Media briefingJune 1, 2006

Chesapeake Bay 2006

Summer ecological forecastChesapeake Bay 2006

Summer ecological forecast

OverviewOverview• Introduction

– Chris Conner (Chesapeake Bay Program)

• Forecast overview– Bill Dennison (University of Maryland Center for Environmental Science)

• Anoxic volume (dissolved oxygen) forecast– Dave Jasinski (Chesapeake Bay Program / UMCES)

• Potomac River harmful algal bloom forecast– Peter Tango (MD DNR)

• Aquatic grass forecast– Bill Dennison (UMCES)

• Introduction– Chris Conner (Chesapeake Bay Program)

• Forecast overview– Bill Dennison (University of Maryland Center for Environmental Science)

• Anoxic volume (dissolved oxygen) forecast– Dave Jasinski (Chesapeake Bay Program / UMCES)

• Potomac River harmful algal bloom forecast– Peter Tango (MD DNR)

• Aquatic grass forecast– Bill Dennison (UMCES)

Professor Bill DennisonVice President for Science Applications

University of Maryland Center for Environmental Science

Media briefingJune 1, 2006

Chesapeake Bay 2006

Forecast overviewChesapeake Bay 2006

Forecast overview

What is an ecological forecast?What is an ecological forecast?

• Analogous to a weather forecast -predict conditions in the future

• Predict the effects of biological, chemical, physical, and human-induced changes on ecosystems

• Do not guarantee what is to come -they offer scientifically sound estimations of what is likely to occur

• Analogous to a weather forecast -predict conditions in the future

• Predict the effects of biological, chemical, physical, and human-induced changes on ecosystems

• Do not guarantee what is to come -they offer scientifically sound estimations of what is likely to occur

Why make an ecological forecast?

Why make an ecological forecast?

• Provide context for understanding summer conditions

• Provide guidance for Chesapeake restoration efforts

• Establish a proactive communication and education program

• Aid management activities

• Provide context for understanding summer conditions

• Provide guidance for Chesapeake restoration efforts

• Establish a proactive communication and education program

• Aid management activities

Wet winter and dry spring sets the stage in 2006

Wet winter and dry spring sets the stage in 2006

Susquehanna River flowSusquehanna River flow

•• Wet winterWet winter Large quantity of nutrients delivered to the Bay in Large quantity of nutrients delivered to the Bay in biologically less active period of the yearbiologically less active period of the year

•• Dry springDry spring Less nutrients delivered than average = less nutrients for Less nutrients delivered than average = less nutrients for phytoplankton / harmful algal bloomsphytoplankton / harmful algal blooms

•• ResponseResponse ModerateModerate summer conditions predictedsummer conditions predicted

Summer 2006 ForecastSummer 2006 Forecast

Aquatic grass

Harmful algal blooms(Potomac River)

Dissolved oxygen(mainstem anoxia)

More details in following presentations

How certain are we?How certain are we?

• Based on 20 years of monitoring data

• Methods reviewed by expert panels

• Models do not account for summer conditions such as;

– Hurricanes / tropical storms

– Above average precipitation, temperatures etc• e.g. loss of eelgrass in southern Bay in 2005

• Based on 20 years of monitoring data

• Methods reviewed by expert panels

• Models do not account for summer conditions such as;

– Hurricanes / tropical storms

– Above average precipitation, temperatures etc• e.g. loss of eelgrass in southern Bay in 2005

Influence of summer weatherInfluence of summer weather

Warm, wet, still (low winds)– Larger volume of low oxygen– Larger and longer harmful algal blooms (unless

very wet)

Cool and dry– Smaller volume of low oxygen– Smaller and shorter harmful algal blooms

Warm, wet, still (low winds)– Larger volume of low oxygen– Larger and longer harmful algal blooms (unless

very wet)

Cool and dry– Smaller volume of low oxygen– Smaller and shorter harmful algal blooms

GeneralizationsGeneralizations……..

Dave JasinskiUniversity of Maryland Center for Environmental Science

Dave JasinskiUniversity of Maryland Center for Environmental Science

Chesapeake Bay 2006

Anoxic volume forecastChesapeake Bay 2006

Anoxic volume forecast

Recent flow at Conowingo Dam

Recent flow at Conowingo Dam

0

50,000

100,000

150,000

200,000

250,000

1/1/

06

2/1/

06

3/1/

06

4/1/

06

5/1/

06

Flow

(cub

ic fe

et p

er s

econ

d)

2006 Daily Mean Flow37-year Daily Mean Flow

Algal IndexAlgal Index

• Total Nitrogen and Total Phosphorus cumulative loads from the Susquehanna and northern point sources

• Total Nitrogen and Total Phosphorus cumulative loads from the Susquehanna and northern point sources

0

10000000

20000000

30000000

40000000

50000000

60000000

70000000

80000000

90000000

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

Alg

al In

dex

*Susquehanna loads data courtesy USGS. 2006 data are provisional

The 2006 ForecastThe 2006 Forecast

Anoxia will be “Moderate” in summer 2006 relative to previous 20 years

The 2006 ForecastThe 2006 Forecast

Anoxia will be “Moderate” in summer 2006 relative to previous 20 years

The forecast volume for 2006 is similar to what was seen in 2001

The forecast volume for 2006 is similar to what was seen in 2001

ForecastAnoxic Zone

Mean Summer Dissolved

Oxygen in 2001

Dr. Peter TangoChief - Quantitative Ecological Assessment

Resource Assessment ServiceMaryland Department of Natural Resources

Dr. Peter TangoChief - Quantitative Ecological Assessment

Resource Assessment ServiceMaryland Department of Natural Resources

Chesapeake Bay 2006

Potomac River harmful algal bloom (HAB) forecast

Chesapeake Bay 2006

Potomac River harmful algal bloom (HAB) forecast

Potomac River harmful algae blooms

Potomac River harmful algae blooms

• Mid-upper reaches of Potomac River

• Predominantly Microcystis aeruginosa

• Blooms observed since 1960s

• Mid-upper reaches of Potomac River

• Predominantly Microcystis aeruginosa

• Blooms observed since 1960s

Rafts of foam during 2004 bloom

Forecast methods (HAB)Forecast methods (HAB)• Simple model based on:

– Potomac River flow rates (previous year & spring)– 21 years of bloom data

• Simple model based on:– Potomac River flow rates (previous year & spring)– 21 years of bloom data

HAB forecast modelHAB forecast model

2006 Potomac River HAB forecast

2006 Potomac River HAB forecast

Professor Bill DennisonProfessor Bill DennisonVice President for Science Applications

University of Maryland Center for Environmental Science

Media briefingMedia briefingJune 1, 2006June 1, 2006

Chesapeake Bay 2006

Aquatic grass forecastChesapeake Bay 2006

Aquatic grass forecast

Aquatic grass communities are important in Chesapeake Bay

•• Food for Food for waterfowlwaterfowl

•• Increase Increase water water clarityclarity

•• Habitat Habitat for blue for blue crabscrabs

Good water clarity – Poor water clarity

Aquatic grass in 2005Aquatic grass in 2005

• Small (7%) increase from 2004

• 42% of goal• Increasing trend since

mid 80’s• Changes observed

depends on location within the Bay

• Small (7%) increase from 2004

• 42% of goal• Increasing trend since

mid 80’s• Changes observed

depends on location within the Bay

Patuxent River aquatic grass

Loss of eelgrass in Southern BayLoss of eelgrass in Southern Bay• Loss occurred in fall of 2005• Occurred after 2005 aerial survey not reflected

in 2005 survey results• May be related to higher than normal water

temperature

• Loss occurred in fall of 2005• Occurred after 2005 aerial survey not reflected

in 2005 survey results• May be related to higher than normal water

temperatureWater Temperature in Tangier Sound (EE3.1)

0

10

2030

40

50

60

7080

90

100

Dec Feb Mar May Jul Aug Oct Nov JanMonth

Tem

pera

ture

(oF)

Minimum (including 2005)Mean (including 2005)Maximum (including 2005)year 2005

Forecast methodsForecast methods• Focuses on three regions

– Northern Bay– Lower Potomac River– Tangier Sound

• Relationships with environmental conditions (e.g. nutrient loads)

• 20 years of bay-wide survey data

• Expert interpretation of recent field observations

• Focuses on three regions– Northern Bay– Lower Potomac River– Tangier Sound

• Relationships with environmental conditions (e.g. nutrient loads)

• 20 years of bay-wide survey data

• Expert interpretation of recent field observations

2006 Aquatic grass forecast2006 Aquatic grass forecast

SUMMARYSUMMARY• “Typical” Bay conditions are predicted

– But typical conditions must be improved• Moderate anoxic volume predicted

– But still exceeds state water quality standards aimed to protect the Bay’s living resources

• Moderate Potomac River HAB– But will lead to reduced water clarity and dissolved oxygen

• Increase in aquatic grasses– Good news in some regions, but gains in Tangier Sound

would be a recovery from recent loss

• “Typical” Bay conditions are predicted– But typical conditions must be improved

• Moderate anoxic volume predicted– But still exceeds state water quality standards aimed to

protect the Bay’s living resources• Moderate Potomac River HAB

– But will lead to reduced water clarity and dissolved oxygen• Increase in aquatic grasses

– Good news in some regions, but gains in Tangier Sound would be a recovery from recent loss

ENDEND

Restoration aims to improve conditions

Restoration aims to improve conditions

Wastewater treatment controlWastewater treatment control

•Chesapeake and Atlantic Coastal Bays Restoration Fund

•Upgrade treatment plants

Restoration aims to improve conditions

Restoration aims to improve conditions

AgricultureAgriculture

• No-till farming

• Winter cover crops

Last years forecast: Dissolved oxygen

Last years forecast: Dissolved oxygen

Last years forecast: Potomac River harmful algal bloom

Last years forecast: Potomac River harmful algal bloom

X(17 miles)

Aquatic grassAquatic grass2005

ObservedSmall

decrease

Increase

Small Increase

Keeping trackKeeping track

• Water quality monitoring at approx. 2 week intervals

• Actual conditions compared to the forecast

• Any deviations from forecast explained on website– www.chesapeakebay.net/bayforecast.htm

• Water quality monitoring at approx. 2 week intervals

• Actual conditions compared to the forecast

• Any deviations from forecast explained on website– www.chesapeakebay.net/bayforecast.htm