Get documents about "Backgroung Document Battersea Drain Area and The County of
Document Sample
2010
Stephanie Simpson
University of Alberta,
Department of Rural Economy
[AWRI PROJECT BACKGROUND DOCUMENT:
THE BATTERSEA DRAIN AREA
AND THE COUNTY OF LETHBRIDGE]
[Table of Contents]
Document Description……………………………………………………….……….……..p.3
Battersea Drain Area………………………………………………………….………….…..p.4
General Information………………………………………………………….……………...p.4
Agriculture in the BDA……………………………………………………….………..…….p.5
Water in the BDA…………………………………………………………….…………….…p.6
Conclusion………...…………………………………………………………….……………p.9
References……...……………………………………………………………..……………p.10
Appendix………………………………………………………………………..……………p.12
County of Lethbridge…………………………………………………………….…….……p.19
General Information…………………………………………………………….………….p.19
Agriculture in the COL…………………………………………………………..………….p.20
Water in the COL………………………………………………………………….….…….p.24
Conclusion………...………………………………………………………….…….………p.26
References……...…………………………………………………………….…….………p.28
Appendix…………………………………………………………………………….…...…p.31
2
[Document Description]
This document was produced for the purpose of providing individuals working on the AWRI
project entitled, ‘Economic Assessment of Ecosystem Services’, with relevant background
information on a number of sites being considered for further study. The two sites covered in
this document are the Battersea Drain Area and the County of Lethbridge. Each site is
considered separately, beginning with the Battersea Drain Area. For each site, relevant details –
including location, land area, population, climate, agriculture, and water – are compiled using a
variety of sources.
3
[Part 1: Battersea Drain Area]
General Information
Location: The Battersea Drain Area (BDA) is a watershed located in southern Alberta, northeast of the
city of Lethbridge; the “approximate centre of the *BDA+ is at 48.89°N, 112.70°W” (Olson & Kalischuk,
2008, p. 15). It falls within Census Division 2 and the Census Subdivision of the County of Lethbridge, and
is close to the town of Picture Butte and the hamlet of Iron Springs1. It is part of Lethbridge Northern
Irrigation District (LNID) and is one of 27 sub-basins of the larger Oldman River Basin (ORB) (Rock &
Mayer, 2006). It falls within the Moist Mixed Grasslands Agricultural Ecoregion and the Dark Brown
Chernozem soil zone (Anderson et al., 1999; Olson & Kalischuk, 2008). See Figures 1-4 in the Appendix
for maps depicting the location of the BDA.
Land Area: The BDA is approximately 71.1 square kilometers (Anderson et al., 1999), or roughly 7800
hectares in size (Lorenz et al., 2008)
Population: In 2000, the population of the BDA was 238 (Rock & Mayer, 2006); the population density
per square kilometer of the area for the same year was between 2.109 – 2.498 (Oldman River Basin
Water Quality Initiative (ORBWQI), 2000). See Figure 5 in the Appendix for a visual represntation of the
population density of the BDA and other sub-basins of the ORB.
Climate: Climate data presented here is based on that data collected at the ‘Lethbridge A’ station by
Environment Canada between 1971 and 2000. For the 30 years under consideration, the daily average
temperature by month ranged from a low of -7.8°C in January to a high of 18.0°C in July, with an annual
average daily temperature of 5.7°C. Average monthly precipitation ranged from a low of 11.6 mm in
February to a high of 63 mm in June, with the annual average precipitation being 386.3 mm.
Battersea Drain Area Basic Information Summary
Location
General Location Southern Alberta
Coordinates of Centre 48.89°N, 112.70°W
Census Division 2
Census Subdivision County of Lethbridge
Irrigation District Lethbridge Northern Irrigation District
River Basin Sub-basin of Oldman River Basin
Dwelling sites Overlaps boundaries of Picture Butte (town) and Iron Springs (hamlet)
Agricultural Ecoregion Moist Mixed Grasslands
Soil Zone Dark Brown Chernozem
Land Area
Square kilometers 71.1
Hectares 7800
Population
Population (2000) 238
Population density per square kilometer (2000) 2.109 – 2.498
1
Information indicating the extent to which the BDA overlaps the boundaries of these dwelling sites could not be
located. This is perhaps not surprising for, as Duke et al. (2005) note, the boundaries for the watersheds in the ORB
region are not “highly accurate” (p. 1827).
4
Climate
Monthly average daily temperature (1971-2000) Low: -7.8°C (January), High: 18.0°C (July)
Annual average daily temperature (1971-2000) 5.7°C
Monthly average precipitation (1971-2000) Low: 11.6 mm (February), High: 63 mm (June)
Annual average precipitation (1971-2000) 386.3 mm
Agriculture in the BDA
The BDA is an area “primarily characterized by agricultural land use”; in 2000 roughly 86% of the land in
the BDA was being used for agricultural purposes2 (Rock & Mayer, 2006a, p. 149). The area is said to be
home to a “high density of confined feeding operations and irrigated crop production” (Olson &
Kalischuk, 2009, p. 249). Regarding crop production, beets, forages, and potatoes have been grown in
the BDA in the past (Animalnet, n.d.), and in 1999 the main crop grown in the BDA was beets (Byrtus et
al., 2005). Regarding livestock operations, there were 27 livestock feeding operations in the BDA in 2000
(Rock & Mayer, 2006). The density of these operations per square kilometer for the same year is
reported as being between 0.13 – 0.371 (ORBWQI, 2000). As Figure 6 in the Appendix indicates, this was
one of the highest densities in the ORB area at the time of measurement. Unfortunately, more detailed
information regarding the types of crop and livestock operations in the BDA could not be located.
As part of Alberta Environmentally Sustainable Agriculture’s (AESA) Water Quality Monitoring Program,
an assessment of the agricultural intensity of a number of watersheds in Alberta, including the BDA, was
conducted in 1999. Intensity indicators used in this assessment “included manure production
(tones/acre), fertilizer expenses ($/acre) and chemical expenses ($/acre)”, with data being drawn from
the 1996 Census of Agriculture (Anderson et al., 1999, p. 2). A 2008 AESA publication by Lorenz et al.
(discussed in further detail later in this document) provides some updated (2006) agricultural intensity
data for the BDA and other watersheds. Agricultural intensity data from these two publications are
summarized in the table below. See Figures 7 and 8 in the Appendix for an idea of the types of graphs
and tables provided in the 1999 and 2008 documents.
Agricultural Intensity Data for the BDA (Battersea Drain near the mouth)
Adapted from Anderson et al. (1999) and Lorenz et al. (2008)
Intensity Indicator 1996 2006
Total Manure Production (tones/acre)* 4.35207 N/A
Total Manure Production (percentile)** 0.992 1.0000
Total Fertilizer Expenses ($/acre)* $15.17856 N/A
Fertilizer Expenses (percentile)** 0.927 0.9948
Total Chemical Expenses ($/acre)* $6.60639 N/A
Chemical Expenses (percentile)** 0.875 0.9948
Agriculture Intensity (percentile)** 0.97700 1.0000
Agriculture Intensity (rating of Low, Medium, or High) High High
Soil Runoff Potential Low N/A
*Data in columns to the right are based on 1996 and 2006 census data, respectively. **Percentiles are relative to 22 other watersheds in Alberta.
2
In addition, 1.2% was used for forest initiatives, 1.4% for water initiatives, and 11.5% for other purposes (Rock &
Mayer, 2006).
5
The ORBWQI3 (2000) has also looked at agricultural practices of the BDA. In 1999, a survey was sent to
60 landowners in the BDA “to assess current manure management practices” (ORBWQI, 2000, p. 14). It
was found that roughly 50% of the landowners engaged in acceptable management practices, with
roughly 70% analyzing their soil to “determine nutrient requirements and therefore the amount of
manure to be applied” (ORBWQI, 2000, p. 14). Frequency of manure application to the same field was
also assessed, with roughly 10%, 20%, 30%, and 30% of respondents stating that they applied manure to
the same field annually, every two years, every three years, and after more than three years,
respectively. Roughly 90% of respondents stated that they mixed manure into the soil “within 48 hours
of spreading”, and roughly 60% said that they applied manure “at least 50 feet from any surface body of
water” (ORBWQI, 2000, p. 15). As a result of the intensive manure application in the BDA, the soil of the
BDA is said to have a “very high nutrient content” (Alberta Soil Science Workshop, 2008, p. 45).
Other materials containing relevant information regarding agricultural practices in the BDA could not be
located free of charge. The ORBWQI has released a document available for purchase – Water Quality
and Land Use Interactive Map and Data CD – that contains information on water quality and land use in
the ORB that may be of value here. Indeed, the information from Rock and Mayer (2006) cited above is
based on data found in this document. Unfortunately, this information – as well as some of the other
information discussed above – is slightly outdated and thus may not be truly reflective of agricultural
practices in the BDA.
Water in the BDA
The BDA is an agricultural sub-basin of the ORB that drains into the Oldman River east of the town of
Picture Butte (ORBWQI, 2000). The Battersea Drain is an “irrigation return flow stream” that receives
“irrigation return flows” from the LNID (Lorenz et al., 2008, p. 46). Hydrometric records for the BDA
were first collected in 1973 (Anderson et al., 1999); since then, a great deal of work has focused on
assessing water quantity and quality in the BDA. This work will now be discussed.
One major study of the BDA is the five-year (1998-2002) project conducted jointly by Alberta
Agriculture, Food and Rural Development (AAFRD) and the ORBWQI for the purpose of improving
surface water quality in the ORB and its sub-basins, including the BDA4. Water quality in the BDA and
other ORB sub-basins was assessed. A progress report published in 2000 notes that, between 1998 and
2000, water quality in the BDA was poor; on a scale from 1 to 10 with 1 indicating good water quality
and 10 indicating poor water quality, the BDA received a score of 7 (ORBWQI, 2000). Specifically, it was
found that, in 1999, surface water concentrations of such substances as fecal coliform, nitrogen, and
3
The ORBWQI was a not-for-profit group founded in 1997 to address water quality issues in the ORB. It has since
been incorporated into the Oldman Watershed Council, though its website (www.oldmanbasin.org/orbwqi/) is still
active and may provide valuable information.
4
Alberta Agriculture, Food and Rural Development also assessed groundwater quality in the BDA for the period
between 1995 and 2001. For more, see Groundwater Quality in the Battersea Drainage Basin (2002).
6
phosphorous “frequently exceeded” surface water quality guidelines5, though the loading impact of the
BDA on the Oldman River was relatively low (ORBWQI, 2000, p. 14). Following initial water quality
assessments, Beneficial Management Practices (BMP) projects were implemented in an attempt to
improve water quality in the BDA and the greater ORB. Water quality analyses were then carried out to
evaluate the effectiveness of this program. Water samples were collected regularly from two supply
sites and six return sites in the BDA and were analyzed for such things as nutrient concentrations,
indicator bacteria concentrations, and flow volumes (Little, 2003). An early factsheet released by AAFRD
and the ORBWQI concludes that water quality in the BDA appeared to be mainly dependent on climate,
with quality improving in drier years (Little, 2003). This seems to imply that the early BMPs had little
effect on water quality. A second factsheet released in 2007 (authored by Villaneuve and Charest)
provides somewhat more detailed and positive data regarding the nature and success of the BMPs used,
though this is still simply a factsheet and not an official review of the program – such a document could
not be located. A study by Riemersma, Rodvang, Little, and Olson (2004) – available for purchase from
the Alberta Soil Science Workshop website (http://www.soilsworkshop.ab.ca/proceedings.html) – may
provide more information.
As a continuation of the efforts of the ORBWQI and AAFRD, a five-year initiative (2007-2011) by Alberta
Agriculture and Rural Development (AARD) and the Oldman Water Council6 (OWC) was launched in
20077. The goal of this initiative is to scientifically evaluate the environmental and economic
effectiveness of BMPs in the BDA, as well as three other watersheds in Alberta (Olson & Kalischuk,
2009). A 65-hectare annually cropped field in the BDA was selected for study and, through 2007 and
2008, pre-BMP water quality and quantity monitoring was conducted8. Six water-monitoring stations
(two instream and four edge-of-field) were set up at the BDA field site. Water samples were collected
during runoff events as well as bi-weekly from May to October (irrigation season) and monthly through
the rest of the year. A great deal of information regarding water quantity at the BDA field site in 2007
and 2008 can be found within the Nutrient Beneficial Management Practices – Progress Report 2008
(NBMPPR) by Olson and Kalischuk (2009), including data for total flows, flows by season, contribution of
runoff events to flows, and other quantity-related details. The NBMPPR also provides a vast amount of
data on the water quality of the field site in the BDA in 2007 and 2008. Concentrations of such things as
nitrogen, phosphorous, total suspended solids, and Escherichia coli, are reported for a variety of
conditions (e.g., upstream versus downstream, edge-of-field versus instream, concentrations following
different runoff events, total loads at different monitoring stations, etc.). Complete quantity and quality
5
According to Ivey et al. (2006), the water quality guidelines referenced here are the Alberta Surface Water Quality
Guidelines.
6
The Oldman Watershed Council is a not-for-profit group formed in 2007 from the merging of the ORBWQI and
the Oldman Basin Advisory Council. For more see www.oldmanbasin.org
7
It should be noted here that some information on the OBRWQI website
(http://www.oldmanbasin.org/orbwqi/publications.html) suggests that another project was intended to be carried
out from 2003-2008, though detailed information regarding the nature and results of this project could not be
located.
8
Additionally, data has been collected for rangeland health, riparian health, and soil nutrient status (Olson &
Kalischuk, 2009).
7
data will not be presented here but rather can be found in the NBMPPR; however, select tables from
this document are included in the Appendix below (Figures 9 and 10) so as to give some sense of the
kind of data that is available. As a result of the pre-BMP monitoring, a BMP plan was developed. The
plan, to be implemented in the BDA through 2008 and 2009, includes eliminating the use of manure and
phosphorous, reducing the use of nitrogen fertilizer, and improving the irrigation system so as to
decrease the amount of water that leaves the field. It is likely that, as a result of these changes, the
water quantity and quality of this site will be changing. Such changes will be monitored and reported by
AARD and the OWC. While this project provides a wealth of data, it should be noted that because it is
focused on just one site in the BDA, this data might not be representative of the greater BDA. Additional
information on the AARD/OWC project can be found here:
http://www1.agric.gov.ab.ca/$department/deptdocs.nsf/all/epw11955.
A number of other publications may be of interest. One source that may be of particular relevance is
AARD’s Volume 3 of the AESA Water Quality Monitoring Project, compiled by Lorenz et al. and published
in 2008, as it provides “reliable reference information for current and future studies aimed at
quantifying and mitigating agricultural impacts on water quality” (Lorenz et al., 2008, p. iv). This lengthy
document contains a plethora of water quality and quantity data for the BDA (and other watersheds in
Alberta) collected from 1995 to 2006. Specifically, one can find BDA data for such things as annual
stream flow volume, annual water temperature, annual water pH, a variety of fecal coliform and
Escherichia coliform statistics, a variety of nitrogen and phosphorous statistics, maximum concentration
and detection frequency of 42 pesticides, and percent compliance with the Protection of Aquatic Life
and Alberta Surface Water Quality guidelines. To summarize, the BDA has fared relatively poorly, with
water in the BDA showing some of the highest concentrations of unwanted substances. Figure 11 in the
Appendix provides a very small sample of the types of data available in this document.
Several documents produced for Alberta Environment also provide water quality data for the BDA (as
well as other watersheds). The first documents 1999 surface water levels of over a dozen pesticides
(Byrtus et al., 2002), the second documents 2002 surface water levels of glycophosphates (Humphries et
al., 2005), and the third documents changes in surface water levels of a variety of pesticides between
1995 and 2002 (Anderson, 2005). As Miller et al. (2009) note, this data is somewhat limited, as Alberta
Environment does not routinely monitor pesticide levels in irrigation drains.
A study by Duke et al. (2006) may also be of interest. Duke et al. (2006) used computer models to
“delineate potential surface water pollution sources” in a number of water basins in Alberta, including
the BDA (p. 1827). The majority of the article is quite technical, though it may be of value in that it
provides some (albeit limited) topographic information for the BDA and a more general discussion of the
effects infrastructure may have on the water quality and size and shape of a watershed. Another point
of interest includes the statement that the Battersea Drain was “not free flowing prior to irrigation
infrastructure” (p. 1831).
8
A final study of interest is that by Ivey et al. (2006), which examines the role “institutional arrangements
for land use planning and water management” may play in local governments’ abilities to protect source
water in the ORB (p. 945). Though this article does not focus specifically on the BDA, it may nevertheless
be worth examining, as the institutional arrangements the authors discuss may have bearing on the
research question at hand. It also provides a few details regarding water quality in the BDA, citing
AAFRD’s findings that the levels of certain contaminants in the BDA have exceeded “federal drinking
water guidelines” (p. 947).
Conclusion
To very briefly conclude, information for agricultural practices in the BDA is somewhat lacking, while the
body of literature on water issues in the BDA is vast. As discussed in further detail above, the BDA is an
area of agricultural intensity and, in part as a result of this intensity, the quality of the water in the BDA
has suffered. Not-for-profit groups like the ORBWQI and the OWC have been set up to address water
quality issues, and BMPs have been put in place with some degree of success. With this in mind, the BDA
may be an area well suited for study in the pending research project.
9
References
Alberta Agriculture and Rural Development. Nutrient Beneficial Management Practices evaluation
project, 2007-2011. Retrieved from
http://www1.agric.gov.ab.ca/$department/deptdocs.nsf/all/epw11955
Alberta Soil Science Workshop (2008). Proceedings from the 45th Annual Soil Science Workshop.
Lethbridge, Alberta, Canada. February 19-21, 2008. 135 p.
Animalnet. (n.d.). ANIMALNET JULY 18. AGNET, ANIMALNET, FSNET Search. Retrieved from
http://archives.foodsafety.ksu.edu/animalnet/2001/7-2001/animalnet_july_18.htm
Anderson, A-M. (2005). Overview of pesticide data in Alberta surface water since 1995. Publication No.
T/772. Alberta Environment. 190 p.
Anderson, A-M., Cooke, S. E., & MacApline, N. (1999). Watershed Selection for the AESA Stream Water
Quality Monitoring program. Alberta Environmentally Sustainable Agriculture Resource Monitoring
Water Quality program. 159 p.
Byrtus, G., Anderson, A-M., & Saffran, K. (2002). Determination of new pesticides in Alberta’s surface
waters (1999-2000). Publication No. T/674. Water Research User Group, Alberta Environment. 31
p.
Changes in the Spatial Distribution of Selected Aspects of Agricultural Production in Alberta. (2001,
August 1). Agriculture and Rural Development : Ropin' The Web. Retrieved from
http://www1.agric.gov.ab.ca/$department/deptdocs.nsf/all/sag1494?opendocument#ecoregion
Duke, G., Kienzle, S., Johnson, D., & Byrne, J. (2006). Incorporating ancillary data to refine
anthropologically modified overland flow paths. Hydrological Processes, 20, 1827-1843.
Environment Canada. Canadian climate normals 1971-2000. Retrieved from
http://www.climate.weatheroffice.ec.gc.ca/climate_normals/results_e.html?Province=ALL&Statio
nName=lethbridge&SearchType=BeginsWith&LocateBy=Province&Proximity=25&ProximityFrom=C
ity&StationNumber=&IDType=MSC&CityName=&ParkName=&LatitudeDegrees=&LatitudeMinutes
=&LongitudeDegrees=&LongitudeMinutes=&NormalsClass=A&SelNormals=&StnId=2263&
Humphries, D., Byrtus, G., & Anderson, A-M. (2005). Glycophosphate residue in Alberta’s atmospheric
deposition, soils and surface waters. Publication No. T/806. Water Research User Group, Alberta
Environment. 51 p.
Ivey, J.L., de Loë, R., Kreutzwiser, R., & Ferreyra, C. (2006). An institutional perspective on local capacity
for source water protection. Geoforum, 37, 944-957.
Little, J. (2003). Water quality in the Battersea Drain: 1999 – 2002. IB001-2003. Factsheet, Irrigation
Branch, Alberta Agriculture, Food and Rural Development, and Oldman River Basin Water Quality
Initiative. 4 p.
Lorenz, K.N., Depoe, S.L., & Phelan, C.A. (2008). Volume 3: AESA Water Quality Monitoring Project A
Summary of Surface Water Quality in Alberta’s Agricultural Watersheds: 1995 to 2006. Alberta
Agriculture and Rural Development, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada. 487 p.
Olson, B.M., & Kalischuk, A.R. (eds.). 2009. Nutrient beneficial management practices evaluation project
2007 to 2011: 2008 Progress report. Alberta Agriculture and Rural Development, Lethbridge,
Alberta, Canada. 344 pp.
10
Olson, B.M., & Kalischuk, A.R. (eds.). 2008. Nutrient beneficial management practices evaluation project,
2007 to 2011: 2007 Progress report. Alberta Agriculture and Rural Development, Lethbridge,
Alberta, Canada. 196 pp.
Oldman River Basin Water Quality Initiative. (n.d.). Oldman Watershed Council. Retrieved from
http://www.oldmanbasin.org/orbwqi/index.html
Oldman River Basin Water Quality Initiative. (2000). Progress summary report. 24 p.
Oldman Watershed Council. (n.d.). Oldman Watershed Council. Retrieved from
http://www.oldmanbasin.org/
Riemersma, S., Rodvang, J., Little, J., & Olson, B. (2004). Evaluation of buffer zones for surface water and
groundwater quality protection and improvement in the Battersea Drain watershed, Alberta. 162-
168. Proceedings from the 41st Annual Alberta Soil Science Workshop. Lethbridge, Alberta, Canada.
February 17-19, 2004. Available from http://www.soilsworkshop.ab.ca/proceedings.html
Rock, L., & Mayer, B. (2006). Nitrogen budget for the Oldman River Basin, southern Alberta, Canada.
Nutrient Cycling in Agroecosystems, 75, 147-162.
Rodvang, S.J. (2002). Groundwater Quality in the Battersea Drainage Basin. 1B002-2002. Factsheet,
Irrigation Branch, Alberta Agriculture, Food and Rural Development, Lethbridge, Alberta, Canada. 6
p.
Villaneuve, J., & Charest, J. (2007). Beneficial Management Practice Evaluation in the Battersea Drain
and Lower Little Bow River watersheds. 1B002-2002. Factsheet, Irrigation Branch, Alberta
Agriculture, Food and Rural Development, Lethbridge, Alberta, Canada. 4 p.
11
Appendix
Figure 1: The BDA and its Location in the ORB
Adapted from Rock and Mayer (2006)
Figure 2: The BDA and Nearby Bodies of Water
From Olson and Kalischuk (2009)
12
Figure 3: Agricultural Ecoregions in Alberta
Adapted from http://www1.agric.gov.ab.ca/$department/deptdocs.nsf/all/sag1494?opendocument#ecoregion
Figure 4: Soil Groups of Alberta and the BDA
From Olson and Kalischuk (2008)
13
Figure 5: Population Density of the ORB
Adapted from ORBWQI (2000)
Figure 6: Livestock Feeding Operations Density
Adapted from ORBWQI (2000)
14
Figure 7: Agricultural Intensity for AESA Watersheds based on 1996 Canada Census Data
From Anderson et al. (1999)
Figure 8: Agricultural Intensity for AESA Streams from 1996, 2001, and 2006 Census of
Agriculture
From Lorenz et al. (2008)
15
Figure 9: Mean water quality parameters for the upstream (Station 201) and downstream
(Station 202) monitoring stations at the Battersea Drain Field site in 2008. z
From Olson and Kalischuk (2009)
16
Figure 10: Concentration values for (a) total nitrogen, (b) organic nitrogen, (c) nitrate nitrogen,
and (d) ammonia nitrogen at the upstream Station 201 and downstream Station 202 at the
Battersea Drain Field site in 2007 and 2008.
From Olson and Kalischuk (2009)
17
Figure 11: Sample of the Types of BDA Data Available in Lorenz et al. (2008)
Adapted from Lorenz et al., 2008
1991 land cover for the BDA.
Annual stream flow volume from 1995 to 2006.
Annual temperature (C) summary statistics for the BDA from 1999 to 2006.
Annual pH summary statistics from 1999 to 2006.
Summary statistics for instream concentrations (mg L-1) from 1999 to 2006.
Total and average number of fecal coliforms from 1999 to 2006.
18
[Part 2: County of Lethbridge]
Basic Information
Location: The County of Lethbridge (COL)9 – classified by Alberta Municipal Affairs (ABMA, 2009) as a
Municipal District and by Statistics Canada (StatCan, 2008b) as a Census Subdivision within Census
Division 2 – is located in southern Alberta. According to ABMA, the longitude and latitude of the COL are
112°48’ and 49°50’, respectively (ABMA, 2009). See Figures 1 and 2 for maps showing the locations and
boundaries of the COL. The COL overlaps the boundaries of multiple irrigation districts, Ecoregions, and
soil groups. Specifically, the COL is part of the Lethbridge Northern Irrigation District (LNID) and St. Mary
River Irrigation District (SMRID), the Moist Mixed Grassland and Mixed Grassland Ecoregions, and the
Dark Brown Chernozemics and Brown Chernozemics soil groups. See Figures 3 through 6 for maps
depicting the Ecoregions and soil groups of Alberta, and the irrigation districts in the COL. With respect
to the river basins and sub-basins of the COL, maps depicting the boundaries of these watersheds and of
the COL10 indicate that the COL falls mainly, if not entirely, within the Oldman River Basin (ORB) – a sub-
basin of the larger South Saskatchewan River Basin (SSRB). Unfortunately, no sources firmly identifying
which sub-basins of the ORB fall within the COL could be located. However, a rough estimate can be
made using the map in Rock and Mayer (2006) (see Figure 7). From this, it appears as though the
following watersheds fall, at least in part, within the boundaries of the COL: Battersea, Chin, Lower Little
Bow, Lower Oldman, Middle Oldman, Piyami, and Six Mile. It should be re-emphasized that this is only
an estimate; and indeed, an estimate may be all that is available at this time for, as Duke et al. (2006)
note, “highly accurate watershed boundaries do not exist” for the sub-basins of the ORB (p. 1827).
Land Area: The COL measures 2,839.28 square kilometers, or 281,980 hectares in size (StatCan, 2008a;
ABMA, 2009). When including the land area of the towns and villages within the COL boundaries (using
StatCan, 2008b data), the total area of the COL increases to 2,853.62 square kilometers. Further adding
in the land area of the city of Lethbridge (StatCan, 2008b) increases the land area to 2,975.59 square
kilometers.
Population: Excluding the city of Lethbridge and the towns and villages within the boundaries of the
COL, the population of the COL in 2006 was 10,302, with a population density of 3.6 people per square
kilometer (StatCan, 2008b). By including population data for the towns and villages within the COL
boundaries (StatCan, 2008b), the 2006 population of the COL rises to 20,559, with a density of 7.2
people per square kilometer. Finally, when one also includes data from the same source for the city of
Lethbridge, the 2006 population rises to 95,196, and the population density to 32.0 people per square
kilometer (StatCan, 2008b).
Climate: Climate data presented here is based on data collected at the ‘Lethbridge A’ station by
Environment Canada between 1971 and 2000. For the 30 years under investigation, the daily average
temperature by month ranged from a low of -7.8°C in January to a high of 18.0°C in July, with an annual
average daily temperature of 5.7°C. Average monthly precipitation ranged from a low of 11.6 mm in
9
In 2000, the Census Subdivision changed its name from ‘County of Lethbridge No. 26’ to ‘County of Lethbridge’ (ABMA, 2009),
though it is still occasionally referred to by its former name.
10
For example, the map found at Alberta Environment (n.d.).
19
February to a high of 63 mm in June, with the annual average precipitation being 386.3 mm. See Figure
8 for a map of the annual total precipitation in Alberta.
County of Lethbridge Basic Information Summary
Location
General Location Southern Alberta
Longitude and Latitude 112°48’ and 49°50’
Census Division 2
River Basin Basin: SSRB
Sub-Basin*: ORB
Sub-basins within the ORB*: Battersea, Chin, Lower Little Bow, Lower
Oldman, Middle Oldman, Piyami, and Six Mile
Dwelling sites** City: Lethbridge
Towns: Coaldale, Coalhurst, Picture Butte
Villages: Barons, Nobleford
Hamlets/urban service areas: Chin, Diamond City, Faireview, Iron
Springs, Monarch, Shaughnessy, and Turin
Irrigation Districts LNID and SMRID
Ecoregions Moist Mixed Grassland and Mixed Grassland
Soil Groups Dark Brown Chernozemics and Brown Chernozemics
Land Area (square kilometers)
Without city, towns, and villages (WOCTV) 2,839.28
With towns and villages (WTV) 2,853.62
With city, towns, and villages (WCTV) 2,975.59
Population Statistics (2006)
Population Population density per square kilometer
WOTCV 10,302 3.6
WTV 20,559 7.2
WCTV 95,196 32.0
Climate (1971-2000)
Monthly average daily temperature Low: -7.8°C (January), High: 18.0°C (July)
Annual average daily temperature 5.7°C
Monthly average precipitation Low: 11.6 mm (February), High: 63 mm (June)
Annual average precipitation 386.3 mm
* Information is based on estimates made using maps of basin and sub-basin boundaries and municipal district boundaries.
**See Footnote 2.
Agriculture in the COL
Two recent surveys conducted and published by StatCan – the 2006 Census of Agriculture (COA)
(StatCan, 2007) and the 2006 Agriculture Community Profiles (ACP) (StatCan, 2008a) – provide a wealth
of data relating to agriculture in the COL. Data in the COA are organized into the following categories:
Farm type (industry group and industry based on the North American Industry Classification System).
Land use, tenure, and land management practices (tillage, inputs, manure, irrigation, soil conservation).
Crops (hay, field crops, vegetables, fruits, berries, nuts, nursery, sod, Christmas trees, greenhouse,
mushrooms, maple).
Livestock, poultry, and bees.
Farm business characteristics (operating arrangements, computer use, farm capital, farm machinery,
gross farm receipts, operating expenses, paid agricultural work, injuries on farm).
Characteristics of farm operators (number of operators, age, sex, living on or off the farm, working on or
off the farm).
20
Data from the ACP are organized into the following categories:
Farm statistics (industry group and industry, total farm area, area in crops and summerfallow, land use).
Land statistics (tenure of land, tillage practices, land inputs in 2005, manure application methods in 2005,
soil conservation practices and land features, forms of weed control, irrigation by type of land in 2005,
organic status).
Crop statistics (hay and field crops, vegetables, fruits, berries, and nuts, nursery products, sod, Christmas
trees, greenhouse products, mushrooms, maple trees).
Livestock statistics (cattle and calves on Census Day, pigs on Census Day, sheep and lambs on Census Day,
other livestock on Census Day, bees on Census Day, poultry inventory on Census Day, poultry in 2005,
number of birds hatched in commercial poultry hatcheries in 2005).
Farm business characteristics (operating arrangements, computer applications used, total farm capital,
farm capital (machinery and equipment, livestock and poultry, land and buildings), farm machinery
inventory and market value on Census Day, farms classified by total gross farm receipts in 2005, total
gross farm receipts and sale of forest products in 2005, paid agricultural work in 2005, farm-related
injuries and person injured).
Farm operator characteristics (characteristics of operators, operators by age and number per farm,
operators by sex and number per farm).
As evidenced by the two lists above, the COA and ACP provide statistics on very similar, and in fact often
identical, topics. While small differences do seem to exist between some of the statistics they report
(e.g., it appears that the ACP but not the COA provides data on the total population and land area of the
COL), the main difference between the two appears to be simply the format in which the statistics are
presented (see Figure 9). Drawing from both the COA and ACP, the table below provides some key
statistics relating to agriculture in the COL. When statistics for a certain topic were located in one survey
but not the other, a note is made to indicate from which survey the statistics are drawn. When the
statistics appear in both the COA and ACP, no note is made. Additional data regarding agriculture in the
COL can be found in both the COA (StatCan, 2007) and ACP (StatCan, 2008a).
Agriculture in the COL
Adapted from StatCan (2007; 2008a)
Farm and farm operator statistics
Total population in 2006* 95,196 (ACP)
Total number of operators 1,510
Average age of operators 50.9
Total number of male operators 1,160
Total number of female operators 350
Total number of farms 1,058
Land statistics
2
Land area (km )* 2,976 (ACP)
Total area of farms (hectares) 293, 569
Average area of farms (hectares) 277 (ACP)
Farm finance statistics
Total gross farm receipts for 2005 (excluding forest products 959,388, 461
sold) (dollars)
Total farm capital (market value in dollars) 2,383,318,632
Total farm business operating expenses for 2005 934,358,787
Farm operating arrangements
Sole proprietorship 474
Partnership without written agreement 238
21
Partnership with written agreement 39
Family corporation 279
Non-family corporation 24
Other operating arrangements 4
Most common farm types classified by industry group (North American Industry Classification System) (number
of farms)
Cattle ranching and farming 386
Oilseed and grain farming 301
Other crop farming 120
Other animal production 111
Hog and pig farming 46
Most common farm types classified by industry (North American Industry Classification System) (number of
farms)
Beef cattle ranching and farming, including feedlots 333
Other grain farming 163
Wheat farming 110
Horse and other equine production 73
Hay farming 67
Crop and horticulture statistics
Land in crops (excluding Christmas tree area) (hectares) 206,404 (907 farms reporting (FR))
Top crops (hectares)
Barley 66,460 (475 FR)
Spring wheat (excluding durum) 44,000 (274 FR)
Alfalfa and alfalfa mixtures 22,525 (448 FR)
Durum wheat 15,127 (106 FR)
Canola (rapeseed) 15,006 (123 FR)
Livestock statistics
Total number of cattle and calves 526,678 (544 FR)
Total number of pigs 120,020 (74 FR)
Total number of hens and chickens 1,121,311 (126 FR)
Irrigation statistics
Acres Hectares
Total area irrigated (763 FR) 268,597 108,697
Top soil conservation practices (number of farms practicing)
Crop rotation 682
Windbreaks or shelterbelts 333
Rotational grazing 265
Buffer zones around water bodies 118
Land inputs in 2005
Acres Hectares
Herbicides (560 FR) 381,808 154,512
Insecticides (150 FR) 41,865 16,942
Fungicides (87 FR) 32,144 13,008
Commercial Fertilizer (662 FR) 386,354 156,352
Lime (3 FR) 840 340
*The numbers reported here indicate that the data from the city, towns, and villages within the COL boundaries have been included in the ACP survey (at
least for these two topics). Though data for population and land area of the COL are only reported in the ACP survey, the consistency between ACP and
COA data for other topics suggests that the COA also includes these dwelling sites when reporting data for the COL.
22
Using StatCan 2001 Census of Agriculture data, Alberta Agriculture and Rural Development (AARD) has
constructed maps providing some indication of the agricultural intensity of various areas11 in Alberta,
including the COL. Four maps may be particularly relevant; these are the:
- Fertilizer Expense Index (Figure 10): This map depicts “the relative expense of fertilizer and lime in
the agricultural area of Alberta” and provides “an estimate of the degree to which agriculture may
affect nutrient levels in surface and groundwater” (AARD, 2005d).
- Chemical Expense Index (Figure 11): This map depicts “the relative expense of farm chemicals in the
agricultural area of Alberta” and provides “an estimate of the degree to which crop production
agriculture may contribute to surface or groundwater contamination” (AARD, 2005b).
- Manure Production Index (Figure 12): This map depicts “the relative amount of manure production
in the agricultural area of Alberta” and provides “an estimate of the degree to which livestock
production may contribute to nutrient loading, pathogens and odour” (AARD, 2005f).
- Cultivation Intensity Index (Figure 13): This map depicts “the relative cultivation intensity in the
agricultural area of Alberta” (AARD, 2005c). Here, cultivation intensity is “an estimate of the degree
to which cultivation [(including no till, conservation tillage, conventional tillage, and summerfallow)]
contributes to wind and water erosion” (AARD, 2005c).
Each map is designed so that one can determine the level (i.e., expense, amount, or intensity) of the
activity in question in a particular area relative to other areas in Alberta. Scores between 0 and 1 are
assigned to each area; a score of 0 indicates that the area ranks lowest on the index in question, while a
score of 1 indicates that that area ranks highest. Across all indices, the majority of the COL is assigned
the highest ranking (0.8-1.0) possible. Thus, by these indices, the COL is among the most agriculturally
intense areas in the province.
Finally, a study by Rock and Mayer (2006) provides some general agriculture and water information for
the watersheds in the ORB, including those overlapping the boundaries of the COL. Relevant information
is reproduced in the table below. It should be noted that the data presented below was, for the most
part, collected in the late 1990s and thus is somewhat outdated. Additionally, one should keep in mind
that the watersheds listed below do not all fall entirely within the boundaries of the COL and thus the
data cannot simply be aggregated to provide a general picture for the COL.
Characteristics of sub-basins falling (at least in part) within the boundaries of the COL
Adapted from Rock & Mayer (2006)
Sub-basin Area Percent (%) of sub- Population Number of Land use (% watershed area)
2
(km ) basin area livestock Forest Agriculture Water Other
contributing to feeding
surface water flow operations
Battersea 73 29.3 238 27 1.2 85.9 1.4 11.5
Chin 985 72.7 17,732 128 0.0 74.5 2.2 23.3
Lower Little 556 85.7 1,385 35 0.0 56.2 0.1 43.7
Bow
Lower 1,165 83.3 2,283 71 0.0 40.3 2.1 57.6
Oldman
Middle 1,892 82.8 62,259 95 1.8 36.9 2.1 59.2
Oldman
Piyami 267 97.0 2,774 62 0.0 67.4 8.4 24.2
11
It should be noted that ‘areas’ are delineated using Soil Landscapes of Canada polygons and not municipal boundaries (AARD,
2005a).
23
Six Mile 175 88.8 4,604 15 0.0 75.2 0.0 24.8
Water in the COL
As noted previously, the COL falls within the ORB – a sub-basin of the greater SSRB) – and overlaps with
the boundaries of a number of watersheds in the ORB, including the Battersea, Chin, Lower Little Bow,
Lower Oldman, Middle Oldman, Piyami, and Six Mile watersheds12. It also overlaps with the boundaries
of two irrigation districts – the LNID and the SMRID.
Unsurprisingly, it seems that data regarding water quantity and quality in southern Alberta is most often
collected and presented with reference to watersheds (e.g., the ORB or sub-basins of the ORB) rather
than municipal districts. Because very little information specifically referencing water quantity and/or
quality within the COL could be located, this section will include information pertaining to the
watersheds within the COL, to the COL itself, and more generally to southern Alberta.
Rock and Mayer (2006) looked at water quality, specifically with respect to nitrogen content, in the ORB
and its various sub-basins. In their study, they provide a table showing the “*nitrogen+ budget for
individual sub-basins” in the ORB (p. 154). Relevant data from this table for the sub-basins overlapping
the COL boundaries is reproduced in the table below. Again, one should keep in mind that the numbers
from Rock and Mayer (2006) are, for the most part, based on data collected in the late 1990s and thus
are somewhat outdated.
Nitrogen budget for ORB sub-basins in the COL
Adapted from Rock & Mayer (2006)
b
Battersea Chin Lower Lower Middle Piyami Six Mile
Little Bow Oldman Oldman
-2 -1
Inputs (kg N km yr )
Atmospheric 300 300 300 300 300 300 300
Deposition
Fixation in 4 0 0 0 18 0 0
forest lands
Fixation in 414 343 233 180 236 328 390
agricultural
lands
Sewage 10 54 7 6 99 31 79
Manure 12,846 9,767 11,650 5,850 2,287 12,846 12,846
Fertilizer 5,437 4,077 2,497 1,785 1,755 3,540 3,538
Total 19,011 14,541 14,687 8,120 4,686 17,046 17,154
Contributing 5,570 10,571 5,287 4,143 3,635 16,534 15,232
a
total
-2 -1
Stream-flow N export (kg N km yr )
c c c
216 n.d. 6 25 35 62 17
Stream export % of input 1999-2000
3.9 n.d 0.1 0.6 1.0 0.4 0.1
a
The product between total nitrogen input and the percent of sub-basin area contributing to surface flow.
b
No water quality monitoring station at this watershed.
c
Based on total drainage area including upstream watersheds.
12
See the section on the location of the COL for a note regarding the certainty with which certain watersheds can be said to fall
within the boundaries of the COL.
24
n.d.: not determined.
Alberta Environmentally Sustainable Agriculture (AESA) – a group created by AARD – has done extensive
work assessing water quantity and quality in various watersheds in Alberta. Unfortunately, of the 23
watersheds studied by AESA, only one – the Battersea Drain watershed – falls within the boundaries of
the COL (see Lorenz et al., 2008 for a recent update of the activities of AESA). The results of AESA’s work
on the Battersea Drain are discussed more extensively in Part 1 of this document. A number of other
documents produced by the Alberta government – including the work done by Byrtus et al. (2002) and
Humphries et al. (2005) for Alberta Environment (AENV) – also examine water quality and quantity in
the Battersea Drain but not any other watersheds in the COL. Another document published for AENV
(i.e., Anderson, 2008), provides Aquatic Pesticide Toxicity Index values for samples taken from both the
Battersea Drain and Six Mile watersheds between 1995 and 2005, though the specific values for these
two watersheds are not discussed in depth.
The Nutrient Beneficial Management Practices (NBMP) 2007-2011 project – run jointly by AARD and the
Oldman Watershed Council13 and discussed in more detail in Part 1 of this document – has examined
water quantity and quality in detail at sites in two watersheds falling within/overlapping the boundaries
of the COL, namely the Battersea Drain and Lower Little Bow. A good deal of potentially relevant
information – including information on irrigation practices in 2008, 30-year average and 2007/2008
precipitation and temperature values, water quality data (including concentration of nitrogen,
phosphorous, total suspended solids, and Escherichia coli) for 2007 and 2008, and details regarding the
Beneficial Management Practices that have been and/or are being adopted – can be obtained for the
Battersea Drain and Lower Little Bow from the NBMP Progress Reports for 2007 and 2008 (Olson &
Kalischuk, 2008; Olson & Kalischuk, 2009). For a more detailed discussion of the nature of the NBMP
project and the results to date, see Olson and Kalischuk (2008; 2009).
Along with the agricultural intensity maps discussed above, AARD has also released maps depicting
water quality risk in the agricultural areas14 of Alberta. Two maps may be particularly relevant; these
are:
- Surface Water Quality Risk for the Agricultural Area of Alberta (Figure 13): This map depicts the
“surface water quality risk for the agricultural area of Alberta” (AARD, 2005g). The level of risk in an
area is determined based on agricultural intensity (using 2001 COA data on manure production,
fertilizer use, and agrochemical use) and the physical characteristics of the land.
- Groundwater Quality Risk for the Agricultural Area of Alberta (Figure 14): This map depicts the
“groundwater quality risk for the agricultural area of Alberta” (AARD, 2005e). The level of risk in an
area is determined based on agricultural intensity (using 2001 COA data on manure production,
fertilizer use, and agrochemical use), aridity, and aquifer vulnerability.
Like the agricultural intensity maps, these maps use a 0 to 1 rating scale, with a score of 0 indicating that
the area ranks lowest on the index in question (level of risk) and a score of 1 indicating that the area
ranks highest. As the water quality risk maps show, surface water quality risk in the COL is among the
highest in the province, while groundwater quality risk in the COL appears to be moderate. AARD has
13
As noted on the Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (AAFC) website, the COL has entered an agreement with AAFC to help with
the implementation of the project (AAFC, 2008).
14
Again, ‘areas’ are delineated using Soil Landscapes of Canada polygons and not municipal boundaries (AARD, 2005a).
25
reported that agricultural activities may have significant negative impacts on surface water and
groundwater quality, and that agricultural activities may be partly responsible for groundwater
contamination in southern Alberta (Rodvang, 2002). A search of the AARD website shows that AARD has
produced a fair amount of work examining the impact of agriculture on water quality in Alberta, though
it seems that most of this work dates to the 1990s and is not specific to the COL.
Several studies have tried to quantitatively establish a link between water quality and proximity to areas
of agricultural intensity in southern Alberta. For example, Johnson et al. (2003) investigated the
“relationships between the prevalence of *E. coli O157:H7 and Salmonella in the surface waters of the
ORB+ and both animal agriculture and human population within the region” (p. 327). Over the two years
(1999 and 2000) of study, the prevalence of E. coli and Salmonella in the water samples Johnson et al.
(2003) collected was found to be 0.9% and 6.2%, respectively15. Surprisingly, a “direct correlation
between bacterial prevalence and manure production from confined livestock feeding operations” was
not found (Johnson et al., 2003, p. 331). They suggest this finding may either reflect good land
management practices, or be a result of the fact that they did not account for a number of potentially
important factors (e.g., temperature and pH of the water at the time of sampling) in their analysis.
Building on the work of Johnson et al. (2003), Little et al. (2003) examined the relationship between land
use, soil type, and water quality in the agriculturally intense Lower Little Bow River watershed. Here,
land use was assessed using such variables as the percent of land area under irrigation, the percent of
land area allocated to different crops, and the density per square kilometre of confined feeding
operations. Water quality was assessed in terms of the concentrations of a variety of substances,
including E. coli, total nitrogen, and total phosphorous. Some significant relationships were found
between land use and nitrogen and phosphorous levels. However, like Johnson et al. (2003), Little et al.
(2003) found no significant relationship between land use and E. coli levels. These findings are
somewhat surprising, given that southern Alberta has shown some of the highest rates of enteric
disease in the province, and Escherichia coli (E. coli) O157:H7 in all of Canada (Johnson et al., 2003;
Health Canada, 2003)16. In light of the fact that “few studies have attempted to relate bacterial
indicators…directly to land use” (Little et al., 2003, p. 564), it seems that more research may be required
to determine whether a meaningful relationship exists between water quality and land use in southern
Alberta and, more specifically, in the COL17.
Conclusion
To very briefly conclude, there exists a great deal of information regarding agriculture in the COL, while
the body of literature on water issues specifically with reference to the COL is lacking. More detailed
information exists for certain sub-basins overlapping the boundaries of the COL – the Battersea Drain
15
A subsequent study by Gannon et al. (2004) examining the levels of these pathogens in ORB surface waters in 2000 and 2001
reported even higher prevalence numbers; E. coli was isolated in 1.3% and 2.0% of samples in 2000 and 2001, respectively,
while Salmonella was isolated in 5.5% and 14.9% of samples in 2000 and 2001, respectively. In this article, the potential link
between pathogen levels and proximity to agricultural operations is only discussed on a hypothetical basis.
16
For a brief discussion of the levels of contaminants found in the groundwater of southern Alberta in the 1990s and the
potential health effects of such contaminants, see Rodvang (2000). Wilson et al. (2001) also provide a good overview of water
quality in southern Alberta in the 1990s and briefly discuss the health effects of contaminated water, and the links between
agricultural activity and water quality.
17
Such a relationship has been hinted at in other parts of the North America. For example, Michel et al. (1999) found a
significant relationship between the incidence of E. coli cases and the density of livestock operations (though the focus here
was not specifically on water quality).
26
and the Lower Little Bow watersheds in particular have been subject to a good deal of study. A variety of
not-for-profit groups – including the Oldman Watershed Council – have been set up to deal with water
quality issues in areas overlapping the boundaries of the COL, and the COL itself has played a role in the
implementation of BMPs – two of which exist in the Battersea Drain and Lower Little Bow watersheds.
27
References
Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (2008). Watershed Evaluation of Beneficial Management Practices
(WEBs) partners > Watershed Evaluation of Beneficial Management Practices > Programs and
Services. Retrieved from http://www4.agr.gc.ca/AAFC-AAC/display-
afficher.do?id=1228498920881&lang=eng
Alberta Agriculture and Rural Development (2005a). Agricultural Land Resource Atlas of Alberta.
Retrieved from http://www1.agric.gov.ab.ca/$department/deptdocs.nsf/all/agdex10300
—— (2005b). Agricultural Land Resource Atlas of Alberta – Chemical Expense Index for the Agricultural
Area of Alberta. Retrieved from
http://www1.agric.gov.ab.ca/$department/deptdocs.nsf/all/agdex10333
—— (2005c). Agricultural Land Resource Atlas of Alberta – Cultivation Intensity Index for the Agricultural
Area of Alberta. Retrieved from
http://www1.agric.gov.ab.ca/$department/deptdocs.nsf/all/agdex10336
—— (2005d). Agricultural Land Resource Atlas of Alberta – Fertilizer Expense Index for the Agricultural
Area of Alberta. Retrieved from
http://www1.agric.gov.ab.ca/$department/deptdocs.nsf/all/agdex10332.
—— (2005e). Agricultural Land Resource Atlas of Alberta – Groundwater Quality Risk for the Agricultural
Area of Alberta. Retrieved from
http://www1.agric.gov.ab.ca/$department/deptdocs.nsf/all/agdex10339
—— (2005f). Agricultural Land Resource Atlas of Alberta – Manure Production Index for the Agricultural
Area of Alberta. Retrieved from
http://www1.agric.gov.ab.ca/$department/deptdocs.nsf/all/agdex10335
—— (2005g). Agricultural Land Resource Atlas of Alberta – Surface Water Quality Risk for the
Agricultural Area of Alberta. Retrieved from
http://www1.agric.gov.ab.ca/$department/deptdocs.nsf/all/agdex10338
—— (2000). Irrigation in Alberta Part 2. Retrieved from
http://www1.agric.gov.ab.ca/$department/deptdocs.nsf/all/irr7197
Alberta Environment (n.d.). Alberta’s river basins. Retrieved from
http://www.environment.alberta.ca/apps/basins/default.aspx?Basin=10.
Alberta Municipal Affairs (2009). Location and history profile: County of Lethbridge. Municipal code
0204. 8 p.
—— (n.d.) Rural municipalities, cities and towns – map. Retrieved from
http://www.municipalaffairs.alberta.ca/mc_boundary_maps.cfm
Anderson, A-M. (2008). Development of an Aquatic Pesticide Toxicity Index for use in Alberta. ISBN: 978-
0-7785-7363-0. Environmental Monitoring and Evaluation Branch, Alberta Environment. 39 p.
Byrtus, G., Anderson, A-M., & Saffran, K. (2002). Determination of new pesticides in Alberta’s surface
waters (1999-2000). Publication No. T/674. Water Research User Group, Alberta Environment. 31
p.
28
County of Lethbridge (2009). Irrigation Map 2009. Retrieved from
http://www.lethcounty.ca/municipal/lethbridge/lethbridge-
website.nsf/AllDocSearch?SearchView&Query=(irrigation+)&Count=50&Start=1&SearchFuzzy=TRU
E&SearchWV=TRUE
Duke, G., Kienzle, S., Johnson, D., & Byrne, J. (2006). Incorporating ancillary data to refine
anthropologically modified overland flow paths. Hydrological Processes, 20, 1827-1843.
Environment Canada. Canadian climate normals 1971-2000. Retrieved from
http://www.climate.weatheroffice.ec.gc.ca/climate_normals/results_e.html?Province=ALL&Statio
nName=lethbridge&SearchType=BeginsWith&LocateBy=Province&Proximity=25&ProximityFrom=C
ity&StationNumber=&IDType=MSC&CityName=&ParkName=&LatitudeDegrees=&LatitudeMinutes
=&LongitudeDegrees=&LongitudeMinutes=&NormalsClass=A&SelNormals=&StnId=2263&
Gannon, V.P.J., Graham, T.A., Read, S., Ziebell, K., Muckle, A., Mori, J., Thomas, J., Selinger, B.,
Townshend, I., & Byrne, J. (2004). Bacterial pathogens in rural water supplies in southern Alberta,
Canada. Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health, Part A, 67, 1643-1653.
Health Canada (2003). Investigation of an E. Coli O157:H7 Outbreak in Brooks, Alberta, June-July 2002:
The Role of Occult Cases in the Spread of Infection within a Daycare Setting.” Canada
Communicable Disease Report, 29(3), 21-28.
Humphries, D., Byrtus, G., & Anderson, A-M. (2005). Glycophosphate residue in Alberta’s atmospheric
deposition, soils and surface waters. Publication No. T/806. Water Research User Group, Alberta
Environment. 51 p.
Johnson, J.Y.M, Thomas, J.E., Graham, T.A., Townshend, I., Byrne, J., Selinger, L.B., & Gannon, V.P.J.
(2003). Prevalence of Escherichia coli O157:H7 and Salmonella spp. in surface waters of southern
Alberta and its relation to manure sources. Canadian Journal of Microbiology, 49, 326-335.
Little, J.L., Saffran, K.A., & Fent, L. (2003). Land use and water quality relationships in the Lower Little
Bow River watershed, Alberta, Canada. Water Quality Research Journal of Canada, 38(4), 563-584.
Lorenz, K.N., Depoe, S.L., & Phelan, C.A. (2008). Volume 3: AESA Water Quality Monitoring Project: A
summary of surface water quality in Alberta’s agricultural watersheds: 1995 to 2006. Alberta
Agriculture and Rural Development, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada. 487 p.
Michel, P., Wilson, J.B., Martin, S.W., Clarke, R.C., McEwen, S.A., & Gyles, C.L. (1999). Temporal and
geographical distributions of reported cases of Escherichia coli O157:H7 infection in Ontario.
Epidemiology and Infection, 122(2), 193-200.
Olson, B.M., & Kalischuk, A.R. (eds.). 2009. Nutrient beneficial management practices evaluation project
2007 to 2011: 2008 Progress report. Alberta Agriculture and Rural Development, Lethbridge,
Alberta, Canada. 344 pp.
—— (eds.). 2008. Nutrient beneficial management practices evaluation project, 2007 to 2011: 2007
Progress report. Alberta Agriculture and Rural Development, Lethbridge, Alberta, Canada. 196 pp.
Rock, L., & Mayer, B. (2006). Nitrogen budget for the Oldman River Basin, southern Alberta, Canada.
Nutrient Cycling in Agroecosystems, 75, 147-162.
Rodvang, J. (2000). Agricultural impacts on groundwater quality in the irrigated areas of Alberta. IB002-
2000. Factsheet, Irrigation Branch, Alberta Agriculture, Food and Rural Development, Lethbridge,
Alberta, Canada. 5 p.
29
—— (2002). Groundwater vulnerability in Alberta. IB002-2002. Factsheet, Irrigation Branch, Alberta
Agriculture, Food and Rural Development, Lethbridge, Alberta, Canada. 4 p.
Statistics Canada. (2008a). 2006 Agriculture Community Profiles. Catalogue number 95-631-XWE.
—— (2008b). 2006 Community Profiles. Catalogue number 92-591-XWE.
—— (2007). 2006 Census of Agriculture. Catalogue number 92-174-GWE.
Wilson, S., Griffiths, M., & Anielski, M. (2001). The Alberta GPI Accounts: Water resource and quality. The
Pembina Institute for Appropriate Development, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada. 50 p.
30
Appendix
Figure 1: Rural Municipalities, Cities and Towns in Alberta
From ABMA (n.d.)
31
Figure 2: The COL
From ABMA (2009)
32
Figure 3: Irrigation Districts in Southern Alberta
Adapted from AARD (2000)
33
Figure 4: Irrigation Districts in the COL
Adapted from County of Lethbridge (2009)
34
Figure 5: Ecoregions of Alberta
From AARD (2005a)
35
Figure 6: Soil Groups of Alberta
From AARD (2005a)
36
Figure 7: Sub-basins of the ORB
Adapted from Rock & Mayer (2006)
Sub-basins: BAR = Barons, BAT = Battersea, BEC = Beaver Creek, BOU = Bountiful, CAS = Castle, CHI = Chin, CLL
= Clear Lake, ENC = Enchant, CRO = Crowsnets, EXP = Expanse, HOR = Horsefly, LLB = Lower Little Bow, LOM =
Lower Oldman, MCG = McGregor, MLB = Middle Little Bow, MOM = Middle Oldman, MOC = Mosquito Creek,
PIN = Pincher, PIY = Piyami, SIM = Six Mile, STM = St. Mary, T11 = T11, T2 = T2, ULB = Upper Little Bow, UOM =
Upper Oldman, WAB = Waterton-Belly, WIC = Willow Creek
37
Figure 8: Annual Total Precipitation of Alberta, 1971 to 2000
From AARD (2005a)
38
Figure 9: Reporting Style of the COA and ACP
Adapted from StatCan (2007; 2008a)
COA: Cattle and Calves – Total cattle and calves on Census Day, 2006 and 2001 (StatCan, 2007).
Geography Cattle and calves
Total cattle and calves
May 16, 2006 May 15, 2001
farms reporting number of animals farms reporting number of animals
Canada (000000000) 109,901 15,773,527 122,066 15,551,449
Alberta - PR (480000000) 28,751 6,369,116 31,774 6,615,201
Agricultural Region 1 - CAR (481000000) 1,842 579,063 2,017 568,278
Division No. 1 - CD (481001000) 873 228,525 912 219,019
Cypress County - CCS (481001003) 589 149,211
Forty Mile County No. 8 - CCS (481001008) 284 79,314
Division No. 4 - CD (481004000) 969 350,538 1,105 349,259
Special Area No. 2 - CCS (481004004) 416 184,927
Special Area No. 3 - CCS (481004012) 320 84,160
Special Area No. 4 - CCS (481004020) 233 81,451
Agricultural Region 2 - CAR (482000000) 3,209 1,585,474 3,448 1,520,762
Division No. 2 - CD (482002000) 1,780 1,046,887 1,887 1,109,133
Warner County No. 5 - CCS (482002001) 306 109,253
Lethbridge County - CCS (482002011) 544 526,678
Taber - CCS (482002021) 410 151,043
Newell County No. 4 - CCS (482002031) 520 259,913
Division No. 5 - CD (482005000) 1,429 538,587 1,561 411,629
Vulcan County - CCS (482005001) 330 171,969
Wheatland County - CCS (482005012) 480 206,252
Starland County - CCS (482005031) 212 34,341
Kneehill County - CCS (482005041) 407 126,025
Etc.
ACP: Cattle and calves on Census Day, 2006 (StatCan, 2008a).
Lethbridge County Division No. 2 Agricultural Region 2 Alberta
(CCS 482002011) (CD 482002) (CAR 4820) (PR 48) Canada
Total cattle and calves
Farms reporting 544 1,780 3,209 28,751 109,901
Number 526,678 1,046,887 1,585,474 6,369,116 15,773,527
Calves under 1 year
Farms reporting 432 1,544 2,829 26,033 98,107
Number 181,452 337,199 492,504 974,559 1,783,913
Etc.
39
Figure 10: Fertilizer Expense Index for the Agricultural Area of Alberta
From AARD (2005d)
40
Figure 11: Chemical Expense Index for the Agricultural Area of Alberta
From AARD (2005b)
41
Figure 12: Manure Production Index for the Agricultural Area of Alberta
From AARD (2005f)
42
Figure 13: Cultivation Intensity Index for the Agricultural Area of Alberta
From AARD (2005c)
43
Figure 14: Surface Water Quality Risk for the Agricultural Area of Alberta
From AARD (2005g)
44
Figure 15: Groundwater Quality Risk for the Agricultural Area of Alberta
From AARD (2005e)
45
Related docs
