Vigil is vice president and Northwest Environmental Hydrology leader at ESA, and directs a team toward science-based solutions in watershed management and restoration. Their aim is to provide a comprehensive, integrated approach to complex water and natural resource projects, where input from several disciplines is essential.
I just got back from a trip to Winona, MN, a lovely college town along the Mississippi River. Located in the southeastern part of MN, Winona itself – because it is a river town – does not look like a community influenced by agriculture. But it is.
The effect upon the Gulf of Mexico is, to put it mildly, damaging.
But as always, better farming practices are out there. Along with the grass buffers that have been presented here in previous blogs, no-till farming is for some farmers (and environmentalists) another exciting option.
Dunlay’s land is hilly, and susceptible to erosion. Commenting on the benefits of no-till, Dunlay gets to the point. “It saves a ton,” he says. Dunlay notes he saves on fuel, equipment costs, time and soil.
All while losing nothing in yields, he says.
It is widely known that no-till farming dramatically reduces soil erosion and, because of improved water retention, crops actually require much less watering per acre. This is a terrific benefit for areas that experience less-than-normal rainfall in a given year.
Dunlay says that no-till may not be for every farmer, but it is worth a serious look for many. He has converted all 250 of his acres to the no-till method, and the results speak for themselves.
Already, NOAA offers some OFS capabilities, the complete list of which appears via this link, but HAB monitoring is not yet a part.
Look for that to change and, though the HAB monitoring may have limited impact in area that already does a good job of monitoring bacteria levels such as E.coli (see: Wisconsin Beach Health), the extra involvement from NOAA certainly underscores the tremendously negative impact HAB have in freshwater and saltwater ecosystems alike.
Projections for massive algae blooms in Lake Erie are once again grim for 2016, and a part of the problem is something that cannot be controlled: climate change.
According to this article in Toledo Blade, research from the American Geophysical Union suggests that blooms in Lake Erie may double in intensity over the next 100 years, even if nutrient runoff from farms is reduced by 40%.
Algae Blooms in IA, 2011.
Given the troubling contribution climate change makes to algae blooms in Lake Erie, and across the planet, a question begs answering which secondary research here has not yet produced.
How much does climate change account for the creation of algae blooms?
Clearly, the relationship between nutrient runoff and climate change is profound. Runoff can be controlled. Climate change cannot. If there is a sweet spot that will secure fresh surface water across the planet, despite the changes, it must be found. Apparently, reductions in nutrient runoff by 40% will not be enough.
What, then, will be? Without a deep and longstanding commitment between farmers and entities (like Clean Water Warrior) that can help them implement best-practices, this question will unfortunately go unanswered.
