status and trends of water quality and benthic habitats in the little manatee river environmental...
TRANSCRIPT
Status and Trends of Water Status and Trends of Water Quality and Benthic Habitats in Quality and Benthic Habitats in
the Little Manatee Riverthe Little Manatee River
Environmental Resources Management (ERM) DivisionEnvironmental Resources Management (ERM) DivisionEnvironmental Protection Commission of Hillsborough County Environmental Protection Commission of Hillsborough County
3629 Queen Palm Dr.3629 Queen Palm Dr.Tampa, FL 33619-1309Tampa, FL 33619-1309
EPCHC Data Sources AvailableEPCHC Data Sources Available Water Quality DataWater Quality Data
Monthly monitoring at fixed stations (long-term surveillance Monthly monitoring at fixed stations (long-term surveillance network) since the early-1970’s. Includes large number of network) since the early-1970’s. Includes large number of chemical and physical parameterschemical and physical parameters
Hillsborough Independent Monitoring Program (HIMP), Hillsborough Independent Monitoring Program (HIMP), monitoring since 1999. Focused on physical parameters monitoring since 1999. Focused on physical parameters (salinity, DO, pH, temperature). Combination of fixed (salinity, DO, pH, temperature). Combination of fixed stations and 72- hour sensor deployments at randomly-stations and 72- hour sensor deployments at randomly-selected locationsselected locations
Benthic DataBenthic Data Bay-wide benthic and sediment monitoring since mid-1990’s, Bay-wide benthic and sediment monitoring since mid-1990’s,
during fall “index period”during fall “index period”
HIMP monitoring (focused on tidal reaches of Hillsborough, HIMP monitoring (focused on tidal reaches of Hillsborough, Palm Alafia, and Little Manatee rivers) since 1999Palm Alafia, and Little Manatee rivers) since 1999
Available at: http://www.epchc.org/himp.htm
EPCHC long-term surface water monitoring networkEPCHC long-term surface water monitoring network
TIDALFRESHWATER
HIMP HIMP Monitoring Monitoring Locations Locations
(Tidal)(Tidal)
Benthic MonitoringStations
HIMP Water QualityMonitoring Stations
Other Information SourcesOther Information Sources
SWFWMD land use mapping program (detailed SWFWMD land use mapping program (detailed land use maps, updated on 5-year cycle)land use maps, updated on 5-year cycle)
U.S. Geological Survey stream gaging program U.S. Geological Survey stream gaging program (long-term trends in river flow)(long-term trends in river flow)
U.S. EPA and FDEP TMDL programs (identify U.S. EPA and FDEP TMDL programs (identify and restore water quality in “impaired” water and restore water quality in “impaired” water bodies not currently meeting federal/state water bodies not currently meeting federal/state water quality standards)quality standards)
Land Use (1999)Land Use (1999)
% of Watershed Altered
47.4 % Agriculture 7.2 % Urbanized 5.7 % Mining
Rainfall / River Flow TrendsRainfall / River Flow TrendsLittle Manatee River
1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000
Sub
-Bas
in A
vera
ge A
nnua
l Rai
nfal
l (In
ches
)
30
40
50
60
70
80
Rainfall - No Trend
Year
Year1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000
Ave
rage
Ann
ual D
isch
arge
(ft
3/s
ec)
0
100
200
300
400Discharge - No Trend
20-Year Water Quality Trends20-Year Water Quality Trends& Recent Conditions& Recent Conditions
Period Mid-Depth DOMid-Depth
SalinityStratification
1984 - 2004 No Trend No Trend Decreasing
2004 Average 5.8 ± 0.4 9.6 ± 0.1 0.37 ± 0.15
1984 - 2004 Decreasing No Trend .
2004 Average 7.1 ± 0.3 0.16 ± 0.05 .
Physical Parameters
Tidal
Freshwater
Period Chlorophyll-aTotal
PhosphorusTotal Nitrogen
Fecal Coliforms
1984 - 2004 No Trend Decreasing No Trend No Trend
2004 Average 5.75 ± 1.1 0.34 ± 0.04 0.88 ± 0.12 347 ± 269
1984 - 2004 Decreasing No Trend No Trend Decreasing
2004 Average 1.05 ± 0.3 0.61 ± 0.04 1.51 ± 0.09 1188 ± 419
Tidal
Freshwater
Nutrient & Bacterial Parameters
Water Quality ComparisonsWater Quality ComparisonsTidal River StationsTidal River Stations
(based on 1984 – 2003 EPCHC monitoring data)(based on 1984 – 2003 EPCHC monitoring data)
LocationLocation
Dissolved Dissolved Oxygen Oxygen (mg/L)(mg/L)
SalinitySalinity
(ppt)(ppt)
TotalTotal
PhosphorusPhosphorus
(mg P/L)(mg P/L)
TotalTotal
NitrogenNitrogen
(mg N/L)(mg N/L)
ChlorophyllChlorophyll--aa
((µµg/L)g/L)
Fecal Fecal ColiformsColiforms
(col/100 ml)(col/100 ml)
Little Little ManateeManatee
RiverRiver5.05.0 12.212.2 0.40.4 1.11.1 7.37.3 132132
AlafiaAlafia
RiverRiver4.64.6 18.118.1 1.01.0 1.41.4 20.520.5 228228
Hills-Hills-borough borough RiverRiver
4.64.6 13.413.4 0.30.3 1.11.1 14.714.7 409409
Palm Palm RiverRiver 4.34.3 23.523.5 0.40.4 1.21.2 21.421.4 189189
Recent Bottom Dissolved Oxygen Recent Bottom Dissolved Oxygen Conditions (HIMP Data) - DiurnalConditions (HIMP Data) - Diurnal
HIMP Continuous Monitoring Data (2000 - 2005)
Time of Day
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 0
Me
an D
isso
lve
d O
xyg
en
Co
nc.
(m
g/L
) ±
95%
C.I
.
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Instantaneous State Standard
72-Hr Depl. at Mul. Stations (N~200+ per Point)Single Fixed Station (N~790 per Point)
Recent Bottom Dissolved Oxygen Recent Bottom Dissolved Oxygen Conditions (HIMP Data) - DailyConditions (HIMP Data) - Daily
HIMP Continuous Monitoring Data (2000 - 2005)
Date
12/0
0
2/01
4/01
6/01
8/01
10/0
1
12/0
1
2/02
4/02
6/02
8/02
10/0
2
12/0
2
2/03
4/03
6/03
8/03
10/0
3
12/0
3
2/04
4/04
6/04
8/04
10/0
4
12/0
4
2/05
4/05
Me
an D
aily
DO
Co
nc.
(m
g/L
) ±
95%
C.I.
0
2
4
6
8
10
24- Hr MeanState Standard
Rain
fall
20
10
0
Dissolved Oxygen Conditions Dissolved Oxygen Conditions Relative to Other Tidal RiversRelative to Other Tidal Rivers
Study Sites
Lit. Man. R. Alafia R. Hills. R. Palm R.
Rel
ativ
e F
req
uen
cy o
f B
ott
om
Dis
solv
ed O
xyg
en <
2.0
mg
/L
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10DISSOLVED OXYGEN [PPM]
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
CU
MU
LA
TIV
E P
RO
PO
RT
ION
LMRHR
RIVER
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10DISSOLVED OXYGEN [PPM]
0.00.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.80.91.0
CU
MU
LA
TIV
E P
RO
PO
RT
ION
LMRAR
RIVER
Impaired Waters, LMR and vicinityImpaired Waters, LMR and vicinityLower LMR & South Fork of LMR
Impaired for DO, Coliforms, & NutrientsTMDLs due in 2008
Tampa Bay WatershedTampa Bay WatershedImpaired WatersImpaired Waters
Little Manatee River Benthic HabitatsLittle Manatee River Benthic Habitats
More coarse-grained (sand) sediments and less silt/clay More coarse-grained (sand) sediments and less silt/clay than the other tidal riversthan the other tidal rivers
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100SILT + CLAY [%]
0.00.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.80.91.0
CU
MU
LA
TIV
E P
RO
PO
RT
I ON
PRMCBLMR
AREA
0
10
20
30
40
% C
OM
PO
SIT
ION
LMRAR
Comparison of Benthic Species Diversity Comparison of Benthic Species Diversity
and Abundance to Other Tidal Riversand Abundance to Other Tidal Rivers
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70NUMBERS OF TAXA [S]
0.00.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.80.91.0
CU
MU
LA
TIV
E P
RO
PO
RT
ION
LMRHR
RIVER
N+1 NUMBERS M-2
0.00.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.80.91.0
CU
MU
LA
TIV
E P
RO
PO
RT
ION
LMRAR
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70NUMBERS TAXA
0.00.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.80.91.0
CU
MU
LA
TIV
E P
RO
PO
RT
ION
PRMCBLMR
Summary – LMR Water Quantity and QualitySummary – LMR Water Quantity and Quality
No trends in rainfall or annual river flow, but dry-season No trends in rainfall or annual river flow, but dry-season flow in the LMR has shown an increasing trend since 1940 flow in the LMR has shown an increasing trend since 1940 (SWFWMD studies suggest agricultural irrigation as the (SWFWMD studies suggest agricultural irrigation as the cause)cause)
Over the past 20 years, nutrient and chlorophyll levels have Over the past 20 years, nutrient and chlorophyll levels have improved (declined) at EPC monitoring stations on the LMRimproved (declined) at EPC monitoring stations on the LMR
Two LMR segments currently considered “impaired” (for Two LMR segments currently considered “impaired” (for coliform bacteria, nutrients and DO). TMDLs due in 2008coliform bacteria, nutrients and DO). TMDLs due in 2008
Relative to the other tidal rivers in Hillsborough County, the Relative to the other tidal rivers in Hillsborough County, the LMR appears to have the best water qualityLMR appears to have the best water quality
Summary – Benthic habitats and organisms Summary – Benthic habitats and organisms
Sandy sediments are the predominant habitats in the tidal Sandy sediments are the predominant habitats in the tidal portion of the LMR. Higher silt+clay levels are present in portion of the LMR. Higher silt+clay levels are present in the other riversthe other rivers
Relative to the other tidal rivers in Hillsborough County, Relative to the other tidal rivers in Hillsborough County, benthic species richness and abundance are generally benthic species richness and abundance are generally higher in the LMRhigher in the LMR
Future Directions – Watershed ManagementFuture Directions – Watershed Management
• EPC is working with several partners (Hillsborough County, City of EPC is working with several partners (Hillsborough County, City of Tampa, SWFWMD, TBEP, FDEP) to develop a county-wide, multi-Tampa, SWFWMD, TBEP, FDEP) to develop a county-wide, multi-stakeholder watershed management programstakeholder watershed management program
• A primary purpose would be to restore and protect the County’s surface A primary purpose would be to restore and protect the County’s surface (and ground) water resources, to support future environmental and (and ground) water resources, to support future environmental and economic needseconomic needs
• Would help the County comply with Federal and State water quality Would help the County comply with Federal and State water quality protection and restoration (MS4 and TMDL) requirementsprotection and restoration (MS4 and TMDL) requirements
• Will require significant co-ordination among programs in several agencies Will require significant co-ordination among programs in several agencies and departmentsand departments
• Planning, zoning and growth management issues are critical elements of Planning, zoning and growth management issues are critical elements of the watershed management processthe watershed management process