Premium
Evaluating the Success of Phosphorus Management from Field to Watershed
Author(s) -
Sharpley Andrew N.,
Kleinman Peter J.A.,
Jordan Philip,
Bergström Lars,
Allen Arthur L.
Publication year - 2009
Publication title -
journal of environmental quality
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.888
H-Index - 171
eISSN - 1537-2537
pISSN - 0047-2425
DOI - 10.2134/jeq2008.0056
Subject(s) - watershed , environmental science , stakeholder , watershed management , environmental resource management , scale (ratio) , field (mathematics) , remedial education , work (physics) , hydrology (agriculture) , computer science , geography , engineering , mathematics , cartography , economics , mechanical engineering , mathematics education , geotechnical engineering , machine learning , pure mathematics , management
Studies have demonstrated some P loss reduction following implementation of remedial strategies at field scales. However, there has been little coordinated evaluation of best management practices (BMPs) on a watershed scale to show where, when, and which work most effectively. Thus, it is still difficult to answer with a degree of certainty, critical questions such as, how long before we see a response and where would we expect to observe the greatest or least response? In cases where field and watershed scales are monitored, it is not uncommon for trends in P loss to be disconnected. We review case studies demonstrating that potential causes of the disconnect varies, from competing sources of P at watershed scales that are not reflected in field monitoring to an abundance of sinks at watershed scales that buffer field sources. To be successful, P‐based mitigation strategies need to occur iteratively, involve stakeholder driven programs, and address the inherent complexity of all P sources within watersheds.