Coup d`eau 2005,Rivière aux brochets

Projet La lisière verte
Keep the soils in the fields
To win the war to non point source
pollution
Richard Lauzier, MAPAQ
Proposition of a new approach towards the
non point source pollution
• Change the crop in floadable plains that
are in annual crop
• Install croppable systematic buffer strips
with perennial plants alongside the
brooks
• Encourage conservation practices in the
fields
The main elements of the project
• Element 1: Systematic installation of runoff
control structures above the streams sides
in order to break the hydrologic
connectivity between the field and the
watershed and implementation of a
perennial buffer strip 9 meters wide(30
feet) continious on each side of the tream
Element 2
Validate the SWAT model: Look at the on field reality of
the parcels identified as being more susceptible to nutrients
exportation and explore the implications of changing
practices for the farmers.
Note here that there is no obligation for the farmers to do
those changes, this is a public policy project serving to
feed the analyst reflexions, aiming then to evaluate what
are the consequences of such changes
Figure 6 - Représentation spatiale des taux d’érosion prédits à l’échelle des
unités de réponse hydrologique avec
le modèle SWAT calibré à l’échelle du bassin versant de la rivière aux Brochets (a), à l’échelle de la parcelle avec
l’outil de diagnostic des exportations de phosphore (ODEP) (b) et à l’échelle des microbassins sur la base
des
données de l’atlas agroenvironnemental GRISE
a
b
c
Figure 2: Image composée de fausses couleurs d’une partie du bassin versant du
Ruisseau Ewing au 31 mai 2006 extraite de l’atlas agroenvironnemental GRISE
qui permet de distinguer les patrons spatiaux dans l’égouttement du sol.
Tableau 2 Pourcentages des indicateurs des problèmes d’égouttement
Oui
Non
49%
51%
Entrée tardive ou retardée au champ
43,8%
56,2%
Circulation difficile, ornières profondes
61,3%
38,7%
Rendement des cultures plus faible ou inégal
90,7%
9,3%
Maturité tardive ou inégale des cultures
55,7%
44,3%
Indicateurs de problèmes d’égouttement
Flaques persistantes après une précipitation
Oui
•Non
Causes probables
Présence de dépressions
88,1%
11,9%
Rigoles aménagées à l’automne pour drainer les dépressions
7,7%
92,3%
Importante superficie contributrice
17%
83%
Parcours de l’eau très long (700 m et plus)
9,3%
90,7%
Cassé de pente
22,2%
77,8%
Pente longitudinale ou latérale supérieure à 3%
9,8%
90,2%
Absence de drainage souterrain
21,6%
78,4%
Drainage souterrain inefficace
25,3%
74,7%
Table 7. Farmers’ adoption or intention to adopt cultural practices to reduce phosphorus export rates.
Type of practice
Post-emergence manure spreading
No till cropping (with residues)
Alternative cropping practices
Small grains
Cover crop — companion crop
Cover crop — catch crop
Hay
Switchgrass
Farmer intentions
Adopted
(%)
Considered
(%)
Not considered
(%)
13.0
47.8
—
52.1
8.7
34.8
43.5
60.9
21.8
34.8
26.1
26.1
21.7
52.2
—
26.1
65.2
17.4
73.3
21.8
69.6
13.0
56.5
13.0
The targetted sectors
• Sector 1: The streams Pelletier, Granger,
Castor and Petit Ruisseau
• Sector 2: The Ewing Stream
Different incentives simultaneously
• Reimbursment of necessary investments
to realize the runoff control structures
• Therefore, drain inlets, filtering trenches,
etc, payed at 100%
• Payment of a unique amount to
compensate the farmers for the monetary
losses: $675/Ha for two years
($337.50/year) and the farmer keeps the
crop, if one
Perennity factors
• To try to ensure the perennity of the buffers, it is
previewed in the project to explore the possibility
to match the EGS production with the income
stabilisation programms already existing
• The project will also look at the obstacles that
the farmers will have to face relatively to the
commercialization, the valorization and the
profitability of outcoming products( hay, or
switchgrass)
Research and analysis questions
Is the watershed approach is
facilitating/motivating/bothering?
What are the economic, agronomic,technical
implications associated with the change of practices
on the vulnerable parcels?
What are the citizens expectations towards water
quality and the uses recovery and what is the
expected role of the agricultural sector?
To discuss of those issues, there is focus-group discussions
that are periodically previewed.
The analysis of those informations and the perennity factors is
going to be realized by a multipartite committee contituted by
experts, stake holders and representatives of agricultural and
governmental sectors, and also analysts from the federal and
provincial governments
Evidently, the monitoring water quality stations already
in place will be used to try to evaluate the effect of the
measures on the water.
During those on field inspections
•
•
•
•
•
We realized that there were 3 sections of the streams that were
needing a clean up before we can install runoff control structures
We then managed to meet the MRC authorities to obtain a « fast
track » for those cleanings. We have been able to meet the mayors
council may 15th to present the project and the urgency to have this
job done
The meeting with the touched farmers happened july 18th
We then were on the first place for the jobs the next spring
Début des travaux juin 2007
Pose d’avaloirs dans les fossés, lignes
de lot, entre-planches arrondies
Ensuite, préparation du terrain
Et enfin, semis de plantes
pérennes
Zones inondables: également
visées par le projet
Semis en foin de bandes de protection le
long de la rivière
Levée du foin
Les zones tampon
Contrôle du ruissellement
Même bande, à l’automne, vue de la rivière
Bande riveraine, terre Paul Bellefroid
Autre bande riveraine établie
Bande semée en orge grainée
Bande riveraine en foin fauchée
Bande riveraine terre Pierre Girard
Pose d’avaloirs entre planches arrondies:
Ferme Marlon
Chemin pour travailler l’hiver
Avaloirs posés en hiver
16 janvier 2008
Transport de la pierre en hiver
Travail de finition en mai
Avaloirs posés l’hiver: un travail de finition est
nécessaire
Début nettoyage cours d’eau Castor:
le 5 mai 2008
Sédiments accumulés
Ensuite, nettoyage cours d’eau Granger
Trappe à sédiment lors du nettoyage
Grainage des berges aussitôt après
nettoyage
Cours d’eau Petit Ruisseau automne 2007
Cours d’eau Petit Ruisseau après nettoyage
printemps 2008
Bon enrochement courbes et sorties de
ponceaux
On continue à installer des infrastructures au
printemps 2008
Préparation champ inondable André
Bogemans
Semis panic érigé avec semoir Great Plains
Érosion de la rivière au bout du champ
Pose paillis plastique au bout du champ
3 rangées
Boutures saule
Plantation boutures dans paillis plastique
Émergence des boutures
Beaucoup de pluie en juin : ruissellement et
croissances des pousses
Croissance des boutures : 10 juillet 2008
But visé: produire de la biomasse et contrôler
l’érosion
Bande riveraine après travail
Semoir de précision calibré
Semoir porté
D’un côté bande riveraine et l’autre pas
Chute enrochée
Drapeaux pour bien indiquer la bande
riveraine aux producteurs quand ils sèment
Avaloirs de ligne de lot : 60 pieds
Bande semée l’an dernier
Bande riveraine et haie arbustive
Inspection pour constater l’état de la levée du
semis
Bande riveraine semée panic Ferme
Dieppe
Passage rotoculteur, terre Daniel Tougas
Pose paillis plastique
Plantation arbres et arbustes et
semis foin
Fin du cours d’eau Pelletier, 8 juillet 2008
Début juillet 2008: on
sème encore du panic
sur nouvelles bandes
préparées
On continue la pose d’avaloirs
Cours d’eau Petit Ruisseau, 8 juillet 2008
Semé en panic érigé
Number of structures installed
• In all, its is 602 different interventions that
have been realized
• 514 drain inlets
• 88 other types of interventions: filtering
trenches, drop spillways, riprap,
Surfaces turned into perennial crops
• 97 hectars of a possibility of 113.5
• 73 hectars in hay
• 24 hectars in switchgrass
The farmers % of participation
• In sector 1(Castor, Granger, Petit
ruisseau, Pelletier brooks): 24/29 farms,
so 83%
• In sector 2(Ewing brook): 36/41 farms, so
88%
• 7 farms have lands in the two sectors
Obstacles encountered
• The time: We received the acceptance
of the project at the end of april, wtih
less than two years to realize all: at
least one more year would have been
necessary
• The conditions attached with the
project: to have a environmental
analysis to provide fefore having any $
and the 10% of the money retained.
Obstacles
• Delays before getting the money
• The multipartite committee: very hard to obtain a
concensus
• Frequent changes in governemental
respondants
• With the farmers: fear of non respect of their
property rights, accesses to the strip, fields
targetted but too small, brooks following the
fields instead of crossing them, impossibility to
have 100% participation
Conclusions
• When financially and technically
accompagnied and guided, the farmers in
majority receptive
• But, they are not willing to leave some of
their productive lands without
compensation
• If such a policy arrives, it has to be put in
place with flexibility( wideness of the strip,
small fields, accesses, etc)
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The member farmers of the Pike River Watershed Multi-Stakeholder Co-operative’s
board of directors.
Mrs. Mireille Molleur, project manager.
Mr. Richard Lauzier and Mr. Djiby Sall (MAPAQ) for their involvement in the
successful completion of the project and the preparation of this report
Our contractor, Mr. André Gagnon and his family.
Mr. Aubert Michaud and his team at the Research and Development Institute for the
Agri-Environment (IRDA), who have, as always, provided outstanding support over
the last ten years.
Individuals from various government agencies who have contributed to the success of
this project: Mrs. France St-Onge, Mrs. Mélanie Tremblay from MAPAQ, and Mrs.
Isabelle Breune from Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada.
The participants of the Multiparty committee:
Denis Boutin, Jacques Roy (MDDEP)
Bernard Dubé, Daniel Morin (FADQ)
Claude Roy, Richard Lauzier, Djiby Sall, Mélanie Tremblay (MAPAQ)
Daniel Bernier (UPA)
Ernest W. Gasser (Multi-Stakeholder Co-operative)
Francis Dorion, Simon Lajeunesse (MRC Brome-Missisquoi)
Serge Villeneuve (Environment Canada)
Pierre Leduc (Corporation Bassin Versant Brome-Missisquoi)
Isabelle Breune, Marc Chenier (AAFC)
Mireille Molleur, project manager
The members of the Corporation Bassin Versant Baie Missisquoi.
The mayors of the regional county municipality (RCM), and the Brome Missisquoi RCM’s
team of employees, in particular Mr. Simon Lajeunesse, waterways coordinator.
To the individual in charge of our project at ACAAF, Mrs. Lise Bussière and Mrs.
Paulette Charette.
In particular to Mr. Sylvain Duquette, who was involved in site preparation and seeding
of switchgrass.
Aux producteurs agricoles qui ont
accepté de participer au projet
M. Jean Asnong
Ferme Colombettes Inc
Martin Beaulac
Ferme Daniel Tougas Inc
Louise et Ernest Bellefroid
Ferme Deringer SENC
Pierre Bellefroid
Ferme Dieppe (M. Pierre St-Denis)
Paul Bellefroid
Ferme Ernest et Barbara Fankhauser SENC
Ferme Bellmeco
Ferme Guy Surprenant
André Bogemans
Ferme G et R Poulin Inc
Gilles et André Brodeur
Ferme Helg SENC
Hélène Campbell
Ferme Heyligen Inc (M. Marcel Heyligen)
Sylvain Duquette
Ferme Jacques et Gisèle Surprenant SENC
Ferme Duval et frères
Ferme Lupack Inc
François Duval
Isidore Isabelle
Ferme Berjo Inc
Ferme L et M. Patenaude SENC
Henriette Nolin Hannigan
Ferme M et J l’Écuyer
Norman Hannigan
Ferme Marlon Enr (M. Jean Reginster)
Ferme Lévesque et frères SENC
Ferme Messier Inc
J. Lévesque et A.M. Delfosse
Ferme Pierre Girard Inc
Ferme Angus (M. Pierre Lévesque)
Ferme Pierre Marchand SENC
Bernard Matthieu
Ferme Raymond Pelletier SENC
Serge Parent et Jeanne Chaussé
Ferme Rocheray Inc (M. Raymond Rochat)
Paul Patenaude
Ferme Rompré Brodeur SENC
Ferme Roland Messier et fils SENC
Ferme Tougas-Lafrance et fils Inc
Robert Santerre
Fermes Gasser Ltée (M. Ernest Gassser)
Société ferme Vermeulen Enr
Fermes Roland et Sylvain Pion
Gérard Vermeulen
Ferme Jozef Matthyssen Enr
Ferme Thomas et Paul Werner SENC
Ferme Georges E Tremblay et fils SENC
Ferme Normand Breton
Ferme M. Granger Enr
Marc Sépul