NUTRIENT THE OHIO RIVER

Transcription

1 NUTRIENT MANAGEMENT FOR THE OHIO RIVER

2 Why nutrient management is necessary Nutrients are necessary for a healthy aquatic community, but Excessive quantities of nutrients can have negative effects

3 Negative effects of nutrients Algae blooms Crowding out of some life forms Effects on Dissolved Oxygen Taste and odor causing algae Pathogen regrowth THM formation in drinking water

4 Ohio River Woes Microcystis 4 Photos by Jim Crawford

5

6 phytoplankton p River Freshwater Nutrients (N, P, Si) and dsediments O2 N, P, Si 02 dead cells zooplankton fecal pellets O2 Healthy benthic community (worms, snails, bivalves, crustaceans) 02 flux blocked escape mortality organic material flux pycnocline fecal pellets and dead algae 02 lighter fresher, warmer surface layer heavier saltier, cooler lower layer 02 consumed

7 The challenge of nutrient management It s a lot easier to set a standard for something that s not supposed to be in the water at all than for something that needs to be there. Ed Decker, US EPA

8 Ohio River Algae Observations Despite high nutrient levels, no evidence of algal impacts in continuous DO monitoring results First reports of widespread algae-related taste and odor problems in late 1980s coincident with spread of zebra mussels and resulting increase in water clarity. Algal l related incidents id have increased since 1980s.

9 ORSANCO Nutrient Management Efforts Ambient monitoring since 1975 Nutrient Criteria Work Group Representing Ohio River Basin states in discussions of Gulf of Mexico Hypoxia since 1995 Algae/Nutrient monitoring Nutrient Criteria Development Convener of Ohio River Sub Basin Team

10 Nutrient Monitoring on the Ohio River Bi-monthly monitoring of N,P since 1975 at 31 locations (17 Ohio River, 14 tributary) Bi-weekly monitoring of nutrients, algae, chlorophyll a, suspended solids since 2000 at seven Ohio River drinking water intakes

11 ORSANCO Nutrient Criteria Work Group Convened by ORSANCO Members: Nutrient Criteria Coordinators from Ohio River main stem states PA, WV, OH, KY, IN, IL- and EPA Regions 3,4 and 5. Oversees ORSANCO development of Ohio River criteria. Provides forum for information exchange among states, EPA.

12 Nutrient Criteria Development- Ohio River States All states have nutrient criteria plans Target dates generally 2010, 2011 Prognosis: ok for lakes; not so good for flowing g ; g g waters.

13 Nutrient Criteria Development Ohio River (by ORSANCO) Looking for relationship between nutrient levels and taste and odor producing algae Contractor assistance provided by US EPA through Tetra Tech Likely outcome (optimistic view) proposed numerical criteria i for phosphorus h in 2010.

14 Sources of Ohio River Nutrients Municipal discharges: 10-20% Urban wet weather sources: about 1% Agriculture still appears to be the dominant source

15 Drivers for Reduction of Ohio River Nutrient Loadings Local water quality standards Ohio River Tributaries Mississippi River standards Gulf of Mexico reduction targets Technology based requirements for point sources

16 MISSISSIPPI ATCHAFALAYA RIVER BASIN

17 Nitrogen Source Distribution Goolsby, et al

18 Mississippi River/Gulf of Mexico Watershed Nutrient Task Force States: Arkansas, Illinois, Iowa, Louisiana, Minnesota, Mississippi, i i i Missouri, i Tennessee, & Wisconsin Tribes: Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians; Prairie Island Indian Community Federal Agencies: EPA; USDA [NRCS & CSREES]; DOC (NOAA); DOI; Army COE; DOJ; OSTP; & CEQ

19 ORSANCO Gulf Hypoxia Activities Represented states at Task Force meetings, Convened Ohio River Sub Basin Committee, Participates on Hypoxia Coordinating Committee.

20 2001 Action Plan Goals for the Gulf and the Basin: Coastal Goal: By 2015, reduce the average zone to < 5,000 Km 2 Within Basin Goal: To restore and protect the waters of the 31 States and 77 Tribes in the Basin Quality of Life Goal: Improve the communities and economic conditions across the Mississippi Basin

21 Plan lists 11 Actions #1 December, 2000, integrated budget proposal for additional funds #2 Summer, 2001, establish Sub-basin Committees #3 Fall, 2001, develop a Hypoxia Research Strategy #4 Spring, 2002, expand the long-term monitoring for the zone #5 Spring, 2002, expand the monitoring within the Basin

22 11 Actions (Continued) #6 Fall, 2002, develop strategies for nutrient reduction for each sub-basin #7 December, 2002, Corps of Engineers (COE) study of nutrient reduction from COE projects or operations #8 January, 2003, reduce loadings from point sources

23 11 Actions (Continued) #9 Spring 2003, increase assistance to landowners for voluntary actions to restore or create wetlands and forested buffers #10 Spring 2003, increase assistance to agricultural producers/ businesses for implementation of best management practices #11 December 2005 and every five years thereafter, the Task Force assess results

24 Ohio River Sub Basin Committee Members Illinois Dept of Agriculture Indiana Dept of Agriculture Indiana Dept of Environmental Management Kentucky Dept of Environmental Protection Kentucky Division of Conservation Ohio Dept of Natural Resources Ohio EPA Pennsylvania Conservation Commission Tennessee Dept of Environmental Cons West Virginia Conservation Agency West Virginia Dept of Agriculture West Virginia Dept of Environmental Protection ORSANCO

25 ORSBC Activities Ohio DNR elected chair (subsequently appointed to Task Force) Framework for state nutrient reduction strategies Sponsored workshop on Nutrient and Energy Reductions at POTWs.

26 Timeline 2001: Hypoxia Action Plan Released 2002: Several Papers Question Technical Basis of Action Plan 2003: Sub Basin Teams established for the Lower Mississippi, Upper Mississippi and Ohio Sub Basins 2004: Review of Action Plan Initiated 2006: Science Advisory Board Report 2007: National Academy of Science Panel 2008: Action Plan Revised

27 2008 Action Plan 11 Actions Assigns responsibilities Calls for annual work plan and status report Dual nutrient strategy

28 1. Complete and implement comprehensive nitrogen and phosphorus reduction strategies for states within the Mississippi/Atchafalaya River Basin encompassing watersheds with significant contributions of nitrogen and phosphorus to the surface waters of the Mississippi/Atchafalaya River Basin, and ultimately to the Gulf of Mexico. 2. Complete and implement comprehensive nitrogen and phosphorus reduction strategies for appropriate basin-wide programs and projects. Target first those programs and projects with significant federal lead or co-implementation responsibilities.

29 3. While developing comprehensive state and federal nitrogen and phosphorus h reduction strategies and continuing current reduction efforts, examine and, where possible, implement opportunities to enhance protection ti of the Gulf and local l water quality through existing federal and state water quality, water management, and conservation programs.

30 4. Develop and promote more efficient and cost- effective conservation practices and management practices for conserving nutrients within the Mississippi/Atchafalaya River Basin watershed and evaluate their effectiveness at all scales beginning with local watersheds and aggregating them up to the scale of the Mississippi/Atchafalaya i i i/at River Basin. 5. Identify and, where possible, quantify the effects of the hypoxic zone on the economic, human and natural resources in the Mississippi/Atchafalaya River Basin and Northern Gulf of Mexico, including the benefits of actions to reduce nitrogen and phosphorus and the costs of alternative management strategies.

31 6. Coordinate, consolidate, and improve access to data collected by State and Federal agencies on Gulf Hypoxia and Mississippi/Atchafalaya River Basin program activities t and results. 7. Track interim progress on the actions to reduce nitrogen and phosphorus by producing an annual report on federal and state program nutrient reduction activities and results.

32 8. Continue to reduce existing scientific uncertainties identified in the Science Advisory Board and MMR workgroup reports regarding source, fate, and transport of nitrogen and phosphorus in the surface waters of the Mississippi/Atchafalaya River Basin to continually improve the accuracy of management tools and efficacy of management strategies for nutrient reduction.

33 9. Continue to reduce uncertainty about the relationship between nitrogen and phosphorus loads and the formation, extent, duration, and severity of the hypoxic zone, to best monitor progress toward, and inform adaptive management of the Coastal Goal. 10. Promote effective communications to increase awareness of hypoxia and support the activities of the Task Force.

34 11. In five years (2013) reassess nitrogen and phosphorus p load reductions, the response of the hypoxic zone, changes in water quality throughout the Mississippi/Atchafalaya River Basin, and the economic and social effects, including changes in land use and management, of the reductions in terms of the goals of this Action Plan. Evaluate how current policies and programs affect the management decisions made by industrial and agricultural producers, evaluate lessons learned, and determine appropriate actions to continue to implement or, if necessary, revise this strategy.

35 Observations Despite the lack of significant dedicated funding, an overall decrease in Nitrogen loading has been achieved. Phosphorus loadings, however, have increased. There are signs that Gulf Hypoxia might receive more attention in federal programs. Nutrient management continues to be a priority for states and US EPA.