Butterfly Dreams Management Plan by Jared Bullock, Alys Hannum, and Johnathon Paynter

Butterfly Dreams Management Plan

Prepared for Jessica Kirby, Certified PATH Instructor

Submitted by Jared Bullock, Alys Hannum, and Johnathon Paynter

Instructors

Dr. Kris Irwin

Mr. Robert Izlar

Advisory Committee

Dr. William Miller

Dr. Gary Green

Spring 2016

Warnell School of Forestry and Natural Resources

University of Georgia

Athens, GA

ii

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Soil erosion and water drainage are serious problems at Butterfly Dreams Farm. Our primary

objectives were as follows: 1) to assess areas with poor water flow and suggest long-term

solutions, 2) to assess soil loss through erosion and suggest attainable management solutions, and

3) to locate potential third party funding sources for drainage and erosion control methods. We

collected all Butterfly Dreams Farm site data from January to April 2016.

We evaluated present drainage issues by examining the site before and after storm events. In

addition to the two emergent streams, we found areas of ponding where water drained slowly

through compacted soil. We evaluated the soil erosion risk by taking composite soil samples

from each pasture and sent them to be analyzed by the UGA Soil, Plant, and Water Laboratory

located in Athens, Georgia. Additionally, we performed on-site evaluations using the Revised

Universal Soil Loss Equation to estimate the rate of yearly topsoil erosion. We located potential

funding sources primarily through online research, then contacted each source through phone

call or email for more information. We ranked each potential source by how well they fit our

client's needs based on application requirements, payment amount, and donor requirements.

Our final recommendation to control drainage on the Farm is a French drain system installed by

Precision Landscape Management. We feel this method will best fit to our client's needs because

a French drain's subsurface nature minimizes horse to drain interaction, lowering the

maintenance costs while still having an affordable installation. For erosion control, our

recommendation is to spread temporary mulch and plant fescue grass seed directly on bare soil

areas. Simple cover is highly effective at reducing topsoil erosion, and we recommend that the

landowner spread mulch and plant seed themselves to further reduce costs. In regards to funding,

our number one recommendation is to contact the Natural Resources Conservation Service

iii

(NRCS). In addition to offering enough funding to cover the majority of the cost for each project

listed previously, the NRCS also provides technical assistance for similar projects. We feel a

good relationship with the NRCS will be essential for the Farm to manage future erosion and

drainage issues. However, each funding source is not exclusive, so we further recommend

applying to the Community Foundation for Northeast Georgia, the David, Helen and Marian

Woodward Fund, the Ford Fund Capital Grant, and the Build-a-Bear Workshop Bear Hugs

Foundation on a yearly basis.

iv

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

We would like to express our utmost gratitude to Dr. Kris Irwin and Mr. Robert Izlar for their

invaluable support, expertise, and guidance throughout the semester. We would also like to thank

our committee members, Dr. William Miller and Dr. Gary Green, for taking time out of their

schedules to provide us with insightful advice.

We also thank the Board of Directors at Butterfly Dreams Farm for allowing us to work on their

beloved property, especially Joey Bristol, Cat and Kyle Vereen, and Jessica Kirby. We give

special thanks as well to Taylor Adams for her assistance in identifying and ranking private

funding sources.

Lastly, we would like to recognize the entire community at Butterfly Dreams Farm, including the

farm staff and volunteers, for allowing us to photograph on-site and for the hours of work they

dedicate to this property and its mission each week.

Without the help of everyone mentioned here, our project would not have been possible.

v

LIST OF FIGURES

1. Butterfly Dreams Farm pasture divisions, Oconee County, Georgia. Created by

Johnathon Paynter on February 21, 2016........................................................................

2. Half-acre sand and gravel parking lot at Butterfly Dreams Farm in Oconee County,

Georgia. Photographed by Johnathon Paynter on April 13, 2016...................................

3. Sheet metal and wood horse barn on Butterfly Dreams Farm, Oconee County,

Georgia. Photographed by Johnathon Paynter on April 13, 2016...................................

4. Hundred Acre Woods pasture on Butterfly Dreams Farm in Oconee County, Georgia.

Photographed by Johnathon Paynter on April 13, 2016..................................................

5. Removal of grass cover by horse pacing along the fence line in Green Frog pasture on

Butterfly Dreams Farm in Oconee County, Georgia. Photographed by Johnathon

Paynter on April 13, 2016................................................................................................

6. Emergent ephemeral stream in the middle of the Hundred Acre Woods pasture at

Butterfly Dreams Farm in Oconee County, Georgia. Photographed by Alys Hannum

on January 30, 2016.........................................................................................................

7. Emergent ephemeral stream at the northern end of Gold Fish pasture at Butterfly

Dreams Farm in Oconee County, Georgia. Photographed by Johnathon Paynter on

April 13, 2016..................................................................................................................

8. Erosion and leaf litter removal by runoff at the southern end of Yellow Duck pasture

at Butterfly Dreams Farm in Oconee County, Georgia. Photographed by Alys

Hannum on January 16, 2016..........................................................................................

9. Augering locations for the collection of soil data on Butterfly Dreams Farm in

Oconee County, Georgia. Created by Johnathon Paynter on April 5, 2016....................

10. Soil Survey Map for Oconee County showing dominant soil series on Butterfly

Dreams Farm, accessed at http://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov on February 16,

2016.................................................................................................................................

11. Construction of a diversion ditch to intercept and redirect overland flow, reducing

potential for erosion of downslope areas. (Virginia City Highlands Property Owners

Association 2006)............................................................................................................

12. Construction of a French Drain to siphon water off the property, reducing overland

flow and erosion potential (NZ Drainage 2013)..............................................................

13. Construction of permeable paving to siphon water off the property, reducing overland

flow and erosion potential (Adamson, pub. date unknown)............................................

Page

2

3

3

4

5

6

6

7

11

12

13

14

15

vi

14. Placement of water bars to divert runoff from trail areas, reducing overland flow and

erosion potential. Accessed at http://woodlandstewardship.org/?page_id=1226 on

April 14, 2016..................................................................................................................

15. Construction of check dams to slow water flow and trap sediment (Georgia Soil and

Water Conservation Commission, 2014).........................................................................

16. Newly installed rip-rap check dam in Hundred Acre Woods pasture on Butterfly

Dreams Farm in Oconee County, Georgia. Photographed by Alys Hannum on

February 24, 2016............................................................................................................

18

19

28

vii

LIST OF TABLES

1. Average cost estimates for the installation of approximately 500 feet of diversion

ditches from various companies which service the Athens-Watkinsville area................

2. Average cost estimates for the installation of approximately 500 feet of French drain

subsurface drainage from various companies which service the Athens-Watkinsville

area....................................................................................................................................

3. Average cost estimates for the installation of 4,000 square feet of permeable paving

from various companies which service the Athens-Watkinsville area.............................

4. Estimated annual soil loss values in tons per acre per year for Butterfly Dreams Farm

pastures based on RUSLE...............................................................................................

5. Average cost estimates for mulch and fescue seed on approximately 150 square feet

(16.7 square yards) of high activity areas from various companies which service the

Athens-Watkinsville area.................................................................................................

6. Average cost estimates for the installation of ten rip-rap check dams from various

companies which service the Athens-Watkinsville area..................................................

7. 2016 Conservation Practice payment rates through the NRCS's Environmental

Quality Incentives Program for regular and historically under-served (HU) farmers

with the establishment of a contract or Conservation Action Plan (CAP)......................

Page

24

25

25

26

27

27

30

viii

LIST OF APPENDICES

A. Soil Pedon Descriptions for three locations on Butterfly Dreams Farm in Oconee

County.............................................................................................................................

B. Soil Test Results for Butterfly Dreams Farm Pastures. Tests performed by UGA Soil,

Plant, and Water Laboratory located in Athens, Georgia.................................................

C. Limestone, Nitrogen, Phosphate, and Potassium recommendations for ideal rye grass

growth conditions in pastures at Butterfly Dreams Farm in Oconee County, Georgia.

Provided by UGA Soil, Plant, and Water Laboratory located in Athens, Georgia..........

D. Summary of total scores from zero to three for funding sources based on Butterfly

Dreams Farm Board Member Taylor Adams’ (MPA) analysis of their

suitability..........................................................................................................................

D. Scoring of the top five funding sources for Butterfly Dreams Farm by Taylor Adams

(MPA)................................................................................................................................

Page

35

38

39

47

48

ix

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY.................................................................................................

LIST OF FIGURES.............................................................................................................

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS................................................................................................

LIST OF FIGURES.............................................................................................................

LIST OF TABLES...............................................................................................................

LIST OF APPENDICES.....................................................................................................

INTRODUCTION...............................................................................................................

Site Description...................................................................................................................

OBJECTIVES AND ALTERNATIVES............................................................................

Drainage Alternative..........................................................................................................

Erosion Alternatives...........................................................................................................

Funding Alternatives..........................................................................................................

METHODS...........................................................................................................................

Drainage..............................................................................................................................

Soil Analysis.......................................................................................................................

Pedon Analysis...................................................................................................................

Alternatives.........................................................................................................................

Erosion.................................................................................................................................

Soil Loss Estimates.............................................................................................................

Alternatives.........................................................................................................................

Funding................................................................................................................................

RESULTS.............................................................................................................................

Drainage..............................................................................................................................

ii

iii

iv

v

vii

viii

1

1

8

8

8

9

10

10

10

10

12

16

16

17

20

23

23

x

Soil Analysis.......................................................................................................................

Pedon Analysis...................................................................................................................

Alternatives.........................................................................................................................

Erosion.................................................................................................................................

Soil Loss Estimates.............................................................................................................

Alternatives.........................................................................................................................

Funding................................................................................................................................

RECOMMENDATIONS....................................................................................................

Drainage..............................................................................................................................

Erosion.................................................................................................................................

Funding................................................................................................................................

APPENDICES......................................................................................................................

LITERATURE CITED.......................................................................................................

23

23

24

26

26

26

28

32

32

33

33

35

53

1

INTRODUCTION

Butterfly Dreams Farm (the Farm) is a nonprofit 501(c)3 organization that specializes in

therapeutic horse riding and hippotherapy. Hippotherapy is a method of physical,

occupational, or speech therapy through the use of equine movement for individuals in need

(Our Story 2015). Soil erosion has affected the farm in the past, and it now poses a serious

threat to the future of the Farm program on its current site. Through a personal connection

with Ms. Jessica Kirby, our group requested permission to conduct our project at the Farm.

Ms. Kirby spoke to the Board of Directors, who approved. They asked us to evaluate soil

conditions, provide possible courses of corrective action, and discover possible funding

sources.

The board of directors invited us to attend meetings each month throughout the project. They

were held on January 21, February 15, March 21, and April 18 of 2016. We attended these

meetings which put us in contact with Board President Joey Bristol. We were then able to

communicate with her directly.

Site Description

The Farm is located on 12 acres at 2981 Hog Mountain Rd, Watkinsville, Georgia along

Highway 53 in Oconee County (Fig 1). It is 7.5 miles directly southwest of Athens. The site

consists of several pastures divided by fencing with a live electric wire over top, and each

pasture is used for grazing and roaming. Although the Georgia Horse Council recommends

that 2 to 2.5 acres of pasture be available per horse for grazing purposes, the farm is currently

only able to allocate approximately 1 acre per horse (Georgia Horse Council 2016). Animals

are rotated among pastures every few weeks to allow for recovery and regrowth. Land use of

2

the Farm is divided into the following categories: open pasture (9.24 acres, 76%), sand ring

(0.59 acres, 5%), tree-covered (0.84 acres, 7%), asphalt (0.19 acres, 2%), gravel (0.69 acres,

6%), and other covered area (0.48 acres, 4%).

Figure 1. Butterfly Dreams Farm pasture divisions, Oconee County, Georgia. Created by

Johnathon Paynter on February 21, 2016.

There is a gravel and asphalt driveway immediately upon entry from the main gate in the

northeast. The driveway follows the eastern property border to the south for approximately

625 feet, where it bends west behind the south side of the landowner's house and continues

for another 50 feet. The driveway ends in a 0.5 acre gravel and sand parking lot (Fig. 2).

There is an approximately 5,800 square foot aluminum sheet-metal siding and wood interior

barn directly west of the parking lot (Fig 3). The barn contains 12 stalls used for animal

housing, two additional stalls for food and equipment storage, and a wash rack on the

northeast corner. A 1,700 square foot aluminum shed used for hay, cedar chip, and

equipment storage is directly adjacent to the west side of the barn. A 0.6 acre sand riding ring

contained within a 4 foot high wooden fence is located in an unnamed pasture directly west

of the barn. The landowner's 2,600 square foot home is located on the property, east of the

3

parking lot and south of the main gate. Directly north of the house is a 0.7 acre lawn which is

used privately by the landowner. One 240 square foot wooden and aluminum equipment

shed, a 400 square foot aluminum chicken coop, and a 500 square foot manure pile are

located in close proximity directly north of the parking lot (Fig. 4).

Figure 2. Half-acre sand and gravel parking lot at Butterfly Dreams Farm in Oconee County,

Georgia. Photographed by Johnathon Paynter on April 13, 2016.

Figure 3. Sheet metal and wood horse barn on Butterfly Dreams Farm, Oconee County,


4

Tree cover is limited to planted leyland cypress (Cupressus leylandii) on extreme edges of

the property boundaries and an isolated patch of mature trees and 6 saplings in the Hundred

Acre Woods pasture. This stand is 0.6 acres and contains the following trees: 17 sweetgum

(Liquidambar styraciflua), 9 water oak (Quercus nigra), 3 shagbark hickory (Carya ovata), 3

southern red oak (Quercus falcata), 3 loblolly pine (Pinus taeda), and 2 eastern red cedar

(Juniperus virginiana) in the overstory (Fig. 5). Understory cover is limited to 6 juvenile

eastern red cedars along the emergent stream bank. The aspect of the site is oriented south-

southeast, with a moderate slope rate of 5%.

Figure 4. Hundred Acre Woods pasture on Butterfly Dreams Farm in Oconee County,


5

Figure 5. Removal of grass cover by horse pacing along the fence line in Green Frog pasture

on Butterfly Dreams Farm in Oconee County, Georgia. Photographed by Johnathon Paynter

on April 13, 2016.

The grass for each pasture is rye, planted using plugs in late September or early October at a

rate of 50 lbs per acre. Horse grazing and pacing has removed all vegetative cover on pacing

trails along the fences and high traffic areas such as water troughs in all pastures (Fig. 5). The

remaining grass is less than 4 inches in height, and soil is readily visible within 6 inches on

either side of each pacing trail. All pastures show signs of erosion and soil compaction, with

new intermittent streams forming in the Hundred Acre Woods (Fig. 6), Gold Fish (Fig. 7),

and Yellow Duck pastures (Fig. 8). During the course of our project, the landowner placed

large rocks, gravel, and woody debris to reduce the rate of water flow in six places along

each of the two emerging streams. The Farm is situated within a single watershed, and the

central drainage point is located on the southern property border.

6

Figure 6. Emergent ephemeral stream in the middle of the Hundred Acre Woods pasture at

Butterfly Dreams Farm in Oconee County, Georgia. Photographed by Alys Hannum on

January 30, 2016.

Figure 7. Emergent ephemeral stream at the northern end of Gold Fish pasture at Butterfly

Dreams Farm in Oconee County, Georgia. Photographed by Johnathon Paynter on April 13,

2016.

7

Figure 8. Erosion and leaf litter removal by runoff at the southern end of Yellow Duck

pasture at Butterfly Dreams Farm in Oconee County, Georgia. Photographed by Alys

Hannum on January 16, 2016.

8

OBJECTIVES AND ALTERNATIVES

The objectives for this project are: 1) to evaluate the hydrology and examine possible

management activities, 2) to evaluate the current soil erosion and to examine possible

management activities, and 3) to identify potential sources of funding for all proposed

projects. With these objectives in mind, our group's research and recommendations are

presented and justified in this report. While the clients are free to decide upon whichever

management action they feels is best, the options in this report are presented in the order that

we recommend.

Drainage Alternatives

1. Construct a system of diversion ditches and berms to retain and redirect surface

runoff.

2. Install a French drain system to redirect and reduce surface runoff.

3. Install permeable paving in front of the bedding storage areas and near the wash rack

to reduce water ponding.

Erosion Alternatives

1. Spread mulch over bare activity areas and in places where grass cover has been worn

away by overgrazing and pacing to reduce soil erosion.

2. Place water diversion bars along each of the main trails and above the emergent

streams to slow and disperse water, reducing erosion.

3. Install rip-rap check dams in the emergent streams to detain sediment runoff.

9

Funding Alternatives

1. Register with the local Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) office and

apply for yearly payments through their Environmental Quality Incentives Program.

2. Apply for yearly grants through the Community Foundation for Northeast Georgia.

3. Apply for bi-yearly project grants through the David, Helen and Marian Woodward

Fund.

4. Apply for yearly grants through the Ford Fund Capital Grant.

5. Apply for yearly grants through The Build-A-Bear Workshop Bear Hugs Foundation,

specifically through the Build-A-Bear Workshop in Buford.

10

METHODS

Drainage

Soil Analysis

Using the guidelines from the Georgia Cooperative Extension Service, we collected soil

samples from each of the ten pastures on the property (Georgia Cooperative Extension 2008).

We extracted 10 soil cores from each pasture to 4 inches depth using a push probe, then

combined them to create a composite sample for each pasture. We determined the sampling

locations using the following systemic survey design: for each pasture, we collected one soil

core from the four corners, one halfway along each fence line, and two from the center.

After allowing the samples to air dry in a plastic pan for 48 hours and removing all visible

roots and rocks, we placed each in a paper soil sample bag labeled with the pasture name.

Due to their management similarities and physical proximity, we combined the soil samples

for White Dog and Paddock 2, Yellow Duck and Black Sheep, and Brown Bear and Green

Frog. We then sent the samples to the University of Georgia's Soil, Plant, and Water

Laboratory in Athens on February 4, 2016 to test their nutrient and organic matter content.

They returned the results on February 15, 2016, and can be found in Appendix C.

Pedon Analysis

Using a modified version of the NRCS guidelines for describing and sampling soils (Natural

Resources Conservation Service 2012), we performed a full analysis of the soil profile at

three locations on the Farm (Fig. 9). We extracted soil to a depth of 5 feet in each location

using a soil auger and identified the textural class, Munsell color, and any identifying

11

features of each soil horizon (Xrite 2000). We used these data to write a full pedon

description of each site, which is located in Appendix A.

Figure 9. Augering locations for the collection of soil data on Butterfly Dreams Farm in

Oconee County, Georgia. Created by Johnathon Paynter on April 5, 2016.

Soil data for the Farm and the areas directly surrounding it were downloaded from the NRCS

Web Soil Survey and used as a reference to ensure that our findings in the field were at least

similar to the official soil designations (Fig. 10). According to the Web Soil Survey, 10.9

acres (59.9%) of the Farm and surrounding area are classified as moderately eroded Cecil

sandy loam. 5.5 acres (28.5%) of this Cecil sandy loam are located at the very northern end

of the property with 6-10% slopes (CYC2). The other 5.4 acres (28.4%) are downhill, with

slopes of 2-6%. 0.6 acres (3.2%) at the southern end of the property were designated as

12

Chewlaca (Cob) alluvial deposits. The remaining 7.6 acres (39.9%) were classified as

severely eroded Pacolet sandy clay loam (PgC3) and was located at the center of the farm

(Natural Resources Conservation Service 2016).

Figure 10. Soil Survey Map for Oconee County showing dominant soil series on Butterfly

Dreams Farm, accessed at http://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov on February 16, 2016.

Alternatives

During our initial visit during the week of January 11, 2016, we observed multiple problem

areas where water had ponded from rain the night before. For each of these problem areas,

we considered three separate methods for drainage control: the creation of diversion ditches

and berms, the installation of French drains along fences, and the use of permeable paving in

front of the bedding storage areas and near the wash rack, where water ponds regularly due to

13

rain and hose usage. We obtained additional information on these control methods through

meetings with our Advisory committee member, Dr. William Miller, and from the Manual

for Erosion and Sediment Control in Georgia, or the “Georgia Green Book” (W. Miller,

personal communication, March 9, 2016; Georgia Soil and Water Conservation Commission

2014).

Figure 11. Construction of a diversion ditch to intercept and redirect overland flow, reducing

potential for erosion of downslope areas (Virginia City Highlands Property Owners

Association 2006).

A diversion system consists of diversion ditches and berms which divert rainwater or hose

runoff downslope into channels, which can then be used to direct the water offsite or into a

holding pond where it can infiltrate slowly through non-compacted soil. Diversion ditches

can be lined with gravel or seeded to avoid further erosion from the channelized runoff (Fig.

11). They require a minimum yearly inspection and cleaning when necessary. Yearly

inspection can be performed by the landowner after a major storm event, during which the

length of the ditch is inspected for blockages or eroded ditch walls that would impair water

flow. If the landowner finds a small blockage, they can simply remove it from the ditch. If

they find a large blockage or a partially eroded ditch wall, it must be cleaned or repaired to

its original dimensions by professionals (Center for Environmental Excellence 2016).

14

Figure 12. Construction of a French Drain to siphon water off the property, reducing

overland flow and erosion potential (NZ Drainage 2013).

A French drain serves much the same purpose as a diversion ditch, except it is confined

underground. It is constructed by burying a length of perforated PVC or other piping under a

layer of permeable material such as gravel (Fig. 12). The water flows down through the

gravel and enters the pipe, where it can then be directed off the property. French drains

require a yearly inspection after a major storm event, which can be performed by the

landowner. During the inspection, the output end of the drain should be examined for

unusually low amounts of water flow, which can be a sign of an interior blockage. In that

event, the landowner should contact a professional to perform a more accurate inspection and

determine if a full drain replacement is necessary.

15

Figure 13. Construction of permeable paving to siphon water off the property, reducing

overland flow and erosion potential (Adamson).

Permeable paving would allow both horses and vehicles to pass normally, but rainwater

would infiltrate into the soil and flow naturally downward towards the stream (Fig. 13).

Unlike permeable concrete, permeable paving does not become clogged with silt and

sediment as quickly and only requires yearly inspections and professional cleanings when

necessary, making the maintenance costs much lower. A typical permeable paving inspection

consists of yearly visits by a professional, during which they measure the infiltration rate of

the paving. If the infiltration rate is too low, it indicates the presence of a blockage

somewhere, at which point a more thorough inspection and cleaning method must be

performed. The probability of a paving blockage can be decreased by minimizing the

sediment, grass clippings, and assorted lawn waste allowed to sit on the paving surface (Hunt

2016). Due to our client's business, the most important factor to consider when selecting

16

permeable paving material is to confirm it is compliant with the Americans with Disabilities

Act (ADA) Standards for Accessible Design (28 C.F.R. § 35; 28 C.F.R. § 36).

We contacted local companies Willow Oak Landscaping, Vision Landscaping, Precision

Landscape Management, Restoration Landscape Company, Drainage Solutions, and Easley's

Yard Care Etc. to obtain cost estimates (Matt Fulton, telephone, April 5, 2016; Andrew

Majsztrik, email, April 8, 2016; Chad Keller, telephone, April 6, 2016; Matt Torrence, email,

April 6 2016; Company representative, voicemail and email, April 6 2016; J. Easley,

telephone, April 8 2016). We compared these estimates to others obtained privately by Kyle

Vereen, husband of the property owner, through College Pro Landscaping and Escapes in

June and September of 2015, respectively.

Erosion

Soil Loss Estimates

Our team estimated the rates of prior and expected future soil loss using the Revised

Universal Soil Loss Equation (RUSLE):

The RUSLE predicts annual erosion rates (A) based on the geographic rainfall factor (R), the

soil erodibility factor (K), the slope gradient (LS), and the vegetation cover (C), while

accounting for conservation practices (P) (Revised Universal Soil Loss Equation 2 2001).

Rainfall factors for this area of Georgia were estimated using the Environmental Protection

Agency's (EPA) Isoerodent Map of the Eastern United States (EPA, 2012). The K factor was

determined using a nomograph equation which relates K factors to topsoil conditions

17

(Goldman et al. 1986). We measured slopes using a clinometer, and obtained C and P values

from the RUSLE Online Soil Erosion Assessment Tool (Institute of Water Research, 2002).

To estimate the rate of erosion on overgrazed pastures, we halved the effect of the RUSLE's

C factor to simulate the effect of short, patchy rye grass cover based on visual assessments of

overgrazed pastures.

Alternatives

Our group considered three separate methods for erosion control on the Farm: the use of

mulch, the use of water diversion bars along major pathways, and the installation of rock

check dams along the intermittent streams. We obtained additional information on these

control methods through meetings with our Advisory committee member, Dr. William

Miller, and from the Manual for Erosion and Sediment Control in Georgia, or the “Georgia

Green Book” (W. Miller, personal communication, March 9, 2016; Georgia Soil and Water

Conservation Commission 2014).

Spreading mulch on areas of disturbed soil will reduce runoff, erosion, and sedimentation.

Common organic mulch materials include straw, hay, and wood chips, spread to a depth of 2

to 4 inches, but inorganic materials such as polyethylene films and geotextiles are also

available. If the landowner plans to use organic mulch and incorporate it into the underlying

soil, 20 to 30 pounds of nitrogen should be applied prior to spreading the mulch.

Organic mulch can last up to 6 months. It is common practice to combine mulching with

temporary or permanent grass seeding. The mulch protects the grass as it grows, and the

grass provides seasonal soil protection. Temporary seeding is often done with rye or barley,

18

and permanent seeding is often done with fescue grass (Georgia Soil and Water Conservation

Commission 2014).

Figure 14. Placement of water bars to divert runoff from trail areas, reducing overland flow

and erosion potential. Accessed at http://woodlandstewardship.org/?page_id=1226 on April

14, 2016.

Water diversion bars are ridges laid at an angle across trails or other areas of high use to

divert flowing water into vegetated areas before it can cause erosion (Fig. 14). Water

diversion bars can either be constructed out of earthen berms or by anchoring logs or rocks

into the trail to create a raised area. Earth-berm water bars degrade more quickly than those

made from logs or rocks, but may also cover a wider area.

19

Figure 15. Construction of check dams to slow water flow and trap sediment (Georgia Soil

and Water Conservation Commission, 2014).

Check dams are small temporary dams constructed across an area of concentrated flow which

reduce erosion by slowing the velocity of water flow (Fig. 15) (Georgia Soil and Water

Conservation Commission, 2014). These are typically placed in diversion ditches such as the

ones we discussed in the previous section, but they can also be placed into existing channels.

An inspection and spot cleaning is required every 5 years.

20

We contacted local companies Willow Oak Landscaping, Vision Landscaping, Precision

Landscape Management, Restoration Landscape Company, Drainage Solutions, and Easley's

Yard Care Etc. to obtain cost estimates (Matt Fulton, telephone, April 5, 2016; Andrew

Majsztrik, email, April 8, 2016; Chad Keller, telephone, April 6, 2016; Matt Torrence, email,

April 6 2016; Company representative, voicemail and email, April 6 2016; J. Easley,

telephone, April 8 2016). We compared these estimates to others obtained privately by Kyle

Vereen, husband of the property owner, through College Pro Landscaping and Escapes in

June and September of 2015, respectively.

We collected spatial data for the Farm during the week of January 18, 2016. We used a Flint

S Series GPS unit for all data collection and mapped all pastures, emergent streams, and

paths by walking along the perimeter of each feature while using automatic point logging at a

rate of 1 point per second. Data collection paused only when a section of the perimeter was

impassible and resumed immediately upon arrival at the next closest point along the

perimeter. We mapped major point features by standing as close to the feature's center as

possible and allowing the GPS unit to average a minimum of 40 logged points.

Funding

One potential source of monetary assistance for the various erosion and drainage control

projects is the NRCS. The NRCS provides financial assistance, conservation easements, and

competitive grants to both private and public landowners. Their largest program is the

Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP). EQIP provides both financial and

technical assistance to agricultural producers with an adjusted gross income of less than

$900,000 and who have at least one natural resource concern. We placed landowner Cat

21

Vereen and Board President Joey Bristol in contact with the Oconee County NRCS

representative, Gerald Grace, through e-mail on February 22, 2016. We were notified on

April 11, 2016, that Mr. Grace had been called away by a family emergency and was unable

to perform a site visit before the conclusion of our project. Additional information on the

EQIP program was afterward provided by the NRCS representative for Greene County (TJ

Oneal, telephone, April 13, 2016).

We researched additional government organizations able to assist in the search for funds.

Through a web search, we discovered that there were no Oconee County departments

dedicated to nonprofit organizations (Oconee County Georgia 2016). We next reached out

via phone call to the Oconee County Area Resource Council on April 1, 2016 and spoke with

Executive Director Ann Hester. This is a nonprofit organization located at 12 Durham Street

in Watkinsville. Their mission is to improve the quality of lives for families and children in

Oconee by networking with other organizations. Ann Hester was not aware of any county,

state or federal organizations that might provide funding for the Farm (A. Hester, telephone,

April 1, 2016).

We then contacted the Georgia Council on Developmental Disabilities on April 4, 2016,

which is a federally funded, independent state agency devoted to improving the well-being of

people with disabilities. We spoke to Grants and Contacts Manager Lisa Eaves. She was also

unable to make any recommendations for potential funding sources (L, Eves. Personal

communication, April 4, 2016). We decided to focus on private funding sources rather than

public ones.

22

At the board meeting on February 15, 2016, we met Taylor Adams, an MPA working with

the board with a focus on obtaining grants. Ms. Adams shared an extensive excel sheet that

listed all the potential funding sources she had identified. Alongside each source, she also

listed the deadline for an application, what project types they sponsor, any requirements or

restrictions for the money, and how much could potentially be received. Ms. Adams selected

the top 5 sources from the list and ranked each on a scale of 0-3 based on the suitability of

their requirements as compared to the Farm's needs (T. Adams, e-mail, March 22, 2016). We

summed these scores to objectively rank how the 5 sources compared.

23

RESULTS

Drainage

Soil Analysis

The UGA Soil, Plant, and Water Laboratory provided us with nutrient, pH, and organic

matter data on each of the twelve pastures at the Farm. They also supplied us with

recommendations for nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium, and limestone application based on

the growing requirements of rye grass (Appendix C). The only pasture we saw a significant

difference in was Red Bird pasture, which requires 0.75 tons/acre of limestone application in

order to reach a target pH of 6.0 and 20 lbs/acre of potassium application. All pastures

require 40-60 lbs/acre of nitrogen application, which is the same rate as the Farm already

applies at a price of $1,500 per year (K. Vereen, email, March 29, 2016). As a result, we did

not factor this into our pricing calculations.

Pedon Analysis

We used the data from our soil profile analysis to identify the drainage class of each area and

determine whether any portions of the Farm lie on hydric soils. Hydric soils are “formed

under conditions of saturation, flooding, or ponding long enough during the growing season

to develop anaerobic conditions in the upper part” (Federal Register 1994). Our soil profile

analysis revealed that none of the soils on the Farm qualified as hydric soils, as none of them

had any visible redoxomorphic features within the 6 to 12 inch rooting zone (Batzer 2014).

The Brown Bear and Yellow Duck pastures both qualified as "well drained" and the Hundred

Acre Woods at the very southern end of the property was "moderately well drained" (W.

Miller, lecture, Feb 2016).

24

Alternatives

The lack of hydric soils means that the drainage issues on the Farm are caused by

compaction, and not a naturally high water table. Installing drain tile would not significantly

improve the drainage of the soil or decrease water ponding. The major issue is soil

compaction caused by horses, which results in a slow initial rainwater infiltration rate.

Of the six companies we initially contacted, Restoration Landscape Company, Drainage

Solutions, and Easley's Yard Care Etc. were unable to provide cost estimates without a site

visitation. Restoration Landscape Company and Drainage Solutions offered a free

consultation visit, but because we could not guarantee that the landowners would be available

at the time, we declined the offer.

Table 1. Average cost estimates for the installation of approximately 500 feet of diversion

ditches from various companies which service the Athens-Watkinsville area.

Company Price estimate per linear foot Total Cost

Willow Oak Landscapes $8 ~ $4,000

Vision Landscaping $18 ~ $9,000

College Pro Landscaping Not Provided $11,024

Willow Oak Landscapes and Vision Landscaping were able to provide us with basic rate

estimates for diversion ditch installation which included labor and equipment costs, as well

as an offer for a free consultation to design the system (Table 1). Kyle Vereen obtained the

additional estimate from College Pro Landscaping.

25

Table 2. Average cost estimates for the installation of approximately 500 feet of French drain

subsurface drainage from various companies which service the Athens-Watkinsville area.

Company Price estimate per linear foot Total Cost



Precision Landscape Mgmt. $18 ~ $9,000


Escapes $1,640 for 20 feet ~ $41,000

Willow Oak Landscapes, Vision Landscaping, and Precision Landscape Management were

able to provide us with basic rate estimates for French Drain installation which included

labor and equipment costs, as well as an offer for a free consultation to design the system

(Table 2). Kyle Vereen obtained the additional estimates from College Pro Landscaping and

Escapes.

Table 3. Average cost estimates for the installation of 4,000 square feet of permeable paving

from various companies which service the Athens-Watkinsville area.

Company Price estimate per square foot Total Cost



Precision Landscape Mgmt $13 ~ $52,000

Willow Oak Landscapes, Vision Landscaping, and Precision Landscape Management were

able to provide us with basic rate estimates for permeable paving installation (Table 3).

These prices may vary based on the design and the material of the permeable paving due to

the range of styles.

26

Erosion

Soil Loss Estimates

The number of horses the Farm keeps forces them to overgraze their pastures at a rate of 1

acre per horse, rather than the recommended 2 to 2.5 acres per horse (Georgia Horse Council

2016). This, combined with bare trail and arena areas contributes to a high rate of erosion

year-round (Table 4).

Table 4. Estimated annual soil loss values in tons per acre per year for Butterfly Dreams

Farm pastures based on RUSLE.

Ground Cover Annual Soil Loss

(conservative)

Annual Soil Loss

(high)

Average Estimated

Annual Soil Loss

Active Pasture 0.31 0.42 0.36 tons/ac/yr

Regrowth 31.26 41.69 36.48 tons/ac/yr

Activity Area 62.53 83.375 72.95 tons/ac/yr

Alternatives

Our erosion control options should be used in conjunction with the proposed drainage

improvements. For instance, no matter what drainage option our clients choose, it is

important to lay down mulch cover on exposed soil, which is the most at risk for erosion by

surface runoff.

27

Table 5. Average cost estimates for mulch and fescue seed on approximately 150 square feet

(16.67 square yards) of high activity areas from various companies which service the Athens-

Watkinsville area.

Company Price estimate per square yard Total Cost

Vision Landscaping $15 delivered, $55 installed ~ $250 delivered,

~ $916 installed

Precision Landscape Mgmt. $50 installed ~ $833 installed


Escapes Not Provided $1,695

Vision Landscaping and Precision Landscape Management were able to provide us with

basic rate estimates for the delivery and spreading of mulch, but not for fescue grass seeding

(Table 5). Kyle Vereen obtained the additional estimates from College Pro Landscaping and

Escapes, which did include fescue grass seeding.

Table 6. Average cost estimates for the installation of ten rip-rap check dams from various

companies which service the Athens-Watkinsville area.

Company Price estimate per dam Total Cost


Vision Landscaping $80 ~ $800


Escapes $2,375 for 5 dams ~ $4,750

Willow Oak Landscapes and Vision Landscaping were able to provide us with basic rate

estimates for the delivery and installation of rip-rap check dams, including the cost of

equipment rental and labor (Table 6). Kyle Vereen obtained the additional estimates from

College Pro Landscaping and Escapes, which also included equipment and labor.

28

Figure 16. Newly installed rip-rap check dam in Hundred Acre Woods pasture on Butterfly

Dreams Farm in Oconee County, Georgia. Photographed by Alys Hannum on February 24,

2016.

It is important to note that during the course of this project, our clients reached the same

conclusion independently. They brought in 14 tons of rip-rap stone and constructed 3 main

check dams in the intermittent stream in Hundred Acre Woods pasture on February 29, 2016

(Fig. 16). Additionally, our clients purchased an excess amount of stone which was used to

prop up the area around the bridge. Bass Landscaping Care Inc. performed this installation

for a total cost of $1,670, paid out-of-pocket.

Funding

Once a landowner registers their agricultural property with the NRCS, their local NRCS field

office is able to offer technical assistance with identifying and designing conservation

projects for implementation even if the landowner is not eligible to receive payments through

any federal programs such as EQIP. A NRCS certified Technical Service Provider will help

29

landowners develop a Conservation Activity Plan (CAP) to "assist in identifying

conservation practices needed to address a specific natural resource need" (Natural Resources

Conservation Service 2016). The labor costs associated with developing the CAP can also be

covered under EQIP for supported CAPs in each state. A list of nationally approved CAP

practices and state-supported CAPs can be accessed at the NRCS website.

In order to receive financial assistance payments from EQIP, an applicant must have a

natural resource concern on "cropland, rangeland, pastureland, non-industrial private

forestland and other farm or ranch lands" that they control or own (Natural Resources

Conservation Service 2016). They must also be in compliance with all conservation

requirements and have an adjusted gross income of less than $900,000 per year, unless they

are part of a federally recognized Native American Tribe or Alaska Native corporation. Once

an applicant has met all these requirements, they can work with the NRCS to develop and

sign a contract to receive financial assistance payments for the implementation and

maintenance of conservation practices. Applications for EQIP are done through a local

NRCS field office.

Financial assistance payment amounts to those in the EQIP program are based on the type of

conservation practice. "Historically under-served" (HU) farmers qualify for a higher payment

rate; this definition may include equine producers, farmers with less than 10 acres of land,

and first-time users of the NRCS service, but HU designation is done on a case-by-case basis

and is not guaranteed. Payments through EQIP are limited to a total of $20,000 per fiscal

year. The table below lists the payment rates for the proposed conservation practices on the

Farm (Table 7).

30

Table 7. 2016 Conservation Practice payment rates through the NRCS's Environmental

Quality Incentives Program for regular and historically under-served (HU) farmers with the

establishment of a contract or Conservation Action Plan (CAP).

Conservation Practice Regular Payment Rate HU Payment Rate Lifespan

Conservation Cover -

Native Grass

$185.28 per acre $222.34 per acre 3 years

Check Dams $42.07 per ton of stone $50.49 per ton of stone 15 years

Diversion $1.69 per square foot $2.02 per square foot 10 years

Natural Mulch $321.51 per acre $385.81 per acre 1 year

Payments for drainage options such as French Drains and permeable paving may also be

available, but we were unable to locate them on the 2016 EQIP Policy Worksheet and our

contacts at the local Oconee County NRCS field office were unable to provide us with

numbers without a field visitation (Natural Resources Conservation Service 2016).

We ranked the private funding sources provided by Taylor Adams. The 5 best private

funding sources, beginning with the strongest recommendation, are as follows:

1. The Community Foundation for Northeast Georgia. This foundation manages donations

from individuals, organizations, and businesses in order to disburse a wide variety of

charitable funds to those in need. Their motto is "Connecting People who Care with Causes

that Matter" (About Us 2016). The grants offered by this group are appropriate as they are

primarily interested in funding projects that benefit children. The Farm is located in Oconee

County, which is within the Foundation’s applicable range. The maximum amount of money

available is $25,000 each year. A typical grant is between $2,000 and $5,000.

2. The David, Helen and Marian Woodward Fund. This Fund focuses on issues involving

human services, animals and the environment. Although the Fund is available to all of

31

Georgia and its neighboring states, they have historically given preference to organizations in

Georgia (David, Helen, and Marian Woodward Fund - Atlanta 2016). Grants often range

between $15,000 and $50,000 bi-yearly.

3. The Ford Fund Capital Grant. This Grant typically offers between $25,000 and $45,000

each year for the general purpose of community development. Although this is potentially as

much or more than the first two recommendations, the Farm does not meet the criteria as

well the first two. Instead of being aimed specifically at children or animals, it is for

community development in general.

4. Build-a-Bear Workshop Bear Hugs Foundation. The goal of this Foundation is to provide

grants to nonprofit organizations within 50 miles of a Build-A-Bear Workshop store for the

purpose of enhancing the lives of animals and people. Their motto is H.E.A.R.T.: Helping

communities through volunteering, Experiencing the power of teamwork, Accepting people’s

unique differences, Respecting people and animals, and Taking the lead to drive positive

change. The grants from this Foundation are smaller than the other recommendations, from

$1,000 to $5,000 each year. The closest Build-A-Bear Workshop to the Farm is in Buford,

approximately 40 miles away.

5. The Rich Foundation. This Foundation is dedicated to distributing a share of the profits

from Rich Inc. to nonprofit organizations, with an emphasis on programs that benefit people

with intellectual and developmental disabilities (Mission and History 2016). Grants usually

range between $5,000 and $10,000. Although this aligns perfectly with the function of

Butterfly Dreams, the fund is aimed at Metro Atlanta.

32

RECOMMENDATIONS

Drainage

We recommend the installation of a French drain system as the best way to manage drainage

on this site. Although French drains are more costly to install and maintain than diversion

ditches, they will minimize the amount of surface runoff on the Farm's pastures therefore also

minimizing the amount of erosion. The drains can be disguised as gravel pathways and

integrated into the current layout of the farm. However, our clients should be aware that a

higher up-front cost will likely reduce the length of drain that can be installed unless an

outside source supplies funding.

Our second recommendation is a system of diversion ditches and berms. Diversion ditches

are easy and cheap to create relative to the other two alternatives. While they will develop

soil buildup more quickly than a French drain, it is possible to clean them without

professional assistance. However, because the interior of the diversion ditch should be seeded

with grass to prevent further erosion during storm events, it is possible that horses will

interfere with them.

Our last recommendation is the installation of permeable paving in front of the bedding

storage and parking lot areas. While installation and maintenance costs are comparatively

low, combined gravel and asphalt cover on the site is only 0.88 acres (7% of the total area).

The open, compacted pastures on the southern end of the property which experience ponding

during rainfall events do not benefit at all from this alternative. One exception is Yellow

Duck pasture which lies directly south of the parking lot.

33

Erosion

We recommend the spreading of temporary mulch and fescue grass seed on bare activity

areas as the best way to manage erosion on this site. It is effective at reducing surface erosion

and the additional grass can be used to graze horses as well as stabilize the site. There are

multiple companies in the area who will deliver mulch material. We recommend that the

landowners spread the material themselves to reduce costs.

Our second recommendation is the placement of water diversion bars on all main trails on the

property, especially in the Hundred Acre Woods pasture and below the sand arena. Water

diversion bars have a simple installation process and can be constructed out of wood or logs

already present on the property, reducing the cost even further.

Our last recommendation is the installation of check dams in emergent streams. The

landowner has already placed new check dams in the emergent stream in Hundred Acre

Woods pasture, and it would not benefit from additional check dams. While the emergent

streams in Yellow Duck pasture and Gold Fish pasture could benefit from their installation,

they are less central to the property and so less of a concern than the heavily used trail areas.

Funding

We recommend that the NRCS be the Farm's first contact. Not only do they offer enough to

cover the entire cost of materials and installation for the Farm's check dam, mulch, and

seeding projects, they also provide professional technical assistance for project design

whether the landowner is applying for money or not. We recommend that our clients build a

working relationship with the NRCS as soon as possible.

34

Our second recommendation is that the Farm contact the Community Foundation for

Northeast Georgia and apply for the David, Helen and Marian Woodward Fund. Both of

these groups have mission statements which closely match the Farm's, and provide money on

a yearly basis.

Our third recommendation is that the Farm contact the Ford Fund Capital Grant and the

Build-a-Bear Workshop Bear Hugs Foundation. Both of these groups have mission

statements that do not fit the Farm's goals as closely, and have historically given money to a

much wider range of recipients, making it less likely that the Farm will receive money from

these sources consistently in subsequent years.

Although the Rich Foundation was mentioned in Taylor Adams’ top five list, we do not

recommend that the Farm apply for their grants. This organization only operates in Metro

Atlanta so the Farm does not qualify.

35

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A - Soil Pedon Descriptions for three locations on Butterfly Dreams Farm in

Oconee County.

Location: Oconee County, GA. Butterfly Dreams Farm, Yellow Duck Pasture.

Landform: Toeslope Elevation: 266 meters Slope: 6% S

Parent Materials: Residuum - Saprolite

Physiography: Piedmont Land Use: Pasture

Described by: Alys Hannum Date: 2/6/16

Soil Description: (colors for moist soils unless otherwise noted)

Oa - 0 to 6 cm; dark brown (7.5YR 3/4)

Ap - 6 to 16 cm; red (2.5YR 4/6) silty clay; weak medium subangular blocky structure; very

friable; common fine roots; abrupt smooth boundary.

- 16 to 35 cm; red (2.5YR 5/8) sandy clay loam; weak medium subangular blocky structure;

friable; few fine roots; clear smooth boundary.

- 35 to 60 cm; red (10R 4/6) clay loam; weak medium subangular blocky structure; firm; few

fine clay films on faces of peds; gradual smooth boundary.

- 60 to 85 cm; red (10R 5/8) clay loam; moderate medium subangular blocky structure; firm;

few fine clay films on faces of peds; common fine mica flakes; clear wavy boundary.

- 85 to 110 cm; red (10R 5/6) clay loam; few fine dull reddish brown (5YR 4/3) redox

depletions; weak medium subangular blocky; friable; few fine mica flakes; gradual smooth

boundary.

- 110 to 130 cm; red (10R 5/6) clay; common fine grayish red (2.5YR 4/2) redox depletions;

weak granular structure; friable; common fine mica flakes; gradual smooth boundary.

- 130 to 150 cm; red (10R 5/6) clay; common fine reddish gray (2.5YR 4/1) redox depletions;

few coarse dull reddish brown (5YR 5/4) redox concentrations;

- 150+ cm; red (2.5YR 4/8) clay;

Wetness Class: 2: well drained

36

Location: Oconee County, GA. Butterfly Dreams Farm, Brown Bear Pasture.

Landform: Backslope Elevation: 266 meters Slope: 4% S





Ap - 0 to 10 cm; reddish brown (5YR 4/3) sandy loam; weak granular structure; friable;

many coarse roots; abrupt smooth boundary.

BA - 10 to 25 cm; reddish brown (5YR 5/4) sandy loam; weak granular structure; very

friable; common coarse and fine roots; clear wavy boundary.

Bt1 - 25 to 40 cm; bright reddish brown (5YR 5/6) sandy clay loam; moderate granular

structure; friable; few fine roots; clear smooth boundary.

Bt2 - 40 to 75 cm; yellowish red (2.5YR 5/6) sandy clay loam; few fine grayish red (2.5YR

5/2) redox depletions; moderate granular structure; gradual wavy boundary.

Bc - 75 to 105 cm; yellowish red (2.5YR 5/6) clay loam; common fine dull reddish brown

(2.5YR 5/3) redox depletions; weak medium subangular blocky structure; firm; common fine

mica flakes; gradual smooth boundary.

C1 - 105 to 140 cm; red (2.5YR 4/8) clay loam; few fine dull reddish brown (2.5YR 5/3)

redox depletions; moderate medium subangular blocky structure; firm; common clay films

on faces of peds; common fine mica flakes; gradual wavy boundary.

C2 - 140+ cm; red (2.5YR 5/8) clay loam; few coarse bright yellowish brown (10YR 6/8)

redox concentrations; few medium dull brown (7.5YR 5/4) concretions; moderate medium

subangular blocky structure; firm; common clay films on faces of peds; common fine mica

flakes; gradual wavy boundary.

Wetness Class: 1; well drained

37

Location: Oconee County, GA. Butterfly Dreams Farm, Hundred Acre Woods Pasture.

Landform: Toeslope Elevation: 266 meters Slope: 4% SW





Ap - 0 to 10 cm; very dark gray (10YR 3/1) loam; single grained; very friable; many very

fine roots, abrupt smooth boundary.

A - 10 to 25 cm; brown (7.5YR 5/4) sandy loam; few fine grayish brown (7.5YR 5/2) redox

depletions; weak fine granular structure; friable; few fine roots, clear smooth boundary.

B - 25 to 45 cm; strong brown (7.5YR 5/6) silty clay loam; few fine dull brown (7.5YR 5/3)

redox depletions; weak granular structure; friable; gradual smooth boundary.

B2- 45 to 60 cm; yellowish red (5YR 5/6) silty clay loam; few medium dull brown (7.5YR

5/3) redox concentrations; weak medium subangular blocky structure; friable; gradual

smooth boundary.

B3 - 60 to 100; yellowish red (5YR 5/6) clay loam; few medium grayish brown (5YR 4/2)

redox depletions; weak medium subangular blocky structure; firm; gradual smooth boundary.

Bt- 100 to 150+ cm; yellowish red (5YR 5/6) clay loam; common fine and medium light

brownish gray (5YR 7/1) redox depletions; moderate medium subangular blocky structure;

firm; common clay films on faces of peds; gradual wavy boundary.

Wetness Class: 3; moderately well drained

38

APPENDIX B - Soil Test Results for Butterfly Dreams Farm Pastures. Tests performed by

UGA Soil, Plant, and Water Laboratory located in Athens, Georgia.

Hannum, Alys From: Soil, Plant, and Water Laboratory 2400 College Station Road Athens GA 30607 Athens, GA 30602 Soil Samples phone: 706-542-5350

Completed: February 15, 2016 e-mail: [email protected]

http://aesl.ces.uga.edu

Mehlich 1 lbs/acre lbs/A %

Lab Sample

LBC 1

(ppm

CaCO3/

pH)

pH

CaCl2 2

Equiv.

water

pH

Ca K Mg Mn P Zn NO3-

N

OM 3

29961 1 442 5.71 6.31 2861 490.5 357.5 36.17 160.22 50.25 21.01 4.74

29962 2 414 5.64 6.24 2545 299.5 295.9 38.74 97.13 147.67 13.30 4.37

29963 3 526 5.75 6.35 4464 257.7 430.8 57.43 168.39 34.02 18.99 5.78

29964 4 487 5.93 6.53 4669 270.5 379.0 39.08 140.93 33.58 30.57 6.52

29965 5 516 5.42 6.02 3215 272.5 357.1 46.46 72.04 18.98 23.75 6.27

29966 6 496 5.13 5.73 2417 239.8 293.7 32.77 89.33 28.63 15.47 6.28

29967 7 445 5.61 6.21 2876 266.6 322.0 46.16 56.13 21.76 11.16 4.99

1. Soil Testing: Measurement of Lime Buffer Capacity

(http://www.caes.uga.edu/Publications/displayHTML.cfm?pk_id=7335) 2. Soil Testing: Soil pH and Salt Concentration (http://www.caes.uga.edu/Publications/displayHTML.cfm?pk_id=7336) 3. Organic Matter is determined by the "loss on ignition" method for 3 hours at 360º C. Results are reported in percent by

weight.

Sample 1 is representative of Paddock 1

Sample 2 is representative of White Dog pasture and Paddock 2

Sample 3 is representative of Goldfish pasture

Sample 4 is representative of Brown Bear and Green From pastures

Sample 5 is representative of Hundred Acre Woods pasture

Sample 6 is representative of Red Bird pasture

Sample 7 is representative of Yellow Duck and Black Sheep pastures

39

APPENDIX C - Limestone, Nitrogen, Phosphate, and Potassium recommendations for ideal

rye grass growth conditions in pastures at Butterfly Dreams Farm in Oconee County,

Georgia. Provided by UGA Soil, Plant, and Water Laboratory located in Athens, Georgia.

47

APPENDIX D – Summary of total scores from zero to three for funding sources based on

Butterfly Dreams Farm Board Member Taylor Adams’ (MPA) analysis of their suitability.

Name of Organization

Organizational Mission Matches Overall Goals of Grant Maker

Matches Location (Geographic Focus)

Matches Target Population/ type of Project

Project Matches Typical Award Size

Grant Seeker Capacity matches Award Structure

Total

Community Foundation for Northeast Georgia

3 3 3 2 3 14

David, Helen and Marian Woodward Fund (Wells Fargo)

2 3 3 3 2 13

The Ford Fund Capital Grant

2 2 2 3 2 11

Build-A-Bear Workshop Bear Hugs Foundation

3 3 2 2 0 10

The Rich Foundation

2 1 3 2 0 8

48

APPENDIX E – Scoring of the top five funding sources for Butterfly Dreams Farm by

Taylor Adams (MPA).

Funder Name: Community Foundation for Northeast Georgia

https://www.cfneg.org/2016_Grant_Coversheet_and_Guidelines_POSTED_1.1.16[5].pdf

Criteria Score

(0= Not at all or barely, 1=

Could argue it fits with a

straight face, 2= Good fit,

3= Perfect!)

Comments

Organizational Mission Matches

Overall Goals of Grant Maker

3

Matches Location

(Geographic Focus)

3

Matches Target

Population/Type of Project

3 Funding priority is children

Project Matches Typical Award

Size

2 Impact Grant request for

capacity building project of us

to $25,000. Also has an option

for a challenge grant (i.e.

matching at a 1:1 2:1 or 3:1

ratio). Typical grant is $2-5k. Grant Seeker Capacity Matches

Award Structure(Match

Requirements, Reimbursement

Schedule)

3 Organization has until

December to raise funds for a

challenge (matching) grant.

Evaluation Methods Compatible

(Required Process?)

N/A Not Listed

Overall Comments or Changes

Needed

“We look for proposals from organizations with a well-

planned approach to issues and needs, with a demonstrated

base of support, committed leadership, and the involvement of

individuals with the skills necessary to carry out the work. We

are interested in those organizations that can demonstrate that

they have planned their projects in light of overall community

need. The fields of interest covered by our grants are social

services, education, community and civic affairs, arts and

culture, and health. “

49

Funder Name: David, Helen and Marian Woodward Fund (Wells Fargo)

https://www.wellsfargo.com/private-foundations/woodward-fund-atlanta/

Criteria Score

(0= Not at all or

barely, 1= Could argue

it fits with a straight

face, 2= Good fit, 3=

Perfect!)

Comments

Organizational Mission

Matches Overall Goals of Grant

Maker

2

Focuses on capital improvement

and project grants

Matches Location

(Geographic Focus)

3 Georgia or one of its neighboring

states with preference to Georgia

Matches Target


3 Environment, animals

Health

Human services


Size

3 $15,000-50,000 are very typical

awards

Grant Seeker Capacity Matches



Schedule)

2 To be considered, requests must be

received by April 1 or September 1.

The distribution committee meets

semi-annually in May and

November. If a grant is awarded,

the funds are generally disbursed to

the organization 4 – 6 weeks after

the committee meeting. Evaluation Methods Compatible

(Required Process?)

N/A Could not find


Needed

Need to contact funder for information about evaluation

methods. Emphasis on Hippotherapy is a better fit since there

seems to be a heavy emphasis on providing funding to

hospitals and medical entities.

50

Funder Name: The Ford Fund capital grant

Criteria Score

(0= Not at all or barely, 1=

Could argue it fits with a

straight face, 2= Good fit,

3= Perfect!)

Comments


Matches Overall Goals of Grant

Maker

2

There is an emphasis on how

capital funding will lead to

ongoing opportunities for the

community, which BDF can

show Matches Location

(Geographic Focus)

2 Funds only in the United States

Matches Target


2


Size

3 the average capital grant award

amount was between $25,000

and $45,000




Schedule)

2 No match requirements or

reimbursement schedule

provided

Evaluation Methods

Compatible

(Required Process?)

N/A Not listed


Needed

Required content for narrative: A brief description of the

overall project; A description of the specific project

Ford Motor Company Fund capital funding will support; Any

naming opportunities; A description of potential programmatic

ties that could be linked to this capital grant in future years

51

Funder Name: The Rich Foundation

http://richfoundationatlanta.org/

Criteria Score

(0= Not at all or barely,

1= Could argue it fits

with a straight face, 2=

Good fit, 3= Perfect!)

Comments


Matches Overall Goals of

Grant Maker

2

Focus is broad and did not present a

single cohesive theme beyond

Atlanta

Matches Location

(Geographic Focus)

1 Metro Atlanta makes it a stretch to

include Athens

Matches Target


3! primary focus has been in the field

of health and education with an

emphasis on early learning and

programs that benefit people with

intellectual/developmental

disabilities Project Matches Typical

Award Size

2 Awards range from $5,000-

$185,000 with the majority being

$5-10k

Grant Seeker Capacity

Matches Award

Structure(Match

Requirements,

Reimbursement Schedule)

4 deadlines for submission and an

autobiographical sketch

Evaluation Methods

Compatible

(Required Process?)

N/A Not listed

Overall Comments or

Changes Needed

Letter of request must be sent prior to a proposal. It must

include: Mission of the organization, Amount of funding to be

requested, Purpose of the funding, Benefits to the community of

the specific funding, Total cost of the project in question, Fund

raising results to date of the project, including a list of the

donors to date, A copy of the IRS determination letter.

52

Funder Name: Build-a-Bear Workshop Bear Hugs Foundation

http://www.buildabear.com/html/en_US/aboutus/community/2010-Domestic-Pet-Grants.pdf

Criteria Score

(0= Not at all or barely,

1= Could argue it fits

with a straight face, 2=

Good fit, 3= Perfect!)

Comments

Organizational Mission Matches

Overall Goals of Grant Maker

3

Enhancing quality of life for

children and animals. Specifically

mentions working with animals

and horse therapy programs as

eligible. Matches Location

(Geographic Focus)

3 Must be within 50 miles of a

Build a Bear Workshop (40 miles

from one in Buford).

Matches Target


2 H - Help communities through

volunteering.

E - Experience the power of

teamwork.

A - Accept people's unique

differences.

R - Respect people and

animals.

T - Take the lead to drive

positive change. Project Matches Typical Award

Size

2 Grants from $1,000 to $5,000.




Schedule)

N/a

Evaluation Methods Compatible

(Required Process?)

N/a


Needed

Struggling to find information and the 2014 guidestar 990

looks fishy. However, their list of 2010 organizations is right

in line with BDF.

53

LITERATURE CITED

Adamson, D. Date unknown [cited April 15 2016]. Pervious Paving Illustration. Available

from: < http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/ia/newsroom/

factsheets/?cid=nrcs142p2_008524>.

Batzer, D. and R. Sharitz. 2014 [cited March 15 2016]. Ecology of Freshwater and Estuarine

Wetlands (2nd Ed).

Center for Environmental Excellence. 2016 [cited April 4 2016]. Roadside Management and

Maintenance: Beyond Vegetation. Available from:

<http://environment.transportation.org/environmental_issues/construct_maint_prac/c

ompendium/manual/10_11.aspx>.

Environmental Protection Agency. 2012 [cited March 22 2016]. Stormwater Phase II Final

Rule: Construction Rainfall Erosivity Waiver. Fact Sheet 3.1. Available from:

<https://www3.epa.gov/npdes/pubs/fact3-1.pdf>.

Georgia Cooperative Extension. 2008 [cited February 23 2016]. Soil Test Handbook for

Georgia. Special Bulletin 62. Available from:

<http://aesl.ces.uga.edu/publications/soil/STHandbook.pdf>.

Georgia Horse Council. 2016 [cited April 19 2016]. Legal Info for Horseowners. Available

from: <http://georgiahorsecouncil.com/advocacy-and-education/legal-info-for-

horseowners/>.

Georgia Soil and Water Conservation Commission. 2014 [cited April 5 2016]. Manual for

Erosion and Sediment Control in Georgia. Sixth Edition. Available from:

<https://gaswcc.georgia.gov/sites/gaswcc.georgia.gov/files/Manual_for_Erosion

_and_Sediment_Control_in_Georgia_Sixth_Edition_2014.pdf>.

Institute of Water Research. 2002 [cited March 2016]. RUSLE Online Soil Erosion

Assessment Tool. Michigan State University. Available from:

<http://www.iwr.msu.edu/rusle/>.

Marion, J. L. and Leung, Y-F. 1998 [cited February 9 2016]. Campsite Survey Implications

for Managing Designated Campsites at Great Smoky Mountains National Park.

Wilderness and natural areas in Eastern North America: research, management and

planning.

Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2012 [cited April 15 2016]. Field Book for

Describing and Sampling Soils. Version 3.0. Available from:

<http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/nrcs142p2_052523.pdf>.

Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2016 [cited February 17, 2016]. Web Soil Survey.

Available from: <http://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/HomePage.htm>.

Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2016 [cited April 17 2016]. FY 2016 EQIP

Conservation Activity Plan (CAP). Available from:

54

<http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/programs/financial/eqip/?c

id=nrcseprd401472>.

Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2016 [cited April 10, 2016]. Georgia FY 2016

EQIP Policy. Available from: <http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/

PA_NRCSConsumption/download?cid=nrcseprd555611&ext=pdf>.

Hunt, William F. March 10 2016 [cited April 5 2016]. Urban Waterways: Maintaining

Permeable Pavements. Available from: <https://www.bae.ncsu.edu/extension/ext-

publications/water/protecting/ag-588-23-maintaining-permeable-pavements.pdf>.

NZ Drainage. 2013 [cited April 14 2016]. French Drain. Available from:

<http://www.nzdrainage.co.nz/services/french-drain/>.

Oconee County Georgia. 2016 [cited April 14 2016]. Available from:

<http://www.oconeecounty.com/>.

Our Story. 2015 [cited February 29 2016]. Watkinsville, Georgia. Butterfly Dreams Farm.

Available from: <http://butterflydreamsfarm.org/our-story/>.

Revised Universal Soil Loss Equation Version 2 (RUSLE 2). 2001 [cited January 25 2016].

USDA RUSLE Development Team. Available from:

<http://fargo.nserl.purdue.edu/rusle2_dataweb/RUSLE2_Index.htm>.

Virginia City Highlands Property Owners Association. 2006 [cited April 14 2016]. Road

Management Guidelines & Road Maintenance Plan. Available from:

<http://www.vchpoa.org/RIP_LARRI_final.htm>.

Xrite: Munsell Color Company. 2000 [cited February 22 2016]. Munsell Soil Color Chart

(Year 2000 Revised Washable Edition).

Butterfly Dreams Management Plan by Jared Bullock, Alys Hannum, and Johnathon Paynter

Documents

Transcript of Butterfly Dreams Management Plan by Jared Bullock, Alys Hannum, and Johnathon Paynter