David Bates: Chairman

Phil Scrimger: Vice-Chair

Mary Barber: Treasurer

Jerry Cooper: Member

Bruce Davis: Member

Featured Inside

Lapeer Conservation District ▪ 1942 - 2007 ▪

Groundwater Stewardship Program 2

News for Forest Landowners 3

Farmland Preservation 4 Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program

5

District Trailer 6

District Volunteers 7

Poster Contest Results 9

Update from NRCS 10

Past Directors 11

Education Program 8

Mary Brown: Administrator

Robin Feiner: Admin. Assistant

Pat Wright: Education Coordinator

Jeff Tuller: Forestry/Wildlife Tech

Jim Hayes: Groundwater Tech

Tom Valentine: Lapeer County Ag Board Technical Advisor

Jason Nielsen: CREP Technician

Jay Blair: District Conservationist

65th Annual Report

USDA NRCS Staff

Board of Directors

District Staff

A Glimpse of Covers from Annual Reports of the Past

2

The focus of the Michigan Groundwater Stewardship Program is to eliminate or at least reduce risks of contamination to ground-water from the use of nitrogen fertilizer and pesticides in agricul-ture. When I visit a farm on invitation, while working with the farmer, we together look at his whole operation and equipment with an eye to spotting practices that might pose a risk. What do we mean by a risk? For an example, here we see agriculture chemicals (pesticides) stored along side of other farming materi-als. The risk here is that other activities might accidentally puncture a container and allow the pesticide to leak unnoticed onto the ground which in turn could leach into groundwater. To eliminate this risk, chemi-cals should be stored in a sepa-rate secure area and some sort of secondary containment pro-vided. This we see being done in the second photo. In the third picture we see that the chemi-cals are being stored in separate building that can be locked and has a sign indicating contents.

The above is just one example of the risk assessment program

can help the farmer identify a potential risk and how the risk can be eliminated. The assessment is voluntary and confidential.

◄ Here we see a fertiga-tion unit. This unit is used to introduce fertilizer to irrigation water. Notice the tray with a high lip under this unit. Prior to the farm assessment the unit sat directly on the wooden floor. This could have al-lowed fertilizer to penetrate

the soil beneath the building if there were an overflow of the unit or spillage during filling. The tray serves as secondary contain-ment, reducing the risk of groundwater contamination.

One particular risk we look for is abandoned water wells on or near actively farmed land. An abandoned well is of particular concern because it serves as a direct conduit to the aquifer which may serve as the source of drinking for surrounding residents. Surface contaminants such as fertilizer and pesticides can readily reach the aquifer. Abandoned wells should be properly sealed by a licensed well driller. The groundwater program will help cover the cost of sealing a well abandoned prior to November of 1993.

During the past year 92 risks were identified by producers and the groundwater technician on their farms, and steps were taken to eliminate or at least lessen the risk. These risks included such things as: recycling instead of burning pesticide containers, proper disposal of syringes, complying with regulations for sepa-ration distances between storage of hazardous materials and wa-ter wells, ponds and streams, installation of anti-backflow devices on water hydrants, implementation of plans to prevent drift of chemicals when spraying, fueling stations concrete pads, and proper signage on fuel tanks and pesticide and fertilizer storage areas. These are just some of the risk concerns addressed in the farm assessment and cropping assessment.

MAEAP VERIFICATION THE END RESULT When all risks have been eliminated or programs put in place to control the risk, a farm may be verified as totally in compliance with all federal and state environmental regulations. The verifi-cation process is managed by the Michigan Department Agricul-ture through its Michigan Agriculture Environmental Assurance Program, for which MAEAP is the acronym.

This past summer, Frank and Cathy Genovese, owners and opera-tor of Candy Cane Christmas Tree farm in Brandon Twp., Oak-land County, were MAEAP verified. Two years ago they com-pleted the farmstead assessment and this past spring completed the cropping assessment for nurseries. As a results of the assess-ments, they addressed the few items that needed attention. Upon being MAEAP verified, Cathy remarked that she had felt confi-dent that they were being good stewards but there were probably areas that they could improve upon. This assessment system has helped us do that. She continued: “We live in a high density resi-dential area of Oakland County therefore we are extremely aware of the environmental foot print that we leave.”

Groundwater Program Seeks to Reduce Risks by Jim Hayes, Groundwater Technician

From left to right:: Frank and Cathy Genovese with Jim Hayes►

3

This past year with the Conservation District Forestry Assistance Program has been a busy one. On a regular basis I was able to make site visits with landowners about 6 to 10 times per county per month for a year end total of about 350 visits for the year. Most of these visits were to provide information, but some devel-oped into writing 15 forest management plans, assisting with several timber sales, planting about 60,000 trees & shrubs, plant-ing about 80 acres of grasses, diagnosing pest problems, treating about 200 ash trees, and much more.

With all this effort to assist landowners, we now find out the pro-gram was totally cut from the state budget with no grant. How-ever, this does not mean we will eliminate our forestry program. What it means is that we will have to come up with new ways of funding which may include fees for site visits, and providing more services that we can charge for. The loss in state funding is not new. We had the same problem about 6 years ago and were able to continue a forestry program.

Besides changes in our forestry program, there are some new things on the horizon that might affect forest landowners in Michigan. Approximately a year ago, the Michigan Legislature tried to help forest land owners by passing the Qualified Forest Act. This Act allows a private forest landowner to get the same property tax break as farmers get on agricultural land. To get involved a forest must be 20 acres or more and have a working forest management plan. If the land is already agriculture or homestead exempted it will not qualify. Another new development is to sell carbon credits from your forest land. This is a new concept here that has already been go-ing on in Europe. The concept comes from the idea that we can control air pollution by setting limits of carbon emissions. A company who pollutes would agree to keep their carbon emis-sions at a certain level, and one way to do it would be to purchase units of carbon being stored. When talking about carbon emis-sions or storage, it is always in tons. Forests are capable of stor-ing somewhere around a ton of carbon per acre per year. This can vary by species and productivity.

Right now landowners can sell carbon credits that result from the installation of conservation practices like no-till planting or tree planting. Soon a forest landowner will be eligible to sell the car-bon credits from their forest which can be a significantly greater carbon sink.

A landowner who wants to sell their carbon credits will need a forest management plan and a carbon inventory which is similar to a timber cruise. Once these are in place the tons per acre of carbon being stored can be traded on the Chicago Climate Ex-change. Right now the amount of money for carbon credits is not great, but it is expected that the federal government might man-date carbon emissions, which would significantly raise the price of a carbon credit.

With energy demands at an all time high, there is a push to make ethanol from crops like corn. But there is only so much corn we can pro-duce, and this competes directly with our food supply. The newest push is to develop the technol-ogy to make ethanol from cellulose which is derived from plant parts like wood. The plan in Michigan is to build a plant to make ethanol from wood in northern Michigan. This would

be one of the first of its kind and be a sort of pilot project. North-ern Michigan is a good location because there is a vast wood re-source and a couple of large production wood processing plants just moved out of that area. Our forestland owners in Lapeer County may also benefit from ethanol production from wood in the future.

New Developments for Forest Landowners by Jeff Tuller, Forestry/Wildlife Specialist

Did You Know? ♦ That in 1951 the Lapeer Conservation District, then known

as the Central Lapeer Soil Conservation District, operated its own tree nursery? It was on 20 acres located near the Hollo-way Reservoir. There the District staff grew Red Pine, White Pine, and Scotch Pine and sold them to farmers at cost. Farmers could also rent a tree planter from the District for $2.50 per thousand (Now the fee is $50 per thousand!). By the mid-fifties, reforestation had become the District’s number one program.

♦ That by 1961, the District was responsible for the planting of over 5,000,000 trees since its founding in 1942?

♦ That windbreaks like the one pictured below in the Mill Creek area of Goodland Township were a major part of the District’s tree planting activities? By 1975, the District had assisted farmers in planting over 192 miles of windbreaks in an effort to keep precious farm ground from blowing away. This photo was taken in 1971.

District Forester, Jeff Tuller, explains forestry principles to a high school student

4

Ugh! I just finished reading another newspaper article by another columnist who thinks we should abolish all government farm and conservation funding and treat conservation and agriculture as any other business venture. Where do these people come from? I hope he didn’t write his article over a meal while enjoying a sce-nic view. It’s nice he has enough food to eat that he can spend his time criticizing the hard working people who brought it to him. But just for the fun of it, let’s imagine. In his article this colum-nist compares buying food to buying concrete and cameras. So I began thinking, in my lifetime I have purchased concrete 7 times, that’s 7 times in 49 years or once every 7 years. Yes, you are right, I didn’t buy any concrete in the first 21 years of my life, but stick to my point, please. I don’t even own a camera, but my wife does and that’s close enough, like in horseshoes. She has pur-chased 6 cameras in her lifetime, that would average one every 8 years (don’t do the math). Now let’s take the columnist’s advice and compare that to our food purchases. I like to average 3 meals a day, I get grumpy if I don’t. Once in a while I do get by on two meals a day, more often I sneak 4, and once during a religious experiment I ate only once but that lasted 2 days. So in my 49 years times 365 days a year times 3 meals a day, I have eaten food 53,655 times. All of a sudden I’m feeling fat, but I still don’t see the colum-nist’s comparison be-tween natural resource conservation, agricul-tural products and concrete or cameras. When most people buy some concrete or a camera they save money for a while, take out a small loan or make a special deal of it, although I could-n’t convince my wife that the concrete floor in our garage was her birthday gift. Our lives are too busy and complicated to make our food purchases in the same way we buy concrete or cameras. Besides that, we want to spend a consistent amount each time we purchase our food. How different our lives would be if every time we purchased food the price was markedly different than the time before, like lets say……..gasoline or diesel fuel. Now there’s the perfect scenario a columnist should use, no government regula-tions there! Just pure capitalism – charge what the market can bear – good old basic rule of supply and demand. It’s been said our government does not have an energy policy in place but I disagree, there is a policy in place. Force the produc-tive people of our country who have no choice but to get up each day and go to work to provide for their families and make them

pay uncontrolled inflated prices to predominantly foreign companies and countries who make unimaginable profits. That’s our energy policy. “Whew” I’m glad I got that off my chest! So let’s don’t listen to points of view that only focus on one as-pect of a government policy, look at the whole picture. Public utilities, electricity and natural gas are other examples of govern-ment programs that are working. The prices we pay for these utilities are set by government commission and allow the compa-nies to make reasonable profits while keeping charges predictable to consumers. How do I relate this all back to natural resource conservation and farmland preservation now? Easy. Beginning back in the 1940’s until today our governments, federal, state and local, have supported natural resource conservation and agricul-tural programs for the good of all people. These policies are working the way they are meant to work, don’t mess with them. What about the future you ask? I’m glad you did. You may or may not agree with me on this next point but hear me out please. Our nation has to become less dependent on fossil fuel. Ethanol and biodiesel are the most realistic alternatives. Whether ethanol is made from corn or another source is not my point, it may come

from a variety of sources. Biodiesel may come from soybeans or another source. My point is these are re-newable resources that will benefit our envi-ronment while they provide us energy. As we make this conver-sion from fossil fuel to renewable energy it has to come under the guidance of a govern-ment program or com-mission. Fuel for trans

portation has become too basic a need in our soci-

ety today to leave it to capitalism. We are learning that lesson every day. Every dollar we have spent on natural resource con-servation has come back to society several fold in improved qual-ity of life including farmland preservation. Oh yea, Lapeer County Farmland Preservation Program, that is my job. We have had a wonderful year, permanently preserving our first farm in Lapeer County, thanks to J.W. and Doris Thrift of Almont Township. We have had many other inquiries since that first one and are looking forward to helping those landown-ers preserve their farmland for future generations’ needs and quality of life. P.S. If you would like to discuss farmland preser-vation please call the Lapeer Conservation District at 810-664-0896 ext 3 or stop by at 1739 N. Saginaw St. Lapeer, MI.

Treat Farming Like Other Businesses?

by Tom Valentine, Lapeer County Ag Board Technical Advisor

Tom Valentine looks on as J.W. and Doris Thrift shake hands with Dave Taylor, Lapeer County Commissioner, on the signing over of their farm’s development rights to the County

5

Over the past year, Conservation District volunteers have assisted with a myriad of projects and tasks. We gratefully acknowl-edge the following for:

Help with the Tree Sale Vicki Baden Lynn Carrithers Mick Hodgson Lon Kenny The Kern Family Rosemary Kramp Steve Listwak Amy Moore Pat Plumb Dick & Nancy Robertson Sandy Strickland Wally Tucker Bill Vandercook Mike Wasilco

Maintenance Work on Our Wetland Cynthia Bader Mary Bammer Mike Bammer Joyce Chapel Margaret Colley Ester Fuchs Becky Harris Eileen Harris Mary Harris

Assistance at Woods-N-Water Weekend Margaret Colley Mark Feiner Sandy Strickland Packing Seedlings for 5th Graders Carole Billig Kathleen Connolly Judy Davis Carolyn Elston Kimberly Himebauch Flossie Jankowske Paula LaFountain Mick Mills Donna Monville Nancy Reno Becky Silkworth Sandy Wadsworth Judging the Poster Contest Pat Presby Doris Rolland Debbie Underhill Gayle Vandercook Assistance at Wild Lapeer Mary Barber Diane & Jack Johnson Carl Kern Phil & Marlos Scrimger

Assistance with Bulk Mailings The Kern Family Dorothy Martus Barb Mione Pat Presby Carol Skiba Sandy Strickland Debbie Underhill Assistance with Transportation Dave Bates Jerry Cooper Lon Kenny Assistance at Project RED Debbie Underhill Information Technology Chuck Wright It is never too late to help out! If you are interested in joining our group of volun-teers, please call or stop by our office to complete a Volunteer Interest Form. The form can also be found on our website: www.lapeercd.org

District Volunteers Support Conservation in Lapeer County

2006 Volunteer of the Year, Maurene Kern (right), receives her award. ▼

▲Volunteers (l-r) Carol Skiba, Sandy Strick-land, and Barb Mione sort the Annual Report for a with a bulk mailing.

◄Volunteers(l-r)Debbie Underhill, Gayle Vandercook, Doris Rolland and Pat Presby judged the poster contest. An efficient crew of Master Gardeners packed over 1500 trees for the 5th grade tree program. ►

▲Clearing the invasive plants from the office wetland are volunteers (l-r) Mike Bammer, Joyce Chapel, Eileen Harris, Mary Bammer, Mary Brown, Cynthia Bader, Ester Fuchs, Mary Harris, Jay Blair,Becky Harris, and Robin Feiner.

Snapshots

6

Since the introduction of the conservation Reserve En-hancement Program (CREP) to the State of Michigan, landown-ers have answered the call of conservation by setting aside over 65,000 acres of land to protect our waters and shelter our wild-life. Farmers and other landowners are realizing that the very act of farming has negative impacts on wildlife as well as local and regional water quality.

CREP offers landowners a way to lessen pollution and improve habitat without having to lessen the bottom line of their farming operations. These financial incentives, coupled with tougher laws regarding farming and the environment, are proving to be enough to get farmers interested in conservation. As a land-owner you may be wondering what changes will be made to your land by CREP. There are several conservation practices that you can apply to your land to protect water and wildlife. ♦ Filter strips: The most popular practice in this program, a

filter strip is simply a strip of grass that is planted between a field and a ditch. The purpose of the grass is to slow any water running off from the field thus catching sediment and chemical pollutants before they reach the ditch.

♦ Whole field grass plantings: Used to keep soil from wash-ing away from land to water, this practice can be used only on the most highly erodible soils where the terrain is very hilly and the soil is coarse grained and susceptible to severe erosion.

♦ Field windbreaks: Two to three rows of trees and shrubs keep high winds from blowing vulnerable topsoil from the land.

♦ Restored wetlands: Water slows down and collects on the land surface. The still water drops sediments and begins to trickle down through the soil to our groundwater supplies. These ponds, along with the planted grass buffers around them, provide the perfect setting for all types of wildlife.

Now that you know what CREP is and how your land will change, let’s discuss the myriad of benefits to wildlife, the environment, and the landowner that comes along with signing on.

The species that would have the most to gain would most likely be pheasants. In landscapes where most of the land is cropland with small inclusions of wooded areas, pheasants do not have much permanent grass in which to nest. Grasses also harbor many insects which the pheasants eat.

Deer and rabbits would also have much to gain from land being planted to grass. These grassed areas will provide a source of food but maybe more importantly, they would provide sheltered corridors so the animals can get from one place to an-other. The wetland practices will also provide a permanent source

of water and different varieties of plant life used by these species as food and cover.

Songbirds will be seen more frequently in the CREP land as well. The ground nesters will have much better cover in which to raise their young. Also, the seeds from the different va-rieties of grasses will become an important food source for these

birds. CREP also benefits your immediate and re-gional environment. The most obvious and immedi-ate benefit of the program is the reduction of soil erosion.

The roots of the grasses will hold the soil in place while the stems slow the flow of the water across the ground. There will also be an improvement in water quality due to the grass filtering out the sediment and using up the excess nutrients that would otherwise go into the water.

That’s just fine you might be saying, but clean water and more pheasants won’t pay the property taxes. This is why CREP has been designed to be the most rewarding government conser-vation program to date. In many cases the profits gained from CREP will exceed any profits gained from raising crops on the same land. Farmers won’t have to till the more unproductive ditch banks where the spoil was put when the ditches were dug. For those of you landowners that are also hunters, you will enjoy increased success due to more habitat and more wildlife. Finally, it may become important for farmers in the near future to show that they are thinking progressively where conservation is con-cerned. With an increase in conservation allotments in the new farm bill it may be time to rethink our cash crop operations to include some conservation practices.

As if the wildlife and water benefits weren’t enough, your government is willing to reimburse you up to 140% for in-stallation of the practice and give you a yearly rental payment for continuation and maintenance.

This is the CREP program and how it will benefit your land. If you think that you would like to sign up or you aren’t fully convinced, please visit your local Conservation District of-fice, or call Jason Nielsen, Sanilac, Lapeer and Oakland County CREP technician at 810-648-2116 x 115.

CREP May Be Ending Soon. Get Your Land Enrolled Now!

by Jason Nielsen, CREP Technician

A landowner checks the Truax no-till drill to make sure it’s ready for planting

7

$200 or more Jerry Cooper Bruce Davis Carl Kern Phil & Marlos Scrimger $100 to $199 Mick Hodgson Pat & Chuck Wright Schapman Farms $25 to $99 Dave Brooks Kevin Cook Joseph Israel & Sons Jim Siudara Up to $25 Kamelle Allen Steve Amato Anonymous donors - 2 John Arthurs Robert Atchison Daniel Athmer Cliff Barton Terry Beegle Richard Benoit Bill Bowman Anthony Calabro

Linda Gyorkey Todd Harris Amy Hart Kathleen Helzer Paul Henry Steve Heusted Gregory Holmes Brian J. Houlihan Valerie Hudson Gabrielle Hume Alex Hummel Fred Kamradt, Sr. Donald Karinen Lon Kenny Marie Kenny Robert Kilbourn Ken Kinyon, Jr. Richard Kramp Greg Kruszewski Frank Krzystowczyk Linda Ladowski Steve Lietz Michele Luther LeRae Mainville Rich Mata Ray McLeod Timothy Meredith Sharlene Miller Mark Monson

Violet Moon Bryan Morawski Nathan Muir Kevin Murphy Eugene Nabors Edmund Novy Brian Pasek Dennis Peacock Pat Potvin Sam Priestly Fred Prince Mike Readwin Ann Reed Sharon Ribble Jerry Ries Scott & Susan Rigg Ernie Robinson Joseph Saunders Joe Schwarzenberger Dave Scott Laura Secord Walter Severn Gary & Nancy Sheretko Mark Sherman Ben Sherwood David W. Sigler Robert & Carol Skiba Earl B. Smith James A. Smith

Paul Smith Tracy Sohn Patrick & Angela Sparr Robert Steakley Vanco Steel Steve Steiner William Sweet Jerry Swoish Jim Tolen Michael J. Tomlin, Jr. Jerry Trout Patricia Turonek Tom Valentine Marg Vanderhorst Tom Wardlaw Scot Wardrop Sean Washburn Devon White Jane Wildey Nick Youtos

Please accept our sincere apologies for any names that may have been accidentally omitted from this list.

Thanks to the enthusiastic response of many of our friends, the Lapeer Conservation District now owns a trailer which will help us with storage, tree sales, and hauling our gear to fairs and festivals. The trailer is used, but in excellent condition, and because of con-tinuing donations, now sports our Conservation District state logo on the front. In fact, if you haven’t had a chance to contribute, we are still accepting donations to help defray the cost of applying other conservation messages to the sides and back of the trailer.

Listed below are the names of the supporters who donated to the trailer fund during fiscal years 2006 and 2007. Each contribution was gratefully received, whether it was for hundreds of dollars or a tree sale order rounded up to the nearest dollar. Thank you!

Melanie Card Donald Chisholm Vaughn Chorland Clemens Tree Farm Ken Corthals Dolores Crowton Kirk Cummings Chris Cynowa Jim D’Arcy Maria Dan Frederick Dashner Judy Davidson Renee Djurovski James M. Dougherty Michael Dueweke David Dyer Kevin Eason Ronald Eaton Ester Fuchs Jesus Garcia Karen Gartley Destain Gingell Robb Gingell David Goddeeris Tara L. Gonda Christine Graver Dennis Gray Jeff Green David & Doriene Grider

8

Each person has the power to conserve natural re-sources and improve the world we live in. In order to help young people establish good conservation habits, your Conservation District offers a variety of programs throughout the year. In 2007, over 1,400 students participated in the programs that were presented.

All fifth grade classrooms in the county had the op-portunity to be involved with programs about soil, water and trees. The soil program included using a soil borer to look at soil samples or seeing a slide show about soil and eco-systems. Surface water issues were addressed with

the use of the EnviroScape and the tree program included a slide show, along with the distribution of a white pine seedling to every student. Programs of various topics were also presented to stu-dents in grades 4-10 who par-ticipated in the summer mi-grant program through the Imlay City School District, two Head Start groups, three first grade classrooms and a class for special needs students.

The District also helped five schools sponsor tree sales as fund raising pro-jects. Fifth graders at Co-lumbiaville Elementary School, fifth and sixth graders at The Chatfield School, fourth graders at Ruth Fox Elementary School and all students at Murphy Elementary School sold 3,212 trees in the spring. Fourth and fifth graders at Turrill Elemen-tary School sold 506 trees in the fall.

In addition to providing educational programs, the District sponsors a yearly poster contest in conjunction with the Michigan Association of Conservation Districts Employ-ees. This year’s contest, “Conservation’s Power,” had 801 entries. District staff also participated in Project RED (Rural Edu-cation Day), the Regional Envirothon, judging 4-H projects

at the Eastern Michi-gan Fair and the city of Lapeer’s Earth Day Celebration.

Conservation Education for the Younger Generation

by Pat Wright, Education Coordinator

◄ A student in Ms. Hohnstadt’s class at St. Paul Lutheran School uses the soil borer.

Fifth grade students at Colum-biaville Elementary learn more about soil by using soil maps.►

David Garcia, a student from Lapeer East High School, talks to third graders going through the Earth Tunnel at Project RED. ▲

A Chatfield student demonstrates the effects of pollution on groundwater.

Ruth Fox Elementary School students in Mrs. Anderson’s class estimate how the earth’s water supply is di-vided.

▲Students in Mrs.Loachridge’s class at Seaton elementary School use the EnviroScape to learn about surface water.

9

2007 Poster Contest Results

Grades K-1: Melina VanDever Elba Elementary, Lapeer

Grades 2-3: Kyle Meldrum Home School, Lapeer

Grades 4-6: Jordan Edwards The Chatfield School, Lapeer

Grades 7-9: Geralyn Carter Imlay City Middle School

Grades 10-12: Kelsey Hizelberger Lapeer East High School

Grades K-1 2nd Place: Marshall Ulmsted,Turrill Elementary, Lapeer 3rd Place: Trinity Mersmann, Turrill Elementary, Lapeer Grades 2-3 2nd Place: Isabella Tindall, St. Paul Lutheran School, Lapeer 3rd Place: Savannah Rogers, Murphy Elementary School, Lapeer Grades 4-6 2nd Place: Laura Willson, Ruth Fox Elem. School, North Branch 3rd Place: Annika Grupp, Maple Grove Elem School, Lapeer Grades 7-9 2nd Place: Felicia Sontag, Imlay City Middle School, Imlay City 3rd Place: Nicole Forrest, Imlay City Middle School, Imlay City Karla Torres, Imlay City Middle School, Imlay City Grades 10-12 2nd Place: Miranda Steffler, Imlay City High School, Imlay City 3rd Place: Travis Cushaway, Lapeer East High School , Lapeer

Other Poster Contest Info

♦ 810 entries

♦ Theme: “Conservation’s Power”

♦ Judged on conservation message, visual effectiveness, originality and universal appeal

♦ All entrants received a certificate.

♦ First, second, and third place winners also received a ribbon.

♦ First place winners received a t-shirt.

♦ 93 Honorable Mention Certificates were awarded.

♦ First place posters in each age group have been entered in the state con-test.

Winning posters can be viewed on the Lapeer Conservation Dis-trict website: www.lapeercd.org

10

Helping People Help the Land Natural Resources Conservation Service 1739 N Saginaw St Suite 300 Lapeer, MI 48446-7741 T (810) 664-3941 x3/ F (810) 664-8254/ www.mi.nrcs.usda.gov

USDA-NRCS FY2007 ANNUAL REPORT The USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) had another successful year. With the assistance of the Lapeer Conservation District (LCD) and oversight from the LCD Board of Directors, conservation was implemented to the various Farm Bill Programs.

NRCS in Lapeer County serviced more than 150 customers and reviewed about 40 Michigan Department of Environ-mental Quality (DEQ) public act permits. In return, LCD assisted NRCS in doing HEL determinations on about 25 par-cels of land, and provided technical assistance by checking out the implementation of about 7 Farm Bill EQIP conserva-tion practices.

There currently are 9 EQIP contracts and 2 WHIP contracts in Lapeer County and all of them had at least one conserva-tion practice implemented this year. There are 3 EQIP applications deferred for FY2008 and at least 4 EQIP applications to be developed for FY2008. There are 3 WHIP applications being developed for FY2008. There is one deferred WRP application and 1 WRP application being developed for FY2008.

NRCS works closely with FSA to develop CRP conservation plans and implement conservation practices contracted through CRP. Currently there are 3 CRP applications being developed for FY2008. There was one CRP contract for FY2007 that involved the Upland Wildlife Habitat practice for the purpose of putting a field border around the field or part of a field. There were 3 CRP contracts that expired in FY2007 that had extensions applied for a few more years. There were 2 CRP contracts funded for FY2007 general sign up.

NRCS in Lapeer County would like to continue to work with livestock owners to implement conservation practices such as buffers along streams, wetland and lakes; pasture plantings to improve quality forage for livestock, manure manage-ment, heavy use areas, and moving livestock out of wood lots as this will improve the quality of the woods.

NRCS would like to work with wood lot owners to improve the quality of their woods for timber and/or wildlife.

NRCS has worked with a few non-agricultural landowners to develop their property for better wildlife habitat via the Wildlife Habitat Incen-tives Program (WHIP). NRCS would like to see this program expand.

The Wetland Reserve Program (WRP) is a good program to use to preserve the wet areas of the farmland. It is an easement pro-

gram to take wet cropland acres out of production and restore them back to wet-lands. The WRP programs look at restoring the hydrology of the wetland, so the wet cropland needs to have tile or been drained in such a way that hydrology can be restored.

United States Department of Agriculture The Natural Resources Conser-vation Service provides leader-ship in a partnership effort to help people conserve, maintain, and improve our natural re-sources and environment.

An Equal Opportunity Provider and Employer

Newly installed conservation practices in Lapeer County include a stream crossing for livestock (above) and a grassed waterway (right).

11

Balance on Hand October 1, 2006 $ 13,465.91

General Fund Revenue District Operations $ 29,923.75 Groundwater Stewardship Program 61,643.56 Forestry/Wildlife Program 3,095.20 Education Program 3,500.00 Agricultural Board Technical Advisor 8,210.00 Tree Sale 65,881.03 Total General Fund Revenue $172,253.54

General Fund Expenditures District Operations $ 65,573.39 Groundwater Stewardship Program 59,103.23 Forestry/Wildlife Program 100.02 Education Program 5,505.32 Agricultural Board Technical Advisor 6,628.16 Tree Sale 35,791.34 Total General Fund Expenditures $172,701.46 Balance on Hand, September 30, 2007 $ 13,017.99

* Russell Evarts…………….….1942-1947 * Adolph Broecker………….….1942-1986 * Albert Seelye………………....1942-1953 * Hugh Buckingham…………..1942-1945 * Claude Fick…………………..1942-1949 * Bruce Clothier………………..1945-1947 * Don Mawdesley……………...1947-1957 * Raymond Chown…………….1947-1950 * Anthony Kreiner……………..1949-1954 * Fred Hoeksema………………1950-1952 * Lloyd Burley…………………1951-1958 * Edgar Miteen………………...1953-1962 Robert Linck…………………1954-1961 * Lewis Scrimger………………1957-1960 * Harold Warner……………….1958-1964 * William Starr………………...1960-1986 * William Simmons…………....1961-1979 * Lester Seelye…………………1962-1971 * Joseph Cichoracki……………1964-1973

* Robert Bristol………………..1971-1977 * Robert Martus………………..1973-1977 Dale Duckert………………...1977-1980 Robert Howland, Jr………….1979-1982 Harry Penzien, Jr…………….1980-1986 John C. Simmons…………….1982-1994 Clinton Ivory………………...1986-1989 Mark Schlaud………………..1986-1998 Norman Nicklas……………..1987- 2003 Stephen Listwak……………..1989-1995 Ron Schapman……………….1994-2004 Cindy Solon………………….1995-2000 Don Wilson………………….1997-2004 Dan Martus…………………..1998-2000 Mary Barber……………....2000-Present David Bates……………….2000-Present Philip Scrimger……….…..2003-Present Jerry Cooper……………....2004-Present Bruce Davis……………….2004-Present

DISTRICT DIRECTORS First District Board

* Deceased

From our files… A few Directors from the decades: (Clockwise from top) Adolph Broecker, William Starr, Robert Bristol, Don Mawde-sley, John Simmons, Stephen Listwak

LAPEER CONSERVATION DISTRICT 2007 FINANCIAL REPORT

October 1, 2006 to September 30, 2007

12

LAPEER CONSERVATION DISTRICT 1739 N. Saginaw Street Lapeer, MI 48446

Phone: 810-664-3941, ext. 3 Fax: 810-664-8254 Website: www.lapeercd.org

Lapeer Conservation District Conservation Calendar

Winter/Spring 2008

65th Annual Meeting January 24

George Washington’s Birthday (office closed) February 18

Monthly Board Meeting February 20

Land & Water Preservation Mtg February 25

Fruit Tree Pruning Workshop April 5

Tree Sale Distribution April 10, 11, 12

Monthly Board Meeting April 16

Earth Day April 22

Arbor Day April 25

Wild Lapeer April 26

Monthly Board Meeting May 21

Memorial Day (office closed) May 26

All programs and services of the Conservation District are offered on a nondiscriminatory basis without regard to race, color, national origin, gender, religion, age, disability, politi-

cal beliefs, sexual orientation and marital status.

2008 Spring Tree Sale

What will be available?

♦ Conifers like Blue Spruce, White Spruce, White Pine and Red Pine

♦ Hardwoods such as White Oak, Sugar Maple, Syca-more, and Flowering Dogwood

♦ Wildlife Shrubs like Elderberry and Hazelnut ♦ Fruit Trees including Bartlett Pear and Wolf River

Apple

We will also have:

Tree packets, native grass and wildflower seeds, books and much more!! Stop by our office or call to be added to our mailing list, or check our website. Remember, Tree Sales are the major source of funding for the conser-vation programs the District has here in Lapeer County.