Upload
barbara-tyler
View
217
Download
2
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Chesapeake Bay Program’s Baywide and Basinwide Monitoring Networks:
Options for Adapting Monitoring Networks and Realigning Resources to Address Partner
Priorities
Peter TangoUSGS @CBPO
January 2009STAC+Senior
Managers; DraftRecommendationsReport Provided
to MASC
Summer/Autumn 2008
STAC Mon Workshops
I, II, III
February/March 2009STAC/Senior Managers Recommendations,
MASC Response, and Realignment Options presented to the CBP Management Board
for final decisions
March 2009US EPA amends
Monitoring Section ofCBP Grant Guidance to
carry out Management Board’s
Decisions
March 25, 2008Proposal Presented
To STAC
The Yearlong Program Review Process:CBP Partner Monitoring Networks
Review and Reporting Schedule Timeline
Winter 2007/08Proposal developed
for STAC Review
STAC-MON REVIEW 2008 WORKSHOPS:
STAC/Senior Manager Findings• Continuing operation of the monitoring
networks in a status quo condition is unacceptable.
• Delisting of the Bay segments and determining the effectiveness of our management actions are the responsibility of the Partnership and should be the priority of the monitoring program.
STAC-MON REVIEW: CBP Senior Managers’ Priorities
• Deliver information to support spatially explicit delisting decisions– Minimize tidal water monitoring while supporting
Bay criteria assessments
• Assess effectiveness of management actions to reduce nutrient and sediment loads in the watershed– Expand the watershed monitoring network to
support analysis of management effectiveness at local, Tributary Strategy and regional scales.
DECISIONS REQUESTED
• Desired monitoring network realignment option directed towards “making delisting decisions” and “assessing management effectiveness”?
• Additional information wanted detailing
changes in the monitoring networks for finalizing the Partner’s monitoring network transition plan?
Minimum Monitoring SupportTidal Bay Delisting Decisions
Monitoring Elements:• June-September water column
measurements• Annual Baywide SAV aerial survey• Annual Benthic Monitoring
AssessmentAssumptions:• Summer open-water 30-day
mean, deep water 30-day mean and instantaneous deep channel D.O. criteria are fully protective of the remaining D.O. criteria.
• Shallow-water bay grass designated use delisting decision based solely on SAV acreage
• No nutrient criteria = no nutrient monitoring in the Bay.
SAV Aerial Survey
B-IBI resultsLiving resourcebased criteria
Current and future Watershed Network Water Quality Monitoring sites where loads can be calculated within the Chesapeake Bay Basin
The CBP Watershed Monitoring Network Nutrient and Sediment Load calculation sites:
Year Sites 2007 332008 732009 792010 88
• Regional nutrient load assessments presently available for 33 sites.
• Quantify trends potentially reflective of control practices.
• Data used to calibrate Watershed models
• “Spatial density… inadequate for determining effectiveness of control actions being taken on the land” (STAC 2005)
Active and Proposed Watershed Network Water Quality Monitoring sites in the Chesapeake Bay
BasinProposed Watershed ActivitiesRespecting New Objectives:
• Refine/Expand our existing network to document load changes at local, tributary strategy and regional scales
• Assess change from different major source sectors, e.g. agriculture, urban, suburban
• Strategically Partner on Priority Watershed Implementation sites
• Develop indicators that related Measured nutrient and sediment changes to allocations needed to meet the Bay TMDL
Secondary Stations
18 sites where monitoring is onlypartially implemented.
Fully implementation monitoring isrequired for the sites to contributeto nutrient and sediment load site Network, ie. The Primary StationWatershed Network.
This directly addresses the STAC2005 critique regarding spatialdensity of monitoring stations in watershed.
Before full implementation for anysuch site, prioritization will bemade by representativenessof landscape character associatedwith these sites.
Status QuoExisting CBP + State Match
Monitoring NetworksResources
$4.3M
Watershed Network $0.9 M
Tidal Network$3.4 M
• Tidal Mainstem and Tributary Monitoring $1.3M• Submerged Aquatic Vegetation $0.6M• Shallow Water Monitoring $0.6M• Phytoplankton Monitoring $0.4M• Benthic Invertebrate Community Monitoring $0.4M• Ecosystem Processes $0.1M• Watershed Water Quality Monitoring I: Network $0.3M• Watershed Water Quality Monitoring II: River Input $0.6M• Total $4.3M
CBP Baywide and Basinwide Partners Monitoring Networks
Realignment Options• Option 1. Minimize monitoring effort in the tidal Chesapeake Bay to
that needed for supporting criteria assessment; maximize information for assessing management effectiveness in the watershed.
• Option 2. Minimize monitoring effort in the tidal Chesapeake Bay for supporting criteria assessment, sustain additional diagnostic monitoring at reduced rate; maximize watershed assessment of Management effectiveness.
• Option 3. Minimize monitoring effort in the tidal Chesapeake Bay for supporting criteria assessment, sustain additional diagnostic monitoring, provide for decision options by supporting DATAFLOW assessments; maximize assessing management effectiveness in the watershed.
• Option 4. Status quo
Monitoring Programming Option
1
Option
2
Option
3
Status
Quo
Listing/Delisting
Seasons: Cruises
Benthic & SAV
SummerAs needed
Apr-OctAs needed
Apr-OctAs needed
Mar-NovAs needed
Cruises 4 MD, VA 7 MD, VA 7 MD, VA 16 MD,
14 VA
Shallow water diagnostics
Other diagnostics (Nutrients, Phytoplankton, Ecosystem Processes, other)
Nutrients
Nutrient/sediment load analyses for expanded data
Load Indicator Development
Additional Support for Priority Watershed Monitoring (e.g. source sectors, small watersheds)
Existing Network Support
WA
TE
RS
HE
D
TID
AL
Status Quovs.
Option 1
Watershed Network $0.9 M
Tidal Network $3.4 M
• Tidal Mainstem and Tributary Monitoring $1.3M 1.0M• Submerged Aquatic Vegetation $0.6M 0.6M• Shallow Water Monitoring $0.6M• Phytoplankton Monitoring $0.4M• Benthic Invertebrate Community Monitoring $0.4M 0.4M• Ecosystem Processes $0.1M• Watershed Water Quality Monitoring I: Network $0.3M 1.7M• Watershed Water Quality Monitoring II: River Input $0.6M_________0.6M_• $4.3M $4.3M
Nontidal Programs
$2.3 M
Status Quo Option 1
Watershed Network $2.3 M
Tidal Network $2.0 M
Status Quo Option 1
This boundary expresses an uncertainty in the exact dollar value of each option
Status Quovs.
Option 1, 2
Watershed Network $0.9 M
Tidal Network $3.4 M
• Tidal Mainstem and Tributary Monitoring $1.3M 1.0M 1.2M• Submerged Aquatic Vegetation $0.6M 0.6M 0.6M• Shallow Water Monitoring $0.6M• Phytoplankton Monitoring $0.4M• Benthic Invertebrate Community Monitoring $0.4M 0.4M 0.4M• Ecosystem Processes $0.1M• Watershed Water Quality Monitoring I: Network $0.3M 1.7M 1.5M• Watershed Water Quality Monitoring II: River Input $0.6M___ 0.6M___0.6M• Total $4.3M $4.3M $4.3M
Status Option Option Quo 1 2
Watershed Network $2.3 M
Tidal Programs
$2.0 MStatus Quo Option 2 Option 1
WatershedNetwork $2.1 M
Tidal Network$2.0 M
Tidal Network$2.2 M
Status Quovs.
Option 1, 2, 3
WatershedNetwork $0.9 M
Tidal Network $3.4 M
• Tidal Mainstem and Tributary Monitoring $1.3M 1.0M 1.2M 1.2M• Submerged Aquatic Vegetation $0.6M 0.6M 0.6M 0.6M• Shallow Water Monitoring $0.6M 0.3M • Phytoplankton Monitoring $0.4M• Benthic Invertebrate Community Monitoring $0.4M 0.4M 0.4M 0.4M• Ecosystem Processes $0.1M• Watershed Water Quality Monitoring I: Network $0.3M 1.7M 1.5M 1.2M• Watershed Water Quality Monitoring II: River Input $0.6M____ 0.6M___0.6M___ 0.6M__• Total $4.3M 4.3M 4.3M 4.3M
Status Option Option Option Quo 1 2 3
Watershed Network$2.3 M
Status Quo Option 3 Option 2 Option 1
WatershedNetwork $2.1 M
Tidal Networks
$2.0 M
Tidal Networks
$2.2 M
WatershedNetwork $1.8 M
Tidal Network $2.5 M
Transition Plan• New FY RFPs to reflect realignment decision by the CBP
Management Board in March 2009.
• Over the summer and fall, Technical Support Services Team and Workgroups conduct analyses on network efficiencies.
• Finalize details of refinements to the Partner’s Tidal and Watershed Monitoring Network structure based on CBP Management Board’s realignment decision.
• Continue existing water year monitoring efforts through the end of the 2009 water year.
• Enact new Partnership’s Tidal and Watershed Water Quality Monitoring Network January 1, 2010.
• Schedule the next review to evaluate how the new networks are meeting the stated management priorities and adapt the networks where necessary.
DECISIONS REQUESTED
• Decision on a desired monitoring network realignment option directed towards “making delisting decisions” and “assessing management effectiveness”?
DECISIONS REQUESTED
• Decision on the transition plan. What additional information is wanted by the Management Board detailing changes in the monitoring networks for finalizing the Partner’s monitoring network transition plan?
Thank you
Tidal Chesapeake Bay and Tributaries
Watershed
Parameters • Mainstem and tidal tributaries D.O., salinity, temperature, pH, Secchi, Chlorophyll a.
SAV
Benthic community
•Nutrient (nitrogen and phosphorus) and sediment at present and new priority stations.
•Prioritize and maximize new stations based on needs for 1) source-type local scale, 2) partner on targeted monitoring and 3) robustness to tributary strategies • Load indicator development
Year-round
Base and storm flow sampling protocol
Seasons June – September Annual SAV
Sampling events
4 Monthly cruisesAerial overflightsBenthic sampling
Option 1. Minimize monitoring effort in the tidal Chesapeake Bay to that needed for supporting criteria assessment; maximize information for assessing management effectiveness in the watershed.
Tidal Chesapeake Bay and Tributaries
Watershed
Parameters Mainstem and tidal tributaries D.O., salinity, temperature, pH, Secchi, Chlorophyll a. Limited nutrient suite.
SAV
Benthic community
Nutrient (nitrogen and phosphorus) and sediment at present and new priority stations.
Limited set of new stations for 1) source-type 2) targeted monitoring and 3) robustness to tributary strategies Load indicator development
Year-round
Base and storm flow sampling protocol
Seasons April-October (except SAV to include Polyhaline)
Sampling events
7 Monthly cruisesSAV Aerial SurveyBenthic sampling
Option 2. Minimize monitoring effort in the tidal Chesapeake Bay for supporting criteria assessment, sustain additional diagnostic monitoring at reduced rate; maximize watershed assessment of Management effectiveness.
Tidal Chesapeake Bay and Tributaries
Watershed
Parameters Mainstem and tidal tributaries D.O., salinity, temperature, pH, Secchi, Chlorophyll a. Limited nutrient suite.
SAV, Benthic community
Shallow water, other?
Nutrient (nitrogen and phosphorus) and sediment at present and new priority stations.
Limited set of new stations for 1) source-type assessments and 2) robustness to tributary strategies Load indicator development
Year-round
Base and storm flow sampling protocol
Seasons April-October (except SAV to include Polyhaline)
Sampling events
7 Monthly cruisesSAV Aerial SurveyBenthic sampling, other?
Option 3. Minimize monitoring effort in the tidal Chesapeake Bay for supporting criteria assessment, sustain additional diagnostic monitoring, provide for decision options by supporting DATAFLOW assessments; maximize assessing management effectiveness in the watershed.