Theron Miller, Division of Water Quality and Heidi Hoven, The ...

Farmington Bay Wetlands:Nutrient Criteria, Biological Studiesand Beneficial UsesGreat Salt Lake Advisory CouncilNovember 20, 2008Theron Miller, Ph.D.Utah Division of Water QualityHeidi Hoven, Ph.DInstitute for Watershed SciencesDr. John Cavitt, WSU; Dr. Sharook Madon, CH2MHill

ImpetusIn the Review of Utah’s 2002 303(d) List:• Environmental groups, academics and EPA challenged thatwe (Utah DEQ) do not assess beneficial uses of Great SaltLake or its associated wetlands• Raised concerns about nutrient impacts to FarmingtonBay and its wetlands

Where did We Start?• Needed a Source of Funding• Needed Technical Assistance• Needed Stakeholder “Buy­in”

OBJECTIVESDEVELOP APPROPRIATE METHODOLOGY FORSITE­SPECIFIC NUTRIENT CRITERIA AND ASSOCIATEDMETHODOLOGY FOR BENEFICIAL USE ASSESSMENTAPPROACH• UNDERSTAND “HOW THE ECOSYSTEM WORKS”• IDENTIFY SENSITIVE HABITAT, SEASON AND FOODCHAIN LINKS• IDENTIFY (TOLERANCE) THRESHOLDS AMONG IMPORTANTECOSYSTEM COMPONENTS

FARMINGTON BAY TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE•Theron Miller, Chair, Limnologist, UDEQ•Ann Neville, Wetland Scientist, Manager, ISSR, Kennecott•Nancy Keate, Wetland Scientist, UDWR•Dennis Wenger, Wetlands Scientist, Frontier Corporation•Heidi Hoven, Wetlands Scientist, Institute for Watershed Sciences•Wayne Wurtsbaugh, Limnologist, USU•Amy Defreeze, Wetlands Scientist, Utah Rivers Council•John Cavitt, Ornithologist, Weber State U•Don Paul, Ornithologist•Sam Rushforth, Phycologist, UVSU•Larry Gray, Entomologist, UVSC•Sharook Madon, Wetlands Scientist, CH2MHill•Leland Myers, P.E., Manager, CDSD•Florence Reynolds, SLC Public Utility•Ella Sorensen, ornithologist, National Audubon

WaterfowlandshorebirdsAquatic lifein theirfood chainBeneficial Uses of GSLImportant feeding andnesting habitat formigratory birdsCorixidaeChironomidaeVariety of recreationalactivities

Farmington Bay Wetlands Study2004­2006• Environmental Variables– Water Quality: (Nutrients, pH, TDS, D.O., TSS,temperature).– Soils: (pH, conductivity, nutrients, organicmatter).• Biotic Variables– Plants: (percent cover, height, speciescomposition, diversity, functional groups).– Macroinvertebrates: (species composition,relative abundance, diversity, functionalgroups).– Shorebirds: (nesting success, egg hatchability,foraging habitats)

Wetland Sampling SitesReference Sheetflow andImpounded Wetland SitesTest Sites

Shorebird Study Objectives­Nesting habitat­Nesting Success­Hatching success­Aquatic life in their food chain

Bear River Bird RefugeStomach contents by volumeAmerican avocetblack neck stilt

Nesting and Hatching Success

Impounded Wetlandsa) Upper PondP ercen t C o ver100.080.060.040.020.0AmbassadorFB WMANewstateISSRPSG0.0July Aug NovMonth

Conclusions Thus Far• Current sheetflow (sloped) vegetationindicators are not very sensitive to nutrientgradients– However, nesting/fledging habitat iscomprised of highly specific plantcharacteristics; and– Plant succession may be related to nutrientgradient.• Sheetflow and impounded wetlandmacroinvertebrates are sensitive to nutrientgradients• However, waterfowl and shorebirds readilyforage on tolerant species and successfullynest in FB wetlands• Early Senescence of SAV may constituteimpairment of beneficial use (waterfowl)

QUESTIONS?