Accelerating Watershed Conservation Planning & Implementation in Michigan’s Stony Creek Subwatershed: A Bottom-Up Approach to Reducing Phosphorus Loading into Lake Erie
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Since the mid-1990s, an increase in annual cyanobacterial harmful algal blooms (HABs) in the Western Lake Erie Basin (WLEB) has driven a focus on nonpoint source (NPS) nutrient pollution in tributary watersheds, especially in the states of Michigan, Indiana and Ohio, and in the Canadian province of Ontario (EGLE et al., 2021; Green et al., 2023; Watson et al., 2016). Attention to the issue was intensified in 2014 when a HAB in WLEB led to a drinking water crisis in Toledo, Ohio, which spurred commitments by the governments of Ohio, Michigan, and Ontario to achieve a 40% reduction of phosphorus loading into the lake by the year 2025 (Snyder et al., 2015; Steffen et al., 2017). However, these states are not currently on track to meet their reduction targets. To address NPS loading into the lake, government attention turned to the approximately 7 million acres draining directly into the WLEB, as well as the region’s primary land use: agricultural production (OSU Extension, 2024). Agricultural production is associated with 70-90% of NPS phosphorus loading into WLEB (Wilson et al., 2019), which can be mitigated through the use of agricultural best management practices (BMPs) for conservation. In Michigan’s 2021 Adaptive Management Plan for Lake Erie, the state identifies and prioritizes 13 subwatersheds for data collection and evaluation toward increased BMP adoption. To explore a new approach in localized conservation planning, the Michigan Department of Agriculture and Rural Development (MDARD) partnered with the University of Michigan School for Environment and Sustainability (SEAS) to research the factors contributing to producer conservation choices in a select priority subwatershed. The Stony Creek (South Branch River Raisin), a HUC-12 component of the River Raisin watershed, was chosen for this research effort. Over a sixteen-month period, our team of five SEAS graduate students reviewed literature related to agricultural, social, biochemical, and economic aspects of WLEB algal blooms; performed informal outreach and information gathering through event participation and farm visits; conducted 12 stakeholder interviews with producers, community members, and local experts; developed an erosion risk map of the subwatershed through GIS analysis utilizing the RUSLE model; and formed a steering committee to direct the development of a Watershed Conservation Plan (WCP) for Stony Creek. Through these various research efforts and their respective results, we synthesized three Key Themes that affect BMP adoption in Stony Creek: 1. Socio-cultural influences and personal attitudes factor heavily in farmer decisionmaking around BMP adoption; 2. Simplicity and specificity of conservation programming play a large role in adoption rates of conservation practices; and 3. Financial incentives are necessary but not alone sufficient for improving BMP adoption rates. Within these three themes, we identified nine cross-cutting barriers and six motivators to conservation adoption in Stony Creek. Based on these barriers and motivators, we developed five key recommendations for improving BMP adoption in Stony Creek: 1. Increase and stabilize funding and support for Lenawee Conservation District; 2. Improve accessibility and simplicity of conservation programming; 3. Improve information and education efforts in Stony Creek concerning BMPs; 4. Enhance avenues for collaboration between producer communities, trusted organizations, and stakeholders to engage with cost-share policies; and 5. Develop a strategic approach to attract and retain younger producers in rural farming communities. Our research findings drove the completion of a Sub-Watershed Conservation Plan (WCP) for Stony Creek, guided by a steering committee of local producers and stakeholders in agricultural conservation and watershed management. In the Stony Creek WCP, we recommend precision agriculture practices (nutrient management, nutrient mass-balance calculations, and precision application of nutrients) and two suites of BMPs based on field topography. While our research findings and recommendations are specific to Stony Creek
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; les deux têtes enseignantes s’accordent sur ce qui est montré ici.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».