Department of Environmental Quality - PowerPoint Presentation

Department of Environmental Quality Annual Agriculture Progress Reports Neuse / Tar-Pamlico / Falls Lake

2 Neuse & Tar-Pamlico River Basins Department of Environmental Quality

3 Falls Lake Watershed Department of Environmental Quality

4 Nutrient Management History Neuse / Tar-Pamlico / Falls Lake Water quality impairments Exceeding chl - a standard Addressing impairments Nutrient Management Strategies for each watershed Address point & nonpoint sources Goal Decrease nutrient loading, achieve chl-a standardEffective dates: Neuse: (1998)Tar-Pam (2001)Falls (2011) Department of Environmental Quality

5 Neuse & Tar-Pamlico Estuaries Agriculture Rule Overview Rule Effective August 1998 (Neuse) & September 2001 (Tar-Pamlico) Collective compliance approach Goal 30% reduction in nitrogen load from baseline Tar-Pamlico: no increase in phosphorus load Baseline 1991-1995 (Neuse) & 1991 (Tar-Pamlico) Basin Oversight & Local Advisory Committees Develop accounting tools, track & report progress Assist with implementation Department of Environmental Quality

6 Falls Watershed Agriculture Rule Overview Rule effective: January 2011 Collective compliance similar to Neuse & Tar-Pamlico Affects all agriculture – cropland & pastureland Stage I 2011-2020: 20% N / 40% P Stage II 2021-2035: 40% N / 77% P 2006 Baseline Watershed Oversight & Local Advisory Committees Develop accounting tools, track & report progress Assist with implementationDepartment of Environmental Quality

7 Oversight Committees BOC (Neuse, Tar-Pamlico), WOC (Falls) Representatives Division of Soil and Water Conservation US Department of Agriculture Natural Resources Conservation Service NC Department of Agriculture & Consumer Services NC Cooperative Extension Division of Water Resources Environmental General Farming Pasture-Based Livestock Scientific Community Department of Environmental Quality

8 Cropland Nitrogen Accounting Neuse, Tar-Pamlico and Falls Nitrogen Loss Estimation Worksheet (NLEW) Empirical spreadsheet-based model Developed by DWR, NRCS, NCSU and others Estimates nitrogen loss from cropland agriculture Compare baseline loss to current crop year Loss estimates at county scale Data collected annually: Crop types Crop acreage Fertilization rates BMPs implementedDepartment of Environmental Quality

9 Pasture Nitrogen Accounting Falls Watershed NLEW Tool Used to Calculate Pasture N Loss Accounting Every 5 Years Based on Ag Census Data Most recent census (2012) Baseline used (2007) Pasture Accounting Factors in NLEW Pasture Acres & Animal Waste Numbers Nitrogen Rates: Fertilizer + Animal Derived N (Deposition) BMPs: Fencing out livestock from stream Department of Environmental Quality

10 Phosphorus Accounting Method Tar-Pamlico and Falls Developed by Joint Technical Committee EMC approved in 2005 Qualitative indicator trends 9 indicators qualitatively assess risk of P loss Baseline vs. current crop year Characterize changes in land use and management Department of Environmental Quality

11 Estimated N Loss Reductions from Cropland Neuse Basin Department of Environmental Quality County 2014 Reported N Loss Reduction 2015 Reported N Loss Reduction Carteret 40% 49% Craven 58%62% Durham 47% 82% Franklin 84% 84% Granville 96% 86% Greene 55% 54% Johnston 60% 53% Jones 29% 43% Lenoir 25% 39% Nash 45% 62% Orange 62% 86% Pamlico 9% 23% Person 53% 77% Pitt 43% 53% Wake 72% 76% Wayne 41% 55% Wilson 50% 47% Total 46% 53%

12 Estimated N Loss Reductions from Cropland Tar-Pamlico Basin Department of Environmental Quality County 2014 reported N loss reduction 2015 reported N loss reduction Beaufort 40% 54%Edgecombe48%48% Franklin 78% 80% Granville 82% 86% Halifax 47% 49% Hyde 35% 58% Martin 27% 28% Nash 74% 70% Person 64% 54% Pitt 56% 68% Vance 69% 77% Warren 70% 80% Washington 47% 54% Wilson 59% 52% Total 51% 58%

13 Phosphorus Loss Tracking Tar-Pamlico Basin Parameter Units Baseline 1991 CY2015 Percent ‘91-‘15 change CY2015 P Loss Risk +/- Agricultural land Acres 807,026 614,715 -24%- Cropland conversion (to grass & trees) Acres 660 47,007 7,022% - CRP / WRP (cumulative) Acres 19,241 41,833 117% -  Conservation tillage Acres 41,415 55,878 35% -  Vegetated buffers (cumulative) Acres 50,836 218,440 330% -  Water control structures (cumulative) Acres affected 52,984 91,308 72% -  Scavenger crop Acres 13,272 85,380 543% -  Animal waste P lbs of P/ yr 13,597,734 15,013,151 10% + Soil test P median P index 8379-5% - Department of Environmental Quality

14 Estimated N Loss Reductions from Cropland Department of Environmental Quality County 2014 reported N loss reduction 2015 r eported N loss reduction Durham 15% 73% Franklin 70% 70%Granville 94% 79% Orange 51% 69% Person 40% 71% Wake 10% 34% Total 46% 70% Falls Watershed

15 Estimated N Loss Reductions from Pasture Falls Watershed Department of Environmental Quality County 2007 nitrogen loss (lbs.) 2012 nitrogen loss (lbs.) 2012 N loss reduction (%) Durham 107,134 81,189 24% Franklin 8,433 9,384 -11% Granville 298,607 193,961 35% Orange 293,720 170,676 42% Person 198,832 125,725 37% Wake 26,110 17,271 34% Total 932,836 598,206 36%

16 Phosphorus Loss Tracking Falls Watershed Parameter Units Baseline 2006 CY2015 Percent ‘06‘15 change CY2015 P Loss Risk +/- Agricultural land acres 55,969 31,208 -44%- Cropland conversion (to grass & trees) acres 1,527 2,207 45% - CRP / WRP (cumulative) acres 0 0 0% N/A   Conservation tillage acres 26,787 19,874 -26% + Vegetated buffers (cumulative) acres 52,139 54,420 4% -  Water control structures (cumulative) acres affected 0 1,190 1,190% -  Scavenger crop acres 3,288 3,202 -3% -  Animal waste P lbs. P/ yr 586,612 489,061 -17% - Soil test P medianP index7768-12%  - Department of Environmental Quality

17 Stage I Progress Falls Watershed One-time report from DWR required in Falls Purpose: Evaluate agriculture’s progress achieving stage I goals Stage I goals: 20% nitrogen & 40% phosphorus Findings: Reasonable progress achieved by agriculture 70% decrease in cropland N loss 36% decrease in pasture N loss Decrease P loss risk Department of Environmental Quality

18 Looking Forward Funding for technicians no longer available Oversight committees continue to evaluate crop trends Ongoing discussions concerning trading Rules readoption for Neuse and Tar-Pamlico strategies S.L. 2016-94 for Falls Lake strategy Department of Environmental Quality

19 QUESTIONS? Department of Environmental Quality