1

Conservation Practices are Working:

Responses from Local Creeks to Chesapeake Bay

Katherine AntosWater Quality Team LeaderChesapeake Bay Program

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

December 4, 2012

Watershed population has more than doubled since 1950

Chesapeake Bay Watershed

Monitoring Network

• 120 stations in 2012

• Started with 31

Long-term (1985-2010) water quality

monitoring stations in the Chesapeake Bay

Watershed

• 9 River Input Stations

• 22 Upstream Stations

Flow-adjusted Total Nitrogen Trends at 31

sites—1985-2010

•21 (68%) down

• 2 up (6%)

• 8 not significant (26%)

Flow-adjusted Total Phosphorus Trends at 31 sites—1985-2010

• 22 (71%) down

• 4 up (13%)

• 5 not significant (16%)

• 13 down sites exceed 50% reduction

Flow-adjusted Total Sediment Trends at 31

sites—1985-2010

•10 down (32%)

• 7 up (23%; 5>50%)

• 14 not sig. (45%)

Approximately 455 million pounds of nitrogen during the 2011 water year.

2025 Planning

Target

Approximately 48 million pounds in the 2011 water year.

2025 Planning

Target

Modeling Information Using Average Hydrology

Approximately 267 million pounds nitrogen delivered to Bay in 2011

Modeling Information Using Average Hydrology

Approximately 18.3 million pounds phosphorus delivered to Bay in 2011

13%

12%

18%

15%

42%

Excellent Good

Fair Poor

Very Poor

Between 2000-2010, more than 15,000 sites were sampled and rated for biological integrity.

Average stream health scores indicated 57% of sites in very poor or poor condition.

Data summarized by sub-watersheds indicate almost half of sub-watersheds are in fair condition. Degradation can be very localized

15%

47%

25%

5%

6%3% GOOD FAIR

POOR VERY POOR

NO RATING NO DATA

Chesapeake Bay

Tidal Water Quality

Monitoring Station

Network

• 178 Stations• 92 Segments

TNAnnual Trends

60%

4%

35%

Total NitrogenNO TREND DEGRADING IMPROVING

TP

73%

4%

23%

Total PhosphorusNO TREND DEGRADING IMPROVING

Annual Trends

Chlorophyll-a

62%

24%

14%

Chlorophyll-aNO TREND DEGRADING IMPROVING

Annual Trends

TSS

66%4%

30%

Total Suspended SolidsNO TREND DEGRADING IMPROVING

Annual Trends

Water Clarity

45%

50%

5%

Water ClarityNO TREND DEGRADING IMPROVING

Annual Trends

Bottom DO

73%

17%

10%

Dissolved OxygenNO TREND DEGRADING IMPROVING

Summer Trends

JHU and UMCES: Mid-late summer dead zones in deep channel leveled off and declining since 1980s due to management actions

Decreasing trends in water clarity have our Bay scientists questioning the causes

Long term increases in Bay grasses keep hitting glass ceiling—lack of improving clarity, hotter summers

This and previous adult abundance indicator show crab populations responding to good, baywide fishery management decisions since 2009 though annual variation

Overall population numbers solid; individuals show signs of less than quality habitats, food

26

Chesapeake Bay TMDL Based on 7 Watershed Implementation Plans

Katherine Antos410-295-1358

antos.katherine@epa.gov

www.epa.gov/chesapeakebaytmdl

www.chesapeakebay.net