Regional Clean Water Guidelines for Fertilization of Urban Turf
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Final Report to the New England and New York State Environmental Agency Commissioners: Regional Clean Water Guidelines for Fertilization of Urban Turf A project of The New England Interstate Water Pollution Control Commission is a non-for-profit interstate agency established by an Act of Congress in 1947. We serve and assist our member states – Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York, Rhode Island, and Vermont – by providing services and support that augment the states’ efforts to protect water resources, reduce water pollution, and improve water quality. NEIWPCC coordinates forums and events that encourage cooperation among the states, develops resources that foster progress on water issues, represents the region in matters of federal policy, trains environmental professionals, manages programs and administers grants, initiates and oversees scientific research, educates the public, and provides overall leadership in water management and protection. Acknowledgments NEIWPCC would like to gratefully acknowledge the time and effort contributed by the project advisory group members (cited below) and by all attendees of the project stakeholder meetings. Additionally, NEIWPCC extends special thanks to Dr. Martin Petrovic, Cornell University, and Mary Owen and Jason Lanier, University of Massachusetts Extension, for providing technical expertise through extensive reviews of earlier drafts. New England Voluntary Turf Fertilizer Initiative Project Advisory Group Bob Capowski, New York State Department of Environmental Conservation Bethany Card, Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Mark Casella, Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Betsy Dake, Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management Aseem Kumar, New York State Department of Environmental Conservation Norm Marcotte, Maine Department of Environmental Protection Barbara McMillan, New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services Ernie Panciera, Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management Mark Parker, Connecticut Department of Energy and Environmental Protection Jane Peirce, Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Michaela Stickney, Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation Eric Williams, New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services NEIWPCC Staff Lead Clair Ryan (978) 349-2519 [email protected] The guidelines presented in this report are suggested to the New England states and New York State by the New England Interstate Water Pollution Control Commission. This project was funded through Grant Agreement I-00199111 awarded by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to NEIWPCC. The guidelines do not represent policy positions of any state agency or of the U.S. EPA. Regional Clean Water Guidelines for Fertilization of Urban Turf Table of Contents Executive Summary ................................................................2 Introduction ......................................................................3 Project Background ................................................................3 Methodology .....................................................................4 Scope of Guidelines ................................................................5 Regional Guidelines Narrative Report ................................................7 Part I: Right Formulation ...........................................................7 Part II: Right Rate .................................................................8 Part III: Right Time ...............................................................10 Part IV: Right Place ...............................................................12 Part V: Right Supporting Actions .....................................................13 Recommendations and Conclusions .................................................15 Works Cited .......................................................................16 Appendix A– Definition of Terms ......................................................18 Appendix B – List of Guidelines .......................................................20 Appendix C – Summary of Northeastern State Laws on Turf Fertilizer .........................23 Appendix D – List of Participating Stakeholders by Affiliation ...............................29 Appendix E – Resources for Further Guidance ...........................................30 1 Regional Clean Water Guidelines for Fertilization of Urban Turf Executive Summary n 2011, the New England environmental agency high foot traffic (defined as “sports turf” in Appendix A), commissioners asked the New England Interstate Water must be managed according to its use. It was, however, IPollution Control Commission to engage pertinent possible to develop guidelines appropriate for non- stakeholders in developing a regional set of turf fertilizer performance turf (defined as “urban turf” in Appendix guidelines aimed at reducing nutrient pollution in A), which accounts for the vast majority of turf coverage order to protect water quality. NEIWPCC convened in the region. Also, turf areas of high environmental risk four stakeholder meetings between 2012 and 2013 that and sensitivity for nutrient losses merit extra precautions were attended by turf fertilizer manufacturers, lawn if fertilizer is used. Periodically, alternate guidelines are care professionals, sports turf managers, turf industry recommended specifically for these areas. trade groups and professional associations, researchers, The set of 33 regional guidelines presented in this university extension specialists, municipal and private report are organized around “5 R’s”: right formulation, groundskeepers, state and federal environmental agencies, right rate, right time, right place, and right supporting and watershed groups. The broad knowledge base actions. The first four R’s are broadly recognized among represented by the stakeholders at the meetings strongly the agronomic community as being the factors that informed the content of the regional guidelines presented determine proper, environmentally safe fertilizer use. The in this report. While there were differences in philosophy fifth R, right supporting actions, describes practices that and opinion between industry and environmental do not directly relate to fertilization but that impact turf’s stakeholders, there were also areas of common ground. ability to retain stormwater and nutrients. The guidelines For example, many management practices that improve appear within a narrative report on pages 7-14 and also as the health of turf simultaneously reduce runoff. NEIWPCC a stand-alone list in Appendix B. believes that the guidelines in this report are supported It is NEIWPCC’s intent that state water quality by the majority of stakeholders who worked on this effort. programs, municipalities, and watershed groups will However, consensus was not possible on all topics, and be able to use or adapt these regional guidelines as a areas of contention are identified and discussed in the basis for outreach and education efforts related to turf report. fertilizer. The need to better educate professional and Although NEIWPCC perceived the original goal of home users on proper turf fertilizer use was a major point this effort to be the production of a one-size-fits-all set of of discussion among stakeholders. We urge the states and guidelines that would reduce nutrient impacts to water EPA regions to consider investing in regional and locally quality while growing adequate turf in all cases, it became targeted approaches to outreach, with a particular focus apparent that a catch-all approach was not practicable. on innovative outreach tools and active training and One reason is that turf which is subject to intensive use, engagement of turf fertilizer users. including that grown for sports use and areas subject to 2 Regional Clean Water Guidelines for Fertilization of Urban Turf Introduction Project Background areas, and unregulated stormwater runoff. Of particular note is that many states, including five in any of the most prominent waters in New England the New England/New York region, have used legislation and New York State suffer from water quality to reduce nutrient pollution resulting from the overuse Mimpairments stemming from pollution with the and misuse of fertilizer on turfgrass (see Appendix C). nutrients phosphorus and nitrogen (U.S. Environmental Turf in lawns makes up a small but significant percentage Protection Agency, 2011a). Nutrient pollution is often char- of total land cover regionally and comprises a much acterized by over growth of algae and other aquatic plants, larger portion of developed land. For example, in an which compromises the suitability of these waters for recre- analysis of the Piscataqua Region Watershed, the New ation, fishing, swimming, aesthetic enjoyment, and drink- Hampshire Department of Environmental Services found ing water supply. There are multiple sources of nutrient that residential lawns make up just 2.7 percent of the total pollution to water bodies, including discharges from mu- watershed land cover. However, the lawns account for nicipal and industrial wastewater treatment facilities, home roughly 21 percent of total developed land cover (where septic systems, combined sewer overflows, atmospheric “developed land” is defined as the sum of impervious deposition resulting from the burning of fossil fuels, and surfaces and lawn areas). Turf is a major feature of all fertilizer runoff and leaching from agricultural and urban but the highest