July 30-1030-Benjamin Wickerham
•Descargar como PPTX, PDF•
0 recomendaciones•38 vistas
2019 SWCS International Annual Conference July 28-31, 2019 Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
Recomendados
Recomendados
Más contenido relacionado
La actualidad más candente
La actualidad más candente (19)
Similar a July 30-1030-Benjamin Wickerham
Similar a July 30-1030-Benjamin Wickerham (20)
Más de Soil and Water Conservation Society
Más de Soil and Water Conservation Society (20)
Último
Último (20)
July 30-1030-Benjamin Wickerham
- 1. Comparing conservation cost share approaches: pay for practice vs. pay for performance
- 2. We strive to create a future where people have the food, energy and economic growth they need without sacrificing nature
- 3. Agriculture: Soil Health and Nutrients Strategy Ultimately we care about the water and improving and protecting aquatic ecosystems 3 Saginaw Bay, Western Lake Erie, Green Bay, Mississippi River Basin, Gulf of Mexico, Chesapeake Bay, Florida Everglades
- 4. Pay for Practice vs. Pay for Performance B.Wickerham, SWCS Conference July 30, 2019
- 5. Pay for Practice vs. Pay for Performance B.Wickerham, SWCS Conference July 30, 2019
- 6. Pay for Practice vs. Pay for Performance B.Wickerham, SWCS Conference July 30, 2019
- 7. Pay for Practice vs. Pay for Performance B.Wickerham, SWCS Conference July 30, 2019 PAY FOR PRACTICE PAY FOR PERFORMANCE
- 8. Highest Priority Farmland Great Lakes Watershed Management System (MSU IWR) http://www.iwr.msu.edu/glwms
- 9. Highest Priority Farmland Great Lakes Watershed Management System (MSU IWR) Indicates where fish communities throughout the watershed are most impacted by land use (red and orange are poorest water quality) Red areas show us which areas of the field are likely at risk for soil erosion and runoff to nearby streams
- 10. Pay for Practice vs. Pay for Performance B.Wickerham, SWCS Conference July 30, 2019 High Impact Targeting (HIT) Model
- 11. 2,800.7 Actual SEDIMENT Load Reduction to-date 0.0 1,000.0 2,000.0 3,000.0 TONS Project Goal: 2,695 tons Actual Enrolled = 59,650 ac. 0 10000 20000 30000 40000 50000 60000 ACRES Enrolled ACRES Project Goal: 25,500 ac. Figure 1. Saginaw Bay RCPP Progress Against Goals July 2019
- 12. Pay for Practice vs. Pay for Performance B.Wickerham, SWCS Conference July 30, 2019
- 13. Implementation Projects Update towards Big Win in Saginaw Bay Watershed:
- 14. Pay for Practice vs. Pay for Performance B.Wickerham, SWCS Conference July 30, 2019 PAY FOR PRACTICE (RCPP) PAY FOR PERFORMANCE • 2015-2020 • Saginaw Bay Watershed • Cover crops, reduced till, no-till, filter strips • Follows NRCS specs & standards • GLWMS used to target and track progress • 2015-2020 • Saginaw Bay Watershed • Cover crops, reduced till, no-till, filter strips • Follows NRCS specs & standards • GLWMS used to target and track progress
- 15. Pay for Practice vs. Pay for Performance B.Wickerham, SWCS Conference July 30, 2019
- 16. Pay for Practice vs. Pay for Performance B.Wickerham, SWCS Conference July 30, 2019 PAY FOR PRACTICE (RCPP) PAY FOR PERFORMANCE • 2015-2020 • Saginaw Bay Watershed • Cover crops, reduced till, no-till, filter strips • Follows NRCS specs & standards • GLWMS used to target and track progress • Contracts administered by NRCS • Burdensome application process • Average contracting time = 4.5 months • Planned acres at CLU scale • Average contract payment $53 / acre • SAME PAYMENT REGARDLESS OF OUTCOME • 2015-2020 • Saginaw Bay Watershed • Cover crops, reduced till, no-till, filter strips • Follows NRCS specs & standards • GLWMS used to target and track progress • Contracts administered by TNC or subcontractor • Two page contract • Contracting time at the speed of the farmer • Allows for precision treatment area • Average contract payment $31 / acre • INCENTIVES INCREASE PROPORTIONALLY WITH GREATER ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFIT
- 17. $0.00 $10.00 $20.00 $30.00 $40.00 $50.00 $60.00 $70.00 $80.00 $90.00 $100.00 0.0000000000 0.0500000000 0.1000000000 0.1500000000 0.2000000000 0.2500000000 0.3000000000 0.3500000000 0.4000000000 Paymentamount($/acre) Tons of sediment reduced per acre Sediment Reduction vs. Compensation Saginaw Bay RCPP vs. Pay for Performance (Bad River Watershed, Saginaw River Watershed) Last Updated: 7/15/19 Bad River PfP Payment/ac RCPP payment/ac Sag.Bay PfP Payment/ac
- 18. $0.00 $10.00 $20.00 $30.00 $40.00 $50.00 $60.00 $70.00 $80.00 $90.00 $100.00 0.0000000000 0.0500000000 0.1000000000 0.1500000000 0.2000000000 0.2500000000 0.3000000000 0.3500000000 0.4000000000 Paymentamount($/acre) Tons of sediment reduced per acre Sediment Reduction vs. Compensation Saginaw Bay RCPP vs. Pay for Performance (Bad River Watershed, Saginaw River Watershed) Last Updated: 7/15/19
- 19. Take-aways: • Based on three years of side-by-side USDA program & PfP program data comparison, we estimate we could achieve: • 2.2# of sediment saved/$ through traditional cost share 9.6# of sediment saved/$ through PfP • Or, if we had $1M of conservation funding: w/ Farm Bill w/ Pay for Performance 1,084 Tons 4,812 Tons …over4timesasmuchenvironmentalbenefitw/ PfP!
- 20. Pay for Practice vs. Pay for Performance B.Wickerham, SWCS Conference July 30, 2019 CONSIDERATIONS: • Modeling vs. Monitoring • Should be used more for comparing relative priority between fields • PfP limited by IT available • Not necessarily transferable to other watersheds • Social Acceptance?
- 21. $0.00 $10.00 $20.00 $30.00 $40.00 $50.00 $60.00 $70.00 $80.00 $90.00 $100.00 0.0000000000 0.0500000000 0.1000000000 0.1500000000 0.2000000000 0.2500000000 0.3000000000 0.3500000000 0.4000000000 Paymentamount($/acre) Tons of sediment reduced per acre Sediment Reduction vs. Compensation Saginaw Bay RCPP vs. Pay for Performance (Bad River Watershed, Saginaw River Watershed) Last Updated: 7/15/19
- 22. Pay for Practice vs. Pay for Performance B.Wickerham, SWCS Conference July 30, 2019 mfales@tnc.org 517/ 316-2278 For GLWMS, visit www.iwr.msu.edu/glwms For Conservation Incentives Program resources, please visit www.nature.org/saginawbay How can YOU Get more information?