Comprehensive Planning for Agriculture and Open Space in Dane County, Wisconsin Kevin Connors, Dane County Conservationist September 2003
Jan 29, 2016
Comprehensive Planning for Agriculture and Open Space
in Dane County, Wisconsin
Kevin Connors, Dane County ConservationistSeptember 2003
Outline
• Background of Dane County Natural and Agricultural Resources
• Overview of Existing Agricultural and Natural Resource Programs
• Future Opportunities
• Natural ResourcesLand Water
• Agricultural Resources
CroplandLivestock
• Nonpoint Issues
Background of Dane County Natural and Agricultural Resources
Shaded Relief Map
Prime Soils
Basins, Watersheds and Water Resources
8
Data from the Dane County Land Conservation Department (2002)
0 2 4 6 Miles
Cold W ater Community
Thermally Sensitive AreasThermally Sensitive Area
Stream or Lake
City or VillageTownship Boundary
Data from WDNR (2000). An outstanding resource water is defined as a lake or stream having excellent water quality, high recreat ional andaesthet ic value, high quality fishing and is free from point source or nonpoint source pollut ion. An except ional resource water is defined as astream exhibiting the same high quality resource values as outstanding waters, but may be impacted by point source pollution or have the potent ial for future discharge from a small sewer community. This DRAFT data is from a particular point in t ime, and is subject to change.
Outstanding Resource Water 80 2 4 6 Mile s
Major Road
Outstanding and Exceptional Resource Waters
#
#
Mt Vernon Creek
GarfootCreek
BlackEarthCreek
RyanCreek
Elvers Creek
Milum Creek
Flynn Creek
Deer Creek
SchalpbachCreek
SugarRiver
Story Creek
RutlandBranch
SixmileCreek
#
#
#
BlueMoundsBranch
LittleSugar River
Milum Creek
Story Creek
RutlandBranch
Spring Creek (Lodi)
# # Wisconsin
River
Dunlap Creek
FryesFeederCreek
Stream or Lake
City or Village
Township Boundary
Watershed Boundary
Exceptional Resource W ater
Data f rom WDNR (2000). An outstanding resource water is defined as a lake or stream having excellentwater quality, high recreational and aesthetic value, high quality fishing and is free from point source or nonpointsource pollution. An exceptional resource water is defined as a stream exhibiting the same high quality resourcevalues as outstanding waters, but may be impacted by point source pollution or have the potential for futuredischarge from a small sewer community. Data is draft from a particular point in time and is subject to change.
Agricultural Resources
Landcover Data (NASS)
Woodland Acres by Township in Dane County
0 - 1,000
1,000 - 2,500
2,500 - 4,000
4,000 - 9,200
Livestock
StreambanksCropland
Urban Areas
Land-related Nonpoint Sources
Streams Lakes
Groundwater Wetlands
Water Resource Issues
Outline
• Background of Dane County Natural and Agricultural Resources
• Overview of Existing Agricultural and Natural Resource Programs
• Future Opportunities
• Local and State Programs- Drainage Districts- Land & Water Resource Management Program - Priority Watersheds- Farmland Preservation- Performance Standards (NR 151, ATCP 50)
• Federal- WRP, WHIP, CRP, CREP, FPP
Overview of Existing Agricultural and Natural Resource Programs
Drainage Districts
Drainage District #20
Cottage Grove
District Boundary
Hydric Soil
Stream or Pond
Parcel Boundaries
District Boundary
Hydric Soil
Stream or Pond
Landowners
LWRM – Land and Water Resource Management Program
Priority Watershed Projects
Towns with FPP – exceptions shown in red
Soil and Water Regulations in Dane County
• Dane County Code of Ordinances– Chapter 14
• Subchapter I. Manure Storage
• Subchapter II. Erosion Control and Stormwater Management
• NR 151 Performance Standards– Non-agricultural
– Agricultural
Soil Loss Standard:
7.5 tons/acre/year
NR 151 and ATCP 50 Performance Standards
• Agricultural
• Urban
Tolerable Soil Loss on All Cropland
8
Data from the Dane County Land Conservation Cooperator Tracking System (CTS)
0 2 4 6 Miles
Major Lake
NA - data not in CTS
soil loss increase
minimal (or none) soil loss reduction
greatest soil loss reduction
Ave. Annual Soil Loss (A value) Comparison -Year 1998 values compared to Year 2002 values
ViennaDaneRoxburyYorkBristolWindsor
Mazomanie
Springfield WestportBlack Earth BerryMedinaSun PrairieBurke
Vermont Cross P lains MiddletonDeerfieldCottage GroveBlooming Grove
Blue Mounds Springdale Verona FitchburgChristianaPleasant SpringsDunn
Perry Primrose Montrose OregonAlbionDunkirkRutland
Madison
A (1998) - 3.8A (2002) - 3.6T - 4.4
A (1998) - 4.2A (2002) - 3.8T - 4.5
A (1998) - 4.6A (2002) - 4.5T - 4.4
A (1998) - 4.3A (2002) - 4.1T - 4.7
A (1998) - 4.9A (2002) - 4.1T - 4.8
A (1998) - 4.7A (2002) - 4.3T - 4.7
A (1998) - 2.4A (2002) - 2.3T - 4.0
A (1998) - 4.0A (2002) - 3.6T - 4.7
A (1998) - 4.6A (2002) - 3.8T - 4.6
A (1998) - 2.5A (2002) - 2.5T - 3.6
A (1998) - 3.4A (2002) - 3.1T - 4.1
A (1998) - 4.6A (2002) - 3.9T - 4.7
A (1998) - 4.4A (2002) - 3.8T - 4.8
A (1998) - 4.8A (2002) - 4.9T - 4.7
A (1998) - 2.8A (2002) - 2.7T - 2.5
A (1998) - 3.2A (2002) - 2.9T - 3.5
A (1998) - 5.3A (2002) - 4.8T - 4.6
A (1998) - 4.1A (2002) - 3.5T - 4.3
A (1998) - 3.9A (2002) - 3.5T - 4.5
A (1998) - 5.0A (2002) - 4.2T - 4.7
A (1998) - 2.3A (2002) - 2.2T - 2.2
A (1998) - 2.7A (2002) - 2.5T - 2.7
A (1998) - 4.2A (2002) - 3.8T - 3.7
A (1998) - 5.5A (2002) - 4.5T - 4.7
A (1998) - 4.1A (2002) - 3.7T - 4.5
A (1998) - 4.4A (2002) - 4.0T - 4.6
A (1998) - 4.2A (2002) - 4.0T - 4.4
A (1998) - 2.0A (2002) - 1.9T - 2.3
A (1998) - 2.5A (2002) - 2.5T - 2.9
A (1998) - 2.8A (2002) - 2.7T - 3.5
A (1998) - 4.8A (2002) - 4.1T - 4.6
A (1998) - 5.0A (2002) - 3.8T - 4.6
A (1998) - 4.5A (2002) - 4.1T - 4.6
A (1998) - 4.1A (2002) - 3.6T - 4.6
NA
Erosion Summary Comparison
8
Data from the Dane County LCD and WDNR (2002)
0 2 4 6 Miles
Township Boundary
Proposed Navigable Waterways
City or Village
Stream or Lake
Proposed Navigable W aterway
Note: currently there is insuff icient data to determine navigability of streamor lakes on map that are not highlighted as proposed navigable waterways.
Feedlot
ATCP 50
NutrientManagement
Manure Management
Communities Required to Have NR 216 Stormwater Discharge Permit
Priority Watershed
Priority Watershed
Project End 12/2000
Watershed Initiative
Outline
• Background of Dane County Natural and Agricultural Resources
• Overview of Existing Agricultural and Natural Resource Programs
• Future Opportunities
1880 1900 1920 1940 1960 1980 2000 2020
Family Farm Ownership
Timeline of a Farm
Owner = Operator
Future Opportunities
• Planning for AgricultureCrop ProductionLivestock ExpansionAg. Business Planning
• Farmland Conversion- Land Evaluation (LESA)- Soil Properties
• Erosion Control and Stormwater Management
Land Cover Summary by Unit Area
Verona Township
SoybeansOther CroplandPasture/CRP/Non Ag.WoodlandUrbanWater
Corn
D A N E C O U N T Y
Verona Township – 2001SoybeansOther CroplandPasture/CRP/Non Ag.WoodlandUrbanWater
Corn
Land Evaluation (LE) for Agricultural Land
Used 3 Factors:
Prime Farmland (10%)
Soils Productivity for Corn and Alfalfa (45%)
Land Capability Class (45%)
Sun Prairie
Springdale
LE from LESAPrime
Highway 12 Realignment – Soil Ratings by Landowner
I, II (best)III, IVV, VIVII, VIII
Agricultural Groups
WISCLAND (~1993)
Verona
Madison
Pasture/CRP/Non Ag.WoodlandUrbanWater
Agriculture
AgricultureGrasslandWoodlandUrbanWaterWetlandBarren
Pasture/CRP/Non Ag.WoodlandUrbanWater
AgricultureAgricultureGrasslandWoodlandUrbanWaterWetlandBarren
NASS (2001)
Verona
Madison
Sun Prairie (2001)
Springdale (2001)
C/S Prime C/S and Prime
Category Acres
Township 22,800
Prime Farmland 17,100
Corn/Soybeans (C/S) 10,000
C/S on Prime Farmland 8,400
Category Acres
Township 23,000
Prime Farmland 4,400
Corn/Soybeans (C/S) 5,200
C/S on Prime Farmland 1,200
Agricultural Business Planning
Ethanol Plant Location (hypothetical)
SoybeansOther CroplandPasture/CRP/Non Ag.WoodlandUrbanWater
Corn
Acres of Crops within a 15-mile Radius of Ethanol Plant
Land Cover 2001 2002
Corn 115,800 108,600
Soybeans 54,100 61,100
Fitchburg
Belleville
Verona
Mt. Horeb
Cross PlainsBlack Earth
Mazomanie
Waunakee Sun Prairie
DaneDeForest
Stoughton
Oregon
Rockdale
Cam-bridge
Deerfield
Marshall
Cottage Grove
Blue Mounds
Madison
Middleton
McFarland
BrooklynEdgerton
Monona
L. Mendota
L. Monona
L. Waubesa
L.Kegonsa
Urban Areas in Dane County
Outstanding and Exception Water Resources
Natural Resource Datasets
303d (Impaired) Waters
Cold Water Communities
Steep Slopes
Frequently Flooded Soils
Monitoring Data
N
Cumulative Phosphorus Yield
Lake Mendota
0 - 1,000
1,000 - 2,000
2,000 - 3,600
3,600 - 6,000
6,000 -13,000
Open water
lbs / year
NN
0 1 2 3 4 5 Miles
NN
0 1 2 3 4 5 Miles
N
Cumulative Sediment Yield
Lake Mendota
0 - 160
160 - 330
330 - 600
600 - 950
950 - 2,120
Open water
tons / year
Farmland Conversion
Village of Waunakee
1996 2003*2020
* Village Boundary
Erosion Control Planning
Plan Implementation
Plan Maintenance
2 & 10 Year Attenuation
Oil & Grease
Temperature
Etc.
Stormwater
ErosionControl
Sediment Control
Erosion Control and Stormwater Management Priorities
Compacted Soil Compacted SoilDeep Tilled