Nitrogen Budget UpdateParry KlassenEast San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition

Central Valley Coalitions Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition

Bruce Houdesheldt

California Rice Commission Tim Johnson

San Joaquin County & Delta Water Quality Coalition Michael Wackman

Westside San Joaquin River Watershed Coalition Joseph C. McGahan David Cory

East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition Parry Klassen

Southern San Joaquin Valley Water Quality Coalition David Orth/Casey Craemer

Westlands Coalition Charlotte Gallock

In operation since 2003

3,949 Landowner / operators

719,446 irrigated acresMadera, Merced, Stanislaus,

Tuolumne, Mariposa counties

We manage group permit for our members

East San Joaquin Valley

Member Responsibilities

• Complete Farm Evaluation (everyone)

• Complete Nitrogen Management Plan – In high vulnerability groundwater area; submit to ESJ annually

– Certified by CCA or grower trained (if developed)

– Low vulnerability keep on site; no certification required

• Sediment and Erosion Control Plan– In areas identified as high vulnerability for erosion and

sediment discharge

• Participate in annual outreach events

4

Waste Discharge Requirements (WDR)

• 2003 ILRP started on surface water; Water Board

always intended to add groundwater regs

• 2012 UC Davis Report to CA Legislature

• “Thomas Harter” report

Activists increasing focus on disadvantaged

communities drinking water high in nitrates

2013 CA legislature had multiple bills on correcting drinking water

problems statewide

5

Water Board Focus Nitrates in Groundwater

• ESJ/CV Coalitions submitted N reporting template in May 2013

• Postpone ESJWQC nitrogen use reporting requirement until

March 2016 (was due May 2015)

• New deadline for ESJWQC (first WDR adopted in Central

Valley)

• Nitrogen Management Plan

• March 2015: in grower hands

• March 2016: report nitrogen use

6

Regional Water Board Decided With All This Going On…

Waste Discharge RequirementsIrrigated Lands Regulatory Program

Changes in nitrogen reporting from “Recommendations

Addressing Nitrate in Groundwater” (SWRCB)

CDFA to form “Task Force”

Develop “Nitrogen Tracking and Reporting System”

Recommendations completed in December 2013

State Board to form “Expert Panel” (requirement originated from

UCD/Harter report recommendation)

Panel will answer “questions” posed by advisory group

Report presented to State Water Board on September 23, 2014

Ambient Shallow GW Quality - Median CVHM Cell Concentration (Shallow Wells 2003-2012)

TDS NO3-N

8

1984-2004

2005-2010

Groundwater Quality: Nitrate Concentrations

Proposed High Vulnerability Area: ESJWQC Region – Compared to NO3 >10 mg/L

Focus on N “Best Management Practices”

Assumption: What’s past is done

Groundwater remediation not practical

Going Forward

Nitrogen Management

Optimize Applications Match fertilizer application to crop use

Manage irrigations to minimize leaching

Removal Replacement

Nitrogen Reporting Template

Proposed by ESJ / CV Coalitions in 2013

Goal is working toward improvements in Nitrogen management (when/if needed)Focuses on crop needs – not total appliedHelps growers understand their use in context with like

cropsHelps to identifies “outliers”Will evolve into better management of nitrogen as

information is developed

CDFA Nitrogen Tracking and Reporting Task Force

28 entities participatedFrom CV, Central Coast, agencies, ag groups, EJ, universities

Meetings held July - September 2013Charged to develop “Nitrogen Tracking and Reporting System”

Review how other states track N use

Final recommendations went to State Water Board, Expert Panel

Tracking and Reporting System Structure Growers collect a number of types of crop and field-

specific information on an event basis to enable calculation of nitrogen mass balance (the quantity of nitrogen applied minus the quantity of nitrogen removed). The difference represents nitrogen that is not currently accounted for, including but not limited to nitrogen available for leaching to groundwater.

Much of the tracking data are retained on farm; a subset is compiled by crop and field at the farm scale and annually reported upward to a data aggregator.

The data aggregator annually compiles and reports data submitted by numerous growers into a single combined report for a larger geographic area as designated by the relevant Regional Water Board.

The Regional Water Board provides to the State Water Board the information necessary to compile an annual report on “status and trends” with respect to management and the fate of nitrogen applied in irrigated agriculture.

The narrowing of the pyramid reflects increasing consolidation of information and larger geographic units of analysis as the information moves upward through the system from grower to State Water Board.

State Water Board Expert Panel

Preliminary indications of makeup & timing

• 10 Participants• Scientists/geologists, CCA/agronomists, farmers

• Cal Poly SLO directed (Charles Burt, chair)

• Advisory Committee provided reviews, comments• Including ag, environmental, EJ

• September 23, 2014• Final report presented to State Water Board

Purpose of Data CollectionData collection serves two main purposes:

1. Development of a baseline nitrogen application information, crop-specific, and integrated regionally. This provides the basis for comparison of regional nitrogen application differences and addresses the probability of nitrogen leaving the crop root zone via deep percolation

2. Identification of multi-year trends as the data collection is continued (Expert Panel Reccomendations)

Additionally:• The data will initially be used for education and later in creating

management plans in certain areas.• The data will provide growers with an understanding of key elements of

on-farm nitrogen components’• The data will provide growers with knowledge of whether they are in an

area that contains high volumes of nitrates in the groundwater• It also provides the growers with an idea of how much nitrogen is in the

groundwater that they may be using for irrigation

Reporting Units

• Two potential reporting units

• Crop basis: could include several fields with similar soils, irrigation methods, irrigation water nitrate levels, and irrigation management nitrate styles

• Defined on an individual field

The flexibility of reporting units provides growers with the ability to group fields as it makes operational sense and grants flexibility in the size of fields as it varies over time and season

Data Consolidation

• Data should be collected over a 12 month period, but be consolidated either monthly or by short season values

• However data should be evaluated on a multi-year basis by doing so yearly and seasonal changes will be averaged out and accounted for. It will also eliminate random error which is introduced by various confounding details.

• A/R ratio values are not known at this time and will take several years of accurate data collection and research to be more able to accurately identify the ranges based on crops.

Basic Elements of Reporting

• Unit location• Nitrogen applied• Estimate of nitrogen removed from the field by the identified crop• Acreage• Stored water and nitrogen reporting should contain annual values

rather than more frequent data

• Multiple years of data (minimum of 3 years) are likely needed to ascertain trends and patterns

• Irrigation and rainfall volumes are not required for reporting because good water management is evidenced by the nitrogen applied versus removal ratio.

Waste Discharge RequirementsIrrigated Lands Regulatory Program

Timing of information reporting to coalitions

Propose a phased approach

Year 1-3

Pounds of nitrogen applied

Year 3-5

Ratios for major acreage crops

Almonds

Grapes

Walnuts

Corn

Pistachios

Waste Discharge RequirementsIrrigated Lands Regulatory Program

Timing of information reporting to coalitionsPropose a phased approach

Year 1-3

Pounds of nitrogen applied to management unit

Year 3-5

Ratios for major acreage crops

Almonds

Grapes

Walnuts

Corn

Pistachios

Year 6-10

All remaining crops

Waste Discharge RequirementsIrrigated Lands Regulatory Program

Elements of a Nitrogen management plan

Two audiences

Regional Water Board

We need to show that a grower is planning the use and managing nitrogen in a way

that is protective of surface and groundwater

To show the coalition is collecting enough information

We need to show there is consultation with an agronomist on what goes into an

applications so that it matches crop consumption with application amounts

Waste Discharge RequirementsIrrigated Lands Regulatory Program

Elements of a Nitrogen management plan

Two audiences

Members

The plan contains the minimum components of a nitrogen management plan

More advance/complex plans can supplant this template and used

This template and a complex plan would have the same fundamental information

reported to the coalition

Fertilizer supplier or consultant can create a more elaborate whole nutrient

planning tool

Waste Discharge RequirementsIrrigated Lands Regulatory Program

Elements of a Nitrogen management plan

Requirements of a reporting system

Must be easily and consistently completed by growers to accurately reflect their

management

Basic Elements of Plan Template

• Grower Nitrogen reporting

• Acreage and management unit

• Total amount of product applied in management unit• i.e. 3000 lbs of 15-15-15 applied to 300 acres

• Coalition does calculation for

• Total N to management unit

• N per acre

• Total N to township

Basic Elements of Plan Template

• Crop • Field(s) or parcel identification• Nitrogen applied to management unit• Estimate of nitrogen in

• the irrigation water

• Compost/manure

• Residual in the soil

Ratio Recommended by Expert Panel

A/R Ratio• A = Nitrogen Applied

• Nitrogen applied can include nitrogen from any source

• R = Nitrogen Removed• Nitrogen removed via harvest + Nitrogen sequestered in

the permanent wood of perennial crops)

• The Expert Panel recommended that the ratio be averaged over multiple years for a more comprehensive and customized nitrogen and water management plan

Ratio Recommended by Expert Panel

• More discussion needed on the best ratio to use• Expert Panel recommendation

• A = Nitrogen Applied; R = Nitrogen Removed

• Other approach developed in conjunction with• Coalitions

• CDFA

• UC

• Considerations for choosing an approach• Accuracy of estimates• Ease of calculations• Comparison among of same crop in different conditions• Need to demonstrate that the nitrogen management approach is protective of

groundwater

Water Board response:

• Good Reporting Tool

• But not a “N Management Plan”

2013 CV Coalition Template Submittal

1. Crop Year, (Harvested): 4. APN(s):

2. Member ID#

3. Name:

5. Crop Nitrogen Fertilizers

6. Production Units Dry & Liquid N (non foliar)

7. Expected Yield (Units/Acre) Foliar N fertilizers

8. N Needed (lbs/acre) Other N fertilizers

9. Acres Organic Material N

Manure (est)

13. Actual Yield (Units/Acre) Compost (est)

Total N (lbs/acre) Total N Applied (per acre)

Soil Nitrogen Credits (est)

Notes:

N in irrigation water (annualized)

Total N Credits (lbs per acre)

X

Field(s) ID

10. Planned N

12. Actual N

N carryover in soil

Total N

(Applications + Credits)

Post Production Actuals

CROP NITROGEN MANAGEMENT PLANNING N APPLICATIONS/CREDITS

Low Vulnerability Area, No Certification Needed

* As defined in the Instructions

11. CERTIFIED BY: CERTIFICATION METHOD

Self-Certified, approved training program attended

Self-Certified, UC or NRCS site recommendation

DATE: * Nitrogen Management Plan Specialist

Proposed Nitrogen Management Plan

Submitted November 7, 2014

Communications Back To Growers

• Coalition to members

• Average rate per acre by crop

• Average rate per acre by area/region

• Average pounds per unit of production across crops

• Average amount of N in well water in area

• CCA to grower• Review previous year’s applications

• Can make suggestions for improvements, if needed• Cost saving potentials

• Improve quality

• Possible timing/placement changes

Field Reporting Map Completed by Grower

Proposed reporting of nitrogen plan worksheet information:

Submit summary form to Coalition

Coalition compiles ratios; separates into crops, “Township” sections (6 sq. miles)

CCA or self certify in high vulnerability areas

What the area report should show:

Where growers are with nitrogen ratios (compared to like crops)

The “Outliers:” those who apply too much

Outliers focus of outreach with commodity specific information/references

1.0

2.3

3.7

5.0

Almonds Corn Tomatoes

Reported Nitrogen Ratios

Crop

Ra

tio

Potentially applying too much N (outliers)

Most growers (UC recommended rates)

Focus of Best Management Practices

Wellhead Protection

Theme: “Good House Keeping”

Prevent ponding for extended periodsWaste can enter if wellhead/casing is

cracked or improperly sealed Grade away from wellhead to prevent storm

runoff ponding

Open discharge well Air gap between well discharge and receiving

device

Pressurized systems: Back flow preventers

Abandoned wells Properly destroyed

Parry Klassen

559-288-8125

www.esjcoalition.org