1. U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Chesapeake Bay SEC Case Study: Stream and Floodplain Ecosystem Services Dianna Hogan, Emily Pindilli, Fabiano Franco, Stephanie Gordon October 21, 2015 Little Bennett / Soper Branch April 2011

2. Introduction  Chesapeake Bay  Nation’s largest estuary – 64,000 mi 2 watershed  Restoration and protection is a priority for numerous government and nongovernmental stakeholders  Development pressure is high, land use decisions constantly being made  This case study comes from direct observations of land use decision making in a part of the Chesapeake Bay watershed Local officials tried to use ecosystem service concepts (but not explicitly)

3. Introduction  Chesapeake Bay  Nation’s largest estuary – 64,000 mi 2 watershed  Restoration and protection is a priority for numerous government and nongovernmental stakeholders  Development pressure is high, land use decisions constantly being made  This case study comes from direct observations of land use decision making in a part of the Chesapeake Bay watershed Local officials tried to use ecosystem service concepts (but not explicitly) 1. ecologic 2. economic 3. social 4. traffic/transportation

4. Background  This project is designed to make ecosystem service concepts directly useful and available for land use decision making  Focusing on stream and river floodplain services  Floodplains (rivers, streams)  Hydrologically important - water quality, quantity, timing, recharge, storage  Ecologically productive, important habitat  Greenspace (recreation), cultural  Environmentally sensitive (urban/ag LU) Soper Branch stream and floodplain  General Method 1. LiDAR mapping of stream and floodplain physical characteristics 2. Integrated biophysical metric development (estimate production) with economic valuation

5. Project Approach 1. Floodplain lidar mapping (began 2014) 2. Use stream and floodplain physical characteristics to estimate ecologic functions 3. Develop metrics based on ecologic functions 4. Correlate ecologic functions with final ecosystem goods and services (local and downstream) 5. Estimate value of local and downstream ecosystem services 6. Scale Up

6.  LiDAR mapping  Entire Chesapeake Bay watershed  Preliminary mapping done for much of the watershed  Missing some areas in VA (pending data)  Not Coastal Plain yet  Validation, checks, potential corrections in progress

7.  Lidar-derived extraction of physical floodplain features  Channel width, bankfull area, floodplain extent and width, elevation (levees and terraces), wetlands, etc.  In addition, use land cover, vegetation cover

8. Develop and test biophysical metrics  Using developed and developing relationships (regressions) between physical features (field measured and lidar) and ecological function  Meaning: linking stream and floodplain physical characteristics with functions we can tie to biophysical production of services  e.g., sediment retention (water quality)  Have field measurements of streams and floodplains that either provide sediment deposition or are a source (bank erosion) expressed as a function of ratios/metrics that can be derived from lidar (floodplain and stream bank characteristics)  Depends on ecosystem, province, stream order, etc.  Status: Literature review and compilation of these ratios/relationships (working closely with partners)

9. ecosystem services  Literature review of floodplain ecosystem services underway  Case study is focused on quantitatively evaluating services which are:  Relevant to Chesapeake Bay watershed  Can be evaluated biophysically  Can be valued monetarily  Additional services may be qualitatively assessed

10. Floodplain Ecosystem Services Ecosystem ServiceEcological FunctionHuman Benefits Nutrient/Sediment Retention Nutrient/sediment retention Water clarity, recreation, commercial fisheries Flood Attenuation Watershed surface flow regulation Avoidance of safety and property damage Wildlife ViewingProvision of wildlife habitatRecreation - wildlife viewing (local focus) Carbon SequestrationCarbon sequestration Reduced climate change impacts to health, property, agricultural yield, etc. Water Supply Surface and groundwater storage Water consumption (domestic, agriculture, industry, etc.) Enhancement of Soil Fertility Sediment and nutrient deposition Improved soil quality, increased crop yield Medicinal Resources Provision of habitat for species with medicinal properties Pharmaceuticals Water PurificationRemoval of toxic substancesPollution control, detoxification

11. Nutrient/Sediment Retention  Ecosystem Service Logic Flow  Benefits accrue both locally (local water quality) and downstream (Chesapeake Bay) Photo Credit: Missouri DOT Photo Credit: USGS Floodplains act as nutrient/sediment sink or source depending on physical features Reduces nutrients and other pollutants from reaching water bodies Increases water quality, may reduce need to purify water, may reduce need to decrease nutrients from other sources Photo Credit: USGS

12.  Ecosystem Service Logic Flow  Benefits being evaluated at local scale  Floodplains reduce local stream flashiness and retain proportion of stream overflows  Link water retention to local reduction in flood risk for adjacent property Flood Attenuation Photo Credit: City of Chesapeake Floodplains should act as ‘sink’ during precipitation events Reduces peak flow Flood probability reduced magnitude, and/or frequency Adapted from Mitsch and Gosselink 2000 Flood damages reduced property damage safety implications Photo Credit: Potomacs.com Adapted from Mitsch and Gosselink 2000

13.  Ecosystem Service Logic Flow  Benefits being evaluated at local scale (recreation downstream will be captured in sediment/nutrient retention) Photo Credit: FWS Wildlife Viewing Photo Credit: Chesapeake Bay Alliance Photo Credit: FWS Floodplains provide and connect wildlife habitat Increases abundance of wildlife Increases opportunities to view wildlife in and near floodplains

14.  Ecosystem Service Logic Flow  Benefits accrue globally, local sequestration will be valued via the Social Cost of Carbon Photo Credit: USGS Carbon sequestration: in vegetation in soil in water Reduced climate change Reduced damages: health effects property damage loss of life loss of ecological functions agricultural yield Lower atmospheric carbon Photo Credit: IPCC Photo Credit: EPA of Ireland Carbon Sequestration

15. Water Supply  Ecosystem Service Logic Flow  Benefits being evaluated at local scale  Capability to derive ground water recharge from floodplains still being assessed  Link recharge to local water consumption Photo Credit: USGS Photo Credit: Chesapeake Bay Alliance Floodplains provide vegetation Photo Credit: EPA Vegetation and other factors help recharge groundwater Increases supply of water for domestic, industrial, and agricultural uses

16.  Valuation will be service-dependent, methods still being fully developed (draft list):  Nutrient/Sediment Retention  Considerable work at EPA and elsewhere on benefits of Bay Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) which are directly relevant for valuation of N and P exported or avoided downstream  Valuation includes aesthetics (property values), recreation, and commercial fishing  Flood Attenuation  Primary study of local property values and flood damage costs  Wildlife Viewing  Benefits transfer of local wildlife viewing values applied using site specific characteristics  Carbon Sequestration  Social Cost of Carbon  Water Supply  Cost-based derivation, considering market values of water as well as potential increase in transportation or accessibility of water costs

17.  Project and metrics designed to be scaled up/down for land use decision support  Explore methods (validation)  Understand confidence in transferability to other watersheds and to scale  Assess level of effort and data requirements to expand analysis to other floodplains and streams at regional or national levels

18.  Chesapeake case study: determine whether readily measured stream and floodplain features can be used to estimate ecosystem services  Directly integrate ecosystem services into land use decision support Conclusion