Development of a Southeastern Reference Stream Monitoring Network Debbie Arnwine Water Resources, TDEC 615-532-0703.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Benthic Assessments One benthic ecologists concerns and suggestions Fred Nichols USGS, retired.
Advertisements

VADEQ Biological Monitoring Self Assessment NPS/TMDL/WQM/WQS Region 3 Program Annual Meeting MAY 2009 NPS/TMDL/WQM/WQS Region 3 Program Annual Meeting.
Strengthening the State- Tribal-Federal Partnership to Assess the Condition of Nations Waters.
Yakama Nation Pacific Lamprey Recovery Project Core Data And Monitoring Framework.
Water Resources Monitoring Strategy for Wisconsin: Building on Experience Mike Staggs, WDNR Bureau of Fisheries Management and Habitat Protection Acknowledgements:
Clearwater River Habitat/Bioassessment
The adequacy of the existing reserve system for the protection of freshwater ecosystems Janet Stein Fenner School of Environment and Society.
Lec 12: Rapid Bioassessment Protocols (RBP’s)
Hydroelectric Relicensing in Vermont Brian Fitzgerald Vermont Agency of Natural Resources.
Indicator Species. What is an indicator species? A species whose presence, absence or abundance reflects a specific environmental condition, habitat or.
Working with Citizen Scientists: Rogue Basin (Oregon) Watershed Councils Stream Biomonitoring Study Michael Mulvey Oregon Department of Environmental Quality.
Adem.alabama.gov Incorporating NPS Intensive Surveys into ADEM’s Monitoring Strategy Southeastern Water Pollution Biologists’ Association Meeting Lake.
Comparable Biological Assessments from Different Methods and Analyses David B. Herbst 1 and Erik L. Silldorff 2 1 Sierra Nevada Aquatic Research Laboratory,
Hydrologic Issues in Mountaintop Mining Areas Ronald Evaldi, USGS-WSC, Charleston, WV Daniel Evans, USGS-WSC, Louisville, KY Hugh Bevans, USGS-WSC, Charleston,
US EPA Region IV Surface Coal Mining Field Activities Adventures in Mountain Top Mining / Valley Fill Chris Decker.
Carolinas Integrated Sciences & Assessments (CISA) Work to Support NIDIS July 31 st – August 1 st, 2012 Wilmington, NC.
Impaired and TMDL Waterbody Listings Impacts on DoD Facilities Bill Melville, Regional TMDL Coordinator
Watershed Assessment and River Restoration Strategies
Probabilistic Monitoring of Streams Below Small Impoundments in Tennessee Debbie Arnwine Water Pollution Control
Name of presenter Date of presentation.  To help preserve and protect Wisconsin’s over 15,000 lakes and 86,000 miles of rivers.
EPSCoR Water Dynamics Workshop Highlights from the Northeast and Appalachian States Michelle Daley Research Scientist, University of New Hampshire Associate.
Currents of Change Workshop Currents of Change Environmental Status & Trends of the Narragansett Bay Region May 1, 2009.
Developing Monitoring Programs to Detect NPS Load Reductions.
CALIFORNIA’S BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT PROGRAM April 5, 2005 Jim Harrington WPCL Bioassessment Laboratory.
The Non-tidal Water Quality Monitoring Network: past, present and future opportunities Katie Foreman Water Quality Analyst, UMCES-CBPO MASC Non-tidal Water.
1 The National Rivers and Streams Survey – An Overview and Results.
1 Survey of the Nation’s Lakes Presentation at NALMS’ 25 th Annual International Symposium Nov. 10, 2005.
A forum for coordinating state, federal, and tribal aquatic monitoring programs in the Pacific Northwest Pacific Northwest Aquatic Monitoring Partnership.
Aquatic Life Selenium Standards Cottonwood Creek Drainage Cherry Creek Segment 4b Regulation 38 June 9, 2015.
1 Do traits of freshwater species predict vulnerability to climate change? Bruce Chessman Climate Change Science, NSW DECCW.
Kentucky’s comprehensive Water Monitoring and Assessment Program addresses water quality management objectives outlined in the Clean Water Act, as well.
National Aquatic Resource Surveys Wadeable Streams Assessment Overview November, 2007.
NWQMC July 26, 2005 Developing A National Water Quality Monitoring Network Design.
Fish Assemblages of the Wabash River Mark Pyron. Wabash River Fishes 1.Large river 2.High diversity 3.History of human impact 4.Fish assemblages respond.
Response of benthic algae communities to nutrient enrichment in agricultural streams: Implications for establishing nutrient criteria R.W. Black 1, P.W.
Stream Ecosystem Assessment Group 1 Camp Caesar August 2003.
HYDROELECTRIC POWER AND FERC. HYDRO 101A ”Water Runs Down Hill”
Chesapeake Bay Program’s Baywide and Basinwide Monitoring Networks: Options for Adapting Monitoring Networks and Realigning Resources to Address Partner.
Rapid Bioassessment Protocols for low gradient streams) for species richness, composition and pollution tolerance, as well as a composite benthic macroinvertebrate.
ORSANCO Biological Programs Extra-curricular Updates EMAP-GRE ORBFHP NRSA.
Adem.alabama.gov ADEM’s Monitoring Summary Reports Alabama – Tombigbee CWP Stakeholders Meeting Montgomery, Alabama 3 February 2010 Lisa Huff – ADEM Field.
Lesson 1.5 Pg
National Monitoring Conference May 7-11, 2006
Agency Questionnaire Results Eastern Brook Trout Joint Venture Conservation Strategy Work Group Information gathered September/October 2005.
Water Quality, Species Diversity, And Quantity In A Stream Habitat Jason Holcomb Undergraduate Wildlife Biology Department Tennessee Technological University.
Preliminary Scoping Effort. Presentation Objectives Identify need for additional sources of future funding Provide background on how elements were identified.
Case Study Development of an Index of Biotic Integrity for the Mid-Atlantic Highland Region McCormick et al
New Mexico Watershed Watch Your school name and river name This project funded by the NM Dept. Of Game & Fish and the Sports Fish Restoration Program.
Water Quality Monitoring in Michigan, : A Decade of Program Evolution By: Gerald Saalfeld, MI Department of Environmental Quality.
Development of Nutrient Water Quality Standards for Rivers and Streams in Ohio Ohio EPA ORSANCO, October 20, 2009 George Elmaraghy, P.E., Chief.
1 Collaboration on EMAP Stream Condition Assessments in EPA Region 8 Thomas R. Johnson and Karl A. Hermann EPA Region 8.
The National Monitoring Network: Monitoring & Management of Alabama Rivers Fred Leslie Alabama Dept of Environmental Management National Monitoring Conference.
Environmental Flow Instream Flow “Environmental flow” is the term for the amount of water needed in a watercourse to maintain healthy, natural ecosystems.
Think about answering the questions: Who? What? Where? When? Why? How? Before your volunteers begin collecting data.
Aquatic Resource Monitoring Overview Anthony (Tony) R. Olsen USEPA NHEERL Western Ecology Division Corvallis, Oregon (541)
National Water Quality Monitoring Conference Session E4 April 29, 2014 Jonathan Witt & Britta Bierwagen, ORD/USEPA Jen Stamp & Anna Hamilton, Tetra Tech,
Stream and Watershed Information What does it consist of? Who has it? Where do you find it?
SFS Sacramento May 23, 2016 Special Session Introduction: Traits-Based Vulnerability Assessment and Monitoring Under Climate Change Britta Bierwagen (EPA/ORD),
Inventory & Monitoring Program U.S. National Wildlife Refuge System Natural Resources Program Center National Office USFWS U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service.
Macroinvertebrate responses to flow and thermal variability associated with impoundments James. C. White 1, Paul. J. Wood 1, David. M. Hannah 2 and Andy.
EVALUATING STREAM COMPENSATION PERFORMANCE: Overcoming the Data Deficit Through Standardized Study Design Kenton L. Sena (EPA VSFS Intern), Joe Morgan,
THE USE OF BENTHIC MACROINVERTEBRATE TRAITS TO ASSESS CLIMATE CHANGE RESPONSES AND VULNERABILITIES Anna Hamilton (Tetra Tech), Britta Bierwagen (US EPA),
Watershed Management Plan Summary of 2014 Activities/Progress Presented by: Matthew Bennett, MS December 2014.
Watershed Health Indicators
GREAT BAY and NEW HAMPSHIRE WATER QUALITY STANDARDS
CBP Update: Climate Change and the Chesapeake Bay TMDL
A (prototype) Shiny app for QCing continuous stream sensor data
Module 10/11 Stream Surveys
Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges Aquatic Ecosystem and Biodiversity Report Card Assess and rate the ecological condition of creeks and rivers across Adelaide.
Spatterdock and Lake Allen Patuxent Research Refuge
Presentation transcript:

Development of a Southeastern Reference Stream Monitoring Network Debbie Arnwine Water Resources, TDEC

2011 Biologists from the 8 EPA Region IV states and TVA considered the need for a stream monitoring network for detecting the effects of climate change on stream biota. Representatives from EPA ORD, USGS, USFS, UC and SIFN gave presentations and held a mini-workshop. Started with Climate change

Concerns Changing climate has the potential to affect biological communities in aquatic systems. Existing biological data are not adequate to isolate climate change related effects. More information is needed on sensitive indicators and species traits. Shifting populations may have an effect on bioassessment programs.

How changing climate can affect stream communities Temperature Warming water in all seasons Change in timing and length of seasons Increase in number of high degree days. Changes in riparian vegetation species

Hydrologic Increase frequency and duration of droughts Increase frequency and severity of floods Change in timing of peak flows

Most vulnerable fauna Limited dispersal options due to biological or geographical constraints including human- caused habitat fragmentation. Small ranges restricted to specific types or to habitats with temperatures already near the species thermal limits. Small populations subject to extirpation by extreme events. Low upper thermal limits

Changes in Taxa Richness, EPT and pollution tolerance are expected but are also responsive to many other stressors. Toxins Nutrients Dissolved Oxygen Sedimentation Standard assessment biometrics are usually geared toward detecting a suite of stressors.

Biometrics that might help tease out climate change effects Feeding Guilds Species Replacement Thermal Tolerance Hydrologic Variability Tolerance Drought Tolerance

Indicators that would be difficult or time-consuming to measure Early emergence Reproductive Cycle Size at maturity Growth Rate

Fledgling SE Climate Change Monitoring Network Monitoring Alabama DEM Georgia DNR Kentucky DOW North Carolina DNR South Carolina DHEC Tennessee DEC TVA Support EPA Region IV EPA ORD Tetratech USFS USGS Southeast Aquatics Florida DEP Mississippi DEQ

Climate Change monitoring hard to add when faced with Shrinking Monitoring Budgets and Growing Needs Needed to expand objectives and work within existing programs

Benefits of Regional Monitoring Pool limited resources. More data to analyze. Coverage of ecoregions and watersheds that cross jurisdictional boundaries. Several stressors (drought, acid rain, mercury air deposition, riparian forest infestations) are regional phenomena Data can be used for multiple assessment and trend analysis purposes in shared watersheds and ecoregions.

March 2012 Planning Meeting What do we want to do? What can we do? Who can do it? How should we do it? Where should we do it? What do we need? When could we start? Name Change! SE Reference Stream Monitoring Network

Climate Objectives Identify vulnerability to climate change Determine whether stream communities are being affected by climate change. Distinguish climate change effects from natural variation and other stressors. Detect changes early in a way that informs management strategies. Create a formal partnership to develop a consistent, long-term monitoring program that can withstand changes in staff.

Challenges Getting 9 agencies in 8 states to agree on s standard protocol. Incorporating monitoring into existing state assessment programs with little extra time or cost expenditures 5-year watershed cycles and probabilistic programs creates difficulty for annual monitoring of reference sites Need for continuous flow and temperature data

What we agreed on Importance of starting monitoring as soon as possible and continuing it – target 2013 Macroinvertebrate as primary indicators (fish and diatoms as secondary) Annual monitoring Consistent methodology Species level identification Reference site criteria

SE Network Site Selection Criteria Moderate to high gradient stream with riffle habitat Existing site with historic data showing a stable macroinvertebrate community Protected watershed with land-use unlikely to change within next 20 years 90% forested watershed No point source discharge and minimal NPS or other stressors.

Perennial Flow Established riparian with minimal invasive species Natural channel with no flow modification structures No power lines or pipelines upstream Few or no roads in watershed Active flow gage preferable

Proposed Monitoring Sites sites Does not include Ga 2-4

Where we are now Reference Sites 37 Sites have been identified for monitoring, expect 3-4 more. Keep original reference site selection (riffle, wadeable, ecoregions) and not follow NE plan (small stream, moderate gradient). Ky include reference site being treated for HWA. Select potential replacement sites in case other sites become compromised.

Macroinvertebrates Riffle Kick – 300 organism subsample Qualitative habitats kept separately Species identification Annual sampling Spring

FISH TVA will help sample TN River drainage sites and will help coordinate fish sampling in other drainages if needed. Spring/summer annually

Diatoms Annual spring sample EPA SPINBR or equivalent Hold for future analysis if necessary

Temperature and Flow Continuous temperature loggers at each site. Continuous flow or surrogate (such as depth logger) at each site.

Water Quality Minimum field parameters (DO, Cond., pH) at each site visit. Nutrients, metals etc at discretion of each agency. (Recommend baseline and if changes in benthic community to rule out other stressors.)

Habitat EPA Rapid Bioassessment Habitat Form Concurrent with macroinvertebrate samples. Digital photo documentation.

Data Management Each agency will house their own data and will provide data to a shared storage facility (TBD). Considering options for shared home and assistance with statistical analyses.

SWPBA Workgroup Meeting Monitoring site commitments – Reference Sites Finalize monitoring protocols – develop draft workplan. Narrow down spring sample window Continuous monitoring considerations Status – who needs help Data storage and analysis options

QUESTIONS? SUGGESTIONS? Debbie Arnwine Water Resources, TDEC