Environmental Management

, Volume 64, Issue 5, pp 626–639 | Cite as

Reducing Wet Ammonium Deposition in Rocky Mountain National Park: the Development and Evaluation of A Pilot Early Warning System for Agricultural Operations in Eastern Colorado

  • Aaron J. PiñaEmail author
  • Russ S. Schumacher
  • A. Scott Denning
  • William B. Faulkner
  • Jill S. Baron
  • Jay Ham
  • Dennis S. Ojima
  • Jeffrey L. Collett


Agricultural emissions are the primary source of ammonia (NH3) deposition in Rocky Mountain National Park (RMNP), a Class I area, that is granted special air quality protections under the Clean Air Act. Between 2014 and 2016, the pilot phase of the Colorado agricultural nitrogen early warning system (CANEWS) was developed for agricultural producers to voluntarily and temporarily minimize emissions of NH3 during periods of upslope winds. The CANEWS was created using trajectory analyses driven by outputs from an ensemble of numerical weather forecasts together with the climatological expertize of human forecasters. Here, we discuss the methods for the CANEWS and offer preliminary analyses of 33 months of the CANEWS based on atmospheric deposition data from two sites in RMNP as well as responses from agricultural producers after warnings were issued. Results showed that the CANEWS accurately predicted 6 of 9 high N deposition weeks at a lower-elevation observation site, but only 4 of 11 high N deposition weeks at a higher-elevation site. Sixty agricultural producers from 39 of Colorado’s agricultural operations volunteered for the CANEWS, and a two-way line of communication between agricultural producers and scientists was formed. For each warning issued, an average of 23 producers responded to a postwarning survey. Over 75% of responding CANEWS participants altered their practices after an alert. While the current effort was insufficient to reduce atmospheric deposition, we were encouraged by the collaborative spirit between agricultural, scientific, and resource management communities. Solving a broad and complex social-ecological problem requires both a technological approach, such as the CANEWS, and collaboration and trust from all participants, including agricultural producers, land managers, university researchers, and environmental agencies.


Early warning system Agriculture ammonia/ammonium Wet nitrogen deposition Weather modeling Mountain meteorology Rocky Mountain National Park 



This paper is based upon work supported by National Science Foundation IGERT Grant No. DGE-0966346 “I-WATER: Integrated Water, Atmosphere, Ecosystems Education and Research Program” at Colorado State University and the National Park Service under award P13AC00599, project CSURM-273. We would also like to thank the Center for Multiscale Modeling of Atmospheric Processes at Colorado State University for their support for this study. We also thank Kristi Morris, Kathy Lambert, and anonymous reviewers for their comments to improve the quality of this paper. Any use of trade, firm, or product names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. The Pilot Early Warning System would not have been possible without the vision and tireless efforts of WBF.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.


  1. Amon B, Amon T, Boxberger J, Alt C (2001) Emissions of NH3, N2O and CH4 from dairy cows housed in a farmyard manure tying stall (housing, manure storage, manure spreading). Nutr Cycl Agroecosyst 60:103–113CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Anderson N, Strader R, Davidson C (2003) Airborne reduced nitrogen: ammonia emissions from agriculture and other sources. Environ Int 29:277–286CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Baron J, Denning AS (1993) The influence of mountain meteorology on precipitation chemistry at low and high elevations of the Colorado Front Range, USA. Atmos Environ A-Gen Top 27:2337–2349CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Baron JS (2006) Hindcasting nitrogen deposition to determine an ecological critical load. Ecol Appl 16:433–439CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Baron JS (1992) Biogeochemistry of a subalpine ecosystem: Loch Vale Watershed. In: Ecological studies 90. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  6. Baron JS, Rueth HM, Wolfe AM, Nydick KR, Allstott EJ, Minear JT, Moraska B (2000) Ecosystem responses to nitrogen deposition in the Colorado Front Range. Ecosystems 3:352–368CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Baron JS, Driscoll CT, Stoddard JL, Richer EE (2011) Empirical critical loads of atmospheric nitrogen deposition for nutrient enrichment and acidification of sensitive US lakes. Bioscience 61:602–613CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Benedict KB, Carrico CM, Kreidenweis SM, Schichtel B, Malm WC, Collett Jr JL (2013a) A seasonal nitrogen deposition budget for Rocky Mountain National Park. Ecol Appl 23:1156–1169CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Benedict KB, Day D, Schwandner FM, Kreidenweis SM, Schichtel B, Malm WC, Collett Jr JL (2013b) Observations of atmospheric reactive nitrogen species in Rocky Mountain National Park and across northern Colorado. Atmos Environ 64:66–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bowman WD, Gartner JR, Holland K, Wiedermann M (2006) Nitrogen critical loads for alpine vegetation and terrestrial ecosystem response: are we there yet? Ecol Appl 16:1183–1193CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Bowman WD, Murgel J, Blett T, Porter E (2012) Nitrogen critical loads for alpine vegetation and soils in Rocky Mountain National Park. J Environ Manag 103:165–171CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Carew R (2010) Ammonia emissions from livestock industries in Canada: feasibility of abatement strategies. Environ Pollut 158:2618–2626CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Davis JG, Marcillac NM, Elliott AL, Pritchett JG, Stewart CE (2007) Best management practices (BMPs) for ammonia emissions reduction from animal feeding operations: update on a Colorado case study. In: International Symposium on Air Quality and Waste Management for Agriculture. American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers. Broomfield, CO, p 43Google Scholar
  14. Du E, de Vries W, Galloway JN, Hu X, Fang J (2014) Changes in wet nitrogen deposition in the United States between 1985 and 2012. Environ Res Lett 9:095004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Embertson N, Davis J (2009) Efficacy of best management practices for ammonia reduction on feedlots and dairies. In: Western Section, Vol 60. American Society of Animal Sciences. Champaign, IL, pp 96–99Google Scholar
  16. Fenn ME, Jovan S, Yuan F, Geiser L, Meixner T, Gimeno BS (2008) Empirical and simulated critical loads for nitrogen deposition in California mixed conifer forests. Environ Pollut 155:492–511CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Fenn ME, Poth MA, Aber JD, Baron JS, Bormann BT, Johnson DW, Lemly AD, McNulty SG, Ryan DF, Stottlemyer R (1998) Nitrogen excess in North American ecosystems: predisposing factors, ecosystem responses, and management strategies. Ecol Appl 8:706–733CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Gebhart KA, Malm WC, Rodriguez MA, Barna MG, Schichtel BA, Benedict KB, Collett JL, Carrico CM (2014) Meteorological and back trajectory modeling for the rocky mountain atmospheric nitrogen and sulfur study II. Adv Meteorol 2014:1–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Gebhart KA, Schichtel BA, Malm WC, Barna MG, Rodriguez MA, Collett Jr JL (2011) Back-trajectory-based source apportionment of airborne sulfur and nitrogen concentrations at Rocky Mountain National Park, Colorado, USA. Atmos Environ 45:621–633CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hristov AN, Hanigan M, Cole A, Todd R, McAllister TA, Ndegwa PM, Rotz A (2011) Ammonia emissions from dairy farms and beef feedlots. Can J Anim Sci 91:1–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Imen S, Chang NB, Yang YJ (2015) Developing the remote sensing-based early warning system for monitoring TSS concentrations in Lake Mead. J Environ Manag 160:73–89CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Krzhizhanovskaya VV, Shirshov GS, Melnikova NB, Belleman RG, Rusadi FI, Broekhuijsen BJ, Gouldby BP, Lhomme J, Balis B, Bubak M, Pyayt AL (2011) Flood early warning system: design, implementation and computational modules. Procedia Comput Sci 4:106–115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Lee C, Hristov AN, Dell CJ, Feyereisen GW, Kaye J, Beegle D (2012) Effect of dietary protein concentration on ammonia and greenhouse gas emitting potential of dairy manure. J Dairy Sci 95:1930–1941CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Li Y, Schichtel BA, Walker JT, Schwede DB, Chen X, Lehmann CM, Puchalski MA, Gay DA, Collett Jr JL (2016) Increasing importance of deposition of reduced nitrogen in the United States. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 201525736:1–6.Google Scholar
  25. Malm WC, Collett Jr JL, Barna MG, Gebhart KA, Schichtel BA, Beem K, Carrico CM, Day DE, Hand JL, Kreidenweis SM, Lee T, Levin EJT, McDade CE, McMeeking GR, Molenar JV, Raja S, Rodriguez MA, Schwandner F, Sullivan AP, Taylor C (2009) RoMANS: Rocky Mountain Atmospheric Nitrogen and Sulfur Study Report. ISSN 0737-5352-84, CIRA (Cooperative Institute for Research in the Atmosphere). Colorado State University, Fort Collins, ColoradoGoogle Scholar
  26. Malm WC, Rodriguez MA, Schichtel BA, Gebhart KA, Thompson TM, Barna MG, Benedict KB, Carrico CM, Collett Jr JL (2016) A hybrid modeling approach for estimating reactive nitrogen deposition in Rocky Mountain National Park. Atmos Environ 126:258–273CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Markowski P, Richardson Y (2011) Mesoscale meteorology in midlatitudes, 2nd edn. Wiley, New JerseyGoogle Scholar
  28. Morris K (2018) 2016 data summary of wet nitrogen deposition at Rocky Mountain National Park. Natural Resource Report NPS/NRSS/ARD/NRR—2018/1610. National Park Service, Fort Collins, ColoradoGoogle Scholar
  29. Otkin JA, Shafer M, Svoboda M, Wardlow B, Anderson MC, Hain C, Basara J (2015) Facilitating the use of drought early warning information through interactions with agricultural stakeholders. Bull Am Meterol Soc 96:1073–1078CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Rodriguez MA, Barna MG, Gebhart KA, Hand JL, Adelman ZE, Schichtel BA, Collett Jr JL, Malm WC (2011) Modeling the fate of atmospheric reduced nitrogen during the Rocky Mountain Atmospheric Nitrogen and Sulfur Study (RoMANS): performance evaluation and diagnosis using integrated processes rate analysis. Atmos Environ 45:223–234CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Rotz C (2004) Management to reduce nitrogen losses in animal production. J Anim Sci 82:E119–E137Google Scholar
  32. Rotz CA, Kleinman PJA, Dell CJ, Veith TL, Beegle DB (2011) Environmental and economic comparisons of manure application methods in farming systems. J Environ Qual 40:438–448CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Saylor RD, Edgerton ES, Hartsell BE, Baumann K, Hansen DA (2010) Continuous gaseous and total ammonia measurements from the southeastern aerosol research and characterization (SEARCH) study. Atmos Environ 44:4994–5004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Schiferl LD, Heald CL, Van Damme M, Clarisse L, Clerbaux C, Coheur PF, Nowak JB, Neuman JA, Herndon SC, Roscioli JR, Eilerman SJ (2016) Interannual variability of ammonia concentrations over the United States: sources and implications. Atmos Chem Phys 16:12305–12328CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Skamarock WC, Klemp JB (2008) A time-split nonhydrostatic atmospheric model for weather research and forecasting applications. J Comput Phys 227:3465–3485CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Thompson TM, Rodriguez MA, Barna MG, Gebhart KA, Hand JL, Day DE, Malm WC, Benedict KB, Collett Jr JL, Schichtel BA (2015) Rocky Mountain National Park reduced nitrogen source apportionment. J Geophys Res 120:4370–4384CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Van Vuuren DP, Edmonds J, Kainuma M, Riahi K, Thomson A, Hibbard K, Hurtt GC, Kram T, Krey V, Lamarque JF, Masui T (2011) The representative concentration pathways: an overview. Clim Change 109:5–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Vitousek PM, Aber JD, Howarth RW, Likens GE, Matson PA, Schindler DW, Schlesinger WH, Tilman DG (1997) Human alteration of the global nitrogen cycle: sources and consequences. Ecol Appl 7:737–750Google Scholar
  39. Wilks DS (2006) Comparison of ensemble-MOS methods in the Lorenz'96 setting Meteorological Applications 13:243–256CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Xing J, Pleim J, Mathur R, Pouliot G, Hogrefe C, Gan CM, Wei C (2013) Historical gaseous and primary aerosol emissions in the United States from 1990 to 2010. Atmos Chem Phys 13:7531–7549CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Earth Science Division, NASA HeadquartersWashingtonUSA
  2. 2.Department of Atmospheric ScienceColorado State UniversityFort CollinsUSA
  3. 3.Department of Biological and Agricultural EngineeringTexas A&M UniversityCollege StationUSA
  4. 4.US Geological SurveyFort Collins Science CenterFort CollinsUSA
  5. 5.Department of Soil & Crop SciencesColorado State UniversityFort CollinsUSA
  6. 6.Department of Ecosystem Science and SustainabilityColorado State UniversityFort CollinsUSA

Personalised recommendations