DOCSLIB.ORG

Nutrients in Estuaries

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Nutrients in Estuaries November 2010 Nutrients in Estuaries A Summary Report of the National Estuarine Experts Workgroup 2005–2007 Cover photos. top: Chesapeake Bay (www.thinkstockphotos.com); bottom: Coastal Bays (photo by J. Thomas, www.ian.umces.edu) Nutrients in Estuaries A Summary Report of the National Estuarine Experts Workgroup 2005–2007 Acknowledgements The members of the National Estuarine Experts Workgroup and, specifically, the editors wish to thank Ifeyinwa Davis, Amy Parker, Jacques Oliver and Jim Latimer, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for their vision and guidance during this process; Peter deFur for guiding the workgroup during all its meetings; Indus Corporation for helping to establish the nutrient database; and especially Nica Mostaghim, Ron Lee and Karie Riley of Versar, Inc., for overseeing all meetings logistics and docu- ment-preparation logistics as this effort came to fruition. Roscoe Tarnove of HCD International assist- ed with final document production. This report was produced under EPA contract numbers 68-C-02- 091 and EP-C-07-025. Contributors Principal Editors Patricia M. Glibert, Christopher J. Madden, Walter Boynton, David Flemer, Cynthia Heil and Jonathan Sharp Members of the National Estuarine Expert Workgroup§ Michael Bira (U.S. EPA Region 6) Walter Boynton (University of Maryland Center for Environmental Science)1 Suzanne Bricker (NOAA)1 Cheryl Brown (U.S. EPA Office of Research & Development)1 James Cloern (U.S. Geological Survey)1 Greg Colianni (U.S. EPA Office of Wetlands, Oceans & Watersheds)1 Tiffany Crawford (U.S. EPA Region 3)§ Ifeyinwa Davis (U.S. EPA Office of Science & Technology)2 Edward Decker (U.S. EPA Region 4) Naomi Detenbeck (U.S. EPA Office of Research & Development)1 Edward Dettmann (U.S. EPA Office of Research & Development)1 Richard Dugdale (San Francisco State University)1 Diana Eignor (U.S. EPA Office of Science & Technology) David Flemer (U.S. EPA retired, Emeritus)1 Patricia Glibert (University of Maryland Center for Environmental Science)1 Richard Greene (U.S. EPA Office of Research & Development) James Hagy (U.S. EPA Office of Research & Development)1 Jawed Hameedi (NOAA) Cynthia Heil (Florida Fish & Wildlife Conservation Commission)1 Amie Howell (U.S. EPA Region 3) Michael Kennish (Rutgers University)1 Jan Kurtz (U.S. EPA Office of Research & Development)1 James Latimer (U.S. EPA Office of Research & Development)1 Martin Lebo (University of North Carolina/Weyerhaeuser)1 Matthew Liebman (U.S. EPA Region 1) Christopher Madden (South Florida Water Management District)1 Walter Nelson (U.S. EPA Office of Research & Development)1 Jacques Oliver (U.S. EPA Office of Science & Technology)2 Hans Paerl (University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill)1 Amy Parker (U.S. EPA Office of Science & Technology)2,§ Susan Saucerman (U.S. EPA Region 9) Steve Settle (U.S. EPA Office of Science & Technology)§ Jonathan Sharp (University of Delaware)1 Theodore Smayda (University of Rhode Island)1 Richard Smith (U.S. Geological Survey)1 Marilyn Tenbrink (U.S. EPA Office of Research & Development) Danielle Tillman (U.S. EPA Office of Research & Development) Carmelo Tomas (University of North Carolina-Wilmington) Ralph Vaga (U.S. EPA Region 10)§ Izabela Wojtenko (U.S. EPA Region 2) 1 Contributing author 2 Technical editing and workgroup coordination § Affiliations at the time of workgroup sessions State Participants Joseph Beaman (Maryland)§ Kimberly Cornelison (Louisiana) Christopher Deacutis (Rhode Island) Lee Doggett (Maine) George Guillen (University of Houston Clear Lake) Steven Halterman (Massachusetts) Paul Stacey (Connecticut) Martha Sutula (Southern California Coastal Water Research Project) Robert Waters (Suffolk County Department of Health Services) Peer Reviewers Thomas Bianchi (Texas A&M University) Robert J. Diaz (College of William and Mary) Peter A. Raymond (Yale University) Donald Scavia (University of Michigan) Erik M. Smith (University of South Carolina) Nutrients in Estuaries A Summary Report of the National Estuarine Experts Workgroup 2005–2007 ________________________________________________________ Contents Preface .......................................................................................................................................... vii Executive Summary ........................................................................................................................ ix Chapter 1: Introduction by David Flemer and Patricia M. Glibert .......................................................... 1 Chapter 2: Impacts of Nutrients in Estuaries by Patricia M. Glibert, David Flemer and Hans Paerl ...................................... 11 Chapter 3: Estuarine Typology Development and Application by Christopher J. Madden, Richard Smith, Edward Dettmann, Jan Kurtz, Walt Nelson, Naomi Detenback, James Latimer and Suzanne Bricker ........................................................................................ 27 Chapter 4: A Framework for Developing Nutrient Criteria by Patricia M. Glibert, Christopher J. Madden, Edward Dettman, Walter Boynton, Cynthia Heil, Walt Nelson, John Lehter, James Latimer, David Flemer, Michael Kennish, Cheryl Brown and Suzanne Bricker ......................................................................................... 43 Chapter 5: Case Studies 1. Overview of the Case Studies by Patricia M. Glibert, Jonathan Sharp, Christopher J. Madden, Walter Boynton and Cynthia Heil .................................................................. 73 2. Narragansett Bay by Theodore J. Smayda and David Borkman ................................................ 77 3. Delaware Estuary by Jonathan Sharp ..................................................................................... 91 4. Chesapeake Bay by Walter Boynton .................................................................................... 99 5. Neuse River Estuary by Martin E. Lebo, Hans W. Paerl and Benjamin Peierls ............................... 107 Contents v Contents (continued) Chapter 5: Case Studies (continued ) 6. San Francisco Bay by James E. Cloern and Richard Dugdale ....................................................... 117 7. Yaquina Estuary by Cheryl A. Brown and Walter G. Nelson ....................................................... 127 8. Barnegat Bay–Little Egg Harbor by Michael J. Kennish ........................................................................ 137 9. Coastal Bays by Patricia M. Glibert and Catherine E. Wazniak ......................................... 145 10. Florida Bay by Christopher J. Madden ................................................................................ 155 11. Pensacola Bay by James Hagy ................................................................................................ 167 Appendix I: An Estuarine Nutrient Database by Cynthia Heil and Greg Colianni.............................................................. 173 Appendix II: Abbreviations and Glossary ..................................................................................... 177 Figure Permissions ....................................................................................................................... 183 Residential development, Maryland Coastal Bays. Photo by J. Thomas (www.ian.umces.edu). vi Nutrients in Estuaries Nutrients in Estuaries Preface The Maryland portion of the Coastal Bays. Photo by J. Thomas This document is a scientific synthesis of the (www.ian.umces.edu). understanding of the effects of nitrogen and phosphorus pollution on estuaries, the underlying causes The synthesis, writing and review of the results of the and co-factors, ecological consequences and scientific first phase proved to be a long process. The members of pathways to help scientists develop numeric nutrient the workgroup recognize that considerable recent efforts criteria. It characterizes the biogeochemical complexities have been made in nutrient criteria development, which inherent in estuaries and, in turn, the complexities asso- are not recognized in this document. However, despite ciated with developing numeric nutrient criteria protective some development in the scientific body of knowledge of designated uses. The document emphasizes meth- since the deliberation phase, the basic foundational syn- ods, models and data that facilitate in either characteriz- thesis is still applicable and relevant today, and this doc- ing or constraining complexity, and it identifies character- ument provides scientifically defensible material founda- istics of data useful for criteria development. The docu- tional to the understanding of the ecological response of ment also includes case-studies of estuaries across the estuaries to nutrient inputs. United States that illustrate the main principles identified. This document complements and does not supersede This synthesis is the product of the National Estuarine previously published EPA guidance such as the Nutrient Experts Workgroup. The workgroup effort had two phas- Criteria Technical Guidance Manual: Estuarine and es: deliberation and compilation. The first phase, from Coastal Marine Waters (EPA-822-B-01-003). The practi- 2005 through 2007, involved multiple modes of commu- tioner interested in developing numeric nutrient criteria nication of the entire workgroup, or subgroups within it. for an estuary or class of estuaries should consult these The second phase involved synthesis, writing and ad- and other documents. ministrative and peer review of the results of the deliber- ation phase. Preface vii
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Ovarian Development of the Mud Crab Scylla Paramamosain in a Tropical Mangrove Swamps, Thailand
    Available Online JOURNAL OF SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH Publications J. Sci. Res. 2 (2), 380-389 (2010) www.banglajol.info/index.php/JSR Ovarian Development of the Mud Crab Scylla paramamosain in a Tropical Mangrove Swamps, Thailand M. S. Islam1, K. Kodama2, and H. Kurokura3 1Department of Aquaculture and Fisheries, Jessore Science and Technology University, Jessore- 7407, Bangladesh 2Marine Science Institute, The University of Texas at Austin, Channel View Drive, Port Aransas, Texas 78373, USA 3Laboratory of Global Fisheries Science, Department of Global Agricultural Sciences, The University of Tokyo, Bunkyo, Tokyo 113-8657, Japan Received 15 October 2009, accepted in revised form 21 March 2010 Abstract The present study describes the ovarian development stages of the mud crab, Scylla paramamosain from Pak Phanang mangrove swamps, Thailand. Samples were taken from local fishermen between June 2006 and December 2007. Ovarian development was determined based on both morphological appearance and histological observation. Ovarian development was classified into five stages: proliferation (stage I), previtellogenesis (II), primary vitellogenesis (III), secondary vitellogenesis (IV) and tertiary vitellogenesis (V). The formation of vacuolated globules is the initiation of primary vitellogenesis and primary growth. The follicle cells were found around the periphery of the lobes, among the groups of oogonia and oocytes. The follicle cells were hardly visible at the secondary and tertiary vitellogenesis stages. Yolk granules occurred in the primary vitellogenesis stage and are first initiated in the inner part of the oocytes, then gradually concentrated to the periphery of the cytoplasm. The study revealed that the initiation of vitellogenesis could be identified by external observation of the ovary but could not indicate precisely.
    [Show full text]
  • Pulse-To-Pulse Coherent Doppler Measurements of Waves and Turbulence
    1580 JOURNAL OF ATMOSPHERIC AND OCEANIC TECHNOLOGY VOLUME 16 Pulse-to-Pulse Coherent Doppler Measurements of Waves and Turbulence FABRICE VERON AND W. K ENDALL MELVILLE Scripps Institution of Oceanography, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, California (Manuscript received 7 August 1997, in ®nal form 12 September 1998) ABSTRACT This paper presents laboratory and ®eld testing of a pulse-to-pulse coherent acoustic Doppler pro®ler for the measurement of turbulence in the ocean. In the laboratory, velocities and wavenumber spectra collected from Doppler and digital particle image velocimeter measurements compare very well. Turbulent velocities are obtained by identifying and ®ltering out deep water gravity waves in Fourier space and inverting the result. Spectra of the velocity pro®les then reveal the presence of an inertial subrange in the turbulence generated by unsteady breaking waves. In the ®eld, comparison of the pro®ler velocity records with a single-point current measurement is satisfactory. Again wavenumber spectra are directly measured and exhibit an approximate 25/3 slope. It is concluded that the instrument is capable of directly resolving the wavenumber spectral levels in the inertial subrange under breaking waves, and therefore is capable of measuring dissipation and other turbulence parameters in the upper mixed layer or surface-wave zone. 1. Introduction ence on the measurement technique. For example, pro- ®ling instruments have been very successful in mea- The surface-wave zone or upper surface mixed layer suring microstructure at greater depth (Oakey and Elliot of the ocean has received considerable attention in re- 1982; Gregg et al. 1993), but unless the turnaround time cent years.
    [Show full text]
  • Effects of Eutrophication on Stream Ecosystems
    EFFECTS OF EUTROPHICATION ON STREAM ECOSYSTEMS Lei Zheng, PhD and Michael J. Paul, PhD Tetra Tech, Inc. Abstract This paper describes the effects of nutrient enrichment on the structure and function of stream ecosystems. It starts with the currently well documented direct effects of nutrient enrichment on algal biomass and the resulting impacts on stream chemistry. The paper continues with an explanation of the less well documented indirect ecological effects of nutrient enrichment on stream structure and function, including effects of excess growth on physical habitat, and alterations to aquatic life community structure from the microbial assemblage to fish and mammals. The paper also dicusses effects on the ecosystem level including changes to productivity, respiration, decomposition, carbon and other geochemical cycles. The paper ends by discussing the significance of these direct and indirect effects of nutrient enrichment on designated uses - especially recreational, aquatic life, and drinking water. 2 1. Introduction 1.1 Stream processes Streams are all flowing natural waters, regardless of size. To understand the processes that influence the pattern and character of streams and reduce natural variation of different streams, several stream classification systems (including ecoregional, fluvial geomorphological, and stream order classification) have been adopted by state and national programs. Ecoregional classification is based on geology, soils, geomorphology, dominant land uses, and natural vegetation (Omernik 1987). Fluvial geomorphological classification explains stream and slope processes through the application of physical principles. Rosgen (1994) classified stream channels in the United States into seven major stream types based on morphological characteristics, including entrenchment, gradient, width/depth ratio, and sinuosity in various land forms.
    [Show full text]
  • Sediment Transport in the San Francisco Bay Coastal System: an Overview
    Marine Geology 345 (2013) 3–17 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Marine Geology journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/margeo Sediment transport in the San Francisco Bay Coastal System: An overview Patrick L. Barnard a,⁎, David H. Schoellhamer b,c, Bruce E. Jaffe a, Lester J. McKee d a U.S. Geological Survey, Pacific Coastal and Marine Science Center, Santa Cruz, CA, USA b U.S. Geological Survey, California Water Science Center, Sacramento, CA, USA c University of California, Davis, USA d San Francisco Estuary Institute, Richmond, CA, USA article info abstract Article history: The papers in this special issue feature state-of-the-art approaches to understanding the physical processes Received 29 March 2012 related to sediment transport and geomorphology of complex coastal–estuarine systems. Here we focus on Received in revised form 9 April 2013 the San Francisco Bay Coastal System, extending from the lower San Joaquin–Sacramento Delta, through the Accepted 13 April 2013 Bay, and along the adjacent outer Pacific Coast. San Francisco Bay is an urbanized estuary that is impacted by Available online 20 April 2013 numerous anthropogenic activities common to many large estuaries, including a mining legacy, channel dredging, aggregate mining, reservoirs, freshwater diversion, watershed modifications, urban run-off, ship traffic, exotic Keywords: sediment transport species introductions, land reclamation, and wetland restoration. The Golden Gate strait is the sole inlet 9 3 estuaries connecting the Bay to the Pacific Ocean, and serves as the conduit for a tidal flow of ~8 × 10 m /day, in addition circulation to the transport of mud, sand, biogenic material, nutrients, and pollutants.
    [Show full text]
  • U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's National Estuary Program
    U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s National Estuary Program Story Map Text-only File 1) Introduction Welcome to the National Estuary Program story map. Since 1987, the EPA National Estuary Program (NEP) has made a unique and lasting contribution to protecting and restoring our nation's estuaries, delivering environmental and public health benefits to the American people. This story map describes the 28 National Estuary Programs, the issues they face, and how place-based partnerships coordinate local actions. To use this tool, click through the four tabs at the top and scroll around to learn about our National Estuary Programs. Want to learn more about a specific NEP? 1. Click on the "Get to Know the NEPs" tab. 2. Click on the map or scroll through the list to find the NEP you are interested in. 3. Click the link in the NEP description to explore a story map created just for that NEP. Program Overview Our 28 NEPs are located along the Atlantic, Gulf, and Pacific coasts and in Puerto Rico. The NEPs employ a watershed approach, extensive public participation, and collaborative science-based problem- solving to address watershed challenges. To address these challenges, the NEPs develop and implement long-term plans (called Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plans (link opens in new tab)) to coordinate local actions. The NEPs and their partners have protected and restored approximately 2 million acres of habitat. On average, NEPs leverage $19 for every $1 provided by the EPA, demonstrating the value of federal government support for locally-driven efforts. View the NEPmap. What is an estuary? An estuary is a partially-enclosed, coastal water body where freshwater from rivers and streams mixes with salt water from the ocean.
    [Show full text]
  • Fire Island—Historical Background
    Chapter 1 Fire Island—Historical Background Brief Overview of Fire Island History Fire Island has been the location for a wide variety of historical events integral to the development of the Long Island region and the nation. Much of Fire Island’s history remains shrouded in mystery and fable, including the precise date at which the barrier beach island was formed and the origin of the name “Fire Island.” What documentation does exist, however, tells an interesting tale of Fire Island’s progression from “Shells to Hotels,” a phrase coined by one author to describe the island’s evo- lution from an Indian hotbed of wampum production to a major summer resort in the twentieth century.1 Throughout its history Fire Island has contributed to some of the nation’s most important historical episodes, including the development of the whaling industry, piracy, the slave trade, and rumrunning. More recently Fire Island, home to the Fire Island National Seashore, exemplifies the late twentieth-century’s interest in preserving natural resources and making them available for public use. The Name. It is generally believed that Fire Island received its name from the inlet that cuts through the barrier and connects the Great South Bay to the ocean. The name Fire Island Inlet is seen on maps dating from the nineteenth century before it was attributed to the barrier island. On September 15, 1789, Henry Smith of Boston sold a piece of property to several Brookhaven residents through a deed that stated the property ran from “the Head of Long Cove to Huntting
    [Show full text]
  • Bothin Marsh 46
    EMERGENT ECOLOGIES OF THE BAY EDGE ADAPTATION TO CLIMATE CHANGE AND SEA LEVEL RISE CMG Summer Internship 2019 TABLE OF CONTENTS Preface Research Introduction 2 Approach 2 What’s Out There Regional Map 6 Site Visits ` 9 Salt Marsh Section 11 Plant Community Profiles 13 What’s Changing AUTHORS Impacts of Sea Level Rise 24 Sarah Fitzgerald Marsh Migration Process 26 Jeff Milla Yutong Wu PROJECT TEAM What We Can Do Lauren Bergenholtz Ilia Savin Tactical Matrix 29 Julia Price Site Scale Analysis: Treasure Island 34 Nico Wright Site Scale Analysis: Bothin Marsh 46 This publication financed initiated, guided, and published under the direction of CMG Landscape Architecture. Conclusion Closing Statements 58 Unless specifically referenced all photographs and Acknowledgments 60 graphic work by authors. Bibliography 62 San Francisco, 2019. Cover photo: Pump station fronting Shorebird Marsh. Corte Madera, CA RESEARCH INTRODUCTION BREADTH As human-induced climate change accelerates and impacts regional map coastal ecologies, designers must anticipate fast-changing conditions, while design must adapt to and mitigate the effects of climate change. With this task in mind, this research project investigates the needs of existing plant communities in the San plant communities Francisco Bay, explores how ecological dynamics are changing, of the Bay Edge and ultimately proposes a toolkit of tactics that designers can use to inform site designs. DEPTH landscape tactics matrix two case studies: Treasure Island Bothin Marsh APPROACH Working across scales, we began our research with a broad suggesting design adaptations for Treasure Island and Bothin survey of the Bay’s ecological history and current habitat Marsh.
    [Show full text]
  • The Influence of Groynes of the River Oder on Larval Assemblages Of
    Hydrobiologia (2018) 819:177–195 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10750-018-3636-6 PRIMARY RESEARCH PAPER Human impact on large rivers: the influence of groynes of the River Oder on larval assemblages of caddisflies (Trichoptera) Edyta Buczyn´ska . Agnieszka Szlauer-Łukaszewska . Stanisław Czachorowski . Paweł Buczyn´ski Received: 17 June 2017 / Revised: 28 April 2018 / Accepted: 30 April 2018 / Published online: 9 May 2018 Ó The Author(s) 2018 Abstract The influence of groynes in large rivers on assemblages. The distribution of Trichoptera was caddisflies has been poorly studied in the literature. governed inter alia by the plant cover and the amount Therefore, we carried out an investigation on the of detritus, and consequently, the food resources. 420-km stretch of the River Oder equipped with Oxygen, nitrates, phosphates and electrolytic conduc- groynes. At 29 stations, we caught caddisflies in four tivity were important as well. Groynes have had habitats: current sites, groyne fields, riverine control positive effects for caddisflies—not only those in the sites without groynes and in the river’s oxbows. We river itself, but also those in its valley. They can found that groyne construction increased species therefore be of significance in river restoration richness, diversity, evenness, and altered the structure (although originally they served other purposes), of functional groups into more diversified and sus- especially with respect to the radically transformed tainable ones compared to the control sites. The ecosystems of large rivers. groyne field fauna is similar to that of natural lentic habitats, but its composition is largely governed by the Keywords Trichoptera Á Species assemblages Á presence of potential colonists in the nearby oxbows.
    [Show full text]
  • Promoting Water Reuse Through Partnership Programs: National Estuary Program and Urban Waters Partnerships Delivering on EPA’S Water Reuse Action Plan
    Promoting Water Reuse through Partnership Programs: National Estuary Program and Urban Waters Partnerships Delivering on EPA’s Water Reuse Action Plan April 2021 EPA -840-R-21-002 i Acknowledgements This document was developed by EPA employee Tara Flint and ORISE Research Participant Daniela Rossi, through their work with the EPA Office of Wetlands, Oceans and Watersheds, and Eric Ruder and Daniel Kaufman of Industrial Economics. Daniela Rossi’s role did not include establishing Agency policy, and all final decision-making was made by the Agency. The information presented here would not have been possible without contributions from EPA’s Office of Water staff on both the Urban Waters and National Estuary Program teams, Regional Offices, and external partners from the partnership programs. Disclaimer The findings reported herein are made available for informational purposes only and do not represent the Environmental Protection Agency’s position on the topics covered. This report does not, nor is it intended to, affect the behavior of non-agency parties. To the extent this report contains summaries and discussions of EPA’s statutory authorities and regulations, the report itself does not constitute an EPA statue or regulation and does not substitute for such authorities. Cover Photo Credits (clockwise from top right): Private raingarden planted as part of Homeowner Rewards Program to incentivize green infrastructure (Peconic Estuary Partnership); Rainwater catchment project near Pennington Creek, CA installed in partnership with Morro Bay NEP (Morro Bay NEP); Installed and blooming bioswale in downtown New Haven, CT (Long Island Sound Office); Riverhead Sewage Treatment Plant renovated which supplies reclaimed water for irrigation (Peconic Estuary Partnership) i Table of Contents Acknowledgements .......................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • MUD CREATURE STUDY Overview: the Mudflats Support a Tremendous Amount of Life
    MUD CREATURE STUDY Overview: The mudflats support a tremendous amount of life. In this activity, students will search for and study the creatures that live in bay mud. Content Standards Correlations: Science p. 307 Grades: K-6 TIME FRAME fOR TEACHING THIS ACTIVITY Key Concepts: Mud creatures live in high abundance in the Recommended Time: 30 minutes mudflats, providing food for Mud Creature Banner (7 minutes) migratory ducks and shorebirds • use the Mud Creature Banner to introduce students to mudflat and the endangered California habitat clapper rail. When the tide is out, Mudflat Food Pyramid (3 minutes) the mudflats are revealed and birds land on the mudflats to feed. • discuss the mudflat food pyramid, using poster Mud Creature Study (20 minutes) Objectives: • sieve mud in sieve set, using slough water Students will be able to: • distribute small samples of mud to petri dishes • name and describe two to three • look for mud creatures using hand lenses mud creatures • describe the mudflat food • use the microscopes for a closer view of mud creatures pyramid • if data sheets and pencils are provided, students can draw what • explain the importance of the they find mudflat habitat for migratory birds and endangered species Materials: How THIS ACTIVITY RELATES TO THE REFUGE'S RESOURCES Provided by the Refuge: What are the Refuge's resources? • 1 set mud creature ID cards • significant wildlife habitat • 1 mud creature flannel banner • endangered species • 1 mudflat food pyramid poster • 1 mud creature ID book • rhigratory birds • 1 four-layered sieve set What makes it necessary to manage the resources? • 1 dish of mud and trowel • Pollution, such as oil, paint, and household cleaners, when • 1 bucket of slough water dumped down storm drains enters the slough and mudflats and • 1 pitcher of slough water travels through the food chain, harming animals.
    [Show full text]
  • Geochronology and Geomorphology of the Jones
    Geomorphology 321 (2018) 87–102 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Geomorphology journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/geomorph Geochronology and geomorphology of the Jones Point glacial landform in Lower Hudson Valley (New York): Insight into deglaciation processes since the Last Glacial Maximum Yuri Gorokhovich a,⁎, Michelle Nelson b, Timothy Eaton c, Jessica Wolk-Stanley a, Gautam Sen a a Lehman College, City University of New York (CUNY), Department of Earth, Environmental, and Geospatial Sciences, Gillet Hall 315, 250 Bedford Park Blvd. West, Bronx, NY 10468, USA b USU Luminescence Lab, Department of Geology, Utah State University, USA c Queens College, School of Earth and Environmental Science, City University of New York, USA article info abstract Article history: The glacial deposits at Jones Point, located on the western side of the lower Hudson River, New York, were Received 16 May 2018 investigated with geologic, geophysical, remote sensing and optically stimulated luminescence (OSL) dating Received in revised form 8 August 2018 methods to build an interpretation of landform origin, formation and timing. OSL dates on eight samples of quartz Accepted 8 August 2018 sand, seven single-aliquot, and one single-grain of quartz yield an age range of 14–27 ka for the proglacial and Available online 14 August 2018 glaciofluvial deposits at Jones Point. Optical age results suggest that Jones Point deposits largely predate the glacial Lake Albany drainage erosional flood episode in the Hudson River Valley ca. 15–13 ka. Based on this Keywords: fi Glaciofluvial sedimentary data, we conclude that this major erosional event mostly removed valley ll deposits, leaving elevated terraces Landform evolution during deglaciation at the end of the Last Glacial Maximum (LGM).
    [Show full text]
  • 6. Geotechnical, Sea Level Rise and Shoreline Improvements
    6. GEOTECHNICAL, SEA LEVEL RISE AND SHORELINE IMPROVEMENTS 6.1 GEOTECHNICAL DOCUMENTS 233 6.2 TREASURE ISLAND AND CAUSEWAY GEOTECHNICAL IMPROVEMENTS 234 6.3 YERBA BUENA ISLAND GEOTECHNICAL IMPROVEMENTS 238 6.4 SEA LEVEL RISE STRATEGY AND SHORELINE IMPROVEMENTS 240 TREASURE ISLAND & YERBA BUENA ISLAND MAJOR PHASE 1 APPLICATION 6 - GEOTECHNICAL AND SHORELINE IMPROVEMENTS 231 6.1 GEOTECHNICAL DOCUMENTS The documents noted below were separately distributed to agency representatives from the Department of Public Works (DPW) and the Department of Building Inspection (DBI) on February, 3, 2015, and they are also included herein as Appendix E. 1. Treasure Island Geotechnical Conceptual Design Report, February 2, 2009 2. Treasure Island Geotechnical Conceptual Design Report Appendix 4, February 2, 2009 3. Treasure Island Sub-phase 1A Geotechnical Data Report; Draft, December 31, 2014 4. Technical Memorandum 1, Preliminary Foundation Design Parameters Treasure Island Ferry Terminal Improvements, January 2, 2015 5. Technical Memorandum 2, Preliminary Geotechnical Design for Sub-Phase 1A Shoreline Stabilization, January 2, 2015 6. Treasure Island Sub-phase 1A Interim Geotechnical Characterization Report; Draft, January 5, 2015 TREASURE ISLAND & YERBA BUENA ISLAND MAJOR PHASE 1 APPLICATION 6 - GEOTECHNICAL AND SHORELINE IMPROVEMENTS 233 6.2 TREASURE ISLAND AND CAUSEWAY GEOTECHNICAL IMPROVEMENTS GEOLOGIC SETTING AND DEPOSITIONAL HISTORY into the Bay. The grain-size distribution of windblown sands on Yerba Buena Island is essentially the same as fine silty sands The San Francisco Bay around Treasure Island is underlain interbedded with Young Bay Mud below Treasure Island. The by rocks of the Franciscan Complex of the Alcatraz Terrain, erosion of the windblown sand from Yerba Buena Island and consisting mainly of interbedded greywacke sandstone and surrounding areas is likely the source for both the historic sandy shale.
    [Show full text]