Agenda

1. Conservation Innovation GrantIntroductory MeetingNovember 9, 2006Institute of Water ResearchMichigan State UniversityEast Lansing, MI

2. Agenda 1. Introductions All 2. Targeting Conservation Practices: the proactive approach Institute of Water Research 3. High Impact Targeting Demonstration Institute of Water Research 4. Background and Organizational Structure MDA & Institute of Water Research 5. Opportunities and Roles All 6. Discussion, Feedback, Questions All 7. Next Steps All

3. The Need to Target Proactively 3

4. High Impact Targeting (HIT) HIT is a web-accessible system that allows users to identify and prioritize, at multiple-scales, areas at high-risk for sediment loading. The data delivered through HIT are the product of results from the Spatially Explicit Delivery Model (SEDMOD)¹ and the Revised Universal Soil Loss Equation (RUSLE)². • Fraser. May 1999 • Renard, Foster, Weesies, McCool, Yoder. 1996.

5. SEDMOD/RUSLE Methodology SEDMOD Land Cover Surface Roughness Delivery Ratio Soil Texture Weighting Soil Clay Content Distance to Stream DEM Sediment Yield LS Factor C Factor Landuse/Tillage K Factor Soil Erosion Soil Erodibility R Factor Rainfall P Factor Support Practice RUSLE

6. Prioritization of 8-digit HUCs Using 90m Resolution Data(Great Lakes Basin) Estimated Potential Sediment LoadingContributed from Cropland (tons/yr.) Source: Ouyang, Bartholic, Selegean (2005)

7. Prioritization of 12-digit HUCs Using 10m Resolution Data (Lower Maumee River Watershed – NW Ohio)

8. Applying BMP (no-till) on highest risk acres in contrasting watersheds

9. Slide “A” shows a 30 square mile area of watershed that can be examined to rapidly locate and magnify high risk contributing areas. 9

10. “B” shows an enlarged map area 10

11. 2,000 feet 0 “C” shows further enlargement with a photographic image of the area. C

12. 2,000 feet 0 “D” shows this resolution with the photo overlaid with the sediment risk layer. D

13. 1,000 feet 0 Specific problem areas can be interpreted from slide “E” by overlaying the sediment risk layer over the photograph. E

14. Slide “F” shows contour lines and three example areas of high sediment delivery. F 2 1 3 1) High sediment deliveries 2) Potential concentrated flow 3) High sediment delivery no riparian buffer

15. Line of Sight in Blue,Model-predicted Flow in Yellow

16. Line of Sight in Blue,Traces of Gullies in Yellow

17. Closer Look at Trace of a Gully

18. Upstream Site Installed Grass Buffer If an existing BMP GIS layer is available, it can be incorporated into the model to further improve targeting efforts.

19. Benefits and Limitations of the Methodology • Benefits • Allows for prioritization of areas with a high risk for sediment loading • Watershed and field-level resolutions • Spatially distributed C-factor (weighted and averaged by county-level tillage data from CTIC) • Limitations • RUSLE does not account for ephemeral gully erosion • 10 meter resolution DEMs not available for all areas • SEDMOD processing can take over a week to finish

20. In order to realize the benefits of the HIT modeling process, the data needs to be readily available to decision makers. Making the Data Web-Accessible: HIT front page. User selects a watershed.

21. Making the Data Web-Accessible: Users can choose from multiple scales and formats to view data. User has the option to view data for the entire 8-digit watershed in three formats: Tabular Bar Graph Spatial Those options are also available for viewing sub-watersheds of the 8-digit watershed. In this example, the user chooses to compare sub-watersheds, instead of looking at just one.

22. Making the Data Web-Accessible: Build a results table Sediment data will be analyzed. Several watersheds will be compared. Cost benefit analyses will be run for each of two BMPs: No Till on the worst 5% of areas Mulch till on the worst 5% of areas Totals and rates will be calculated for each sub-watershed.

23. Making the Data Web-Accessible: Table Results

24. Making the Data Web-Accessible: Closer look at the tabular results BMP cost/acre provided by NRCS. HIT uses NRCS value to calculate total cost of BMP in a particular watershed. Results sorted by BMP cost per ton reduction (by clicking on column title). This can help an organization determine where (and which) conservation efforts will yield the maximum return in sediment reduction within its budget.

25. Making the Data Web-Accessible: Same data displayed in the table is also available in bar graph format.

26. Making the Data Web-Accessible: Viewing the data spatially If Wade Creek is identified as the targeted watershed, the user can use HIT to connect to Digital Watershed in order to explore Wade Creek’s high risk areas spatially.

27. Future Expansion of HIT • More options for entering the system • Increase the BMP options • Ability to query results • Expand number of watersheds modeled

28. HIT Summary • SEDMOD/RUSLE methodology facilitates prioritization of areas in terms of sediment loading at the watershed, sub-watershed, and field levels. • HIT system makes SEDMOD/RUSLE results readily accessible over the web. • HIT allows results to be explored in either tabular, bar graph, or spatial formats. • Empowers conservation districts, field staff, and agricultural operators to target areas at high-risk for sediment loading.

29. 35.9.116.206/hit/hit.asp

30. CIG Technical Flow Determine reduction targets Develop and deliver outreach plan Monitoring Model sediment yield in select watersheds Build and refine on-line HIT system Interface with Provide user feedback Feedback provided by a Technical Advisory Committee NRCS MDEQ MDA Year 1 Cost/benefit analysis of BMPs Conservation Districts On-going IWR Year 1 Year 1-Year 2 Year 1 Farmers CIG Specialists On-going On-going CREP Technicians On-going

31. Other inputs Water quality info Estimate levels of farmer participation Identify high risk erosion areas Composition of Advisory Committee and Planned Inputs Representatives of MACD Farm Bureau MDEQ IWR Watershed Orgs MDNR FSA NRCS MSUE Advisory CommitteeInputs MDA Identify Targeted Sub-watersheds

32. HIT utility Outreach effectiveness Modeling improvements Composition of IWR Technical Committee Representatives of CIG Specialists MACD Farm Bureau Watershed Orgs FSA NRCS MSU Ag Engineering MDA CREP Technicians Technical CommitteeInputs IWR Ease of system use Refine and enhance HIT technical capacity

33. Quantify reductions in sediment loadings Estimate long term water quality improvements Number of farmers and organizations receiving conservation education Participants and enrolled acres as a % of potential participants and acres Unique hits on HIT website CIG Program Evaluation MDA Conservation Districts IWR MDEQ Provides

34. Opportunities and Roles • How will NRCS, MDA, and IWR determine sediment reduction “targets”? • Use HIT models to come up with numbers to shoot for. • Utilize the specialists to do some ground-truthing, get a sense if the worst 5% of areas predicted by the HIT model are actually the worst 5%. • We need to remember that these are targets, not deliverables. • Could also establish targets for specialists. • Numbers of farmers engaged with the program, dependent on sub-watershed and degree of engagement.

35. Opportunities and Roles • How will MDA and IWR evaluate the cost-benefit of BMPs? • Cost is the easy part. • Benefit is harder. • What type of benefit? • Water quality? • Habitat improvement? • Project’s focus is sediment reduction. • Might be able to include Phosphorus into the analysis by looking at the soils. • Have to make some assumptions, it is not possible to come up with precise estimates for efficacy of all BMPs. • Each watershed will provide list of BMPs utilized, to give us a starting point.

36. Opportunities and Roles • How will the Conservation Districts and IWR develop an outreach plan? • Get the HIT web system in place. • Recruit for focus groups, initiate dialogs with potential users/groups. • Tailor it based on initial conversations with potential users. • Utilize pre-existing outreach programs (319 or CSP).

37. Opportunities and Roles • What are the primary responsibilities of the CIG Specialists? What will they do in the first year? • Familiarize themselves with HIT tool, provide initial feedback to IWR. • Familiarize themselves with conservation planning, MEAP, EQIP, other programs. Maybe in the form of a training program (after conservation districts assess their respective backgrounds). • Start informing the public about the program • Meeting, interacting with watershed groups, building rapport with farmers. • Later-on: ground-truthing HIT model predictions.

38. Opportunities and Roles • How often will the Advisory Committee meet? • Semi-annual • First meeting probably not until after February. • Potential Advisory Membership • Exec. Dir Conservation Districts (Lori Phelan) • Each district could recommend a local watershed group rep. • M-DNR – Bill Mortz (Wildlife Division) • FSA – Dale Allen could recommend someone • MSUE – Jane Herber or Alan Krizeek (sp.?) • NRCS – Kevin Wickey • DEQ – Meghan McMahon

39. Opportunities and Roles • How often will the Technical Committee meet? • Potential Technical Membership • Spicer • DEQ – John Esch • 1st meeting?

40. Next Steps • Establish advisory committees. • Advisory: MDA • Technical: IWR • Set up introductory meetings between MDA, IWR, and CIG Specialists (once they have been hired) • IWR begins building HIT data. • After assessing each Specialist’s background, the Conservation Districts and MDA will develop a list of training needs for the specialists. • Specialists familiarize themselves with MEAP, EQIP, CRP, other programs identified on the training list. • Conservation Districts provide lists of most common BMPs to IWR and MDA.

41. http://www.iwr.msu.edu Thanks for Caring and Acting to Sustain Water Resources 41