Adapting the RMP to Answer the Important Questions Keeping the Program Relevant

Thanks to: Water Board Staff Technical Review Committee and Workgroups Steering Committee Pulse of the Estuary Team

Overview Monitoring as Part of Adaptive Management What Have We Learned? Which Questions Remain? Moving Toward Proactive Management

The Three Cs

1. How do pollutants compare to various guidelines? 2. Can pollutant changes be linked to changing inputs? 1. What should cleanup targets be? 2. Which pollutants accumulate faster than they can be degraded?

4. What is the relative magnitude of pollutant inputs from different pathways? 4. Can data from a few high intensity sites be projected to other watersheds? 3. Which factors influence effects of specific pollutants on biota? 3. Which pollutants bioaccumulate?

How Much Have We Learned?

Better understanding of relative loadings from various sources and transport pathways

San Francisco Estuary Institute Rivers (11 kg) Small Tribs? Local small tributaries in the Bay Area Sacramento / San Joaquin Rivers Suspended Sediment Hg PCBs

Lessons, continued Management actions produce results Estuary and watershed processes affect beneficial use restoration Emerging pollutants require increased attention

PCBsTop PCBs and HgTop PAHsHigh PBDEsHigh OPsHigh PyrethroidsMedium? HgMedium SeMedium SeMedium DDT, chlordane, dieldrinMedium CuMedium CuMedium NiMedium NiMedium TBTMedium PAHsLow AgMedium Ag, As, Cd, Cr, Pb, ZnLow CdMedium OP pesticidesLow? ChlordaneLow DDTLow The Evolution of Management Priorities for Restoring the Chemical Integrity of Water

Institutional and Communication Lessons

Information Clients Water Boards RMP Participants EPA Neighbors State Legislature Congress

Traditional: Fix problems after they have become emergencies in the public eye – TMDLs Forever! New: Anticipate problems through surveillance, develop predictive recovery models, emphasize risk assessment and problem prevention

Next Steps Systematic look at efficiencies Modeling the system is now possible!