2010 Macatawa Watershed Agricultural Survey Final Report · MACC’s Watershed Coordinator, Mary Fales, with input from members of the Agricultural Outreach Committee in accordance

2010

Macatawa Watershed Agricultural Survey

Final Report

September 2011

Mary Fales, Watershed Coordinator Kara Scheerhorn, MACC Intern

2010 Agricultural Survey Final Report

2

Table of Contents

1.0 Executive Summary ...................................................................................................................... 3

2.0 Background and Methodology .................................................................................................. 4

3.0 About the Farm and the Farmer ................................................................................................. 5

4.0 Recreational Water Quality Use and Water Quality Attitudes .............................................. 6

5.0 Types, Sources and Consequences of Water Quality Pollution .............................................. 8

6.0 Use of Best Management Practices........................................................................................... 10

7.0 Making Management Decisions and Conservation Programs .............................................. 14

8.0 Information and Activities ........................................................................................................ 15

9.0 Recommendations ....................................................................................................................... 17

10.0 Lessons Learned .......................................................................................................................... 18

Appendices

Appendix 1 - Macatawa Watershed Agricultural Survey Appendix 2 - Quality Assurance Project Plan Appendix 3 - Pre-Notice Postcard

Original Cover Letter Farm News Postcard Reminder Postcard Reminder Letter

Appendix 4 - Macatawa Watershed Agricultural Survey Results Appendix 5- Macatawa Cross Tabulation (1) & (2)


3

1.0 Executive Summary

In January of 2010, the Macatawa Area Coordinating Council (MACC) conducted a survey of the agricultural community within the Macatawa Watershed area. The purpose of the survey was to gain valuable insight from farmers on topics of water related issues, the use of best management practices on the farm, and participation in government-funded cost share programs. This is the first Macatawa Watershed Agricultural Survey compiled by the MACC and was partially funded by a Section 319 grant from the State of Michigan.

The survey was conducted using a sixteen-page written survey, sent by mail to agricultural landowners within the watershed that owned at least 20 acres of land. A total of 150 completed surveys were received by the MACC, out of the 479 originally sent to landowners (30% response rate). A majority of respondents were males (87%) and were in the role of decision maker on the farm (91%). Over half of the respondents (65%) owned relatively small farms in the category of 1-99 acres.

Most of the respondents showed concern for water quality and an understanding of their connection to the Macatawa Watershed. Although most agreed with a need for good water quality, many do not have sufficient information about water pollutants in the watershed or the sources of those pollutants.

A major objective of the survey was to measure the use of various best management practices (BMPs) which are practices shown to be effective and practical for preventing or reducing pollution on the farm. In most cases about half of the respondents indicated they are currently using each of the BMPs listed in the survey including grassed waterways, filter strips, cover crops, conservation tillage and nutrient management plans. For those who were not currently using a practice, a large percentage indicated that they are willing or a may be willing to use such practices on their farm.


4

2.0 Background and Methodology

The Macatawa Area Coordinating Council (MACC) conducted a survey of watershed farmers in order to collect a baseline of information on local farmer’s viewpoints concerning water-related issues, best management practices on the farm, and participation in government-funded cost share programs. This information is important to the MACC in order to plan and implement effective water quality projects in agricultural areas of the watershed. The sixteen- page written survey (Appendix 1) focused on gathering basic information about the farm and the landowners, and gauging the respondent’s perception of water quality issues (sources, pollutants, and consequences), decision making on the farm, use of best management practices, participation in government-funded programs and view of local agricultural agencies and information sources.

The survey was partially funded by a Section 319 grant from the State of Michigan (Tracking Code 2008-0016) and was developed from a template that was provided by the United States Environmental Protection Agency in conjunction with Purdue University as part of a pilot survey project called SIDMA (Social Indicators Data Management and Analysis Tool). The survey was further developed by the MACC’s Watershed Coordinator, Mary Fales, with input from members of the Agricultural Outreach Committee in accordance with the Quality Assurance Project Plan (Appendix 2). The survey was also reviewed independently by the Director of the Carl Frost Center for Social Science Research at Hope College. The survey and survey methodology received final approval from the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality.

The survey was distributed according to the following schedule:

• January 4, 2010: Pre-notice postcard sent to agricultural landowners in the Macatawa Watershed. • January 11, 2010: A copy of the survey was mailed to each eligible address with a cover letter

and a stamped return envelope. • January 15, 2010: The Farm News distributed the January edition with a postcard insert about the

survey (in Allegan and Ottawa County only). • January 20, 2010: Approximately 414 reminder postcards were sent to eligible addresses that had

not responded. • February 8, 2010: Approximately 349 reminder letters and surveys were sent to eligible addresses

that had not yet responded. • Surveys were accepted through the end of March 2010. • June-August 2010: MACC staff reviewed surveys for completeness and entered all data into a

central database hosted by Purdue University. • March 2011: Purdue University provided a summary document of the survey results.

A copy of the pre-notice postcard, original cover letter, Farm News postcard, reminder postcard and reminder cover letter are included in Appendix 3. Please note that five respondents completed the online version of the survey (developed via Survey Monkey) and one respondent asked to complete it over the phone (administered and recorded by MACC staff). All survey results were kept confidential and survey responses were not associated with respondent’s names or addresses.


5

Eligibility for the survey was based on agricultural landowners who owned 20 acres or more within the Macatawa Watershed. There were 995 total eligible parcels of land (46,605 acres) which were represented by 547 unique landowners. The mailing list was reduced to 479 landowners due to vacant addresses and people who declined to participate. The goal of the study was to achieve a 30% response rate (at least 144 completed surveys). In total, 150 complete surveys were returned to the MACC. A copy of the survey results (from Purdue University) is included in Appendix 4.

3.0 About the Farm and the Farmer (24 questions)

In this section of the survey, farmers were asked about themselves, their property, and the operation and management of their farm.

On average, the respondents have been farming in the Macatawa Watershed for 34 years. Most of the respondents were male (87%) and the decision maker for the home and/or made decisions about lawn care for the household (96%). When asked about the highest level of school they completed, 39% of respondents said they had received their High School Diploma or GED, while 34% had completed a 2 year, 4 year or graduate degree.

In the Macatawa Watershed area, most of the respondents’ farms were small scale farms that range from 1-99 tillable acres (65%), while 21% were slightly larger farms ranging from 100-499 tillable acres. The other 14% include farms that range from 500-2,000 or more acres. Most of the farmed acres were used for the production of corn, followed by soybeans and then small grains. The livestock farmers that responded were mostly swine and poultry producers.

Almost half of the respondents were currently not retired (49%) while the other 51% were either retired (22%) or partially retired (30%). The respondents with smaller farms (1-99 acres) had a higher percentage of retired or partially retired people than those with larger farmers (100-2,000 or more acres). Looking ahead five years from now, about half of the respondents reported that their farms will be about the same size as they are today (55%), while others are unsure (28%), or they predict their farm may be larger (13%), or smaller (4%).

The Michigan Agriculture Environmental Assurance Program is a voluntary program that was designed to help farmers reduce pollution and environmental risks on their farm through education, farm-specific risk assessment, and on-farm verification procedures. Of those that responded, most farmers either did not have MAEAP-verified farms (31%) or didn’t know what MAEAP verification was (43%). When asked if the farm property bordered a stream, river, lake, drain, ditch, or wetland, 90% of respondents answered yes and 10% answered no.

Most respondents use pesticides or herbicides on their farm (87%) and 61% say they use a commercial applicator for some of their fields (37%) or all of their fields (24%). Out of those that responded, none of

The Average Farmer Completing the Survey

Male GED or higher Decision making role

on the farm 34 years farming in

Macatawa Watershed Small scale farm


6

8.0% 6.2%

6.2%

13.3%

13.3%

53.1%

Water Use Acitivies Most Important to Farmers

Canoeing/kayaking/other boating

Eating fish caught locally

Swimming

Picnicking and family activities near water

Fish habitat/fishing

Scenic beauty/enjoyment

Figure 1

2.63 2.53

2.35 2.15

1.92 1.91

0 1 2 3

For wildlife habitat

For picnicking and family activities near water

For canoeing/kayaking/other boating

For fish habitat

For eating locally caught fish

For swimming

How would you rate the quality of water for the activity listed? 1 - Poor 2- Okay 3 - Good

Activities in the Macatawa Watershed

Figure 2

the large scale farms (2,000 or more acres) indicated that they have a commercial applicator apply pesticides or herbicides to their farm. When it comes to fertilizers, 91% of respondents use it on their farm and 88% have had their soil tested to determine fertilizer needs. Only about half (59%) of respondents apply manure to their farm and 43% of those apply it in accordance with a manure management plan. 71% of respondents said their application equipment for pesticides, fertilizers, and/or manure was calibrated regularly.

4.0 Recreational Water Quality Use and Water Quality Attitudes (4 questions, 20 subcategories) The Water Quality section looked into how farmers use local waterways and their attitudes and beliefs about water quality related issues.

Scenic beauty and enjoyment was the most important water- related activity for the respondents (53%), while others selected fishing (13%) and picnicking and other family activities near the water (13%) as popular activities (See Figure 1). The respondents view the local water quality as “poor” for swimming and eating fish, “okay” for canoeing/kayaking and fish habitat and near “good” conditions for picnicking and wildlife habitat (See Figure 2).

When farmers were asked if they knew where the rain water goes when it runs off of their property 87.4% said yes and 12.6% said no. Of those who knew where the rain water goes, most answered with a body of water (lake, river, stream), or a ditch or drain. Most seem to know they are part of the Macatawa Watershed


7

Figure 3

although many used the historic nomenclature of “Black River” or “Black Creek” or “Black Lake”.

A variety of questions were asked to measure the general attitude of the respondents regarding various water quality issues using a rating of strongly disagree, disagree, neither agree nor disagree, agree or strongly agree.

In general the results indicated that farmers agreed that:

• It is important to protect water quality, • It is their personal responsibility to protect water quality, • The way they care for their property can affect water quality, and that • Their actions have an impact on local waterways.

Of those that responded, 87% agree or strongly agree that it is their personal responsibility to help protect water quality, and 78% agree or strongly agree their actions have an impact on lakes, rivers, and streams. It appears that many of the farmers understand their connection to the watershed and impact on water quality.

In general the results indicated that the farmers disagreed that:

• It is okay to reduce water quality to promote economic development, • Farm management practices do not have an impact on water quality, and • That they would be willing to pay more to improve local waterways through taxes or fees.

2.29

2.34

2.47

2.54

2.9

3.08

3.22

3.39

3.5

3.56

3.59

3.8

4.02

4.05

0 1 2 3 4 5

Reduce water quality to improve economic development

Farm management practices = no impact on water quality

Willing to pay more to improve lakes, rivers, and streams

My property doesn’t affect water quality

Taking action to improve water quality too expensive

Investing in water quality = economic disadvantage

Important to protect water even if more expensive

Willing to change to improve water quality

Economic Stability = Clean lakes, rivers, and streams

Quality of life depends of quality of water

Protect water over economic development

My actions have impact on water quality

Personal responsibility for water quality

Property care influences water quality

Level of Agreement to Statement (0-5) 1 - Strongly Disagree 2 - Disagree 3 - Neither Agree nor Disagree 4 - Agree 5 - Strongly Agree

Water Quality Attitudes


8

Figure 4

71% of respondents disagree or strongly disagree that farm management practices (on individual lots) do not have an impact on local water quality, and 61% disagree or strongly disagree that what they do on their property does not have much impact on overall water quality. A little over half of respondents disagree or strongly disagree when asked if they were willing to pay more to improve lakes, rivers, and streams (See Figure 3).

5.0 Types, Sources and Consequences of Water Quality Pollution (3 questions, 41 subcategories) Respondents were given a list of 10 common water quality pollutants and were asked to evaluate the impact of those pollutants on the Macatawa Watershed. On average, respondents categorized all 10 pollutants as being only a “slight” to “moderate’ problem. On average, the pollutants that received the highest score were dirt, soil and phosphorus (although they were only ranked just slightly higher than other categories). However, trash and debris was most commonly identified as being a “severe problem” followed by bacteria and viruses such as E.coli.

It appeared that two categories of pollutants were the most unfamiliar to the respondents as over 40% marked “Don’t Know” for toxic materials such as PCBs and not enough oxygen in the water (See Figure 4).

The farmers were given a list of 19 possible sources of water quality problems and asked to evaluate the impact of each on the Macatawa Watershed. In general, the two sources of pollution that were of highest concern were discharges from sewage treatment plants and stormwater runoff from streets, highways and parking lots. While respondents living in both Allegan and Ottawa Counties believe stormwater is a moderate problem, more people from Ottawa County categorized it as a severe problem. In general, the

2.25 2.29

2.41 2.43

2.51 2.55 2.59 2.59 2.64 2.64

1 2 3 4

Not enough oxygen in the water in local streams Toxic materials such as PCBs in local streams

Cloudiness of the water in local streams Algae in local streams

Invasive aquatic plants and animals Nutrients from fertilizers in local streams

Bacteria and viruses in local streams (E.coli/Coliforms) Trash or debris

Dirt and Soil in local streams Phosphorus in local streams

1 - Not a problem 2 - Slight Problem 3 - Moderate Problem 4 - Severe Problem

How much of a problem are these pollutants for the Macatawa Watershed?


9

Figure 5

respondents did not consider grazing-related sources, pet waste, and animal feeding operations to be a significant problem at all.

Many of the typical agricultural sources of pollutants like soil erosion from farm fields, manure from farm animals and agricultural fertilizers and pesticides were viewed as only a “slight” problem.

It appeared that at least three sources of water pollution were unfamiliar to the respondents as a considerable percentage marked “Don’t Know” about removal of riparian vegetation (32%), soil erosion from stream channels (27%), and discharges from industry into streams and lakes (27%), (See Figure 5).

Respondents were given a list of 12 conditions that are commonly consequences of poor water quality and were asked to rate the presence of each in the Macatawa Watershed. On average, the respondents ranked the 12 conditions as only a “slight problem” in the Macatawa Watershed. The issues of polluted/closed swimming areas and contaminated fish scored the highest (although they were only ranked just slightly higher than the rest (See Figure 6).

1.58

1.73

1.85

2.01

2.03

2.03

2.08

2.19

2.24

2.25

2.27

2.3

2.34

2.44

2.49

2.5

2.74

2.96

3

0 1 2 3 4

Grazing-related sources

Pet waste (such as dogs or cats)

Animal feeding operations

Drainage/filling of wetlands

Grass clippings and leaves

Manure from farms

Agricultural fertilizers and pesticides

Droppings from geese, ducks, and other waterfowl

Soil erosion from construction sites

Removal of riparian vegetation

Soil erosion from stream channels

Improperly maintained septic systems

Soil erosion from farm fields

Outputs from marinas and/or recreational boats

Discharge from Industry

Land development or redevelopment

Lawn fertilizers and pesticides

Stormwater runoff from streets, highways, and/or parking lots

Discharge from sewage treatment plant

How much of a problem are the following sources? 1- Not a Problem 2-Slight Problem 3-Moderate Problem 4 - Severe Problem

Sources of Water Pollution


10

Figure 6

6.0 Use of Best Management Practices (22 Questions, 43 subcategories) In this section, farmers were asked about their use of common best management practices with a special focus on the use of filter strips, cover crops, conservation tillage and nutrient management plans. The most common currently used practices were regular servicing of septic systems (73%), rotation of crops to maintain or improve soil (68%), using a grassed waterway to reduce erosion and soil loss (65%), and conducting regular soil tests for pH and nutrients (60%).

It appeared that respondents were relatively unfamiliar with some of the BMPs as a considerable percentage marked “never heard of it” for installing a two stage ditch (53%), regulating water levels in tile lines (44%), constructing an artificial wetland for waste treatment (30%) and constructing sediment basins (22%), (See Figure 7).

1.93 1.95 1.97 2.03

2.15 2.16 2.17 2.17

2.33 2.42 2.47 2.49

0 1 2 3 4

Contaminated drinking water Lower property values

Reduced opportunities for water activities Odor

Increase in water/sewage bill Reduced quality of water activities

Reduced beauty of rivers, lakes, and streams Fish kills

Loss of desirable fish and wildlife species Excessive aquatic plants or algae

Contaminated fish Polluted/closed swimming areas

How much of a problem are the following issues in the Macatawa Watershed? 1 - Not a Problem 2- Slight Problem 3- Moderate Problem 4 - Severe Problem

Consequences of Poor Water Quality


11

3.55 3.53

3.45 3.29

2.97 2.85

2.61 2.34

2.06 1.91

1.83

1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4

Rotate crops to maintain or improve soil

Regular servicing of septic system

Use a grassed waterway to reduce erosion and soil loss

Conduct regular soil tests for pH, and nutrients

Use fences to exclude livestock from streams, rivers, ditches, etc.

Stabilized and protect streambanks and/or shorelines

Restore wetlands

Construct sediment basins to collect and store debris or sediment

Construct an artificial wetland for waste treatment

Regulate the water level in tile lines

Install a two stage ditch design to reduce bank erosion

Rate your level of experience with each practice 1 - Never heard of it 2 - Somewhat familiar with it 3 - Know how to use it; not using it 4 - Currently use it

Practices to Improve Water Quality

Figure 7

40.1%

42.2%

17.7%

Do you use or have you used cover crops?

Currently Use

Don't Currently Use

Never Used

45.7%

38.6%

15.7%

Are you willing to try to use cover crops?

Yes or already do

Maybe

No

Figure 8 Figure 9

Cover crops include grasses, legumes and forbs for seasonal cover and other conservation purposes. 40% of the respondents indicated they currently use cover crops on their farm. Most seem at least somewhat familiar with the practice (97%) and only 16% indicate they would not be willing to try using cover crops.

The factors that limit the use of cover crops the most were cost (50%), difficulty using with their farming system (38%) and the features of the property don’t support it (32%). The lack of information or skills was not seen as a limiting factor at all (See Figure 8 & 9). Interestingly, 27 respondents from Ottawa County said implementing cover crops was not at all a problem for their current farming system while only 8 in Allegan County felt the same.


12

46.9%

25.2%

27.9%

Do you use or have you used filter strips?

Currently Use

Don't Currently Use

Never Used

50.4% 38.7%

10.9%

Are you willing to try to use filter strips?

Yes or already do

Maybe

No

Figure 10 Figure 11

53.5% 21.8%

24.6%

Do you have or have you used conservation tillage?

Currently Use

Don't Currently Use

Never Used

54.0% 32.8%

13.1%

Are you willing to try using conservation tillage?

Yes or already do

Maybe

No

Figure 12 Figure 13

Filter strips include grasses and other plants that provide a vegetative buffer between farmland and watercourses. 47% of the respondents currently use filter strips on their farm. Most seem at least somewhat familiar with the practice (90%), while only 11% are not willing to try filter strips at all. Again cost was indicated as the largest obstacle to using filter strips (56%) and the lack of information or skills was not seen as a limiting factor (See Figures 10 & 11).

Conservation tillage is a practice that requires planting directly into the undisturbed residue left from the previous crop. Currently 54% of those who responded are practicing conservation tillage. Most seem at least somewhat familiar with the practice (95%), while only 13% say that are not willing to try the practice in the future. The factors that limit the use of conservation tillage the most were cost (50%), lack of equipment (26%) and difficulty using with their farming system (26%). The lack of information or skills was not seen as a limiting factor (See Figures 12 & 13).


13

28.0%

17.4% 54.5%

Do you have or have you used a CNMP or MMP?

Currently Use

Don't Currently Use

Never Used

28.8%

42.4%

28.8%

Are you willing to try using a CNMP or MMP?

Yes or already do

Maybe

No

Figure 14 Figure 15

A Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plan (CNMP) and or Manure Management Plan (MMP) are plans unique to livestock operations that guide the use of manure on a farm in a way that protects natural resources. 28% of the respondents indicated they currently use a nutrient management plan. Please note that nutrient management plans are not applicable on all farms. Out of those that responded, 55% have never used a nutrient management plan and 28% of those have never even heard of it and are not willing to try it in the future. Again the greatest obstacle to using a nutrient management plan is cost and the time required. Lack of information or skills was seen as a somewhat limiting factor (See Figures 14 & 15).

Seven additional questions were asked regarding BMPs. It appears that most farmers (65%) would not be willing to talk about their experiences with various BMPs to other farmers. However, large-scale farmers (with 2,000 or more acres) are generally more willing to talk with other farmers about their experiences with BMP’s than smaller-scale farmers. Only 8% of respondents knew about the carbon trading program and showed interest in participating. The majority were not familiar with the program at all and some were not interested in learning more (41%), while other requested more information (27%).

The majority of respondents (63%) were familiar with the farmland preservation concept of purchasing development rights (PDR). It appears the Ottawa County farmers are slightly more familiar with the program than Allegan County farmers. Almost 40% of respondents were willing or potentially willing to participate in a local PDR program in the future, while 26% were not at all willing and 34% needed more information before making a decision.


14

3.24 3.06

2.89 2.87

2.65 2.49

2.22 2.16

2.12 2.09

1.78

0 1 2 3 4

I do not own the property

Approval of my neighbors

No one else I know is implementing the practice

Not being able to see a field demonstration

Lack of available information about a practice

Don’t want to participate in government programs

Environmental damage caused by the practice

Concerns about reduced yields

Possible interference with changing land use practices

Requirements or restrictions of government programs

Personal out-of-pocket expenses

How much does each issue limit your ability to change your agricultural management practices? 1 - A lot 2 - Some 3- A little 4 - Not at all

Making Management Decisions

66.9%

33.1%

Have you every participated in a government funded cost share program? (Examples: Conservation Reserve

Program, Wetland Reserve Program, EQIP-Environmental Quality Incentives Program)

No

Yes

Figure 17

Figure 16

7.0 Making Management Decisions and Conservation Programs (5 questions, 18 subcategories) When making management decisions, often certain issues limit a farmer’s ability and/or desire to change agricultural management practices. Most respondents felt they are limited in making changes to their management practices because of personal out-of-pocket expenses (40%), requirements or restrictions of government programs (31%), concerns about reduced yields (27%) and interference with their flexibility to change practices as conditions warrant in the future (25%). The issues of least concern were ownership of the property, approval of neighbors, and that no one else they know is implementing the project (See Figure 16).

Most farmers (67%) indicated that they have never participated in a government-funded cost-share program (See Figure 17). It appears that Ottawa County farmers are more likely than Allegan County farmers to have never participated in a such programs. The results indicate that about half of the Allegan County farmers have participated in such a program in the past. A higher percentage of farms with 1,000-2,000 or more acres have participated in a government funded cost share program than those with less than 1,000 acres.


15

3.48

3.26

3.22

3.21

2.82

2.5

2.26

1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4

Requirements/Restrictions (red tape) of government programs

Amount of funding provided by the program

The time it takes to work through the application process

Possible interference with changing land use practices in the future

Difficulty understanding the program requirements

Access to program staff

Being able to attend a field day or field demonstration

How important are these issues when deciding whether or not to participate? 1- Not at all 2- A little 3-Some 4- A lot

Participation in Government Funded Programs

Figure 18

When making a decision on whether or not to participate in government-funded conservation or cost-share programs, farmers are most discouraged by the red tape of government programs (58%), amount of funding provided by the program (45%), and the time it takes to work through the application process (40%). Other lesser concerns included difficulty understanding program requirements, and access to program staff (See Figure 18).

It was evident from the extra comments provided by the respondents that cost, loss of income, and “government red tape” were the largest deterrents to farmers when deciding about using BMPs or participating in government cost-share programs in general.

8.0 Information and Activities (2 questions, 10 subcategories)

Respondents were asked to describe the level of trust they had in a variety of local organizations. In general, farmers had the highest level of trust in Michigan State University Extension and the Michigan Farm Bureau. Many of the other organizations were “slightly” trusted by the respondents including the Farm Services Agency, Conservation Districts, Michigan Department of Agriculture, County Drain Commissions, and the Macatawa Watershed Project. The lowest levels of trust were attributed to the Natural Resources Conservation Service, the Macatawa Area Coordinating Council, and the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (See Figure 19).


16

2.03

2.39

2.47

2.53

2.64

2.72

2.82

2.93

3.16

3.23

0 1 2 3 4

MDEQ (Michigan Department of Environmental …

Macatawa Area Coordinating Council

NRCS (Natural Resources Conservation Service)

Macatawa Watershed Project

County Drain Commission

MDA (Michigan Department of Agriculture)

Conservation District

Farm Services Agency

Michigan Farm Bureau

Michigan State University

1- Not at all 2- Slightly 3- Moderately 4- Very Much

To what extent do you trust the organizations listed below as a source of information about water quality and land management?

Figure 19

0.00% 10.00% 20.00% 30.00% 40.00% 50.00% 60.00% 70.00%

Internet

Other

Workshops/demonstrations/meetings

Television or Billboards

Radio

Conversations with others

Newspaper/Magazine

Newsletters/brochures/factsheets

Which of the following have you heard about local water quality problems from? (Choose all that apply)

Figure 20

When it comes to receiving information about local water quality problems the highest number of respondents rely on newsletters, brochures and factsheets (60%), newspaper and magazines (53%), conversations with others (40%) and radio (34%). The internet, schools, television and billboards were not preferred outlets for getting information (See Figure 20).


17

9.0 Recommendations

The agricultural survey was conducted to help the MACC better understand the viewpoints of farmers in the Macatawa Watershed. The survey results provide vital information to the Macatawa Watershed Project to help us improve farmer’s knowledge of local water quality issues, pollutant sources and consequences, and to overcome obstacles to help farmers implement BMPs and take advantage of conservation programs. This section focuses on recommendations for future work and programs with farmers within the boundaries of the Macatawa Watershed.

The survey responders were generally aware of the environmental impact of their farms on the watershed and care about the quality of water in the watershed! However it’s evident that there is some confusion about the most important pollutants in the watershed and where those pollutants come from. For instance, trash and debris were listed as severe problems which may not be accurate. In addition, pollution from industries and sewage treatment plants was listed as a severe problem, when in actuality those inputs make up less than 10% of the pollutant load.

A sizeable percentage of respondents indicated they are already using some of the BMPs that are priorities for the Macatawa Watershed (filter strips, conservation tillage, cover crops and nutrient management plans). It is recommended that more information be provided about two-stage ditch design, regulating the water level in tile lines and constructing artificial wetlands due to the percentage of respondents who have never heard of these practices. In addition, it appears that the MAEAP program (Michigan Agricultural Environmental Assurance Program) is poorly advertised and might be more popular if more farmers were aware of this voluntary program.

Many respondents were open to new ideas and practices, but perceive cost and personal out of pocket expense as deterrents. Farmers are looking for low-cost solutions, or funding opportunities that are easy to understand and don’t take excessive amounts of time or paperwork. It will also be important to develop cost-benefit analyses that show farmers that they can actually save money in reduced fuel, fertilizer and time when implementing these BMPs.

It is important for the Macatawa Watershed Project to involve all the relevant agricultural agencies in watershed projects. However, it appears that it is most important to have highly trusted agencies involved including Michigan State University Extension and the Michigan Farm Bureau. It may also be helpful to provide local farmers with clear direction on who to contact for technical assistance and demonstrate just how much assistance is available (even without having to participate in a government cost-share programs).


18

10.0 Lessons Learned

Although the information resulting from this survey is extremely valuable, managing a survey of this magnitude was a daunting, time-consuming and expensive process. The most difficult aspects of completing the survey were gathering the appropriate contact information and analyzing the results since an incredible amount of data was generated by this sixteen-page survey. In addition, developing and then distributing the survey was a tedious process.

One comment that was common from respondents was that they only owned the land and were not the ones actively farming the property. While we tried to make it clear in the directions that recipients should only fill out the survey if they were actively farming, a percentage appeared to be landowners only.

Appendix 1 Macatawa Watershed Agricultural Survey

1

Macatawa Watershed Agricultural Survey 2010

Dear Agricultural Landowner, Thank you for taking the time to complete the following survey! The purpose of this survey is to gain valuable insight from the agricultural community on water quality related issues, the use of best management practices on the farm and participation in government funded cost share programs. This is your chance to tell us what you think! If you are not a farmer, or if you do not own land that is farmed, please disregard this survey. INSTRUCTIONS: Please read each question carefully. Your answers are completely confidential and will be included only in summaries where individual answers cannot be identified. Unless otherwise instructed, please check the circle that corresponds to the answer category that best describes you and your situation or your opinion. It will take approximately 20-25 minutes to complete this questionnaire. If you have questions or want further information, please contact the project coordinators listed on the back page.

LET US SHOW OUR APPRECIATION! By taking the time to complete and return this survey

you will be eligible to win one of seven monetary prizes totaling $250! Upon receipt of the completed survey, the unique code (located on the back page of the survey) will be entered into a

drawing. This code is only used to track who has responded and will not be used for any other purposes. All prizes will be mailed to the address associated with this code.

Fact: The Macatawa Watershed suffers from poor water quality which results from urban, suburban and rural land uses. Farming makes up 50% of the land use in the watershed. That’s why we want to know how you view water quality and how you think farms can help improve water quality in our area.

2


The survey must be completed by an adult member of your household 18 years of age or older. Please mark all answers clearly, in pen or pencil, as indicated in the example below.

1. Water Quality Overall, how would you rate the quality of the water in the rivers, streams, and lakes of the Lake Macatawa watershed?

Poor Okay Good Don’t Know

a. For canoeing / kayaking / other boating

b. For eating locally caught fish c. For swimming d. For picnicking and family

activities near water e. For fish habitat f. For wildlife habitat

2. Your Water Use a. Of these activities, which is the most important to you? Canoeing / kayaking / other boating Eating fish caught locally Swimming Picnicking and family activities near water Fish habitat / fishing Scenic beauty / enjoyment

b. Do you know where the rain water goes when it runs off of your property? No, I don’t know

Yes, it goes to ______________________________

3


3. General Water Quality Attitudes

What is your level of agreement with the following statements?

Strongly Disagree Disagree

Neither Agree nor Disagree

Agree Strongly Agree

a. The economic stability of my community depends upon clean lakes, rivers, and streams.

b. The way that I care for my property can influence water quality in lakes, rivers, and streams.

c. It is my personal responsibility to help protect water quality.

d. It is important to protect water quality even if it slows economic development.

e. What I do on my property doesn’t have much impact on overall water quality.

f. Investing in water quality protection puts the farmer at an economic disadvantage.

g. Farm management practices (on individual lots) do not have an impact on local water quality.

h. My actions have an impact on lakes, rivers, and streams.

i. Taking action to improve lakes, rivers, and streams is too expensive for me.

j. It is okay to reduce water quality to promote economic development.

k. It is important to protect water quality even if it costs me more.

l. I would be willing to pay more to improve lakes, rivers, and streams (for example: through local taxes or fees).

m. I would be willing to change the way I care for my farm to improve water quality.

n. The quality of life in my community depends on good water quality in local streams, rivers, and lakes.

4


4. Types of Water Pollutants

Below is a list of types of water pollutants that are generally present in water bodies to some extent. In your opinion, how much of a problem are the following pollutants in the Lake Macatawa watershed?

Not a Problem

Slight Problem

Moderate Problem

Severe Problem

Don’t Know

a. Dirt and Soil in local streams

b. Nutrients from fertilizers in local streams

c. Phosphorus in local streams

d. Bacteria and viruses in local streams (such as E. coli/Coliform)

e. Algae in local streams

f. Toxic materials such as PCBs in local streams

g. Not enough oxygen in the water in local streams

h. Invasive aquatic plants and animals

i. Cloudiness of the water in local streams

j. Trash or debris

5


5. Sources of Water Pollution

The items listed below are sources of water quality pollution across the country. In your opinion, how much of a problem are the following sources in the Lake Macatawa watershed?

Not a Problem

Slight Problem

Moderate Problem

Severe Problem

Don’t Know

a. Discharges from industry into streams and lakes

b. Discharges from sewage treatment plants

c. Soil erosion from construction sites

d. Soil erosion from farm fields

e. Soil erosion from stream channels

f. Lawn fertilizers and pesticides

g. Grass clippings and leaves

h. Improperly maintained septic systems

i. Grazing-related sources

j. Manure from farm animals k. Stormwater runoff from streets, highways,

and/or parking lots

l. Animal feeding operations m. Droppings from geese, ducks, and other

waterfowl

n. Pet waste (such as dogs or cats)

o. Agricultural fertilizers and pesticides

p. Land development or redevelopment

q. Removal of riparian vegetation

r. Drainage / filling of wetlands s. Outputs from marinas and/or recreational

boats

6


6. Consequences of Poor Water Quality

Poor water quality can lead to a variety of consequences for communities. In your opinion, how much of a problem are the following issues in the Lake Macatawa watershed?

Not a Problem

Slight Problem

Moderate Problem

Severe Problem

Don’t Know

a. Contaminated drinking water

b. Polluted / closed swimming areas

c. Contaminated fish

d. Increase in water / sewage bill

e. Loss of desirable fish and wildlife species

f. Reduced beauty of rivers, lakes, and streams

g. Reduced opportunities for water activities such as boating, canoeing, and fishing

h. Reduced quality of water activities

i. Excessive aquatic plants or algae

j. Fish kills

k. Odor

l. Lower property values

7


7. Practices to Improve Water Quality

Please indicate which statement most accurately describes your level of experience with each practice listed below.

Never Heard Of It

Somewhat familiar with it

Know how to use it;

not using it Currently

Use It

a. Conduct regular soil tests for pH, and nutrients b. Construct sediment basins to collect and store debris or

sediment

c. Construct an artificial wetland for waste treatment

d. Rotate crops to maintain or improve soil

e. Use a grassed waterway to reduce erosion and soil loss f. Use fences to exclude livestock from streams, rivers,

ditches, etc.

g. Restore wetlands

h. Stabilize and protect streambanks and/or shorelines

i. Regular servicing of septic system

j. Install a two stage ditch design to reduce bank erosion

k. Regulate the water level in tile lines

8


8. Making Management Decisions

In general, how much does each issue limit your ability to change your agricultural management practices (such as those in Question 7)?

Not at All A little Some A lot Don’t Know

a. Personal out-of-pocket expenses b. Concerns about reduced yields

c. Lack of available information about a practice

d. No one else I know is implementing the practice

e. Approval of my neighbors

f. Environmental damage caused by the practice

g. Don’t want to participate in government programs

h. I do not own the property

i. Requirements or restrictions of government programs

j. Possible interference with my flexibility to change land use practices as conditions warrant

k. Not being able to see a field demonstration of the practice(s) before I decide

l. Other __________________________ (Please specify)

9


9. Participation in Government Funded Programs

Have you ever participated in a government funded cost share program? (Examples: Conservation Reserve Program, Wetland Reserve Program, EQIP-Environmental Quality Incentives Program)

No

Yes, I have participated in ______________________________ In general, how important are these issues when you decide whether or not to participate in a government funded conservation or cost-share programs?


a. Amount of funding provided by the program

b. The time it takes to work through the application process

c. Requirements/Restrictions (red tape) of government programs

d. Possible interference with my flexibility to change land use practices in the future

e. Difficulty understanding the program requirements

f. Being able to attend a field day or field demonstration of the practice(s)

g. Access to program staff

h. Other __________________________ (Please specify)

10


10. Constraints for Specific Practices

Cover Crops. Cover crops include grasses, legumes and forbs for seasonal cover and other conservation purposes.

1. Do you have or have you used cover crops? Currently use Don’t currently use Never used

2. How familiar are you with cover crops? Never heard of it Somewhat familiar with it Know how to use, not doing it Currently use it

3. Are you willing to try to use cover crops?

Yes or already do Maybe No

How much do the following factors limit your

ability to use cover crops (or limited, if you already

use)?


a. Lack of information or skills b. Time required c. Cost d. The features of my property do not support it e. Insufficient proof of water quality benefit f. Desire to keep things the way they are g. Hard to use with my farming system h. Lack of equipment

Filter Strips. Filter strips include grasses and other plants that provide a vegetative buffer between farmland and watercourses.

1. Do you have or have you used filter strips? Currently use Don’t currently use Never used

2. How familiar are you with filter strips? Never heard of it Somewhat familiar with it Know how to use, not doing it Currently use it

3. Are you willing to try to use filter strips?



ability to use filter strips (or limited, if you already

use)?



11


Conservation Tillage Conservation tillage is a practice that requires planting directly into the undisturbed residue left from the previous crop.

1. Do you have or have you used conservation tillage? Currently use Don’t currently use Never used

2. How familiar are you with conservation tillage? Never heard of it Somewhat familiar with it Know how to use, not doing it Currently use it

3. Are you willing to try using conservation tillage?



ability to use conservation tillage (or limited, if you

already use)?



Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plan (CNMP) and or Manure Management Plan (MMP) Both are plans unique to livestock operations that guide the use of manure on a farm in a way that protects natural resources.

1. Do you have or have you used a CNMP or MMP? Currently use Don’t currently use Never used

2. How familiar are you with CNMPs or MMPs? Never heard of it Somewhat familiar with it Know how to use, not doing it Currently use it

3. Are you willing to try using a CNMP or MMP?



ability to use CNMPs or MMPs (or limited, if you

already use)?



12


11. Additional BMP questions BMP: Stands for “Best Management Practice” which is an agricultural practice that has

been determined to be an effective, practical means of preventing or reducing pollution. a. Would you be willing to speak to other farmers about your experiences with the BMPs you have implemented? (Note: Your answers here do not commit you to anything) Yes No

b. Are you familiar with the Carbon Trading Program and the financial benefits it provides to those farmers that implement practices that sequester carbon (like planting perennial grasses or practicing no-till) Yes, I am familiar with the program and I plan on participating. Yes, I am familiar with the program but I do not plan on participating. No, I am not familiar with the program but I would like to learn more. No, I am not familiar with the program and am not interested in learning more

c. Are you familiar with the farmland preservation concept of purchasing development rights (PDR)? Yes, I am familiar with the concept of PDR. No, I am not familiar with the concept of PDR.

d. If you had the opportunity, would you be willing to permanently protect your farmland from development by selling your development rights to a county or land conservancy? (Note: Your answers here do not commit you to any involvement in the program) Yes, I would be willing to participate in a PDR program. Maybe, depending on how much money was offered for the development rights. No, I would not be willing to participate in a PDR program. I need more information before I could make a decision.

e. Are there other BMP(s) that are not listed previously that you would like to implement on your farm / property? Please list here: f. In your opinion what are some barriers or obstacles to installing these BMPs on your farm? Please list up to three. g. Are there any agricultural cost share programs you would like to know more about? (Ex. EQIP (Environmental Quality Incentives Program), WRP (Wetlands Reserve Program), CRP (Conservation Reserve Program), CREP (Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program) etc.)

13


12. Information and Activities

People get information about water quality from a number of different sources. To what extent do you trust the organizations listed below as a source of information about water quality and land management?

Not At All Slightly Moderately Very Much Am Not

Familiar a. NRCS (Natural Resources Conservation

Service) b. Farm Services Agency c. Michigan State University Extension d. Conservation District e. MDA (Michigan Department of Agriculture) f. MDEQ (Michigan Department of

Environmental Quality) g. County Drain Commission h. Michigan Farm Bureau i. Macatawa Watershed Project j. Macatawa Area Coordinating Council k. Other _________________________ (Please specify)

14


13. About Your Farm Operation

a. How many years have you been farming in the Macatawa Watershed? _____________ years

b. Do you consider yourself retired from

your farm operation? Retired Partially Retired Not Retired

c. Which of the following best describes

your position as a farm operator? (Please check all that apply) Me alone or with my spouse Me with my family partner(s)

(ex. siblings, parents, children) Me with the landowner Me with my tenant Me and my business partner(s) Someone else makes the decisions for

the operation d. How likely is it that any family member

will continue farm operations when you retire or quit farming? Will not happen Likely Will definitely happen Unknown

e. Five years from now, which statement

will best describe your farm? About the same as it is today It will be larger It will be smaller I don’t know/unsure

f. Please estimate the total tillable acreage

(owner and/or rented) of your farming operation this year? 1-99 acres 100-499 acres 500-999 acres 1,000-1,999 acres 2,000 or more acres

g. This year, how many acres of the

following do you manage? If none, please enter zero. _____ Corn _____ Soybeans _____ Small grains _____ Canning crops _____ Clover/alfalfa _____ Pasture _____ Conservation set aside _____ Forest/woodland _____ Non row crops for energy _____ Blueberries _____ Other

h. Does the property you manage touch a

stream, river, lake, drain, ditch or wetland? Yes No

i. How many of the following animals are

part of your farming operation? If none, please enter zero. _____ Dairy cattle (incl. heifers, young stock) _____ Beef cattle (incl. young stock) _____ Hogs _____ Poultry _____ Other livestock

j. Is your farm MAEAP verified? Please check all that apply. Yes, verified in cropping systems Yes, verified in livestock systems Yes, verified in farmstead systems Yes, verified in greenhouse No, my farm is not MAEAP verified No, my farm is not verified but I have filled out a Farm-A-Syst, or Crop-A-Syst, or Livestock-A-Syst form I don’t know what MAEAP verification is

15


14. About You and Your Property

a. Do you make the home or lawn care

decisions in your household? Yes No

b. What is your gender? Male Female

c. What year were you born? _______ d. What is the highest grade in school that

you have completed? Some formal schooling High school diploma or GED Some college 2 year college degree 4 year college degree Graduate degree

e. How long have you lived at your current residence? _______years

f. In what county is your property

principally located in? Ottawa County Allegan County I have property in both counties

g. Do you use pesticides or herbicides on

your farm? Yes No

h. If yes, are pesticides or herbicides applied by a commercial applicator? Some All None

i. Do you use fertilizer on your farm? Yes No

j. If so, have you ever had your soil tested to determine your fertilizer needs? Yes No, it is too expensive No, I don’t know how No, I didn’t know soil testing was

important Other

k. Is manure applied to your farm? Yes No

l. If yes, is manure applied in accordance with a manure management plan? Yes No Not applicable

m. Is application equipment for pesticides, fertilizers and/or manure calibrated regularly? Yes No Not applicable

n. I’ve heard about local water quality problems from the following (check all that apply). Newsletters/brochures/factsheets Internet Radio Newspaper/Magazine Workshops/demonstrations/meetings Television or Billboards Schools Conversations with others Other


Thank you for your time and assistance! Please return your completed survey in the postage-paid

envelope provided. Please use the space below for any additional comments about this survey or water resource issues in the Lake Macatawa watershed.

Local Project Coordinator: Mary Fales Watershed Coordinator Macatawa Area Coordinating Council 301 Douglas Avenue Holland, MI 49424 616-395-2688 [email protected] www.the-macc.org

ENTER YOUR NAME FOR A PRIZE! We appreciate that you took the time to complete this survey and we want to give you something to show for it! If you would like to be entered into a drawing for an appreciation gift, please return this completed survey in the envelope provided and make sure not to remove the sticker at the bottom of this page. Appreciation gifts include five $20 gift cards, one $50 gift card, and one $100 gift card! Gift cards will be in the form of VISA prepaid gift cards that can be used anywhere VISA is accepted. (Gift cards will be mailed)

Appendix 2 Quality Assurance Project Plan

Appendix 3 Pre-Notice Postcard

Original Cover Letter Farm News Postcard Reminder Postcard

Reminder Letter

WE NEED YOUR HELP!

WE NEED YOUR HELP!

WE NEED YOUR HELP!

WE NEED YOUR HELP!

Next week you will receive a survey in the mail. This survey is being sent to all agricultural landowners (who own parcels larger than 20 acres in size) that live within the Macatawa Watershed.

This survey is completely confidential and your contact information will not be connected to any of your responses. Please contact Mary Fales at [email protected] or call 616-395-2688, if you have any questions.

Please take the time to fill out the survey which is sponsored by the Macatawa Watershed Project. The MWP and local agricultural agencies are interested in your views on water quality issues, best management practices and government funded cost share programs.










Finish a survey and you’ll be eligible to win monetary prizes!




mailto:[email protected]�




301 Douglas Avenue, Holland, Michigan 49424 www.the-macc.org phone: (616) 395-2688 - fax: (616) 395-9411 email: [email protected]

January 11, 2010 To: PRODUCER Subject: 2010 Agricultural Survey Please take just a minute to read the following letter! This letter is being sent to you by the Macatawa Watershed Project (MWP) because you own a piece(s) of property within the Macatawa Watershed that is zoned agricultural. The MWP is housed at the Macatawa Area Coordinating Council (MACC), which is a metropolitan planning organization for the Holland/Zeeland Area. The MACC is not a regulatory agency. Our mission is to encourage cooperation among neighboring units of government on area wide issues. The MWP is supported by local governments and consists of a proactive group of local stakeholders that strive to improve the water quality of Lake Macatawa and its tributaries. Our goal is to learn more about farmers and farmland in Ottawa and Allegan Counties. Specifically, we want to learn more about your opinions on water quality related issues, the use of Best Management Practices (BMPs) on the farm and about your participation in government funded cost share programs. Is there a benefit to you? Yes! The results of this survey will be provided to many of the local agricultural agencies that you work with often in an effort to improve service. In addition, your ideas could help determine the future projects for the MWP. This is your chance to have your opinions heard! Don’t worry, all of your answers will remain completely confidential (your name will not be connected to your responses). Survey responses will only be reported out as a group. Please help us by filling out the enclosed survey! OR choose an alternate survey method from the choices below. By completing a survey you will be eligible for a chance to win monetary prizes!

I will take this survey online. Please email me the link at _______________________________(email)

I will take this survey over the phone. Please call me at ________________________________(phone)

I will take this survey in person. Please call or email me at _________________________________ to set up an appointment.

I am not the most appropriate contact for the above listed property. Please contact the following person instead: Name:________________________________________________ Phone or Email_________________________________________

I am not interested in participating in this survey If you send this completed form or the completed survey back by January 16th, you will be entered in a drawing to receive either one $50, one $100 or one of five $20 gift cards. Prizes will be issued in the form of a Visa prepaid card that can be used anywhere Visa is accepted. Thanks so much for your time! Sincerely, Mary Fales, Watershed Coordinator

Are you farming in the Macatawa Watershed?

WE NEED YOUR HELP!

The Macatawa Watershed is pictured at the left. It is a 175 square mile area that contains all the land that eventually drains to Lake Macatawa.

www.photography-plus.com


WE NEED YOUR HELP!

The Macatawa Watershed is pictured at the left. It is a 175 square mile area that contains all the land that eventually drains to Lake Macatawa.

www.photography-plus.com

If you live or farm land in the area pictured on the back of this card, then you are farming in the Macatawa Watershed. The watershed is facing water quality problems which are the result of activities that happen on the land in rural, urban and suburban areas. Farming is a substantial use of acreage in the watershed which is why we are hoping you can help us!

We will soon be sending out a survey to farmers in this area and we’d like to know how farmers view surface water quality, the use of best management practices and government funded cost share programs. When you receive this survey in the mail, please take the time to fill it out and send it back to us. Everyone who completes a survey will have the chance to win monetary prizes!

This notice is being sent to you by the Macatawa Watershed Project which is a

program of the Macatawa Area Coordinating Council (MACC). The MACC is not a regulatory

agency. Please contact Mary Fales at [email protected] or call 616-395-2688, if

you have any questions.


WE NEED YOUR HELP!

www.the-macc.org

If you live or farm land in the area pictured on the back of this card, then you are farming in the Macatawa Watershed. The watershed is facing water quality problems which are the result of activities that happen on the land in rural, urban and suburban areas. Farming is a substantial use of acreage in the watershed which is why we are hoping you can help us!

We will soon be sending out a survey to farmers in this area and we’d like to know how farmers view surface water quality, the use of best management practices and government funded cost share programs. When you receive this survey in the mail, please take the time to fill it out and send it back to us. Everyone who completes a survey will have the chance to win monetary prizes!

This notice is being sent to you by the Macatawa Watershed Project which is a

program of the Macatawa Area Coordinating Council (MACC). The MACC is not a regulatory

agency. Please contact Mary Fales at [email protected] or call 616-395-2688, if

you have any questions.


WE NEED YOUR HELP!

www.the-macc.org

mailto:[email protected]


WE NEED YOUR HELP!

WE NEED YOUR HELP!

WE NEED YOUR HELP!

WE NEED YOUR HELP!

You recently received a survey in the mail and we haven’t heard back from you.

Please take some time today to fill out the

survey and tell us what you think about local water quality, best management practices and government funded cost

share programs.

Remember, you can fill out the paper copy or go online to complete the survey!

This survey is completely confidential and your contact information will not be connected to any of your responses. Please contact Mary Fales at [email protected] or call 616-395-2688, if you have any questions, want to be removed from our mailing list or need another copy of the survey.



survey and tell us what you think about local water quality, best management

practices and government funded cost share programs.

Remember, you can fill out the paper copy

or go online to complete the survey!
















Finish a survey and

you’ll be eligible to win

monetary prizes!

Finish a survey and


monetary prizes!

Finish a survey and


monetary prizes!

Finish a survey and


monetary prizes!





301 Douglas Avenue, Holland, Michigan 49424 www.the-macc.org phone: (616) 395-2688 - fax: (616) 395-9411 email: [email protected]

February 9, 2010 Dear PRODUCER Subject: 2010 Agricultural Survey (Second Notice)

IF YOU WERE NOT INTERESTED IN FILLING OUT THIS SURVEY BEFORE- PLEASE RECONSIDER AND READ THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION.

This letter is being sent to you by the Macatawa Watershed Project (MWP) because you own property within the Macatawa Watershed that is zoned agricultural. The MWP is housed at the Macatawa Area Coordinating Council (MACC), which is a planning organization for the Holland/Zeeland Area. The MACC is not a regulatory agency. We are asking our local farmers to take some time today to fill out the attached survey, which is very important to us. Our goal is to learn more about farmers and farmland in Ottawa and Allegan Counties to help us better understand the progress that has been made over the years with regards to water quality related issues. It will also help clarify our future goals for building partnerships and developing programs to gain even more successes as we work to integrate our rural and urban water quality improvement solutions. These questions were designed by researchers at Purdue University and the University of Wisconsin in collaboration with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). They are intended to be general questions that might apply to a variety of different agricultural practices. Please just answer to the best of your ability. This survey is 100% confidential! Your name will not be connected to any of your responses. Survey responses will only be reported out as a group. IF YOU RENT OUT YOUR LAND: You may still fill out the survey to the best of your ability OR you may give this survey to your tenant to fill out and return to us. If you would like one-on-one assistance with the survey or have any questions please call Mary Fales at 616-395-2688. PLEASE HELP US BY FILLING OUT THE ENCLOSED SURVEY! OR choose an alternate survey method from the choices below. By completing a survey you will be eligible for a chance to win monetary prizes!

I will take this survey online. Please email me the link at _______________________________(email)

I will take this survey over the phone. Please call me at ________________________________(phone)

I will take this survey in person. Please call or email me at _________________________________ to set up an appointment.

I am not the most appropriate contact for the above listed property. Please contact the following person instead: Name:________________________________________________ Phone or Email_________________________________________

I am not interested in participating in this survey If you send this completed form or the completed survey back by the end of February, you will be entered in a drawing to receive either one $50, one $100 or one of five $20 gift cards. Prizes will be issued in the form of a Visa prepaid card that can be used anywhere Visa is accepted. Thanks so much for your time! Sincerely, Mary Fales, Watershed Coordinator

Appendix 4 Macatawa Watershed Agricultural Survey Results

Macatawa Watershed

Macatawa Watershed Agricultural Survey Results

The purpose of this study was to collect social indicators data from residents of the Macatawa watershed to inform planning and implementation activities. The results of this survey also provide baseline social indicator information that will be used for comparison with a follow up survey in order to examine changes that occurred in the watershed over the project’s lifetime.

In the survey results, you will find that the number of people answering each question is different. This is a result of all respondents not answering every question. The total in each table is the total number of people answering that question. The numbers in the columns represent the percentage of respondents who chose that response. The results have not been weighted.

This report was prepared for the Macatawa Watershed by:

Natural Resource Social Science Lab Department of Forestry and Natural Resources Purdue University (765) 496-2221

Macatawa Watershed

1. Water Quality

Overall, how would you rate the quality of the water in the rivers, streams, and lakes of the Lake Macatawa watershed?

Poor (1)

Okay (2)

Good (3)

Don’t Know

Mean

(n) a. For canoeing / kayaking / other boating 8.4% 39.9% 38.5% 13.3% 2.35

(143)

b. For eating locally caught fish 28.0% 37.1% 21.0% 14.0% 1.92 (143)

c. For swimming 29.6% 38.7% 21.8% 9.9% 1.91 (142)

d. For picnicking and family activities near water 4.9% 34.3% 55.2% 5.6% 2.53 (143)

e. For fish habitat 17.4% 35.4% 29.9% 17.4% 2.15 (144)

f. For wildlife habitat 2.8% 28.5% 59.7% 9.0% 2.63 (144)

2. Your Water Use

a. Of these activities, which is the most important to you? (n=113)

8.0% Canoeing / kayaking / other boating 6.2% Eating fish caught locally 6.2% Swimming 13.3% Picnicking and family activities near water 13.3% Fish habitat / fishing 53.1% Scenic beauty / enjoyment

b. Do you know where the rain water goes when it runs off of your property? (n=143) 12.6% No, I don’t know 87.4% Yes, it goes to _________ See Appendix A

Macatawa Watershed

3. General Water Quality Attitudes

What is your level of agreement with the following statements?

Strongly Disagree

(1) Disagree

(2)

Neither Agree

nor Disagree

(3) Agree

(4)

Strongly Agree

(5)

Mean

(n) a. The economic stability of my community

depends upon clean lakes, rivers, and streams.

0.7% 10.9% 33.3% 47.6% 7.5% 3.50 (147)

b. The way that I care for my property can influence water quality in lakes, rivers, and streams.

0% 3.4% 7.5% 69.4% 19.7% 4.05 (147)

c. It is my personal responsibility to help protect water quality. 0% 2.0% 10.9% 70.1% 17.0% 4.02

(147)

d. It is important to protect water quality even if it slows economic development. 2.1% 5.5% 33.1% 49.7% 9.7% 3.59

(145)

e. What I do on my property doesn’t have much impact on overall water quality. 10.9% 50.3% 15.6% 20.4% 2.7% 2.54

(147)

f. Investing in water quality protection puts the farmer at an economic disadvantage. 2.8% 25.7% 36.8% 29.9% 4.9% 3.08

(144)

g. Farm management practices (on individual lots) do not have an impact on local water quality.

13.0% 58.2% 13.0% 13.7% 2.1% 2.34 (146)

h. My actions have an impact on lakes, rivers, and streams. 0.7% 4.1% 17.7% 69.4% 8.2% 3.80

(147)

i. Taking action to improve lakes, rivers, and streams is too expensive for me. 4.2% 26.4% 45.1% 23.6% 0.7% 2.90

(144)

j. It is okay to reduce water quality to promote economic development. 12.2% 57.1% 23.1% 4.8% 2.7% 2.29

(147)

k. It is important to protect water quality even if it costs me more. 2.1% 11.7% 52.4% 29.7% 4.1% 3.22

(145)

l. I would be willing to pay more to improve lakes, rivers, and streams (for example: through local taxes or fees).

15.2% 42.1% 25.5% 15.2% 2.1% 2.47 (145)

m. I would be willing to change the way I care for my farm to improve water quality. 0% 10.9% 40.8% 46.9% 1.4% 3.39

(147)

n. The quality of life in my community depends on good water quality in local streams, rivers, and lakes.

1.4% 10.3% 27.4% 52.7% 8.2% 3.56 (146)

Macatawa Watershed

4. Types of Water Pollutants

Below is a list of types of water pollutants that are generally present in water bodies to some extent. In your opinion, how much of a problem are the following pollutants in the Lake Macatawa watershed?

Not a Problem

(1)

Slight Problem

(2)

Moderate Problem

(3)

Severe Problem

(4) Don’t Know

Mean (n)

a. Dirt and Soil in local streams 6.8% 30.4% 42.6% 11.5% 8.8% 2.64 (148)

b. Nutrients from fertilizers in local streams 6.7% 30.9% 35.6% 8.1% 18.8% 2.55 (149)

c. Phosphorus in local streams 5.4% 31.3% 29.3% 13.6% 20.4% 2.64 (147)

d. Bacteria and viruses in local streams (such as E.coli/Coliform) 10.8% 25.7% 25.0% 15.5% 23.0% 2.59

(148)

e. Algae in local streams 10.8% 29.1% 32.4% 6.1% 21.6% 2.43 (148)

f. Toxic materials such as PCBs in local streams 16.1% 16.8% 14.8% 8.7% 43.6% 2.29

(149)

g. Not enough oxygen in the water in local streams 14.9% 18.2% 19.6% 4.7% 42.6% 2.25

(148)

h. Invasive aquatic plants and animals 10.1% 27.5% 23.5% 12.1% 26.8% 2.51 (109)

i. Cloudiness of the water in local streams 15.6% 31.3% 23.8% 12.9% 16.3% 2.41 (147)

j. Trash or debris 10.1% 33.6% 32.9% 16.1% 7.4% 2.59 (149)

Macatawa Watershed

5. Sources of Water Pollution

The items listed below are sources of water quality pollution across the country. In your opinion, how much of a problem are the following sources in the Lake Macatawa watershed?

Not a Problem

(1)

Slight Problem

(2)

Moderate Problem

(3)

Severe Problem

(4)

Don’t Know

Mean (n)

a. Discharges from industry into streams and lakes 8.7% 26.7% 31.3% 6.7% 26.7% 2.49

(150)

b. Discharges from sewage treatment plants 7.4% 16.1% 24.2% 30.9% 21.5% 3.00

(149)

c. Soil erosion from construction sites 10.8% 40.5% 22.3% 3.4% 23.0% 2.24 (148)

d. Soil erosion from farm fields 10.1% 49.3% 21.6% 9.5% 9.5% 2.34 (148)

e. Soil erosion from stream channels 10.8% 37.8% 18.2% 6.1% 27.0% 2.27 (150)

f. Lawn fertilizers and pesticides 6.7% 26.7% 32.0% 18.0% 16.7% 2.74 (150)

g. Grass clippings and leaves 26.7% 28.7% 16.7% 6.0% 22.0% 2.03 (150)

h. Improperly maintained septic systems 12.1% 36.2% 20.1% 7.4% 24.2% 2.30 (149)

i. Grazing-related sources 40.0% 34.7% 4.7% 0.7% 20.0% 1.58 (150)

j. Manure from farm animals 24.0% 44.7% 13.3% 6.7% 11.3% 2.03 (150)

k. Stormwater runoff from streets, highways, and/or parking lots 6.0% 17.4% 37.6% 26.2% 12.8% 2.96

(149)

l. Animal feeding operations 29.9% 41.5% 8.8% 4.1% 15.6% 1.85 (147)

m. Droppings from geese, ducks, and other waterfowl 24.8% 28.2% 20.1% 10.1% 16.8% 2.19

(149)

n. Pet waste (such as dogs or cats) 41.3% 28.0% 10.7% 4.0% 16.0% 1.73 (150)

o. Agricultural fertilizers and pesticides 20.7% 45.3% 18.0% 4.7% 11.3% 2.08 (150)

p. Land development or redevelopment 9.4% 32.9% 29.5% 10.7% 17.4% 2.50 (149)

q. Removal of riparian vegetation 14.8% 26.2% 22.1% 4.7% 32.2% 2.25 (149)

r. Drainage / filling of wetlands 23.8% 34.7% 15.0% 4.8% 21.8% 2.01 (147)

s. Outputs from marinas and/or recreational boats 10.0% 30.7% 26.0% 8.7% 24.7% 2.44

(150)

Macatawa Watershed

6. Consequences of Poor Water Quality

Poor water quality can lead to a variety of consequences for communities. In your opinion, how much of a problem are the following issues in the Lake Macatawa watershed?

Not a Problem

(1)

Slight Problem

(2)

Moderate Problem

(3)

Severe Problem

(4)

Don’t Know

Mean (n)

a. Contaminated drinking water 30.6% 31.9% 16.7% 4.2% 16.7% 1.93 (144)

b. Polluted / closed swimming areas 9.0% 32.6% 32.6% 8.3% 17.4% 2.49 (144)

c. Contaminated fish 7.7% 35.2% 28.2% 8.5% 20.4% 2.47 (142)

d. Increase in water / sewage bill 14.9% 27.0% 17.0% 3.5% 37.6% 2.15 (141)

e. Loss of desirable fish and wildlife species 11.9% 30.1% 24.5% 5.6% 28.0% 2.33

(143)

f. Reduced beauty of rivers, lakes, and streams 23.1% 33.6% 23.8% 7.0% 12.6% 2.17

(143)

g. Reduced opportunities for water activities such as boating, canoeing, and fishing

28.0% 35.0% 14.7% 5.6% 16.8% 1.97 (143)

h. Reduced quality of water activities 18.1% 38.2% 15.3% 7.6% 20.8% 2.16 (144)

i. Excessive aquatic plants or algae 9.8% 32.2% 28.0% 7.0% 23.1% 2.42 (143)

j. Fish kills 16.7% 31.3% 19.4% 4.9% 27.8% 2.17 (144)

k. Odor 21.5% 38.2% 18.1% 2.8% 19.4% 2.03 (144)

l. Lower property values 25.7% 30.6% 11.1% 5.6% 27.1% 1.95 (144)

Macatawa Watershed

7. Practices to Improve Water Quality

Please indicate which statement most accurately describes your level of experience with each practice listed below.

Never heard of it (1)

Somewhat familiar with it

(2)

Know how to use it;

not using it (3)

Currently use It

(4)

Mean (n)

a. Conduct regular soil tests for pH, and nutrients 1.4% 28.2% 10.6% 59.9%

3.29 (142)

b. Construct sediment basins to collect and store debris or sediment 21.9% 39.4% 21.9% 16.8%

2.34 (137)

c. Construct an artificial wetland for waste treatment 30.0% 39.3% 25.7% 5.0%

2.06 (140)

d. Rotate crops to maintain or improve soil 0.7% 12.1% 19.1% 68.1% 3.55 (141)

e. Use a grassed waterway to reduce erosion and soil loss 2.1% 15.7% 17.1% 65.0%

3.45 (140)

f. Use fences to exclude livestock from streams, rivers, ditches, etc. 6.6% 20.4% 42.3% 30.7%

2.97 (137)

g. Restore wetlands 3.5% 46.5% 35.2% 14.8% 2.61 (142)

h. Stabilize and protect streambanks and/or shorelines 8.5% 33.8% 21.8% 35.9%

2.85 (142)

i. Regular servicing of septic system 2.8% 14.8% 9.2% 73.2% 3.53 (142)

j. Install a two stage ditch design to reduce bank erosion 52.5% 22.0% 15.6% 9.9%

1.83 (141)

k. Regulate the water level in tile lines 44.3% 30.0% 15.7% 10.0% 1.91 (140)

Macatawa Watershed

8. Making Management Decisions

In general, how much does each issue limit your ability to change your agricultural management practices (such as those in Question 7)? Not at all

(4) A little

(3) Some

(2) A lot (1)

Don’t know

Mean (n)

a. Personal out-of-pocket expenses 4.2% 11.9% 34.3% 39.9% 9.8% 1.78 (143)

b. Concerns about reduced yields 12.9% 15.7% 35.0% 27.1% 9.3% 2.16 (140)

c. Lack of available information about a practice 19.4% 23.6% 35.4% 6.9% 14.6% 2.65

(144)

d. No one else I know is implementing the practice 31.3% 17.4% 23.6% 8.3% 19.4% 2.89

(144)

e. Approval of my neighbors 39.7% 19.9% 24.8% 5.0% 10.6% 3.06 (141)

f. Environmental damage caused by the practice 15.6% 12.8% 27.7% 26.2% 17.7% 2.22

(141)

g. Don’t want to participate in government programs 19.4% 19.4% 33.3% 15.3% 12.5% 2.49

(144)

h. I do not own the property 53.4% 7.5% 15.0% 9.0% 15.0% 3.24 (133)

i. Requirements or restrictions of government programs 10.5% 17.5% 24.5% 30.8% 16.8% 2.09

(143)

j. Possible interference with my flexibility to change land use practices as conditions warrant

7.0% 21.1% 33.1% 24.6% 14.1% 2.12 (142)

k. Not being able to see a field demonstration of the practice(s) before I decide

29.6% 21.1% 20.4% 9.9% 19.0% 2.87 (142)

l. Other _____________________ (Please specify) 5.3% 0% 5.3% 42.1% 47.4% 1.40

(19) See Appendix B

Macatawa Watershed

9. Participation in Government Funded Programs Have you ever participated in a government funded cost share program? (Examples: Conservation Reserve Program, Wetland Reserve Program, EQIP-Environmental Quality Incentives Program) (n=142) 66.9% No 33.1% Yes, I have participated in ________________ See Appendix C In general, how important are these issues when you decide whether or not to participate in a government funded conservation or cost-share program? Not at all

(1) A little

(2) Some

(3) A lot (4)

Don’t know

Mean (n)

a. Amount of funding provided by the program 6.5% 8.7% 28.3% 44.9% 11.6% 3.26

(122)

b. The time it takes to work through the application process 6.5% 7.9% 32.4% 39.5% 13.7% 3.22

(120)

c. Requirements/Restrictions (red tape) of government programs 4.3% 7.2% 17.4% 58.0% 13.0% 3.48

(120)

d. Possible interference with my flexibility to change land use practices in the future 6.5% 10.8% 28.1% 41.7% 12.9% 3.21

(121)

e. Difficulty understanding the program requirements 13.8% 18.1% 20.3% 30.4% 17.4% 2.82

(114)

f. Being able to attend a field day or field demonstration of the practice(s) 24.6% 23.2% 26.1% 10.1% 15.9% 2.26

(116)

g. Access to program staff 18.8% 18.1% 28.3% 15.2% 19.6% 2.50 (111)

h. Other _____________________ (Please specify) 5.5% 0% 0% 27.8% 66.7% 3.50

(6) See Appendix D

Macatawa Watershed

10. Constraints for Specific Practices Cover Crops. Cover crops include grasses, legumes and forbs for seasonal cover and other conservation purposes. 1. Do you have or have you used cover crops? (n=147) 40.1% Currently use 42.2% Don’t currently use 17.7% Never used

2. How familiar are you with cover crops? (n=147) 2.7% Never heard of it 23.8% Somewhat familiar with it 38.1% Know how to use, not doing it 35.4% Currently use it 3. Are you willing to try to use cover crops? (n=140) 45.7% Yes or already do 38.6% Maybe 15.7% No


ability to cover crop (or limited, if you

already use)?

Not at All (4)

A little (3)

Some (2)

A lot (1)

Don’t Know

Mean (n)

a. Lack of information or skills 55.4% 20.9% 8.6% 4.3% 10.8% 3.43 (139)

b. Time required 34.3% 21.1% 22.9% 10.7% 10.7% 2.89 (140)

c. Cost 22.5% 20.3% 30.4% 19.6% 7.2% 2.49 (138)

d. The features of my property do not support it 32.6% 18.1% 19.6% 13.0% 16.7% 2.84 (138)

e. Insufficient proof of water quality benefit 38.1% 17.3% 23.7% 5.8% 15.1% 3.03 (139)

f. Desire to keep things the way they are 47.1% 18.1% 15.2% 10.1% 9.4% 3.13 (138)

g. Hard to use with my farming system 26.4% 19.3% 19.3% 18.6% 16.4% 2.64 (140)

h. Lack of equipment 44.1% 16.2% 16.2% 11.0% 12.5% 3.07 (136)

Macatawa Watershed Filter Strips. Filter strips include grasses and other plants that provide a vegetative buffer between farmland and watercourses. 1. Do you have or have you used filter strips? (n=147) 46.9% Currently use 25.2% Don’t currently use 27.9% Never used

2. How familiar are you with filter strips? (n=144) 8.3% Never heard of it 33.3% Somewhat familiar with it 14.6% Know how to use, not doing it 43.8% Currently use it 3. Are you willing to try to use filter strips? (n=137) 50.4% Yes or already do 38.7% Maybe 10.9% No


ability to use filter strips (or limited, if you

already use)?

Not at All (4)

A little (3)

Some (2)

A lot (1)

Don’t Know

Mean (n)


b. Time required 30.4% 22.2% 32.6% 8.1% 6.7% 2.80 (135)

c. Cost 17.8% 17.8% 32.6% 23.7% 8.1% 2.32 (135)






Macatawa Watershed Conservation Tillage. Conservation tillage is a practice that requires planting directly into the undisturbed residue left from the previous crop. 1. Do you have or have you used conservation tillage? (n=142) 53.5% Currently use 21.8% Don’t currently use 24.6% Never used

2. How familiar are you with conservation tillage? (n=141) 4.3% Never heard of it 17.0% Somewhat familiar with it 29.1% Know how to use, not doing it 49.6% Currently use it 3. Are you willing to try using conservation tillage? (n=137) 54.0% Yes or already do 32.8% Maybe 13.1% No


ability to use conservation tillage (or limited,

if you already use)?

Not at All (4)

A little (3)

Some (2)

A lot (1)

Don’t Know

Mean (n)


b. Time required 60.3% 19.8% 7.6% 5.3% 6.9% 3.45 (131)

c. Cost 44.6% 16.2% 18.5% 12.3% 8.5% 3.02 (130)






Macatawa Watershed Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plan (CNMP) and or Manure Management Plan (MMP) Both are plans unique to livestock operations that guide the use of manure on a farm in a way that protects natural resources. 1. Do you have or have you used a CNMP or MMP? (n=132) 28.0% Currently use 17.4% Don’t currently use 54.5% Never used

2. How familiar are you with CNMPs or MMPs? (n=133) 27.8% Never heard of it 42.1% Somewhat familiar with it 9.8% Know how to use, not doing it 20.3% Currently use it 3. Are you willing to try using a CNMP or MMP? (n=125) 28.8% Yes or already do 42.4% Maybe 28.8% No


ability to use CNMPs or MMPs (or limited, if

you already use)?

Not at All (4)

A little (3)

Some (2)

A lot (1)

Don’t Know

Mean (n)


b. Time required 25.4% 19.5% 20.3% 11.9% 22.9% 2.76 (118)

c. Cost 21.4% 11.1% 23.1% 21.4% 23.1% 2.42 (117)






Macatawa Watershed

11. Additional BMP questions

BMP: Stands for “Best Management Practice” which is an agricultural practice that has been determined to be an effective, practical means of preventing or reducing pollution.

a) Would you be willing to speak to other farmers about your experiences with the BMPs you have implemented? (Note: Your answers here do not commit you to anything) (n=46)

34.8% Yes 65.2% No

b) Are you familiar with the Carbon Trading Program and the financial benefits it provides to those farmers that implement practices that sequester carbon (like planting perennial grasses or practicing no-till) (n=138)

7.9% Yes, I am familiar with the program and I plan on participating. 25.4% Yes, I am familiar with the program but I do not plan on participating. 26.1% No, I am not familiar with the program but I would like to learn more. 40.6% No, I am not familiar with the program and am not interested in learning more c) Are you familiar with the farmland preservation concept of purchasing development rights (PDR)?

(n=140)

62.9% Yes, I am familiar with the concept of PDR. 37.1% No, I am not familiar with the concept of PDR. d) If you had the opportunity, would you be willing to permanently protect your farmland from

development by selling your development rights to a county or land conservancy? (Note: Your answers here do not commit you to any involvement in the program) (n=138)

13.8% Yes, I would be willing to participate in a PDR program. 26.1% Maybe, depending on how much money was offered for the development rights. 26.1% No, I would not be willing to participate in a PDR program. 34.0% I need more information before I could make a decision. e) Are there other BMP(s) that are not listed previously that you would like to implement on your farm /

property? Please list here:

See Appendix E

f) In your opinion what are some barriers or obstacles to installing these BMPs on your farm? Please list up to three.

See Appendix F

g) Are there any agricultural cost share programs you would like to know more about? (Ex. EQIP (Environmental Quality Incentives Program), WRP (Wetlands Reserve Program), CRP (Conservation Reserve Program), CREP (Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program) etc.)

See Appendix G

Macatawa Watershed

12. Information and Activities

People get information about water quality from a number of different sources. To what extent do you trust the organizations listed below as a source of information about water quality and land management? Not at all

(1) Slightly

(2) Moderately

(3)

Very much

(4)

Am not familiar

Mean (n)

a. NRCS (Natural Resources Conservation Service) 12.3% 26.8% 31.2% 9.4% 20.3% 2.47

(138)

b. Farm Services Agency 4.3% 18.0% 43.9% 20.9% 12.9% 2.93 (139)

c. Michigan State University Extension 1.4% 12.9% 43.6% 37.1% 5.0% 3.23 (140)

d. Conservation District 6.3% 20.4% 38.0% 18.3% 16.9% 2.82 (142)

e. MDA (Michigan Department of Agriculture) 6.4% 25.5% 45.4% 12.8% 9.9% 2.72

(141)

f. MDEQ (Michigan Department of Environmental Quality) 36.4% 19.6% 25.2% 7.0% 11.9% 2.03

(143)

g. County Drain Commission 14.0% 22.4% 42.7% 16.1% 4.9% 2.64 (143)

h. Michigan Farm Bureau 2.8% 16.1% 35.7% 35.7% 9.8% 3.16 (143)

i. Macatawa Watershed Project 12.6% 26.6% 32.2% 12.6% 16.1% 2.53 (143)

j. Macatawa Area Coordinating Council 15.0% 25.7% 28.6% 8.6% 22.1% 2.39 (140)

k. Other ________________________ (Please specify) 25.0% 0% 25.0% 25.0% 25.0% 2.67

(4) See Appendix H

Macatawa Watershed

13. About Your Farm Operation

a. How many years have you been farming in the Macatawa Watershed? (n=132) Range: 0-80 years Average: 34.0 years See Appendix I b. Do you consider yourself retired from your farm operation? (n=139) 21.6% Retired 29.5% Partially Retired 48.9% Not Retired c. Which of the following best describes your position as a farm operator? (Please check all that apply) (n=150) 22.7% (34) Me alone or with my spouse 29.3% (44) Me with my family partner(s) (ex. siblings, parents, children) 7.3% (11) Me with the landowner 26.0% (39) Me with my tenant 7.3% (11) Me and my business partner(s) 11.3% (17) Someone else makes the decisions for the operation d. How likely is it that any family member will continue farm operations when you retire or quit farming? (n=92) 42.4% Will not happen 47.8% Likely 9.8% Will definitely happen e. Five years from now, which statement will best describe your farm? (n=141) 54.6% About the same as it is today 12.8% It will be larger 4.3% It will be smaller 28.4% I don’t know/unsure f. Please estimate the total tillable acreage (owner and/or rented) of your farming operation this year? (n=140) 65.0% 1-99 acres 20.7% 100-499 acres 7.9% 500-999 acres 2.9% 1,000-1,999 acres 3.6% 2,000 or more acres g. This year, how many acres of the following do you manage? If none, please enter zero.

Corn: 0-2500 acres Mean: 172.91 (n=107) Soybeans: 0-1000 acres Mean: 90.91 (n=102) Small grains: 0-500 acres Mean: 23.66 (n=80) Canning crops: 0-42 acres Mean: 0.86 (n=72) Clover/alfalfa: 0-250 acres Mean: 14.34 (n=85) Pasture: 0-50 acres Mean: 5.52 (n=86) Conservation set aside: 0-40 acres Mean: 1.80 (n=69) Forest/woodland: 0-80 acres Mean: 5.32 (n=78) Non row crops for energy: 0-20 acres Mean: 0.29 (n=69) Blueberries: 0-70 acres Mean: 3.76 (n=76) Other: 0-3500 acres Mean: 64.57 (n=70) See Appendix J h. Does the property you manage touch a stream, river, lake, drain, ditch or wetland? (n=140) 10.0% Yes 90.0% No i. How many of the following animals are part of your farming operation? If none, please enter zero. Dairy cattle: 0-600 Mean: 12.46 (n=114) Beef cattle: 0-200 Mean: 7.27 (n=114) Hogs: 0-6000 Mean: 199.31 (n=111) Poultry: 0-625000 Mean: 22721.87 (n=109) Other livestock: 0-160 Mean: 3.36 (n=105) See Appendix K

Macatawa Watershed

j. Is your farm MAEAP verified? Please check all that apply. (n=150) 7.3% (11) Yes, verified in cropping systems 8.0% (12) Yes, verified in livestock systems 3.3% (5) Yes, verified in farmstead systems

0% (0) Yes, verified in greenhouse 31.3% (47) No, my farm is not MAEAP verified 3.3% (5) No, my farm is not verified but I have filled out a Farm-A-Syst, or Crop-A-Syst, or Livestock-A-Syst form 43.3% (65) I don’t know what MAEAP verification is

Macatawa Watershed

14. About You and Your Property

a. Do you make the home or lawn care decisions in your household? (n=142) 95.8% Yes 4.2% No b. What is your gender? (n=143) 87.4% Male 12.6% Female c. What year were you born? Range: 1920-1983 Mean: 1948.76 (n=134) See Appendix L d. What is the highest grade in school that you have completed? (n=141) 10.6% Some formal schooling 39.0% High school diploma or GED 16.3% Some college 7.1% 2 year college degree 20.6% 4 year college degree 6.4% Graduate degree e. How long have you lived at your current residence? Range: 1-81 years Mean: 30.67 (n=140) See Appendix M f. In what county in your property principally located in? (n=143) 54.5% Ottawa County 37.1% Allegan County 8.4% I have property in both counties g. Do you use pesticides or herbicides on your farm? (n=140) 87.1% Yes 12.9% No h. If yes, are pesticides or herbicides applied by a commercial applicator? (n=131) 36.7% Some

24.4% All 38.9% None i. Do you use fertilizer on your farm? (n=139) 90.6% Yes 9.4% No j. If so, have you ever had your soil tested to determine your fertilizer needs? (n=137) 87.6% Yes 2.2% No, it is too expensive 1.5% No, I don’t know how 1.5% No, I didn’t know soil testing was important 7.3% Other k. Is manure applied to your farm? (n=140) 58.6% Yes 41.4% No l. If yes, is manure applied in accordance with a manure management plan? (n=127) 43.3% Yes 11.8% No 44.9% Not applicable m. Is application equipment for pesticides, fertilizers and/or manure calibrated regularly? (n=137) 70.8% Yes 10.2% No 19.0% Not applicable n. I’ve heard about local water quality problems from the following (check all that apply). (n=150) 60.0% (90) Newsletters/brochures/factsheets 3.3% (5) Internet 34.0% (51) Radio 53.3% (80) Newspaper/Magazine 12.7% (19) Workshops/demonstrations/meetings 28.7% (43) Television or Billboards 2.0% (3) Schools 40.0% (60) Conversations with others 4.0% (6) Other

Macatawa Watershed

Thank you for your time and assistance! Please return your completed survey in the postage-paid envelope provided. Please use the space below for any additional comments about this survey or

water resource issues in the Lake Macatawa watershed. See Appendix N

Macatawa Watershed

Appendix A

b. Do you know where the rain water goes when it runs off of your property?-TEXT

Frequency Percent Valid Percent

Cumulative

Percent

Valid 31 20.7 20.7 20.7

1/2 to rabbit river, 1/2 to mac

watershed

1 .7 .7 21.3

A creek 1 .7 .7 22.0

Allegan county drain to lake

mac

1 .7 .7 22.7

back into the lawn 1 .7 .7 23.3

Bareman Drain to Black

River

1 .7 .7 24.0

Black Creek 2 1.3 1.3 25.3

Black Drain 1 .7 .7 26.0

Black or Big Creek then to

Black River

1 .7 .7 26.7

black river 2 1.3 1.3 28.0

Black river 1 .7 .7 28.7

Black River 11 7.3 7.3 36.0

Black River Creek 1 .7 .7 36.7

Black River Drain 2 1.3 1.3 38.0

Black River Noordeloos

Creek

1 .7 .7 38.7

black river, lake mac, lake

mi

1 .7 .7 39.3

Bosch and Hulst Drain 1 .7 .7 40.0

Boven Drain to Harlem Drain

to Macatawa

1 .7 .7 40.7

Bovin/Harlem Drain 1 .7 .7 41.3

county ditch 1 .7 .7 42.0

County ditches 1 .7 .7 42.7

County Drain 3 2.0 2.0 44.7

Dalman Drain 1 .7 .7 45.3

Dont know the name 1 .7 .7 46.0

drain ditch, black river, lake

mac, lake mi

1 .7 .7 46.7

Drainage Creek 1 .7 .7 47.3

Drainage Ditch 1 .7 .7 48.0

Macatawa Watershed

drainage ditch then to Lake

Mac

1 .7 .7 48.7

Drenthe Drain and

Macatawa River

1 .7 .7 49.3

Effers Drain 1 .7 .7 50.0

eventually into lake mac 1 .7 .7 50.7

Harlem Drain 2 1.3 1.3 52.0

heads towards zeeland 1 .7 .7 52.7

into the lakes 1 .7 .7 53.3

jaanda drain 1 .7 .7 54.0

kalamazoo river 1 .7 .7 54.7

Kleinheksel drain 1 .7 .7 55.3

Kuipers Drain 1 .7 .7 56.0

lake 1 .7 .7 56.7

lake mac 1 .7 .7 57.3

Lake mac 1 .7 .7 58.0

Lake Mac 6 4.0 4.0 62.0

Lake Macatawa 7 4.7 4.7 66.7

Lake Macatawa/MIchigan 1 .7 .7 67.3

lake mi 1 .7 .7 68.0

Lake Mi 2 1.3 1.3 69.3

Lake MI 1 .7 .7 70.0

Lake Michigan 3 2.0 2.0 72.0

Lentero drain- black river 1 .7 .7 72.7

local creeks and streams to

mac watershed

1 .7 .7 73.3

M.W.P 1 .7 .7 74.0

Mac Watershed 1 .7 .7 74.7

macatawa 1 .7 .7 75.3

Macatawa 1 .7 .7 76.0

Macatawa Lake and Pigeon

River

1 .7 .7 76.7

Macatawa River 3 2.0 2.0 78.7

macatawa river to Lake MI 1 .7 .7 79.3

Macatawa watershed 1 .7 .7 80.0

macatawa, lake mi 1 .7 .7 80.7

Mostly soaks in 1 .7 .7 81.3

my ditch 1 .7 .7 82.0

Macatawa Watershed

my ditch and has been

blocked and does not flow

into proper channels any

longer

1 .7 .7 82.7

NE 1 .7 .7 83.3

neighbors fields, ditches,

and further down stream

1 .7 .7 84.0

next farm 1 .7 .7 84.7

North and South Branch

Rivers

1 .7 .7 85.3

North Blendon Drain 1 .7 .7 86.0

Ottawa Co. Dam 1 .7 .7 86.7

peters drain, black river, lake

mac

1 .7 .7 87.3

Pigeon Creek 1 .7 .7 88.0

Pigeon River 1 .7 .7 88.7

Pine Creek 2 1.3 1.3 90.0

PK 1 .7 .7 90.7

pond 1 .7 .7 91.3

rivers and Lake Michigan 1 .7 .7 92.0

South branch 1 .7 .7 92.7

storm sewer then streams

and lake

1 .7 .7 93.3

the ditch to the Ovens Drain 1 .7 .7 94.0

the ditches 1 .7 .7 94.7

the north 1 .7 .7 95.3

the north 8 acres of my

property and stays there for

about 5 days, thats when we

have a rain that adds up to

1-1.5 inches

1 .7 .7 96.0

The River 1 .7 .7 96.7

The watershed 2 1.3 1.3 98.0

to low spots, soacks in/away

in time into miserable

useless clay

1 .7 .7 98.7

To the ditch 1 .7 .7 99.3

watershed 1 .7 .7 100.0

Total 150 100.0 100.0

Macatawa Watershed

Appendix B 8. Making Management Decisions In general, how much does each issue limit your ability to

change...-l. Other (please specify):-TEXT


Cumulative

Percent

Valid 138 92.0 92.0 92.0

Amount of time to be

reimbursed for constructing

waterways

1 .7 .7 92.7

Common sense 1 .7 .7 93.3

farmer renting knows what

he's doing: no toxic apps,

rotations, seventh year

resting

1 .7 .7 94.0

Farming is a bussiness 1 .7 .7 94.7

Let nature prevail 1 .7 .7 95.3

Selling my farm 1 .7 .7 96.0

Slow process of paperwork

with NRCS

1 .7 .7 96.7

Too much paperwork 1 .7 .7 97.3

total economic impact 1 .7 .7 98.0

we rent out our property 1 .7 .7 98.7

Weather 1 .7 .7 99.3

What is practical 1 .7 .7 100.0

Total 150 100.0 100.0

Appendix C

Have you ever participated in a government funded cost share program? (Examples:

Conservation Reserv...-TEXT


Cumulative

Percent

Valid 103 68.7 68.7 68.7

2002 1 .7 .7 69.3

conservation 1 .7 .7 70.0

Conservation 1 .7 .7 70.7

Controlled Drainage 1 .7 .7 71.3

Macatawa Watershed

cost share 1 .7 .7 72.0

CREP 1 .7 .7 72.7

CRP 8 5.3 5.3 78.0

CRP and EQIP 1 .7 .7 78.7

CRP and wetland reserve 1 .7 .7 79.3

CRP, CREP 1 .7 .7 80.0

drain upkeep, management

through allegan co.

1 .7 .7 80.7

Env. Quality Incentives,

Conservation Reserve

Program, Wetland Reserve

1 .7 .7 81.3

EQIP 4 2.7 2.7 84.0

EQIP CRP 1 .7 .7 84.7

EQUIP CRP 1 .7 .7 85.3

erosion 1 .7 .7 86.0

Erosion Control 1 .7 .7 86.7

Farm A Syst 1 .7 .7 87.3

Grass waters down drainage 1 .7 .7 88.0

Grass waterway 2 1.3 1.3 89.3

Grass Waterway 1 .7 .7 90.0

Grass waterway and filter

strips

1 .7 .7 90.7

Grass waterways 3 2.0 2.0 92.7

Grass Waterways 1 .7 .7 93.3

Grassed Waterway 1 .7 .7 94.0

Groundwater Stewardship

team Allegan/Van Buren Co.

1 .7 .7 94.7

Manure storage building 1 .7 .7 95.3

No till 1 .7 .7 96.0

Structure, waterway 1 .7 .7 96.7

Tile and sod waterways 1 .7 .7 97.3

Water Nurse tank 1 .7 .7 98.0

Water ways, tile lines,

grassed waterways,

sediment basins

1 .7 .7 98.7

waterways 1 .7 .7 99.3

Wetland incentives program 1 .7 .7 100.0

Total 150 100.0 100.0

Macatawa Watershed

Appendix D

In general, how important are these issues when you decide whether or not to participate in a

govern...-h. Other (please specify):-TEXT


Cumulative

Percent

Valid 142 94.7 94.7 94.7

"one time" 1 .7 .7 95.3

Amount of time to be

reimbursed for practices

after installation

1 .7 .7 96.0

Common sense always 1 .7 .7 96.7

Cost/Benefit 1 .7 .7 97.3

do not farm the land myself 1 .7 .7 98.0

Government sucks,

squanders, torments

1 .7 .7 98.7

Not a farm 1 .7 .7 99.3

You are wasting money 1 .7 .7 100.0

Total 150 100.0 100.0

Appendix E

e. Are there other BMP(s) that are not listed previously that you would like to implement on

your fa...


Cumulative

Percent

Valid 137 91.3 91.3 91.3

? 1 .7 .7 92.0

already doing the best 1 .7 .7 92.7

Farmers have implemented

these things years ago, now

homeowners and golf

courses have to pay up.

1 .7 .7 93.3

Grass waterways, odor

management

1 .7 .7 94.0

Most are implemented over

10 years ago with little

interest in how they are

perceived and work

1 .7 .7 94.7

no 5 3.3 3.3 98.0

Macatawa Watershed

No 1 .7 .7 98.7

Tile 1 .7 .7 99.3

We are working on Farm-A-

Syst and Nursery-A-Syst as

time, money, and practical

practices work.

1 .7 .7 100.0

Total 150 100.0 100.0

Appendix F

f. In your opinion what are some barriers or obstacles to installing these BMPs on your farm?

Please...


Cumulative

Percent

Valid 126 84.0 84.0 84.0

? 1 .7 .7 84.7

am not interested at this

time

1 .7 .7 85.3

consistency of units of

government regulations from

field to field. time and

money. science before and

after proof of impact on

watershed

1 .7 .7 86.0

cost 1 .7 .7 86.7

Cost 1 .7 .7 87.3

cost and loss of income to

implement and to continue

implementation

1 .7 .7 88.0

Cost, and the hassle of

getting DEQ permits

1 .7 .7 88.7

Farm is too small 1 .7 .7 89.3

Get and keep the Gov't out

of my life!

1 .7 .7 90.0

Government Red Tape 1 .7 .7 90.7

Government red tape, and

time it takes for approval

1 .7 .7 91.3

I am already using good

common sense conservation

practices

1 .7 .7 92.0

Macatawa Watershed

information/research,

equipment

1 .7 .7 92.7

money 1 .7 .7 93.3

money, money, money 1 .7 .7 94.0

n/a 1 .7 .7 94.7

none 1 .7 .7 95.3

not available I don't think 1 .7 .7 96.0

Restricted- low areas that

are very wet. Has to start

planting later in the year.

1 .7 .7 96.7

Retired, lease land 1 .7 .7 97.3

Time, Money, Practicality 1 .7 .7 98.0

We already have too much

government interference in

private property!

1 .7 .7 98.7

We are not currently farming

any of the land-it is

pasture/grass without

livestock

1 .7 .7 99.3

weather, cost, upkeep cost

for records

1 .7 .7 100.0

Total 150 100.0 100.0

Appendix G

g. Are there any agricultural cost share programs you would like to know more about? (Ex.

EQIP (Envi...


Cumulative

Percent

Valid 130 86.7 86.7 86.7

EQIP 1 .7 .7 87.3

I dont know much about any

of these programs.

1 .7 .7 88.0

I would consider all again 1 .7 .7 88.7

need less restriction with a

total plan not just one little

piece, crop rotation

w/grazing with wind erosion

options

1 .7 .7 89.3

no 9 6.0 6.0 95.3

Macatawa Watershed

No 4 2.7 2.7 98.0

Not at the present time 1 .7 .7 98.7

Wetland Reserve Program 1 .7 .7 99.3

Yes EQIP 1 .7 .7 100.0

Total 150 100.0 100.0

Appendix H

12. Information and Activities People get information about water quality from a number of

diffe...-k. Other (please specify)-TEXT


Cumulative

Percent

Valid 148 98.7 98.7 98.7

Dept. of Fish and Wildlife 1 .7 .7 99.3

Gov't in general 1 .7 .7 100.0

Total 150 100.0 100.0

Appendix I

a. How many years have you been farming in the Macatawa Watershed? (Please

enter years)


Cumulative

Percent

Valid 14 9.3 9.3 9.3

? 1 .7 .7 10.0

0 1 .7 .7 10.7

10 4 2.7 2.7 13.3

12 4 2.7 2.7 16.0

15 4 2.7 2.7 18.7

16 1 .7 .7 19.3

17 4 2.7 2.7 22.0

180 1 .7 .7 22.7

19 2 1.3 1.3 24.0

2 1 .7 .7 24.7

20 5 3.3 3.3 28.0

20-30 1 .7 .7 28.7

21 1 .7 .7 29.3

22 1 .7 .7 30.0

24 1 .7 .7 30.7

Macatawa Watershed

25 9 6.0 6.0 36.7

25- my father 1 .7 .7 37.3

28 1 .7 .7 38.0

29 1 .7 .7 38.7

3 generations 1 .7 .7 39.3

30 14 9.3 9.3 48.7

30+ 1 .7 .7 49.3

32 1 .7 .7 50.0

34 3 2.0 2.0 52.0

35 1 .7 .7 52.7

36 1 .7 .7 53.3

37 3 2.0 2.0 55.3

38 4 2.7 2.7 58.0

40 23 15.3 15.3 73.3

41 1 .7 .7 74.0

42 2 1.3 1.3 75.3

45 5 3.3 3.3 78.7

46 2 1.3 1.3 80.0

47 1 .7 .7 80.7

48 3 2.0 2.0 82.7

5 2 1.3 1.3 84.0

5.5 1 .7 .7 84.7

50 7 4.7 4.7 89.3

51 1 .7 .7 90.0

55 4 2.7 2.7 92.7

6 1 .7 .7 93.3

60 4 2.7 2.7 96.0

70 3 2.0 2.0 98.0

74 1 .7 .7 98.7

80 1 .7 .7 99.3

rented out 1 .7 .7 100.0

Total 150 100.0 100.0

Appendix J

g. This year, how many acres of the following do you manage? If none, please

enter a zero.-Corn (acres):-TEXT


Cumulative

Percent

Macatawa Watershed

Valid 0 32 21.3 29.9 29.9

1 1 .7 .9 30.8

6 2 1.3 1.9 32.7

10 3 2.0 2.8 35.5

15 4 2.7 3.7 39.3

19 1 .7 .9 40.2

20 3 2.0 2.8 43.0

25 1 .7 .9 43.9

30 5 3.3 4.7 48.6

35 2 1.3 1.9 50.5

40 4 2.7 3.7 54.2

45 1 .7 .9 55.1

50 4 2.7 3.7 58.9

58 1 .7 .9 59.8

62 1 .7 .9 60.7

65 1 .7 .9 61.7

70 2 1.3 1.9 63.6

75 1 .7 .9 64.5

80 3 2.0 2.8 67.3

84 1 .7 .9 68.2

90 1 .7 .9 69.2

100 1 .7 .9 70.1

120 2 1.3 1.9 72.0

125 1 .7 .9 72.9

150 7 4.7 6.5 79.4

160 1 .7 .9 80.4

180 1 .7 .9 81.3

200 1 .7 .9 82.2

250 2 1.3 1.9 84.1

300 1 .7 .9 85.0

400 3 2.0 2.8 87.9

450 1 .7 .9 88.8

500 2 1.3 1.9 90.7

600 2 1.3 1.9 92.5

650 1 .7 .9 93.5

800 2 1.3 1.9 95.3

1200 2 1.3 1.9 97.2

1300 1 .7 .9 98.1

Macatawa Watershed

1700 1 .7 .9 99.1

2500 1 .7 .9 100.0

Total 107 71.3 100.0 Missing System 43 28.7 Total 150 100.0


enter a zero.-Soybeans (acres):-TEXT


Cumulative

Percent

Valid 0 44 29.3 43.1 43.1

9 1 .7 1.0 44.1

10 1 .7 1.0 45.1

15 3 2.0 2.9 48.0

17 1 .7 1.0 49.0

20 3 2.0 2.9 52.0

22 1 .7 1.0 52.9

30 2 1.3 2.0 54.9

32 1 .7 1.0 55.9

34 1 .7 1.0 56.9

35 3 2.0 2.9 59.8

36 1 .7 1.0 60.8

37 1 .7 1.0 61.8

40 4 2.7 3.9 65.7

45 1 .7 1.0 66.7

50 5 3.3 4.9 71.6

55 1 .7 1.0 72.5

56 1 .7 1.0 73.5

60 1 .7 1.0 74.5

75 1 .7 1.0 75.5

80 1 .7 1.0 76.5

85 1 .7 1.0 77.5

100 3 2.0 2.9 80.4

130 1 .7 1.0 81.4

150 4 2.7 3.9 85.3

160 1 .7 1.0 86.3

200 2 1.3 2.0 88.2

250 3 2.0 2.9 91.2

Macatawa Watershed

300 1 .7 1.0 92.2

400 1 .7 1.0 93.1

500 1 .7 1.0 94.1

600 2 1.3 2.0 96.1

700 2 1.3 2.0 98.0

800 1 .7 1.0 99.0

1000 1 .7 1.0 100.0



enter a zero.-Small grains (acres):-TEXT


Cumulative

Percent

Valid 0 56 37.3 70.0 70.0

1 1 .7 1.3 71.3

5 2 1.3 2.5 73.8

10 2 1.3 2.5 76.3

14 1 .7 1.3 77.5

20 5 3.3 6.3 83.8

30 2 1.3 2.5 86.3

38 1 .7 1.3 87.5

40 2 1.3 2.5 90.0

50 2 1.3 2.5 92.5

70 1 .7 1.3 93.8

100 1 .7 1.3 95.0

200 1 .7 1.3 96.3

300 2 1.3 2.5 98.8

500 1 .7 1.3 100.0



enter a zero.-Canning crops (acres):-TEXT

Macatawa Watershed


Cumulative

Percent

Valid 0 70 46.7 97.2 97.2

20 1 .7 1.4 98.6

42 1 .7 1.4 100.0



enter a zero.-Clover/Alfalfa (acres):-TEXT


Cumulative

Percent

Valid 0 52 34.7 61.2 61.2

2 1 .7 1.2 62.4

3 1 .7 1.2 63.5

4 2 1.3 2.4 65.9

5 3 2.0 3.5 69.4

7 1 .7 1.2 70.6

8 1 .7 1.2 71.8

10 3 2.0 3.5 75.3

15 1 .7 1.2 76.5

20 8 5.3 9.4 85.9

21 1 .7 1.2 87.1

30 4 2.7 4.7 91.8

50 3 2.0 3.5 95.3

100 1 .7 1.2 96.5

130 1 .7 1.2 97.6

200 1 .7 1.2 98.8

250 1 .7 1.2 100.0



enter a zero.-Pasture (acres):-TEXT

Macatawa Watershed


Cumulative

Percent

Valid 0 54 36.0 62.8 62.8

2 2 1.3 2.3 65.1

3 3 2.0 3.5 68.6

5 6 4.0 7.0 75.6

6 1 .7 1.2 76.7

8 1 .7 1.2 77.9

10 7 4.7 8.1 86.0

15 1 .7 1.2 87.2

20 4 2.7 4.7 91.9

25 1 .7 1.2 93.0

30 1 .7 1.2 94.2

33 1 .7 1.2 95.3

35 1 .7 1.2 96.5

40 2 1.3 2.3 98.8

50 1 .7 1.2 100.0



enter a zero.-Conservation set aside/CRP (acres):-TEXT


Cumulative

Percent

Valid 0 60 40.0 87.0 87.0

2 1 .7 1.4 88.4

3 1 .7 1.4 89.9

4 1 .7 1.4 91.3

5 2 1.3 2.9 94.2

10 1 .7 1.4 95.7

25 1 .7 1.4 97.1

30 1 .7 1.4 98.6

40 1 .7 1.4 100.0


Macatawa Watershed


enter a zero.-Forest/woodland (acres):-TEXT


Cumulative

Percent

Valid 0 54 36.0 69.2 69.2

2 2 1.3 2.6 71.8

3 3 2.0 3.8 75.6

4 1 .7 1.3 76.9

5 2 1.3 2.6 79.5

6 1 .7 1.3 80.8

7 1 .7 1.3 82.1

8 1 .7 1.3 83.3

10 2 1.3 2.6 85.9

12 1 .7 1.3 87.2

20 4 2.7 5.1 92.3

25 1 .7 1.3 93.6

30 3 2.0 3.8 97.4

60 1 .7 1.3 98.7

80 1 .7 1.3 100.0



enter a zero.-Non-row crops for energy (acres):-TEXT


Cumulative

Percent

Valid 0 68 45.3 98.6 98.6

20 1 .7 1.4 100.0



enter a zero.-Blueberries (acres):-TEXT


Cumulative

Percent

Macatawa Watershed

Valid 0 62 41.3 81.6 81.6

1 2 1.3 2.6 84.2

4 1 .7 1.3 85.5

5 2 1.3 2.6 88.2

8 1 .7 1.3 89.5

17 1 .7 1.3 90.8

20 3 2.0 3.9 94.7

35 1 .7 1.3 96.1

40 2 1.3 2.6 98.7

70 1 .7 1.3 100.0



enter a zero.-Other (please specify):-TEXT


Cumulative

Percent

Valid 0 53 35.3 75.7 75.7

1 1 .7 1.4 77.1

3 1 .7 1.4 78.6

5 1 .7 1.4 80.0

10 2 1.3 2.9 82.9

13 1 .7 1.4 84.3

14 1 .7 1.4 85.7

16 1 .7 1.4 87.1

20 1 .7 1.4 88.6

30 1 .7 1.4 90.0

38 1 .7 1.4 91.4

50 1 .7 1.4 92.9

60 1 .7 1.4 94.3

100 1 .7 1.4 95.7

250 1 .7 1.4 97.1

400 1 .7 1.4 98.6

3500 1 .7 1.4 100.0


Macatawa Watershed

Appendix K

i. How many of the following animals are part of your farming operation? If

none, please enter a zer...-Dairy cattle, including heifers and young stock

(enter number):-TEXT


Cumulative

Percent

Valid 0 107 71.3 93.9 93.9

20 1 .7 .9 94.7

65 2 1.3 1.8 96.5

100 1 .7 .9 97.4

120 1 .7 .9 98.2

450 1 .7 .9 99.1

600 1 .7 .9 100.0



none, please enter a zer...-Beef cattle, including young stock (enter number):-

TEXT


Cumulative

Percent

Valid 0 95 63.3 83.3 83.3

3 1 .7 .9 84.2

6 1 .7 .9 85.1

7 1 .7 .9 86.0

8 1 .7 .9 86.8

10 1 .7 .9 87.7

12 2 1.3 1.8 89.5

15 1 .7 .9 90.4

20 1 .7 .9 91.2

25 1 .7 .9 92.1

35 1 .7 .9 93.0

40 1 .7 .9 93.9

45 2 1.3 1.8 95.6

46 1 .7 .9 96.5

100 3 2.0 2.6 99.1

200 1 .7 .9 100.0

Macatawa Watershed



none, please enter a zer...-Hogs (enter number):-TEXT


Cumulative

Percent

Valid 0 99 66.0 89.2 89.2

4 1 .7 .9 90.1

200 1 .7 .9 91.0

220 1 .7 .9 91.9

300 1 .7 .9 92.8

400 1 .7 .9 93.7

800 1 .7 .9 94.6

2000 1 .7 .9 95.5

4000 3 2.0 2.7 98.2

6000 1 .7 .9 99.1

30000 1 .7 .9 100.0



none, please enter a zer...-Poultry (enter number):-TEXT


Cumulative

Percent

Valid 0 93 62.0 85.3 85.3

1 1 .7 .9 86.2

3 1 .7 .9 87.2

7 1 .7 .9 88.1

13 1 .7 .9 89.0

30 2 1.3 1.8 90.8

50 2 1.3 1.8 92.7

500 1 .7 .9 93.6

1000 1 .7 .9 94.5

50000 2 1.3 1.8 96.3

500000 1 .7 .9 97.2

625000 3 2.0 2.8 100.0

Macatawa Watershed



none, please enter a zer...-Other livestock (enter number):-TEXT


Cumulative

Percent

Valid 0 96 64.0 91.4 91.4

1 2 1.3 1.9 93.3

4 1 .7 1.0 94.3

6 2 1.3 1.9 96.2

7 1 .7 1.0 97.1

8 1 .7 1.0 98.1

160 2 1.3 1.9 100.0


Appendix L

c. What year were you born?


Cumulative

Percent

Valid 12 8.0 8.0 8.0

1044 1 .7 .7 8.7

19.. 1 .7 .7 9.3

1920 1 .7 .7 10.0

1924 1 .7 .7 10.7

1926 2 1.3 1.3 12.0

1927 1 .7 .7 12.7

1928 3 2.0 2.0 14.7

1929 3 2.0 2.0 16.7

1930 3 2.0 2.0 18.7

1935 2 1.3 1.3 20.0

1936 5 3.3 3.3 23.3

1938 4 2.7 2.7 26.0

1939 3 2.0 2.0 28.0

1940 5 3.3 3.3 31.3

Macatawa Watershed

1941 3 2.0 2.0 33.3

1942 3 2.0 2.0 35.3

1943 4 2.7 2.7 38.0

1944 6 4.0 4.0 42.0

1945 5 3.3 3.3 45.3

1946 1 .7 .7 46.0

1947 2 1.3 1.3 47.3

1948 2 1.3 1.3 48.7

1949 7 4.7 4.7 53.3

1950 5 3.3 3.3 56.7

1951 3 2.0 2.0 58.7

1952 6 4.0 4.0 62.7

1953 5 3.3 3.3 66.0

1954 5 3.3 3.3 69.3

1955 4 2.7 2.7 72.0

1956 4 2.7 2.7 74.7

1957 5 3.3 3.3 78.0

1958 5 3.3 3.3 81.3

1959 4 2.7 2.7 84.0

1960 5 3.3 3.3 87.3

1961 1 .7 .7 88.0

1962 3 2.0 2.0 90.0

1963 3 2.0 2.0 92.0

1964 1 .7 .7 92.7

1965 3 2.0 2.0 94.7

1969 1 .7 .7 95.3

1971 2 1.3 1.3 96.7

1973 1 .7 .7 97.3

1975 1 .7 .7 98.0

1983 1 .7 .7 98.7

61 2 1.3 1.3 100.0

Total 150 100.0 100.0

Appendix M

e. How long have you lived at your current residence?


Cumulative

Percent

Macatawa Watershed

Valid 10 6.7 6.7 6.7

1 1 .7 .7 7.3

10 4 2.7 2.7 10.0

12 4 2.7 2.7 12.7

13 1 .7 .7 13.3

14 1 .7 .7 14.0

15 5 3.3 3.3 17.3

16 2 1.3 1.3 18.7

17 4 2.7 2.7 21.3

18 1 .7 .7 22.0

19 2 1.3 1.3 23.3

2 2 1.3 1.3 24.7

20 4 2.7 2.7 27.3

21 1 .7 .7 28.0

22 3 2.0 2.0 30.0

23 4 2.7 2.7 32.7

24 3 2.0 2.0 34.7

25 8 5.3 5.3 40.0

27 1 .7 .7 40.7

29 1 .7 .7 41.3

30 7 4.7 4.7 46.0

30+ 1 .7 .7 46.7

31 1 .7 .7 47.3

32 2 1.3 1.3 48.7

33 1 .7 .7 49.3

34 2 1.3 1.3 50.7

35 5 3.3 3.3 54.0

36 2 1.3 1.3 55.3

37 2 1.3 1.3 56.7

38 4 2.7 2.7 59.3

39 1 .7 .7 60.0

4.5 1 .7 .7 60.7

40 14 9.3 9.3 70.0

42 1 .7 .7 70.7

43 2 1.3 1.3 72.0

45 6 4.0 4.0 76.0

46 3 2.0 2.0 78.0

48 5 3.3 3.3 81.3

Macatawa Watershed

49 1 .7 .7 82.0

5 2 1.3 1.3 83.3

50 3 2.0 2.0 85.3

51 1 .7 .7 86.0

52 1 .7 .7 86.7

53 1 .7 .7 87.3

55 2 1.3 1.3 88.7

56 2 1.3 1.3 90.0

59 1 .7 .7 90.7

6 2 1.3 1.3 92.0

63 1 .7 .7 92.7

65 1 .7 .7 93.3

69 1 .7 .7 94.0

7 1 .7 .7 94.7

75 1 .7 .7 95.3

8 4 2.7 2.7 98.0

81 1 .7 .7 98.7

9 2 1.3 1.3 100.0

Total 150 100.0 100.0

Appendix N

Thank you for your time and assistance! Please use the space below for any additional comments about...

Frequency Percent

Valid

Percent

Cumulative

Percent

Valid 118 78.7 78.7 78.7

Macatawa Watershed

1. Without specific cost/benefit ratio, impossible to

answer. 2. What are "individual lots"? Can't answer

3. Without more info. Can't answer. 4. Yes maybe,

how much more is cost? 5. Grass clippings and

leaves are very different. Leaves occur naturally

clippings probably contain lots of lawn

fert/pesticides? 6. Confined feedlots? Pastures? All

have a different answer, cannot answer. 7. Why is

this in an ag. survey? City water/sewer is not a

factor! 8. Missing a key factor, weather. Often too

late afer row crop harvest or too wet in field. 9. This

requires an increased use of pesticides which I see

at least as large a problem as soil runoff! Comment:

Looks like no one with a farm background was part of

developing these questions...

1 .7 .7 79.3

Could not answer some questions. Use of manure,

because we have no livestock on our farm.

1 .7 .7 80.0

County plows gravel and such into the ditches

causing it to plug up and the water is not able to flow.

They are very difficult to work with and get out to

property to clean ditches out that they have plowed

dirt and gravel into. This causes water to back p on

yards and gets too close to houses. Clean out

ditches yearly on Ransom and 92nd ave after each

winter season.

1 .7 .7 80.7

Have retired from farming 1 .7 .7 81.3

I am 81 years old. I have no livestock. I have rented

my crop land to a neighbor for nearly 10 years. he

talked about getting a grass waterway put in last

year. I think it will be coming this year. It was hard for

me to do this paper not farming the land ll though

owning it.

1 .7 .7 82.0

I am not currently operating the farm. It is rented to

another farmer.

1 .7 .7 82.7

Macatawa Watershed

I farm blueberries. We have sod roadways and don't

till the soil between rows. If, there is runoff, it is

general quite clean. For pesticides I use IPM, and

banned our herbicides. Fertilizers we split apply to

avoid runoff and the bushes can use it befoe we

apply the next application. I truely believe that road

salt and teh salt they are applying to parking lots has

the greatest effect on the water quality. Thirty years

ago there was not a trace of salt in Lake Mi. Now it

is there, and every year inreasing. What about lake

Mac?

1 .7 .7 83.3

I feel that if the river was cleaned out I would have a

better chance of harvesting a crop off the north 8

acres of my property, because right now when it

rains 1 to 2 inches the water doesn't go anywhere for

about 4-6 days. My crops are usually under 2 t 4 feet

of water when this happens

1 .7 .7 84.0

I feel that one of teh major contributing factors of

debris is the practice of no til. Also most, if not all, the

farm fields in our area are tiled and drained into the

maatman-jaarda. This system was not set up to take

on this much water and should be reuilt and the cost

put on to those who benefit the most, not just the

adjoining property owners. We only suffer from the

over-use.

1 .7 .7 84.7

I hope my answers were helpful. I rent my land out to

a farmer in Overisal, and most of my answers were

from observation. Thanks!

1 .7 .7 85.3

I own 20 acres, 8 are planted in blueberries. Most, if

not all questions do not apply- I felt bad about

answering questions "Know about, but do not use"

not having animals or crops to "rotate" makes my

participation in this survey mostly "not helpful"

1 .7 .7 86.0

I personally believe the worst pollution to the local

water comes from: -Municipal waste treatment runoff

-High density livestock operations for pork -

Unnecessary use of some pesticides, herbicides, and

fertilizer It would be beneficial if all the watrshed's

creeks and rivers were tested, especially around

high-density livestock operations, to determine where

the pollution is coming from.

1 .7 .7 86.7

I rent approximately 35 of my 40 acres annually. 1 .7 .7 87.3

Macatawa Watershed

I run a nursery operation. Do not have animals on

property so CMNP and MMP programs don't apply. I

heard of these programs because area animal

farmers would like, even beg, to spread manure on

my property. I decline because of 1)weed seeds in

hog and cowmanure and 2) with fertilizer I can make

more timely applications.

1 .7 .7 88.0

I think you are spending too much money on projects

such as parks, walkways, etc. that get little or no use.

My wilflife population has decreased since your

operation began and the quality of the Black River

has not changed at all.

1 .7 .7 88.7

I used to apply manure to my land but new law

forbids it. So to get the same benefit I have to apply

commercial fertilizer at twice the rate to get same

benefit as manure. Doesn't make sense.

1 .7 .7 89.3

It is good to keep track of what is happening. 1 .7 .7 90.0

It makes good sense to keep good management

decisions and take part in government programs.

1 .7 .7 90.7

Lease our land to farmer who is careful with use of

chemicals. Heavy dosages of human waste on

adjacent property is disturbing and concerning.

1 .7 .7 91.3

Many of the practices talked about are implement in

other programs through Mich Blueberry Assn. who

have trained professionals on staff. We take the

environment very seriously not only for our own well

being but our buyers and the public demand it. The

mc. watershed has lost most of its natural filtering

area many years ago through land fills and just plain

filling in the swamps. Population and water quality

are not compatible. One practice that should be

considered is wind breaks, did not see it in

yourquestions.

1 .7 .7 92.0

My water quality if terrible. 1 .7 .7 92.7

Our water is a blessing to all of us and whatever

each of us can do to protect it will benefit ourselves

and those who come after us. Please continue to do

all you can to protect it. Thanks

1 .7 .7 93.3

Macatawa Watershed

Please listen to a plea for balance. Some of your

questions seem to indicate that we need to choose

between economic development and clean water. we

need both! We all know how important water is to life.

Along with that we need food and jobs (income). If e,

in the state and nation, continue to smother

agriculture and other industry with heavy regulations

and taxes we will, in time, have a nice third world

country with clean water.

1 .7 .7 94.0

Property is rented out. I dont know the answers to

some of the questions.

1 .7 .7 94.7

Question 10. poor choice for answers, weather

makes it hard Question 14N. Other is Farm Bureau

1 .7 .7 95.3

Some questions poorly written - in my opinion. i.e.

question 10 #1. On most pages is about use Should

say- "Do you use or have you used..." Question 10

#2. is about knowledge or familiarity Choices should

be: - Never heard of it - Somewhat familiar Very

familiar Some questions need a "Does not apply to

me" choice 13.g Need to add "grass hay"

1 .7 .7 96.0

Sorry it's late, I laid it on a pile and forgot about it. 1 .7 .7 96.7

Thank you for taking the time for this survey. Maybe I

am sensitive to this issue, but, I feel that agriculture

is taking the blame for the water issues in Ottawa

County. I believe that the current residents do not

have any idea what most farmers go throuh to make

sure that the water supply is clean. For example,

lawn fertilizers are a larger culprit than most farms. In

an average year we use approximately 250 lbs of

fertilizer per acre of land to grow our crops, whereas

the homeowner can use 1000 lbs peracre. Pesticides

are another issue the amount of actual ingredient

that agriculture uses is less than is used on the

sprinkling systems for lawns. I believe that the

general public needs to see what is being used

(fertilizer/pesticide/water) for lawns andlandscaping

per acre as to what is being used for growing crops

1 .7 .7 97.3

The layout of question number 8 is confusing. How

does environmental damage limit my ability to

change management practices? How much does not

wanting to participate in a gov't prgram limit my

changing management practices? Strange

1 .7 .7 98.0

Macatawa Watershed

There is a severe proglem of over application of

animal waste. Large producers do not adhere to

phosphorous limits.

1 .7 .7 98.7

Water quality is impacted largely by natural rain/snow

melt events. The events affect water quality not only

from farm land but also from urban areas.

1 .7 .7 99.3

We need roadside ditches cleaned out! 1 .7 .7 100.0

Total 150 100.0 100.0

Appendix 5 Macatawa Cross Tabulation (1) & (2)

Macatawa Cross Tabulation(1)

OttawaCounty

AlleganCounty

I havepropertyin bothcounties

Total

Poor 9 1 2 12

Okay 31 19 3 57

Good 26 25 2 55

Poor 25 9 4 40

Okay 29 19 2 53

Good 15 12 1 30

Poor 26 10 5 42

Okay 30 21 1 55

Good 14 13 1 31

Poor 6 0 1 7

Okay 29 16 3 49

Good 37 32 4 79

Poor 18 4 2 25

Okay 28 18 2 51

Good 21 17 3 43

Poor 3 1 0 4

Okay 24 10 3 41

Good 46 34 4 86

Canoeing / kayaking / other boating 4 3 2 9

Eating fish caught locally 6 0 1 7

Swimming 7 0 0 7

Picnicking and family activities nearwater

9 3 2 15

Fish habitat / fishing 9 6 0 15

Scenic beauty / enjoyment 27 29 2 60

No, I don't know. 8 8 1 18

Yes, it goes to: 67 44 8 125

Strongly disagree 0 0 1 1

Disagree 7 9 0 16

Neither Agree nor Disagree 24 20 3 49

Agree 40 20 5 70

Strongly Agree 6 3 2 11


Disagree 2 2 1 5


Agree 56 35 7 102



Disagree 0 3 0 3


Agree 58 33 7 103



Disagree 2 6 0 8


Agree 45 21 4 72



Disagree 42 26 5 74

n. In whatcounty is your

propertyprincipallylocated ...

Water Quality Overall, how would yourate the quality of the water in your local

rivers, streams,... - a. Forcanoeing/kayaking/other boating

Water Quality Overall, how would yourate the quality of the water in your localrivers, streams,... - b. For eating locally

caught fish


rivers, streams,... - c. For swimming

Water Quality Overall, how would yourate the quality of the water in your localrivers, streams,... - d. For picnicking and

family activities near water


rivers, streams,... - e. For fish habitat

Water Quality Overall, how would yourate the quality of the water in your localrivers, streams,... - f. For wildlife habitat

Your Water Use a. Of these activities,which is the most important to you?

b. Do you know where the rain watergoes when it runs off of your property?

3. General Water Quality Attitudes Whatis your level of agreement with thefollowing statements?... - a. The

economic stability of my communitydepends upon clean lakes, rivers, and

streams.

3. General Water Quality Attitudes Whatis your level of agreement with the

following statements?... - b. The way thatI care for my property can influence

water quality in lakes, rivers, andstreams.

3. General Water Quality Attitudes Whatis your level of agreement with thefollowing statements?... - c. It is my

personal responsibility to help protectwater quality.

3. General Water Quality Attitudes Whatis your level of agreement with thefollowing statements?... - d. It is

important to protect water quality even ifit slows economic development.

3. General Water Quality Attitudes What

Disagree 42 26 5 74


Agree 15 9 3 30



Disagree 22 11 2 37


Agree 23 13 2 43



Disagree 48 24 9 85


Agree 9 10 0 20



Disagree 2 3 1 6


Agree 61 32 5 102



Disagree 23 12 2 38


Agree 16 10 4 34



Disagree 48 26 6 84


Agree 2 4 1 7



Disagree 10 3 2 17


Agree 25 14 3 43



Disagree 33 24 2 61


Agree 12 6 2 22



Disagree 13 2 1 16


Agree 34 25 7 69



Disagree 6 7 1 15


Agree 39 30 4 77


Not a problem 9 1 0 10

Slight problem 23 15 4 45

Moderate problem 33 24 3 63

Severe problem 6 7 4 17







is your level of agreement with thefollowing statements?... - e. What I do onmy property doesn't make much impact

on overall water quality.


following statements?... - f. Investing inwater quality protection puts the farmer at

an economic disadvantage.

3. General Water Quality Attitudes Whatis your level of agreement with thefollowing statements?... - g. Farm

management practices (on individual lots)do not have an impact on local water

quality.


following statements?... - h. My actionshave an impact on lakes, rivers and

streams.


following statements?... - i. Taking actionto improve lakes, rivers, and streams is

too expensive for me.


following statements?... - j. It is okay toreduce water quality to promote

economic development.


following statements?... - k. It isimportant to protect water quality even it

it costs me more.


following statements?... - l. I would bewilling to pay more to improve lakes,

rivers, and streams (for example: thoughlocal taxes or fees)


following statements?... - m. I would bewilling to change the way I care for my

farm to improve water quality.


following statements?... - n. The qualityof life in my community depends on goodwater quality in local streams, rivers and

lakes.

4. Types of Water Pollutants Below is alist of water pollutants that are generallypresent in wa... - a. Dirt and soil in local

streams

4. Types of Water Pollutants Below is alist of water pollutants that are generally

present in wa... - b. Nutrients fromfertilizers in local streams





























































present in wa... - c. Phosphorus in localstreams

4. Types of Water Pollutants Below is alist of water pollutants that are generallypresent in wa... - d. Bacteria and virusesin local streams (suc as E.coli /Coliform)


present in wa... - e. Algae in localstreams

4. Types of Water Pollutants Below is alist of water pollutants that are generallypresent in wa... - f. Toxic material such

as PCBs in local streams

4. Types of Water Pollutants Below is alist of water pollutants that are generallypresent in wa... - g. Not enough oxygen

in the water in local streams


present in wa... - h. Invasive aquaticplants and animals


present in wa... - i. Cloudiness of thewater in local streams


present in wa... - j. Trash or debris

5. Sources of Water Pollution The itemslisted below are sources of water quality

pollution acro... - a. Discharges fromindustry into streams and lakes


pollution acro... - b. Discharges fromsewage treatment plants


pollution acro... - c. Soil erosion fromconstruction sites


pollution acro... - d. Soil erosion fromfarm fields


pollution acro... - e. Soil erosion fromstream channels

5. Sources of Water Pollution The itemslisted below are sources of water qualitypollution acro... - f. Lawn fertilizers and

pesticides

5. Sources of Water Pollution The itemslisted below are sources of water qualitypollution acro... - g. Grass clippings and

leaves





























































pollution acro... - h. Improperlymaintained septic systems


pollution acro... - i. Grazing-relatedsources


pollution acro... - j. Manure from farmanimals

5. Sources of Water Pollution The itemslisted below are sources of water qualitypollution acro... - k. Stormwater runoff

from streets, highways, and/or highways


pollution acro... - l. Animal feedingoperations


pollution acro... - m. Droppings fromgeese, ducks, and other waterfowl

5. Sources of Water Pollution The itemslisted below are sources of water qualitypollution acro... - n. Pet waste (such as

dogs or cats)

5. Sources of Water Pollution The itemslisted below are sources of water qualitypollution acro... - o. Agricultural fertilizers

and pesticides

5. Sources of Water Pollution The itemslisted below are sources of water qualitypollution acro... - p. Land development or

redevelopment

5. Sources of Water Pollution The itemslisted below are sources of water qualitypollution acro... - q. Removal of riparian

vegetation


pollution acro... - r. Drainage/filling ofwetlands


pollution acro... - s. Outputs from marinasand/or recreational boats

6. Consequences of Poor Water QualityPoor water quality can lead to a variety

of consequences for c... - a.Contaminated drinking water

6. Consequences of Poor Water QualityPoor water quality can lead to a varietyof consequences for c... - b. Polluted /

closed swimming areas


of consequences for c... - c.Contaminated fish






































Never heard of it 1 1 0 2

Somewhat familiar with it 16 19 2 40

Know how to use it; not using it 11 4 0 15

Currently use it 47 27 9 85



















Contaminated fish

6. Consequences of Poor Water QualityPoor water quality can lead to a varietyof consequences for c... - d. Increase in

water/sewage bill


of consequences for c... - e. Loss ofdesirabel fish and wildlife species

6. Consequences of Poor Water QualityPoor water quality can lead to a varietyof consequences for c... - f. Reducedbeauty of rivers, lakes, and streams

6. Consequences of Poor Water QualityPoor water quality can lead to a varietyof consequences for c... - g. Reduced

opportunities for water activities such asboating, canoeing, and fishing

6. Consequences of Poor Water QualityPoor water quality can lead to a varietyof consequences for c... - h. Reduced

quality of water activities

6. Consequences of Poor Water QualityPoor water quality can lead to a varietyof consequences for c... - i. Excessive

aquatic plants or algae

6. Consequences of Poor Water QualityPoor water quality can lead to a varietyof consequences for c... - j. Fish kills


of consequences for c... - k. Odor


of consequences for c... - l. Lowerproperty values

7. Practices to Improve Water Quality -a. Conduct regular soil tests for pH, and

nutrients

7. Practices to Improve Water Quality -b. Construct sediment basins to collect

and store debris or sediment

7. Practices to Improve Water Quality - c.Construct an artificial wetland for waste

treatment

7. Practices to Improve Water Quality -d. Rotate crops to maintain or improve

soil

7. Practices to Improve Water Quality -e. Use a grassed waterway to reduce

erosion and soil loss

7. Practices to Improve Water Quality - f.
























Not at all 5 1 0 6

A little 8 6 2 17

Some 26 19 2 49

A lot 30 19 6 57

Not at all 12 5 1 18

A little 10 10 1 22

Some 26 15 5 49

A lot 18 14 4 38


A little 19 11 2 34

Some 26 15 6 51

A lot 3 6 1 10

Not at all 23 17 5 45

A little 10 9 3 25

Some 18 13 1 34

A lot 6 3 2 12

Not at all 34 16 5 56

A little 14 9 4 28

Some 15 18 0 35

A lot 3 0 2 7


A little 9 7 1 18

Some 18 17 2 39

A lot 20 11 5 37


A little 14 11 1 28

Some 22 20 4 48

A lot 12 7 3 22

Not at all 40 26 4 71

A little 7 2 0 10

Some 7 6 4 20

A lot 6 4 1 12


A little 14 10 1 25

Some 19 10 4 35

A lot 22 15 5 44

Not at all 6 4 0 10

Use fences to exclude livestock fromstreams, rivers, ditches, etc.

7. Practices to Improve Water Quality -g. Restore wetlands

7. Practices to Improve Water Quality -h. Stabilize and protect streambanks

and/or shorelines

7. Practices to Improve Water Quality - i.Regular servicing of septic system

7. Practices to Improve Water Quality - j.Install a two stage ditch design to reduce

bank erosion

7. Practices to Improve Water Quality - k.Regulate the water level in tile lines

8. Making Management Decisions Ingeneral, how much does each issue limit

your ability to change... - a. Personalout-of-pocket expense


your ability to change... - b. Concernsabout reduced yields


your ability to change... - c. Lack ofavailable information about a practice

8. Making Management Decisions Ingeneral, how much does each issue limityour ability to change... - d. No one else

I know is implementing the practice

8. Making Management Decisions Ingeneral, how much does each issue limityour ability to change... - e. Approval of

my neighbors


your ability to change... - f.Environmental damage caused by

practice

8. Making Management Decisions Ingeneral, how much does each issue limityour ability to change... - g. Don't want to

participate in government programs

8. Making Management Decisions Ingeneral, how much does each issue limityour ability to change... - h. I do not own

the property

8. Making Management Decisions Ingeneral, how much does each issue limityour ability to change... - i. Requirementsor restrictions of government programs

Not at all 6 4 0 10

A little 12 11 5 30

Some 29 14 3 47

A lot 17 12 3 35

Not at all 23 17 2 42

A little 8 13 6 30

Some 18 7 1 29

A lot 8 5 1 14

Not at all 1 0 0 1

A little 0 0 0 0

Some 1 0 0 1

A lot 3 4 1 8

No 58 29 5 95

Yes, I have participated in 15 23 6 47

Not at all 5 3 1 9

A little 4 5 0 12

Some 23 14 1 39

A lot 30 20 10 62

Not at all 5 3 0 9

A little 5 5 0 11

Some 25 17 2 45

A lot 26 16 10 55

Not at all 3 3 0 6

A little 2 7 0 10

Some 12 8 3 24

A lot 45 22 9 80

Not at all 3 5 0 9

A little 5 7 2 15

Some 16 16 5 39

A lot 38 13 5 58

Not at all 8 8 2 19

A little 10 13 2 25

Some 18 6 2 28

A lot 20 13 6 42

Not at all 18 12 3 34

A little 12 17 2 32

Some 20 8 5 36

A lot 9 3 1 14

Not at all 14 10 1 26

A little 13 10 2 25

Some 20 12 4 39

A lot 9 7 3 21

Not at all 1 0 0 1

A little 0 0 0 0

Some 0 0 0 0

A lot 1 3 1 5

Currently use 33 20 4 59

Don't currently use 34 22 2 62

Never used 10 10 6 26



Know how to use, not doing it 32 16 4 56


Yes or already do 34 23 4 64

Maybe 30 17 6 54

No 9 9 2 22

Not at all 45 25 4 77

A little 11 13 3 29

Some 6 3 2 12


your ability to change... - j. Possibleinterference with my flexibility to changeland use practicies as conditions warrant


your ability to change... - k. Not beingable to see a field demonstration of the

practice(s) before I decide

8. Making Management Decisions Ingeneral, how much does each issue limityour ability to change... - l. Other (please

specify):

Have you ever participated in agovernment funded cost share program?

(Examples: Conservation Reserv...

In general, how important are theseissues when you decide whether or notto participate in a govern... - a. Amount

of funding provided by the program

In general, how important are theseissues when you decide whether or notto participate in a govern... - b. The timeit takes to work through the application

process

In general, how important are theseissues when you decide whether or not

to participate in a govern... - c.Requirements/Restrictions (red tape) of

government programs

In general, how important are theseissues when you decide whether or notto participate in a govern... - d. Possibleinterference with my flexibility to change

land use practices in the future

In general, how important are theseissues when you decide whether or notto participate in a govern... - e. Difficultyunderstanding the program requirements


to participate in a govern... - f. Being ableto attend a field day or field

demonstration of the practice(s)


to participate in a govern... - g. Access toprogram staff

In general, how important are theseissues when you decide whether or notto participate in a govern... - h. Other

(please specify):

1. Do you have or have you used covercrops?

2. How familiar are you with cover crops?

3. Are you willing to try to use covercrops?

How much do the following factors limityour ability to use cover crops (or limited,if you already... - a. Lack of information

Some 6 3 2 12

A lot 4 1 1 6

Not at all 29 15 1 48

A little 14 14 1 30

Some 15 10 5 32

A lot 7 4 4 15


A little 12 12 2 28

Some 21 17 4 42

A lot 13 8 4 27

Not at all 27 14 3 45

A little 14 8 3 25

Some 12 11 2 27

A lot 8 6 2 18

Not at all 29 16 6 53

A little 11 11 1 24

Some 17 10 3 33

A lot 4 2 2 8

Not at all 35 22 8 65

A little 14 8 1 25

Some 8 9 1 21

A lot 8 3 2 14


A little 10 13 1 27

Some 11 10 5 27

A lot 12 10 3 26

Not at all 37 18 3 60

A little 7 9 3 22

Some 11 8 3 22

A lot 6 6 2 15









Maybe 30 18 5 53

No 7 7 0 15

Not at all 35 22 6 66

A little 11 14 1 27

Some 14 7 2 25

A lot 2 2 1 5

Not at all 23 15 1 41

A little 12 15 2 30

Some 23 13 5 44

A lot 5 3 3 11

Not at all 12 10 1 24

A little 12 9 2 24

Some 21 16 5 44

A lot 16 11 3 32

Not at all 25 18 5 50

A little 12 10 4 27

Some 10 7 1 19

A lot 11 6 1 20

Not at all 29 20 4 56

A little 9 8 4 22

Some 13 11 1 27

or skill

How much do the following factors limityour ability to use cover crops (or limited,

if you already... - b. Time required


if you already... - c. Cost

How much do the following factors limityour ability to use cover crops (or limited,if you already... - d. The features of my

property do not support it

How much do the following factors limityour ability to use cover crops (or limited,if you already... - e. Insufficient proof of

water quality benefit

How much do the following factors limityour ability to use cover crops (or limited,if you already... - f. Desire to keep things

the way they are

How much do the following factors limityour ability to use cover crops (or limited,if you already... - g. Hard to use with my

farming system

How much do the following factors limityour ability to use cover crops (or limited,if you already... - h. Lack of equipment

1. Do you have or have you used filterstrips?

2. How familiar are you with filter strips?

3. Are you willing to try to use filterstrips?

How much do the following factors limityour ability to use cover crops (or limited,if you already... - a. Lack of information

or skill


if you already... - b. Time required


if you already... - c. Cost

How much do the following factors limityour ability to use cover crops (or limited,if you already... - d. The features of my


How much do the following factors limityour ability to use cover crops (or limited,if you already... - e. Insufficient proof of


A lot 6 2 2 10

Not at all 31 25 5 63

A little 16 8 4 30

Some 10 8 0 18

A lot 6 1 2 11

Not at all 29 19 4 54

A little 11 9 3 23

Some 13 7 3 25

A lot 8 6 1 17

Not at all 36 20 6 64

A little 11 9 0 21

Some 7 8 2 20

A lot 6 7 2 15







Currently use it. 38 23 7 70


Maybe 22 16 5 45

No 9 7 1 18

Not at all 42 29 8 80

A little 13 8 1 25

Some 6 4 0 12

A lot 2 1 3 6

Not at all 45 26 6 79

A little 12 8 3 26

Some 3 6 1 10

A lot 3 2 2 7

Not at all 34 20 3 58

A little 10 8 1 21

Some 13 7 4 24

A lot 4 6 3 16

Not at all 32 21 6 60

A little 11 8 2 24

Some 9 6 2 19

A lot 9 5 2 16

Not at all 31 24 4 61

A little 11 6 2 21

Some 13 7 2 23

A lot 1 1 2 5

Not at all 36 28 8 74

A little 8 6 2 18

Some 10 4 0 16

A lot 6 3 2 11

Not at all 31 18 4 54

A little 9 9 4 24

Some 12 7 0 22

A lot 5 5 3 13

Not at all 36 22 4 63

A little 8 6 2 19

Some 4 6 2 12

A lot 10 7 4 23






How much do the following factors limityour ability to use cover crops (or limited,if you already... - f. Desire to keep things

the way they are

How much do the following factors limityour ability to use cover crops (or limited,if you already... - g. Hard to use with my

farming system

How much do the following factors limityour ability to use cover crops (or limited,if you already... - h. Lack of equipment

1. Do you have or have you usedconservation tillage?

2. How familiar are you with conservationtillage?

3. Are you willing to try usingconservation tillage?

How much do the following factors limityour ability to use conservation tillage (orlimited, if you... - a. Lack of information or

skill

How much do the following factors limityour ability to use conservation tillage (or

limited, if you... - b. Time required


limited, if you... - c. Cost

How much do the following factors limityour ability to use conservation tillage (orlimited, if you... - d. The features of my


How much do the following factors limityour ability to use conservation tillage (orlimited, if you... - e. Insufficient proof of


How much do the following factors limityour ability to use conservation tillage (orlimited, if you... - f. Desire to keep things

the way they are

How much do the following factors limityour ability to use conservation tillage (orlimited, if you... - g. Hard to use with my

farming system


limited, if you... - h. Lack of equipment

1. Do you have or have you used aCNMP or MMP?





Maybe 30 19 2 53

No 21 9 4 36

Not at all 15 17 3 36

A little 12 12 1 26

Some 10 2 3 18

A lot 7 3 0 10

Not at all 12 15 2 30

A little 15 7 0 23

Some 13 7 3 24

A lot 6 4 2 14


A little 7 4 0 13

Some 17 5 4 27

A lot 13 10 1 25

Not at all 14 17 4 37

A little 10 8 0 18

Some 11 1 3 18

A lot 8 6 0 14

Not at all 16 19 4 41

A little 11 8 0 20

Some 12 3 2 19

A lot 2 1 1 4

Not at all 17 24 5 48

A little 9 3 1 14

Some 11 5 1 19

A lot 6 3 0 9

Not at all 16 15 3 36

A little 10 9 1 21

Some 10 3 2 17

A lot 8 5 1 14

Not at all 17 19 2 40

A little 5 4 3 13

Some 10 3 2 17

A lot 9 8 0 17

Yes 15 13 2 30

No 57 32 9 104

Yes, I am familiar with the programand I plan on participating.

5 5 1 11

Yes, I am familiar with the programbut I do not plan on participating.

20 10 2 35

No, I am not familiar with theprogram but I would like to learnmore.

18 10 8 36

No, I am not familiar with theprogram and am not interested inlearning more.

32 20 1 56

Yes, I am familiar with the conceptof PDR.

58 21 6 88

No, I am not familiar with theconcept of PDR.

19 24 6 52

Yes, I would be willing to participatein a PDR program.

14 3 2 19

Maybe, depending on how muchmoney was offered for thedevelopment rights.

15 15 3 36

No, I would not be willing toparticipate in a PDR program.

24 8 2 36

I need more information before I22 19 5 47

2. How familiar are you with CNMPs orMMPs?

3. Are you willing to try using a CNMP orMMP?

How much do the following factors limityour ability to use CNMPs or MMPs (or

limited, if you alread... - a. Lack ofinformation or skill

How much do the following factors limityour ability to use CNMPs or MMPs (orlimited, if you alread... - b. Time required


limited, if you alread... - c. Cost

How much do the following factors limityour ability to use CNMPs or MMPs (orlimited, if you alread... - d. The features

of my property do not support it

How much do the following factors limityour ability to use CNMPs or MMPs (orlimited, if you alread... - e. Insufficient

proof of water quality benefit

How much do the following factors limityour ability to use CNMPs or MMPs (orlimited, if you alread... - f. Desire to keep

things the way they are

How much do the following factors limityour ability to use CNMPs or MMPs (orlimited, if you alread... - g. Hard to use

with my farming system


limited, if you alread... - h. Lack ofequipment

a. Would you be willing to speak to otherfarmers about your experiences with the

BMPs you have impl...

b. Are you familiar with the CarbonTrading Program and the financial

benefits it provides to those...

c. Are you familiar with the farmlandpreservation concept of purchasing

development rights (PDR)?

d. If you had the opportunity, would yoube willing to permanently protect your

farmland from develo...

could make a decision.22 19 5 47


Slightly 22 12 3 37

Moderately 20 16 4 43

Very Much 7 3 3 13

Am not familar 14 11 1 28

Not at all 4 1 1 6

Slightly 15 8 1 25


Very Much 18 8 2 29


Not at all 1 1 0 2

Slightly 5 10 1 18


Very Much 36 13 3 52


Not at all 6 2 1 9

Slightly 15 12 1 29


Very Much 16 7 3 26


Not at all 3 5 1 9

Slightly 18 13 2 36


Very Much 11 5 2 18


Not at all 28 16 6 52

Slightly 14 12 1 28


Very Much 6 2 2 10



Slightly 15 12 2 32


Very Much 15 4 3 23


Not at all 2 2 0 4

Slightly 10 7 4 23


Very Much 31 14 5 51



Slightly 18 17 2 38


Very Much 10 3 4 18



Slightly 19 14 2 36


Very Much 8 2 2 12


Not at all 0 0 1 1

Slightly 0 0 0 0

Moderately 1 0 0 1

Very Much 1 0 0 1


Retired 14 14 2 30

Partially retired 26 12 3 41

Not retired 36 26 6 68

12. Information and Activities People getinformation about water quality from anumber of diffe... - a. NRCS (Natural

Resources Conservation Service)

12. Information and Activities People getinformation about water quality from anumber of diffe... - b. Farm Services

Agency

12. Information and Activities People getinformation about water quality from anumber of diffe... - c. Michigan State

University Extension

12. Information and Activities People getinformation about water quality from a

number of diffe... - d. ConservationDistrict

12. Information and Activities People getinformation about water quality from anumber of diffe... - e. MDA (Michigan

Department of Agriculture)

12. Information and Activities People getinformation about water quality from anumber of diffe... - f. MDEQ (MichiganDepartment of Environmental Quality)


number of diffe... - g. County DrainCommission

12. Information and Activities People getinformation about water quality from anumber of diffe... - h. Michigan Farm

Bureau


number of diffe... - i. MacatawaWatershed Project

12. Information and Activities People getinformation about water quality from anumber of diffe... - j. Macatawa Area

Coordinating Council

12. Information and Activities People getinformation about water quality from anumber of diffe... - k. Other (please

specify)

b. Do you consider yourself retired fromyour farm operation?

Me alone or with my spouse 15 15 4 34

Me with my family partners (siblings,parents, children)

24 15 5 44

Me with the landowner 4 6 1 11

Me with my tenant 21 14 4 39

Me and my business partners 9 2 0 11

Someone else makes the decisionfor the operation

7 8 2 17

Will not happen 23 16 0 39

Likely 27 14 3 44

Will definitely happen 6 3 0 9

Not sure 20 20 9 49

It will be about the same as it istoday

42 30 5 77

It will be larger 8 7 3 18

It will be smaller 5 1 0 6

I don't know/unsure 22 15 3 40

1 - 99 acres 48 39 4 91

100 - 499 acres 21 4 4 29

500 - 999 acres 3 7 1 11

1,000 - 1,999 acres 3 0 1 4

2,000 or more acres 1 3 1 5

Corn (acres): 60 39 9 108

Soybeans (acres): 55 38 9 102

Small grains (acres): 43 33 5 81

Canning crops (acres): 37 30 5 72

Clover/Alfalfa (acres): 48 32 5 85

Pasture (acres): 48 33 5 86

Conservation set aside/CRP (acres): 36 28 5 69

Forest/woodland (acres): 41 32 5 78

Non-row crops for energy (acres): 35 29 5 69

Blueberries (acres): 40 31 5 76

Other (please specify): 40 27 4 71

Yes 69 48 9 126

No 7 4 3 14

Dairy cattle, including heifers andyoung stock (enter number):

63 44 7 114

Beef cattle, including young stock(enter number):

64 45 7 116

Hogs (enter number): 60 45 8 113

Poultry (enter number): 64 42 6 112

Other livestock (enter number): 58 41 6 105

Yes, verified in cropping systems 4 5 2 11

Yes, verified in livestock systems 3 7 2 12

Yes, verified in farmstead systems 3 1 1 5

Yes, verified in greenhouse 0 0 0 0

No, my farm is not MAEAP verified 27 16 4 47

No, my farm is not verified but Ihave filled out a Farm-A-Syst, orCrop-A-Syst, or Livestock-A-Systform

3 2 0 5

I don’t know what MAEAPverification is

39 21 5 65

Yes 75 50 11 136

No 3 3 0 6

Male 70 45 10 125

Female 8 8 2 18

Some formal schooling 7 7 1 15

High school diploma/GED 33 18 4 55

Some college 8 13 2 23

2 year college degree 4 4 2 10

c. Which of the following best describesyour postition as a farm operator?

(Please check all that a...

d. How likely is it that any family memberwill continue farm operations when you

retire or quit far...

e. Five years from now, which statementwill best describe your farm operation?

f. Please estimate the total tillableacreage (owned and/or rented) of your

farming operation this y...

g. This year, how many acres of thefollowing do you manage? If none,

please enter a zero.

h. Does the property you manage toucha stream, river, lake, drain, ditch, or

wetland?

i. How many of the following animals arepart of your farming operation? If none,

please enter a zer...

j. Is your farm MAEAP verified? Pleasecheck all that apply.

a. Do you make the home or lawn caredecisions in your household?

b. What is your gender?

d. What is the highest grade in schoolyou have completed?

4 year college degree 20 7 2 29

Graduate degree 5 4 0 9

Ottawa County 78 0 0 78

Allegan County 0 53 0 53

I have property in both counties 0 0 12 12

Yes 68 44 10 122

No 9 7 2 18

Some 26 17 5 48

All 16 13 3 32

None 33 16 2 51

Yes 70 45 11 126

No 7 5 1 13

Yes 67 42 11 120

No, it is too expensive 2 1 0 3

No, I don't know how 1 1 0 2

No, I didn't know soil testing wasimportant

2 0 0 2

Other 5 5 0 10

Yes 41 33 8 82

No 35 19 4 58

Yes 24 24 7 55

No 9 5 1 15

Not applicable 37 18 2 57

Yes 55 35 7 97

No 8 3 3 14

Not applicable 14 10 2 26

Newsletters/brochures/factsheet 51 31 8 90

Internet 3 2 0 5

Radio 23 23 5 51

Newspaper/Magazines 43 31 6 80

Workshops/demonstrations/meetings 14 2 3 19

Television or Billboards 20 19 4 43

Schools 3 0 0 3

Conversations with others 30 23 7 60

Other 5 1 0 6

Total 78 53 12 151

n. In what county is your propertyprincipally located ...

g. Do you use pesticides or herbicides onyour farm?

h. If yes, are pesticides or herbicidesapplied by a commercial applicator?

i. Do you use fertilizer on your farm?

j. If so, have you ever had your soiltested to determine your fertilizer needs?

k. Is manure applied to your farm?

l. If yes, is manure applied in accordancewith a manure management plan?

m. Is application equipment forpesticides, fertilizers and/or manure

calibrated regularly?

n. I’ve heard about local water qualityproblems from the following (check all

that apply).

Macatawa Cross Tabulation(2)

1 -99

acres

100 -499

acres

500 -999

acres

1,000-

1,999acres

2,000or

moreacres

Total

Poor 7 3 1 0 1 12

Okay 39 6 3 1 3 57

Good 30 12 6 3 1 55

Poor 25 9 2 0 1 40

Okay 37 6 3 1 3 53

Good 12 6 5 3 1 30

Poor 27 8 2 0 3 42

Okay 34 11 4 1 1 55

Good 14 6 4 3 1 31

Poor 3 3 1 0 0 7

Okay 29 11 3 1 2 49

Good 50 11 6 3 3 79

Poor 15 5 2 0 1 25

Okay 32 12 1 1 2 51

Good 21 7 7 3 2 43

Poor 2 2 0 0 0 4

Okay 26 5 3 1 1 41

Good 51 18 7 3 4 86

Canoeing / kayaking / other boating 2 3 1 1 2 9

Eating fish caught locally 4 2 0 0 0 7

Swimming 5 0 0 2 0 7

Picnicking and family activities nearwater

10 4 0 0 0 15

Fish habitat / fishing 11 2 1 0 0 15

Scenic beauty / enjoyment 40 9 6 0 3 60

No, I don't know. 12 2 0 1 1 18

Yes, it goes to: 76 25 10 3 4 125

Strongly disagree 0 0 0 1 0 1

Disagree 12 2 0 0 2 16

Neither Agree nor Disagree 29 8 7 1 0 49

Agree 41 17 3 2 2 70

Strongly Agree 8 1 0 0 1 11


Disagree 4 0 0 1 0 5


Agree 63 21 7 2 3 102





Agree 61 24 6 3 3 103





Agree 43 17 6 0 1 72

f. Please estimate thetotal tillable acreage

(owned and/or rented)of your farming

operation this y...

Water Quality Overall, how wouldyou rate the quality of the water inyour local rivers, streams,... - a.

For canoeing/kayaking/otherboating

Water Quality Overall, how wouldyou rate the quality of the water inyour local rivers, streams,... - b.

For eating locally caught fish

Water Quality Overall, how wouldyou rate the quality of the water in

your local rivers, streams,... - c.For swimming

Water Quality Overall, how wouldyou rate the quality of the water inyour local rivers, streams,... - d.

For picnicking and family activitiesnear water

Water Quality Overall, how wouldyou rate the quality of the water inyour local rivers, streams,... - e.

For fish habitat

Water Quality Overall, how wouldyou rate the quality of the water in

your local rivers, streams,... - f.For wildlife habitat

Your Water Use a. Of theseactivities, which is the most

important to you?

b. Do you know where the rainwater goes when it runs off of

your property?

3. General Water Quality AttitudesWhat is your level of agreement

with the following statements?... -a. The economic stability of mycommunity depends upon clean

lakes, rivers, and streams.


with the following statements?... -b. The way that I care for myproperty can influence waterquality in lakes, rivers, and

streams.


with the following statements?... -c. It is my personal responsibility

to help protect water quality.


with the following statements?... -d. It is important to protect waterquality even if it slows economic

development.



Disagree 46 17 5 2 2 74


Agree 20 3 2 1 0 30



Disagree 23 6 2 0 2 37


Agree 24 11 3 0 0 43



Disagree 52 20 4 2 2 85


Agree 12 2 2 1 2 20





Agree 66 19 5 2 4 102



Disagree 28 3 1 0 3 38


Agree 18 7 3 1 1 34



Disagree 48 19 6 2 3 84


Agree 4 1 0 1 1 7



Disagree 10 3 2 0 0 17


Agree 29 8 2 0 2 43



Disagree 37 10 6 2 3 61


Agree 14 6 0 0 0 22



Disagree 11 2 1 0 0 16


Agree 41 15 4 2 4 69



Disagree 9 4 0 0 1 15


Agree 50 12 5 1 4 77


Not a problem 5 3 1 1 0 10

Slight problem 26 9 5 1 1 45

Moderate problem 40 10 4 1 3 63

Severe problem 9 5 1 0 1 17




development.


with the following statements?... -e. What I do on my property

doesn't make much impact onoverall water quality.


with the following statements?... -f. Investing in water quality

protection puts the farmer at aneconomic disadvantage.


with the following statements?... -g. Farm management practices

(on individual lots) do not have animpact on local water quality.


with the following statements?... -h. My actions have an impact on

lakes, rivers and streams.


with the following statements?... -i. Taking action to improve lakes,

rivers, and streams is tooexpensive for me.


with the following statements?... -j. It is okay to reduce water quality

to promote economicdevelopment.


with the following statements?... -k. It is important to protect waterquality even it it costs me more.


with the following statements?... -l. I would be willing to pay more toimprove lakes, rivers, and streams(for example: though local taxes or

fees)


with the following statements?... -m. I would be willing to changethe way I care for my farm to

improve water quality.


with the following statements?... -n. The quality of life in my

community depends on goodwater quality in local streams,

rivers and lakes.

4. Types of Water PollutantsBelow is a list of water pollutantsthat are generally present in wa...- a. Dirt and soil in local streams

4. Types of Water PollutantsBelow is a list of water pollutantsthat are generally present in wa...

- b. Nutrients from fertilizers in




























































local streams

4. Types of Water PollutantsBelow is a list of water pollutantsthat are generally present in wa...- c. Phosphorus in local streams

4. Types of Water PollutantsBelow is a list of water pollutantsthat are generally present in wa...- d. Bacteria and viruses in localstreams (suc as E.coli /Coliform)


- e. Algae in local streams

4. Types of Water PollutantsBelow is a list of water pollutantsthat are generally present in wa...- f. Toxic material such as PCBs

in local streams


- g. Not enough oxygen in thewater in local streams

4. Types of Water PollutantsBelow is a list of water pollutantsthat are generally present in wa...- h. Invasive aquatic plants and

animals

4. Types of Water PollutantsBelow is a list of water pollutantsthat are generally present in wa...- i. Cloudiness of the water in local

streams


- j. Trash or debris

5. Sources of Water Pollution Theitems listed below are sources ofwater quality pollution acro... - a.

Discharges from industry intostreams and lakes

5. Sources of Water Pollution Theitems listed below are sources ofwater quality pollution acro... - b.

Discharges from sewagetreatment plants

5. Sources of Water Pollution Theitems listed below are sources ofwater quality pollution acro... - c.Soil erosion from construction

sites

5. Sources of Water Pollution Theitems listed below are sources ofwater quality pollution acro... - d.

Soil erosion from farm fields

5. Sources of Water Pollution Theitems listed below are sources ofwater quality pollution acro... - e.

Soil erosion from stream channels

5. Sources of Water Pollution Theitems listed below are sources ofwater quality pollution acro... - f.Lawn fertilizers and pesticides

5. Sources of Water Pollution Theitems listed below are sources of







Not a problem 34 11 6 2 3 60




















Not a problem 38 10 7 2 3 62

































water quality pollution acro... - g.Grass clippings and leaves

5. Sources of Water Pollution Theitems listed below are sources ofwater quality pollution acro... - h.

Improperly maintained septicsystems

5. Sources of Water Pollution Theitems listed below are sources ofwater quality pollution acro... - i.

Grazing-related sources

5. Sources of Water Pollution Theitems listed below are sources ofwater quality pollution acro... - j.

Manure from farm animals

5. Sources of Water Pollution Theitems listed below are sources ofwater quality pollution acro... - k.Stormwater runoff from streets,

highways, and/or highways

5. Sources of Water Pollution Theitems listed below are sources ofwater quality pollution acro... - l.

Animal feeding operations

5. Sources of Water Pollution Theitems listed below are sources ofwater quality pollution acro... - m.

Droppings from geese, ducks, andother waterfowl

5. Sources of Water Pollution Theitems listed below are sources ofwater quality pollution acro... - n.Pet waste (such as dogs or cats)

5. Sources of Water Pollution Theitems listed below are sources ofwater quality pollution acro... - o.

Agricultural fertilizers andpesticides

5. Sources of Water Pollution Theitems listed below are sources ofwater quality pollution acro... - p.

Land development orredevelopment

5. Sources of Water Pollution Theitems listed below are sources ofwater quality pollution acro... - q.Removal of riparian vegetation

5. Sources of Water Pollution Theitems listed below are sources ofwater quality pollution acro... - r.

Drainage/filling of wetlands

5. Sources of Water Pollution Theitems listed below are sources ofwater quality pollution acro... - s.

Outputs from marinas and/orrecreational boats

6. Consequences of Poor WaterQuality Poor water quality can

lead to a variety of consequencesfor c... - a. Contaminated drinking

water


lead to a variety of consequencesfor c... - b. Polluted / closed

swimming areas









































Never heard of it 2 0 0 0 0 2

Somewhat familiar with it 33 2 1 0 1 40

Know how to use it; not using it 12 2 0 0 0 15

Currently use it 41 22 10 4 4 85

















lead to a variety of consequencesfor c... - c. Contaminated fish


lead to a variety of consequencesfor c... - d. Increase in

water/sewage bill


lead to a variety of consequencesfor c... - e. Loss of desirabel fish

and wildlife species


lead to a variety of consequencesfor c... - f. Reduced beauty of

rivers, lakes, and streams


lead to a variety of consequencesfor c... - g. Reduced opportunities

for water activities such asboating, canoeing, and fishing


lead to a variety of consequencesfor c... - h. Reduced quality of

water activities


lead to a variety of consequencesfor c... - i. Excessive aquatic

plants or algae


lead to a variety of consequencesfor c... - j. Fish kills


lead to a variety of consequencesfor c... - k. Odor


lead to a variety of consequencesfor c... - l. Lower property values

7. Practices to Improve WaterQuality - a. Conduct regular soil

tests for pH, and nutrients

7. Practices to Improve WaterQuality - b. Construct sediment

basins to collect and store debrisor sediment

7. Practices to Improve WaterQuality - c. Construct an artificial

wetland for waste treatment

7. Practices to Improve WaterQuality - d. Rotate crops to

maintain or improve soil

7. Practices to Improve WaterQuality - e. Use a grassed

waterway to reduce erosion and



























Not at all 6 0 0 0 0 6

A little 10 3 1 0 1 17

Some 30 11 2 2 1 49

A lot 29 12 8 2 3 57

Not at all 12 4 1 0 1 18

A little 15 3 1 1 1 22

Some 27 11 2 3 2 49

A lot 18 9 7 0 1 38

Not at all 17 3 3 2 2 28

A little 18 8 4 1 0 34

Some 26 14 3 0 3 51

A lot 7 1 1 1 0 10

Not at all 24 7 6 2 3 45

A little 12 2 5 1 2 25

Some 18 14 0 0 0 34

A lot 8 2 0 1 0 12

Not at all 31 9 5 3 4 56

A little 18 7 1 0 1 28

Some 20 8 4 1 0 35

A lot 3 1 1 0 0 7

Not at all 15 2 1 0 1 22

A little 10 5 0 1 1 18

Some 21 8 6 1 0 39

A lot 21 7 3 2 3 37

Not at all 16 7 0 1 1 28

A little 19 5 1 0 1 28

Some 22 12 9 2 1 48

A lot 15 3 1 1 2 22

Not at all 42 15 6 1 3 71

A little 6 3 0 0 0 10

Some 9 3 2 1 2 20

A lot 10 1 0 0 0 12

Not at all 11 2 1 0 0 15

soil loss

7. Practices to Improve WaterQuality - f. Use fences to exclude

livestock from streams, rivers,ditches, etc.

7. Practices to Improve WaterQuality - g. Restore wetlands

7. Practices to Improve WaterQuality - h. Stabilize and protectstreambanks and/or shorelines

7. Practices to Improve WaterQuality - i. Regular servicing of

septic system

7. Practices to Improve WaterQuality - j. Install a two stage ditch

design to reduce bank erosion

7. Practices to Improve WaterQuality - k. Regulate the water

level in tile lines

8. Making Management DecisionsIn general, how much does each

issue limit your ability to change...- a. Personal out-of-pocket

expense


issue limit your ability to change...- b. Concerns about reduced

yields


issue limit your ability to change...- c. Lack of available information

about a practice


issue limit your ability to change...- d. No one else I know isimplementing the practice


issue limit your ability to change...- e. Approval of my neighbors


issue limit your ability to change...- f. Environmental damage caused

by practice


issue limit your ability to change...- g. Don't want to participate in

government programs


issue limit your ability to change...- h. I do not own the property


A little 19 4 1 0 0 25

Some 16 10 3 3 1 35

A lot 22 8 6 1 4 44

Not at all 8 1 1 0 0 10

A little 18 5 3 1 0 30

Some 27 12 4 1 1 47

A lot 16 7 2 2 4 35

Not at all 27 6 3 1 3 42

A little 12 9 4 1 1 30

Some 16 6 3 1 0 29

A lot 10 3 0 0 1 14

Not at all 1 0 0 0 0 1

A little 0 0 0 0 0 0

Some 0 1 0 0 0 1

A lot 3 1 1 1 2 8

No 64 17 6 1 1 95

Yes, I have participated in 22 10 5 3 4 47

Not at all 8 0 0 0 0 9

A little 4 1 3 1 0 12

Some 21 10 3 1 2 39

A lot 35 15 5 2 3 62

Not at all 8 0 0 0 0 9

A little 6 3 0 1 0 11

Some 25 13 3 0 2 45

A lot 28 9 8 3 3 55

Not at all 6 0 0 0 0 6

A little 6 3 0 0 0 10

Some 14 6 2 0 1 24

A lot 41 16 9 4 4 80

Not at all 8 0 0 0 0 9

A little 10 3 0 1 0 15

Some 19 8 6 1 2 39

A lot 32 13 5 2 3 58

Not at all 13 2 1 0 1 19

A little 18 3 2 0 2 25

Some 11 10 4 0 0 28

A lot 20 9 4 4 2 42

Not at all 21 6 2 1 2 34

A little 16 8 6 0 1 32

Some 20 6 3 3 1 36

A lot 7 5 0 0 1 14

Not at all 17 2 2 2 2 26

A little 13 7 4 1 0 25

Some 18 11 4 1 2 39

A lot 13 3 1 0 1 21

Not at all 1 0 0 0 0 1

A little 0 0 0 0 0 0

Some 0 0 0 0 0 0

A lot 2 1 1 0 1 5

Currently use 33 14 5 2 2 59

Don't currently use 37 10 6 2 1 62

Never used 19 5 0 0 2 26



In general, how much does eachissue limit your ability to change...- i. Requirements or restrictions of

government programs


issue limit your ability to change...- j. Possible interference with my

flexibility to change land usepracticies as conditions warrant


issue limit your ability to change...- k. Not being able to see a fielddemonstration of the practice(s)

before I decide


issue limit your ability to change...- l. Other (please specify):

Have you ever participated in agovernment funded cost share

program? (Examples:Conservation Reserv...

In general, how important arethese issues when you decide

whether or not to participate in agovern... - a. Amount of funding

provided by the program


whether or not to participate in agovern... - b. The time it takes to

work through the applicationprocess


whether or not to participate in agovern... - c.

Requirements/Restrictions (redtape) of government programs


whether or not to participate in agovern... - d. Possible interferencewith my flexibility to change land

use practices in the future


whether or not to participate in agovern... - e. Difficulty

understanding the programrequirements


whether or not to participate in agovern... - f. Being able to attenda field day or field demonstration

of the practice(s)


whether or not to participate in agovern... - g. Access to program

staff


whether or not to participate in agovern... - h. Other (please

specify):

1. Do you have or have you usedcover crops?

2. How familiar are you with cover

Know how to use, not doing it 32 13 3 1 2 56


Yes or already do 34 16 6 2 2 64

Maybe 36 9 4 1 2 54

No 15 3 0 1 0 22

Not at all 48 12 5 2 4 77

A little 12 8 5 1 1 29

Some 6 4 1 0 0 12

A lot 6 0 0 0 0 6

Not at all 34 6 3 1 1 48

A little 14 7 6 0 1 30

Some 16 8 1 2 3 32

A lot 7 4 1 1 0 15

Not at all 20 4 3 1 1 31

A little 14 6 3 1 1 28

Some 25 9 3 1 3 42

A lot 16 5 2 1 0 27

Not at all 27 12 3 0 1 45

A little 14 7 1 2 0 25

Some 13 4 3 1 3 27

A lot 10 2 2 1 1 18

Not at all 30 12 5 1 1 53

A little 17 4 1 1 0 24

Some 13 8 3 2 3 33

A lot 5 0 2 0 1 8

Not at all 36 17 6 1 3 65

A little 16 3 1 1 2 25

Some 10 3 4 0 0 21

A lot 9 2 0 2 0 14

Not at all 22 9 3 1 1 37

A little 16 6 2 0 0 27

Some 11 4 5 2 2 27

A lot 15 6 1 1 2 26

Not at all 32 16 3 2 4 60

A little 10 1 4 1 1 22

Some 14 5 3 0 0 22

A lot 11 2 1 0 0 15



Never used 33 7 1 0 0 41






Maybe 34 11 6 0 1 53

No 11 2 0 1 0 15

Not at all 34 13 5 3 5 66

A little 18 5 3 0 0 27

Some 14 6 3 0 0 25

A lot 4 1 0 0 0 5

Not at all 27 5 3 1 3 41

A little 16 9 2 1 0 30

Some 23 8 6 2 2 44

A lot 7 2 0 0 0 11

Not at all 15 4 1 1 2 24

A little 12 5 2 2 1 24

Some 24 9 7 0 2 44

A lot 19 7 1 1 0 32

crops?

3. Are you willing to try to usecover crops?

How much do the following factorslimit your ability to use cover crops

(or limited, if you already... - a.Lack of information or skill


(or limited, if you already... - b.Time required


(or limited, if you already... - c.Cost


(or limited, if you already... - d.The features of my property do

not support it


(or limited, if you already... - e.Insufficient proof of water quality

benefit


(or limited, if you already... - f.Desire to keep things the way they

are


(or limited, if you already... - g.Hard to use with my farming

system


(or limited, if you already... - h.Lack of equipment

1. Do you have or have you usedfilter strips?

2. How familiar are you with filterstrips?

3. Are you willing to try to usefilter strips?


(or limited, if you already... - a.Lack of information or skill


(or limited, if you already... - b.Time required


(or limited, if you already... - c.Cost

Not at all 29 11 3 0 3 50

A little 15 7 2 2 0 27

Some 9 4 2 1 2 19

A lot 12 2 3 0 0 20

Not at all 34 12 4 0 2 56

A little 10 3 4 2 1 22

Some 13 6 3 2 1 27

A lot 6 2 0 0 1 10

Not at all 35 14 6 1 4 63

A little 16 6 2 2 1 30

Some 11 2 3 1 0 18

A lot 6 3 0 0 0 11

Not at all 31 12 3 1 4 54

A little 16 5 0 1 0 23

Some 8 5 7 2 0 25

A lot 9 4 1 0 1 17

Not at all 32 16 4 3 5 64

A little 12 4 3 0 0 21

Some 12 2 3 0 0 20

A lot 12 2 1 0 0 15



Never used 27 5 0 0 1 35




Currently use it. 35 15 8 3 4 70


Maybe 32 8 1 1 1 45

No 12 4 1 0 0 18

Not at all 44 18 8 3 4 80

A little 15 4 2 1 0 25

Some 7 1 1 0 1 12

A lot 5 1 0 0 0 6

Not at all 42 19 8 3 4 79

A little 13 4 3 1 1 26

Some 9 1 0 0 0 10

A lot 7 0 0 0 0 7

Not at all 33 10 6 3 3 58

A little 10 4 4 0 1 21

Some 14 7 1 1 1 24

A lot 10 3 0 0 0 16

Not at all 38 10 4 3 3 60

A little 10 6 3 0 1 24

Some 10 3 3 0 1 19

A lot 9 5 1 1 0 16

Not at all 39 9 5 2 3 61

A little 11 5 1 1 1 21

Some 10 5 5 0 1 23

A lot 4 0 0 0 0 5

Not at all 40 17 9 2 3 74

A little 10 4 1 0 1 18

Some 9 1 1 1 1 16

A lot 8 2 0 1 0 11

Not at all 31 12 5 2 2 54

A little 15 3 2 1 1 24

Some 10 4 2 0 2 22

A lot 6 5 2 0 0 13

Not at all 33 15 5 4 4 63


(or limited, if you already... - d.The features of my property do

not support it


(or limited, if you already... - e.Insufficient proof of water quality

benefit


(or limited, if you already... - f.Desire to keep things the way they

are


(or limited, if you already... - g.Hard to use with my farming

system


(or limited, if you already... - h.Lack of equipment

1. Do you have or have you usedconservation tillage?

2. How familiar are you withconservation tillage?

3. Are you willing to try usingconservation tillage?

How much do the following factorslimit your ability to use

conservation tillage (or limited, ifyou... - a. Lack of information or

skill


conservation tillage (or limited, ifyou... - b. Time required


conservation tillage (or limited, ifyou... - c. Cost


conservation tillage (or limited, ifyou... - d. The features of my



conservation tillage (or limited, ifyou... - e. Insufficient proof of



conservation tillage (or limited, ifyou... - f. Desire to keep things the

way they are


conservation tillage (or limited, ifyou... - g. Hard to use with my

farming system

Not at all 33 15 5 4 4 63

A little 10 3 2 0 0 19

Some 8 2 1 0 1 12

A lot 14 4 3 0 0 23



Never used 55 10 1 1 1 72






Maybe 36 14 1 0 0 53

No 27 5 0 1 0 36

Not at all 14 9 8 1 2 36

A little 16 6 2 0 1 26

Some 8 6 1 0 0 18

A lot 9 1 0 0 0 10

Not at all 13 6 7 1 1 30

A little 16 5 1 0 0 23

Some 14 6 2 0 1 24

A lot 6 4 1 0 1 14

Not at all 11 4 6 1 1 25

A little 7 3 1 0 0 13

Some 16 8 1 0 1 27

A lot 14 5 3 1 1 25

Not at all 16 8 7 1 2 37

A little 12 6 0 0 0 18

Some 6 5 3 0 1 18

A lot 13 0 1 0 0 14

Not at all 19 9 7 1 2 41

A little 13 5 1 0 0 20

Some 11 4 2 0 0 19

A lot 2 1 0 0 1 4

Not at all 22 12 8 1 2 48

A little 10 1 2 0 0 14

Some 11 4 1 0 1 19

A lot 7 2 0 0 0 9

Not at all 15 8 7 1 2 36

A little 13 5 2 0 0 21

Some 10 4 1 0 0 17

A lot 9 3 1 0 1 14

Not at all 16 11 7 1 2 40

A little 7 3 1 0 1 13

Some 12 2 1 0 0 17

A lot 13 2 2 0 0 17

Yes 13 8 3 1 4 30

No 65 19 8 3 1 104

Yes, I am familiar with the programand I plan on participating.

5 2 1 1 2 11

Yes, I am familiar with the programbut I do not plan on participating.

18 8 3 0 2 35

No, I am not familiar with theprogram but I would like to learnmore.

20 13 2 1 0 36

No, I am not familiar with theprogram and am not interested inlearning more.

39 5 5 2 1 56

Yes, I am familiar with the conceptof PDR.

45 23 7 3 4 88


conservation tillage (or limited, ifyou... - h. Lack of equipment

1. Do you have or have you useda CNMP or MMP?

2. How familiar are you withCNMPs or MMPs?

3. Are you willing to try using aCNMP or MMP?

How much do the following factorslimit your ability to use CNMPs orMMPs (or limited, if you alread... -

a. Lack of information or skill


b. Time required


c. Cost

How much do the following factorslimit your ability to use CNMPs orMMPs (or limited, if you alread... -d. The features of my property do

not support it


e. Insufficient proof of waterquality benefit

How much do the following factorslimit your ability to use CNMPs orMMPs (or limited, if you alread... -f. Desire to keep things the way

they are


g. Hard to use with my farmingsystem


h. Lack of equipment

a. Would you be willing to speakto other farmers about your

experiences with the BMPs youhave impl...

b. Are you familiar with theCarbon Trading Program and the

financial benefits it provides tothose...

c. Are you familiar with thefarmland preservation concept of

No, I am not familiar with theconcept of PDR.

38 5 4 1 1 52

Yes, I would be willing to participatein a PDR program.

9 7 1 2 0 19

Maybe, depending on how muchmoney was offered for thedevelopment rights.

17 7 5 1 3 36

No, I would not be willing toparticipate in a PDR program.

24 7 0 1 1 36

I need more information before Icould make a decision.

33 7 4 0 1 47

Not at all 11 1 2 1 0 17

Slightly 17 11 5 1 3 37

Moderately 28 8 2 1 1 43

Very Much 6 4 1 0 1 13

Am not familar 20 4 1 1 0 28

Not at all 2 1 1 1 0 6

Slightly 15 4 2 1 1 25


Very Much 16 7 5 0 0 29


Not at all 0 1 0 0 1 2

Slightly 12 2 0 1 1 18


Very Much 34 9 6 1 1 52


Not at all 4 1 2 1 0 9

Slightly 14 8 2 2 2 29


Very Much 18 5 1 0 1 26


Not at all 6 1 0 1 0 9

Slightly 21 5 4 1 1 36


Very Much 11 4 2 0 1 18


Not at all 32 9 5 2 1 52

Slightly 15 5 4 0 3 28


Very Much 4 4 0 1 0 10


Not at all 11 5 2 0 1 20

Slightly 23 3 1 2 0 32


Very Much 11 7 4 0 0 23


Not at all 2 2 0 0 0 4

Slightly 12 7 0 0 1 23


Very Much 26 13 7 1 2 51


Not at all 13 1 1 1 0 18

Slightly 17 13 6 0 1 38


Very Much 10 5 0 1 1 18


Not at all 13 3 2 1 0 21

Slightly 18 12 3 0 1 36


Very Much 7 5 0 0 0 12

purchasing development rights(PDR)?

d. If you had the opportunity,would you be willing to

permanently protect your farmlandfrom develo...

12. Information and ActivitiesPeople get information about

water quality from a number ofdiffe... - a. NRCS (Natural

Resources Conservation Service)


water quality from a number ofdiffe... - b. Farm Services Agency


water quality from a number ofdiffe... - c. Michigan State

University Extension


water quality from a number ofdiffe... - d. Conservation District


water quality from a number ofdiffe... - e. MDA (MichiganDepartment of Agriculture)


water quality from a number ofdiffe... - f. MDEQ (Michigan

Department of EnvironmentalQuality)


water quality from a number ofdiffe... - g. County Drain

Commission


water quality from a number ofdiffe... - h. Michigan Farm Bureau


water quality from a number ofdiffe... - i. Macatawa Watershed

Project


water quality from a number ofdiffe... - j. Macatawa Area



Not at all 1 0 0 0 0 1

Slightly 0 0 0 0 0 0


Very Much 0 1 0 0 0 1


Retired 28 1 0 0 1 30

Partially retired 28 12 1 0 0 41

Not retired 32 16 10 4 4 68

Me alone or with my spouse 26 5 2 1 0 34

Me with my family partners (siblings,parents, children)

17 12 7 2 4 44

Me with the landowner 4 3 3 1 0 11

Me with my tenant 36 3 0 0 0 39

Me and my business partners 4 5 0 1 1 11

Someone else makes the decisionfor the operation

14 2 1 0 0 17

Will not happen 35 3 0 0 1 39

Likely 17 12 8 2 3 44

Will definitely happen 3 3 1 1 1 9

Not sure 35 11 2 1 0 49

It will be about the same as it istoday

54 18 2 2 1 77

It will be larger 4 3 5 2 3 18

It will be smaller 5 1 0 0 0 6

I don't know/unsure 28 6 4 0 1 40

1 - 99 acres 91 0 0 0 0 91

100 - 499 acres 0 29 0 0 0 29

500 - 999 acres 0 0 11 0 0 11

1,000 - 1,999 acres 0 0 0 4 0 4

2,000 or more acres 0 0 0 0 5 5

Corn (acres): 61 28 10 4 5 108

Soybeans (acres): 59 24 10 4 5 102

Small grains (acres): 46 20 8 3 4 81

Canning crops (acres): 45 13 8 3 3 72

Clover/Alfalfa (acres): 47 22 10 3 3 85

Pasture (acres): 48 22 10 3 3 86

Conservation set aside/CRP (acres): 44 13 6 3 3 69

Forest/woodland (acres): 49 14 9 3 3 78

Non-row crops for energy (acres): 44 12 7 3 3 69

Blueberries (acres): 50 12 8 3 3 76

Other (please specify): 44 13 7 3 3 71

Yes 79 28 9 3 5 126

No 10 1 2 1 0 14

Dairy cattle, including heifers andyoung stock (enter number):

77 22 8 3 3 114

Beef cattle, including young stock(enter number):

78 23 8 3 3 116

Hogs (enter number): 76 19 9 3 5 113

Poultry (enter number): 74 21 9 4 3 112

Other livestock (enter number): 72 18 8 3 3 105

Yes, verified in cropping systems 6 2 3 0 0 11

Yes, verified in livestock systems 1 1 6 1 3 12

Yes, verified in farmstead systems 2 3 0 0 0 5

Yes, verified in greenhouse 0 0 0 0 0 0

No, my farm is not MAEAP verified 34 11 2 0 0 47

No, my farm is not verified but Ihave filled out a Farm-A-Syst, orCrop-A-Syst, or Livestock-A-Systform

2 0 2 1 0 5

I don’t know what MAEAP49 12 0 2 1 65



water quality from a number ofdiffe... - k. Other (please specify)

b. Do you consider yourself retiredfrom your farm operation?

c. Which of the following bestdescribes your postition as a farmoperator? (Please check all that

a...

d. How likely is it that any familymember will continue farm

operations when you retire or quitfar...

e. Five years from now, whichstatement will best describe your

farm operation?

f. Please estimate the total tillableacreage (owned and/or rented) of

your farming operation this y...

g. This year, how many acres ofthe following do you manage? If

none, please enter a zero.

h. Does the property you managetouch a stream, river, lake, drain,

ditch, or wetland?

i. How many of the followinganimals are part of your farming

operation? If none, please enter azer...

j. Is your farm MAEAP verified?Please check all that apply.

verification is49 12 0 2 1 65

Yes 87 27 11 4 4 136

No 4 2 0 0 0 6

Male 76 28 10 3 5 125

Female 15 1 1 1 0 18

Some formal schooling 11 3 1 0 0 15

High school diploma/GED 34 13 4 1 2 55

Some college 14 1 4 1 3 23

2 year college degree 6 1 2 0 0 10

4 year college degree 21 7 0 1 0 29

Graduate degree 5 3 0 0 0 9

Ottawa County 48 21 3 3 1 78

Allegan County 39 4 7 0 3 53

I have property in both counties 4 4 1 1 1 12

Yes 73 26 11 4 5 122

No 15 3 0 0 0 18

Some 27 13 3 3 0 48

All 19 8 5 0 0 32

None 33 8 3 1 5 51

Yes 78 27 10 4 5 126

No 9 2 1 0 0 13

Yes 71 28 10 4 5 120

No, it is too expensive 3 0 0 0 0 3

No, I don't know how 1 1 0 0 0 2

No, I didn't know soil testing wasimportant

2 0 0 0 0 2

Other 9 0 0 0 0 10

Yes 49 21 4 2 5 82

No 40 8 6 2 0 58

Yes 26 17 5 2 4 55

No 12 3 0 0 0 15

Not applicable 38 8 6 2 1 57

Yes 55 22 9 4 5 97

No 12 2 0 0 0 14

Not applicable 19 4 2 0 0 26

Newsletters/brochures/factsheet 54 20 9 2 3 90

Internet 2 2 0 0 0 5

Radio 35 10 3 0 1 51

Newspaper/Magazines 47 20 7 1 3 80

Workshops/demonstrations/meetings 5 8 4 0 1 19

Television or Billboards 28 8 4 2 0 43

Schools 1 0 1 0 0 3

Conversations with others 36 12 8 1 2 60

Other 3 1 0 0 1 6

Total 91 29 11 4 5 151

a. Do you make the home or lawncare decisions in your household?

b. What is your gender?

d. What is the highest grade inschool you have completed?

n. In what county is your propertyprincipally located ...

g. Do you use pesticides orherbicides on your farm?

h. If yes, are pesticides orherbicides applied by acommercial applicator?

i. Do you use fertilizer on yourfarm?

j. If so, have you ever had yoursoil tested to determine your

fertilizer needs?

k. Is manure applied to your farm?

l. If yes, is manure applied inaccordance with a manure

management plan?

m. Is application equipment forpesticides, fertilizers and/or

manure calibrated regularly?

n. I’ve heard about local waterquality problems from the following

(check all that apply).

Documents

2010 Macatawa Watershed Agricultural Survey Final Report · MACC’s Watershed Coordinator, Mary Fales, with input from members of the Agricultural Outreach Committee in accordance