Skip to main content
ARS Home » Northeast Area » University Park, Pennsylvania » Pasture Systems & Watershed Management Research » Research » Publications at this Location » Publication #318568
Title: Nutrient management planners feedback on New York and Pennsylvania phosphorus indices

Author
item CELA, SEBASTIAN - Cornell University
item KETTERINGS, QUIRINE - Cornell University
item CZYMMEK, KARL - Cornell University
item WELD, JENNIFER - Pennsylvania State University
item BEEGLE, DOUG - Pennsylvania State University
item Kleinman, Peter

Submitted to: Journal of Soil and Water Conservation
Publication Type: Peer Reviewed Journal
Publication Acceptance Date: 8/27/2015
Publication Date: N/A
Citation: N/A

Interpretive Summary: Nutrient management planning with the Phosphorus (P) Index is now one of the central tools used in promoting sustainable phosphorus management in agriculture. To gain insight into the virtues and limitation of the P Index, a survey was conducted of nutrient management planners working in New York and Pennsylvania. While most planners working with the P Index were content with it in its current state, opportunities were identified to better promote best management practices using the P Index while discouraging practices such as manure application to fields near streams and drainage conduits, or to soils with insufficient cover.

Technical Abstract: State Phosphorus Indices (PIs) are being evaluated across the US due to variability in P management recommendations and questions about the lack of water quality improvement in some watersheds. Nutrient management planners in New York (NY) and Pennsylvania (PA) were surveyed via two separate but related questionnaires to document perspectives on the current NY-PI and PA-PI and to obtain recommendations for improvements. Many planners were content with the current versions of the PIs but felt improvements could be made to more strongly discourage application of manure under conditions of high phosphorus loss potential and better promote certain best management practices. The NY planners felt that the NY-PI should discourage manure application during winter and to fields near streams, and should more strongly promote manure incorporation, cover crops, crop residues, setbacks and vegetated buffers. Similarly, the PA planners also felt that the PA-PI should more strongly discourage manure application to fields with insufficient ground cover, near subsurface drainage and surface inlets, and during winter. In addition, the PA planners felt the PA-PI should more strongly encourage soil conservation practices such as no-till practices, use of cover crops, and vegetated buffers. Results of the survey suggest common experiences and viewpoints among planners in NY and PA, resulting in a valuable on-the-ground assessment of the PIs as nutrient management planning tool in both states, and the potential for development of a single, physiographic-region PI.