View
44
Download
2
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Overview of 15 years of best management practice research in the Mackinaw River watershed, Illinois
K. G. Kirkham1, A. M. Lemke1, A. R. Maybanks1, W. L. Perry 2, J. R. Kraft3, M. P. Wallace4, D. A. Kovacic4, K. L. Bohnhoff5, A. T. Noto6, R. M. Twait7
1The Nature Conservancy, Peoria, Illinois. 2Illinois State University, Normal, Illinois. 3McLean County Soil and Water District, Normal, Illinois. 4University of Illinois, Champaign, Illinois. 5Macon County Natural Resources Conservation Service, Decatur,
Illinois. 6Conservation Strategies Consulting, LLC. 7City of Bloomington, Water Department, Bloomington, Illinois
Authors
Jackie Kraft, McLean County SWCDKent Bohnhoff, McLean County NRCS
Dr. Maria Lemke, The Nature Conservancy
Ashley Maybanks, The Nature Conservancy
Rick Twait, City of Bloomington
Dr. Bill Perry, Illinois State UniversityDr. David Kovacic, University of Illinois Urbana‐Champaign
Mike Wallace, University of Illinois Urbana‐Champaign
Terry Noto, Conservation Strategies Consulting, LLC
28 million acres of land in Illinois are agricultural (80% of total land area)
Generates $9 billion annually (~40% corn, 35% soybeans, 25% livestock)
Altered hydrology Eutrophication
>12 million acres in Illinois
2025 Goals:1) Reduce nitrate nitrogen levels 15% 2) Reduce total phosphorus levels by 25%
Target Goal:• 45% reduction in nitrate‐nitrogen
and total phosphorus (in accordance with the 2008 Gulf Hypoxia Action Plan)
Illinois:• Contributes 20% of N, 11% of P
loadings, but only 7% of the total water flow to the Gulf of Mexico
Mackinaw River Program Goals
(1) Improve hydrology and water quality of the Mackinaw River watershed for mussels, fishes, and people who depend on it for habitat, water supply, and recreation
(2) Reduce nutrient export from the Mackinaw River to downstream river systems
(3) Develop a model for hydrologic and water quality improvements that is economically viable, compatible with agricultural production, and scalable across the Upper Mississippi River Basin.
Land UseCornSoybeanForestedGrasslandDeveloped
Mackinaw River Watershed
730,000 acresc
Illinois River
Mississippi River
Franklin Research & Demonstration Farm
Paired WatershedProject
Bloomington DrinkingWatersheds Project
XX
Mackinaw River
Bray Creek: Treatment (10,000 acres)
Frog Alley: Reference(10,000 acres)
Paired Watershed Project (13 years)
X
YSIYSI
YSI
Question: How well do conservation practices work to improve water quality, hydrology, and biodiversity at the watershed scale?
ISCO Water Samplers (Storm events, stage height)
Biweekly grab samples: NH4+, NO3
-, SRP, TP, TSS
Met Stations: Air temperature, rain, soil moisture
Water temperature, turbidity, pH, conductivity, DO
Conservation tillage
Grassed waterways
Stream buffers
Intensive outreach to famers and landowners for best management practices
Paired Watershed Project Results: 1999‐2006
• Outreach works• No nutrient/suspendedsediment reduction
• No impact on hydrology or biota
Need to better retain runoff, especially from tile drainage
WETLANDS
Quantify watershed‐scale effectiveness of constructed wetlands at restoring altered hydrology and reducing nutrient and sediment transport (10,000 acre‐scale)
X
X
D
Mackinaw River
Bray Creek: Treatment
Frog Alley: Reference
Paired Watershed Project‐‐‐Phase II (2007‐present)
XX
Mackinaw River
Treatment (10,000 acres)
Reference(10,000 acres)
YSIYSINew wetlandsCurrent wetlandsLong term monitoring
Inlet
Outlet
0
5
10
15
20
25
Nitrate‐nitrogen
(mg/L)
2010 2011 2012 2013
InletOutlet
29%
24%
38%
36%
Year
Inlet
Cell 1 Cell 2 Cell 3Tile
3% 3% 3%
6%
9%
Monitornutrients& flow
Monitornutrients& flow
Monitornutrients& flow
Monitornutrients& flow
How well does a wetland perform?
What size of wetland is most effective at reducing nutrients in tile runoff?
3% 6% 9%
20
40
60
80
100Re
duction in nutrie
nt load
(%)
Percent of tile‐drained area (%)
East
Gully
West
8‐year Monitoring Results:Nitrate‐nitrogen (NO3‐N)
3 6 9
Franklin Research and Demonstration Farm
USGS gaging stations
Lake EvergreenLake Bloomington
Research and Demonstration Farm
This image cannot currently be displayed.
Paired Watershed
Drinking Watershed Project
Mackinaw River Project SitesIllinois River
Mississippi River
Six Mile Creek Watershed• 25,730 acres• Evergreen Lake
Money Creek Watershed• 43,100 acres• Lake Bloomington
0
10
20
30NO3‐N (m
g/L)
Finished Water Nitrate Levels
83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98Year Nitrate‐N sources: 1993‐ 2002
0 5 10 15 20
Tile water: Row Crop Agriculture
Tile water: Organic Agriculture
Surface water runoff: Agriculture
Artesian well
Rain water
Tile water: pasture
Creek water
Nitrate‐N (mg/L)Smiciklas et al., 2008
EPA Drinking Water Standard
Money Creek
Lake Bloomington
Long‐term goals:• To reduce nitrate loading to Lake Bloomington, the source of water for 80,000 people and Bloomington and Normal, IL.
• To construct tile‐drainage treatment wetlands and nutrient management practices at scale throughout the Lake Bloomington watershed.
• A proof of concept study that proposes a more sustainable approach to agricultural runoff than solely an engineering solution.
X 3
Monitoring equipmentAdaptive managementConstructed wetlands
ConstructedWetlands
Bundled Practices
TreatmentReference
How many wetland acres are needed? (i.e., how much tile is in the watershed?)
What kind of watershed reductions can be expected?
How many wetland acres are possible?
How well does a wetland perform?
Mapping Monitoring Outreach
Flow netsusing high resolution LiDAR data
Money Creek Watershed
USDA‐NRCS Conservation Innovation Grant : 2012‐2015
Wetlands reducing N and P levels ~50%
Lessons Learned/Challenges Ahead
(1) Partnerships are critical: Natural Resources Conservation Service, Soil and Water Conservation District, universities, non‐profit conservation organizations• Challenge: Declining funding to support local partners (i.e., SWCD)
(2) Communication: Consistent, transparent
(3) Monitoring is important, but expensive: Federal and state grants, private funding (e.g., match)• Challenge: Keeping pace with agricultural impacts (i.e., tiling)
(4) Leverage Farm Bill dollars for implementation• Challenges: (a) Inconsistency of available programs, (b) Sign‐up
process is complicated and time‐consuming
(5) Engage agricultural landowners and producers: Planning, Implementation, Outreach and Communication• Challenges: How to (a) engage more agricultural landowners and
producers, (b) provide appropriate incentives and financial support
(1) Alternative funding options: Development of sustainable funding (Water Fund, Environmental Utility)
(2) Engagement with agricultural community: (a) Development of Agricultural Advisory Group (i.e., grass roots support and outreach), (b) Continue partnerships with agricultural agencies (IL Corn, IL Soy, Farm Bureau) to help promote large‐scale adoption of effective practices and community awareness of IL Nutrient Loss Reduction Strategy
On the Horizon
http://mcleancountyswcd.com/
Application to Illinois and beyond
● Over 6 million acres of agricultural landsdrain into surface drinking water sources
● These drinking waters sourcesserve 1.6 million people in Illinois
• Applicability to agricultural watersheds throughout the Midwest
Corn‐Soybean‐GrainSurface Water SourcesLakes and Rivers
If you build it……
Mother Nature will flood it
A farmer will mow over it
Algae will clog it
Build it higher and stronger
Flag it!!
Get creative
Collaborators, Partners and Funding Sources:Natural Resources and Conservation Service (NRCS)Soil and Water Conservation District (SWCD)University of Illinois at Champaign‐Urbana (UIUC)Environmental Defense Fund (EDF)/Walton Family FoundationCity of Bloomington, IllinoisWorld Wildlife FoundationPrivate landowners and producersIllinois State University (ISU)MonsantoDuPont ‐PioneerLumpkin Family FoundationIllinois State Water Survey (ISWS)AGREM LLC Illinois Department of Natural Resources (IDNR)Southern Illinois University (SIU)Ducks Unlimited (DU)Illinois Natural History Survey (INHS)Illinois State Geological Survey (ISGS)Illinois Environmental Protection Agency (IEPA)United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA)United States Department of Agriculture (USDA)Kellogg Foundation; Mackinaw River Partnership
Thank you!