chesapeake bay 2006 summer ecological forecast · overview • introduction – chris conner...
TRANSCRIPT
Media briefingJune 1, 2006
Chesapeake Bay 2006
Summer ecological forecastChesapeake Bay 2006
Summer ecological forecast
OverviewOverview• Introduction
– Chris Conner (Chesapeake Bay Program)
• Forecast overview– Bill Dennison (University of Maryland Center for Environmental Science)
• Anoxic volume (dissolved oxygen) forecast– Dave Jasinski (Chesapeake Bay Program / UMCES)
• Potomac River harmful algal bloom forecast– Peter Tango (MD DNR)
• Aquatic grass forecast– Bill Dennison (UMCES)
• Introduction– Chris Conner (Chesapeake Bay Program)
• Forecast overview– Bill Dennison (University of Maryland Center for Environmental Science)
• Anoxic volume (dissolved oxygen) forecast– Dave Jasinski (Chesapeake Bay Program / UMCES)
• Potomac River harmful algal bloom forecast– Peter Tango (MD DNR)
• Aquatic grass forecast– Bill Dennison (UMCES)
Professor Bill DennisonVice President for Science Applications
University of Maryland Center for Environmental Science
Media briefingJune 1, 2006
Chesapeake Bay 2006
Forecast overviewChesapeake Bay 2006
Forecast overview
What is an ecological forecast?What is an ecological forecast?
• Analogous to a weather forecast -predict conditions in the future
• Predict the effects of biological, chemical, physical, and human-induced changes on ecosystems
• Do not guarantee what is to come -they offer scientifically sound estimations of what is likely to occur
• Analogous to a weather forecast -predict conditions in the future
• Predict the effects of biological, chemical, physical, and human-induced changes on ecosystems
• Do not guarantee what is to come -they offer scientifically sound estimations of what is likely to occur
Why make an ecological forecast?
Why make an ecological forecast?
• Provide context for understanding summer conditions
• Provide guidance for Chesapeake restoration efforts
• Establish a proactive communication and education program
• Aid management activities
• Provide context for understanding summer conditions
• Provide guidance for Chesapeake restoration efforts
• Establish a proactive communication and education program
• Aid management activities
Wet winter and dry spring sets the stage in 2006
Wet winter and dry spring sets the stage in 2006
Susquehanna River flowSusquehanna River flow
•• Wet winterWet winter Large quantity of nutrients delivered to the Bay in Large quantity of nutrients delivered to the Bay in biologically less active period of the yearbiologically less active period of the year
•• Dry springDry spring Less nutrients delivered than average = less nutrients for Less nutrients delivered than average = less nutrients for phytoplankton / harmful algal bloomsphytoplankton / harmful algal blooms
•• ResponseResponse ModerateModerate summer conditions predictedsummer conditions predicted
Summer 2006 ForecastSummer 2006 Forecast
Aquatic grass
Harmful algal blooms(Potomac River)
Dissolved oxygen(mainstem anoxia)
More details in following presentations
How certain are we?How certain are we?
• Based on 20 years of monitoring data
• Methods reviewed by expert panels
• Models do not account for summer conditions such as;
– Hurricanes / tropical storms
– Above average precipitation, temperatures etc• e.g. loss of eelgrass in southern Bay in 2005
• Based on 20 years of monitoring data
• Methods reviewed by expert panels
• Models do not account for summer conditions such as;
– Hurricanes / tropical storms
– Above average precipitation, temperatures etc• e.g. loss of eelgrass in southern Bay in 2005
Influence of summer weatherInfluence of summer weather
Warm, wet, still (low winds)– Larger volume of low oxygen– Larger and longer harmful algal blooms (unless
very wet)
Cool and dry– Smaller volume of low oxygen– Smaller and shorter harmful algal blooms
Warm, wet, still (low winds)– Larger volume of low oxygen– Larger and longer harmful algal blooms (unless
very wet)
Cool and dry– Smaller volume of low oxygen– Smaller and shorter harmful algal blooms
GeneralizationsGeneralizations……..
Dave JasinskiUniversity of Maryland Center for Environmental Science
Dave JasinskiUniversity of Maryland Center for Environmental Science
Chesapeake Bay 2006
Anoxic volume forecastChesapeake Bay 2006
Anoxic volume forecast
Recent flow at Conowingo Dam
Recent flow at Conowingo Dam
0
50,000
100,000
150,000
200,000
250,000
1/1/
06
2/1/
06
3/1/
06
4/1/
06
5/1/
06
Flow
(cub
ic fe
et p
er s
econ
d)
2006 Daily Mean Flow37-year Daily Mean Flow
Algal IndexAlgal Index
• Total Nitrogen and Total Phosphorus cumulative loads from the Susquehanna and northern point sources
• Total Nitrogen and Total Phosphorus cumulative loads from the Susquehanna and northern point sources
0
10000000
20000000
30000000
40000000
50000000
60000000
70000000
80000000
90000000
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
Alg
al In
dex
*Susquehanna loads data courtesy USGS. 2006 data are provisional
The 2006 ForecastThe 2006 Forecast
Anoxia will be “Moderate” in summer 2006 relative to previous 20 years
The 2006 ForecastThe 2006 Forecast
Anoxia will be “Moderate” in summer 2006 relative to previous 20 years
The forecast volume for 2006 is similar to what was seen in 2001
The forecast volume for 2006 is similar to what was seen in 2001
ForecastAnoxic Zone
Mean Summer Dissolved
Oxygen in 2001
Dr. Peter TangoChief - Quantitative Ecological Assessment
Resource Assessment ServiceMaryland Department of Natural Resources
Dr. Peter TangoChief - Quantitative Ecological Assessment
Resource Assessment ServiceMaryland Department of Natural Resources
Chesapeake Bay 2006
Potomac River harmful algal bloom (HAB) forecast
Chesapeake Bay 2006
Potomac River harmful algal bloom (HAB) forecast
Potomac River harmful algae blooms
Potomac River harmful algae blooms
• Mid-upper reaches of Potomac River
• Predominantly Microcystis aeruginosa
• Blooms observed since 1960s
• Mid-upper reaches of Potomac River
• Predominantly Microcystis aeruginosa
• Blooms observed since 1960s
Rafts of foam during 2004 bloom
Forecast methods (HAB)Forecast methods (HAB)• Simple model based on:
– Potomac River flow rates (previous year & spring)– 21 years of bloom data
• Simple model based on:– Potomac River flow rates (previous year & spring)– 21 years of bloom data
HAB forecast modelHAB forecast model
2006 Potomac River HAB forecast
2006 Potomac River HAB forecast
Professor Bill DennisonProfessor Bill DennisonVice President for Science Applications
University of Maryland Center for Environmental Science
Media briefingMedia briefingJune 1, 2006June 1, 2006
Chesapeake Bay 2006
Aquatic grass forecastChesapeake Bay 2006
Aquatic grass forecast
Aquatic grass communities are important in Chesapeake Bay
•• Food for Food for waterfowlwaterfowl
•• Increase Increase water water clarityclarity
•• Habitat Habitat for blue for blue crabscrabs
Good water clarity – Poor water clarity
Aquatic grass in 2005Aquatic grass in 2005
• Small (7%) increase from 2004
• 42% of goal• Increasing trend since
mid 80’s• Changes observed
depends on location within the Bay
• Small (7%) increase from 2004
• 42% of goal• Increasing trend since
mid 80’s• Changes observed
depends on location within the Bay
Patuxent River aquatic grass
Loss of eelgrass in Southern BayLoss of eelgrass in Southern Bay• Loss occurred in fall of 2005• Occurred after 2005 aerial survey not reflected
in 2005 survey results• May be related to higher than normal water
temperature
• Loss occurred in fall of 2005• Occurred after 2005 aerial survey not reflected
in 2005 survey results• May be related to higher than normal water
temperatureWater Temperature in Tangier Sound (EE3.1)
0
10
2030
40
50
60
7080
90
100
Dec Feb Mar May Jul Aug Oct Nov JanMonth
Tem
pera
ture
(oF)
Minimum (including 2005)Mean (including 2005)Maximum (including 2005)year 2005
Forecast methodsForecast methods• Focuses on three regions
– Northern Bay– Lower Potomac River– Tangier Sound
• Relationships with environmental conditions (e.g. nutrient loads)
• 20 years of bay-wide survey data
• Expert interpretation of recent field observations
• Focuses on three regions– Northern Bay– Lower Potomac River– Tangier Sound
• Relationships with environmental conditions (e.g. nutrient loads)
• 20 years of bay-wide survey data
• Expert interpretation of recent field observations
2006 Aquatic grass forecast2006 Aquatic grass forecast
SUMMARYSUMMARY• “Typical” Bay conditions are predicted
– But typical conditions must be improved• Moderate anoxic volume predicted
– But still exceeds state water quality standards aimed to protect the Bay’s living resources
• Moderate Potomac River HAB– But will lead to reduced water clarity and dissolved oxygen
• Increase in aquatic grasses– Good news in some regions, but gains in Tangier Sound
would be a recovery from recent loss
• “Typical” Bay conditions are predicted– But typical conditions must be improved
• Moderate anoxic volume predicted– But still exceeds state water quality standards aimed to
protect the Bay’s living resources• Moderate Potomac River HAB
– But will lead to reduced water clarity and dissolved oxygen• Increase in aquatic grasses
– Good news in some regions, but gains in Tangier Sound would be a recovery from recent loss
ENDEND
Restoration aims to improve conditions
Restoration aims to improve conditions
Wastewater treatment controlWastewater treatment control
•Chesapeake and Atlantic Coastal Bays Restoration Fund
•Upgrade treatment plants
Restoration aims to improve conditions
Restoration aims to improve conditions
AgricultureAgriculture
• No-till farming
• Winter cover crops
Last years forecast: Dissolved oxygen
Last years forecast: Dissolved oxygen
Last years forecast: Potomac River harmful algal bloom
Last years forecast: Potomac River harmful algal bloom
X(17 miles)
Aquatic grassAquatic grass2005
ObservedSmall
decrease
Increase
Small Increase
Keeping trackKeeping track
• Water quality monitoring at approx. 2 week intervals
• Actual conditions compared to the forecast
• Any deviations from forecast explained on website– www.chesapeakebay.net/bayforecast.htm
• Water quality monitoring at approx. 2 week intervals
• Actual conditions compared to the forecast
• Any deviations from forecast explained on website– www.chesapeakebay.net/bayforecast.htm