For the first time, horse operations in Marin County will face the kind of regulatory scrutiny that dairies have operated under for decades. The California State Water Resources Control Board is requiring confined animal facilities near watersheds to comply with an order designed to regulate discharge and protect impaired water bodies from pathogens. The rule was adopted two years ago, but until now facilities were given a fairly lax timeline to come into compliance.
Last Friday, horse facility owners and managers from the Tomales Bay watershed and beyond attended a workshop to hear state and county water agencies lay out the requirements and demonstrate things like how to manage storm water runoff and control erosion. Laurie Taul from the San Francisco Regional Water Quality Control Board spoke over the whinnies of horses at Nicasio’s Halleck Creek Ranch.
The order’s discharge requirements apply to all commercial confined animal facilities. In West Marin, most eligible facilities are horse boarding operations, though they could include everything from llamas to chickens. Since 2016, when notices about the order were first sent out, Ms. Taul said that 11 of the roughly 16 eligible facilities in West Marin have submitted notices of intent to comply.
“We’ve got the big sources [of pathogens], and now we’re looking at the smaller ones,” said Rob Carson, the water quality program manager for the Tomales Bay Watershed Council, which presented at the workshop. “What you’re seeing is a ratcheting of the regulatory requirements.”
Rick Holland, president of the Marin Horse Council, said climate change has brought less frequent but more intense storms, meaning practices need to adapt. “Something done five years ago now may not be able to accommodate two, three inches of rainfall in one event,” he said.
Managers who have not already submitted a notice of intent must hand one in as soon as possible, said Ms. Taul, along with a $200 application fee. They should spend the next year completing a monitoring and sampling plan of nearby waterways. A year after that, they must complete a ranch water quality plan. Permitted facilities must submit annual reports and sampling results.
If a ranch needs more time to submit any part of the application or plan, Ms. Taul said, they simply need to request an extension. “We just want you to work on it,” she said, “really look at your facility and take the time to do it.”
In order to obtain and maintain a permit, facilities must divert clean storm water away from areas with animals or manure, contain manure and bedding, and apply soil and liquid wastes in a manner that emits no discharge. Manure and bedding may not be stored or applied within 100 feet of surface water unless an alternative practice—like a vegetative barrier—is used. Facilities must keep animals out of creeks, contain non-stormwater and manage grazing lands to reduce bacteria and sediment runoff.
Water-quality monitoring must include a visual inspection with photos, surface-water sampling, and evidence of preparation for the rainy season, such as covering up areas used to store bedding or manure. Ranch managers can either conduct their own sampling or participate in a group effort. If, after two years, the results are good, the water board may reduce the number of samples that facilities have to pull.
Samples must be taken from streams during or directly following three major storm events that are at least 14 days apart. When one manager last Friday pointed out that, to access the creek near her ranch in Nicasio, she would have to descend eight feet through poison oak, Ms. Taul said sampling runoff on the ranch itself might be a better alternative.
Ms. Taul said the water board had tried to make the process as smooth as possible. “You can customize your facility as much as possible, and you can test it yourself,” she said.
Improvement implementations are expected to be completed within two years of enrollment, but Ms. Taul admitted that might not be a realistic goal. “We are totally open to schedules and you setting your own schedule and just letting us know what that is,” she said.
Under existing state guidelines, facilities should have already been doing most of the required practices, she added. Although the new testing, reporting and monitoring are a slightly larger ask, funds to carry out those tasks are available through the Natural Resources Conservation Service. “They can get free assistance for putting together a ranch plan and implementing specific improvements like installing gutters or infrastructure improvements,” Ms. Taul said.
Serena Ahlgren, general manager of Shamrock Ranch in Pacifica, said that although the water board’s flood of requirements initially seemed daunting, she was relieved to see that they were flexible with timelines and customizing plans. Finding the manpower and expertise necessary to make any needed changes would be the biggest hurdle. “We’re a little short-staffed—getting work done is a little bit of a challenge,” she said. “[This is] adding to the list of regulatory agencies wanting things from us.”
Susan Rowsell has managed 90 acres and 14 horses for 20 years as a manager at Point Reyes Arabian Adventures. She said her facility already complies with the new state requirements. Horses are kept far enough away from water bodies so water contamination is not a problem, and the ranch’s large swath of land compared to its number of horses prevents over-grazing and any destruction of natural vegetative barriers.
She said she appreciated that the water board was educating people and monitoring facilities. “We don’t want to eat our oysters and fish and have to worry if they’re not clean,” she said.
Halleck Creek Ranch’s executive director, Molly Scannell, said that despite the burdens posed by the ranch plans, “We rely on the health of our land… It’s the right thing to do.” Ms. Scannell has been working with the Natural Resources Conservation Service to develop a comprehensive nutrient management plan that focuses on the ranch’s manure piles. After that plan is developed, she plans to apply for equine grants to help offset some of the costs that will be incurred under the new requirements.
When one attendee asked last Friday what would happen to scofflaws, Ms. Taul said that a violation of the waste discharge requirement can add up to a $5,000-a-day fine.
But, she said, “We would never issue a fine for a year at that. It would be ‘Talk to me, let’s figure this out.’ But if someone is not even submitting a notice of intent, or responding to a letter, then letters turn into stronger letters. And then, if they continue to avoid us, that’s when the potential for fines can come up.”