Water Quality Partnership Meeting LOTT Alliance Regional Service Center November 18, 2010 Rob Duff and Josh Baldi Washington State Department of Ecology.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
1 Briefing for WRIA 8 – Lake Washington/Cedar/Sammamish Watershed July 17, 2008.
Advertisements

February 20, 2013 Puget Sound Partnerships 2012 Action Agenda Update: Revised Approach Continues to Lack Key Accountability Tools Envisioned in Statute.
Legislative Oversight The House Bay Trust Study Commission Presented by Sandra T. Whitehouse, Ph.D.
Water Resources Monitoring Strategy for Wisconsin: Building on Experience Mike Staggs, WDNR Bureau of Fisheries Management and Habitat Protection Acknowledgements:
7:00 pmWelcome and introductions 7:05pmHLWD planning overview Plan update process 7:25 pmStakeholder involvement Watershed problems 7:40 pmPublic comment.
2009 Water Quality Monitoring Report – Fish Creek Vaughn Hauser, B.Sc. Naomi Parker, B.Sc., BIT, CEPIT.
Upper Providence Township Stormwater Management MS4 Program.
Stream Monitoring in Loudoun County David Ward, Water Resources Engineer Department of Building and Development, Department of Building and Development,
Using the Open Standards to Advance Puget Sound Recovery Kari Stiles, PhD Puget Sound Partnership Conservation Measures Partnership Oct 7-9, 2014.
Narragansett Bay Estuary Program Narragansett Bay CCMP  Original done 1992  Stakedholder-developed goals, objectives, actions  Many key actions implemented.
Jeff Weiss, Founder Marcy Knysz, Watershed Coordinator Buffalo Creek Clean Water Partnership.
Capitol Hill Oceans Week Wetlands Restoration Panel June 8, 2005 JOHN H. DUNNIGAN Ecosystem Goal Lead Capitol Hill Oceans Week June 8, 2005.
Imperial River: Water Quality Status and Basin Management Action Plan.
Effectiveness Monitoring: What’s Working to Restore Puget Sound? Leska Fore, Puget Sound Partnership Constance Sullivan, Friday Harbor Labs Ken Dzinbal,
Island County SMP Shoreline Residential Development Workshop December 5, 2011.
The National Aquaculture Policy and The State Shellfish Initiative Perry Lund Shorelands and Environmental Assistance Program 17 November 2011.
The Importance of Coastal Waters - Recent Reports National Coastal Condition Report National Coastal Condition Report Heinz Center’s State of the Nation’s.
2010 Water Quality Assessment MARINE WATER Presented by Mike Herold.
Florida Department of Environmental Protection Watershed Assessment 2015 Strategic Monitoring in the Florida Keys DEAR- Water Quality Assessment Program.
Department of the Environment Overview of Water Quality Data Used by MDE and Water Quality Parameters Timothy Fox MDE, Science Service Administration Wednesday.
What does the SALCC do? Mission: Create a shared blueprint for landscape conservation actions that sustain natural and cultural resources.
 Review/compare effectiveness monitoring categories and approve a set  Review and compare hypotheses-driving questions and provide guidance or approval.
Puget Sound Initiative 2007 At A Glance Jay Manning, Director Washington Department of Ecology April 26,
ANACOSTIA RESTORATION Indicators: How They Are Helping Achieve Water Quality Goals? SWRR April 2006 Meeting Ted Graham, Metropolitan Washington Council.
The HCCC Integrated Watershed Plan Alliance for a Healthy South Sound Council 19 May 2015 Purpose: – Establish strategic priorities for the HCCC to implement.
Water Quality Planning Division Monitoring & Assessment Section Surface Water Quality Monitoring Program (SWQM)
Elaine Snouwaert – WA Department of Ecology Walt Edelen – Spokane Conservation District Spokane River DO Advisory Group Meeting January 19, 2012.
WRIA 8 Status and Trends Monitoring ( ) Hans B. Berge, Dan Lantz, Scott Stolnack, and Curtis DeGasperi King County Department of Natural Resources.
Stormwater Status & Trends Monitoring Proposal for Freshwater Streams (wadeable) & Marine Nearshore Participants: Scott Collyard, Shayne Cothern, Jay Davis,
Draft Stormwater Monitoring and Assessment Strategy for the Puget Sound Region: Volume 1 Scientific Framework November 18, 2009 Jim Simmonds and Karen.
Overview 1.Types of monitoring 2.Partnership monitoring needs 3.Current monitoring coordination efforts.
Benefits of the Redesigned RMP to Regional Board Decision Making Karen Taberski Regional Water Quality Control Board San Francisco Bay Region.
Environmental Indicators are attributes associated with specific ecosystem elements (e.g., water, plants, animals and people) that are used to characterize.
Performance Management Thought for the Day “The perfect is the enemy of the good” - Voltaire The original quote in French is "Le mieux est l'ennemi du.
Government Management Accountability & Performance Program Natural Resources Cabinet Presentation October 6 th, 2010 A Healthy Puget Sound By 2020.
Addressing the Sediment Problem in Sonoma Creek Watershed Rebecca Lawton 1, Deanne DiPietro 1, Laurel Collins 2, Arthur Dawson 1 1 Sonoma Ecology Center,
Rapid Bioassessment Protocols for low gradient streams) for species richness, composition and pollution tolerance, as well as a composite benthic macroinvertebrate.
Presented to: Severn River Association 2008 State of the Severn Anne Arundel County Government Department of Public Works Ron Bowen, P.E. October 21, 2008.
January 27, 2011 Examples of Recovery Evaluation Objectives in the Western U.S. Delta Stewardship Council Presentation by the Independent Consultant.
The State of the Sound Scott Redman Puget Sound Action Team February 5, 2003 Marine Water and Nearshore Successes & Challenges.
Management of threats to fish and wildlife from PBTs Scott Redman, Puget Sound Action Team Puget Sound Plankton - The Ultimate Seafood Experience, Jan.
Indicator Status Updates Overview Nita Sylvester, EPA CBPO Chair of STAR’s Indicator Workgroup.
AHSS Council September Initial Recovery Strategy Deliverable Due to PSP in early October Focused on documenting / describing our work to date Will.
Alliance for a Healthy South Sound March 25, 2015.
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.
Estuary, Marine Waters and Nearshore Indicators Presented to the Governor’s Forum on Monitoring, October 5, 2005 Sarah Brace, Puget Sound Action Team,
Water Resources Workshop Standards, Use Attainability, Impairments and TMDLS Richard Eskin Maryland Department of the Environment February 20, 2004.
Puget Sound Partnership Action Agenda: Roadmap to Completion.
Counselor dr. Otilia Mihail Ministry of Environment, Water and Forest Constanta 17 June
Watershed Monitoring *Background Watershed Stewardship Plan-2004 Gap Projects IRWMP-Dec Policies SFEI study-2007 Joint TC/WC meeting-June 2010 *Proposed.
Think about answering the questions: Who? What? Where? When? Why? How? Before your volunteers begin collecting data.
For EBTJV meeting October 26, 2010 Executive Order Strategy for Protecting and Restoring the Chesapeake Bay Watershed.
The Chesapeake Bay: How is it Doing? An Overview of The Chesapeake Bay Watershed.
2035 General Plan Update Joint Study Session on Draft Conservation Element Planning Commission and Parks & Recreation Commission December 1, 2015.
Mulberry River Watershed
GREAT BAY and NEW HAMPSHIRE WATER QUALITY STANDARDS
Puget Sound Watershed Characterization Project
Water Quality Planning Division Monitoring & Assessment Section
Division of Aquaculture
Request Approval of (d) Listing Methodology
Tim Cawthon TCEQ Nonpoint Source Program
Mulberry Watershed Management Plan
Watershed Management Plan Citizens Advisory Committee April 18, 2011
John Tinger U.S. EPA Region IX
Indicators of Water Quality
Indicators of Water Quality
Water Quality Planning Division Monitoring & Assessment Section
Marco island water quality monitoring
Water Quality Planning Division Monitoring & Assessment Section
Presentation transcript:

Water Quality Partnership Meeting LOTT Alliance Regional Service Center November 18, 2010 Rob Duff and Josh Baldi Washington State Department of Ecology

 Background  Framework  Dashboard  Next Steps  Resources

 Puget Sound Partnership (Partnership) mandated to establish ecosystem indicators by 2008 ◦ Phase 1 process completed in December 2008  Over 100 indicators identified as “good” or “potential”  Various recommendations to move forward  Puget Sound Science Update – “Phase 2” ◦ Considered Phase 1 recommendations and other sources ◦ Provides framework for ecosystem indicators selection ◦ Posted October 2010  Partnership forms team in March 2010 to select high-level ecosystem indicators (Dashboard)  Leadership Council approves Dashboard in July 2010

 Dashboard are high-level status and trends indicators ◦ NOT the only indicators needed ◦ ecologically important & socially resonant  Integrated with Performance Measurement System ◦ Open Standards for the Practice of Conservation ◦ Results chains (a.k.a logic models)  Used framework outlined in the Puget Sound Science Update

 Begin with the six goals of the Partnership ◦ Human health, human well-being, species and food webs, water quality, water quantity, habitat  Decompose goals into unique ecological Focal Components ◦ Specific habitat domains……marine, freshwater, terrestrial, and interface  Each focal component is then characterized by Key Attributes ◦ Describe fundamental aspects of each focal component.  Indicators are assigned to each ecosystem key attribute.

Framework

Natural DimensionHuman DimensionProgram Dimension Marine Water Quality Index - ECY Sound Behavior Index (under constr.) - PSP Funding for Action Agenda - PSP Freshwater Quality Index - ECY Puget Sound Quality of Life Index (under constr.) - PSP Percent of Action Agenda Items Addressed - PSP Stream Flows Below Critical Levels - ECY Tribal/Non-Tribal Commercial Harvest - NWIF Wild Chinook Salmon - RITTSwimming Beaches - ECY Orcas/ South Resident Killer Whales – Center for Whale Research Recreational Fishing Permit Sales - DFW Pacific Herring - DFWShellfish Beds Restored – EPA & DOH Birds - DFW Shoreline Armoring - DNR Eelgrass - DNR Toxics in Fish - DFW Toxics in Sediments - ECY Land Use/Land Cover - DFW Puget Sound Dashboard of Ecosystem Indicators

Implement a Strategy/Activity Action Agenda: Implement Shellfish Protection District plans Implement a Strategy/Activity Action Agenda: Implement Shellfish Protection District plans Intermediate Result Performance Measures: Onsite septic discharges & Wastewater treatment plant discharges Intermediate Result Performance Measures: Onsite septic discharges & Wastewater treatment plant discharges Threat Reduction Result Performance Measures: Acres of shellfish beds re-opened Threat Reduction Result Performance Measures: Acres of shellfish beds re-opened Improves Outcomes Dashboard/ Ecosystem Indicators: Recreational fishing permit sales Improves Outcomes Dashboard/ Ecosystem Indicators: Recreational fishing permit sales …so that… Degree of Influence/Control Outputs Immediate Outcomes Intermediate Outcomes …so that… Ultimate Policy Intent Ultimate Outcomes Results Chain (a.k.a. logic model)

Dashboard Example: Freshwater Quality Index

 Conventional pollutants for14 major rivers in Puget Sound representing 70% of the drainage ◦ temperature, pH, fecal coliform bacteria, dissolved oxygen, suspended sediment, turbidity, nitrogen, and phosphorus  Toxic pollutants not included ◦ More than 80% of the water bodies sampled for toxics in Puget Sound are impaired  Urban streams subject to higher levels of pollution ◦ King County found 24 of 43 sites had WQI scores below 40 (2007)  The WQI shows that conventional water quality pollution in Puget Sound gets a “C.” Dashboard Example: Freshwater Quality Index

 Need to drill down ◦ Spatially ◦ Puget Sound is already a small grouping of 62 statewide sites ◦ By parameter ◦ Individual stations  Spatial drill down – urban streams Dashboard Example: Freshwater Quality Index

 Freshwater Quality Index ◦ King County Urban Streams

 Building the Dashboard ◦ Indentify single point of contact for each indicator (Champion) ◦ Compile logistics for each indicator  Frequency of reporting, stability of funding, data format, data management, improvements, ect ◦ Design and launch  Target setting ◦ Partnership will set 3-5 priority 2020 targets by February 2011 ◦ Eelgrass, shellfish beds, estuary restoration  Puget Sound Coordinated Ecosystem Monitoring Program

 Dashboard ◦  Puget Sound Science Update ◦  Open Standards for the Practice of Conservation ◦