|
<br />i-'
<br />C'()
<br />C)
<br />OJ
<br />
<br />
<br />To control turbidity problems, the Illinois project targeted natric soils with
<br />2 percent slop~, fine particle size ,and high erodibility, and non-natric soils
<br />with 5 percent slope, high erodibility, and proximity to the stream system.
<br />The Louisialila RCWP addressed turbidity, sedimentation, and pesticide'
<br />problems by tatgetlng cropland adjacent to the water body. Cotton growing
<br />on silty solis h/ld highest priority because the fields are close to water- '
<br />bodies, Intensiyely cultivated, and require pesticides and nutrients. This
<br />project also offbred high cost-share rates (gO percent) to farmers located
<br />adjacent to Bayou Bonne Idee to increase participation in the critical area.
<br />In addressln,g eutrophication problems in St. Albans Bay, the Vermont
<br />RCWP targeted areas nearest major water courses or the bay where major.
<br />rionpolnt sourc&s of phosphorus were present. The project has also used'
<br />SCS computer: models to estimate the total phosphorus and sediment
<br />loads from altemative management scenarios. The portion of the total load
<br />that needs to bb controlled by agricultural BMPs, is designated as critical,
<br />. and progressii; then evaluated in terms of the amount of critical load
<br />treated with BM,Ps.
<br />Water qualitY problems in the Oregon RCWP result from high fecal
<br />coliform levels ,and sediment loading to Tillamook Bay. This project tar-
<br />geted land with, high priority dairies. Priority levels were based on a point
<br />system that considers distance to open water course, manure manage-
<br />ment practices:number of animals, and location.
<br />
<br />. A project's t!meframe should Include a pre-Implementation assess-
<br />ment period: 1\1 addition to identifying the water use impairments, the as-
<br />sessment should (1) identify and quantify all pollutants, and their major
<br />sources; (2) asbertain the surface and ground-water hydrologic regimes;
<br />(3) identify, quatltify, and target critical areas; (4) establish a list of suitable
<br />BMPs; and (5) petermine the benefits from improving or maintaining the
<br />water quality. Such an assessment will help ensure that project funds are
<br />used efficiently.
<br />Some RCWP projects with insufficient assessment Information had to
<br />redefine their otiginal critical area two to three years after the program
<br />began. Minnesota, for example, changed its focus from surface water to
<br />
<br />OJ'
<br />:1
<br />
<br />fi
<br />
<br />Testing the soli is key to Its nutrient
<br />management.
<br />
<br />J
<br />j
<br />,
<br />.
<br />':j
<br />
<br />:1
<br />.,
<br />"
<br />-:~
<br />'J;
<br />'j
<br />
<br />"
<br />.j
<br />,
<br />
<br />'"
<br />. :~
<br />
<br />,)
<br />.
<br />"
<br />
<br />'~
<br />
<br />.--i
<br />--"j
<br />J
<br />..j
<br />",::
<br />
<br />,
<br />,
<br />',1
<br />;
<br />,
<br />
<br />.
<br />
<br />I
<br />,
<br />,
<br />:::
<br />.,
<br />~
<br />
<br />Targeting Criteria
<br />
<br />Criteria to use In ranking critical .
<br />area treatment needs:
<br />(1) the magnitude of the pollutant
<br />source;
<br />(2) distance to the water resource;
<br />(3) location, type, and severity of
<br />the water resource Impainnent or threat;
<br />(4) the type of pollutant;
<br />
<br />(5) present conservati9n status;:and
<br />(6) on-site evaluation.
<br />
<br />.,
<br />,
<br />1{
<br />
<br />
<br />. ,(j
<br />.
<br />
<br />J
<br />
<br />o
<br />
<br />,'I
<br />
<br />:~-
<br />;'i
<br />,
<br />
<br />1
<br />,
<br />
<br />7
<br />
<br />-f
<br />f
<br />
<br />,
<br />,
<br />il
<br />
|