Telling Pennsylvania s Local Stories: A Lancaster Example

Transcription

1 Telling Pennsylvania s Local Stories: A Lancaster Example Emily Trentacoste EPA Chesapeake Bay Program Office Matt Johnston University of Maryland Chesapeake Bay Program Office Agriculture Workgroup Meeting 6/19/2018 The opinions expressed in this technical presentation are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of US EPA.

2 Water quality trends vary geographically and patterns are changing Nitrogen trends Phosphorus trends 10-year Trend Improving Degrading No Trend USGS.

3 Water quality trends vary geographically and patterns are changing Pounds per acre watershed Monitoring shows that some Pennsylvania watersheds, especially in the Lower Susquehanna, generate some of the highest amounts of nitrogen, phosphorus and sediment in the Chesapeake Bay watershed. Total Nitrogen Pounds per Acre Susquehanna River North to south Pennsylvania Source: USGS Monitoring station

4 Water quality trends vary geographically and patterns are changing USGS.

5 Example: Water quality in Lancaster County watersheds

6 Flow normalized load (lbs) Flow normalized load (lbs) Flow normalized load (lbs) Flow normalized load (lbs) Example: Water quality in Lancaster County watersheds: nitrogen Susquehanna River at Marietta Nitrogen Loads 10-yr: improving Long-term: improving Conestoga River Nitrogen Loads 10-yr: improving Long-term: improving Pequea Creek Nitrogen Loads 10-yr: improving Octoraro Creek Nitrogen Loads 10-yr: improving USGS.

7 Example: Water quality in Lancaster County watersheds: phosphorus Flow normalized load (lbs) Flow normalized load (lbs) Flow normalized load (lbs) Flow normalized load (lbs) Susquehanna River at Marietta Phosphorus Loads 10-yr: degrading Long-term: no trend Conestoga River Phosphorus Loads 10-yr: degrading Long-term: improving Pequea Creek Phosphorus Loads Octoraro Creek Phosphorus Loads yr: degrading yr: no trend USGS.

8 Water quality is strongly tied to land use Land use Agriculture Developed Natural Land use Developed Forest Cropland Pasture Water/wetland Chesapeake Bay Program Phase 6 Watershed Model Progress V9. Land-use map from USGS. Falcone, 2015.

9 Water quality is strongly tied to land use Water quality monitoring Nitrogen yields (lbs/acre) 1 to 7 7 to to 33 Land use Developed Forest Cropland Pasture Water/wetland Loads from USGS. Chesapeake Bay Program Phase 6 Watershed Model Progress V9. Land-use map from USGS. Falcone, 2015.

10 Water quality is strongly tied to land use Water quality monitoring Nitrogen yields (lbs/acre) 1 to 7 7 to to 33 Land use Developed Forest Cropland Pasture Water/wetland Loads from USGS. Chesapeake Bay Program Phase 6 Watershed Model Progress V9. Land-use map from USGS. Falcone, 2015.

11 We can t monitor everywhere under all conditions Models are built off water quality monitoring using research that explains how nutrients move through the watershed, and incorporating reported inputs to the watershed Bay Program Watershed Model Estimated annual nitrogen load to local streams (lbs/acre) Nitrogen Less More Chesapeake Bay Program Phase 6 Watershed Model Progress V9.

12 Load (lbs) Loads (lbs) Water quality is strongly tied to land use Estimated Nitrogen Loads Estimated Phosphorus Loads Agriculture Developed Natural Wastewater Chesapeake Bay Program Phase 6 Watershed Model Progress V9.

13 Lancaster County has much less forested land than most other Pennsylvania counties Lancaster County Land Use 25% 49% 26% Agriculture Developed Natural Developed Forest Cropland Forest Pasture Phase 6 land use coverage available at Water/wetland Land-use map from USGS. Falcone, Google Earth 13

14 Chesapeake Bay Program Phase 6 Watershed Model Progress. 14

15 Estimated Share of Nitrogen Applied to Agricultural Land in Lancaster County in 2016 by Main Source 25% 1% CBPO estimates that application of manure alone almost exceeded crop need in Manure Fertilizer Biosolids 74% Chesapeake Bay Program Phase 6 Watershed Model Progress. 15

16 Estimated Share of Manure Nitrogen Applied to Agricultural Land in Lancaster County in 2016 by Animal Source 4% 3%1% 1% dairy 18% 18% 21% 35% layers broilers swine pullets other cattle turkeys horses Chesapeake Bay Program Phase 6 Watershed Model Progress. 16

17 Lancaster County Nitrogen delivered to streams from developed/stormwater sector Nitrogen Phosphorus Sediment 26% 2% 19% 29% 4% 14% 18% 1% 27% 25% 28% 33% 20% 23% 31% Chesapeake Bay Program Phase 6 Watershed Model Progress. Construction Roads, buildings and other impervious outside MS4 Roads, buildings and other impervious in MS4 Turf grass outside MS4 Turf grass in MS4 17

18 The transport of nutrients matters for planning implementation Phosphorus reaches streams primarily from overland runoff during storms Nitrogen reaches streams as runoff or as nitrate through groundwater Conestoga River: 64% of nitrogen is from GW nitrate Ator, S.W. & Denver, J.M., Bachman, L.J., et al., Diagram from Lyerly, A.L. et al., 2014.

19 Buildup of phosphorus in soils can lead to increased phosphorus runoff Estimated soil phosphorus content on agricultural land Application of phosphorus above what plants can uptake can result in phosphorus build in soils As soils become more saturated with phosphorus, new phosphorus is more apt to run off, and can result in an increase in dissolved phosphorus Sediment erosion from these areas can also deliver high amounts of sediment-bound phosphorus Soil phosphorus content on agricultural land in 2013 in parts per million (ppm) Phase 6 Watershed Model.

20 Certain areas of the watershed are more vulnerable Geology makes the groundwater (and therefore streams) in some areas especially vulnerable to high nitrogen inputs These areas can be the most effective to focus practices for nitrate in groundwater Areas of vulnerable geology Karst/carbonate areas Modified from Jimmy Webber, USGS, using Brakebill, JW 2000, Ator, S. et al. 2005

21 Certain areas of the watershed are more vulnerable Contribution of groundwater nitrate to streams Geology makes the groundwater (and therefore streams) in some areas especially vulnerable to high nitrogen inputs These areas can be the most effective to focus practices for nitrate in groundwater Per-acre nitrate load from groundwater delivered to streams Low High USGS. Terziotti, et al., 2018

22 Certain areas of the watershed are more vulnerable Areas of vulnerable geology Geology makes the groundwater (and therefore streams) in some areas especially vulnerable to high nitrogen inputs These areas can be the most effective to focus practices for nitrate in groundwater Karst/carbonate areas Modified from Jimmy Webber, USGS, using Brakebill, JW 2000, Ator, S. et al. 2005

23 Certain areas of the watershed are more vulnerable Geology makes the groundwater (and therefore streams) in some areas especially vulnerable to high nitrogen inputs These areas can be the most effective to focus practices for nitrate in groundwater High groundwater nitrate Data from USGS PA Water Science Center

24 Groundwater takes varying amounts of time to reach streams depending on location Nitrate in groundwater represents a range of ages from recent to decades old Benefits from management actions will manifest immediately as well as into the future Median groundwater age Estimated median age of groundwater, in years 1 to 5 6 to to to to 45 Phase 6 WSM groundwater age estimates. DRAFT from Gopal Bhatt, Chesapeake Bay Program.

25 Remaining opportunities in Lancaster County for agricultural practices Practice Current Percent Implementation Acres Remaining Nitrogen $/lbs reduced/yr Chesapeake Bay Program Phase 6 Watershed Model Progress. Phosphorus $/lbs reduced/yr Sediment $/lbs reduced/yr Conservation Tillage 44% 112, Soil & Water Conservation Plans 16% 260, Forest Buffers 1% 24, Barnyard Runoff Control 76% Basic Nutrient Management for N 21% 241, Cover Crop 32% 138, Prescribed Grazing 7% 41,

26 Remaining opportunities in Lancaster County for stormwater practices on developed/urban land Practice Current Reported Implementation Acres Remaining Erosion & Sediment Control 100% 0 Stormwater Management 5.3% 150,739 Chesapeake Bay Program Phase 6 Watershed Model Progress. 26

27 Questions? Emily Trentacoste EPA Chesapeake Bay Program Office Matt Johnston University of Maryland Chesapeake Bay Program Office Agriculture Workgroup Meeting 6/19/2018 The opinions expressed in this technical presentation are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of US EPA.