RESOLUTIONS 2013 Training Conference
Proposed Bylaw Changes - passed as proposed
Resolution #1 -- Gasconade County SWCD
Whereas, on January 1, 2009, the Soil and Water Conservation Districts Commission established the Administrative Policies and Procedures for the District Technician II as requiring a Baseline Technician II verification process for assessing the individual skills in certifying conservation practices required by the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS)
Whereas, on January 1, 2012, technicians that pass the Baseline Technician II testing must also complete the NRCS Certified Conservation Planner training and submit conservation plans according to NRCS requirements to become fully certified as a District Technician II
Whereas, the Baseline Technician II Certification and the NRCS Certified Conservation Planner must be established in order to receive the Technician II status and financial allocation that is associated with the position, and Whereas, according to Memorandum 2012-019, any District employee with board approval may take the Baseline Technician II test.
Therefore, be it resolved: that the Soil and Water Program Commission and the DNR Program Director establish precedence in establishing a more structured schedule committed to offering the required testing and allow adequate time to achieve the Certified Conservation Planner course as provided by NRCS. Be it also resolved: that if the Program Director is unable to establish an instantaneous agreement with the current developer of the baseline testing, that other alternatives be sought out immediately to remedy the situation. Also, that the Soil and Water Conservation Program Director and staff be forthcoming on the progress related to this issue to all the Districts.
Supporting Counties: Lawrence, Warren, Madison, Oregon, Camden, Miller, Putnam, Cole, Dunklin, Dent, Butler, St. Genevieve, Cedar, DeKalb, Pettis, McDonald, Howell, Moniteau, Lafayette, Livingston, Laclede, Stone
Passed -- yes--50 / no--0
Resolution #2 Carter County SWCD
Whereas, Current policy states that to qualify for the DSL 2 practice there must be cross fencing in place to comply with the Prescribed Grazing (528) guidelines contained in the Field Office Technical Guide, and resources must be available before a grazing system can be applied, and
Whereas, This policy disqualifies many landowners who meet all other requirements but must have cross fencing for their grazing operation, and Whereas, It would be more practical and efficient to lime, fertilize, and seed before installing a water system and fences, and
Whereas, A sufficient grass stand resource needs to be in place for a rotational system to work most effectively, and Therefore be it resolved: That provisions be implemented into the policy to take into consideration that landowners not have to meet the Prescribed Grazing (528) guidelines contained in the Field Office Technical Guide if all other qualifications are met to qualify to install the DSL 2 practice.
Amended as follows:
Whereas,Current DSL-2 policy makes it difficult for smaller acreage farms to qualify for the practice and,
Whereas, There is a great need for this assistance with many smaller acreage farms that would substantially benefit from a practice that includes interseeding legumes, and
Whereas, a sufficient grass stand resource needs to be in place before the farms will qualify for grazing system assistance, and
Whereas, precedence has been set with the WQ10 that the Missouri Dept. of Natural Resources can create its own practice that is independent from NRCS technical guidelines, and
Whereas, the Missouri Dept. of Natural Resources has the ability to create its own practice that would include interseeding legumes without the NRCS 512 and 528 standards and specs but still include the 723, and
Whereas, the Missouri Dept. of Natural Resources can put in place requirements that annual spot checks be made by the district technician to ensure that the stand is persistent on farms that install this new practice, and
Whereas, A maintenance violation can be handled on individual basis by the district board who will follow the strictest guidelines for repayment;
Passed as amended -- yes-20 / no-19
Resolution #3 Barton County SWCD
Whereas, soil and water conservation districts have a need for additional funding to support local district conservation programs and district staffing, and Whereas, there is a previous history of a proven successful soil and water conservation district matching grant program sponsored through prior soil and water program budgets, and
Whereas, a matching grant program would provide an incentive for additional local funding to combine with state funding to support local district conservation efforts, and Whereas, there seems to be sufficient state funding available in a new fiscal year budget to support a soil and water conservation district matching grant program,
Therefore be it resolved: the Barton County Soil and Water Conservation District requests the MASWCD to encourage the Soil and Water Districts Commission to reinstate a FY15 one to one Matching Grant Program for districts to be utilized for staffing, district programs or the purchasing of conservation equipment to be made available to landowners and operators for rent.
Supporting Counties: Barton, Stone, Livingston, Clark, Johnson, Bates, Polk, Clay, Grundy, Taney, Perry, Crawford, St. Charles, Christian, Callaway, Cape Girardeau, Caldwell, Butler, Cedar, Shelby, Marion, Ray, St. Louis, St. Francois, Dallas, Camden, Jackson, Miller, Worth, Morgan, Howard, Benton, Cass, Warren, Pettis, Carter, Barry.
Passed -- yes-41 /no-6
Resolution #4 Howard County SWCD
Whereas, it is the mission of the Soil and Water Conservation Program is to administer the policies and general programs developed by the Soil and Water Districts Commission for the saving of Missouri soil and water through the soil and water conservation districts in their work with landowners.
Therefore be it resolved, that only issues concerning Soil and Water should be the focus of Soil & Water Commission.
Passed -- yes-28 / no-12
Resolution #5 Oregon County SWCD
Whereas, ground cover availability is accessible to all types of weather conditions, especially heavy rains, due to the cool season grasses drying up during the summer months, and
Whereas, the weather conditions cause erosion issues in pasture and hay fields, resulting in less grass to be grazed in the fall and winter months, and
Whereas, non-native and native warm season grass seedings have become popular due to the growth period allowing grazing during the summer months and allowing less erosion and increased grazing during the fall and winter months of the cool season grass establishments, and
Whereas, the cost associated with the non-native and native warm season grass establishments being substantially higher than cool season grass establishments;
Therefore be it resolved: that the Missouri Association of Soil and Water Conservation District urge the Missouri Soil and Water Commission to reinstate the Warm Season Grass component on the soil and water cost-share component list.
Supporting Counties: Lafayette
Passed -- yes-36 / no-4
Resolution #6 St. Louis County SWCD
Whereas, Overuse of or poorly timed fertilizer applications such as phosphorous degrade water quality as a result of runoff into wells, waterways, and wetlands, and can contribute to hypoxic conditions in the Gulf of Mexico; Over-application of nitrogen can oxidize (into N2O) and vaporize into greenhouse gas (GHG) and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has identified reduced N2O emissions through improved agricultural fertilizer application techniques as a key GHG mitigation practice; Overuse or over-spray of pesticides can damage field borders, grass waterways, and other conservation practices; There is a suite of tools related to yield monitoring, soil mapping, precision application equipment and variable rate technology (collectively known as Precision Agriculture) that mitigates these negative impacts through improved application techniques that require less fertilizer and pesticide inputs; Precision Agriculture is applicable to large and small scale crop production as well as orchards, pasture, turf management, and livestock production; The use of Precision Agriculture is increasing nationally, but Missouri has lower adoption rates than neighboring states and research suggests that the large initial investments in equipment, complexity of the technology, and the need to use multiple precision technologies together may be factors; The Soil and Water Conservation Program (SWCP) has established the importance of promoting farming techniques which protect soil and water resources as a means of preserving the productive power of Missouri's agricultural land; SWCP provides financial incentives to landowners to help implement such practices; The common mission among Missouri's Soil & Water Conservation Districts (SWCDs) is to be locally responsive, to assume active leadership in conservation education, and to address producer, public, and natural resource concerns through the wise administration of cost-share programs; Cost-share funds come from a statewide tax, but there is private industry support that would leverage those dollars by providing matching funds for Precision Agriculture; And whereas, this convergence of conservation goals, producer needs, technology, and private-industry innovation offers an opportunity to leverage public funds in order to serve the public interest in multiple ways,
Therefore be it resolved by the body of the Missouri Association of Soil and Water Conservation Districts to request that the Missouri Soil & Water Districts Commission work with the SWCP to continue to demonstrate exceptional stewardship of public resources and (1) establish a new cost-share category for Precision Agriculture which will include components, such as surveying, software, hardware, and aftermarket production equipment, that support the suite of tools related to yield monitoring, soil mapping, precision application equipment and variable rate technology, and (2) set up and administer an account for matching funds from private industry.
Amended as follows:
· Negative impacts from chemical fertilizer and pesticide applications are established environmental concerns affecting soil health and water quality and for which agricultural operations are targeted;
· A suite of tools related to yield monitoring, soil mapping, precision application equipment andvariable rate technology (collectively known as Precision Agriculture) mitigates these negative impacts;
· Precision Agriculture is increasingnationally but Missouri has lower adoption rates than neighboring states, with research suggesting that the large initial investments in equipment, complexity of the technology, and the need to use multiple precision technologies together are entrance barriers;
· The Soil and Water Conservation Program (SWCP), having established the importance of promoting farming techniques which protect soil and water resources, provides financial incentives to landowners to help implement such practices;
And whereas this convergence of conservation goals, producer needs, technological advances, and private-industry support reflects an opportunity to leverage public funds to serve the public interest, develop new channels to market conservation practices, and meet environmental goals through innovation rather than regulation,
Therefore be it resolved by the body of the Missouri Association of Soil and Water Conservation Districts to request that the Commission work with the SWCP to continue to demonstrate exceptional stewardship of public resources and establish a work group to (1) explore developing a cost-share category for Precision Agriculture—which would include components such as surveying, software, hardware, and after-market production equipment—that support thesuite of tools related to yield monitoring, soil mapping, precision application equipment and variable rate technology, and (2)explore options for receiving and administering matching funds from private industry.
Failed -- yes-18 / no-26
Failed -- yes-18 / no-26
GASCONADE COUNTY SWCD
Whereas, the Soil and Water Districts Commission has a policy providing up to 75% of the state average cost to assist with conservation practices, Whereas, the state average cost has increased annually,
Whereas, in FY2010 the grazing system program was split up into five different categories each having a set acreage limit, Whereas, the acreage limits in regards to water establishment and distribution have not increased to reflect the increase in the state average costs;
Therefore be it resolved: that MASWCD urge the Missouri Soil and Water Commission to address the DSP-3.1 and DSP-3.2 acreage limit maximums to be more reflective of the rising state average costs.
Passed -- yes-43 / no-0