Mississippi River/Gulf of Mexico Watershed Nutrient (Hypoxia) Task Force History and New Direction: Tracking Progress Towards Our Goal NEMW Institute Congressional Briefing Katie Flahive, US EPA January 31, 2018 epa.gov/ms-htf
Hypoxia Task Force Background • Formed by EPA in 1997; legislatively authorized in 1998 HABRHCA Law • At the Task Force’s request, an interagency committee convened by the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy completed an Integrated Assessment, which served as scientific basis for a 2001 Action Plan with goal: reduce size of the Hypoxic Zone to <5000 sq km by 2015 • Focused on reducing nitrogen loads to the gulf via the Mississippi River • Science Reassessment 2004-2007: • Considered phosphorus a co-driver of the hypoxic zone • Convened four science symposia, outcomes submitted to EPA Science Advisory Board panel for consideration • Science Advisory Board recommended a dual N and P strategy; estimated a 45% reduction needed in both N and P to reach goal; urged “directionally correct” progress toward goal rather than continued debate over goal revision • 2008 Action Plan included commitment by states to develop and implement Nutrient Reduction Strategies with continued federal support • In 2015 the Task Force reaffirmed its goal with a new 2035 target date; adopted interim, 20% N and P load reduction targets for 2025; committed to enhanced tracking of progress • 2014 HABHRCA required EPA to submit to Congress biennial reports on behalf of the HTF, describing progress towards the goal; 2015 and 2017 Reports to Congress complete 2
Science Based Goal Coastal Goal Interim Target By 2035, reduce 5-year running average size 20% reduction of nitrogen and of the Gulf hypoxic zone to 5,000 km 2 phosphorus loading by 2025 From Nancy Rabalais (LSU/LUMCON) 3
Nit itrogen and Phosphorus Loadin ing Sources in in th the Mis ississip ippi i and Atchafala laya Riv iver Basin in (M (MARB) USGS SPARROW model estimates of sources of TN and TP transported from Mississippi River Basin to the Gulf of Mexico (Robertson and Saad 2013) 4
Hypoxia Task Force Members Five Federal Agencies plus Tribes: • US Army Corps of Engineers • National Oceanic and Atmospheric • US Environmental Protection Agency Administration • US Department of Agriculture • National Tribal Water Council • US Geological Survey 12 State Agencies: • Arkansas Mississippi • Missouri River Basin • Iowa • Tennessee HTF States • Minnesota • Indiana • Ohio • Louisiana • Illinois Each state is represented by one of • Mississippi • Kentucky Agriculture agency, Environmental Quality agency, or Natural • Wisconsin Resources agency 5
HTF Priority Activities Nutrient Reduction Strategies • All 12 states have developed strategies • Focus on implementation in state priority watersheds Tracking progress towards the goal • Point Source Measures Report • Nonpoint source (NPS) Measures • Federal Accomplishments and revised Federal Strategy, 2016 Continue to build and leverage partnerships, including with Land Grant Universities • SERA-46 Priorities for Collaboration Communicating Progress • 2017 Report to Congress 6
Federal Agency Efforts to Support States • Improving both MARB and Gulf monitoring data and modeling approaches to help demonstrate progress • Continuing research on the impacts and relationship between nutrients and hypoxia to inform management strategies • Targeted delivery of federal funding for conservation systems and watershed planning to support state nutrient reduction strategies • Develop and improve technical tools to help support state strategy implementation • Expanding outreach and partnerships with organizations • Support states in implementing their nutrient reduction strategies 7
Tracking Progress Measuring & Towards Our Goal Modeling Hypoxic Zone • NOAA Cruise, Gliders, Models Modeling Decadal Measuring Biennial Basin Loading Loading Trends Trends • Point Source • USDA CEAP Measures • SPARROW • NPS Measures Quantify and Track Progress Monitoring Modeling Regional WQ Trends & State Loading Trends • WQX: EPA, USGS • SPARROW & state data • Monitoring • SWAT Collaborative • State models 8
Tracking Progress: Annual TN and TP loads in the MARB transported to the Gulf of Mexico from 1980 to 2015 (USGS 2017) 9
Forging State and Basinwide Connections & Partnerships to Implement Nutrient Reduction Strategies • In 2014, established MOU with Land Grant Universities in each HTF State; these LGUs formed a committee for collaboration , “SERA - 46” (see next slide) • Farmers and Agricultural Organizations: HTF members seek to encourage farmer-led actions that improve water quality and enhance ecological benefits and services • Businesses, e.g., the Midwest Row Crop Collaborative, a coalition of ag/food industry and conservation NGOs seeking to accelerate sustainable ag practices while meeting production goals • Cities and Communities, including municipal wastewater agencies and the communities they serve • Other NGO Conservation Organizations seeking to restore and enhance natural resources in the MARB, e.g., The Nature Conservancy 10
For More Information: 2017 Report to Congress 11
HTF State Engagement & Perspective • Iowa • Co-chair HTF w/ EPA • Development of Strategy • Transition to Implementation • Progress Tracking • State Perspectives • NPS Measures workgroup • Farm Bill Letter
Iowa Update • Strategy Released in 2013 • Collaborative, science-based assessment • Iowa Legislature established Water Quality Initiative • Leveraging resources (RCPP, private $, other federal funding, and landowners) • Engage partners, build capacity and overcome barriers to scale-up • Accountability and tracking (www.nutrientstrategy.iastate.edu/documents) • 2018 Legislative Session passes longer- term sustainable funding. • Nearly $300M over the next 12 years to advance Iowa NRS.
Leadership from the States • All states developed their own Strategies • Engaged stakeholders • Targeted watersheds • Similarities between states, but still unique to each. • HTF provides opportunity for states: • Lead efforts tailored to the state • Work across borders • Learn from each other • Successes, lessons learned • Greater coordination with federal partners • Improved collaboration with land grant universities • Common measures and tracking progress while preserving state individuality
Background on NPS Measures Workgroup • NPS Measures workgroup tasked with identifying a common measure • Impact • All States could reasonably report on. • Not the only measure. • Use to report and track progress, but also to help inform and improve implementation.
Background on NPS Measures Workgroup 1. Practices implemented: State and/or Local-level 1. Federal-level 2. Private/NGO-level 3. • Categories/parameters identified • Consistency of NPS Framework among states • Identified challenges and barriers • Walton Family Foundation Grant • Completed Final Draft of NPS Measures Progress Report
Private data • Framework reportable for: NGOs, Agribusiness, Individual Landowners/Farmers • Partnerships • Aggregate data, low resolution, statistically based • Appropriate for broad scale/variable practices • Surveys (land use, tillage, 4Rs), Mapping (structural, “visible”), other data collection methods
HTF State Member Recommendations on Farm Bill Letter sent on behalf of HTF state members: • Encourage greater emphasis and funding on practices to limit losses of nutrients • Encourage expansion of engagement from partners to help prioritize and implement programs • Prioritize and expand investments in applied on-farm research and monitoring.
SERA-46 Land Grant Universities Working Collaboratively with the Hypoxia Task Force Amanda Gumbert, University of Kentucky Beth Baker, Mississippi State University
Role of Land Grant Universities (LGUs) in U.S. Teaching Research Extension Morrill Act, 1862 Hatch Act, 1887 Smith Lever Act, 1914 Teach such branches of Provide federal funds to Provide education to adults learning as are related to state land grant colleges to off-campus that is relevant, agriculture and the create agricultural research understandable and mechanic arts. facilities. practical. Jan 31, 2018 Northeast Midwest Institute Congressional Briefing
What is SERA-46? Land-grant universities (LGUs) provide research, teaching, and extension programs in the agricultural and related sciences, serving the people of their respective states. • Southern Extension and Research Activities committee number 46; includes both Southern and North Central Regions of the US Jan 31, 2018 Northeast Midwest Institute Congressional Briefing
USDA-NIFA coordinates multistate efforts via regional committees Strong linkage/coordination with Hypoxia Task Force 12 LGUs in Mississippi River Basin Jan 31, 2018 Northeast Midwest Institute Congressional Briefing
SERA-46 Goal Promote effective implementation of science- based approaches to nutrient management/conservation that reduce nutrient losses to the environment. Jan 31, 2018 Northeast Midwest Institute Congressional Briefing
Recommend
More recommend
