Annual Agriculture Progress Reports Neuse & Tar-Pamlico River Basins Prepared by the Neuse and Tar-Pamlico Basin Oversight Committees John Huisman – Division of Water Resources

Neuse & Tar-Pamlico River Basins

Nutrient Management History Tar-Pamlico / Neuse WQ Impairment Neuse & Tar-Pam Estuaries Exceeding Chl-a standard Nutrient Management Strategies for each basin Address Point & Nonpoint Sources Goal Decrease nutrient loading - Achieve Chl-a standard Effective Dates Neuse: (1998), Tar-Pam (2001)

Neuse & Tar-Pamlico Agriculture Rule Overview Rule Effective August 1998 (Neuse) & September 2001 (Tar-Pam) Collective Compliance Approach Goal 30% Reduction in Nitrogen Load from Baseline Tar-Pam: No Increase in Phosphorus Load Baseline 1991-1995 (Neuse) & 1991 (Tar-Pam) Basin Oversight Committees & Local Advisory Committees Develop accounting tools, track & report progress Assist with implementation

Basin Oversight Committees (BOC) 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 Quality Environmental General Farming Pasture-Based Livestock Scientific Community

EMC-Approved Accounting Methods Cropland Nitrogen Loss – NLEW Tool Phosphorus Loss – Qualitative Indicators Introduce the EMC Approved Accounting Methods Emphasize that these accounting methods do not represent loading to the lake. They are the best tools available based on the most recent science. Explain “N Loss Reduction” = the estimated change in nitrogen loss from agriculture relative to the nitrogen loss in the baseline year.

Cropland Nitrogen Accounting N Loss Estimation Worksheet (NLEW) Empirical Spreadsheet-based Model Developed by DWQ, NRCS, NCSU, and others Estimates Nitrogen Loss from Cropland Ag Compare baseline loss to current crop year Loss Estimates at County Scale Data Collected Annually Number of Acres / Type of Crop Fertilization Rates BMPs implemented

Neuse Estimated N Loss Reductions County 2012 Reported N Loss Reduction 2013 Reported N Loss Reduction Carteret 35% 38% Craven 48% 44% Durham 53% 56% Franklin 77% 76% Granville 47% Greene 46% 37% Johnston 51% 52% Jones 40% 22% Lenoir 16% -3% Nash 67% 57% Orange Pamlico 26% Person 58% Pitt Wake 72% Wayne Wilson 31%   Total 45%

Tar-Pamlico Estimated N Loss Reductions County 2012 Reported N Loss Reduction 2013 Reported N Loss Reduction Beaufort 36% 32% Edgecombe 37% Franklin 72% 71% Granville 54% 53% Halifax 44% 34% Hyde 33% 30% Martin 28% 25% Nash 70% 65% Person 66% Pitt 40% Vance 68% 61% Warren 67% 63% Washington Wilson 47% 42%   Total 46% 43%

Phosphorus Accounting Method Tar-Pamlico & 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

Phosphorus Loss Tracking: Tar-Pamlico 2013 P Loss Indicators Parameter Units Baseline 1991 CY2013 Percent ‘91-‘13 change CY2013 P Loss Risk +/- Agricultural Land Acres 807,026 716,289 -13% - Cropland conversion (to grass & trees) 660 46,647 6,314% CRP / WRP (cumulative) 19241 41,833 117%  - Conservation tillage 41,415 52,185 13% Vegetated buffers (cumulative) 50,836 218,236 317% Water Control Structures (cumulative) Acres affected 52,984 90,356 68% -  Scavenger Crop 13,272 92,269 451% Animal waste P lbs of P/ yr 13,597,734 16,880,526 22% + Soil test P median P index 83 85 2.4%

Looking forward Funding for staff is critical, without which tasks would fall to the voluntary LACs & Oversight Committees for data compilation; staff also needed for BMP installation Committees will continue working with LACs and farmers to implement the rules and adopt nutrient-reduction BMPs Committees will continue to review data from all studies to incorporate into the process

Questions