190 likes | 202 Views
Explore the monitoring strategy and results of agriculture in California's Central Valley, focusing on achievements, challenges, and collaboration efforts. Learn about the formation of coalition groups, monitoring phases, and communication approaches. Discover how monitoring data provides valuable insights, guides program revisions, and fosters collaboration. Stay informed about current actions, upcoming challenges, and ways to track program effectiveness.
E N D
Monitoring Agriculture – Strategy and Results Margie Read, REAII Senior Environmental Scientist Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program California Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board
Presentation Outline • Where we were – Day 1 • Addressing the challenges • Using the 4 ‘C’s • What we have achieved • Where we go from here
Opportunities for Compromise • Formation of Coalition Groups • Coalition Monitoring (phased) • -- Phase I: Toxicity, Field Parameters, Flow • -- Phase II: Pesticides, Metals, Nutrients • Water Board Monitoring through UC • No phasing – comprehensive approach
Approach for Communications • Staff Leads for Coalition Management • Outreach Meetings • Website and E-mail notices • Stakeholder Groups • SWAMP Comparability
Other Active Stakeholders Environmental Interests Consulting Firms Ag Commissioners Academia USEPA State Pesticide Regulators Food and Agriculture Analytical Laboratories
Approach for Coordination • Identify all monitoring activities • Synchronize sampling schedules • Strategize on monitoring sites • Encourage SWAMP Comparability
Monitoring Data Value • Provides common ground • Baseline information (status) • Identifies data gaps • Identifies water quality problems • Guides Program revisions
Approach for Collaboration • Start with common ground • Identify issues • Developed strategy • Utilize impartial review
What is the same… • Coalitions still need to comply • Program objectives • Categories for Monitoring: field measures, chemistry, flow, toxicity • Exceedance response • SWAMP QAPP
What is different…. • Objectives as 5 Program Questions • Monitoring framework • Requires electronic data submittal • Clarified actions for exceedances • Reduction of reporting & paperwork • Monitoring Design Guidance
Five Program Questions • Is the water quality protective of beneficial uses? • 2. If not, how bad is the problem? • 3. What is causing the problem? • What are the management practices used to fix the problem? • 5. Is the problem getting better as a result?
What is Different ….. Monitoring Framework • Assessment Monitoring (status) • Core Monitoring (trends) • Special Project (resolve problems)
Upcoming Challenges... • Build efficiency in Coalition work • Maximize MP implementation • Develop links with new partners • Expand SWAMP electronic submittals • Coordinate monitoring • Track Program effectiveness
For further information…. Program website: http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/centralvalley/ programs/irrigated_lands/index.html Monitoring data reports: http:/waterboards.ca.gov/centralvalley/water_issues/ irrigated_lands/monitoring/index.shtml Monitoring Program documents: http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/centralvalley/water_issues/irrigated_lands/coalition_group_waiver/index.shtml
Questions? Margie Lopez Read mread@waterboards.ca.gov Thank you for listening….