Comprehensive Planning for Agriculture and Open Space

in Dane County, Wisconsin

Kevin Connors, Dane County ConservationistSeptember 2003

Outline

• Background of Dane County Natural and Agricultural Resources

• Overview of Existing Agricultural and Natural Resource Programs

• Future Opportunities

• Natural ResourcesLand Water

• Agricultural ResourcesCroplandLivestock

• Nonpoint Issues

Background of Dane County Natural and Agricultural Resources

Shaded Relief Map

Prime Soils

Basins, Watersheds and Water Resources

8

Data from the Dane County Land Conservation Department (2002)

0 2 4 6 Miles

Cold Water Community

Thermally Sensitive AreasThermally Sensitive Area

Stream or Lake

City or VillageTownship Boundary

Outstanding Resource Water 80 2 4 6 Miles

Major Road

Outstanding and Exceptional Resource Waters

#

#

Mt Vernon Creek

GarfootCreek

BlackEarthCreek

RyanCreek

Elvers Creek

Milum Creek

Flynn Creek

Deer Creek

SchalpbachCreek

SugarRiver

Story Creek

RutlandBranch

SixmileCreek

#

#

#

BlueMoundsBranch

LittleSugar River

Milum Creek

Story Creek

RutlandBranch

Spring Creek (Lodi)

# # Wisconsin

River

Dunlap Creek

FryesFeederCreek

Stream or Lake

City or Village

Township Boundary

Watershed Boundary

Exceptional Resource Water

Data f rom WDNR (2000). An outstanding resource water is defined as a lake or stream having excellentwater quality, high recreational and aesthetic value, high quality fishing and is free from point source or nonpointsource pollution. An exceptional resource water is defined as a stream exhibiting the same high quality resourcevalues as outstanding waters, but may be impacted by point source pollution or have the potential for futuredischarge from a small sewer community. Data is draft from a particular point in time and is subject to change.

Agricultural Resources

Landcover Data (NASS)

Woodland Acres by Township in Dane County

5304

5581

5111

2788

6317

9101

4037 4135

3209 3010 2365 17721852

259819712367

2094

1578

3290 929889 691 1592

2134103516951435

924 944 1823 2878

18132020

1301 1618

0 - 1,0001,000 - 2,5002,500 - 4,0004,000 - 9,200

Livestock

StreambanksCropland

Urban Areas

Land-related Nonpoint Sources

Streams Lakes

Groundwater Wetlands

Water Resource Issues

Outline

• Background of Dane County Natural and Agricultural Resources

• Overview of Existing Agricultural and Natural Resource Programs

• Future Opportunities

• Local and State Programs- Drainage Districts- Land & Water Resource Management Program - Priority Watersheds- Farmland Preservation- Performance Standards (NR 151, ATCP 50)

• Federal- WRP, WHIP, CRP, CREP, FPP

Overview of Existing Agricultural and Natural Resource Programs

Drainage Districts

Drainage District #20

Cottage Grove

District Boundary

Hydric Soil

Stream or Pond

Parcel Boundaries

District Boundary

Hydric Soil

Stream or Pond

Landowners

LWRM – Land and Water Resource Management Program

Priority Watershed Projects

Towns with FPP – exceptions shown in red

Soil and Water Regulationsin Dane County

• Dane County Code of Ordinances– Chapter 14

• Subchapter I. Manure Storage• Subchapter II. Erosion Control and Stormwater Management

• NR 151 Performance Standards– Non-agricultural– Agricultural

Soil Loss Standard:

7.5 tons/acre/year

NR 151 and ATCP 50 Performance Standards

• Agricultural

• Urban

Tolerable Soil Loss on All Cropland

8

Data from the Dane County Land Conservation Cooperator Tracking System (CTS)

0 2 4 6 Miles

Major Lake

NA - data not in CTS

soil loss increaseminimal (or none) soil loss reductiongreatest soil loss reduction

Ave. Annual Soil Loss (A value) Comparison -Year 1998 values compared to Year 2002 values

ViennaDaneRoxburyYorkBristolWindsor

Mazomanie

Springfield WestportBlack Earth BerryMedinaSun PrairieBurke

Vermont Cross Plains MiddletonDeerfieldCottage GroveBlooming Grove

Blue Mounds Springdale Verona FitchburgChristianaPleasant SpringsDunn

Perry Primrose Montrose OregonAlbionDunkirkRutland

Madison

A (1998) - 3.8A (2002) - 3.6T - 4.4

A (1998) - 4.2A (2002) - 3.8T - 4.5

A (1998) - 4.6A (2002) - 4.5T - 4.4

A (1998) - 4.3A (2002) - 4.1T - 4.7

A (1998) - 4.9A (2002) - 4.1T - 4.8

A (1998) - 4.7A (2002) - 4.3T - 4.7

A (1998) - 2.4A (2002) - 2.3T - 4.0

A (1998) - 4.0A (2002) - 3.6T - 4.7

A (1998) - 4.6A (2002) - 3.8T - 4.6

A (1998) - 2.5A (2002) - 2.5T - 3.6

A (1998) - 3.4A (2002) - 3.1T - 4.1

A (1998) - 4.6A (2002) - 3.9T - 4.7

A (1998) - 4.4A (2002) - 3.8T - 4.8

A (1998) - 4.8A (2002) - 4.9T - 4.7

A (1998) - 2.8A (2002) - 2.7T - 2.5

A (1998) - 3.2A (2002) - 2.9T - 3.5

A (1998) - 5.3A (2002) - 4.8T - 4.6

A (1998) - 4.1A (2002) - 3.5T - 4.3

A (1998) - 3.9A (2002) - 3.5T - 4.5

A (1998) - 5.0A (2002) - 4.2T - 4.7

A (1998) - 2.3A (2002) - 2.2T - 2.2

A (1998) - 2.7A (2002) - 2.5T - 2.7

A (1998) - 4.2A (2002) - 3.8T - 3.7

A (1998) - 5.5A (2002) - 4.5T - 4.7

A (1998) - 4.1A (2002) - 3.7T - 4.5

A (1998) - 4.4A (2002) - 4.0T - 4.6

A (1998) - 4.2A (2002) - 4.0T - 4.4

A (1998) - 2.0A (2002) - 1.9T - 2.3

A (1998) - 2.5A (2002) - 2.5T - 2.9

A (1998) - 2.8A (2002) - 2.7T - 3.5

A (1998) - 4.8A (2002) - 4.1T - 4.6

A (1998) - 5.0A (2002) - 3.8T - 4.6

A (1998) - 4.5A (2002) - 4.1T - 4.6

A (1998) - 4.1A (2002) - 3.6T - 4.6

NA

Erosion Summary Comparison

8

Data from the Dane County LCD and WDNR (2002)

0 2 4 6 Miles

Township Boundary

Proposed Navigable Waterways

City or Village

Stream or Lake

Proposed Navigable Waterway

Note: currently there is insuff icient data to determine navigability of streamor lakes on map that are not highlighted as proposed navigable waterways.

Feedlot

ATCP 50

NutrientManagement

Manure Management

Communities Required to HaveNR 216 Stormwater Discharge Permit

Priority Watershed

Priority WatershedProject End 12/2000

Watershed Initiative

Outline

• Background of Dane County Natural and Agricultural Resources

• Overview of Existing Agricultural and Natural Resource Programs

• Future Opportunities

1880 1900 1920 1940 1960 1980 2000 2020

Family Farm Ownership

Timeline of a Farm

Owner = Operator

Future Opportunities

• Planning for AgricultureCrop ProductionLivestock ExpansionAg. Business Planning

• Farmland Conversion- Land Evaluation (LESA)- Soil Properties

• Erosion Control and Stormwater Management

Land Cover Summary by Unit Area

Verona Township

SoybeansOther CroplandPasture/CRP/Non Ag.WoodlandUrbanWater

Corn

D A N E C O U N T Y

Verona Township – 2001SoybeansOther CroplandPasture/CRP/Non Ag.WoodlandUrbanWater

Corn

Land Evaluation (LE) for Agricultural Land

Used 3 Factors:

Prime Farmland (10%)

Soils Productivity for Corn and Alfalfa (45%)

Land Capability Class (45%)

Sun Prairie

Springdale

LE from LESAPrime

Highway 12 Realignment – Soil Ratings by Landowner

I, II (best)III, IVV, VIVII, VIII

Agricultural Groups

WISCLAND (~1993)

Verona

Madison

AgricultureGrasslandWoodlandUrbanWaterWetlandBarren

Pasture/CRP/Non Ag.WoodlandUrbanWater

Agriculture

NASS (2001)

Verona

Madison

Sun Prairie (2001)

Springdale (2001)

C/S Prime C/S and Prime

8,400C/S on Prime Farmland10,000Corn/Soybeans (C/S)17,100 Prime Farmland22,800TownshipAcresCategory

1,200C/S on Prime Farmland5,200Corn/Soybeans (C/S)4,400 Prime Farmland23,000TownshipAcresCategory

Agricultural Business Planning

Ethanol Plant Location (hypothetical)

SoybeansOther CroplandPasture/CRP/Non Ag.WoodlandUrbanWater

Corn

Acres of Crops within a15-mile Radius of Ethanol Plant

108,600115,800 Corn

20022001Land Cover

61,10054,100Soybeans

Fitchburg

Belleville

VeronaMt. Horeb

Cross PlainsBlack Earth

Mazomanie

Waunakee Sun Prairie

DaneDeForest

Stoughton

Oregon

Rockdale

Cam-bridge

Deerfield

Marshall

Cottage Grove

Blue Mounds

Madison

Middleton

McFarland

BrooklynEdgerton

Monona

L. Mendota

L. Monona

L. Waubesa

L.Kegonsa

Urban Areas in Dane County

Outstanding and Exception Water Resources

Natural Resource Datasets

303d (Impaired) Waters

Cold Water Communities

Steep Slopes

Frequently Flooded Soils

Monitoring Data

N

Cumulative Phosphorus Yield

Lake Mendota

0 - 1,0001,000 - 2,0002,000 - 3,6003,600 - 6,0006,000 -13,000

Open water

lbs / year

NN

0 1 2 3 4 5 Miles

NN

0 1 2 3 4 5 Miles

N

Cumulative Sediment Yield

Lake Mendota

0 - 160160 - 330330 - 600600 - 950950 - 2,120

Open water

tons / year

Farmland Conversion

Village of Waunakee1996 2003*2020

* Village Boundary

Erosion Control Planning

Plan Implementation

Plan Maintenance

2 & 10 Year Attenuation

Oil & Grease

Temperature

Etc.

Stormwater

ErosionControl

Sediment Control

Erosion Control and Stormwater Management Priorities

Compacted Soil Compacted SoilDeep Tilled