Wisconsin Legislature: ATCP 50.04(5)(b)

(de) A landowner may be required to provide documentation to the county land conservation committee that animal stocking rate and soil test values for pastures do not exceed the levels in par. (b) 1. and (d) 2., respectively.

(dm) If the nutrient management plan uses manure nutrient values, other than nutrient values of organic by-products regulated under ch. NR 113, 204 or 214, the manure nutrient values shall be based on one of the following:

1. Standard values specified in Nutrient Application Guidelines for Field, Vegetable and Fruit Crops, UWEX publication A2809 referenced in the NRCS conservation practice standard 590.

Note: The current 2012 version of UWEX pub. A2809 and subsequent editions are available at: https://datcp.wi.gov/Pages/Programs_Services/ATCP50.aspx and are also on file with the department and the legislative fiscal bureau.

2. Manure analyses conducted at a laboratory that complies with s. ATCP 50.50 (8).

(e) The plan shall comply with the NRCS conservation practice standard 590 nutrient management (December, 2015) except for sections IV. D., IV. E., and V., and shall also comply with the Wisconsin Conservation Planning Technical Note WI-1 (February, 2016).

Note: The NRCS conservation practice standard 590 (December, 2015) and the companion document Wisconsin Conservation Planning Technical Note WI-1 (February, 2016) are on file with the department and the legislative reference bureau. Copies are available from a county land conservation department, a NRCS field office, the national NRCS website at: http://www.nrcs.usda.gov, the Wisconsin NRCS website at: www.wi.nrcs.usda.gov, or the department website at: https://datcp.wi.gov/Pages/Programs_Services/ATCP50.aspx. Components of a nutrient management plan are summarized on a checklist. An example nutrient management checklist is available at the department’s website at: https://datcp.wi.gov/Pages/Programs_Services/ATCP50.aspx.

(f) The plan may not recommend nutrient applications that exceed the amounts required to achieve applicable crop fertility levels recommended by the University of Wisconsin-Extension in the 2012 edition of Nutrient Application Guidelines for Field, Vegetable and Fruit Crops, UWEX publication A2809, or in the latest edition of that publication if preferred by the landowner, unless the nutrient management planner can show that one or more of the following circumstances justifies the recommended application:

1. A soil or tissue test reveals a specific nutrient deficiency. For supplemental in-season nitrogen applications, a nutrient management planner shall follow steps outlined in NRCS conservation practice standard 590 nutrient management (December 2015).

Note: Environmental conditions can make it challenging to assess nutrient deficiencies. In-field scouting is strongly recommended to verify the nutrient deficiency is not a result of pest or disease pressure, and that an additional nutrient application will resolve the observed deficiency.

2. Excess nutrients are the result of an unforeseen change in the type of crop planted.

3. Excess nutrients are the result of manure applications made in the last year prior to the implementation of the nutrient management plan.

4. Other special agronomic conditions documented by the nutrient management planner. A nutrient management planner who wishes to justify higher applications shall include credible information to show that the higher applications will not materially increase environmental damage.

Note: The 2012 edition of the UWEX publication A2809 is on file with the department and the legislative reference bureau. The latest edition of A2809 is available from the UWEX website at: http://learningstore.uwex.edu. Copies are also available from the department website at: https://datcp.wi.gov/Pages/Programs_Services/ATCP50.aspx.

(g) The plan shall be consistent with any nutrient management plan required under ch. NR 113, 204, or 214 if the landowner applies septage, municipal sludge, industrial waste, or industrial by-products to the land and in accordance with s. ATCP 65.22 (6) (c). A landowner is not required to have a nutrient management plan under this subsection if the landowner applies primarily septage, municipal sludge, industrial waste, or industrial byproducts according to ch. NR 113, 204, or 214.

(gm) A landowner or nutrient management planner qualified under s. ATCP 50.48 (2) shall annually review a nutrient management plan to determine whether the plan accurately reflects the planned cropping, tolerable soil loss, nutrient application rates, and application methods. The plan shall be updated, by a nutrient management planner qualified under s. ATCP 50.48, when necessary to reflect changes in those planned activities.

(i) A landowner is rebuttably presumed to comply with this section if the landowner complies with a nutrient management plan that is prepared or approved by a nutrient management planner who is qualified under s. ATCP 50.48.

(4) Tillage setback.

(a) A landowner shall manage cropland to achieve compliance with the DNR performance standard for tillage setback under s. NR 151.03.

(b) A landowner is not required to establish a tillage setback distance greater than 5 feet unless all of the following conditions are met:

1. The 5-foot setback distance is increased by the smallest increment necessary to achieve the purposes of s. NR 151.03, but in no case greater than a total setback distance of 20 feet.

2. In determining whether to increase the setback distance, county or other conservation professionals shall do all of the following:

a. Consider bank materials, height, slope, cause of bank erosion, soil type, and other factors that affect bank integrity.

b. Use best professional judgment, based on the latest technical standards and practices required under this chapter.

c. Follow a consistent approach in making determinations for increased setback distances by consulting with NRCS or department engineering specialists.

d. Provide the landowner with a written statement documenting the findings and conclusions in support of the increased setback distance.

(c) Determinations regarding compliance with this standard may be appealed as authorized under s. 227.42, Stats., or other provisions of law.

(5) Silurian Bedrock.

(a) A landowner shall manage cropland or pasture, or both, to achieve compliance with DNR performance standard for Silurian Bedrock under s. NR 151.075.

(b) A landowner is not required to comply with this section unless all of the following conditions are met:

1. They mechanically apply manure to cropland or pasture areas.

2. The cropland or pasture, or both, is located in an area of Silurian bedrock.

1. The landowner’s nutrient management plan is written in accordance with s. ATCP 50.04 (3) and the plan incorporates the restrictions and prohibitions set forth in s. NR 151.075 where applicable.

2. The landowner uses any of the following, or any combination of the following:

a. Silurian bedrock maps developed by the department of agriculture, trade and consumer protection, the department of natural resources, or both, maps available from the University of Wisconsin department of soil science, maps available from the Wisconsin geological and natural history survey, or NRCS soil survey maps.

b. In-field bedrock verification conducted in compliance with s. ATCP 50.925.

3. The landowner uses weather and precipitation predictions to determine the appropriate timing of manure application.

Note: The Runoff Risk Advisory Forecast is an optional tool that highlights the highest risk within the forecast period of 3 days, with an extended forecast period of 10 days in the presence of frozen soils or snow, found at: http://www.manureadvisorysystem.wi.gov/runoffrisk/index.

(d) A landowner under par. (b) has until April 1, 2027, to comply with par. (a).

History: CR 01-090: cr. Register September 2002 No. 561, eff. 10-1-02; CR 05-013: am. (3) (d), (e), (f) (intro.), 3. and (g), cr. (3) (dm) and (i), r. and recr. (3) (f) 4., r. (3) (f) 5. to 9., Register May 2007 No. 617, eff. 6-1-07; CR 08-075: am. (3) (dm) 1. and (e) Register April 2009 No. 640, eff. 5-1-09; CR 13-016: am. (1), (2), (3) (a), renum. (3) (b) to (intro.) and am., cr. (3) (b) 1., 2., renum. (3) (d) to (intro.) and am., cr. (3) (d) 1., 2., (de), am. (3) (f) (intro.), cr. (3) (gm), am. (3) (h) (intro.), cr. (4) Register February 2014 No. 698, eff. 5-1-14; CR 14-047: am. (3) (dm) 1., (e) Register May 2015 No. 713, eff. 6-1-15; CR 16-083: am. (1), (3) (dm) 1., (e), (f) (intro.), (g) Register January 2018 No. 745, eff. 2-1-18; CR 23-024: am. (1), (2), (3) (a), (dm) 1., (e), (f) 1., 4., r. (3) (h), am. (3) (i), cr. (4) (c), (5) Register May 2024 No. 821, eff. 6-1-24; correction in (5) (d) made under s. 35.17, Stats., Register May 2024 No. 821.

ATCP 50.06 Installing conservation practices.

(1) General. A landowner may use any of the following to comply with s. ATCP 50.04, unless s. ATCP 50.04 mandates a specific practice:

(a) Conservation practices identified in subch. VIII or the NRCS field office technical guide.

(b) Other conservation practices that comply with s. ATCP 50.04.

(2) Funded practices. Conservation practices for which a landowner receives financial assistance under this chapter shall comply with subch. VIII.

History: CR 01-090: cr. Register September 2002 No. 561, eff. 10-1-02; CR 23-024: am. (1) (a), (2) Register May 2024 No. 821, eff. 6-1-24.

ATCP 50.08 Cost-sharing required.

(1) General. A landowner engaged in agricultural practices in this state is not required to do any of the following, under s. ATCP 50.04, unless the landowner receives a bona fide offer of cost-sharing:

(a) Discontinue or modify cropping practices on existing cropland. In this paragraph, “existing cropland” has the meaning given in s. NR 151.09 (4) (b).

(b) Discontinue or modify an existing livestock facility or operation. In this paragraph, “existing livestock facility or operation” has the meaning given in s. NR 151.095 (5) (b).

(2) Cost-share amount. A cost-share offer under sub. (1) shall cover at least 70% of the landowner’s cost to install and maintain each required conservation practice, or 90% of the landowner’s cost if there is an economic hardship under s. ATCP 50.42 (4).

(3) Landowner’s cost. A landowner’s cost to install and maintain a conservation practice includes all of the following that apply:

(a) The landowner’s reasonable and necessary expenditures to install and maintain the conservation practice. This includes eligible installation costs identified in subch. VIII, and costs for engineering services under s. ATCP 50.40 (7).

(b) The reasonable value of necessary labor, equipment, and supplies provided by the landowner in the installation and maintenance of the conservation practice for the period required under subch. VIII or specified in the contract. This does not include normal operating routines such as clean-outs of barnyards, storage facilities, and gutters.

(d) The landowner’s cost to take or keep land out of agricultural production, if the landowner must take or keep more than ½ acre out of agricultural production in order to install or maintain the conservation practice. The landowner’s cost, determined on the date of the cost-share contract, equals the sum of the annual costs that the landowner will incur over the maintenance period specified in the cost-share contract. The landowner’s annual cost, for each year of the maintenance period, equals the number of affected acres multiplied by the per-acre weighted average soil rental rate in the county on the date of the cost-share contract. This paragraph does not apply to land directly occupied by a facility or structure, such as a manure storage facility, that a landowner installs as part of the conservation practice.

(4) Riparian land taken out of production; crep-equivalent payment.

(a) If a landowner must take or keep more than ½ acre of riparian land out of agricultural production in order to install or maintain a conservation practice, the cost-share offer under sub. (1) for that conservation practice shall be at least equal to the amount that would be offered under the CREP program if the affected lands were enrolled in that program, regardless of whether the lands are actually eligible for the CREP program.

(b) Paragraph (a) does not apply unless the landowner agrees to keep the land out of agricultural production for 15 years, or in perpetuity, under contract terms equivalent to those that apply under the CREP program.

(d) Paragraph (a) does not apply to land directly occupied by a facility or structure, such as a manure storage facility, that a landowner installs as part of the conservation practice.

(5) Exemptions. The cost-sharing requirement under sub. (1) does not apply to any of the following:

(a) A conservation practice that has already been cost-shared for at least 10 years. This exemption does not apply to costs under sub. (3) (d).

(b) The following conservation practices if those practices have already been cost-shared for 4 years:

1. Cover crops, as defined in s. ATCP 50.68 (1).

2. Nutrient management, as defined in s. ATCP 50.78 (1).

3. Residue management, as defined in s. ATCP 50.82 (1).

4. Conservation crop rotation, as defined in s. ATCP 50.668 (1).

(d) Conservation practices or costs to correct a landowner’s criminal or grossly negligent discharge of pollutants to waters of the state.

(e) Conservation practices required by a WPDES permit issued under ch. NR 243.

(6) Compliance actions not affected. Subsection (1) does not limit any of the following:

(a) An emergency or interim response to a pollution discharge, to prevent or mitigate imminent harm to waters of the state.

(b) County action under s. ATCP 50.16 (6) to suspend a landowner’s eligibility for farmland preservation tax credits, if the landowner fails to comply with conservation standards under s. ATCP 50.16 (1).

(7) Cost-share grant sources. A grant from any public or private source, or combination of sources, may be counted as part of a cost-share grant under sub. (1). A loan is not a grant.

History: CR 01-090: cr. Register September 2002 No. 561, eff. 10-1-02; CR 08-075: am. (5) (b) 6. Register April 2009 No. 640, eff. 5-1-09; CR 13-016: am. (1) (intro.) Register February 2014 No. 698, eff. 5-1-14; CR 23-024: am. (3) (b), r. (3) (c), r. and recr. (5) (b) Register May 2024 No. 821, eff. 6-1-24; correction in (5) (b) 1. to 4. made under s. 35.17, Stats., Register May 2024 No. 821.

Subchapter III — County Soil and Water Program

ATCP 50.10 County program; general.

(1) Program elements. Every county land conservation committee shall establish and maintain a county soil and water conservation program. The program shall include all of the following elements:

(a) A county land and water resource management plan under s. ATCP 50.12, and a program to implement that plan.

(b) A program to implement soil and water conservation standards.

(c) A program to prepare and submit annual reports under s. ATCP 50.18 and annual grant applications under s. ATCP 50.20.

(d) A program to receive, distribute, and account for soil and water resource management grants under this chapter.

(e) A procedure to ensure that conservation practices funded under this chapter are designed and installed according to this chapter.

(f) An accounting and recordkeeping system under s. ATCP 50.22.

(g) An information and education program to promote effective soil and water resource management.

(h) Other program elements, if any, required under this chapter.

(2) Coordination. A county land conservation committee shall, to the extent practicable, coordinate the program elements under sub. (1) with each other and with the related activities of NRCS, state agencies, other county departments, and other governmental entities.