Assessment of the Iowa River's South Fork watershed: Part 2. Conservation practices

被引:87
作者
不详
机构
[1] National Soil Tilth Laboratory, USDA Agricultural Research Service, Ames, IA
[2] USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service, Des Moines, IA
[3] Blacklands Research Center, USDA Agricultural Research Service, Temple, TX
关键词
Conservation Effects Assement Project (CEAP); conservation practices; nutrient management; tillage practices; water quality;
D O I
10.2489/jswc.63.6.371
中图分类号
Q14 [生态学(生物生态学)];
学科分类号
071012 ; 0713 ;
摘要
Documenting the types and extent of conservation practices in a watershed is necessary to determine their water quality impacts. A conservation practice inventory for the South Fork of the Iowa River, 85% in corn (Zea mays L.) and soybean [Glycine max L. (Merr.)] rotations, showed only 7% of cropland was managed using no-tillage. About 30% of cropland receives manure annually, prior to corn. Surface residue following soybean was usually inadequate (30%) indicating a key management challenge. About 90% of fields with >34% highly erodible land subject to USDA conservation compliance, indeed had erosion-control practices installed. Grassed waterways and riparian buffers were common edge-of-field practices and highly erodible land fields near streams often had multiple practices and rotations including third crops. Yet while most conservation practices are aimed at controlling runoff, tile drainage is the dominant hydrologic pathway. Resource management systems that address tile drainage as the primary route of nutrient loss need to be developed and encouraged. Better targeting of this pathway could include practices such as nutrient removal wetlands.
引用
收藏
页码:371 / 379
页数:9
相关论文
共 33 条
  • [1] Burkart M., James D., Liebman M., Herndl C., Impacts of integrated crop-livestock systems on nitrogen dynamics and soil erosion in western Iowa watersheds, Journal of Geophysical Research, 110, (2005)
  • [2] Claassen R., Hansen L., Peters M., Breneman V., Weinberg M., Cattaneo A., Feather P., Gadsby D., Hellerstein D., Hopkins J., Johnston P., Morehart M., Smith M., Agri-environmental policy at the crossroads: Guideposts on a changing landscape, Agricultural Economic Report Number 794, (2001)
  • [3] Daverede I.C., Hoeft R.G., Nafziger E.D., Bullock D.G., Warren J.J., Gonzini L.C., Phosphorus runoff from incorporated and surface-applied liquid swine manure and phosphorus fertilizer, Journal of Environmental Quality, 33, 4, pp. 1535-1544, (2004)
  • [4] ARC/ INFO 8.2 User's Guide, (2002)
  • [5] Fisher M.J., Fausey N.R., Subler S.E., Brown L.C., Bierman P.M., Water table management, nitrogen dynamics, and yields of corn and soybean, Soil Science Society of America Journal, 63, 6, pp. 1786-1795, (1999)
  • [6] Gowda P.H., Mulla D.J., Dalzell B.J., Examining the targeting of conservation tillage practices to steep vs. flat landscapes in the Minnesota River basin, Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 58, pp. 53-57, (2003)
  • [7] Green C.H., Tomer M.D., Di Luzio M., Arnold J.G., Hydrologic evaluation of the Soil and Water Assessment Tool for a large tile-drained watershed in Iowa, Transactions American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers, 49, 2, pp. 413-422, (2006)
  • [8] Hatch L.K., Mallawatantri A., Wheeler D., Gleason A., Mulla D., Perry J., Easter K.W., Smith R., Gerlach L., Brezonik P., Land management at the major watershed - Agroecoregion intersection, Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 56, 1, pp. 44-51, (2001)
  • [9] Iowa Geographic Map Server, (2002)
  • [10] Johansson R.C., Randall J., Watershed abatement costs for agricultural phosphorus, Water Resources Research, 39, 4, (2003)