The Non-tidal Water Quality Monitoring Network: past, present and future opportunities Katie Foreman Water Quality Analyst, UMCES-CBPO MASC Non-tidal Water.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Monitoring Watershed Restoration Effectiveness Nez Perce Tribe DFRM-Watershed Division Rebecca A. Lloyd, Project Leader.
Advertisements

Future Directions and Initiatives in the Use of Remote Sensing for Water Quality.
Planning for Our Future:
2009 Water Quality Monitoring Report – Fish Creek Vaughn Hauser, B.Sc. Naomi Parker, B.Sc., BIT, CEPIT.
Nelly Smith EPA Region 6. - Develop or revise bacteria reduction program for consistency with new TMDL requirements and allocations - Develop or revise.
Michael J. Brayton MD/DE/DC Water Science Center Hydrologic Controls on Nutrient and Pesticide Transport through a Small Agricultural Watershed, Morgan.
Imperial River: Water Quality Status and Basin Management Action Plan.
Assessment of Ecological Condition in Coastal Waters Impacted by Hurricane Katrina.
Chesapeake Bay Program Monitoring Activities and Monitoring Network Design Chesapeake Bay Program Monitoring Activities and Monitoring Network Design Stephen.
0 The National Hydrography Dataset Plus a tool for SPARROW Watershed Modeling Richard Moore (presented by Alan Rea)
Spatial and temporal trends in dissolved oxygen concentrations and dissolved oxygen depletion (hypoxia) in the Delaware River Basin Demonstration Area.
Common Monitoring Parameters. Step 1 Consider purpose/objectives of monitoring Assess use attainment Characterize watershed Identify pollutants and sources.
West Virginia Non-tidal Monitoring Network: 2010 Update West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection West Virginia Department of Agriculture USGS.
Nutrient Concentrations in Coastal Streams, Variation with Land Use in the Carpinteria Valley (Santa Barbara Coastal LTER) Timothy H. Robinson John M.
DEVELOPMENT OF A WATERSHED MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR THE RIVER RAISIN BY: BILL BENNETT LESLIE RAMIREZ KAT RIDOLFI 4/5/2005 ADVISORS: DR. DAVID ALLAN DR. TOM.
Nutrient Loading in Coastal Streams, Variation with Land Use in the Carpinteria Valley Timothy H. Robinson Bren School of Environmental Science and Management.
Brian Haggard Arkansas Water Resources Center UA Division of Agriculture Arkansas Water Resources Center.
Water Quality Monitoring and Parameter Load Estimations in Lake Conway Point Remove Watershed and L’Anguille River Watershed Presented by: Dan DeVun, Equilibrium.
Water-Quality Monitoring for Environmental Management and Source-Water Protection U.S. Geological Survey New England Water Science Center in cooperation.
U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Assessing Watershed Scale Responses to BMP Implementation - Fairfax County, VA - John Jastram Hydrologist.
Inventory, Monitoring, and Assessments A Strategy to Improve the IM&A System Update and Feedback Session with Employees and Partners December 5, 2011.
Region III Activities to Implement National Vision to Improve Water Quality Monitoring National Water Quality Monitoring Council August 20, 2003.
Developing Monitoring Programs to Detect NPS Load Reductions.
Sustaining Long Term Regional Coordinated Monitoring Programs Todd Running, H-GAC May 9, 2006.
The Importance of Watershed Modeling for Conservation Policy Or What is an Economist Doing at a SWAT Workshop?
Aqua Case Mussel culture area- Chalastra Thessaloniki Exercise Environmental Impacts of mussel farming o n water quality. Amalia Moriki, Sofia Galinou-Mitsoudi,
1 Survey of the Nation’s Lakes Presentation at NALMS’ 25 th Annual International Symposium Nov. 10, 2005.
Site Locations Shaded area = Counties that do not drain into the Chesapeake Bay Watershed Basin.
Lake Whatcom Tributary Monitoring – Phase II Summary Whatcom County Department of Public Works April 26 | 2013.
Ric Lawson Watershed Planner Huron River Watershed Council MiCorps Staff.
NWQMC July 26, 2005 Developing A National Water Quality Monitoring Network Design.
Price Creek Watershed Project A joint project of the Iowa & Benton County Soil and Water Conservation Districts IOWATER Meeting – November 13, 2007.
Delaware River Basin SPARROW Model Mary Chepiga, , Susan Colarullo, , Jeff Fischer, ,
Robert M. Summers, Ph.D. September 16, 2015 How can we make sure the Chesapeake Bay Restoration really works?
U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey CBP Partnership Team- Enhance Monitoring in the Bay and its Watershed Scott Phillips, USGS Jonathan.
Response of benthic algae communities to nutrient enrichment in agricultural streams: Implications for establishing nutrient criteria R.W. Black 1, P.W.
Non-tidal network monitoring update for calendar year 2011 Non-tidal Monitoring Workgroup 8 February 2011 Bill Romano MD Dept. of Natural Resources Photograph.
Chesapeake Bay Program’s Baywide and Basinwide Monitoring Networks: Options for Adapting Monitoring Networks and Realigning Resources to Address Partner.
Adem.alabama.gov ADEM’s Monitoring Summary Reports Alabama – Tombigbee CWP Stakeholders Meeting Montgomery, Alabama 3 February 2010 Lisa Huff – ADEM Field.
Tidal Monitoring and Analysis Workgroup (TMAW) Meeting February 7, 2013 Annapolis, MD Katie Foreman and Liza Hernandez University of Maryland Center for.
Lessons Learned from BMP evaluation studies in the nontidal streams and river in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed Katie Foreman University of Maryland Center.
Delaware’s Non-Tidal Monitoring Update for CY 2011 February 8,
WLRD Science Seminar Sammamish River Water Quality Model Status Report November 19, 2002.
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Surface Water Monitoring Pam Anderson, MPCA May 20 th, 2015.
Edge of Field Monitoring in the Lake Champlain Basin of Vermont
What do we have in common? Do more with less! PNAMP Integrated Status & Trend Monitoring Workgroup.
State Agency Needs for Remote Sensing Data Related to Water Quality By Bob Van Dolah Marine Resources Research Institute South Carolina Department of Natural.
STREAM MONITORING CASE STUDY. Agenda  Monitoring Requirements  TMDL Requirements  OCEA Initial Monitoring Program  Selection of Parameters  Data.
Water Quality Indicators and Monitoring Design to Support the Albemarle-Pamlico National Estuary Program: A Progress Report Dean E. Carpenter and William.
Potential Activities, Costs, and Priorities for Watershed Monitoring Scott Phillips Joel Blomquist Katie Foreman Eff/Opt Conf Call July 24, 2009.
Stream Health Outcome Biennial Workplan Neely L. Law, PhD Center for Watershed Protection Chesapeake Bay Program Sediment & Stream Coordinator Habitat.
Existing Non-tidal Monitoring Network. Existing Non-tidal Monitoring Network classified according to size of watershed and predominant land use upstream.
Water Quality Monitoring in Michigan, : A Decade of Program Evolution By: Gerald Saalfeld, MI Department of Environmental Quality.
Criteria Attainment and Assessing Management Effectiveness Peter Tango CBPO Co-chair Bob Hirsch USGS Staff Expert Katie Foreman May 20,
The National Monitoring Network: Monitoring & Management of Alabama Rivers Fred Leslie Alabama Dept of Environmental Management National Monitoring Conference.
Integrated Approach for Assessing and Communicating Progress toward the Chesapeake Bay Water-Quality Standards Scott Phillips USGS, STAR May 14, 2012 PSC.
Watershed Monitoring *Background Watershed Stewardship Plan-2004 Gap Projects IRWMP-Dec Policies SFEI study-2007 Joint TC/WC meeting-June 2010 *Proposed.
For EBTJV meeting October 26, 2010 Executive Order Strategy for Protecting and Restoring the Chesapeake Bay Watershed.
Watershed Management Plan Summary of 2014 Activities/Progress Presented by: Matthew Bennett, MS December 2014.
GIS M ETHODOLOGY Swearing Creek Watershed Restoration Plan 8/26/2015 Piedmont Triad Regional Council.
Citizens Advisory Council
Chesapeake Monitoring Cooperative
CBP Update: Climate Change and the Chesapeake Bay TMDL
2025 Chesapeake Bay Climate Change Load Projections
Unified Approach to Stormwater Monitoring (UASM)
Des Plaines River Watershed Workgroup Midwest Biodiversity Institute
West Virginia CBP Non-tidal Network: 2006 Status Update
Little River Ditches Watershed Monitoring
Chesapeake Bay Program Climate Change Modeling 2.0
Marco island water quality monitoring
Presentation transcript:

The Non-tidal Water Quality Monitoring Network: past, present and future opportunities Katie Foreman Water Quality Analyst, UMCES-CBPO MASC Non-tidal Water Quality Workshop May 7-8, 2008

Outline History and Objectives Network Development Challenges STAC recommendations for design improvement Discussion questions and session goals

The NT network was developed with 3 objectives in mind Developed by the Non-tidal Water Quality Workgroup in 2004 for consistency in monitoring Objectives: 1. Measure and assess the status and trends of nutrient and sediment in tributary strategy basins 2. Assess the factors affecting nutrient and sediment status and trends 3. Improve calibration and verification of partners’ watershed models

200 sites were proposed 200 candidate sites Site criteria: Outlets of tributary strategy basins Highest nutrient load delivery regions Low monitoring site density regions Funding was limiting factor – states prioritized sites

Limitations of candidate sites 200 candidate sites address only the first objective Need to study representativeness of sites Lack of funding requires prioritizing new site implementation

Current non-tidal water quality network (88 sites) 70 primary sites ($45,000/yr/site) 18 secondary sites (25,000/yr/site) 2007 Sampling cost: $3.6 million mostly existing funds, $300,000- CBP

Criteria for sampling and analysis Chemistry samples minimum of 12/yr (primary vs. secondary). Standardized parameters, sampling, and analytical techniques. 3 years of data for load calculations, 5 years for trends.

Parameters are standardized Required NTN Parameters Additional RIM Parameters (Recommended for NTN) Total Nitrogen, as N (TDN + PN) or (TKN + NO23) Total Dissolved Nitrogen (TDN) Ammonium, as N (dissolved) (NH3F)Particulate Nitrogen (PN) Nitrate + Nitrite, as N (dissolved) (NO23F)Total Dissolved Phosphorus (TDP) Total Phosphorus, as P (TP) or (TDP + PP) Particulate Phosphorus (PP) Phosphate, as P (dissolved) (PO4F)Particulate Carbon (PC), or TOC Total Suspended Solids (TSS)Dissolved Organic Carbon (DOC) Suspended Sediment Concentration (SSC) (Storm events only) Volatile Suspended Solids (VSS) SSC-Sand & SSC-Fines (4 storms per year)Chlorophyll-a (corrected) (CHLA) Field Parameters: Dissolved Oxygen, Temperature, pH, Specific Conductance

Analytical techniques are standardized

Almost 1200 samples collected in 2007

Network Challenges Coordination of many agencies Logistical constraints given size of watershed (storm sampling) Funding (stream gage funding dependent on states) Only 1/3 of proposed sites are fully implemented Spatial representativeness is unknown

STAC recommends changes to improve the network 2005 STAC reports made 11 main recommendations STAC Publication

STAC recommends changes to improve the network 1.Evaluate spatial representativeness of current network 2.Use models to optimize network design 3.Add sites at smaller scales STAC Publication

STAC recommends changes to improve the network 4. Target high pollution areas (urban, ag. areas) 5.Monitor unmonitored areas (coastal plain) 6.Augment with info. from other programs 7.Use sensor technologies and automated samplers STAC Publication

STAC recommends changes to improve the network 8.Improve point source load estimates 9.Use adaptive management and increase flexibility of program 10.Integrate monitoring and modeling programs STAC Publication

STAC recommends changes to improve the network 11. Expanded network should be responsive to multiple objectives and be flexible. STAC Publication

Session Goals Discuss the STAC recommendations for the enhancement of the network. Prioritize STAC recommendations for the enhancement of the network and create a plan for carrying out those recommendations.

Discussion Questions How can site selection be optimized to incorporate all objectives of the program? Is the monitoring program able to support the development of key watershed health indicators and other management tools? –additional parameters and/or improved multi- agency monitoring coordination?

Discussion Questions How would a flexible monitoring program be structured? What are key coordination efforts that need to be implemented to augment network data with other monitoring program data? –smaller scales, BMP projects What are the needs for the non-tidal database to be enhanced?

Expected session outcomes Prioritize STAC recommendations for the enhancement of the network. Create a plan for non-tidal workgroup to carrying out selected recommendations.