15
Adapting the RMP to Answer the Important Questions Keeping the Program Relevant

Adapting the RMP to Answer the Important Questions Keeping the Program Relevant

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: Adapting the RMP to Answer the Important Questions Keeping the Program Relevant

Adapting the RMP to Answer the Important

Questions

Keeping the Program Relevant

Page 2: Adapting the RMP to Answer the Important Questions Keeping the Program Relevant

Thanks to:

• Water Board Staff• Technical Review Committee and

Workgroups• Steering Committee• “Pulse of the Estuary” Team

Page 3: Adapting the RMP to Answer the Important Questions Keeping the Program Relevant

Overview• Monitoring as Part of Adaptive

Management• What Have We Learned?• Which Questions Remain?• Moving Toward Proactive

Management

Page 4: Adapting the RMP to Answer the Important Questions Keeping the Program Relevant

The Three “Cs”

Page 5: Adapting the RMP to Answer the Important Questions Keeping the Program Relevant

1. How do pollutants compare to various guidelines?

2. Can pollutant changes be linked to changing inputs?

1. What should cleanup targets be?

2. Which pollutants accumulate faster than they can be degraded?

Page 6: Adapting the RMP to Answer the Important Questions Keeping the Program Relevant

4. What is the relative magnitude of pollutant inputs from different pathways?

4. Can data from a few high intensity sites be projected to other watersheds?

3. Which factors influence effects of specific pollutants on biota?

3. Which pollutants bioaccumulate?

Page 7: Adapting the RMP to Answer the Important Questions Keeping the Program Relevant

How Much Have We Learned?

Page 8: Adapting the RMP to Answer the Important Questions Keeping the Program Relevant

Better understanding of relative loadings from various sources and transport pathways

Page 9: Adapting the RMP to Answer the Important Questions Keeping the Program Relevant

• 2000

• 2005

San Francisco Estuary Institute

Rivers (11 kg)Small Tribs?

Local small tributaries in the Bay Area

Sacramento / San Joaquin Rivers

Suspended Sediment Hg PCBs

Page 10: Adapting the RMP to Answer the Important Questions Keeping the Program Relevant

Lessons, continued• Management actions produce

results• Estuary and watershed processes

affect beneficial use restoration• Emerging pollutants require

increased attention

Page 11: Adapting the RMP to Answer the Important Questions Keeping the Program Relevant

2000 2005

PCBs Top PCBs and Hg Top

PAHs High PBDEs High

OPs High Pyrethroids Medium?

Hg Medium Se Medium

Se Medium DDT, chlordane, dieldrin Medium

Cu Medium Cu Medium

Ni Medium Ni Medium

TBT Medium PAHs Low

Ag Medium Ag, As, Cd, Cr, Pb, Zn Low

Cd Medium OP pesticides Low?

Chlordane Low

DDT Low

The Evolution of Management Priorities for Restoring the Chemical Integrity of Water

Page 12: Adapting the RMP to Answer the Important Questions Keeping the Program Relevant

Institutional and Communication

Lessons

Page 13: Adapting the RMP to Answer the Important Questions Keeping the Program Relevant

Information “Clients”

• Water Boards• RMP Participants• EPA

• Neighbors• State Legislature• Congress

Page 14: Adapting the RMP to Answer the Important Questions Keeping the Program Relevant

• Traditional: “Fix” problems after they have become “emergencies” in the public eye – TMDLs Forever!

• New: Anticipate problems through surveillance, develop predictive recovery models, emphasize risk assessment and problem prevention

Page 15: Adapting the RMP to Answer the Important Questions Keeping the Program Relevant

Next Steps

• Systematic look at efficiencies• Modeling the system is now

possible!