Many Virginia Farmers Struggle to Get Financial Help to Deal With Pollution

By Scott Harper, The Virginian-Pilot, Norfolk, Va.

Jan. 13–VIRGINIA BEACH — Mike Cullipher considers himself an environmentally sensitive farmer and says he would gladly do more to protect the nearby North Landing River and Back Bay in southern Virginia Beach — if the government would help him.

But like many other Virginia farmers, Cullipher has been turned down for state aid that would have made his family business even greener.

There just was not enough money to go around, state officials told him. And the improvements were too costly for Cullipher to bear alone.

Environmentalists and agriculture advocates argue that this financial trap must change if the Chesapeake Bay and other state waters can ever be expected to recover from decades of pollution and abuse.

“I know a lot of guys who have just given up on the whole deal,” Cullipher said last week during a tour of his fruit and vegetable farm off Princess Anne Road, near the North Carolina border.

“Either the money’s not there, or the application process is too complicated, or the rules are too rigid,” he said. “Believe me, it can be a real nightmare.”

His wife, Jane, an accountant, helps do the paperwork to satisfy existing conservation programs.

“Otherwise,” Cullipher said, with a self-effacing grin, “I wouldn’t have a clue what to do.”

Gov. Timothy M. Kaine has turned his attention this year to farm pollution — fertilizers, pesticides, muddy runoff, animal waste — and is asking state lawmakers to approve $20 million in 2008-09 to assist farmers such as Cullipher so they can afford to install progressive practices and equipment.

The move comes after Kaine and his Democratic predecessor, Mark R. Warner, persuaded lawmakers to spend more than $600 million in recent years to upgrade sewage plants and industrial systems that directly pipe their treated wastes into state waters.

Farm pollution, by contrast, does not shoot into the Bay from any pipe.

Instead, it washes off fields during rain storms or oozes from the ground; it’s thus called “non-point source” pollution, as opposed to “point sources” such as sewage plants and factories.

Non-point pollutants include runoff from city streets, storm drains, lawns, gardens and development sites. They account for as much as 67 percent of the nitrogen flowing into the Virginia portion of the Bay and 36 percent of the phosphorus, according to state estimates.

Nitrogen and phosphorus are the primary nutrients that are choking the Bay.

In excessive amounts, nutrients spark algae blooms, which in turn rob oxygen from waterways and can kill fish and shellfish.

Mud and sediments from farm fields can cloud surface waters, as well as smother underwater grasses that breathe life into the Bay and provide habitat for baby crabs and fish.

Kaine pledged to tackle farm runoff in December during a meeting of top officials heading the Chesapeake Bay cleanup. But with budget deficits in Richmond, many wondered just how much aid the governor could muster.

Environmentalists and farmers, who traditionally have not gotten along, formed a partnership in Virginia last year to urge more funds in 2008 for “best management practices” on farms across the state.

These conservation practices include planting cover crops during the winter to keep soil in place, no-till farming to minimally disturb the ground, fencing to keep livestock from wading — and pooping — in streams and installing water-holding devices to curb rainy runoff.

The partners — including the Virginia Farm Bureau Federation, the Chesapeake Bay Foundation, the James River Association and the Virginia Soil and Water Conservation Districts — urged Kaine and the General Assembly to approve $100 million a year toward the conservation effort.

They suggested the funds come from a reallocation of one-tenth of 1 percent of the state sales tax. As part of their cost-share offer, farmers would put up $640 million of their own money for the next 10 years, to be paired with $1 billion from the state.

The partnership applauded Kaine for requesting $20 million this year but said it also will support two other bills — HR1335 and SB511 — that would appropriate the $100 million per year for the next decade.

“It’s the next big step that has to be taken,” said Chuck Epes, a spokesman for the Chesapeake Bay Foundation in Virginia. He called non-point source pollution “the 800-pound gorilla in the room that no one wants to talk about.”

The foundation estimates that if the $100-million plan is adopted, as many as 12 million pounds of nitrogen could be prevented from entering the Bay — “a huge bang for the buck,” said Ann Jennings, the group’s director in Virginia.

In addition to the huge boost in funding, the bills also would provide a key ingredient for farmers: a consistent, predictable pot of money.

A lack of predictability has been the biggest obstacle to getting more farmers involved with environmental practices, said Roy Flanagan, a conservation specialist for the Virginia Dare Soil and Water Conservation District, which serves Virginia Beach and Chesapeake.

“You have to remember, these guys are investing their money too, and they aren’t going to jump into something new if we can’t guarantee our share of the bargain,” Flanagan said.

With most environmental-ag programs, the state pays 75 percent of the cost, while the farmer picks up the other 25 percent. Plus, as Flanagan pointed out, they get no money if, say, their winter cover crops don’t grow.

From 1987 to 1997, Virginia offered a little over $1 million for cost-share programs. Since then, the numbers have swung as high as $18.5 million last year to a low of $409,000 in 2004, according to statistics from the state Department of Conservation and Recreation.

Gary Waugh, a department spokesman, said a record number of farmers received money last year (1,881) and a record number were turned away (at least 140).

Those who were rejected might never try again. And that concerns state officials and environmentalists.

Cullipher, the Virginia Beach farmer, said he almost gave up on the program when he was told that one field near the North Landing River would receive aid but another right next door, and closer to Back Bay, would not.

“I mean, they were literally a foot apart from each other,” he said. “I was like, ‘What in the world is the sense of that?’ “

He is excited about one added incentive this year: The winter wheat he planted on one tract in November can be harvested in the spring. Previously, the wheat had to be left alone come springtime or plowed into the soil.

A fifth-generation farmer, Cullipher said that agriculture, like the rest of the world, seems to be getting greener and greener, which is a good thing.

“We are a lot softer on the environment, no doubt,” he said.

“People talk about sustainability, and these programs are all about sustainability,” Cullipher said. “Everybody benefits from them. If nothing else, we’re making food. And we’re doing so with less impact to our natural world.”

—–

To see more of the The Virginian-Pilot, or to subscribe to the newspaper, go to http://www.pilotonline.com.

Copyright (c) 2008, The Virginian-Pilot, Norfolk, Va.

Distributed by McClatchy-Tribune Information Services.

For reprints, email tmsreprints@permissionsgroup.com, call 800-374-7985 or 847-635-6550, send a fax to 847-635-6968, or write to The Permissions Group Inc., 1247 Milwaukee Ave., Suite 303, Glenview, IL 60025, USA.