Plan Implementation Committee
Minutes
August 16, 2006
Red River Basin Commission, Moorhead
Attendance: April Kiers North, Rhonda McDougal, Brian Dwight, Henry Van Offelen, Molly
MacGregor, Joe Belford, Jake Gust, Bethany Kurz, Lee Klapprodt, Ruth Lewis, Genevieve
Thompson, Lance Yohe
Minutes of 6/21/06: Approved with changes to Joe Belford’s name spelling
Presentation: Bethany Kurz, EERC
SWAT – Soil & Water Assessment Tool: developed by the USDA-Agriculture Research
Station in Texas to “predict the impact of land management practices on water, sediment and
agricultural chemical yields in large, complex watersheds with varying soils, landuse and
management conditions over long periods of time.” The model can work with large watersheds
identified by the 8 digit HUC, and can further break down the input information and modeling to
sub-watersheds of these main watersheds. The hydrologic cycle and water balance are the
driving force of the model simulation. The hydrology is split between a land phase (runoff) and
the routing of the hydrologic cycle. The model utilizes “hydrologic response units” (HRU) based
on combinations of soil and land cover to predict watershed response. By inputing data based on
various parameters such as: climate, land management practices, tillage practices, application of
fertilizer, infiltration, surface runoff, etc. , the model can provide the following applications:
water quantity evaluations for overland/stream flow changes due to retention/detention
structures, wetland restorations, BMP’s or changes in landuse/cover; drought planning, for water
supply options and regional impacts of climate change on groundwater recharge. It can also
provide water quality applications to evaluate BMP’s to control sediment and nutrients entering
the water ways. SWAT can differentiate between overland and stream-based sediment loading,
it can estimate chlorophyll based on measured P concentrations; sediment deposition and outflow
from lakes can be estimated.
Within the RRB, EERC has developed and calibrated 26 of the 28 watersheds for high flow
conditions. The models can be used to evaluate flood damage reduction options for individual
watersheds. Within the RRB, additional work is needed to develop and calibrate SWAT for use
in water quality and low flow conditions.
•
Once the water quality component of these models is developed, we will have a basinwide tool to conduct comprehensive water quality assessments in the RRB.
• To have water quality models developed for an entire basin the size
of the RRB is unprecedented.
These models could be used to:
– Evaluate the major sources of P and sediment loading for individual
subwatersheds (down to 5 mi2) throughout the entire RRB.
– Evaluate the impacts of BMPs on sediment and nutrient loading in tributaries of
the RRB
Challenges: there are many models being developed in the RRB, it would be nice to have one
model, as a way to unify and link work for a basin wide effort.
Discussion by committee:
Perhaps the development of the Joint Powers agreement between the RRB jurisdictionas
would provide funding and implementation for on model effort.
What could SWAT be used for? How does the Commission need to get involved?
Motion: PIC recommends that the Executive Committee talk with EERC about the funding
needs to develop a basin wide model using SWAT for water quality and flood reduction
evaluations.
Motion passed
Bethany handed out a peer reviewed paper titled: SWAT peer-reviewed Literature: A Review ,
by Philip W. Gassman, et.al., which was presented at the 3rd International SWAT conference.
Presentation: Brian Dwight and Molly MacGregor – eLink
eLink is an electronic tracking software program which has multiple uses for state
agencies such as Board of Water and Soil Resources and Pollution Control Agency to 1)deliver
cost-share programs and 2) track the accomplishments with the dollars appropriated. Through
reports it can show the “big picture” in the county as to what projects have been done and where,
and it can help agencies interact. One applicability regards the grant applications for funds from
state grants for conservation and flood damage reduction programs. However, it can also
determine what pollution reduction goals are being met by the reporting program that is built in.
It can track the funding expenditure based on staff hours; it can keep track of geospatially where
the installation of BMP’s has occurred, and the size and type of the projects. It is a good “easy”
reporting system for documentation of “on the ground projects”. It can track the matching funds
necessary for state and federal grants. It has variable ability to get output reports for MN RRB
projects. These reports can be generated on request from the state eLink office. Useful reports
that were handed out to show the ability of eLink included: BMP’s located within the basin, soil
loss reduction(tons/year), sediment reduction (tons/year) and phosphorus reduction (lbs/year).
Other tracking programs in use in the basin:
Manitoba doesn’t have anything similar to eLink. They are looking into the use of SWAT
for other uses.
ND SWC has a database accounting system, but nothing that tracks projects/benefits for
reduction of phosphorus, sediment, etc. ND DOH has a 319 program to track projects, but its
use is primarily for budget tracking, not for tracking project goals and objectives. Progress in
meeting project goals and objectives and pollutant load reductions are made through semi-annual
and annual reports to EPA.
Discussion:
There needs to be a way to better track the NRFP Action agenda. This would help develop the
State of the Basin reports ( annually). These reports would identify information per jurisdiction
for the impacts/benefits of projects to decrease nitrogen/phosphorus and other NRFP
goals/objectives. The State of the Basin report could be a way to promote the basin efforts.
The role of the RRBC could be to develop a reporting system that allows each jurisdiction to
provide information and share capabilities. The RRBC could provide the forum to talk about the
how to reports.
The RRBC could create an index (subjective or descriptive) of programs within each jurisdiction.
The RRBC would send out a questionnaire/inquiry to the jurisdictions to ask general information
regarding the NRFP goals/objectives.
What does the RRBC need for the state of the basin report? Is it a broad inventory of programs
geared at flood damage reduction, water supply, etc., or is it a modeling tool with scientific
predictions of changes in the watershed?
The first goal is to have a State of the Basin report for the 25th Summit conference anniversary in
2008. This would be the State of the Basin after 25 years.
Concerns were expressed that at each PIC meeting there should be a standing agenda so that each
of the 13 goals can be reviewed, and then each are thoroughly discussed and this would be the
beginning of the report as it stands for each goal.
Another concern was expressed about the actual reduction of phosphorus – the agreement for the
10% reduction was decided 2 years ago, but what is the actual reduction now. Has there been a
measured reduction. Who has the baseline level, and who knows the levels that are current.
What processes are in place to measure.
eLink can show the results of BMP practices in the reduction of sediment and phosphorus.
RRBC needs to show who is measuring, and what the monitoring is showing.
PIC future meeting –
Focus a meeting on water quality, with staff assigned to each goal respectively.
Need to link Plan with committed reduction
The first State of the Basin report should be on Water Quality and Flood damage reduction.
PIC should work with Conference Committee (meeting Monday 21st) to begin the coordination
for this January meeting. After which, the two committees should meet in February to determine
how to coordinate the 25th meeting around the NRFP.
NRFP has no evaluation plan. It needs to have a measuring stick developed for each goal.
Other Issues:
IRRB/Aquatic Ecosystem Health Committee –
The Ion data base that RRBC developed was discussed. The committee felt that more
date needed to be added, and members were helpful to suggest where the updated
information could be found. RRBC staff will work to update the database.
American Heritage Rivers Program:
Lance and Ruth reported that they had talked with the National coordinator about the
program. It is currently undergoing discussions with the CEQ Task Force to determine
how to select the next 6 nominations, from the first Presidential Executive Order (1997).
We were told not to put in too much effort until we hear back from the coordinator, but
she has passed our request on to the task force and she felt that we would have a very
good chance of success because of our international connection, and because we are so
far along in our partnering.
Next meeting: (3rd Wednesday)- location to be announced
September 20
October18
November15
December 20