A focused study on the Swatara Creek watershed Integrating monitoring, modeling, and trends analyses Emily Trentacoste, PhD EPA Chesapeake Bay Program Office Forestry Workgroup 11/1/2017 DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR DISTRIBUTE. 1 * References & descriptions of data analyses are described at the end of these slides. A LOT of new and updated info available… Monitoring & Trends Modeling Tools Synthesis Analyses Nontidal water quality CBP Watershed Model USGS Non-tidal Syntheses Tidal water quality Geographic load -Regional Nitrogen, distribution Phosphorus and Tidal attainment Sediment Stream & tidal benthic Geographic influence on Bay -Groundwater Submerged aquatic vegetation BMP progress reports SAV Syntheses Water Clarity Synthesis Water Quality Synthesis …and more to come 2 Swatara Creek Storyline 3 Key Lower Susquehanna Watersheds Chesapeake Bay watershed boundary = Water quality monitoring stations Watersheds Swatara Creek West Conewago Creek Hershey • Conestoga River Harrisburg• Pequea Creek Octoraro Creek • RaystownYorkBranch Juniata River 4 Swatara Creek Watershed Swatara Creek watershed • Trends • Drivers • Management implications Hershey • • USGS monitoring station Harrisburg • Lancaster 5 Water Quality Trends in Nitrogen • Total nitrogen and nitrate are decreasing • Nitrogen loads are on the higher end for the Chesapeake Bay watershed Change in nitrogen and nitrate loads (2005-2014) 8000000 7000000 6000000 -13% 5000000 -14% 4000000 3000000 Total nitrogen Nitrate 2000000 1000000 0 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 From USGS Chesapeake Bay non-tidal 6 network: https://cbrim.er.usgs.gov/ Swatara Creek Watershed Swatara Creek watershed Hershey • • USGS monitoring station Harrisburg • Lancaster 7 Where is nitrogen coming from? Swatara Creek watershed • Land-use is a mixture of natural, agricultural and developed Acres in Swatara Creek 30% 45% Developed Forest Lebanon Cropland Pasture 25% Water Hershey Harrisburg Agriculture Developed Natural From CBP WSM Phase 6 2013 Progress Report. See data analysis at end of this document. USGS. Falcone, 2015. 8 Where is nitrogen coming from? • Land-use is a mixture of natural, agricultural and developed • The predominant source of nitrogen is agriculture, followed by developed land Acres in Swatara Creek Nitrogen Load to Swatara Creek (2013) 6000000 5000000 30% 4000000 45% 3000000 Pounds 2000000 1000000 25% 0 Agriculture Developed Natural From CBP WSM Phase 6 2013 Progress Report. See data analysis at end of this document. 9 How is nitrogen reaching streams? • Nitrogen reaches streams either from surface runoff or through groundwater (often as nitrate) • A high proportion of nitrate in streams is likely indicative of groundwater sources 46% From Ator, S.W., and Denver, J.M., 2015. USGS Circular 1406; Bachman, L.J. et al., 1998. 54% Water Resources Investigations Report 98-4059. 10 How is nitrogen reaching streams? • Nitrogen reaches streams either from surface runoff or through groundwater (often as nitrate) • A high proportion of nitrate in streams is likely indicative of groundwater sources Change in nitrogen and nitrate loads (2005-2014) 4000000 From USGS Chesapeake Bay non-tidal 3500000 network: https://cbrim.er.usgs.gov/; Bachman, L.J. et al., 1998. Water 3000000 Investigations Report 98-4059. 2500000 2000000 49% Nitrogen is from Total Nitrogen 1500000 Nitrate normalized load (lbs/yr) load normalized groundwater sources - 1000000 Flow 500000 0 11 How is nitrogen reaching streams? • Nitrate in groundwater represents a range of ages from recent to decades old • Nitrogen in streams is a reflection of both recent Estimated median and past nitrogen age of groundwater, applications in years 1 to 5 • The median groundwater 6 to 10 age in this area is 1-10 11 to 20 years old 21 to 30 31 to 45 Phase 6 WSM groundwater age estimates. DRAFT from Jimmy Webber, USGS. DO 12 NOT CITE OR DISTRIBUTE. What are drivers behind changes in nitrogen? • Loads from developed have increased as development has increased Nitrogen Load from Developed Sector, Swatara Creek Developed, 1974 2000000 1800000 Semi-developed, 1974 1600000 1400000 Developed, 2012 1200000 Semi-developed, 2012 1000000 Nitrogen 800000 Lbs 600000 400000 200000 0 From CBP WSM Phase 6 Progress Reports. See data analysis at end of this document. USGS. Falcone, 2015. 13 What are drivers behind changes in nitrogen? • The Swatara Creek drainage basin is made of Swatara Creek counties Berks, Dauphin, Lebanon and Schuylkill Counties • Lebanon County has most area Schuylkill Swatara Creek Acres by County Berks 10% 24% 23% Lebanon 43% Berks Dauphin Lebanon Schuylkill Dauphin 14 How have nitrogen inputs changed? • Nitrogen inputs on agriculture have decreased over the last two Nitrogen Applied (lbs/acre) decades, but have recently been 140 increasing in recent years 120 100 Berks 80 Dauphin Lebanon Lbs/Acre 60 Schuylkill 40 20 0 From CBP WSM Phase 6 inputs; https://mpa.chesapeakebay.net/ Phase6DataVisualization.html 15 How has nitrogen removal changed? • Removal of nitrogen in crops often mirrors nitrogen input on Nitrogen Removal (lbs/acre) agriculture 160 140 120 100 Berks Dauphin 80 Lebanon 60 Schuylkill Nitrogen Removed per Acre per Removed Nitrogen 40 Lbs 20 0 From CBP WSM Phase 6 inputs; https://mpa.chesapeakebay.net/ Phase6DataVisualization.html 16 Where to focus efforts geographically? • Certain areas of the watershed are higher loading than others • These can be the more effective areas to focus restoration efforts Total nitrogen yield to local waters in lbs/acre <5 5 to 10 10 to 15 15 to 20 20 to 25 >25 Average Total Nitrogen yield (2005-2014) in lbs/acre 0 to 6.88 6.89 to 13.8 Modified from Jimmy Webber, USGS, using 13.9 to 33.4 Ator, S. et al, 2011. 17 Where to focus efforts geographically? Modified from Jimmy Webber, USGS, using Ator, S. et al, 2011; Falcone, et al. 2015. 18 Where to focus efforts geographically? • Geology makes the groundwater (and therefore streams) in some areas especially Vulnerable geology vulnerable to high (Areas underlain by nitrogen inputs carbonate rocks or coarse • These areas can be the coastal sediments) most effective to focus Average Total Nitrogen yield practices for nitrate in (2005-2014) in lbs/acre groundwater 0 to 6.88 6.89 to 13.8 13.9 to 33.4 Modified from Jimmy Webber, USGS, using Brakebill, JW 2000, Ator, S. et al. 2005 and Nolan & Hitt, 2006. DO NOT CITE OR DISTRIBUTE. 19 Where to focus efforts geographically? • Geology makes the groundwater (and therefore streams) in some areas especially Vulnerable geology vulnerable to high (Areas underlain by nitrogen inputs carbonate rocks or coarse • These areas can be the coastal sediments) most effective to focus Average Total Nitrogen yield practices for nitrate in (2005-2014) in lbs/acre groundwater 0 to 6.88 6.89 to 13.8 13.9 to 33.4 Modified from Jimmy Webber, USGS, using Brakebill, JW 2000, Ator, S. et al. 2005 and Nolan & Hitt, 2006. DO NOT CITE OR DISTRIBUTE. 20 Where to focus efforts geographically? • From CBP WSM Phase 6 inputs; Loads and practices can differ between counties https://mpa.chesapeakebay.net/ • For example, Lebanon county has more intense application of Phase6DataVisualization.html nitrogen per acre, and increasing application of manure, correlating to animal production Nitrogen Applied to Agriculture - Schuylkill Nitrogen Applied to Agriculture - Lebanon 80 80 70 70 60 60 Direct Deposit 50 50 Manure Fertilizer /Acre 40 /Acre 40 Lbs Lbs 30 Manure 30 20 20 10 10 0 0 21 1984 2012 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 What practices to focus on? • The highest loading sources are different types of cropland and barnyards • Effective practices for these sources can include buffers, barnyard management, and cover crops Implementation of Agricultural Practices 100.0% 90.0% 80.0% 70.0% 60.0% Schuylkill, PA 50.0% Lebanon, PA 40.0% Berks, PA 30.0% Dauphin, PA Percent Implementation Percent 20.0% 10.0% 0.0% Nutrient Conservation Cover Crops Forest Buffers Grass Buffers Forest Buffers Barnyard Phase 6 WSM Management Tillage with Stream Management 2013 BMP Fencing Progress Report *Percent implementation = acres with practice implemented out of acres available for practice 22 What practices to focus on? • The highest loading sources are different types of cropland and barnyards • Effective practices for these sources can include buffers, barnyard management, and cover crops Implementation of Agricultural Practices 100.0% 60.00% 90.0% Schuylkill, PA 50.00% 80.0% Lebanon, PA 70.0% 40.00% 60.0% Berks, PA 50.0% 30.00% Dauphin, PA 40.0% 20.00% 30.0% Nitrogen Removal Implementation Percent 20.0% 10.00% Efficiency 10.0% 0.0% 0.00% Nutrient Conservation Cover Crops Forest Grass Buffers Forest Barnyard Phase 6 WSM Management Tillage Buffers Buffers with Management 2013 BMP Stream Progress Fencing Report 23 What practices to focus on? • Loads from developed land are not insignificant in these areas and are increasing • Stormwater management will be important to address issues associated with increasingly developed areas Implementation of Stormwater Management 100.0% 90.0% 80.0% 70.0% Schuylkill, PA 60.0% Lebanon, PA 50.0% Berks, PA 40.0% Dauphin, PA 30.0% 20.0% 10.0% Phase 6 WSM 0.0% 2013 BMP Progress Stormwater Management PA state-wide Report implementation (2013) 2.9% 24 And it’s not just about water quality… • Local waters benefit from the same Temperature Trends at USGS Monitoring conservation and restoration Stations (1960-2010) practices