The document summarizes a water quality monitoring project in the School Branch watershed in Indiana. The objective is to document how soil health management systems used in production agriculture, such as no-till, cover crops, and nutrient management, can improve water resources. The project involves continuous automatic edge-of-field and in-stream water quality monitoring, as well as soils and plant analysis. Key questions center around nutrient and sediment loads from fields using soil health practices, and biological responses in streams with different agricultural land use. Partners include farmers, universities, NRCS, USGS, and local conservation organizations.

1. Helping People Help the Land.
Water Quality Monitoring in the
School Branch Watershed (Indiana)
Shannon Zezula, State Resource Conservationist
United States Department of Agriculture
Natural Resources Conservation Service
Memphis, TN December 3, 2015

2. School Branch Monitoring Project
Objective:
Document the potential for production
agriculture to complement water
resources through the implementation
of soil health management systems

3. Healthy, Productive Soils System Criteria
USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer.www.nrcs.usda.gov
Indiana is a national leader in Soil Health!
• What does Soil Health mean?
• Soil Health Key Indicators =
• Increasing organic matter
• Improving aggregate stability
• Increasing water infiltration
• Increasing water-holding capacity
• Improving nutrient cycling
• Enhancing and diversifying soil biology
Soil Health is not a destination...it’s a Journey

4. Healthy, Productive Soils System Criteria
USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer.www.nrcs.usda.gov
Mining Organic Matter
Is Not An Option!
• Each 1% of O.M.
contains:
10,000 lbs. of C
1000 lbs. of N
100 lbs. of P
100 lbs. of S
14,000 gallons of H2O

5. Healthy, Productive Soils System Criteria
USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer.www.nrcs.usda.gov
SoilHealthPrinciples

6. Healthy, Productive Soils System Criteria
USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer.www.nrcs.usda.gov
• Achieving soil health through:
• A Quality No-till (Never-Till) System
• Diverse and Strategic Cover Crops
• Adapted Nutrient Management
• Integrated Weed & Pest Management
• Diverse Crop Rotations
• Precision Farming Technology
• Prescriptive Buffers and other
Edge-of-field practices
Indiana is a national leader in Soil Health!
Soil Health is not a destination...it’s a Journey

7. Healthy, Productive Soils System Criteria
USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer.www.nrcs.usda.gov
154,590 acres
3,832 acres
223,469 acres
0
50,000
100,000
150,000
200,000
250,000
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
INDIANA PRS-REPORTED APPLIED COVER CROP ACRES
(Includes EQIP, AWEP, WHIP, CSP, and CTA) 199,197 acres

8. Healthy, Productive Soils System Criteria
USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer.www.nrcs.usda.gov
0
100,000
200,000
300,000
400,000
500,000
600,000
700,000
800,000
900,000
1,000,000
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Transect =
184,000 acres
68,141 acres
Transect =
441,100 acres
154,590 acres
933,397 acres
199,197 acres
Indiana FARMERS ARE
IMPLEMENTING COVER
CROPS AS PART OF THEIR
MANAGEMENT DECISIONS
AND TECHNICAL
ASSISTANCE - NOT RELYING
ON PROGRAMS
= SUCCESS!
~ 3 times
~ 3 times
~ 4.5 times

9. Healthy, Productive Soils System Criteria
USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer.www.nrcs.usda.gov
School Branch Monitoring Project
Objective:
Document the potential for production
agriculture to complement water
resources through the implementation
of soil health management systems

10. Eagle Creek
Watershed
Past
Monitoring
(Indiana University
- Purdue University
- Indianapolis –
IUPUI)

11. Eagle Creek Watershed
Past Monitoring (IUPUI)
Approximately 10 mi. NW of
Indianapolis
Area above Dam = 419 km2
(162mi2)
11 Subwatersheds
2007 Land Cover
63% Agriculture
 25% Corn
 20% Soy
 18% Pasture/Hay
19% Urban
13% Forested
2% Open Water
Eagle Creek Reservoir – Eutrophic
Drinking Water Source for
Indianapolis

12. Nitrate - ECWMP 12/4/08 - 3/9/11
Site
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 SS STE STW
Nitrate(mg/L)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
M. Stouder
Eagle Creek
Watershed
Past Monitoring
(IUPUI)

13. Total Phosphorus - ECWMP 12/4/08 - 3/9/11
Site
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 SS STE STW
TotalP(mg/L)
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
M. Stouder
Eagle Creek
Watershed
Past Monitoring
(IUPUI)

14. Slide 15
Past Monitoring Limitations (not just Eagle Creek...)
• Monitoring Frequency
o Hourly vs. Daily vs. Weekly vs. Monthly
• Monitoring Duration
o Number of Years; Growing Season vs. Winter
• Monitoring Location & Size
o In-Stream vs. Edge-of-Field vs. Size vs. Mgmt.

15. Slide 16
Past Monitoring Limitations (not just Eagle Creek...)
• Land Use
o Agriculture vs. Forested vs. Urban vs. Residential
• Land Management
o Tillage vs. Nutrients (rate, time, form, place) vs.
Rotation vs. ...

16. School Branch Monitoring Project
80% Agriculture
Over 40% in soil health management systems
• continuous no-till +
• cover crops +
• intense nutrient management
Targeted Efforts =
National Water Quality Initiative (NWQI)
Field to Market - Field Print Calculator

17. School Branch Crop Management
Typical Tillage Strip Tillage
No-Till + Cover Crops

18. Slide 19
Made Possible by Two of the Nation’s Soil Health Leaders

19. Slide 20
School Branch
Monitoring Project
Continuous/Automatic
Monitoring
24 hours/day
7 days/week
365 days/year
• Automatic Edge-of-field
• Continuous Water Quality Gage
(USGS “Sentry”/”Super”)
• Stream Gages
Bi-Weekly/Monthly Grabs + Gage
Bi-Weekly/Monthly Grabs + Gage

20. Automatic edge-of-field sampling =
– Surface runoff measurements
+
– Sub-surface
– Both in heated structures for year-round
sampling
Slide 21
Farmer + NRCS (201/202) + IUPUI + ISA +
SWCD

21. Edge-of-field Baseline Period
= crop years 2015, 2016
Soy-Corn Rotation + No-Till +
Cover Crops + buffer + split N+
Fall Broadcast solid P at Tri-
State Recommendations
Soy-Corn Rotation + No-Till +
Cover Crops + buffer + split N+
Fall Broadcast solid P at Tri-
State Recommendations

22. Edge-of-field Treatment Period
= crop years 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020
Soy-Corn Rotation + No-Till +
Cover Crops + buffer + split N+
Fall Broadcast solid P at Tri-
State Recommendations Soy-Corn Rotation + No-
Till + Cover Crops +
buffer + split N + Liquid
injected P at planting at
adapted rates

23. EoF Baseline and Treatment Periods
= crop years 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020
Soils = grid and multi-
depth sampling;
Plants = annual tissue
tests
Soils = grid and multi-
depth sampling;
Plants = annual tissue
tests

24. Slide 25
Bio-Reactor/Bioswale Monitoring
(Indiana University - Purdue
University Indianapolis – CEES)
Data collected since 2011 and will
continue

25. Continuous Water Quality Sampling Gage
and Stream Gages =
– Data are available in real-time on the web
Slide 26
USGS

26. School Branch West
(Maloney Farm)
School Branch East
(Starkey Farm)
Continuous Soil Moisture Monitoring =
– Data are available in real-time on the web
IGS + IDEM

27. Groundwater Monitoring
+
Biological (Algae + Fish +
Macro-Invertebrates)
Monitoring
+
Source Tracking
USGS

28. Slide 29
School Branch Monitoring Plan
Edge-of-field
• Farmers, IUPUI, ISA/ICMC, SWCD, NRCS
In-Stream (Sentry Gage)
• USGS
In-Stream (Fixed Station)
• USGS, IDEM, MCHD
In-Stream (Biology)
• USGS
Groundwater
• USGS, IDEM
Nutrient Source Tracking
• USGS
Sediment Characterization
• IUPUI
Soils and Plant Condition
• IUPUI, NRCS, IGS, Farmers
N
P
Sediment
Discharge
DO
pH
E Coli
Pesticides
Biology

29. Slide 30
Key Questions to be Answered:
In fields managed with long-term no-till + cover crops + precise
nutrient management + buffers:
• What is the nutrient and sediment load of this system
from the edge-of-field?
• What is the nutrient load from the edge-of-field by
switching phosphorus application rate, form, placement
and timing?
• What is the edge-of-field nutrient load from a bio-
reactor/bio-swale?

30. Slide 31
Key Questions to be Answered:
• What are the in-stream loads of nitrogen, phosphorus, and
suspended sediment in a stream reach where 40% of the upstream
cropland drainage area is managed with long-term no-till + cover
crops + precision nutrient management + buffers and the other 60%
of cropland in reduced tillage systems, compared with other reaches
of the stream?
• What are the biological community responses in reaches of the
stream that have different combinations of upstream agricultural
and residential land use?

31. PA JacintheRainfall: May 15-17 (0.5 inch), June 9-10 (0.7 inch)
Eagle Creek Watershed Monitoring
(Indiana University - Purdue University Indianapolis )
Nitrate (data not published)
No-Till + Cover Crops +
Precision Nutrient Mgmt

32. PA JacintheRainfall: May 15-17 (0.5 inch), June 9-10 (0.7 inch)
Eagle Creek Watershed Monitoring
(Indiana University - Purdue University Indianapolis )
Soluble Reactive Phosphorus (data not published)
No-Till + Cover Crops +
Precision Nutrient Mgmt

33. Slide 34
School Branch Monitoring
Future Plans
Edge-of-field Monitoring
Add farmer sites to include:
• Existing tillage to no-till/strip-till
• No cover crops to Cover Crops
• Existing nutrient mgmt to various
4R principles
Conservation Practices
(current funding available through
NRCS NWQI, CREP, others)
• Increase buffers
• Increase no-till/strip-till adoption
• Increase conservation cropping
systems adoption
• Install a 2-stage ditch

34. School Branch Monitoring Project Partners
• Farmers
• Indiana University - Purdue University Indianapolis
(IUPUI)
• Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS)
• US Geological Survey (USGS)
• Indiana Department of Environmental Management
(IDEM)
• Marion County Health Department (MHCD)
• Indiana Soybean Alliance/Indiana Corn Marketing
Council (ISA/ICMC)
• Hendricks County Soil and Water Conservation
Districts (SWCD)
• Indiana Geological Survey (IGS)