Keeping Pace with Science and Engineering Case Studies in Environmental Regulation (1993) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
Nutrient Loadings to Surface Waters: Chesapeake Bay Case Study
Nutrient Loadings to Surface Waters: Chesapeake Bay Case Study
Pages 8-38
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 8... ...
Senator Bernie Fowler, Baltimore Sun, June 14, 1992 Nutrient inputs that result from human activities often cause aquatic ecosystems to become overloaded with nutrients and deficient in oxygen, a process referred to as cultural eutrophication. This phenomenon occurs when nutrient inputs exceed the ability of the system to absorb and use them its assimilation capacity resulting in the degradation of water quality.i Since the 1960s, environmental scientists and managers have struggled with the causes, consequences, and prevention of eutrophication.
|
From page 9... ...
The environmental effects of anthropogenic nutrients enrichment (cultural eutrophication) began to receive national and international attention in the 1960s with major efforts to control nutrient loadings and continued during the 1970s to the present.
|
From page 10... ...
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Chesapeake Bay Study mandated by Congress in 1976, implemented in 1977, and completed in 1983 with the release of the Chesapeake Bay Program reports: A Profile of Environmental Change (EPA, 1983d)
|
From page 11... ...
of 1965 and 1972 reflected a growing concern over the pollution of lakes and rivers and the threat this posed to the nation's water supply, living resources, recreational use, and aesthetics (see Figure 2~. The 1965 CWA required the adoption of enforceable ambient water quality standards for all interstate waters.
|
From page 12... ...
^~ _ ~ A ~ _ L _ 1 _ - ~HeCIS CT I ropical worm signed puolibneu - Nonpoint source watershed workshop - EPA Chesapeake Bay study begins - EPA symposium on effects of nutrient enrichment in estuaries - Chesapeake Bay Technical Studies: A Synthesis - Chesapeake Bay: A Profile of Environmental Change - Chesapeake Bay monitoring program; seasonal anoxia in the Chesapeake Bay - CatastroDic 1984 anoxia in the Chesapeake Bay ~ 1985 - STAC: Nutrient Control in Chesapeake Bay ~ - Nitrogen in groundwater - ~ - Sea Grant anoxia workshop MALONE, BOYNTON, HORTON, AND STEVENSON Policy and Regulation 1965 ~- Federal Water Pollution Control Act - Federal Rivers and Harbors Act - Clean Water Restoration Act _~ - Estuary Protection Act - First Govenor's Conference on Chesapeake Bay - Potomac-Washington Metro Area Enforcement Conference 1 970 ~ _~ - AL - - Advanced wastewater treatment of phosphorous: upper Potomac _ ~ - Federal Water Pollution Control Act _ - · I ' _ - Coastal Zone Management Act 19 75 ~ ~ - Chesapeake Bay Status Report , ~- Wasteload Allocation Study · National Estuary Study - Workshop: Tri-County Council of Southern Maryland - Bi-state Conference on the Chesapeake Bay - Chesapeake Bay future conditions report ~ ~ - ~- Chesapeake Bay Commission established 1980 , - Patuxent "Charrette" , - - Chesapeake Bay Commission: Need to control ,_ both nitrogen and phosphorous | ~ - BMP cost-sharing program initiated - ~' `-~-Maryland enacts stormwaterlaw · - Water Quality Management Plan for the Patuxent River Basin approved by EPA - Chesapeake Bay Commission endorses nonpoint nutrient control plan - Chesapeake Bay Program Findings and Recommendations: A Framework for action; Conference on Maryland's Future: Chesapeake Bay Agreement _ -- - MOUs: EPA, NOM, USGS, SCS, and FWS it- - Maryland legislation - - Chesapeake Bay Restoration Plan , - Maryland: Phosphate detergent plan - Reduction in federal matching funds for STPs `-. - Maryland: Chesapeake Bay Trust established ~ _ 1990 _ L a- - r , - - Clean Water Act reathorized and amended - Chesapeake Bay Commission report on nutrints I -- - 2nd Chesapeake Bay Agreement signed -- - Chesapeake Bay Program Implementation Committee: Restoration Progress and the Course Ahead - Maryland: Deadlines for implementation of nitrogen removal t- on the Patuxent River - Coastal Zone Act: Nonpoint-Source Nutrient Control - Baywide nutrient reduction reevaluation; Chesapeake Bay Agreement amended FIGURE 2 Timeline of significant events in the Chesapeake Bay management program.
|
From page 13... ...
The 1972 CWA effectively gave the federal government the enforcement power to regulate nutrient inputs to the nation's surface waters. The responsibility for implementation remained with the states, which were mandated to report on water quality within their borders beginning in 1975.
|
From page 14... ...
Mathias, this would cause the Congress in 1976 to direct the EPA to "undertake a comprehensive study of the Bay's resources and water quality, and to identify appropriate management strategies to protect this national resource." The Chesapeake Region In the midst of these studies and federal legislation, symptoms of overenrichment were appearing in Chesapeake Bay and its tributaries during the late 1960s and early 1970s. Massive algal blooms, oxygen depletion, and fish kills in the upper Potomac River were gaining the attention of the public and federal government officials in Washington, D.C.
|
From page 15... ...
For the first time in the Chesapeake region, Jaworski et al. clearly demonstrated a relationship between nitrogen and phosphorus loading from municipal wastewater discharges and deteriorating water quality, and prescribed a program of advanced wastewater treatment to remove N and P
|
From page 16... ...
In 1971 a workshop involving university scientists and the TriCounty Council of Southern Maryland concluded that the water quality of the lower (salty) Patuxent River estuary had declined to unacceptable levels as a consequence of increases in municipal wastewater nutrient loadings to the upper (fresh)
|
From page 17... ...
(The immense amount of water runoff carried with it large amounts of nutrients from nonpoint sources such as fertilizers and animal wastes.) The storm demonstrated the systemwide susceptibility of the Bay to nutrient enrichment.
|
From page 18... ...
The problems of overenrichment were thought to be restricted to a few local tributaries such as the upper Potomac and Patuxent River estuaries, where point-source inputs were clearly related to the degradation of water quality. Despite the effects of Tropical Storm Agnes and subsequent research findings, the baywide impacts of nonpoint nutrient loading were not broadly appreciated at this time.
|
From page 19... ...
THE PERIOD OF THE EPA BAY STUDY Setting the Stage Largely in response to baywide declines in the abundance and harvest of living resources (e.g., submerged aquatic vegetation [SAV1, oysters, and shad) , Congress in 1976 directed the EPA to conduct a comprehensive, systemwide study of the resources and water quality of Chesapeake Bay and to recommend management plans to protect and restore this national resource.
|
From page 20... ...
It worked to formulate, and secure support for, legislation that in 1984 would facilitate the implementation of a broad range of nutrient management actions. In 1983 the commission also recognized the need for a watershed approach when it endorsed the Patuxent River Basin plan as a model for a comprehensive nutrient control strategy that would address the control of both point and nonpoint loadings in terms of total inputs.
|
From page 21... ...
Despite the lack of scientific information needed to quantify the effects of anthropogenic nutrient inputs, the major focus of these recommendations was on the control and monitoring of nutrients "to reduce point and nonpoint source nutrient loadings to attain nutrient and dissolved oxygen concentrations necessary to support the living resources of the Bay." Following the release of this report, the Citizen's Program for the Chesapeake Bay (precursor of the Alliance for the Chesapeake Bay) organized a conference, "Choices for the Chesapeake: An Action Agenda," which laid the foundation for the subsequent signing of the 1983 Chesapeake Bay Agreement by the governors of Maryland, Virginia, and Pennsylvania, the mayor of the District of Columbia, the administrator of the EPA, and the chairman of the Chesapeake Bay Commission.
|
From page 22... ...
The Chesapeake Bay Monitoring Program addressed a major problem encountered during the years of the Bay Study the inability to document how the Bay had changed. Temporal and spatial variability would be monitored in order to determine long-term trends in water quality and living resources, to resolve natural cycles and anthropogenic sources of variability, and to evaluate the efficacy of pollution control programs.
|
From page 23... ...
, the report emphasized the susceptibility of the Bay to seasonal oxygen depletion and to climatic variability, and concluded that nonpoint nutrient inputs were the primary sources of the nutrients that fueled oxygen depletion in the main Bay. The report also endorsed the goal of achieving at least a 40 percent reduction in nutrient inputs to the Bay and underscored how little is known concerning the relationship between water quality and the capacity of the Bay to support living resources.
|
From page 24... ...
Despite the cumulative evidence that N removal was needed to improve water quality (from the Patuxent Charrette in 1981 to the 1986 STAC report and the 1987 Chesapeake Bay Agreement) , resistance within the management community to implementing the measures needed to reduce N inputs remained strong through most of the 1980s.
|
From page 25... ...
Although specific actions to control nonpoint nutrient sources would not be forthcoming until the l990s, the results of the Bay Study and continued research on nutrient runoff from agricultural lands were gaining the attention of the management community. The Chesapeake Restoration Plan, released by the Chesapeake Bay Commission in 1985, recognized the need for basin-specific nutrient control strategies and outlined implementation plans for reducing point and nonpoint nutrient inputs.
|
From page 26... ...
Finally, Maryland's Coastal Zone Management Plan (approved in 1978 and administered by the DNR) , which did not explicitly address the problem of eutrophication, was modified in 1990 to include provisions for nonpoint-source nutrient control and water quality management consistent with the CWA.
|
From page 27... ...
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS The Interplay Between Science and Management Our analysis reveals a change in the relationship between science and management as the emphasis in nutrient control shifted from point to nonpoint sources. During the formative years, neither the science nor the management communities in Maryland perceived nutrient enrichment to be an immediate, high-priority problem (compared with thermal pollution, dredging, and the threat of oil spills)
|
From page 28... ...
Low rainfall during the 1960s undoubtedly exacerbated conditions in the Potomac River where noxious algal blooms, fish kills, and generally unsanitary conditions were occurring at the doorstep of the White House. Here, secondary treatment and advanced wastewater treatment for P reversed the trend of declining water quality, at least in the tidal freshwater reach of the estuary (Jaworski, 1990~.5 However, the Potomac case was unique, not only in terms of the apparent close coupling between new scientific information and management action (which probably reflected the river's proximity to Washington, D.C., and its role as a political showcase as much as anything else)
|
From page 29... ...
Studies of benthic nutrient fluxes revealed that models of water quality in the Bay would have to incorporate benthic-water column interactions into their calculations; large-scale baywide studies revealed the mechanisms by which nutrient inputs cause oxygen depletion in the main Bay, and showed that nonpoint sources were the principal cause; and current soil conservation practices were shown to have little effect on N input to the Bay. These advances could not have been made without a major research and monitoring effort by the science and management communities in the Chesapeake Bay region.
|
From page 30... ...
The cost of reducing nonpoint sources is more unpredictable because of uncertainties in loading rates and in the effectiveness of different methods of nutrient control. Thus, for justifying the social and economic costs of nutrient management, it becomes much more important to demonstrate causeeffect relationships between nonpoint sources, water quality, and the capacity of the ecosystem to support living resources.
|
From page 31... ...
The distrust that these dichotomies and lack of communication breed has two important and related consequences: (1) the management community tends to question the relevance of environmental research conducted by an independent science community, and (2)
|
From page 32... ...
features, but all assume that the water quality model provides an accurate representation of the real world. The current heavy reliance on the 3-D, time-dependent, coupled hydrodynamic water quality model to set nutrient reduction goals and evaluate the success of nutrient control programs is reminiscent of the Patuxent experience.
|
From page 33... ...
By pulling together large numbers of scientists and decision makers from throughout the Bay and its watershed, the EPA Bay Study marked a significant departure from the course of the 1960s and 1970s. Under the auspices of the EPA, it gave rise to a governance structure that would involve citizens, government officials, and scientists in the oversight of environmental research, formulation of policy, and implementation of that policy throughout the entire Bay and its watershed (the Chesapeake Executive Council, Citizens Advisory Committee, Science and Technology Committee, and Implementation Committee)
|
From page 34... ...
Such leadership was clearly demonstrated by the actions of Senator Mathias, who formulated the legislation that led to the EPA Bay Program; by Senator Fowler, whose environmental concerns led to a nutrient management plan for the Patuxent River basin; and by the state governors who had the foresight to look beyond their borders in agreeing to clean up the Bay. The Patuxent case in particular illustrates the need for trust.
|
From page 35... ...
NOTES 1. The degradation of water quality occurs when assimilation capacity is exceeded.
|
From page 36... ...
1990. Retrospective of the water quality issues of the upper Potomac estuary.
|
From page 37... ...
Annapolis, Md.: Tidewater Administration, Maryland Department of Natural Resources. Maryland Sea Grant College Program and Virginia Sea Grant College Program.
|
From page 38... ...
1993. Water quality associated with survival of submersed aquatic vegetation along an estuarine gradient.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.