Agriculture and urban activities are major sources of phosphorus and nitrogen to aquatic ecosystems. Atmospheric deposition further contributes as a source of N. These nonpoint inputs of nutrients are difficult to measure and regulate because they derive from activities dispersed over wide areas of land and are variable in time due to effects of weather. In aquatic ecosystems, these nutrients cause diverse problems such as toxic algal blooms, loss of oxygen, fish kills, loss of biodiversity (including species important for commerce and recreation), loss of aquatic plant beds and coral reefs, and other problems. Nutrient enrichment seriously degrades aquatic ecosystems and impairs the use of water for drinking, industry, agriculture, recreation, and other purposes.

Based on our review of the scientific literature, we are certain that (1) eutrophication is a widespread problem in rivers, lakes, estuaries, and coastal oceans, caused by overenrichment with P and N; (2) nonpoint pollution, a major source of P and N to surface waters of the United States, results primarily from agriculture and urban activity, including industry; (3) inputs of P and N to agriculture in the form of fertilizers exceed outputs in produce in the United States and many other nations; (4) nutrient flows to aquatic ecosystems are directly related to animal stocking densities, and under high livestock densities, manure production exceeds the needs of crops to which the manure is applied; (5) excess fertilization and manure production cause a P surplus to accumulate in soil, some of which is transported to aquatic ecosystems; and (6) excess fertilization and manure production on agricultural lands create surplus N, which is mobile in many soils and often leaches to downstream aquatic ecosystems, and which can also volatilize to the atmosphere, redepositing elsewhere and eventually reaching aquatic ecosystems.

If current practices continue, nonpoint pollution of surface waters is virtually certain to increase in the future. Such an outcome is not inevitable, however, because a number of technologies, land use practices, and conservation measures are capable of decreasing the flow of nonpoint P and N into surface waters.

From our review of the available scientific information, we are confident that: (1) nonpoint pollution of surface waters with P and N could be reduced by reducing surplus nutrient flows in agricultural systems and processes, reducing agricultural and urban runoff by diverse methods, and reducing N emissions from fossil fuel burning; and (2) eutrophication can be reversed by decreasing input rates of P and N to aquatic ecosystems, but rates of recovery are highly variable among water bodies. Often, the eutrophic state is persistent, and recovery is slow.

/pdf/nonpoint-pollution-of-surface-waters-with-phosphorus-and-3ekibgjhee.pdf

Nonpoint pollution of surface waters with phosphorus and nitrogen

▪ Abstract Local habitat and biological diversity of streams and rivers are strongly influenced by landform and land use within the surrounding valley at multiple scales. However, empirical associations between land use and stream response only varyingly succeed in implicating pathways of influence. This is the case for a number of reasons, including (a) covariation of anthropogenic and natural gradients in the landscape; (b) the existence of multiple, scale-dependent mechanisms; (c) nonlinear responses; and (d) the difficulties of separating present-day from historical influences. Further research is needed that examines responses to land use under different management strategies and that employs response variables that have greater diagnostic value than many of the aggregated measures in current use. In every respect, the valley rules the stream.      H.B.N. Hynes (1975)

http://deq.idaho.gov/media/525804-Landscapes_Riverscapes_Influence_landuse_stream_ecosystems_Allan_2004.pdf

Landscapes and Riverscapes: The Influence of Land Use on Stream Ecosystems

The Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) model is a continuation of nearly 30 years of modeling efforts conducted by the USDA Agricultural Research Service (ARS). SWAT has gained international acceptance as a robust interdisciplinary watershed modeling tool as evidenced by international SWAT conferences, hundreds of SWAT-related papers presented at numerous other scientific meetings, and dozens of articles published in peer-reviewed journals. The model has also been adopted as part of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) Better Assessment Science Integrating Point and Nonpoint Sources (BASINS) software package and is being used by many U.S. federal and state agencies, including the USDA within the Conservation Effects Assessment Project (CEAP). At present, over 250 peer-reviewed published articles have been identified that report SWAT applications, reviews of SWAT components, or other research that includes SWAT. Many of these peer-reviewed articles are summarized here according to relevant application categories such as streamflow calibration and related hydrologic analyses, climate change impacts on hydrology, pollutant load assessments, comparisons with other models, and sensitivity analyses and calibration techniques. Strengths and weaknesses of the model are presented, and recommended research needs for SWAT are also provided.

/pdf/the-soil-and-water-assessment-tool-historical-development-4e4d97tdfq.pdf

The Soil and Water Assessment Tool: Historical Development, Applications, and Future Research Directions

The Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) model is a continuation of nearly 30 years of modeling efforts conducted by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), Agricultural Research Service. SWAT has gained international acceptance as a robust interdisciplinary watershed modeling tool, as evidenced by international SWAT conferences, hundreds of SWAT-related papers presented at numerous scientific meetings, and dozens of articles published in peer-reviewed journals. The model has also been adopted as part of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's BASINS (Better Assessment Science Integrating Point & Nonpoint Sources) software package and is being used by many U.S. federal and state agencies, including the USDA within the Conservation Effects Assessment Project. At present, over 250 peer-reviewed, published articles have been identified that report SWAT applications, reviews of SWAT components, or other research that includes SWAT. Many of these peer-reviewed articles are summarized here according to relevant application categories such as streamflow calibration and related hydrologic analyses, climate change impacts on hydrology, pollutant load assessments, comparisons with other models, and sensitivity analyses and calibration techniques. Strengths and weaknesses of the model are presented, and recommended research needs for SWAT are provided.

Soil and Water Assessment Tool: Historical Development, Applications, and Future Research Directions, The

SWAT (Soil and Water Assessment Tool) is a comprehensive, semi-distributed river basin model that requires a large number of input parameters, which complicates model parameterization and calibration. Several calibration techniques have been developed for SWAT, including manual calibration procedures and automated procedures using the shuffled complex evolution method and other common methods. In addition, SWAT-CUP was recently developed and provides a decision-making framework that incorporates a semi-automated approach (SUFI2) using both manual and automated calibration and incorporating sensitivity and uncertainty analysis. In SWAT-CUP, users can manually adjust parameters and ranges iteratively between autocalibration runs. Parameter sensitivity analysis helps focus the calibration and uncertainty analysis and is used to provide statistics for goodness-of-fit. The user interaction or manual component of the SWAT-CUP calibration forces the user to obtain a better understanding of the overall hydrologic processes (e.g., baseflow ratios, ET, sediment sources and sinks, crop yields, and nutrient balances) and of parameter sensitivity. It is important for future calibration developments to spatially account for hydrologic processes; improve model run time efficiency; include the impact of uncertainty in the conceptual model, model parameters, and measured variables used in calibration; and assist users in checking for model errors. When calibrating a physically based model like SWAT, it is important to remember that all model input parameters must be kept within a realistic uncertainty range and that no automatic procedure can substitute for actual physical knowledge of the watershed.

/pdf/swat-model-use-calibration-and-validation-3yiyw8b1pn.pdf

SWAT: Model Use, Calibration, and Validation

Phosphorus (P), an essential nutrient for crop and livestock production, can accelerate freshwater eutrophication, now one of the leading water quality impairments in the United States. In response, the U.S. Department of Agriculture and the Environmental Protection Agency proposed a new nutrient management policy, now addressing P as well as nitrogen (N), which each state must enact by 2008. There are three approaches that address P—agronomic soil test P recommendations, environmental soil test P thresholds, and a P index to rank fields according to their vulnerability to potential P loss. There are many versions of the P index now in use, demonstrating the robustness and flexibility of the indexing framework to better target remedial measures. Of the three P-based approaches, the P indexing approach has been most widely adopted with 47 states using this approach to target P management. This paper charts the development of the indexing approach, which ranks site vulnerability to P loss by accounting for source (soil test P, fertilizer, and manure management) and transport factors (erosion, runoff, leaching, and connectivity to a stream channel) and outlines modifications made among states that reflect local conditions and policy. Additional factors include flooding frequency, STP modifiers (texture, pH, P sorption, reactive aluminum [Al]), conservation practices, and priority of receiving waters. While computation of the final index value is additive in 20 states, 17 multiply source and transport factors to define critical source areas. Most states (47) have maintained the original indexing approach of assessing site vulnerability to P loss, with indices in three states quantifying P loss. We demonstrate using three management scenarios (changing the time of applied manure, riparian buffer establishment, and reduced feed P ration) that overall P index ratings can be decreased, giving farmers more options for manure management than by simply reducing application rates.

Development of phosphorus indices for nutrient management planning strategies in the United States

Development of strategies for controlling P loss from upland agricultural watersheds requires an ability to identify specific source areas of P at field and farm scales, and to predict their resultant effects at the watershed scale. Key to identification of P source areas is defining the interaction between P availability over the landscape and its potential for movement to the watershed outlet by runoff and erosion. A current weakness in quantifying this interaction is determining specific zones of runoff and erosion within a watershed, that is, source areas for the P transport mechanisms. Research results from a series of studies within a small, upland agricultural watershed in east-central Pennsylvania show that the zones of runoff production, and consequently the areas ultimately controlling most P transport, are often a limited and identifiable portion of the landscape. Quantifying the hydrologic controls on P transport within and from a watershed in this way allows us to focus management options on small and definable portions of the total watershed that contribute most P export.

Hydrologic Controls on Phosphorus Loss from Upland Agricultural Watersheds

We considered hydrologic and chemical factors controlling P export from a 39.5-ha mixed land use watershed in east-central Pennsylvania, focusing our evaluation on watershed vulnerability to P loss. The spatial variations of P source factors, soil P, and P inputs from fertilizer and manure were evaluated. Distribution of Mehlich-3 soil P on a 30-m grid over the watershed showed that soil P varied with land use. Soils in wooded areas had low Mehlich-3 P ( 200 mg kg−1. Phosphorus sources and transport controls on P loss were evaluated by examining in-stream P concentrations during storm hydrographs. Phosphorus concentrations decreased 50% downstream from headwaters to watershed outlet, and were more closely related to near-stream (within 60 m) distribution of high-P soils than to that of the whole watershed. This suggests that near-stream surface runoff and soil P are controlling P export from the watershed. Based on these findings, we modified the Phosphorus Index (PI), a user-oriented tool developed by the NRCS-USDA to identify critical source areas controlling P export from agricultural watersheds. The modification separately evaluates P source and transport factors, and incorporates the hydrologic return period to describe contributing areas. The modified PI was applied to the watershed to illustrate interactions between P source and transport processes controlling P export, and approaches for managing P loss.

William J. Gburek

Papers

Development of phosphorus indices for nutrient management planning strategies in the United States

Hydrologic Controls on Phosphorus Loss from Upland Agricultural Watersheds

Phosphorus management at the watershed scale:a modification of the phosphorus index

Hydrology and the Management of Watersheds

Critical source area controls on water quality in an agricultural watershed located in the Chesapeake basin.