STRATEGIC AND TACTICAL CHALLENGES FOR WATER MANAGEMENT IN THE CHESAPEAKE BAY WATERSHED Douglas Beegle, Distinguished Professor of Agronomy

Dept. of Plant Science

Penn State University

Chesapeake Bay Health

Chesapeake Bay Program

Ag Nutrient Management for Environmental Protection in the Chesapeake Bay

• What is causing the problem?

– Tactical - Management • Mismanagement

– Environmental – Economic

» Assumption: Economics should solve the problem . . . but that’s not happening?

• On the farm focus • Regulations • Education

– Strategic - Systemic • Economics are driving the problem,

not the solution • Structure of agricultural systems • Regional nutrient imbalance • Beyond the farm focus

• Solutions must address both strategic and tactical issues

Traditional Animal Ag Nutrient Flows

Crops

Local Animals

Soil

¼

¾

Manure

Fertilizer

$

In 1881 the PA

Supreme Court

ruled that manure

was part of the

“realty” of the

farm.

Why is there a pollution problem with nutrients?

• Prior to WW II, most farms relatively feed self-sufficient traditional farms – Main source of N was legumes and manure

• Nitrate plants built for explosives in WW II – Converted to fertilizer production after the war

– Enabled grain production on farms without animal manure and legumes to supply N

• Facilitated specialization – Specialization

• Farms in the “corn belt” grew corn

• Farms in places like PA fed that corn to animals

– Concentration of ag industries

$

Contemporary Animal Ag Nutrient Flow

Soil

Crops

Feed mill

$

- $

¼

-$

Animals

¾

Manure ? ? ?

Global

Externality $?

(~ $900 M/yr) Shortle, et al, 2013

Nutrient Imbalance

Maguire et al., 2007

Bay Watershed Model

• PA Nutrient Management Act

• PA Clean Streams Law

• Federal Clean Water Act: AFO/CAFO

• Chesapeake Bay TMDL

• Bay Watershed Model

All focus on changing on-farm management!

On-farm management has been at the core of Bay restoration efforts

Progress in the Chesapeake Bay

• BMP based programs – Significant progress. . . But

not enough progress

– Relatively low hanging fruit

– Progress may be slowing

– Economic of going forward with this same approach are not sustainable

• Strategic approaches – Real progress requires

strategic approaches that address the fundamental underlying systemic problem

• Nutrient Imbalance

– Internalize the environmental costs

Chesapeake Bay Program

Strategic Conflict Between Economic Production and the Environmental Protection

Social Pressure

Non-Market Env.

Outputs

Adapted from Lanyon, 2000

Food

Economic Forces

Market

Current Policy

Response

BM

Ps

Economic externality!

Some Public

Funding

Farm

Production

Decisions

$

Contemporary Animal Ag Nutrient Flow

Soil

Crops

Feed mill

$

- $

¼

-$

Animals

¾

Manure ? ? ?

Global

Externality $?

(~ $900 M/yr) Shortle, et al, 2013

Env.

Strategic Solution to Food Production and the Environment

Production

Decisons

Economic Power Economic/Social Signals

Adapted from Lanyon, 2000

Market BMPs

We need to internalize the environmental

costs of food production . . . Somehow?

Food

Outputs

Contemporary Animal Ag Nutrient Flow

Soil

Crops

Feed mill

Global

¼

Externality $?

Animals

¾

Manure ? ? ?

$

Addressing the Real Solution to the Nutrient Management Problem?

• This is not an just agricultural issue it is a food issue

Producing food in a way that causes less pollution is more expensive . . . How are we going to pay that cost?

• Will require changes and restructuring in our food systems – In government policy – On the farm – In the home/grocery store

• Nutrient management is a complex socioeconomic/environmental problem within a complex ecosystem – Limited Resources

• Balance Idealism & Realism • Cost/benefits - Targeting

– Understand variability and uncertainty – Continued emphasis on science and education

• More emphasis strategic issues

Summary • Understand and address both the systemic and management issues

• Major progress has been made in many segments of the food production system resulting in significant improvements in water quality

– Improved agronomic efficiency

– Improved animal production efficiency

– Improved nutrient management systems

• Integrate nutrient management into systems focusing on outcomes not activities

– Set the objectives and give managers the freedom to come up with solutions

– Encourage individual innovation

– Don’t dictate practices, especially one size fits all prescriptions

• Greater emphasis on solutions to the systemic issues

– Relieve the strategic conflict between production and the environment

– Encourage public and private strategic innovation

Douglas Beegle

dbb@psu.edu

Pennsylvania Nutrient Management Program

http://panutrientmgmt.cas.psu.edu

Penn State Extension Crop Management Team

http://cmeg.psu.edu

Penn State Extension

http://extension.psu.edu