farm so that we can retain our water quality. The Eastern Shore has one of the healthiest aquaculture environments in the country. How long can these two co-exist?

The State of Virginia did not even know the amount of acreage in plasticulture until a few years ago. I hope the State Water Control Board will not let this industry fly under the radar in the future.

Regards,

                 Chip Dodson

                 Eastville

         My name is Harvey Belote and I am a retired Farmer and business owner in Northampton County, Virginia.

         I  farmed for 25 years and was successful by being involved with regulatory agencies and coming to common ground on a varieity of issues.

        Agriculture is a ongoing education of stewartship of the soil. Aquaculture is the same thing.

         I have always found that things work best when you present the problems to the industries involved and let those industries work them out, rather than regulating them with unfounded regulations.

       Agriculture and Aquaculture are inovators and should find the answers to their problems by mutual respect and understanding and not be regulated by Government!

        Let Government be the moderator; and not the Dictator!

Mr. Weeks:

Please ask the SWCB to look at the attached 5 pictures taken Dec 21st, 2008.  They are from the Northampton County tax map parcel 31-1-B and taken on Birdsnest Drive looking south.  I believe this is exactly the problem Mr. Terry is trying to have the SWCB address.

 The USDA/NRCS Technical guides are the primary scientific references for NRCS. The section under Virginia Conservation Practice Standards at the following link

http://www.va.nrcs.usda.gov/technical/va_standards.htm

addresses such things as

     Drainage Water Management (Code 554),

            Purpose-- Improve water quality

   Nutrient Management (Code 590)

            Purpose--To minimize agricultural nutrient contamination of surface and groundwater resources.

               Filter Strip (Code 393)

            Purpose---To filter sediment, particulate organics, and other pollutants  in runoff

The above are examples of many clear guidelines of the agricultural practices that, if followed, would have obviated the need for this petition.

 I believe the real problem to be the lack of a few agricultural community members to follow the NRCS Virginia Conservation Practice Standards.  There are others who follow them completely.  Unfortunately there is no current method of requiring these practices to be followed.  If such a requirement were developed with appropriate deterrent penalties, much could be done to improve coastal waters.  I envision appropriate penalties that would require dedicated land use with expenditure of money and time to ensure water quality improvement well beyond a minimum requirement.

 I emphatically support Mr.Terry’s petition.

                                                                   RH Meyers

I am of the same sentiment of Mr. Harvey Belot, inherently against government regulation. I have to believe that the small farmers and large corporate farmers do care for the lands they till on the Eastern Shore of Virginia. How can we help them to protect our waters?

I would like for there to be grant monies for our farmers to incorporate buffers and ponds on their land to contain runoff of silt and chemicals. The runoff from the plasticulture farms is visually apparent  after and during a heavy rain storm. There are neighboring farms here, where during a heavy rain storm, you can see the successful farming methods of containment of runoff through the use of a vegetative buffers. Right across the road, on a plasticulture farm, heavy runoff into ditches and streams of orange colored soils.

Please help us to help ourselves to protect our surrounding waters, and the farming and aquaculture industry which helps our area survive economically.

This petition is very vague and could be interpreted to include every ditch on the EasternShore .What does large scale mean? Economics have dictated that farms expand to survive. If the target is plasticulture that should be stated.Apparently there have been a few bad actors ,the Ag Stewardship Act was enacted to deal with these type of operations.Specific incidents should be documented and reported.Many erosion control measures havebeen installed in the past few years.Several studies have concluded that runoff from these fields is not harmful to the waterways. Runoff is inevitable ,all of the Eastern Shore drains to the bayside or the seaside eventually.Before any more regulations are enacted the content of this water should  be known.I encourage DEQ to table this petition and work with the plasticulture users to find a suitable resolution of this matter that doesnt burden both parties with more unneeded regulation that cost taxpayers and farmers. Other than the tomato industry and a few vegetable acres no till practices are used by most farms ,resulting in very little runoff .

I was a tomato farmer on the Eastern Shore of Virginia in Accomack County for 25 years. In 1996 I was the recipient of the Eastern Shore Soil and Water Conservation District’s, “Conservation Farmer of the Year” Award. I have had the unfortunate experience of being a defendant in a law suit regarding run off from my tomato farms.  From this I learned that personal opinion, non science based conjecture, and lack of vision can inflict great misfortune and cost a lot of money.  I also learned that never dismiss any threat no matter how idle it may seem.  Always look over your shoulder for agriculture is inherently vulnerable to this type of threat.  Our environment functions in many ways.  It is adaptable in some and not others.   Discerning this is in many ways beyond science.  I have talked to those that believe after a rain event the water should be clear and not soil stained, that any cloudiness is unacceptable.  I have had water samples taken from run off from my farms that claimed the residues of an agrichemical I had not used.  I have seen countless (dated) pictures of water running off from my farms when I knew that on the same date I had seen similar situations on other non tomato fields.

I have implemented numerous run off abatement measures costing tens of thousands of dollars totally out of pocket, not subsidized.  Much of this work is not highly engineered but as I say, “Eye balled and dead reckoning”.  It works.  I have farmed many years with aquaculture operations immediately under tomato farm outfalls.

Getting the water off of the fields is paramount for all field activities and crop production practices to occur.  Some times it is not pretty but is necessary.  Many times not pretty works and is acceptable.  Some time it is not. It can be achieved in many ways.  Site specific is always the operative word.

Years ago I opposed the Ag. Stewardship Act designed to deal with “Bad Actors”.  Just who is going to look over agricultural operations based on complaints? Is this really necessary? What kind of funding is this going to require?  Yet it passed and it is here as a tool for just what Mr. Terry’s petition addresses.  As I see it this petition is by an individual, not a group or organization.  It is a complaint against all large agricultural operations and has implications state wide. Yes, we are concerned. Yes, someone discovered the big hammer.  Where did the direction come from to activate this process?  Who prepared the document?  Why was the Ag Stewardship process not used?

Discussions repeatedly focus on tomato production, “Plasticulture”, and bad actor(s).  If this truly is the intent of the petition then state it.  If the Ag Stewardship process is not effective then make it so.  The regulatory processes are there, then use them.

Several years ago Mr. Terry told me that, “Tomato companies need to be careful how they farm”.  I did not dismiss this as an idle comment.  I made sure that the necessary precautions were taken and runoff abatement measures implemented.  Other tomato operations have also heeded the warning bells.  The Eastern Shore Soil and Water Conservation district has also communicated with and conducted tours with the tomato operations to resolve the runoff issue.  This is ongoing.

Both sides of this issue have demonstrated complete lack of vision.  The petition is an exercise in how outlandish our government can be.  How can a petition by an individual create so much disruption and promulgate regulatory action by a citizen board, on which an aquiculuturalist is a member and acquaintance of the petitioner.  Also, how can this occur without the legislative process? 

The petition is too general and is directed at all agricultural operations. Crops are rotated from field to field. Does every field need a run off pond? The present ditches drain water not only from the fields, but also from the roads, school yards, housing developements and individual's yard. Home owners have a tendency to use the "some is good, more is better" method when it comes to the application of chemicals to their lawns. Agriculture operations use the mimimun amount because excess use of chemicals cuts into the bottom line. Should a home owner have a retention pond? When and where does over regulation stop?

Robert Colson

As an agribusiness employee and the wife & daughter-in-law of watermen, I have a vested interest in the sustainability of both agriculture and aquaculture here on the Eastern Shore.  While I support the protection of our waterways, I do not see the need for further regulation of the agricultural industry, especially if the regulations are as open-ended, broad-spectrum and vague as this petition.  The Ag Stewardship Act is already in place; the DCR is already overseeing the implementation of Nutrient Management Plans, the VDACS already oversees pesiticide application,and the great majority of growers (of all size operations) that I have worked with for almost 20 years utilized Best Management Practices voluntarily.  A significant number of watermen involved in aquaculture are also farmers, and conscientious stewards of the land AND waterways.  Finally, how feasible would it be for a state already strapped for cash to have multiple agencies overseeing farming practices that are already regulated?  Do we really want to devote funds for oversight of ditching?  These farmers are our neighbors-yes even the large scale operations based out of state have owners and managers that live here, fish here and drink the water here-and just as interested in the preservation of our environment as any other resident.  I believe we should address this issue in the spirit of cooperation, not regulation. 

My residence at 10352 Church Neck Rd., Machipongo, VA 23405, is surrounded by farm fields of 500+ acres and woods of 70 acres. The ditches cut through and surround the fields and define the woods areas. Rain water runs off the farm fields and into the ditches that feed into Westerhouse Creek and the Chesapeake Bay. The surface of the water is covered with thick algae from nutrient pollution. Please consider this in your deliberations about improving water quality.

January 22, 2009

Mr. Rick Weeks

Chief Deputy

Department of Environmental Quality

629 East Main Street

Post Office Box 1105

Richmond, VA 23218

(Transmitted by fax 804-698-4346 and email rfweeks@deq.virginia.gov )

RE: Comment on Petition Title “Prevention of Degradation of Water Quality on the Eastern Shore as a Result of Large Scale Agricultural Operations”

Dear Mr. Weeks,

Per the Administrative Process Act this letter contains our response to the State Water Board regarding the above mentioned petition. Pacific Tomato Growers (PTG) does not support initiation of rulemaking until and unless peer reviewed science credibly supports such an action.

PTG annually farms approximately 200 net acres of grape tomatoes split between Accomack and North Hampton Counties. About 20 percent of that acreage is certified as organically grown. Our farmers and their families live and work on the Eastern Shore of Virginia.

Our family owned company and its operating managers have adopted the Best Management Practices (BMPs) developed by the Eastern Shore Soil and Water Conservation District (ESSWCD) as the basis for our farming activities on the Eastern Shore so that we can be confident that our farms contribute to the local economy and do not contribute to the degradation of the environment. Recently, we were named the Conservation Farmer of the Year by the ESSWCD in recognition of our efforts.

We laser level fields and utilize erosion controlled barriers. We research and select the most environmentally friendly pesticides.  Our irrigation systems are designed to meet the highest grade of efficiency, thus minimizing the amount of water needed during the crop cycle and consequently diminishing any run off water.  Our fertilizer program is designed to provide only the minimum amount of nutrients necessary to produce an economical crop and is based on the soil and leaf analysis taken from the fields. 

During the off season (fall and winter) all our fields are planted with a cover crop to eliminate wind and water erosion, as well as, absorb remaining nutrients, if any, left from the previous cycle of tomato production. The cover crop also adds a significant amount of organic matter to our land. 

We believe farmers are the consummate environmentalists. As the fourth generation assumes management responsibility PTG farming operations they remain firmly committed to improving the land and acting in an environmentally beneficial manner everywhere we farm. Our firm belief is that we are stewards of the resource for the next generation. It is hoped our comments and commitment to utilizing BMPs are helpful to your process.

Sincerely,

Billy L. Heller, Jr.

Chief Executive Officer

Dear Mr. Weeks:

I am writing to add my comments to the record regarding Petition 68, as an Eastern Shore agribusiness person, a friend to many who make their living on our land and in our waters, and as a life long resident.

Many regulations already exist to protect the quality of our waters; indeed, the NRCS has set many Conservation Practice Standards, most if not all of which are being practiced by "large scale agricultural operations" here on the Shore.  Best Mamagement Practices (BMPs) as developed in conjunction with the Eastern Shore Soil and Water Conservaton District have become very much a part of most growers' operations, in a effort to retain precious topsoil.  

If some specific problems exist, it seems to me that methods to deal with those particular issues are available thru the Ag Stewardship Act.  I am opposed to the addition of regulations, unless based on multi-year, verifiable data pointing to a problem which cannot be addressed by standards already in place.

The bandwagon of "Save Our Water!" is simply too easy to jump on; we all want to preserve this asset.  Additional regulations seem unwarranted at this time.

Sincerely,

Dixon Leatherbury

The grower- members of our organization are strongly opposed to petition # 68 requesting the promulgation of a new regulation regarding the actual and “potential” adverse effects of draining excess water from fields. 

First, we would submit that the petition is very broad as written and could have a serious economic impact on agriculture statewide.  We have been told that the intent and focus is on plasticulture. If that is the case, the petition should be amended to reflect the actual intention.

Second, we question the need for DEQ’s involvement in regulating agricultural runoff.  Under the Stewardship Act, the Virginia Dept of Agriculture and Consumer Services has responded to every complaint in a timely manner, and duplicating those efforts seems to us to be not in the best interest of either agency or the Virginia taxpayer.  In addition, since 2005, VDACS, VA Cooperative Extension, Ag Research staff, and Eastern Shore Soil and Water Conservation District have all worked and continue to work closely with growers throughout the area to implement conservation practices.   This partnership has seen hundreds of thousands of dollars spent on BMPs by vegetable growers since 2005, mostly on tomato fields. A copy of that report will be emailed to your office by the Eastern Shore Soil and Water Conservation District.

Under the direction of Jane Corson-Lassiter, the Eastern Shore Soil and Water Conservation District enrolls over 20,000 acres in the State’s cover crop program each year. In addition, nutrient management plans are now in place on nearly ½ of the region’s farm acreage.  Over

 90% of grain production  is planted and grown using conservation tillage.

Third, we question the assertion that the water quality of the Eastern Shore is being degraded by the actions of those of us engaged in agriculture, especially given the steps that have been taken in recent years to address both nutrient management and erosion and sediment control.  Additionally, both NRCS and the Soil and Water Conservation District work with the counties and Corps of Engineers to implement wetland and buffer protections under the Federal Clean Water Act and the State’s Chesapeake Bay Act.  The simple fact that large scale agriculture and aquaculture not only co-exist, but thrive, on the Eastern Shore is itself strong evidence that water quality is not compromised to any appreciable degree  by the actions of the tomato industry.

Since 2000 several scientific studies have been conducted by various state agencies to evaluate the adverse effects of agricultural runoff from vegetable production on plastic mulch on estuarine resources.    Three studies are summarized below, and their conclusions support the effectiveness of agricultural best management practices in mitigating any potential problems.

1.  “Fate and Effects of Crop Protectants from Tomato Cultivation on Living Resources in Tidal Creeks” Arnold, Lukenbach et al. 1999-2000

Result of study:  Failed to identify long term, chronic or community level impacts to the fauna in tidal creeks associated with plasticulture.  No difference in finfish diversity and abundance or in benthic indicators.  Any short term effects were eliminated when BMP were used on fields.  Note that these  BMPs identified have been adopted by every tomato operation on the Shore. 

2.  “Modeling and Mitigation of Land Use Changes in Cherrystone Inlet Watershed”, Arnold, Wang, et al.  2005

Results of Study:  Replacing agriculture with residential development as identified in county comprehensive plan  led to decreased water quality in the Cherrystone Creek, including  increased Nitrogen and Phosphorus loading.

3.  “Evaluating the Relationship between Impervious Surfaces within Watersheds and Coastal Water Quality on Virginia’s Eastern Shore”  2008.   Lukenbach, Ross, et al.

Results of Study:  “the results from this study do not reveal significant loading of bacteria, sediment or nutrients associated with tomato cultivation within the watersheds we studied.  It is not apparent from our dataset that impervious surface attributable to tomato cultivation is correlated with elevated loadings of these materials.  This finding is somewhat surprising given our casual observations over the past decade of high levels of runoff from tomato fields.”

  Eastern Shore  farmers are proud of their record of  environmental stewardship, and in the face of the above evidence, find it puzzling that words like  “irreversible impacts”  are used by those in favor of another level of regulation when there have been such great strides in conservation practices made by a hardworking and effective local partnership.   Indeed, we would challenge those who doubt the results of our work to point out a better place for aquaculture on the East Coast. 

In short, the Ag Stewardship Act is in place to handle any case where environmental stewardship is not being practiced.   We will be happy to assist any citizen who wishes to discuss an issue or file a complaint.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this matter.   Throughout your deliberation process, please feel free to call us at the above number if we may of further assistance.

Sincerely

Association of Virginia Potato and Vegetable Growers