1 / 15

Adapting the RMP to Answer the Important Questions

This article discusses the adaptation of the Regional Monitoring Program (RMP) in order to address key questions and remain relevant. It highlights the contributions of Water Board staff, the Technical Review Committee, Workgroups, and the Steering Committee. The article also emphasizes the importance of the "Pulse of the Estuary" team and the role of monitoring in adaptive management. It explores the lessons learned, remaining questions, and the move towards proactive management. The article concludes with a discussion on the evolution of management priorities and the need for improved institutional and communication strategies.

rchandler
Download Presentation

Adapting the RMP to Answer the Important Questions

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. Adapting the RMP to Answer the Important Questions Keeping the Program Relevant

  2. Thanks to: • Water Board Staff • Technical Review Committee and Workgroups • Steering Committee • “Pulse of the Estuary” Team

  3. Overview • Monitoring as Part of Adaptive Management • What Have We Learned? • Which Questions Remain? • Moving Toward Proactive Management

  4. The Three “Cs”

  5. 1. What should cleanup targets be? 1. How do pollutants compare to various guidelines? 2. Which pollutants accumulate faster than they can be degraded? 2. Can pollutant changes be linked to changing inputs?

  6. 3. Which pollutants bioaccumulate? 3. Which factors influence effects of specific pollutants on biota? 4. What is the relative magnitude of pollutant inputs from different pathways? 4. Can data from a few high intensity sites be projected to other watersheds?

  7. How Much Have We Learned?

  8. Better understanding of relative loadings from various sources and transport pathways

  9. Local small tributaries in the Bay Area Sacramento / San Joaquin Rivers San Francisco Estuary Institute Suspended SedimentHg PCBs • 2000 • 2005 Rivers (11 kg) Small Tribs?

  10. Lessons, continued • Management actions produce results • Estuary and watershed processes affect beneficial use restoration • Emerging pollutants require increased attention

  11. The Evolution of Management Priorities for Restoring the Chemical Integrity of Water

  12. Institutional and Communication Lessons

  13. Information “Clients” • Water Boards • RMP Participants • EPA • Neighbors • State Legislature • Congress

  14. Traditional: “Fix” problems after they have become “emergencies” in the public eye – TMDLs Forever! • New: Anticipate problems through surveillance, develop predictive recovery models, emphasize risk assessment and problem prevention

  15. Next Steps • Systematic look at efficiencies • Modeling the system is now possible!

More Related