# Presentation: 700236

## Lake Michigan Pilot Study Update

- National Water Quality Monitoring Council Meeting
- Philadelphia, PA
- July 23, 2007

## General Process and Flow

- Submitted Statement of Interest
- Pilot selected
- Recruited initial members
- Held “kick-off” meeting May 10, 2007 in New Buffalo, MI
- Component Workgroups formed – more participates recruited (~ 50 total to date)
- Lake MI Pilot Study wiki created:
- _[http://glos.us/wiki/display/PilotNMN/Lake+Michigan+Pilot+Study+of+the+National+Monitoring+Network+Home](http://glos.us/wiki/display/PilotNMN/Lake+Michigan+Pilot+Study+of+the+National+Monitoring+Network+Home)_
- Lake MI Pilot Study listserv created

## Map of Lake MI Pilot Study area

## Two key Lake MI Ref Docs

- Lake MI Lakewide Management Plan (LaMP)
- Biennial updates
- Snapshot of the basin
- Can you eat fish, swim, drink the water?
- Series of indicators
- Excellent reference for Lake MI Management issues
- Lake MI Mass Balance Study
- 1995-2005
- PCBs, Mercury, Nutrients concentrations/loadings
- Studied at mouths of 11 major tributaries – LMMB model
- Follow-up (10-year anniversary) in final analysis/reporting phase
- See web site for details

## GL Monitoring Inventory

- Approximately 300 programs include monitoring in some portion of Lake Michigan
- Majority of the monitoring programs taking place at the state level

## Metadata Fields Collected

- Program Information
- Organization, department, website
- Contact Information
-  Name, title, address, phone, fax, email
- Program Description
- Program name, description, data uses, start and end dates, status (ongoing, etc.), medium monitored, sampling frequency, collection months, # of stations, methods, parameters monitored

**Notes:**
The next two slides list off the information collected through the inventory on each program.

## Metadata Fields Collected

- Geographic Description
- State/province, Great Lakes basin, focus area, sampling location coordinates
- Data Collection and Storage Information
- QAPP, # of staff, training, trainer, data available to public, data format, data location, report location
- Funding Support
- Funding source, annual budget

## Monitoring Categories

- Fish Consumption
- Drinking Water
- Beach Safety
- Air Monitoring
- Water Quality
- Sediment Quality
- Soil
- Groundwater
- Climate/Weather
- Fish Population Health
- Urban Issues

- Aquatic Invasive Species
- Coastal Wetlands
- Wildlife Ecology
- Benthic and Invertebrate Ecology
- Plant Ecology
- Habitat and Community
- Atmospheric Deposition
- Nutrient Management
- Land Use
- Erosion

**Notes:**
Categories were based on SOLEC indicators, tweaked somewhat.

## Distribution of Sampling Programs by Agency

**Notes:**
Likely many more small local programs not included through this inventory.

## Distribution of Sampling Programs by Lake

## Rivers Component

- Progress
- Developed Rivers component working group and held meeting and conference call
- Developed a comparison matrix of the LMMB study, proposed NMN design, and ongoing monitoring design for major State/Federal entities. Looked at Great Lakes Inventory for other important river monitoring activities for possible inclusion in matrix.
- Developed matrix of major State/Federal ongoing monitoring that includes locations, parameters, methods, management objectives, and data management information.

## Rivers Component

- Progress (cont’d)
- Compared proposed nutrient method range and detection levels to major State/Federal protocol range and detection levels for nutrients.
- Pulled historic water quality information for Lake Michigan river sites and from 1970 – 2001 and summarized graphically.
- All information included on Lake Michigan pilot wiki

## The Numbers Tell a Story

## Rivers Component

- Needs
- Final information from all IWGs (nutrients, contaminants, biology)
- Information for data inventory format
- Format for rivers component of Lake Michigan Pilot report

## Ground Water Component

- Conducted query of GL Mon Inventory for GW monitoring in Lake MI basin
- Held conference call – coming activities:
- Conduct an inventory of wells in the drainage areas that directly discharge to the Lake for shallow flow paths (we don't think there will be very many)
- Put together GIS layers on geology and land use from either the GAP project or from the Water Availability and Use Project (or both)
- Use existing models and reports to determine ground-water flux directly to the lake (RASA model, Milwaukee Model, Door Peninsula models, etc and Annotated Bibliography report)

## Ground Water Component

- Thoughts on How to Proceed (cont’d)
- Conduct NWIS and STORET queries for quality of water data in the drainage area (we haven't yet figured out how to do this)
- Use flux estimates and GW data to make a rough estimate of loads of some chemical constituents to the Lake
- Based on these load estimates, we will work on a monitoring plan that will improve the load estimates

## Wetlands Component

- Progress
- Created a spreadsheet of current wetland monitoring efforts being conducted in Lake Michigan and comparing the goals of each program to the goals of the Lake Michigan Lakewide Management Plan (LaMP).
- The group has compiled a list of existing efforts and is continuing to add to the list as we learn about new monitoring programs.  Current programs include efforts being conducted at national, state and local levels.

## Wetlands Component

- Exploring the possibility of using methods from the Great Lakes Coastal Wetland Consortium (GLCWC) as part of the monitoring design
- Status: The GLCWC is in the process of preparing  a GL coastal wetlands monitoring plan (indicators, protocols, metrics, site selection, etc.) to be complete by September 2007.  When these protocols are available, we will compare them to current monitoring efforts and determine what the cost differences may be for implementing the GLCWC design for CWs.

## Wetlands Component

- Will prepare a report comparing existing efforts for Lake Michigan with a new network design (if available).  If a network design is unavailable, will summarize existing efforts in Lake Michigan/Great Lakes and comment on their applicability to a nationwide design.

## Embayments (Estuaries) Comp.

- Need to compare the 19 existing monitoring projects to the 50 randomly selected embayments chosen by the Network design in the Great Lakes region
- Need to get our hand on the entire list of embayments that the 50 were chosen from – why 50?

## Embayments (Estuaries) Comp.

- 7 of the 50 randomly chosen sites are in Lake MI
- Need to determine whether 7 sites are adequate for sampling
- Determine whether embayments with different surrounding landscapes (urban vs ag vs pristine) should have different monitoring goals and different monitoring requirements

## Atmospheric Deposition Component

- Great Lakes covered in full report appendix
- Looks to GLs and how PBT/toxic chemical deposition might apply elsewhere
- Still vague recommendations – awaiting national feedback
- IADN is lacking in Mercury monitoring
- IADN will look at national recommendations

## Why air?

- Important pathway for input to the Lakes
- Air concentrations respond rapidly to changes in emissions

**Notes:**
The atmosphere is a major route by which PBTs enter the Great Lakes, contributing up to about 90% of inputs to the Lakes (depending on the Lake and the chemical).

Less so for Erie and Ontario which have greater inputs from trib.  Atm dominant for Huron, Michigan, and Superior.

## Shift to Atmospheric Inputs Over Past Decades

## Slide 25

**Notes:**
15 stations, 10 Cdn, 5 U.S.  
5 master stations on each of the Lakes.  
Many of the Cdn satellite stations are precipitation-only (part of pre-existing network).
Network intercomparison site is at Point Petre on Lake Ontario.

## IADN Overview

- Joint EPA-Environment Canada project
- Ron Hites at Indiana University is U.S. grantee
- In operation since 1990 (GLWQA and CAAA of 1990)
- Measure PBTs in air and precipitation at 15 sites around the Great Lakes (U.S. runs five)
- Goals:
- Determine atmospheric loadings to the Lakes
- Look at trends in concentrations
- Use data to measure progress made by toxics reduction efforts

**Notes:**
Annex 15 of the GLWQA and the 1990 CAA Amendments called for the monitoring of airborne toxic substances and the establishment of IADN.  

We measure concentrations of persistent toxic substances like PCBs, PAHs, organochlorine pesticides including DDT, and trace metals in the air and precipitation of the Great Lakes.  We also collect weather data at each station, which is necessary to calculate loadings to the lakes and is also needed for modelling.

It has been operating since 1990 as a partnership between Environment Canada and U.S. EPA GLNPO.  
Gas/particulate samples collected every 12 days
Precipitation samples are monthly composites
Methods are somewhat different but for the most part comparable between the U.S. and Canadian laboratories

## IADN Summary

- Levels of “legacy” chemicals are decreasing, but they may be starting to level off.
- Cities are important source areas of many chemicals (PCBs, PAHs, PBDEs, some pesticides, etc.)
- Ongoing monitoring is useful for examining progress in reducing “old” chemicals and finding new potential problems (Dechlorane Plus, for example)
- IADN drawbacks:
- No Hg measurements on U.S. side (states doing some monitoring)
- Urban coverage only in Chicago and Cleveland
- We are currently considering dropping or reducing frequency on some legacy chemicals with low detection rates to free up resources for adding chemicals of emerging concern

**Notes:**
Budget is a zero-sum game.

## Off Shore Component

- Problem with probabilistic approach – what is it based on?
- 3 programs – 30 years of data
- Build on existing monitoring
- Few Off Shore stations – what is minimum number required to capture status/trends?
- Need to determine spatial & temporal variation for extrapolating to other lakes
- 10-45 meter Near Shore needs attention
- Temporal variation increases Near Shore

## Off Shore Component

- USGS-GLSC long-term survey of prey fish community (since 1973)
- 7 different bottom trawl fixed sites  around Lake MI
- Acoustic survey uses a stratified random design to select transects each year
- No consistent water quality monitoring done on USGS vessels
- Little communication with EPA with regard to their WQ and zooplankton sampling efforts on Lake MI
- Perhaps this will change as a result of the NMN

**Notes:**
At a minimum, it would be good to place the fixed sampling sites from the long-term bottom trawl survey on Figure 3-5.  The acoustic survey uses a stratified random design to select its transects each year. We currently have no consistent water quality monitoring done on USGS vessels.  Unfortunately, we have little communication with EPA with regard to their water quality and zooplankton sampling efforts during their Lake Michigan surveys, but perhaps that will change as a result of this National Monitoring Network.

## Beaches Component

- Federal money
- Left up to local decisions on which beaches to monitor, e.g., heavier use, potential for contamination
- State allocations vary – MI monitors select beaches only once/week; WI more often
- GAP analysis being done for MI (close to completion)
- Began prior to LMPS selection – model to use
- Great Lakes Beach Association meets once/year: _[http://www.glin.net/glba/](http://www.glin.net/glba/)_
- Current beach conditions for GL states + Ontario online

## Near Shore Component

- Need to define Near Shore area
- Utilities do monitoring of raw water intakes – shallow near shore to 30 meters
- Characterizing sites – what should coasts look like?

**Notes:**
The sites are monitored for presence of Cladophora growth, zebra/quagga mussel presence, water quality (TP, TDP, SRP, TKN, NO3, TSS, and Chlor-a), and physical parameters profile (dissolved oxygen, conductivity, temperature, and light). Algae tissue samples are also collected for nutrient analysis (C, N, P, and Si). 

## Slide 32

**Notes:**
Summary of Near Shore data for Lake Michigan from the Great Lakes Environmental Indicators project.  These data were primarily gathered in 2002 and 2003.

## Near Shore Component

- On WI side, sites monitored for (WDNR/UW-M):
- Cladophora growth/densities
- Zebra and quagga mussels presence
- Water quality (TP,TDP,SRP,TKN,NO3,TSS, Chlora-a)
- Physical parameters profile (dissolved O2, conductivity, temperature, light)
- Algal tissue samples collected for nutrient analysis (C,N,P,SI)
- USGS-GLSC NS studies looking at food web – invasives/native fish – changes w/ depth – to 18 meters

## Regional data processing center
servers, bandwidth, software
Based on Service-Oriented Architecture
Modeling clearinghouse and applications
     development center
Linkage to Great Lakes Information Network
National interface

- Regional data processing center
- servers, bandwidth, software
- Based on Service-Oriented Architecture
- Modeling clearinghouse and applications
-      development center
- Linkage to Great Lakes Information Network
- National interface

**Subsystems Components:**

**Notes:**
Information integration is a major component of GLOS. GLOS members are being asked to implement international data standards to improve regional capabilities for finding critical data and exchanging information.

 Implementation of rapidly evolving web services are well underway under GLOS, linking historic geospatial data resources collected and maintained by GLOS members across the region, including information from the Ontario Geospatial Data Exchange (OGDE) and U.S. state clearinghouses.  

GLOS will utilize (and expand upon) existing facilities and capabilities provided by the Great Lakes Information Network (GLIN).  GLIN currently has up to 130,000 unique visitors per month, making it the unparalleled leader in providing information to stakeholders across the region.  

The GLOS application development staff have designed new web mapping tools to “mine” existing databases and information repositories maintained by GLOS partners.

## ComponentsData DiscoveryData Visualization Data EvaluationData AccessData Publishing

- Core GLOS-DMAC Functionalities

_**Tenants**_
** ****Empower user/organizations**
** ****Make data accessible to ALL**
** ****Be extensible/expandable**
** ****Minimize duplication**
** ****Metadata driven**
** ****Standards based**
** ****Leverage open source software**
** ****Service Oriented Architecture**

**Notes:**
PPGIS-it can enhance capacity in generating, managing, and communicating spatial information 

## Slide 36

**Notes:**
adsfasf

## Contact:Great Lakes Commission John Hummer (jhummer@glc.org)734-971-9135

- QUESTIONS?