what are known as the Bay TMDL and the WIP. T e Bay TMDL (or “Total Maximum Daily Load”) is essentially a prescription for the maximum amount of a pollutant that will be al- lowed to enter a water body. TMDL’s have been variously described as “pol- lution budgets” or “pollution diets” that must be adhered to if the bay is to be restored to, and maintain, environmental health. For the bay, the pollutants that are subject to the TMDL are nitrogen, phosphorus and sediment. In 2010, the EPA established the TMDLs for the Bay watershed, an area of 64,000 square miles including New York, Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia and the District of Columbia, and required these jurisdictions to develop “Phase I Watershed Implementation Plans” (WIPs). T ese Phase I WIPs allocated the allowable pollutant load among diff erent types of sources and identifi ed statewide strategies for reducing these nutrient and sediment pollutants. You can read the Executive Summary of
Maryland’s Phase I WIP here: http://www.
mde.state.md.us/programs/Water/TMDL/ Documents/
www.mde.state.md.us/assets/ document/MD_Phase_I_Plan_Exec_Sum_ Submitted_Final.pdf. You can see the entire Maryland Phase I WIP here:
http://www.mde.
state.md.us/programs/Water/TMDL/TM- DLHome/Pages/
Final_Bay_WIP_2010.aspx. For general information, see: http://www.
mde.state.md.us/programs/Water/TMDL/ TMDLImplementation/Documents/Citi- zen%20Phase%20II%20WIP%20Guide_Au- gust2011_fi nal.pdf.
Maryland Must Comply Maryland is now engaged in developing its
Phase II WIP. T e Maryland Phase I WIP identifi ed the following broad sources of pol- lutants: agriculture, urban, septic, wastewater and forest. T e Phase II WIP will refi ne the Phase I plan to include more local details about where and how nutrient and sediment loads will be reduced to clean up the bay. Although the Phase II WIP is a state docu- ment, required by EPA, the state is working
Barrel Racing World Champ
T e December Maryland Horse Industry Board Touch of Class Award was given to champion Barrel Racer Tiff any McClure at a ceremony held before the Mary- land Jockey Club and American Horse Council private screening of DreamWorks Pictures’ War Horse on December 15 at the Historic Lincoln T eatre in Washington, DC. T e award is to honor Maryland horses, individuals, teams, organizations or events that demonstrate the highest standard of excellence in the Maryland horse industry. Tiff any was born and raised in Prince George’s County and graduated from Anne
Arundel Community College. Her passion for Barrel Racing began at an early age and in 2010, she was named the International Professional Rodeo Association’s World Champion Barrel Racer. Last year, Tiff any, then a 24-year-old rookie, left her job as a large animal veterinary assistant, and moved to Oklahoma with her horse Dinks Rockin Again. She quickly jumped to the lead in the rookie category and kept winning her way to the world title her fi rst year on the circuit. Tiff any was also the 2002 American Professional Rodeo Association’s Rookie Barrel Racer of the Year and Rookie Cowgirl of the Year.
www.equiery.com | 800-244-9580
Jim Steele, chairman of the Maryland Horse Industry Board; Ashley Valis from Governor O’Malley’s offi ce; Tiffany McClure; Maryland Agriculture Secretary Buddy Hance; Maryland Agriculture Deputy Secretary Mary El- len Setting; Congressman Dennis Cardoza of California and co-chair of the Congressional Horse Caucus
JANUARY 2012 | THE EQUIERY | 107
with local teams, organized at the county level, to produce the plan. T ese teams include repre- sentation by entities with responsibility and au- thority to control nutrient and sediment loads, such as county and municipal governments, soil conservation districts, and federal and state agencies among others. Meetings are currently underway on a county-by-county basis to dis- cuss specifi c targets and goals for pollutant reduction and receive input from stakeholders about their realistic achievability. To fi nd out about the status in your county,
www.mde.state.md.us/TMDL/Pages/
see:
PhaseIIBayWIPDev.aspx, and scroll down to click on your county.
What does this mean to Horse Farm Owners?
TMDLs apply to both “point” (e.g., indus-
trial facilities and sewage treatment plants) and “non-point” (e.g., runoff from the land follow- ing rain or snow melt) sources of pollutants. However, although there are direct regulatory mechanisms under the Clean Water Act for enforcing TMDL requirements for “point” sources, e.g., through the permitting process, “non-point” sources are generally not regulated and so there is no direct enforcement mecha- nism. (Although, theoretically, there are cer- tain measures that could be taken that could transform non-point sources into point sources (e.g., the EPA could rewrite state-level CAFO (confi ned animal feeding operations) permits to “expand the universe of regulated operations” to include more livestock farmers.) Nevertheless, at least for the present, achieve- ment of TMDL goals for non-point sources generally must be achieved by promoting the use of best management practices (BMPs) through incentives such as cost-sharing and grants (although in this era of budget cutting, there is admittedly not enough grant money to address all non-point source discharges). So, bottom line, in order to meet its TMDL goals for the agricultural sector, the state and county teams are looking at how the use of cer- tain best management practices ( such as cover crops, stream buff ers and fencing, manure incor-
poration, etc.), can be increased, with a resultant reduction in pollution reaching the bay. Again, although at this point neither the state nor the federal government can force individ- ual landowners to use certain BMPs, there is enormous pressure, both legal and political, on the state to meet its TMDL goals. According to MDA’s press release announcing the pro- posed changes to the nutrient management regulations, “a main purpose of the changes is to achieve consistency in how all sources of nutri- ents . . . are managed and applied to agricultural land throughout the state. T at consistency will facilitate the state’s ability to demonstrate how it will meet its TMDL requirements.” Horse farmers should not lose sight of the fact that they already play an important and positive role in protecting the health of the bay. T ere is no more benefi cial use of land in terms of protecting water quality than a well- managed horse pasture. Given the inevitability of the TMDL require- ments, horse farmers may well want to consider how they can get out in front of this issue, to help improve the bay without hurting their bot- tom lines. In the meantime, lots of free advice and help are available from local soil conserva- tion districts, which can provide horse farmers with individualized soil conservation plans that improve both farm operational effi ciency and the health of the environment. Help in fi nding and applying for cost share
programs and grants is also available, and par- ticipation in these programs is voluntary. In- formation on local Soil Conservation Districts can be found here:
http://www.mascd.net/scds/ MDSCD05.htm.
MHC has formed a new Farm Stewardship Committee, which will be tracking regulatory and legislative developments and working to get the word out on the positive role that well- managed horse farms already play in protecting the natural environment. To get more involved with the Farm Stewardship Committee, con- tact Jane T ery at
jthery@starpower.net. To learn more about this and other legislative or regulatory eff orts, stop by the Maryland Horse Council booth at Horse World Expo.
Jerry Dzierwinski/Maryland Jockey Club
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120