National Water Quality Initiative (NWQI) Pilot Project
National Water Quality Initiative (NWQI)
Pilot Project – Connecting on-farm
conservation efforts to watershed scale
assessments to benefit water quality
USDA-NRCS Landscape Conservation Initiatives Team
Dee Carlson
SWCS 72nd International Annual Conference
• Working collaboratively with EPA and states
to improve water quality in small agricultural
watersheds
• Primary goal to reduce nonpoint sources of
nutrients and sediment, and pathogens
related to animal agriculture
A major focus of the Initiative is to demonstrate that
focused implementation of conservation practices can
lead to meaningful progress on water quality goals
National Water Quality Initiative (NWQI) Launched in 2012
Successful Watershed Planning*
• Establish strong partnerships through stakeholder, community and
producer involvement
• Define achievable and measureable watershed goals
• Clearly understand the pollutants of concern and transport modes
• Target conservation to critical source areas
• Develop conservation systems that address the pollutants, and that
meet producers’ needs (fit the watershed and fit the operations)
• Apply effective outreach strategies
* CEAP watersheds synthesis (2012), Rural Clean Water Program evaluation (1993), EPA
watershed planning (2008), RESOLVE review of NRCS watershed projects (2015)
NWQI Increases Water Quality Conservation
NWQI provided a three-fold
increase in average annual
practice obligation and a
four-fold increase in average
annual treated acres for core
water quality practices, as
compared to General EQIP in
the same small watersheds
Baseline Years – 2010-2011
NWQI Reaches More Customers
NWQI more than doubled
the amount of producers
reached for voluntary
conservation in small priority
watersheds
Baseline Years – 2010-2011
NWQI’s Targeted Approach
Primary targeting approach for
NWQI is to concentrate efforts at the
small watershed scale (HUC12) in
priority watersheds identified by the
State water quality agency and
other NRCS partners.
Further targeting is needed to
adequately address water quality
concerns….
Source: Vulnerability Assessment and Program
Performance Tool (VAPPT) developed by the NRCS RAD
GIS Lab for NWQI
• Identify pollutants of concern
• Identify pollutant sources
• Identify pollutant transport mechanisms
and routes
• Identify and target conservation to critical
source areas
Pollutant(s)
Sources
Transport
Critical Areas
Within-Watershed Targeting Approach
Slide courtesy of Craig Goodwin, NRCS National Water Quality Specialist
Need for Watershed-Scale Assessment
While a watershed plan is a requirement for inclusion in
NWQI, many of the initial NWQI watersheds lack
watershed plans at the scale or level of detail necessary
to inform placement of on-farm conservation efforts for
greatest water quality benefit.
NWQI Pilot Project
• Develop watershed-scale assessments during the pilot period
sufficient to guide future investments in on-farm planning and
conservation efforts to increase water quality improvements.
• Assessments complement existing watershed plans by
identifying vulnerable acres for treatment in order to
accomplish watershed goals.
• Outreach strategies to achieve conservation on acres most in
need of treatment
• Identify meaningful measures of progress towards watershed
goals
Targeting Tools Used by Pilot Watersheds
• Soil Vulnerability Index (SVI) - NRCS Resource Assessment Division
• CEAP Conservation Benefits Identifier (CCBI) – NRCS Resource
Assessment Division
• Agricultural Conservation Planning Framework (ACPF) – ARS-Iowa
• Prioritize, Target, Measure Application (PTMApp) - International Water
Institute, Red River Watershed Management Board, MN Board of Soil and
Water Resources, Houston Engineering Inc.
• APEX/SWAT – TAMU/ARS – Texas
NRCS CEAP Soil Vulnerability Index (SVI) - Identifies cropland soils vulnerable to
runoff and leaching. Based on APEX modeling for CEAP cropland.
Source: Vulnerability Assessment and Program Performance Tool
(VAPPT) developed by the NRCS RAD GIS Lab for NWQI
NRCS CEAP Conservation Benefits Identifier (CCBI) - Qualifies relationships between levels of
inherent vulnerability (SVI) and known levels of conservation treatment to rank fields by their potential
for soil or water quality gains from additional conservation.
Source: Vulnerability Assessment and Program
Performance Tool (VAPPT) developed by the NRCS
RAD GIS Lab for NWQI
Across watershed: Nutrient/manure management, Cover Crops, No-tillage or strip tillage
Slide courtesy of Jill Reinhart, NRCS Indiana State Office
ARS - Agricultural
Conservation
Planning
Framework
(ACPF):
GIS-based planning
resource to help
improve soil
management and
identify potential
practices and
locations to
control/reduce water
and nutrient
movement within
fields, at and below
field edges, and in
riparian zones.
Avoid point and non-point source
contributions from agricultural
operations
Control runoff, erosion, and leaching to
ground water
Trap or physically stop contaminants
before they can exit the agricultural
landscape
Systems Approach to Non-Point Source Control:
Avoid, Control, and Trap (ACT)
Control
Avoid
Trap
Slide courtesy of Craig Goodwin, NRCS National Water Quality Specialist
Pilot Results Analysis and Lessons Learned
Nitrogen Transport/
New vs. Existing NWQI
Priority 1 Treated
Acres (%)
Priority 1 Needing
Treatment (%)
Acres with
Improvement (%)
Acres Fully Treated*
(%)
RUNOFF
New Watersheds 54% 60% 44% 10%
Existing Watersheds 76% 51% 63% 2%
LEACHING
New Watersheds 37% 54% 19% 8%
Existing Watersheds 38% 66% 35% 24%
Successful Targeting – Example Analysis
Average Watershed Size 24,000
Average Percent Cultivated Acres 33%
*Full treatment refers to a system comprised of all 3 components - avoiding, controlling
and trapping practices.
Data from the NWQI Decision Tool developed by the NRCS RAD GIS Lab
Pilot Results Analysis and Lessons Learned
• Measure progress towards watershed goals
– Track implementation on critical source areas in graduated pilot watersheds
– Establish and monitor a set of water quality metrics that meets local partners’
needs - outcomes
– In-stream monitoring results where available
• NRCS will continue to work with science partners to evaluate and
implement targeting tools
• Continued focus on outreach strategies - the importance of producer
engagement cannot be overstated
Next Steps
Hinweis der Redaktion
The NWQI is one of a number of NRCS initiatives that address critical resource concerns, like wildlife and water quality, at a landscape level. Initiatives build on existing locally-led efforts, are partnership driven, and they are a wallow NRCS to focus financial and technical assistance to accelerate implementation where it is most needed. NWQI was initiated in 2012 as a collaborative effort with EPA and state water quality agencies to address water quality in priority small watersheds, typically HUC12. The initiative addresses surface water pollutants originating from ag lands, primarily nutrients, sediment, and pathogens.
External evaluations of past NRCS watershed programs, and detailed analyses of the CEAP watershed studies have both identified common elements that lead to successful projects. These lessons learned guided the development of NWQI.
Targeting strategies are watershed dependent to reflect local conditions.
They now include inherent factors that are landscape related and deemed vulnerable.
First determine the vulnerability of the landscape - crops with high nutrient recs - land close to CAFOs (manure surplus) - soil erodibility K factor - steep slopesThen determine the level of existing treatment. - Highest Priority is High vulnerability and no treatment. - Lowest Priority is Low vulnerability and treatment in place.
Target at the watershed scale and implement at the field level.
This may be one factor contributing to the absence of positive water quality trends in many of the NWQI watersheds.
Watershed assessment at the HUC-12 scale helps to identify critical source areas needing treatment, and assess effective conservation systems amenable to producers
Assessment ties into/complements the existing watershed plan(s) – it is not a stand-alone document
Assessment follows the NRCS area-wide planning policy, and includes the first 6 steps of planning
Assessment is a useful document to inform conservation planning at the field level
Working at the watershed or landscape scale is the best way to deal with the off-site effects in agricultural watersheds
Working at the watershed scale opens up opportunities to plan and implement different strategies that complement and increase the benefits of in-field practices - strategies to implement buffers, restore wetlands, repair stream channels, and enhance riparian corridors are best implemented at the watershed scale and will reinforce the benefits of work at the farm scale if the efforts are effectively targeted and coordinated
Working at the watershed scale provides the ability to “focus for effect” - to direct conservation efforts at the most vulnerable parts of the landscape and during the most vulnerable times of the year
CEAP quantified the relationship between inherent vulnerability to nutrient and sediment loss and the effects of farming and conservation practices on those losses, for cultivated cropland.
CEAP documented that a significant portion of vulnerable cropland acres remain “critically under-treated.”
CEAP modeling suggested that treating those acres with a system of “Avoiding”, “Controlling”, and “Trapping” (ACT) practices could be a more cost effective way to deliver conservation.
Practices are not implemented randomly, but as systems of practices to address specific resource concerns. For nutrients, a systems approach looks toward avoiding, controlling, and/or trapping nutrients through a set of conservation practices.
The voluntary, incentives-based conservation approach is achieving results
Opportunities exist to further reduce sediment and nutrient losses from cropland
Comprehensive conservation planning and implementation are essential
Targeting enhances effectiveness and efficiency
Full treatment of the most vulnerable acres will require suites of conservation practices because no single practice is a universal solution
Nationally we will be tracking pollutant load reductions by watershed based on the CEAP framework, as well as implementation on critical acres as identified by watershed assessements.
Priority 1 Acres – percent of a cultivated cropland acres that falls in Priority 1 ranking – typically the highly to moderately high vulnerability soils
Priority 1 treated acres – of all acres with some treatment (practices), what % are on Priority 1 acres
Priority 1 still needing treatment (no practices yet applied) - % of Priority 1 acres
Acres with improvement– of acres treated, how many have moved to lower priority?
Full treatment – of acres treated, what % have been fully treated?
Develop watershed assessments that identify vulnerable acres within small watersheds (HUC12)
Design outreach strategies that engage producers and other stakeholders and that focus on vulnerable areas
Systems identified to fully address water quality – meet the needs of producers