Ce diaporama a bien été signalé.
Nous utilisons votre profil LinkedIn et vos données d’activité pour vous proposer des publicités personnalisées et pertinentes. Vous pouvez changer vos préférences de publicités à tout moment.
How Legacy Nutrients
Affect Farm Conservation
Measures
Andrew Sharpley
Crop, Soil,& Environmental Sciences
Water to Worth ...
Dealing with a 10-ton gorilla
Legacy P & system response
 Soil
 BMPs
 Hydro-chemistry
 Fluvial
Where do we go from ...
Soil Hydro-chemBMPs System
Uptake & release of P
by sediments affects
waterbody response
Decline in soil P
with crop
offtake is slow
Adoption of
BMPs...
0
100
200
300
400
500
1988 1992 1996 2000 2004 2008 2012
Available soil P (Mehlich-3), mg/kg
Grazed pasture
Dairy manure a...
Land use Location Decline Time Decline
mg P/kg years mg P kg-1 yr-1
Pasture OK. 260 - 190 15 4.7
Corn NC 100 – 20 16 4.7
W...
BMPs can take
time to effectively
decrease P runoffPonds
trap P
Time for buffer
to become
effective
Wetlands
trap P
But ar...
• 1.2 billion broilers produced annually in AR
• In 2003
 Judge set 300 mg/kg Mehlich-3 P threshold
 Litter rates went f...
AR Water Resources Center, 2012
Diss. P Total P
2000 0.224 0.377
2003 0.148 0.244
2011 0.070 0.130
Mean annual concentrati...
Time for water body
to biologically
respond to P input
Response to
BMPs takes
time
Variable delivery
time from source to
p...
36
48
15
Baseflow dissolved P, µg/L
27
Stormflow dissolved P, µg/L
170
124
304
202
I mile
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
1990 1995 2000 2005 2010
Lake P
µg/L Recovery phase
Internal recycling of
‘legacy’ P (10-15 y)
Wa...
Lakes (c.5-30 yr)
Groundwater
(<1 – 50 yr)
In-channel (<1 yr)
Riparian & floodplains
(<1 – 1000 yr)
Soils & hillslopes
(c....
Maumee River
watershed
Sandusky River
watershed
MICHIGAN
Lake Erie
OHIO
Richards et al., 2002
3
4
5
6
7
1975 1980 1985 1990 1995
15
20
25
30
35
40
1975 1980 1985 1990 1995
Conservation measures reduced fertilizer P i...
1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010
0.00
0.02
0.04
0.06
0.08
0.10
0.12
0.14
Maumee River
1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000...
Some of the drivers
Increased DP input & blooms result of…
Same annual rainfall but more intense spring rains
 Prior to ...
Conservation initiatives, metrics, & outcomes
should account for & adapt to legacy impacts
 Legacies mask/delay water qu...
Model fluvial processing of P
 Move from delivery coefficients &
distance functions to process-based model
Legacy P will likely become a resource
 As costs of fertilizer production increase
 Market forces & govt. intervention ...
Need better understanding of
 Spatial & temporal aspects of watershed
response to nutrient load reductions
 Scale at wh...
How legacy nutrients affect farm conservation measures
How legacy nutrients affect farm conservation measures
Prochain SlideShare
Chargement dans…5
×

How legacy nutrients affect farm conservation measures

423 vues

Publié le

Full proceedings available at: http://www.extension.org/72868

There has been a tremendous amount of activity and funding of conservation programs with regional and watershed-specific cost-share initiatives. While there have been some successes, water quality response in many areas has not been as great as expected. This has led many to question the efficacy of these measures and to call for stricter land and nutrient management strategies. In many cases, this limited response has been due to the legacies of past management activities, where sinks and stores of phosphorus along the land-freshwater continuum mask the effects of reductions in edge-of-field losses of phosphorus.

Publié dans : Formation
  • Soyez le premier à commenter

How legacy nutrients affect farm conservation measures

  1. 1. How Legacy Nutrients Affect Farm Conservation Measures Andrew Sharpley Crop, Soil,& Environmental Sciences Water to Worth 2015 Advancing Sustainability in Animal Agriculture Seattle, WA
  2. 2. Dealing with a 10-ton gorilla Legacy P & system response  Soil  BMPs  Hydro-chemistry  Fluvial Where do we go from here?
  3. 3. Soil Hydro-chemBMPs System
  4. 4. Uptake & release of P by sediments affects waterbody response Decline in soil P with crop offtake is slow Adoption of BMPs by farmers is variable BMPs can take time to decrease P runoff Soil processes Hydro-chemical response System response BMP response Wetlands trap & buffers can trap then recycle P Time for ground water to reach stream can vary from days to years
  5. 5. 0 100 200 300 400 500 1988 1992 1996 2000 2004 2008 2012 Available soil P (Mehlich-3), mg/kg Grazed pasture Dairy manure added 75 kg P/ha/yr Pasture cut for hay Crop response
  6. 6. Land use Location Decline Time Decline mg P/kg years mg P kg-1 yr-1 Pasture OK. 260 - 190 15 4.7 Corn NC 100 – 20 16 4.7 Wheat Canada 125 – 109 4 4.0 Soybean IA 95 - 10 27 3.2
  7. 7. BMPs can take time to effectively decrease P runoffPonds trap P Time for buffer to become effective Wetlands trap P But are not infinite sinks for P Can eventually release P
  8. 8. • 1.2 billion broilers produced annually in AR • In 2003  Judge set 300 mg/kg Mehlich-3 P threshold  Litter rates went from 3 to 1.3 tons/acre/yr • In 2014  Most of the litter exported out of watershed  85% in Eucha-Spavinaw & 45% in Illinois River Watershed  Judge reduced STP threshold to 150 mg/kg
  9. 9. AR Water Resources Center, 2012 Diss. P Total P 2000 0.224 0.377 2003 0.148 0.244 2011 0.070 0.130 Mean annual concentration, mg/L
  10. 10. Time for water body to biologically respond to P input Response to BMPs takes time Variable delivery time from source to point of impact
  11. 11. 36 48 15 Baseflow dissolved P, µg/L 27 Stormflow dissolved P, µg/L 170 124 304 202 I mile
  12. 12. 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 Lake P µg/L Recovery phase Internal recycling of ‘legacy’ P (10-15 y) Water quality target met P input reduced 60% Water quality target 40 µg/L Loch Leven, Scotland; Linda May & Bryan Spears, CEH
  13. 13. Lakes (c.5-30 yr) Groundwater (<1 – 50 yr) In-channel (<1 yr) Riparian & floodplains (<1 – 1000 yr) Soils & hillslopes (c.5-30 yr)
  14. 14. Maumee River watershed Sandusky River watershed MICHIGAN Lake Erie OHIO Richards et al., 2002
  15. 15. 3 4 5 6 7 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 15 20 25 30 35 40 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 Conservation measures reduced fertilizer P inputs Maumee Sandusky Fertilizer P, 103 tonnes P/yr
  16. 16. 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 0.00 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.10 0.12 0.14 Maumee River 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 0.00 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.10 0.12 0.14 Sandusky River Baker et al (2014) J. Great Lakes Research Mean total P mg/L 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Maumee River 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Sandusky River Mean dissolved P, mg/L
  17. 17. Some of the drivers Increased DP input & blooms result of… Same annual rainfall but more intense spring rains  Prior to 2008 – 12% of annual rains  2008 to 2011 – 30% of annual rains Surface soil P buildup with no-till Increased tile drainage of soils created more critical source areas Solutions need to consider day-day farm management decisions
  18. 18. Conservation initiatives, metrics, & outcomes should account for & adapt to legacy impacts  Legacies mask/delay water quality improvements  Some practices will transition from sinks to sources of P – no-till soils & buffers
  19. 19. Model fluvial processing of P  Move from delivery coefficients & distance functions to process-based model
  20. 20. Legacy P will likely become a resource  As costs of fertilizer production increase  Market forces & govt. intervention will determine how quickly legacy P stores are tackled
  21. 21. Need better understanding of  Spatial & temporal aspects of watershed response to nutrient load reductions  Scale at which responses may occur in a more timely fashion Local water quality & quantity benefits evident more quickly at a smaller scale Important to demonstrate change & foster accountability & ultimately wider adoption of conservation practices

×