NUTRIENT TRACKING TOOL - UF/IFAS OCI | Home · 2012-12-20 · NUTRIENT TRACKING TOOL A Cooperative Project Between Texas Institute for Applied Environmental Research (TIAER) USDA

NUTRIENT TRACKING TOOL

A Cooperative Project Between Texas Institute for Applied Environmental Research (TIAER) USDA – NRCS USDA – ARS US EPA

12/20/2012 A. Saleh

Funding support for this project was provided in part through a cooperative agreement between USDA-NRCS and the Texas Institute for Applied Environmental Research

(TIAER) through Conservation Innovation Grants program

Why NTT?

• NTT was built to:

• Facilitate water quality trading • Assess various conservation practices

• Single national model with site specific soil, climate & calibration coefficients • Transparent and rigorous using the National and

local data basis

• Combines ease of use with rigorous science & oversight framework

12/20/2012 A. Saleh

How does NTT work?

• Uses Agricultural Policy Environmental eXtender (APEX)

to determine nutrient, sediment losses, runoff, and crop

production in agricultural and forest lands

• A web-based program that requires no software

installation

• Required data for major portions of US are provided

through National, local and pre-existing databases (e.g.,

weather, soils, major local and RUSLE2 management

zone data)

12/20/2012 A. Saleh

Who can use NTT?

• NTT employs a user-friendly web-based interface to

make the benefits of APEX directly accessible to

farmers, crop consultants, government officials and the

general public

• Anyone with internet access can use NTT, but the

tool was designed with specific attention to the needs

of the typical farmer

• Proprietary data input by farmers can be kept

confidential

12/20/2012 A. Saleh

Practices simulated by NTT

• Simulates a wide variety of conservation practices

(CPs), including most listed in the USDA field office

technical guides

• Cultural CPs (e.g., nutrient management, tillage,

irrigation, etc.)

• Structural CPs (e.g., forest buffers, filter strips,

wetlands, terraces, tile drainage, grass waterways,

lagoons, ponds, reservoir, etc.)

12/20/2012

A. Saleh

Possible applications for NTT

• NTT can be used as an assessment tool to analyze water quality and quantity impacts of CPs for – Many conservation program evaluation and – TMDL achievement evaluation

• NTT output can be used in conjunction for

– economic models to estimate cost-effectiveness of CPs – Other programs, such as NutrientNet, to calculate nutrient

credits in the trading platform

12/20/2012 A. Saleh

Current States Evaluating NTT

• Missouri

• Mississippi

• Oregon

• Washington

• California

• Idaho

• Ohio

• Chesapeake States (New York, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, and West Virginia (NutrienNet)

12/20/2012 A. Saleh

APEX Model

12/20/2012 A. Saleh

Weather

Hydrology

Erosion (wind and water)

Nutrients (N, P, and K)

CO2

Pesticides

Crop growth

Tillage

Management

Routing

Reservoirs

Groundwater

Grazing

Manure management

Components of APEX model

9

Example of CP evaluated by NTT Structural CPs

Filter strips

Stream channel stabilization

Grass waterways

Wetland, reservoir, and ponds

Riparian forest

Fencing

Terracing

Contour buffers

Tile Systems

Cultural CPs

Nutrient management

Tillage operation

Irrigation and fertigation

Grazing operation

Manure management

10

NTT Input Data Sources

12/20/2012 A. Saleh

(1) WEATHER

Includes 47 years (1960-2007) of measured daily rainfall and min/max temperature

– Source: USDA-NRCS Climate Data Center

Soil SURGO up to 10 layers & up to 9 major soils within a field

– Source: National Cooperative Soil Survey operated by the USDA-NRCS Soil Survey Data Mart site:

(http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/WebSoilSurvey.aspx)

12/20/2012 A. Saleh

(2) SOIL AND FIELD GEOMETRY

(3) Management

• Includes daily management operations for any crop rotations

– Sources:

• A. user input (including options for saving, editing, and uploading

• B. pre-existing – Most common local cropping systems

– RUSLE management zone data

12/20/2012 A. Saleh

NTT Example

Change of Agricultural Land to Forestry

12/20/2012 A. Saleh

12/20/2012 A. Saleh

12/20/2012 A. Saleh

12/20/2012 A. Saleh

12/20/2012 A. Saleh

Corn-soybean rotation with BMPs versus Forestry

Summary page: Corn-soy with BMPs versus Forestry

NO BMP

WITH BMP

Future work on NTT

• Extending NTT capabilities for all regions of U.S. by developing the required databases

• Simulation of multiple fields within a farm

• Herbicides, pesticides, and CO2 outputs

• Adoption of NTT for Water Quality Trading Programs in all States

• Modification of NTT for other land uses such as Forestry

• Completing the integration of FEM to estimate the costs/benefits of CPs

12/20/2012 A. Saleh

Main CPEC Screen

Conservation Practices Economic Calculator (CPEC)

The CPEC Program provides important information regarding the costs/benefits of conservation practice

implementation to complement data on changes in nutrients, sediment, and crop yield as calculated by

NTT. This economic information is essential for programs, such as trading or Total Maximum Daily Loads

(TMDLs), to better understand the associated cost/ benefits.

CPEC is based on Farm Economic Model, which was developed by researchers at the Texas Institute for

Applied Environmental Research (TIAER) at Tarleton State University. FEM has been used in numerous

locations in US and other countries. For more information regarding FEM or CPEC please contact Dr.

Edward Osei ([email protected]) and Dr. Ali Saleh ([email protected])

ENTER

31

An example list of scenarios (1 of 2)

Scenario Scenario Description

Manure Application (M)

M1 Manure applied at the N rate and manure

nutrient crediting

M2 Manure applied at the high P rate and

manure nutrient crediting

M3 Manure applied at the low P rate and

manure nutrient crediting

M6 Incorporation of solid manure

M7 Injection of liquid manure

Fertilizer Application (F)

F1 Elimination of fall crop removal fertilizer

applications on all cropland

F2 Reduced N application on all cropland

F3 Reduced and split N application on all

cropland

Cropland tillage (c)

C1 No-till on all cropland

32

List of scenarios (2 of 2)

Soil Management (S)

S1 Terraces on cropland with slopes greater than 2

percent

S2 Contouring on cropland and pastureland with

slopes greater than 2 percent

S3 Contour buffer strips on cropland with slopes

greater than 2 percent

Ration Modifications (R)

R1 Phytase-supplemented rations for swine farms

Structural BMPs (B)

B3 Filter strips on manure application fields

B5 Enhancing and developing waterways for all

cropland

Production System (P)

P2 Hoop structures for all swine operations

P3 Hoop structures for open lot swine operations

Illustrative Combinations of Individual Practices

Maquoketa 1 No-till and reduced N rate on all cropland b

Maquoketa 2 Contour buffer strips on cropland with slopes

greater than 2 percent; reduced N on cropland b

Maquoketa 3 Contour crop and pastureland with slopes

greater than 2 percent; reduced N on cropland b

Maquoketa 4 No-till on solid manure fields and injection of

liquid manure

33

S1

B5

S3

S2C1

B3

P2 P3

R1

M7M6

M2M1 M3 F3 F2

F1

-80

-60

-40

-20

0

20

-30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30

Profit impact: $/acre

Sedim

ent lo

sses: %

change

34

F1

F2

F3M3

M1

M2

M6M7

R1P3

P2

B3

C1

S2S3B5S1

-60

-40

-20

0

20

-30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30

Profit impact: $/acre

Nitra

te lo

sse

s: %

ch

an

ge

35

S1

B5

S3 S2

C1

B3

P2

P3 R1

M7M6

M2

M1

M3F3

F2

F1

-60

-40

-20

0

20

-30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30

Profit impact: $/acre

To

tal N

lo

sse

s: %

ch

an

ge

36

F1F2

F3M3

M1M2

M6M7

R1P3

P2B3

C1

S2

S3

B5

S1

-60

-40

-20

0

-30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30

Profit impact: $/acre

Tota

l P

losses: %

change

Questions and feedback

Thanks

12/20/2012 A. Saleh