Mike Langland USGS PA Agricultural Advisory Board April 28, 2016

Transcription

1 Mike Langland USGS PA Agricultural Advisory Board April 28, 2016

2 Chesapeake Bay Nontidal Monitoring Network - Loads to the Bay (1) How are nitrogen, phosphorus, and suspendedsediment loads responding to restoration activities and changing land use across the bay watershed? (2) What are the trends in nitrogen, phosphorus, and suspended-sediment loads being delivered to the bay from the nontidal portions of the watershed?

3 Multi-agency and State effort Using Monitoring Data To Measure Progress and Explain Change 1. Explain water-quality changes Response to management practices 2. Inform management Mid Point Assessment (2017) 2-yr Progress Watershed Implantation Plans (WIP) 3. Enhance models to explain change CBP WSM and Estuarine models USGS SPARROW 4. Monitor and measure progress toward local and Chesapeake Bay TMDL

4 USGS Nontidal Web Page

5 Chesapeake Bay Nontidal Monitoring Network 1985: River-Input Monitoring (9 RIM) and 6 selected upstream sites : agree on comparable methods (added 30 sites) : TMDL and WIP expansion (53 sites) 117 stations (87 > 5 years) Range from 1 to 27,100 mi 2 PA: 36 sites / 41 Susquehanna Nutrient and sediment collected monthly/storms/streamflow Loads and trends computed

6 WHY LOAD and TREND ESTIMATION? Loads Reflects changes in nutrient and sediment inputs and stream flow Compare sites using load per acre (yield) Trends in load Changes due to landuse, input sources, and BMPs Ancillary data to further refine Use statistical package to estimate loads and trends from monitoring data (WRTDS, Hirsch and others, 2010, Moyer and others, 2012) Remove affects of climatic variability

7 Load and Trend Example: Susquehanna River Total Nitrogen Susquehanna River At Marietta, PA 33% reduction Long-term trends 30 sites 13% reduction Short-term trends 87 sites

8 Loads Nontidal Network -Results Per acre loads (yields) Trends Directional change Total mass change

9 Total Nitrogen per Acre Loads Bay watershed Range: 1.19 to 33.4 lbs/ac Average: 7.33 lbs/ac PA results: lbs per acre 11.5 lbs per acre Highest in southern areas

10 Total Nitrogen per Acre Loads and Trends: Chesapeake Watershed Improving Trends: 54% Degrading Trends: 27% No Trend: 19% PA: Majority improving Improving: 14 Degrading: 3 No change: 1

11 Changes in Nitrogen per Acre Loads: Susquehanna Watershed

12 Changes in Nitrogen per Acre Loads: Improvements - WWTP upgrades - Agricultural practices - Land conversion - Less N in rainfall Download figure:

13 PHOSPHORUS - Point sources - Non point sources - Natural sources 13

14 Total Phosphorus per Acre Loads and Trends: Loads per acre: Higher in PA Lower part of basin Bay Watershed trends: Improving Trends : 68% Degrading Trends : 20% No Trend : 12% PA trends: Majority improving Improving: 13 Degrading: 2 No change: 1

15 Changes in Phosphorus per Acre Loads: Susquehanna Watershed

16 Changes in Phosphorus per Acre Loads: Improvements - WWTP upgrades - Agricultural practices - Land conversion - Construction management actions Download figure:

17 Suspended Sediment per Acre Loads and Trends: Watershed: loads per acre Range 18 to 2,206 lbs/ac Average load of 482 lbs/ac PA similar Watershed Trends Improving: 50% Degrading: 30% No Trend : 20% PA: mixed results Improving: 8 Degrading: 3 No change: 6

18 Chesapeake Bay Nontidal Monitoring Network Loads to the Bay (Question #2) What are the trends in nitrogen, phosphorus, and suspendedsediment loads being delivered to the bay from the nontidal portions of the watershed? To answer this question, we look to the loads delivered from the nine River Input Monitoring stations.

19 Changes in Total Nitrogen Delivered to the Bay Estuary from the 9 RIM Stations

20 Less Improvement in nitrogen, phosphorus, and sediment at the RIM sites vs upstream sites. The Susquehanna and Potomac Rivers carry the largest loads. All RIM stations have an influence on their respective estuary.

21 1. What Works Upgrades to WWTPs Reductions in air emissions Some agricultural practices 2. Challenges Response times Continued development and intensified agriculture 3. Future Monitoring Restoration efforts target high loading locations Target storm water management Improve ancillary data From UMCES, USGS, EPA (2014) Watershed Trends

22 PA Highlights High loads per acre in some areas Nitrogen: SE portion of basin Phosphorus: Eastern portion Improving trends Total Nitrogen and Phosphorus Mixed Results for Sediment WWTP, air inputs, selected ag practices Other Challenges: continued development, intensified ag, lag times

23 Acknowledgements Load and Trend Analysis Jeff Chanat Joel Blomquist Mike Mallonee Gavin Yang Ken Hyer Doug Moyer Mike Langland Bob Hirsch Many Others!! USGS Nontidal Web Page ( Cassandra Ladino Scott Phillips Water-Quality Monitoring Partners DE Dept. Natural Resources and Env. Control DC Dept. of the Environment MD Dept. of Natural Resources PA Dept. of Env. Protection NY State Dept. of Env. Conservation VA Dept. of Env. Quality Susquehanna River Basin Comm. WV Dept. of Env. Protection U.S. Environmental Protection Agency WV Dept. of Ag. U.S. Geological Survey (All Bay States)