Agency of Agriculture details $18.4 million in farm clean‑water assistance, flags federal funding uncertainty

Laura DiPietro, director of water quality at the Agency of Agriculture, told a legislative committee that the agency administered “about $18,400,000 out the door to farms and also to partners” in the last year as part of its annual technical and financial assistance report.

DiPietro said the money supports measures that go “above and beyond what the minimum regulatory standards are,” including capital projects and annual agronomic practices designed to reduce phosphorus runoff into Lake Champlain and other waters. She described a shared database used by the agency and partner organizations to track technical‑assistance visits and quantify phosphorus reductions achieved by funded projects.

The report groups the agency’s work into several programs. DiPietro described the Ag Clean Water Initiative (a multi‑year, competitive funding stream), best management practices (BMP) grants for structural projects such as manure storage and silage leachate collection, the Farm Agronomic Practices program (FAP) for annual practices including cover crops and no‑till, CREP tree‑buffer contracts, a Capital Equipment Assistance program to help farmers and custom applicators buy specialized equipment, and newer incentive efforts including a Conservation Stewardship‑linked incentive and a Pay‑for‑Performance pilot.

DiPietro gave several examples of recent funding allocations within the Ag Clean Water Initiative: University of Vermont programs received about $3,100,000, conservation districts about $2,500,000, roughly $500,000 to the Champlain Valley Farmer Coalition, and about $3,500,000 to a Farmers Watershed Alliance, all awarded through competitive two‑year grants to local partners.

On the BMP side, DiPietro said the program funds “brick‑and‑mortar” projects such as silage leachate collection and manure storage and often matches federal funding from USDA programs such as EQIP (the Environmental Quality Incentives Program). She said state statute requires the agency to first pursue federal funds when projects qualify. DiPietro described how state funds often raise a federal cost‑share from lower levels up to higher combined shares for farmers.

On agronomic practices, DiPietro highlighted cover cropping, no‑till and manure injection as high‑value, repeatable practices that account for a large share of estimated phosphorus reductions. She said the agency’s FAP tallied program‑funded acres separately from acres farmers implement on their own, and that the program pays a flat per‑acre rate up to statutory caps.

Committee members pressed on sector responsibilities and data. Representative John Berg asked about the contribution of wastewater treatment facilities to phosphorus loads; DiPietro responded that sector estimates are centrally managed by the Agency of Natural Resources and that wastewater facilities are accounted for in the statewide modeling. Representative Nelson asked whether the reported reductions were year‑to‑year or cumulative since 2016; DiPietro said the figures were annual, so practices repeated each year are counted each year.

DiPietro warned that federal funding uncertainty could strain the mix of federal and state programs. She said American Rescue Plan funds provided a recent boost that is phasing out and that the federal Farm Bill and USDA funding levels remain in flux. “If USDA money declines, it will put more pressure on the state programs to do those projects,” she said, adding that the agency would prioritize highest‑risk projects if resources tighten.

DiPietro described regional challenges within Vermont’s Lake Champlain watershed that influence policy choices. She said northern and southern segments of the lake require extra reductions because of internal phosphorus loads in Missisquoi Bay and unusually erosive soils in southern portions of the watershed, which means more stringent actions or incentives are required in those areas.

The presentation also covered programs aimed at small or specialty farms, shared equipment or custom applicators, and pilot approaches to pay farmers for measured reductions beyond modeled targets. DiPietro said the agency maintains outreach and partner funding to increase enrollment in under‑subscribed federal programs such as the Conservation Stewardship Program.

The agency offered the committee a public Power BI dashboard and two annual reports — a technical/financial assistance report (presented) and a shorter regulatory MOU report — and said staff would return to discuss the regulatory report on a later date.

Ending: DiPietro concluded by urging continued coordination among state agencies, federal partners and local conservation districts to sustain progress on phosphorus reductions while acknowledging that tighter federal budgets would require the agency to prioritize projects with the largest water‑quality benefits.