# Presentation: 248964

## New England

**New England**
**Regional **
**SPARROW **
**Water-Quality **
**Model**

## Purpose of the New England Model is to support major water-quality management activities

**Nutrient Criteria Development**	- expected ranges in concentrations	- variation by ecoregion	- relate concentrations to designated use attainment
**Total Maximum Daily Load Allocations**	-magnitude and sources of loads	-load transport (especially interstate)

## Design of the New England SPARROW 

**Model**
-  2 models: Total Nitrogen and Total Phosphorous
-  Calibrating model for the early-mid 1990s time 	period
-  Improve on national model by improved spatial 	detail and by additional local data sets
- Work began in 1999; now completing report 	summarizing results

## New England Model

**New England Model**
**Network of River**
**Reaches and Reach **
**Catchments**
**Based on the 1:100,000 scale****   National Hydrography**
**   ****Data Set (NHD)**
**42,000 reaches in model**
**Average size is 1.7 mi****2**** **
**Corrected to NRCS 12-digit ****    watersheds**
**Hydrologically connected**

## Slide 5

## Spatial Detail of the SPARROW Network

**Spatial Detail of the SPARROW Network**

- Saco River Cataloging Unit Example

## Enhanced Predictor Variables being tested in the Model – Physical Watershed Features

**Mean annual flow estimations ****	**based on Randall (1996) – regional runoff map
**Time of travel/impoundment detention estimations **
**	****-**time of travel** **based on Jobson (1996); function of 			drainage area size, streamflow and slope
- 	-settling factor for lakes/impoundments
- 		(surface area / flow)
**Wetlands from National Land Cover Data**
**Climatic data (temperature and precipitation) from ****	****Oregon State PRISM program**

## Nutrient Sources

**Land use ****	**National Land Cover Dataset (11 classes)
**Point Sources **
- 	1993 TN and TP discharge estimates provided by EPA; 	~2600 in New England
** ****Agricultural fertilizer and manure applications****	**USDA Natural Resource Inventory by county applied to 	ag land use areas
** ****Atmospheric Deposition of Total Nitrogen****	**based on Ollinger and others (1993)

## Nitrogen fertilizer use for Androscoggin County Maine

- Green is crop land

## Slide 10

## Nutrient Data (Dependent Variable) 

**Used in the Model**
- Collected data from USGS, STORET, States, research studies
-  Calculated streamflow/nutrient relation to predict nutrient loads during all conditions of a hydrograph using the USGS Estimator Program.
- Loads are average over a period of record for streamflow data

## 65 sites used in the model                                   67 sites used in the model

## Model Results

- Nitrogen and Phosphorous Models have been calibrated and bootstrap models have been run
- Writing report

## Model Calibration Runs for the           New England SPARROW Nitrogen Model

- Significant Predictors:		Point Sources (municipal STPs), 			Atmospheric Deposition, 				agricultural land, and urban land 		R-squared = .94, MSE = 0.18
- Variable     COEF    STD ERR      BOOTEST   BOOTSTD
-  POINT      1.13     0.37         1.18     0.43
-  ATMOS      0.33     0.03         0.34     0.04
-  AG LAND    1114     506          1149     619
-  URBAN      2409     584          2574     860

## Slide 15

## Slide 16

## Slide 17

## Slide 18

## Slide 19

## Slide 20

## Model Calibration Runs for the           New England SPARROW Phosphorous Model

- Significant Predictors:	Point sources (municipal STPs and paper), 		Forest land, agricultural land, urban land, 	Attenuation in lakes with surface areas <= 10 km2
- 	R-squared = .91, MSE = .36
- Variable     COEF    STD ERR      BOOTEST   BOOTSTD
-  POINT      1.15     0.25         1.18     0.29
-  ATMOS        26     9.4           28      8.5
-  AG LAND     311     65           302      96
-  URBAN        79     28            77      11

## Observed ln(load kg)

## Using the New England SPARROW Model to Assist in the Upper Connecticut River TMDL Process

-  Compare SPARROW results to other load estimates, modeling 	studies and professional judgment
-  Use New England SPARROW model to determine loads, sources 	of loads, and errors
- Determine if additional/refined SPARROW modeling is needed	-Nested model to assess attentuation
-  Use SPARROW model to assist in design of monitoring 	network to better define loads
- Revised SPARROW model after additional data collection

**Using the New England SPARROW Model to Assist in the Upper Connecticut River TMDL Process**

## Utility of New England SPARROW Model Results for TMDL Applications – An Example from the Connecticut River Basin

**Utility of ****New England**** ****SPARROW ****Model Results for TMDL Applications – ****An Example from the Connecticut River Basin**

- Sources
- in
- NH-VT

- TN
- Loads toLong Is
- Sound

- 36 %

## Mercury SPARROW Model

- Multivariate regression model (not true SPARROW)	-dependent variable: Hg in tissue by species	-independent variables: SPARROW-generated 	watershed characteristics, Hg deposition, other Hg 	sources, water chemistry, other variables shown to	influence Hg in fish
- Data collection initiated
- Model development in 2003/04?
- EPA/NEIWPCC/NESCAUM/USGS cooperative study

## Summary of Results

- 1:100,000 NHD needed work
- Quality point source data difficult to obtain
- New England TN and TP models are improvements over the national SPARROW model
- Packaged and documented SPARROW programs needed
- Significant interest and value in SPARROW products from EPA, NEIWPCC, and state agencies

## Slide 27

## Slide 28