1 / 27

EPA’s National Coastal Assessment: Results, Lessons Learned and Future Directions

EPA’s National Coastal Assessment: Results, Lessons Learned and Future Directions. National Monitoring Conference May 7-11, 2006 San Jose, CA Kevin Summers, Barry Burgan & Peter Grevatt U.S. EPA/ORD & OW. National Coastal Assessment Goal.

curt
Download Presentation

EPA’s National Coastal Assessment: Results, Lessons Learned and Future Directions

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. EPA’s National Coastal Assessment:Results, Lessons Learned and Future Directions National Monitoring Conference May 7-11, 2006 San Jose, CA Kevin Summers, Barry Burgan & Peter Grevatt U.S. EPA/ORD & OW

  2. National Coastal Assessment Goal • Build the scientific basis, and the local, state and tribal capacity, to monitor for status and trends in the condition of the Nation’s coastal ecosystems.

  3. National Coastal Assessment Uncertainties/Questions • What is the status, extent, and geographical distribution of ecological resources? • What proportions of these resources are declining or improving? Where? At what rate? • What factors are likely to be contributing to declining conditions? • Are pollution control, reduction, mitigation, and prevention programs achieving overall improvement in ecological condition?

  4. Trademarks of National Coastal Assessment • Probability Design • Exposure and Response Indicators • Partnerships & Coordination

  5. Probability Design Site Selection

  6. Probability Survey • Estimate extent and condition of resource • Characterize trends in extent and condition of resource • Represent spatial patterns . . .with known certainty!

  7. Sampling Sites

  8. SAB Shelf (~10-100 m): April 04 Partners: NOAA (NCCOS, NMSP) EPA/ORD/NHEERL States of FL, GA, SC, NC Sampling Parameters: Habitat Characteristics (T, S, DO, Nutrients, Grain-Size, TOC) Stressors (Chemical Contaminants in Sediments & Biota) Biological Condition (Benthic Infauna, Chlorophyll A, fish pathology)

  9. Indicators

  10. Indicator Selection CriteriaCritical Criteria • Regionally responsive • Unambiguously interpretable • Simple quantification • Index period stability • Low year-to-year variation • Environmental impact

  11. Indicator Type Exposure Response Habitat Indicator NutrientsSediment ContaminantsSediment ToxicityDissolved Oxygen concentrationContaminants in fish and shellfish Benthic community compositionBenthic abundanceFish community compositionPathology in Fish Percent light transmittanceSalinity, temperature, pHPercent silt-clay

  12. Index Type Water Quality Index Sediment Quality Index Habitat Quality Index Benthic Index Fish Contaminants Index Indicator Elements Nutrients ChlorophyllWater Clarity Dissolved Oxygen Sediment Contaminants TOC Sediment Toxicity Historical Wetland Loss Rate Recent Decadal Wetland loss rate Community Biodiversity Proportion of Pollution Sensitive Species Proportion of Pollution Tolerant Species Metals in whole fish and shellfish Organic contaminants in whole fish and shellfish

  13. ERM and ERL Guidance Values in Sediments

  14. Partnerships & Coordination Surveys (2000-2006)

  15. NCA Surveys (2000-2006) • Only coordinated national monitoring program examining ecological condition in coastal ecosystems • Core Indicators • Consistent & Compatible Designs • Extensive Partnering (States) • Consistent with Ocean Action Plan Recommendations • National Monitoring Network

  16. Percent Area in Poor Condition (1999-2000)by Indicator (except Coastal Habitat Index) and Region

  17. Rating Score (1999-2000)by Indicator and Region

  18. No real improvement seen

  19. Using National Coastal Assessment Data • Determine compliance with standards/criteria to communicate environmental health • Use in and develop biological numerical standards for 305(b) and 303(d) assessments • Develop biological, benthic, sediment quality and nutrient criteria • NCCR type assessments-communication- temporal and spatial • Supplement PCB analyses for fish consumption determinations • Adopt existing sampling methodologies for consistent/comparable monitoring • Investigate new indicators - photopigment/zooplankton index

  20. National Coastal Assessment After 2006

  21. NCA – The Future • Regional/State surveys (2000-2006) • Integration into Rotating National Surveys on 5-Year Cycle • National Surveys of Wadeable Streams, Lakes, Great Rivers, Estuaries, Wetlands on Rotating Panel Design • Consistent with National Monitoring Network Recommendations • Research in Coastal Wetlands • Develop Sampling Design • Develop Core Indicators • Offshore Coastal Waters • Expected that NOAA will continue

  22. Schedule for Survey Implementation

  23. Thank You and QUESTIONS ???

More Related