# National Water Quality Initiative



# (NWQI)

EPA Farm, Ranch, and Rural Communities 

### Committee January 17, 2013

Tom Christensen USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Regional Conservationist

– Central Region

12 “Most of what needs doing must be done by the farmer himself. . . . All the non

farming public can do is to provide information and build incentives on which farmers may act.”

— Aldo Leopold, 1933 Aldo Leopold

“In this democracy, national action to conserve soil must be generated by these millions of land users. If they are active and willing participants in such a movement, it will endure; otherwise it will fail.”

— Hugh Hammond Bennett, 1939 Hugh H. Bennett 

# Private Lands and Conservation3 

### • 70 percent of the land in the lower 48 states is owned by private landowners.

• 88 percent of all surface water falls on private land before reaching lakes, streams, and groundwater aquifers.

• The quality of our environment depends on the millions of individual decisions private landowners make every day

. 

# Private Lands and Conservation

• Since 2009, USDA has worked with more than 500,000 private landowners to implement conservation practices.

# Highest Priority Natural Resource Concerns Soil and Water Resources Conservation Act (RCA) 2010 Focus Groups and Surveys

Water: Sediment & Nutrients, 28%

Water: Insufficient, 20%

Soil Erosion, 31% Fish or Wildlife Habitat Condition, 9% Plants: Invasive Species, 11% Other, 26%5 

### • V oluntary , incentives

- based conservation approach is achieving results.

• Opportunities to further reduce sediment and 

### nutrient losses from cropland.

• Comprehensive conservation planning and implementation are essential.



### • Targeting enhances effectiveness and efficiency.

• Full treatment of most vulnerable acres will require a suite of conservation practices, because no single practice is a universal solution

. 

## CEAP: Key Findings of the Regional Cropland Assessments Upper Mississippi, Chesapeake Bay, Great Lakes, Ohio/Tennessee, Missouri6 River Sub

- Basin Conservation Effects Assessment Project (CEAP) Reports

Published (in yellow)

○ Chesapeake Bay

○ Upper Mississippi

○ Great Lakes

○ Ohio

- Tennessee

○ Missouri Scheduled for release in early 2013:

○ Arkansas

- White

- Red (Under Peer Review)

○ Lower Mississippi Scheduled for future release:

○ South/Atlantic/Gulf

○ Texas Gulf

○ Pacific Northwest 

## CEAP: Regional Cropland Assessments7 

## CEAP: Key Findings of the Regional Cropland Assessments

15% 19% 19% 24%

1% 45% 61%

34% 46%

17%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90%

Upper Mississippi

River Basin Chesapeake Bay

Watershed Great Lakes

Region Ohio

- Tennessee

River Basin Missouri River

Basin

Moderate treatment need High treatment need Acres Needing Conservation Treatment Percentage of Cropped Acres8 

## CEAP: Key Findings of the Regional Cropland Assessments Acres Needing Conservation Treatment for Nitrogen and Phosphorus Loss

Note: Percentages include cropped acres with a high or moderate need for additional conservation treatment. Percentage of Cropped Acres 53% 64%

40% 37%

5%

22% 51%

12% 63%

1% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%

Upper Mississippi River Basin Chesapeake Bay

Watershed Great Lakes

Region Ohio

- Tennessee

River Basin Missouri River

Basin Nitrogen loss

(runoff and subsurface)

Phosphorus loss (surface water)9 Energy

Climate Change Plants Soil Water

Animals Air 

### Conservation Planning 

# The Conservation Planning Process

### At its core, the focus of conservation planning is on increasing voluntary adoption of:

 

## Right conservation systems

 

## Right position on landscape

 

## Right amount

 

## Right timing and sequencing of practice/system implementation (progressive implementation) 

## Focus of Conservation Planning = Conservation Systems

“Practices to reduce nitrogen and phosphorus are very different due to



### different transport pathways.”

— Dr. Jane Frankenberger, Purdue University11



### Avoiding

 Nutrient management

 Rate, Timing, Form, Method



### Controlling

 Residue and tillage management

 Drainage water management 

### Trapping

 Buffers

 Wetlands designed for nutrient removal 

## Systems Approach to Nutrients: Avoiding, Controlling, Trapping (ACT)

Avoiding

Trapping Controlling 

## ACT12 

### Initiatives have national or regional significance and focus on critical 

### resource concerns at the landscape level.



### • Build on existing locally

- led efforts

• P artnership driven



### • Dedicated funding to accelerate implementation

• Science

- based

• Focused on performance and environmental outcomes 

# Landscape Conservation Initiatives13

## Iowa Farm and Rural Life Poll: Conservation funding should be higher for land that is most vulnerable to soil and water quality problems.

• 

### Data were collected through the 2009 

### Iowa Farm and Rural Life Poll (1,262 Iowa farmers)

• 

### Dozen questions about targeting

• 

### Analysis of factors associated with acceptance, or symbolic adoption , of 

### targeted conservation as a concept

14 Source: J. Gordon Arbuckle Jr., Iowa State University15Fiscal Year Total

2010 $107 million

2011 $193 million

2012 $277 million

Total $577 million

16 

# Water Quality Driven Initiatives

Includes: Mississippi River Basin Healthy Watersheds Initiative (MRBI), Great Lakes Restoration Initiative (GLRI), Chesapeake Bay Watershed Initiative (CBWI), Ogallala Aquifer Initiative (OIA), Bay Delta Initiative, National Water Quality Initiative (NWQI), and Gulf of Mexico Initiative

( GoMI ). Numbers are approximate.17

# National Water Quality Initiative (NWQI)

18  

### Goal: Remove streams and other water bodies

 

### from 303d list, or

 

### from threatened status, or

 

### from contributing to impairments, or

 

### to adequately address a TMDL plan.

 

### NWQI addresses agricultural sources of pollution that NRCS 

### can effectively address through voluntary action of producers:

 

### Nutrients

 

### Sediment

 

### Pathogens (new for FY 2013)

# NWQI: Watershed Selection Process

State Water Quality Agency

— Consultation State Technical Committee

— Consultation


## State Conservationist

— Decision Regional Conservationist

— Concurrence

19

# NWQI: Characteristics of Watersheds

 

### 162 watersheds submitted

 Rejected 5 watersheds (either not a watershed or no sediment/nutrient problem)

 Three additional watersheds withdrawn (AK)

 

### 154 watersheds approved in all 50 states plus Caribbean Area

 Average: three watersheds per state

 Ranges from one to seven (Texas)

 137 watersheds are 303d listed

20

# NWQI: Conservation Practices/Activity Plans

 

## Core and supporting practices

 

### Core practices are those that have been selected that will directly impact the resource concern.

 

### Supporting practices are those that make it possible for core practices to function properly.

 

## Conservation Activity Plans: Five types

 

### Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plans (CNMP)

 

### Nutrient Management Plan (NMP)

 

### Integrated Pest Management (IPM)

 

### Irrigation Water Management (IWM)

 

### Drainage Water Management (DWM)

21

# NWQI: Screening and Ranking Criteria
Screen Applications

 

### High : All conservation practices within NWQI watershed, AND core conservation practices are on more than 25 percent of the

acres OR the application is a Conservation Activity Plan.

 

### Medium : One or more conservation practices within NWQI watershed, AND application contains core conservation practices.
 

### Low : All others (these will not be ranked for FY 2013 NWQI). Rank Applications

 

### National program questions for consistency

 

### State questions for specific NWQI objectives

 

### Local questions in consultation with State Technical Committee

2223 

# Progress Through NWQI (through 2012)

 

## More than 760 agreements with landowners in 154 small (12

- digit HUC) watersheds (1,082 applications 

## received)

 

## 128 have water quality monitoring stations

 

## 82 have 319 projects

 

## 68 are within Landscape Conservation Initiatives (e.g., MRBI and GoMI )

 

## Approximately 161,000 acres of targeted conservation 

## under contract or agreement in FY 2012

 

## More than $38 million in funding obligated in FY 201224 

# Texas

FY 2012 Progress:

• Approximately 

### $4.3 million in financial assistance

• 17,000 acres

• 61 contracts

# South Dakota: Skunk Creek Watershed

25 

### FY 2012 Progress:

• Approximately 

### $1.3 million in financial assistance

• 8,600 acres



### • 11 contracts

## FY 2013 NWQI Improvements

 

## Earlier and consistent coordination with state water quality agencies.

 

## Strengthen outreach to farmers/ranchers in selected watersheds.

 

## Selection of FY2013 watersheds

— allow states 

## the flexibility to use FY2012 watersheds and/or add new ones on a limited basis.

 

## Encourage states to choose contiguous 

## watersheds for any new selections.

26

## FY 2013 NWQI Improvements ( cont. )

27 

###  

## Additional emphasis on source water when selecting watersheds

 

## Establish realistic expectations for outcomes.

 

## Establish incremental measures of success

— it may be many years before delistings

.  

## Need to be very strategic about where to add monitoring.

# NWQI: Path to Outcomes

 

## Water Quality Index for Agricultural Fields ( WQIag )  

### One pilot watershed per state

 

## APEX at 12

- digit HUC level

 

## Water quality monitoring

 

### Edge of field

 

## In

- stream

 

## Pour point

2829 Water Efficiency

, November/December 2012 www.waterefficiency.net Screenshot of online WQIag tool Modeling is needed to augment three

- tiered monitoring.

 Simulates nutrient, pesticide, and sediment losses under conditions of agricultural practices based on farmer surveys at selected National Resource Inventory (NRI) sample points.

30 

## CEAP Agricultural Policy/Environmental Extender (APEX)

 NRCS is developing a method to use APEX to characterize 12

- digit watersheds and is meant to complement monitoring activities.

 Boone and Raccoon Watersheds (Iowa)

 Maumee Watershed (Indiana, Michigan, and Ohio)

## Partnership Opportunity: Three

- Tiered Water Quality Monitoring

31  

### To assess environmental outcomes and facilitate producer use of adaptive management, a three

- tiered monitoring and evaluation approach is desired:

1. 

### Edge

- of

- field

2. 

### In

- stream
3. 

### Watershed level (Pour point)

 

### NRCS can cost

- share with producers on edge

- of

- field monitoring but needs partners to assist producers with managing monitoring stations and covering the producers’ share of the cost.

 

### NRCS also relies on partners to perform the in

- stream and watershed



### level monitoring and evaluation.32 

### Edge

- of

- Field Water Quality Monitoring Station Under Installation

## NRCS Edge

- of

- Field Monitoring and Evaluation

Purposes of Practice
1. 

## Provide site

- specific field data for input into models to predict 

## practice/system performance and to validate the models

2. 

## Sample and measure 

## practice/system performance

3. 

## Collect and evaluate data for adaptive management by 

## producer

33

### Edge

- of

- Field Monitoring in the Context of Three

- Tier Approach to Water Quality Monitoring

34

Potential sub

- watershed approach to edge

- of

- field monitoring

## NRCS Edge

- of

- Field Monitoring and Evaluation (Conservation Practice Standard 799) 

## Geographic Focus of Practice (Activity) in FY 2013

1. 

## Mississippi River Basin Initiative, Chesapeake Bay Watershed Initiative, Great Lake Restoration Initiative, Gulf of Mexico Initiative, National Water Quality Imitative (one per state), Lake 

## Champlain;

2. 

## States may seek approval to use this practice in watersheds outside of the focus area when the 

## watershed meet the established criteria.

35

# NWQI: What’s next?

 

### Entering year two of multi

- year initiative (President’s FY2013 Budget)

 

### Need to be strategic about where to add monitoring

 

### Focus on measuring outcomes for FY2013

 

## NRCS uses many tools (CEAP

- APEX, SWAT, SPARROW, WQIag , etc.)

 

## Use WQIag in selected watershed for FY2012

 

### Establish incremental measures of success

— it may be many years before de

- listing

36

## FY 2013 NWQI: Timeline



## Late January: Issue guidance to states.

Early March: States’ watershed selections are due.

Application and ranking period through July 2013.

37

## Leveraging Partnerships to Enhance Small Watershed Approach 

## Field

- to

- Market (FTM)/Natural Resources Conservation 

## Service (NRCS) Pilot Program
 

## Use pilot watersheds to assess use of FTM’s Fieldprint Calculator in NRCS’s resource assessment 

## and conservation planning processes

 

### Provide value to growers

— conservation alternatives and economic impacts

 

### Incorporate NRCS’s WQIag into FTM’s Fieldprint Calculator

 

### Pilot watersheds : Colorado, Indiana, Iowa, Louisiana, Michigan, Nebraska, Oklahoma, and Texas

 

### Grower groups : corn, soybeans, wheat, cotton, potatoes

38

## Leveraging Partnerships to Enhance Small Watershed Approach 

## Environmental Defense Fund/NRCS

— Systems Approach to Improve Water Quality

 

### Pilot project in three small watersheds to implement a watershed approach

 

### Combine field

- scale nitrogen management and conservation systems with landscape

- scale nitrogen removal practices

• Achieve water quality goals with minimal impact on crop production

• Provide resilience against floods and drought

• Provide additional ecosystem service benefits (wildlife habitat, flood control, aquifer recharge, carbon sequestration, etc.)
 

### Pilot watersheds

 

### Indiana: St. Joseph River (Maumee River)

 

### Iowa: Upper Cedar River

 

### Minnesota: Root River
39

## Opportunities to Improve Water Quality Efforts

 

### Increased commitment to a systems approach to conservation, with soil health as the foundation

 

### Improved and expanded technical assistance to foster systems 

### approach

 

### Greater focus on the economics and sustainability of conservation systems
 

### Greater commitment to adaptive management and the tools/technical assistance to support it

 

### Approaches to foster and sustain conservation innovation with regards to both technologies and approaches

40

## Opportunities to Improve Water Quality Efforts ( cont. )

 

### Further refinement of targeting efforts

— greater focus on high treatment need/vulnerable acres

 

### Greater collaborative commitment to monitoring, modeling, and assessment of environmental outcomes on a long

- term basis

 

### Development and implementation of recognition and certainty “programs” by states or added incentives to support voluntary approaches

 

### Continued development of environmental service economic opportunities

41 

### In 1960, one farmer fed 26 people. Today, one farmer can feed 155 people.
 

### We’ll need farming systems that are: 

###  Even more productive,  More environmentally friendly, and  Capable of producing safe food from field to table.
 

### Targeting conservation resources generates 3 to 5 times the benefits of more general approaches.

42 

### Sustainable, environmentally friendly, safe food production 

## Partnership OpportunityThe U

. S

. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, religion, age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, and marital or family status

. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs

. ) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc

. ) should contact USDA's TARGET Center at (

202 ) 720

- 2600 (voice and TDD)

. To file a complaint of discrimination write USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, Room 326

- W, Whitten Building, 14 th and Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20250

- 9410 or call ( 202 ) 720

- 5964 (voice or TDD)

. USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer

.

43