Creating Credible Community-based Stream Monitoring Programs · 2019-03-04 · Chesapeake Monitoring Cooperative. A partnership that aims to provide technical, logistical, and outreach

Creating Credible Community-based Stream Monitoring

Programs

Julie VastineSeptember 26, 2018

Overview

• ALLARM introduction• US Stream Monitoring History

• Credibility ingredients• Regional partnership example• Monitoring mantras

• Q&A

ALLARM Introduction

ALLARM educates communities to use science as a tool to investigate the

health of their streams and to use the data they generate for aquatic

protection and restoration efforts.

www.dickinson.edu/allarm

http://www.dickinson.edu/allarm

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/6d/Pennsylvania_in_United_States.svg/1024px-Pennsylvania_in_United_States.svg.png

US Volunteer Monitoring

• Oldest program 1968• 48 out of 50 states have active programs• Challenge: Each state has a different

approach

Clean Water Act (1987 addition):“assemble and evaluate all existing and readily available water quality-related data and information.” Including data “for which water quality problems have been reported by local, state, or federal agencies; members of the public; or academic institutions.”

Power of Volunteers

• Local connection, buy-in, impact• Local expertise• More boots on the ground • Local eyes, ears, voices of waterways

http://volunteermonitoring.org/

http://volunteermonitoring.org/

Ingredients in Credible Programs

1. Study design2. Quality Assurance Project

Plan (QAPP)3. Monitoring methods

manual (Standard Operating Procedures, SOPs);

4. Volunteer engagement –recruit, train, certify, and retain

5. Evaluation and assessment

Volunteer Training and Certification

Quality Assurance Project Plan

Volunteer Recruitment and

Retention

Study DesignMonitoring Methods Manual

Evaluation and Assessment

Role of equipment testing, etc…

• Check out the National Water Quality Monitoring Council’s Webinar from January 2018.

• https://acwi.gov/monitoring/webinars/index.html

https://acwi.gov/monitoring/webinars/index.html

Matching appropriate data with policy goals

Water monitoring one of the key examples

www.wilsoncenter.org/sites/default/files/clearing_the_path_eli_report.pdf

http://www.wilsoncenter.org/sites/default/files/clearing_the_path_eli_report.pdf

Monitoring Best Practices: Study Design

Concern or Question Technical Assistance - Study Design/QAPP/Training

Data collection & quality verification

Data Use Data interpretationProgram evaluation

Study Design Tools

https://www.rivernetwork.org/resource/river-monitoring-study-design-workbook/

www.Dickinson.edu/allarm

https://www.rivernetwork.org/resource/river-monitoring-study-design-workbook/

http://www.dickinson.edu/allarm

Tools – EPA VolMon QAPP

For more information, see: The Volunteer Monitor’s Guide to Quality Assurance Project Plans.

EPA 841-B-96-003. September 1996. https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-06/documents/vol_qapp.pdf

https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-06/documents/vol_qapp.pdf

Regional Example

• Chesapeake Bay Watershed• 64,000 mi2 or 103,000 km2

• 6 States (Delaware, Maryland, Pennsylvania, New York, Virginia, West Virginia) & Washington DC

Chesapeake Monitoring CooperativeA partnership that aims to provide technical, logistical, and outreach support for the integration of volunteer-based and nontraditional water quality and benthic macroinvertebrate monitoring data into the Chesapeake Bay Program (CBP) partnership.

Cooperative AgreementCMC development team partners & service providers

Participating Jurisdictions

USEPA Grant #CB96334901

Presenter

Presentation Notes

Liz The Chesapeake Monitoring Cooperative is a group of leading organizations that provide technical, programmatic, and outreach support for the integration of water quality and macroinvertebrate monitoring data into the Chesapeake Bay Program partnership. The Chesapeake Monitoring Cooperative was set up through a cooperative agreement between the Chesapeake Bay Program and the Alliance for the Chesapeake Bay in 2015. And includes other partners….IWLA, ALLARM, UMCES. Each of us serves a different role in order to create a cohesive program. Goals and benefits: Supplement coverage (space, time) for the traditional Chesapeake Bay Program water quality monitoring networks and benthic macroinvertebrate assessments. Consolidate data of known integrity using a 3-tier filter allowing everyone to have quality assured data for varied assessments. Expand environmental stewardship across the watershed. In addition to collecting water quality data, the CMC also touches on other goals under engaged communities, like fostering stewardship and environmental literacy and diversity.

Chesapeake Bay Program Monitoring

Sites

Presenter

Presentation Notes

Liz First we can look at what traditional monitoring already exists… The Chesapeake Bay Program Partnership’s Long-term water quality monitoring program has supported the assessment of Bay health, reinforced science-driven management, and led to understanding ecosystem response to natural and anthropogenic drivers. However, looking at this map you can see that this network, cannot monitor everywhere, all the time, and sometimes relies on one monitoring site to represent a large area of the watershed. Then, where do you think volunteer and non-traditional data could fill in?

Community Survey

Sent to 600+ entities:• General Information• Monitoring Program Overview

(Where? Why?)• Monitoring Program Design

(How?)• Data Use and Storage

~ 120 groups responded

Chesapeake Bay Program Monitoring

Sites + Volunteer &

Nontraditional monitoring

sites

Presenter

Presentation Notes

The CMC developed a prioritization report in 2016 which included created a census to assess the citizen based monitoring groups currently working throughout the watershed. The sites in purple represent those known groups. As you can see, this alone is starting to fill in the spatial and temporal gaps of the CPB network by reaching the smaller tribs and headwater areas. Win-win situation- CBP needed more data and we already have this existing network of additional data providers, so the CMC was developed to bring together all of this non-traditional data into a centralized location and under standardized methods and QA procedures. **all of these groups are not integrated but we are working to integrate them over time, so far we have integrated….

CMC Tiered Framework – Data Use Suggestions

Presenter

Presentation Notes

Julie Transition slide – introduce the examples we will discussing and how they fit into the tiered framework. *Based on 13 state models of data integration* (Just a transition slide for each target topic about the MOU. This first section covers the T1, T2, T3 filtered data thrust of the MOU. Maybe this covers 2 topics: Tiered Framework of Known Data Integrity. That could then include reference of the QA work.

Integrated tools - QAPPs

Connect QAPP to Standard Operating Procedures

Connect SOPs to Database & Metadata

Example: Otsego County Conservation AssociationMonitoring Goals• Establish a baseline understanding of six

watersheds in Otsego County• Engage community members in monitoring• Identify sites for potential BMPs and

restoration• Use data locally and support CBP data needs

TIERS Methodology

1 Macroinvertebrates

Nitrate-Nitrogen, Orthophosphate, pH, WaterClarity

2 Conductivity, Dissolved Oxygen, Water Temperature

Monitoring Mantras

• All data of known quality have use

• Must match intended use with quality of data collected

Thank you! Questions?

Alliance for Aquatic Resource Monitoring (ALLARM)dickinson.edu/ALLARM | @ALLARMwaterJulie Vastine | [email protected]

Documents

Creating Credible Community-based Stream Monitoring Programs · 2019-03-04 · Chesapeake Monitoring Cooperative. A partnership that aims to provide technical, logistical, and outreach