water quality and agriculture - teagasc | agriculture and

Water quality andagriculture

How can we achieve improvements?Jenny Deakin

Catchment Science and Management UnitWith assistance from EPA colleagues

and RPS consultants

60

65

70

75

80

85

90

95

100

1987-1990

2010-2012

1995-1997

1998-2000

2021

Expenditure 2000-2014 € billion

Context: River Water Quality, past, now, future?

Urban Waste Water

REPS Water

Farm Buildings

0 1 2 3 4 5

Slide source: Pat Duggan

2015

?

?

2027

%rive

rchannell

ength

atsatisfa

cto

rysta

tus

?

€8bn for 5% improvement. Needs a new approachChallenging in the context of FH2020/Food Wise2025 strategies,

increasing population and implications of climate change.

Status update 2010-15

Rivers

Lakes

Estuaries

Coastal

Groundwater

Water quality status (% monitored water bodies)

Changes in status during the last plan

Improvements were offset by deteriorationWhat can we learn from this?

Significant loss of high status sites

1987 2015

How do wefix it?

What iscausing it,where, and

why?

Is there aproblem?

What is characterisation?

‘The right measure in the right place’

Nested scales

5000• Waterbodies

583• Subcatchments

46• Catchments

1• River basin management

plan

Characterisation approach

Aiming for ‘The right measure in the right place’

MonitoringStatus

For every waterbody…

Aquifers Subsoils Vulnerability Soils

LPIS dataSmall pointsources

Large pointsourcesForestry

Source: DAFM Source: DAFM Source: EPA Source: EPA

Source: GSI Source: Teagasc Source: GSI Source: Teagasc

Pathway

Source

ReceptorTo make improvements, need tobreak the links.

140 datasets>25 person years, not incl help!All recorded in the WFD App

Risk assessment outcomes

Approximately one third (1360) of all waterbodies are At Risk of not achievingWFD objectives and need additional action

Risk

P is the most significant WQ issue

Issues Possible pressures

P – eutrophication (rivers/lakes)N – eutrophication (saline)

Agriculture, WWTPs, DWWTSs,Urban areas, Forestry, Industry

Ammonium Peat extraction, WWTPs

Fine sediment Channel maintenance, forestry,agriculture

Channel modification Channel maintenance, drainageworks

Industrial pollutants Landfills, industry

But we need the significant pressures for each water body

Significantissue

How do we know what thesignificant pressures are?

1. Evidenced-based assessment process, waterbody bywaterbody, using the source-pathway-receptor approach

2. New nutrient modelling tools Source Load Apportionment Model

Load reduction calculations, and stream profiles

Pollution Impact Potential Maps for diffuse agriculture

TraCs team estuary models, GW load models

3. Local knowledge from EPA colleagues

4. Workshops and discussions with Local authorities andInland Fisheries Ireland, incorporating their local data andknowledge

More than one pressure may be significant

Investigative assessments: ‘right measure in the right place’

Significantpressures

Significant Pressures in At-Risk rivers and lakes


Where are the significant pressures forrivers and lakes? (Estuaries to be completed)


Selecting the right measure

We now have a better understanding for everywaterbody:What the water quality problems are and why.

Where to focus in to carry out field scale investigativeassessments to find the right measure and get itimplemented, i.e. further characterisation.

What the physical characteristics are, as a basis fordetermining

‘the right measure in the right place’.

Measures

Investigative assessments

Carried out in At Risk water bodiesCatchment and stream walks

Focus on the significant pressures

Rule areas in or out

Refine understanding of the problem

Focus on finding the right solutions

Challenge: How do we find the right solution and getit implemented, at the farm scale?

Measures

NB: We don’t need agricultural measures everywhere‘One size fit all’ approaches are not the solution

Source Pathway Receptor

Currentsituation



Option 1:Reduce thesource

Currentsituation



Option 1:Reduce thesource

Currentsituation


Option 2:Repair thereceptor


Option 3:Break thepathway

Critical Source Areas now delineatedMap of relative risk of transport of diffuse P from agriculture to rivers via OF pathwaysNot field scale. Field scale ‘investigative assessments’ needed to find the right solution

Pollution Impact Potential maps

Measures

Prioritising action

Measures

Priorities identified in the dRBMP:

Compliance with existing EU legislation (e.g. UWWTD)

Prevent deterioration

Meet water objectives for designated ‘protected areas’

Protect high status waters

Focus sub-catchments for targeted actions and pilot schemes.

Key messages

1360 river and lakes waterbodies have unsatisfactory WQ

P is the main issue for rivers and lakes

Agriculture is known to be a significant pressure in 800

Only some of these will get prioritised for action in the currentriver basin plan – decision process underway

Only some farms within the affected areas will have problems

For P, intercepting the pathway is the key

Solutions need to be farm specific – in places where there areproblems

Key concerns

That satisfactory water quality (and WFD objectives) will not beachieved quickly enough

That there will be ECJ cases against Ireland

That the nitrates derogation could be compromised

That the FH2020 and Food Wise 2025 objectives will not beachieved

How can we best work together to…

1. Decide on and target action into the areas that need itthe most, as a means of achieving water quality andother benefits?

2. Engage with, and support farmers to ensuresatisfactory water quality and environmentalsustainability?

Role of farm advisors is critical

water quality and agriculture - teagasc | agriculture and

Documents