This document summarizes several large watershed projects and lessons learned from them. Key lessons include: (1) conservation planning must be done at the watershed scale with water quality data; (2) identify pollutants and their sources before implementing practices; (3) target critical source areas; (4) understand farmer attitudes; (5) maintain practices; (6) technical assistance is most effective locally; and (7) economic incentives are often needed for adoption. The North Canadian River project in Oklahoma applied these lessons through practices like no-till, riparian fencing, and monitoring, significantly reducing phosphorus loads. In Vermont's Lake Champlain basin, phosphorus levels remained high despite efforts, requiring new regulations
2. Lessons Learned from
Large Federal Watershed Projects
Black Creek 1978-1984
Project
Model 1978-1982
Implementation
Program
The Rural Clean 1980-1995
Water Program
Hydrologic Unit 1991-1994
Area Projects &
Demonstration
Projects
USEPA Section 319 1991 - present
National Nonpoint
Source Monitoring
Program
NIFA CEAP 2004-2011
With dwindling resources and mounting environmental
degradation, it is essential that many of the lessons from
NIFA-CEAP be integrated into policy and agency protocol if
water resources are to be protected or improved.
3. Lessons Learned from
Large Federal Watershed Projects
1. Conservation planning must be done at the watershed scale with sufficient
water quality and potentially modeling information.
2. Before implementing conservation practices, identify the pollutants of concern,
and the sources of the pollutants.
3. Identify critical source areas to prioritize conservation practices.
4. Identify watershed farmers’ attitudes toward agriculture and conservation
practices to promote adoption.
5. Even after conservation practices have been adopted, continue to work with
farmers on maintenance and sustained use.
6. Technical assistance to farmers is most effective when delivered by a trusted
local contact and is very people intensive. Reduced funding is eroding the
ability of NRCS, extension, and soil & water conservation districts to deliver
effective programming.
4. Lessons Learned from
Large Federal Watershed Projects
7. Economic incentives were often required for adoption of
conservation practices not obviously profitable or fitting with
current farming systems.
8. Conservation practice adoption is a multivariate choice and
although economics are exceptionally important, there are many
other factors that are part of the decision-making process.
9. Most conservation implementation projects should NOT conduct
water quality monitoring. For projects that do conduct water
quality monitoring, establish monitoring systems that are
designed to specifically evaluate response to treatment and ensure
that projects include the necessary resources and expertise.
10. Conservation activities must be monitored as intensively as water
quality monitoring, and at the same temporal and spatial scales to
link water quality response to land treatment changes.
7. Project Beginnings
In 2004, conservation districts joined together to seek
assistance for a program that would address water quality
concerns in the North Canadian River.
8. Watershed Characterization
Landuse is 35% pasture
and 38% winter wheat
Water Quality Problems:
Enterococcus
Turbidity
E. coli
Low DO
High chlorophyll a
values in downstream
Lake Overholser
9. Watershed Planning
Developed plan early in 2008
Formed Local Watershed Advisory Group
Select conservation practices
Select cost-share rates
Developed Watershed Model
Hired local Project Coordinator
Hired local Education Coordinator
10. Water Quality Monitoring
Standard grab
samples monthly
+ 6 high flow per
year
Autosampler flow
weighted –TP,
discharge, nitrate
& ammonia
weekly
Weekly during
recreation
season- bacteria-
E. coli, and
Enterococcus
$T
$T
$T
$T
$T
$T
ÊÚ
ÊÚ
ÊÚ
#
Canton LakeCanton Lake
Lake Overholser
Blaine Co.
Canadian Co.
Dewey Co.
Monitoring Sites$T
North Canadian watershed
ÊÚ Autosampler Sites
13. 13
Approximately 290 Acres
60 acres of cropland
180 acres of pastureland
Balance in ponds, creeks, riparian areas
Implemented Best Management Practices include:
Rotational grazing
Riparian area exclusion
Solar watering facility
Pond exclusion and let-down area
Conversion to no-till
OSU Extension Studies included:
Impacts of grazing on no-till and soil health
Sequestration of carbon in no-till systems
Cover crops and crop rotations in no-till
Inter-seeding forage mixes into no-till systems
Nutrient management, i.e. N-Strips, grid soil sampling
Demonstration Farm
Working in partnership with OSU Cooperative Extension Service
14. Implementation
Occurred in three
phases, beginning
in 2007, 2010, and
2011
158 cooperating
landowners
$2,651,715 worth of
BMPs installed
$1,614,841 state
dollars
$746,705 EPA
319 dollars
$290,169
landowner
dollars
16. 16
Making a Difference
Over 85,077 linear feet
of riparian area fencing
has been installed.
Riparian area fencing
protects stream banks
from erosion and helps
filter out soil, nutrients
and bacteria.
18. Other Project Results
Private funding from an Electric Cooperative to
incentivize carbon sequestration in the watershed
Development of hand-held, more cost-effective green-
seeker technology unit to allow the use of n-rich strips
Developed and demonstrated a training and data
collection program using Conservation District
Employees to collect environmental data (where
districts earned extra funds)
Demonstrated that agricultural producers are willing do
their part to address environmental concerns
19. Keys to Success
Local Leadership
Invested Partners
Understanding of the Watershed
Historical water quality data
Watershed Model
Targeting
Watershed plan
Possibility of Success
Monitoring for Success-
water quality, landuse change…
Long-term program
26. Multiple NRCS land treatment Watershed Projects dating back to 1980
Federal Legislation
1990‐Lake Champlain Basin Act
Increased coordination of conservation in basin – basin plan and steering
committee
Funded through EPA and GLFC ‐ $3 to 6 Million/year
1995 ‐ Vermont adopts Accepted Agricultural practices and regulations on
Large Farm Operations
2002 ‐ 1st TMDL approved by EPA
2006 – Vermont enacts regulations on Medium Farm Operations
2004‐2014 ‐ NRCS obligated over $40 million for water quality practices in the
Lake Champlain basin
History of Water Quality
Improvement Efforts
31. In response to pending TMDL, Act 64 Passed by Vermont
Legislature ‐ 2015
Applies to Farms with $2,000 gross income in an average
year or 4 or more acres with livestock
Requirements
NRCS 590 standard
Cover Crops on floodplain fields
Perennial Buffers
Surface Water – 25 feet wide
Ditches – 10 feet wide
No Manure applied
On any field Dec. 15 – April 1
On floodplains Oct 15‐ April 15
On 10% slopes or greater
In Buffer Zones
Vermont’s New Required Ag Practices
(RAPS)
32. Strengthen Partner Coordination
Signed Water Quality MOU with 8 Partners
Improve Understanding of the Problem
Edge of Field Monitoring
Identified tile drainage as a significant source of soluble phosphorus
Using CIG to fill data gaps
Target Resources
Technical and Financial Assistance to Critical Source Areas identified through SWAT modeling
Watershed Action Plans for 4 High Priority HUC 12 subbasins
Accelerate Implementation through Increased Funding and
New Initiatives
RCPP
Vilsack Commitment
Certainty – VT Environmental Stewardship Program
National CIG grant for Nutrient Trading Program
Improve On Farm Planning, Accountability and Tracking
Development of a Vermont‐specific, user friendly APEX model
Development of a shared NRCS/partner database
Tracking progress in meeting P reduction goals in 4 priority watersheds
A Look Back at NRCS Efforts
Over the Past Five Years
38. Focused on watersheds that were:
Most impaired
In the public eye
Long term water quality monitoring
data
Four watersheds will receive prioritized FA
and TA over the next four years.
The goal is to apply the most appropriate
conservation measures in the most critical
areas to achieve water quality
improvement.
Nearly ½ of EQIP funds ($4.6 million in FY
2016) was focused in these priority areas.
Each watershed project includes an
agreement with a local partner for
coordination, E&O and farmer assistance
Targeting the Most Critical Areas
45. Locally‐led farmer engagement
Farmer‐to farmer meetings with NRCS, UVM, and key partners
Enhanced Technical Assistance for Farmers
Develop watershed specific action plan to identify four key strategies
Develop a plan of delivery for technical assistance
Financial Assistance for Farmers through Targeting
Outreach and Education
Watershed specific fact sheets with key contacts listed (partners and NRCS)
Include state cost share availability
Initiate one‐on‐one contact with farmers to explain goals and options.
Develop farmer success stories and promote positive work being
accomplished in the watershed
Demonstration farms to illustrate conservation practices and benefits.
Soil health signage to celebrate and recognize stewardship
Local Leadership and Coordination
Funding support to “work” the Action Plan
Local Action Team Priorities
48. Purpose
Identify and articulate the key organizational factors in
effective watershed projects
Watersheds:
Tulpehocken Creek, Pennsylvania;
Rock River, Vermont
Shenandoah Valley, Virginia
Point Remove, Arkansas
North Canadian River, Oklahoma;
Root River, Minnesota
Whatcom County, Washington
Tillamook Bay, Oregon
49. Characteristics of Effective
Watershed Projects
“Happy families are all alike; every unhappy family is
unhappy in its own way.” Leo Tolstoy, Anna Karenina
Watershed assessment – Successful projects are based on sound
watershed plans or assessments that characterize the nature of the
water quality problems, identify sources, prioritize critical areas, &
identify conservation practices.
Collaboratively developed implementation plan – Creating the plan
collaboratively helps create and reinforce the partnerships that are
integral to success.
Creation of a credible set of data - multiple benefits of baseline
information, credibility, creating shared knowledge base and
commitment
50. Characteristics of Effective
Watershed Projects
Capacity to coordinate and manage project activities -
adequate capacity and skill to organize and manage a project;
an anchor organization; project coordinator & staffing.
One on one engagement with farmers and landowners -
there is no substitute for the direct interaction with a farmer
and the trust formed by strong working relationships.
Flexibility ability to respond to site specific conditions on a
farm and engender adoption of practices that might not
otherwise have been installed.
Appropriate time frame: Watershed planning, creating a
shared strategy for implementation, assembling credible data,
and developing the trusted relationships extends over multiple
years.
51. Conclusions
We know how to organize and manage effective watershed
scale projects:
• Studies consistently identify the same key factors
• Effectively organized and managed projects consistently
achieve substantive results
However most public and private programs are not using
this knowledge on a wide scale to develop successful
watershed projects
If we are serious about:
• Addressing water quality
• Enabling the farming community to improve water quality
• Making the best use of our conservation programs and
resources
Our task is to learn from the experiences of effective project
organizers and to systematically apply those lessons in
watershed programs
52. NIFA CEAP Outreach Information
USDA NRCS CEAP Website
http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/technica
l/nra/ceap/ws/?&cid=stelprdb1047821
Book: Osmond, D., D. Meals, D. Hoag, and M. Arabi. 2012.
How to Build Better Agricultural Conservation Programs to
Protect Water Quality: The National Institute of Food and
Agriculture Conservation Effects Assessment Project
Experience. Soil and Water Conservation Society. Ankeny, IA.
Fact Sheets
Proceedings
USEPA Webinar
USDA NIFA National Water
Quality Conference slides