Date post: | 05-Dec-2014 |
Category: |
Environment |
Upload: | soil-and-water-conservation-society |
View: | 150 times |
Download: | 0 times |
69th Soil and Water Conservation Society ConferenceJuly 28-30, 2014Jennifer Filipiak, Natural Resources CoordinatorAmerican Farmland Trust ©Champaign SWCD
Evolution of the Upper Salt Fork Watershed:
from wildlife habitat and flooding to the Mississippi River Basin Initiative and water quality
Upper Salt Fork Watershed
90% Champaign County
Popn. 200,000+ 381 mi2 Land grant
University Very productive ag NRCS state HQ 5 watersheds! IEPA impaired
stream segments
©Champaign SWCD
Upper Salt Fork Watershed
Glacial moraines bound the watershed
80% row crop Flat and Fertile
©NRES, University of Illinois ©Champaign SWCD
©Champaign SWCD
44 drainage districts!
• 1879 first drainage district
• 1950s cattle industry in decline
• Boneyard Creek:• 1948-2007• Increasing peak flows
• Responsible for free flow w/in the drainage district
Localized flood events 1990, 1994
Watershed Planning
IEPA 319 grant
Led by SWCD, steering committee formed
©Champaign SWCD
Channel maintenance, fish kill
©Champaign SWCD
Active stakeholders
Riverwatch 1996-2003
Stream Teams –2004 –
Audubon bird surveys
USGS stream gages, IEPA since 1966
©Champaign SWCD
©Champaign SWCD
2006: Implementation!
©Champaign SWCD
Overview of goals/objectives2006 Water quality:
70% adoption of practices! More aquatic wildlife habitat, in-stream practices. Homer Lake aesthetics/recreation
Flooding and channel stewardship: Reach consensus! Improve stormwater
storage. Computer modeling. Terrestrial wildlife: Promote programs, landowner education
Public Information and Education: hire a coordinator
Results of goals/objectives2006 - 2011
Water quality: 40% adoption achieved – barriers equipment,
lack of knowledge. Aquatic habitat – funding, permitting (one
project just approved) Flooding and channel stewardship: Consensus reached! Funding, staffing…
Terrestrial wildlife: Public Information and Education: Funding, inconsistent staffing
Reducing nutrient losses
2008 Gulf Hypoxia plan 2011: MRBI + CIG + Walton + McKnight SWCD, U of I, Reetz Agronomics
©NRES, University of Illinois
Nutrients, nutrients, nutrients!MRBI 590 Nutrient mgt. 329 Strip till 340 Cover crops 554 Drainage
water management
799 Monitoring
CIG – BMP Challenge Replicates mid-
Atlantic model Risk “insurance” Provide TA
KIC 2025 Council on BMPs Use the 4 R’s Nutrient efficiency
©AFT
Watershed success factors
Flitcroft, et al. 2010. Trust: the critical element for successful watershed management. Ecology and Society 15(3): r3.
Ohio State Extension: The Ohio Watershed Network
World Resources Institute, 2013 review of MRBI
Boone River Watershed Evaluation, Enloe et al. Iowa State University, 2013
©Champaign SWCD
Watershed success factors Stakeholder engagement, stakeholder and producer buy in Public/private partnerships SMART, Quantitative goals Appropriate scale Management Plan is a startingpoint, and adaptive Sound Science, monitoring, evaluation Monitor social AND environmental change
©AFT
Relationships take time!
What we’ve learned since 2011: You only get one chance to make a
bad impression… Farmer leaders aren’t in the sub-
watershed with the best monitoring! Anhydrous ammonia and the BMP
challenge Cover crops: financial barrier? Or
equipment barrier: establishment, yield questions
Solutions Cover crop cost share: 1 page Progressive field days Tool bars for spring application Very engaged District sub-committees
©AFT
Conclusions
Watersheds: we know what works! Patience – the culture, relationships,
extenuating circumstances Develop a plan, but be flexible, look
for the true barriers.
©AFT
Upper Salt Fork – success?
Frustrations - funding, staffing, stop/start, but… Keep monitoring Taking time to evaluate Updating the implementation plan
©Champaign SWCD
Jen Filipiak, [email protected]
American Farmland Trust –saving the land that sustains us by
protecting farm and ranchland, promoting sound farming practices and keeping
farmers on the landwww.farmland.org
©Lussier Photography