Skip to main content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Here’s how you know

Dot gov

Official websites use .gov
A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

HTTPS

Secure .gov websites use HTTPS
A lock ( Lock A locked padlock ) or https:// means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

  • Environmental Topics
  • Laws & Regulations
  • Report a Violation
  • About EPA
Risk Assessment
Contact Us

Our national nutrient reduction needs: Applying a conservation prioritization framework to US agricultural lands

On this page:

  • Overview
  • Downloads
Targeted conservation approaches seek to focus resources on areas where they can deliver the greatest benefits and are recognized as key to reducing nonpoint source nutrients from agricultural landscapes into sensitive receiving waters. Moreover, there is growing recognition of the importance and complementarity of in-field and edge-of-field conservation for reaching nutrient reduction goals. Here we provide a prioritization framework that can help with spatial targeting: It begins with identifying areas with high agricultural nutrient surplus, i.e. where the most nitrogen (N) and/or phosphorus (P) inputs are left on the landscape after crop harvest. Subwatersheds (eight-digit hydrologic unit code or HUC8) with high surplus included almost half of the conterminous US subwatersheds, and were located predominantly in the Midwest for N, in the South for P, and in California for both N and P. Then we identified most suitable conservation strategies using a hierarchy of measures including nutrient use efficiency (proportion of nutrient inputs removed in crop harvest), tile drainage, existing buffers for agricultural run-off, and wetland restoration potential. In-field nutrient input reduction emerged as a priority because nutrient use efficiency fell below a high but achievable goal of 0.7 (30% of nutrients applied are not utilized) in 86% and 88% of high surplus subwatersheds for N and P, respectively. In many parts of the southern and western US, in-field conservation (i.e. reducing inputs + preventing nutrients from leaving fields) alone was likely the optimal strategy as agriculture was already well-buffered. However, additional edge-of-field buffering would be important to conservation strategies in 67% of high N and 58% of high P surplus subwatersheds nationwide. Nutrient efficiencies were often high enough in the Midwest that proposed strategies focused more on preventing nutrients from leaving fields, managing tile effluent, and buffering agricultural fields. Almost all HUC2 river basins would benefit from a variety of nutrient reduction conservation strategies, underscoring the potential of targeted approaches to help limit excess nutrients in surface and ground waters.

Impact/Purpose

This represents the first paper which develops the prioritization framework that builds on nutrient surplus, nutrient use efficiency, tile drainage, and potentially restorable wetlands.  A national-scale analysis will provide the foundation to examine the effectiveness of on-field nutrient management, wetland connections and conservation practices to reduce nutrient loads and concentrations in surface water and groundwater.  Here EPA scientists apply CONUS-wide data available from the National Nutrient Inventory (SSWR.405.1), EnviroAtlas, StreamCat and other nationally available data.  We will use these overlapping datasets to identify places where N or P or both can be addressed, and in addition prioritize areas where existing wetlands may be effective, where constructed riparian buffers may be more successful, or where field nutrient management may be needed. The effort will be used to help inform the prioritization of areas for in-field, edge-of-field and other conservation practices, based on nutrient loads, suitability for restoration and current buffered agricultural lands.

Citation

Kirk, L., J. Compton, A. Neale, R. Sabo, AND J. Christensen. Our national nutrient reduction needs: Applying a conservation prioritization framework to US agricultural lands. Elsevier Science Ltd, New York, NY, 351:119758, (2024). [DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2023.119758]

Download(s)

DOI: Our national nutrient reduction needs: Applying a conservation prioritization framework to US agricultural lands
  • Risk Assessment Home
  • About Risk Assessment
  • Risk Recent Additions
  • Human Health Risk Assessment
  • Ecological Risk Assessment
  • Risk Advanced Search
    • Risk Publications
  • Risk Assessment Guidance
  • Risk Tools and Databases
  • Superfund Risk Assessment
  • Where you live
Contact Us to ask a question, provide feedback, or report a problem.
Last updated on December 15, 2023
United States Environmental Protection Agency

Discover.

  • Accessibility Statement
  • Budget & Performance
  • Contracting
  • EPA www Web Snapshots
  • Grants
  • No FEAR Act Data
  • Privacy
  • Privacy and Security Notice

Connect.

  • Data
  • Inspector General
  • Jobs
  • Newsroom
  • Open Government
  • Regulations.gov
  • Subscribe
  • USA.gov
  • White House

Ask.

  • Contact EPA
  • EPA Disclaimers
  • Hotlines
  • FOIA Requests
  • Frequent Questions

Follow.