Climate Change, Marsh Erosion and the Chesapeake Bay TMDL

Similar documents
CBP Climate Resiliency Workgroup. June 20, 2016

Application of SLAMM to Estimate N removal services in tidal wetlands

Estimated Influence of 2050 Climate Change on Chesapeake Bay Water Quality Standards.

Understanding the Influence of the Conowingo Reservoir Infill on Expectations for States Nutrient and Sediment Pollutant Load Reductions

Results of Latest Phase 6 Conowingo Analysis

Chesapeake Bay 2017 Midpoint Assessment Policy Issues for Partnership Decisions. Water Quality Goal Implementation Team Meeting December 4-5, 2017

Understanding the Influence of the Conowingo Reservoir Infill on Expectations for States Nutrient and Sediment Pollutant Load Reductions

Peer Review: Conowingo Pond Mass Balance Model Exelon Generation Company, LLC April By:

Understanding the Effect of the Conowingo Dam and Reservoir on Bay Water Quality

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

Session I: Introduction

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

Protecting & Restoring Local Waters and the Chesapeake Bay

Management Modeling of Suspended Solids and Living Resource Interactions

Chesapeake Bay TMDL 2017 Mid-Point Assessment

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

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

Phase 6 Approval Process

Factoring in the Influence of the Conowingo Reservoir on State Allocations

Critical Period for the Chesapeake Bay TMDL

Factoring in the Influence of the Conowingo Reservoir on State Allocations

Appendix E. Summary of Initial Climate Change Impacts on the Chesapeake Bay Watershed Flows and Loads

An Introduction to Aggregate Air-Water Exchanges

2016, 2017 Estuarine Water Quality and Modeling in the Royal and Cousins Rivers

Chesapeake Bay Program Partnership s Investment in the Chesapeake Monitoring Cooperative: What s Different This Time Around

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

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

Chesapeake Bay Program in Pennsylvania. Karl G. Brown Executive Secretary PA State Conservation Commission

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

Nitrogen Cycling, Primary Production, and Water Quality in the New River Estuary. Defense Coastal/Estuarine Research Program (DCERP)

Factoring in Climate Change into the Jurisdictions Phase III WIPs. Mark Bennett, CBP Climate Resiliency Workgroup Co-Chair

ITAT Workshop on Integrating Findings to Explain Water Quality Change

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

Adjustments to the Bay s Assimilative Capacity & Determination of Additional Nitrogen and Phosphorus Loads

Prioritizing Climate Change Impacts and Action Strategies

Septic Systems 4% Chemical Fertilizer: Agricultural Land 15%


Modeling Quarterly Review Meeting January 14, Bruce Michael Maryland Department of Natural Resources

Water Quality Standards Attainment

Briefing Paper for the Principals Staff Committee in Preparation for their March 2, 2018 Meeting

Planning Targets. For WQGIT Review Draft November 7, 2017

STAC Review of Chesapeake Bay Program Phase 6 Watershed Model

Riparian Buffers and Stream Restoration

Total Maximum Daily Load Development for Unnamed Tributary to Pitts Creek. Public Meeting March 26, Why Are We Here

Dead-Zones and Coastal Eutrophication: Case- Study of Chesapeake Bay W. M. Kemp University of Maryland CES Horn Point Laboratory Cambridge, MD

The Chesapeake Bay TMDL Midpoint Assessment What s Changing, What s New, What to Expect in 2017 and 2018

Continuous Monitoring Network Strategy Continued Discussion. Peter Tango November 18, 2015 DIWG-INWG SERC

APPENDIX A. Nutrient Trading Criteria Specific for the Chesapeake Bay Watershed

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

Watershed Technical Workgroup Approval Decision Meeting. December 1, 2016

Big Bend Model. Wayne Magley Watershed Evaluation and TMDL Section FDEP. March 7, 2016

Restoring the Chesapeake Bay Challenges & Opportunities

Integrating Air and Water Environmental Management in the Chesapeake Bay Program: An Encouraging Tale

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

2025 Chesapeake Bay Climate Change Load Projections

The Colley Bay Story: Successful Implementation of a Living Shoreline

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

Fish Habitat Management Strategy Outline

Quittapahilla Creek Watershed Implementation Plan

THE COMPETING IMPACTS OF

Go Green, Save Money: Lowering Flood Insurance Rates in Virginia with Stormwater Management. Kristen Clark VCPC Alumna, Spring 2014

Fact Sheet. Pennsylvania s Chesapeake Bay Tributary Strategy Goals for Nutrient and Sediment Reduction and Habitat Restoration

Chesapeake Bay Stream and Floodplain Ecosystem Services

Phosphorus Goal Setting Process Questions and Answers 2010

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

MODELING NUTRIENT LOADING AND EUTROPHICATION RESPONSE TO SUPPORT THE ELKHORN SLOUGH NUTRIENT TOTAL MAXIMUM DAILY LOAD

The Chesapeake Bay TMDL

The Midpoint Assessment and Phase III WIP

Estuarine and Coastal Biogeochemistry

Update on STAC Reviews of Watershed and WQSTM Model Development for the Midpoint Assessment

Chesapeake Bay Program Partnership s Scientific, Technical Assessment and Reporting (STAR) Team Briefing and Options Paper:

Chesapeake Bay TMDL and Watershed Implementation Plan. Robert M. Summers, Ph.D. Secretary Maryland Department of the Environment

DOG RIVER AND GARROW S BEND STEERING COMMITTEE MEETING. Dog River Garrow s Bend Watershed Management Plan

The State of the Bay Restoration The Moment In Time. Beth McGee Senior Scientist Chesapeake Bay Foundation

Restoring a National Treasure: Chesapeake Bay. Presented by Dan Nees, Director Environmental Finance Center University of Maryland April 27, 2007

2014 Chesapeake Bay Watershed Agreement:

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

Mike Langland USGS PA Agricultural Advisory Board April 28, 2016

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

Decision Rationale. Total Maximum Daily Load for Phosphorus for the Sassafras River, Cecil and Kent Counties, Maryland 4/1/2002

CHESAPEAKE BAY COMPREHENSIVE WATER RESOURCES AND RESTORATION PLAN - UPDATE. Update to Chesapeake Bay Program STAR January 25, 2018

Hypoxia in the Gulf of Mexico: Benefits and Challenges of Using Multiple Models to Inform Management Decisions

Clean Water Optimization Tool Case Study: Kent County

The Snapshot CONODOGUINET CREEK WATERSHED SNAPSHOT

Adapting Living Shorelines: Siting and Design for Climate Impacts

Bayou La Batre Watershed Management Planning

CBF Water Quality Interactive Map

A Vision for the 2025 Chesapeake Bay Program Models

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

Evolution of P-Loss Risk Assessment Tools

Phosphorus Kyle Minks Land and Water Resources Scientist Land Conservation Division

FINAL. Appendix D: Newport Bay

Philadelphia Water Department 9/24/13

Qian Zhang (UMCES / CBPO) Joel Blomquist (USGS / ITAT)

E3 Model Scenario Purpose and Definitions

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

MARYLAND DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT 1800 Washington Boulevard Baltimore MD

WIP Development Dashboard

Chesapeake Bay Water Quality Restoration:

Reservoir sedimentation results in management

Transcription:

Climate Change, Marsh Erosion and the Chesapeake Bay TMDL Rising sea level in Chesapeake Bay is inexorable. One environmental effect associated with sea level rise is marsh erosion. Marsh erosion can impact water quality in two fashions. The first is the effect on light attenuation and biogeochemistry associated with eroded materials released to the water column. The second, often overlooked, effect is the loss of marsh function. Beneficial functions include retention and burial of suspended solids, nutrient uptake and sequestration, and nitrogen removal through denitrification. Loss of these functions has the potential to affect water quality standards enforced through enactment of the recent total maximum daily load (TMDL).

Incremental effect of marsh erosion on suspended solids, averaged over an SAV growing season (April September, 1994). 1994 is considered a year of average flow in the Susquehanna River, the largest tributary to Chesapeake Bay.

Incremental effect of wetlands uptake on dissolved oxygen, averaged over the summer months (June - August, 1994). 1994 is considered a year of average flow in the Susquehanna River, the largest tributary to Chesapeake Bay.

Climate Change, Marsh Erosion and the Chesapeake Bay TMDL We propose to examine the potential impact of marsh loss through a three-phase program including: Phase I Estimate marsh loss and transition due to sea level rise. Phase II Investigate the reactivity of material eroded from marshes and released to Chesapeake Bay waters. Phase III Quantify effects of marsh loss on water quality and examine implications for TMDL.

Phase I Estimate Marsh Loss and Transition We will investigate and project marsh loss through several approaches: The first is to investigate existing projections which may have been conducted for other purposes e.g. flood insurance or shoreline protection. The second approach will investigate the use of predictive modeling e.g. the SLAMM (Sea Level Affecting Marshes Model). The third approach will utilize GIS and will project the area and characteristics of future marshes by overlaying a projection of future sea level on a representation of existing marsh area and type. The projected sea level rise will be taken from climate change scenarios currently being run by the Chesapeake Bay Program.

Phase II - Investigate the Reactivity of Material Eroded from Marshes Particulate material eroded from marshes includes inorganic sediments, organic carbon, organic nitrogen, and organic and inorganic phosphorus. The carbon and nutrients have the potential to react in the bay water column and/or after settling to bottom sediments. Little is known about the potential reactivity of this material, however, especially in terms that are useful within the current modeling framework. We propose that eroding sediments will be collected from two or three marsh environments e.g. salt marsh and tidal freshwater marsh. The carbon, nitrogen, and phosphorus in the material will be quantified and classified. Then, reactivity experiments will be conducted to determine the availability of this material to the bay water column and bottom sediments. These experiments will be conducted by a local research institute under contract to the Engineer Research and Development Center.

Phase III - Quantify Effects of Marsh Loss on Water Quality and the TMDL This phase will involve multiple model activities and will interface with two CBP activities. CBP is presently estimating the impact of climate change, including but not limited to sea level rise, on the bay and incorporating these estimates into the 2017 reassessment of the Watershed Implementation Plans (WIPs) and the TMDL. The first activity in this phase will be to develop basic algorithms to describe marsh function with relation to water quality. These algorithms will include, at least, solids removal and burial, nutrient removal and burial, denitrification, and respiration. Algorithms will be developed for two or three marsh types, determined by salinity classification. The algorithms will be based on published investigations in Chesapeake Bay and elsewhere.

Phase III - Quantify Effects of Marsh Loss on Water Quality and the TMDL These algorithms will be installed and tested in the existing water quality and sediment transport model (WQSTM). Testing will be conducted for the 2001 2011 simulation presently under development. Required adjustments to the WQSTM calibration will be completed along with the algorithm development. The algorithms will then be installed in the existing WQSTM implemented with TMDL conditions to assess the influence of marsh processes on the TMDL conditions. We will next execute the WQSTM for the climate change scenarios with existing marsh areas and with projected marsh areas determined in Phase I. These two scenarios will help in understanding the impact of marsh loss on bay water quality and will provide improved projections of future conditions. The last stage of model implementation will be to conduct two 2017 TMDL scenarios, one with existing marsh areas and function and one with projected marsh areas and function. These two scenarios will provide insight into the effects of sea level rise and associated marsh loss on WIPs and the TMDL.

Deliverables A consensus projection of marsh loss due to sea level rise. A set of algorithms describing effects of marsh functions on water quality. Documentation of the algorithms. All computer codes employed in this investigation Model scenarios that examine the effect of marsh function and loss on current bay conditions, under projected climate change conditions, and under TMDL conditions.