Presentation by Marcos Coreiro and Bruce Shewfelt.

1. Marcos Cordeiro – PhD, EIT
Bruce Shewfelt – MSc, P. Eng.
Dec. 8th, 2015

2. Portage Online 2015.07.30
"We had some tile drainage applications that we're
considering, and it's just brought up some
questions from our council and possible concerns,
which could be nothing. But we just needed some
clarification on what the potential impacts could be
if liquid manure injection/application was put onto
a tile-drained land. And if that tile-drained land
was then drained into a local riverbed, or something
like that. We're just wanting to get some
information on that. We're going to try and bring in
some people to explain what the impacts could be,
if there are any. Then we'll proceed from there on
how we handle the situation."

3. Portage Online 2015.09.09
The RM of Portage la Prairie has decided to
implement restrictions on manure use, when it
comes to future tile drainage applications.
…impact the use of liquid manure injection and
application could have on the region's water system
no technology that will completely eradicate
contaminants, the nutrients but also all the others
things that go along with liquid manure
lack of knowledge regarding the local aquifers,
making it hard to identify just what kind of impact
the situation could have on the local water supply

4.  Does liquid manure pose higher environmental risk
than synthetic fertilizer?
 Is the risk minimized if tile is avoided?
 Can the risk be minimized through management
practices?
Questions
 Does tile drainage pose a risk to aquifers?
 What is the actual risk associated with tile drainage?
 How to minimize risks associated with tile drainage?

5. Presentation Outline
 Key Soil Physics Concepts
 Tile Drainage Overview
 Impacts on Hydrology and Water Quality
 Manure versus Synthetic Fertilizer
 Minimizing the Impact of Tile Drainage

6. Key Soil Physics Concepts
 Water Surface Tension

7. Key Soil Physics Concepts
 Capillarity

8.  Soil Capillarity
Key Soil Physics Concepts
 Saturation:
‘Gavitational water’
is not held by soil
particles. That’s the
water that goes into
the tiles
 Field Capacity:
Soil water is not
drained by gravity
but can be extracted
by plants
 Wilting Point:
Plants can no
longer extract soil
water (residual
saturation)

9.  Saturation
Tile Drainage Overview
 Field capacity

10.  Natural drainage
Impact on Hydrology
Percolation into aquifers
 Tile drainage

11. Impact on Hydrology
Percolation into aquifers
Surface RunoffSurface Runoff?
Infiltration?
Infiltration
Yield
Potential;
Product
Quality

12. Impact on Hydrology
Sands and Canelon. 2013. Developing optimum drainage design guidelines for the Red River basin.
University of Minnesota, Department of Bioproducts & Biosystems Engineering. Available at:
http://www.extension.umn.edu/agriculture/water/reports/docs/final_report__developing_draina
ge_guidelines_for_rrb_sands.pdf. Accessed November 30, 2015.
Decreases
Increases
Decreases
Increases
Poor crop performance leads to nutrient
inefficiency, which creates opportunity for
non-used fertilizer to be exported

13. Impact on Hydrology
 Reduces in surface runoff from 29% to 45 %
 Reduces in peak flows from 15% to 30 %
 Little impact on the total annual flow
1 Busman and Sands. 2012. Agricultural drainage publication series: issues and answers. University of Minnesota. Available at:
http://www.extension.umn.edu/agriculture/water/agricultural-drainage-publication-series/. Accessed November 30, 2015.

14. Impact on Hydrology

15. Seasonal Water Table

16.  Does tile drainage pose a risk to aquifers?
 Tile drainage intercepts water percolating towards
aquifers, thus reducing the risk of aquifer contamination
if the leaching water contains any sort of contaminants
 What is the risk associated to tile drainage?
Impact on Hydrology

17.  What is the actual risk associated to tile drainage?
 Eutrophication of water bodies
 natural process caused by nutrient export from upland
 can be accelerated by anthropogenic activities such as
agriculture
 e.g. eutrophication of Lake Winnipeg has been taken place
since the 1990’s, well before tile drainage expansion in MB
Impact on Water Quality

18. Impact on Water Quality
Schindler et al. 2012. The rapid eutrophication of Lake Winnipeg:
Greening under global change . Journal of Great Lakes Research 38: 6-13
 Lake Winnipeg

19.  What is the nutrient-related risk associated to tile
drainage?
 Tile drainage can contribute to eutrophication through
enhanced nutrient transport
 e.g. hypoxia in Gulf of Mexico has been linked to N export
from the Corn belt in the US
 Nutrient levels exceeding desired levels in surface water
if not managed properly
Impact on Water Quality
 Does liquid manure pose higher environmental risk
than synthetic fertilizer?

20. Synthetic Fertilizer vs. Manure
Synthetic Fertilizer‡ N P K
Ammonium Nitrate 33-34 0 0
Urea 46 0 0
Anhydrous ammonia 82 0 0
Mono-ammonium phosphate 12 51 0
Ammonium polyphosphate 10-11 34-37 0
Triple superphosphate 0 46 0
ASABE. 2005. Manure Production and Characteristics. ASABE Standard ASAE D384.2 MAR2005 (R2014)
Manure† N P K
Beef: Finishing cattle 25 3.3 17.1
Swine: Nursery pig,12.5 kg 0.41 0.068 0.16
Swine: Grow-finish, 70 kg 4.7 0.76 2.0
†Estimated typical manure (urine and feces combined) characteristics as excreted. Values in kg/finished animal (f.a.)
‡ Values expressed as percent of product composition

21. Challenge of using Manure

22. N:P ratio in manure Plant uptake ratios
4.5:1 to 9:1
4.5:1 to 9:1
Challenge of using Manure
 Applying manure on a N-basis results in P surplus
http://www.farmwest.com/node/953

23. Challenge of using Manure

24. N and P Movement in the Soil
 Nitrogen
 Crops absorb Nitrogen from the soil as nitrate (NO3
-)
 Nitrate is highly soluble and moves with water
 Phosphorus
 Crops absorb phosphorus from the soil as soluble
orthophoshates (H2PO4
- and HPO4
2)
 Becomes unavailable at low or high pH
 Binds to Fe and Al
 Moves mostly with soil particles
 Leaching occurs when P reaches saturation

25. Nitrogen Leaching Through Tile
 Ontario
 Clay loam soil
 Corn and
soybean rotation
 Application rate
of 200 kg N ha-1
 Ammonium
nitrate
 Manure
Tan et al. 2015. Impact of subsurface drainage
management and organic manure and chemical
fertilizer on nutrient loss. ASABE Annual
International Meeting.
New Orleans, LA, July 26-29 .
Synthetic fertilizer Liquid cattle manure Solid cattle manure
Free drainage
Controlled
drainage

26. Synthetic fertilizer Liquid cattle manure Solid cattle manure
Cumulativenitratelossbyrunoff(kgha-1)
Free drainage
Controlled drainage
Nitrogen Leaching Through Tile
 Cumulative nitrate loss by runoff over 4 years

27. Synthetic fertilizer Liquid cattle manure Solid cattle manure
Free drainage
Controlled drainage
Cumulativenitratelossthroughtile(kgha-1)
Nitrogen Leaching Through Tile
 Cumulative nitrate loss through tiles over 4 years

28. Nitrogen Leaching Through Tile
 Summary
 Application rate: 200 kg N ha-1
 Cumulative application in 4 years = 4 x 200 = 800 kg
 Total export in 4 years (runoff + tile)
 Synthetic fertilizer  12 + 135 = 147 kg N ha-1
 Liquid cattle manure  15 + 81 = 96 kg N ha-1
 Solid cattle manure  32 + 98 = 130 kg N ha-1
 Total loss by treatment (%)
 Synthetic fertilizer  147/800 = 18.4 %
 Liquid cattle manure  96/800 = 12.0 %
 Solid cattle manure  130/800 = 16.2 %

29. 0
05
10
15
20
25
30
40
35
PM 2x
PM
UAN
None
Nitrate-Nconcentration(ppm)
Nitrogen Leaching Through Tile
 Iowa
 Clay loam soil
 12-yr corn-
soybean rotation
 Poultry manure
application rates
168 and 336 kg N
ha-1
 Urea ammonium
nitrate 168 kg N
ha-1
Nguyen et al. 2013. Long-term effects of poultry manure application on nitrate leaching in tile drain water. Transactions of the
ASABE 56: 91-101

30. Nitrogen Leaching Through Tile
0
05
10
15
20
25
30
40
35
PM 2x
PM
UAN
None
1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 AVERAGE
Nitrate-Nconcentration(ppm)

31. Nitrogen Leaching Through Tile
PM 2x
PM
UAN
None
Nitrate-Nconcentration(ppm)

32. P Levels and Leaching
Ashjaei et al. 2010. Correlations between phosphorus fractions and total leachate phosphorus from cattle
manure- and swine manure-amended soil. Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis 41: 1338 - 1349
 Saskatchewan
 Loamy soil
 Corn-Wheat-
Barley rotation
 10-cm soil cores
collected
 100-mm rainfall
simulation

33. Phosphorus Leaching Through Tile
Beauchemin et al. 1998. Forms and concentration of phosphorus in drainage water of
twenty-seven tile-drained soils. Journal of Environmental Quality 27:721–728
 Quebec
 27 soils
 Intensively
cropped
areas
Clay
Flat
P-rich

34. Management and Preferential Flow
Hoorman and Shipitalo. 2006. Subsurface drainage and liquid manure. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 61:94A–97A
Management issues
Preferential flow (21%)

35.  Is the risk from fertilizer application minimized if tile
is avoided?
Alternative Scenarios
 What would farmers do if tile is restricted?
Surface drainage
- Increased P movement by runoff
- Increased N movement by leaching
- Reduced N to surface water
Tile drainage
- Reduced P movement by runoff
- Reduced N movement by leaching
- Increased N to surface water

36.  Best Management Practices
 Nutrient management
 Controlled drainage
 Agronomic practices
 Tillage
 Crop rotation
 Cover crops
 End-of-pipe treatments
 Vegetative/riparian buffers
 Wetlands
 Bio-filters
Literature Suggested Approach
 Best Management Practices
 Nutrient management
 Controlled drainage
 Agronomic practices
 Tillage
 Crop rotation
 Cover crops
 End-of-pipe treatments
 Vegetative/riparian buffers
 Wetlands
 Bio-filters

37.  4R approach
 Right rate
 Crop yield goals
 Manure regulations
 Variable rate
 Right place
 Application (broadcast; banding)
 Right source
 Crop stage
 Slow release fertilizer
 Right time
 Crop needs
 Tile flow
 Cracking clay
Nutrient Management
 Although timing and
method of application
are important, the most
important factor to
reduce nitrate leaching
in the correct amount of
N fertilizer
Dinnes et al. 2002. Nitrogen
management strategies to reduce
nitrate leaching in tile-drained
midwestern soils. Agronomy Journal
94:153–171
 4R approach
 Right rate
 Crop yield goals
 Manure regulations
 Variable rate
 Right place
 Application (broadcast; banding)
 Right source
 Crop stage
 Slow release fertilizer
 Right time
 Crop needs
 Tile flow
 Cracking clay

38. Right Rate
Randall and Mulla 2001. Nitrate nitrogen in surface waters as influenced
by climatic conditions and agricultural practices. Journal of
Environmental Quality 30:337–344
 Iowa
 6-yr continuous corn
 Application rate of 134 and 202 kg N ha-1

39. Right Rate
 Variable application rate based on soil texture, topography, geology, and fertility
Surface soil texture Subsurface geology
Nutrient
critical areas
Clay loam
soils
Sand channel
aquifer

40. Right Rate
0.0
20.0
40.0
60.0
80.0
100.0
120.0
A1-1 A1-2 A1-3 A1-4 A1-5 A1-6 West - SB
Nitrate-N(ppm)
CMCDC-Winkler Groundwater Nitrate-N(ppm)
Fall 2011
Fall 2012
June 2013
Fall 2013
 Manitoba example – 30% reduction in ground water
concentration due to reduced fertilizer application rates

41.  Tile drainage vs. Surface drainage
 Tile drainage improves crop yields and uptake of applied
nutrients and reduces surface runoff and associated off site
movement of sediment and near surface nutrients
 Surface drainage, the alternative to tile drainage, has higher
sediment and phosphorus export and higher potential for
deep percolation of nitrates to shallow water table
 Tile drainage lowers seasonal water tables by removing near
surface (root zone) water , thus reducing deep percolation of
that water to the water table (aquifer)
 If planned and managed properly, tile drainage generally
reduces the risk of direct aquifer contamination
 Tile drainage outputs to surface water and can change the
balance of nutrients coming from agriculture to the surface
water bodies (e.g. increase nitrates and reduction in
phosphorus)
Summary

42.  Manure vs. Synthetic fertilizer
 Risk of manure is similar to that of synthetic fertilizers if
recommended rates are utilized
 BMPs can reduce the risk to surface waters and aquifers
 Nutrient management is critical for water quality,
regardless of drainage method (surface, tile) and
nutrient source (synthetic, manure)
Summary

43.  Best Management Practices
 Agronomy BMPs are critical to managing manure on
tiled fields, including timing of application,
maintenance of tile systems, and tillage to control
potential preferential flow in clay soils
 A variety of tile drainage BMPs are being implemented
in the Upper Midwest USA including controlled
drainage, bio-filters, and saturated buffers. Controlled
drainage has been shown to reduce nutrient export in
Manitoba studies.
Summary

44. Questions and Discussion