1 / 30

Chesapeake Bay Shallow Water Monitoring - Progress on Implementation and Analysis

Chesapeake Bay Shallow Water Monitoring - Progress on Implementation and Analysis. Bruce Michael Director, Tidewater Ecosystem Assessment Division MSC Meeting, May 17, 2006. Chesapeake Bay Shallow Water Monitoring Design Consists of 2 Components Integrated with Other Forms of Monitoring.

creola
Download Presentation

Chesapeake Bay Shallow Water Monitoring - Progress on Implementation and Analysis

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Chesapeake Bay Shallow Water Monitoring - Progress on Implementation and Analysis Bruce Michael Director, Tidewater Ecosystem Assessment Division MSC Meeting, May 17, 2006

  2. Chesapeake Bay Shallow Water Monitoring Design Consists of 2 Components Integrated with Other Forms of Monitoring Mapping Buoys/ Profilers Fixed Station Continuous Monitors • Continuous Monitors • All criteria • Shallow-water designated use • Water Quality Mapping • All criteria • Shallow & open-water designated use • Existing Fixed Stations • All criteria • All but shallow-water designated use

  3. Continuous Monitors • Generally, deployed April – October, over a 3-year period • A subset of meters are telemetered real-time to website • Measures water quality parameters every 15 minutes YSI 6600 EDS – Measures Dissolved Oxygen, Turbidity, Chlorophyll, Water Temperature,Salinity, pH

  4. Water Quality Mapping • Monthly cruises, April – October, over a 3-year period • Measures water quality parameters every 4 seconds YSI 6600 EDS – Measures Dissolved Oxygen, Turbidity, Chlorophyll, Water Temperature, Salinity, pH Dataview Real – Time GIS Software Water Quality Mapping Stowaway YSI/Flow Unit Electronics

  5. Virginia – 2006 Proposed Tidal Monitoring Sites

  6. Better Coordination with Other Long-Term Monitoring Programs New 2006 Segments and Partners • Entire Potomac • CBL • SMCM • VA DEQ • VIMS • COG • GMU • CBOS • EPA • NOAA • USGS • US Army • St. Mary’s Co. • Choptank • HPL • USDA • Creekwatchers • Wicomico • SU & HPL • Creekwatchers • NERRS

  7. Water Quality Mapping Potomac River April 10-14th 2006

  8. Water Quality Criteria Assessment Protocols (CAP) Workgroup • The Chesapeake Bay Program established this workgroup to:- develop assessment methods to evaluate attainment of the criteria and designated uses, - address many unresolved issues regarding assessment of water quality criteria

  9. CAP Workgroup’s SWM Chlorophyll/Turbidity/DO Analysis Team • Elgin Perry – statistics consultant • Ken Moore - VIMS • Walter Boynton - CBL • Julie Baldizar – USGS • Bill Romano – MD DNR • Mark Trice – MD DNR • MD & VA State and Federal partners

  10. CAP Workgroup SWM Tasks - Shallow water issues * water clarity assessment procedures * chlorophyll assessment procedures * use of fixed stations for high frequency DO measurements * temporal adjustment of spatial mapping data - Reporting * how should assessment results be reported * what type of information should be reported * how should information be managed/stored * what is the schedule for reporting assessment results

  11. Directions Needed for Potential Water Clarity Assessment • Baywide Consistency • Simplicity • Use of CFD for Clarity Assessment

  12. Attainment Depth Contour Clarity Criteria Assessment Method 1 (MD&VA) Attainment of SAV Acreage Goal SAV Area A SAV Area B Attainment Defined as: SSAV Acreage > SAV Goal Single Best Year

  13. Attainment Depth Contour Clarity Criteria Assessment Method 2 (VA) Attainment of Water Clarity Acreage Goal SAV Area A SAV Area B Water Clarity Area A Attainment Defined as: SSAV Acreage < SAV Goal SWater Clarity Acreage > WC Goal Single Best Year Water Clarity Area B

  14. Attainment Depth Contour Clarity Criteria Assessment Method 3 (MD) Attainment of Water Clarity Criteria Based on CFD SAV Area A Attainment Area SAV Area B No Grow Zone Non-Attainment Area Attainment Defined as: SSAV Acreage < SAV Goal Calculate % Area in Attainment Assess Using CFD

  15. Attainment Depth Contour Clarity Criteria Assessment Method 4 (MD) Attainment of Combined SAV & WC Acreage Goals SAV Area A Clarity Attainment Area SAV Area B No Grow Zone Non-Attainment Area Attainment Defined as: SSAV Acreage < SAV Goal (SSAV Acreage + SWC Acreage) > SAV Goal

  16. Issues Related to Current State Standards • Method 1 - Attainment of SAV Acreage Goal • No Issues. Method is accepted by both States, CBPO and EPA Region 3 • Method 2 - Attainment of Water Clarity Acreage Goal • No attainment depth and thus not consistent definition of spatial extent. • Method of summarizing multiple cruises in one year is unclear. • Comparison to goal precludes use of CFD. • Method 3 - Attainment of Water Clarity Criteria Based on CFD • No issues other than those related to normal use of CFD. • Method 4 - Attainment of Combined SAV & WC Acreage Goals • Method of summarizing multiple cruises in one year is unclear. • Comparison to goal precludes use of CFD.

  17. Chlorophyll and Turbidity Measurement Issues • Although YSI 6600 chlorophyll approximates extractive chlorophyll a at many stations, the criteria will be in terms of chlorophyll a • kd will be used to evaluate the Bay water clarity standards, so turbidity would be used at shallow water sites • kd can also be used in the Gallegos optical model to partition light attenuation into TSS and chlorophyll components

  18. Develop a post-calibration chlorophyll model • Match extractive and YSI 6600 chlorophyll • Outlier prediction model to remove data • Test for significant differences (adjust all data, or only for significant differences?) • Geographical differences • Background fluorescence adjustment • Photo-inhibition (diel study conducted on the Patuxent estuary)

  19. Develop a kd model • Using linear regression, USGS found that turbidity was the best single variable predictor of kd at 5 of 10 sites (r2 from 0.23 to 0.62) • Turbidity was significant, but not best at one site • Other than turbidity, TP, DOC, salinity, TN, DIN, and TVS were found to good predictors of kd • VA found that in general, turbidity was the best predictor of kd in their systems

  20. Next steps • Complete assembling multiyear shallow water monitoring database (MD and VA) • Determine best model approach based on spatial distribution (lumping or splitting) • Evaluate models using both continuous and water quality mapping data • Provide documentation for review • Publish by late 2006

  21. Time of Day Averaged Continuous Monitoring DO Magothy R., April 15 - October 31, 2001

  22. Correcting DO Data for Time of Day to “Normalize” Water Quality Mapping • Average 15-minute intervals of Continuous Monitoring DO data from a 2-week period surrounding a water quality mapping cruise (8/22/01). • Fit 3rd-order polynomial regression of averaged continuous monitoring DO data from 5am to 1-hr after DATAFLOW cruise. • Use regression equation to obtain time-based correction factor for water quality mapping and adjust to daily minimum (0600). • Mapping Data - (Predicted (Tcollected) - Predicted T0600)

  23. Water Quality Mapping: Uncorrected vs. Corrected (to daily min.)

  24. Corrected vs Non-Corrected Spatial Data Minimum DO Cruise Uncorrected Corrected <5 mg/l >5 mg/l

  25. Water Quality Criteria Assessment Protocols Workgroup • SCHEDULE • - Workgroup efforts initiated in spring 2005 • - Assessment results for States 2006 impaired waters listing for dissolved oxygen and shallow water SAV coverage completed in November 2005 • - Concerted efforts beginning January 2006 to complete tasks by June 2006 meeting of Water Quality Steering Committee to review efforts. • Develop draft document addressing criteria • assessment issues for science review - summer 2006 • - Complete/release technical report by December 2006 for States to consider in updating regulations

More Related