Where are we?

Where have we been?

Where do we go from here?

Adaptive Integrated Framework (AIF): a new methodology for managing impacts of multiple

stressors in coastal ecosystems(aka the Saginaw Bay Multiple Stressors Project)

5 year, $3.76 million grantNOAA Center for Sponsored Coastal Ocean Research

NOAA Great Lakes Environmental Research LaboratoryMichigan State University

University of MichiganUniversity of Akron

Limno-Tech, Inc.Western Michigan University

Michigan Department of Natural ResourcesMichigan Department of Environmental Quality

Also featuringWayne State

PurdueCase Western

DukeEastern MI Michigan Department of Natural Resources

and the Environment

And now, a word from your sponsor►Beth Turner – your

friendly neighborhood program manager

►Taking over from Larry Pugh, enjoying a well-earned retirement

►Also managing Ecological Forecasting program in Lake Erie

NOAA

National Ocean Service

National Centers for

Coastal Ocean

Science

Center for Sponsored Coastal Ocean Research

CSCOR Reporting Requirements

►Greater emphasis on reporting both research outputs and management outcomes

►CSCOR compiles annual report that draws on all projects and their outputs and outcomes

►Forms at http://www.cop.noaa.gov/opportunities/grants/reporting_requirements.html

►Explanation at http://www.cop.noaa.gov/opportunities/grants/outcomes.html

Research Outputs Outputs are “typical” results of research

►New fundamental or applied knowledge ►Scientific publications ►Patents ►New methods and technology ►New or advanced tools such as models,

biomarkers, etc. ►Workshops ►Presentations ►Outreach products (e.g. website or newsletter

articles)

Research Outcomes► Outcomes are utilization or adoption of

outputs Management application or adoption of:

►New fundamental or applied knowledge ►New or improved skills ► Information from publications, workshops, seminars,

outreach products ►New or improved methods or technology ►New or advanced tools

Societal condition improved due to management action resulting from output:

► Improved water quality ►Lower frequency of harmful algal blooms ►Reduced hypoxic zone area ► Improved sustainability of fisheries

Help Me Help You(please!)

► Talk to me – I’m very nosy! Upcoming meetings, workshops, presentations Publications (pub numbers?) Interactions with managers or stakeholders

► Visit DC NOAA seminar series

► Elizabeth.turner@noaa.gov► 603-862-4680

THANK YOU!

5 Year ProjectFirst funding ~ July 2007

First PI meeting December 2007Organization, Modeling, Light field year – 2008

First “real” field year – 2009Second field year – 2010

Last funding ~ spring 2011$$$

This is where we are, approximately…

Fishery Notes from First PI Meeting

…we also recognized that while our project involves a number of researchers and spans five years, there is still some limit to aspects which we can explore. Thus, our work will continue to focus on (but not be limited to) the two species constituting the historically most important fisheries in Saginaw Bay, walleye and yellow perch.

…it is not only important for management agencies to establish predictive links between particular actions and fish production. Rather, it is also beneficial for management agencies to be equipped with a qualitative understanding of processes affecting fish productions. As such, we plan to structure our field and modeling efforts to facilitate both prediction and understanding.

Water Quality Notes from First PI MeetingWe want to look at stressors for which we have predictive capabilities and management options, P load is the most obvious stressor to fit this description.

The hypothesis is that total chlorophyll a is the same for Sag Bay, but there has been a shift from pelagic to benthic due to dreissenids (making more P available, diverting it to nearshore).

… we are concerned about HABs both because they produce toxins (human health issue) and are unpalatable to grazers.

… phytoplankton composition is also important because certain phytoplankton groups will be better food for zooplankton and thus have an impact on fish production.

We may be able to predict muck on shoreline well if we have data on light …, temperature …, wind and currents …, and water level

We are still struggling with how to quantify benthic algae as well as muck – no one in our group has done it. Divers, towed benthic camera, a “flying fish” …, flyovers if water clarity is sufficient.

Where Have We Been?

• Dreissenid dominated system• P shunted, routed to benthic algae

– Cladophora? Spirogyra?• Phytoplankton shift to cyanobacteria• Alewife↓ Walleye, Yellow Perch↑, Growth↓• GLWQA P targets met? Relevant?

Data courtesy of Tom Nalepa

Mussels ↓

Saginaw River Annual TP Loads

Partial-pooling across years using a Bayesian hierarchical modelPrepared by Yoonkyung Cha – Duke University

17

P ( annual load > 440 metric tons / yr )

Inner Saginaw Bay Annual TP Budget (tonnes/yr)

pre-control (1968-1978, orange), post- control (1979-1990, blue), post-invasion (1991-2008, green)

Dead Zone?

Saginaw Bay 'dead zone' may explain muck problemsThursday, July 23, 2009, 8:20 AM

Bay City Times

But there's a spot that's just a few feet deeper, which fishermen know well.They call it the Black Hole.

Is it the dead zone, or is the oxygen-deprived water somewhere else, caused by an eddy in the bay's currents?

Mlive.com

Site of interest: Saginaw Bay

• Eutrophic

• Shallow: mean depth 5m

• Horizontally well-mixed by strong winds (Skubinna et al., 1995)

• Vertically Isothermal (Vanderploeg et al., 2008)Outer

Inner

Nathan Hawley 2009

Dis

solv

ed O

xyge

n (m

g/L)

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

29JUL10 09AUG10 21AUG10 01SEP10

Temperature (C

)

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

Temperature

DissolvedOxygen

Saginaw Bay Recon Buoy

Bottom Conditions 11.6 m depth

Goals (where do we go from here?)1) Comprehensive update from project participants2) Data inventory and comprehensive data base3) Priorities for work next year4) Stakeholder workshop5) Engage with managers and develop list of modeling

scenarios that will support management decisions.6) Discuss the AIF that was a goal of this project in

terms of successes, failures, lessons learned7) Communication into the future

AIF – Good Communication

Leftover logisticsDinnerHeidi – visit Other things to cover?