CSP Water Quality Eligibility Tool

For Cropland Applications

**Background**

For the next CSP sign-up a new water quality eligibility tool will be
available to assess the offered acres of a producers operation and
ensure that nutrient, sediment, pest and salinity resource concerns are
addressed in a consistent manner. In the past, water quality has been
addressed variably across the country. This tool will ensure water
quality issues are looked at consistently and minimum thresholds are
met. By simply answering yes or no to a series of questions all CSP
applicants will be assessed equally using the same tool across the
country. When all of the answers are complete, a clear determination of
CSP eligibility based on water quality will be displayed.

The approach adopted accounts for multiple management activities that
protect and enhance water quality on the farm. Each conservation measure
contributes to a cumulative index score defined by the CSP water quality
concerns (nutrient, sediment, pest and salinity). There are many
conservation measures and they may contribute to each of the water
quality concern index scores. For example, the conservation measure of
cover crops contributes to every water quality index category. Thus
measures that are more effective are weighted higher than measures that
are focused on a single water quality issue.

Each of the constituent water quality concerns (nutrient, sediment, pest
and salinity issues) requires a minimum index score for the producer to
be eligible for CSP. There are many conservation measures that may be
applied on an agricultural operation. Not all of these measures must be
applied to meet the minimum threshold score for each resource concern.
In other words there are many ways to combine and uniquely apply
conservation measures that would add up to the minimum thresholds needed
to meet basic eligibility. This was specifically designed into the tool
to address the variability found in agricultural operations, the
environment, soils, etc. Different suites of conservation measures,
focusing on protecting water quality, will meet the CSP thresholds in
different combinations. Thus providing the American Farmer the
flexibility to meet water quality resource concerns on their operation
site specifically yet assessed consistently.

The CSP Water Quality Eligibility tool was created by a panel of agency
experts. This team together assigned index values to each conservation
measure for each of the CSP water quality concern categories. The tool
was further reviewed and tested by NRCS employees from around the
country.

The tool is a spreadsheet based tool and will easily run in the CCE
environment. If you have any questions or comments please contact Shaun
P. McKinney with the Water Quality and Quantity Team in the West
National Technology Support Center at (503) 273-2413.

The CSP Water Quality Eligibility Tool answers the basic question "Does
the producer address the minimum water quality resource concerns
outlined in the CSP legislation?" It is not a planning tool. The tool
has been likened to taking the vital signs of a patient. It is a broad
overview to determine if a patient is healthy or not. Further tests and
procedures exist to delve deeper into specific questions with great
detail (e.g. MRI, or blood tests). In much the same way, NRCS has more
detailed planning tools, such as the P-Index, WIN-PST and NLeap. The
Water Quality Tool was designed to take a national overview of
conservation measures addressing water quality and use those results to
determine if producers are meeting the minimum requirements of CSP.

Every state has water quality standards on nutrient rates, conservation
requirements such as soil tests and buffers, as well as varying state
water quality regulations. In most cases these vary from state to state.
These standards, requirements and regulations are all rooted in
appropriate conservation stewardship. In the process of implementing a
national conservation program like CSP a tool was required that assessed
producers with a common yardstick. Thus, the Water Quality Tool was
created to meet this need. The conservation measures within the tool
will not necessarily match state quality criteria. For example, the tool
asks if producers have buffers at least 25 feet wide. There are some
states with local laws requiring 100 foot buffers, and at the same time
there are states that only require 25 foot buffers.

Completing the Water Quality Tool does not advocate nor endorse stream
buffers that are wider or shorter than state law or local NRCS
Conservation Practice Standards. The tool will allow the best stewards
to document that they are addressing water quality resource concerns. It
simply allows the consistent implementation of a nation-wide program
with minimum requirements for water quality. There may be situations
where producers following local NRCS Practice Standards (e.g. 590) will
not be able to affirmatively mark the questions on conservation measures
required by the water quality tool. Regardless of the answers to
individual questions, the tool should discern producers addressing water
quality issues from those that need to do more.

**Scale to apply the Tool**

The CSP Water Quality Eligibility Tool will be applied and run for the
acres that are offered by the producer for the program. The intent is to
NOT apply the tool on a field by field basis. Each statement should be
interpreted as asking the question "Is \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
(management activity) applied on your offered acres?" A check in the box
indicates an affirmative answer. The tool can be used iteratively on
different configurations of fields or potential CSP offered packages.
The eligibility question must be true on all acres to be able to check
the box affirmatively. For example all streams must have 20 foot buffers
to check question 8 yes.

**Documentation**

The producer should have appropriate records available at the interview.
The following are examples of appropriate records and documentation:

1\) Nutrient Management Plan that includes one or more of the following:

> • Realistic crop yield goal,
>
> • Soil test results,
>
> • Previous crop credits,
>
> • Leguminous crop credits,
>
> • Manure application history, and/or
>
> • Leaf tissue analysis (if appropriate).
>
> 2\) Pest Management Plan:
>
> 3\) Other records should include:
>
> Crop type,
>
> Projected
>
> yields,
>
> Soil analyses,
>
> Dates and application rates of all nutrients used,
>
> Weather conditions at application.
>
> Records should also include the target pest, crop type and type of
> pesticides used, dates and application rates or the cultural or
> biological control method(s) used and dates implemented, including
> spot treatments.

The following is a narrative of the questions and additional guidance to
be used to fill out the CSP Water Quality Eligibility Tool.

**Management Activities**

1.  **No Surface Water Transport from Field. This applies to low
    rainfall areas (\< 14 inches) where most of the water needed for
    crop production comes from high efficiency irrigation that produces
    no surface runnoff.** Does not include flood or furrow irrigation.

2.  **No Pesticides Used (This triggers a pass for pesticides).**
    Includes organic farming operations that do not use pesticides.

3.  CHOOSE ONE (1) Integrated Pest Management CHOICE BELOW - IF NONE
    APPLY CHECK HERE.

-   **(Choice A) A full Integrated Pest Management system is not yet
    implemented, but one or more IPM management techniques that are
    appropriate for the crop and site are utilized on a regular basis.
    Integrated Pest Management - IPM includes a wide array of crop and
    site specific prevention, avoidance, monitoring, and suppression
    management techniques.**

> Prevention - Preventing pest populations (e.g., using pest-free seeds
> and transplants, cleaning tillage and harvesting equipment between
> fields, and scheduling irrigation to avoid situations conducive to
> disease development, etc.).
>
> Avoidance - Avoiding pest impacts (e.g., using pest-resistant
> varieties, crop rotation, trap crops, etc.).
>
> Monitoring - Identifying the extent of pest populations and/or the
> probability of future populations (e.g., pest scouting, soil testing,
> weather forecasting, etc.).
>
> Suppression - Suppressing a pest population or its impacts using
> cultural, biological, or chemical pest controls.
>
> Note: Guidance on appropriate IPM management techniques is available
> from Cooperative Extension.

-   **(Choice B) A basic Integrated Pest Management system with scouting
    and economic thresholds is used to manage pests and reduce pest
    management environmental risk. A basic IPM system utilizes pest
    suppression techniques (including pesticide applications) only after
    monitoring (including pest scouting) verifies that a pest population
    has reached an economic threshold.**

> An economic threshold is the number of pests (weeds, insects,
> diseases, etc.) per some unit (square foot, plant, feet of row, etc.)
> that, if left uncontrolled, will soon increase to levels high enough
> to cause economic injury that is equal to the cost of suppression.
>
> Pest management environmental risk is reduced by applying mitigation
> techniques. Mitigation techniques include both IPM management
> techniques, such as timing pesticide application to avoid heavy
> rainfall, and Conservation Practices, such as a Constructed Wetland
> that captures pesticide residues and facilitates their degradation.
> Appropriate mitigation techniques may be selected based on
> environmental risk evaluation with tools like the NRCS Windows
> Pesticide Screening Tool (WIN-PST).
>
> Note: Guidance on basic IPM systems is available from Cooperative
> Extension.

-   **(Choice C) A high level IPM system with pesticides applied only as
    a last resort is used to manage pests and reduce pest management
    environmental risk. A high level IPM system goes beyond a basic IPM
    system by relying primarily on prevention and avoidance management
    techniques (see definitions in Choice 1 note). When pest suppression
    is necessary, chemical controls are generally used only when
    cultural and biological controls have proven inadequate.**

> Pest management environmental risk is reduced by substituting cultural
> and biological management techniques for pesticides whenever possible,
> and applying other appropriate mitigation techniques. Mitigation
> techniques include both IPM management techniques and Conservation
> Practices.
>
> Appropriate mitigation techniques may be selected based on
> environmental risk evaluation with tools like the NRCS Revised
> Universal Soil Loss Equation 2 - RUSLE2 (for evaluating the use of
> tillage for weed control) and the NRCS Windows Pesticide Screening
> Tool - WIN-PST (for evaluating the use of last resort pesticides).
>
> Note: Guidance on high level IPM systems is available from Cooperative
> Extension.

4.  **Partial Treatment by spot treatment, banding, or directed spraying
    to reduce amount of pesticide applied. This can be in addition to
    other IPM choices above**.

5.  **Perennial streams, ponds and lakes are bordered with vegetated
    buffers at least 20 feet wide. For flooded rice and cranberry
    fields, dikes that are at least 20 feet wide can substitute for
    vegetated buffers.**

6.  **When applying pesticides, maintain a minimum setback distance of
    33 feet between the application area and intermittent
    streams/ditches, perennial streams, ponds/lakes, surface water
    inlets and open sink holes.** Application rates for liquid manure do
    not exceed the Available Water Capacity of the soil. Winter manure
    application is limited to daily haul.

7.  **When applying manure, maintain a minimum setback distance of 33
    feet between the application area and intermittent streams/ditches,
    perennial streams, ponds/lakes, surface water inlets and open sink
    holes.** Application rates for liquid manure do not exceed the
    Available Water Capacity of the soil. Winter manure application is
    limited to daily haul.

8.  **A minimum of 30% surface residue cover remains after planting
    annual crops on 2/3 or more of the rotation; OR, Hay/Pasture is more
    than 1/2 of the rotation.** Applies to a cropping system where 30%
    surface cover is maintained after planting for 2/3\'s or more of the
    crops planted during the rotation; OR, the other option is that hay
    or pasture make up 1/2 or more of the rotation.

9.  **In an annual cropping system, no crop is grown more than two
    consecutive years. In a perennial based cropping system no single
    annual crop makes up more than 1/2 of the rotation.** Two or more
    crops (within a 3 yr period) are included in the rotation to improve
    crop diversity for soil health, pest management, and erosion
    control.

10. **Erosion is controlled in the concentrated flow areas.** Ephemeral
    and gully erosion is stabilized.

11. **Conservation measures (such as, crop rotation, residue management,
    contouring, and buffers) are maintained to reduce erosion and
    minimize sediment from entering intermittent streams/ditches,
    perennial streams, ponds/lakes, surface water inlets and open sink
    holes.** A system of practices are applied and maintained to reduce
    erosion and minimize sedimentation and transport of sediment to
    surface waters. Practices may include: crop rotation, residue
    management, contour farming, contour buffers, grassed waterways,
    water and sediment control basins, terraces, strip cropping, cover
    crops, filter strips, vegetative buffers.

12. **CHOOSE ONE (1) NITROGEN CHOICE BELOW - IF NONE APPLY, CHECK HERE**

    -   **(Choice A) Most nitrogen (manure or fertilizer) is applied at
        or close to planting.** Greater than 75% of the crop nitrogen
        requirement, as determined by the nutrient management plan, is
        applied at or within 30 days of crop planting.

    -   **(Choice B) Most nitrogen (manure or fertilizer) is applied as
        a sidedress or foliar.** Greater than 75% of the crop nitrogen
        requirement, as determined by the nutrient management plan, is
        applied as sidedress after crop / plant emergence at the
        appropriate growth stage. This also applies to split application
        of nitrogen on hayland or hay fields and foliar applications.

    -   **(Choice C) No nitrogen is ever applied (manure or fertilizer)
        this triggers a pass for nitrogen.** No manure or fertilizer
        nitrogen is applied to the crop / plant. The entire source of
        nitrogen for plant growth comes from carryover of N from
        leguminous plants (previous crop or cover crop), N fixation,
        rainfall, and soil O.M.

13. **Where nitrogen is applied (manure and/or fertilizer), the rate is
    based on a nutrient management plan.** A nutrient management plan
    provides recommendations or procedures to determine the amount,
    form, placement and timing of plant nutrients to obtain optimum
    yields while minimizing the risk of surface and ground water
    pollution. The procedure used to determine nutrient recommendations
    should be based on one or more of the following:

> • Realistic crop yield goal,
>
> • Soil test results,
>
> • Previous crop credits,
>
> • Leguminous crop credits,
>
> • Manure application history, and/or
>
> • Leaf tissue analysis (if appropriate).
>
> The nutrient management plan should address all sources of nutrients.

14. **Cover crops are utilized or permanent vegetation is established
    between rows such as orchards and vineyards.** Cover crops include
    grasses, legumes, forbs, or other herbaceous plants established for
    seasonal or perennial cover to:

> • Reduce erosion from wind and water.
>
> • Sequester carbon in plant biomass and soils to increase soil organic
> matter content.
>
> • Capture and recycle excess nutrients in the soil profile.
>
> • Promote biological nitrogen fixation.
>
> • Increase biodiversity.
>
> • Weed suppression.
>
> • Provide supplemental forage.
>
> • Soil moisture management.
>
> • Reduce particulate emissions into the atmosphere

15. **Where applicable, nitrogen and phosphorus credits from manure,
    irrigation water, previous crop, and soil O.M. are calculated from
    analyses or book values and used to plan nutrient application
    rates.** Where applicable, both nitrogen and phosphorus credits from
    the following sources   are calculated using laboratory analyses of
    soil or manure (or book values) and used to plan nutrient
    applications rates:

> ° current and prior year\'s) manure applications,
>
> ° irrigation water applied during the growing season,
>
> ° previous crop including legume or cover crop,
>
> ° and soil OM.

16. **Soil Tests are taken at least once every 5th year.** Soil samples
    analyzed by a recognized land grant university or private laboratory
    using methods approved by the land grant university for the purposes
    of determining amounts of nutrients needed for crop / plant
    production. Producer needs to demonstrate the use of soil tests to
    plan nutrient application rates.

17. **No Phosphorus (excluding starter) is applied where soil test
    indicate a "very high or excessive" rating.** When soil tests
    results that are analyzed by a recognized land grant university or
    private laboratory for the purposes of determining amounts of
    nutrients needed for crop / plant production indicate that
    phosphorus levels are in the \"very high\" or \"excessive\" or
    \"above optimum\" rating category (regardless of P extraction
    method), no phosphorus is applied with the exception of up to 25
    lbs/acre of P2O5 as starter fertilizer at time of planting.

18. **No phosphorus is applied via fertilizer, manure, biosolids, or
    other amendments.** No phosphorus is applied at any time in any
    form.

19. **Phosphorus (manure or fertilizer) is injected or incorporated at
    least 2 inches deep within 24 hours; or applied on 80% surface
    residue cover or 80% crop canopy cover according to soil test
    requirements.**

20. **No Salinity Concern (This triggers a pass for Salinity).**

21. **Saline recharge and discharge areas have been identified.**
    Acceptable methods of identifying saline seep recharge areas include
    soil maps and geologic information, soil moisture probes and test
    holes, and visual inspections. Visual assessments and electrical
    conductivity measurements are acceptable methods of identifying
    discharge areas. Visual indicators of discharge areas include
    vigorous weed growth, salt crystals on the soil surface, lodging of
    the crop and prolonged soil wetness.

22. **For saline seeps, high water use crops/vegetation or the cropping
    pattern has been changed to manage or minimize salinity in ground or
    surface water.** An example of high water use crops/vegetation is
    planting alfalfa in the recharge area Using a flexible cropping
    system where planting decisions are based on available moisture is
    an example of a cropping pattern change.

23. **Irrigation water is managed to minimize salt delivery to surface
    and ground water.** Irrigation water is managed to meet the crop
    needs with minimal deep percolation and surface runoff.

Special Crops

Completing the CSP Water Quality Eligibility Tool is required for all
cropland, permanent hayland, horticultural cropland, orchards and
vineyards. It is also required to be completed for specialty crops. Some
of these products such as "sugar bush" operations require specific
directions to be appropriately applied. For sugar bush, ginseng and
similar specialty crops where neither pesticides nor nutrients are
applied questions 2, 12c, and 18 should be checked. This will result in
"pass" marks for pesticide and nutrients concerns. Surface water
sediment concerns as well as salinity concerns must be addressed to
fully pass the minimum water quality resource issues.

The CSP Water Quality Eligibility Tool presents a single, consistent
approach to help determine CSP eligibility. The tool will help
streamline the process and provide comparable results across the
country. CSP represents a new chapter in a long legacy of conservation
for our agency. Conserving and protecting water quality is at the very
roots of CSP and American agriculture.