Estuaries – “Hold the Line” Strategy - ACWI · >Exotic aquatic vegetation not greater than...
Transcript of Estuaries – “Hold the Line” Strategy - ACWI · >Exotic aquatic vegetation not greater than...
![Page 1: Estuaries – “Hold the Line” Strategy - ACWI · >Exotic aquatic vegetation not greater than 25% > Mean C of C score greater than 2.5 > Benthic algae coverage of 6 mm or greater](https://reader030.fdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022011803/5b8da06509d3f272408c6318/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
![Page 2: Estuaries – “Hold the Line” Strategy - ACWI · >Exotic aquatic vegetation not greater than 25% > Mean C of C score greater than 2.5 > Benthic algae coverage of 6 mm or greater](https://reader030.fdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022011803/5b8da06509d3f272408c6318/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
![Page 3: Estuaries – “Hold the Line” Strategy - ACWI · >Exotic aquatic vegetation not greater than 25% > Mean C of C score greater than 2.5 > Benthic algae coverage of 6 mm or greater](https://reader030.fdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022011803/5b8da06509d3f272408c6318/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Estuaries – “Hold the Line” Strategy
Lakes – Nutrient/Chlorophyll-aRelationship
![Page 4: Estuaries – “Hold the Line” Strategy - ACWI · >Exotic aquatic vegetation not greater than 25% > Mean C of C score greater than 2.5 > Benthic algae coverage of 6 mm or greater](https://reader030.fdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022011803/5b8da06509d3f272408c6318/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Nutrient WatershedRegion
TN(mg/L)
TP(mg/L)
Panhandle West 0.67 0.06
Panhandle East 1.03 0.18
North Central 1.87 0.30
West Central 1.65 0.49
Peninsula 1.54 0.12
Chlorophyll-a
LinearVegetation
Survey
Rapid Periphyton Survey
Stream Condition Index
FDEP
FDEP
![Page 5: Estuaries – “Hold the Line” Strategy - ACWI · >Exotic aquatic vegetation not greater than 25% > Mean C of C score greater than 2.5 > Benthic algae coverage of 6 mm or greater](https://reader030.fdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022011803/5b8da06509d3f272408c6318/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
![Page 6: Estuaries – “Hold the Line” Strategy - ACWI · >Exotic aquatic vegetation not greater than 25% > Mean C of C score greater than 2.5 > Benthic algae coverage of 6 mm or greater](https://reader030.fdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022011803/5b8da06509d3f272408c6318/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
![Page 7: Estuaries – “Hold the Line” Strategy - ACWI · >Exotic aquatic vegetation not greater than 25% > Mean C of C score greater than 2.5 > Benthic algae coverage of 6 mm or greater](https://reader030.fdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022011803/5b8da06509d3f272408c6318/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
![Page 8: Estuaries – “Hold the Line” Strategy - ACWI · >Exotic aquatic vegetation not greater than 25% > Mean C of C score greater than 2.5 > Benthic algae coverage of 6 mm or greater](https://reader030.fdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022011803/5b8da06509d3f272408c6318/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
![Page 9: Estuaries – “Hold the Line” Strategy - ACWI · >Exotic aquatic vegetation not greater than 25% > Mean C of C score greater than 2.5 > Benthic algae coverage of 6 mm or greater](https://reader030.fdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022011803/5b8da06509d3f272408c6318/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
![Page 10: Estuaries – “Hold the Line” Strategy - ACWI · >Exotic aquatic vegetation not greater than 25% > Mean C of C score greater than 2.5 > Benthic algae coverage of 6 mm or greater](https://reader030.fdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022011803/5b8da06509d3f272408c6318/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Nutrient WatershedRegion
TN(mg/L)
TP(mg/L)
Panhandle West 0.67 0.06
Panhandle East 1.03 0.18
North Central 1.87 0.30
West Central 1.65 0.49
Peninsula 1.54 0.12
Chlorophyll-a
LinearVegetation
Survey
Rapid Periphyton Survey
Floral Metrics and Nutrient Thresholds
- Reference System Approach
- No Causal Relationship Established
![Page 11: Estuaries – “Hold the Line” Strategy - ACWI · >Exotic aquatic vegetation not greater than 25% > Mean C of C score greater than 2.5 > Benthic algae coverage of 6 mm or greater](https://reader030.fdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022011803/5b8da06509d3f272408c6318/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
> Exotic aquatic vegetation not greater than25%
> Mean C of C score greater than 2.5
> Benthic algae coverage of 6 mm or greaternot more than 25%
> Benthic algae species is not nuisance orundesirable (if more than 20 % coverageobserved)
> Annual geometric mean chlorophyll-a lessthan 20 µg/L
– Between 3.2 and 20 µg/L – site specificconditions must indicate nutrients not anissue
– No increasing trend observed
![Page 12: Estuaries – “Hold the Line” Strategy - ACWI · >Exotic aquatic vegetation not greater than 25% > Mean C of C score greater than 2.5 > Benthic algae coverage of 6 mm or greater](https://reader030.fdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022011803/5b8da06509d3f272408c6318/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3
SCIS
core
TN (mg/L)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8
SCIS
core
TP (mg/L)
![Page 13: Estuaries – “Hold the Line” Strategy - ACWI · >Exotic aquatic vegetation not greater than 25% > Mean C of C score greater than 2.5 > Benthic algae coverage of 6 mm or greater](https://reader030.fdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022011803/5b8da06509d3f272408c6318/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
…If the biology of the system is ok, then nutrientsmust not be causing a problem.
![Page 14: Estuaries – “Hold the Line” Strategy - ACWI · >Exotic aquatic vegetation not greater than 25% > Mean C of C score greater than 2.5 > Benthic algae coverage of 6 mm or greater](https://reader030.fdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022011803/5b8da06509d3f272408c6318/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
If the numeric interpretation of the narrativenutrient criterion is exceeded, then nutrients shall
be identified as the causative pollutant unless astressor identification study links the adverse
biological effects to causal factor(s) other thannutrients.
62-303.430(5)(b)2., F.A.C.
![Page 15: Estuaries – “Hold the Line” Strategy - ACWI · >Exotic aquatic vegetation not greater than 25% > Mean C of C score greater than 2.5 > Benthic algae coverage of 6 mm or greater](https://reader030.fdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022011803/5b8da06509d3f272408c6318/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
![Page 16: Estuaries – “Hold the Line” Strategy - ACWI · >Exotic aquatic vegetation not greater than 25% > Mean C of C score greater than 2.5 > Benthic algae coverage of 6 mm or greater](https://reader030.fdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022011803/5b8da06509d3f272408c6318/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
SC
IS
core
Stream below 7Q10flow during sampling
![Page 17: Estuaries – “Hold the Line” Strategy - ACWI · >Exotic aquatic vegetation not greater than 25% > Mean C of C score greater than 2.5 > Benthic algae coverage of 6 mm or greater](https://reader030.fdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022011803/5b8da06509d3f272408c6318/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
Linear Vegetation Survey
![Page 18: Estuaries – “Hold the Line” Strategy - ACWI · >Exotic aquatic vegetation not greater than 25% > Mean C of C score greater than 2.5 > Benthic algae coverage of 6 mm or greater](https://reader030.fdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022011803/5b8da06509d3f272408c6318/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
![Page 19: Estuaries – “Hold the Line” Strategy - ACWI · >Exotic aquatic vegetation not greater than 25% > Mean C of C score greater than 2.5 > Benthic algae coverage of 6 mm or greater](https://reader030.fdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022011803/5b8da06509d3f272408c6318/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
January 2011February 2011March 2011May 2011June 2011August 2011
FailPassFailPassFailPass
Rapid Periphyton Survey
![Page 20: Estuaries – “Hold the Line” Strategy - ACWI · >Exotic aquatic vegetation not greater than 25% > Mean C of C score greater than 2.5 > Benthic algae coverage of 6 mm or greater](https://reader030.fdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022011803/5b8da06509d3f272408c6318/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
NNC Progress
Including Biological Information
Not Including Biological Information
![Page 21: Estuaries – “Hold the Line” Strategy - ACWI · >Exotic aquatic vegetation not greater than 25% > Mean C of C score greater than 2.5 > Benthic algae coverage of 6 mm or greater](https://reader030.fdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022011803/5b8da06509d3f272408c6318/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
Lessons Learned
>Florida’s NNC compliance linked to biologicalsampling judgment – not nutrients
> Indicators based on general waterbodyhealth are insufficient
> Implementation issues burden stakeholders
>Biological indicators must show validrelationship with nutrient effects
![Page 22: Estuaries – “Hold the Line” Strategy - ACWI · >Exotic aquatic vegetation not greater than 25% > Mean C of C score greater than 2.5 > Benthic algae coverage of 6 mm or greater](https://reader030.fdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022011803/5b8da06509d3f272408c6318/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
FDEP Rule EPA Rule
31%
EPA’s rule would have resulted in fewerwaterbodies listed as impaired!
The difference is the biological information.
55%