Using Using Modeling Modeling and and Online Online T ools Im Implement plemen Outc Out ome Based Conser vation in the the Saginaw Bay

Transcription

1 Using Modeling and Online Tools to Implement Outcome Based Conservation in the Saginaw Bay Watershed Mary Fales Saginaw a Bay Watershed ed Project Director June 5, 2014

2 Saginaw Bay is Michigan s Largest Watershed! Drains 8,709 mi 2 Covers 22 counties 15% of MI s total land area 7,000 miles of rivers! 45% agricultural land use

3 Saginaw Bay Watershed TNC working to reduce the impact of agricultural non point source pollution on water quality How Much is Enough? to actually see water quality results Innovative Approaches New Funding Mechanisms

4 Traditional Approach in Agricultural Watersheds Conservation Tillage Buffer Strips Where will they have the most impact? Cover crops How much is enough?

5 How Much is Enough?

6 Algae Blooms

7 It Depends on Your Goal Acres of BMPs Total $$ Spent

8 Conservation Effects Assessment Program (CEAP) Scott P. Sowa, Matthew Herbert, John Legge, Mary Fales, Kim Hall, Patrick Doran, Sagar Mysorekar, Layla Cole, Tia Bowe, Gust Annis, A. Pouyan Nejadhashemi, Lizhu Wang, & Charles Rewa

9 Phases of Work Phase 1 linking biological communities to water quality Phase 2 linking conservation actions to water quality and biological endpoints Phase 3 decision tools to target and track Phase 4 partnering to set goals and test innovative strategies to achieve them

10 Phase 1: Models Linking Fish Communities to Water Quality Actual Fish community health data vs. Predicted water quality (SWAT modeling)

11 Phase 1 Identify ceilings to set goals

12 Which Variables Are Limiting and Where? PHOSPHORUS NITROGEN SEDIMENT/FLOW

13

14 Phase 2: Linking Practices to Water Quality and Fish Within 4 watersheds of Saginaw Bay Used SWAT to model changes in water quality under different scenarios (12 BMPs) Current condition 1. Nutrient Management/Waste Utilization Medium (25%) 2. Conservation Crop Rotation 3. Filter Strip High (50%) 4. Conservation Cover Historic i Condition 5. Residue and Tillage Management No Till/Strip Till/Direct Seed 6. Mulch Till, Residue Management 7. Residue Management, No Till/Strip Till 8. Cover Crop 9. Pasture and Hay Planting 10. Wetland Creation/Restoration

15 Dose Response Curve BMPs Fish Health Assess costs and benefits 25% scenario costs $22 M 50% scenario costs $44 M

16 Sub-watershed Comparison: Fish Community Health Current Condition 25% BMP Implementation

17 Sub-watershed Comparison: Fish Community Health Current Condition 50% BMP Implementation

18 50% BMP Implementation Sub-watershed Comparison: Fish Community Health More than $44 million to achieve non-limiting conditions in all streams of four focal watersheds What is a realistic goal? Lower expectations? ti Conservation innovation?

19 QUICK SUMMARY TNC and partners have developed the science so we can determine: 1. HOW MUCH: What percentage of the land needs to be treated with practices 2. WHERE: Where conservation practices need to be implemented 3. OUTCOME ORIENTED: All the work is tied to improving fish community health

20 Improving Process For Western Lake Erie CEAP Use multiple biological endpoints (fish and inverts) Many Improvements to SWAT Model Downscale Model (NHDPlus) Lost 75% of biological data in Great Lakes CEAP Will not lose any for WLEB Better Land Use & Management Data Downscaled NRI survey Drain tiles Spatially distributed WQ validation Improve predictions away from gaged sites

21 Phase 3: Decision Tools Getting the right information to the right people in the right format at the right time to support the logistics i of strategic conservation Context Target and Track

22 Sediment and Nutrient Calculators

23 Parcel Specific Scenarios

24 Phase 4: Partner and Test Innovative Strategies Cass River Watershed Pilot (Sanilac CD) Test if information and decision tools can foster changes via traditional Farm Bill to meet conservation action goals Saginaw Bay Regional Conservation Partnership Program Set watershed scale sustainability yg goals and related conservation action goals to drive changes in behavior through supply chain demand Pay for Performance in the Bad River Watershed (Great Lakes Commission grant) Set ecologically meaningful sediment reduction goals and use online tools to pay farmers per ton of sediment reduced

25 New Technology with Traditional Funding Models: Utilize the Farm Bill Targeting Practices Using Traditional Farm Bill Programs Partner: Sanilac and Tuscola Conservation Districts, MSU IWR Mott Foundation Grant Use modeling to select highest ROI implementation areas Targeted technical assistance & outreach Using the Great Lakes Watershed Management System to quanitfy outcomes

26 Cass River Subwatershed Comparison Health of the Local Fish Community

27 Where Do Fish Improve the Most? Sanilac and Tuscola Conservation Districts will be focusing in these areas for Implementation 116,034 row crop acres total 25%=29,000 acres 50%=58,000 acres

28 Cass River Watershed Demo Project STRIP TILL COVER CROPS WETLAND RESTORATION EDUCATION

29 Cass River Watershed Demo Project Practice Goal Acres Jan 2014 Update Nutrient Management 12,000 4,740 Conservation Crop 3,000 1, Rotation Tillage Mgt (No Till, Strip Till, Mulch Till) 15,000 1,606 Cover Crop 3, Filter Strip Wetland Creation/Restoration 2acres 5-7 sites (min acres (8 acres) sites) These goals are contingent on securing funding via Farm Bill program.

30 New Funding Models: Pay for Performance Sediment Reduction in the Bad River Watershed Partner: Gratiot Conservation District, NRCS Great Lakes Commission Grant ($250,000) Develop a watershed goal for sediment reduction Set a payment rate for sediment reduction ($/ton) Using the sediment calculator to determine reduction amount

31 New Funding Models: Drain Fee Reduction Project Shiawassee River Watershed Partners: County Drain Commissioner, MSU IWR, local conservation district, CD Cook Family Foundation Develop a watershed hdgoal for sediment reduction Set a discount value for sediment reduction ($/ton) Using the sediment calculator to determine reduction amount

32 New Funding Models: Regional Conservation Partnership Program RCPP: $100 M available annually for 10 years Partners: Many! 1. Set ecologically relevant implementation goals 2. Use online tools to target and track progress (Quantify Outcomes) 3. Agribusiness as the Delivery Mechanism It can become part of everyday business efficient/cost effective Much broader reach and much greater trust Scalable to Great Lakes and beyond

33 Partners Engaged to Date LEADS: Michigan Agri-business Association CONSERVATION O GROUPS The Nature Conservancy Ducks Unlimited AGRONOMY RETAILERS: AgriDrain/Ecosystem Services Star of the West Exchange, Inc. (ESE) Crop Production Services Delta Institute Auburn Bean and Grain Co. HIGHER EDUCATION Wilbur Ellis Michigan State University Cooperative Elevator Company STATE AGENCIES COMMODITY GROUPS: Michigan Department of Natural Resources (MDNR) Michigan Dry Bean Commission Michigan Department of Michigan Sugar Environmental Quality (MDEQ) Michigan Soybean Promotion Michigan Department of Agriculture Committee and Rural Development (MDARD) Michigan Milk Producers Association OTHER Michigan Corn Growers Association Kellogg s Michigan Wheat Association

34 Great Lakes Project AG Strategy: Theory of Change

35 Sediment and Nutrient Calculators

36 Watershed Scale Analysis

37 Select Watersheds to Analyze

38 Select Watersheds to Analyze

39 HIT Analysis: Sediment

40 HIT Analysis: Sediment

41 Total Sediment Loading