Reducing Nitrogen Export from the Corn Belt to the Gulf of Mexico: Agricultural Strategies for Remediating Hypoxia

SPAtially Referenced Regression on Watershed models developed for the Upper Midwest were used to help evaluate the nitrogen‐load reductions likely to be achieved by a variety of agricultural conservation practices in the Upper Mississippi‐Ohio River Basin (UMORB) and to compare these reductions to the 45% nitrogen‐load reduction proposed to remediate hypoxia in the Gulf of Mexico (GoM). Our results indicate that nitrogen‐management practices (improved fertilizer management and cover crops) fall short of achieving this goal, even if adopted on all cropland in the region. The goal of a 45% decrease in loads to the GoM can only be achieved through the coupling of nitrogen‐management practices with innovative nitrogen‐removal practices such as tile‐drainage treatment wetlands, drainage–ditch enhancements, stream‐channel restoration, and floodplain reconnection. Combining nitrogen‐management practices with nitrogen‐removal practices can dramatically reduce nutrient export from agricultural landscapes while minimizing impacts to agricultural production. With this approach, it may be possible to meet the 45% nutrient reduction goal while converting less than 1% of cropland in the UMORB to nitrogen‐removal practices. Conservationists, policy makers, and agricultural producers seeking a workable strategy to reduce nitrogen export from the Corn Belt will need to consider a combination of nitrogen‐management practices at the field scale and diverse nitrogen‐removal practices at the landscape scale.     

ROLE OF WATERSHED SUBDIVISION ON MODELING THE EFFECTIVENESS OF BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES WITH SWAT1

Distributed parameter watershed models are often used for evaluating the effectiveness of various best management practices (BMPs). Streamflow, sediment, and nutrient yield predictions of a watershed model can be affected by spatial resolution as dictated by watershed subdivision. The objectives of this paper are to show that evaluation of BMPs using a model is strongly linked to the level of watershed subdivision; to suggest a methodology for identifying an appropriate subdivision level; and to examine the efficacy of different BMPs at field and watershed scales. In this study, the Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) model was calibrated and validated for streamflow, sediment, and nutrient yields at the outlet of the Dreisbach (623 ha) and Smith Fry (730 ha) watersheds in Maumee River Basin, Indiana. Grassed waterways, grade stabilization structures, field borders, and parallel terraces are the BMPs that were installed in the study area in the 1970s. Sediment and nutrient outputs from the calibrated model were compared at various watershed subdivision levels, both with and without implementation of these BMPs. Results for the study watersheds indicated that evaluation of the impacts of these BMPs on sediment and nutrient yields was very sensitive to the level of subdivision that was implemented in SWAT. An optimal watershed subdivision level for representation of the BMPs was identified through numerical simulations. For the study watersheds, it would appear that the average subwatershed area corresponding to approximately 4 percent of total watershed area is needed to represent the influence of these BMPs when using the SWAT model.     

Is Urban Stream Restoration Worth It?1

Kenney, Melissa A., Peter R. Wilcock, Benjamin F. Hobbs, Nicholas E. Flores, and Daniela C. Martínez, 2012. Is Urban Stream Restoration Worth It? Journal of the American Water Resources Association (JAWRA) 48(3): 603-615. DOI: 10.1111/j.1752-1688.2011.00635.x Abstract: Public investment in urban stream restoration is growing, yet little has been done to quantify whether its benefits outweigh its cost. The most common drivers of urban stream projects are water quality improvement and infrastructure protection, although recreational and aesthetic benefits are often important community goals. We use standard economic methods to show that these contributions of restoration can be quantified and compared to costs. The approach is demonstrated with a case study in Baltimore, Maryland, a city with a legal mandate to reduce its pollutant load. Typical urban stream restoration costs of US$500-1,200 per foot are larger than the cost of the least expensive alternatives for management of nitrogen loads from stormwater (here, detention ponds, equivalent to $30-120 per foot of restored stream) and for protecting infrastructure (rip-rap armoring of streambanks, at $0-120 per foot). However, the higher costs of stream restoration can in some cases be justified by its aesthetic and recreational benefits, valued using a contingent valuation survey at $560-1,100 per foot. We do not intend to provide a definitive answer regarding the worth of stream restoration, but demonstrate that questions of worth can be asked and answered. Broader application of economic analysis would provide a defensible basis for understanding restoration benefits and for making restoration decisions.     

Factors Affecting Stream Nutrient Loads: A Synthesis of Regional SPARROW Model Results for the Continental United States1

Preston, Stephen D., Richard B. Alexander, Gregory E. Schwarz, and Charles G. Crawford, 2011. Factors Affecting Stream Nutrient Loads: A Synthesis of Regional SPARROW Model Results for the Continental United States. Journal of the American Water Resources Association (JAWRA) 47(5):891‐915. DOI: 10.1111/j.1752‐1688.2011.00577.x Abstract: We compared the results of 12 recently calibrated regional SPARROW (SPAtially Referenced Regressions On Watershed attributes) models covering most of the continental United States to evaluate the consistency and regional differences in factors affecting stream nutrient loads. The models – 6 for total nitrogen and 6 for total phosphorus – all provide similar levels of prediction accuracy, but those for major river basins in the eastern half of the country were somewhat more accurate. The models simulate long‐term mean annual stream nutrient loads as a function of a wide range of known sources and climatic (precipitation, temperature), landscape (e.g., soils, geology), and aquatic factors affecting nutrient fate and transport. The results confirm the dominant effects of urban and agricultural sources on stream nutrient loads nationally and regionally, but reveal considerable spatial variability in the specific types of sources that control water quality. These include regional differences in the relative importance of different types of urban (municipal and industrial point vs. diffuse urban runoff) and agriculture (crop cultivation vs. animal waste) sources, as well as the effects of atmospheric deposition, mining, and background (e.g., soil phosphorus) sources on stream nutrients. Overall, we found that the SPARROW model results provide a consistent set of information for identifying the major sources and environmental factors affecting nutrient fate and transport in United States watersheds at regional and subregional scales.     

“Nutrient Inputs to the Laurentian Great Lakes by Source and Watershed Estimated Using SPARROW Watershed Models” by Dale M. Robertson and David A. Saad2

Richards, R. Peter, Ibrahim Alameddine, J. David Allan, David B. Baker, Nathan S. Bosch, Remegio Confesor, Joseph V. DePinto, David M. Dolan, Jeffrey M. Reutter, and Donald Scavia, 2012. Discussion –“Nutrient Inputs to the Laurentian Great Lakes by Source and Watershed Estimated Using SPARROW Watershed Models” by Dale M. Robertson and David A. Saad. Journal of the American Water Resources Association (JAWRA) 1‐10. DOI: 10.1111/jawr.12006 Abstract: Results from the Upper Midwest Major River Basin (MRB3) SPARROW model and underlying Fluxmaster load estimates were compared with detailed data available in the Lake Erie and Ohio River watersheds. Fluxmaster and SPARROW estimates of tributary loads tend to be biased low for total phosphorus and high for total nitrogen. These and other limitations of the application led to an overestimation of the relative contribution of point sources vs. nonpoint sources of phosphorus to eutrophication conditions in Lake Erie, when compared with direct estimates for data‐rich Ohio tributaries. These limitations include the use of a decade‐old reference point (2002), lack of modeling of dissolved phosphorus, lack of inclusion of inputs from the Canadian Lake Erie watersheds and from Lake Huron, and the choice to summarize results for the entire United States Lake Erie watershed, as opposed to the key Western and Central Basin watersheds that drive Lake Erie’s eutrophication processes. Although the MRB3 SPARROW model helps to meet a critical need by modeling unmonitored watersheds and ranking rivers by their estimated relative contributions, we recommend caution in use of the MRB3 SPARRROW model for Lake Erie management, and argue that the management of agricultural nonpoint sources should continue to be the primary focus for the Western and Central Basins of Lake Erie.     

Impacts of a nutrient trading plan on stream water quality in Sugar Creek,Ohio

In the early 2000s, a phosphorus nutrient trading plan (NTP) requiring best management practices (BMPs) to be installed as pollution abatement strategies to offset phosphorus waste from the Alpine Cheese Company was implemented in four subwatersheds of Sugar Creek in northeast Ohio. To assess the impacts of the Alpine NTP, 49 sites were sampled approximately biweekly from 2010 to 2018 for phosphate, total phosphorus, nitrate, ammonia, and total nitrogen. In addition, the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency conducted stream health surveys at 21 sites before and after the BMPs were implemented. This study evaluated the potential impact of 68 BMPs implemented under the NTP on the observed changes in nutrient concentrations and stream health indicators. Most nutrient concentrations observed during high discharge conditions showed significant declines from 2010 to 2018 for all subwatersheds, which was most likely due to BMPs that reduced erosion and surface runoff. However, there were fewer significant declines and some significant increases in nutrient levels during low discharge conditions, suggesting a possible contribution from legacy nutrient sources. Most sites reported increases in stream health indicators, but many streams are still below recommended levels. Collectively, the installation of BMPs and decreases in nutrient concentrations observed during high discharge conditions can be attributed to the NTP and likely contributed to improved stream health.     

Streamside Forest Buffer Width Needed to Protect Stream Water Quality,Habitat, and Organisms: A Literature Review

This literature review addresses how wide a streamside forest buffer needs to be to protect water quality, habitat, and biota for small streams (≤~100 km² or ~5th order watershed) with a focus on eight functions: (1) subsurface nitrate removal varied inversely with subsurface water flux and for sites with water flux >50 l/m/day (~40% avg base flow to Chesapeake Bay) median removal efficiency was 55% (26‐64%) for buffers <40 m wide and 89% (27‐99%) for buffers >40 m wide; (2) sediment trapping was ~65 and ~85% for a 10‐ and 30‐m buffer, respectively, based on streamside field or experimentally loaded sites; (3) stream channel width was significantly wider when bordered by ~25‐m buffer (relative to no forest) with no additional widening for buffers ≥25 m; (4) channel meandering and bank erosion were lower in forest but more studies are needed to determine the effect of buffer width; (5) temperature remained within 2°C of levels in a fully forested watershed with a buffer ≥20 m but full protection against thermal change requires buffers ≥30 m; (6) large woody debris (LWD) has been poorly studied but we infer a buffer width equal to the height of mature streamside trees (~30 m) can provide natural input levels; (7, 8) macroinvertebrate and fish communities, and their instream habitat, remain near a natural or semi‐natural state when buffered by ≥30 m of forest. Overall, buffers ≥30 m wide are needed to protect the physical, chemical, and biological integrity of small streams.