1. 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

2. Neuse & Tar-Pamlico River Basins

3. 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)

4. 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 (Neuse) & 1991 (Tar-Pam)
Basin Oversight Committees & Local Advisory Committees
Develop accounting tools, track & report progress
Assist with implementation

5. 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

6. 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.

7. 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

8. 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%

9. 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%

10. 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

11. 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%

12. 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

13. Questions