United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Water (4503F)
Washington, DC 20460
EPA841-F-97-003
April 1998
Report Brochure
National Water Quality Inventory: 1996 Report to Congress
Background
Section 305(b) of the Clean Water Act (GWA) requires that
states and other jurisdictions receiving CWA grant funding
submit a water quality report to EPA every 2 years. The
CWA also requires that EPA analyze the state reports
and transmit the results to Congress every 2 years in the
National Water Quality Inventory: Report to Congress
(the Report).
The Report is the primary vehicle for informing Congress
and the public about water quality conditions in the
United States. The 1996 Report summarizes information
submitted by 58 states, American Indian tribes, territories,
Interstate Water Commissions, and the District of Colum-
bia in their 1996 Section 305(b) reports.
Most of the information is based on data collected and
evaluated by the states, tribes, and other jurisdictions
during 1994 and 1995. The 1996 Report contains
national summary information about water quality condi-
tions in rivers, lakes, estuaries, wetlands, coastal waters,
the Great Lakes, and groundwater. The Report to
Congress also contains information about public health
and aquatic ecosystem concerns, water quality monitor-
ing, and state and federal water pollution management
programs.
As of 1996, about 40% of the nation's
surveyed rivers, lakes, and estuaries are
too polluted for basic uses, such as fishing
and swimming. This information from the
States indicates that serious water quality
problems persist nationwide and emphasizes
the importance of implementing the recently
released Clean Water Action Plan: Restoring
and Protecting America's Waters.
States, tribes, and other jurisdictions measure water
quality by determining if waterbodies are clean enough to
support basic uses, such as swimming, drinking supply,
and fishing. These uses are part of the water quality
standards set by each state, tribe, and jurisdiction to
protect their waters. These standards must be approved
by EPA. The states, tribes, and jurisdictions use the follow-
ing terminology to rate their water quality for each indi-
vidual use:
• Good/Fully Supporting - Water quality meets
the designated use criteria.
• Good/Threatened - Water quality currently
supports the designated use criteria, but changes
in land use or other factors threaten water quality.
• Fair/Partially Supporting - Water quality fails
to meet the designated use criteria at times.
• Poor/Not Supporting - Water quality frequently
fails to meet the designated use criteria.
• Poor/Not Attainable - The state has determined
that the designated use criteria cannot be met due
to one of six specific biological, chemical, physical,
or economic/social conditions.
For waterbodies with more than one use, the states,
tribes, and other jurisdictions consolidate use support
information into a summary use support determination of
general water quality conditions. These uses are character-
ized as:
• Good/Fully Supporting All Uses - Water quality
meets designated use criteria for all uses.
• Good/Threatened for One or More Uses -
Water quality meets use criteria now but may
not in the future.
• Impaired for One or More Uses - One or more
designated uses are partially or not supported.
States and Tribes
SURVEYED
of the nation's total river
miles (53% of their perennial
miles) for the 1996 report
States and Tribes SURVEYED
693,905 Miles of Rivers and Streams
for the 1996 Report
-------
Summary of Use Support
in Surveyed Rivers and Streams
if r , H
Good
(Threatened for One
or More Uses)
8%
NOTE Impaired miles are equivalent
to about 100 Mississippi Rivers.
.
Good", cfartiafy ; ;
-------
The Effects of Siltation in Rivers and Streams
Sediment
abrades gills
Sediment suffocates
fish eggs and bottom-
dwelling organisms
Sediment smothers cobbles
where fish lay eggs
Siltation is one of the leading pollution problems in the nation's rivers and streams.
Over the long term, unchecked Siltation can alter habitat with profound effects on
aquatic life. In the short term, silt can kill fish directly, destroy spawning beds, and
increase water turbidity resulting in depressed photosynthetic rates.
Siltation, which clouds the water and has many adverse
impacts on fish and other aquatic organisms, is the most
widespread pollutant impacting surveyed rivers and
streams (Figure 4). Excessive Siltation can also interfere
with drinking water treatment processes and recreational
use of a river (Figure 5).
Agriculture is the most widespread source, on a national
basis, of pollutants impairing surveyed rivers and streams
(Figure 4). Agricultural activities may introduce siltation,
nutrients, pesticides, and organic matter that deplete
oxygen in surface and groundwaters.
States and Tribes
SURVEYED
40%
of their total lake acres
for the 1996 report
States and Tribes SURVEYED
17 Million Acres of the Nation's Lake
Waters Excluding the Great Lakes
for the 1996 Report
Acres
Surveyed
Total Acres:
41,684,902
Municipal sewage treatment plants also continue to
impact many rivers and streams across the country.
Sewage treatment plants are often a source of bacteria,
nutrients, and organic matter that depletes oxygen.
Lakes, Reservoirs, and Ponds
For the 1996 Report, 45 states, tribes, and other jurisdic-
tions surveyed water quality conditions in 40% of the
nation's total 41.7 million acres of lakes, reservoirs, and
ponds (Figure 6).
Overall, 61 % of the surveyed lake acres fully support all
uses set by states and tribes, such as fishing, swimming,
and aquatic life habitat (Figure 7). Water quality is threat-
ened in 10% of these lake acres. Thirty-nine percent of
the surveyed lake acres are impaired for one or more
uses. Some form of pollution or habitat degradation
prevents these lakes from fully supporting healthy aquatic
communities or human activity.
Fish consumption use is the most frequently impaired
individual use in surveyed lakes, reservoirs, and ponds,
followed by aquatic life and swimming uses (Figure 8).
Rsh contamination problems are a growing concern
across the country, especially in lakes. The states and
other jurisdictions reported that 65% of their fish con-
sumption advisories apply to lake waters.
Nutrients and metals are the most widespread pollutants
impacting surveyed lakes, followed by siltation, oxygen-
depleting substances, and noxious aquatic plants (Figure
9). Lakes are especially susceptible to nutrient over-
enrichment and the accumulation of other pollutants
.(such as metals) because they retain their contents for
long periods of time.
NOTE: Impaired acres cover an
area about the size of six Great
Salt Lakes.
-------
ndiyidual Use Support in Lakes, Reservoirs;! and Ponds
jiJtilijO^
riuir-Ji .Bi: 'a iii:.il.i.ii..iii. iiiupiarp-spiip."^^
«£»ia-__~n'» « ! T "" • If I' ii'il'l!" y^rNM':11'"'*!'?! ill! \Stl1 «P *flj.'Sll]|™i!li'!;l*!Fi»!!iPj *
S^SSS ";t '*" •*" " "•" *"''- "• • '»: •">! i • -* ;1 i'^*.1(*teSWW»™iift«!(Bte!«|
S^JPT^'I 13, r{•!":, JV :> i!. :*• CM-1:; :!'"! r !•!» "|; ^tTv'il:W*?*.l|jl!l|^4(^i^RifWf
«=fefc^ ! ' ss •• ';- •'•|!'"11 "ii:''l':*li:l:!':!TS!iii:y!j|:[i!liinSli
SURVEYED Lake Acres: Pollutants and Sources
Total lakes = 41.7 million acres
Total surveyed = 16.8 million
acres
Impaired
(39%)
Good
(61%)
Surveyed 40%
Leading Pollutants/Stressors'
Nutrients
Metals
Siltation
Oxygen-Depleting Substances
Noxious Aquatic Plants
Suspended Solids
Total Toxics
' surveyed %
20
20
10
8
6
5
0 5 10 15 20 25
Percent of Surveyed Lake Acres
i Leading Sources
Agriculture
Unspecified Nonpoint Sources
Atmospheric Deposition
Urban Runoff/Storm Sewers
Municipal Point Sources
Hydromodification
Construction
Land Disposal
,! ' " Surveyed* %'',
19
9
8
8
7
5
4
0 5 10 15 20 25
Percent of Surveyed Lake Acres
MOTE: Percentages do not add up to 100% because more than one pollutant or source
may impair a lake.
Figure 10
Lake Impaired by Excessive Nutrients
Healthy Lake Ecosystem
Algal blooms form mats
on surface. Odor and
taste problems result.
Nutrients cause overgrowth of algae as well as noxious aquatic plants. Noxious aquatic plants clog shorelines and reduce lake access.
Dead algae sink to the bottom where bacteria deplete oxygen as they decompose them. Fish die due to low oxygen concentrations.
-------
Good 3%
Nutrient overenrichment can initiate a chain of impacts
that includes algal blooms, low dissolved oxygen condi-
tions, fish kills, foul odors, and excessive aquatic weed
growth that can interfere with recreational activities
(Figure 10).
Agriculture is the most widespread source of pollutants
impairing surveyed lakes, followed by unspecified non-
point sources, atmospheric deposition, urban runoff and
storm sewers, and municipal sewage treatment plants
(Figure 9). Agricultural fertilizers and manure from animal
operations can be a major source of nutrients.
The source of mercury and other metals in lakes remains
unclear, but some states speculate that air pollution is a
significant source.
The Great Lakes
Despite dramatic declines in the occurrence of algal
blooms, fish kills, and localized "dead" zones depleted of
oxygen, less visible problems continue to degrade the
Great Lakes. Six of the eight Great Lakes states surveyed
SURVEYED Great Lakes Shoreline: Pollutants and Sources
Not Surveyed
Total shoreline = 5,521 miles
Impaired
Surveyed 94%
Total surveyed = 5,186 miles
Priority Toxic Organic
Chemicals
Pesticides
Nonpriority Organic
Chemicals
Nutrients
Metals
Oxygen-Depleting
Substances
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Percent of Surveyed Great Lakes Shoreline
Leading $"oiar<:es-^
Atmospheric Deposition
Discontinued Discharges
from Pipes
Contaminated Sediment
Land Disposal of Wastes
Unspecified NPS
Other Point Sources
Urban Runoff/Storm
Sewers
20
20
15
9
6
6
4
0 5 10 15 20
Percent of Surveyed Great Lakes Shoreline
NOTE: Percentages do not add up to 100% because more than one pollutant or source
may impair a shoreline.
-------
94% of the Great Lakes shoreline miles for 1996. These
slates reported that most of the Great Lakes nearshore
waters are safe for swimming and other recreational
activities and can be used as a source of drinking water
with normal treatment However, about 97% of the
surveyed Great Lakes shoreline is under fish consumption
advisories and shows unfavorable conditions for support-
Ing aquatic life (Figures 11 and 12). Aquatic life impacts
result from persistent toxic pollutant burdens in the food
web, habitat degradation and destruction, and competi-
tion and predation by nonnative species such as the zebra
mussel and the sea lamprey.
The states reported that most of the Great Lakes shoreline
waters are impacted by priority toxic organic chemicals
(primarily PCBs) that appear in fish tissue samples at much
higher concentrations than in water samples (Figure 13).
Only four of the Great Lakes states identified the sources
of pollutants impacting their shoreline waters. These states
attributed some of the water quality problems in the
Great Lakes to air pollution, discontinued discharges from
industrial sites that no longer operate, urban runoff and
storm sewers, contaminated sediments, land disposal of
wastes, and unspecified nonpoint sources.
Estuaries
Rivers meet the oceans in coastal waters called tidal
estuaries. For the 1996 Report^ 23 of the 27 coastal states
and territories surveyed water quality conditions in 72% of
the nation's total 39,839 square miles of estuarine waters
(excluding Alaska) (Figure 14).
Overall, 62% of the surveyed estuarine waters fully
support all uses set by the states and territories, such as
fishing and swimming (Figure 15). Water quality is threat-
ened in 4% of these estuarine waters. About 38% of the
States
SURVEYED
72%
of their total estuarine
waters for the 1996 report
—'•'•' ' '* * " "" ——-^"^^^
States SURVEYED
28,819 Square Miles of Estuarine
Waters for the 1996 Report
Summary of Use Support
in Su/veyed Estuaries "_, ,'
>/ Good - '
(Threatened for One
or More Uses) J
NOTE: Impaired square miles
cover an area three times the
size of Chesapeake Bay.
-------
Figure 17
Bacteria
Urban runoff and storm sewers are
the leading source of impairment
in estuarine waters
Failing septic systems
may release bacteria
Overloaded or improperly functioning
sewage treatment plants may release
waste that contains bacteria
Some bacteria provide evidence that an estuary is contaminated with sewage that may contain pathogenic bacteria and viruses harmful
to people. Often, the pathogenic viruses and bacteria do not adversely impact aquatic life, such as fish and shellfish. However, shellfish
may accumulate bacteria and viruses that cause human disease when ingested. Bacteria also impair swimming uses.
surveyed estuarine square miles are impaired for one or
more uses. Some form of pollution or habitat degradation
prevents these estuaries from fully supporting healthy
aquatic communities or human activities.
Shellfishing use is the most frequently impaired individual
use in surveyed estuaries (Figure 16). Most of the shellfish
harvested in the United States spend at least part of their
lives in estuarine waters. Officials restrict the harvest of
sedentary shellfish (such as oysters and clams) in waters
with high bacteria concentrations because these shellfish
may accumulate bacteria and viruses that cause human
illness when eaten.
Nutrients are the most widespread pollutants impacting
surveyed estuaries, followed by bacteria, toxic organic
chemicals, and oxygen-depleting substances.
Nutrient overenrichment in estuaries causes many of the
same impacts seen in lakes, including algal blooms, low
dissolved oxygen conditions, fish kills, foul odors, and
excessive aquatic weed growth. High bacteria loads
indicate that waters may be unfit for swimming or
harvesting shellfish (Figure 17).
Industrial point sources and urban runoff/storm sewers
are the most widespread sources of pollutants impairing
surveyed estuaries, followed by municipal sewage treat-
ment plants, upstream sources, and agriculture (Figure
18). However, estuaries may be stressed by a wide range
of activities that occur within their watersheds. They
receive pollutants carried by rivers from adjacent cities
and upstream agricultural lands; they often support
SURVEYED Estuaries: Pollutants and Sources
Not Surveyed
28%
> Total estuaries = 39,839 square
miles
Impaired
(28%)
Surveyed 72%
Total surveyed = 28,819 square miles
^
Nutrients
Bacteria
Priority Toxic Organic Chemicals
Oxygen-Depleting Substances
Oil and Crease
Salinity
Habitat Alterations
5 10 15 20
Percent of Surveyed Estuarine
Square Miles
25
Leading Sources^j. '_'• 1 _ "r*i;';??;''^."!"«.'v"5^".I'iS'&^^j^^j.ii'1
Industrial Discharges
Urban Runoff/Storm Sewers
Municipal Point Sources
Upstream Sources
Agriculture
Combined Sewer Overflows
Land Disposal of Wastes
5 10 15 20
Percent of Surveyed Estuarine
Square Miles
25
NOTE: Percentages do not add up to 100% because more than one pollutant or source
may impair an estuary.
-------
Percentage of Wetlands Acreage Lost,
1780s-1980s
Ttoenty-two states have lost at least 50% of their original wetlands.
Seven of these 22 (California, Indiana, Illinois, Iowa, Missouri, Ken-
tucky, and Ohio) have lost more than 80% of their original wetlands.
Source: Dahl,T.E., 1990, Wetlands Losses in the United States 1780's
to 1980's, U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife
Service.
marinas, harbors, and commercial fishing fleets; and their
surrounding lands are highly prized for development
These stresses pose a continuing threat to the survival of
these bountiful waters.
Wetlands
Our nation continues to lose wetlands at a significant rate
(Figure 19), but the net rate of wetlands loss appears to
have slowed from 458,000 acres lost per year during the
mid-1950s through the mid-1970s to between 70,000
acres and 90,000 acres per year between 1982 and 1992
on nonfederal lands (which is about 75% of the land
mass). The net loss reflects the difference between gross
wetlands losses of 1,561,300 acres and gross gains of
768,700 acres between 1982 and 1992.
The states, tribes, and other jurisdictions report that
wetlands losses result from commercial and residential
development, agriculture, road construction, and hydro-
logic modification. Although the loss rate is decreasing,
progress is still needed to achieve a national interim goal
of no net loss of the nation's remaining wetlands and the
long-term goal of increasing the nation's quality and
quantity of wetlands.
The states and other jurisdictions also report that many
activities degrade our remaining wetlands with pollutants,
including sediment, nutrients, and filling and draining.
Information on the extent of that degradation is limited;
wetlands monitoring programs are still in their infancy.
Several states are currently collecting baseline information
on their wetlands to aid in the development of wetlands
indicators and wetlands monitoring programs. This infor-
mation will be useful in defining aquatic life designated
uses and biological criteria and setting restoration goals.
Groundwater
Groundwater—found in natural underground rock forma-
tions called aquifers—is a vital national resource that is
used for myriad purposes. About 51% of the nation's
population relies to some extent on groundwater as a
source of drinking water. Unfortunately, this resource is
vulnerable to contamination, and groundwater contami-
nant problems are being reported throughout the coun-
try. Groundwater contamination can occur as relatively
well-defined plumes emanating from specific sources such
as spills and waste lagoons, or it can occur as a general
deterioration of groundwater quality over a wide area due
to diffuse nonpoint sources such as agricultural fertilizer
and pesticide applications and septic systems.
In their 1996 305(b) reports, 37 states provided EPA with
information related to contaminant sources. Leaking
underground storage tanks (USTs) were cited as the high-
est priority contaminant source of concern, with more
than 300,000 confirmed UST releases as of March 1996.
Landfills and septic systems were identified as the second
and third sources of concern, respectively. Thirty-three
states reported data summarizing groundwater quality.
Nationally, more states reported data for nitrates, metals,
t ^ t
,A Comprehensive; Sfafe Grpijhcji Water, Protection ,
f*qgrap|° (CSGWPP) & cocnposid of six:"strattgfc
'' *' '' '
..
J " * < " " ' '%^>^?-~fs*'4 * / ' ^* /
x • , Establishing priorities, based ojvtfie characterization
^ *'/" L
m^ Deffnirsg jdes//e$ponslBiWes/o resources; #rid *\^
^ 'co^rdiriati'r|gomechani»ns /> - > ° *,
"** '- \ ^y^ \ *• x x « ^ '"':""'" -,,,- "f^
Impfementirig all necessary effqrts to accotnprfsh ";* -
trnpro^ng pu^lfc educatiop and participatttsv /,
" "'" ' ' '
-------
volatile organic compounds (VOCs), and semivolatile
organic compounds (SVOCs) than any other parameter
grouping.
To address groundwater contamination problems, states
are developing Comprehensive State Ground Water
Protection Programs (CSGWPPs) tailored to their goals
and priorities for the protection of groundwater resources.
CSGWPPs emphasize contamination prevention and
attempt to combine the efforts of the numerous laws,
regulations, and programs that play a vital role in
protecting groundwater. Another means of protecting our
nation's groundwater resources is through the implemen-
tation of Wellhead Protection Plans (WHPs). As of
December 31,1996, over 2,600 communities had
become involved in developing local WHPs to manage
their wellhead protection areas to ensure that community
water supplies are protected.
Public Health and Aquatic Ecosystem
Concerns
Based on data provided by the states and other jurisdic-
tions, 2,196 fish consumption advisories were in effect in
47 states, the District of Columbia, and American Samoa
as of September 1996 (Figure 20). These advisories warn
the public to restrict consumption of fish contaminated
with toxic chemicals. States and other jurisdictions are
responsible for sampling fish and issuing fish consumption
advisories where needed.
The number of fish consumption advisories in effect grew
from 1,740 advisories in 1995 to 2,196 advisories in 1996
as the states expanded their sampling programs. Most of
the fish consumption advisories (76%) are due to mercury
contamination. Other frequently cited contaminants
include PCBs, chlordane, dioxins, and DDT or its deriva-
tives, such as DDE and ODD. The majority of the advi-
sories (65%) restrict consumption of fish caught in lakes.
Collectively, 10 of the 27 coastal states and territories
reported shellfish harvesting restrictions in over 4,800
square miles of estuarine waters. Most of the shellfish har-
vesting restrictions result from bacterial contamination.
Advisories were also issued to warn the public about
health risks from water-based recreation. Thirteen states
identified 342 sites where recreation was restricted by
local health departments at least once during 1994-1995.
Many of these sites were closed more than once. The
states identified sewage treatment plant bypasses,
malfunctions, and pipeline breaks as the most common
sources of elevated bacteria concentrations in bathing
areas. Agricultural and urban runoff, failing septic systems,
combined sewer overflows, and a fuel spill also restricted
recreational activities.
Fish Consumption Advisories in the United States
^ American Samoa
a!00 of these advisories were issued by tribal
agencies in Wisconsin.
b13 of these advisories were issued by tribal
agencies in Michigan.
Number of Advisories in Effect
(December 1996)
0
1-10
11-20
21-30
31-50
•• 51-100
•• >100
" Statewide Advisory
NOTE: States that perform routine fish tissue analysis (such as the Great
Lakes states) will detect more cases of fish contamination and
issue more advisories than states with less rigorous fish
sampling programs. In many cases, the states with the most fish
advisories support the best monitoring programs for measuring
toxic contamination in fish, and their water quality is no worse
than the water quality in other states.
Communities also noted violations of national drinking
water safety standards. In 1994, the drinking water
supplied to 19% of the population served by Community
Water Systems (46 million people) violated health-based
standards at least once during the year. Violations
occurred for coliform bacteria, radiological contaminants,
and metals.
Relationship of Index of Watershed
Indicators to the National Water Quality
Inventory
The Index of Watershed Indicators (IWI) is a compilation
of information on the condition of aquatic resources in the
United States. Using data from many sources, IWI maps
15 indicators on a watershed basis. Together these indica-
tors point to whether these watersheds are "healthy" and
whether activities on the surrounding lands are making
these waters more vulnerable to pollution (Figure 21).
While this new assessment tool is broader and more
inclusive than the National Water Quality Inventory, state
-------
305(b) assessment information is the most important data
source in the IWI.
State 305(b) information is included as one of the 15
indicator maps in IWI as: Assessed Rivers Meeting All
Designated Uses Set in State/Tribal Water Quality
Standards. The IWI uses data compiled on a watershed
basis from a number of national assessment programs
from several EPA programs; from U.S. Department of
Agriculture (USDA), National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA), U.S. Geological Survey (USGS),
the Corps of Engineers, and the Nature Conservancy; and
from the states, tribes, and other jurisdictions. Six other
indicator maps show EPA's rating of the condition of
watersheds; eight additional indicator maps show EPA's
rating of the vulnerability of watersheds. Vulnerability
factors include, for example, the rate of population
growth, the potential of various forms of nonpoint source
pollution, and compliance facility permits. Using this
approach, the IWI characterizes nearly three-quarters of
the 2,111 watersheds in the 48 contiguous states.
The IWI was released in October 1997 and is updated
periodically. In October 1997,16% of the watersheds had
good water quality; 36% had moderate water quality
problems; 21 % had more serious water quality problems;
and sufficient data were lacking to fully characterize the
remaining 27%. In addition, one in 14 watersheds in all
areas was vulnerable to further degradation from pollu-
tion, primarily from urban and rural runoff.
The IWI enables managers and community residents to
understand and help protect the watershed where they
live. The information is easily available on the Internet at
http://www.epa.gov/surf/iwi.
Improving Nationwide Monitoring
Much of our water quality data cannot be aggregated or
compared because the various organizations that survey
water quality use different monitoring strategies designed
National Watershed Characterization
V.V.mhcd Ctaaifkation
O V:»Wi;tfQu>Sty-low Vulnerability
E3 e«tK Wiser QuJlty-K9hVulnetabi8l}>
Bi l^Sertou»W«terQuj«
-------
The watershed approach also provides a framework for
integrating traditional water quality management pro-
grams that address point sources or nonpoint sources, the
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)
controls discharges from industrial and municipal waste-
water treatment plants with a permit system. EPA or states
with approved NPDES programs are responsible for issu-
ing permits, conducting compliance inspections, and
enforcing compliance. Currently, 43 states have EPA
approval to administer their NPDES programs.
Section 319 of the Clean Water Act authorizes EPA to issue
annual grants to assist states in implementing their EPA-
approved nonpoint source management programs.
Roughly half of each state's award supports statewide
program activity (such as staffing, public education and
outreach, and technical assistance) and half supports
specific projects to prevent or reduce nonpoint source
pollution at the watershed level.
Discussions between EPA and stakeholders during 1995
and 1996 resulted in a new national 319 program and
grant guidance jointly signed by EPA and the Association
of State and Interstate Water Pollution Control Adminis-
trators on May 16,1996. This guidance reflects a joint
commitment to upgrade state nonpoint source manage-
ment programs to incorporate nine key program elements
designed to achieve and maintain beneficial uses of water.
These elements include a state program with goals, objec-
tives, and strategies to protect surface water and ground-
water; strengthening of partnerships between states and
stakeholders; identification and protection of unimpaired
waters at risk; and periodic review of the state nonpoint
source management program. The guidance also included
a new section on lake protection and restoration activities
that encourages the use of Section 319 funds for eligible
activities that might have been funded in previous years
under Section 314 (the Clean Lakes Program). North
Carolina has completed its nonpoint source management
program and has been nationally recognized by EPA. A
number of other states are nearing completion and will be
seeking EPA approval.
Place-Based Management Programs
EPA manages and/or participates in several programs that
embody a watershed protection approach, including the
Gulf of Mexico Program, the Great Lakes National
Program, the Chesapeake Bay Program, and the National
Estuary Program.
The Gulf of Mexico Program
The Gulf of Mexico Program (GMP) was established in
August 1988 by the five Gulf states (Alabama, Florida,
Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas) and 10 federal agencies
as a partnership to provide a broad geographic focus on
the major environmental issues in the Gulf before they
become irreversible or too costly to correct. Eight issues
were initially identified as Program concerns:
• Degraded coastal habitats such as wetlands
and seagrass beds
• Freshwater inflow changes from reservoir
construction
• Nutrient enrichment
• Toxic substances and pesticides
• Coastal and shoreline erosion
• Public health threats from swimming in and eating
food from contaminated waters
• Trash on beaches
• Sustainability of the Gulfs living aquatic resources.
The GMP's current focus is on nutrient enrichment, shell-
fish restoration, critical habitat, and introduction of exotic
species.
Since its formation, the GMP has been committed to
sponsoring projects that will benefit the environmental
health of the region. These projects, numbering over 200,
vary immensely, from "shovel-in-the-ground" demonstra-
tion projects to scientific research to public education.
The Great Lakes National Program
Rehabilitating the Great Lakes requires cooperation from
numerous organizations because pollutants originate in
both Canada and the U.S., as well as other countries. The
International Joint Commission (IJC) provides an interna-
tional framework for managing the Great Lakes. Within
the United States, the EPA Great Lakes National Program
Office (GLNPO) coordinates activities at all government
levels and works with nongovernmental organizations to
protect and restore the Lakes. The GLNPO also serves as a
liaison to the IJC.
The Great Lakes Water Quality Initiative is a key element of
U.S. environmental protection efforts in the basin. The
Initiative promotes a consistent level of protection from
the effects of toxic pollutants. EPA issued the final guid-
ance for implementing the Initiative in March 1995
following extensive public comment. The final guidance
prioritizes control of long-lasting pollutants that accumu-
late in the food web.
The Chesapeake Bay Program
The Chesapeake Bay Program is a unique regional partner-
ship of federal, state, and local participants that has led
and directed the restoration of Chesapeake Bay since
1983. Program milestones include the 1987 Chesapeake
Bay Agreement to reduce the nutrients nitrogen and
phosphorus entering the bay by 40% by the year 2000,
and the 1992 amendments to the Agreement The
n
-------
amendments reaffirm the nutrient reduction goal, stress
managing the bay as a whole ecosystem, and advocate
broader interstate cooperation and increased local govern-
ment involvement
Overall, the Chesapeake Bay still shows symptoms of stress
from an expanding population and changes in land use
in the surrounding basin. Elevated loads of the nutrients
nitrogen and phosphorus are the most significant wide-
spread threat to the bay. Excess nutrients are a problem
because they nourish algal blooms that cloud the water,
deprive underwater grasses of sunlight, and deplete the
water of oxygen needed by living resources.
During warm months, low dissolved oxygen conditions
persist in large portions of the bay, impairing the survival
and reproduction offish, oysters, clams, and other bot-
tom-dwelling organisms. With increasing fishing pressures
and relatively low harvests in recent years, there is grow-
ing concern for the health of blue crab stocks, the most
important commercial and recreational fishery in the bay.
While scientists agree that neither the crab population nor
the fishery are on the verge of collapse, they concur that
the stock is fully exploited. The 7997 Blue Crab Fisheries
Management Plan contains recommendations to maintain
regulations, limit access to the fishery, prevent exploita-
tion, and improve research and monitoring. It also incor-
porates an enhanced habitat section recommending pro-
tection and restoration of bay grasses and water quality.
Although water quality problems persist, the Chesapeake
is clearly on the upswing. Bay grasses have increased by
60% since 1984, with recent population changes suggest-
ing that many of these populations may rebound if water
quality conditions are improved and maintained. Striped
bass populations have reached historically high levels, and
wild shad are increasing in numbers as hatchery-reared
shad successfully reproduce and their offspring make their
runs back up into tributaries.
In spite of near record high flows in three of the past four
years, most of the bay's major rivers are running cleaner
than they were 10 years ago. Phosphorus concentrations
have shown significant reductions throughout most of the
bay, and nitrogen levels have remained steady in spite of
the high flows and population increases. Chemical releases
in the bay watershed have shown a 55% drop between
1988 and 1994.
The National Estuary Program
The National Estuary Program (NEP) adopts a watershed
approach to managing estuarine water quality. A state
governor nominates an estuary in his or her state for
participation in the NEP. The state must provide evidence
of institutional, financial, and political commitment to
solving estuarine problems.
Once an estuary is selected, the EPA Administrator
convenes a management conference of representatives
from federal, regional, state, and local governments;
affected industries; scientific and academic institutions;
and citizen organizations. The management conference
develops and initiates implementation of a Comprehen-
sive Conservation and Management Plan to restore and
protect the estuary.
The NEP currently supports 28 estuary projects, including
seven new projects approved by the EPA Administrator in
July 1995 (Figure 22).
Figure 22
Locations of National Estuary Program Sites
r'^JB^'fJ'W« iWii'i'iuri.E i (»irij,t's.s ii (i i a IB'i Bf n iiiti ,1 iiB,''>.]
U'Jl?;AVj*';i'!'rri!iO^l|n^ev'!r!!h11y!:!jiiU'!!!l^
12
------- |