The Good, Bad, Ugly Of Manure Applications In 2017 - Kevin Elder, from the 2018 Conservation Tillage and Technology Conference, March 6 - 7, Ada, OH, USA. More presentations at https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCZBwPfKdlk4SB63zZy16kyA

1. The Good, Bad and Ugly Of
Manure Applications in 2017
2018 Conservation Tillage and
Technology Conference
March 6th, 2018
Kevin H. Elder, Chief
ODA – Division of Livestock
Environmental Permitting
Elder@agri.ohio.gov
614/387-0469 Office 614/582-7880 Cell

2. The Good!
 Every Year More Manure is being applied
better to and for crop production!
 Number of Warnings, NOV’s and NOD’s is
decreasing.

3. The Good! (Continued)
 We have been having
100 to 150 attending
CLM Training each year
and certifying an
additional 20 to 30
each year and with a
total of 299 certified
currently.
 Number of complaints
on permitted facilities
was only 24, with 9 of
those valid.

4. The Good! (Continued)
 Number of Complaints
on Certified Livestock
Managers was 21,
with only 13 of them
Manure application.
 Additional training
occurring at Manure
Science Review and
here at ADA is helping
get additional
understanding.

5. One Ohio Government Agency Has Authority
Over Manure Application
Department of
Agriculture
Commercial
Fertilizer
Manure from all
other Livestock
Facilities
Division of Soil
andWater
Conservation
Division of Livestock
Environmental
Permitting
Division
of Plant
Health
Manure from Permitted
Livestock Facilities,
Certified Livestock
Managers
Effective Jan. 1,
2016

6. Division of Soil and Water
Conservation and Local SWCD’s
Historical Authority
 “Agricultural Pollution” means failure to
use management or conservation
practices … to abate the degradation of
waters of the state by animal manure or
soil sediment
 Those BMP’s are defined in the Technical
Standards of the USDA-NRCS Technical
Guide (for the most part)

7. What is DSWC/SWCD’s
Agricultural Pollution
Abatement?
7
Program philosophies:
 A fair enforcement procedure emphasizing
local review and peer evaluation.
 A public complaint procedure.
 A technical assistance service.
 Desire for voluntary compliance through a
cooperative solution.

8.  “Waters of the state” –all streams,
lakes, ponds, wetlands, watercourses,
waterways, wells, springs, irrigation
systems, drainage systems, and all other
bodies or accumulations of water, surface
and underground, natural or artificial
DLEP, DSWC & SWCD Historical
Authority/Definitions

9. ODA’s Division of Livestock
Environmental Permitting
Authority
 Is much more detailed and regulatory
 Ohio Revised Code Chapter 903 (Laws)
 Ohio Administrative Code 901:10 (Rules)
 Six Chapters covering Permits to Install and
Permits to Operate.
 Both Rules and Permits dictate what is required by
the larger facilities.

10. What’s the Newest?
 Senate Bill 1
 Effective July 3, 2015
 Includes new restrictions on:
 Manure and fertilizer application
 Dredging and disposal of dredged
material in Lake Erie
 Waste water treatment plants

11. What’s New? DSWC Civil Penalties
Agricultural Pollution Abatement Program
 1973 - Agricultural Nonpoint Pollution
Abatement Program began at ODNR
 1979 - First Pollution Abatement rules were
adopted
 1991 - Enforcement authority / Chief’s Order
 July 28, 2017 – Civil penalty authority
Trends over life of the program:
 Rules have become more lenient
 Penalties have become more strict
11

12. ORC 939.07 (A)(3)
The director may impose a civil penalty only if all of the following occur:
(a) The owner or operator is notified in writing of the deficiencies resulting in
noncompliance, the actions that the owner or operator must take to correct the
deficiencies, and the time period within which the owner or operator must correct the
deficiencies and attain compliance.
(b) After the time period specified in the notice has elapsed, the director or the
director's designee has inspected the agricultural land or animal feeding operation,
determined that the owner or operator is still not in compliance, and issued a
notice of an adjudication hearing.
(c) The director affords the owner or operator an opportunity for an adjudication
hearing under Chapter 119. of the Revised Code to challenge the determination of
the director or the director's designee that the owner or operator is not in compliance
or the imposition of the civil penalty, or both. However, the owner or operator may
waive the right to an adjudication hearing.
DSWCD Civil Penalties

13. DSWC Civil Penalties
 Minor
 1st Violation – up to $250
 2nd Violation – up to $1,000
 3rd Violation – up to $5,000
 Moderate
 1st Violation – up to $2,000
 2nd Violation – up to $5,000
 3rd Violation – up to $10,000
 Major – up to $10,000

14. ORC 939.08 / Senate Bill 1
ORC 939.09
(A) Except as provided in division (D) of this section, the
director of agriculture may assess a civil penalty against a
person that violates section 939.08 of the Revised Code. The
director may impose a civil penalty only if the director
affords the person an opportunity for an adjudication
hearing under Chapter 119. of the Revised Code to
challenge the director's determination that the person
violated section 939.08 of the Revised Code. The person
may waive the right to an adjudication hearing.
ODA can issue civil penalties for violations of WLEB
restrictions without corrective actions / NOD.

16. New Authority for Manure
 No person in the western basin shall
surface apply manure under any of the
following circumstances:

17. New Authority for Manure
 No person in the western basin shall
surface apply manure under any of the
following circumstances:
1. On snow-covered or frozen soil

18. New Authority for Manure
 No person in the western basin shall
surface apply manure under any of the
following circumstances:
2. When the top two inches of the
soil are saturated from precipitation

19. New Authority for Manure
 No person in the western basin shall
surface apply manure under any of the
following circumstances:
3. When the local weather forecast
for the application area contains
greater than fifty per cent chance of
precipitation exceeding one-half inch
in a 24 hour period

20. New Authority for Manure
 Restrictions do not apply if:
1. The manure is injected into the
ground

21. New Authority for Manure
 Restrictions do not apply if:
2. The manure is incorporated with
24 hours of surface application

22. New Authority for Manure
 Restrictions do not apply if:
3. The manure is applied onto a
growing crop

23. New Authority for Manure
 Restrictions do not apply if:
4. In the event of emergency, the
chief of the division of soil and water
resources or the chief’s designee
provide written consent…

24. New Authority for Manure
 Restrictions do not:
Prohibit on-site stockpiling of solid
manure.

25. New Authority for Fertilizer
 Senate Bill 1
 Effective July 3, 2015
 Rules going through JCARR process and
should be final by the end of January
 Includes new restrictions on manure and
fertilizer application

26. New Authority for Fertilizer
 No person in the western basin shall
surface apply fertilizer under any of the
following circumstances:
1. On snow-covered or frozen soil
2. When the top two inches of the soil
are saturated from precipitation

27. New Authority for Fertilizer
 No person in the western basin shall
surface apply fertilizer in granular
form under any of the following
circumstances:
3. When the local weather forecast for the
application area contains greater than fifty
per cent chance of precipitation
exceeding one-half one inch in a 24 12
hour period

28.  Restrictions do not apply if:
1. The fertilizer is injected into the
ground
2. The fertilizer is incorporated with
24 hours of surface application
3. The fertilizer is applied onto a
growing crop
New Authority for Fertilizer

29.  The director of agriculture may assess a
civil penalty
New Authority for Fertilizer

30. SB1 Permitted livestock farms
requirements
 New – Anyone taking and applying
manure from a permitted farm must be
either a Certified Livestock Manager or
Fertilizer Certified.
 ODA –Division of Livestock Environmental
Permitting’s rules do not allow manure
application on frozen and/or snow covered
ground…anywhere…except

31. What are some of the working
definitions?
 Snow Covered – when residue or ground
cannot be seen because of snow cover or
½ inch of ice or more.
 Frozen – ground that is not able to be
penetrated because or frozen soil moisture
 Saturated soil – occurs when all the pore
spaced are filled with water….above field
capacity

32. What are some of the working
definitions?
 Growing Crops – will vary by season, any
green plant that will be harvested or that
was planted as a cover crop that will not
winter kill. Has to have a reasonable %
ground cover.
 Weather prediction – Recommend using
http://weather.gov, but will accept any
copy of a forecast that shows predictions
and amounts for the 24 hours.

33. What are some of the working
definitions?
 Injection – placing the manure or fertilizer
beneath the soil surface.
 Incorporation – Tillage that mixes the
manure or fertilizer into the soil to a
average minimum depth of 4 inches, with
80% of the material covered with soil.

34. The Bad!
What has Gone Wrong!!
939.08 & A Growing Crop
In January of 2018, examples of three ways the
“growing crop” exemption can lead to trouble:
1. Crop planted, but barely emerged

39. 939.08 & A Growing
Crop
In January of 2018, examples of three ways the
“growing crop” exemption can lead to trouble:
1. Crop planted, but barely emerged
2. Not following recommended application
rates or setbacks, leading to pollution

45. 939.08 & A Growing
Crop
In January of 2018, examples of three ways the
“growing crop” exemption can lead to trouble:
1. Crop planted, but barely emerged
2. Not following recommended application rates or
setbacks, leading to pollution
3. Cover crops that winter kill are not
“growing”

48. Even when things are done
RIGHT, it can go to #%@^
 This summer we had several instances
where the rules were followed, but waters
of the state were impacted, fish killed…

49. Williams County
 Poultry litter application to wheat stubble.
 5 fields, ~ 2 tons/acre application rate.
 Farmer was planning on working it in and
planting a cover crop.
 Farmer had soil tests showing it needed
nutrients.

50. What could go wrong?
 Manure originated out of Mercer county
and was sold to farmer and applied by
CLM.
 CLM had looked at weather forecast.

51.  CLM had records of
everything but
weather forecast.
 We pulled the
forecast which
called for less than
50% chance of less
than ½ inch of
rainfall.
 CLM began
applying around
8:00 AM

52.  He stopped at 11:00 AM when it began
raining.
 They received 2.4 inches of rain in a short
time.
 This resulted in a $16,000.00 Fish Kill

53. There were several other
discharge incidents…
 We had several other fish kills this past
summer.
 One had applied liquid dairy manure after
taking off a cutting of alfalfa.

54.  Manure had
been applied on
August 1st .
 Rain event on
August 4th
caused a
discharge and
fish kill resulting
in several
thousand dollars
of restitution.

55. What do I need to do?
 If in doubt??? Don’t
do it!!!
 Have good records!
 Soil Test!
 Manure Test!
 Use nutrients where
needed!
 Keep weather
predictions!
 Look at condition of
soil at time of
application!
 Look at available
water holding
capacity!
 Watch tile outlets and
surface water
patterns!
 Watch field after first
rainfall!

56. What’s Next??
 Lots of rumors!!
 Something will
happen/change!
 Regulations seldom go
backwards!
 Discussions on
mandated nutrient
management plans.
 Additional BMP’s
required.
 Required Monitoring of
application fields till
after first rainfall event.
 Kevin’s wishes
 One set of rules for
everyone. (Permitted,
Grand Lake St. Mary’s,
WELB, small and
medium producers)
 Realize no rule is 100%
guaranteed effective.
(Mother Nature Rules)
 When everything is
being done correctly,
don’t penalize for what
can’t be controlled.
 Everyone would use
common sense (all sides)

57. The Really UGLY!!!!
and
I Have No Pity on Stupidity!

58. KEVIN ELDER
OHIO DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
8995 EAST MAIN STREET REYNOLDSBURG
OHIO 43068
ELDER@AGRI.OHIO.GOV
614/582-7880
KRAZYKEV2001@YAHOO.COM
614/565-9691
Questions?

59. Where are our regulations?
 Ohio Revised Code 903
 http://codes.ohio.gov/orc/903
 Ohio Administrative Code 901:10
 http://codes.ohio.gov/oac/901%3A10

60. How were our regulations
developed?
 Use of scientifically
developed and
reviewed BMP’s.
 Reviewed by 21
member CAFF
Advisory Committee.
 Reviewed and
Updated at least
every 5 years.
 What are some of the
references?
 USDA NRCS Ohio
Nutrient Management
Standard 590 (2012)
 Tri-State Fertility
Guide
 Manure and
Wastewater
Management Guide
 Current and on-going
edge of field research

61. What do you need to know?
 Manure Sampling
 Soil Sampling
 Crop Rotations
 Crop Yields
 Time of Application
 Method of Application
 Land application
restrictions
 Available Water
Holding Capacity

62. Manure Sampling
 Minimum of yearly
sample of every
structure and type of
manure
 Collect accurate
sample (agitated) as
close to application
time as possible
 Sample each type of
manure being applied
 Account for variables

63. Soil Sampling
 Follow minimum
University Stds.
 Every 3-4 years
 Represent no more
than 25 acres
 9-12 cores per sample
 Even depth of 6-8
inches
 Taken min. 6 months
after nutrient app.

64. Nutrient Recommendations for
Crops and Yields
 Tri-State Nutrient
Recommendations
 https://www.extension.purdue.ed
u/extmedia/AY/AY-9-32.pdf
 USDA-NRCS Ohio 590 Std.
 http://www.oardc.ohio-
state.edu/ocamm/images/OH_590
_Standard_2012.pdf
 Ohio Livestock Manure and
Wastewater Guide, Bulletin 604
 http://agcrops.osu.edu/specialists
/fertility/fertility-fact-sheets-and-
bulletins/bulletin_604.pdf/view

65. What are the limitations?
 No more Nitrogen
than the next crops
needs.
 Not more than 50 pounds if
no crop growing before
ground temp goes below
50 degrees.
 Recommend using Cover
Crops to capture N.
 Recommend using Pre-
Side-dress Nitrogen test.
 Recommend applications to
crops that require N.

66. What are the limitations?
 Phosphorus
 Keep in Agronomic range
to allow application for
rotations (15-30 PPM)
 No more than 250#
P2O5/year
 If Soil test is over 100
ppm, then only single year
application
 If manure is very
concentrated (over 80
#/ton) or soil tests very
high there are special
requirements

67. What are the Limitations?
 What is the
condition of the
soil at the time of
application?
 Compacted?
 Cracks?
 Earthworm
burrows?
 Root channels?

68. What are the limitations?
 How much liquid?
 No more than the
Available Water
Holding Capacity at
the time of application.
(can make more than
one application)
 If field is tiled, (most
Ohio soils are) No
more than ½ inch or
13,600 gallons/acre.

69. What are the limitations?
 No Frozen and/or Snow-covered Manure
Applications (on permitted farms since 2006)
 Any request must be an emergency.
 Must have looked at all other alternatives.
 Must have prior approved site meeting all additional
requirements.

70. What are the Limitations?
 Land Application Restrictions – Setbacks
from Surface waters
 Minimum of 100 feet of residue if surface
applied or
 35 feet of growing vegetation

71. Now for the Why’s
 Review of existing
information
 New research on
nutrient movement
here in Ohio

72. Probably some of the best summary
of Information on Phosphorus!
http://www.epa.state.oh.us/dsw/lakeerie/index.as
px#126087070-phase-i-information

73. Some of the Most Recent
Testing Information

74. Changes in Rainfall patterns

75. Rainfall Event Amounts

76. Effects of Rainfall

77. Effects of Rainfall

78. Research Results

80. Time of
Application
• Greatest potential
for surface and tile
losses occurs with
fall and winter
application
• Applying P in
spring or after
wheat harvest
seems to minimize
surface and tile
losses
Mehlich3STP(ppm)
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
Time of application
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
Surface Losses
Tile Losses
0.56 kg/ha 0.50 kg/ha
0.04 kg/ha
0.50 kg/ha0.06 kg/ha

81. Days since application
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
DRPconcentration(mg/L)
0
5
10
15
20
1/3/12: 225# MAP
11/13/13: 193# MAP

82. Effect of tillage on preferential flow and
phosphorus transport
TD2
TD1
0 50 100
meters
Drainage area
Tile outlet
Rain gauge
Ohio, USA
UBWC
Soil type: Silt loam
Tile depth: 3 ft
Soil test P: 30 ppm Mehlich-3P
Tillage: No-till
2014 management
May 6th – Applied 175 lb/ac of MAP
May 8th – Tilled field TD1 (disc)
(TD2 remained no-till)
Study Objective
Compare P transport before and
after tillage and between tilled and
no-till fields

83. 0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
0.00
0.20
0.40
0.60
0.80
1.00
1.20
1.40
0 10 20 30
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.4
0 20 40 60 80
Discharge
Preferential flow
DRP
Discharge(mm) Before P application & tillage
(April 28th)
DRP(mg/L)
TD1 TD2
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.4
0 20 40 60 80
Discharge
DRP
DRP(g/ha)
After P application & tillage
(May 12th)
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
0.00
0.20
0.40
0.60
0.80
1.00
1.20
1.40
0 10 20 30
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
0.00
0.20
0.40
0.60
0.80
1.00
1.20
1.40
0 10 20 30
TD1 TD2
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
1.4
0 20 40 60 80
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
1.4
0 20 40 60 80
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
0.00
0.20
0.40
0.60
0.80
1.00
1.20
1.40
0 10 20 30
Avg DRP (mg/L) =0.08 Avg DRP (mg/L) =0.08 Avg DRP (mg/L) =0.58 Avg DRP (mg/L) =2.12
DRP Load (g/ha) = 12.6 DRP Load (g/ha) = 12.4 DRP Load (g/ha) = 18.2 DRP Load (g/ha) = 129.6
DRP(mg/L)DRP(g/ha)
Williams et al, 2015: unpublished

84. Tile drain
DRP(mgL-1
)
0.0
0.3
0.6
0.9
1.2
4.0
5.0
1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Storm event
a a a a
b
a
b
a
b
a
b
a
b
a
P application
& tillage
TD1
TD2
DRP concentrations in tile discharge
remain greater from the no-till field
compared to the tilled field even
after 5 storm events (>1 month)
Storm
Event
TD1
(tilled)
TD2
(no-till)
g/ha
1 12.6 12.4
2 16.5 19.7
3 18.2 129.6
4 54.8 210.3
5 1.7 3.9
6 0.6 1.5
7 2.0 3.8
Total 106.4 381.2
Incorporating the fertilizer
substantially decreased DRP
loads in tile drain discharge
Williams et al, 2015: unpublished

85.  P & N losses are impacted by:
 STP
 Connectivity to water
 Placement of P fertilizer
 Timing of fertilizer
 Rate of fertilizer
 Source and legacy effects
Conclusions

86.  Potential practices that may help address:
 Adherence to tri-state
recommendations or lesser application
 Avoiding fall and winter applications
 Accounting for manure in nutrient
calculations
 Subsurface placement of nutrients
(banding or injecting)
 Disconnecting hydrologic pathways
(DWM and blind inlets)
 Cover crops – soil health, increase
infiltration, reduce surface runoff, water
quality benefits not clear
 Gypsum – limited to concentration
reductions and increased infiltration
Conclusions

87. Working together - Interface between science and implementation
Consider multiple approaches – no simple answer
Science Implementation
Ag Retailers,
Crop Consultants,
Farmers,
Extension, ODA,
NRCS, ARS,
EPA
What is the solution?

88. KEVIN ELDER
OHIO DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
8995 EAST MAIN STREET REYNOLDSBURG
OHIO 43068
ELDER@AGRI.OHIO.GOV
614/582-7880
Questions?

91. New Regulations for Manure
and Fertilizers in Ohio
 Ohio legislature is moving quickly to prohibit
surface application of manure, fertilizers and
bio-solids to frozen and/or snow-covered
ground.

92. Sub. S. B. 1 & Sub. H. B. 61
 Both Bills are in response to addressing
Agriculture’s part in contributing to L.E.
Algae blooms and Toledo’s water issues.
 Both address Fertilizers and Manures.
 Legislation has passed both Senate and
House, but there are differences.
 Those differences are still being worked
out.

93. What is in each?
Fertilizer Provisions
(Regulated by ODA)
Sub. S.B. 1
 No person in the Western
Basin shall apply fertilizer
on:
 Frozen or Snow-covered soil.
 When top two inches are
saturated from precipitation.
 When the local weather
forecast is predicting more
than one inch of
precipitation in a twelve
hour period.
Sub. H.B. 61
 No person in the Western
Basin shall apply fertilizer
on:
 Same
 Same
 When the local weather
forecast is prediction mor
than ½ inch of
precipitation in a 24 hour
period.

94. What is in each? (Exceptions)
Sub. S.B. 1
 Unless:
 Fertilizer is injected into
ground.
 Fertilizer is incorporated
into ground within 48
hours.
 Fertilizer is applied to a
growing crop.
Sub. H.B. 61
 Unless:
 Same
 Fertilizer is incorporated
within 24 hours.
 Same

95. Enforcement provisions
 Director may respond to complaints
 May investigate any alleged violations
 Does not affect any permitted livestock
facilities. They have their own regulations
in law and rule.
 Is currently proposed for all watershed in
the Western Lake Erie Basin.
 Is specific to Nitrogen and Phosphorus.

96. Penalties
 Director may access a civil penalty.
 Penalty is to be established by rules, but not
more than $10,000.00 per violation.
 Any alleged person may request a
adjudication hearing
 Each 30 day period constitutes a separate
offence.

97. What is in each?
Manure Provisions
(Regulated by ODNR-DSWR)
Sub. S.B. 1
 No person in the Western
Basin shall apply Manure
on:
 Frozen or Snow-covered soil
 When top two inches are
saturated from precipitation.
 When the local weather
forecast is predicting more
than 1/2 inch of precipitation
in a 24 hour period.
Sub. H.B. 61
 No person in the Western
Basin shall apply Manure
on:
 Same
 Same
 Same

98. What is in each? (Exceptions)
Sub. S.B. 1
 Unless:
 Manure is injected into
ground.
 Manure is incorporated into
ground within 24 hours.
 Manure is applied to a
growing crop.
 Emergency provisions
provide for written
permission by Chief to
apply following the NRCS
590 standards.
Sub. H.B. 61
 Unless:
 Same
 Same
 Same
 Same Emergency
provisions. Additional
allowance of time for plan
to come into compliance.

99. Enforcement provisions
 Chief may respond to complaints
 May investigate any alleged violations
 Is currently proposed for all watershed in
the Western Lake Erie Basin.
 Does not apply to permitted facilities.
 House version has allowances for coming
into compliance plans.

100. Penalities
 Chief may access a civil penalty.
 Penalty is to be established by rules, but not
more than $10,000.00 per violation.
 Any alleged person may request a
adjudication hearing.
 Each 30 day period constitutes a separate
offence.

101. Other Provisions
Sub. S.B. 1
 OEPA authorized to
coordinate HAB
management and response.
 Lead free plumbing
 Study contributions of
nutrient loadings on Lake
Erie and Ohio River basins
 Monitoring of Water
Treatment Works
 Dredge Disposal
 Healthy Lake Erie fund
 Has immediate enactment.
Sub. H.B. 61
 Not in bill.
 Not in bill
 Not in Bill
 Same
 Same
 Not in Bill
 Requires OEPA to develop
similar Sludge rules.

102. What’s Next?
 The differences in the two versions will
have to be worked out.
 Probably will work on Senate Version.
 Is currently being negotiated.
 Anticipate passage within month.

103. Now, What’s the Science
behind the proposed laws?
 It begins with actions and attitudes of
utilizing nutrients for the crops, minimizing
loss, using the 4 R’s and ACT principles!
 4 R’s include’s infield practices of:
 Right material
 Right rate
 Right time
 Right place
 ACT includes infield, edge of field and
downstream practices of:
 Avoid, Control, Treat

104. Probably some of the best summary
of Information on Phosphorus!
http://www.epa.state.oh.us/dsw/lakeerie/index.as
px#126087070-phase-i-information

105. Phosphorus in Crop Production

106. What is the problem with
Nutrient Movement?
 By Long Term monitoring of the Maumee
 We have discovered that losses of Total
Phosphorus have decreased.
 That Nitrogen losses have remained the same
or decreased slightly.
 That Sediment loads have decreased.
 We have discovered that Dissolved Phosphorus
have increased since the mid 90’s.
 That the loss of Dissolved P/acre of watershed
has doubled over last 15-20 years

107. Phosphorus Impacts to Water
 Even though DRP has
doubled it is still a low
average between 2 & 4
#/acre and less than
5% of use of a Crop.
 Can’t see that…
 Hard to measure…
 Some losses are much,
much HIGHER!!

108. Edge-of-field instrumentation
H-flumes for surface runoff
Thel-mar compound weirs and
Isco area velocity sensors
for tile

109. 4R Research Fund
USDA-ARS: USDA-Agriculture Research Service
CEAP: Conservation Effects Assessment Project
EPA: DW-12-92342501-0
Ohio Corn Growers
Funding Sources: CIG: 69-3A75-12-231 (OSU)
CIG: 69-3A75-13-216 (Heidelberg University)
MRBI: Mississippi River Basin Initiative
The Nature Conservancy

110. Eventmeanconcentration(mg/L)
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
surface
tile
DRP TP
Phosphorus Concentrations

111. Eventmeanconcentration(mg/L)
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
surface
tile
DRP TP
Phosphorus Concentrations

112. AnnualDRPloading(kg/ha/yr)
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
Tile
Surface
P Tack Force recommendation
AnnualTPloading(kg/ha/yr)
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.4
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q

113. Month
Precipitation(inches)
0
2
4
6
8
1982-2004
2005-2014
J F M A M J J A S O N D
Precipitation Trends

114. Time
Cumulative(1982-2014)dayswith
greaterthan2"ofprecipitation
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
1982 1986 1990 1994 1998 2002 2006 2010 2014
8 Events in 16 Years!
20 Events in 16 Years
Event Size

115. Fertilizer Source

116. DRPLoad(kg/ha)
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
5.0
5.5
6.0
DRPNO3-NLoad(kg/ha)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
110
120
NO3-N
inorganic mixed organic
Fertilizer Source (chronic vs acute risk)

117. Fertilizer Rate

118. Discharge:Precipitation Ratio
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
Mehlich3STP(ppm)
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
300
400
500
<0.3 kg/ha
>0.3 kg/ha
tri-state critical level
tri-state maintencance level
Nutrient Rate

119. AnnualNO3-Nloading(kg/ha/yr)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
110
120
tile
surface
A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q
In addition to manure, applications of
ammonia and/or 28% is added before
planting and as side dress

120. Timing

121. Time of Application
• Greatest potential for
surface and tile losses
occurs with fall and
winter application
• Applying P in spring or
after wheat harvest
seems to minimize
surface and tile losses
Mehlich3STP(ppm)
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
Time of application
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
Surface Losses
Tile Losses
0.56 kg/ha 0.50 kg/ha
0.04 kg/ha
0.50 kg/ha0.06 kg/ha

122. Days since application
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
DRPconcentration(mg/L)
0
5
10
15
20
1/3/12: 225# MAP
11/13/13: 193# MAP

123. Placement

124. Broadcast variable rate application on May 6, 2014

125. 4-part stratification
• Stratification evident even in the top 1” of soil
(ANOVA, P<0.001, n=232)
• Although the degree of stratification varied some…
• 85% of the samples had some degree of stratification
M3P (ppm)
0 25 50 75 100 125 300
Coredepth(inches)
0-1
1-2
2-5
5-8
Median
60
49
34
26
54.5
Source: Johnson and Baker, Heidelberg University

126. Effect of tillage on preferential flow and
phosphorus transport
TD2
TD1
0 50 100
meters
Drainage area
Tile outlet
Rain gauge
Ohio, USA
UBWC
Soil type: Silt loam
Tile depth: 3 ft
Soil test P: 30 ppm Mehlich-3P
Tillage: No-till
2014 management
May 6th – Applied 175 lb/ac of MAP
May 8th – Tilled field TD1 (disc)
(TD2 remained no-till)
Study Objective
Compare P transport before and
after tillage and between tilled and
no-till fields

127. 0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
0.00
0.20
0.40
0.60
0.80
1.00
1.20
1.40
0 10 20 30
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.4
0 20 40 60 80
Discharge
Preferential flow
DRP
Discharge(mm) Before P application & tillage
(April 28th)
DRP(mg/L)
TD1 TD2
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.4
0 20 40 60 80
Discharge
DRP
DRP(g/ha)
After P application & tillage
(May 12th)
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
0.00
0.20
0.40
0.60
0.80
1.00
1.20
1.40
0 10 20 30
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
0.00
0.20
0.40
0.60
0.80
1.00
1.20
1.40
0 10 20 30
TD1 TD2
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
1.4
0 20 40 60 80
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
1.4
0 20 40 60 80
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
0.00
0.20
0.40
0.60
0.80
1.00
1.20
1.40
0 10 20 30
Avg DRP (mg/L) =0.08 Avg DRP (mg/L) =0.08 Avg DRP (mg/L) =0.58 Avg DRP (mg/L) =2.12
DRP Load (g/ha) = 12.6 DRP Load (g/ha) = 12.4 DRP Load (g/ha) = 18.2 DRP Load (g/ha) = 129.6
DRP(mg/L)DRP(g/ha)
Williams et al, 2015: unpublished data

128. Tile drain
DRP(mgL-1
)
0.0
0.3
0.6
0.9
1.2
4.0
5.0
1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Storm event
a a a a
b
a
b
a
b
a
b
a
b
a
P application
& tillage
TD1
TD2
DRP concentrations in tile discharge
remain greater from the no-till field
compared to the tilled field even
after 5 storm events (>1 month)
Storm
Event
TD1
(tilled)
TD2
(no-till)
g/ha
1 12.6 12.4
2 16.5 19.7
3 18.2 129.6
4 54.8 210.3
5 1.7 3.9
6 0.6 1.5
7 2.0 3.8
Total 106.4 381.2
Incorporating the fertilizer
substantially decreased DRP
loads in tile drain discharge
Williams et al, 2015: unpublished data

129. Summary
 Nutrients applied on the surface have a
higher risk of movement if a rainfall runoff
event occurs soon after application!
 Soils with a high phosphorus soil test have a
higher risk of nutrient movement!
 Above the agronomic crop level
 The higher the test the higher the potential loss
 Tile losses of dissolved P are occurring!
 Frozen and snow-covered losses are HIGH!

130. Snowmelt 2015
• Runoff after manure application to frozen and
snow covered ground
• Events from 3/2 – 3/10/15 during snowmelt

131. Highlights from five locations in Ohio

132. Shelby County

133. Shelby County
• Swine manure
• Application to 20 acres on 3/5/15
• Discharge with snowmelt

134. Shelby County
Liquid manure application on top of snow

135. Shelby County
Straw bales and trench – attempt to prevent discharge

136. Shelby County
Same site during snow melt – water flowing around and entering ditch – 15ppm
ammonia

137. Paulding County

138. Paulding County
• Liquid dairy manure application
• Discharge with snowmelt

139. Paulding County
Dairy manure – no livestock at facility – emptying manure pond in preparation for
bringing livestock to the facility

140. Paulding County

141. Paulding County
Flow over snow and frozen ground during melt

142. Paulding County

143. Paulding County

144. Paulding County
Discharging to ditch on
right outside of photo

145. Mercer County

146. Mercer County
• In GLSM watershed
• Watershed in distress rules:
– after March first it is permissible to apply manure
on frozen or snow covered ground only when
manure is injected or incorporated within twenty-
four hours of surface application
• Three observed applications of manure on
frozen ground

147. Mercer County – Watershed in Distress
March 6 - Liquid dairy manure being applied to frozen ground without incorporation.
Solid heifer pen pack manure previously applied to area in right of photo.

148. Mercer County – Watershed in Distress
March 6 - Liquid dairy manure being applied to frozen ground and snow covered
ground without incorporation.

149. Darke County

150. Darke County
• Three complaints received
• During investigation, SWCD found six fields
with a manure discharge within a
approximately 1500 acre area

151. Darke County
Runoff from rotten silage disposed of in field

152. Darke County
Chicken litter spread to field in February – discharging to open ditch at 10ppm
ammonia (ditch not shown – to right of photo)

153. Darke County
Same site with straw bales

154. Darke County
Tile running – tested at 7ppm. With the ground frozen, tile flow would primarily be
from surface receivers and blowholes.

155. Darke County
Chicken litter was applied to the field without setbacks. Discharge observed to the
ditch at bottom right (approximately 50 ppm ammonia).

156. Darke County
Downstream of previous photo. Visual mixing of runoff from two fields. Tea colored, manure
polluted runoff entering on the left. Light brown, sediment rich runoff entering from the right.

157. Darke County
Field test for ammonia in runoff water.

158. Darke County
Solid manure applied uphill of this wheat field. Highlighted manure solids are flowing with
runoff water through field and into a tile receiver. Manure is pen pack from steers.

159. Ashland County

160. Cinnamon Lake
• Dairy manure application
• Discharge with snowmelt on 3/9/15

161. Meyer Farm – Manure Source
Dairy Manure
Application Field with
discharge to Cinnamon Lake
Approx. flow path to Lake

162. Runoff from frozen field

163. Runoff from frozen field

164. Flow through culvert en route to lake
Foam – Not Snow

165. Flow through culvert en route to lake
Snow

166. Flowing on top of ice into lake
Private Dock
Runoff flowing
on top of lake
surface ice

167. KEVIN ELDER
OHIO DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
8995 EAST MAIN STREET REYNOLDSBURG
OHIO 43068
ELDER@AGRI.OHIO.GOV
614/582-7880
Questions?