SAV Workgroup Meeting

Thursday, April 12, 2007
10:00 am - 3:00 pm
USFWS Chesapeake Bay Field Office
177 Admiral Cochrane Drive
Annapolis, MD 21401

Minutes

Presentations and the SAIC Report can be viewed at:

http://www.chesapeakebav.net/cbpo/calendar/web calendar/calendar.cfm?EventDetails=8407&DefaultVie
w=2&ReauestDate=04/16/2007

~~~ Attendance

Name

Phone/Email Address

Affiliation

Mark Lewandowski

410-260-8634

mlewandowski(S?dnr. state.md.us

MDDNR

Kendra Scheminant

410-694-9401

kscheniinant@bavlandinc.coni

Bay Land

Candy Croswell

410-887-3778

ccriswell@baltimorecountvmd.aov

Baltimore Comity DEPRM

Keith Tate

410-694-9401 ktate@bavlandinc.com

Bay Land

Court Stevenson

410-221 -8442 court@liDl. unices. edu

University of MD

Lee Karrh

410-260-8650 lkarrh@dnr. state.md.us

MDDNR

Evamaria Koch

410-221 -8418 koch@liDl.umces.edu

UMCES-HPL

Bennett Anderson

302-739-9939

bennett.anderson@state.de.us

DE/DNREC

Howard Weinberg

410-267-5735

hweinber(S?chesapeakebav .net

UMCES-CBPO

Becky Golden

410-260-8698
raolden@dnr.state.md.us

MDDNR

Katie Preen

410-260-8654 kpreen(S?dnr.state.md.us

MDDNR

Becky Thur

443-482-2415 (Temporary)
thurb@si.edu

CRC

Keely Clifford

410-269-9853 clifford.keelv@eDa.aov

EPA-CBPO

Mike Fritz

410-267-5721 fritz.mike@eDa.aov

EPA-CBPO

Peter Bergstrom

410-267-5665

Deter. berastrom@noaa. aov

NOAA CBO

Tom Parham

410-260-8633
tDarhamfS?dnr.state.md.us

MDDNR

Bob Ortli

804-684-7392 iiortlifS)vims.edu

VIMS

Mike Naylor

410-260-8652
mnavlorfS)dnr.state.md.us

MDDNR

Debbie Hinkle

410-221-8257 liinklefS)hDl.umces.edu

UMCES-HPL

Genevieve Trafelet

410-267-5718

trafelet.aenevieve(S)eDa.aov

CRC-CBPO

4^

Chesapedke Bay Program

A Wfi.twshvxi tnerabip


-------
~~~ Action Items

•S Peter Bergstrom will use the means and then try it with and without the
exclusion zones.

•S Genevieve Trafelet to post Peter's report on the calendar. Completed

•S Bill Romano Look at trends of water temperature; possible work with
Mike Williams and his data.

•S Bill Romano Plotting salinity in addition to other parameters may show a
pattern.

•S Bob Orth/VIMS to send grass samples to Evamaria Koch to use; send
sediment analysis to Lee Karrh

•S Peter Bergstrom will talk with Deborah and circulate draft proposal for
project.

•S Tom Parham will contact MDE to see about funding sources for
restoration activities.

~~~ Introductions/Announcements

Mike Naylor announced he will be stepping down as chair of the SAV

workgroup.

~~~ Mike Fritz- SAV Aerial Survey RFP

Matt Fleming will decide who the next chair of the SAV workgroup will be. If
you are interested, call Matt Fleming at 410-260-8719. Lee Karrh said he would like to
serve as chair/co-chair.

Jeff Lape is the new chair of the Chesapeake Bay Program. He is currently going
around and meeting with various partners of CBP.

For the FY2008, EPA will be issuing an RFP for SAV aerial surveys. EPA is also
looking for other agencies to cost share for the project. There will be a panel formed to
advise EPA on the selection of the grantee. The award will be made in early 2008 for
the 2008 data collection season. The workgroup supported the continuation and inclusion
of ground-truthing and organization of the data in the RFP. Having species data is
important information to have and the accuracy of the species identification should also
be checked. It was suggeted that the ground-truthing component be split apart and into a
separate RFP because EPA is not getting any additional money in 2008 so there would
be no funding available for additional projects.

The workgroups would like to have an error estimate on the data collection.
Possibly have one group to make maps and a separate group to check their work to get
an estimate of error. This should be done every 5 years or so; not necessary to do every
year.

People were concerned about what will happen to coastal bay SAV surveys. The
possibility of a joint RFP to be made with the National Estuary Program was suggested.
Some members felt that the Bay survey and the Coastal Bay survey should be advertised
separately. People with additional concerns should talk to Mike Fritz, 410-267-5721.


-------
~~~ Peter Bergstrom- Comparing Water Clarity and SAV area, 2001-2005

Peter gave a presentation explaining his analysis of water clarity and SAV area.
The workgroup suggested using data that excludes the exclusion zones. Segments that
are completely exclusion zones will probably never have grasses. It may be important to
include the partials because they also have good water quality.

It was suggested that 3 years of data from various salinity regimes be used in the
analysis. This may help to determine PLW for the shallow water. Some areas will have 6-
7 fixed stations. You can obtain data per bed instead of per segment by overlaying the
areas.

It was suggested to look at water temperature and grass beds in the lower Bay
(especially Tangier Sound). However, current temperature data for Tangier Sound is not
available.

~> Howard Weinberg- How SAV is Used in Determining Water Clarity

Attainment

Howard noted that some outstanding issues have already been addressed.
Any changes to the methodology of how SAV is surveyed will affect whether places will
be in attainment or not for water quality. Continuous sensors will be deployed next year
by VIMS instead of data flow in some places.

~~~ Kendra Scheminant- Magothy River, Mill Creek SAV Trends

Mill Creek was studied in response to the Dec 17, 2005 wastewater main collapse
that pumped sewage into the creek. The species, density and maximum depth of SAV
were recorded from field surveys; the same density scale as VIMS was used. The percent
cover trends were similar to what was occurring in the Bay.

The Magothy River trends were very close for the field surveys and the aerial
surveys. There was a decline in SAV in Magothy River and Mill Creek in 2006. It is
possible that the spill could have magnified the effects in Mill Creek.

A restoration plan is in place and they want to develop a habitat restoration and
enhancement plan. There is maintenance on the channel that needs to be done which
includes the removal of areas of high sedimentation to make the areas accessible to
boaters, stabilization of the banks, making multiple channels into the stream, and SAV
enhancements.

Partnership with Mill Creek Scientific Review Committee will continue. They
will engage agency employees often and early and get input from SAV workgroup
regarding ideas on how to conduct SAV restoration. The citizens will have to pay for the
spur channels ($1,000-3,000 a piece) and the county/state will pay for the main channel.
The new channel will be about 4 feet deep; this may be difficult to achieve with current
regulations and the fact that it has been 2 feet deep for the past 10 years or so.

The SAV workgroup offered some suggestions and comments regarding SAV
restoration. If boater stir up is decreased, then the seed bank may come up in a few years
after the water clarity improves. Within 3 years of the dredging the grasses should come
back. It is important to have citizens focus on shoreline and land BMPs and tell them
their SAV will come back once they implement the BMPs and some time has passed.
Possibly do mixed species plantings to see what works best.

Keith Tate: ktate@bavlandinc.com Kendra Scheminant: kscheminant@bavlandinc.com


-------
~> Bill Romano- Water Quality Trends in Chesapeake Bay 1985-2005

There are links between SAV and water quality but it is difficult to represent
statistically. Labs were changed in May 1998 from Department of Health and Mental
Hygiene to Chesapeake Biological Lab and the TSS concentrations results have shifted
greatly; but there is no difference in the overall trends. This change is possibly due to the
difference of methods for preparing filters for analysis. There seems to be a greater
difference when the TSS is low. The mainstem data has been analyzed at CBL; samples
from the Potomac River may potentially be affected.

Chi a has seen lots of improvements possibly due to the improvements at Blue
Plains. Secchi depth however is decreasing although TSS is increasing. This is of great
concern and can not be explained easily. Data from the upper bay seems to be related to
SAV data. SAV has gotten a lot better in the upper bay but the water quality trends are
stable. This may be a reason why the mid channel data are not good to use. The invasion
of hydrilla may have some relation to this. The comment was made that the invasion of
dark false mussels helped to improve secchi depth.

They tried to correlate SAV improvement with water quality data. Completed
regression analysis from some areas to see if they could be used to predict SAV success;
was not successful as a reliable tool to make predictions. 2005 and 2006 had high
temperatures and high diebacks of SAV. Summer time temperatures seem to be very
important in SAV success. Critical temperature areas (above 30C) are where eelgrass
diebacks occur. The percentage of time above critical temperature also has an impact on
SAV abundance. Critical turbidity is 22%. High temperatures and high turbidity are not a
favorable combination for SAV. Pulses of increased turbidity and decreased temperature
could be due to rain events.

~~~ Bob Murphy- Baywide monitoring and assessment of SAV restoration

projects, 1997-present: A Proposal

Many different agencies and organizations have been involved in SAV restoration
in the Bay. Methodology and origin of plants are different for various restoration efforts.
Different methods can teach different things; adult plant based restoration, seed based
restoration, site selection, site suitability, etc.

There are many military installations along the Bay (about 12) and most of the
military installations are on the western shore of the Bay. There is currently about 10
years of restoration data available from these sites. Funding is restricted to military site
surveys.

Bob Murphy would like feedback from SAV workgroup on the SAV Restoration
Monitoring matrices for:

1.	Methodology Input

The water quality data will be a snapshot for that day. You can draw additional
data from other larger water quality monitoring programs. Sediment assessment is
important to analyze when visiting sites.

Suggestion: Put HOBO temperature instrument at sites with grasses. It would also be
beneficial to get data on waves.

2.	Thresholds for "success" or "failure"


-------
They would like to expand sites to those beyond DoD sites. There is a 10 year
cutoff. They are looking for active restoration programs and seeking funding
opportunities. Deborah Schaeffer, Verna Harrison, Peter Bergstrom have some money
available to do a data analysis project. This may be a more lessons learned report and
include mitigation projects, coastal projects and NOAA/ACOE funded projects. DNR and
VIMS have a similar project and the information will be available/are available online;
this could dove tail with the CRC proposal.

This would be an excellent independent follow-up on projects that have been
completed already. The time of year and frequency of visits are important to make sure
grasses are recorded accurately. Species can vary and grasses are not present all year.

~~~ Tom Parham- Changes in MD DNR's SAV Program

DNR has very small amounts of general funds to use discretionally. The Green
Fund was not passed and that was going to be a source of additional funding for Bay
restoration activities. DNR will now have to look for outside funding sources but will
continue with its current projects.

It was suggested that MDE has Nontidal/Tidal Wetland fee which could be a
potential source of funds for SAV restoration projects. There is also a mitigation fund.

~> Mike Naylor- Chesapeake Bay Program Strategic Implementation Planning

for SAV

Mike gave a quick overview of his presentation given at the Feb. 21-22, 2007 SIP
meeting. The SAV Strategy is very thorough and first came out in 1988. Funding gaps
and water quality are two main obstacles in SAV restoration.

~~~ Closing

It was suggested to change the current SAV workgroup structure to have a co-
chair to teach new chairs and shortening the term to 2-3 years. This would only be
successful if there were enough people willing to serve in the positions.

The process for changing the procedures needs to be determined; does it need to
go through LRSC? Talk to Mike Fritz or Matt Fleming concerning this issue.

Adjourn


-------