Source: AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH SERVICE submitted to
TESTING OF TARGETING TOOLS IN GOODWATER CREEK EXPERIMENTAL WATERSHED, MISSOURI
Sponsoring Institution
Agricultural Research Service/USDA
Project Status
NEW
Funding Source
Reporting Frequency
Annual
Accession No.
0423342
Grant No.
(N/A)
Project No.
3622-12130-005-03R
Proposal No.
(N/A)
Multistate No.
(N/A)
Program Code
(N/A)
Project Start Date
May 1, 2012
Project End Date
May 1, 2015
Grant Year
(N/A)
Project Director
SADLER E J
Recipient Organization
AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH SERVICE
(N/A)
COLUMBIA,MO 65211
Performing Department
(N/A)
Non Technical Summary
(N/A)
Animal Health Component
70%
Research Effort Categories
Basic
30%
Applied
70%
Developmental
0%
Classification

Knowledge Area (KA)Subject of Investigation (SOI)Field of Science (FOS)Percent
1010110205015%
1120210205065%
1310320205020%
Goals / Objectives
Test and validate three targeting tools proposed by NRCS to identify and prioritize land most in need of conservation treatment. These three tools are the Soil Vulnerability Index (SVI), the Conservation CEAP Benefits Index (CCBI), and field office APEX. We will verify whether the information provided by the tools is consistent with our observations of land degradation in GCEW, edge-of-field monitoring, and our own APEX and SWAT modeling results.
Project Methods
The project will first assess the correctness of the information that went into the derivation of the proposed indices and the parameterization of field office APEX given our knowledge of the area. We will then compare land classification using the proposed indices to that provided by our own indices on one hand and SWAT results at the hydrological response unit (HRU) level on the other hand. Finally, we will evaluate the parameterization of field office APEX for 3 fields and 30 1-acre plots that represent various tillage strategies for row crop systems in GCEW, and compare it with our own parameterization that resulted from full calibration/validation using measured flow and water quality data at one field. This comparison of parameterization may result in improvements in both the field office APEX and our own parameterizations.