the chesapeake bay program’s decision support tools
DESCRIPTION
The Chesapeake Bay Program’s Decision Support Tools. Gary Shenk 5/21/2013. Chesapeake Bay Partnership Models. CBP Modeling Tools. CAST. Interaction Tools. Decision Models/ Databases. NEIEN. Bay WQSTM. Related Tools. sparrow. 2010. 2020. 2030. Anne Arundel County. - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
The Chesapeake Bay Program’s Decision Support Tools
Gary Shenk5/21/2013
2
Chesapeake Bay Partnership Models
Bay WQSTM
NEIEN
CBP Modeling Tools
CASTInteractionTools
DecisionModels/Databases
RelatedTools sparrow
201020202030
Prince George’s County
Anne ArundelCounty
6
Estuarine Model
• 57,000 cells• sub-hour hydrodynamics
•CH3D •CEQUAL-ICM
7
Water Quality Model State Variables
Temperature Salinity
Fixed Solids Freshwater Cyanobacteria
Spring Diatoms Other (Green) Algae
Microzooplankton Mesozooplankton
Dissolved Organic Carbon Labile Particulate Organic Carbon
Refractory Particulate Organic Carbon Ammonium
Nitrate+Nitrite Dissolved Organic Nitrogen
Labile Particulate Organic Nitrogen Refractory Particulate Organic Nitrogen
Total Phosphate Dissolved Organic Phosphorus
Labile Particulate Organic Phosphorus Refractory Particulate Organic Phosphorus
Chemical Oxygen Demand Dissolved Oxygen
Dissolved Silica Particulate Biogenic Silica
Living Resources OutputsSAVOystersMenhaden
8
Estuarine Model
Decision variablesDissolved OxygenClarity Submerged Aquatic VegetationChlorophyll concentrations
Role of the Bay Partnership Models In Decision-Making
Annual, monthly or daily values of anthropogenic factors:Land use acresBMP implementationFertilizer Application RatesManure Application RatesMaximum UptakeVegetative CoverAFO-CAFO and Septic Loads
10
Annual, monthly, or daily values of anthropogenic factors:
Land Use AcreageBMPsFertilizerManureTillageCrop typesAtmospheric depositionWaste water treatmentSeptic loads
Hourly or daily values of Meteorologicalfactors:
PrecipitationTemperatureEvapotranspirationWindSolar RadiationDew pointCloud Cover
Daily flow, nitrogen, phosphorus, and sediment comparedto observationsover 21 years
How the Watershed Model Works
HSPF
Calibration Mode
1111
Each segment consists of 30 separately-modeled land uses:
• Regulated Pervious Urban• Regulated Impervious Urban• Unregulated Pervious Urban• Unregulated Impervious Urban• Construction• Extractive • Combined Sewer System• Wooded / Open• Disturbed Forest
• Corn/Soy/Wheat rotation (high till)
• Corn/Soy/Wheat rotation (low till)
• Other Row Crops• Alfalfa• Nursery• Pasture• Degraded Riparian Pasture• Afo / Cafo• Fertilized Hay • Unfertilized Hay
– Nutrient management versions of the above
Plus: Point Source andSeptic Loads, and
Atmospheric Deposition Loads Each calibrated to nutrient and
Sediment targets
How the Watershed Model Works
12
Precipitation FertilizerManureAtmospheric deposition
Runoff
How the Watershed Model Works
Hydrologysubmodel
Management filter
RiverSedimentsubmodel Phosphorus
submodel
Nitrogensubmodel
}hourly
Bufferswetlands
13
14
ELK
TIOG A
ON EID A
YO RK
KEN T
STEU BE N
SUS SE X
HER KIM E R
PO TTER
DEL A WA RE
BER KS
OTS EG O
MC KE AN
ACC O M AC K
IND IAN A
WAY NE
HALIF AX
ALL EG AN Y
SO M ERS ET
LE E
CLEA RFIE LD
CAY UG A
BLAIR
LU ZE RN E
BRA DF OR D
CEN TR E
LA NC AS TER
PER RY
BRO O M E
CH EST ER
CH EN ANG O
SUR R Y
CAM B RIA
ST M AR YS
CLIN TO N
ON TAR IO MA DIS ON
CEC IL
DO RC H ESTE R
LO U ISA
PITTS YLVA NIA
ON O ND AG A
GA RR ETT
CH AR LES
WISE
SCO TT
PRE STO N
HU NTIN G DO N
LY CO M IN G
BED FO RD
SCH U YLKILL
GU ILFO RD
FRA NK LIN
TALBO T
WYT HE
BALTIM O R E
FAU QU IER
FL OY DSM YTH
YATE S
HEN R Y
STO KE S
AUG U STA
JE FFER SO N
BATH
HAR D Y
FULTO N
HAM P SH IRE
BLAN D
ALBE MA RLE
SUS Q UEH AN N A
ADA M S
MIF FLIN
HAR FO RD
MO N RO E
WO RC ES TER
LIV ING S TON
CAR O LINE
SCH O HA RIE
CR AIG
LO U DO U NTUC KE R
NO RT HAM P TO N
WAR R EN
AM ELIA
FAIR FAX
PER SO N
HAN O VER
CAR R OLL
GR AN VILLE
CAM P BELL
JU NIA TA
TOM P KIN S
CO LUM B IA
DIN WID DIE
SULLIV AN
SUF FO LK
OR AN G E
MC D OW ELL
BRU N SWIC K
CO RT LAND
CAR BO N
BUC H ANA N
ASH E
NELS O N
CAS WE LL
ME CK LEN BU RGPATR IC K
FOR SY TH
BUC KIN G HA M
ESS EX
RO CK ING H AM
RU SSE LL
DAU PH IN
TAZE WELL
GR AN T
SNY DE R
CH EM UN G
ALAM AN C E
CH AR LOTT E
PULA SKI
BO TETO U RT
VAN CE
CAM E RO N
SO UTH AM P TON
RO CK BR IDG EAL LEG HA NY
WAS HIN G TO N
LE BA NO N
AM HE RS T
NEW C ASTLE
ANN E A RU ND EL
CALV ER T
WIC OM IC O
FRE DE RIC K
CU LPEP ER
QU EE N AN N ES
LU N EN BUR G
MO N TG OM E RY
PAG E
LA CK AW AN NA
SCH U YLER
JO H NS ON
WAT AU GA
BER KE LE Y
VIRG IN IA BE AC H
CU MBER LAN D
WYO M IN G
PEN DLE TO N
CH EST ERF IELD
DIC KEN SO N
UN ION
HO WA RD
PRIN C E G EO RG ES
FLUV ANN A
NO TTO WA Y
SPO TS YLVA NIA
HEN R ICO
GR AY SO N
STAF FOR D
CH ESA PEA KE
MO R G AN
HIG HLA ND
SHE NA ND O AH
MA TH EWS
NO RT HU M BER LAN D
GILE S
APP OM A TTO X
ISLE O F W IGH T
GO O CH LAN D
PO WH ATA N
CLAR KE
PRIN C E WILL IA M
GR EE NSV ILLE
MIN ER AL
NEW KE NTGLO U CES TER
KING W ILLIAM
PRIN C E ED WA RD
RIC HM O ND
KING A ND QU EE N
MID D LESE X
RO AN O KE
PRIN C E G EO RG E
JA M ES C ITY
WES TM O RE LAND
CH AR LES C ITY
KING G EO R GE
HAM P TO N
MO N TO UR
NO RF OLK
RAP PA HAN N OC K
GR EE NE
NEW PO R T NE WSPO QU O SO N
BO TETO U RT
DAN VILLE
LY NC HB UR G
DIST OF CO LUM B IA
PO RTS M OU THBRIS TO L
HAR R ISO NB UR G
RAD FO RD
WAY NE SBO R O
HO PE WELL
MA NA SSA S
NO RT ON
EMPO RIA
FRE DE RIC KSB UR G
WILLIAM S BU RG
BUE NA VIST A
SO UTH BO ST ON
ARLIN G TO N
SALE M
STAU N TON
PETE RS BU RG
GA LAX
ALEX AN DR IA
MA RT INSV ILLE
WIN CH EST ER
CH AR LOTT ESV ILLE
FAIR FAX CITY
CO L O NIAL H EIG H TS
CO VIN G TONLE XIN G TON
CLIFTO N FO RG E
FALL S C HU R CH
MA NA SSA S P ARK
ELK
TIOG A
ON EID A
YO RK
KEN T
STEU BE N
SUS SE X
HER KIM E R
PO TTER
DEL A WA RE
BER KS
OTS EG O
MC KE AN
ACC O M AC K
IND IAN A
WAY NE
HALIF AX
ALL EG AN Y
SO M ERS ET
LE E
CLEA RFIE LD
CAY UG A
BLAIR
LU ZE RN E
BRA DF OR D
CEN TR E
TIOG A
LA NC AS TER
PER RY
BRO O M E
CH EST ER
CH EN ANG O
KEN T
SUR R Y
CAM B RIA
ST M AR YS
CLIN TO N
ON TAR IO MA DIS ON
CEC IL
DO RC H ESTE R
LO U ISA
PITTS YLVA NIA
ON O ND AG A
GA RR ETT
CH AR LES
WISE
SCO TT
PRE STO N
HU NTIN G DO N
LY CO M IN G
BED FO RD
SCH U YLKILL
GU ILFO RD
FRA NK LIN
TALBO T
SUS SE X
WYT HE
BALTIM O R E
FAU QU IER
FL OY DSM YTH
YATE S
HEN R Y
STO KE S
AUG U STA
JE FFER SO N
BATH
HAR D Y
FULTO N
SO M ERS ET
HAM P SH IRE
BLAN D
ALBE MA RLE
SUS Q UEH AN N A
ADA M S
MIF FLIN
HAR FO RD
MO N RO E
WO RC ES TER
LIV ING S TON
CAR O LINE
SCH O HA RIE
CR AIG
LO U DO U N
LY CO M IN G
TUC KE R
NO RT HAM P TO N
CEN TR E
WAR R EN
AM ELIA
FAIR FAX
FRA NK LIN
PER SO N
HAN O VER
CAR R OLL
GR AN VILLE
CAM P BELL
CAR R OLL
JU NIA TA
TOM P KIN S
CO LUM B IA
DIN WID DIE
SULLIV AN
SUF FO LK
OR AN G E
MC D OW ELL
BRU N SWIC K
BED FO RD
CO RT LAND
BATH
CAR BO N
BUC H ANA N
ASH E
SULLIV AN
NELS O N
SUR R Y
CAS WE LL
ME CK LEN BU RGPATR IC K
FOR SY TH
BUC KIN G HA M
ESS EX
RO CK ING H AM
RU SSE LL
DAU PH IN
TAZE WELL
GR AN T
SNY DE R
CH EM UN G
ALAM AN C E
OR AN G E
CH AR LOTT E
PULA SKI
BO TETO U RT
VAN CE
CAM E RO N
SO UTH AM P TON
RO CK BR IDG E
YO RK
AL LEG HA NY
WAS HIN G TO N
LE BA NO N
AM HE RS T
NEW C ASTLE
ANN E A RU ND EL
CALV ER T
WIC OM IC O
FRE DE RIC K
AUG U STA
FRE DE RIC K
RO CK ING H AMCU LPEP ER
NO RT HAM P TO N
QU EE N AN N ES
LU N EN BUR G
MO N TG OM E RY
PAG E
ASH E
WAS HIN G TO N
LA CK AW AN NA
SCH U YLER
CAR O LINE
JO H NS ON
WAT AU GA
BER KE LE Y
VIRG IN IA BE AC H
CU MBER LAN D
FRA NK LIN
BED FO RD
CL IN TO N
BED FO RD
WYO M IN G
PEN DLE TO N
CH EST ERF IELD
HAR D Y
GR AN T
DIC KEN SO N
PEN DLE TO N
UN ION
HO WA RD
PRIN C E G EO RG ES
FLUV ANN A
NO TTO WA Y
SPO TS YLVA NIA
MO N TG OME RY
HEN R ICO
GR AY SO N
STAF FOR D
CH ESA PEA KE
MO R G AN
HIG HLA ND
SHE NA ND O AH
MA TH EWS
NO RT HU M BER LAN D
GILE S
APP OM A TTO X
ISLE O F W IGH T
ALLEG AN Y
MA DIS ON
PAG E
GO O CH LAN D
RO CK ING H AM
PO WH ATA N
CLAR KE
LE E
PRIN C E WILL IA M
GR EE NSV ILLE
FRE DE RIC K
CU M BER LAN D
GILE S
DAU PH IN
MIN ER AL
NEW KE NT
UN ION
GLO U CES TER
KING W ILLIAM
PRIN C E ED WA RD
ADA MS
RIC HM O ND
LA NC AS TERKING A ND QU EE N
GR AY SO N
MID D LESE X
JE FFER SO N
RO AN O KE
ALLEG AN Y
PRIN C E G EO RG E
BRA DF OR D
GILE S
MIN ER AL
HIG HLA ND
JA M ES C ITY
ALLEG HA NY
WES TM O RE LAND
BED FO RD
NO RT HU M BER LAN D
CH AR LES C ITY
WAR R EN
NELS O N
KING G EO R GE
HAM P TO N
MO N TO UR
SCO TT
PATR IC K
MA DIS ON
SHE NA ND O AH
RU SSE LL
AM HE RS T
WYO M IN G
NO RF OLK
AUG U STA
RAP PA HAN N OC K
GR EE NE
WAR R EN
LU ZE RN E
CU M BER LAN D
FRA NK LIN
TAZE WELL
SM YTH
GR EE NE
BALTIM O R E
SCO TT
ALBE MA RLE
RO AN O KE
NEW PO R T NE WSPO QU O SO N
RIC HMO ND
RAP PA HAN N OC K
BO TETO U RT
ALLEG HA NY
DAN VILLE
FAU QU IER
RO AN O KE
LY NC HB UR G
WYT HE
CAR R OLL
DIST OF CO LUM B IA
PO RTS M OU THWAS HIN G TO N
PETE RS BU RG
BRIS TO L
RAD FO RD
WAY NE SBO R O
HO PE WELL
MA NA SSA S
EMPO RIA
BED FO RD
FRE DE RIC KSB UR G
WILLIAM S BU RG
SO UTH BO ST ON
CH EST ER
RO CK BR IDG E
RO CK ING H AM
ARLIN G TO N
SALE M
STAU N TON
GA LAX
ALEX AN DR IA
HAR R ISO NB UR G
NO RT ON
FRA NK LIN
MA RT INSV ILLE
WIN CH EST ER
CH AR LOTT ESV ILLE
BUE NA VIST A
FAIR FAX CITY
CO L O NIAL H EIG H TS
CO VIN G TONLE XIN G TON
CLIFTO N FO RG E
FALL S C HU R CH
MA NA SSA S P ARK
Phase 5 land segmentation
• Most counties are completely within a hydrogeomorphic region
• BMP and Crop data are not known on a finer scale in most cases
• Near the limit of computing capacity
15
Phase 5 RiverSegmentation
• Greater than 100 cfsor
• Has a flow gage
• Near the limit of meaningful data
• Consistent criterion
16
Snapshot ofanthropogenic factors:
Land Use AcreageBMPsFertilizerManureTillageCrop typesAtmospheric depositionWaste water treatmentSeptic loads
Hourly or daily values of Meteorologicalfactors:
PrecipitationTemperatureEvapotranspirationWindSolar RadiationDew pointCloud Cover
Flow-normalized loads
How the Watershed Model Works
HSPF
Scenario Mode
Nitrogen Loads to the Chesapeake Bay2012 Estimated
Agriculture -Manure15%
Agriculture -Chemical Fertilizer
19%
Agriculture -Legume Fixation
5%
Atmospheric Deposition -livestock &
fertilized soil emissions,
mobile+utility+industry
33%
Urban / Suburban -Fertilizer
8%
Wastewater17%
Septic3%
Source: CBP Phase 5.3.2 Watershed Model data and simulation for 2012 assessment including jurisdictional supplied inputs
18
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
40019
8519
8619
8719
8819
8919
9019
9119
9219
9319
9419
9519
9619
9719
9819
9920
0020
0120
0220
0320
0420
0520
0620
0720
0820
0920
1020
11
CBP Watershed Model Phase 5.3.2 Nitrogen Million lb per year (not official progress runs)
PAVAMDNYWVDCDE
19
Nutrient Impacts on Bay WQ
20
Scenario Builder
Livestock
Manure storage practice
Pasture Fertilizer
Crops
Image Creditshttps://utextension.tennessee.edu/lincoln/4-H/Pages/Livestock-Skillathons-%28Beef,-Sheep-and-Swine%29.aspxRebelwoodsranch.comSeaburst.comhttp://pubs.ext.vt.edu/442/442-308/442-308.html
BMPs
BMPs
BMPs
BMPs
21
Scenario Builder
Scenario Builder
• Input processor for the Watershed Model
• Generates past, present or future state of watershed conditions
• Specific WSM Inputs from Scenario Builder:o Management practiceso Land use acreso Manure and chemical
fertilizer application rateso Crop growtho Septic loads
Spatial ScaleCounty scale source data and calculations.
To output at a finer scale, Scenario Builder uses an area-weighted average.
Scenario Builder Ag Data Output• BMPs
– Acres– Pounds nitrogen, phosphorus and sediment reduced
• Manure application (nutrient species/month)• Fertilizer application (month)• Legumes (pounds ammonium)• Maximum Crop uptake (monthly nutrients)• Vegetative cover• Sediment generated by plowing• Land use acreage
25
Scenario BuilderAg Census Crops
Land Change ModelLand Use
Conservation Practices
BMPs
Breakout 1
Breakout 2
Breakout 3
Ag Census Crops
Regional Crop data Max uptake
Vegetative cover
Plowing Effects
Leguminous Fixation
Crop Need
Ag Census Animals
Manure applicationRegional management data
Fertilizer application