Register now on PaFlyFish.com! Login
HOME FORUM BLOG PHOTOS LINKS


Sponsors

Browsing this Thread:   1 Anonymous Users



(1) 2 »


"No cows in the stream..."

Joined:
2008/8/24 20:26
From Mount Joy, PA
Posts: 2232
Offline

Posted on: 2011/2/3 13:13


Re: "No cows in the stream..."

Joined:
2008/1/31 17:19
From Pretty much everywhere at some point, Thorndale today.
Posts: 13556
Offline
I know its a big change for these guys, and I understand why. Kind of intimidating for a small family farmer to get the scrutiny of environmental regulations.

Nonetheless, its the way forward. They're in a business, and if they want to remain that way, you gotta play by the rules.

Agree with them, though, that any efforts already taken voluntarily need to be taken into account.

Posted on: 2011/2/3 13:28


Re: "No cows in the stream..."

Joined:
2009/4/1 21:52
From Johnstown, PA
Posts: 4469
Offline
Do it the way the dairy farmer on Big Spring does it , limiting the watering hole to just a few feet instead of hundreds _________I I_______

Posted on: 2011/2/3 16:42


Re: "No cows in the stream..."

Joined:
2008/1/31 17:19
From Pretty much everywhere at some point, Thorndale today.
Posts: 13556
Offline
If you read the article, its far more than just the cows. Fertilizer is probably gonna be the big push.

Posted on: 2011/2/3 16:46


Re: "No cows in the stream..."

Joined:
2006/9/11 11:47
From Hollidaysburg (originally Lititz)
Posts: 320
Offline
Stream bank erosion of "Legacy Sediments" is probably the main source of nitrogen going into the Bay. The phosphorus is probably coming from the inorganic fertilizers. There is no way to drastically cut the nitrogen load without addressing the eroding stream banks. There is phosphorus in the stream bank sediments, but the nitrogen seems to be the bigger problem from the eroded sediments. Most farmers seem to think that stream bank erosion is due to the livestock trampling the banks. If we really want to save the Bay then we should restore all the cattle pastures to wetlands. Make the stream valleys a carbon/phosphorus/nitrogen sink rather than a source.

Posted on: 2011/2/3 18:50
_________________
Will not return until Dark:30.


Re: "No cows in the stream..."

Joined:
2006/9/9 20:09
From Harrisburg
Posts: 2194
Offline
Dear Board,

Farmers are generally regarded as good stewards of the land that they farm. Because they are held in that regard they will fight many of these regulations to the bitter end. They are already fighting the regulations in NY State so PA is sure to follow.

Great irony lies in the fact that the watermen of the Chesapeake Bay who can no longer harvest oysters or net fish will have to get "real jobs" because farming is in the blood of those upstream and those people upstream will change their ways grudgingly, if at all.

Regards,

Tim Murphy

Posted on: 2011/2/4 20:19
_________________
"Then the coal company came with the world's largest shovel, and they tortured the timber and stripped all the land. Well they dug for their coal till the land was forsaken, then they wrote it all down as the progress of man."


Re: "No cows in the stream..."

Joined:
2009/10/15 13:45
From Eastern PA
Posts: 10291
Offline
The good news for these small farmers is that there are a lot of conservation groups out there that want to work with them. It is amazing how often our TU group approaches farmers to help them out and they decline the request.

Posted on: 2011/2/5 14:12


Re: "No cows in the stream..."

Joined:
2008/1/31 17:19
From Pretty much everywhere at some point, Thorndale today.
Posts: 13556
Offline
I agree Tim. But farming is an industry. Like industry, there are constant and ever changing rules to follow.

Historically, small family owned businesses in all industries tended to get away with not following those rules. Why? Because following them means keeping up to date on a lot of complicated regulations, which likely means employing people and equipment which specialize in those situations. Regulations are expensive for the regulated. So small business was always able to get exceptions to those rules because small businesses are the lifeblood of our economy and politicians respect that. Farming just so happens to be an industry primarily run by such small, family owned businesses.

But things are a changing. Our population is growing. And regulating only the big businesses is no longer acceptabe to keep environmental concerns in check. Small business MUST adapt or die. Farmers MUST adapt or be put out of business. It's a price they must pay. We should do everything possible to help them on their journey, but they need to realize they're going on that journey whether they like it or not.

In a highly regulated society, it is very hard for small business to survive.

Posted on: 2011/2/5 14:24


Re: "No cows in the stream..."

Joined:
2006/9/9 20:09
From Harrisburg
Posts: 2194
Offline
Dear Ray,

I'm not dismissing what you said just merely saying the oyster fisherman is pretty much screwed, heyna?

It all flows downhill.

Regards,

Tim Murphy

Posted on: 2011/2/5 15:28
_________________
"Then the coal company came with the world's largest shovel, and they tortured the timber and stripped all the land. Well they dug for their coal till the land was forsaken, then they wrote it all down as the progress of man."


Re: "No cows in the stream..."

Joined:
2009/2/10 16:30
From SE PA
Posts: 4954
Offline
No mention of tilling practices? I would think that contributes more overall sediment in the Susquehanna watershed than erosion from cows in streams.

Posted on: 2011/2/6 10:06


Re: "No cows in the stream..."

Joined:
2009/10/15 13:45
From Eastern PA
Posts: 10291
Offline
Quote:

franklin wrote:
No mention of tilling practices? I would think that contributes more overall sediment in the Susquehanna watershed than erosion from cows in streams.


I think they are more concerned about nitrates in the matter at hand.

Posted on: 2011/2/7 14:30


Re: "No cows in the stream..."

Joined:
2006/11/2 8:50
Posts: 6274
Offline
If cows were fenced out of the streams, I don't know how much it would help fish populations in the Chesapeake, but fish populations in many PA trout streams would certainly go up.

Posted on: 2011/2/7 14:40


Re: "No cows in the stream..."

Joined:
2009/2/10 16:30
From SE PA
Posts: 4954
Offline
Quote:

jdaddy wrote:
Quote:

franklin wrote:
No mention of tilling practices? I would think that contributes more overall sediment in the Susquehanna watershed than erosion from cows in streams.


I think they are more concerned about nitrates in the matter at hand.


The article does not mention erosion. When discussing cows in a stream bed erosion is my (our?) first reaction. They probably want the cows out of the stream to reduce the amount of manure deposited right in the stream.

Posted on: 2011/2/8 8:11


Re: "No cows in the stream..."
Moderator
Joined:
2006/9/9 19:16
From Dallastown, PA
Posts: 7088
Offline
Keeping cows, and other livestock, out of the stream is a three pronged effect.

1. reduces and/or eliminates direct nitrate pollution.

2. reduces streambank erosion by allowing the buffers to grow.

3. forested riparian buffers planted inside the fencing act as a filter for runoff from surrounding fields.

Fencing is only one step though. Its cost effective but a hard sell to farmers who stand to lose over .5 acres per 200 linear feet of stream.

It is more important to reconnect the streambanks with the flood plains where severe erosion is occurring. The erosion carries fine sediments laced with nutrients from long ago. (legacy sediments). These endeavors are much more expensive however and cannot be abated by fencing out cattle and planting trees. Reasonable slopes need to be excavated and structures placed in stream to control the channel while vegetation takes root and matures.

Streambank fencing is a small but important step toward these goals....but it is a step.

Posted on: 2011/2/8 9:10
_________________
Don't hit me with them negative waves so early in the morning. Think the bridge will be there and it will be there. It's a mother, beautiful bridge, and it's gonna be there. Ok?


Re: "No cows in the stream..."

Joined:
2006/9/13 10:18
From LV
Posts: 7749
Offline
What wasn't said is that these streams can be fenced off at no cost to the farmers if they take action themselves, there are plenty of people out there to get the funding, hire the fencing contractors, plant vegetation, and do the clean-ups. It's a win/win for everyone. We get cleaner water the farmer gets a fence. And they do allow water access for catlle, it's not like it's closed off completely.

Posted on: 2011/2/9 17:40
_________________
There is always time to do more to protect wild trout.



(1) 2 »



You can view topic.
You cannot start a new topic.
You cannot reply to posts.
You cannot edit your posts.
You cannot delete your posts.
You cannot add new polls.
You cannot vote in polls.
You cannot attach files to posts.
You cannot post without approval.

[Advanced Search]





Site Content
Login
Username:

Password:

Remember me



Lost Password?

Register now!
Stay Connected

twitterfeed.com facebook instagram RSS Feed

Sponsors
Polls
Will you be fly fishing this autumn?
Yes
No
Thinking about it
_PL_TOTALVOTES
The poll will close at 2014/10/31 17:56
1 Comment





Copyright 2014 by PaFlyFish.com | Privacy Policy| Provided by Kile Media Group | Design by 7dana.com