The Natural Resources Board made a good decision last week when it voted to advance changes to manure-management rules that would affect Wisconsin's largest livestock farms.

The board forwarded the rules to the state Legislature despite testimony from livestock-group representatives and others who asked for a one-month delay. The livestock groups asked for the delay to give them time to review some of the rule provisions, which they said were released just two weeks prior to the Natural Resources Board meeting.

The DNR should have distributed copies of its rule proposal sooner, but yet, there are no big surprises in the package approved by the Natural Resources Board. Stakeholders have been attending hearings and providing input on the proposal for months, so they've had plenty of opportunities to make their opinions known.

They will have at least one more chance to comment, when the rule package is considered by the state Legislature within the next few weeks.

The proposed revisions would affect the 150 farms that now have, or have pending, water quality permits from the state because they exceed 1,000 animal units. An additional 10 to 15 farms would be brought under regulation because of changes in how the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency calculates animal units.

To reduce the likelihood of manure-related well contamination, fish kills and pollution from large farms, the DNR is proposing that the operations be required to have six-months storage for liquid manure and to prohibit spreading liquid manure on frozen or snow-covered ground unless it's injected or immediately incorporated into the ground.

DNR officials say 80 percent of regulated Wisconsin farms already have six-month storage capacity, and that Illinois, Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio and Indiana have similar requirements.

The proposal would also ban the spreading of solid manure on frozen or snow-covered ground during February and March; require farms to follow nutrient-management plans based on applying the right amount of phosphorus to the soil; require farms applying manure near lakes and streams to implement runoff reduction practices; and require farms to develop an emergency-response plan to address manure spills or discharges.

It's undeniable that farmers face a plethora of rules and regulations. These new requirements would be added to an already long laundry list for the state's largest farms.

Yet, the rules are generally reasonable. Most large-farm operators are already doing most of what the regulations would require. The rules would simply standardize much of what is already being done and let the public know farmers are doing what they can to keep manure out of surface- and groundwater.

One thing that is getting old is the DNR's presentation that emphasizes the 52 manure-runoff events in 2005 that resulted in fish kills. The statistics would lead the public to believe that farmers are bad actors and have little regard for the environment.

How about incorporating those 2005 statistics into a five-year average? Yes, it's much more dramatic to emphasize the 52 runoff events that occurred in a single year, but it would be much more accurate to note that there have been virtually none in 2006. An unusual weather phenomenon caused the large number of runoff events last year, and the DNR should remember to make that point when it makes its presentation to the Legislature.

Also, DNR officials shouldn't focus so heavily on the large livestock farms that they forget about the small- and medium-sized operations. Some reports have indicated that most manure runoff events occur on nonregulated farms, which means many large operations are managed so efficiently that they aren't likely to pollute.

This is not to say that small- and medium-sized farms need more regulations, but perhaps DNR officials should spend a little more time zeroing in on some of the so-called bad actors. Manure from a 50-cow dairy farm near a stream can be just as toxic as manure from a 1,000-cow operation.

The rules revisions have been nearly four years in the making, and DNR officials say they won't be fully implemented until 2010. That's a long time from start to finish.

The rules been talked about long enough. It's time for the Legislature to approve the recommendations and for the implementation process to begin.

By Jim Massey