*4




A

               Section 319
                     IP3INT SIHTiCE PROGRAM SUCCESS  STORY
 Tar-Pamlico Basin Agricultural Management Strategy

 Reduces Instream Nutrients


Watprhnrlv Imnrnx/pH   ^ow cr°Ps anc' anima' feeding operations in the Tar-Pamlico River
        "" ' ""1     r  "   """   Basin, one of three main feeders to the nation's second largest
 estuary—the Albemarle-Pamlico Sound—have led to excessive nutrients in the estuary, forcing it to
 be added to the state's 303(d) list for chlorophyll a. Through implementation of best management
 practices (BMPs) on agricultural lands, such as riparian buffer protection, reduced fertilizer use,
 and implementation of conservation tillage practices.  North Carolina met its 30 percent nitrogen
 reduction goal ahead of schedule and impaired acreage in the estuary was reduced by 90 percent,
 allowing  one section of the estuary to be removed from the 303(d) list for chlorophyll a.


 Problem

 In the mid-1980s, the Pamlico River estuary
 saw an increase in problems that pointed to
 excessive levels of nutrients in the water—
 harmful algal blooms, low oxygen levels,
 increased numbers offish kills, and other
 symptoms of stress and disease. Row crops,
 confined animal feeding operations, and highly
 erodable soils were the culprits. The Pamlico
 River estuary was eventually placed on the
 303(d) list for chlorophyll a, driven by excess
 nutrient concentrations contributed by agricul-
 tural runoff and point sources.

 Project Highlights

 In response, the North Carolina Environmental
 Management Commission designated the
 Tar-Pamlico River Basin as "Nutrient Sensitive
 Waters" and called for a strategy to reduce
 nutrient inputs from around the basin. The
 strategy's first phase, which ran from 1990
 through 1994, produced an innovative point
 source/nonpoint source trading program that
 allows point sources, such as wastewater
 treatment plants and industrial facilities, to
 achieve reductions in nutrient loading in more
 cost-effective ways. The group cap structure
 of the trading program has allowed the point
 source coalition to exceed its reduction targets
                                         Area farmers installed water table control structures
                                         like the one shown here to address excess nutrients.
                                         so cost-effectively that nonpoint source trades
                                         have been unnecessary to date. The second
                                         phase established a plan to reduce nitrogen
                                         by 30 percent (from 1991 levels) and hold
                                         phosphorus loadings to 1991 levels based on
                                         estuarine conditions by 2006, implementing
                                         the targets set in the total maximum daily
                                         load (TMDL) for chlorophyll a. In addition to
                                         point sources, Phase II called on nonpoint
                                         sources to contribute to meeting these goals
                                         and established  a set of nonpoint source rules
                                         addressing agriculture, urban stormwater, and
                                         fertilizer management across all land uses and
                                         called for riparian buffer protection. Between

-------
            1991 and 2003, farmers installed water control
            structures to treat 32,200 acres of cropland,
            buffers to treat 72,000 acres and planted
            scavenger crops on 81,500 acres. In addition,
            many farmers reduced fertilizer use and imple-
            mented conservation tilling practices to help
            meet the goal. The third phase of the nutrient
            strategy was adopted by the EMC effective
            April 14, 2005, setting an eight year clean-up
            deadline for the rest of the estuary by 2013.
            Results
            Agriculture met its 30 percent nitrogen
            reduction goal ahead of schedule. In fact, data
            from 2003 indicate a 45 percent reduction in
            nitrogen losses compared to 1991, mostly from
            decreasing fertilization rates. Progress is fur-
            ther reflected by samples taken at the Pamlico
            estuary's head showing an 18 percent in-
            stream reduction in nitrogen and a 33 percent
            instream decrease in phosphorus between
            1991 and 2002, reflecting significant progress
            toward meeting the targets set in the TMDL.
            The installation of BMPs in the watershed has
            prevented more than 396,000 tons of soil from
            being washed away  by erosion. As a result of

               Sampling at Pamlico Estuary
   I
            ALL SEASONS
           • Seasonal Sen Slope
                                 SEASONAL KENDALL (SKWC)
                                 Slope = -0.01686
                                 2xP = 0.0197
                                 Signif95%
        90  91   92  93   94  95  96   97  98   99  100   101  102  103
                             YEAR

    Samples reflect an 18 percent instream reduction in nitrogen.
                                                       watershed-wide efforts, impaired acreage in
                                                       the estuary has been reduced by 90 percent
                                                       (from 36,200 to 3,450 acres), and one segment
                                                       of the Pamlico estuary has been removed from
                                                       the 303(d) list for chlorophyll a.
                                                       Partners and Funding
                                                       Partners involved in the effort were North
                                                       Carolina Division of Water Quality, Soil and
                                                       Water Conservation Districts, North Carolina
                                                       Division of Soil and Water Conservation, North
                                                       Carolina Cooperative Extension, U.S. Depart-
                                                       ment of Agriculture's Natural Resources Con-
                                                       servation Service,  North Carolina Department
                                                       of Agriculture, North Carolina Farm Bureau,
                                                       North Carolina State University, and agricultural
                                                       community and commodity groups. The North
                                                       Carolina Environment Management Commis-
                                                       sion brought together stakeholder groups of
                                                       affected parties and provided the participants
                                                       with a chance to express differing viewpoints.
                                                       Stakeholders involved in the process included
                                                       environmental groups, municipalities, devel-
                                                       opers, businesses, and the public. The North
                                                       Carolina Agriculture Cost Share Program,
                                                       administered by the Division of Soil and Water
                                                       Conservation (DSWC), contributed $12.5 million
                                                       between  1992 and 2003. Another DSWC-
                                                       administered program, the federal Conserva-
                                                       tion Reserve Enhancement Program, has
                                                       obligated approximately $33.1  million in the Tar-
                                                       Pamlico River Basin since 1998. Between 1995
                                                       and 2003, approximately $2.67 million in Clean
                                                       Water Act section 319 expenditures supported
                                                       a variety of  nonpoint source projects in the Tar-
                                                       Pamlico Basin,  including BMP demonstration
                                                       and implementation, technical assistance and
                                                       education, GIS  mapping, development and dis-
                                                       semination  of accounting tools, and monitoring.
                                                       As part of the Phase I Agreement, the area's
                                                       Point Source Association both contributed
                                                       funds and acquired a section 104(b)(3) grant for
                                                       agricultural  BMP implementation. The com-
                                                       bined total of their contributions was $850,000
                                                       in nutrient-reducing BMPs in the basin.
I
5
w
        \
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Water
Washington, DC

EPA841-F-05-004B
July 2005
For additional information contact:
John Huisman
NC Division of Water Quality
919-733-5083 x572 •john.huisman@ncmail.net
Steve Coffey
NC Division of Soil and Water Conservation
919-715-6106 •  steve.coffey@ncmail.net

-------