A conversation with Chris Winslow, Director of the Ohio Sea Grant College Program and Dusty Sonnenberg, CCA, Ohio Ag Net.
Dusty: There are a lot of different approaches that farmers can participate in through the H2Ohio program. And I think a lot of farmers are asking the question: If I change things on my farm that’s maybe 120 miles from Lake Erie, how does that actually affect water quality?
Chris: On the west side of Lake Erie, we have harmful algal blooms and most of the nutrients that come into the lake come from the Maumee River. When we look at that watershed, we see that those nutrients are coming from farms. We call that a distant source of those nutrients. It’s not the things that happen right on the shore. It’s happening further up the watershed and we know there’s a lot of agricultural land up there in the Maumee watershed with great producers doing what they do. We definitely need to focus on the upper watershed where that source comes from.
Dusty: We also talk about sustainability — not just environmental sustainability, but the economic sustainability — of the farm. It has to make sense for them not only in terms of their operation, but financially and in terms of bigger picture sustainability. As we look at these practices, farmers have had the opportunity over the last few years to watch what their neighbors have been doing who have participated in the H2Ohio program and see what practices have worked and what practices may not have. The programs have also evolved to better meet the needs of farmers. As we look at some of these practices, we’ve also seen changes in the water going into the lake in this short period of time. Can you talk a little bit about where we are, what we’re seeing with river water going into Lake Erie?
Chris: We get asked this question quite a bit. We want a 40 percent reduction in nutrient inputs compared to 2008. The incentives we’re asking for under the H2Ohio program are the right ones. The 4Rs must be met. Research has shown that things like drainage water management and subsurface application, edge strips and subsurface application work. But it can take time and resources to put these practices into practice. Subsurface application is one method that shows the best results in slowing the loss of applied nutrients. The forage harvesters that pull behind the tractors aren’t cheap, though. Cover crops help with nitrogen and water management, but these cover crops are a new tool for some farmers. Some of these things like soil testing and applying the right amount may be a little more palatable and easier. Timing applications away from a storm and away from frozen ground and even on grass waterways or buffer strips is not so easy. Knowing where this buffer strip should be and how wide it should be – these are not trivial questions.
I would say it’s too early to tell. When you run a program of this magnitude, to get the money from the agencies to the farmers, it takes a while. We also know that some of the practices that are implemented don’t give you an immediate return on the money when you apply them to your field. No-till and cover crops take a while. If you look at the data that we’re getting now from Heidelberg to the National Center for Water Quality Research, you can see a downward trend in dissolved reactive phosphorus levels. But the way we see it, because every year things change based on rainfall and variability, statistically we’re not seeing a decline at the end of the mouth of the Maumee. But I would argue that the blooms are definitely not getting worse and we’re at a point where I think we have the right practices and the right program. We’re just going to need a little time under this H2Ohio. Also in Ohio, they’re creating wetlands, not necessarily an agricultural practice, but they help to sequester some of the nutrients. Planning and building a wetland doesn’t happen overnight, and the plants and organisms that live in that wetland and help break down the nutrients don’t happen overnight. So I wouldn’t say we’re seeing a statistical decline in phosphorus levels, but according to many researchers, the trend is going in the right direction.
Dusty: One of the terms I’ve heard you talk about in the past is the concept of old phosphorus. We know that phosphorus is one of the main drivers and that’s exactly what the program is targeting. How much of that is old phosphorus when you look at the amount of phosphorus that’s there?
Chris: Over the last decade, we’ve learned how phosphorus moves and where the higher and lower concentrations are. What we’ve found is that some of the phosphorus that comes out in a given year comes from the phosphorus that was applied either in the fall before planting season or in the spring before planting season. We’re seeing numbers anywhere from 30% to maybe over 50% of the phosphorus that leaves the field is from phosphorus that wasn’t applied that growing season. Some of these practices don’t really account for the old phosphorus that’s running off the field. We didn’t fully realize how important or significant that loss of old phosphorus would be.
Dusty: If we look at existing practices, which practices will provide the greatest benefit?
Chris: Of course, not every method is right for every field. In fact, when I give talks, I try not to talk about best practices. I call them management methods and what’s best for your field really depends on things like slope, growing history and crop rotation. We also need to make sure that when our growers look at this, they’re probably not using the same method for every acre. A lot of the modeling work that Ohio State University and a lot of our partner universities are doing shows that we need to use stacked methods. It’s not just variable rates. It’s variable rates and subsurface placement and things like grass waterways and buffer strips. You need to figure out what’s best for every acre and that’s probably not going to be one thing, it’s going to have to be stacked. The data that we’re seeing shows that we need to use methods on about 70% of the acres in the watershed and in many cases stacked methods.
Dusty: When we talk about subsurface placement or dosing of fertilizers, most people think of commercial fertilization. However, livestock manure is another key variable in agricultural production. It really got a bad rap, especially in the beginning. Over time, we have learned more about fertilizer in the Maumee River basin through research. What have we learned?
Chris: The key is that fertilizer is not inherently a bad product. I like to use that word: product. Because fertilizer is a resource and the truth is we know Tri-State Fertilizer’s recommendations, we know what our crops need and as long as you’re applying commercial fertilizer or fertilizer in the amounts that the crops need, it’s a good source of fertilizer. And fertilizer has some benefits. It contains micronutrients and organic matter. But at the same time, because it’s often applied as a liquid, there’s a higher risk of runoff in some cases. With any fertilizer, whether you’re using commercial or fertilizer, you just have to know your field, know how to apply it and know the risks. So, yes, the fertilizer is part of the nutrients that leave our fields and go into the Maumee River and ultimately the lake. We would say about 20% of the area in the Maumee Basin is applied with manure and if we trace that manure source downstream, that’s a pretty equivalent number. The amount of phosphorus we see at the edge of the field is equivalent to the amount being applied up in the catchment, but again, one could argue that there are some further risks associated with this nutrient source. We’re not saying that slurry is off the radar, but we can’t put all the blame on slurry. As with commercial fertilizers, slurry shouldn’t be applied where it’s not needed. Often the problem is getting the slurry further away from where it’s produced. Fields in that area have probably already had enough applied and they don’t need it anymore, so we move it away. Of course, in many cases it’s too expensive to move it further away and we have to look at other options there.
Dusty: It’s important to implement the best management practices on your farm that make the most sense for the operation while also being sustainable in terms of water quality. If you’re not enrolled in H2Ohio, watch your neighbors who are. Hopefully there’s a way to really find the programs and management practices you can implement so that they fit your farm operation and help meet overall water quality goals.
