A Project to Reduce Bacteria in Texas Waterways: Lone Star Healthy Streams Larry A. Redmon 1, Kevin L. Wagner 2, Robert K. Lyons 3, and Garrett Norman.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Little Canyon Creek Subwatershed Steelhead Trout Habitat Improvement Project Sponsored by: Lewis Soil Conservation District.
Advertisements

West Virginia Conservation Agency. Section 319 Non Point Source Program WVCA is the primary entity responsible for the implementation of the: Agriculture.
FARM BILL UPDATE. LAST FARM BILL: A LOT ACCOMPLISHED ON WORKING LANDS.
Grazing Management for Healthy Riparian Areas Authors: Gene Surber, MSU Extension Natural Resources Specialist Bob Ehrhart, Research Specialist, RWRP,
Delivering SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY Through the National Science and Technology Consortium.
Stream Corridors Christine Hall Natural Resources Conservation Service North Jersey RC&D Slides 1-12.
Watershed Approaches and Community Based Planning
Fecal Colform Bacteria Contamination during Rain Events in Sayler’s Creek, Virginia Blake N. Robertson Senior Honors Research Under the Supervision of.
Utilization of Remotely Sensed Data for Targeting and Evaluating Implementation of Best Management Practices within the Wister Lake Watershed, Oklahoma.
Listed on 303(d) list Organic enrichment causing depleted oxygen levels. Not sustaining the designated use for aquatic life because of low dissolved oxygen.
Whatcom CWP Partnership Whatcom County Planning and Development Whatcom County Health Whatcom County Public Works Whatcom Conservation District Nooksack.
Equine Environmental Stewardship: A Comprehensive Approach to Enhancing Adoption of Best Management Practices on Equine Operations DonnaFoulk 1, Ann Swinker.
Performance–based Incentives for Conservation in Agriculture (PICA)
RESULTS With increasing amounts of Novobiocin there was an obvious decrease in survival of colony forming units of bacteria (Fig. 8). Triclosan was more.
Mississippi Soil & Water Conservation Commission.
Incorporating the 9-Elements into a WMP Lindsey PhillipsMike Archer Source Water CoordinatorState Lakes Coordinator (402) (402)
A partnership between Wise Soil and Water Conservation District, Wise County Water Control and Improvement District #1, Wise County Commissioners Court,
2014 Federal Farm Bill Overview 3/14/14. Conservation Compliance 2 “Recoupling” federal crop insurance premium support benefits to HEL and wetland conservation.
Who does the monitoring?. State agency staff University/Extension Consultant Volunteer/citizens’ groups Soil & Water Conservation District, Irrigation.
Rick Koelsch University of Nebraska – Lincoln Bob Broz University of Missouri - Columbia.
A gricultural E nvironmental M anagement NYS Soil & Water Conservation Committee Department of Agriculture & Markets A E MA E M.
Approaches to Addressing Bacteria Impairments Kevin Wagner Texas Water Resources Institute.
Agroforestry Assistance §History §Technical §Financial.
Catoctin TMDL Project Proposal for New Initiatives to Loudoun Watershed Management Stakeholders Steering Committee Loudoun Watershed Watch Data Compilation.
New Jersey Local Work Group Pilot Project Camden County, Gloucester County, Freehold and Morris County Soil Conservation Districts.
Managing for a Higher Purpose. Your Leadership Role Assess local natural resource needs and issues Prioritize issues Set goals Coordinate human and financial.
Natural Resources Conservation Service
Catoctin Creek: A Stream in Distress Catoctin Watershed Project A Partnership of County and Citizen Organizations.
1. Natural Resources Conservation Service Strategic Plan Strategic Plan
Agriculture Enhancement Program West Virginia Conservation Agency.
Taking the Next Step: Implementing the TMDL. What IDEM Provides to Help With Implementation  Compiling all the data in one place  Data-driven recommendations.
Natural Resources Conservation Service Tom Krapf Assistant State Conservationist NRCS - Wisconsin The Regional Conservation Partnership Program.
Components For A Successful Precision Agricultural System In Citrus Scott L. Peterich Integrated GIS, Inc. January 21, 2004.
APPLYING CONSERVATION TO THE TEXAS LANDSCAPE Norman Bade, NRCS State Resource Conservationist Conservation Provisions of the 2002 Farm Bill (Farm Security.
La Moine River Ecosystem Partnership: Organizing for Success Dan Moorehouse & Jeff Boeckler.
LOWER L’ANGUILLE WATERSHED COST SHARE PATRICIA PERRY ST. FRANCIS COUNTY CONSERVATION DISTRICT.
Sediment & Nutrient Management in the L’Anguille River Watershed St. Francis County Cost Share Project Patricia Perry St. Francis County Conservation.
Costs and Benefits of Livestock Exclusion Fencing Spencer Duran.
Catoctin Creek TMDL Implementation Plan Development June 24, 2004.
Price Creek Watershed Project A joint project of the Iowa & Benton County Soil and Water Conservation Districts IOWATER Meeting – November 13, 2007.
T20-1 Soil Science and Management, 4E Chapter 20 Government Agencies and Programs.
Water Quality Monitoring in the Upper Illinois River Watershed and Upper White River Basin Project Brian E. Haggard University of Arkansas.
Reducing Nutrient Loads from the Opequon Creek Watershed Project Team Meeting Oct 19, 2007 Chesapeake Bay Targeted Watersheds Grant Program.
CENTRAL MUSCATATUCK WATERSHED. BMPs Cost-Shared by Central Muscatatuck Watershed Project.
Critique of North Branch of Sunrise River TMDL Nate Topie and Taylor Hoffman.
Coles Creek Watershed Assessment and Education Summary The Coles Creek Watershed, located in the southwestern quadrant of the state of Mississippi, with.
The Lake Okeechobee Protection Plan Evaluation Update, 2007 The Lake Okeechobee Protection Plan Evaluation Update February 8, 2007.
Manure Wastewater Handling & Storage Summary CNMP Core Curriculum Section 4 – Manure Wastewater Storage and Handling.
Conservation Provisions of the 2002 Farm Bill Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002.
Update by Alane Boyd, P.E.. Desert Rose Environmental.
Willow Lake Cobb Gauge site Sample site Mesonet site For more information: We gratefully acknowledge.
Presented By: Boone County Conservation District.
Volunteer/State Partnerships Inspire Grassroots Action Cheryl Snyder Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection.
USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Environmental Quality Improvement Program (EQIP) Edwards Aquifer State Resource Concern (EA SRC) Jim.
Introduction to the Regional Conservation Partnership Program (RCPP) June 10, 2016 Carol Rivera– Program Manager An Equal Opportunity Provider and Employer.
Introduction to Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations CAFOs Christina Richmond West Virginia Department of Agriculture.
Mary Apostolico Potomac Watershed Manager. Current Authorities for TMDL Process Federal Clean Water Act, § 303(d) - TMDL List & TMDL Development §303(e)
Wetlands Focus Group. Responsibilities and Goals   Growth Managements Act (Chapter 163, FS) of 1985   Included the adoption of the State Comprehensive.
Dodge County Water Monitoring Update
Andrew Lyon and Daniel Storm Biosystems and Agricultural Engineering
Drinking Water Source Protection Action Kit
Modeling Support for Attoyac Bayou Watershed– SELECT
Lower Rio Grande Valley Stormwater Conference
Texas Water Resources Institute
Water Quality Improvement Through Implementation of a Watershed Protection Plan in the Leon River Watershed Lower Rio Grande Valley Stormwater Conference.
Current VA Ag Initiatives
Water Quality Trading Advisory Committee MDA Headquarters
Water Quality Trading Advisory Committee MDA Headquarters
Groundwater Contamination Cases in Texas
Presentation transcript:

A Project to Reduce Bacteria in Texas Waterways: Lone Star Healthy Streams Larry A. Redmon 1, Kevin L. Wagner 2, Robert K. Lyons 3, and Garrett Norman 1 Introduction According to the DRAFT 2008 Water Quality Inventory and 303(d) List, 386 water bodies are impaired in Texas (Fig. 1). Of these, approximately half of the impairments are due to excessive bacteria. Bacterial source tracking work in a number of water bodies has identified a contribution from grazing cattle to the bacteria loading of these streams. Grazing lands, which represent the dominant land use in the majority of watersheds in Texas, have received little attention until recently regarding the effect of grazing livestock on water quality. Thus, implementation of watershed management practices on grazing lands are critical to the success of water resource protection efforts in the state. Landowner education and voluntary adoption of best management practices (BMPs) could substantially reduce bacterial contamination of streams and water bodies and reduce the likelihood of increased regulatory oversight. The Texas State Soil and Water Conservation Board (TSSWCB), local Soil and Water Conservation Districts and the USDA- NRCS support producers through technical assistance and cost-share programs enabling implementation of BMPs. For such measures to be effective, however, they must be properly implemented and managed to ensure sustainability. In addition, these practices must be compatible with the overall management system and not result in additional economic burden to agricultural producers. The goal of LONE STAR HEALTHY STREAMS is to reduce levels of bacteria in Texas watersheds from grazing beef cattle (Fig 2). This goal will be accomplished by: Developing an educational curriculum delivering current knowledge in production and environmental management of grazing lands and their associated watersheds, Evaluating and demonstrating effectiveness of value-added BMPs in reducing bacteria of streams in a pilot watershed, Testing the functionality of the education program and making necessary changes and program modifications based on the results of the pilot project, Promoting Statewide adoption of appropriate BMPs and other watershed/water quality protection activities through education, outreach and technology transfer. Funding for this project was provided by the TSSWCB with EPA 319 funds. Summary and Future Efforts The provision of alternative water decreased the time cattle spent in the riparian area of the study site stream and reduced the median daily loading of E. coli of the study site stream outflow. Currently Lone Star Healthy Streams is developing an educational program for state-wide distribution that informs producers about the issue of bacteria impairment of Texas waterways. A Beef Cattle Production BMP guide has also been developed as a companion piece for the educational program. Additional BMPs need to be evaluated in the same manner. 1 Texas AgriLife Extension Service, College Station 2 Texas Water Resources Institute, College Station 3 Texas AgriLife Extension Service, Uvalde TWRI Materials and Methods A perennial stream segment, the Clear Fork of the Plum Creek, in Caldwell County, TX, was selected to evaluate alternative water sources as a relevant BMP that could reduce the time grazing livestock spend in or near riparian areas. The Clear Fork, as well as Plum Creek, are listed on the state of Texas 303(d) list as impaired due to bacteria. Water to existing water troughs was terminated to force the cattle to obtain water from the stream segment. Water samples from the stream segment were obtained twice monthly for a 24-month period. One sample was obtained where the creek entered the cooperating landowner’s property and a second sample was obtained just as it left the landowner’s property. Water was analyzed for E. coli and expressed as colony forming units per 100 ml of water. Concurrently, during the middle of each season of the year (summer, autumn, winter, and spring), eight randomly selected beef cows residing on the property were fitted with GPS collars. The collars remained on the cows for approximately 21 days. Data points regarding the location of each cow was collected each five minutes. The data was analyzed to determine how much time the cows spent within close proximity to the stream with or without access to an alternative water source. Results Daily loadings of E. coli, expressed as billions of organisms, obtained from the twice-monthly water sampling are shown in Figure 2. The data indicate an overall contribution to the daily loading of E. coli by the cattle on the property where the trial was conducted. Of considerable interest, however, is that the median daily loading of E. coli was reduced from 1.8 billion organisms d -1 in the stream outflow to 0.2 billion organisms d -1 when alternative water sources were provided to the cattle (Table 1). Figure 3 offers an explanation as to why the daily loading of E. coli was reduced when alternative water was provided. Data obtained from the GPS collars indicated cattle spent 48%, 52%, and 53% less time in the 5m, 11m, and 15m riparian buffer zones when offered the alternative water source. Thus, as a BMP, even when there is continued full access to the stream, development of alternative water sources may be used to reduced the level of E. coli in waterways. This fact, coupled with the cost-share programs provided by NRCS, makes development of an alternative water source less of a financial burden for the beef cattle producer. Figure 1. Water quality impairments in Texas, 2008, TCEQ. 07/ /200907/2008 Figure 2. E. coli loading (billions organisms d -1 ) contained in stream inflow and outflow without alternative water source; with alternative water source. Figure 3. Percent time cattle spent in the riparian area without alternative water sources and with alternative water sources. YearTotal Load (Inflow) Total Load (Outflow) Total Contribution (Ranch) Median Daily Load (Inflow) Median Daily Load (Outflow) Median Daily Load (Ranch) Table 1. Total and median daily E. coli loadings (billions organism d -1 ) during Year 1 (without alternative water source) and Year 2 (with alternative water source.