Goodwin, Emma Landau - Cornell University · 2016-07-29 · Sheet mulch Geotextile (landscape fabric) The fourth bed is a control and will have no barrier between the compost/topsoil

Soil Best Management Practices Project 2010 Report

Bonnie Cherner, Elizabeth Goodwin, and Emma Landau

2

TableofContentsAbstract........................................................................................................................................4

Introduction...............................................................................................................................4

Background.................................................................................................................................4

BMPBookClub..........................................................................................................................5

ProjectMaterials.......................................................................................................................6

Methodology...............................................................................................................................6Pre‐barrierSoilSampling................................................................................................................7BedDesign.............................................................................................................................................7DeFeliceBedDesignGuidelines,2008..................................................................................................7BMPProjectBedDesignGuidelines,2010..........................................................................................7

BedBuilding.........................................................................................................................................8Cropdecisions......................................................................................................................................9Planting..................................................................................................................................................9Cultivation..........................................................................................................................................10Harvest&Post‐Harvest.................................................................................................................10TissueSampling&Analysis.........................................................................................................11

Results.......................................................................................................................................11

Discussion................................................................................................................................15

Outreach...................................................................................................................................16BMP/HSHCFieldDay......................................................................................................................16HORT101:IntroductiontoHorticulturelab.........................................................................17HORT220:SustainableLandCarelab......................................................................................18GardensforHumanity(G4H)trainingsession......................................................................18Additionaloutreach........................................................................................................................19FarmManagementStructure......................................................................................................20

Conclusion................................................................................................................................21

Acknowledgments.................................................................................................................22

Contacts.....................................................................................................................................23

LiteratureReview..................................................................................................................24

Appendices...............................................................................................................................25AppendixA.SoilSampleResults................................................................................................25AppendixB.WholeFarmMap.....................................................................................................26AppendixC.HotSpotMaps...........................................................................................................27Block3HotSpotMaps..............................................................................................................................27Block1HotSpotMaps..............................................................................................................................28WholeFarmHotSpotMaps....................................................................................................................29TortillaFlatsHotSpotMaps...................................................................................................................30BarnWestHotSpotMaps........................................................................................................................31StreetSideHotSpotMaps.......................................................................................................................32

AppendixD.Block3ExperimentalDesignMapandKey..................................................33AppendixE.CompleteBlock3TissueTestResults.............................................................35

3

AppendixF.HistoricAerialPicturesofDilmunHill............................................................36AppendixG.DilmunHillStudentFarmSABapplication...................................................38AppendixH.DilmunHillStudentFarmFSABapplication................................................40AppendixI.SummaryBudget2010...........................................................................................42AppendixJ:ManagementandWorkerSafety........................................................................43

4

Abstract Dilmun Hill is located on old orchard land where lead arsenate based insecticides were used to control pests in the early part of the 19th century. The Best Management Practices (BMP) Project exists to expand land‐use possibilities at Dilmun Hill Student Organic Farm for the safe production of saleable crops. The goal of our BMP is to prevent human exposure to heavy metal contaminants through mitigating exposure to airborne dust and preventing direct contact of fruits and vegetables with contaminated soil. There are three aspects of our BMP: ground cover, crop selection, and raised beds. Our project investigates the efficacy of different raised‐bed barriers at preventing heavy metal contamination of vegetables. Our raised‐bed barriers are cardboard, geotextile (landscape fabric), incorporated compost, and a native soil control. The vegetables that we tested are a rooting crop (carrot), fruiting crop (peppers) and leafy greens (mustard greens). We found that in all cases, levels of lead and arsenic in vegetable tissue were below levels of concern. We recommend another year of raised‐bed testing before allowing sale of produce grown in raised beds.

Introduction Dilmun Hill Student Farm was founded in 1996 by a group of students who wanted to create a place for experiential learning in the field of agriculture. Dilmun Hill is located on thirteen acres of land adjacent to the Cornell Orchards on Rt. 366. Much of the site is located on land that was previously a part of the Cornell Orchards. Until approximately 1960 it was common practice to spray lead arsenate on apples as an insecticide. Inorganic pesticides such as lead arsenate are extremely persistent in the soil, and cannot be degraded to less harmful substances because of their elemental form. In 2008, Dilmun Hill became a part of the Cornell University Agricultural Experiment Station (CUAES). Under CUAES, Dilmun Hill students and staff took a renewed look at the implications this long‐term contamination has on student‐led agriculture. Since 2008, there have been several different research projects focused on the issue of arsenic and lead contamination at Dilmun Hill. This report will provide a summary of activities during the 2010 season, including fieldwork, laboratory work, and on and off‐site outreach. It also includes data characterizing levels of metals in crops grown in raised beds, and a discussion of what these results mean for the future of the farm.

Background The current student‐led research at Dilmun Hill was started in 2008 by Melissa Madden, CUAES Organic Farm Coordinator, and Angela DeFelice, a staff member with a particular interest in the student farm. Angela mapped levels of lead and arsenic in Blocks 1 and 3 of the farm (See Appendix C – Hot Spot Maps). As a part of her report, Angela included

5

recommendations for best management practices, which are currently being implemented. Angela’s best management practices include: building raised beds to limit human and vegetable exposure to metals, using mulch and groundcover to reduce exposure through inhalation of dust, and selecting low‐risk crops. The best management practices from Angela’s report are discussed in greater detail on p. 6 under Bed Design. Leigh Kalbacker, an undergraduate and staff member at Cornell University, conducted the “Whole Farm Sampling” project in 2009, where she continued mapping the soils at Dilmun Hill, completing maps of the lead and arsenic levels across Dilmun Hill, and including the McDaniels Nut Grove and a portion of the Cornell Orchards (see Appendix C – Hot Spot Maps). Also in 2009, Bonnie Cherner conducted a field trial on Block 1 (see Appendix B – Whole Farm Map) looking at levels of lead and arsenic in vegetable tissue grown in contaminated soil. Bonnie’s field trials became the Best Management Practices (BMP) project, which aims to investigate and implement low cost and low tech solutions for agriculture in contaminated soils (Cherner, 2009; contact Melissa Madden). The BMP project goal is to prevent human exposure to heavy metal contaminants through exposure to airborne dust and direct contact of fruits and vegetables with contaminated soil. By building permanent, imported soil raised beds, carefully selecting our crops, and using ground cover wherever possible, student managers facilitate safe research and low‐tech simple solutions for gardeners and farmers alike. The 2010 growing season brought changes and expansion to Dilmun Hill. The student BMP project grew to two managers with the addition of Emma Landau. Dilmun Hill also began collaboration with the “Healthy Soils, Healthy Communities” (HSHC) project funded by the National Institutes of Health and National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences. The HSHC project is a partnership with urban gardeners across the state that addresses issues of soil contamination through research and education. It includes Crop and Soil Sciences (CSS) professors Murray McBride and Jonathan Russell‐Anelli, and Extension Associate Hannah Shayler. Their research at Dilmun Hill investigates levels of heavy metals in vegetables grown in contaminated soil under different management techniques. The HSHC project added sophomore Elizabeth Goodwin to the team of student managers, faculty and staff researching soil contamination at Dilmun Hill. For more information on the HSHC project, please see the Cornell Waste Management Institute’s (CWMI) website: (http://cwmi.css.cornell.edu/healthysoils.htm).

BMP Book Club One of the goals of the BMP project is to increase student managers’ understanding of soil contamination in order to make more informed decisions. To facilitate this goal, students met weekly with the whole project team. The topic of the meeting alternates, with every other week dedicated to discussing papers, i.e. “Book Club.” On opposite

6

weeks, students set the agenda to communicate progress, make decisions on project issues, and plan for future events. Recent Book Club topics include background levels of lead in US food, arsenic contamination of groundwater in Bangladesh, phytoremediation of pesticide residue, and acceptable standards of arsenic in food. This literature review informs the direction of the BMP project. For example, multiple papers debated the efficacy of phytoremediation of lead, but the inconclusiveness of these papers led us to decide not to pursue phytoremediation (Adriaensen et al., 2009). Students also use these meetings to interact with experts on relevant topics. Professors Murray McBride and Jonathan Russell‐Anelli are a regular part of Book Club, and their knowledge of soil contamination issues has been invaluable. Other advisors include John Duxbury, CSS professor who discussed arsenic contamination in Bangladesh and safe levels of arsenic in food. Jean Bonhotal of the CWMI helped design Dilmun raised beds, which ultimately consist of 50% compost and 50% topsoil. For details on the management structure of Dilmun Hill as a whole, see p. 16.

Project Materials Bed‐building amendments (Farm Services topsoil and compost); Limbwalker Treecare hardwood mulch; ground staples; cover crop seeds; irrigation (drip tape, hose clamps, hose connectors); vegetable seeds; row cover; potting soil; raised bed barriers (compost, cardboard, geotextile); sampling equipment (sharpies, ziplock bags, soil corers).

Methodology Preparations for the 2010 growing season began in January 2010, and the season ended in November 2010. Starting in January, BMP team members met at regularly scheduled Book Club meetings and made decisions pertaining to bed design, crop choices, and analysis of plant tissue data. The methods for the BMP project, listed below, will be explained as they occurred chronologically:

Pre‐barrier Soil Sampling

Bed Design

Bed Building

Crop Decisions

Planting

Cultivation

Harvesting and Tissue Sampling & Analysis

Wrap‐up

7

Pre‐barrier Soil Sampling Composite samples of native soil in each of the four Block 3 beds and raised bed amendments (compost and topsoil) were collected and sent to Cornell Nutrient Analysis Lab (CNAL) for testing (for sampling procedures, see Cherner, 2009; DeFelice, 2008; Peryea, 1999.) In addition, Block 1 soil was re‐sampled on May 24 (for information about Block 1 testing, see Cherner 2009). These samples were taken to assess levels of heavy metals ‐ particularly arsenic (As) and lead (Pb) ‐ in the native soil and raised‐bed amendments. All samples were dried in the Guterman greenhouse and taken to Murray McBride’s lab where they were ground with a mortar and pestle and then passed through a 2mm sieve. The prepared samples were sent to CNAL for a full‐metal analysis using ICP Mass Spectrometry (for details on ICP Mass Spectrometry (ICP‐MS), see DeFelice, 2008).

Bed Design The design of the four raised beds in Block 3 (see Appendix B – Whole Farm Map) was a combination of recommendations from Angela DeFelice, as outlined in her 2008 report, and design plans created by the BMP project team in 2010. DeFelice’s proposed guidelines, and the adjusted design plan for the BMP project are listed below.

DeFelice Bed Design Guidelines, 2008

● Raised beds, 2’ in height, will be built between tree rows and used for growing edible and non‐edible plants;

● The beds will be constructed of compost from an off‐site source, with levels of Pb and As below natural background levels;

● Compost/mulch from off‐site sources will be dumped on non‐contaminated areas (verified through soil testing) or on a large tarp/piece of plastic;

● All farmed areas and non‐farmed pathways will be covered with an overlapping layer of cardboard and mulch.

BMP Project Bed Design Guidelines, 2010

● The beds will be constructed of a 50/50 mix of off‐site compost and top soil; ● The compost/topsoil amendments in three of the raised beds will be separated

from native soil by one of three barriers: ○ Pure compost ○ Sheet mulch ○ Geotextile (landscape fabric)

● The fourth bed is a control and will have no barrier between the compost/topsoil amendments and the native soil.

DeFelice’s 2008 report recommends a pure compost mix for the raised beds. The decision to instead construct the raised beds out of a 50/50 compost and topsoil mix

8

came out of Book Club meetings in Spring ‘10. As discussed previously (see “Book Club,” 4), McBride, Russell‐Anelli and Bonhotal warned that a pure compost mix would retain too much water due to its physical properties, and would burn crop roots due to the high nitrogen content of organic matter. The decision to use compost, sheet mulch, and geotextile barriers was also made during Book Club meetings in Fall ‘09. Our project builds on DeFelice’s recommendations, seeking to test the efficacy of different raised bed barriers at preventing tissue contamination by Pb and As heavy metals. The reasons for a barrier are twofold: (1) weed suppression, and (2) preventing contaminants from the native soil from migrating upward into the raised‐bed amendments. The decision to investigate raised bed barriers stemmed from concern over this upward migration of contaminants via bioturbation, capillary action, and penetration of plant roots into the native soil (Peryea, 1999). The raised bed barriers chosen by the BMP team are common and easily accessible gardening tools, though they vary significantly in price and durability. Our project is chiefly interested in determining effective, low‐cost mitigation strategies for gardeners. The beds vary in size. The dimension of each crop repetition within each bed is 8 ft. x 8 ft. Each beds has a 1.5 ft. wide aisle running length‐wise through the center to create an easy access path for planting and weeding (see Appendix D: Block 3 Experimental Design Map and Key)

Bed Building The compost barrier was prepared during Spring 2010. In April, student volunteers and BMP project managers double‐dug a layer of Farm Services compost into the designated bed space (see Appendix D: Block 3 Experimental Design Map and Key). The rest of the bed preparation work took place during the week of May 24th. The initial labor consisted of collecting large pieces of cardboard from local furniture stores, car dealerships, and home appliance centers. In the next phase of bed preparation, the geotextile and cardboard barriers were laid on top of the native soil. The geotextile was secured to the ground with wire landscape staples. The cardboard covered the native soil in overlapping layers in order to prevent contact between the native soil and the raised bed amendments. Prior to laying down the bed amendments, composite samples of topsoil and compost were sent to CNAL for a full metal analysis, to ensure that the amendments themselves were not contaminated (see Appendix E: Complete Block 3 Tissue Test Results). Applying the bed amendments was a complicated and time‐intensive process. In order to create the 50/50 mix of compost and topsoil, Madden borrowed a manure spreader from Cornell University Agricultural Experiment Station (CUAES) Campus Area Farms and distributed the mix across the four plots (see Appendix D: Block 3 Experimental Design

9

Map and Key). After that process was completed, the student managers evened out the beds with rakes and dug the center aisles with shovels. Some of the labor associated with setting up drip irrigation occurred simultaneously with cardboard collection, however the system was not assembled until after the beds were completed.

Crop decisions The BMP project seeks to test the efficacy of different barriers at preventing contamination of crops by Pb and As heavy metals. It is also designed to test the tendency of different crops to accumulate Pb and As when grown in contaminated soils. In order to understand differences in Pb and As accumulation between rooting, fruiting, and leafy vegetables, we selected one crop of each category for evaluation: “Mokum” carrots, red bell peppers, and mustard greens. Direct inhalation and ingestion of Pb‐contaminated soil particles likely poses a greater human health risk than ingestion of crops grown in Pb‐contaminated soil, as research indicates that crops have a limited ability to incorporate Pb into their tissue (DeFelice, 2008; Peryea, 1999). Arsenic is also unlikely to concentrate in plant tissue, however it is more mobile in the soil that Pb and plants have been shown to take up As when it is available (DeFelice, 2008). Fruiting crops are suspected to be a relatively safe for growth in contaminated soil due to their elevation above the topsoil, posing little risk for surface contamination of crops (DeFelice, 2008; Environmental Agency, 2002). Growing rooting crops in contaminated sites is thought to be risky, as the edible portion of the crop has direct contact with the soil throughout the growing season. Members of the mustard family are thought to bioaccumulate heavy metals (particularly Pb), and the leaves have a rough texture prone to trapping soil particles (Butcher et. al., 2003; Xiong, 1997). This suggests mustard greens may also be poorly suited for growth in contaminated sites. Expected results from our raised bed trials would show the lowest level of As and Pb accumulation in the pepper samples, and the highest level of As and Pb in the carrot and mustard green samples.

Planting There were three plots of each crop variety in each bed. The repetitions of each crop were arranged randomly in order to account for slight variations in Pb and As levels throughout the Block 3 native soil. The peppers were seeded with the help of volunteers on May 16th in the Guterman Greenhouse, approximately 6 weeks before transplanting. Before planting, the peppers

10

were watered with fish emulsion to provide nutrients they been lacking in the small tray cells. The peppers were planted into the raised beds on June 16th. The carrots were seeded directly into the raised beds twice during the season, as the first germination was very poor. The first seeding occurred on June 16th and the second seeding occurred in mid‐July. The mustard greens were seeded along with the peppers in the Guterman Greenhouse on May 16th. Like the peppers, the greens were watered with fish emulsion in order to provide additional nutrients to the crop. The peppers were planted into the raised beds on June 22nd.

Cultivation The beds were weeded constantly throughout the season. There was weed variability in the beds; variation was likely due to the multiple compost and topsoil deliveries which sat out for a period of weeks, allowing rhizomious grasses blown from around the farm to establish. A geotextile border covered with a layer of mulch lined the perimeter of each raised bed as a form of weed control. Pumpkins and acorn squash were planted in bare areas at the end of the beds to stabilize the amendments and out‐compete weeds. The peppers grew very well, though some exhibited circular burns on their flesh. The carrots germinated poorly after the first planting, but grew extremely well after the second planting. Many carrots with ample space within a plot grew to nearly a foot in length. The greens were very successful within each bed, with the exception of the cardboard bed (see Appendix D: Block 3 Experimental Design Map and Key). McBride and Russell‐Anelli tested the pH of all the beds but did not find a significant difference between the pH of the cardboard bed and the other three. It remains unclear why the greens in this bed exhibited stunted growth and slight discoloration.

Harvest & Post‐Harvest The peppers were harvested on August 8th, the carrots were harvested on September 6th, and the mustard greens were harvested twice – first on July 20th, and again on August 1st. In October‐November, after all tissue sampling was completed, the mustard greens and the peppers were cut down and all carrots were pulled out of the raised beds. This was done in order to prevent the spread of disease in our plot, and allow for easier management of the beds for next season.

11

Tissue Sampling & Analysis All crop samples were washed, dried and ground in Murray McBride’s lab. Research methods of other studies entail washing vegetables multiple times with distilled water or detergent before the samples are dried and ground (Kachenko, 2005). The BMP project seeks to understand actual human health risks rather than precise amounts of Pb and As accumulation in plant tissue. Therefore, all harvested vegetables were washed thoroughly with tap water, as a typical consumer would wash them, in order to determine the amount of Pb and As a consumer would likely ingest. After washing, the vegetables were dried for several days at 60‐70°C in a drying oven. Once dried, the vegetable samples were ground in a coffee grinder. Finally, all samples were sent to H2M Labs in Brooklyn, New York for a full‐metal analysis using ICP Mass‐Spectrometry (ICP‐MS) (see Appendix E: Complete Block 3 Tissue Test Results). Vegetable samples were sent to H2M, as machines at CNAL were not capable of reaching the testing limit of concern for our vegetable tissues (see Appendix E: Complete Block 3 Tissue Test Results).

Results Tissue test results for Pb and As by ICP‐MS were received from H2M Labs in August and November. For all vegetable samples, the Pb and As levels were below our determined level of concern of 0.1 mg/kg Pb and 0.25 mg/kg As. The range of Pb in vegetable tissue was from 0.0028 mg/kg in peppers grown in the first repetition of the incorporated compost treatment to 0.035 mg/kg in mustard greens grown in the first repetition of the cardboard treatment. Arsenic in the pepper and the carrots was below detection using ICP‐Mass Spectrometry. In the mustard greens, As levels ranged from 0.022 mg/kg in greens grown in the first repetition of the cardboard treatment to 0.046 mg/kg in greens grown in the first repetition of the control (no barrier) bed. A table of all Pb and As levels found in vegetable tissue is included in Appendix E. Complete Block 3 Tissue Test Results. All values are recorded in mg/kg fresh weight. Overall, the greens had the highest levels of Pb and As, followed by the peppers and the carrots (see Figure 4). While Figure 1 shows elevated levels of Pb in peppers grown in the incorporated compost treatment, the Pb levels in the pepper tissues were not significantly different across treatments (p>.05). Carrots grown in the incorporated compost treatment showed significantly higher Pb levels in their tissue (p<.05) (see Figure 2). In the greens, the Pb levels were significantly lower in the incorporate compost treatment (p<.05) (see Figure 3). Arsenic levels in the greens were significantly higher in the no barrier (control) treatment (p>.05) (see Figure 3).

12

Figure1. Figure2.

Figure3. Figure4.

13

Figure5. Figure6.

Figure7. Figure8.

14

Table 2. provides a summary of the data, showing the range and mean of Pb and As values. Table 2 also includes the European Union/World Health Organization/Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (EU/WHO/FAO) standard for safe levels of Pb in food (0.1 mg/kg fresh weight). There is currently no established EU/WHO/FAO standard for safe levels of As in vegetables, however the Chilean standard for As in vegetables is .5 mg/kg, assuming a “normal” diet (Queirolo et al.). The BMP project is using a provisional standard of 0.25 mg/kg. This value is based on the Chilean standard, but adjusted to account for a diet with higher vegetable consumption.

Table 2. Heavy Metal Contaminant Levels in Block 3 Carrots, Peppers and Greens

Level of Concern (mg/kg, fresh weight)

Mean and Range of Metal Levels in Dilmun Hill Block 3 Vegetables (mg/kg, fresh weight)

Carrots Peppers Greens

Mean (Range) Pb

0.1* 0.0100 (.00702‐0.0195)

0.00505 (0.00280‐0.0176)

0.0287 (0.0224‐0.0352)

Mean (Range) As

0.25** Below detection Below detection 0.0290

(0.0224‐0.0464)

* EU/WHO/FAO (“Legal Standards for Selected Heavy Metals…”) ** Provisional working guideline for Dilmun Hill We also tested plant tissue from the Growing Mosaic Garden (GMG), a permaculture garden located on Block 3. We found that the mean level of lead in strawberries grown in raised beds was 0.044 mg/kg and the mean arsenic level was 0.017 mg/kg. Of the three samples taken, the range of lead was from 0.0128‐0.08 mg/kg Pb and 0.0128‐0.0192 mg/kg As. All Pb and As values were calculated according to fresh weight.

0

0.01

0.02

0.03

0.04

0.05

Strawberries

mg/kg

GrowingMosaicGardenStrawberriesMeanPbandAsLevels

Pb

As

15

Discussion The levels of lead found in vegetables grown in Block 3 raised beds across all treatments fall below the level of concern determined by the FAO/WHO. This shows that raised beds show promise as an effective method for growing vegetables on contaminated sites. Because this is the first year of raised bed trials, we recommend another year of testing to confirm the efficacy of raised beds. There was no significant difference between the barrier treatments in terms of Pb and As levels in peppers (p>.05). Figure 4 shows elevated mean levels of Pb in peppers grown in the incorporated compost treatment due to an outlier in the data set. Carrots grown in the incorporated compost treatment show mean high levels of Pb (p<.05). One possible explanation for the higher Pb levels in the carrots grown in the incorporated compost treatment (p<.05) is that the carrots in this bed grew into the incorporated compost layer, where there were likely higher levels of metal contamination. This would most likely occur in carrots growing along the sloping sides of the bed, where the height of bed amendments above the barrier is relatively low, thus making root penetration into the barrier treatment more likely. Mustard greens grown in the incorporated compost treatment show mean low levels of Pb contamination. It is possible that the rooting structure of mustard greens is shallower than that of the carrots, and therefore root penetration into the barrier treatment is a nonissue. Mean levels of As in the mustard greens are significantly higher in the no barrier treatment (p<.05). One possible explanation for this is that bioturbation and capillary action brought contaminants from the native soil into the raised bed amendments, making them more available for uptake. This explanation does not address why Pb levels in the greens grown in the no barrier treatment are not also elevated, nor why Pb and As levels in the peppers and carrots grown in the no barrier treatment are not elevated. It is interesting to note the ratio of Pb to As in the mustard green tissue, as it did not follow the same pattern as the peppers or carrots. It is possible that the physiology and growth pattern of mustard plants causes them to have higher levels of Pb. The crinkly‐texture of the leaves creates more surface area where dust from contaminated soil could settle. However, this does not explain why the levels of As found in the mustard greens were all above the detection limit, and in some cases, greater than the amount of Pb. This could possibly indicate that the mustard greens have a different mechanism for As uptake than the peppers and the carrots. It could also be explained by inconsistencies in analytical techniques.

16

Outreach The aim of our research is to determine the efficacy of low‐cost mitigation strategies for contaminated soils, for the purpose of assuring safe and affordable solutions for farmers and gardeners. In keeping with the goals of our project, it is necessary that we engage the public so that we can be sure that our research methods are actually practical on a wide scale. We also seek to educate the public about strategies for evaluating soil for contamination, so that farmers and gardeners can make informed decisions about their farm or garden design. With that being said, one of our top priorities for the BMP project is to create opportunities for outreach events. While our goals for particular outreach events vary based on intended audience, our general intentions with these events are to:

Educate interested people who may have limited experience with farming and gardening

Increase awareness about soil contamination issues as they relate to farming and gardening, and to promote low‐cost best management practices that emphasize health and safety

Empower student managers by enabling us to share our research experience with peers

Integrate Dilmun Hill into the Cornell community by providing a hands‐on classroom space and facilitating the contextualization of practical knowledge.

Overall, we strive to create a dialogue between ourselves and our student peers, farmers and gardeners, Cornell University faculty and staff, and other interested persons in order to share our accumulated knowledge and to get feedback on our research questions and goals. Since the start of the new season in May, we have organized four formal outreach events focused specifically on the BMP/HSHC projects. Specific curricula for all outreach events are kept in the Organic Farm Coordinator’s office.

BMP/HSHC Field Day (August 10, 2010)

HORT 101: Introduction to Horticulture lab (September 10, 2010)

HORT 220: Sustainable Land Care lab (September 23, 2010)

Gardens for Humanity (G4H) Training Session (October 23, 2010)

BMP/HSHC Field Day The BMP/HSHC Field Day was our first formal event of the season, scheduled for August 10th, 9AM‐5PM. For this event, we sent out invitations to targeted individuals and organizations from the Cornell, Ithaca, and greater NYS community. We had a diverse pool of attendants: an affiliate of Shale Shock, Groundswell affiliates, Cornell and Ithaca College students, and Cornell professors. A total of 20 people attended, though our

17

attendance was lower than projected. We did not find that this had a negative effect on the quality of the event; rather, the small group size was conducive to organizing hands‐on activities, such as raised‐bed building, and created a more intimate atmosphere for discussion. Our overall goal for this event was to empower gardeners and farmers to assess their soils for contaminants and to explore best management options for contaminated soils. Towards this end, we scheduled activities that we hoped would be both physically engaging and informative. The day was divided into five main parts:

Raised bed‐building;

Instruction regarding basic soil sampling techniques;

Assessing soil health characteristics;

Practice analyzing soil test results;

Collaboration with researchers and growers at a round table discussion Overall, we were able to achieve many of our outreach goals through this event. Attendees varied in terms of their experience with gardening/farming, which created opportunities for interesting discussion. Many of the attendees had not been to Dilmun before, so this event helped to increase our exposure in the Ithaca community. This was the first large outreach event for the BMP/HSHC projects at Dilmun, and we gained a lot through its planning and execution. It was useful for developing curriculum for future events, and for the experience of teaching others. It was extremely rewarding for us to be able to communicate our research progress with interested members of the community, as it gave the project more relevance. In the future, we would recommend that these events not last all day, and that they occur on a weekend to ensure that everyone who would like to participate is able to.

HORT 101: Introduction to Horticulture lab In the first month of the fall semester, we led two on‐site lab classes. The first lab was for HORT 101: Introduction to Horticulture taught by Dr. Frank Rossi, held on September 10th from 1:25‐4:25 pm. The HORT 101 class was taught by Dilmun Hill managers Elizabeth Goodwin, Liz Burritcher and Hanna Broback. The curriculum for this lab contained less technical information about the BMP project, and was generally less focused on soil contamination issues than our other 3 major outreach events of the semester (listed above). The main objective of this class was for students to participate in hands‐on work. During the lab, the class was given a tour of the entire farm, and in addition to building raised beds for the BMP project, students harvested Market Garden vegetables and weeded yarrow for the Growing Mosaics Garden beneficial insects study. Overall, we were able to achieve many of our outreach goals through this lab. As Dilmun Hill Student Organic Farm is particularly interested in experiential education, offering up

18

the farm as a learning facility for classes is congruent with the farm’s mission regarding its commitment to outreach. Offering classes at the farm helps integrate it into the Cornell community, and establishes Dilmun as a classroom site in addition to being a “business” and social endeavor. Dr. Frank Rossi spoke on behalf of himself and the class when providing us with his feedback on the lab:

“The students and I were so thoroughly impressed with your engaging style and dedication to the facility..it was contagious! Also for me as an educator you created the perfect learning environment that allowed them to inquire and sometimes finding there are many "right" answers...”

HORT 220: Sustainable Land Care lab The second lab class was for HORT 220: Sustainable Land Care taught by Dr. Jane Mt. Pleasant, held on September 23rd from 1:25‐4:25 pm. The HORT 220 lab required more advanced planning and included the involvement of the entire BMP/HSHC team and Dr. Jane Mt. Pleasant. In addition to providing general background information about the BMP project, we discussed concerns related to heavy metal contamination in agricultural soils, introduced basic soil science topics, demonstrated soil sampling techniques and Dr. Murray McBride’s colorimetric test (“quick test”) for lead concentration in soils, and discussed what we have learned so far from our research. Overall, we were able to achieve many of our goals for outreach during this event. It was a great learning experience for the students (many of whom had little to no experience with farms or gardens whatsoever) and for the BMP student managers. Dr. Jane Mt. Pleasant spoke on behalf of herself and the class when providing us with his feedback on the lab:

“The Hort 2200 lab at Dilmun Hill farm on September 23 was a great learning exercise for students. This is third time the class has visited the farm this semester and each time I have been so impressed with the willingness of Dilmun student managers (and their staff and faculty advisors) to take on significant roles in teaching other students. You have generously and graciously welcomed students to the farm and shared much of your expertise.”

Gardens for Humanity (G4H) training session On October 23rd from 1PM – 4PM, students, faculty and staff involved with the BMP/HSHC projects and Cornell Cooperative Extension agents working with the Gardens for Humanity (G4H) training program organized a community outreach event at the Greater Ithaca Activities Center. The idea for this event came about after Josh Dolan, Community Food Gardens Educator with Cornell Cooperative Extension, attended the BMP/HSHC Field Day (see above) in August. This event was targeted towards Gardens for Humanity volunteer trainees, who were enrolled in a class about garden‐based

19

learning through Cornell Cooperative Extension, taught by CCE agents Liz Falk and Josh Dolan. The goal for this event was essentially to “train the trainer” – we hope that what participants gained from the session at GIAC will be useful to them as they educate others. The BMP/HSHC teams worked closely with Liz Falk and Josh Dolan in the planning of this event; we met with Liz and Josh twice at the CCE building to discuss target audience, content, logistics, etc. The BMP team separately spent several of its weekly meetings towards planning the event and fine‐tuning content. The content of this event was very similar to that of the BMP outreach event in August. The 3‐hour event (which actually became a 4‐hour event) included a long discussion, generally focused on key soil testing questions from a gardener’s perspective, demonstrated tools to determine soil health (soil sampling techniques, pH test, colorimetric test (“quick test”) for lead concentration in soils), and raised bed‐building at the GIAC site. We were able to achieve many of our goals for outreach through this event. Many of the attendees had no prior knowledge of or experience with Dilmun Hill, as they were largely members of the Ithaca community and not Cornell students, and in this way were able to increase visibility of Dilmun Hill in Ithaca. This event was particularly exciting as we created something permanent and extremely visible for the community; the raised beds at the GIAC site do not directly promote Dilmun Hill or the BMP/HSHC projects in particular, however they will help integrate safe gardening initiatives into the Ithaca community, and will be beneficial to Cornell Cooperative Extension in their garden‐based learning programs. We received the following feedback for the event from Kristen Loria, a resident of Ithaca and an undergraduate at Cornell University:

“I found the G4H training session to be very helpful and engaging ‐ the pervasiveness of soil contamination, especially in urban environments, was something I hadn't thought of before, and it is such an important issue for community gardens. I found the workshop to be a good balance of caution and optimism ‐ it gave us a good overview of the problem, but also told us how we can adapt to contamination issues. I thought it was very well run, and even though there were a fair number of people leading it, the workshop did not seem disjointed at all.”

Additional outreach In addition to outreach events focused specifically on BMP/HSHC research, there are events held at Dilmun Hill throughout the summer and fall that draw people out to the farm; though these events are not targeted specifically at the BMP project, they are a key avenue through which people (students especially) come to learn about the project, and even about soil contamination issues in general. Examples include work parties (held twice a week during the fall semester), the Dilmun Hill whole farm Field Day in September, tours for specific organizations (i.e. summer camps, 4H groups, prospective

20

students), presentations at university‐related functions, etc. Events such as these, though not focused specifically on the BMP project, are still a very important means through which we have generated interest in our project among the Cornell and greater Ithaca communities.

Farm Management Structure There are currently 4 student projects at the farm, each with its own manager(s): the Market Garden, the Best Management Practices (BMP) project, the Growing Mosaics Garden (GMG), and the Streetside Landscaping project. Dilmun is also a site for the Healthy Soils, Healthy Communities (HSHC) research project; this project is not student run, but it is student‐supported. A Steering Committee ‐ composed of student project managers, student volunteers, faculty advisor Dr. Kenneth Mudge, and the Organic Farm Coordinator, Melissa Madden ‐ serves as the governing body of the farm. Historically, and throughout the 2010‐growing season, the committee has had a horizontal power structure and has made decisions on a consensus basis. The committee generally functions to make long‐term decisions for the farm, and to coordinate all‐farm outreach events. During the summer, the Steering Committee meets two hours per week, and members of the Steering Committee who are on campus attend meetings. During the academic year, the Steering Committee meets biweekly for two hours. The Steering Committee has been working towards restructuring since October 2010. The restructure was proposed in order to address issues of accountability and continuity of information. The Steering Committee deemed it was necessary to restructure for the sake of creating a more stable community. The Committee has made two important changes that will effect the future governance of Dilmun Hill: (1) members of the Committee have agreed upon a new, more efficient model for consensus decision‐making, and (2) the Committee is in the final stages of forming a Student Advisory Board (SAB) and a Faculty and Staff Advisory Board (FSAB). The SAB and FSAB will work together to support students and others involved in the operation of Dilmun Hill to better fulfill Dilmun Hill’s goals as laid out in the farm mission statement. Interested students, faculty and staff will be chosen for board membership by the Steering Committee through an application process (see Appendix G & H for applications). The FAB and FSAB will strengthen the student farm by:

1. Utilizing student and faculty/staff experience for forming strategic policy design in cooperation with Faculty Advising Committee.

2. Fostering open communication between farm participants and Cornell Faculty and Administration.

21

3. Improving continuity on the farm by retaining a resilient pool of stakeholders in the management structure.

These boards will be formally established in Spring 2011.

Conclusion Our results show that the beds, as they are now, are a safe medium for growing rooting, fruiting and leafy crops at Dilmun, and hold promise for other sites. However, the beds are dynamic and are likely to change overtime, which precludes us from making conclusions about their long‐term usability. We see three main ways that the beds will change in the future:

1) The organic matter in the beds will break down, reducing the 1:1 compost to

topsoil ratio. In a few years, the percent compost in the beds could go down

to 5% from the current 50%.

2) The cardboard and geotextile barriers will break down over time, which

could allow for mixing between the native soil and the raised bed

amendments. The cardboard will likely break down completely in the next 3‐

5 years. The geotextile is more durable and will likely break down completely

in the next 15‐20 years.

3) Native soil could get into the beds, through wind deposition and/or mixing

with the native soil underneath the beds. We have mitigated wind deposition

by keeping the contaminated soil in a constant sod cover.

The uncertainty surrounding future management of the beds complicates our ability to pose sound recommendations for the kinds of crops that can be grown in them. While we can be comfortable about allowing for the production of fruiting crops, our research has informed us that leafy greens and rooting crops are more susceptible to heavy metal contamination. The texture and surface area of mustard greens (and other leafy greens, such as spinach and leaf lettuce) is problematic because the likelihood of trapping small soil and dust particles on the surface of the produce is increased. Furthermore, mustards are thought to be high bioaccumulators of heavy metals, particularly Pb (Butcher et. al., 2003; Xiong, 1997). Rooting crops are also problematic for the obvious reason that they are in contact with the soil for their entire growing season. For these reasons, future contamination of the beds due to lack of management (ie. failure to add bed amendments annually) could compromise the safe consumption of leafy greens and rooting crops. We aim to address the issues described as we continue with our research. Our concerns over future bed management are more broadly related to the issue of continuity at Dilmun Hill. We expect that the SAB and FSAB will help resolve many of the continuity

22

issues, so that we can be more confident in our recommendations to future Market Garden managers. With proper management, the beds could continue to serve their function as a BMP in the future. Towards this goal, we must develop a plan for bed maintenance over the long‐term, recognizing that (1) limited funding may restrict intensive management of the beds, and (2) high‐turnover among Market Garden managers necessitates an effective plan for continuity between seasons. BMP project research goals for the 2011 season are to:

Continue raised‐bed trials in Block 3;

Same crops, different randomized design;

Test how As and Pb are accumulated in vegetables grown on the slope of a raised bed vs. the crest of a raised bed;

Continue cover cropping in Block 1;

Continue outreach.

Acknowledgments

Many people have supported Dilmun Hill as we have investigated management of contaminated soils. We would especially like to thank Melissa Madden, Hannah Shayler, Jonathan Russell‐Anneli, Murray McBride and Leigh Kalbacker for their incredible devotion of time, energy and knowledge to this project since its conception. We would also like to thank Drew Lewis, Jane Mt. Pleasant and Frank Rossi for their support of our BMP research. We would especially like to acknowledge Mike Hoffman for his continued support.

We would also like to thank the Cornell Waste Management Institute (CWMI), the Cornell Department of Horticulture, the Cornell Department of Crop and Soil Science, the Cornell University Agricultural Experiment Station (CUAES), the National Institutes of Health, and Dilmun Hill Student Organic Farm for their show of support for our project.

The dedication of these individuals and organizations, as well as the many others who helped with this project, ensures that Dilmun Hill will continue to be a safe place for student learning.

23

Contacts Betsy Leonard, Organic Farm Coordinator (as of May 2011), [email protected] Bonnie Cherner, BMP project manager, [email protected] Glenn Evans, Director of Agricultural Operations, [email protected] Emma Landau, BMP project manager, [email protected] Eric Harrington, CU Environmental Health and Safety, [email protected] Hannah Shayler, Cornell Waste Management Inst, NIH Grant Collaborator, [email protected] Janet Myrick, Guterman Greenhouse, [email protected] Jonathan Russell‐Anelli, Soil Science Professor, NIH Grant Collaborator, [email protected] Kristin Ramsay '88, RCPRS Program Coordinator, [email protected] Mike Hoffman, Director, Cornell University Agricultural Experiment Station, [email protected] Mike Rutzke, USDA Lab, [email protected] Melissa Madden, Organic Farm Coordinator (2008‐2011), [email protected] Murray McBride, Cornell Waste Management Inst., Soil Chemistry Professor, NIH Grant Collaborator, Research Adviser, [email protected]

24

Literature Review Butcher, D., & Pendergrass, A. 2006. Uptake of lead and arsenic in food plants grown in contaminated soil from Barder Orchard, NC. Microchemical Journal, 83(1), 14‐16. DeFelice, A. 2008. Best management plan for soils containing lead‐arsenate pesticide residues. Cornell University. Ithaca, NY. Duxbury, J.M., & Zavala, Y.J. What are safe levels of arsenic in foods and soils? Cornell University. Ithaca, NY. Martin, I, De Burca, R., Morgan, H. 2009. Soil guideline Values for Arsenic Contamination. Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. The Environmental Agency. Fields, Tessie. 1999. Findings and Recommendations for the Remediation of Historic Pesticide Contamination. New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, Trenton NJ. “Legal standards for selected heavy metals in food/vegetables in India, UK, EU, New Zealand, Australia, Poland, and China.” Various sources. Contact Hannah Shayler for this report. Merwin, I., Pruyne, P.T., Ebel, J.G., Manzell, K.L., & Lisk, D.J. 1994. Persistence, phytotoxicity, and management of arsenic, lead and mercury. Chemosphere, 29(6), 1361‐1367. Peryea, F. 1999. Gardening on Lead‐ and Arsenic‐Contaminated Soils. Washington State University. Pullman, WA. Schoof, R., Yost, L., Eickhoff, J., Crecelius, E., Cragin, D., Meacher, D., & Mensel, D. 1999. A market basket survey of inorganic arsenic in food. Food Chemical Toxicology, 37(8), 839‐46. Queirolo, F., Stegen, S., Restovic, M., Paz, M., Ostapczuk, P., Schwuger, M.J., and Munoz, L. 2000. Total arsenic, lead and cadmium levels in vegetables cultivated at the Andean villages of Northern Chile. The Science of the Total Environment, 255(1‐3), 74‐84.

25

1(NewYorkStateDepartmentofEnvironmentalConservation[NYSDEC],2008)2(Ahmed,Z.,2008)3(NYSDEC,2006;USEPA,2001;USEPA,2004),SeeAppendixCformoreinformation.

Appendices

Appendix A. Soil Sample Results

TABLE 1. Dilmun Hill Block 3 Soil Sample Results, NYS and Dilmun Hill Background Levels of soil Pb and As, Range of U.S. Residential Cleanup Guidelines/Soil Screening Levels.

Block 3 (mg/kg)

NYS Background1

(mg/kg)

Dilmun Hill Background2

(mg/kg)

Range of U.S. Residential

Cleanup Guidelines and Soil Screening Levels3

(mg/kg)

Lead (Pb) 60.4 ‐ 498.9

4 ‐ 61 12.2 40 ‐ 400

Mean Pb 258.78 ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐

% Samples above NYS background Pb levels

99% ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐

% Samples above Dilmun background Pb levels

100% ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐

Arsenic (As) 17.92 – 127.10

3 ‐ 12 7.01 13‐22

Mean As 69.24 ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐

% Samples above NYS background As levels

100% ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐

% Samples above Dilmun background As levels

100% ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐

26

Appendix B. Whole Farm Map

27

Figure 1. Block 3 Soil Arsenic

Appendix C. Hot Spot Maps

Block 3 Hot Spot Maps

379383 m379373 m379363 m379353 m

379383 m379373 m379363 m379353 m

4699

775

m46

9976

5 m

4699

755

m69

9 745

m

4699

775

m46

9976

5 m

4699

755

m69

9745

m

Soil As (mg/kg)<2020- 4040-60

60- 8080-100

>100

379383 m379373 m379363 m379353 m

379383 m379373 m379363 m379353 m

4699

775

m46

9976

5 m

4699

755

m69

9745

m

4699

775

m46

9976

5 m

4699

755

m69

9745

m

Soil Pb (mg/kg)<100100-150150-200

200-250250-300

>300

Figure 2. Block 3 Soil Lead

28

Block 1 Hot Spot Maps

Figure 3. Hot Spot Map for Pb in Block 1

Figure 4. Hot Spot Map for Pb in Block 1

29

Whole Farm Hot Spot Maps

Figure 5. Hot Spot Map for Pb, Whole Farm

Figure 6. Hot Spot Map for Pb, Whole Farm

30

Tortilla Flats Hot Spot Maps

Figure 7. Hot Spot Map for Pb and As, Tortilla Flats

31

Barn West Hot Spot Maps

Figure 8. Hot Spot Map for As, Barn West

Figure 9. Hot Spot Map for Pb, Barn West

32

Street Side Hot Spot Maps

Figure 10. Hot Spot Map for Pb, Street Side

Figure 11. Hot Spot Map for As, Street Side

33

Appendix D. Block 3 Experimental Design Map and Key

34

Block 3 Sample I.D. Key

Bed I.D. Sample Name

NG1 No barrier greens R1



NC1 No barrier carrots R1



NP1 No barrier peppers R1



IG1 Incorporated compost greens R1



IC1 Incorporated compost carrots R1



IP1 Incorporated compost peppers R1



PG1 Plastic greens R1



PC1 Plastic carrots R1



PP1 Plastic peppers R1



CG1 Cardboard greens R1



CC1 Cardboard carrots R1



CP1 Cardboard peppers R1



35

Appendix E. Complete Block 3 Tissue Test Results

Pepper Lead and Arsenic Levels

Sample ID Pb (mg/kg) As (mg/kg)

PP1 0.00376 0.00088

PP2 0.00304 0.00088

PP3 0.00464 0.00088

IP1 0.0028 0.00088

IP2 0.0176 0.00088

IP3 0.00448 0.00088

CP1 0.00288 0.00088

CP2 0.004 0.00088

CP3 0.00448 0.00088

NP1 0.0032 0.00088

NP2 0.00592 0.00088

NP3 0.0048 0.00088

Mustard Greens Lead and Arsenic Levels


CG1 0.0352 0.0224

CG2 0.0336 0.0264

CG3 0.0296 0.024

IG1 0.0224 0.0232

IG2 0.0184 0.0312

IG3 0.024 0.0328

NG1 0.0312 0.0464

NG2 0.0272 0.0416

NG3 0.0328 0.0288

PG1 0.0312 0.0232

PG2 0.032 0.024

PG3 0.0272 0.024

Carrot Lead and Arsenic Levels


CC1 0.01001 0.00143

CC2 0.00702 0.00143

CC3 0.00884 0.00143

PC1 0.00702 0.00143

PC2 0.00871 0.00143

PC3 0.00728 0.00143

NC1 0.01092 0.00143

NC2 0.00715 0.00143

NC3 0.00741 0.00143

IC1 0.0143 0.00143

IC2 0.0195 0.00143

IC3 0.01235 0.00143

36

Appendix F. Historic Aerial Pictures of Dilmun Hill

Figure 1. Dilmun Hill 1938


37



38

Appendix G. Dilmun Hill Student Farm Student Advisory Board application Purpose of Advisory Board The Advisory Board will support students and others involved in the operation of Dilmun Hill to better fulfill Dilmun Hill’s goals as laid out in the farm mission statement. The Board will strengthen the student farm by: 1. Utilizing student experience for forming strategic policy design in cooperation with Faculty Advising Committee. 2. Fostering open communication between farm participants and Cornell Faculty and Administration. 3. Improving continuity on the farm by retaining a resilient pool of stakeholders in the management structure. Expectations of Advisory Board Board members will meet regularly as needed to create policy recommendations based on requests from the Steering Committee, Organic Farm Coordinator and other Dilmun Hill stakeholders. These meetings are separate from monthly Steering meetings, and the Steering Committee will vote on and implement these policies. A member of the Steering Committee (“Steering Liasion”) will update the advisory boards after every Steering meeting through concise and pertinent emails. To ensure advisors are up to date on farm happenings they must read updates from the Steering committee. Advisors are expected to attend the first hour of a designated Steering Committee meeting per month. Advance notice will be given of the meeting and if advisors are unable to attend they should inform the Steering liaison. Advisors are welcome to attend additional Steering meetings in order to participate more widely in Dilmun Hill, but will not have voting rights. Advisors will be invited to teach a workshop at a work party each season. While not mandatory, Advisors should feel welcome to participate in any work parties throughout the season. This will provide an opportunity for open communication between farm participants and help build a community of investment. Advisory boards will participate in one team building workshop per year alongside the Steering Committee on topics designed to strengthen communication and meet the farm mission statement. One example is consensus decision process. To provide support and continuity, Advisors are expected to mentor the Organic Farm Coordinator. This entails meeting with the Coordinator and the CUAES Director of Ag

39

Operations and/or CUAES Director once a month outside of steering, and be available as needed to review financial, safety, training, and Human Resource Issues. Structure of Advisory Board The Student Advisory Board will consist of 4 former managers or Steering volunteers who apply and are selected by the Steering Committee and approved by the Organic Farm Coordinator and CUAES Director. The Student advisors will be mirrored by a Faculty and Staff Advisory Board consisting of 4 staff or faculty, also approved via CUAES. Both Boards will meet at Steering and outside of Steering to construct policy recommendations. The term of advisory board members will be one year, after which the incumbent board members, the Steering Committee and CUAES administration will have an opportunity to re‐asses and decide to continue or not continue the advisory position. In keeping with the spirit and mission of Dilmun Hill, the Advisory Boards will utilize a consensus decision making model.

40

Appendix H. Dilmun Hill Student Farm Faculty and Staff Advisory Board application Purpose of Advisory Board The Advisory Board will support students and others involved in the operation of Dilmun Hill to better fulfill Dilmun Hill’s goals as laid out in the farm mission statement. The Board will strengthen the student farm by: 1. Providing support in the form of strategic policy design in cooperation with the Student Advisory Board. 2. Fostering open communication between farm participants and Cornell Faculty and Administration. 3. Improving continuity on the farm by retaining a resilient pool of stakeholders in the management structure. Expectations of Advisory Board Board members will meet regularly as needed to create policy recommendations based on requests from the Steering Committee, Organic Farm Coordinator and other Dilmun Hill stakeholders. These meetings are separate from monthly Steering meetings, and the Steering Committee will vote on and implement these policies. A member of the Steering Committee (Steering liaison) will update the advisory boards after every Steering meeting through concise and pertinent emails. To ensure advisors are up to date on farm happenings they must read updates from the Steering committee. Advisors are expected to attend the first hour of a designated Steering Committee meeting per month. Advance notice will be given of the meeting and if advisors are unable to attend they should inform the Steering liaison. Advisors are welcome to attend additional Steering meetings in order to participate more widely in Dilmun Hill, but will not have voting rights. Advisors will be invited to teach a workshop at a work party each season. While not mandatory, Advisors should feel welcome to participate in any work parties throughout the season. This will provide an opportunity for open communication between farm participants and help build a community of investment. Advisory boards will participate in one team building workshop per year alongside the Steering Committee on topics designed to strengthen communication and meet the farm mission statement. One example is consensus decision process. To provide support and continuity, Advisors are expected to mentor the Organic Farm Coordinator. This entails meeting with the Coordinator and CUAES Director of Ag Operations and/or CUAES Director once a month outside of Steering, and be available as needed to review financial, safety, training, and Human Resource Issues.

41

Structure of Advisory Board The Faculty and Staff Advisory Board will consist of 4 members who apply and are selected by the Steering Committee, Organic Farm Coordinator and CUAES Director. The Faculty and Staff advisors will be mirrored by a Student Advisory Board consisting of 4 Dilmun alumni (former managers and/or Steering volunteers). Both Boards will meet at Steering and outside of Steering to construct policy recommendations. The term of advisory board members will be two years, after which the incumbent board members, the Steering Committee, the Organic Coordinator and CUAES Director and Director of Ag Operationswill have an opportunity to re‐asses and decide to continue or not continue the advisory position. In keeping with the spirit and mission of Dilmun Hill, the Advisory Boards will utilize a consensus decision making model.

42

Appendix I. Summary Budget 2010

Dilmun Project Name Best Management Practices Research (BMP)

Operating Accout To May '10- 102 3701; to Sept '10- 125 8360-xxx-316-0000; to Dec. '10- 125 8360

2010 Operating

Year Notes

Forward beginning balance

IncomeHATCH funding- McBride 14000

Additional fundingCUAES Hatch Supplement for E. Goodwin, Nov. 10, 2010

Total Income 14000

Expenses

Student Salary 9800OY '10 estimated- no viewing access to 125…

Soil tests 2650Tissue tests 975Seeds 70Supplies 1050Fees 89Farm expenses 886Outreach and events 167

Total expenses 15687

Ending Balance -1687Amount asking CUAES to cover, 2011

43

Appendix J: Management and Worker Safety Melissa Madden, Leigh Kalbacker and Bonnie Cherner developed a manager and worker safety protocol for working in the contaminated soils. All Dilmun managers and Steering Committee members as well as the Cornell University Environmental Health and Safety department have reviewed these procedures. Basic Worker Safety Procedures: for EVERYONE working on the farm:

Closed toed shoes mandatory (Fully closed, no perforated shoes like Crocs)

Only trained managers can operate motorized equipment including the BCS, rototiller, weed‐whacker, etc

Wash stations will be provided at the barn and in the field. Those washing vegetables are expected to wash their hands prior to handling vegetables for sale. Managers are responsible to keep wash stations clean and stocked.

Additional Worker Safety Procedures regarding contaminated soils‐ FIELDS:

Mowing in lane‐ways with high lead/arsenic content will be done to minimize dust‐ i.e. when no one else in on the farm, during moist mornings etc

Fieldwork involving native soils in Blocks 1,2,3,4 is restricted to managers who have been trained.

Fieldwork such as laying raised beds in Blocks 1,2,3,4 can be done by volunteers who are properly attired under the guidance of a trained manager

Workers in contact with native soil in contaminated areas are expected to wash their hands after work and before eating

Produce from Blocks 1,2,3,4 is not for consumption under any circumstances. We are growing this produce for tissue testing only.

Additional Worker Safety Procedures for contaminated soils‐ LAB:

All grinding should be done in a laboratory with a functioning fume hood, used properly.

All soil drying will occur near exhaust fans to minimize exposure to greenhouse workers.

Documents

Goodwin, Emma Landau - Cornell University · 2016-07-29 · Sheet mulch Geotextile (landscape fabric) The fourth bed is a control and will have no barrier between the compost/topsoil