Session Lead: Kurt Stephenson

Co-Lead: Zach Easton

Session Format: Panel discussion

Abstract:

As the CBP passes the mid-point assessment, point source discharges will have achieved (or nearly achieved) their final TMDL nitrogen (N) and phosphorus (P) wasteload allocations. Jurisdictions, however, still need to achieve substantial nutrient and sediment reductions from agricultural and urban nonpoint sources. Based on current understanding and modeling, the CBP estimates that agriculture and urban nonpoint sources need to achieve an additional 35 million and 12 million pounds of N reductions, 1.3 and 0.6 million pounds of P reductions, and 941 and 594 million pounds of sediment, respectively to meet TMDL goals. State and local governments are poised to spend hundreds of millions of additional dollars to meet these goals, primarily by installing nonpoint source BMPs.

Thus, BMP implementation stands at the center of CBP efforts to meet TMDL requirements. Yet, water quality monitoring suggests that the link between BMP implementation and load reductions is tenuous at best. In a recent STAC review, Keisman et al (2018) state “current research suggests that the estimated effects of conservation practices have not been linked to water quality improvements in most streams.” The CB watershed model estimates substantial reductions in ag loads, but monitoring data suggests little to no change in ag loads between 1992-2012 (Keisman et al 2018). A critical question is why? Potential explanatory factors include inadequate BMP coverage, poor implementation/ maintenance, lag times between implementation and pollutant load reductions, and inability to target cost-effective BMPs investments to high loss areas.  In this session we propose to address the last point, improvement of BMP targeting.

This session discusses the policy needs, opportunities, and challenges to creating incentive programs that target and reward improved targeting of BMPs. The overall goal is to inform the development of processes/approaches to identify cost effective selection and placement of BMPs that maximize nutrient reductions of limited funding in the Chesapeake Bay. Questions/Objectives that will be addressed include:

  • How NPS programs can be designed/redesigned to maximize the treatment benefits of NPS control measures by identifying and targeting high loss areas?
  • Discuss evidence of incentive designs to increasing participation for land managers with high loss areas.
  • What outcome (performance) indicators can be used to provide clearer incentives for land managers to devote management attention to high loss areas?
  • What modeling or monitoring changes are needed to improve targeting of NPS BMP investments?
  • What policy needs and barriers need to be overcome to reward targeting of high loss areas?