Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Source: C. Benton Monitoring Program Development David Senn, Emily Novick, Anthony Malkassian February 4, 2014 1.Background/assumptions 2.Monitoring Program.

Published byAnika Stamper Modified over 10 years ago

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Source: C. Benton Monitoring Program Development David Senn, Emily Novick, Anthony Malkassian February 4, 2014 1.Background/assumptions 2.Monitoring Program."— Presentation transcript:

1 Source: C. Benton Monitoring Program Development David Senn, Emily Novick, Anthony Malkassian February 4, 2014 1.Background/assumptions 2.Monitoring Program Development: proposed approach a.3 year plan b.Year 1 3.Feedback

2 Discussion Topics/Questions Highest priority experimental studies to inform monitoring? Highest priority data analysis to inform monitoring? Approach to program development Goal: Feedback on discussion topics

3 Nutrient science/management questions Increasing biomass  does trajectory indicate future impacts? Phytoplankton composition, toxins  Caused by nutrients? Low DO in margin habitats, impacts  Anthropogenic nutrients? Future adverse impacts  Current loads + future scenarios How do various nutrient sources contribute to ambient concentrations (space, time) Bay? What load reductions will mitigate or prevent impairment?

4 Monitoring Program Background 1.Need for a sustainably-funded, regulatory-driven nutrient monitoring program 1.Declining support ($) for USGS science program 1.Future monitoring program will a.include/build around current USGS program + other efforts b.regulatory-driven approach will have different requirements 1.Program should be an optimal blend blend of ship-based measurements, moored sensors, and other methods (e.g., AUVs, remote sensing)

5 5.Broad goals of program: a.Assess current conditions (impaired? yes or no) b.Track status and trends c.Data for model calibration (physical, chemical, biological) 5.Want/need to take advantage of cooperative/collaborative efforts a. USGS-Menlo Park b. USGS-Sac (moored sensors) c. IEP/DWR (both discrete and moored programs) d. other institutions (e.g., RTC) 5.Need for a research vessel a. Polaris aging, USGS may not continue supporting b. need to carry out work on shoals/shallows Monitoring Program Background

6 What will shape Monitoring Program?

7 Nutrient Science Program Modeling Monitoring Special Studies Assessment Framework Loads

8 Modeling Assessment Framework Nutrient Management/Science Questions Indicators Monitoring -chl-a -dissolved oxygen -phytoplankton composition -algal toxins -… -others (?) Supporting measurements -… e.g., identify magnitude, duration, size of a problematic bloom spatial/temporal resolution of monitoring to detect a problem Model Calibration - high resolution data (moored sensors for chl-a, DO, turbidity) - additional analytes (e.g, TN, TP) - rate measurements - hydrodynamic or physical data

9 Thompson et al., 2008 What monitoring is needed to detect this? Either for… -compliance -model calibration Moorings, continuous sensors Long-term USGS cruises/stations ? ? ?

10 9/6/13 9/8/13 9/10/13 Dumbarton Chl-a Dissolved Oxygen 9/6/13 9/8/13 9/10/13 Alviso Slough Chl-a Dissolved Oxygen 9/6/13 9/8/13 9/10/13

11 Sloughs Former Salt Ponds %Time below 5 mg L -1 n=10 n=14 SFEI (2013) 100 80 60 40 20 DO in Sloughs and Former Salt Ponds (data = 2004-2012) 0

12 Alviso Slough: June 2012 – April 2013 Data: M Downing-Kunz, USGS 8 4 0 10

13 Phytoplankton composition in South Bay and Lower South Bay s36 s32 s27 s18 Data: USGS Cell counts (%total) Centric Diatoms Pennate Diatoms Cryptomonads Dinoflagellates Euglenoids Other Flagellates Green Algae Cyanobacteria

14 Modeling Assessment Framework Nutrient Management/Science Questions Indicators Monitoring -chl-a -dissolved oxygen -phytoplankton composition -algal toxins -… -others (?) Supporting measurements -… e.g., identify magnitude, duration, size of a problematic bloom spatial/temporal resolution of monitoring to detect a problem Model Calibration - high resolution data (moored sensors for chl-a, DO, turbidity) - additional analytes (e.g, TN, TP) - rate measurements - hydrodynamic or physical data

15 Monitoring Planning Needs Habitats Deep subtidal Shoals margins Compartments Sediments – Biota – chemistry/process Water column – Basic chemistry – Other chemistry, processes, toxins – Phytoplankton biomass, composition – Other biota Approach Ship-based Moorings, AUVs What to measure Analytes/processes Approach(es) Organizational/Institutional Funding, partnerships, logistics

16 Implement Phase 1 v1.0 2015 20162014 2017 → Phase 2 v1.0 → Phase 3 v1.0 → Phase 1 v1.1, v2.0

17 Implement Phase 1 v1.0 March 2014 Draft Program Development Plan 2015 20162014 2017 → Phase 2 v1.0 → Phase 3 v1.0 → Phase 1 v1.1, v2.0 Reporting or meetings Assessment framework Iterative refinement of indicators, criteria, etc. →|→| →|→|→|→|

18 Implement Phase 1 v1.0 March 2014 Draft Program Development Plan 2015 20162014 2017 → Phase 2 v1.0 → Phase 3 v1.0 → Phase 1 v1.1, v2.0 Reporting or meetings Assessment framework Iterative refinement of indicators, criteria, etc. →|→| →|→|→|→|

19 Implement Phase 1 v1.0 2015 20162014 2017 Assessment framework → Phase 2 v1.0 → Phase 3 v1.0 → Phase 1 v1.1, v2.0 Iterative refinement of indicators, criteria, etc. →|→| →|→|→|→| Model development Carry out modeling studiesModeling March 2014 Draft Program Development Plan Reporting or meetings

20 Implement Phase 1 v1.0 2015 20162014 2017 Assessment framework → Phase 2 v1.0 → Phase 3 v1.0 → Phase 1 v1.1, v2.0 Iterative refinement of indicators, criteria, etc. →|→| →|→|→|→| Inventory potential program components to address high priority issues Monitoring program Development Evaluate and prioritize monitoring program components Model development Carry out modeling studiesModeling March 2014 Draft Program Development Plan Reporting or meetings

21 Implement Phase 1 v1.0 2015 20162014 2017 Assessment framework → Phase 2 v1.0 → Phase 3 v1.0 → Phase 1 v1.1, v2.0 Iterative refinement of indicators, criteria, etc. →|→| →|→|→|→| Inventory potential program components to address high priority issues Monitoring program Development Evaluate and prioritize monitoring program components Model development Carry out modeling studiesModeling March 2014 Draft Program Development Plan Draft Program Structure Program Structure v1.0 Reporting or meetings

22 Implement Phase 1 v1.0 2015 20162014 2017 Assessment framework → Phase 2 v1.0 → Phase 3 v1.0 → Phase 1 v1.1, v2.0 Iterative refinement of indicators, criteria, etc. →|→| →|→|→|→| Inventory potential program components to address high priority issues Monitoring program Development Evaluate and prioritize monitoring program components Monitoring Program Investigations Identify studies and data analysis needed to inform monitoring component requirements/structure Model development Carry out modeling studiesModeling March 2014 Draft Program Development Plan Draft Program Structure Program Structure v1.0 Reporting or meetings

23 Implement Phase 1 v1.0 2015 20162014 2017 Assessment framework → Phase 2 v1.0 → Phase 3 v1.0 → Phase 1 v1.1, v2.0 Iterative refinement of indicators, criteria, etc. →|→| →|→|→|→| Inventory potential program components to address high priority issues Monitoring program Development Evaluate and prioritize monitoring program components Monitoring Program Investigations Identify studies and data analysis needed to inform monitoring component requirements/structure Model development Carry out modeling studiesModeling March 2014 Draft Program Development Plan Draft Program Structure Program Structure v1.0 Carry out Data analyses/studies Carry out Experimental studies Reporting or meetings

24 Implement Phase 1 v1.0 2015 20162014 2017 Assessment framework → Phase 2 v1.0 → Phase 3 v1.0 → Phase 1 v1.1, v2.0 Iterative refinement of indicators, criteria, etc. →|→| →|→|→|→| Inventory potential program components to address high priority issues Monitoring program Development Evaluate and prioritize monitoring program components Monitoring Program Investigations Identify studies and data analysis needed to inform monitoring component requirements/structure Model development Carry out modeling studiesModeling March 2014 Draft Program Development Plan Draft Program Structure Program Structure v1.0 Carry out Data analyses/studies Carry out Experimental studies Reporting or meetings

25 Implement Phase 1 v1.0 2015 20162014 2017 Assessment framework → Phase 2 v1.0 → Phase 3 v1.0 → Phase 1 v1.1, v2.0 Iterative refinement of indicators, criteria, etc. →|→| →|→|→|→| Inventory potential program components to address high priority issues Monitoring program Development Evaluate and prioritize monitoring program components Monitoring Program Investigations Identify studies and data analysis needed to inform monitoring component requirements/structure Model development Carry out modeling studiesModeling March 2014 Draft Program Development Plan Draft Program Structure Program Structure v1.0 Carry out Data analyses/studies Carry out Experimental studies Reporting or meetings

26 Implement Phase 1 v1.0 2015 20162014 2017 Assessment framework → Phase 2 v1.0 → Phase 3 v1.0 → Phase 1 v1.1, v2.0 Iterative refinement of indicators, criteria, etc. →|→| →|→|→|→| Inventory potential program components to address high priority issues Monitoring program Development Evaluate and prioritize monitoring program components Monitoring Program Investigations Identify studies and data analysis needed to inform monitoring component requirements/structure Model development Carry out modeling studiesModeling March 2014 Draft Program Development Plan Draft Program Structure Program Structure v1.0 Carry out Data analyses/studies Carry out Experimental studies Reporting or meetings Programmatic/Institutional Considerations

27 March 2014 Draft Program Development Plan Implement Phase 1 v1.0 2015 20162014 2017 Assessment framework → Phase 2 v1.0 → Phase 3 v1.0 → Phase 1 v1.1, v2.0 Reporting or meetings Iterative refinement of indicators, criteria, etc. →|→| →|→|→|→| Inventory potential program components to address high priority issues Monitoring program Development Evaluate and prioritize monitoring program components Monitoring Program Investigations Identify studies and data analysis needed to inform monitoring component requirements/structure Model development Carry out modeling studiesModeling Carry out Data analyses/studies Carry out Experimental studies Draft Program Structure Program Structure v1.0 Programmatic/Institutional Considerations

28 March 2014 Draft Program Development Plan

29 Monitoring Planning Needs Habitats Deep subtidal Shoals margins Compartments Sediments – Biota – chemistry/process Water column – Basic chemistry – Other chemistry, processes, toxins – Phytoplankton biomass, composition – Other biota Approach Ship-based Moorings, AUVs What to measure Analytes/processes Approach(es) Organizational/Institutional Funding, partnerships, logistics

30 March 2014 Draft Program Development Plan Lay out issues related to … Habitat Compartments Approach What to measure/how Organizational/Institutional Put forward… Approach for monitoring program development Obvious major components Major unknowns, uncertainties

31 Monitoring Program Investigations Identify studies and data analysis needed to inform monitoring component requirements/structure Carry out Data analyses/studies Carry out Experimental studies Experimental Studies Measuring phytoplankton composition Pigments flow cytometry/imaging Toxins ✔ ✔ Data analysis Historical data: spatial/temporal resolution to address need Historical data + modeling what are we measuring (mixing, space, time)? Moored sensors: data analysis, logistics/maintenance ✔ ✔ ✔ Some work underway

32 Discussion Topics/Questions Highest priority experimental studies to inform monitoring? Highest priority data analysis to inform monitoring? Approach to program development

Download ppt "Source: C. Benton Monitoring Program Development David Senn, Emily Novick, Anthony Malkassian February 4, 2014 1.Background/assumptions 2.Monitoring Program."

Similar presentations

… with a trend of improving trophic status. Inflow (757 r. km) mg chl a m -3 Outflow (163 r. km) mg chl a m -3 An order of magnitude increase in 1-2 weeks.

… with a trend of improving trophic status. Inflow (757 r. km) mg chl a m -3 Outflow (163 r. km) mg chl a m -3 An order of magnitude increase in 1-2 weeks.
C OPPER AND N ICKEL TMDL D EVELOPMENT: L OWER S OUTH B AY.

C OPPER AND N ICKEL TMDL D EVELOPMENT: L OWER S OUTH B AY.
Mercury Monitoring and Assessment in the South Baylands Letitia Grenier, Joshua Collins, Jay Davis SFEI Mark Marvin-DiPasquale USGS David Drury Santa Clara.

Mercury Monitoring and Assessment in the South Baylands Letitia Grenier, Joshua Collins, Jay Davis SFEI Mark Marvin-DiPasquale USGS David Drury Santa Clara.
201 529 5151 www.hydroqual.com Use of Mechanistic Modeling to Enhance Derivation of Great Bay TN Criteria and Inform Restoration Strategy Thomas W. Gallagher,

Use of Mechanistic Modeling to Enhance Derivation of Great Bay TN Criteria and Inform Restoration Strategy Thomas W. Gallagher,
An Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission and National Marine Fisheries Service partnership activity under the Marine Fisheries Advisory Committee.

An Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission and National Marine Fisheries Service partnership activity under the Marine Fisheries Advisory Committee.
Phosphorus eutrophication in an inter-drumlin lake: causes and effects Lucy Crockford Walsh Fellow Trinity College Dublin What’s impeding this lake’s recovery?

Phosphorus eutrophication in an inter-drumlin lake: causes and effects Lucy Crockford Walsh Fellow Trinity College Dublin What’s impeding this lake’s recovery?
Limnology 101 Dan Obrecht MU Limnology

Limnology 101 Dan Obrecht MU Limnology
Lake Erie Algal Source Tracking (LEAST) homas B. Bridgeman, University of Toledo Thomas B. Bridgeman, University of Toledo Cyndee L. Gruden University.

Lake Erie Algal Source Tracking (LEAST) homas B. Bridgeman, University of Toledo Thomas B. Bridgeman, University of Toledo Cyndee L. Gruden University.
Great Lakes Observing System GLRI Tributary Monitoring Project

Great Lakes Observing System GLRI Tributary Monitoring Project
James River Chlorophyll Study Status Update: January 2015 House Agriculture, Chesapeake and Natural Resources Committee David K. Paylor, DEQ Director.

James River Chlorophyll Study Status Update: January 2015 House Agriculture, Chesapeake and Natural Resources Committee David K. Paylor, DEQ Director.
By: Carrie Turner Prepared for: New Jersey Association of Environmental Authorities Annual Conference March 12, 2013 Watershed Management Planning Provides.

By: Carrie Turner Prepared for: New Jersey Association of Environmental Authorities Annual Conference March 12, 2013 Watershed Management Planning Provides.
Tonnie Cummings National Park Service, Pacific West Region National Tribal Forum on Air Quality May 14, 2014.

Tonnie Cummings National Park Service, Pacific West Region National Tribal Forum on Air Quality May 14, 2014.
Assessment of Ecological Condition in Coastal Waters Impacted by Hurricane Katrina.

Assessment of Ecological Condition in Coastal Waters Impacted by Hurricane Katrina.
Delta TRIM Hydrodynamic modeling in CASCaDE Nancy Monsen USGS/Menlo Park IEP Modeling Workshop Tuesday, May 26, 2009.

Delta TRIM Hydrodynamic modeling in CASCaDE Nancy Monsen USGS/Menlo Park IEP Modeling Workshop Tuesday, May 26, 2009.
REMOTE SENSING Presented by: Anniken Lydon. What is Remote Sensing? Remote sensing refers to different methods used for the collection of information.

REMOTE SENSING Presented by: Anniken Lydon. What is Remote Sensing? Remote sensing refers to different methods used for the collection of information.
Linking watershed characteristics and land use to lake water quality using GIS presented by Brian Block ESR 575 - Limnology instructed by Dr. Mark Sytsma.

Linking watershed characteristics and land use to lake water quality using GIS presented by Brian Block ESR Limnology instructed by Dr. Mark Sytsma.
Chesapeake Bay Program Monitoring Activities and Monitoring Network Design Chesapeake Bay Program Monitoring Activities and Monitoring Network Design Stephen.

Chesapeake Bay Program Monitoring Activities and Monitoring Network Design Chesapeake Bay Program Monitoring Activities and Monitoring Network Design Stephen.
Problem Description: Networked Aquatic Microbial Observing System (NAMOS) Problem Description: Networked Aquatic Microbial Observing System (NAMOS) Proposed.

Problem Description: Networked Aquatic Microbial Observing System (NAMOS) Problem Description: Networked Aquatic Microbial Observing System (NAMOS) Proposed.
Cooperative Efforts with Gulf of Mexico Alliance New Web Site –http://www.gulfofmexicoalliance.org/welco me.html First Annual Monitoring Forum Priority.

Cooperative Efforts with Gulf of Mexico Alliance New Web Site – me.html First Annual Monitoring Forum Priority.
Ohau Channel Diversion Wall  Lake Rotorua experiences anoxic bottom waters and cyanobacterial blooms (Fig. 1A). Water from Lake Rotorua flows through.

Ohau Channel Diversion Wall  Lake Rotorua experiences anoxic bottom waters and cyanobacterial blooms (Fig. 1A). Water from Lake Rotorua flows through.

Similar presentations

Ads by Google