22, 2000 Minutes
Janice Degni Sylvia
Schutt called the meeting to order at 10:10 AM. All agricultural producers
present received a binder with pertinent information relating to the
Schutt gave a short description of the Committee’s purpose to all those
present. This Committee was
out of the I.O., in lieu of the pending Cayuga Lake Watershed Management Plan.
Representation of the municipalities within the Cayuga Lake Watershed comprise
this Ag. Committee. Because approximately 50% of the watershed is
agricultural, it is vital that agriculture be represented in the formulation of
the final management plan to ensure its viability.
draft mission statement was reviewed and Craig solicited input from farmers
present. Membership in the Committee was also reviewed and farmers were asked
if they agreed with the representative numbers from each County. Membership
must be an odd number for voting purposes. (Please note your handout on the
of the Cayuga Lake Watershed Agricultural Committee –
“The Cayuga Lake Watershed Network has also voted this Committee as the
official agricultural committee for the watershed and will be working closely
with the Committee.”)
is available to hire a watershed steward. Both the I.O. and the Cayuga Lake
Network should view this Committee as
Dalrymple questioned if in addition to agricultural members some should be
non-ag. Possibly having someone from a water company and/or agribusiness. It
would be valuable to have someone other than a producer on the Committee.
Possibly a Mennonite farmer from Seneca County. At the last meeting, it was
left to each County to select which members they would like to have on the
Committee. Jim Malyj suggested membership from a hog operation. Ken Burr
suggested a beef farmer who owns land in three counties in the watershed. It
was mentioned that since the problems and concerns are virtually the same, the
Committee should have representation from someone other than farming, such as a
fertilizer company, ag. service, chemical company, etc. It may be difficult to
choose the right person or to gain their interest, however they could provide
valuable input. Because a person from this type of business must abide by very
strict regulations, they would have a broader perspective. The following were
suggested; Phelps Supply, Mark Oaks, Genoa Ag. Center, Dan Magari, feed company
rep. Specialists in various fields can be called in for expert comment when
needed. Janice Degni suggested someone with a financial background such as
bankers who fund construction. A crop consultant was also suggested. It was
decided to ask Mark Oaks or a representative from Genoa Ag.
Overview – Agriculture in the Watershed: Dave Zorn, Genesse-Finger Lakes
attendee received handouts. Dave reviewed the idea of the watershed plan and
how to implement BMPs in the watershed. The first phase of the plan is the
watershed characterization. This is the foundation of the present state of the
watershed. The main purpose of the plan is to progress from the present state
of the watershed to the desired state. The I.O., agricultural, technical,
financial and educational committees are very important to this effort.
Educational committee and public participation will provide input to the plan.
Fact finders and the technical committees will take part in formulating the
watershed characterization. The second phase is the development of the actual
then gave a very informative power point presentation on the Cayuga Lake
Ag. Committee needs to devise strategies for watershed restoration and
protection which will aid in the development of the final watershed management
plan. The plan should be revised every 1-2 years. It should be a
“working document”, or “the strategy”
#319 and #404 money will fund the development of the plan. Dave feels that
even while the plan is being written, implementation can still be done. Some
of the concerns in the watershed are septic and municipal sewage,
runoff, stormwater runoff, spills, and industrial cooling water to name a few.
He noted that during the last 15 years there have been over 500 spills within
the watershed boundaries. The plan will describe the numerous ways in which
the watershed is used. The southern tributaries capture approximately 50% of
the flow into Cayuga Lake. Approximately 140 tributaries enter the lake.
processes that can be utilized to improve water quality in the watershed are,
water quality monitoring, agricultural support, the use of permits/ordinances,
stormwater management, and septic system management.
noted that with respect to phosphorus levels, the Ithaca sewage treatment plant
is being renovated with new technology. The southern end of Cayuga Lake has
the most serious problem with phosphorus levels.
present at this meeting should review the characterization and please bring
comments and/or suggestions to the next meeting.
next meeting will be on Wednesday, April 12 at 11:00 AM at Cornell Cooperative
Extension, Willow Ave, Ithaca.
meeting adjourned at 12:05 PM.
Return to index
To contact the
Cayuga Lake Watershed
CLW IO 2002