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