Abstracts from Day 2 of the conference (November 8, 2019)
Concurrent Session I, 8:00-9:15 am
A. Playa Lakes (Walnut)
Moderator: Heidi Mehl, The Nature Conservancy
- Playas Recharging Kansas Communities
Mike Carter, Playa Lakes Joint Venture
There is growing recognition that playa conservation is an important strategy to preserve water quality and quantity, along with more programs and funding that engender and support a coordinated, regional approach to conserving and restoring playas. For example, a playa restoration model that provides collateral benefits to the people who live in small towns in western Kansas is really gaining traction. Not only does the restoration work provide critical habitat for wetland birds and other wildlife but, more importantly, results in increased and cleaner water recharge to the High Plains aquifer — the primary source of water for western Kansas towns. Outreach to the first of these communities, Leoti and Tribune, has already led to two county-wide efforts to achieve sustainable water use through playa restoration and reduced irrigation. In this session, we relay the basics about playas and how they function, how recharge to the aquifer via playas happens, the desired condition of playas near water sources, the science behind our restoration efforts, and a prioritization of playas near municipal, stock, and domestic wells that will be used to drive those efforts. The model is a proof of concept which we plan to export to other communities and producers who are facing diminishing water supplies, both in Kansas and other states where playas occur. We believe it can be applied to other new efforts, such as water farms, and should be promoted wherever water conservation is a necessity in playa country. This project has widespread support and engagement among a diverse set of partners in Kansas including the following organizations who participate on the steering committee: Kansas Association of Conservation Districts, Ducks Unlimited, Groundwater Management District #1, Kansas Water Office, Kansas Department of Agriculture, Kansas Department of Wildlife Parks and Tourism, Pheasants Forever, USDA Farm Service Agency, and USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service. More locally, landowners, Greeley and Wichita Co. Conservation Districts, economic development, public health and government officials are participating.
- Kansas Playas – A Past and Future Resource
Jude Kastens, University of Kansas
Randy Stotler, University of Kansas
Debbie Baker, University of Kansas
Don Huggins, University of Kansas
In the uplands between the main drainages of western Kansas, thousands of playas perforate the landscape. These ephemeral wetlands, sometimes called buffalo wallows, lagoons, or sloughs by local farmers, were a valuable resource for Native Americans and European settlers, providing sustenance in a water-scarce environment. Hundreds of species of plants and animals, indigenous and migratory, rely on playas for food, water and shelter. Presently, the vast majority of Kansas playas are embedded in farm fields and have long been viewed as an obstacle to production agriculture—that is until recently when playa functions and benefits have come into sharper focus. Primary among these are their role as hotspots for both biodiversity and, critically for the region’s citizens and communities, aquifer recharge. A number of government programs provide landowners with options for conserving or restoring their playas, supported by tremendous efforts from a network of stakeholders ranging from concerned individuals to state agencies and non-profit organizations such as PLJV, KAWS, and DU. As we shed more light on the science and nature of playas, the importance of this abundant landscape feature for future generations of western Kansans is becoming increasingly apparent.
- Restoring Playas – What’s It Look Like and Who Can Help?
Matt Hough, Ducks Unlimited
Matt Smith, Kansas Department of Wildlife, Parks and Tourism
Many playas have been modified in ways that reduce their ability to function properly. Excess sediment, pits, diversions and lack of vegetative buffers are common throughout playa country. This session will describe restoration techniques and best management practices for playas. The variety of programs and sources of funding available to landowners who have playas in need of restoration or protection and introduce the partners willing to provide assistance will also be explained. Discussions will also touch on future needs for playa conservation. Many playas have been lost but there is still opportunity to achieve a higher level of conservation if the necessary resources become available.
- Playas as Sources of Recharge to the High Plains Aquifer in Western Kansas
Randy Stotler, University of Kansas
Jude Kastens, University of Kansas
Sam Zipper, University of Kansas
Andrea Brookfield, University of Kansas
Mark Bowen, Minnesota State University
Recharge rates and depth to water in the High Plains aquifer (HPA) vary depending on surface land use and subsurface geology; however, rates generally vary between 0.2 and 3.9 in/yr (5 to 100 mm/yr). Considering depth to water, these values represent recharge rates between 2,000 and 40 years. Yet despite annual declines in water levels and slow recharge rates, physical and chemical evidence indicate water is recharging the aquifer more quickly in some locations, primarily through playas. These areas of focused recharge may be locally significant. Here, recharge data are presented from playas across the High Plains region, including one in Kansas, to illustrate the importance of playas to the health of the HPA. Current research is investigating the effects of various farming practices on playa recharge, and how choices to farm or preserve playas affect producer economic outcomes
B. Groundwater Characterization, Management and Conservation (Redbud)
Moderator: Amy Kremen, Colorado State University
- Addition of Quantitatively Interpreted Drillers’ Log Tables to the Kansas Geological Survey’s WWC5 Database
Geoffrey Bohling, University of Kansas
Brownie Wilson, University of Kansas
Dana Adkins-Heljeson, University of Kansas
The Kansas Geological Survey (KGS) has long stored and served information from Kansas water well completion records in its WWC5 database. A table in this database contains transcriptions of the lithological logs – descriptions of the sediments and rocks encountered during drilling – contained in the forms. To date, more than 148,000 logs statewide, containing descriptions of over 1 million depth intervals, have been transcribed into this table. KGS investigators developed a process for quantitatively interpreting these logs and have been using the resulting information in the development of groundwater flow models for a number of years. We have recently added tables representing the initial steps of this quantification process to the WWC5 database, to allow others to employ this information in their own studies. This presentation will document these tables and explain how to access them.
- Transitioning to Non-Irrigated Crop Production in Southwest Kansas – Will We Have Another Dust Bowl?
Bill Golden, Kansas State University
The Ogallala Aquifer in Southwest Kansas is declining rapidly. The area faces the risk of aquifer depletion by 2060 due to withdrawals exceeding almost negligible recharge. As a result, conservation and management efforts to extend the life of the aquifer are accelerating in the area. However, it is likely that with or without conservation or management practices, much of the currently irrigated cropland will transition to either dryland production or pasture. When modeling future groundwater use and aquifer decline, economists typically assume that irrigated cropland will transition to dryland crop production. Recent evidence suggests that this might be not be the case, and much of the irrigated cropland may transition to pasture land. This research will combine an irrigated cropland layer with the NRCS soil classification layer and other indicators to predict the quantity of land that is too fragile to support dryland crop production. Experiences from the Kansas Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program and the difficulty of converting irrigated cropland to pasture land will be discussed. Additionally, intertemporal optimization models will be developed to predict the long-run economic implications to producers and rural economies of transitioning irrigated cropland to pasture.
- Conserving Ogallala Communities through Voluntary, Group Efforts to Manage Groundwater
Stephen Lauer, Kansas State University
Matthew Sanderson, Kansas State University
We present findings from a four-year, USDA-funded research project on the values and motivations for groundwater conservation among Kansas producers. Our key finding is that voluntary group efforts are effective at conserving groundwater, and merit state support to help local organizers succeed and to create a social-political environment that encourages producers to participate. Drawing on our survey of 1226 producers across Ogallala region (279 in Kansas), 41 Kansas producer interviews, and a case study of the Wichita County Water Conservation Area, we demonstrate that:
-
- An overwhelming majority of Kansas producers believe that Ogallala groundwater should be conserved. Their primary motivations for groundwater conservation are securing their way of life for future generations, supporting their local communities, and preparing for droughts.
- While most Kansas producers believe that they are already doing all they can individually to conserve water, producers involved in LEMA’s and WCA’s are finding additional ways to conserve.
- Voluntary group efforts have tremendous opportunity to grow. While only 4% of Kansas producers are currently involved, 81% are open to the idea that such efforts can solve problems and 79% believe they might personally have something to contribute.
We present five keys to success for future voluntary group conservation efforts.
- Potential for Mobile Drip Irrigation Technology to Reduce Water Use on Low Capacity Wells
Trevor Ahring, Southwest Groundwater Management District No. 3
Clay Scott
There are nearly 3 million irrigated acres of farmland in Kansas. Most of this acreage is located above the High Plains Aquifer, an abundant yet often unsustainable water supply that supports portions of 5 states in the central United States. This aquifer has declined since irrigation development in the 1950s, with some of the largest declines in southwest Kansas. These declines and the economic activity that western Kansas stands to lose necessitate increasing crop water productivity and reducing the rate of groundwater use.
As water supply diminishes, the total amount of water that can be pumped in each irrigation season also diminishes. Low pumping rates require producers to slow down the speed of their pivots to achieve effective irrigation. Lower rates of application through a center pivot system require very low flow rates for individual nozzles located on the inner tower spans to maintain uniform application of water. These rates may be too low for standard nozzles.
Converting the first three spans of a 122 acre center pivot system to mobile drip irrigation results in an increased efficiency of 38% over the inner 21 acres of the circle and increased efficiency of 6.8% over the entire system. The purpose of this project was to demonstrate the effectiveness of combining mobile drip irrigation covering the inner portion of the field with the outer portions utilizing bubbler nozzle packages and soil moisture sensors to significantly reduce water use without negatively impacting yield, increasing overall profitability.
The project was located on 14 fields covering 3,821 acres in Grant and Stanton Counties, Kansas. Project fields grew fully irrigated corn, limited irrigation corn, and irrigated wheat. Fully irrigated corn was seeded at a rate of 28,000 spa and fertilized with 225 lb N. Limited irrigation corn was seeded at a rate of 19,600 spa and fertilized with 160 lb N. Irrigated wheat was seeded at a rate of 90 lb/ac and fertilized with 100 lb N.
Water savings were quantified by calculating the difference of water applied to the acreage under mobile drip irrigation and the water that would have been applied under the same duration using a standard drop nozzle package. Yield, rainfall, and water use information were documented for each project year. The average cost of mobile drip installation at the project location during the project period was $3,960.24 per system. The average cost per acre-inch of water pumped in the project area was $7.50. Given average rainfall and cost to pump water in the project area, the break-even time of implementing mobile drip irrigation on the inner three spans using the practices demonstrated by the project is 3.27 years on fully irrigated corn, 4.39 years on limited irrigation corn, and 6.85 years on irrigated wheat.
This project was funded in partnership with West Acre Farms and the Natural Resources Conservation Service, United States Department of Agriculture, under the Conservation Innovation Grant program.
C. Alternative Crops (Redbud A)
Moderator: Susan Metzger, Kansas State University College of Agriculture, K-State Research and Extension
- Industrial Hemp at K-State: Trying to Fill the Research Void
Jason Griffin, Kansas State University
Industrial Hemp started making a comeback to the Sunflower State in 2019. This was the first year Kansans were allowed to apply for a license through the Kansas Department of Agriculture (KDA) to conduct research on growing and processing the crop. Industrial Hemp consists of varieties of Cannabis sativa with a Δ-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) content less than 0.3%. It can be grown and harvested for its seed (grain), stem (fiber), or floral material. Grain can be processed for a multitude of human and animal consumed products. The fiber can be incorporated into a wide variety of products including plastics and textiles. Crops grown for floral material are often harvested and processed to extract the plants cannabinoids. The most popular, cannabidiol (CBD), is alleged to have many human health benefits. Grain and fiber varieties are often grown similar to many agronomic crops in large acreage, using familiar agronomic farm implements. Varieties grown for CBD, are produced similar to many horticultural crops and are often grown in a greenhouse or other enclosed structure where the environment can be closely controlled. Currently there are no variety recommendations or recent best management practices for the production of either type of Industrial Hemp in Kansas. Therefore, in the summer of 2019, Kansas State University College of Agriculture undertook efforts to close that information gap. Professors in the Department of Horticulture and Natural Resources and the Department of Agronomy planted test plots throughout the state. In Wichita at the John C. Pair Horticultural Center, 17 varieties of grain and fiber hemp were planted in replicated plots to evaluate establishment, growth, and yield. Additionally, seven CBD Hemp varieties were grown to investigate fertility and the influence of various growing environments. In Colby at the Northwest Research and Extension Center 14 varieties of grain and fiber hemp were planted under different water schedules to investigate the irrigation requirement of field grown Industrial Hemp in NW Kansas. In Manhattan at the K-State Agronomy Farm, 14 varieties of grain and fiber Hemp were also planted with the intent to investigate irrigation requirements, however, flooding shortly after planting destroyed any potential crop. In Olathe at the Olathe Horticulture Research and Extension Center one CBD Hemp variety was grown to investigate productivity potential in the NE portion of Kansas. Finally, at K-State Olathe, faculty are accepting hemp samples for analysis of THC and CBD to assist farmers with determining when it is time to harvest their crop. Data from these locations will be compiled and delivered to KDA in December where it will be made available to the public on their website so growers can begin making informed decisions regarding their potential 2020 planting plans. Together, K-State faculty are generating first year data across the state to support this exciting new crop.
- DropXL Sorghum, a simulation study to design crop trait technology for water productivity in Kansas environments
Rubi Raymundo, Kansas State University
Sandeep Marla, Kansas State University
Terry Felderhoff, Kansas State University
Sarah Sexton Bowser, Kansas State University
Geoffrey Morris, Kansas State University
DropXL Sorghum is a State of Kansas effort managed by the Collaborative Sorghum Investment Program to advance sorghum technology for the benefit of farmers and Kansas water resource stakeholders. The trait technology package provides farmers with sorghum technology for higher productivity under moderate water limitation. DropXL will identify optimal trait combinations for water productivity across Kansas’ target environments (Trait Map), identify genetic markers for targeted trait in field trials (Trait Marker), and develop improved trait donor lines to facilitate water-optimized sorghum hybrids (Trait Donor). The first phase deliverable is a trait map with informing by a study simulating combinations of crops traits and Kansas environments. A sorghum with a chilling tolerant trait has potential to extend the growing season to better synchronize the crop water demand and water availability. In addition, a sorghum with a limited transpiration trait has the potential to reduce the crop transpiration in hours with high evaporative demand resulting in conservation of soil water for use during late season. Crop ecophysiological models that simulate the crop response as a function of genotype (G), management (M) and environment (E) are common tools to assess the impact of genetic traits in a range of scenarios. In this study, we used the APSIM-Sorghum crop model to quantify the potential benefit of chilling tolerance (CT) and limited transpiration (LT) trait, across Kansas. Simulation experiments were conducted under rainfed conditions in Colby, Garden City, Hays and Manhattan from 1986 to 2018. The crop was simulated to be grown every year in three planting dates: mid-April (Early planted), mid-May (Early planted) and mid-June (Early planted). In every planting date, we analyzed the variability of precipitation, soil moisture and predicted yields. Our results suggest that a standard grain sorghum hybrid with a CT trait could escape drought and have higher yields (~5%) if planted 30–60 days early (mid-May to mid-April). Similarly, a grain sorghum with a LT trait may have potential to increase grain yields by 4% with a balance of using soil moisture in periods of stress and conserving for moisture availability through the entire season. Overall, these simulations offer encouragement that genetic improvement in sorghum with the introgression of CT and LT trait are likely to make valuable economic contributions to the communities in Kansas supported by agricultural productivity. This knowledge informs the continuing research and development of the DropXL trait technology package.
- Cotton Production in Kansas
Stu Duncan, Kansas State University
No abstract available.
D. Water and Human Health (Oak)
Moderator: Brian Meier, Burns & McDonnell
- Evaluation of Streambed-Sediment Metals Concentrations in the Spring River Basin, Cherokee County Superfund Site, Southeast Kansas, 2017
Brian Klager, U.S. Geological Survey
Kyle Juracek, U.S. Geological Survey
The Tri-State Mining District covers parts of Kansas, Missouri, and Oklahoma and was historically (1850-1950) mined for lead and zinc. Mining-related contamination has been documented in sediments in the Spring River Basin in Cherokee County, Kansas. Adverse effects on biota and human health have also been documented. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency listed southeast Cherokee County, Kansas as a Superfund hazardous waste site in 1983 because of the contamination. In this study, streambed sediment was sampled from 30 sites in the Spring River Basin in the Cherokee County Superfund site in July-August 2017 and analyzed for cadmium, lead, and zinc. These 30 sites were also sampled in 2004 as part of a previous study. Cadmium, lead, and zinc streambed-sediment concentrations from the 2017 samples were compared with those from the samples collected in 2004 and with established sediment quality guidelines. Overall, streambed-sediment concentrations of cadmium, lead, and zinc followed the same spatial pattern in 2017 as in 2004. Cadmium concentrations in the 2017 samples ranged from 0.58 to 291 milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg), with a median concentration of 5.91 mg/kg. Lead concentrations ranged from 19.2 to 2,880 mg/kg, with a median concentration of 105 mg/kg. Zinc concentrations ranged from 119 to greater than 10,000 mg/kg, with a median concentration of 1,070 mg/kg. The largest concentrations of these metals were on streams that drain the most heavily mined areas, such as Short Creek, Spring Branch, and Turkey Creek. The smallest concentrations were on Brush Creek and Shawnee Creek. The number of sites with cadmium, lead, and zinc concentrations greater than Tri-State Mining District-specific sediment quality guidelines in the 2017 sampling decreased compared to the 2004 sampling. Cadmium concentrations in samples collected at 12 sites in 2017 were greater than the sediment quality guideline of 11.1 mg/kg, compared to 16 sites in 2004. Lead concentrations in samples collected at 14 sites in 2017 were greater the sediment quality guideline of 150 mg/kg, compared to 16 sites in 2004. Zinc concentrations in samples collected at 11 sites in 2017 were greater than the sediment quality guideline of 2,083 mg/kg, compared to 13 sites in 2004. Results from this study allow assessment of the efficacy of ongoing remediation efforts. Nationally, the methods and results from this study provide guidance and perspective for future studies concerned with the documentation of mining-related contamination, assessment of the efficacy of implemented remediation measures in former mining areas, and planning for future remediation efforts. The study is documented in a USGS Scientific Investigations Report available online at https://doi.org/10.3133/sir20195046.
- The Kansas Climate + Health Declaration
Rachel Myslivy, Climate + Energy Project
Dorothy Barnett, Climate + Energy Project
The Kansas Climate + Health Declaration will to increase awareness of the impacts of climate change on public health, to increase civic engagement on climate action in Kansas, and to advance policies that build community resilience and safeguard the future of our state.
The connections between climate change and health are coming to the forefront as many public health organizations are speaking out about climate change. Leading public health organizations like the Centers for Disease Control, the American Public Health Association, American Lung Association, American Academy of Pediatrics and many others put forward a Declaration on Climate and Health in 2016, and revised in 2019, to encourage action on climate change as a public health crisis.
In July of 2019, the Kansas Health Institute released a Policy Brief on Health and Climate Change in Kansas, citing climate change as a substantial concern in Kansas, particularly considering our agricultural industry. The report addresses specific health concerns that will affect Kansans. Inspired by public health calls for action on climate change as a public health issue, and informed by the Kansas Health Institute’s report, the Climate + Energy Project, along with many organizational supporters came together to release the Kansas Climate + Health Declaration in 2019.
The Kansas Climate + Health Declaration draws attention to the specific impacts of climate change on public health in Kansas. Backed by research from trusted public health organizations like the Kansas Health Institute, American Public Health Association, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the Kansas Climate + Health Declaration orients around four principles:
-
-
- Climate disruption impacts the lives, health, and economic well-being of Kansans.
- Climate change is a major public health concern in Kansas.
- Those least responsible will be the most impacted and least able to adapt.
- Solutions exist to build resilience, economic opportunities, and healthy communities.
-
Each section includes the specific public health concerns for Kansans. The full Declaration is available at ResilientKansas.org.
Kansas organizations stand with leading public health organizations in making a clear call to our state’s leadership to address climate change as a primary threat to public health. Climate + Health Declaration signers urge bold, comprehensive action to reduce emissions and build resilience. The Declaration states, “We need to reduce risks of climate disruption to safeguard the future of our state. We declare a commitment to a healthier future for all.”
Statements from these original organizational signers can be found at reslientkansas.org.
This presentation will highlight climate change impacts on Kansas and the ways climate change is and will continue to affect the health of Kansans. Focusing on Kansas-specific scientific data, attendees will gain a broader understanding of the issue, while learning about solutions that work to build community resilience in Kansas.
- Impacted Groundwater as a Source of Drinking Water: Design, Permitting and Regulatory Considerations for Potable End Use Groundwater Remediation Systems
Maria Vishnevskiy, Geosyntec Consultants
In drought-stricken areas in the United States, including many areas in the Midwest and Southwest, and especially where populations are predicted to continue to increase significantly for decades to come, the scarcity of available drinking water is an ever-growing threat. Today in many groundwater basins, heavy fees are imposed on impacted groundwater that is extracted and not used as drinking water or restored and reinjected into the aquifer. This session will present the design and permitting considerations associated with groundwater extraction and treatment systems (GETS) in California that will serve as valuable new potable water supplies that will decrease the region’s reliance on imported water in addition to cleaning up impacted groundwater. Due to the geographic location and system end uses, numerous local, state and federal permitting requirements are associated with the system design, construction and operation including permitting under the California Division of Drinking Water’s 97-005 Policy. The extensive 97-005 permitting process is required due to the end-use of the GETS as potable water.
This presentation will also discuss related considerations regarding the status of water reuse in Kansas and how we can apply lessons learned from the water reuse systems and associated policy implemented by California.
- Long-Term Water-Quality Data Collection Associated with Wichita’s Primary Drinking Water Sources: Cheney Reservoir and the Equus Beds Aquifer, South-Central Kansas, 1966–2019
Mandy Stone, U.S. Geological Survey
Ariele Kramer, U.S. Geological Survey
Wichita’s water supply comes from two primary sources: Cheney Reservoir and the Equus Beds aquifer. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), in cooperation with the City of Wichita, has collected water data in the reservoir (including its major inflow, the North Fork Ninnescah River) and aquifer [including its source water for aquifer storage and recovery recharge, the Little Arkansas River (LAR)] since the 1920s and continuous water-quality data, transmitted in near-real time, since the 1990s. Discrete water-quality sample data and concomitant continuously monitored physicochemical parameters were used to develop models to compute continuous concentrations of water-quality constituents in real-time and quantify and characterize long-term constituent loads; models are available on the USGS National Real-Time Water Quality webpage at nrtwq.usgs.gov. Cheney Reservoir’s calendar year 1996–August 2019 suspended-solids load, computed using a streamflow-based surrogate model, was 4,600,000 tons (t); over half of total reservoir load during this period occurred in 5 years with extreme flow events. The LAR’s calendar year 1999–August 2019 total organic carbon load, computed using a turbidity-based surrogate model, was 133,500 t; 12 percent (%) of this load occurred in 2019 (through August) and 10% of the 2019 (through August) load occurred during a 48-hour period in May. LAR and aquifer water-quality samples were collected during 2001–2016 and compared to Federal drinking-water criteria. Less than (<) 1% of chloride and nitrate, 7% of dissolved iron, 48% of dissolved manganese, 12% of dissolved arsenic, and 39% of atrazine detections in LAR samples exceeded their respective criteria. Aquifer constituents of concern that exceeded their respective criteria included chloride, sulfate, nitrate, indicator bacteria, iron, and arsenic. About 5% of shallow (<80 feet) and 7% of deep (greater than 80 feet) groundwater chloride sample concentrations exceeded the Federal criterion of 250 milligrams per liter (mg/L); chloride exceedances tended to occur in shallow and deep wells along the Arkansas River and near Burrton, Kansas, an area with past oil and gas activity that caused contamination of the aquifer with produced waters. Shallow groundwater mean nitrate was substantially larger than deep nitrate and about 15% of shallow and <1% of deep nitrate sample concentrations exceeded the Federal criterion of 10 mg/L. Arsenic concentrations generally were larger in the deep parts of the aquifer and about 12% of shallow and 34% of deep arsenic sample concentrations exceeded the Federal primary drinking-water criterion of 10 micrograms per liter (µg/L). Shallow groundwater arsenic concentrations were larger near the LAR and the center of the aquifer; large shallow arsenic concentrations (10–50 µg/L) in the center of the study area correspond to areas that have had the most water level recovery since the 1993 historical low. Mean oxidation-reduction potential (ORP) in shallow wells generally decreased with increasing water-level depths and were inversely related to mean arsenic concentrations due to more reducing conditions (smaller ORP) at larger depths below the land surface. Long-term continuous monitoring alongside discrete sampling of Wichita’s primary drinking water sources allows quantification of changing water-quality conditions over time and provides critical information for decision-making.
E. Bioengineered Solutions to Address Water Quality (Cypress B)
Moderator: Chris Janssen, Kansas Department of Health and Environment
- Are streambank stabilization systems really reducing sediment supply and reservoir sedimentation?
Kari Bigham, Kansas State University
Reservoir sedimentation, resulting in loss of storage for flood protection and societal water needs, is a major issue in Kansas and worldwide (ICOLD, 2009; KWO, 2014). Most reservoirs are designed to fill with sediment over a finite period of time but for some reservoirs in Kansas, that time has arrived much sooner than anticipated due to accelerated erosion upstream (KWO, 2014). Excess sediment may originate from upland sources, such as rill and gully erosion, as well as channel sources, such as streambank erosion, although several case studies have identified channel erosion as the greatest contributor of sediment in some impaired rivers (Belmont et al., 2011; Juracek & Ziegler, 2009; Rondeau et al., 2000). Although hundreds of streambank stabilization projects have been installed on Kansas streams over the last two decades, little to no post-construction monitoring has been conducted to assess their overall effectiveness in reducing channel erosion and thus, reservoir sedimentation. My research aims to address the following questions:
-
- Do streambank stabilization projects push the ‘erosion problem’ upstream or downstream?
- What are the causes of bank stabilization failure?
- Can we use wood instead of rock to stabilize streambanks?
- How can we improve the design of bank stabilization systems to confidently meet project objectives?
To answer these questions, extensive, site- to reach-scale field data is being collected at bank stabilization sites on the Big Blue, Little Blue, Cottonwood, and Smoky Hill rivers. In addition, collected field data is being used to calibrate one- to two-dimensional numerical models to assist with both monitoring and design. This presentation will review these research questions, my hypotheses, and methods being used to assess bank stabilization projects, as well summarize any preliminary results and findings.
- The use of Unmanned Aircraft Systems to assess streambank erosion and related engineering solution
Tony Layzell, Kansas Geological Survey
Small Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) have emerged in recent years as an effective remote sensing platform due to their low risk and cheap cost. UAS technology now offers a cost and time effective means to collect very high-resolution imagery (cm-scale or higher) that has wide ranging application, including mapping geomorphic changes and quantifying streambank erosion in fluvial settings. In Kansas, streambank erosion has been recognized as a significant source of total watershed sediment yield, resulting in the implementation of numerous streambank stabilization (SBS) projects designed to reduce sediment yields into major federal reservoirs. The effectiveness of such SBS projects in reducing sediment yields, however, is currently unknown. SBS effectiveness can only be assessed by long term, repeat monitoring. One of the major problems with such an assessment, however, is the associated cost in both time and money. The use of UAS provides a means to overcome these limitations. UAS surveys have been conducted on the Cottonwood River to determine spatial and temporal patterns of erosion and to estimate volumes of sediment eroded after SBS construction. Preliminary results indicate that streambank erosion processes, including mass wasting and entrainment by the flow, continue to operate after SBS construction. UAS surveys allow for the documention and quantification of these erosional processes where appropriate baseline data exists. Results are helpful to both SBS engineers, in order to improve construction design, as well as to policy makers to determine whether volumes of sediment eroded post-SBS construction are acceptable in terms of cost vs. benefit.
- Modeling Nutrient Removal in Constructed Wetlands Collecting Terraced Field Runoff
Edward Peltier, University of Kansas
Daniyal Siddiqui, University of Kansas
Josh Roundy, University of Kansas
Pamela Sullivan, Oregon State University
C. Bryan Young, University of Kansas
Over the past decade, tile outlet systems have begun to replace grassed waterways for agricultural drainage from terraced fields in northeastern Kansas. These tile outlet terraced (TOT) systems can improve site drainage and increase available land for cultivation, but could also increase the transportation of nutrients and sediments to local waterways. For the past three years, researchers at the University of Kansas have been developing models to assess the ability of constructed wetlands to remove nutrients from TOT runoff prior to discharge. This work builds on field monitoring data collected since 2014 three sites in Douglas County where constructed wetlands were constructed as a cost sharing program between the Kansas Water Office, U.S. EPA and the local landowners as a pilot project to improve runoff water quality in the Upper Wakarusa Watershed. This presentation provides an overview of the development of our models to estimate terraced field runoff, wetland hydrologic performance, and nutrient removal. The models are then used to examine the performance of on-field constructed wetlands for nutrient removal under different scenarios, and to help establish design guidelines for future systems.
A hydrological model was developed to estimate storm runoff volumes and retention times in the constructed wetlands, and calibrated to observed field data from 2014-15 at two of our three experimental sites. The first part of the hydrological model used a modified curve number approach to estimate runoff volumes from the terraced fields for individual storm events. Both antecedent precipitation and vegetation cover were significant factors in determining runoff volumes. Runoff volumes generated from this process were then used as one of the inputs in generating a water balance for the constructed wetlands, along with observed drawdown rates, direct precipitation, and calculated evaporation rates based on nearby weather station data. Water storage in the constructed wetlands had a seasonal pattern, as the modeled water level fluctuated between 25 inches in spring to about 2 inches in summer with a mean yearly water depth of 13 inches. Modeling results also showed that both wetlands operated as flow through systems during spring storm events, but detained water for much longer times during the summer and fall. The higher wetland detention times observed during late summer corresponded with better observed removals of total nitrogen and total and dissolved phosphorus. A relaxed Tank in Series model was used to calibrate the pollutant removal parameters and estimate rate constants for N and P removal. Both wetlands were best fitted for a single CSTR system with relatively low reaction rate constants, indicating a well-mixed system with low to mid-range average annual removal capacities compared to literature values for other treatment systems. These results are being combined with field observations to prepare design guidelines to improve nutrient removal and retention in future constructed wetlands and assess the impact of this treatment strategy on water quality in the Upper Wakarusa watershed.
- Effects of Bank Stabilization on Regional Sediment Management (RSM)
Aaron Williams, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Kansas City District
No abstract available.
Concurrent Session II, 9:30 – 10:45 a.m.
A. Municipal and Industrial Water Supply (Cypress B)
Moderator: Mike Armstrong, Johnson County WaterOne
- Proactive Asset Management Training- Getting Ahead of the Issues
Brian Bohnsack, Wichita State University
Melissa Walker, Wichita State University
Nick Willis, Wichita State University
Tonya Bronleewee, Wichita State University
Asset management is an important component of water and wastewater management. In recognition of its importance, the Kansas Department of Health and Environment has contracted the Wichita State University Environmental Finance Center (WSU EFC) to provide asset management training free of charge to Kansas’ water and wastewater professionals and others. The WSU EFC and our training partner, the Kansas Municipal Utilities, are recognized leaders in asset management training and provide trainings throughout the state. Our presentation today will focus on the benefits of the training and how it can possibly reduce the operating costs of facilities. We also summarize our training and its implementation by water utilities in the state. Finally, we briefly provide examples of the 5 core concepts of asset management: 1) Assessing the current state of the assets, 2) determining the level of service, 3) criticality of the infrastructure, 4) life cycle costing and 5) long-term funding and how to get started with training or implementing an asset management program.
- Reducing your water system vulnerability….It’s not just a good idea, it’s the Law!
Sarah Tuite, Burns & McDonnell
The population served by your utility’s water system determines the deadline for certification of your water system Risk and Resiliency Assessment and Emergency Response Plan. The American Water Infrastructure Act (Act) was signed into law in October 2018 and updates the Bioterrorism Act of 2002. The Act requires utilities to take an “all-hazards” approach at assessing risks to and resilience of water system infrastructure including source supply, treatment, storage, and distribution as well as computer and SCADA networks and financial infrastructure.
Threats evolve over time, so should your utility’s Emergency Response Plan, procedures, and anticipated contingencies. Under the Act, acts of terrorism (including insider, outside, and cyber) should be considered; however, weather and natural threats, lifecycle, and dependency (or supply-chain) threats should also be evaluated.
Emergency response planning requires significant coordination with local emergency responders and planning committees, and emergency water providers. Successful execution of risk assessments and emergency planning starts with top-down support from local government and a foundation of security and risk focused culture.
- Smart Stormwater Solutions
Andy Sauer, Burns & McDonnell
Brenda Macke, Burns & McDonnell
Stormwater design has historically been based on basic calculations that provide simple solutions. As more detailed data has becomes available, including digital elevation models (DEMs), spatial rainfall data, and advanced computer simulation models, it is apparent that we need to elevate our stormwater design evaluations for smart stormwater solutions. Smart stormwater solutions need to consider rainfall amounts, duration, and intensity, not just intensity. Smart stormwater solutions need to consider how excess rainfall ponds and flows over the land to collection points; not just assume it all gets into the sewer system. And finally, smart stormwater solutions need to use available computer models to simulate a range of hydraulic scenarios to determine the best solution, not just a solution.
Stormwater solutions have been reduced to very basic calculations that typically require very limited evaluation. Stormwater runoff is treated as a waste product to urbanization which is routed away from the built environment (buildings, roads, streets, and parking lots) as efficiently as possible. The goal of most stormwater standards is to reduce the flood risk by routing stormwater downstream as fast as possible. But have we really reduced the flood risk or only passed this risk downstream? An examination of stream banks or of the flooding impacts downstream confirms that we are passing the problem downstream for someone else to pay either the financial cost to really analyze and fix at a future date.
Today’s stormwater policies are piecemeal at best and focus only on reducing flooding at or near the source and not on the downstream impacts. We don’t typically consider a system approach to understand the downstream issues or look at a range of rainfall events. We don’t consider how more frequent rainfall events impact our streams and rivers. We often are simply transferring the risk downstream from one area to another and in the process creating more expensive improvements downstream. There are opportunities to be proactive in the upstream portions of our watershed and anticipate the impacts downstream.
Overall, our current approach to stormwater management is not sustainable. We need to develop stormwater policies and standards that create more sustainable solutions for our communities with benefits beyond stormwater management. Stormwater solutions need to evaluate a range of rainfall events and not just one hypothetical rainfall event. We need to create adaptive designs that can better react to future climate change, to future land use changes, or to future regulations. This presentation will examine how we can, and should, develop smart stormwater solutions that provide a greater public benefit. Also, it will provide a vision of how stormwater management can change to meet the future creating more affordable solutions that are resilient.
B. 2019 Flooding in Kansas (Redbud B)
Moderator: Nathan Westrup, Kansas Water Office
- Improving Situational Awareness with Real-time Flood Mapping in Kansas: Live Action from Spring 2019
Jude Kastens, University of Kansas
Chris Shultz, Kansas Water Office
Luke Finley, Kansas Adjutant General’s Department
Cara Mays, Coffey County Appraiser’s Office
In May of this year, record-level flooding came to eastern Kansas, causing rivers to spill out of their banks and filling reservoirs. Past funding from GIS Policy Board database development grants supported the creation of inundation map libraries for the greater eastern half of Kansas, the vast majority of which utilize the state’s LiDAR elevation data collection. During the peak of the 2019 spring flooding, the Kansas Biological Survey (KBS) worked closely with the Kansas Water Office (KWO) and the Kansas Division of Emergency Management (KDEM) to implement the flood libraries and provide timely and regularly updated inundation extents. Though real-time flood mapping technology continues to improve, KBS’s one-of-a-kind, flexible, rapid, wide-area inundation library approach remains at the forefront. KBS intends to continue to coordinate with KDEM, KWO and other agencies to develop a strategic plan for real-time flood mapping in Kansas.
- 2019 Flooding and the Impact on Water and Wastewater Facilities – A Boots on the Ground Perspective
Jason Solomon, Kansas Rural Water Association
Daryn Martin, Kansas Rural Water Association
In the past year the majority of water and wastewater facilities in Kansas were severely affected by extreme weather conditions that left more than half of the counties in Major Disaster Declaration.
Under the provisions of Section 401 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, Governor Laura Kelly requested a Major Presidential Declaration for counties in the State to receive aid in recovery efforts for those affected by the severe storms, straight-line winds, tornadoes, flooding, landslides and mudslides. President Donald Trump approved the request for 53 of the 63 requested counties in the State of Kansas.
The impact of the record-breaking precipitation events overwhelmed water and wastewater facilities. Many were inundated by flood waters, others were inaccessible due to flooding, whole town public water supply lines were severed by high river flows, communities were left with no source of regulatory compliant drinking water, and currently there are public water supply wells inactive due to flood water impacts. Many wastewater lagoon facilities were submerged under several feet of water while mechanical wastewater treatment systems exceeded holding capacity and were forced to discharge millions of gallons of untreated wastewater into Kansas waterways and receiving streams.
Throughout this presentation, specific examples will outline the initial impacts of the flooding to current operational recovery and the financial burden associated with these events.
- Summary of the 2019 Spring and Summer Kansas Flooding
Bradley Lukasz, U.S. Geological Survey
The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Kansas Water Science Center, in cooperation with Federal, State, and Local agencies, maintains a long-term network of hydrologic monitoring gages in Kansas. The data from these gages provide critical information for protecting life and property, water supply management, flood forecasting, reservoir operations, bridge and culvert design, interstate and intrastate water rights claims, ecological monitoring, and many other purposes. Heavy rainfall during the spring and summer months of 2019 caused flooding throughout Kansas, and the Midwestern United States. Many midwestern states, including Kansas, South Dakota, and Nebraska, experienced high or record runoff during the spring and summer months of 2019 due to the heavy precipitation. Several dams and levees in the Midwest were breached or overtopped due to the flooding caused by the rainfall. Reservoirs reached and/or exceeded capacity and, in some cases, set records for historic elevation. El Dorado Lake and Cheney Reservoir were two of the nine lakes in Kansas that set water-elevation records. These lakes acted to mitigate flooding for the downstream communities. The continued heavy rainfall and the higher releases caused high flow conditions to continue into the late summer months. Some USGS streamgages with greater than 10 years of data also exceeded highest historical crest on record including the Little Arkansas River near Halstead, Kansas, and the Little Arkansas River near Sedgwick, Kansas.
- Water in Kansas State Parks
Linda Lanterman, Kansas Department of Wildlife, Parks, and Tourism
No abstract available.
C. Groundwater Management Districts (Cypress A)
Moderator: Chris Beightel, Kansas Department of Agriculture
- Equus Beds GMD 2
Tim Boese, Manager
No abstract available.
- Southwest Kansas GMD 3 Management Program Update
No abstract available.
- Northwest Kansas GMD 4
Shannon Kenyon, District Manager
No abstract available.
- Big Bend GMD 5
Orrin Feril, Manager
No abstract available.
D. Harmful Algae Blooms (Redbud A)
Moderator: Megan Maksimowicz, Kansas Department of Health and Environment
- Harmful Blue-Green Algae Blooms in Kansas
Ted Harris, Kansas Biological Survey
No abstract available.
- Harmful Algal Bloom Student Research Project in Cheney Reservoir
Maize High School
No abstract available.
- 2019 Harmful Algal Bloom Season Overview
Pattie Haines-Lieber, Kansas Department of Health and Environment
No abstract available.
Concurrent Session III, 11:00 a.m. – 12:15 p.m.
A. Water Technology Farms Panel (Cypress A)
Moderator: Armando Zarco, Kansas Water Office
- Ryan Goering, R&E Goering Farm
No abstract available.
- Steve Schemm, Homeland Farm
No abstract available.
- Weston McCary, Northwest Kansas Technical College
No abstract available.
Mini-Concurrent Session IV, 11:00 – 11:35 a.m.
A. History and Future of the Garden City Company (Redbud A)
Moderator: Mike Meyer, Kansas Department of Agriculture – Division of Water Resources
- Troy Dumler, Manager, Garden City Company
No abstract available.
B. Groundwater Quality (Cypress A)
Moderator: Logan Smith, Kansas Department of Health and Environment
- Fred Jones, Garden City Water Systems Manager
No abstract available.
- Darrin Unruh, Pretty Prairie City Council
No abstract available.
C. Invasive Species (Oak)
Moderator: Bobbi Luttjohann, Kansas Water Office
- Status and Impacts of Aquatic Nuisance Species in Kansas
Chris Steffen, Kansas Department of Wildlife, Parks and Tourism
No abstract available.
D. Deep-Injection Well Management (Redbud B)
Moderator: Blair Schneider, Kansas Geogical Survey
- Deep-Injection Diversion Options
Isaac Wright, Kansas State University
Lynelle Ladd, Kansas State University
The Pollution Prevention Institute, a part of Engineering Extension at Kansas State University, is dedicated to serving Kansas businesses and organizations with environmental and pollution prevention (P2) technical assistance. Entirely grant-funded, PPI furthers its P2, mission through its summer P2 intern program. By pairing top-level engineering and environmental science students with Kansas businesses and industries, PPI provides strategies and innovative solutions for its industry partners, reducing regulatory burdens and operating costs. This abstract describes a summer project investigated by a P2 intern for a host company, Compass Minerals, in Lyons, Kansas. The focus of the project was injection wells managed by the company.
If injection well disposal in the Arbuckle rock strata is not managed more efficiently, increasing pore pressure will reduce disposal options and increase operating costs for Kansas industries employing this strategy. To address this concern, KDHE launched an objective in June 2018 encouraging Class 1 well operators to reduce the volume of material sent to disposal wells. Limiting volume and types of material injected ensures future pore space for material limited to this disposal method, while decreasing seismicity from injections. Arbuckle pressure beneath Kansas is affected by neighboring states, but it is the responsibility of Kansas companies to do their part in limiting injection volume when diversion is feasible.
To evaluate deep-well disposal diversion at Compass Minerals, the intern’s study involved reviewing historical agreements and data to understand where and how much water was disposed in the Class 1 wells. Possible diversion options for the untreated and treated remediation water was assessed through a literature review and interviews with Compass Minerals employees and vendors. Proposals were collected from several vendors to quantify the cost of water treatment.
Results of the study indicated that untreated remediation water would best be utilized for process use, irrigation of salt-tolerant grasses, and possible wetland creation/restoration. The study also indicated that treating the water allows uses such as surface discharge, crop irrigation, and other expanded process use. Although it was identified that each of these options would require significant infrastructure cost, it could benefit sustainability statistics and goals of Compass Minerals.
Findings presented will include the estimated amount of water that could be diverted from the Class I wells at Compass Minerals and the associated potential environmental impact for various scenarios. While no restrictions have been placed on Class 1 injection wells, a study of diversion options is important in order to understand the financial and environmental impact of these various options. Treated or untreated, any water remaining in or returning to the usable hydrological cycle benefits the local environment and economy.
E. Water Quality Assessment and Implementation (Walnut)
Moderator: Andy Klein, Kansas Forest Service
- 2010-2019 Accomplishments of K-State’s Watershed Management Programs
Dan Devlin, Kansas State University
Amanda Schielke, Kansas State University
From 2010-2019, the K-State Watershed Management Program consisted of:
1) five extension watershed specialists (EWS), located in high priority watersheds with goals of developing local watershed plans and implementing those plans;
2) staff that assisted local WRAPS SLTs to develop and update watershed plans;
3) extension and research faculty developing and testing new technologies and supporting the extension watershed specialists.
Accomplishments described below were completed in partnership with local, state and federal agencies, such as, KDHE, NRCS, US EPA, KDA DOC, county conservation districts, WRAPS SLTS, and others.
During 2010-2019, the EWS had the following accomplishments:
-
- provided one-on-one technical consultations to 2,466 landowners/producers. These one-on-one visits with landowners/producers served to develop knowledge and skills and led to BMP implementation.
- Facilitated and/or participated in 3,905 educational events, making over 134,000 contacts.
- Provided technical assistance that resulted in the implementation of 1,702 cropland BMPs, affecting 246,124 acres. In addition, 29 streambank stabilization BMPs were implemented, stabilizing nearly 14,300 linear feet of streambank. Also provided assistance in the implementation of 616 livestock related BMPs, affecting over 50,800 animal units and over 12,400 acres.
Pollutant Load reductions for cropland, streambank and livestock implemented BMPs were calculated by KDHE with the exception of atrazine herbicide which was calculated by K-State. Total load reductions for BMPs implemented from 2010 through 2018 within targeted areas were:
-
- Nitrogen – 449,834 lbs/year
- Phosphorus – 177,626 lbs/year
- Sediment – 26,387 tons/year
- Atrazine – 9,112 lbs a.i.
The Watershed Management Program provided assisted local groups in developing 22 WRAPS watershed plans and five watershed plan revisions. The program also worked to leverage outside funding and received over $4.6 million in additional funding to support watershed research and extension activities.
Mini-Concurrent Session V, 11:45 a.m. – 12:15 p.m.
A. Education and Outreach (Walnut)
Moderator: Dr. Gaea Hock, Kansas State University Agricultural Education and Grace Roth, Student
- Katie Burke, Kansas State University
No abstract available.
- Shane Neel, Kansas Forest Service
No abstract available.
B. NRCS Rainfall Simulator (Mead Patio)
Moderator: Alex Geisler, Kansas Water Office
- Dale Younker, Natural Resources Conservation Service
No abstract available.
C. Extreme Event Assessment and Planning (Oak)
Moderator: Gary Koons, Kansas Water Office
- Coordinated Drought Response in Missouri – Lessons Learned from the 2018 Drought
Jennifer Hoggatt, Missouri Department of Natural Resources
Colleen Meredith, Missouri Department of Natural Resources
The 2018 drought in Missouri was notable in its localized intensities and impacts to both agriculture and public water supplies. The drought’s origin can actually be traced into late 2017, which provided a unique set-up for the acute and lasting impacts felt by Missourians.
As the drought progressed, decision-makers had to quickly adapt from a monitoring and mitigation mindset to a response and resource-delivery mindset. With a drought response plan that had not been updated since 2002, agency partners and stakeholders chose to institute an adaptive management approach, to listen to a wide variety of technical advice and stakeholder input, and to quickly communicate and employ available information and resources.
Post-drought, agency partners agreed the approach provided many lessons learned, and there is still more to be learned to provide an even more efficient and effective future response, which should also include enhanced mitigation efforts when possible.
Just like our water resources, droughts don’t know state boundaries. Jennifer Hoggatt, Missouri’s Water Resources Center Director, and Colleen Meredith, Missouri’s Soil and Water Conservation Program Director would like to use this opportunity to share Missouri’s experience, challenges, and lessons learned with partners from Kansas to enhance our collective response to water resource challenges.
- Evaluation of Rainfall‐Runoff Trends in Texas – with applications for Kansas water supplies?
Jordan Furnans, LRE Water
Within portion of the Upper Colorado River Basin (Texas), gauged streamflows have drastically decreased from the 1950’s to the present. Decreases are only partially attributed to increased permitted water diversions and permitted storage, and rainfall quantities have remained stable or increased. We applied statistical and hydrologic modeling techniques to identify trends in rainfall, temperature, soil moisture, and land-use/land cover to explain observed streamflow differences. We also quantified the proliferation of small, un-permitted surface water ponds and developed a water balance model to assess streamflow impacts over time due to watershed changes. We found that watershed changes resulted in streamflow reductions of between 10% and 30% for subject Texas watersheds.
For comparison purposes, we applied our analysis techniques to the Neosho River watershed upstream from the USGS gauge at Council Grove, KS (USGS # 07179500).
D. Public Water Supply Reuse (Cypress A)
Moderator: Fred Jones, Garden City Water Systems Manager
- The Changing Face of Water Supply
Jake White, Project Manager, Burns & McDonnell
No abstract available.
E. Wichita Regional Water Supply (Redbud A)
Moderator: Matt Unruh, Kansas Water Office
- Alan King, Director of Public Works & Utilities, City of Wichita
No abstract available.
F. Cargill Nebraska Irrigation Project (Redbud B)
Moderator: Mike Beam, Kansas Department of Agriculture
- Mike Kondrath, Cargill
No abstract available.