Sustainable Fertility Management Update on Nitrogen Management - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Sustainable Fertility Management

Update on Nitrogen Management Plans for the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program

Parry Klassen Executive Director

Central Valley Coalitions

• Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition

– Bruce Houdesheldt

• California Rice Commission

– Tim Johnson

• San Joaquin County & Delta Water Quality Coalition

– Michael Wackman

• Westside San Joaquin River Watershed Coalition

– Joseph C. McGahan – David Cory

• East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition

– Parry Klassen – Wayne Zipser

• Westlands Water Quality Coalition
• Southern San Joaquin Valley Water Quality Coalition

– 7 new coalitions

• In operation since 2003
• 3,949 Landowner / operators
• 719,446 irrigated acres

– Madera, Merced, Stanislaus, Tuolumne, Mariposa counties

• We manage group permit

for our members

Coalition Overview

4

Administrative Civil Liability (ACL) Complaints issued December 2014 $32,000 Madera County $8,600 Madera County Dozens more ACLs planned in coming months “…failed to submit a Report of Waste Discharge (“RoWD”) as required under Water Code section 13260…” Fines Announced in January 2015

• Madera: $31,000
• Ceres: $51,000

Regional Water Board Enforcement

Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program

Member Responsibilities

• Complete Farm Evaluation (everyone)
• Complete Nitrogen Management Plan

– In high vulnerability groundwater area; submit to ESJ annually

– Certified by 3rd party or grower trained (if developed)

– Low vulnerability keep on site; no certification required

• Sediment and Erosion Control Plan

– In areas identified as high vulnerability for erosion and sediment discharge

• Participate in annual outreach events

5

What Is Now Required

Waste Discharge Requirements

Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program

– CDFA formed “Task Force”

• Develop “Nitrogen Tracking and Reporting System”
• Recommendations completed in December 2013

– State Board formed “Expert Panel”

• Panel to answer “questions” posed by advisory group
• Final report to State Water Board on September 23, 2014

EXPERT PANEL RECOMMENDATION: REPORT A/R RATIO

• A = Nitrogen Applied
• Nitrogen applied can include nitrogen from any source
• R = Nitrogen Removed
• Nitrogen removed via harvest + Nitrogen sequestered in

the permanent wood of perennial crops)

• Recommend ratio be averaged over multiple years

CV COALITIONS PREPARING PLAN TO PROPOSE REPORTING REQUIREMENTS

• Proposal and timeline due to Water Board on December

2015

• Recommending Applied N/Yield (A/Y)
• Instead of A/R Ratio recommended by Expert Panel
• Considerations for choosing A/Y
• Growers know N applied, yield of crop per acre (average)
• Ease of calculations
• Allows comparison among same crop w/varying conditions
• Need to demonstrate that the nitrogen management

approach is protective of groundwater

DATA COLLECTION

Development of baseline nitrogen application information

1. Crop-specific 2. Integrated regionally 3. Provides basis for comparison of regional nitrogen application differences 4. Identification of multi-year trends 5. Addresses the probability of nitrogen leaving the crop root zone via deep percolation

Information for Outreach and Education

1. Create management plans in certain areas. 2. Provide growers with understanding of key elements of on-farm nitrogen components 3. Show areas with high nitrates in groundwater 4. Nitrogen levels to irrigation supply water

REPORTING UNITS

• Management Unit
• Could include several fields with similar soils, irrigation

methods, irrigation water nitrate levels, and irrigation management nitrate styles

• Individual Field

The flexibility of reporting units provides growers with the ability to group fields as it makes operational sense and grants flexibility in the size of fields as it varies over time and season

Field Reporting Map Completed by Grower

NITROGEN MANAGEMENT PLAN

APPROVED BY REGIONAL WATER BOARD DECEMBER 23, 2014

NMP

In High Vulnerability Areas, CCA sign-off required ESJWQC Deadline for CCA sign-off March 1, 2016

Basic Elements of NMP

• Crop
• Field(s) or parcel identification
• Nitrogen applied to management unit
• Estimate of nitrogen in
• Irrigation water
• Compost/manure
• Residual in the soil

In High Vulnerabilty Areas, CCA sign off required

High Vulnerability Areas

Proposed reporting of nitrogen plan worksheet information:

• Submit summary form to Coalition
• Coalition compiles ratios; separates into

crops, “Township” sections (6 sq. miles)

• CCA or self certify in high vulnerability areas

Nitrogen Management Plan Certification

For members with fields that are high vulnerability to groundwater contamination

Two options for NMP certification

• 1. Sign off by professional
• Certified Crop Advisor (CCA)
• Professional agronomist
• Soil scientist

OR

• 2. Grower CDFA Certification
• Member (or member representative) can be certified to certify your own

NMP

Nitrogen Management Plan Certification

For members with fields that are high vulnerability to groundwater contamination

To obtain NMP certification, a grower must

• Attend a four-hour session in nitrogen management
• Pass a 30-question test at the end of the session.

NMP Trainings are taught by CCAs who have been trained by UC Extension Personnel and are experts in nitrogen management. Over the next 3 years, growers must attend Continuing Education meetings to maintain the certification. CURES Managing 3-year pilot program in Central Valley through FREP grant

• Create “speakers bureau” of CCAs to provide training
• Working with coalitions on grower training meetings

Management Practice Effectiveness Program (MPEP)

• Confirm that management practices implemented to improve

groundwater quality are working

• Are agricultural management practices protective of groundwater?
• Modify practices if needed
• Implemented by CV Coalitions either individually or combined effort

Coordinated effort by coalitions/commodity groups to complete

• Share study expenses among coalitions willing to collaborate

– ESJWQC forming group made up of 4 other coalitions

Northern Central Valley Coalitions form MOU to Complete Management Practice Studies

Question: Are farming practices protective of groundwater?

• Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition
• San Joaquin County & Delta Water Quality

Coalition

• Westside San Joaquin River Watershed

Coalition

• East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition
• Westlands Water District Coalition

Selection of Management Practices

• Coordinate with commodity groups of

selected crops what “best practices” are

• Select practices to study based on:

– Current usage by growers – Potential to be adopted by large percentage of growers

• Economical
• Practical
• Ability to measure effectiveness

Examples of Potential Measurements in MPEP Field Studies

Groundwater

• N Applied as:

– Commercial fertilizer – Cover crops/manure/comp

• st

– Irrigation water

• N Harvested with crop

– N stored (where applicable)

• N in Vadose Zone

– Soil cores

• N in Leachate

– Suction Lysimeters

Also measure water applied through irrigation and rainfall on site

Parry Klassen 559-288-8125 www.esjcoalition.org