conservation practice impacts on nutrient loads
DESCRIPTION
69th SWCS International Annual Conference July 27-30, 2014 Lombard, ILTRANSCRIPT
![Page 1: Conservation practice impacts on nutrient loads](https://reader033.vdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022052601/558ec9d91a28ab3d3c8b45b9/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Conservation Practice Impacts on Nutrient Loads from the Maryland CEAP Choptank Watershed using AnnAGNPS
• Ronald L. Bingner, USDA-ARS, Oxford, MS• Ali Sadeghi, USDA-ARS, Beltsville, MD• Henrique Momm, Middle TN State Univ.,
Murfreesboro, TN• Greg McCarty, USDA-ARS, Beltsville, MD• Dean Hively, USGS-EGSC, Reston, VA• Yongping Yuan, USEPA, Las Vegas, NV• Eugenie Kamgue, Middle TN State Univ.,
Murfreesboro, TN
![Page 2: Conservation practice impacts on nutrient loads](https://reader033.vdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022052601/558ec9d91a28ab3d3c8b45b9/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Objective
To evaluate conservation practice effects on sediment and nutrient loads within the ARS Conservation Effects and Assessment Project (CEAP) Choptank, Maryland Benchmark Watershed.
![Page 3: Conservation practice impacts on nutrient loads](https://reader033.vdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022052601/558ec9d91a28ab3d3c8b45b9/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Choptank Watershed, MD
![Page 4: Conservation practice impacts on nutrient loads](https://reader033.vdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022052601/558ec9d91a28ab3d3c8b45b9/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
German Branch
4960 ha
![Page 5: Conservation practice impacts on nutrient loads](https://reader033.vdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022052601/558ec9d91a28ab3d3c8b45b9/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Landuse
#
CropForestUrbanFarms
![Page 6: Conservation practice impacts on nutrient loads](https://reader033.vdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022052601/558ec9d91a28ab3d3c8b45b9/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Crop Distribution
cornwheatbarleysoybean
![Page 7: Conservation practice impacts on nutrient loads](https://reader033.vdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022052601/558ec9d91a28ab3d3c8b45b9/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
ManagementRotation 1 (reduced tillage): Corn, commodity wheat, double crop soybeans.
April 12th poultry manure application; 2 T/A
April 30th plant corn; no-till
June 15th sidedress 30% UAN; 100 lbs/acre
October 15th harvest corn
October 25th disk
October 30th poultry manure application; 1 T/A
November 5th plant winter wheat; drill
March 5th 30% UAN applic; 60 lbs N/A
June 10th harvest wheat
June 15th plant double crop soybean; no till
November 10th harvest soybeanWinter fallow
Rotation 2 (conventional tillage): Corn, commodity wheat, double crop soybeans
April 18th poultry manure application; 2 T/A
April 19th subsurface chisel
April 27th plant corn; conventional tillage
June 19th sidedress; 30% UAN; 100 lbs/A
September 30th harvest corn
October 6th disk
October 9th poultry manure application; 1T/A
October 12th plant wheat
March 10th 30% UAN applic.; 60 lbs/A
June 12th harvest wheat
June 15th plant soybean; conv.till
November 10th harvest soybeanWinter fallow
Reduced Tillage70% of cropland
Conventional Tillage30% of cropland
![Page 8: Conservation practice impacts on nutrient loads](https://reader033.vdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022052601/558ec9d91a28ab3d3c8b45b9/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Ephemeral Gully Locations
#
#######
#
###
####
# #
#
###
##
########
## ##
#
####
####
#####
#####
##
## #
#
# ###
####
# #
####
#
##
## ##
##
###
##
## # #### #
############
## #######
### ##
# ### ## ###
## ## ####
#####
######
###
##
###
####
#
#############
######## ####
############## ###
#
##
#######
#####
###
## ##
##########
##
########### ### ####
######
#### ##### ###########
############## ###
############ ######## ##
### #############
#####
#########
###########
#### #
# ######## #
###
#####
##################
## ##
#######
####
####
###
######
#####
# ############# #####
##### #
########## ###
### ## ######
## ###########
# ########################
# ###
#
####
#####
#### ####### ############
#
### ###### ######### ####
###
# ## #
###### ###
## ## #
###########
####### ###
#
## ##
#####
##
######
######## ##
#
##
###########
#
#######
#######
#
##
##
#
#########
###########
######## #
####
###############
######## #
###
##
######### ##
######
##
###### #### ##
##
####
#############
###
##
##
##### ###
# ##########
###############
############ #
########
### ###
################
#### ### #### ###
##############
#
##### # ###
# #####
#
##
# ##
##########
######
#####
####
#
### ##
#####
##
##
########### ### ###
###### ####
#
#
# ########
######
##################
##
# #
# #
####
#
#
######
##
###
##
###
## ####
######
#
# #
#
####### ######
## #
##
####### ####
#################
#######
#################
#################### ### # ###### ####
#
##########
#####
# #####
###########
##########################
#############
#########
############## #######
###########
##########
###############
###
###########
###
###########
############# #
######
######
#############
############# #
####
#################### ### #####
######### ###########
#############################
#
##############
#
######### ########## ##########
##############
## #######
#
##########
###################
############
#########
###################
##########
############################
######
##############
###
######
################### ##########
######
###########
#########
################
# ###
######
#
##
########
##
#########
#########
# #######
######
##
#############
##
##############
####
######
#
### #######
#
#######
#####
#
###
#### ######
#########
###
##### #
#########
#######
#####
##
###########
#
####### ##
#
#
########
#
########
# #
##
#####
#
##
#
#
#####
#
1607 Actual Gullies
Identified
![Page 9: Conservation practice impacts on nutrient loads](https://reader033.vdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022052601/558ec9d91a28ab3d3c8b45b9/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
NRCS Photo Gallery: Ephemeral Gully (?)
Where does sheet & rill end & ephemeral gullies begin?
![Page 10: Conservation practice impacts on nutrient loads](https://reader033.vdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022052601/558ec9d91a28ab3d3c8b45b9/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
NRCS Photo Gallery: GullyGully forming in a corn field in Pennsylvania
Narrow & Deep Gullies
![Page 11: Conservation practice impacts on nutrient loads](https://reader033.vdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022052601/558ec9d91a28ab3d3c8b45b9/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
German Branch
![Page 12: Conservation practice impacts on nutrient loads](https://reader033.vdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022052601/558ec9d91a28ab3d3c8b45b9/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
AGBUFAGNPS‐GIS Buffer Utility Feature
Provides buffer characterization for AnnAGNPS input parameters
![Page 13: Conservation practice impacts on nutrient loads](https://reader033.vdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022052601/558ec9d91a28ab3d3c8b45b9/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
AGBUFRiparian Buffer GIS representation
AnnAGNPS cells & reaches Buffer
![Page 14: Conservation practice impacts on nutrient loads](https://reader033.vdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022052601/558ec9d91a28ab3d3c8b45b9/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
AGBUF (continued)TE Estimation in AnnAGNPS Cells includes the effect of concentrated flow paths through buffers (short‐circuits)
A
0
0
0
1 2
3 4
5 6 TE = 97%
Potential short‐circuits
TE = 90%
TE = 47%
Varying widths & lengths
![Page 15: Conservation practice impacts on nutrient loads](https://reader033.vdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022052601/558ec9d91a28ab3d3c8b45b9/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
Runoff
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
Jan_
91
May
Sep
Jan_
92
May
Sep
Jan_
93
May
Sep
Jan_
94
May
Sep
Jan_
95
May
Sep
Flo
w (
mm
)
Observed Simulated
NSE = 0.71
![Page 16: Conservation practice impacts on nutrient loads](https://reader033.vdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022052601/558ec9d91a28ab3d3c8b45b9/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
Total Nitrogen
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
Jan_
91
May
Sep
Jan_
92
May
Sep
Jan_
93
May
Sep
Jan_
94
May
Sep
Jan_
95
May
Sep
N L
oss
es
(kg/h
a)
Observed Simulated
NSE = 0.51
![Page 17: Conservation practice impacts on nutrient loads](https://reader033.vdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022052601/558ec9d91a28ab3d3c8b45b9/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
Buffer/Gully Comparisons
Sediment Load Sheet & Rill (% Change from Base)
Sediment Load Ephemeral Gully (% Change from Base)
Nitrogen Load (% Change from Base)
No gullies/No buffers
216 - -2
Gullies/No buffers 214 191 1
Buffer/No gullies 2 - -3
Buffers and Gullies (BASE)
- - -
Since most N load is dissolved from poultry litter, buffers do not have much impact on controlling N
![Page 18: Conservation practice impacts on nutrient loads](https://reader033.vdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022052601/558ec9d91a28ab3d3c8b45b9/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
Average Annual Runoff
Runoff0.098 - 3.658
3.658 - 8.874
8.874 - 13.206
13.206 - 16.441
16.441 - 45.583
tn/ac/yr
![Page 19: Conservation practice impacts on nutrient loads](https://reader033.vdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022052601/558ec9d91a28ab3d3c8b45b9/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
Average Annual Sediment Load
Sediment0 - 0.017
0.017 - 0.069
0.069 - 0.19
0.19 - 0.579
0.579 - 1.25
tn/ac/yr
![Page 20: Conservation practice impacts on nutrient loads](https://reader033.vdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022052601/558ec9d91a28ab3d3c8b45b9/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
Average Annual Nitrogen Load
Nitrogen0
0 - 36.592
36.592 - 44.342
44.342 - 84.071
84.071 - 165.311
lb/ac/yr
![Page 21: Conservation practice impacts on nutrient loads](https://reader033.vdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022052601/558ec9d91a28ab3d3c8b45b9/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Con
trib
uted
Loa
d (%
)
Contributing Drainage Area (%)
TOTAL CELL NITROGEN FROM ALL SOURCES
OUTLET
![Page 22: Conservation practice impacts on nutrient loads](https://reader033.vdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022052601/558ec9d91a28ab3d3c8b45b9/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
Areas of 50% Nitrogen Load
Nitrogen0
0 - 36.592
36.592 - 44.342
44.342 - 84.071
84.071 - 165.311
lb/ac/yr
![Page 23: Conservation practice impacts on nutrient loads](https://reader033.vdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022052601/558ec9d91a28ab3d3c8b45b9/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
Summary
AnnAGNPS adequately simulated runoff and nitrogen loads in the watershed.
Ephemeral gullies impacted sediment and nitrogen loads, while buffers mainly only had an impact on sediment. Since most N is transported as dissolved N from poultry litter applications.