Soil and Water Conservation Concerns


	From Leonard Jordan I've been observing from a far the matter of the Soil and Water Commission and Conservation Districts. I first want to say that I'm not attempting to get into the business of the great folks in GA. As you know I spent 4 great years working with that great partnership and recognize the amount of progress that was made in putting conservation on the land. Those efforts not only provided benefits to rural Georgia, but to all of Georgia. The drought and water shortage would have been much greater if it had not been for those great conservation efforts. Although I'm federal, I realize that the local district partnership made this happen. I could go on and on about the value of maintaining that local infrastructure and the benefits Georgia receive because of the local infrastructure. I can tell you that over the last 10 years alone, there has been approximately $400 million federal dollars that have come into the state because of the local district partnership and the Conservation Commission. Think about all of the work that has taken place with the watershed dams and how valuable that has been for the state. Without that local partnership, Georgia would not have been blessed with those resources. You see it makes a difference to have local folks that are organized and truly care about their local communities and their great state. As a federal agency we were invited into the local communities by the local districts. These folks provided that leadership that resulted in the great conservation ethics and stewardship that has created the desire for local farmers and others to protect their valuable natural resources. This stewardship has made Georgia the great state that it is. The local economy has been able to survive because of the local districts providing leadership that results in the protection of these vital and critical natural resources. Georgia is a desirable place for other industries to relocate and provide additional jobs because of the conservation efforts that have resulted from the conservation partnership efforts. I truly hope what I've been hearing doesn't become reality. I would certainly hate to see all of the gains the state has made be lost. I apologize for this lengthy email, but felt the need to express my view and perspective. Leonard Jordan, Associate Chief for Conservation (NRCS) National Resources Conservation Service 202-720-4531
	Clean Water Threatened by Silt Net Manufacturers. A few Silt-net manufacturers in Georgia have asked their state representatives to punish the Ga Soil and Water Conservation Commission (SWCC) for discovering and advocating for cheaper and more effective silt control devices than the old standard silt-net fences. The Ga House representatives are: David Knight, Penny Houston and J Shaw. The SWCC researched various new techniques for controlling storm water runoff. They discovered several new techniques that were not only cheaper and easier for developers to use, but also these new techniques were more effective than the black and/or orange silt net fences seen along highway constructions and freshly bulldozed developments. These new techniques threaten the old silt net manufacturers because they introduce significant competition. Knight, Houston and Shaw are protecting their constituent silt-net industries by threatening the Georgia SWCC with de-funding, dissolution and demotion from a stand-alone state agency to a department under the Ag Commission. The silt-net lobby is willing to damage Georgia's environment and make construction more expensive for eveyone else just to get their way. - Lindsay D. Holliday Bibb County Supervisor, Georgia SWCC ...

	Soil conservation agency on state chopping block under Deal's budget Posted by Maggie Lee on Fri, Jan 23, 2015 Creative Loafing Of all the moves in Gov. Nathan Deal’s proposed budget for next year, one that environmentalists are watching closely is the proposed end of independence for a conservation agency that has recently tried to toughen rules on a dirty pollutant. The Georgia Soil and Water Conservation Commission came from Dust Bowl-era efforts to help farmers keep their soil rich, and later, to keep water clean. Its officials also write the so-called “Green Book,” the erosion rules that developers across the state must follow if they’re going to start digging and moving dirt. “It sounds wonky but it’s a big issue,” says state representative-turned-environmental attorney Stephanie Stuckey Benfield of GreenLaw. “I don't think a lot of people realize that the number one pollutant in our waterways … is runoff … dirt from construction sites.” One of the key tools to keeping dirt out of streams are silt fences: the orange or black fabric fences or booms that criss-cross construction sites to keep soil in place. The Green Book sets technical standards that products must meet to be legal in Georgia. In 2010, funded by a federal grant, SWCC began what turned out to be a three-year process of research for updating the circa-2000 Green Book. Some local SWCC supervisors in metro Atlanta looked forward to starting use of the new Green Book, the sixth edition, right about now. But something put the brakes on it. The updated rules on silt fence standards in the sixth edition touched some nerves and began about a year of industry-led pushback. A bare quorum of the commission voted late last year to let the old book stand and make the new book optional. It wasn't necessarily death for the sixth edition, but it was not the best outcome, in Benfield's opinion. “If the sixth edition is followed, the technology that is being used on these sites is going to be best practices, it’s going to be the most protective of our waterways,” Benfield says. She wants the new book to become the sole standard. Just weeks after the commission announced its sort-of non-decision, Deal's office released the governor's draft budget. The spending plan showed SWCC’s $2.6 million budget line cut down to zero and most of its staff, functions,and funding moved to the Georgia Department of Agriculture. In case of that move, it's not clear how Green Book decisions would be made, or if there would still be a five-seat commission to make that decision in public as is done now. Or even what would happen to the sixth edition. A request for comment to Gov. Deal’s office was not returned. The state agriculture department has yet to announce its opinion. The SWCC’s current executive director, Brent Dykes, said that he’s not going to voice an opinion on the proposal. “It needs to go through the legislative process," Dykes says. "If that’s the will of the legislative body then it gets signed by the governor, that’s the way it works." Last year, Deal’s budget started out with the same proposal to put SWCC under the agriculture department, but it did not survive the General Assembly's vetting Emacs! Stephanie Stuckey Benfield, a former state rep turned eco attorney at GreenLaw, says commission's work is vital to protecting waterways from major pollutant

wabe.org	State Budget Threatens Agency That Helps Keep Rivers Clean By Molly Samuel http://wabe.org/post/state-budget-threatens-agency-helps-keep-rivers-clean For nearly 80 years an obscure agency has helped keep Georgia’s rivers clean. The Georgia Soil and Water Conservation Commission was created during the Dust Bowl. Now Gov. Nathan Deal has proposed to take away the agency’s independence. Where I-285 crosses over the Chattahoochee River in Sandy Springs, there’s a pretty spot that is part of the Chattahoochee River National Recreation Area. Joggers run on a path on one side of the river. Alan Toney, standing on the other side, pointed out a muskrat. Toney is the chairman of the Fulton County Soil and Water District. Keeping Urban Rivers Clean “When this park was created, this river was pristine,” he said. “There was nothing north of here. And that expressway was like probably the outer piece of Atlanta right there.” Now metro Atlanta sprawls for miles north of here, but the river still looks good. That’s thanks, in part, to Toney’s work. “There’s a lot of development upstream and a lot of impacts on this resource,” he said. “A lot of people don’t realize that silt is actually the most damaging thing to a water body.” Picture a construction site on a really rainy day with red clay washing out of it. Toney’s role is to help make sure construction companies keep that from happening. Silt can clog a river, Toney explained. It smothers plants and insects, gives bacteria a surface to latch onto, and it can lead to bigger flooding problems. I’ve seen people’s lakes filled up with mud. I’ve seen their pastures filled up with mud, their backyards filled with mud, streets,” he said. “So all those things are things we try to prevent.” Toney doesn’t have regulatory authority. He helps inspectors check on construction sites and recommends better ways to do things. His position is elected, and it’s unpaid. There are 40 soil and water conservation districts around Georgia. In urban and suburban areas, they’re focused on construction. In rural areas, they revolve more around agriculture. But they’re all part of the state Soil and Water Conservation Commission, an agency based in Athens, funded partially by the state and partially by the federal government. But the commission may lose its independence. Why Change the Budget? In Gov. Deal’s 2016 budget proposal, the Soil and Water Conservation Commission is zeroed out. In 2015, it got $2.6 million. Next year, nothing. Most of the budget and the responsibilities would move to the Department of Agriculture; some would go to the Environmental Protection Division. Terry England, a Republican representative from Auburn, Georgia, said the move is a good fiscal decision. He’s the chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, and he also served as a Soil and Water district supervisor before being elected to the House. “Soil and Water is a very small agency in itself, about 38 to 40 people,” he said. So it makes sense to roll it into a bigger entity and save on administrative costs, he said, because "you’ve got individuals at the Department of Ag. that are already doing those functions.” England said the money saved could go back to programming, for “boots on the ground” work, instead of paying an extra person to do payroll. That’s not how environmental groups see it. “This is really a needless shrinking of an agency that actually performs fairly well and certainly at a low cost,” Neill Herring, a lobbyist for the Sierra Club in Georgia, said. Herring, Toney and others think the reason this is happening is over a dispute. Soil and Water was updating its manual for controlling construction runoff. In that process, the agency tested the tools that keep runoff out of rivers and creeks. And, according to Herring, some of the manufacturers of the tools that didn’t make the cut were unhappy with the results. And they complained to their legislators. “If there’s a problem with the testing, then redo the testing,” but don’t take away the agency’s independence, Herring said. The testing is an issue, England said, but it’s not what the budget move is about. “One is an issue that has to be dealt with; the other is an issue that makes good fiscal policy,” he said. “We all have a vested interest in making sure we take care of the environment.” The governor’s budget office referred me to Republican Rep. David Knight when I asked them for the reason for the change. Knight didn’t return emails or phone calls and declined an in-person request for an interview, made by another WABE reporter. The move was suggested in last year’s legislative session, too. That time, it made it through the House, but the Senate stopped it. Herring said he doesn’t think the other two agencies, both juggling other priorities, will maintain Soil and Water’s mission. And he’s concerned about the 357 dams the agency manages. The Environmental Protection Division, already stretched thin, would take those over. Toney, in Fulton County, said he’s especially worried about the Department of Agriculture keeping up an interest in urban runoff. “We’re very concerned we’ll not be able to continue doing what we’re doing,” he said. “And it’s already the smallest agency, and by far the best bang for the buck.” The House is considering the governor’s budget, then it goes to the Senate.
	Read Georgia House Bill 397 (link)

	Send Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2015 06:45 To: letters@macon.com Macon Telegraph - Letters: Clean Water vs. Bad Deal Don't let some dirty deals in Atlanta rob Georgia of its precious clean water. Georgia Governor Deal says he is in secret negotiations that will allow some unnamed company to impact our state waters. To do this, he is demanding the GA General Assembly to defund and dismantle a small agency that is tasked to keep Georgia streams and rivers clean. That agency is the Georgia Soil and Water Conservation Commission (SWCC). For 80 years the SWCC has slowly improved the quality of our surface waters by promoting better farming practices and soil stabilization at construction sites. Different business deals come and go over time as the economy changes, but we need clean water every day and forever. Macon's award-winning tap water comes from the Ocmulgee River. If you value clean water, let your state legislators know. Ask them to keep the SWCC independent and fully funded to protect Georgia's water. Lindsay D. Holliday Bibb County Supervisor, Ocmulgee River District, Ga Soil and Water Conservation Commission http://www.macon-bibb.com/SWC
	The GREEN BOOK Conserves the Environment,
	The Greenbook 6^th Edition is a good idea and here is why. Answers to the questions regarding the product testing for the New 6^th edition Greenbook. What was the purpose of the GSWCC TRI testing of Erosion and Sedimentation Control Products including sediment barriers, and check dams? To create a fair playing field for all products offered through an honest scientific evaluation of the Best Management Practices (BMPs) that is consistent and reproducible. Why was TRI Environmental used to do the testing? They had the low bid. It was offered to UGA but they turned it down because it was not economically feasible to tool up for one set of test. How is the new 6th edition superior to the 5th edition Greenbook? The 6th Edition gives the developer more options, some being less expensive, to control erosion on a construction site resulting in cleaner water and less downstream property damage. The original 5th edition of the Green Book was published 15 years ago. Much has changed with regard to technological innovations for controlling erosion and sedimentation on job sites. What about the videos circulating that show testing irregularities? There were 6000 minutes of testing, so the opportunity to make videos of a few minutes of problems is not surprising. All test were conducted three times. Any missteps were not material if you view the entire 100 hours of video. Why was Bentonite used instead of a standard installation? Bentonite is the sealer of choice for correcting problems if the water is not flowing through the fabric. This test was not about the installation of the silt fence. It was strictly designed to evaluate the fabric’s ability to catch sediment. Each test was evaluated individually and all test where conducted three times. Is there another opinion about the test accuracy for tm11340? ASTM International was provided information on the testing. It was found to be of good repeatability. Why is there a skimmer option in the 6th edition? It is part of new federal requirements for NPDES (rooted in the Clean Water Act). It did not come from the Commission. 3 widely used Type C silt fence products were shown to be less effective. Was this a surprise? No one expected or wanted the Type C silt fence to be less effective in holding back silt, but the results are conclusive. There are some fairly simple design changes that could allow these products to increase effectiveness and score better. Also, there may be federal dollars made available to retest the products of concern. Why is a performance-based standard the proper way to include new and innovative Best Management Practices (BMPs) in the Green Book? Every year, companies provide cheaper and more effective solutions to manage erosion related issues on construction sites; however, if the practices or products are not specifically approved in the Green Book (5^th edition), developers have a much more difficult time using them in the field. The performance-based standard provides a way in which these new products can be tested in order to be included in the design manual. Alan O. Toney Fulton County Soil and Water Conservation District Supervisor District Chairman 770-456-1446

	Disclaimer: All information and opinion on this page comes from Lindsay Holliday (a Ga SWCC District Supervisor) and his friends, neighbors and other Concerned Citizens. None of the expressed opinions are attributable to either the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), nor the Georgia Soil and Water Conservation Commission (GSWCC) , nor the Georgia Association of Conservation District Supervisors (GACDS)
	Links to Official Conservation Information sites below:
	Conservation Organizations
	Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Georgia Soil and Water Conservation Commission (GSWCC) Georgia Association of Conservation District Supervisors (GACDS) ....... Dedicated to the Protection and Conservation of Natural Resources

Lindsay 'Doc' Holliday	Send Email
Holliday Dental Associates 360 Spring Street Macon, GA 31201	office 478-746-5695 home 478-742-8699 Thank-You...

	Georgia Governor Deal says economic development threatened by Soil and Water Conservation Commission !!
AJC.com	Feb 2015 www.ajc.com GEORGIA'S ECONOMY More job wins on horizon? Governor, state leaders appear active in luring major companies to Georgia. By Greg Bluestein gbluestein@ajc.com and J. Scott Trubey strubey@ajc.com Georgia economic development officials are angling for their biggest jobs recruitment deal in nearly a decade, and Gov. Nathan Deal is flexing his political muscle to help land the prospect. The governor's midyear budget proposal pumps tens of millions of new dollars into grant programs the state uses to seal deals with corporate prospects. He's also backing legislation that could steer more state business to automakers with Georgia factories. Last week, the governor told a key farmers group their resistance last year to his still-pending plan to alter an independent state environmental agency could have jeopardized â€œthe largest economic development project in the state since 2006. That was the same year Georgia landed one of its biggest ever coups — the Kia Motors plant and thousands of manufacturing jobs. Is all this a sign that the state is going after a trophy project? "If I was a betting man, I'd say: "Yes they are," said John Boyd, a corporate site selection expert with the Boyd Co. in New Jersey. The moves are some of the most aggressive Deal has made to lure economic development prospects to Georgia. They follow Deal's recent trip abroad to meet with executives of U.K.-based Jaguar Land Rover — a manufacturing prospect that could demand a bounty off state and local incentives. The company has reportedly considered the U.S. for a plant to make 200,000 vehicles a year, though last week a newspaper in its home city reported that Turkey or Austria may be favored candidates. But Jaguar Land Rover might not be the only big fish. Two people with knowledge of the situation told The Atlanta Journal-Constitution another major manufacturer is in the late stages of deciding between Georgia and other sites for a major expansion. The people declined to name the company or its industry, citing the sensitivity of the talks. Deal's office has declined to comment on the potential deals. Possible signs Tucked away in the midyear budget the governor signed into law on Friday to cover state spending until June is a major hint at something big. Deal has secured $40 million for a pair of economic development grant programs used to sweeten the pot for key projects. Last year's midyear spending plan included about half that sum. On Thursday, Deal spoke to the Georgia Farm Bureau and asked their support for a measure that would take away the independence of a state environmental agency. The agriculture group fiercely opposed a similar measure last year. The proposal, outlined in his budget plan and upcoming legislation, would shift most of the funding and resources of the little-known Soil and Water Conservation Commission to the Department of Agriculture and the Environmental Protection Division. It comes as the commission rewrites regulations to keep runoff from construction and manufacturing sites from polluting streams and rivers. A lot of earth is moved in the development of factories. Deal said "contradictory" environmental guidelines could lead to litigation and threaten major economic development deals. "It's bad policy. And it could risk the future of job growth in the state," he said to the Farm Bureau. "We came very close to having the largest economic development project in the state since 2006 jeopardized because of that very thing." Problem "avoided" In a brief follow-up interview, the governor said the problem was "avoided" — he and his office declined to elaborate — and the project remains pending. Rolling the commission into the Agriculture Department "would avoid any kind of possibility with that kind of interference with ongoing projects," he said. Neill Herring, a Sierra Club lobbyist, said the governor's use of economic development as a "general threat" ratchets up the pressure on lawmakers. "Who would want to be the stubborn fool who cost Georgia a big employer?" quipped Herring, whose organization opposes the changes. The governor is also pushing legislation that would allow state agencies to buy cars made in Georgia without competitive bids. Kia is Georgia's only major auto manufacturer, but Deal's spokesman made clear "it would encompass future Georgia-based car companies, too." Boyd, the site consultant, said states pursuing trophy recruits often review regulations or take other steps to create a competitive advantage or eliminate a perceived liability. "Deal needs deep pockets to close (such a) deal, and it looks like he's marshalling those resources now," Boyd said. Compared to Kia Deal's comments to the Farm Bureau echo ones he made in January 2012 to a gathering of the Georgia Press Association when he said the state was "in the final stages of negotiating what will hopefully be the largest business opportunity for the state of Georgia since Kia." A month later Athens landed a Caterpillar manufacturing plant and 1,400 promised jobs. That April, Baxter International announced a 1,500-job bioscience facility near Social Circle, east of Atlanta. Manufacturing centers — auto plants in particular — are coveted for the jobs they create and the potential for thousands more at suppliers. Incentives for Kia, which built a plant in West Point near the Alabama border, totaled more than $195,000 per job in grants, tax breaks and other perks, according to an AJC analysis. Baxter International got an incentive package valued at more than $140,000 per job when it picked the Social Circle area east of Atlanta for a new bioscience plant. By comparison, Mercedes-Benz was offered a package totaling about $28,750 per job for its recent U.S. headquarters move to Sandy Springs. Critics say companies often pit jobs-hungry states against each other. That practice, they say, results in ever-growing incentives offers to companies that would likely expand for business reasons in a given region anyway. The Atlanta Journal-Constitution recently reported, citing unnamed people with knowledge, that Deal and economic development chief Chris Carr met with Jaguar Land Rover representatives last month. Jaguar Land Rover did not confirm its interest in Georgia, but said this month it â€œhas ambitions to expand its international manufacturing footprint.â€ The company has no U.S. plants. Owned by Tata Motors of India, it makes Jaguar luxury cars and Land Rover SUVs. U.S. automaking has shifted south for decades, thanks in no small part to lower business costs, a largely non-unionized workforce and generous incentives. A decision by the auto company could come within a few months, the people with knowledge said.