Documenting and monitoring management changes in watersheds
-
Upload
soil-and-water-conservation-society -
Category
Environment
-
view
144 -
download
0
description
Transcript of Documenting and monitoring management changes in watersheds
Documenting and Monitoring Management Changes in WatershedsUW- Discovery Farms
Amber RadatzSoil and Water Conservation Society
July 29, 2014
Discovery Farms• Producer led
– Steering committee, cooperating farms
• Credible water quality research– Partnership with USGS– 46 surface, tile, and stream sites since 2002– 160 site years (58% edge of field, 16% tile, 26% stream)
• Communicating results– 100+ presentations per year– 160 publications on our website– Several articles and inserts in newspaper annually
1 Beef
1 Swine (Odor)
1 Poultry-stacking
2 dairy – grazing
1 Dairy -grazing/organic
4 Dairy - confinement
2 Watersheds
3 Bunker silo leachate
Surface Monitoring
Nutrient management data• 9,200 acres
completed total
• 2,200 in watershed– 12 farms, – 65% of ag acres
• Watershed area– 4,975 acres
(7.75 sq. mi)
Soil Test Values• 11 farms, 776 fields,
8620 acres
• Average field size: 11 acres
• All use manure regularly
80%
Phosphorus Index Values
60% 90%
Predicted Soil Loss7 out of 628 fields were greater than 4 tons/acre
82% of fields less than 2 tons/acre
65% less than ½ T value
Walkover data
• 32 farms, 4,776 acres already walked (94% of total)
• Began in fall 2012, finishing now
• Changes began fall 2013
Walkovers: Verification Tool 2
72 areas in need of improvement– Most challenging: livestock areas, upland area, waterways
530 more areas that could be nutrient and sediment sources but are currently managed well
72 Changes Recommended to 32 farmers
21 changes made immediately
Incentivizing • Nutrient management planning
– Paid consultants per acre, not farmer• No incentive payment for participating in
walkover• Cover crop cost share
– $1,000 towards seed purchase– 2013- 593 acres, $10.33/acre)
• Earthwork cost share– $1,000 towards hiring contractor to repair
identified areas
Monitoring StationsOgden- Intermittent, drains
approx. 1/3 of watershed
Peaceful- Perennial, drains approx. 3/4 of watershed
Farm 1- No Till, Dairy, Daily Haul Manure
Farm 2- No Till with vertical tillage, Dairy, Surface Applied Manure
Farm 3- Minimum Till, Dairy, Incorporated Manure
Sediment ResultsStream Field
1 Low sediment loss from field sites (WI DF Average 650 pounds/acre)
2 Sediment yield at Ogden similar between ‘11 and ’13 even though runoff during non-frozen higher in ‘13 – effect of improvements?
1
2
1 Watch similarities in phosphorus and nitrogen results in fields2 Note low losses from Farm 3 –impact of manure incorporation?
3 Perennial stream so far meeting state water quality criteria
Phosphorus ResultsStream Field
1
2
3
Nitrogen Results
Stream Field
1 N loss is function of flow in perennial stream (baseflow)2 2013 N loss from farms mostly in April
(before commercial N)
1
2
Lessons• Acute vs. chronic events• No low hanging fruit• Many implementable answers to the same
question• Multiple methods of verification are crucial• Educational programming and relationship
building are cornerstones, monitoring data provides support
$1 million ??s• Does this area meet water quality
criteria even after a major fish kill event? So far, yes.
• Does the current suite of practices do an adequate job of protecting water quality and farm sustainability?
• Manure incorporation with minimal soil disturbance
• Nitrogen use efficiency• Careful timing of manure application