Incorporating Lag-Times Into the Chesapeake Bay Program Report for STAC Workshop October 16-17, 2012 Annapolis, MD.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
RTI International RTI International is a trade name of Research Triangle Institute. Economic Study of Nutrient Credit Trading for the Chesapeake.
Advertisements

Management Plan: An Overview
Agricultural and Biological Engineering SWFREC, UF/IFAS Immokalee.
The Effect of the Changing Dynamics of the Conowingo Dam on the Chesapeake Bay Mukhtar Ibrahim and Karl Berger, COG staff Water Resources Technical Committee.
Assessment of Utah’s Nonpoint Source control program Nancy Mesner, Doug Jackson-Smith, Phaedra Budy, David Stevens Lorien Belton, Nira Salant, William.
Metropolitan Council Environmental Services A Clean Water Agency Presented to the Environment Committee November 9, 2010 Information Item Master Water.
Bill Orme, Senior Environmental Scientist, State Water Board Liz Haven, Asst. Deputy Director, Surface Water Regulatory Branch, State Water Board Dyan.
Lake Status Indicator Selection and Use in SLICE David F. Staples.
Current Planning for 2017 Mid-Point Assessment Gary Shenk COG 10/4/2012 presentation credit to Katherine Antos and the WQGIT ad hoc planning team.
Incorporating the 9-Elements into a WMP Lindsey PhillipsMike Archer Source Water CoordinatorState Lakes Coordinator (402) (402)
Lake Status Indicator Selection David F. Staples Ray Valley.
Program framework 1.Articulate program goals 2.Develop system level model for goal attainment 3.Assess current management efforts – identify gaps 4.Develop.
Nutrient Trading Framework in the Coosa Basin April 22, 2015.
PPA 502 – Program Evaluation Lecture 10 – Maximizing the Use of Evaluation Results.
Western States Energy & Environment Symposium October 27, 2009.
Rick Koelsch University of Nebraska – Lincoln Bob Broz University of Missouri - Columbia.
Chesapeake Bay Program Decision Framework Implementation.
Chesapeake Bay Program Incorporation of Lag Times into the Decision Process Gary Shenk 10/16/12 1.
Northwest hydraulic consultants 2NDNATURE Geosyntec Consultants September 11, 2007 Urban Upland / Groundwater Source Category Group (UGSCG) Overview Presentation.
Organization Mission Organizations That Use Evaluative Thinking Will Develop mission statements specific enough to provide a basis for goals and.
Agricultural Stakeholder Committee August 3, 2011 DWR’s Discussion Paper on Proposed Methodology for Quantifying the Efficiency of Agricultural Water Use.
Building a Legacy: Integrated Water Resource Management in Damascus, Oregon Oregon Water Conference May 25, 2011 WBG PDX GS
Watershed Assessment and Planning. Review Watershed Hydrology Watershed Hydrology Watershed Characteristics and Processes Watershed Characteristics and.
1 Breakout Notes Session 3 Group 2 – (Global/Broad Scale/Regional) Integrated assessment models (socio-economic/biophysical) in relationship to land cover.
Progress on Coordinating CBP and Federal Leadership Goals, Outcomes, and Actions Principals’ Staff Committee Meeting 2/16/12 Carin Bisland, Associate Director.
Maryland Climate Change Commission Scientific and Technical Working Group Regional Assessment of Climate Change Impacts Metropolitan Washington COG Climate.
CHESAPEAKE BAY PROGRAM PARTNERSHIP MANAGEMENT BOARD MEETING MAY 9, 2012 ANNAPOLIS, MD Social Science Action Team: Incorporating Social Science into the.
1 Questions Addressed What are the options for reducing pollutant inputs to Lake Tahoe? Pollutant Reduction Opportunities.
NOAA Restoration Center Implementing the Gulf Regional Sediment Management Master Plan …responding to an ongoing emergency, improving responses to new.
Lessons Learned from BMP evaluation studies in the nontidal streams and river in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed Katie Foreman University of Maryland Center.
Integrated Risk Management Charles Yoe, PhD Institute for Water Resources 2009.
Click to edit Master subtitle style Exemplary Strategies to Protect and Restore Urban Watersheds: Preparing for the Chesapeake Bay TMDL and Watershed Implementation.
Chesapeake Bay Policy in Virginia - TMDL, Milestones and the Watershed Agreement Russ Baxter Deputy Secretary of Natural Resources for the Chesapeake Bay.
EPA Chesapeake Bay Trading and Offsets Workplan June 1, 2012.
PP 4.1: IWRM Planning Framework. 2 Module Objective and Scope Participants acquire knowledge of the Principles of Good Basin Planning and can apply the.
Integrated Ecological Assessment February 28, 2006 Long-Term Plan Annual Update Carl Fitz Recovery Model Development and.
Robert M. Summers, Ph.D. September 16, 2015 How can we make sure the Chesapeake Bay Restoration really works?
Critical Issues in Implementing Trading Programs in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed STAC Workshop May 14, 2013 Annapolis, MD.
2004 Tributary Strategies: Assessment of Implementation Options Steve Bieber Water Resources Program Presented at: COG Chesapeake Bay Policy Committee.
Reducing Nutrient Loads from the Opequon Creek Watershed Project Team Meeting Oct 19, 2007 Chesapeake Bay Targeted Watersheds Grant Program.
Chesapeake Bay Program Partnership’s Basinwide BMP Verification Framework: Building Confidence in Delivering on Pollution Reductions to Local Waters Maryland.
Clifton Bell, P.E., P.G. Chesapeake Bay Modeling Perspectives for the Regulated Community.
Chesapeake Bay Program’s Baywide and Basinwide Monitoring Networks: Options for Adapting Monitoring Networks and Realigning Resources to Address Partner.
Lessons Learned from BMP evaluation studies in the nontidal streams and river in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed Katie Foreman University of Maryland Center.
Need for Advanced Stormwater Treatment at Lake Tahoe John E. Reuter & Dave Roberts Tahoe TMDL Research Program.
Chesapeake Bay TMDL 2017 Midpoint Assessment: A Critical Path Forward Lucinda Power EPA Chesapeake Bay Program Office Citizens Advisory Committee Meeting.
1 State Parks  Soil and Water Conservation  Natural Heritage Outdoor Recreation Planning  Land Conservation Dam Safety and Floodplain Management Chesapeake.
Rebuilding the System Reducing the Risk California Water Plan Plenary Session October 22-23, 2007.
OWEB Effectiveness Monitoring Program Key Components  Effectiveness Monitoring Workshop  Development of definitions  Effectiveness Monitoring of: 
OVERVIEW: CHESAPEAKE BAY PROGRAM DEVELOPMENTS AND WATER & CLIMATE CHANGE ACTIVITIES Water Resources Technical Committee Oct. 29, 2015 Presented by Tanya.
Adaptive Integrated Framework (AIF): a new methodology for managing impacts of multiple stressors in coastal ecosystems A bit more on AIF, project components.
California Water Plan Update Advisory Committee Meeting January 20, 2005.
Stream Health Outcome Biennial Workplan Neely L. Law, PhD Center for Watershed Protection Chesapeake Bay Program Sediment & Stream Coordinator Habitat.
Katherine Antos, Water Quality Team Leader Water Quality Goal Implementation Team Coordinator U.S. EPA Chesapeake Bay Program Office Chesapeake Bay Program.
HAMPTON ROADS REGIONAL WATER RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PROGRAM Presentation John M. Carlock, AICP Deputy Executive Director, Physical Planning Hampton Roads.
Maryland’s Nutrient Trading Program How Trading Works John Rhoderick Maryland Department of Agriculture.
Draft example: Indicators for water supply reliability and storage projects Presented by Steve Roberts (Department of Water Resources, Storage Investigations)
1 State Parks  Soil and Water Conservation  Natural Heritage Outdoor Recreation Planning  Land Conservation Dam Safety and Floodplain Management Chesapeake.
Integrated Approach for Assessing and Communicating Progress toward the Chesapeake Bay Water-Quality Standards Scott Phillips USGS, STAR May 14, 2012 PSC.
Chesapeake Bay Program Decision Framework Implementation.
Williamsburg’s Local Strategies to meet the ChesBay TMDL March 2012 Chesapeake Bay Watershed Virginia Maryland Pennsylvania New York Delaware West Virginia.
MS4 and Trading Considerations
CBP Update: Climate Change and the Chesapeake Bay TMDL
program framework Articulate program goals
CLINICAL INFORMATION SYSTEM
Communicating Credit Where Credit is Due
Southern California Stormwater Monitoring Coalition
Chesapeake Bay TMDL Milestones, Progress, Mid-point Assessment
Jim Edward Acting Director Chesapeake Bay Program Office May 23,2018 EPA’s Draft Final Phase III WIP Expectations.
Watershed Restoration, Chesapeake Bay
Presentation transcript:

Incorporating Lag-Times Into the Chesapeake Bay Program Report for STAC Workshop October 16-17, 2012 Annapolis, MD

 Bob Hirsch, chair  Jack Meisinger  Marc Ribaudo  Claire Welty  Weixing Zhu  Kevin Sellner  Russ Brinsfield Steering Committee  Don Weller  Kurt Gottschalk  David Sample  Natalie Gardner  Matt Ellis  Gene Yagow

Context of the Workshop

 Expand our conceptual modeling framework to encompass interactions between floodplains, stream channels, and sediment storages in a manner that enables comprehensive sediment budgeting.  Improve the accounting of sediment and attached nutrient storages either within the CBWM (lower order streams, stream channel erosion, groundwater dynamics, and reservoir dynamics), and/or through the use of supplemental models. Draft Recommendations

 Comprehensive local inventory of all agricultural and urban BMPs, including performance characteristics.  Expedite data sharing agreements, account for previously unaccounted for practices, and standardize local accounting methods and procedures.  Expand site-specific data collection efforts to include particle size distribution and soil P in the top few cm of soil.  Design new monitoring efforts to explicitly evaluate hypotheses needed to guide restoration, BMP implementation, and land planning in a holistic manner.  Expand regional research efforts to include inflow-outflow monitoring of major reservoirs and delineation of province- specific groundwater flow path delivery mechanisms. Recommendations (cont.)

 In order to mitigate the effects of lag-times, existing trading programs should be revised to incorporate forward markets to efficiently allocate reductions over time.  Additional ecosystem benefits that are delivered more quickly need to be highlighted to foster public support for the program.  Information about lag-times can be used to inform the adaptive management process, to educate the public about setting realistic restoration expectations, and to assist local managers in more appropriate selection of control measures that will produce the desired short-term and long-term effects. Recommendations (cont.)

 Prepare a scenario(s) that contrast current CBWM output with and without lag times for hydrology, BMP maturation, and sediment storage to inform the public when the implemented practices will produce the detectable improvements in WQ that we expect.  Simulation of BMP implementation requires the use of best professional judgment which includes a degree of uncertainty. Additionally, real-time changes in flow, major weather events, and politics affect the expected changes in WQ, so that adaptive management is key in accommodating lag-time during implementation. Develop General Statements about Lag-Time for the Public

 Since lag-times are associated with most agricultural BMPs, modeled results will not be consistent with WQ observations, and WQ standards and TMDL reduction goals will not be met as soon as the CBWM projects.  If lag-times are accounted for, and point source WQ permits must still be met annually, the economics driving the decision of point source permit holders, about whether to participate in nutrient trading or to install advanced treatment technology, will favor the advanced treatment technology. Implications