Grazing Management Effects on Non-point Source Pollution of Pasture Streams J.R. Russell 1, D.A. Bear 1, K.A. Schwarte 1, and M. Haan 2 1 Iowa State University,

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Lawyer Creek Steelhead Trout Habitat Improvement Project presented by: Lewis Soil Conservation District.
Advertisements

Phosphorus Loads from Streambank Erosion to Surface Waters in the Minnesota River Basin D. J. Mulla Professor, Dept. Soil, Water, Climate University of.
Phosphorus and Potassium CNMP Core Curriculum Section 5 – Nutrient Management.
©2003 Institute of Water Research, all rights reserved Water Quality Modeling for Ecological Services under Cropping and Grazing Systems Da Ouyang Jon.
Baraboo River Watershed RCPP
Riparian Zone Habitat Assessment Vegetation and More.
Relationship between size of vegetative buffers and transport of fecal coliform bacteria from pasturelands treated with dairy cow manure T. Sullivan,
REMM: Riparian Ecosystem Management Model USDA-Agricultural Research Service University of Georgia California State University – Chico USDA-Natural Resources.
Defining Land Management in the Wisconsin River Basin Defining Land Management in the Wisconsin River Basin Adam Freihoefer Wisconsin Department of Natural.
How Management Effects Nutrient and Sediment Losses Dennis FrameFred Madison Directors UW Discovery Farms Program.
OKLAHOMA STATE UNIVERSITY Biosystems and Agricultural Engineering Department Hydrology 101 OKLAHOMA STATE UNIVERSITY Biosystems and Agricultural Engineering.
Water Pollution. Watershed A watershed is an area of land from which all the water drains to the same location, such as a stream, pond, lake, river, wetland.
Major Rivers in the United States Eric Angat Teacher.
ANIMAL-RELATED ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES THAT MAY BE CONTROLLED BY ANIMAL MANAGEMENT Nitrogen Phosphorus Odors Greenhouse gases Sediment Species diversity.
Way’s Livestock Affect Environmental Quality Excess manure nutrients –Fecal Nutrients N and N-containing components P Trace minerals –Urinary nutrients.
This training was prepared by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) team of Otto Gonzalez-USDA Foreign Agricultural Service (Team Leader), Jon Fripp.
Watersheds Capture, Store And Safely Release Water.
Surface Erosion and Control Ali Fares, PhD Watershed Hydrology, NREM662 UHM-CTAHR-NREM.
Determining the effectiveness of best management practices to reduce nutrient loading from cattle grazed pastures in Utah Nicki Devanny Utah State University,
Agricultural Nonpoint Source Pollution and Water Quality as a function of Land Management Practices on Four Kansas Farms William W. Spotts Dr. Donald Huggins.
Soil Fertility and Nutrient Cycling in Grazed Systems Miguel L. Cabrera Crop & Soil Sciences University of Georgia.
WATER USE IN LIVESTOCK SYSTEMS. Water consumption Factors affecting water consumption –Dry feed intake Water/dry feed (w/w) Pigs2 Lactating sows3 Horses.
Streamside Grazing in Indiana. Indiana Streams: Are a precious natural resource Provide clean water for a variety of human uses as well as habitat for.
Greg Jennings, PhD, PE Professor, Biological & Agricultural Engineering North Carolina State University BAE 579: Stream Restoration Lesson.
Visual Environmental Education Guide Eutrophication Tracing Nutrient Pollution Back to Penns Creek.
The Effects of Grazing Management on Water Quality Kirk Schwarte Iowa State University
Catoctin Creek: A Stream in Distress Catoctin Watershed Project A Partnership of County and Citizen Organizations.
TMDLs on the Clearwater River Fecal Coliform Impairment of the Trout Stream Portion of the Clearwater River By Corey Hanson Water Quality Coordinator Red.
Grass controls erosion…but does grazing cause nutrient pollution?  % of N and P ingested passes thru the cow.  kg N/ha/yr directly under.
Grazing Management 101 Basic Concepts
Materials Transport & NSCD Material Classes Velocity to Transport Relationships York NSCD Restoration PSY CCREP.
Elaine Snouwaert – WA Department of Ecology Walt Edelen – Spokane Conservation District Spokane River DO Advisory Group Meeting January 19, 2012.
Nonpoint Source Management Plan: Issues and Opportunities Greg Anderson Nonpoint Source Coordinator MO DNR.
The Importance of Watershed Modeling for Conservation Policy Or What is an Economist Doing at a SWAT Workshop?
Oregon Case Studies Ryan Johnson. Studies  The response of impounded sediment to a culvert replacement project on Sutter Creek, a tributary of Honey.
Chapter 15 Issues in Water Quality. What is Water Quality? Physical –Sufficient flow to sustain fish and aquatics –Enough pools and riffles –Riparian.
Field Specific Decisions: N vs P CNMP Core Curriculum Section 5 – Nutrient Management.
Inland Wetlands Alternate Names: Marshes, bogs, swamps Presented by: VC and AMB.
Assorted Issues in Grazing System Design Dennis Chessman State Grazing Land Specialist USDA-NRCS, Athens, GA.
Timeline Impaired for turbidity on Minnesota’s list of impaired waters (2004) MPCA must complete a study to determine the total maximum daily load (TMDL)
Watersheds Chapter 9. Watershed All land enclosed by a continuous hydrologic drainage divide and lying upslope from a specified point on a stream All.
Natural vs. Accelerated Soil Erosion Natural geologic erosion has occurred at a relatively slow rate since the earth was formed. Natural erosion produces.
CACHE CREEK WATERSHED Watershed Overview –Physical Description –Land Uses Present –Flow Characteristics –Beneficial Uses Point and Non-Point Source Pollutants.
CENTRAL MUSCATATUCK WATERSHED. BMPs Cost-Shared by Central Muscatatuck Watershed Project.
Critique of North Branch of Sunrise River TMDL Nate Topie and Taylor Hoffman.
How Great Lakes Observations Can Work For You: A Case Study in Agriculture (Scott Piggott, Michigan Farm Bureau)
Ch. 1: “Watersheds and Wetlands” Lesson 1.5: “Factors That Affect Wetlands and Watersheds” Part 2.
15 Feet : Minimum Width for Zone 1 Zone 1 Functions: Bank Stabilization Shading (water temperature control) Flood Protection Stream Inputs: Structural.
Beef Cattle Management for Water Quality Protection Dirk Philipp University of Arkansas Animal Science Department October 2012.
Iowa BMPs for soil erosion prevention. BMP context BMPs needed for managed land (duh!) Strategies differ by land- use – Ag/crops (>71%) +/- CRP, etc –
New Mexico Watershed Watch Your school name and river name This project funded by the NM Dept. Of Game & Fish and the Sports Fish Restoration Program.
Land Uses & Water Pollution Sources By Joan Schumaker Chadde, Western U.P. Center for Science, Mathematics and Environmental Education. All photos by Chadde,
Effects of N Loadings from Dairy Cows to the Susquehanna River Effects of N Loadings from Dairy Cows to the Susquehanna River Austin Weidner CE394K : GIS.
Precision Management beyond Fertilizer Application Hailin Zhang.
Impacts of Livestock Waste on Surface Water Quality By the North Dakota Department of Health Division of Water Quality For the Livestock Manure Nutrient.
Human Impacts Part 2- Watersheds. What’s a Watershed? An area of land that drains into a common body of water.
Effects of Stream Restoration: A Comparative Study of Pine Run in Felton, Pennsylvania Luke Mummert, Department of Biological Sciences, York College of.
Introduction to Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations CAFOs Christina Richmond West Virginia Department of Agriculture.
Riparian Buffers for Water Resource Protection Michael R. Burchell II Associate Professor and Extension Specialist Department of Biological and Agricultural.
Agricultural Soil and Water Conservation Stewardship
Andrew Lyon and Daniel Storm Biosystems and Agricultural Engineering
Christina Curell, Central Region Water Quality Educator
Hydrosphere Notes Part 9-Land Use.
Challenges Facing Riparian Ecosystems
Total Maximum Daily Loads of Fecal Coliform for the Restricted Shellfish Harvesting/Growing Areas of the Pocomoke River in the Lower Pocomoke River Basin.
Land Uses & Water Pollution Sources
Riparian Vegetation.
Land Uses & Water Pollution Sources
Environmental problems caused by Dairy Farming
Karl Williard and Jon Schoonover Department of Forestry
Presentation transcript:

Grazing Management Effects on Non-point Source Pollution of Pasture Streams J.R. Russell 1, D.A. Bear 1, K.A. Schwarte 1, and M. Haan 2 1 Iowa State University, Ames, IA 2 Michigan State University, Hickory Corners, MI

IMPAIRMENTS TO IOWA’S WATER RESOURCES 2008 Impaired Waters List (357 streams & 77 lakes) (Iowa DNR, 2008)

ANNUAL SEDIMENT, PHOSPHORUS, AND NITROGEN LOADING OF ROCK CREEK LAKE FROM TRIBUTARIES WITH DIFFERENT PROPORTIONS OF PASTURELAND (Downing et al., 2000)

PHOSPHORUS DELIVERY TO THE GULF OF MEXICO (Alexander et al., 2008) /

HYPOTHETICAL ROUTES OF NONPOINT SOURCE POLLUTION BY GRAZING CATTLE Direct manure deposition Stream bank erosion or is it cut bank erosion? Surface run-off

CONCENTRATIONS OF NITRATE-N, TOTAL P,TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS, AND E. COLI IN WATER SAMPLES TAKEN DURING HIGH FLOW EVENTS UPSTREAM AND DOWNSTREAM OF A 10-ACRE PASTURE (Vidon et al., 2007)

CONCENTRATIONS OF NITRATE-N, TOTAL P,TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS, AND E. COLI IN WATER SAMPLES TAKEN DURING HIGH FLOW EVENTS UPSTREAM AND DOWNSTREAM OF A 10-ACRE PASTURE GRAZED BY 25 COWS YEAR-ROUND (Vidon et al., 2007)

FACTORS CONTROLLING THE EFFECTS OF GRAZING ON WATER QUALITY Location of grazing Timing of grazing Intensity of grazing Length of grazing (CAST, 2002)

EFFECTS OF COW DISTRIBUTION ON DISTRIBUTION OF FECES AND URINE IN PASTURES

MODEL FOR QUANTIFYING THE EFFECTS OF GRAZING MANAGEMENT ON NONPOINT SOURCE POLLUTION OF PASTURE STREAMS Pollutant concentration or frequency Cattle #s Grazing DaysStream Length Cow-days/ft Diet intake and indigestibility Fecal Pollutant Load or Incidence Distribution Grazing management Plant species Shade distribution Stream Riparian zone Open area Congregation area Transport in runoff Transport in runoff Stream Climate Off-stream water

EFFECTS OF AMBIENT TEMPERATURE ON THE PROBABILITY OF GRAZING COWS BEING IN AND WITHIN 100 ft OF A STREAM OR POND IN PASTURES ON FIVE FARMS OVER THREE YEARS

EFFECTS OF PASTURE SIZE ON THE CONGREGATION OF GRAZING COWS IN AND WITHIN 100 ft OF A PASTURE STREAM OR POND ON SIX PASTURES OVER THREE YEARS y = x x 2 (r 2 =0.61)

IMPLICATIONS OF PASTURE SIZE AND SHAPE ON CATTLE TEMPORAL/SPATIAL DISTRIBUTION RESEARCH Ref. (State)Approx. pasture size, ac TreatmentEst. distance from treatment to stream, ft Stream and/or riparian effects Sheffield et al., 1997 (VA) Offstream water 37Reduced congregation Porath et al., 2002 (OR) 30Offstream water 1600Reduced congregation Byers et al., 2005 (GA) 42Offstream water 296Reduced congregation “35Offstream water 263No significant effect on congregation Agouridis et al., 2005 (KY) 5 – 7.5Offstream water 230No effect on congregation Line et al., 2000 (NC) 104Offstream water 338No effect on NPS

IMPLICATIONS OF PASTURE SIZE AND SHAPE ON CATTLE TEMPORAL/SPATIAL DISTRIBUTION Regulatory Treatments to control NPS of pasture streams seem likely to be most effective on small or narrow pastures.

PERCENTAGE OF TIME GRAZING CATTLE ARE IN AND WITHIN 110 ft OF A PASTURE STREAM IN TWO YEARS 30 ac pastures 463 ft stream reach (Haan et al., 2010) CSU = Continuous stocking unrestricted

EFFECT OF RESTRICTING STREAM ACCESS TO STABILIZED CROSSING ON CONGREGATION OF CATTLE IN OR NEAR PASTURE STREAMS IN TWO YEARS (Haan et al., 2010) CSU = Continuous stocking unrestricted CSR = Continuous stocking restricted

EFFECT OF RESTRICTING STREAM ACCESS BY ROTATIONAL GRAZING ON CATTLE CONGREGATION IN OR NEAR PASTURE STREAMS IN TWO YEARS (Haan et al., 2010) CSU = Continuous stocking unrestricted CSR = Continuous stocking restricted RS = Rotational stocking

EFFECT OF SHORT- TERM ACCESS TO OFFSTREAM WATER AND MINERAL SUPPLEMENTATION ON CONGREGATION OF CATTLE IN OR NEAR PASTURE STREAMS CSU = Continuous stocking unrestricted CSR = Continuous stocking restricted w/W or open = with offstream water and mineral

EFFECT OF OFF-STREAM WATER OR RESTRICTED STREAM ACCESS ON CONGREGATION OF CATTLE WITHIN 110 FT OF A PASTURE STREAM IN 10 (small) OR 30 (large) ACRE PASTURES OVER 5 MONTHS (2010)

RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE PROPORTION OF TIME THAT CATTLE ARE WITHIN 110 FT OF A STREAM AND THE PROPORTION OF PASTURE AREA WITHIN THAT AREA

CONSIDER ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS

EFFECTS OF BLACK GLOBE TEMPERATURE-HUMIDITY INDEX ON THE PROBABILITY OF CONGREGATION OF CATTLE WITHIN 33 m OF A PASTURE STREAM IN TWO GRAZING SEASONS CSU = Continuous stocking unrestricted CSR = Continuous stocking restricted

EFFECT OF THE TEMPERATURE-HUMIDITY INDEX ON THE AMOUNTS OF TIME CATTLE WERE IN THE RIPARIAN AREAS OF BERMUDAGRASS-TALL FESCUE PASTURES WITH OR WITHOUT OFFSTREAM WATER (Franklin et al. 2009)

EFFECTS OF AMBIENT TEMPERATURE ON THE PROBABILITY OF COWS SEEKING SHADE (Haan et al., 2010)

EFFECTS OF PASTURE SIZE ON THE PROBABILITIES OF CATTLE PRESENCE IN SHADE IN THE TOTAL PASTURE OR RIPARIAN ZONE

EFFECTS OF GRAZING MANAGEMENT ON NONPOINT SOURCE POLLUTION OF PASTURE STREAMS

EFFECTS OF STOCKING RATE BETWEEN MEASUREMENT PERIODS ON STREAM BANK EROSION MEASURED QUARTERLY ON 13 FARMS IN THE RATHBUN LAKE WATERSHED OVER THREE YEARS

EFFECTS OF GRAZING MANAGEMENT ON ANNUAL EROSION/DEPOSITION ACTIVITY AND NET EROSION OF STREAM BANKS IN 2008 AND 2009

GRAZING MANAGEMENT MAY NOT ALWAYS PREVENT STREAM BANK EROSION

EFFECTS OF STOCKING RATE BETWEEN BIMONTHLY MEASUREMENTS OF THE PROPORTION OF BARE AND MANURE- COVERED GROUND WITHIN 50 FT OF STREAMS IN 13 PASTURES y = x – 0.314x 2 (r 2 =0.16) y = x – 0.009x 2 (r 2 =0.35)

GRAZING SYSTEM EFFECTS ON PROPORTIONS OF BARE AND MANURE-COVERED GROUND WITHIN 15 TO 110 FT OF PASTURE STREAMS CSU = Continuous stocking unrestricted CSR = Continuous stocking restricted RS = Rotational stocking

GRAZING SYSTEM EFFECTS ON PROPORTIONS OF APPLIED PRECIPITATION AND AMOUNTS OF SEDIMENT AND P TRANSPORTED IN RUNOFF FROM SIMULATED RAIN APPLIED TO BARE AND VEGETATED SITES ON STREAMBANKS AT 7.5 cm/hr (P < 0.10) aa a a a a b b b b b b cc c

CONTRIBUTIONS OF PRECIPITATION RUNOFF, DIRECT FECAL DEPOSITION, AND CUT BANK EROSION TO ANNUAL SEDIMENT LOADING OF PASTURE STREAMS CSU = Continuous stocking unrestricted CSR = Continuous stocking restricted RS = Rotational stocking

CONTRIBUTIONS OF PRECIPITATION RUNOFF, DIRECT FECAL DEPOSITION, AND CUT BANK EROSION TO ANNUAL SEDIMENT LOADING OF PASTURE STREAMS CSU = Continuous stocking unrestricted CSR = Continuous stocking restricted RS = Rotational stocking

CONTRIBUTIONS OF PRECIPITATION RUNOFF, DIRECT FECAL DEPOSITION, AND CUT BANK EROSION TO ANNUAL PHOSPHORUS LOADING OF PASTURE STREAMS CSU = Continuous stocking unrestricted CSR = Continuous stocking restricted RS = Rotational stocking

CONTRIBUTIONS OF PRECIPITATION RUNOFF, DIRECT FECAL DEPOSITION, AND CUT BANK EROSION TO ANNUAL PHOSPHORUS LOADING OF PASTURE STREAMS CSU = Continuous stocking unrestricted CSR = Continuous stocking restricted RS = Rotational stocking

GRAZING SYSTEMS EFFECTS ON STREAM BANK EROSION SUSCEPTIBILITY (1 – 60) OVER FIVE YEARS CSU = Continuous stocking unrestricted CSR = Continuous stocking restricted RS = Rotational stocking

ROLE OF GRAZING CATTLE ON PATHOGEN LOADING OF PASTURE STREAMS

STOCKING RATE EFFECTS ON MEAN CONCENTRATIONS OF TOTAL COLIFORMS IN BIWEEKLY WATER SAMPLES FROM UP- AND DOWNSTREAM SAMPLING SITES IN 13 PASTURES OVER 3 YEARS

STOCKING RATE EFFECTS ON THE INCIDENCES OF BOVINE ENTEROVIRUS (BEV), CORONAVIRUS (BCV), AND ROTAVIRUS (BRV) IN BIWEEKLY WATER SAMPLES FROM STREAMS IN 13 PASTURES FOR THREE YEARS BEV: y = x x 2 (r 2 =0.0101) BCV: y = x-0.015x 2 (r 2 =0.0345) BRV: y = x x2 (r 2 =0.0708)

CONCLUSIONS Stream bank erosion is primarily related to hydrologic processes that supersede possible grazing effects Improper grazing management may increase: –Bare ground near pasture streams –Manure concentration near pasture streams –Sediment and nutrient loading of precipitation runoff Pathogen loading of pasture streams by grazing cattle is: –Poorly related to presence of total coliforms Bovine enterovirus may be a better indicator –Confounded by upstream loading Domestic and wildlife species –Rare and controlled by: Seasonal incidence of shedding of the pathogens Manure distribution Transport of the pathogens to the stream

CONCLUSIONS Risks of grazing on nonpoint source pollution of pasture streams may be controlled by maintaining streamside vegetation through use of: –Stabilized crossings with riparian buffers –Rotational grazing –Off-stream shade? –Off-stream water and/or nutrient supplementation???

BOTTOM LINE The Best Management Practices to control nonpoint source pollution on individual pastures will be site specific. –Small, narrow pastures will likely need more restrictive practices to control distribution of grazing cattle than large, wide pastures –Other characteristics to consider Cattle stocking rate Cattle breed, age, and physiological state Distance to off-stream water Shade distribution Botanical composition Stream order and evolution

Acknowledgements: This project is supported in part by: The Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, under Award No The Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, under Award No The Leopold Center for Sustainable Agriculture Iowa Beef Center Rathbun Land and Water Alliance

EFFECTS OF PRESENCE OR ABSENCE OF CATTLE IN PASTURES FOR 0 TO 6 DAYS PRIOR TO SAMPLING ON THE INCIDENCES OF BOVINE ENTEROVIRUS, CORONAVIRUS, AND ROTAVIRUS IN UP- OR DOWNSTREAM WATER SAMPLES FROM 13 PASTURES FOR 3 YEARS

INCIDENCE OF BOVINE ENTEROVIRUS AND CORONAVIRUS SHED BY 90 GRAZING COWS IN 3 MONTHS OVER TWO YEARS (No E. coli O157:H7 or Bovine rotavirus shed)

INCIDENCE OF BOVINE ENTEROVIRUS IN RUNOFF FROM RAINFALL SIMULATIONS ON STREAM BANKS OF PASTURES WITH UNRESTRICTED STREAM ACCESS IN TWO YEARS (No E. coli O157:H7, Bovine coronavirus, or Bovine rotavirus observed )