A GRAZING LAND WATER QUALITY EDUCATION PROGRAM FOR PRODUCERS

Paul D. Ohlenbusch,⁽¹⁾ Rodney D. Jones,⁽²⁾ and Erek H. Fuchs⁽³⁾

Table of Contents

ASTRACT
INTRODUCTION
DEVELOPING THE EDUCATION PROGRAM
PROCEDURES
PRELIMINARY RESULTS
THE EDUCATION PROGRAM
LITERATURE CITED
ACKNOWLEGMENT

INTRODUCTION

Sediment in runoff from grazing lands has been identified as a contributor to pollution in surface water. Soil erosion and sedimentation are the primary contributors to lowered water quality from rangeland in many areas (George et al., 1996). Rangeland and pasture generally become a source of nonpoint pollution when grazing removes a high percentage of the vegetative cover, exposing the soil surface to the erosive action of wind and water. Eroded soil subsequently becomes sediment, creating the potential for water degradation which may lead to impaired uses. Some potential pollutants, such as nutrient accumulations, have a high correlation with the sediment content of water leaving grazing land (i.e. phosphate binding with sediment). Also, there is evidence that indicator bacteria persist in stream sediments (Sherer et al., 1992).

    This work utilizes sediment sources, onsite and offsite, as indicators of potential grazing land water quality concerns. The objective of this project is to develop an educational program to improve grazing land water quality. Educational programs, materials, and demonstrations are needed to assist producers and landowners in understanding and implementing strategies that are identified as having the potential to maintain or improve water quality while maintaining the livestock operation profitability (Ohlenbusch et al., 1995).

DEVELOPING THE EDUCATION PROGRAM

    Educational materials and demonstrations are needed to assist producers in understanding and implementing strategies that have the potential to maintain or improve water quality while maintaining the livestock operation profitability. It is likely that some strategies identified will improve or maintain water quality with little or no additional capital investment. In these instances, where awareness is the only obstacle, producers may implement practices that will lead to improved water quality without any further incentive. Other strategies may involve an economic cost to the individual producer, either in terms of significant changes in management level or practices, or significant capital expenditures. In these cases, the economic cost to each producer will be quantified to help evaluate the magnitude of economic incentives or other programs necessary to encourage the owners and users of Kansas grazing lands to implement water quality improvement measures.

PROCEDURES

    The first phase of the project developed a comprehensive review of published literature and interim reports from grazing land water quality projects. This review is regularly updated.

    The second phase of the project involves the development of a physical inventory, management profile, and economic analysis of producer-volunteered operations that will comprise a confidential database including soils, vegetation, physical improvements, erosion, and other potential water quality factors. Once completed, an overall management and economic evaluation will be made. Potential water quality impacts will be prioritized and alternative management strategies will be prepared for consideration by the cooperator.

    A complete enterprise economic evaluation of all livestock enterprises that use grazing resources on cooperating locations will be conducted. Management changes will be recommended in situations where changes are deemed necessary, and projections will be provided to cooperators regarding potential economic impacts. As management changes are implemented, all increased operating costs (if any) associated with implementing water quality strategies, as well as changes in production that result in revenue adjustments, will be tracked. Annualized costs of any capital improvements necessary to implement water quality plans will be included.

    Whenever possible, demonstration sites will be established with cooperating producers implementing recommended practices. Demonstrations will be monitored for evidence of improvement, or lack thereof, in physical factors influencing water quality. Periodically, a re-inventory of a site may be conducted to determine how the management strategies have impacted water quality, vegetation, and profitability. An enterprise analysis will be used following water quality plan implementation to determine changes in per unit costs of production and returns.

    Once a study area database has been compiled, a local educational program will be developed and implemented to meet the needs identified in the area. The educational program may include delivery methods such as demonstrations, meetings, publications, videos, and newsletters. Evaluation methods to determine the educational program's impact on water quality will be developed to identify changes in attitude and management.

    At the state and watershed levels, advisory committees are being developed to aid communications. Each committee will help develop procedures for obtaining volunteered inventory sites, reviewing data, and identifying desirable management strategies. The state advisory committee will consist of producer and other interested groups, as well as state and federal agency representatives. The watershed advisory committees will include local producers, county agricultural groups, as well as local, state, and federal agency personnel.

The Study Area

    The first study area has focused on the Black Vermillion River-Big Blue River-Vermillion River Basin. Additional basins will be added as time and resources allow, and the project will eventually be statewide.

    The vegetation within the study area was originally tallgrass prairie on 500,000 year old glacial till. The vegetation has changed from prairie to a crops-livestock agriculture with introduced forages. Smooth bromegrass [Bromus inermis, Leyss.], tall fescue [Festuca arundinacia, Schreb.], and native rangeland is the major forage base. Woody plants have encroached resulting in large areas of native and non-native, undesirable plants. The woody-plant invasion, red cedar [Juniperus virginiana, Linn.] in particular, has occupied stream corridors and hillsides. Cropping systems range from traditional to no-till with corn [Zea mays, L.], grain sorghum [Sorghum bicolor, L. Moench], soybeans [Glycine max, Merr.], wheat [Triticum spp., L.], and alfalfa [Medicago sativa, L.] the most common. The Black Vermillion-Big Blue-Vermillion Area local advisory committee has been established. Volunteered sites have been and are being identified for inventory. These sites are representative of the vegetation types and conditions in the area. Geographic Information System (GIS) technology will be utilized to help catalog and analyze the data. The inventory of each site will include data such as vegetation characteristics (including dominant/subdominant species and location of vegetation types), water resources, erosion (kind and source), economic inputs, and current management. Once sites have been inventoried, potential water quality and economic impacts will be evaluated. Alternative management strategies will be developed for consideration with the owner/operator.

PRELIMINARY RESULTS

    Five cooperators have been included in the initial group. Inventories and initial evaluations have been completed.

Grazing land Concerns

    Concerns associated with grazing land and associated management generally include improper stocking rate, poor grazing distribution, brush invasion, and historical physical changes. The manifestation of poor grazing distribution is often perceived in the context of riparian degradation occurring within grazing land. Although documentation from many sources shows that cattle, given the opportunity, will spend a disproportionate amount of time in a riparian area as compared to drier upland areas, very little information is available on how well-managed grazing affects riparian-stream systems (George, et al., 1993). Concentration of livestock around stock ponds, along stream beds, and other water sources for extended periods has not been a common occurrence in the study area.

Figure 1. Cattle commonly seek shade during the hot part of the day. Typical locations are the south side of a pasture (shown here) or along stream beds.

However, a select few, site-specific, smaller areas have shown cause for some correction potential. Most of the concerns can be addressed by adjustments to management rather than through major changes. Most erosion not related to specific sources appears to be stable or recovering.

    Historical physical changes include abandoned wells, silted-in ponds, channeling of streams, woody plant invasion, abandoned fences, and dumps. Abandoned wells, most hand-dug during settlement or the early 20^th century, need to be properly plugged to prevent groundwater contamination and eliminate safety concerns for people and livestock. Silted-in ponds have lost their effectiveness as livestock water sources and present a hazard to livestock. Renovation (cleaning) may be an option. Channeling of streams, once considered an appropriate practice, has resulted in a permanent change in the landscape. Woody plant invasion, the result of eliminating fire from the tallgrass prairie, is often associated with accelerated erosion, particularly where the invasion has occurred in minor stream beds. Channeling has occurred in many areas. Abandoned fences are barriers to livestock movement, creating excessive trailing and concentration of livestock. Repair or removal of the fences will reduce the potential impacts on water quality. Old farm dumps, common for disposal of many forms of solid waste, are frequent. Items found include collectibles, car parts, appliances, furniture, and occasionally, pesticide or similar containers. Hazardous materials need to be removed whenever possible.

Non-grazing land Concerns

    To date, factors identified which appear to affect water quality are more often associated with adjacent non-grazing land uses. Among the most common problems are cropland draining onto grazing land, public transportation (roads, railroads) drainage, and historic land use (Homestead Act, Public Land Survey System). Each may create increased or abnormal water flow and/or sediment loads.

Cropland Influences

 

    Most cropland in the study area has been terraced to reduce runoff and sediment loss. The terrace systems may or may not include grassed waterways, depending on when they were installed. In addition, pesticides from cropland may be deposited on the grazing land. The major concern is the channeling of runoff from large areas into drainage that had developed naturally under much lower average flow rates.

    Two separate concerns have been identified, one when grassed waterways are used and one when they are not. When grassed waterways are used, terraces intercept other drainage and combine them into a single drainage. The increased discharge often results in channeling in adjacent grazing land. When waterways are not included, terraces are allowed to empty onto grazing lands and road ditches

.

Figure 2. Runoff from cropland can occur in uncontrolled runoff such as this channel from an adjacent field through a hedge row.

Figure 3. The runoff from the field in Figure 2 drains down slope along the fence/hedge row creating a channel.

When emptied onto grazing land, accelerated erosion can result cutting new drainage (gullies).

Public Transportation

    Public transportation, including public roads (federal, state, county, and township), have the capacity to create potential water quality hazards for grazing land and other land uses. The classical example is the culvert, commonly used for small drainage.

.

Figure 4. Culverts are a major source of stream degradation. This example has cropland draining from terraces and a grassed waterway under the road. Runoff also enters the stream at four places from the road ditches.

The culvert is used to flow water on a level plane under the road. It is normally installed with the up slope end slightly below the soil surface of the pasture. The downstream end is installed higher than the next pasture.

Figure 5. Erosion at the discharge end of the culvert tube has created a basin that continues to erode the limestone bottom due to the velocity and volume of the flow.

  The result is a change in the baseline flow of water on both ends. Cutting (channel incisement) will work up slope until a new equilibrium is reached. Downstream, the falling water can create a hole that allows for accelerated erosion.

Figure 6. Channeling has occurred downstream due to the increased volume and velocity created by the culvert.

A less common occurrence is heavy silting in the culvert due to stream bed changes.

    An additional aspect of public transportation is the channeling of water via the "borrow ditches" alongside roads, often resulting in increased discharge to an arbitrary outlet or stream. This added source of water can augment the flow characteristics of the receiving stream and exacerbate the erosion and sediment occurring down stream. Also, roadway dust and other pollutants from vehicles may contribute to water quality impairment.

Historic Land Use

    The study area was subject to two historic government programs: The Homestead Act and the Public Lands Survey System (PLSS). The Homestead Act allowed individuals to claim 160 acres of land, build a house, and till 10-20 acres (or plant trees) to gain title to the land. The PLSS determined the boundaries of the claims. The result has been two distinct kinds of erosion: from tilled land and from fence lines.

    Often, the land plowed in the study area was on hill tops or nearly level to rolling side slopes. Erosion began down slope and continued when the land was abandoned, largely because permanent vegetation was seldom established. Most of the down slope erosion has stabilized with the upper ends nearing recovery.

Figure 7. Gullying from old cropland fields has revegetated over the years.

In some cases, erosion has again started at the lower ends due to recent disturbances. The most recent disturbance appears to be the extreme precipitation of 1993.

    Fence line erosion appears to be the result of water flowing down fence lines or from livestock trailing along fence lines. Both forms occur and are the result of property line fences that are on steep slopes or on soils that are highly erodible. Both forms are common.

Figure 8. Location of fences has a strong influence on erosion. This fence line erosion is stable and revegetating. Providing barriers to cattle trailing will provide continued opportunities for stabilizing the area.

Possible Solutions

    As stated earlier, the concerns within grazing lands can often be reduced or eliminated through management changes. The main thrust of this project is to develop the education program necessary to accomplish the needed changes.

    Many of the non-grazing land concerns are situations that have existed for decades and appear to have little potential for correction. The cost and risk (of additional erosion) associated with many mechanical treatment options (i.e. diversion construction) appears to outweigh potential reclamation benefits in many cases. Future design of terrace systems (or similar technology) and public transportation water-handling innovations may help reduce erosion and sediment-laden water.

 

THE EDUCATION PROGRAM

    Once the inventory and evaluation of the cooperating producers has been finished, the database will be used to develop materials that, with a minimum of training, a producer or other person can evaluate grazing lands and determine if potential water quality concerns exist. The educational program may include delivery methods such as demonstrations, meetings, publications, videos, and newsletters. The material must: 1) describe the characteristics of potential sites; 2) provide criteria for determining the source or cause of the concern and potential for correction; and 3) provide information for the correction of the concern, sources of technical assistance, and/or economic assistance or incentives. In addition, current educational programs and materials covering the use and management of grazing lands will be revised over time to reflect the water quality concerns of producers and the public.

 

LITERATURE CITED

George, M.E. and J.W. Clawson. 1992. Nonpoint sources of pollution on rangeland. California Cooperative Extension Service. Rangeland Watershed Program FS-3. 3 pp.

George, M.E. and W.C. Krueger. 1993. Grazing effects on riparian areas. California Cooperative Extension Service. Rangeland Watershed Program FS-14. 3 pp.

Ohlenbusch, P. D., S. L. Satterthwaite and S. L. Watson. 1995. Managing Kansas grazing lands for water quality. Kansas Cooperative Extension Service MF-2086. 16 pp.

Sherer, B.M., J.R. Miner, J.A. Moore and J.C. Buckhouse. 1992. Indicator bacteria survival in stream sediments. J. Environ. Qual. 21(4): 591-595.

 

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

    Appreciation is expressed to the Kansas Department of Health and Environment, Bureau of Water, Nonpoint Source Section, for funding of this project. Financial sources include Kansas Water Plan Fund and EPA Section 319 of the Clean Water Act.

AUTHORS

¹ Professor and Extension Specialist, Range and Pasture Management, Kansas State University, Department of Agronomy, Throckmorton Hall, Manhattan, KS 66506-5504

² Assistant Professor and Extension Agricultural Economist, Livestock Production, Kansas State University, Department of Agricultural Economics, Waters Hall, Manhattan, KS 66506-4026

³ Extension Assistant, Grazing land Water Quality, Kansas State University, Department of Agronomy, Throckmorton Hall, Manhattan, KS 66506-5504

---

home page
Maintainer: AWRA Webserver Team
Last modified: 22JUL98 KJL
Copyright © 1998, American Water Resources Association