Nutrient Management and Edge of Field Monitoring December 1-3, 2015 Memphis TN

1. Nutrient Management and EOF
Monitoring Conference
December 2, 2015
Applying Monitoring
Projects, Practice
Effectiveness and
Results to Meet
Water Quality
Protection, Policy
and Goals
Lisa F. Duriancik, USDA NRCS
Conservation Effects Assessment Project (CEAP)
Watersheds Component Leader
SSRA, Resource Assessment Division

2. Take Home: Major Uses of Data
• NRCS business uses of data:
– Reporting needs, briefing input, Program design and
guidelines, project level support, new CP standards
and effectiveness
• Considering watershed scale outcomes, practice
effects and interactions
• Identify constituents and sources within
watersheds to target
• Developing more effective watershed projects
• Developing more effective conservation practices

3. “People here in the United States –
and in many other countries – are
learning that we must have soil
conservation if we are to have
continuous, abundant agricultural
production. We are fast learning,
too, that it must be effective
conservation…”
Dr. Hugh H. Bennett, 1946, JSWC
1 (1): 21-24.

4. CEAP Watersheds –
Carrying on the Vision:
• Vision: enhanced natural resources and
ecosystems through
– more effective conservation
– better management of agricultural landscapes
• Goal: Improve efficacy of conservation practices
and programs
• Conservation Planning and Implementation
• Management Decisions and
• Policy
Maresch, et al., 2008, JSWC Vol. 63, No. 6, pp. 198A-203A.

5. Challenges of Yesterday (2008)…
and of Tomorrow
• Drought & Water
Availability
• Climate Change,
Extreme Events
• Land Use Change,
Hydrologic Modification
• Translating Science
Into Practice
– Targeting
– Planning
ARS image
HYPOXIA
Eutrophication
Maresch, et al., 2008, JSWC Vol. 63,
No. 6, pp. 198A-203A.

6. Findings and Use of CEAP
Watersheds Information in NRCS
Reporting:
Performance and Documenting
Outcomes

7. Reporting Uses: Hypoxia Task Force
• Results showing lake
water quality
improvements (clarity
and TSS) reported
• Hypoxia Task Force
progress report
– lessons learned,
measureable changes
• Forthcoming
HABHRCA progress
report
Beasley Lake CEAP Watershed, MS
• Total suspended Solids (TSS) in Spring
showing improvements over time
following implementation of conservation
system.
• Improvements persisted across seasons.
Lizotte et al., 2014, JSWC, 69 (2): 160-170.

8. Reporting Uses: USDA APG for
Water Pilot Projects Final Report
• CEAP Watershed Studies
addressed this OMB
performance reporting
requirement with 2 pilots
• Final report was prepared
and submitted to OMB
• Recommendations and
Considerations section for
Performance Reporting
Relative Change in Annual Load for
Nutrients and Sediments by Conservation Practice
NH4-N NO3-N TKN Soluble P Total P Sediment
RelativeChangeinAnnualLoad
-100
-50
0
50
100
150
200
Grassed Waterway
Blind Inlet
Conservation Crop Rotation
Tillage

9. Reporting: Strategic Opportunities for
Water Quality Outcomes:
• Better align some targeted
conservation (RCPP, MRBI,
NWQI) with watershed
assessment infrastructure
– Some EOF now established
– But watershed outcomes
needed
• Research watersheds often not
those with greatest needs
• Watersheds with needs often do
not have monitoring or
assessment infrastructure

10. Support for RCPP and MRBI –
Project Level
• WLEB RCPP Project
based in part on CEAP
Watersheds insights and
data, outcomes
– 5 projects in WLEB
• Delmarva RCPP Project
using insights, data and
has opportunity to
document outcomes
Weir in Choptank CEAP Watershed Study

11. Findings and Use of CEAP
Watersheds Information in NRCS
Translating Science Into Practice:
Support for Program
Development, Guidelines and
Review Criteria

12. Greatest Opportunities for More Effective
Water Quality Conservation:
 Work in smaller watersheds
 Use systems of conservation practices – ACT
 Address multiple water quality and soil
conservation concerns, especially trade-offs
 Consider hydrology
 transport pathways
 most effective conservation practices to
intercept or treat the water resource
Osmond et al., 2012 SWCS. 387 pp. “How to Build Better Ag Conservation Programs to Protect Water Quality”
Tomer et al. 2014, JSWC, 69(5) 365‐373

13. Greatest Opportunities for More Effective
Water Quality Conservation (cont.):
 Work with ag community and engage
producers as part of the solution
 Producer-led watershed coalitions
 One-to-one technical assistance
 Use partnerships to help fund
 Consider producer preferences
 Track conservation implemented against a
watershed plan
Osmond et al., 2012 SWCS. 387 pp. “How to Build Better Ag Conservation Programs to Protect Water Quality”
Tomer et al. 2014, JSWC, 69(5) 365‐373

14. Support for RCPP and MRBI –
Guidelines and Review Criteria
• Program guidelines and
review criteria in the
RCPP APF and MRBI
drew on NIFA Lessons
Learned
• Website resources for
applicants
MRBI

15. Findings and Use of CEAP
Watersheds Information in NRCS
Translating Science Into Practice:
Support for Targeted, More
Effective Conservation in Small
Watersheds

16. Planning and Targeting: More Effective
Conservation for Water Quality
Slide 16
 Monitoring data can be used to identify the
pollutants of concern and sources in
watershed
 Select the correct conservation practices for
the specific water quality concern
 Target practices on lands where they’ll do the
most good
 Identify critical source areas
 Ensure conservation practices are used and
maintained
 Consider producer preferences and goalsOsmond et al., 2012 SWCS. 387 pp. “How to Build Better Ag Conservation Programs to Protect Water Quality”

17. • Hydrology: Peak tile discharge often occurred
concurrently or even before peak discharge in
surface runoff, bypassing soil matrix release and
moving via macropores
What Have We Learned:
Phosphorous in WLEB
Water Quality: Nearly 50%
on average of both
dissolved (soluble) P (49%)
and total P (48%) left fields
via the tile - higher than
previously thought
A tile outlet in the St. Joseph River CEAP Watershed, IN
With permission, Douglas R. Smith, et al., JEQ, October 10, 2014
Nutrient Management and
Changes in Hydrology:

18. CEAP Conservation Insights:
• Practices work for P loading
to surface runoff, but…
• Many complex interactions
• Conservation Planning -
Identify practices to decrease
P loading to tile to address
unintended consequences
• Vary suites of practices and
management strategies
• Focus timing of interventions
• Watershed Planning -
Expands contributing source
area for P in drained
watersheds
Data from Kevin W. King et al.,2014 JEQ
Discharge, DRP and Total
P in Tile and Watershed

19. What Have We Learned:
Sediment Sources
• Stream sources for sediment
loads
• More than 50% of the fine
sediment in 6 of 8 CEAP
Watersheds originated from
channel sources: stream banks,
riverine beds, and gullies.
• Conservation Insights:
– Targeting riparian area,
stream restoration
– Ephemeral gullies
C.G. Wilson et al, 2014, JSWC 69(5):402-413
100
80
60
50
40
20
0
Sedimentfromchannelsources(%)
CEAP Watersheds

20. Findings and Use of CEAP
Watersheds Information in NRCS
Translating Science Into Practice:
New Conservation Practice
Standards: Effects and
Effectiveness at Watershed
Scales

21. CEAP Watersheds Impact
• Now, when new or improved conservation
practice standards are developed, they are
evaluated in the context of a watershed:
– What is the impact in a watershed, not just a
field?
• When, where and under what conditions is it best
implemented?
– What is the life-span of design to maintain
effectiveness over time?
– How does it interact with other practices in the
hillslope/catchment and landscape?

22. Water Quality Monitoring – 201 & 202
• Largely based on ARS expertise and
experience, publications in CEAP
Watersheds for EOF
• And on NIFA CEAP Watershed
Lessons Learned on watershed
monitoring design
– Factsheet on CEAP Website
• Monitoring Guideline references
– Extension brochure; NC State Tech Notes

23. Blind Inlets – OH and IN
CP 620 Underground Outlet Mod.
Blind Inlet with pit-run cover
(coarse sand and gravel)
Photos by Dr. Doug R. Smith, USDA-ARS
• soluble phosphorus losses
decreased by up to 50 %
• total phosphorus losses by 50 %
• sediment losses by up to 72 %

24. Denitrifying Bioreactors in 3 CEAP WSs
• “NO3-N removal by wood-chip
bioreactors can approach 30% of
total NO3-N transported at the
watershed scale with a modest
amount of land being converted
into bioreactors.”
– “CEAP watersheds provide robust
data sets to test this concept
• for moderate to large seasonal NO3-N
concentrations and
• significant areas of tile drained lands.”
2002 2004 2006 2008 2010
NRemoval(%)
0
20
40
60
80
Base Flow SFIR
Total Q
Year
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
NRemoval(%)
0
20
40
60
80
Base Flow CC
Total Q
2004 2006 2008 2010
NRemoval(%)
0
20
40
60
80
Base Flow WC
Total Q
T. Moorman, et al., 2015. Ecol. Eng. 75: 441-448. Estimated NO3- Removal as a % of Baseflow or Discharge

25. • Climate change scenarios of
increased precipitation
intensity
• exponential increase in soil
erosion, runoff, and
watershed sediment yield
• Stresses current conservation
practices or future with
present day standards
Conservation Insights:
• Diminished conservation
practice effectiveness
• Increases sediment supply
to the stream network
J.D. Garbrecht et al, 2014, JSWC 69(5): 374-392
What Have We Learned:
Climate Impacts

26. Farmland in Coon Valley, WI - 1955
“These tools [of soil conservation] are sometimes used
singly where the land is easy to stabilize, but they are
more often used in combination, one supplementing
another, where the conservation needs are more difficult
or complex.”
--Dr. Hugh H. Bennett, 1946, JSWC 1 (1): 21-24.
lisa.duriancik@wdc.usda.gov