The Green Bay Saga: Research for Management of a Freshwater Estuary

The Green Bay Saga

Research for Management of a Freshwater Estuary

Emeritus Professor H.J. “Bud” Harris

University of Wisconsin-Green Bay

& Paul A. Wozniak-river historian

GREEN BAY

MADISON Where in the world is Green Bay, Wisconsin?

Green Bay drainage basin

Inputs 25% of Lake Michigan’s water

40,500 sq kmLand uses:

Forest & agriculture

Six major rivers

Green Bay waters of Lake Michigan

• Length:190 km• Width: 37 km• Area: 4,250 sq km• Depth: 20 meters

– Deepest = 53 meters

• Chemistry: steep N-S trophic gradient

• Biology: High primary and secondary production – 60% of Lake Michigan’s commercial catch

Runoff varies with land use

Sub-basin of Lower Fox River

• 52% Ag/Rural• 29% Urban/Dev.• 10% Forest• 4% Wetland

Timeline of Environmental Decline and Recovery for the Fox River/Green Bay

Fur EraFish Era

Lumber Era

Industrial and Agricultural

Era

Chemical Era

Mgt of NonPoint Source

Pollution

PCB Remediation

and Point Source Control

1700’s to

1800’s1800’s

to 1900’s Max Cut

1870

Peak #paper mills

1870

Chemical Era

post 1945

1970’s

1970s to Present

Present

En

viro

nm

en

tal D

ec

line

En

viro

nm

en

tal R

ec

ove

ry

?

BOD Waste Load

Allocation

1980s to Present

1920’s• Citizen groups organize for

changes after massive fish kills and river stink increases

• 1st statewide water pollution survey of major rivers in1925– 1927 report published

• River ice harvest ends due to gross filth

• But whose pollution is to blame? Canneries, creameries, foundries?

1927:What was the cause of the fish kills? Low dissolved oxygen

1930s• 1938 water quality

study of Green Bay reported 90% of BOD loading from pulp-paper mills

• Blue-green algae linked to organic and nutrient discharge of Fox River

• But which nutrients?

Blue-green algae

Aphanizomenon (# per L @ 6ft)Green Bay

1938-39

1940’s/1950’s• Freshwater “dead zone”

persists • Commercial fisheries

decline – Green Bay (lake herring)

– Lake Michigan (lake trout)

• Poor water quality closes city swimming beach in Green Bay permanently

• Little statutory authority to respond to deteriorating conditions!!!

Benthic surveys: Hexagenia

• 1938 : 16 of 51 stations

• 1952 : 1 of 27 stations (Surber & Cooley)

• 1956 : 1 of 99 stations (Balch, industry-state survey)

• 1967 : 0 of 73 stations (Howmiller & Beaton)

% occurrence

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

1938195219561967

Policymaking and enforcement

1972 – US Clean Water Act Amendments1972 –Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement between US-Canada1974 – International Joint Commission names Green Bay a problem spot on Great Lakes

Senator Muskie 1972

Major questions of 1970-7314 Sea Grant projects on Bay, most ‘observational’

• “Is the patient already dead?”• What are the nutrient inputs to Bay?• What are the levels of Nitrogen-fixation in

Bay and are they related to algal blooms?• Are there organic chemicals with unknown

but potentially dangerous impacts?• Do people who use the bay know about the

pollution? Do swimmer decisions on where to swim correlate with health risk data?

• Does the local economy really need a port for large ships (with associated dredging)?

Chemical correlates of water mass movement

• Modlin & Beaton, 1970• Arnsbach & Ragotzkie, 1970

Conductivity distribution

1970’s: Early modeling in anticipation of new rules

• Late 60s: WI begins modeling effort

– BOD absorption Fox River only

• First EPA model tried but found inappropriate for Fox River

• 1973-74: Data collection to calibrate QUAL models of (O’Connor, Manhattan College, NYC)

• Fox River BOD wasteload allocation for permits

1970s: Paper industry & wastewater treatment plants install equipment

Average Total Discharge of BOD Material to the Lower Fox River and Summer DO Averaged from

8 Sites Across the Lower Bay

From State of the Bay Report, 1990

1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 19930

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Number of Fish Species Caught Annually in the Lamprey Trap at the De Pere Dam

Year

Nu

mb

er o

f S

pec

ies

Year Species First Caught in Lamprey Trap at the De Pere Dam

Parallel efforts 1978-86: research & planning for implementation

ecosystem researchUnderstanding structure &

function of “ecosystems green”

ecosystem rehabilitationHolistic approach

• Identify critical stressors• Biophysical dimensions• Socioeconomic context

GLERR : Great Lakes Ecosystem Rehabilitation & Restoration

1978 GB Research Workshop”blueprint” to guide research agenda for 80s

• Trophic interactions: Paul Sager

• Environmental Contaminants & Human Health: Anders Andren

• Water Movement & Mass Transport: Clifford Mortimer

• Influences of Land Use: Daniel Bromly

• Water Use Implications: Jack Day

“Green Bay Research Workshop Proceedings” WIS-SG-78-234

Blueprint-recommended research priorities* led to 25 studies over 8 yrs, $2.1 million

• Fisheries (stock assessment) 31%• Physics/Chemistry (water mass

movement, transport) 30%• Trophic (interactions, dynamics) 18%• Watersheds (runoff, land use-remote

sensing) 7%• Outreach 10%• Socioeconomics (people issues) 4%

Designing a plan for rehabilitation of Green Bay-Great Lakes Ecosystem Restoration & Rehabilitation

• Green Bay I - 1979• Green Bay II - 1980• Green Bay III - 1981

Designing a plan for rehabilitation• Green Bay I – 1979

– Ranking critical stressors

• Green Bay II – 1980– Defining elements of

rehabilitation• Technical• Socioeconomic• institutional

• Green Bay III – 1981– Structuring the plan

Digraph of Green Bay stressors

Apply 8 yrs of research and GLERR experience

• 1984: Wisconsin ordered by EPA to act on AOC’s via Remedial Action Plan (RAP)– GB is 1 of 42 RAPs in Great Lakes– WDNR asks UW-Sea Grant for help on RAP

• 1986: Workshop integrates Sea Grant research and GLERR management experience for RAP– Organized by WDNR’s Llewellyn & Harris– Coupling Ecosystem Science with Management: A Great

Lakes Perspective from Lake Michigan, USA. Environmental Management 11(5): 619-625

1986: GBMSD starts monitoring Bay

16 sites, 9 parameters

“Take action” = RAP

• Remedial Action Plan (RAP)– Based on prior work for GLFC and GLERR– 1987 Key Actions identified by Technical

Advisory Committees• LIST OF 100+ POSSIBLE ACTIONS• REDUCED TO 11 KEY ACTIONS

• “RAP Update”1993

RAP High Priority Key Actions, 1987

• Eliminate Toxicity of Industrial and Municipal Point Source Discharges

• Reduce Availability of Toxic Chemicals from Contaminated Sediments

• Reduce Phosphorus Inputs to the River and Bay from Point and Nonpoint Sources

• Reduce Input of Sediment and Suspended Solids

• Create an Institutional Structure for Plan Implementation

• Increase Public Awareness of, Participation In and Support for River and Bay Clean Up

1988: Rising concern about PCBs and other toxics

• PCB impact on birds supported by evidence

• Green Bay RAP first to be approved by IJC

• GB Mass Balance Study creates model with potential application to Great Lakes management

Green Bay Mass Balance Study1989-90: USEPA & WDNR-sponsored

• Coupling river-to-bay transport models– Planning 1988, data collection starts 1989– Multi-agency, $13 million

• Assess feasibility of mass balance

• Calibrate model for Green Bay• List PCB sources, rank priorities• Improve methodology for mass

balance studies

• Victor Bierman, Univ of Notre Dame• Joseph DePinto, Univ of Buffalo• Thomas Young, Clarkson University• Paul Rogers, Limno-Tech, Inc.

Sources and Fate of Toxic Substances Start with inventory, leads to Green Bay Mass Balance Study

Role of Mass Balance Modeling in Research and Management of Toxic Chemicals in the Great Lakes: The Green Bay Mass Balance Study, Great Lakes Research Review, July 1994

Ecological Risk Assessment 1991 – Ranking Stressors on GB Ecosystem Values and Services

Ecosystem Values and Services

Human Health

Aesthetics, Cultural, and Recreation

Biota (Populations and Health)

Natural System

Function

Ecosystem Impacts

Habitat

Stressors            

Nutrient Loading 1 3 3 3 3 3

Heavy Metals 1 1 1 0 1 0

Wetland and Shoreline Filling

0 3 3 3 2 3

Solids Loading 0 3 3 3 3 3

Persistent Organics 2 2 2 1 3 0

BOD 0 1 2 2 1 2

Aquatic Exotics 0 3 3 3 3 3

Non-persistent Toxics (NH3, microcystins) 1 1 1 1 1 0

Biota Harvest 0 2 2 2 3 0

Hydrologic Modifications

0 1 2 3 2 2

Pathogens (VHS, Botulism, E.Coli)

2 2 2 2 2 0

Impact Scale  

0-No Apparent Impact 1-Minor Impact 2-Moderate Impact 3-Major Impact

1999: Four action priorities pre-climate change

• Remediate contaminated sediments• Reduce nutrients and solids loading• Protect wetlands & ecological services• Prevent further exotic species introduction

2003: Lower Fox River Watershed Monitoring Program

• Multi-year water monitoring & assessment program

• Established in 2003• Connects university

and agency scientists with teachers and their students

Loads are seasonal and event driven.

Monthly Flow, TSS & Phosphorus Loads at Ashwaubenon: WY 2004-06

0

20

40

60

80

100

10/0

3

11/0

3

12/0

3

1/04

2/04

3/04

4/04

5/04

6/04

7/04

8/04

9/04

10/0

4

11/0

4

12/0

4

1/05

2/05

3/05

4/05

5/05

6/05

7/05

8/05

9/05

10/0

5

11/0

5

12/0

5

1/06

2/06

3/06

4/06

5/06

6/06

7/06

8/06

9/06

Mo

nth

ly F

low

(m

m)

& P

rec

ip. (

mm

/2)

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

Mo

nth

ly L

oa

d

Flow (mm)

Precipitation (mm/2)

TSS (tons)

Phosphorus (kg)

2004: Loads are seasonal and event driven

March Snowmelt

During dry years, 45-65% of annual load occurred in March.

2007: Future basin-wide load reduction scenarios built on SWAT model supported by robust monitoring.

Laura Blake and Sandra Brown, The Cadmus Group, Inc., and others, 2007.

How has research informed management?

!BOD point

source reduction

Targeted research & monitoring

Knowledge Modeling Scenarios ?P&TSS non-point source

reduction

!?Contaminated

sediment remediation