OLD_SERA46: Framework for Nutrient Reduction Strategy Collaboration: the Role for Land Grant Universities

(Multistate Research Coordinating Committee and Information Exchange Group)

Status: Inactive/Terminating

Project Menu

SAES-422 Reports

Annual/Termination Reports:

[09/15/2015] [08/15/2016] [02/07/2017] [11/21/2017] [09/19/2018] [03/16/2019]

Date of Annual Report: 09/15/2015

Report Information

Annual Meeting Dates: 05/18/2015 - 05/19/2015
Period the Report Covers: 10/01/2014 - 09/01/2015

Participants

Rebecca Power
Jason Hubbart
Amanda Gumbert
Mike Schmitt
Wes Burger
Forbes Walker
Ken Genskow
Eric Young
Robin Shepard,
Matt Helmers
Jane Frankenberger
Brian Miller
Richard Ingram
Ron Cossman
Joe Bonnell
Andy Ward
Joe Piotrowski
Mike Daniels
Bob Broz
John Lawrence

Brief Summary of Minutes

SERA-46 meeting
May 18, 2015 1pm
DRAFT notes

Rebecca Power introduced the meeting and challenged us to work more effectively as a group than individually.
Mike Schmitt presented survey results
Two surveys (perception of our group on the issues):
1) How do we view the issues facing Gulf Hypoxia?
• Two most important factors in addressing Hypoxia: nutrient mgmt. and drainage
• Universities influencing producer behavior – greatest in manure mgmt. and nutrient mgmt., least on drainage
o Is this a true reflection of reality?
o Separate Iowa surveys reflect co-ops, dealers, CCAs, etc. more influential than universities
• Do field practices match what is known scientifically? – undecided on the issues
• LGUs have made great progress in the past 20 years? – greatest: nutrient rates and nutrient mgmt.; least: drainage
• Without more research and education, we will make progress in the next 20 years? Overall disagreement
• With continued research and education, we will make progress in the next 20 years? Overall agree
Wordle popped out “research” as dominant word from the open comments
2) Intra-state work with collaborators
• How is relationship with these entities: overall good
o Dept of Ag
o State pollution agency
o NRCS
o Conservation dists
o Farm orgs
o Conservation orgs
• With respect to LGU mission how important should the relationship be?: verged on Very Important
• How frequently do you interact with groups: averaging 2.5-3 (For this question, the responses were on a "continuous" quantitative scale with "4" being "very frequently" and "3" being "frequently" and "2" being "occasionally" and "1" being "rarely." So, depending on the specific group, the average of the respondents’ replies was in the "occasionally" to "frequently" part of the spectrum.)

• How productive are interactions of mutual influence? Low for NRCS, higher for farm organizations
Wordle result: Nutrient, management
Katie Flahive (EPA, co-chair of coordinating committee) – discussion of Priorities for Collaborative Work document
• Interaction of HTF with SERA-46 very important for moving forward
• Identify Common Attributes and Gaps across State Nutrient Reduction Strategies
o Challenge is to get states moving toward implementing their strategies
o SERA-46 members role: taking our expertise to identify gaps and providing ways to fill them
• Conservation practice systems
o What will accumulate as a result of practices implemented?
o Growing knowledge and converge them into implemented practices and measurable benefits
• Nutrient efficiency
o How do you quantify benefits?
• Monitoring/calibration/validation
o Non-point and point source metrics and measures to represent their work – from modeling?
o Large-scale modeling?
o Edge –of-field monitoring
Challenge: scale. Address via measurement and modeling
How do we take what we know now and scale appropriately?
Rebecca leading review of DRAFT Priorities for Collaborative Work, gave a brief synopsis of the document:
• 3 broad objectives
• Identifying gaps across state nutrient reduction strategies (identify opportunities to apply across other states that might have been omitted in some states’ strategy documents)
• Conservation Practice Systems
o Would like to identify a few practices that could be applied broadly, but is this appropriate?
o High priority: cover crops and tile drainage
o Extension:
? Focus on people (practitioners) and practices in priority watersheds
? Ag 101
o Serve as a clearinghouse?
o Research:
? Core stewardship practices across ecoregions
? Optimization of cover crops
? Social and economic research/need for expansion
• Nutrient Use Efficiency
o Extension
? Work in partnership with CCAs to train, develop training, how do we facilitate
? Work w/fertilizer industry and markets to support appropriate fertilizer application
o Research
? 4Rs
? Identify reasons for different state recommendations for N & P rates for similar soil types and fields
• Monitoring, Calibration, Validation
o Water quality database integration/exchange (USGS, state env monitoring agency, LGUs, etc)

What do you like? What do you not like?

• Jason Hubbart: Getting through the groan zone, more synthesis of ideas, making real progress, lots of to-dos, think about what products come from this, what are the specific types of research, what studies do we need (or not), what are the products of those studies, how to synthesize the moving parts to reduce Hypoxia
• Mike Schmitt: likes the current form, challenge Extension folks: how do we do better taking the science and changing behavior
• Joe Piotrowski: collaboration has come a long way, are there things in research that can make a difference tomorrow, is 45% reduction too big of a bite?, can we take smaller bites (2% + 2%...), prioritize priorities
• Ron Cossman: don’t see what is downstream, fishermen should be ally/collaborators, do they have potential clout that we don’t know about, upstream (USACE has different priorities) – targeting ag producers, where are fertilizer manufacturers, coordinating and sharing information – how do we do this on demand, science-driven, easy wins, quick progress, connect ag economists, producers, and the social indicators
• Matt Helmers: like the framework, focus on monitoring, examining performance of practices across the regions, believe can have a broader core of practices (floodplain restoration, where are water quality benefits from buying out floodplains), heavily focused on nutrient mgmt. and not sure this can be solved with nutrient mgmt., need to diversify landscape, how to implement when in the short term they don’t make money, what about policy in relation to diversifying the landscape, ecosystem services benefits – expanded economic benefits, who pays for ecosystem services?
• Norm Fausey: how do we address risk aversion for producers?
• Joe Engeln: early adopters needed for practice implementation
• Bob Broz: more realistic, what is our fertilizer use today vs where it’s going, climate variability integration, economics must be addressed, more profit and not production, lot of education upstream, careful with terminology (“sustainable” has negative meaning from early 1980s)
• Joe Bonnell: likes connecting farmers and watershed practitioners, need more consultation of farmers, need more focus on human systems (policies and markets), targeting needed
• Xiaoqiang Liu: more conservation practice integrity (practice might not be effective across the landscape), question about data
• Barry Tonning: looking for commitment
• Katie Flahive: pleased with document, how does this work relate/aggregation of benefits result in reduction of hypoxia?
• Brian Miller: liked discussion of extension/research priorities, where is the interface on the ground? 1. Taking results/bmp tools to regional/farmer scales; 2. Economics of bmps; 3. Ability for edge-of-field measurements as an education tool; 4. Not one size fits all, extension educator training so that message is carried by local messenger
• Jane Frankenberger: likes concrete and concise, agrees w/Matt in terms of matching field practices with the science but need to address profitability – need policy dimension, we maybe shouldn’t develop conservation systems but rather synthesize
• Andy Ward: echo others sentiments, connectors are missing (streams, wetlands, ditches) and seems system at a field scale, document is unrealistic ($5m is a low estimate for this committee), doesn’t think we are organized correctly – we should be coordinating and integrating committee, focus on public awareness (general public, Toledo example)
• Richard Ingram: very comprehensive, what are the priorities and what is the sequence, what can we leverage, lots of social science, what can be phased, what is low-hanging fruit?
• Ken Genskow: lays out a series of issues to leverage other funding sources from an agreed-upon document, overall likes the document, back in divergent part, could frame the first paragraph more openly, not set in stone, open to opportunities, help refine and implement nutrient reduction strategies, list the four priorities we have later in the document, establish policy priorities, need to reflect opportunities for resilience for farm operations, 3rd objective addresses ag and non-ag audiences – maybe should change title to include ag focus
• Wes Burger: missing – serve as integrator and communicator of information, diversifying landscapes are overlooked – not a sandbox with a plug – they are complex systems, need to look at multi-function landscapes, economic asymmetry – need to think about profitability from producers’ standpoint, we are asking for a public service (clean water) at a private costs and could we go beyond paying for that with subsidies,
• Mike Daniels: like the geographic approach that helps us learn about ag in other regions, likes the opportunities for research/extension but don’t let that keep the ideas separately, monitoring/calibration component needs extension component, monitoring a great learning experience for farmers, need simple risk assessment tools, liked that farmers were put in leadership positions, recommends 12-state farmer committee, how do we track adoption, beyond tracking increased knowledge
• Ray Knighton: need to include better nutrient metrics, what is nutrient use efficiencies in various watersheds, counties, etc, state nutrient reduction strategies are remarkably similar yet remarkably different
• Forbes Walker: emphasis on fishermen
• Amanda Gumbert: economics – save money and save time which equates to making money, comprehensive profitability

Social Indicators Sub-committee
Ron Cossman – can measure public opinion change in a short period of time compared to stream monitoring, must do some sort of intervention between baseline surveys and follow-up survey, really want to get 3-4 producers in a room discussing what they do and what we do and how we make our efforts palatable to them, identify handful of early adopters, what are driving forces of attitudes and beliefs, would like to get a working group that represents all LGUs to help collect data that proves success of the efforts of this group, recruit social scientists from LGUs (opportunity for collaborative funding, publication)
Ken Genskow – 2 posters talking about this

Nutrient Reduction Strategy Assessment sub-committee
Ken Genskow presented summary, reflected in Appendix B of Atlanta notes
• Proposed purpose, scope, and methods to assess NRS documents
• Showed example of PushGraph tool that provides a concept map, distribution of concepts via word associations, could be used to analyze states’ NRS documents

Research and Monitoring Subcommittee
Andy Ward – needs guidance from HTF to determine priorities, if data collected from farmers/producers what will data be used for, edge-of-field: what is confidentiality of data? Farmers concerned about getting themselves in trouble/data used against them,
Joe: is there some sort of quick analysis farmer can use to monitor runoff on their own, so farmer knows what they are losing out of their tiles?
Matt: Iowa is getting a lot of questions for protocol development for monitoring their own tile drain outlets
Jane: low-cost sensors aren’t out there
Matt: has a colleague w NIFA grant working to develop low-cost sensor
Katie: EPA has received 29 applicants for grant challenge for developing low-cost sensors, also collecting names for testing the sensors
Jason: citizen science, working with colleagues at Rolla S&T to develop technologies for testing nitrate on a dissolving (??) sensor that bluetooths with your phone

Ag101
Forbes: can provide basics of agriculture, what nutrients are important, how do we grow a crop, why are soil recommendations different across states
Joe Piotrowski: what about buyers of commodities that are suggesting suppliers (growers) do certain things
Katie: Field to Market group working to develop indicators, Katie has met with science director of this group to let her know about SERA-46

What is our bigger goal?
Stay out of the weeds, don’t need to be another multi-state group focused on one particular science topic, but be more of an integrator
Need short term action
Change “conservation practice systems” to “conservation systems”
Adding economics/profitability (cost savings as well)/feasibility

May 19, 2015
8:30am Prioritization in 3 small groups (assignment: rank short term and long term actions)

Short term
Group 1:
• Strengthening Networks #2
• Conservation Systems #7
• Monitoring, Calibration, Validation #3
Group 2:
• Review state nutrient strategies – Strengthening Networks #5
• Inventory of existing monitoring – NCU #1
• Training and education – Conservation Systems #9
o Identify existing effective materials
o Tailor for appropriate transfer
Group 3:
• Strengthening Networks #1,2,5 – Conservation Systems #1 will be used as part of Strengthening Networks 2, 5
• Conservation Systems #3
• Conservation Systems #8
Long term
Group 1:
• Conservation Systems #8
• Conservation Systems #1
• Conservation Systems #3
Group 2:
• Development of social indicators Conservation Systems #7
• State nutrient reduction strategy implementation
• Monitor and track individual and cumulative impacts, tracking effects of multifunctional impacts
Group 3:
• Conservation Systems #7
• Conservation Systems #10
• Strengthening Networks # 3,4
John Lawrence: What are our outcomes? What will the HTF accept as an outcome? Ex: monitoring conference? Stds developed for monitoring?

Three working groups:
Strengthening Networks (all)
Conservation Systems # 7
Conservation Systems # 8
Tasks: identify overarching goal, Short term/Long term deliverables, Other people needed

Accomplishments

SERA-46 has been working with an ad-hoc Hypoxia Task Force (HTF) sub-group over the past six months to develop the priorities document shown below, which we finalized in our SERA-46 meeting on May 18-19. The SERA-46 Executive Committee presented these priorities to the full HTF the next day. The shared priorities document was well received. We got some good questions. Comments ranged from being fully supportive and thanking us for our work (most comments) to wondering if what we’ve outlined is too much business as usual (one comment). While we did not make a specific “resource ask”, we did ask the HTF to help us find and advocate for the resources necessary to get our shared priorities accomplished. There seemed to be general agreement on this approach, but we’ll follow up with Katie Flahive to see what came out of the rest of the HTF meeting. Other important next steps include: - Engage necessary collaborators within and outside of the LGUs - Develop short white papers that can be used as pre-proposals; will include goals, deliverables, costs, anticipated impacts, etc. (Social indicators group is close to having one already) The white papers will set the stage for resource asks where additional resources are needed. A template will be designed for the white papers. Hypoxia Task Force and LGU SERA-46 Priorities for Collaborative Work Working DRAFT May 2015 This document outlines emergent opportunities for potential short- and long-term collaborative work between the Hypoxia Task Force and LGU SERA-46. It is a work in progress, reflecting the most recent thinking of HTF and SERA-46 members about where collaboration will contribute most to state-level nutrient strategies and reducing the hypoxic zone in the Gulf of Mexico. Each item in this summary can be tied to the three broad, proposed objectives: Objective 1: Establish and strengthen relationships that can serve the missions of multiple organizations addressing nutrient movement and environmental quality. Objective 2: Expand the knowledge base through the discovery of new tools and practices as well as the continual validation of recommended practices. Objective 3: Improve the coordination and delivering of educational programming and increase the implementation effectiveness of nutrient management strategies that reduce nutrient movement for agricultural and non-agricultural audiences. Additional information will be necessary to operationalize these ideas, such as: • How will SERA-46 and HFT integrate these ideas with existing efforts? • How will these ideas be resourced (e.g. funded, staffed)? Answering these questions will be important next steps in moving priorities for land-grant HTF collaboration forward. Document Key ? = SERA-46 Priority Items in Bold Italics = Short-term deliverables (May-Dec 2016). Note that some priority items may have short-term deliverables that are not yet developed and that all items will be communicated within the land-grants as being priorities for HTF and LGU collaboration. ? Strengthening Networks 1. ? Refer the pertinent work of other multistate committees and land-grant university researchers and extension educators to the HTF and its member agencies. A specific priority is to communicate to the HTF the reasons for differences in state LGU recommended N/P application rates for similar soil types and fields. 2. ? Work with NIFA and other HTF agencies to identify and share information on latest research being done across university systems with a priority for those being done under federal grants, e.g., the USDA-funded Climate and Corn-based Cropping Systems Coordinated Agricultural Project, commonly known as the Sustainable Corn Project, and others. With sufficient support, SERA-46 could serve a clearing house role. 3. ? Work within LGU’s to develop more consistent messaging across disciplines/specialists. A specific proposal is to convene livestock and crop specialists to discuss how they can work with farmers on nutrient management strategies that address water quality. 4. ? Strengthen communication between SERA-46, HTF, and agriculture and food industry groups such as Field to Market. 5. ? Identify common attributes and gaps across state nutrient reduction strategies - Review the HTF states’ nutrient reduction strategies to identify the state goals, approaches and common attributes. Highlight opportunities for cross state information sharing to enhance other HTF state strategies. Conservation Systems Research and Outreach Overview Develop recommendations for integrated agricultural conservation systems that meet state and basin-wide nutrient management goals, incorporate ecoregional differences, consider the cumulative impacts of practices. Guidelines should include costs and known benefits. Consider hurdles and identify potential future challenges to widespread adoption of systems of conservation practices for water quality improvement. State priority watersheds will be critical to leverage resources and demonstrate innovative and successful approaches to achieving nutrient management goals. While achieving state and basin wide nutrient goals are most critical, design and performance of multifunctional landscapes that address other ecosystems services should be considered. Priority Activities 1. Assist in the optimization of cover crop practice performance as a part of conservation practice systems. Provide analytical and technical assistance for practice design at field and watershed scales, taking into account local and ecoregional conditions and variations; agronomic, economic, soil health, water quality benefits; and validation of results, benefits and challenges. 2. ? Translate science regarding the issues and solutions in tile drained areas into accessible information for states to adopt into policies to address nutrient use and movement, particularly where corn is the main crop and where N movement is the main issue in the broad landscape. This item has been referred to NCERA 217, Drainage design and management practices to improve water quality. NCERA 217 has agreed to accomplish this within 12-18 months. 3. Expand research and outreach on multifunctional agricultural landscapes that provide a broad suite of societal and ecosystem services. Wetted buffers, saturated buffers, prairie strips, and other buffers incorporating native vegetation and embedded in agricultural working lands are examples of practices that address multiple ecosystem services in agricultural landscapes. 4. Develop a fertilizer efficiency metric that quantifies nutrient loss to the environment in terms of water quality related to the 4Rs. Improve understanding and translate into adoptable options for quantifying efficiency to improve metrics and accounting for nutrient reduction. a. An example metric: units of nutrients lost (or used by the target crop) per total units made available, including nutrients in the soil pool and atmospheric deposition. Relative to this metric, define reasonable industry average estimates of efficiency currently, by objective and as occurred during the HTF baseline period. 5. Determine how the fertilizer industry and markets can support increased implementation of post-emergence side dressing (split spring application) and minimize fall application. Analyze whether the current infrastructure for delivering fertilizer to the grower is adequate for spring fertilization. 6. ? Consider current social, economic, and public policy research and opportunities/needs for expansion. Examples include: a) Develop and implement a social indicators system that will guide, evaluate and advance implementation of strategies to reduce nutrient loss from agricultural lands across the 12 HTF states. This process would consider the input of numerous stakeholders, as well issues derived from hypoxia- and water resource management-related literature, such as the Social Indicator Planning and Evaluation System (SIPES) Handbook. Once baseline date is collected, it will be used to inform education and outreach in high priority watersheds. “Post-programming” data collection will follow to evaluate program impact and inform the next generation of outreach. i. Form subcommittee including SERA-46, NC1190 (ERS has a member), and others, including a request for HTF participation ii. Develop a social indicators framework strawman and seek funding for a social indicators system development, including identification of needs at state and basin-wide levels b) http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1178&context=usarmyresearch and c) https://www.extension.purdue.edu/extmedia/FNR/fnr-488-w.pdf 8. ? Create a network of watershed practitioners and farmer leaders to strengthen the implementation effectiveness of nutrient management strategies that reduce nutrient movement. a) Organize infrastructure for 12-state leadership team with members from LGUs, agribusiness, NGOs, and state and local conservation agencies. b) Identify common areas and gaps across existing state extension programs so that they can be further developed to enhance cultivating farmer leadership, civic engagement, and other strategies for increasing success of watershed projects. c) Facilitate the development and activities of a network of watershed practitioners and farmers, prioritizing (but not limited to) the tile-drained areas of the corn belt. Extension and other organizations are already facilitating farmer leadership in watershed projects within the 12 HTF states. This effort would connect watershed practitioners and famers working in priority watersheds to increase the pace and quality of learning. Topics could include: o communicating the latest research on conservation practices, including cumulative impact of practices and cost effectiveness, o engaging farmers in watershed leadership, o strategies for increasing adoption of conservation practices, and o effective use of monitoring by citizens, farmers, and agency staff in watershed projects at field and watershed scales. 9. ? Develop training and educational materials that will provide basic information about agriculture and nutrient management to agency staff, conservation NGOs and others who are less familiar with agriculture. Training could be state-specific or regional in nature. Example topics include: a. Nutrients 101 – what are the major nutrients of concern and why, in what forms do they exist in the soil and fertilizers, the” 4 R concept”(right source, rate, timing and placement). b. Development of soil fertility recommendations – why they vary from state to state. c. Agricultural best management practices (BMPs) – what works, why there are barriers to adoption, what consultants recommend and why. d. Row crop production 101 – how do you grow a crop? What decisions are made? Soil testing, variety selection, planting, tillage, weed and pest control etc. 10. ? Work in partnership with ASA’s CCA Program to: a. Identify and summarize pertinent CCA training available in each state. b. Assess the feasibility of more CCAs producing customized whole farm conservation plans c. Where appropriate, develop training that addresses state nutrient-related regulations and policies to strengthen nutrient management and reduce nutrient loss from agricultural lands. d. Facilitate learning among CCAs, agencies, university researchers and extension professionals, and farmers to improve adoption of nutrient management practices that reduce nutrient loss from agricultural lands. ? Monitoring, Calibration and Validation 1. ? Determine the potential for use of comparable edge of field monitoring measures from state to state. 2. ? Building from the work by the Monitoring Collaborative, identify further gaps in data available. 3. ? Conduct a 12-state survey of experts to better understand the scope of both edge-of-field and in-stream monitoring and means to link them for research purposes as well as developing the means to track progress from the field to the watershed to the Gulf, including: a) what research monitoring is being done in the 12 state region; b) where is it being done; c) what is the focus of each study; d) what water quality data are being obtained at different scales; e) what other data are being obtained; f) how is the data being used; g) what is the availability of the data; and h) how is monitoring being funded? 4. ? Conduct a survey of experts within the 12 state region and other regions, such as the Great Lakes and Chesapeake Bay, to determine a) what data are needed at different scales; b) where will it come from; c) how will it be used; d) what will be the data security, confidentiality and ownership; e) who will do the data collection; f) what will it cost; g) how will it be funded; h) what data is already being obtained; and i) how is it being used?

Publications

Impact Statements

Date of Annual Report: 08/15/2016

Report Information

Annual Meeting Dates: 04/25/2016 - 04/26/2016
Period the Report Covers: 10/01/2015 - 04/25/2016

Participants

April 25 -
Matt Helmers
Richard Ingram
Rebecca Power
Amanda Gumbert
Jack Jones
Mike Schmitt
Fabian Fernandez
Joe Engell
Jason Hubbart
Jane Frankenberger
Joe Bonnell
Bob Broz
Leslie Holloway – Missouri Farm Bureau
Laura Christianson
Paul Davidson
Beth Baker
Forbes Walker

April 26 -
Matt Helmers
Richard Ingram
Rebecca Power
Amanda Gumbert
Mike Schmitt
Fabian Fernandez
Joe Engell
Jason Hubbart
Jane Frankenberger
Joe Bonnell
Bob Broz
Laura Christianson
Paul Davidson
Beth Baker
Forbes Walker
Madhu Khanna, Univ of Illinois (economics), joined via Zoom
Vinicius Moreira via Zoom
Erika Larsen – USEPA calling in
Jon Westra via Zoom
Allison Thomson (Farm to Table)
Katie Flahive
Matt Lechtenberg
Barry Tonning

Brief Summary of Minutes

Minutes Attachment:

SERA46 STL mtg notes_final.docx

Accomplishments

SERA-46 has continued quarterly conference calls to discuss progress on SERA-46 and Hypoxia Task Force shared priorities. We met in person with a small group of the committee in January in Ames, IA to continue work on these items and had our annual face-to-face meeting of the whole group at the same time as the Hypoxia Task Force meeting in April in St. Louis, MO. The group has continued to work to strengthen networks between the Hypoxia Task Force (HTF) and the Land Grant University system (LGU). We have provided information to the  HTF on relevant information on why there are differences in LGU recommendations on nitrogen management and a short white paper with a proposal was developed that would address differences in LGU nutrient management recommendation and integrate for 4R outreach. We have continued through Mississippi State University leadership to review the HTF states’ nutrient reduction strategies to identify common goals, approaches and attributes. A publication has been prepared that assists with translating science regarding the issues and solutions for reducing nitrogen export in tile drained lands. This publication will be released from the University of Illinois Extension in August of 2016. A priority item of SERA-46 is to develop and implement a social indicators system that will guide, evaluate and advance implementation of state strategies for nutrient loss. Based on this item a white paper was developed and a project was funded by USEPA. The title of the project is “Using Social and Civil Engagement Indictors to Advance Nutrient Reduction Efforts.” Another priority item was to create a network of watershed practitioners and farmer leaders to strengthen the implementation effectiveness of nutrient strategies. Based on this priority a white paper was developed and a project was funded by USEPA. The title of the project is “Building Capacity for Watershed Leadership and Management in Twelve Mississippi River Basin States.” A critical group for educating producers on nutrient management are Certified Crop Advisors and SERA-46 has a priority item to work in partnership with the American Society of Agronomy (ASA) Certified Crop Advisors program. At our April meeting Luther Smith from ASA visited with SERA-46 about their program and ways we can better engage. A near term action item was to make sure we are posting events for continuing education offerings and including articles in the Crops and Soil magazine. Another priority topic for SERA-46 is monitoring, calibration, and validation. We are continuing to work on the potential for LGUs to contribute data to the water quality portal and some pilot projects have been identified for testing this process and developing case studies. There is some potential to engage the water institutes in each state to participate in this process. SERA-46 is looking beyond our initial shared priorities to areas where we can have an impact. At our April meeting we had a presentation by Glen Salmon on the Landscape Conservation Cooperatives and plan to continue to engage with Glen on how we can better work together. In addition, we are looking at how we better factor in economics into our shared priorities and can provide information to the HTF on this item. We had presentations at both our January and April meeting on the economic evaluation of improved water quality and ecosystem services and believe this is a critical area where we need to continue efforts. Most recently we have engaged with the HTF on potential projects related to Nutrient Reduction Metrics and Measures.

Publications

Impact Statements

Date of Annual Report: 02/07/2017

Report Information

Annual Meeting Dates: 12/05/2016 - 12/07/2016
Period the Report Covers: 10/01/2015 - 09/30/2016

Participants

In-person
Wes Burger Miss State Univ
Amanda Gumbert Univ of KY
Forbes Walker Univ of TN
Jack Jones Univ of Missouri
Matt Helmers Iowa State Univ
Sandra Guzman Miss State Univ
Mike Schmitt Univ of Minnesota
Beth Baker Miss State Univ
Rebecca Power Univ of Wisconsin
Richard Ingram Miss State Univ
Eric Young SAAESD
Mike Daniels Univ of Arkansas
Jane Frankenberger Purdue Univ
John Westra Louisiana State Univ
Austin Omer Miss State Univ
Robbie Kroger Covington Civil and Environmental, LLC

Joined by phone
Joe Bonnell Ohio State Univ
Tim Baye Univ of Wisconsin
Nick Jordan Univ of Minnesota
Carissa Slotterback Univ of Minnesota

Brief Summary of Minutes

Minutes Attachment:

SERA 46 Meeting Notes Dec 2016.docx

Accomplishments

SERA-46 2016 Accomplishments <ul> <li>Face-to-face meeting in Ames, IA – January 25-26, 2016</li> <li>Face-to-face meeting concurrent to Hypoxia Task Force in St. Louis, MO – April 25-27, 2016 <ul> <li>Reported to HTF progress made during working session</li> <li>Provided updates on EPA-sponsored projects</li> </ul> </li> <li>Face-to-face meeting concurrent to Hypoxia Task Force in New Orleans, LA – Dec 5-7, 2016 <ul> <li>Joint executive session with HTF</li> <li>Reported SERA-46 progress during HTF public meeting</li> <li>Reported to HTF progress made during working session/updates to Shared Priorities</li> </ul> </li> <li>Negotiated and secured $350,000 project with Walton Family Foundation to develop a framework for tracking progress toward nutrient reduction goals via reductions in nonpoint sources of pollution; two pilot states to be identified for participation and database construction/BMP inventory/source tracking.</li> <li>Secured EPA funds to work on the following projects/progress made: <ul> <li>Building Capacity for Watershed Leadership and Management in Twelve Mississippi River Basin States <ul> <li>Preliminary needs assessment for watershed training programs underway</li> <li>Two pilot watersheds identified</li> <li>Plans underway for watershed leadership summit in February 2018</li> </ul> </li> <li>Social Indicators <ul> <li>Questionnaire developed and distributed to all SERA-46 and HTF members to identify studies, projects, and related information on social responses that address water management projects in the MARB.</li> </ul> </li> <li>Transforming Drainage <ul> <li>Ten Ways to Reduce Nitrogen Loads from Drained Cropland in the Midwest publication published by University of Illinois; <a href="http://draindrop.cropsci.illinois.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/Ten-Ways-to-Reduce-Nitrate-Loads_IL-Extension-_2016.pdf">http://draindrop.cropsci.illinois.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/Ten-Ways-to-Reduce-Nitrate-Loads_IL-Extension-_2016.pdf</a>. </li> </ul> </li> <li>State nutrient reduction strategies examined to identify common attributes and gaps. <ul> <li>Preliminary analysis presented to HTF at New Orleans meeting; white paper under development.</li> </ul> </li> <li>Reviewed and updated Hypoxia Task Force and LGU SERA-46 Shared Priorities document.</li> </ul> </li> </ul>

Publications

Impact Statements

Date of Annual Report: 11/21/2017

Report Information

Annual Meeting Dates: 09/27/2017 - 09/29/2017
Period the Report Covers: 10/01/2016 - 09/30/2017

Participants

Jane Frankenberger
Amanda Gumbert
Mike Daniels
Joe Bonnell
Rebecca Power
Robin Shepard
Beth Baker
Dan Downing
Larry Oldham
Laura Christianson
Reid Christianson
Wes Burger
Matt Helmers
Fabian Fernandez
Forbes Walker
Michael Schmitt
Eric Young
Katie Flahive
Kyra Reumann-Moore

Brief Summary of Minutes

Minutes Attachment:

HTF Fall Coordinating Committee Meeting_2017_BBaker notes.docx

Accomplishments

Overall Accomplishments Strengthening Networks <ol> <li>Identify common attributes and gaps across state nutrient reduction strategies - Review the HTF states’ nutrient reduction strategies to identify the state goals, approaches and common attributes. Highlight opportunities for cross-state information sharing to enhance other HTF state strategies.</li> </ol> Delivery: Wes Burger analysis summarized in PowerPoint posted on HTF SharePoint site. <ol start="2"> <li>Work within land-grant universities to develop more consistent messaging across disciplines/specialists. A specific proposal is to convene livestock and crop specialists to discuss how they can work with farmers on nutrient management strategies that address water quality.</li> </ol> Delivery: University of Minnesota What is the University of Minnesota doing towards a consistent message across disciplines/specialist on the subject of nutrient management and water quality? The nutrient management team (approximately 15 members) consists of departmental faculty, regional and local Extension educators, and scientists in the areas of soil fertility, drainage, water quality, soil water management, irrigation, manure, and general cropping systems. The team meets 2-3 times a year for the purpose to share and express consistent messages, coordinate group research projects, inform team members of ongoing activities as well as to identify gaps in educational priorities. Similarly, the U of M Extension Crops Team meets twice a year to provide a forum for exchange of information and provide a platform for consistency of programming among its members. This team of approximately 40 people has state specialists and regional and local educators that have integrated research and educational programs in the area of general crop production, integrated pest management, cover crops,  pesticide safety, soil and nutrient management, water quality, and soil health. . Education programs at the University of Minnesota: Nitrogen Smart is a training program exclusively for producers that presents fundamentals for maximizing economic return on nitrogen investments while minimizing nitrogen losses. The workshops throughout the state deliver high-quality, research-based education so producers can better manage nitrogen. The curriculum was developed by several nutrient management specialists and extension educators. Nitrogen: Minnesota’s Grand Challenge and Compelling Opportunity Conference. This conference brings the latest in research on nitrogen management. This annual event brings together approximately 250 farmers, agriculture professionals, and people from government and non-government agencies to learn about issues related to nitrogen management and water quality.  Iowa State University: Presentations and training on the Iowa Nutrient Reduction Strategy have become commonplace in all Iowa State University Extension and Outreach Professional Development activities. The goal is to make sure livestock, crop, and agriculture engineering specialists hear the same message and can share information on the Iowa Nutrient Reduction Strategy with their clientele. In addition, Iowa State University has incorporated discussions on these topics in all of Agriculture and Natural Resource Extension training. Conservation Systems Research and Outreach <ol> <li>Assist in the optimization of cover crop practice performance as a part of conservation practice systems. Provide analytical and technical assistance for practice design at field and watershed scales, taking into account local and ecoregional conditions and variations; agronomic, economic, soil health, water quality benefits; and validation of results, benefits and challenges.</li> </ol> Delivery: <ul> <li>Midwest Cover Crop Council (<a href="http://mccc.msu.edu/">http://mccc.msu.edu/</a>) and NCCC-211 (<a href="../../projects/view/mrp/outline/17036">https://www.nimss.org/projects/view/mrp/outline/17036</a>) are the best sources for land grant university cover crop information.</li> <li>Far less research, extension, and farmer adoption of cover crops has occurred in the Mississippi Alluvial Valley than progress that has been made in the Midwest. A recent project, co-led by Mississippi State University and the University of Kentucky and funded by USDA-NIFA, is underway to expand research and extension of the environmental, agronomic, and economic impacts of cover crop implementation in the Mid-south/Mississippi Alluvial Valley. Beth Baker (SERA-46 and Mississippi State University) is a co-PI on the project and will lead water quality monitoring and extension on the project to improve adoption and optimization of cover crops in the Mid-South. </li> </ul> <ol start="2"> <li>Translate science regarding the issues and solutions in tile drained areas into accessible information for states to adopt into policies to address nutrient use and movement, particularly where corn is the main crop and where N movement is the main issue in the broad landscape. This item has been referred to NCERA 217, Drainage design and management practices to improve water quality. Members of NCERA 217 have agreed to accomplish this within 12-18 months.</li> </ol> Delivery: C1400 Ten Ways to Reduce Nitrogen Loads from Drained Cropland in the Midwest (University of Illinois Extension, 2016) posted to HTF SharePoint site; Phosphorus issues referred to SERA-17. <ol start="3"> <li>Create a network of watershed practitioners and farmer leaders to strengthen the implementation effectiveness of nutrient management strategies that reduce nutrient movement.</li> </ol> Delivery: <ul> <li>Received funding from USEPA and others to support the development of the items in this section</li> <li>Developed draft needs assessment expanding upon previous work in watershed leadership to incorporate a new analysis on 1) farmer and farm advisor leadership in watershed management, and 2) recommendations for training and other support for these important leaders in watershed management</li> <li>Planned a Great Lakes to Gulf Watershed Leadership Summit for farmer, farm advisor, extension, federal, state, and local agencies, and NGOs. The summit will take place on Feb 21-22, 2018.</li> <li>Engaged two pilot watersheds – one in Ohio and one in Arkansas – to help us begin building out the network on local watersheds. These local pilots are helping us understand how to effectively bridge scales – from local to the Mississippi River Basin – when it comes to watershed leadership.</li> <li>Received complementary funding from the Environmental Defense Fund and Walton Family Foundation to explore and share best practices for “getting to scale” – achieving the extent of watershed management networks and resources necessary to achieve nutrient-related watershed management goals.</li> <li>Developed a preliminary literature review and hosted a workshop to gather input for a “getting to scale” white paper that will be available in May, 2018.</li> </ul> Monitoring and Tracking of Progress <ol> <li>Consider current social, economic, and public policy research and opportunities/needs for expansion.</li> </ol> <ul> <li>Implement a social indicators system that will guide, evaluate and advance implementation of strategies to reduce nutrient loss from agricultural lands across the 12 HTF states. This process would consider the input of numerous stakeholders, as well issues derived from hypoxia- and water resource management-related literature, such as the <a href="http://greatlakeswater.uwex.edu/sites/default/files/library/outreach-and-education/sipeshandbook-medium-res.pdf">Social Indicator Planning and Evaluation System (SIPES) Handbook</a>. Once baseline date is collected, it will be used to inform education and outreach in high priority watersheds. “Post-programming” data collection will follow to evaluate program impact and inform the next generation of outreach. <ul> <li>Form subcommittee including SERA-46, NC1190 (ERS has a member), and others, including a request for HTF participation</li> <li>Develop a social indicators framework strawman and seek funding for a social indicators system development, including identification of needs at state and basin-wide levels</li> </ul> </li> </ul> Delivery:  Phase 1 – Refining and improving existing social indicators to guide, evaluate, and accelerate implementation of state-level nutrient reduction strategies through a regionally inclusive and consistent expansion of the use of SIPES/SIDMA tools throughout the MARB. The following Phase 1 activities have been completed through funding provided by EPA and GOMA: <ol> <li>Established and facilitated active work group that includes members of the SERA-46 and NC-1190 Committees, HTF Coordinating Committee, GOMA Water Resources Team, and social and environmental scientists from the 15 HTF and GOMA states.</li> <li>Facilitated numerous webinars and conference calls culminating in “Applied Research Symposium:  The Social Dimensions of Nutrient Reduction.”</li> </ol>             iii. Developed and released “Social Indicators to Accelerate the Implementation of Nutrient Reduction Strategies Synthesis Report.” <ol> <li>  Established website:  Human Dimension in Water <a href="https://h2o.ssrc.msstate.edu/">https://h2o.ssrc.msstate.edu/</a></li> </ol> Collaborations/Sponsored Projects/Publications as a result of SERA-46 involvement Multi-State: As an outcome of a Soil and Water Conservation Society Conference- “Nutrient Management and Edge-of-Field Monitoring”, a special issue of Journal of Soil and Water Conservation comprised of presentation manuscripts was developed. The special issue directly aligns topics of interest and priorities of SERA-46, and SERA-46 members contributed to the special issue (Mike Daniels (University of Arkansas) helped organize the effort and Beth Baker (Mississippi State University) contributed original monitoring research). This special issue is expected to be published in January 2018 and will be a product that directly serves priorities of SERA-46. Illinois (Laura Christianson): “Serving as one of the Illinois representatives on the multi-state SERA 46 committee has resulted in my leveraging time invested in service activities to yield grant funding. I am leading a multi-state collaboration, stemming from SERA 46 activities, to develop a nutrient loss reduction measurement and tracking framework for the US Hypoxia Task Force (funded by Walton Family Foundation, 2016-2018, $344K).” Enhanced distribution of <a href="http://draindrop.cropsci.illinois.edu/index.php/i-drop-impact/ten-ways-to-reduce-nitrogen-loads-from-drained-cropland-in-the-midwest/">Ten Ways to Reduce Nitrogen Loads from Drained Cropland in the Midwest</a> document among Mississippi River basin state pollution control agencies and federal agencies. Indiana (Otto Doering): Publication Doering, Otto. 2017. Economic and Policy Issues of Phosphorus Management, in Advances in Soil Science: Soil Phosphorus. Edit. Rattan Lal and B.A. Stewart. CRC Press, Boca Raton. Pp 133-150. Minnesota (Fabian Fernández): Publications Yuan, M., F.G. Fernández, C.M. Pittelkow, K.D. Greer, and D. Schaefer. n.d. Tillage and fertilizer management effects on phosphorus runoff from minimal slope fields. J. Environ. Qual. (In review). Kitchen, N.R., J.F. Shanahan, C.J. Ransom, C.J. Bandura, G.M. Bean, J.J. Camberato, P.R. Carter, J.D. Clark, R.B. Ferguson, F.G. Fernández, D.W. Franzen, C.A.M. Laboski,  E.D. Nafziger, Z. Qing, J.E. Sawyer, and M. Shafer. 2017. A public-industry partnership for enhancing corn nitrogen research and datasets: Project description, methodology, and outcomes. Agron. J. 109:2371-2388. Fernández, F.G., K.P. Fabrizzi, and S. Naeve. 2017. Corn and soybean’s season-long in-situ nitrogen mineralization in drained and undrainded soils. Nutr. Cycl. Agroecosys. 107: 33–47. Mississippi (Beth Baker): The development of <a href="http://extension.msstate.edu/sites/default/files/publications/publications/p3050.pdf">Natural Resource Conservation in Agriculture</a>, a landowner guide to conservation in the Mississippi Alluvial Valley. Mississippi (Richard Ingram): Through its Gulf Star Program, the Gulf of Mexico Alliance (GOMA) awarded a two-year grant to expand the scale of an EPA-funded SERA-46 project to address social, economic, and public policy research and opportunities. This expansion to the original grant included all of the Gulf Coast states not covered in the EPA grant (i.e., not Hypoxia Task Force member states). The leveraging of these resources would ensure that all states throughout the MARB and across the northern Gulf will work together to develop and implement consistent, correlatable measures to track progress in the human dimension of reducing nutrient pollution within the basin and across the northern Gulf.

Publications

Multi-State: As an outcome of a Soil and Water Conservation Society Conference- “Nutrient Management and Edge-of-Field Monitoring”, a special issue of Journal of Soil and Water Conservation comprised of presentation manuscripts was developed. The special issue directly aligns topics of interest and priorities of SERA-46, and SERA-46 members contributed to the special issue (Mike Daniels (University of Arkansas) helped organize the effort and Beth Baker (Mississippi State University) contributed original monitoring research). This special issue is expected to be published in January 2018 and will be a product that directly serves priorities of SERA-46. Illinois (Laura Christianson): “Serving as one of the Illinois representatives on the multi-state SERA 46 committee has resulted in my leveraging time invested in service activities to yield grant funding. I am leading a multi-state collaboration, stemming from SERA 46 activities, to develop a nutrient loss reduction measurement and tracking framework for the US Hypoxia Task Force (funded by Walton Family Foundation, 2016-2018, $344K).” Enhanced distribution of <a href="http://draindrop.cropsci.illinois.edu/index.php/i-drop-impact/ten-ways-to-reduce-nitrogen-loads-from-drained-cropland-in-the-midwest/">Ten Ways to Reduce Nitrogen Loads from Drained Cropland in the Midwest</a> document among Mississippi River basin state pollution control agencies and federal agencies. Indiana (Otto Doering): Publication Doering, Otto. 2017. Economic and Policy Issues of Phosphorus Management, in Advances in Soil Science: Soil Phosphorus. Edit. Rattan Lal and B.A. Stewart. CRC Press, Boca Raton. Pp 133-150. Minnesota (Fabian Fernández): Publications Yuan, M., F.G. Fernández, C.M. Pittelkow, K.D. Greer, and D. Schaefer. n.d. Tillage and fertilizer management effects on phosphorus runoff from minimal slope fields. J. Environ. Qual. (In review). Kitchen, N.R., J.F. Shanahan, C.J. Ransom, C.J. Bandura, G.M. Bean, J.J. Camberato, P.R. Carter, J.D. Clark, R.B. Ferguson, F.G. Fernández, D.W. Franzen, C.A.M. Laboski,  E.D. Nafziger, Z. Qing, J.E. Sawyer, and M. Shafer. 2017. A public-industry partnership for enhancing corn nitrogen research and datasets: Project description, methodology, and outcomes. Agron. J. 109:2371-2388. Fernández, F.G., K.P. Fabrizzi, and S. Naeve. 2017. Corn and soybean’s season-long in-situ nitrogen mineralization in drained and undrainded soils. Nutr. Cycl. Agroecosys. 107: 33–47. Mississippi (Beth Baker): The development of <a href="http://extension.msstate.edu/sites/default/files/publications/publications/p3050.pdf">Natural Resource Conservation in Agriculture</a>, a landowner guide to conservation in the Mississippi Alluvial Valley.

Impact Statements

A SERA-46 Success Story: Expanding the Development and Use of Social Indicators to Track Nutrient Reduction Progress throughout the Mississippi/Atchafalya River Basin and Across the Northern Gulf of Mexico During the fall of 2016, EPA awarded a two-year grant to a consortium of land-grant universities established to support the Mississippi River/Gulf of Mexico Watershed Nutrient (Hypoxia) Task Force (HTF) in its efforts to reduce nutrient pollution within the Mississippi/Atchafalaya River Basin (MARB) which is the leading cause of Gulf of Mexico hypoxia. This consortium, referred to by the HTF as its Land Grant University Initiative and academically as the SERA-46 Committee, consists of agricultural research and Extension staff from the land grant universities in the twelve HTF states. Through its Gulf Star Program, the Gulf of Mexico Alliance (GOMA) also awarded a two-year grant to expand the scale of the original grant to include all of the Gulf Coast states not covered in the EPA grant (i.e., not HTF members). The leveraging of these resources would ensure that all states throughout the MARB and across the northern Gulf will work together to develop and implement consistent, correlatable measures to track progress in the human dimension of reducing nutrient pollution within the basin and across the northern Gulf. The consortium established a Social Science Work Group that coordinates with a larger social science work group, the NC-1190 Committee. The two-year grants provide resources for data discovery, assimilation, and analysis of published and unpublished social science projects and infrastructure within the MARB. Phase 1 of the project, “Refining and improving existing social indicators to guide, evaluate, and accelerate implementation of state-level nutrient reduction strategies through a regionally inclusive and consistent expansion of the use of the Social Indicators Planning and Evaluation System/Social Indicators Data Management and Analysis (SIPES/SIDMA) tools throughout the MARB,” was completed in September 2017 with the release of the Phase 1 Synthesis Report: Social Indicators to Accelerate Implementation of Nutrient Reduction Strategies. The report’s final chapter, Recommendations, Next Steps, and Future Research, identified a set of activities needed to operationalize the expansion of social indicators throughout the MARB and Gulf Coast with a higher emphasis on nutrient reduction as well as modify the infrastructure and improve collaboration needed to support such an effort. These recommendations and next steps will be addressed as components of new proposal which will be submitted to appropriate resource organizations for funding support. Phase 2 of the EPA and GOMA awards, “Developing civic engagement indicators to assess and encourage non-government stewardship of state-level nutrient reduction strategies,” employs a similar process as that used during Phase 1 for data discovery, assimilation, and analysis of published and unpublished reports describing various approaches and projects designed to encourage civic engagement in environmental restoration projects. Also included will be a review of incentives developed to encourage civic engagement. Phase 2 began in September 2017 and is scheduled for completion in August 2018.

Date of Annual Report: 09/19/2018

Report Information

Annual Meeting Dates: 09/18/2018 - 09/19/2018
Period the Report Covers: 10/01/2017 - 09/30/2018

Participants

Karelyn Cruz
Beth Baker
Laura Christianson
Eric Young
John Westra
Naveen Adusumilli
Amanda Gumbert
Jennie Pugliese
Larry Oldham
Wes Burger
Dan Downing
Katie Flahive
Mike Daniels
Matt Helmers
Forbes Walker
Jane Frankenberger
Noel Aloysius
Robin Shepard
Rebecca Power

Brief Summary of Minutes

This meeting was cancelled due to cancellation of the Hypoxia Task Force meeting, which was caused by hurricane Florance travel disruptions. Below are minutes from a two hour video conference that was held on Tuesday, Sep 18 in place of the meeting.

Member Updates:

Multistate team working on fertilizer recommendations (N, P, K) as part of CIG grant; NC to AR and South; may want to seek synergy with SERA-46; building database; Deanna Osmond leading the project; collaborating with soil testing groups (SERA-6, others); communication might be an outcome?

Mike Daniels - attended southern extension directors’ natural resources group; formed a water committee to seek out funding to leverage funds for marketing LGU water programming/extension resources; Eric has kept this group aware of SERA-46 work

Karelyn Cruz: NIFA Updates

NIFA has a new director (Dr. Scott Angle) beginning in Oct; Priority Areas: Sustainable Agroecosystems - soil health, water mgmt, ecosystem services, tools, BMPs *close fit to our SERA-46 work; Ag Microbiomes - systems approach, bigger than just soil microbiome, smaller projects; Networks for Synthesis, Data Sharing, Mgmt - research to interpret data already available - producing tools, BMPs, networks (regional/national/international); Ag Systems/Technology - ag engineering; nanotechnology; FACT - cyberinformatics tools; ELI - Educational and Literacy Initiative (K-14 educators, undergrads, pre-doc/post-doc fellowships); AFRI FASE Grants - must be EPSCoR state/minority-serving institution, conference grants; Sustainable Ag Systems (SAS), $80m, catalyze transformational changes in US ag;

If we need more programmatic information, contact national program leader directly.

NIFA Listens - https://nifa.usda.gov/nifalistens comments deadline Nov 30, 2018
- What is needed to move the needle in science and technology?
- What are top priorities for food and ag?

Naveen Adusumilli

Master Farmer

Nutrient credit trading resolution
- Monitor and evaluate BMPs
- conflict with crop insurance and conservation practices - unintended consequences - more cover crops are integrated in cropping systems the more normalized the practice become
- Split N applications
- Will trading work in the absence of caps?
  - Using NRCS practice stds to determine efficiency
  - Some conservation practices not documented
  - Trading should stay within watershed? Watershed size? What are the trading boundaries?
  - How to communicate effectively to apply less fertilizer
  - Are there voluntary targets? Does the 45% voluntary reduction serve as a target for states?
- AR farmers concerned about liability of conservation practices to improve water quality, what if the water quality is NOT improved?

Separate conversation about trading possibilities? Katie is willing to organize a spin-off conversation.

Eric: kudos for a successful SERA group and progress on original proposal

focus objectives a bit more

Co-chairs for writing committee (total committee 5-6 people - Laura, Amanda, Beth, Rebecca, Mike, Naveen, Dan Downing, Wes - Katie as well?) - cross-section of expertise, research and extension

1st draft before holiday break sent to larger group, 4 wks review time

review draft by April 1 to Eric

condense background and justification bc we are already established

talk about what we have accomplished and justification for continuing on

Leadership Transition

Beth Baker moved into lead co-chair, Mike Daniels into co-chair roles

Nominations for new secretary:
- Forbes Walker
- Fabian Fernandez - new secretary

Renewing SERA-46 proposal

Include a “Why” component
- EPA uses Shared Priorities document and others as they share with ag partners the needs for research in the MARB

Critical needs
- Relationship objective (LGU and state/federal agencies,; farmer/farm advisors)
- Critical research needs
- Critical extension needs

Tracking progress - will SERA-46 be the holder of information/archive if funding for specific projects goes away?
- Website? Who hosts? Director’s office willing to host?
- WFF update documents coming in the next few months; keeping in mind how to expand this framework throughout the basin
- SERA-46 members contributing to a data source for utilization in states’ nutrient reduction strategies

Members
- Early Summer 2019 - Current and official members have to rejoin - membership doesn’t automatically transfer
- Send names to Eric of members who have been inactive +/- one year and he will follow up with directors

Collaboration with other intenties
- Chesapeake Bay Program - Jason Hubbart, Katie could help us think through exchange; STAC consortium involves land-grant universities
- Voluntary vs regulatory nutrient reductions

Accomplishments

Accomplishments will be reported after the rescheduled face-to-face meeting in late Jan or Feb, 2019.

Publications

Impact Statements

Date of Annual Report: 03/16/2019

Report Information

Annual Meeting Dates: 01/29/2019 - 01/31/2019
Period the Report Covers: 10/01/2017 - 09/30/2018

Participants

Jane Frankenburger
Amanda Gumbert
Rebecca Power
Mike Daniels
Wes Burger
Fabian Ferdandez
Laura Christianson
Reid Christianson
Naveen Adusumilli
Beth Baker
Dan Downing
Forbes Walker
Robin Shepard
Eric Young

Brief Summary of Minutes

Minutes Attachment:

SERA-46_Baton Rouge19_Meeting Notes.docx

Accomplishments

Publications

Peer-reviewed: <ol> <li>Christianson, R., L. Christianson, C. Wong, M. Helmers, G. McIsaac, D. Mulla, and M. McDonald. 2018.  Beyond the nutrient strategies: Common ground to accelerate water quality improvement in the Upper Midwest. Journal of Environmental Management 206:1072-1080.</li> <li>Doering, Otto C. , Benjamin M. Gramig, and Dawoon Jeong. 2018. “Economic and Policy Implications of Nitrogen Management” in Rattan Lal and B.A. Stewart, Soil Nitrogen Uses and Environmental Impacts. CRC Press. Boca Raton. Pp. 315-319.</li> </ol> Non-Peer Reviewed Publications, Reports, and Outreach Articles <ol> <li>Christianson, L., J. Frankenberger, C. Hay, M. Helmers, and G. Sands. 2018. Ten ways to reduce nitrogen loads from drained cropland in the Midwest: A summary Factsheet. University of Illinois Extension, Urbana, Illinois (4-pg factsheet).</li> <li>Christianson, L., J. Frankenberger, C. Hay, M. Helmers, and G. Sands. 2016. Ten ways to reduce nitrogen loads from drained cropland in the Midwest. Pub. C1400, University of Illinois Extension, Urbana, Illinois.</li> </ol> Proposals: Baker, B. (Principal), Gumbert, A. (Co-Principal), Power, R. (Co-Principal), Daniels, M. (Co-Principal), Christianson, L. (Co-Principal), Christianson, R. (Co-Principal), "Multi-State Collaboration to Improve Mississippi River and Gulf of Mexico Water Quality through Farmer-Led Initiatives and Farmer-Driven Data," Sponsored by US Environmental Protection Agency, $1,088,025.00. Awarded, final award pending, Grant. (April 1, 2019 - March 31, 2022).