Private Lands Voluntary Conservation in the

Great Lakes Basin

Vicki AndersonGreat Lakes Coordinator

2

• Can’t do conservation work from behind a desk or truck windshield• Good science must be the foundation for conservation• Can’t treat natural resource concerns in isolation – soil, water, air, plants,

and animals – plus humans (SWAPA+H) must be considered in conservation solutions

• Focus coordinated action on a watershed or landscape scale (“random acts of conservation” are not as effective as ones focused on a geographical basis)

• Local leadership is critical to success – local leaders know the issues best and how to fix them (SWCDs, RC&Ds)

Despite all the changes since 1935, and Bennett’s passing 50 years ago, many of his ideas and principles have withstood the test of time and still greatly inform our work today…

3

Private Lands ConservationElements• Personalized assistance• Local leadership• Voluntary approach• Sound science and technical standards• High quality resource information• Site specific• Watershed and landscape based

approach• Progressive implementation• Adaptive management

4

Benefits of Conservation Programsand Practices

• Partnership efforts have yielded great benefits for SWAPA+E+H.

Soil, Water, Air, Plants, Animals, Energy + Humans

• Conservation tillage has experienced phenomenal growth.

• Considerable progress in reducing soil erosion.

• Wetland gains outnumber losses on agricultural lands.

• Significant gains in wildlife habitat.

5

• Conservation works and can improve the bottom line.• Watershed and conservation planning are needed to aid

decision-making.• Targeting critical areas improves

effectiveness and efficiency.• Technical assistance is critical

to planning, implementation,and follow-up.

• Effective adaptive management,after implementation, is vital.

• Leadership and partnershipsmust be effective and sustainable.

What Have We Learned?

6

Working in the Great Lakes Basin• Wide range of resource issues – high quality to degraded• Traditional issues (soil erosion) and emerging issues

(Harmful Algal Blooms)

7

Challenges of Working in the Great Lakes Basin

• Wide range of land covers/uses (forest, ag ranging from cash crops to orchard & specialty crops, urban)

• Loss of ag lands to other uses

Photos courtesy of NRCS and US EPA GLNPO

8

Challenges of Working in the Great Lakes Basin

• Outreach to people who have not participated in USDA conservation programs in the past

• Intensive technical assistance to people enhancing existing conservation systems – e.g., enhanced nutrient management

9

EPA funding through the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative (GLRI)• Great Lakes Commission Soil Erosion and Sediment Control grants

– FY2010 $5 million– FY2011 ~ $2.7 million?

• Focused assistance (technical & financial) FY2010 ~ $23 million; FY2011 ~ $14 million?– Aid with outreach to new or reluctant land owners– Geographically– Practice selection– Ranking priorities

10

GLC Soil Erosion and Sediment Control Grants GLRI 2010

9 grants totaling over $4.3 million, save >24,000 tons of erosion annually

• Blue Creek - St. Marys River, Indiana: Adams County Soil and Water Conservation District, $448,115

• Little Elkhart River, Indiana: LaGrange County Soil and Water Conservation District, $190,000

• Pinnebog River, Michigan: Michigan Dept. of Agriculture, $745,373 • River Raisin, Michigan: Michigan Dept. of Agriculture, $438,033 • Shiawassee River, Michigan: Shiawassee Conservation District, $536,000 • Poplar River, Minnesota: Cook County Soil and Water Conservation District,

$687,034 • Black and Oatka Creeks, New York: NY State Soil and Water Conservation

Committee, $536,000 • Old Woman Creek, Ohio: Erie Soil and Water Conservation District, $137,552 • Sandusky River, Ohio: WSOS Community Action Commission, Inc., $581,926

11

Geographic focus on specific resource issues – Nonpoint source(sediments, nutrients, pesticides)

St. Louis River, Fox River/Green Bay, Saginaw River, Maumee River, Genesee River

12

Practice selection – NPS

Nutrient Management, including manureIntegrated Pest Management

Cover Crops to cycle nutrients and reduce runoff

Cover crops for wind & water erosion control

GLRI financial assistance is limited to core practices effective for addressing the resource concern

2010 ~ 4,000 acres nutrient mgt applied ~ 400 acres pest mgt applied ~ 18,000 acres cover crops applied2011 ~ 36,000 acres nutrient mgt planned ~ 18,000 acres pest mgt planned ~ 13,000 acres cover crop planned

13

Practice selection – NPSCore practices for non-point source include those that reduce erosion

2010 ~ 3 Water & Sediment Control Basins applied2011 ~ 17 WASCOBs planned ~ 13,000 acres no till planned ~ 5,000 acres mulch till planned

No till

Water & Sediment Control Basins

mulch till

14

Practice selection - NPS

Riparian Forest Buffer

Grass filter strip

Core practices for non-point source include those that reduce sediment and associated contaminants from running off the edge of the field

2011 ~ 29 acres filter strips planned (4-8miles)

15

Practice selection - NPS

Fencing, limited access

Livestock watering facilities

Core practices for livestock include those that limit or eliminate access to surface water

2010 ~ 2 miles fence installed 2011 ~ 16 miles fence planned ~ 16 watering facilities planned ~ 13 stream crossings planned

16

Basin

17

18

Challenges & Opportunities

Looking forward, we need to be strategic about getting the – right amount of conservation – in the right place – at the right time

Follow up and adaptive management to continuously optimize the benefits of applied conservation practices

19

Western Lake Erie Basin• Dissolved Reactive Phosphorus

(DRP) and resulting Harmful Algal Blooms

• Cause might be related to – no-till planted Roundup Ready©

soybeans?– fall/winter (surface) applied

fertilizer?– soil compaction leading to

more runoff?– manure application?– more land being farmed

due to high crop prices?• Conservation systems can effectively

address any of these

20

Western Lake Erie Basin

NRCS is increasing the level of conservation in WLEB through• Nutrient Management – emphasize the “4 Rs”

– Right source (less prone to loss)– Right time (close to crop needs)– Right place (beneath the soil surface)– Right rate (based on soil tests & crop need)

• Moving beyond the basics– Use systems of practices (nutrient management AND residue

management, filter strips, subsoiling, cover crops)– Use new technologies (crop reflectance, corn stalk nitrate

testing, variable rate application technology)

21

Strategic Watershed Action TeamsSWATs

• Accelerate conservation activities through– Outreach– Conservation Planning– Practice Implementation– Follow-up

• 6 teams in the Great Lakes Basin (GLRI funded watersheds)

• $1.1 million NRCS + partner match in Contribution Agreements

• Over 30 staff years over the next 2 years

22

Private lands conservation is needed to continue producing high quality food and providing essential ecosystem services in the Great Lakes Basin.