The chippewa 10% project boody
•
0 likes•85 views
The document discusses a project called the Chippewa 10% Project that aims to increase continuous living cover in the Chippewa River Watershed in Minnesota by 10% through practices like perennial crops, cover crops, and rotational grazing. Modeling shows these practices could significantly reduce nutrient runoff and soil erosion compared to conventional corn and soybean farming. Engagement strategies are targeting 100 farmers in the watershed to adopt continuous living cover farming through education and incentives, which could help restore water quality while keeping farming economically viable. Barriers include existing government subsidies that favor corn and soy, and monitoring shows perennials and rotational grazing significantly reduce soil loss during rainstorms compared to conventional tillage systems.
Recommended
More Related Content
What's hot
What's hot (10)
Similar to The chippewa 10% project boody
Similar to The chippewa 10% project boody (20)
More from Soil and Water Conservation Society
More from Soil and Water Conservation Society (20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
The chippewa 10% project boody
- 1. George Boody (Executive Director) www.landstewardshipproject.org The Chippewa 10% Project: Ecosystem Services Resulting from Continuous Living Cover in an Agricultural Watershed We are grateful for funding from: the Walton Family Foundation, USDA NIFA, the MN ENTF 2010 Chp 362, Sec2, Subd 3i, the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation, MN Board of Water and Soil Resources and MN Department of Agriculture, Glacial Lakes Trust. USDA NRCS-Wallace Center, Any opinions conclusions or recommendations do not necessarily reflect the view of any funder.
- 2. Many Rivers Need Restoration Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. 2015. Swimmable, Fishable, Fixable
- 4. Challenges
- 5. Impairments and Focal Areas
- 6. 1999-2006 TSS Average vs percent of Acres in basin that are Wetlands, Open Water, Grass and Forest R2 = 0.914 0.00 20.00 40.00 60.00 80.00 100.00 120.00 15.00% 20.00% 25.00% 30.00% 35.00% 40.00% TSS(ppm) 1999-2006 TSS Average vs percent of Acres in basin that are Wetlands, Open Water, Grass and Forest R2 = 0.914 0.00 20.00 40.00 60.00 80.00 100.00 120.00 15.00% 20.00% 25.00% 30.00% 35.00% 40.00% TSS(ppm) Chippewa River Stream Concentration and Land-Use
- 8. Chippewa or Root Project Partners
- 10. Continuous Living Cover (CLC) Farming (A Green Lands Blue Waters Partner) Perennial Grains Perennial Crops Perennial Biomass Agroforestry Cover Crops Winter Annual Crops Longer Crop Rotations Managed rotational grazing
- 12. ???? C2-MIRG if >40 ac on LCC 3>6% slope and 4-8 Corn/ Soybean Sensitive Fields Cover crops: LCC 1,2, and 3< 6% slope C3 Prairie Strips: on LCC 3 > 6% slope Reduced N on Corn 20% ↓N fertilizer on Corn Ac C4- Longer rotations on LCC 4-8 C1: Riparian filter strips Perennials: Scenarios for Modeling Based on Engagement
- 13. Ecosystem Service Output Coefficients Comparing Systems on LCC 3 from APSim Eco‐ Service Corn /Soy CSW HHH (Org) Warm season BG Cont graze Basic rot graze MIRG MOB graze Animal Units/Ac/Yr 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.78 2.5 Erosion MT/ha/yr 0.98 0.05 0 0 0 0.01 0.02 NO3‐N Leach Kg/ha/yr 16.7 9.49 12.46 17.14 6.48 2.80 3.07 Runoff mm/ha/yr 36.7 29.81 10.5 5.24 4.62 5.75 6.29
- 14. Hydrologic Simulation Program FORTRAN (HSPF) Results Using C10 Scenarios (% change in load from baseline) Parameter {Base load in Metric Tons/year} N fertilizer reduction/ or Cover Crops Perennials affecting 3.7% of CRW Goals in TMDL or MN Nutrient Reduction Strategy Total suspended solids {82,818} 0/‐3.2% ‐16.5% ‐54% TMDL Total nitrogen{1,924} ‐2.9%/3.5% ‐18.4% ‐45% MNRS Total phosphorous {143} 0/‐5.8% ‐16.9% ‐15% MNRS
- 15. 1‐to‐1 Individual Conversations Networks with 100 Farmers Learning Incentives Farmer Workshops and Field Days CLC Opportunity Areas Values: Stewardship, community, family; Barriers; Options Haney Soil Tests, Cover Crop Seed Engagement Strategies in Chippewa River Watershed to Build Community Cropping Systems Calculator
- 16. Barriers and Costs Barriers: • Economic analysis: CLC can be profitable but, • Gov’t policies that deliver $19 +million for corn and soybeans • Too few operations with livestock on the land Costs: • $31,000,000 to lessen bacteria and turbidity • Engagement costs • Individual/public wells? • Reduced recreation?
- 17. Structural Change To Restore Clean Water, Soil Health and People on the Land Engage Other Watersheds Integrate CLC into Models • Federal Crop Insurance Reform Can Be Achieved • It Should Improve Fertility and Serve Broad Public Good • Be Shaped by People Affected Shift Narrative and Markets Advocate for 20% CLC by 2020 in MN
- 19. Perennials are Effective, Monitoring Shows Severe Storm: June 26th, 1998 2.9” fell in <2 hr, 5” total Same Lester, Le Sueur, Webster soils Farm system Slope Soil erosion (%) (lb/acre) • Organic pasture w/ contours1 18 53 • Conventional corn/soybean field2 – Chisel plow 8 5,000 – Moldboard plow 8 10,000 1Digiacomo, G. C. J. Iremonger, L. Kemp, C. van Schaik, and H. Murray. 2001 . “Sustainable Farming Systems: Demonstrating Environmental and Economic Performance.” A Minnesota Institute for Sustainable Agriculture publication. University of Minnesota. St. Paul, MN. www.misa.umn.edu 2 Hansen, N.C., 1999
- 20. Management Intensive Rotational Grazing (MIRG) Adds CLC and Profitability • High density • Short duration • High quality • High yield Rest-Rotation Continuum Slide by Laura Paine, 2008. DATCP (used with permission) • 30 days • 1 paddock • 30 days • 30 paddocks