Return to Video

Cyanotoxins, Nutrients, and Public Health

  • 0:07 - 0:11
    The webinar will last for about an hour.
  • 0:11 - 0:14
    As attendees, you'll be muted
    throughout the presentation.
  • 0:14 - 0:22
    If you have questions, please type them
    into the questions pane in your go-to
  • 0:22 - 0:25
    webinars toolbar, which should be on the
    side of your screen.
  • 0:26 - 0:31
    We will try to reserve about 15 minutes
    at the end of the webinar to address any
  • 0:32 - 0:34
    questions, which we will read aloud so
    our speakers can respond.
  • 0:35 - 0:37
    The webinar is being recorded and will
    be available later this week for your
  • 0:38 - 0:39
    reference.
  • 0:39 - 0:42
    If you have any technical questions,
    please email Emily at
  • 0:42 - 0:49
    ebrumit@cowatercongress.org.
  • 0:50 - 0:56
    So now on to the topic at hand.
    Cyanotoxins, algoglams, nutrients and
  • 0:56 - 0:59
    of course, how it affects
    Coloradoan's public health.
  • 1:00 - 1:04
    Today, we will hear from, hopefully,
    three wonderful experts and leaders
  • 1:04 - 1:07
    who will guide us through these topics.
  • 1:07 - 1:09
    Djenette Khiari with the water research
    foundation.
  • 1:09 - 1:13
    Steve Lundt, representing the Barr
    Milton Watershed association.
  • 1:14 - 1:16
    And Troy Bauder with CSU extension.
  • 1:16 - 1:22
    Steve has worked on lakes and reservoirs
    as a certified lake manager since 1999.
  • 1:22 - 1:27
    Focusing on improving water quality
    through in-lake techniques and
  • 1:27 - 1:30
    watershed projects.
  • 1:32 - 1:34
    Today he will be talking with us about
    work reducing algolams at Barr lake.
  • 1:34 - 1:37
    Which he has worked on along with other
    reservoirs downstream of Denver for
  • 1:37 - 1:38
    the past 15 years.
  • 1:39 - 1:42
    Troy Bauder is an Extension water
    quality specialist in the department
  • 1:42 - 1:45
    of soil and crop sciences at Colorado
    State University.
  • 1:46 - 1:50
    There he is responsible for conducting
    statewide educational and applied
  • 1:50 - 1:54
    research programs for water quality,
    especially related to the protections
  • 1:54 - 1:58
    of groundwater quality from
    impremest to agricultural chemicals.
  • 1:58 - 2:02
    His research and expertise include
    nutrients and irrigation management,
  • 2:02 - 2:04
    which he'll be talking about today.
  • 2:06 - 2:08
    Is Dejenette on the line?
  • 2:09 - 2:13
    I am not seeing that Dejenette has been
    able to join us.
  • 2:13 - 2:15
    As Kaitlyn mentioned, she had a
    power outage.
  • 2:16 - 2:22
    So we are planning, um, Steve if you
    are OK with this plan.
  • 2:22 - 2:28
    So kind of like, let you go through her
    slides, and I will advance them for you.
  • 2:28 - 2:29
    Does that work for you?
  • 2:30 - 2:34
    [laughing] I will do my best. I'll have
    to remember what she was going
  • 2:35 - 2:35
    to talk about.
  • 2:36 - 2:38
    But I can definitely address some of the
    things also in my talk, but I can maybe
  • 2:38 - 2:41
    fill in a little.
  • 2:41 - 2:43
    Kaitlyn: So I'll just go through the
    slides and when you are ready for
  • 2:44 - 2:46
    me to advance, just let me know.
  • 2:46 - 2:49
    So Djenette was going to offer an
    introduction to cyanobacteria
  • 2:50 - 2:54
    and cyanotoxins. So Steve can kick us off.
  • 2:55 - 3:00
    Steve: [laughing] This is a fun game,
    to wing someone else's presentation.
  • 3:00 - 3:06
    The whole reason why we probably have
    all these people on this webinar is to.
  • 3:06 - 3:15
    Because we all do care about our lakes,
    our reservoirs, our rivers and it boils
  • 3:15 - 3:18
    down to managing nutrients that
    support algae bloom that then now
  • 3:22 - 3:24
    have gotten into the realm of toxins.
  • 3:25 - 3:28
    This idea of blue-green algae blooms
    that produce cyanotoxins has been around
  • 3:29 - 3:33
    for quite a while. but it wasn't until
    about 2015, I believe, with Lake Erie
  • 3:34 - 3:37
    and the Toledo incident where they had
    to close down their drinking water plant
  • 3:37 - 3:40
    for, what was it, close to 1 million
    people. or a half a million people.
  • 3:41 - 3:45
    So it really brought this topic to the
    surface for our country.
  • 3:45 - 3:49
    and so since then we've been really
    focusing on cyantoxins.
  • 3:50 - 3:52
    what does it mean to drinking water?
  • 3:52 - 3:55
    what does it mean to recreation?
    and all that.
  • 3:56 - 4:00
    Colorado and around the country,
    have been focusing on nutrient standards
  • 4:01 - 4:03
    and have been trying to come up with
    appropriate numbers for phosphorus
  • 4:04 - 4:09
    and nitrogen. And maybe the main focus
    has been on, obviously, to control algae
  • 4:09 - 4:12
    blooms and to make sure all the uses for
    those waters are being met.
  • 4:13 - 4:18
    And so what's kind of come up as more of
    a higher priority is, maybe, this public
  • 4:18 - 4:23
    health idea. So maybe let's go to the next
    slide and see what she has to say.
  • 4:23 - 4:31
    So there are a few key blue-green algae
    that are very common.
  • 4:31 - 4:39
    There's microcystins, Anabana,
    Aphantzomenon and those blue-greens
  • 4:39 - 4:42
    are very typical throughout our lakes
    and reservoirs around our country as
  • 4:43 - 4:45
    well as the world.
  • 4:45 - 4:50
    The world health organization, a few
    years back, you know, came up with
  • 4:51 - 4:53
    some guidelines for the toxins that
    those produce.
  • 4:54 - 4:58
    It's really been a hard topic because
    those blooms sometimes produce
  • 4:58 - 5:00
    the toxins and sometimes they don't.
  • 5:00 - 5:05
    And sometimes when they die and there's
    no bloom or scum on the surface, that's
  • 5:05 - 5:09
    when the toxins are the highest.
    So it's a really hard thing
  • 5:09 - 5:12
    to understand about these toxins
    and the properties around them.
  • 5:12 - 5:21
    But some of them, they impact the liver.
    They impact your nervous system.
  • 5:22 - 5:24
    They also, you know there's even
    dermatologists that will give you
  • 5:25 - 5:30
    skin rashes and so forth. And then
    there's some toxins that will kind
  • 5:30 - 5:34
    of cover everything and just wreck
    havoc on your body and your system.
  • 5:35 - 5:44
    A lot of times those toxins, have hurt
    animals like cattle and pets like dogs
  • 5:44 - 5:48
    that will go down to a scum covered pond
    and drink from it.
  • 5:48 - 5:54
    Typically humans are wise enough to know
    not to get into close contact or to drink
  • 5:55 - 5:59
    water with cyanotoxins in it, with a
    bloom.
  • 5:59 - 6:04
    But you can see from this chart, that
    some of the names of the toxins.
  • 6:04 - 6:07
    Some of the primary organs that it
    goes after.
  • 6:07 - 6:12
    and then the different species of algae for each of those toxins.
  • 6:12 - 6:17
    Might talk later, for Barr Lake, we
    definitely have mirocystis, and
  • 6:18 - 6:21
    Anabana. Those are the ones
    that I mainly have been monitoring.
  • 6:21 - 6:24
    As well as Aphanzomenon. You
    can go to the next one.
  • 6:24 - 6:34
    Microcystin, there's a whole sort
    of different kinds of these toxins.
  • 6:35 - 6:39
    So there's microcystin-LR , but there's
    a whole series of different kinds of
  • 6:39 - 6:42
    microcystin. So this is just a more
    common one. And then you can
  • 6:42 - 6:46
    see the saxitoxin and the
    cylindrospermopsin and anatoxin-a.
  • 6:46 - 6:52
    Some samples that I've sent off from
    Barr Lake we sent to a lab in Florida.
  • 6:52 - 6:57
    When we had them tested for these four
    main categories, to see what we had
  • 6:57 - 7:03
    in Barr Lake. And then also states around
    the country are starting to set up their
  • 7:03 - 7:08
    monitoring program and how to sample
    for toxins and to give warning to people
  • 7:09 - 7:10
    that are using it for drinking water,
    for recreation.
  • 7:11 - 7:15
    So these are the main cyantoxins that
    we are concerned about. Next one.
  • 7:16 - 7:28
    So in June 2015, EPA put out an
    advisory for drinking water.
  • 7:29 - 7:35
    I know here in Colorado I've been working
    with the health department and a group to
  • 7:35 - 7:37
    kind of figure out what that means for drinking water plants and how do you
  • 7:37 - 7:40
    monitor, and where do you monitor and
    how do you go about this whole process.
  • 7:41 - 7:44
    This whole new thing about another
    toxin to worry about.
  • 7:44 - 7:47
    To figure out how to make sure it's not in
    your drinking water, how you're
  • 7:47 - 7:49
    getting it out of your drinking water,
    how to prevent it.
  • 7:50 - 7:54
    And then what to do, god forbid that
    it gets through the system and it's all
  • 7:54 - 7:56
    sent out into distribution lines, what
    do you do then?
  • 7:56 - 8:01
    So states, Colorado and others have
    been working on that since 2015.
  • 8:03 - 8:10
    And then you see recently, EPA sent out
    in the fall of 2016 the recreational waters.
  • 8:11 - 8:17
    And this is more applied to Barr Lake
    and to maybe more reservoirs in Colorado
  • 8:17 - 8:21
    where there's a lot more recreational
    contact and swimming involved.
  • 8:21 - 8:26
    And you can see those toxins and
    those levels for recreational waters.
  • 8:26 - 8:30
    The closing period for comments, I
    believe, just closed for that process.
  • 8:32 - 8:36
    Let's see. I think we can skip this one
    and I'll cover it with maybe my talk?
  • 8:41 - 8:46
    I like this one actually. When I saw this,
    it definitely tells the story.
  • 8:47 - 8:51
    Blue-greens are the only species of
    algae that can change their buoyancy.
  • 8:52 - 8:56
    So that's why you see that one cartoon
    figure up there on the surface
  • 8:56 - 8:57
    getting a suntan.
  • 8:57 - 9:00
    It's blocking out the sunlight to any
    other species of algae that grow.
  • 9:00 - 9:05
    So blue-greens have evolved over
    billions of years to really be able to
  • 9:06 - 9:10
    do a good job of surviving in any kind
    of condition.
  • 9:11 - 9:12
    They prefer the warmest water.
  • 9:12 - 9:16
    They prefer the still water, so that's why
    they are more in lakes and reservoirs.
  • 9:17 - 9:18
    And they can get to the surface.
  • 9:18 - 9:22
    Obviously they can change their
    buoyancy and they go down at night.
  • 9:22 - 9:27
    I've seen blooms literally come to
    the surface while I'm anchored in
  • 9:27 - 9:28
    one spot monitoring a lake.
  • 9:28 - 9:31
    They can go down and they can
    store phosphorus.
  • 9:31 - 9:34
    They also have the ability to take
    nitrogen right out of the atmosphere
  • 9:34 - 9:37
    and use that instead of ammonia or
    nitrate.
  • 9:37 - 9:41
    So they are capable of using nitrogen right
    out of the atmosphere, which all the other
  • 9:42 - 9:46
    species cannot do.so that's why they
    definitely can beat when nitrogen is low.
  • 9:47 - 9:54
    They can still use that phosphorus that
    they stored up and they can use it
  • 9:55 - 9:56
    from the air.
  • 9:56 - 9:58
    So they have this kind of daily cycle
    of going down and coming back
  • 10:00 - 10:02
    up to get to the sun and blocking
    everything out.
  • 10:03 - 10:06
    Definitely, this occurs and has occurred
    at Barr Lake for many years.
  • 10:07 - 10:07
    Next slide.
  • 10:09 - 10:12
    I think I can get to my slides on this
    one too.
  • 10:12 - 10:14
    We can skip this one.
  • 10:15 - 10:19
    Definitely these are the sources of
    nutrients. If any body is dealing with
  • 10:19 - 10:22
    lakes, with reservoirs, with water quality
    with drinking water, with waste water,
  • 10:22 - 10:28
    these are the classic sources of nutrients.
    If any body's ever doing TMDL for nutrients
  • 10:29 - 10:32
    and you're doing it on a watershed scale,
    these are, you're going to be looking at
  • 10:32 - 10:37
    background, you're going to be looking
    at fertilizer application whether it's lawns
  • 10:37 - 10:37
    or agriculture.
  • 10:38 - 10:42
    Definitely stormwater. And then reservoirs
    and lakes, you know when a lake has zero
  • 10:42 - 10:46
    oxygen at the sediment, the phosphorus
    can recycle, dissolve out of the sediment
  • 10:46 - 10:50
    and get recycled into the water.
    next slide.
  • 10:50 - 11:04
    Nice pictures. Those are all the different
    sources.
  • 11:04 - 11:07
    So, how much is too much?
  • 11:07 - 11:13
    A lot of times for lakes and reservoirs
    I've seen where anything under 10 micro
  • 11:13 - 11:15
    grams per litre, you should be really
    good.
  • 11:15 - 11:19
    Anything that gets above 10, above 20,
    then you're going to start running into
  • 11:19 - 11:24
    signs of nutrofication and water quality
    issues with algae.
  • 11:24 - 11:29
    So dealing with lakes, I kind of keep
    those numbers in mind.
  • 11:30 - 11:33
    We can keep going , I think , to the
    next one.
  • 11:37 - 11:41
    So you can see here, you know, if total
    phosphorus is below 10 then it should
  • 11:41 - 11:45
    be very good. And then to the different levels.
    Very high or poor, you'll see over 100 and
  • 11:46 - 11:48
    with my talk, you'll see where we are at
    Barr Lake.
  • 11:49 - 11:54
    I'm at, right now, typically 250 at Barr Lake
    and I'm ecstatic.
  • 11:54 - 11:57
    I'm happy because it's a lot better than
    where it used to be.
  • 11:58 - 12:01
    So these numbers are all relevant, they
    are just sort of guidelines too, so just
  • 12:01 - 12:04
    keep that in mind. Next slide.
  • 12:07 - 12:12
    Source control strategies. There's a lot
    of things you can do in the reservoir to
  • 12:13 - 12:16
    keep intraloading, to keep the phosphorus
    in the sediment.
  • 12:16 - 12:18
    There's a lot of things you can do at
    point sources like wastewater treatment
  • 12:18 - 12:21
    plants. They are starting to treat for
    phosphorus, tertiary treatment.
  • 12:22 - 12:26
    There's a lot of in lake techniques.
    You can skim the algae off.
  • 12:27 - 12:29
    That's sort of a band-aid approach. Not
    really getting at the source of the
  • 12:30 - 12:34
    problem, which is the phosphorus.
    Many states, there's about 12
  • 12:34 - 12:39
    states that have state-wide phosphorus
    controls on lawn fertilizers.
  • 12:40 - 12:43
    We don't have one here in Colorado, but
    definitely that's the way.
  • 12:43 - 12:46
    You can no longer buy phosphorus in
    detergents in laundry soap.
  • 12:48 - 12:52
    That has definitely helped since 1970's
    with the Great Lakes and around the
  • 12:53 - 12:57
    country is controlling phosphorus in the
    products that everybody uses.
  • 12:58 - 13:06
    Go to the next one. Multi-barrier approach.
    Let's see. I think we'll just skip this one.
  • 13:08 - 13:10
    Prefer to get to my talk here soon.
    [laughter]
  • 13:10 - 13:15
    Looks like we are getting close to
    the end here. Obviously her organization
  • 13:15 - 13:18
    has put out a lot of good information and
    hopefully you can contact Dejenette and
  • 13:18 - 13:22
    get more information from the great things
    that she does. at the water resource
  • 13:22 - 13:25
    foundation. How was that?
  • 13:25 - 13:29
    Kaitlyn: thank you so much Steve,
    that was awesome!
  • 13:29 - 13:30
    Steve: Sure.
  • 13:30 - 13:33
    Kaitlyn: Thanks, for stepping in for
    Djenette. I'm going to go ahead and
  • 13:33 - 13:36
    pass the controls to you for your
    presentation.
  • 13:37 - 13:38
    Steve: Sure.
  • 13:39 - 13:40
    Thank you.
  • 13:41 - 13:45
    Are we good? Alright.
  • 13:45 - 13:52
    Round 2 here. I first want to say I just
    really appreciate this opportunity to talk
  • 13:52 - 13:54
    about Barr Lake specifically.
  • 13:54 - 14:01
    I've worked on it for about 15 years and
    for me it's pretty exciting to see how water
  • 14:01 - 14:03
    quality has changed over those 15 years.
  • 14:04 - 14:09
    And so much like the talk before, going
    to talk about nutrients and how algae
  • 14:09 - 14:13
    responds and I have definitely seen
    improvements in Barr Lake.
  • 14:14 - 14:18
    So this is why I was definitely on board
    when I was asked to do this webinar.
  • 14:21 - 14:29
    First off, cultural eutrophication it's
    sort of, it's a fancy way, a term of
  • 14:29 - 14:34
    saying people mess up a lake by sending
    it too much nutrients all at once.
  • 14:35 - 14:40
    Especially at Barr Lake. Barr Lake probably
    gets a million years' worth of phosphorus
  • 14:41 - 14:43
    in just a few months when it fills up
    every year.
  • 14:44 - 14:50
    So the process of lakes that can handle
    over time, thousands of years, millions
  • 14:50 - 14:55
    of years, can transition from a
    ligatrophic lake to a mesatrophic
  • 14:55 - 14:58
    to a hypotrophic lake where it's
    very very productive.
  • 14:59 - 15:05
    That can occur in a reservoir in a
    matter of years. So that's the process
  • 15:05 - 15:08
    that we all talk about and that we're
    worried about with cyanotoxins.
  • 15:08 - 15:13
    In the news, we usually hear about
    the problems. Where it's toxins, fish kills.
  • 15:13 - 15:17
    For Barr Lake it was high pH. It was
    all based around the idea that there's
  • 15:17 - 15:20
    these algae blooms. But again, it's
    mislabled. Those are just symptoms,
  • 15:21 - 15:24
    the true problem, is that it always
    goes back, every single time to too
  • 15:24 - 15:28
    much phosphorus and nitrogen, too
    quickly to a body of water.
  • 15:30 - 15:32
    To introduce you to Barr Lake, this is
    an aerial photo of Barr Lake.
  • 15:32 - 15:36
    It's just north of DIA. A lot of times,
    people fly in and you can see it out
  • 15:36 - 15:38
    your window as you are looking at
    the mountains.
  • 15:38 - 15:43
    Just north of the rocky mountain
    arsenal wildlife refuge.
  • 15:43 - 15:47
    There's also, you can see the community.
    There's definitely a lot of developments and
  • 15:47 - 15:52
    growth in the area. It's not quite as
    popular as Cherry Creek and Chatfield,
  • 15:52 - 15:54
    but this reservoir is quite different.
  • 15:55 - 15:58
    It's been around for a little over 100 years.
    About as old as Denver, almost.
  • 15:59 - 16:08
    The other thing is, is that, it fills up
    every winter and the main use over
  • 16:08 - 16:09
    the years has been agriculture.
  • 16:10 - 16:13
    While Cherry Creek and Chatfield and
    Bear Creek have been flood control.
  • 16:13 - 16:18
    Barr Lake has been around a long
    time and a lot of water goes out
  • 16:18 - 16:20
    there to be sent out to grow crops.
  • 16:20 - 16:24
    And so the residence time is only 8 months.
    Basically, fills in the winter and releases
  • 16:24 - 16:27
    during the summer and does
    this annual cycle.
  • 16:27 - 16:31
    It is twice the size of volume as
    Cherry Creek so it is pretty big.
  • 16:32 - 16:40
    It's had a state park since 1975. And
    the main uses now are recreation,
  • 16:40 - 16:44
    aquatic life, agriculture and drinking
    water that was added about
  • 16:44 - 16:46
    15 or so years ago.
  • 16:47 - 16:50
    The main source of water to Barr Lake
    is from the South Platte river.
  • 16:50 - 16:54
    There's a 19 mile ditch, the Burlington
    Ditch that diverts water from the
  • 16:54 - 16:58
    South Platte River. Typically, it sweeps
    the entire river. So any water you see
  • 16:58 - 17:02
    downtown by the confluence at Cherry
    Creek or by REI, that's going out a
  • 17:02 - 17:06
    couple of miles to almost the riverside
    cemetery and gets diverted and
  • 17:06 - 17:07
    sent to Barr Lake.
  • 17:08 - 17:10
    So travel time, if you were standing
    Downtown Denver, water going down
  • 17:11 - 17:15
    the south platte, it probably gets to
    Barr Lake in about a day and a half.
  • 17:16 - 17:21
    A lot of times, people think Barr Lake
    is way out northeast. People don't see
  • 17:21 - 17:24
    it that much, but it is definitely
    connected to the urban Denver area.
  • 17:24 - 17:31
    The ditch can also send water around
    Barr Lake to several other agricultural
  • 17:31 - 17:38
    reservoirs. So here's the watershed.
    Back in the 90's it collected a lot of
  • 17:38 - 17:41
    water quality data in Barr Lake as
    well as Milton Reservoir.
  • 17:42 - 17:44
    And determined that both were
    exceeding the pH standard which
  • 17:44 - 17:47
    is the upper limit is 9 and so they
    were going above 9.
  • 17:47 - 17:56
    So it got put on a 303 D-List. And
    similar to Bear Creek, and Chatfield
  • 17:58 - 18:01
    and Cherry Creek, the state helped
    organize a watershed association.
  • 18:02 - 18:05
    We call it the Barr-Milton watershed
    association because we focus on both
  • 18:05 - 18:09
    of those. But my main focus of this talk
    is Barr lake. The idea was that this group
  • 18:10 - 18:11
    would bring all the stakeholders
    together.
  • 18:12 - 18:19
    And help write a TMDL for pH. Which
    meant obviously, pH is a symptom,
  • 18:19 - 18:21
    so you go back to phosphorus.
  • 18:21 - 18:27
    So it's actually a phosphorus TMDL.
    To determine how you can achieve
  • 18:27 - 18:28
    the pH standard.
  • 18:29 - 18:32
    The big story for this watershed,
    obviously, is the number of people
  • 18:32 - 18:34
    living just upstream of Barr Lake.
  • 18:34 - 18:39
    It's literally about 1 in 2 coloradoans,
    live upstream of Barr. Which means,
  • 18:39 - 18:43
    obviously, cultural eutrophication
    again and excessive amount of
  • 18:44 - 18:45
    phosphorus that goes out to Barr Lake.
  • 18:47 - 18:50
    This is sort of a timeline. This is a
    timeline of the phosphorus out at
  • 18:51 - 18:53
    Barr Lake, prior to 1960's for
    about 50 years.
  • 18:53 - 18:57
    As long as there was water in the
    South Platte coming out of Denver,
  • 18:57 - 18:59
    they didn't care what was in it.
  • 18:59 - 19:03
    Quantity trumped quality, so they sent
    water, anything to Barr Lake to
  • 19:03 - 19:07
    according to it's water rights so they
    could fill it up so they could grow crops.
  • 19:07 - 19:11
    But that finally caught up to them and
    it was labeled as the country's largest
  • 19:11 - 19:15
    inland sewage bloom back in the
    50's and 60's.
  • 19:15 - 19:18
    And so you can see the phosphorus
    concentrations are enormous.
  • 19:19 - 19:24
    Then there was in the mid-60's there was
    a better job of consolidating wastewater
  • 19:25 - 19:27
    treatments. and built a new treatment
    plant that was downstream of the
  • 19:28 - 19:34
    burlington ditch. And then by 1975
    it became a state park. EPA actually
  • 19:34 - 19:38
    came out and sampled it three
    times in the mid 70's.
  • 19:38 - 19:41
    So you can see where the concentrations
    were in the 70s, just over 1 milligram
  • 19:41 - 19:43
    per litre phosphorus.
  • 19:44 - 19:48
    and then we started collecting a lot of
    data on water quality in the 90's, 2000's.
  • 19:48 - 19:53
    And we collected a lot more data and that
    resulted in showing about half of the
  • 19:53 - 19:56
    phosphorus now, about 660
    micrograms per litre.
  • 19:56 - 20:04
    Then by 2015 we got down to 250 micrograms
    per litre and that's where I got excited,
  • 20:05 - 20:06
    because look where we came from.
  • 20:06 - 20:13
    From 10,000 micrograms per litre to 250.
    reason why this happened was there was
  • 20:13 - 20:18
    the 2013 flood that happened in September
    and it came down sand creek and washed
  • 20:18 - 20:23
    out a pipeline that used to send treated
    effluent from metro wastewater uphill
  • 20:23 - 20:25
    and put it into the burlington ditch.
  • 20:26 - 20:32
    That pipeline was washed away. so since
    2013 there's been no treated effluence
  • 20:32 - 20:36
    being pumped up into the ditch to go
    to Barr Lake.
  • 20:37 - 20:41
    So by, sort of, an act of God. It has
    definitely helped water quality.
  • 20:42 - 20:47
    The TMDL process, the goal is to get
    to less than 100 micorgrams/litre in
  • 20:48 - 20:51
    the growing season. So that's what we're
    shooting for. So we still have to reduce
  • 20:51 - 20:56
    it by half again. So now we're in
    the phase of implementing the TMDL.
  • 20:56 - 21:03
    From the TMDL, we estimated the annual
    load of phosphorus, 70,000kg would go
  • 21:04 - 21:08
    out to Barr Lake. About 90% of that came
    from point sources, which was wastewater
  • 21:09 - 21:13
    treatment plants and permitted
    stormwater MS4 folks.
  • 21:14 - 21:19
    then there was background, and background
    is what's coming from Chatfield, Cherry Creek
  • 21:19 - 21:22
    and Bear Creek. Those reservoirs release
    water into our watershed and so then
  • 21:23 - 21:24
    we have to account for that.
  • 21:25 - 21:28
    And then about 4,000kg comes internally
    from the reservoir.
  • 21:29 - 21:36
    We need about a 92% reduction, which is
    huge, to get down to about 6,000kg a year.
  • 21:37 - 21:40
    And then, you can see, it's a little more
    balanced distribution from the different
  • 21:40 - 21:45
    sources. One thing to note though, in
    this process, we learned that even if
  • 21:45 - 21:47
    you removed every single person in
    the watershed, all the streets, all the
  • 21:47 - 21:53
    stormwater, removed all the point
    sources, you'd still be left with the
  • 21:53 - 21:56
    3,000 coming in from upstream watersheds
    and the 4,000 in the reservoir.
  • 21:56 - 22:02
    So that's 7000kg which is more than what
    we think it will take to achieve the pH
  • 22:02 - 22:07
    standard. And so it just means that every
    single source needs to be addressed.
  • 22:09 - 22:10
    So how are we going to do this?
  • 22:11 - 22:14
    A lot of dollar signs on this slide, so
    you can see it's going to take a lot of money
  • 22:15 - 22:17
    to get down below 100 micrograms
    per litre.
  • 22:18 - 22:22
    First off, wastewater treatment plants
    are moving to tertiary treatment.
  • 22:23 - 22:26
    Metro wastewater, Littleton/Englewood,
    and Centennial are the three upstream
  • 22:28 - 22:29
    wastewater treatment plants to Barr Lake.
  • 22:31 - 22:40
    Stormwater also. Denver, just last year I
    believe, increased their stormwater bills. So they
  • 22:40 - 22:44
    now have plans for major improvements in
    north Denver.
  • 22:44 - 22:49
    Platte Park Hill is one of those big
    stormwater projects that will eventually
  • 22:49 - 22:51
    help water quality in Barr Lake.
  • 22:52 - 22:58
    We've also looked at studies for internal
    loading. Not quite as expensive, but still
  • 22:58 - 23:01
    going to cost some money.
  • 23:01 - 23:05
    we also have to treat the phosphorus
    that's coming out, from upstream in
  • 23:06 - 23:08
    our watershed. So we somehow have
    to intercept that.
  • 23:10 - 23:12
    And then of course we do public education.
  • 23:18 - 23:24
    Here's a chart of our phosphorus.
    This is sort of a monthly timeframe
  • 23:24 - 23:26
    of the 15 years I've been sampling.
  • 23:26 - 23:29
    You can see the phosphorus comes in
    with the water in the winter and slowly
  • 23:29 - 23:32
    drops out. and then increases again in
    the summer, maybe during internal loading.
  • 23:33 - 23:35
    and then it gets lowest in October.
  • 23:38 - 23:42
    Along with that, you get chlorphyill A.
    Chart here shows there's a big diatom
  • 23:43 - 23:45
    growth in the spring time.
  • 23:45 - 23:49
    the best time to go up to Barr Lake, I
    recommend, is in May and early June.
  • 23:50 - 23:55
    There's very little growth of algae, it's
    full, and it's got great water clarity.
  • 23:55 - 24:00
    Because as soon as 4th of July comes
    around and the big recreational season,
  • 24:00 - 24:01
    and the growing season.
  • 24:01 - 24:05
    Typically we would get the big blue-green
    algae bloom, the first one, the microcystis
  • 24:05 - 24:08
    algae bloom. And the kind of crash and
    bloom, crash and bloom. And we have
  • 24:09 - 24:11
    another big one Aphantzomenon in
    late September.
  • 24:13 - 24:19
    So this is why Barr Lake has the reputation
    of being a blue-green algae scummy lake.
  • 24:20 - 24:24
    When I first started in '02 sampling this
    was pretty much every summer what it
  • 24:24 - 24:28
    would look like. It would be monoculture
    of algae bloom that would go over
  • 24:28 - 24:34
    the entire lake. And eventually get crusty
    and scab over and cause odor issues
  • 24:35 - 24:37
    and stuff.
    And you can see the bottom picture.
  • 24:37 - 24:41
    The people that would mostly recreate
    would be people fishing from shore
  • 24:41 - 24:47
    and they would just tolerate it and avoid
    those scums the best that they could.
  • 24:47 - 24:52
    More recently, since the 2013 flood, there
    has been a big noticeable change.
  • 24:53 - 24:58
    Open water, it's clear and back in '02
    and '03 the boat wake would be green
  • 24:58 - 25:03
    not white and foamy. And then you can
    see last, middle of July, when we should
  • 25:03 - 25:07
    be having a big bloom, we have really
    nice water quality compared to
  • 25:07 - 25:08
    previous years.
  • 25:11 - 25:15
    We did, because of the 2015 issues
    around the cyanotoxins. We decided to
  • 25:15 - 25:19
    say "Ok let's just kind of explore this
    and get some strip tests from Abraxis
  • 25:19 - 25:25
    and do some testing out there." I tested
    the open water as well as near shore.
  • 25:27 - 25:32
    Open water never had any indication
    of the cyanotoxins. The only time I got
  • 25:32 - 25:36
    it was when I would sample the shoreline
    where we see this green line of
  • 25:36 - 25:38
    blue-green algae.
  • 25:38 - 25:43
    Water quality's pretty good. It's not like
    the other pictures where it's completely
  • 25:44 - 25:44
    crusted over.
  • 25:45 - 25:53
    There was still a small less intense algae
    bloom. It was typically microcystis and
  • 25:53 - 25:54
    some Aphantzomenon.
  • 25:55 - 25:58
    but when we sent off those samples to
    green water, we did get a hit on
  • 25:59 - 26:03
    microcystin. We did not have any
    Anatoxin-A, saxitoxin, or
  • 26:03 - 26:07
    cylindrospermopsin. It was mainly
    because of the microcystis.
  • 26:07 - 26:12
    But Barr Lake, key note is, that even
    though it's classfied as primary full
  • 26:12 - 26:16
    contact use. The rules out there for the
    state park is that there is no swimming,
  • 26:16 - 26:21
    no swim beach, even dogs are not allowed
    to wade into the water.
  • 26:21 - 26:26
    The main thing is just boating and recreating,
    fishing from shore.
  • 26:26 - 26:30
    Now clearly, people get into the water
    they roll their kayaks this was a camp
  • 26:30 - 26:32
    here that would take kayaks out and learn
    how to roll kayaks.
  • 26:33 - 26:39
    so there is incidental contact. but the
    thing is that we try to do a good job of
  • 26:39 - 26:43
    educating people year round at Barr Lake
    to be algae aware.
  • 26:44 - 26:49
    That you just want to avoid any time you
    see green surface scum on any body of water.
  • 26:50 - 26:55
    So what we do educationally, we try to do
    our best to educate people just algae in
  • 26:56 - 26:59
    general, water quality, phosphorus and
    the watershed.
  • 27:01 - 27:08
    So the big plan here. If we achieve making
    sure all these uses are being met, then
  • 27:08 - 27:09
    I think we'll be good.
  • 27:10 - 27:15
    Obviously there's dollar signs to this.
    so if aquatic life is happy then the
  • 27:15 - 27:16
    fish will be happy.
  • 27:16 - 27:19
    We'll be spending less money on fixing
    the problem than just maintaining the
  • 27:20 - 27:21
    proper conditions out there.
  • 27:21 - 27:25
    Recreation's a big deal. And then of
    course we grow a lot of food and
  • 27:25 - 27:26
    it's a water supply.
  • 27:27 - 27:31
    So those are definitely all these.
    What's unique about our lake is that
  • 27:31 - 27:32
    these uses are equally important.
  • 27:33 - 27:36
    And if we achieve the right amount of
    nutrients coming from the watershed,
  • 27:37 - 27:41
    then we believe the blooms will be less
    intense, not as long and that the
  • 27:42 - 27:44
    reservoir will be a healthy system.
  • 27:45 - 27:49
    So I believe with that, I'll end with a
    sunset picture and I thank every body
  • 27:49 - 27:51
    for listening to me for the last
    half hour.
  • 27:54 - 27:58
    Kaitlyn; Thank you so much Steve.
    We are going to switch to Troy.
  • 27:59 - 28:03
    Troy I just made you a presenter and I
    believe you just un-muted yourself.
  • 28:04 - 28:05
    So thank you.
  • 28:05 - 28:17
    Troy: Good morning every body.
    Is my sound and screen working ok?
  • 28:18 - 28:19
    They sure are.
  • 28:20 - 28:21
    Troy: Ok good deal.
  • 28:21 - 28:28
    Moderator: You are not in presentation
    mode so we can still see your next slide.
  • 28:29 - 28:55
    Troy: Let's try that. Did that help?
  • 28:55 - 29:01
    Moderator: No, we can still see your next
    slide but feel free to carry on.
  • 29:02 - 29:06
    Troy: Ok, sorry about that. So you get a
    preview of what I'm talking about before
  • 29:06 - 29:12
    I get there. We're going to switch from
    point sources, that Steve was talking
  • 29:12 - 29:14
    about with Barr Lake.
  • 29:14 - 29:18
    You know, system mostly impacted by point sources to non point source.
  • 29:18 - 29:23
    My field is working with agricultural producers on reducing nutrient losses on their fields.
  • 29:24 - 29:29
    I'll give you a little bit about the
    process. and where we are on that.
  • 29:30 - 29:34
    So it's important to remember that ag
    nutrients, nitrogen and phosphorus are
  • 29:35 - 29:39
    in other nutrients, but in this instance
    we are talking about N and P.
  • 29:39 - 29:44
    Are absolutely required for productive
    agriculture. If we fail to replace or
  • 29:44 - 29:48
    supplement nitrogen and phosphorus
    that's removed by our crop systems,
  • 29:49 - 29:54
    ultimately not only will you result in low
    and unprofitable yields,
  • 29:54 - 30:02
    but you'll end up with a situation where you're not putting enough crop residue back into the system and you can have soil degredation.
  • 30:02 - 30:04
    So it is important for sustainable
    agriculture.
  • 30:04 - 30:13
    But of course we need good management.
    To prevent too much N and P in our soils
  • 30:14 - 30:18
    and then of course the potential to
    reduce the potential for movement to
  • 30:18 - 30:20
    surface and groundwater.
  • 30:21 - 30:32
    So recently, in 2012, Colorado passed
    a nutrient policy called regulation 85.
  • 30:34 - 30:38
    For agriculture it's still a non point
    source kind of voluntary approach
  • 30:39 - 30:47
    to help incentivize producers to utilize,
    voluntarily, BMPs around nitrogen and
  • 30:47 - 30:49
    phosphorus control in their operations.
  • 30:50 - 31:00
    and we partnered with CDPHE, to produce
    some resources and outreach program
  • 31:01 - 31:04
    which we are calling Colorado Ag Water
    Quality and this is our logo.
  • 31:05 - 31:10
    And you'll find all these resources at
    that URL, coloradoagnutrients.org.
  • 31:11 - 31:18
    the purpose of this outreach effort is
    to get the word out to growers about
  • 31:18 - 31:21
    how reg 85 could potentially affect them.
  • 31:22 - 31:27
    and right now it's a non point source
    voluntary policy for agriculture, but
  • 31:28 - 31:31
    they are going to reevaluate that in
    2022 to see if we've made progress
  • 31:32 - 31:37
    on BMP implementation, adoption and
    water quality as it relates to non
  • 31:38 - 31:39
    point source in agriculture.
  • 31:40 - 31:44
    I'd really encourage you to go to that
    URL. There's a couple of videos up
  • 31:44 - 31:51
    there that do a really nice job of having
    the stakeholders, producers and people
  • 31:51 - 31:58
    that represent them talk about how
    nutrient, using nutrients in agriculture
  • 31:58 - 31:59
    is important to them.
  • 31:59 - 32:05
    and practices they can use to prevent
    non point source pollution.
  • 32:05 - 32:07
    I'd encourage you to go check that out.
  • 32:08 - 32:14
    So the approach that I encourage and
    we do in our program is what I call
  • 32:14 - 32:16
    participatory research and outreach.
  • 32:17 - 32:20
    Around getting growers to implement
    BMPs voluntary.
  • 32:21 - 32:25
    And some of the concepts that we work
    with are nutrient management with
  • 32:25 - 32:27
    the 4R concept.
  • 32:27 - 32:31
    We encourage BMPs around conservation
    tillage and the soil resource.
  • 32:31 - 32:38
    And what's really important in a semi-arid
    state like colorado, where so much of our
  • 32:38 - 32:45
    crop production relies on agriculture's
    managing that water source improved
  • 32:46 - 32:48
    irrigation systems and advanced
    irrigation scheduling.
  • 32:48 - 32:51
    and i'll talk about that a little bit more
    in a couple of slides.
  • 32:51 - 32:57
    and then finally, we definitely want to
    work with our growers on the agronomic
  • 32:57 - 33:01
    and economic feasibility of these
    practices to help them understand
  • 33:01 - 33:03
    how they can help the bottom line.
  • 33:05 - 33:11
    so early in the process of any localized
    or state wide stakeholder engagement
  • 33:11 - 33:14
    around ag and water quality, it's
    important to get the stakeholders
  • 33:15 - 33:16
    involved early in the process.
  • 33:17 - 33:23
    And we've been doing that for many years.
    producer input; we want them to
  • 33:23 - 33:28
    understand that buying into what is even
    defined as a best management practice.
  • 33:29 - 33:33
    and then demonstrate their effectiveness
    and their agronomic practicality.
  • 33:33 - 33:37
    and then try to follow up with tools and
    resources that our producers can use
  • 33:37 - 33:41
    and understand and help them manage
    their nutrients and water better.
  • 33:44 - 33:48
    So a little bit about BMP effectiveness
    on the ground.
  • 33:49 - 33:53
    I talked about the 4R concept that's kind
    of become fairly popular recently in
  • 33:53 - 33:58
    agriculture. And that is applying the
    right nutrient at the right amount, or rate,
  • 33:59 - 34:01
    at the right place within the soil.
  • 34:02 - 34:09
    Either spatially or within the plane of
    the root zone, at the right time. Trying
  • 34:09 - 34:12
    to time our nutrients when the crops
    need them the most.
  • 34:12 - 34:18
    So the uptake efficiency will be be higher.
    and the right source.
  • 34:19 - 34:24
    Sometimes we have different nutrient
    sources, whether it be compost or
  • 34:24 - 34:28
    commercial fertilizer. It might be
    better for the conditions on the
  • 34:29 - 34:31
    ground or the farmer's situation.
  • 34:33 - 34:37
    When these practices are properly
    implemented, they do in most cases
  • 34:37 - 34:42
    increase nutrient use efficiency by the
    crop and thus prevent the potential for
  • 34:43 - 34:44
    movement in most environments.
  • 34:45 - 34:48
    However, as I mentioned before,
    in Colorado in our irrigated
  • 34:48 - 34:55
    environment we know that most of our
    losses are with water, soluableized
  • 34:55 - 34:56
    or attached to sediments.
  • 34:56 - 35:03
    For these 4R's to work we need improved
    irrigation management to take place
  • 35:03 - 35:08
    at the same time. In each of nutrients
    type we don't manage our water,
  • 35:09 - 35:10
    we could be defeating the purpose.
  • 35:14 - 35:16
    So a little bit about irrigation
    management.
  • 35:17 - 35:19
    Like I mentioned, it's really critical
    for quatifiable reductions at the
  • 35:19 - 35:23
    field level. Particularly with nitrate
    leaching but also with runoff.
  • 35:24 - 35:30
    and you can have improvements in system
    upgrades moving from a furrow to a
  • 35:30 - 35:36
    pivot to a drip system. or you can improve
    your management in terms of scheduling
  • 35:37 - 35:39
    your water at the right time and
    right amount.
  • 35:39 - 35:45
    and together those two practices can go a
    long way for tightly managing your water
  • 35:45 - 35:53
    and your nutrients. and a lot of this is
    occurring organically in the watershed.
  • 35:53 - 36:02
    a good example I like to show is some
    google earth imagery, satellite imagery
  • 36:03 - 36:08
    from around fort morgan.
    And if you go back to 1998 and look,
  • 36:08 - 36:13
    and this is black and white imagery. you
    can see a grid work of rectangular and
  • 36:14 - 36:20
    square fields out there as recently as
    only 20 years ago.
  • 36:21 - 36:24
    but if you look at an image from just a
    couple of years ago, you can see that
  • 36:24 - 36:30
    most of those have been replaced with
    circles and center pivot irrigation systems
  • 36:31 - 36:35
    and the opportunity to manage your
    water and your nutrients is much higher
  • 36:35 - 36:38
    when you improve your efficiency of
    your system.
  • 36:39 - 36:44
    a lot of this is happening already.
    growers are adopting these practices
  • 36:44 - 36:47
    for a variety of reasons, but usually it's
    economics and labor.
  • 36:48 - 36:53
    I mentioned we like to provide tools that
    growers can use to manage their nutrients
  • 36:54 - 36:54
    and their water.
  • 36:55 - 37:00
    and recently we released an online
    irrigation scheduler called WISE.
  • 37:01 - 37:05
    This is a couple screen shots from that
    particular product.
  • 37:06 - 37:10
    you can find that at wise.colostate.edu.
  • 37:10 - 37:15
    it's a very user friendly, convenient
    irrigation scheduling platform at
  • 37:16 - 37:18
    erams at colorado state university.
  • 37:19 - 37:21
    again tying our nutrients to our
    water management.
  • 37:23 - 37:27
    the other thing that i mentioned that is
    important for agriculture for adoption
  • 37:27 - 37:31
    of BMPs is to show results and water
    quality is part of that.
  • 37:32 - 37:38
    growers need to know that if they use
    these practices it will make a difference.
  • 37:38 - 37:43
    on one side of your screen you can see
    some water quality coming off fields
  • 37:43 - 37:48
    where we had just conventional tillage
    and on the other side of the screen
  • 37:48 - 37:52
    you can see BMP in terms of strip tillage
    and you can see the residue that it
  • 37:52 - 37:55
    left in place there.
    and how that residue is affecting the
  • 37:56 - 37:59
    quality of the water coming off that plot
    compared to the other plot.
  • 38:02 - 38:06
    and of course, the bottom line matters
    with growers. they are in business to
  • 38:06 - 38:12
    make money. and so we try to provide
    them the costs and returns of
  • 38:12 - 38:20
    adopting practices. our gross returns are
    represented largely by the yield on one
  • 38:20 - 38:25
    side of your graph where you can see the
    dark brown bar of conventional, compared
  • 38:25 - 38:33
    to the light brown bar of strip vs the green
    bar of another BMP that we tried that was
  • 38:33 - 38:35
    minimum till on this particular project.
  • 38:36 - 38:42
    and where the gross returns showed the
    BMP was losing a little bit of money,
  • 38:42 - 38:47
    when we looked at the net returns because
    of the costs of inputs for that particular
  • 38:47 - 38:51
    practice, you can see that the gross
    returns were highest with the BMP
  • 38:51 - 38:53
    practice of strip tillage.
  • 38:53 - 38:57
    so the bottom line matters and it's
    important to work with growers so
  • 38:57 - 39:00
    that they know how these practices are
    going to affect that for them.
  • 39:02 - 39:08
    Some challenges that i see or have seen in
    my career, both looking locally and
  • 39:08 - 39:12
    nationally in terms of what we're facing in
    nutrients and water quality.
  • 39:13 - 39:21
    in colorado, where water rights and
    policy may be perceived from keeping
  • 39:22 - 39:25
    growers from implementing certain,
    maybe, irrigation practices.
  • 39:25 - 39:29
    a lot of times that's more perception
    than reality but it's still out there.
  • 39:29 - 39:33
    In many parts of the country we have some
    nutrient balances and watersheds, with
  • 39:33 - 39:36
    high density of animal feeding
    that are off.
  • 39:37 - 39:39
    we have more N and P coming in than
    is going out as product.
  • 39:40 - 39:46
    I see places where perhaps our baseline
    concentrations are greater than the
  • 39:46 - 39:49
    standard that we are going to try and
    achieve and I think that's going to be
  • 39:49 - 39:53
    difficult with non point source
    implementation to meet those targets.
  • 39:55 - 39:59
    And then the idea, we know that a lot
    of our water quality problems are localized.
  • 40:00 - 40:08
    And how do you target a watershed or an
    area of agriculture without making the
  • 40:08 - 40:13
    producers feel like they are being
    targeted, as, at the problem with
  • 40:13 - 40:19
    finger pointing. Funding is always an
    issue. not all of these BMPs are cost
  • 40:20 - 40:21
    neutral or positive.
  • 40:21 - 40:26
    so getting funding through NRCS cost
    shares or other places to help implement
  • 40:26 - 40:28
    these is an issue.
  • 40:28 - 40:33
    and then finally, when it comes to showing
    these are working. obtaining non point
  • 40:33 - 40:39
    source water quality and adoption data is
    going to be necessary to show agriculture's
  • 40:39 - 40:40
    doing it's part moving forward.
  • 40:43 - 40:48
    just to finish up here. like i said,
    supplemental nutrients are definitely
  • 40:48 - 40:54
    necessary for sustainable agriculture.
    you can't continue to grow profitable crops
  • 40:54 - 40:57
    without supplementing what they are
    removing from the system.
  • 40:57 - 41:01
    They have a lot of BMPs that can help
    mitigate that loss in movement in
  • 41:01 - 41:02
    water resources.
  • 41:02 - 41:07
    A lot of these growers are using already
    and I think we can improve upon what
  • 41:07 - 41:10
    we are doing as we learn more information.
  • 41:10 - 41:16
    Incentives, tools and resources are all
    critical to help growers adopt BMPs.
  • 41:17 - 41:20
    and i think we can all work together
    to do a better job with that.
  • 41:20 - 41:26
    It's definitely important to engage
    growers early and often in this process
  • 41:26 - 41:30
    and not only the growers but their
    representatives and commodity groups
  • 41:31 - 41:32
    and the people that advise them.
  • 41:37 - 41:43
    and that is what I had to share this morning.
    I appreciate your attention and
  • 41:43 - 41:48
    I appreciate the opportunity to be
    on this call. So I'll turn it back to Kaitlyn.
  • 41:51 - 41:57
    Kaitlyn: It looks like we have a few
    questions coming in, so i think Emily
  • 41:57 - 42:04
    will read those and Troy and Steve can
    see if they have responses.
  • 42:05 - 42:08
    Emily: Yeah, so we have a few questions.
  • 42:10 - 42:14
    The first question comes from Lisa
    Buchanan and she asks, "How difficult
  • 42:14 - 42:19
    was it to get buy in for upstream treatment for Barr Lake?"
  • 42:22 - 42:28
    Steve: Well, buy-in. So starting in 2002
    we formed this watershed group that
  • 42:29 - 42:36
    brought together the point source
    dischargers as well as the users of the
  • 42:36 - 42:39
    lake and the owners of the lake and the
    people that use it for drinking water.
  • 42:40 - 42:45
    So our goal from the very beginning
    was to have the consensus- driven
  • 42:46 - 42:48
    process with this board of directors and
    this watershed group.
  • 42:48 - 42:53
    We didn't want to have finger pointing
    and going down lawsuit routes and
  • 42:53 - 42:57
    have twenty models trying to
    explain the system.
  • 42:58 - 43:02
    so from the very beginning when we
    formed our watershed group and we put in
  • 43:02 - 43:07
    our bylaws, we wanted to have buy in from
    every body that was sitting at the table.
  • 43:07 - 43:14
    To join, and to be a member of the board,
    you had to put in $10,000 as a member
  • 43:14 - 43:15
    and you got a seat on the board.
  • 43:16 - 43:21
    And so the people, the dischargers, the
    upstream folks that were definitely
  • 43:21 - 43:26
    going to be part of the TMDL as an
    allocation for phosphorus, wanted
  • 43:26 - 43:27
    to be at the table.
  • 43:27 - 43:31
    so you joined and then we all agree,
    that you know. We all understand this
  • 43:32 - 43:37
    is an effort by everybody and that
    everyone's going to be paying for
  • 43:37 - 43:40
    treatment plant upgrades, everyone's
    going to be paying for drinking
  • 43:40 - 43:41
    water upgrades.
  • 43:42 - 43:47
    Everybody will hopefully be enjoying
    Barr Lake and so we really tried to come
  • 43:48 - 43:53
    together as one group and always make
    decisions based on 100% consensus.
  • 43:54 - 43:57
    We literally do our voting with thumbs up
    or thumbs down. if we don't have
  • 43:58 - 44:00
    everyone's thumbs up then we
    continue to work on it.
  • 44:02 - 44:04
    Emily: thank you so much.
    we have a couple more questions.
  • 44:05 - 44:14
    The next one is directed at Steve. "Steve
    did you alum to fix P in sediment?
  • 44:14 - 44:17
    If so, what was the result and cost? Thanks"
  • 44:19 - 44:24
    Steve: Sure. So alum is a very common
    whole lake treatment process. People
  • 44:24 - 44:25
    have been using since the 70's.
  • 44:25 - 44:30
    We have not used alum in Barr Lake.
    We have people, we've had some reports
  • 44:30 - 44:34
    saying that alum would be a great way to
    bind up and keep that phosphorus
  • 44:34 - 44:36
    bound up in the sediment.
    The in-canal treatment,
  • 44:37 - 44:40
    treating the upstream phosphorus that
    comes into our watershed and then
  • 44:40 - 44:41
    comes through and comes down the ditch.
  • 44:41 - 44:46
    One process or a study we said was that
    we could divert that water out of the ditch.
  • 44:46 - 44:52
    mix it with alum, separate the phosphorus,
    and then send that water into Barr Lake.
  • 44:52 - 44:56
    We did use alum a little bit in, there
    was that picture of those corrals, those
  • 44:56 - 45:00
    columnar corrals they did some studying
    of what would happen to cholophill A
  • 45:00 - 45:04
    and phosphorus if phosphorus
    did get below 100.
  • 45:04 - 45:08
    Because we've never seen it below 300.
    so we had to do some artificial
  • 45:08 - 45:12
    testing out there. and we did use alum
    to strip out the phosphorus in the water
  • 45:12 - 45:15
    column. just so we could see how
    the lake responds.
  • 45:16 - 45:20
    It's about, when we did our study, it's
    about $1 per gallon and so it's just a
  • 45:20 - 45:23
    matter of how many gallons of alum you
    want to put in to remove the amount
  • 45:23 - 45:24
    of phosphorus.
  • 45:26 - 45:33
    Emily: thanks. The next question comes
    from Ken Clark. "What are the
  • 45:33 - 45:38
    opportunities. What opportunities are
    there for translating or scaling, agricultural
  • 45:38 - 45:41
    BMPs to urban landscape practices?"
  • 45:46 - 45:48
    Let me know if you want me to
    repeat the question.
  • 45:49 - 45:52
    Troy: Go ahead and start Steve.
  • 45:53 - 45:58
    Steve:The only thing I can sort of talk
    about a little bit is, some of those
  • 45:59 - 46:04
    translations of nutrient management with
    fertilizers, the same concept can be
  • 46:04 - 46:07
    applied to what we do with urban lawns.
  • 46:07 - 46:15
    And so, a lot of times, its a matter of
    keeping the fertilizer on your lawn.
  • 46:16 - 46:19
    so it's the 4R's applies to your lawn as
    well as a corn field in Weld county.
  • 46:20 - 46:25
    Don't do it just before a storm event,
    washes on your driveway and goes
  • 46:25 - 46:29
    into a storm drain. Maybe do some soil
    testing and maybe you don't need
  • 46:29 - 46:30
    phosphorus to grow a lawn.
  • 46:31 - 46:34
    Phosphorus is, as I understand, is for
    seed production and flowering. People
  • 46:34 - 46:38
    just want a green lawn so that's the
    nitrogen part of it. Troy do you have
  • 46:38 - 46:39
    anything else?
  • 46:39 - 46:46
    Troy: Just would ditto that. Again when
    you look at CSU Extension's
  • 46:47 - 46:50
    recommendations for lawns, we don't
    really even recommend phosphorus.
  • 46:51 - 46:56
    We prefer folks stick with nitrogen
    and for a low maintenance lawn that's
  • 46:56 - 47:03
    really at around 1 pound per
    1,000 square foot per year.
  • 47:04 - 47:08
    Again making sure you put the right rate on,
    not too much, at the right time.
  • 47:09 - 47:10
    and we have recommendations for those too.
  • 47:11 - 47:16
    And the biggest one is just keeping it
    off impermeable surfaces.
  • 47:18 - 47:26
    Emily: Great, thanks. So the next question
    is directed at Troy. From Kelly Denataly.
  • 47:26 - 47:30
    "Do you think the rollback of the Obama
    administration's clean water rules
  • 47:30 - 47:34
    will change the attitudes of ag producers
    towards implementing BMPs?"
  • 47:37 - 47:42
    Troy: Hmm. [chuckle] Good one Kelly.
    I don't think so.
  • 47:42 - 47:52
    Particularly in Colorado, since we do have
    somewhat of a statewide policy with reg 85
  • 47:52 - 47:56
    and some of the other policies with non
    point source with agriculture.
  • 47:58 - 48:04
    You know, our state, is so semi-arid and
    we have so few places where we have
  • 48:05 - 48:10
    direct contact between agriculture and a
    stream, I don't think so.
  • 48:10 - 48:18
    I think that there are a lot of economic
    incentives especially around fertilizer to
  • 48:18 - 48:28
    apply the 4R concept to what they're
    doing that what I worry perhaps more
  • 48:28 - 48:36
    about is cuts to conservation programs
    within agencies such as USDA-NRCS
  • 48:36 - 48:43
    and research potential cuts as has been
    proposed to the ag research service,
  • 48:43 - 48:47
    agricultural research service within USDA
    and our land grant system.
  • 48:48 - 48:54
    because that's where we develop a lot of
    the information that we can translate to
  • 48:54 - 48:59
    producers about, you know, the best way
    to manage their nutrients.
  • 49:00 - 49:06
    I don't think it's going to be, I'm less
    worried about perhaps, changes in
  • 49:06 - 49:13
    attitudes with growers than I am with the
    proposed cuts to our research and land
  • 49:13 - 49:19
    grant and outreach organizations that work
    directly with producers around the country.
  • 49:22 - 49:32
    Emily: the next question comes to us from
    Kevin McBride. and he asks "how is the?"
  • 49:32 - 49:36
    agricultural practice of high alt hay and
    ranching different from the row cropping
  • 49:37 - 49:41
    discussed? Is there extra nutrients appropriate BMPs?"
  • 49:42 - 49:47
    Troy: I think I understand the question.
    What are some differences in Best
  • 49:54 - 49:58
    management practices between high
    altitude mountain meadow production
  • 49:58 - 49:59
    versus row crop production.
  • 50:00 - 50:06
    They are not terribly different, it's just
    the opportunities perhaps to do things
  • 50:06 - 50:12
    like placement like nutrients in the
    root zone or a little more limited in
  • 50:12 - 50:14
    those established pastures.
  • 50:14 - 50:19
    but there's other things that they can
    do up there. Timing makes a difference
  • 50:20 - 50:23
    on when you apply fertilizer to a high
    altitude meadow system.
  • 50:23 - 50:30
    we've done some research with Joe
    Brummer, in our department, a forage
  • 50:30 - 50:35
    and high mountain meadow specialist, on
    timing fertilizer applications in the fall vs
  • 50:35 - 50:40
    early spring vs late spring.
    and found that the earlier you can apply
  • 50:40 - 50:43
    your nutrients before you apply your
    irrigation water in the spring, the less
  • 50:43 - 50:46
    likely they are going to move out of
    those systems.
  • 50:47 - 50:50
    I'd say the other difference is that
    those mountain meadows have a
  • 50:50 - 50:55
    very short growing season and limited
    productivities, so they, a lot of times
  • 50:56 - 51:00
    their productivity is not necessarily
    defined as much by how much fertilizer
  • 51:00 - 51:04
    they apply.
    Is the short growing season whereas
  • 51:04 - 51:09
    down here on the plains with row crop
    agriculture much longer growing season
  • 51:10 - 51:12
    and typically much higher nutrient application rates.
  • 51:14 - 51:20
    Emily: great thanks. The next question is
    for Troy from Lisa Buchanan. She asks
  • 51:20 - 51:25
    "for areas where BMPs are being used, have
    you seen an improvement in downstream
  • 51:25 - 51:26
    water quality is treated?"'
  • 51:28 - 51:31
    Troy: Yeah that's a good question. I
    personally haven't done any, that
  • 51:32 - 51:37
    many studies with surface water quality
    and BMP implementation on a
  • 51:37 - 51:42
    watershed scale. The data I showed
    you was on the edge of field scale.
  • 51:43 - 51:49
    and we definitely can show edge of
    field water quality improvements at
  • 51:49 - 51:55
    edge of field in the work that I've done.
    nationally other folks have done
  • 51:56 - 52:01
    watershed studies and it depends on the
    BMP systems and how well they were
  • 52:01 - 52:05
    implemented and how well the BMP
    fit the agriculture in the area.
  • 52:08 - 52:12
    Emily: thanks. we have time for one
    more question. This question comes
  • 52:12 - 52:18
    from Jojo Laff and he asks "Troy in your
    experience what is the best way to
  • 52:18 - 52:22
    agricultural members buy in for
    participation in voluntary programs?"
  • 52:23 - 52:27
    "What do you believe are the best
    incentives for participation? Additionally,
  • 52:27 - 52:33
    what is the best way to conduct public
    education on BMPs and the tools available?"
  • 52:34 - 52:36
    Let me know if you want me to repeat
    any part of that.
  • 52:38 - 52:43
    Troy: So the best, or the first part of that
    question I heard, I think I heard was
  • 52:43 - 52:47
    "what's the best way to agricultural
    producers involved and interested in
  • 52:47 - 52:51
    learning about and implementing
    best management practices.?"
  • 52:51 - 52:55
    It depends on the practice to be honest
    with you. I think a lot of practices, like I
  • 52:56 - 53:00
    showed with implementing center pivot
    irrigation instead of furrow irrigation
  • 53:01 - 53:04
    are happening on their own because
    the incentives are already there.
  • 53:04 - 53:08
    whether it's labor saving time or
    money or nutrients.
  • 53:08 - 53:13
    The tougher ones I think are
    structural BMPS like filter strips
  • 53:14 - 53:19
    and set backs and things like that may cost
    producers some time and money.
  • 53:19 - 53:24
    I think those have, your incentives there
    are cost sharing and those kinds of things.
  • 53:25 - 53:32
    I think in terms of getting them to the table,
    you know, working through their groups that
  • 53:32 - 53:37
    represent them, whether they be commodity
    or livestock associations are really important.
  • 53:37 - 53:42
    those folks are really engaged in the
    conversation and they want their
  • 53:42 - 53:44
    producers to know what's going on.
  • 53:45 - 53:49
    Because there's so many producers and
    there's so few of us doing this kind of work,
  • 53:49 - 53:50
    that we can't talk to every body.
  • 53:51 - 53:57
    But getting people around the table is really important whether it be growers or the people that represent them.
  • 53:58 - 54:01
    Can you repeat the second part of
    that question?
  • 54:02 - 54:07
    Emily: The second part asks, "Additionally,
    what is the best way to conduct public
  • 54:07 - 54:10
    education on BMPs and the tools available?"
  • 54:13 - 54:18
    Troy: yeah, that is an interesting question.
  • 54:18 - 54:24
    because we just went through this process
    with CDPHE and stakeholders over the past
  • 54:24 - 54:32
    year with reg 85 and the example outreach
    program that I showed early in my
  • 54:32 - 54:41
    presentation. And we've kind of evolved
    about how we presented information to
  • 54:41 - 54:46
    producers. It used to be a lot of factsheets
    and bulletins and written materials.
  • 54:46 - 54:52
    and that kind of thing. and it's certainly
    going more high tech with short videos a
  • 54:53 - 54:58
    nd websites and providing them tools
    like irrigation schedulers or nutrient
  • 54:58 - 55:05
    management planners that they can use.
    particularly stuff that they can pull
  • 55:05 - 55:08
    up on their smartphone when they
    are up there on their tractor with their g
  • 55:09 - 55:11
    uidance system taking them down the row.
  • 55:13 - 55:22
    Definitely, technology and I think the
    other place, again, is getting to the
  • 55:22 - 55:23
    people that talk to them.
  • 55:23 - 55:28
    getting to the local extension people,
    getting to NRCS, getting to
  • 55:29 - 55:30
    certified crop advisers.
  • 55:31 - 55:37
    Fertilizer dealers, people who, input
    suppliers can reach so many more
  • 55:37 - 55:44
    growers than we can.
    Emily: great thanks so much.
  • 55:45 - 55:50
    I believe that concludes the question
    part and I will pass it over to Katelyn.
  • 55:51 - 55:55
    Kaitlyn: thank you to both of our
    panelists. And Steve, thanks for
  • 55:56 - 56:02
    taking over for Dejenette. We did record
    this webinar, so you all will receive an
  • 56:02 - 56:04
    email with links to the recording.
  • 56:05 - 56:07
    Or you can find it on either
    of our websites.
  • 56:09 - 56:13
    We encourage you to take the next step
    by connecting with the Colorado foundation
  • 56:13 - 56:15
    for water education and colorado
    water congress.
  • 56:16 - 56:18
    You should see our websites on
    your screen.
  • 56:20 - 56:23
    Thanks to the presenters for their
    time as well as the audience for
  • 56:23 - 56:26
    their participation and those
    wonderful questions.
  • 56:26 - 56:29
    This concludes our webinar, thank you.
Title:
Cyanotoxins, Nutrients, and Public Health
Description:

more » « less
Video Language:
English
Duration:
56:39

English subtitles

Revisions Compare revisions