WIP Development Dashboard

Similar documents
Incorporating monitoring, modeling and trends analyses into management decisions: a Choptank River example

Telling Pennsylvania s Local Stories: A Lancaster Example

ITAT Workshop on Integrating Findings to Explain Water Quality Change

Telling watershed stories with science

Climate Change Impacts of Most Concern for CB Agreement Goal & Outcome Attainment

Monitoring Data in Support of Mid-Point Assessment

Session I: Introduction

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency s Interim Expectations for the Phase III Watershed Implementation Plans

Full Title of Priority: Enhanced Analysis and Explanation of Water-Quality Data for the TMDL Mid-Point Assessment

Full Title of Priority: Enhanced Analysis and Explanation of Water-Quality Data for the TMDL Mid-Point Assessment

Restoring the Water-Quality Conditions in the Chesapeake Bay: What is working and what still needs to be done

Prioritizing Climate Change Impacts and Action Strategies

Sustainable Fisheries GIT: Fish Habitat

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency s Interim Expectations for the Phase III Watershed Implementation Plans

The Chesapeake Bay Program Biennial Strategy Review System: A Guide to Your Quarterly Progress Meeting

Biennial Strategy Review System: Logic Table and Work Plan

Submitted by: Zoë Johnson (NOAA Chesapeake Bay Office) and Susan Julius (EPA/ORD, STAC Member) on behalf of Climate Resiliency Working Group

Modeling to Support Management Decisions

Chesapeake Bay Program Watershed Policy. PA Statewide Conference for Watershed Organizations March 6, 2017

Mike Langland USGS PA Agricultural Advisory Board April 28, 2016

SUPPORTING CHESAPEAKE BAY RESTORATION BY MODELING NUTRIENT SOURCES AND TRANSPORT

Crediting Conservation

STAC Fish Habitat Workshop Report

Modeling the Urban Stormwater (and the rest of the watershed) Katherine Antos, Coordinator Water Quality Team U.S. EPA Chesapeake Bay Program Office

STAC Review of Chesapeake Bay Program Phase 6 Watershed Model

CBP Agriculture Workgroup Update. CBP Modeling Quarterly Review Meeting July 23, 2013

SCIENCE PRIORITIES OF THE

Pennsylvania s Phase III Watershed Implementation Plan

Chesapeake Bay Program Indicator Analysis and Methods Document Reducing Pollution Indicators Updated May 2018

Chesapeake Bay TMDL Phase III Watershed Implementation Plan (WIP) Russ Baxter Deputy Secretary of Natural Resources

FieldDoc.io User Guide For 2016 NFWF Chesapeake Bay Stewardship Fund Applicants

Statewide Results (Final Target)

Lag-Times in the Watershed and their Influence on Chesapeake Bay Restoration. STAC Workshop October 16-17, 2012 Annapolis, MD

Proposed Interim Application Reduction Efficiency

BMP Verification: What is it and How Will it Impact Pennsylvania?

Planning Targets. For WQGIT Review Draft November 7, 2017

E3 Model Scenario Purpose and Definitions

Meeting Agenda. Water Quality Goal Implementation Team Meeting December 14 15, 2015 / NCTC Shepherdstown, WV

2017 Midpoint Assessment: Year of Decision. October 19, 2017 PA Phase III WIP Steering Committee Meeting

Agriculture Initial Inspections Update

Factoring in the Influence of the Conowingo Reservoir on State Allocations

Center for Nutrient Solutions (CNS) Nutrient Solution Scenarios Concept Paper September 5, 2014 Draft

2017 Revised Guide for Chesapeake Bay Water Quality Two-year Milestones

Chesapeake Bay Updates. Agricultural Advisory Board June 18, 2014 Andy Zemba Interstate Waters Office

Maryland Phase II WIP Strategies. MONTGOMERY Agriculture - Annual Practices

Scientific and Technical Advisory Committee Workshop Chesapeake Bay Program Climate Change Modeling 2.0

CHESAPEAKE BAY COMPREHENSIVE WATER RESOURCES AND RESTORATION PLAN. Habitat GIT Meeting 9 May 2017

Pennsylvania / NRCS Potomac Pilot Remote Sensing Project Chesapeake Bay Ag Workgroup

STAC Workshop: Understanding and Explaining 30+ Years of Water Clarity Trends In the Bay s Tidal Waters. February 6-7 th, 2017

Factoring in the Influence of the Conowingo Reservoir on State Allocations

Anthony Moore Assistant Secretary for Chesapeake Bay Restoration

Nontidal Wetland Rehabilitation, Enhancement and Creation BMP Expert Panel

Chesapeake Assessment Scenario Tool CAST

2014 Chesapeake Bay Watershed Agreement:

A Guide for Forestry Practices in the Chesapeake TMDL Phase III WIPs

FieldDoc.org User Guide For 2017 NFWF Chesapeake Bay Stewardship Fund Applicants. Background 2. Step 1: Register for a FieldDoc account 3

CHESAPEAKE BAY TMDL PHASE III WIP NORTHERN VIRGINIA OPENING STAKEHOLDER MEETING AUGUST 17, 2018 NORMAND GOULET NVRC

Chesapeake Bay TMDL 2017 Mid-Point Assessment

FieldDoc.org User Guide - for 2018 NFWF Chesapeake Bay Stewardship Fund Applicants -

Pennsylvania s Phase III Watershed Implementation Plan. Kick-Off & Listening Session June 5, 2017

A Guide for Forestry Practices in the Chesapeake TMDL Phase III WIPs

Protecting & Restoring Local Waters and the Chesapeake Bay

RE: Public Comment Invited to Help Develop State Plan to Improve Local Water Health in Chesapeake Bay Watershed Counties

Incorporating Soil P in the Phase 6.0 Model

Chesapeake Bay s Problems

Building a Phase III WIP for Wastewater, Stormwater & Septic Systems

Goal: Clean Water M-NCPPC

Septic Systems 4% Chemical Fertilizer: Agricultural Land 15%

Fact Sheet. Chesapeake Bay Water Quality

Current Progress and Next Steps in Implementing Maryland s Blueprint for Bay Restoration

Chesapeake Bay Restoration -- Phase III JULY 13, 2018

Reducing Nitrogen, Phosphorus and Sediment Pollution Progress Update. Jeff Corbin, Senior Advisor to the EPA Administrator

Phase 6 Approval Process

Exploring the Environmental Effects of Shale Gas Development in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed

Restoring the Chesapeake Bay Challenges & Opportunities

2025 Chesapeake Bay Climate Change Load Projections

CHAPTER 4 WATERSHED PLAN GOALS & OBJECTIVES

Meeting Agenda Water Quality Goal Implementation Team Meeting Meeting Theme: Getting Ready for Development of the Phase III WIP Planning Targets

Phase III Watershed Implementation Plans

Fish Habitat Management Strategy Outline

Water Quality Trading and Offsets in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed. Beth McGee Chesapeake Bay Foundation

Pennsylvania s Phase III Watershed Implementation Plan: What are the Expectations?

CHESAPEAKE BAY TMDL WATERSHED IMPLEMENTATION PLAN (WIP) PHASE III. August 23, 2018 Region 2000 Local Government Council Stakeholder Meeting

Chesapeake Bay Maryland Phase I WIP Strategy Key Concepts: Septics and Stormwater June 13 th, 2011

Reservoir age, increasing human population,

Water Quality Standards Attainment

%XLOGLQJ D &RPPXQLW\ &OHDQ :DWHU 7RROER[ 3$ :DWHUVKHG,PSOHPHQWDWLRQ 3ODQ :,3 /RFDO 3ODQQLQJ 3URFHVV 6WDNHKROGHU 0HHWLQJ

North Dakota s Nutrient Reduction Strategy. Presented to the 2016 ND Water Quality Monitoring Conference March 4, 2016

Chesapeake Bay Program Water Quality Goal Implementation Team

Making the Connection: Engaging Communities in Watershed Restoration and Protection With this theme in mind the Forum Planning Committee is now

Protocol for Setting Targets, Planning BMPs and Reporting Progress for Federal Facilities and Lands

Land Conservation & Chesapeake Restoration

SUPPORTING CHESAPEAKE BAY RESTORATION BY MODELING NUTRIENT AND SEDIMENT SOURCES AND TRANSPORT

Watch Us WIP, Now Watch Us Bay Bay: Delaware s Choreographed Approach to Chesapeake Bay Restoration

CBP Implementation Plan

Use of Market and Voluntary Approaches for Reducing Nonpoint Source Pollution in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed

Proposal for Responsive STAC Workshop: Chesapeake Bay Program Climate Change Modeling 2.0

Lake Creek Watershed Management Plan Public Meeting. Arrowhead Lake May 3, :00 PM

Chesapeake Bay Program Indicator Analysis and Methods Document Nitrogen, Phosphorus, and Suspended Sediment Loads to the Bay Updated October 9, 2018

PCB Facts. >1 million tons produced US largest producer 40% still in use

Transcription:

WIP Development Dashboard Integrating 30 years of Chesapeake Bay data into a new decision support framework for Watershed Implementation Plan development Water Quality GIT Meeting 9/24/2018 Emily Trentacoste, PhD Contributions from: Aera Hoffman, John Wolf, Jimmy Webber, Doug Moyer, Joel Blomquist, Jeni Keisman, Rebecca Murphy, Matt Johnston, Qian Zhang, Lindsey Gordon & more

From the Science side A LOT of new and updated science available Monitoring & Trends Non-tidal water quality Tidal water quality Tidal attainment Submerged aquatic vegetation Modeling Tools CBP Watershed Model Geographic load distribution Geographic influence on Bay BMP progress reports Synthesis Analyses USGS Non-tidal Syntheses -Regional Nitrogen, Phosphorus and Sediment SAV Syntheses -Groundwater Water Clarity Synthesis Water Quality Synthesis 2

From the Management side New plans, new expectations, new requests Phase III WIPs Assess what s been working and what hasn t Develop local area goals at finer resolution Identify remaining opportunities for BMPs Planning for urban growth and climate change Better decision-making Targeting restoration efforts - Geographically - By sector Co-benefits of nutrient and sediment reduction Planning for urban growth and climate change 3

Some issues arise working with 30 years of data 1) Data come in all shapes, sizes and flavors Spatial Temporal Tabular Agricultural BMPs Nitrogen $/lb reduced/year WIP-2 Level Grass Buffer with Fencing 2.84 6.6% Forest Buffer 4.34 3.2% Barnyard Runoff Control 5.00 0.0% Floodplain Wetland Restoration 6.70 0.1% Forest Buffer with Fencing 6.71 0.7% Water Control Structures 7.38 0.0% Agricultural Stormwater Management 7.82 0.0% Prescribed Grazing 12.95 56.8%

1985 1988 1991 1994 1997 2000 2003 2006 2009 2012 2015 Lbs Some issues arise working with 30 years of data 1) Data come in all shapes, sizes and flavors Modeling Monitoring Research Nitrogen at James at Richmond 14000000 12000000 10000000 8000000 6000000 4000000 2000000 0 Total Nitrogen Nitrate

Some issues arise working with 30 years of data 2) Science and management don t always work at the same spatial or temporal scales

Some issues arise working with 30 years of data 3) Audience and users range widely from local city planners to state agency staff to non-profit practitioners Technical detail Practitioners Jurisdiction staff developing WIPs NGOs Local planners Overview Local officials Explore data Use data

Some issues arise working with 30 years of data 3) Audience and users range widely from local city planners to state agency staff to non-profit practitioners Technical detail Practitioners Jurisdiction staff developing WIPs NGOs Local planners Overview Local officials Explore data Use data

The WIP Development Data Dashboard What is the Dashboard? The purpose of the WIP Development Data Dashboard is to consolidate and provide accessibility to technical and scientific information in one cohesive location and to provide guidance on how and why the information should be used. This information includes, but is not limited to: Tidal and watershed water quality monitoring trends SAV trends and their explanations Urban growth projections Information to help geographically target restoration efforts Information to help choose BMPs Current BMP implementation and opportunities

The WIP Development Data Dashboard What can you do with it? The Dashboard provides information that can inform planning efforts and help to: Understand status of local water quality and change over time Understand local pollution sources and drivers of water quality Target, focus or prioritize restoration efforts Identify co-benefits associated with management practices Identify effective and cost-effective practices Identify opportunities for implementing practices Plan for future growth and development. Some uses of this information include: Targeting restoration efforts geographically, by sector, or by practice Developing scenarios to run on the Chesapeake Assessment Scenario Tool (CAST) Outreach and communication of water quality information Building local stories

The WIP Development Data Dashboard How do I get started? What are you trying to do? Example Topics Corresponding Module Understand status of local water quality and change over time Understand local pollution sources and drivers of water quality Target, focus or prioritize restoration efforts Current water quality and trends of freshwater rivers and streams Current water quality and trends of tidal waters Current status, trends, and explanations for tidal submerged aquatic vegetation Sources of nutrients and sediment by sector Land use in different areas Highest loading areas geographically Sources of applied nutrients Importance of goundwater Effective places to implement Vulnerable areas of the watershed Freshwater Rivers & Streams Tidal Water Quality & Living Resources Targeting Restoration Efforts Targeting Restoration Efforts Identify cobenefits associated with management practices Other priorities addressed by water quality practices Targeting Restoration Efforts Identify effective and cost-effective practices Identify opportunities for implementing practices Plan for future growth and development Most effective practices at reducing nutrients and sediment Cost-effectiveness of practices Current implementation rates of practices Remaining acres available for practices Areas of predicted growth Conservation and smart growth opportunities Projected changes in loads due to growth Management Practice Implementation Management Practice Implementation Planning for Change

Going from data to decision-support tools 1) Work with scientific community to determine essential scientific messages and data to back them up

Going from data to decision-support tools 2) Solicit feedback from management community on essential information needed to make their decisions Tell me my options, but don t tell me what to do Water Quality Goal Implementation Team Soil Conservation Districts Phase III WIP Steering Committees STAC Workshops Local Government Advisory Committee

Going from data to decision-support tools 3) Determine a way to communicate data that resonates with managers We found that using the data to tell local stories ( storylines ) resonated best

Going from data to decision-support tools 3) Determine a way to communicate data that resonates with managers Local water quality Sources and drivers behind local water quality What s happening with local water quality in my area? What s the status? What are the trends? Where does pollution come from? Where geographically? How is pollution getting onto the landscape? How is pollution making it to streams? Effective management practices Opportunities for restoration efforts What practices address the sources and drivers? What are the most effective practices? What are the most cost-effective practices? Where are the most effective places to focus efforts? What practices have been implemented and to what extent? Do they address the sources and drivers? Are they the most effective? Where do opportunities for implementation exist?

Going from data to decision-support tools 4) Conduct preemptive user research to understand how, when and why users would want to access decision-support information Essential considerations for user research: - Business case for decision-support tool - Who exactly your users are - What they should be using it to do - What questions you need answered

Going from data to decision-support tools 5) Inventory current data visualization products & projects

Going from data to decision-support tools 6) Organize information in manageable chunks modules What is the status of water quality in my area? Freshwater Rivers & Streams Water Quality Tidal Water Quality & Living Resources What are sources & drivers of pollution? Where geographically is most effective to focus? Targeting Restoration Efforts What are the most effective and cost effective BMPs? Where can I implement them? Identifying Implementation Opportunities How can I plan for growth and mitigate issues associated with it? Planning for Urban Growth

Going from data to decision-support tools 7) Utilize user research and management input to provide significant guidance with data

Thank you! Emily Trentacoste Trentacoste.Emily@epa.gov 410-267-5797