2018 SWCS International Annual Conference July 29-August 1, 2018 Albuquerque Convention Center

1. Reduce Gulf Hypoxia: Tackling
Goals through Partnerships
and Tracking Progress
Katie Flahive
2018 SWCS Annual Meeting, July 31
Flahive.Katie@epa.gov, 202-566-1206

2. Hypoxia Task Force Background
• Late 1990s: Formed based on the White House Committee on
Environment and Natural Resources’ “Integrated Assessment”
– Scientific basis for 2001 Action Plan with goal to reduce the size of the
Hypoxic Zone
– Led to focus on reducing nitrogen loads to the gulf via the Mississippi River
• 2001 Action Plan called for Reassessment
– 2004 white paper  Is phosphorus a co-driver of the hypoxic zone?
– Convened four science symposia
– EPA Science Advisory Board formed a panel, took symposia outcomes
• 2008 Action Plan
– Calls for need for state strategies and dual N and P nutrient reduction effort
• 2015 reiterated the goal, adopted an interim target
2

3. Mississippi
River Basin
3
• US Army Corps of Engineers
• US Environmental Protection Agency
• US Department of Agriculture
• US Geological Survey
• National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
• National Tribal Water Council
5 Federal Agencies and Tribes:
12 State Agencies:
Each state is represented by one of the following:
• Agriculture agency,
• Environmental Quality agency, or
• Natural Resources agency
Hypoxia Task Force Members
HTF States
• Arkansas
• Missouri
• Iowa
• Tennessee
• Minnesota
• Indiana
• Ohio
• Louisiana
• Illinois
• Mississippi
• Kentucky
• Wisconsin

4. HTF Focus
Nutrient Reduction Strategies
– All twelve states have developed
strategies
– Implementation on the ground in
state priority watersheds in
partnership with state stakeholders
Tracking progress towards the goal
Continue to build and leverage
partnerships
– SERA-46 Priorities for Collaboration
Communicating Success
– 2017 Report to Congress
4

5. Science Based Goal
Coastal Goal
By 2035, reduce 5-year running average size
of the Gulf hypoxic zone to 5,000 km2
Interim Target
20% reduction of nitrogen and
phosphorus loading by 2025
5
Squaremiles(mi2)ofdissolvedoxygen2mgl-1)
N.D.
N.D.
Goal
5-yr
Ave.
0
2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
Bottom-Water Area of Hypoxia—1985-2018
Historic size of hypoxia from 1985 to 2018. There are no data (n.d.) for 1989 and
2016. The value for 1988 is 15 square miles and barely visible on the scale.
(N. Rabalais, LSU/LUMCON & R. Turner, LSU)

6. State of Gulf Science, Dec 2017
• Research model results offer guidance on watershed nutrient
reduction levels needed to reduce the size of the zone and significantly
advances understanding on:
– Single (N) and dual (N and P) load reductions needed to meet the Goal
– Expected effects of the Interim Goal on the zone
• Coastal Goal
– To achieve the goal, more effective to reduce both N and P simultaneously
than to decrease either nutrient type alone.
– The present findings do not suggest a need to increase current nutrient
targets, but emphasize the criticality of reducing both nutrients by 45%
• Interim Goal
– When the interim goal for load reduction is reached, though a large
hypoxic zone is likely to persist, reaching the interim goal brings the system
closer to an inflection point where measureable decreases in the hypoxic
zone size can be expected with future load reductions

7. Quantify and
Track Progress
Measuring &
Modeling Hypoxic
Zone
• NOAA Cruise,
Gliders, Models
Measuring Biennial
Loading Trends
• Point Source
Measures
• NPS Measures
Monitoring
WQ Trends
• WQX: EPA, USGS
& state data
• Monitoring
Collaborative
Modeling Regional
& State Loading
Trends
• SPARROW
• SWAT
• State models
Modeling Decadal
Basin Loading
Trends
• USDA CEAP
• SPARROW
Tracking Progress
Towards Our Goal
7

8. Measuring & Modeling Hypoxic
Zone: 2018 Zone Size
• 2018 Northern Gulf of Mexico dead zone is ~2,720 square
miles (7,040 sq km), an area about the size of Delaware
• This is the fourth smallest area mapped since 1985; < than the
5,780 square miles forecast by NOAA in June (~size of CT)
• The size over the last week is mainly due to strong winds that
helped stir up the Gulf, broke up some formed zone, and
prevented a larger hypoxic zone from forming
8
Distribution of bottom-water
DO taken during research
cruise, July 24 to 28, 2018.
(N. Rabalais, LSU/LUMCON &
R. Turner, LSU)

9. Measuring Biennial Loading Trends:
Point Sources
• October 2014: Adopted two point source measures as part of
revised Goal Framework:
o # major POTW permits with monitoring requirements for N & P
o # major POTW permits with limits for N & P
• March 2016: first report on PS progress using e-o-y 2014 permit data
on monitoring and limits
o 57% monitoring both N&P; 74% monitoring N or P
o 5% with limits for both N&P; 33% with limits for N or P
• 2018 report will include loading measure calculated with “DMR
Loading Tool” that uses existing permit data, for POTWs

10. • Practice Summary:
1. State and/or Local-level
2. Federal-level
3. Private/NGO-level
• Categories/parameters
identified
– Consistency of NPS
Framework among states
• Identified challenges and
barriers
– Walton Family Foundation
Grant
• Published NPS Measures
Progress Report
State (IA)
Private
Federal
CREP
IFIP
RCPP
WQI
MRCC
FtM
CRP
EQIP
REAP
4Rs
319
ACEP
SRF
Measuring Biennial Loading Trends:
Nonpoint Sources

11. • Key parameters identified
• Categorize based on likelihood of availability, make assumptions and
consistency between sources
• Develop a draft NPS Framework for reporting from all sources
KeyBaseParametersof PracticeDataasDeterminedbyNPSMeasuresWorkgroup
LIKELYAVAILABLE
LIKELYAVAILABLE
DEPENDINGONSOURCE
LIKELYABLETOASSUMEVALUEBASED
ONCOLLECTEDINFORMATION
NOTLIKELYAVAILABLEWITHOUT
BROADERASSUMPTIONS
State HUC_12 watershed Sunset Date Pre-Implementation Tillage
County Practice Code Total Project Costs
HUC_8 Watershed Water Quality Benefits
Practice Name Practice Category
Funding Source (State, Fed, Local, etc.) Pre-Implementation Land Use
Program Area Treated (ac)
Applied Amount Ancillary Benefits
Practice Units Phosphorus Reduction (fraction)
Applied Date Nitrogen Reduction (fraction)
Cost Share Funding Expended
Measuring Biennial Loading Trends:
Nonpoint Sources

12. • Barriers:
– Potential for duplication and over reporting (without certain
information)
• Ex. Combined state/fed sources for 1 practice (CREP), practices
established on non-cropland, etc.
– Consistent reporting of practices (similar units)
– Account for longevity of practice(s)
– Variability amongst practices and reported information –
variability in practice names, acres treated, etc.
– Location of practice installation and downstream effects
– Private Implementation-needs more work, examples from other
states
• Walton Family Foundation project:
– Resources to help coordinate continued development of the NPS
Measures Framework
– 2 pilot states underway
Measuring Biennial Loading Trends:
Nonpoint Sources

13. State HUC 8 Practice …
Arkansas 08020304 No-Till
Arkansas 08020205 Reduced Till
Arkansas 08020301 Cover Crop
⋮ ⋮ ⋮
Indiana 05120111 Cover Crop
Indiana 05120201 Filter Strip
Indiana 05120202 Wetland
% N and P
Non-Point Source
Load Reduction
Measuring Biennial Loading Trends:
Nonpoint Sources Monitoring WQ
Trends

14. 1980
1982
1984
1986
1988
1990
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
2002
2004
2006
2008
2010
2012
2014
2016
0
200,000
400,000
600,000
800,000
1,000,000
1,200,000
1,400,000
Annual Nitrate Loading to the Gulf of Mexico
NitrateLoad,inTons
5−year moving average
Flow normalized Load
Monitoring Water Quality Trends

15. Modeling Regional & State
Loading Trends
15
Load Reductions
Indiana Nutrient and Sediment Load Reductions
Voluntary conservation efforts from private landowners in Indiana with support from the Indiana
Conservation Partnership have reduced nutrients and sediment from entering Indiana’s waterways. The
figures below represent these efforts in 2017 from conservation practices installed since 2013.*
Sediment
A football field covered to a depth of
596 feet, which is almost as tall as the
Space Needle!
Nitrogen
14.25 freight cars
Phosphorus
7 freight cars
Reduction:
2,841,449 Pounds
Reduction:
1,372,892 Tons
Reduction:
1,407,346 Pounds
596 feet

16. USGS SPARROW model estimates of sources of TN and TP transported from
Mississippi River Basin to the Gulf of Mexico (Robertson and Saad 2013)
16
Modeling Decadal Basin Loading Trends

17. Modeling Decadal Basin Loading Trends
USDA CEAP model estimates of sources of TN and TP transported from Mississippi
River Basin to the Gulf of Mexico (White et al 2014)
17

18. A Collaborative, Science-Based
Approach
18

19. Priorities for Collaboration with SERA-46
• USDA-NIFA-supported multi-state
Southern Extension and Research
Activities Committee number 46
• The 12 Land Grant Universities
are represented by one
research scientist and
one extension specialist
• HTF LGU Partnership 19

20. Reports to Congress
• In 2015, HTF submitted our first report to congress,
and we have one due biannually going forward
• November, 2017 Report on the website
– Present to Congress and interested parties the
collaborative, partnership-based approach that states are
taking to develop, implement and adaptively manage
nutrient strategies
– Describe how the HTF and partners are tracking progress
– Highlight federal support, identify needed next steps
• Getting started on the 2019 Report to Congress
20

21. 2017 Report to Congress
21

22. THANK
YOU!
For more information
visit:
www.epa.gov/ms-htf
22