Strategic and Prioritized Implementation of Conservation and Compliance For

Improved Water Quality and Aquatic Life Habitat

SWCS ConferenceGreensboro, NC

July 28, 2015

What I’ll Talk About

Vernacular

Agricultural Diversity and Importance

Ag Water Quality Program Overview

Focus Areas

Strategic Implementation Areas

Compliance Evaluation

12 digit HUC Prioritization

Oregon’s Top 10 in 2012

Source: Oregon Agricultural Statistics Service and Oregon State University

Product Gross sales value in 2012 (millions)

Nursery/greenhouse

$745

Cattle & Calves $654

Hay $638

Milk $498

Wheat $472

Grass seed $411

Potatoes $173

Pears $134

Corn, grain & silage

$120

Christmas trees $103

• Over 220 crops

• Approximately $30 Billion Annual Economic Footprint

• 15% of Oregon’s Economy

• 12% of jobs or 1 in every 8

Background & History

Agricultural Water Quality Management Act – 1993 Prevent & control pollution and soil erosion Regulate farming practices for water quality Must meet water quality standards set by Environmental Quality

Commission

Based off of Federal Clean Water Act ODF -- private land forestry DEQ -- Urban storm water, municipal waste water, transportation system and

non-ag point sources, federally managed land ODA -- private land agricultural activities

38 Agricultural Water Quality Management Areas

Soil and Water Conservation Districts as Local Management Agencies

Water Quality Rules

(a) Pollute any waters of the state, or (b) Place wastes where they are likely to enter waters of the state.

Allow site capable vegetation to develop & establish along streams that provide stabile streambanks, shade, and filtering surface runoff.

2014 Compliance Summary

Water Quality ConcernNumber of

Investigations2014*

Number of InvestigationsTotal to Date

Potential manure runoff to surface or groundwater

29 316

Potential sediment runoff to surface water

22 196

Riparian area management concerns

40 225

Other issues 3 41

Other 468B potential violations

3 60

* If more than one issue was identified it is counted under both categories.

1998 to 2014 Compliance Investigations

Strategic Focus of Resources

Need both to “tell the story” of ag and water quality

Focus Areas

SWCD-led

Outreach

Assessments Pre and Post

Voluntary

Strategic Implementation Areas

ODA-led

Outreach

Assessments Pre and Post

Regulatory

Map Categories

35’Streamside Vegetation

Assessment

Strategic Implementation

2012--Board of Agriculture recommended that alternatives to a complaint-based agricultural water quality program are developed.

January 2014--Two test SIAs initiated. Tests systematic use of program initiated compliance across a small watershed.

December 2014--Board of Agriculture recommended that ODA in concert with other Natural Resource Agencies prioritize watersheds and develop an accelerated schedule for full-scale statewide implementation of the Departments systematic approach.

Workload and Capacity over 3,000 6th field HUCs

Compliance Evaluation

Threat Assessment Concern on Agricultural lands

Categories:

Manure Piles

Bare Ground

Riparian Vegetation

Compliance Evaluation:

Publically Available Information

*Aerial Photos

*Topographic maps

*Stream location maps

*Property boundary maps

*Field Survey

Riparian Vegetation, Manure Piles, and Bare Ground

Low Concern--(remote evaluation) Condition present, but unable to determine if agricultural activities causing the condition.

Moderate concern--(remote evaluation) Agricultural activity causing observed condition.

Significant/Serious Concern--Agricultural activity observed during field evaluation and appears to be causing observed condition.

If a discharge or removal of riparian vegetation is observed during the field evaluation then a compliance investigation is initiated (Serious Concern).

Outreach/Enforcement

All (No, Low, Moderate, Significant, Serious) General Informational letter, SIA/FA Info Card, Open House invitation

Moderate Category 1st Personalized Fix-it letter 2nd Personalized Fix-it letter Request for site visit

Significant Category 1st Personalized Fix-it letter Request for site visit

Serious Category Request of site visit

Low Category General Fix-it letter

Noyer Creek Compliance Evaluation

Not Applicable

No Concern

Potential Concern

2013-2014 Strategic Implementation Areas

Noyer Creek (Clackamas County)

Total Parcels in Assessment Area = 623

- 368 (N/A) (Fed. Land, Not Ag etc.)

237 Evaluated

Evaluation Categories Pre-evaluation Post-evaluation

No Concern = 200 Parcels 209 Parcels

Low Concern = 19 Parcels 26 Parcels

Moderate Concern = 16 Parcels 0 Parcels

Significant Concern = 2 Parcels 2 Parcels

Serious Concern = 0 Parcels 0 Parcels

Total = 237 Parcels 237 Parcels

379 HUCs

638 HUCs

402 HUCs

189 HUCs

659 HUCs

442 HUCs

412 HUCs

Total HUCs 3121

SIA Prioritization

Urban Forestry Zone Not Private LandsAg Land

3121 HUCS Statewide minusHUCS without Ag or water =

HUCs WITH AG & WATER = 2174

HUCS with Ag & Water and……CRITERIA! =

HUCs with Ag and Water: (2174 HUCs)

Water Quality; (303(d) listed or TMDL:

Criteria: Temperature (10) Bacteria (10) Nutrients (10) Sediment (10)Possible WQ score (40)

Aquatic Species of Concern

Criteria: Priority 1 and 2 from ODFW Aquatic Species of Concern data layer.

Possible score (5)

Priority 1 and 2 includes salmonid species and other non-salmonid species that are endemic to Oregon.

Score is calculated based the stream feet or acres of each category divided by the total stream feet or acres in agricultural use, multiplied by the scoring factor (10 for water quality and 5 for aquatic species of concern).

HUCs with Ag, Water, and WQ Criteria = 1018

Water Quality SCORING example

Water Quality Score (303(d) listed or TMDL

Criteria:#1 - Temperature (10)#2 - Bacteria (10)#3 - Nutrients (10)#4 - Sediment (10)Possible total (40)

WQ Criteria: 1a5,000 feet - TMDL for Temperature5,000 feet / 10,000 feet = .5.5 x 10 = 5

WQ Criteria: 1b3,000 feet - TMDL for Bacteria3,000 feet / 10,000 feet = .3.3 x 10 = 3

Total WQ Score = 8

3,000 stream feetBacteria TMDL

5,000 stream feetTemperature TMDL

10,000 stream feetInside Ag Areas

Willamette Reporting Area Priority Levels

Total HUCs 412

HUCs with Ag and Water

241

Priority Level

High 33

Medium 50

Low 82

HUCs with WQ Criteria

165

HUCs with No WQ Criteria

76

Local Partner Considerations

Drinking Water Source Protection Areas

Groundwater Management Areas

Pesticide Stewardship Partnerships

DEQ long-term ambient water quality monitoring locations

Prior work--build on or potentially harm

Current Focus Area

Current partner priorities--to align resources (Natural Resources Conservation Service, Oregon Watershed Enhancement Board, Oregon Department of Environmental Quality, Oregon Association of Conservation Districts

2015-2016 Strategic Implementation Areas

Input from state level partners. Local SWCDs, NRCS District Conservationists, DEQ Basin Team Leaders and Coordinators, OWEB/Watershed Councils

June SIAs selected

Geographically distributed

State and local priorities

July Implementation begins—7 SIAs

Each year 6-8 new SIAs

Legislature allocated 3 new positions and 1,000,000 dollars for technical assistance and on the ground projects.

Questions??

Kevin Fenn

Compliance Lead

(503) 986-6486

kfenn@oda.state.or.us

Thank you: Diana Walker GIS ODA Water Quality Staff Team