June Beneficial Management Practices Working Group Policy and Policy

Document Sample
June Beneficial Management Practices Working Group Policy and Policy Powered By Docstoc
					June 2007

                           Beneficial Management Practices

                   Working Group Policy and Policy Statements


Cat.   # Policies                                                       Policy statements in
                                                                        approval/rejection
                                                                        letters
Gen-   1    Date: January 1, 2004 is to be the date for all BMPs
eral        where relevant
            (WG ratification June 16, 2005)
       2    Funding of partial projects: Funding for partial
            projects are eligible only when the partial projects,
            on their own, achieve significant environmental risk
            reduction
            (WG ratification June 16, 2005)
       3    New equipment: Provide funding for the
            environmental enhancing components of new
            equipment. This should be based on a technical
            review and cost estimates by appropriate experts.
            (WG ratification December 14, 04)
       4    Stacking: Federal policy is that the maximum                According to the application, a
            amount of government funds for a project is not to          portion of the project funds are
            exceed 75% of the total project costs. Where                being provided by [insert
            funding is provided by a government agency and the          agency or level of government].
            agency deems that the funding is not from                   The application further states
            government (e.g. DFO use of funds originating in the        that these funds are not from
            United States), a letter from the agency confirming         Canadian government sources.
            the source of funds must accompany the request for          A letter from [insert agency or
            payment.                                                    level of government] must
            (P. Bergen September, 2005)                                 accompany your request for
            (WG ratification October, 2005)                             payment indicating the source
                                                                        of these funds.
       5    In-kind: One of the purposes of allowing in-kind
            contributions to cover a portion of the project costs is
            to reduce the cash costs for the applicant and the
            cost to the program. Wherever possible, projects
            should comply with this principle.
            (WG ratification October, 2005)
1      1    Engineering: Manure storage structures are to be            The approval is subject to the
            designed by a Professional Engineer. Exemptions             structure being designed by a
            for low risk projects are at the discretion of the          Professional Engineer. Your
            approval process.                                           request for payment must be
            (WG ratification June 16, 2005)                             accompanied by a letter from
                                                                        the Professional Engineer
                                                                        indicating that the structure was
                                                                        built as designed.
       2    Structures below barns: For structures built below
            barns; a portion of the cost of the roof is eligible if a
            roof is deemed necessary to meet the minimum
            storage requirement for the program. The maximum
Cat.   # Policies                                                     Policy statements in
                                                                      approval/rejection
                                                                      letters
           eligible cost for the roof will be the equivalent of the
           cost of a roof over a similar sized storage structure
           that is not below the barn.
           (WG ratification June 16, 2005)
       3   Nutrient Management Plan: A NMP is not a
           prerequisite under Category 01: Improved Manure
           Storage and Handling. This will allow all farms and
           ranches, where manure storage is deemed to be an
           environmental risk based on the EFP, to be eligible
           for funding assistance in this category.
           (WG ratification June 16, 2005)
       4   Linkage to SMMP: There is no linkage between the
           Sustainable Manure Management Program and the
           NFSP with respect to manure storage enhancement.
           (WG ratification June 16, 2005)
2      1   Anaerobic biodigestors: Funding for this practice
           is to be focused on consultancy costs for feasibility
           studies, generation of construction and design plans,
           tendering processes, permitting and final economic
           calculations. If, after using funds for these purposes,
           the cap has not been reached, funds can be used to
           assist with construction costs.
           (WG ratification February 15, 2006)
3      1   Solid manure spreaders: Up to $8,000 ($2,400
           from the program) can be provided for the additional
           costs of cyclone spreading attachments (based on
           technical evaluation by Bert van Dalfsen,
           Mechanical Engineer, MAL).
           Other types of spreaders will be reviewed, on a case
           by case basis, to determine components that can be
           funded from the program.
           (WG ratification June 16, 2005)
5      1   Gutters and downspouts: Gutters and downspouts
           for farm buildings are not eligible for funding. These
           are considered to be conventional building
           components that are the responsibility of producers.
           (WG ratification October, 2005)
6      1   Water supply for off-stream watering: Water
           supply developments that are required as a result of
           implementing an EFP are eligible for funding. If the
           water supply is needed to deal with water shortages,
           such as to address drought, herd expansion or
           irrigation, the applicant will be directed to the Water
           Supply Expansion program.
           (WG ratification June 16, 2005)
           Effective April 1, 2006, where new water supplies
           are eligible for funding under the Water Supply
           Expansion program (e.g. wells, dugouts, spring
           development) these are to be funded under the
           NWSEP. Projects that include off-stream
           infrastructure and a new water supply will require an
           application to both the NFSP (for the infrastructure)



June 07                                                                                      2
Cat.   # Policies                                                     Policy statements in
                                                                      approval/rejection
                                                                      letters
           and the NWSEP (for the water supply).
           (AAFC policy communicated to the WG on February
           15, 2006)
       2   Groundwater protection: Proximity to sensitive
           groundwater is not a rationale for use of this BMP.
           Funding is to be used to move operations away from
           sensitive surface water, riparian areas, critical
           wildlife habitat and areas of sever erosion potential.
           (WG ratification February 15, 2006)
7      1   Water supply: see 6,1
8      1   Worker sanitation facilities: These facilities are not
           eligible for funding assistance under the program.
           (WG ratification June 16, 2005)
       2   Poultry mortality incinerators: These are eligible         Ensure that the specifications
           as long as the incinerator uses Best Available             for the incinerator will result in
           Technology and meets appropriate air emission              air emissions meeting
           standards.                                                 appropriate air emission
           (WG ratification June 16, 2005)                            standards.
       3   Fertilizer storage: All types of structures are eligible
           for funding assistance with a limit being placed on
           the area of the structure based on the type(s) of crop
           and area being farmed.
           (WG ratification June 16, 2005)
           The maximum area of the structure is the lesser of
           1.86 m2 (20 ft2) per pallet or 0.93 m2 (10ft2) per
           hectare of land receiving the fertilizer.
           (WG ratification October, 2005)
       4   On-farm processing and marketing: These are
           considered farm operations where the majority of the
           material being processed or marketed is produced
           on the farm or the majority of the output of the
           processing operation is used on the farm. Waste
           management from these activities is eligible for
           funding.
           Where wastes are not agricultural wastes, the farm
           must ensure that appropriate authorizations for
           disposal have been obtained.
           (WG ratification June 16, 2005)
       5   Mulching mowers: Heavy duty mulching mowers
           for dealing with orchard prunings are eligible for
           incremental assistance. The maximum project cost
           is $4,500 ($1,350 from the program). This is based
           on the difference between a conventional mower
           and a mulching mower. (based on technical
           evaluation by Bert van Dalfsen, Mechanical
           Engineer, MAL).
           (WG ratification June 16, 2005)
       6   Fuel storage: The program supports the cost of
           providing a roof and containment for a single walled
           tank or the cost of a double walled (enviro) tank. The
           program will not provide a roof and containment of a
           double walled tank. The cost of a concrete slab and


June 07                                                                                              3
Cat.   # Policies                                                     Policy statements in
                                                                      approval/rejection
                                                                      letters
           bollards for enviro-tanks are eligible items. Spill kits
           and fire extinguishers are eligible items.
           (WG ratification October, 2005)
           Fuel storage structures should be designed with
           sufficient roof over hang and partial walls to
           minimize water collecting in the containment
           structure.
           (WG ratification June, 2006)
       7   Silage storage: Funding assistance can be
           provided to modify an existing facility or build a new
           facility where the existing facility (in place on or
           before January 1, 2004) is not adequate from an
           environmental protection perspective. Existing
           facilities include pit silos and free standing bunkers
           silos in addition to other types of constructed silos.
           (WG ratification May, 2007)
9      1
10     1   Water supply: see 6,1
       2   Cross fencing: Eligibility for funding must be based       Eligibility for funding for the type
           on a plan (Riparian Management Plan, Grazing               of fencing proposed in your
           Management Plan or Biodiversity Enhancement                application must be based on a
           Plan) that identifies the importance and value of          plan (Riparian Management
           cross fencing in dealing with identified environmental     Plan, Grazing Management
           risks and achieving environmental benefits.                Plan or Biodiversity
           (WG ratification June, 2006)                               Enhancement Plan) that
                                                                      identifies the importance and
                                                                      value of cross fencing in
                                                                      dealing with identified
                                                                      environmental risks and
                                                                      achieving environmental
                                                                      benefits. You are encouraged
                                                                      to contact your Planning
                                                                      Advisor to assist you with
                                                                      preparing such a plan.
       3   Fencing costs: The maximum amount of eligible
           costs for materials, labour and equipment is $20.00
           ($10.00 from the program) per metre or $6.00 ($3.00
           from the program) per foot.
11     1   Organic soil subsidence: Based on a Soil Erosion
           Control Plan (Category 27) using a qualified soils
           specialist, activities that are consistent with what is
           eligible under Categories 11 or 12 can be funded.
           For instance if Drop Inlet Structures or In-Channel
           Control Structures are needed, these can be eligible
           activities. Activities related to constructing or
           repairing drainage systems, where the purpose is to
           remove ponded water or draining saturated soils,
           are not eligible for funding.
           (WG ratification October, 2005)
12     1   Organic Soil Subsidence: see 11,1
13     1   Water supply: see 6,1
       2   Cross fencing: see 10,2


June 07                                                                                              4
Cat.   # Policies                                                  Policy statements in
                                                                   approval/rejection
                                                                   letters
       3   Fencing costs: see 10,3
14     1   Zero-till equipment: 50% of the value of a zero-till    Program policy is that 50% of
           drill is eligible for funding assistance.               the cost of a zero-till drill is
           (WG ratification May, 2007)                             eligible for assistance. Of that
                                                                   amount, the program can
                                                                   provide a maximum of 30% of
                                                                   the funding.
15     1
16     1   Common pest management practices: Pest                  It is the policy of the Working
           management practices common to the industry and         Group that, pest management
           well understood, will not be funded.                    practices common to the
           (WG ratification March 3, 05)                           industry and well understood,
                                                                   will not be funded.
       2   IPM practices: Where use of IPM practices are new
           to the producer, one year of funding can be provided
           to assist producers to become familiar with these
           techniques in accordance with an IPM plan.
           (WG ratification March 3, 05)
       3   Non-wildlife pests: Funding will not be provided to     It is the policy of the Working
           assist with the control of non-wildlife, pest species   Group that funding will not be
           that are commonly found on farms and ranches in         provided to assist with the
           British Columbia.                                       control of non-wildlife, pest
           (WG ratification March 3, 05)                           species that are commonly
                                                                   found on farms and ranches in
                                                                   British Columbia.
       4   Tower sprayers: Up to $5,000 ($1,500 from the
           program) can be provided for the additional
           incremental costs of converting an existing sprayer
           into a tower sprayer or of purchasing a new tower
           sprayer (based on technical evaluation by Bert van
           Dalfsen, Mechanical Engineer, MAL).
           (WG ratification June 16, 2005)
       5   Tillage equipment: The incremental costs to modify
           conventional tillage equipment for the purposes for
           reducing pesticide are eligible for funding.
           (WG ratification February 15, 2006)
       6   Orchard tillage equipment: 50% of the value of a
           “Weed Badger” or like piece of equipment be eligible
           for funding to a maximum of $1200 from the
           program.
           (WG ratification June, 2006)
       7   P. ramorum: Any projects related to control of P.
           Ramorum must be based on a revised or new
           Integrated Pest Management Plan that deals with all
           pest issues on the farm.
           (WG ratification June, 2006)
       8   Implementing practices from a revised IPM plan:
           One year of funding can be provided to assist
           producers to become familiar with new IPM practices
           identified in a revised IPM plan.
           (WG ratification August 31, 2006)
17


June 07                                                                                         5
Cat.   # Policies                                                      Policy statements in
                                                                       approval/rejection
                                                                       letters
18     1   Irrigation efficiency: A minimum efficiency increase
           of 15% for the entire irrigation system should be
           demonstrated before an eligible category activity is
           eligible for assistance.
           (WG ratification June 2006)
       2   In-kind: In-kind costs for installing irrigation systems
           are eligible project costs. The rate is 25% of
           materials costs.
           (Based on a technical evaluation by Ted van der
           Gulik, Senior Engineer, MAL)
           (WG ratification June 16, 2005)
       3   Irrigation systems: For drip irrigation systems,
           assistance is to be provided for eligible components
           up to $3,000 per hectare ($900 per hectare from the
           program) for converting from a conventional system
           to a drip system.
           For micro sprinkler systems, up to $2,000 per
           hectare ($600 per hectare from the program) for
           converting from a conventional system to a micro
           sprinkler system. (Based on a technical evaluation
           by Ted van der Gulik, Senior Engineer, MAL and
           Policy Committee approval)
           (WG ratification June, 2006)
           Contracted costs for installation can be up to 40% of
           the cost for materials.
           (WG ratification October, 2005)
       4   Irrigation design: All eligible systems are to be
           based on a Certified Irrigation Plan.
           (Based on a technical evaluation by Ted van der
           Gulik, Senior Engineer, MAL and Policy Committee
           approval)
           (WG ratification June 16, 2005)
       5   Irrigation equipment: For equipment that improves
           irrigation efficiency (e.g. timers, soil moisture probes,
           climate measuring equipment, etc.), eligible costs of
           up to $3333 ($1000 from the program) can be
           funded without a Certified Irrigation Plan. The
           irrigation schedule needs to be provided with the
           application.
           (Based on a technical evaluation by Ted van der
           Gulik, Senior Engineer, MAL and Policy Committee
           approval)
           (WG ratification June 16, 2005)
       6   Farm use change: Changes in farm use are
           deemed to be normal farm evolution. Irrigation
           upgrades associated with these changes are
           therefore eligible for funding assistance under the
           NFSP provided they meet all other relevant irrigation
           requirements of the program.
            (WG ratification June 16, 2005)
       7   Eligible technology: Conversions from one type of
           eligible irrigation technology to another type of



June 07                                                                                       6
Cat.   # Policies                                                 Policy statements in
                                                                  approval/rejection
                                                                  letters
           eligible irrigation technology are eligible for
           assistance under the NFSP provided they meet all
           other relevant irrigation requirements of the
           program.
           (WG ratification June 16, 2005)
       8   Pre-existing irrigation systems:
           • The pre-existing irrigation system must have
                been in place on or before January 1, 2004.
           • The pre-existing irrigation system must have
                been:
                  o a sprinkler system – hand move, solid set
                       or stationary gun, or
                  o a traveling gun, or
                  o a designed flood system, and
                  o capable of meeting water demand based
                       on climate, crop and soils.
           • Ineligible systems include:
                  o garden hoses, or
                  o buckets, or
                  o systems for areas not previously irrigated
                       by the pre-existing system.
           • Evidence of a pre-existing system that must be
                observed by the Planning Advisor include one or
                more of the following:
                  o old system in place, or
                  o irrigation infrastructure on farm, or
                  o irrigation plan for previous system, or
                  o photos of previous system, or
                  o water bills from use of previous system, or
                  o pump system in place, or
                  o invoices for previous system.
           • The BMP application description needs to
                include information about the pre-existing
                system.
           (WG ratification August 31, 2006)
       9   BMP cap: Increase from $10,000 to $15,000 for
           projects approved after November 1, 2006.
           (WG ratification May, 2007)
19     1                                                          Prior to designing your
                                                                  shelterbelt (including the
                                                                  selection of species to plant)
                                                                  please refer to the Landscape
                                                                  Buffer Specifications document
                                                                  published by the Agricultural
                                                                  Land Commission at:
                                                                  http://www.alc.gov.bc.ca/public
                                                                  ations/buffer/lbs_main.htm. and
                                                                  the Prairie Farm Rehabilitation
                                                                  Administration shelterbelt
                                                                  publications at:
                                                                  http://www.agr.gc.ca/pfra/shelte
                                                                  rbelt/publications_e.htm


June 07                                                                                       7
Cat.   # Policies                                                   Policy statements in
                                                                    approval/rejection
                                                                    letters
       2   In-kind for shelterbelts: In-kind valuation for
           establishing shelterbelts to be 100% of materials
           cost to a maximum of $5.00 per metre ($1.50 per
           foot) of shelterbelt.
           (WG ratification May, 2007)
20     1   Invasive plants: A list of species eligible for
           assistance and standard amount of funding for
           control of these species, such as a per hectare
           amount are to be developed and funding will be
           limited to strategic approaches that are based on a
           geographic area and other relevant criteria.
           (WG ratification June 16, 2005)
           1. The Producer with an isolated invasive
                species present is not within an area that is
                part of a provincial or regional strategy
                • The invasive specie must be listed as
                    noxious in the Field Guide to Noxious and
                    Other Selected Weeds of British Colombia
                    or identified as a priority by a Ministry of
                    Agriculture and Lands weed specialist.
                • There must be an expectation of longer term
                    control from an annual treatment
           2. The Producer with an invasive species
                present is within an area that is part of a
                provincial or regional strategy
                • The invasive specie must be listed as
                    noxious in the Field Guide to Noxious and
                    Other Selected Weeds of British Colombia
                    or identified as a priority by a Ministry of
                    Agriculture and Lands weed specialist.
                • The proposed approach to control must be
                    part of a provincial or regional strategy and
                    endorsed by a local weed committee or
                    equivalent
                • There must be an expectation that one
                    allocation of funding will have a longer term
                    benefit
           Funding limit of $500/ha for the project and $250/ha
           from the program.
           (WG ratification October, 2005)
21     1   Water supply: see 6,1
       2   Cross fencing: see 10, 2
       3   Fencing costs: see 10,3
22     1   Water supply: see 6,1
       2   Cross fencing: see 10, 2
       3   Fencing costs: see 10,3
23     1   Non-wildlife pests: Funding will not be provided to      It is the policy of the Working
           assist with the control of non-wildlife, pest species    Group that funding will not be
           that are commonly found on farms and ranches in          provided to assist with the
           British Columbia.                                        control of non-wildlife, pest
           (WG ratification March 3, 05)                            species that are commonly



June 07                                                                                          8
Cat.   # Policies                                                   Policy statements in
                                                                    approval/rejection
                                                                    letters
                                                                    found on farms and ranches in
                                                                    British Columbia.
       2   New commodities: All agricultural lands, regardless
           of current land uses are eligible for wildlife damage
           prevention funding based on an action item in the
           Planning Workbook.
           (WG ratification June 16, 2005)
       3   Surveys for boundary fencing: Relevant legal
           boundary survey costs for fencing BMPs are an
           eligible BMP expense.
           (WG ratification June 16, 2005)
       4   Raising drip lines: Raising drip irrigation lines to     Funding for raising drips lines is
           prevent wildlife damage is eligible for funding. The     restricted to existing systems
           maximum amount of funding is the amount required         where there is evidence of
           to build a damage prevention perimeter fence.            damage.
           Based on recommendation from G. Hughes-Games,
           MAL, the fencing cost to be used to calculate
           equivalency is $20.00 per metre ($6.00 per foot).
           Value of in-kind contribution to raise drip lines is
           $0.35 metre ($0.11 foot).
           (WG ratification October, 2005)
           Additional criteria for this BMP are:
                • it must be an existing drip system,
                • there must be evidence of damage, and
                • raising the drip lines must not be the
                    conventional method of installing drip lines
                    for the commodity in question.
           (Technical Committee February, 2006)
       5   Falcons: Construction of facilities and training of
           growers to employ falcons for bird control be
           deemed ineligible.
           (WG ratification June 2006)
       6   Fencing to protect livestock: Fencing to protect
           livestock from wildlife damage is not eligible for
           funding assistance.
           (WG ratification June, 2006)
       7   Netting and Other Project to Prevent Bird                Funding can only be provided
           Damage: Funding can only be provided where the           for projects that are intended to
           primary cause of damage is from “protected and           prevent damage from protected
           managed” species. If funding is to be provided one       or managed bird species. To
           of the following criteria must be met:                   warrant funding assistance,
                • a conservation concern must be identified         enhancement measures for the
                    with respect to protected and managed           protected and managed
                    species, or                                     species must be taking place
                • enhancement measures for the protected            on or adjacent to your farm.
                    and managed species must be taking place
                    on or adjacent to farms that are applying for
                    the funding.
           (WG ratification November 9, 2006)

           The application must be accompanied by a letter
           from an environmental or wildlife agency stating that


June 07                                                                                          9
Cat.   # Policies                                                  Policy statements in
                                                                   approval/rejection
                                                                   letters
           protected and/or managed species are the primary
           cause of bird damage to the crop in question and
           specify the measures that are being taken to protect
           and/or manage the species.
           (WG ratification May, 2007)
       8   Fencing costs: The maximum amount of eligible
           costs for materials, labour and equipment is $20.00
           ($6.00 from the program) per metre or $6.00 ($1.80
           from the program) per foot.
25     1   Consultant Qualifications: Producers, Delivery
           Groups and Planning Advisors be provided with
           information on the desired qualifications of planning
           consultants.
           (WG ratification March 3, 05)
       2   Revision of existing IPM plans: Funding can be
           provided for revision of exiting plans to deal with a
           pest issue that was not present when the existing
           plan was prepared.
           (WG ratification Aug 31, 06)
26     1   Consultant Qualifications: see 25,1
27     1   Consultant Qualifications: see 25,1
28     1   Consultant Qualifications: see 25,1
29     1   Pre-Authorization of Irrigation Management Plan:
           Up to $1,000 of eligible costs ($500 of program
           costs) to be pre-authorized (does not need an
           application). Coordinators to provide verbal
           authorization to Planning Advisor or applicant. At a
           later date a completed application for this BMP
           needs to be submitted and approved.
           (WG ratification June 16, 2005)
       2   Consultant Qualifications: see 25,1
80     1   Boilers: Funding for air emission control equipment
           for biomass (e.g. wood waste) fired boilers that will
           meet emission standards and where the boilers
           were in operation on or before January 1, 2004.
           (WG ratification June 16, 2005)
81     1
82     1   Consultant Qualifications: see 25,1
84     1




June 07                                                                                   10