The Chesapeake Bay - University of Delawareudel.edu › ~inamdar › nps2007 ›...

The Chesapeake BayFactors causing pollutionandState of the bay

The Chesapeake BayOutline:

• Overview

• Problem Statement

• Factors causing pollution

• State of the Bay

• Restoration

Notes and graphics from –

http://www.chesapeakebay.net/index.aspx?menuitem=13853

The Chesapeake Bay: OverviewThe Bay

• The largest of 130 estuaries in the United States.

• 200 miles long, stretching from Havre de Grace, Maryland, to Virginia Beach, Virginia.

• Width ranges from 3.4 miles near Aberdeen, Maryland, to 35 miles near the mouth of the Potomac River.

• More than 15 trillion gallons of water.


• Shallow - Its average depth is about 21 feet. A person who is 6 feet tall could wade through over 700,000 acres of the Bay and never get his or her hat wet.

• Shallow depth – also important for SAV!

• A few deep troughs running along much of the Bay's length reach up to 174 feet in depth. These troughs are believed to be remnants of the ancient Susquehanna River.

•During Ice Age – just the river was flowing with the valley around it!

The Chesapeake Bay: Overview

Is that the ancient Susquehanna river channel in Google view?!


• The Bay and its tidal tributaries have around 11,684 miles of shoreline—more than the entire U.S. West Coast.

• The surface area of the Bay and its tidal tributaries is 125 billion square feet, or around 4,480 square miles.

• The Bay supports more than 3,600 species of plants, fish and animals, including 348 species of finfish, 173 species of shellfish and over 2,700 plant species.

• The Bay produces about 500 million pounds of seafood per year.

The Chesapeake Bay: OverviewThe shallow bay

Highest ratio of drainage area to volumetric water!

The Chesapeake Bay: OverviewSalinity of the bay – freshwater and saltwater mixing

Salinity is highest at its mouth, where ocean water from the Atlantic enters. Salinity at the mouth of the Bay averages 35 ppt. Salinity gradually decreases as you move northward in the Bay.

Three zones in the bay –

Oligohaline (0.5- 5ppt)

Mesohaline (5 – 18 ppt)

Polyhaline (18 – 30 ppt)


Spring (1985-2006) Fall (1985-2006)


Warmer, lighter fresh water flows southward toward the ocean over a layer of saltier and denser water flowing up the Bay.

The two layers are divided by the pycnocline, a zone of intensive mixing and rapid increases in salinity.

http://web.vims.edu/physical/WEB/PRESNT/bsalt.htm?svr=www

http://www.eco-check.org/images/do_conceptual_diagram.png


Stratification varies within any season depending on rainfall:

Highest in the spring as the amount of fresh water increases due to melting snow and frequent rain.

These stratified layers are maintained as surface waters warm throughout the summer.

In autumn, fresher surface waters cool faster than deeper waters. This causes the fresh water layer to sink, and the two layers mix rapidly (usually overnight). The vertical mixing moves nutrients up from the bottom, making them available to phytoplankton and other organisms living in higher water levels. This turnover also distributes much-needed dissolved oxygen to deeper waters.

During the winter, water temperature and salinity are relatively constant from surface to bottom.

The Chesapeake Bay: OverviewThe Bay Watershed

• Receives about half its water volume from the Atlantic Ocean.

• The rest drains into the Bay from an enormous 64,000-square-mile watershed.

• Six states—Delaware, Maryland, New York, Pennsylvania, Virginia and West Virginia—and the entire District of Columbia.

• The Susquehanna River - about 50 percent of the fresh water coming into the Bay—an average of 19 million gallons of water per minute.

Susquehanna river near the bay

The Chesapeake Bay: OverviewThe Bay Watershed

• The Bay watershed is home to more than 16.6 million people. About 170,000 new people move into the Bay watershed each year.

• There are about 150 major rivers and streams in the Bay watershed.

• More than 100,000 streams and rivers that drain into the Bay.


• Land-to-water ratio (14:1) is the largest of any coastal water body in the world.

• Multiple physiographic provinces


• 50 major tributaries that flow into the Chesapeake Bay, just three deliver about 80 percent of the Bay's fresh water:

•The Susquehanna River (48 percent)•The Potomac River (19 percent)•The James River (14 percent)


A large portion of the watershed is covered with forests (58%).

But agriculture and urban development are having a disproportionate impact on the bay.

The Chesapeake Bay: The problem

Excess nutrients

Nitrogen & Phosphorus

Eutrophication

Over-harvesting

Reduction in SAV

Depletionof fish and shellfish

Population

4 key factors –

1. Pollutants: Excess nitrogen, phosphorus and sediment. The main sources of these pollutants are agriculture, urban and suburban runoff, wastewater, and air pollution.

2. Land Use: The Bay’s decline is directly linked to the rise in population and corresponding development in the watershed.

3. Natural Factors: Annual rain and snowfall influence the amount of water that flows in rivers. Pollution entering the Bay each year generally corresponds with the volume of water that flows from its tributaries and the concentration of pollutants in that water.

4. Other Pressures: Climate change, invasive species and fisheries harvest are additional factors that impact the health of the Bay ecosystem.

Nitrogen: 240 million pounds of nitrogen reached the Bay during the 2009 water year.

This is 43 million pounds less than 2008 and 98 million pounds less than the 338 million pound average load from 1990‐2009.

Phosphorus: 11.3 million pounds of phosphorus reached the Bay during the 2009 water year.

This is 3.1 million pounds less than 2008 and 9.5 million pounds less than the 20.8 million pound average load from 1990‐2009.

Sediment: 2 million tons of sediment from nontidal rivers reached the Bay during the 2009 water year.

This is 1.6 million tons less than 2008 and 2 million tons less than the 4 million ton average load from 1990‐2009.

• Generally, as river flow increases, it brings more nutrient and sediment pollution to the Bay.

• Runoff from winter and spring rains delivers pollution loads that drive summer water quality conditions in the Bay.

• Years with low or high amounts of precipitation can result in changes to pollution levels in the Bay, but not mean the health of the watershed is improving or declining.

Loadings from various sources

SEDIMENT LOADS TO THE BAY:

Provisional estimates indicate that 2 million tons of sediment from nontidal rivers reached the Bay during the 2009 water year.

This is 1.6 million tons less than 2008 and 2 million tons less than the 4 million ton average load from 1990‐2009.

Chemicalcontaminants

2. Land Use

The Bay watershed is home to nearly 17 million people.

About 150,000 people move to the area each year.

The Bay’s decline is directly linked to the rise in population and corresponding development in the watershed.

Increasing IMPERVIOUS SURFACES with land use

Between 1990 and 2000, impervious cover increased by nearly 250,000 acres—about 41 percent, or the size of five District of Columbia's.

Since the 1970s, the number of people per household has steadily decreased, while the average home size and number of vehicles per household has risen.

At the current rate of change to impervious cover—nearly 25,000 acres per year—the watershed is estimated to have about 1.1 million acres of impervious surface by 2010.

IMPERVIOUS SURFACES

• Decrease infiltration

• Increase runoff amount and peak discharge

• Temperature of water

• Other contaminants

Stormwater –

17 percent of phosphorus, 11 percent of nitrogen and 9 percent of sediment loads to the Bay come from stormwater.

Chemical contaminants from runoff can rival or exceed the amount reaching local waterway from industries, federal facilities and wastewater treatment plants.

Change in peak discharge

About 58 percent of the watershed is forest.

The rest of the land has been developed for other uses, such as agriculture and urban and suburban lands.

As suburban sprawl increases – forest cover is lost.

Additional urban contributions of pollutants are offsetting all the gains that are being made in agriculture.

Natural factors, such as temperatures and wind, as well as precipitation, which affects the volume of water flowing into the Bay, have a great impact on water quality, habitat and fish and shellfish populations.

Annual rain and snowfall affect how much water flows in rivers.

The levels of pollution entering the Bay each year generally correspond with the volume of water that flows from its tributaries.

Large inputs of sediment and nutrients. Decrease in salinity.Widespread destruction of SAV. Oyster mortality increases in low salinity.

Susquehanna River flow data have been collected since 1938. The 2009 flow of 30.8 billion gallons per day is 17.6 billion gallons per day less than the 48.4 billion gallon per day average flow from 1938‐2009.

Too much rain can increase nutrient loads!

Too little rain can also impact the Bay:

• Nutrients and sediment instead become trapped in tributaries, where they may increase algae growth and reduce water clarity.

• Prolonged periods of low fresh water flow allow salty ocean water to move further up into the Bay. This can have varying effects on some Bay species.

• Oysters have higher spat sets in saltier waters; however, MSX and Dermo, two diseases that have ravaged Bay oyster populations, thrive in higher salinities.

• Many species of bay grasses can only grow in fresh water. Since bay grasses cannot migrate when salinity increases, they ultimately die. Fewer bay grasses mean less food and habitat for crabs, waterfowl and juvenile fish.

• Sea nettles, which are restricted to higher salinities, tend to move further up into the Bay during dry summers.

Climate Change

The Chesapeake region has already begun to see the effects of global climate change in the form of sea level rise and higher water temperatures. Scientists predict that climate change could also cause:

• A decrease in underwater grasses

• More “dead zones” of low oxygen

• More annual precipitation and a resulting increase in the flow of pollution

• Fewer wintering waterfowl

• A change in the plants and animals that live in the area

Invasive Species

Invasive species are animals and plants that are not native to their habitat and negatively affect the invaded ecosystem.

Once an invasive species population is established it is unlikely to be completely eradicated.

In the Bay region there are more than 200 invasive species thought to cause serious problems; the mute swan, nutria, phragmites, purple loosestrife, water chestnut and zebra mussel are the species that pose the greatest threats.

Fisheries Harvest and Pressures

Demand for seafood has driven these commercial fisheries, and crabbing and angling have long been popular activities for residents.

But these fisheries have put tremendous pressure on the population of key Chesapeake species, such as blue crabs and oysters.

Between 1968 and 2005, commercial blue crab harvest from the Bay averaged around 73 million pounds annually. In several of those years, commercial harvests yielded over 100 million pounds of crabs; a record of 113 million pounds was set in 1993.

The 2007 Chesapeake blue crab harvest of 44.2 million pounds was among the lowest recorded since 1945.

What is the current health of the Bay? What are the trends?

Despite a 6 percent improvement in health since 2008, the Bay continues to have poor water quality, degraded habitats, and low populations of many fish and shellfish species.

Based on three areas, the overall health averaged 45 percent.

• Water Quality

• Habitats and lower food web

• Fish and Shell fish

The modest gain in the health score in 2009 was due to a large increase in the adult blue crab population, expansions of underwater grass beds growing in the Bay’s shallows, and improvements in water clarity and bottom habitat health

Water Quality:Water quality was again very poor in 2009, meeting just 24 percent of health goals, a 2 percent increase from 2008.

Habitats and Lower Food Web: The Bay’s critical habitats and lower food web showed signs of improvement in 2009, increasing by 7 percent from 2008. However, they remain far below what is needed to support thriving populations of underwater life.

Fish and Shellfish:Most fish and shellfish populations in the Bay remain far belowdesired levels. Overall, 59 percent of the health goals for fish and shellfish abundance have been met, a 9 percent increase from 2008.

Water Quality

Water quality met just 24 percent of health goals in 2009, a 2 percent increase from 2008.

The Bay’s water quality is measured with four indicators:

• Dissolved Oxygen • Water Clarity • Chlorophyll a • Chemical Contaminants

Quantitative restoration goals have been set for these indicators. When all of the goals are reached, it should mean that water quality has been restored.

Attainment of Water Quality parameters

How Much Dissolved Oxygen Does Life in the Chesapeake Bay Need?

DO concentrations of 5.0 mg/L or greater will allow the Chesapeake Bay's aquatic creatures to live and thrive.

Worms and small clams living in the Bay's muddy bottom, where oxygen levels are naturally low, only need dissolved oxygen concentrations of at least 1 mg/L.

Fish, crabs and oysters that live or feed along the bottom require oxygen concentrations of 3 mg/L and greater.

Spawning migratory fish and their eggs and larvae need up to 6 mg/L during these sensitive life stages.

DO can be affected by –

• Temperature of water

• Flow of fresh and salt water

• Nutrient pollution

• Depth in the Bay

State water quality standards have been adopted to reflect the dissolved oxygen needs of the Bay’s aquatic life. The standards vary with water depth, season and duration of exposure.

http://www.eco-check.org/images/do_conceptual_diagram.png

Data gathered from 2007 to 2009 indicate that about 12 percent of the combined volume of open‐water, deep‐water and deep‐channel water of the Bay and its tidal tributaries met dissolved oxygen standards during the summer months. This is a decrease of 5 percent from the 2008 assessment.

Water Clarity ‐measured by Secchi disk

Secchi Depth Thresholds

The Secchi depth indicator is currently judged by the frequency that Secchi depth exceeds the following thresholds, weighted by Bay segment area:

Tidal Freshwater/April‐October/greater than or equal to 0.85 meters deep

Oligohaline (brackish)/April‐October/greater than or equal to 0.65 meters deep

Mesohaline (moderately salty)/April‐October/greater than or equal to 1.63 meters deep

Polyhaline (salty)/March‐November/greater than or equal to 2.0 meters deep

These thresholds are based on conditions during the underwater bay grass growing season, which is April through October for allsalinity regimes except the most saline (polyhaline); in the polyhaline region, the growing season is March through November.

Mid‐Channel Water Clarity In 2009, 26 percent of tidal waters met or exceeded thresholds for water clarity. This was an increase from 2008, when about 14 percent met guidelines.

Chlorophyll a

The goal is for 100 percent of Chesapeake Bay tidal waters to be below certain threshold concentrations of chlorophyll a that are acceptable to underwater bay grasses.

Chlorophyll a is measured in different ways. The status of chlorophyll a is currently assessed according to the limit of 15 micrograms per liter for underwater bay grasses.

Chlorophyll a thresholds ‐

Spring (March, April and May) thresholds (micrograms per liter):

Tidal freshwater threshold less than or equal to 14 Oligohaline (brackish waters) threshold less than or equal to 20.9 Mesohaline (moderately salty waters) threshold less than or equal to 6.2 Polyhaline (salty waters) threshold less than or equal to 2.8

Summer (July, August and September) thresholds (micrograms per liter):

Tidal freshwater threshold less than or equal to 12 Oligohaline threshold less than or equal to 9.5 Mesohaline threshold less than or equal to 7.7 Polyhaline threshold less than or equal to 4.5

Chlorophyll aIn 2009, 29 percent of tidal waters had chlorophyll a concentrations below the threshold. This is an increase of 2 percent from 2008.

Chemical ContaminantsBased on the 2008 303(d) assessments, 25 of the 89 monitored tidal water segments (28 percent) were unimpaired by chemicals. This represents a 6 percent decrease from 2007. The other 64 segments contained impairments in at least part or all of the segment. The 2009 status is based on the 2008 assessments, since 303(d) lists are updated every other year and will not be updated again until 2010.

Chemical Contaminants

Based on the 2008 303(d) assessments, 25 of the 89 monitored tidal water segments (28 percent) were unimpaired by chemicals. This represents a 6 percent decrease from 2007. The other 64 segments contained impairments in at least part or all of the segment. The 2009 status is based on the 2008 assessments, since 303(d) lists are updated every other year and will not be updated again until 2010.

The Bay Program’s goal is for 100 percent of tidal tributaries to be unimpaired by chemical contaminants such as metals, PCBs and tributyltin.

Bay Habitats and Lower Food Web

The Bay’s habitat and lower food web is measured with four indicators:

• Bay Grass Abundance • Phytoplankton • Bottom Habitat • Tidal Wetlands Abundance

Quantitative restoration goals have been set for three of these indicators.

When all of the goals are reached, it should mean that these habitats and the lower food web have been restored.

Bay Habitats and Lower Food Web

Bay Grass Abundance (Baywide)

In 2009, there were 85,899 acres of bay grasses throughout the Bay, which was 46 percent of the goal and an increase of 9,039 acres from 2008.

In 2009:

Grasses in the upper Bay covered about 23,598 acres (nearly 100 percent of the area’s 23,630‐acre goal)Middle Bay grasses covered 39,604 acres (34 percent of the 115,229‐acre goal for the area)Grasses in the lower Bay covered 22,697 acres (49 percent of the area’s 46,030‐acre goal)

GOAL: The goal is to have 185,000 acres of underwater bay grasses in the Chesapeake Bay by 2010, which represents approximate historic abundance from the 1930s to present.

Benefits of Bay Grasses:

• Provide critical shelter to many key species, such as young striped bass and blue crabs

• Improve water clarity by helping sediment settle to the bottom

• Add oxygen to the water

• Reduce shoreline erosion

Bay grass abundance is an excellent barometer of the health of the Bay because these grasses depend on good local water quality and provide significant benefits to aquatic life.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=__Srii0b_cY&feature=player_embedded

Phytoplankton

In 2009, 54 percent of the Bay’s surface waters met the phytoplankton goal, an increase of 1 percent from 2008.

GOAL: A measurement called the Index of Biotic Integrity is used to rate the health of phytoplankton on a scale of 1 to 5. Scores are generated using monthly samples taken from 31 monitoring stations during the spring and summer. The goal is for all scores to be at least a 3.

Phytoplankton, or algae, serve as an excellent indicator of the health of the Chesapeake Bay's surface waters because they are especially sensitive to changes in pollution levels, water clarity, temperature and salinity.

Though phytoplankton form the base of the Chesapeake Bay food web, too much algae or the wrong type of algae can be detrimental to the Bay's health by decreasing oxygen, blocking sunlight and harming underwater life.

In some cases, algae blooms can also harm human health.

IBI > 3

Bottom Habitat

In 2009, 56 percent of the area of the Bay and its tidal tributaries met the bottom habitat restoration goals, which is a 15 percent increase from the previous year and a record high level.

GOAL: A measurement called the Benthic Index of Biotic Integrity is used to rate the health of bottom habitats on a scale of 1 to 5. Each year, 250 random samples are collected throughout the Bay and its tributaries. The goal is for all sites to have index scores of 3 or more.

The Bay’s bottom is home to many species, including worms, small fish, and shellfish such as clams, oysters and mussels. These species serve as food for bottom‐feeding fish and crabs, and are especially sensitive to increased pollution and decreased oxygen.

Their health is a good indicator of long‐term conditions in bottom habitat and the Bay overall.

The Benthic Index of Biotic Integrity makes a good integrator of long‐term environmental conditions because benthic organisms have limited mobility and their responses to stress are well documented.

Bay Fish and Shellfish Abundance

Most fish and shellfish populations in the Bay remain far below desired levels. Overall, 59 percent of the health goals for fish and shellfish abundance have been met, a 9 percent increase from 2008.

The Bay’s fish and shellfish abundance is measured with five indicators:

• Blue Crab Abundance • Native Oyster Abundance • Striped Bass Abundance • Shad Abundance • Juvenile Menhaden Abundance

For the Bay to be considered restored, there must be healthy and abundant fish and shellfish populations.

Blue Crab Abundance (Adults)

In 2009, the population of spawning‐age blue crabs in the Bay was 223 million, or 112 percent of the goal. This is a substantial increase from 2008, when the population was 131 million, or 66 percent of the goal.

GOAL: The goal is to have 200 million blue crabs that are at least one year old in the Bay.

This abundance of crabs can result in a harvest of 60 million to 65 million pounds each year while still preserving 20 percent of the spawning population. The goal is based on an interim target recommended by Chesapeake Bay Stock Assessment Committee (CBSAC) for management adoption.

Native Oyster Abundance

Based on the most recent data from 2008, there are 3.24 billion grams of oyster biomass, or about 10 percent of the goal.

GOAL: The goal is to achieve at least a tenfold increase in native oysters in the Chesapeake Bay by 2010, based on 1994 levels, which would equal 31.6 billion grams of oyster biomass.

Oysters join blue crabs as one of the most valuable species in the Chesapeake Bay.

These bivalves have an incredible ability to filter water, which increases water clarity.

It has been estimated that at their historic population peak, oysters filtered all of the Bay’s water in less than one week; it takes about one year for the current population to do so.

Striped Bass Abundance

Female striped bass spawning stock biomass has exceeded the target (goal) since 1995. In 2008, striped bass abundance measured 122 million pounds (148 percent of the goal).

GOAL: The goal for a restored striped bass population is to have a spawning stock biomass (SSB) equal to the averages from 1960‐1971, which is 82.7 million pounds of females.

Striped Bass Abundance

American Shad Abundance

Based on the most recent data from the James, Potomac, Susquehanna and York rivers, the estimates of Bay‐wide shad abundance is 27 percent of goal achieved in 2009.

GOAL: The goal for American shad is based on an estimate of the spawning shad stock in major river systems, some with fish passage systems in place to bypass existing blockages by dams and other barriers.

Susquehanna River: Two million shad passing York Haven Dam annually James River: 500,000 shad passing Boshers Dam annually Potomac River: 31.1 Catch per Unit Effort (CPUE) York River: 19.54 CPUE

Shad form an important ecological link between the planktonic community and predatory fish in the Chesapeake Bay food web.

Shad feed on plankton and small fishes throughout their lives.

In turn, they are preyed upon by larger fish, including bluefish, weakfish and striped bass.

Juvenile Menhaden Abundance (Maryland)

Researchers in Maryland measure juvenile menhaden abundance by casting nets and recording the number of hauls where menhaden are present. In 2009, the proportion of positive hauls was 22 percent.

NO GOAL, since no population estimates.

Menhaden play a key ecological role in the Bay because they are food for top predators such as striped bass and have a great ability to filter the water. The menhaden fishery is also one of the most productive on the Atlantic Coast, providing fish meal, fish oil and bait.

Menhaden that inhabit the Chesapeake Bay are part of a coastal Atlantic stock, and while populations along the Atlantic Coast are healthy, some scientists are worried about low abundance in the Chesapeake.

Tidal Wetlands Abundance

As of 2005, there were approximately 283,946 acres of tidal wetlands.

NO TARGET OR GOAL.

Wetlands connect the land to the water. Throughout the Chesapeake Bay, these areas of transition provide unique habitats for a rich diversity of land animals and aquatic life.

Wetlands also act as sponges and natural filters by absorbing runoff and removing pollution from water before it enters streams, creeks, rivers and the Bay.

But the Chesapeake’s wetlands are fragile and threatened by shoreline development, sea level rise and invasive species.

At Blackwater National Wildlife Refuge on Maryland’s Eastern Shore, scientists are documenting losses in wetlands due to sea level rise, land subsidence, coastal erosion and invasive species such as nutria.

Multipronged approach –

• Restoring water quality

• Habitat restoration

• Managing fisheries

• Protecting watersheds

• Stewardship and education

Restoring water quality

• agriculture • air deposition• wastewater treatment• land development• forested lands• erosion prevention

Agriculture

Reduce nutrients and sediment –

• Nutrient management plans• animal manure and poultry litter management• cover crops• conservation tillage• grass and forested buffers

Wastewater treatment

In 2005, Chesapeake Bay jurisdictions began to implement a new permitting process that limited the amount of nitrogen and phosphorus that the Bay watershed's 483 significant wastewater treatment plants could discharge.

To meet the nutrient limits, most of these facilities are being upgraded with nutrient reduction technology, including biological nutrient removal (BNR) and enhanced nutrient removal (ENR).

Reducing impacts of land development

To date, it is estimated that increased pollution loads from new land development—such as converting farms and forests to suburban developments—have surpassed the gains achieved from improved landscape design and stormwater management practices.

•Lawn and garden fertilizers •Pet waste •Septic tanks and wastewater treatment facilities •Improperly discarded chemicals, such as motor oil •Airborne nitrogen and chemical contaminants from automobiles, gas-powered lawn tools, industries and other sources •Litter

Riparian Forest Restoration

Their original goal to restore 2,010 miles of forest buffers by 2010 was met in 2002.

In 2003, Bay Program partners established an expanded goal to restore 10,000 miles of forest buffers by 2010.

Through August 2008, approximately 6,172 miles of forest buffers had been restored in Maryland, Virginia, Pennsylvania and the District of Columbia.

Habitat Restoration : Bay Grasses

CBP currently working towards a goal to restore underwater bay grasses —to 185,000 acres in the Bay and its tidal tributaries by 2010.

Not going well.

To help accelerate progress toward the 185,000-acre goal, the Bay Program set an additional goal to plant 1,000 acres of underwater bay grasses by the end of 2008.

As of 2008, Bay Program partners had planted 148 acres of bay grasses, achieving just 15 percent of the goal.

Wetland Restoration

As of 2008, Bay Program partners had restored approximately 13,000 acres of wetlands, which is 52 percent of the 25,000-acre “acreage gain”goal.

A separate goal was established in 2005 to track “functional gains”(enhancement and rehabilitation) on additional acres of the Bay watershed's existing wetlands.

Fish Passage

From 1988 through 2005, Bay Program partners restored 1,838 miles of fish passage, surpassing their original 1,357-mile restoration goal.

The fish passage restoration goal has since been increased to 2,807 miles by 2014.

By removing dams or installing fish lifts, ladders and other passageways, migratory fish like American shad, river herring, American eels and white and yellow perch are able to return to upstream spawning and nursery grounds.

Fisheries management: Oysters

The main strategy for regulating harvest and enhancing harvest potential is to establish sanctuaries and special management areas throughout the Bay.

Oyster sanctuary

Fisheries management: American Shad

3 strategies –

• Fishing Moratorium

• Stocking hatchery-raised fish

• Removing dams and providing fish ladders

Watershed Management Plans

CBP goal - watershed management plans in two-thirds of the Bay watershed by 2010.

Watershed management plans must: • Address the protection, conservation and restoration of stream corridors, riparian forest buffers and wetlands. • Reflect the goals and objectives of improving habitat and water quality. • Identify ways to implement the plan. • Have demonstrated local support.

By the end of 2007, watershed management plans were in place for 13 million acres of the Bay watershed—approximately 57 percent of the two-thirds goal.

Land Preservation

Permanently preserved more than 7 million acres of land in Maryland, Pennsylvania, Virginia and the District of Columbia — more than 20 percent of the combined Bay watershed land area of these four jurisdictions.

In December 2007, the Bay Program set a goal to preserve an additional 695,000 acres of land by 2020.

The Chesapeake Bay - University of Delawareudel.edu › ~inamdar › nps2007 ›...

Documents

Transcript of The Chesapeake Bay - University of Delawareudel.edu › ~inamdar › nps2007 ›...