DELAWARE BAY-CHESAPEAKE BAY
ECOLOGICAL MONITORING AND FORECASTING PILOT PROJECT
PLANNING MEETING – PHASE 2
MARCH 27, 2014
9:00 am- 4:00 pm (lunch provided)
Mathias Lab-Smithsonian Environmental Research Center
647 Contees Wharf Road
Edgewater, Maryland 21037-0028
http://www.serc.si.edu/public_programs/directions.aspx
Goal: to determine interest and capacity for development of a real-time water quality and
eco-monitoring and forecasting network for Delaware Bay-Chesapeake Bay
NOTES
Follow on to Sept User engagement meeting.
 List of attendees

Need all presentations
o
MARACOOS Overview slides (Doug)
o
GOOGLE earth presentation from ocean acidification meeting (Doug)
o
Eyesonthebay.net
o
Lyon Lanerolle – CSDL
o
Liz Smith – IOOS Coastal and Ocean Modeling Testbed
o
John Jacobs – Pathogens
o
Raleigh Hood – CBEFS
o
Bill Boicourt – WL predictions during Sandy
NOAA Ecological Forecasting Roadmap Annual Meeting on April 2-3 – P.O.C. - Allison Allen. Meeting
agenda is included at the end of this document.
Doug gave the “What is MARACOOS” overview: http://maracoos.org and http://www.ioos.noaa.gov/
MARACOOS taps into a wide variety of federal agencies, academic/research, states, NGOs etc.
The delivery of a forecast/predictive product requires data, standards, data discovery/delivery, etc.
This MARACOOS W/Q workshop is broken into 3 groups:
1. Observations
2. Models
3. Users (shellfish, FDA)
To improve forecasting of vibrio fields, better temperature and salinity observations and forecasts are
required. In general, vibrio forecasts need better forecasts of the environmental condition.
Summaries of Existing Assets
What Observations, what models and what products?
What do end users need?
Models:
NOAA Ecological Forecasting Roadmap: HABS, Hypoxia, Pathogens (Wood), Infrastructure (Chris Brown)
Develop a national scale eco-forecasting capability, run by NOAA, in an operational context….always
supported.
NOAA’s Ecological Forecasting Roadmap has five task teams:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
HABS
Hypoxia
Pathogens
Infrastructure
Habitat and Speciation (new)
Set more specific goals for beaches; vibrio……
How does NOAA intend to use IOOS in the process of the Roadmap?
Gabrielle is involved in how to engage RAs in ecological roadmap. There has been a webinar w/
Southeast RA. Next will be a webinar w/ Northeast and Mid-Atlantic RAs. The goal is to get the NOAA
folks working with RAs to share and exchanging info.
HABS have chosen to go thru Sea Grant.
Lyon Lanerolle – CSDL: (get his slides)
Ocean circulation is the primary goal: ROMS, FVCOM, ADCIRC (2d)—development of operational
forecasting system based on existing hydrodynamic models. CBOFS uses ROMS (structured grid).
Validation using water level, currents, temperature, and salinity. Most data are surface data and Lyon
would like to get more water column data. Can MARACOOS be the way to deliver these water column
data?
No data assimilation yet, but they are experimenting with data assimilation now.
Wood: Lyon’s models are designed to meet the needs of navigation, not ecosystems.
It is harder to predict temperature and salinity than currents. Models consistently over predict
temperature and salinity. This is an ongoing research questions.
How can changes be made to the operational models:
1. In-line – change the code….this is tricky and hard to justify;
2. Off-line – download data and work outside of the system.
Whole goal of the IOOS COMT is to figure out if we can use a simple O2 model or will we be forced to
use a more complicated mechanistic model. See Liz’s slides.
Chesapeake Bay has a lot of observations as compared to DE Bay.
Several issues with vibrio forecasting:

How to characterize uncertainty in vibrio;

Understanding how accurate are the observations of generic vibiro;

Validation of vibrio forecasts with accurate observations.
For the users – It would be good to be able to say ‘there is a 75% chance that vibrio will be about X
concentration in this location.’
Two steps are necessary -- validate the data, and then validate the models. Use probability of
exceedence….
FDA has done risk assessments.
Who is the customer for the pathogen, forecast model/capability? As far as NOAA is concerned, the
mission isn’t just forecasting pathogens. It is important to translate the pathogen angle into the NOAA
mission. Wood thinks that it is the broad-based mission of improving “coastal intelligence.” Pathogens
may also be a factor in human health, but that is not necessarily be the most interesting to NOAA.
John – vibrio – what is the approach within NOAA and with Raleigh’s group? National network of
circulation models.
Not just temperature and salinity are needed. In addition to t&s, Vibrio observations are also required
for forecasts of vibrio. For ecological forecasting, they are still defining what is operational.
Get John’s slides……
Kevin -- Does ROMS have the resolution to get the shellfish depths? No – there is no model info
between 0-2m. Shellfish may be in that zone. Vibrio water samples are taken from the surface.
NOAA’s future in eco-forecasting – John outlined the need for a coastal observing network to feed the
needs of eco-forecasting to meet the needs of specific user groups. Need this to be a unified message to
NOAA…..the vision is for a coastal observing network to feed these needs.
How can MARACOOS do this with scarce resources. Need to be strategic and leverage existing efforts.
Lesson Learned – CBP had decades of data; but there isn’t the vision with the connection to the
customers. Monitoring plankton was eventually cut because the requirements from the users could not
be made and the mission could not be justified.
MD DNR – it is very tough to find pathogenic strains when they sampled sediments, water columns and
oysters. It is a rare target….need a LOT more data. FDA has started to develop a data set for patterns.
These are very large data sets.
What are the specific monitoring needs for observations of vibrio? Today, it is “take whatever you can
get.” Good spatial coverage is essential. Chesapeake Bay started out with all 150 stations; now just 50
stations monthly – for validation.
Research question: What are the pathogenic strains and when do they show up? In NJ, it is not when
the water temperature is the warmest.
Dauphin Island is going to look for Pathogenic strains this summer in NJ, NY.
FDA risk model –required to use, and does not incorporate local information.
Tampa Bay data – where is it; who has it??
There are sensors that can detect vibrio…..very expensive….on the cusp of development.
Bill B…..adopt more of an ensemble approach.
MARACOOS can promote itself as the vision for the future.
When it comes to ecological forecasting – the definition of operational is based on the requirements of
the end user. It might be 24/7 or it might be a seasonal forecast.
Raleigh – UMCES will be running CBEFS operationally. It is a prototype operational biogeochemical
model.
Sea Nettle model is very simple empirical model very dependent on T&S. How well does it work?
Validation is a challenge. Sea Nettle model works very well……
The real challenge is the salinity – it gives the range inside the Bay as to where vibrio will appear.
Getting the salinity right is the real challenge for ROMS. If there was real-time salinity data in the CB,
could it be assimilated? Not really that simple……it is really a research problem.
Questions of accuracy really are relevant to the customer’s needs. Don’t overshoot the
accuracy/resolution. Be relevant to customers in order to retain funding. False positives are not good.
Development of sea nettle and vibrio forecasts – approach is quite robust (salinity notwhithstanding).
Modeling HABS is a huge research challenge. There is one empirical model that “sorta” works. We can
model biogeochemistry, but how well? Need to be able to model with high skill - the light, chemistry,
biology.
Why is modeling salinity so difficult? The models don’t represent the stratification directly. There is
enough salt, but it isn’t mixed correctly in the models. Freshwater flow isn’t the problem. The CH3D is
the best model for modeling salinity because of its grid structure (horizontal). It does better than ROMS.
USER DISCUSSION
Shellfish
MD DNR – oysters
FDA from two regions
HAB forecasting goes thru state organizations; not a public product.
We need to understand the demand; need to understand more about virulence and salinity. But we
need to understand what are the intermediate products to help take the next steps to the final. It is a
process.
Now MD DNR is in a position of being very reactive. There is an illness or two and then there is a
reaction. It is very reactive, not proactive. It would b easy to just say NO harvesting at a certain
temperature, but the industry is not OK with that.
Research questions are:

How do we identify virulent strains routinely? FDA needs this info so they can make their Risk
Assessment model more regional. As it stands now the model does not work that well with the
mid-Atlantic.

What causes the growth of virulent vibrios? What is an infectious does? Different analytic
methods are used in different regions which complicates things from the regulatory side.
Regulatory agencies need the research to be very targeted (like a testbed).

Dose response is much trickier.
From NOAA’s perspective – from the fisheries organizations, and an OAR component…..human health is
not the ticket. There has to be a financial hook – coastal resilience is in peril. NOAA has the data and
the models but when it comes to communicating – must team with regulatory agencies. There needs to
be an alignment of needs.
Climate change and human health is another key…..all the states are looking at sustainability.
Is the FDA a federal partner to get to the NOAA brass? More than one agency on the same problem is
not done. Although the presidential initiative on climate change does require that the agencies sit
together. If we can get the vibrio issue into that climate change then there is hope.
What agency does the research end…..virulence…..? Is it NIH?
Beach programs
The big question is how to fit a local issue to a national standard. Data to the public……
How can we measure the different risks associated with different pollutants. EPA has a national
standard. Right now, whether is it raw sewage or a flock of birds and associated droppings, the beach
closure notice is the same. And the risk is very different and the public health significance is very
different. Perception is everything when it comes to public health.
Use vibrio as an example…..of other forecasts that fit into that framework.
What might be a MARACOOS role within that framework?
Going forward…..working group on pathogens as an eco-forecast…….?
No one from VA is at this meeting, and there is such a big aquaculture industry. They must be very
interested in the vibrio issue. VDH? VA CZM
Mark Trice: MDDNR data….provided a run-down of DNR observations and monitoring.
MDDNR has a sister program w/Virginia (VECOS) - Willy Reay-all the same protocols and sampling
strategies….etc. All of the data have to be submitted to the CBP (there is a significant delay in time) so
MARACOOS could aggregate/consolidate and make available thru IOOS web services. DNR has to
submit to a multitude of sources.
DNR Telemetry units are starting to fail - $4k-$5k and cellular plan…..these are going down.
State government – Mark’s effort is devoted to organizing monitoring, and q/a data and is expected to
understand myriad data delivery formats/structures? Mark just doesn’t have time.
CBEO – project is done, but website is transitioning to UMCES. No new data // no funding…..
Bill Boicourt – WL forecasting……FVCOM-WRF wl predictions during sandy (get Bill’s slides).
SINAR – neracoos and maracoos:
Improve forecasts;three implementations of FVCOM and two of adcirc? Why? Because the
resolution needed is 2m (in scituate). Harry has sub-grid scale modeling which is important in the urban
settings.
Models are not doing so well for mixing……(same thing that Lyon and Raliegh were saying).
Storm gliders…..to get observations during the storms.
Kevin Brinson U. of Delaware: http://demac.udel.edu/waterquality2 - DE Water Quality Portal
Most data monthly; beaches data measured more frequently.
They also have a DBOFS site that shows flood potential; for emergency management community.
Covers 15 communities; validated. Road flooding. What limits DE from going north of New Castle? No
upstream component; no northern rivers or watersheds.
User Product: Vibrio Forecast
If we had the ideal environment then the priority for observations would be detection of the virulent
strains in shellfish (fisheries) and water column (recreation). In DE there is more a concern about
shellfish. Harvest controls are established for the industry based on predicted risk of vibrio infection of
oysters. This can increase costs to the industry, but also compounds costs up the chain. For recreational
monitoring – the regulation is different – it is a naturally occurring bacteria but the risk is lower. The
industry would like to know – within the four month ‘risky’ period, when is it most likely to cause illness
in which regions. This is so they don’t have to shut down the whole four months. MD is too small…must
shut down the whole time. DE doesn’t have the summer harvest. It would be great to be able to show
that a tainted oyster is the result of vibrio present in the growing area versus poor temperature
regulation in the restaurant, or other mis-handling during handling after harvest.
If you can say there is a higher risk area/time – the state can increase patrols at a high-risk area and
high-risk time.
There is the point that millions of oysters are harvested, but there are only a very few illnesses. Even
with the best predictive system, there will be an illness. Is it worth putting the resources given that fact?
YES -- because states have to be able to hold their heads high. NOAA should be able to help with this
efficiency. In Great Lakes, NOAA can tell when they are about to have a HAB event, and can tell the
water companies when to close their intake.
Resolution – need to ask an industry person? NOAA does a darn good job for a 3-day weather forecast,
for instance and since the growing areas are effected by weather. But a model can provide a hindcast
which could be very useful.
If there is a way to predict when to re-open. That would be a very useful forecast. A prediction that the
conditions are no longer favorable for the vibrio to grow would be a useful product. . Now, they use the
FDA Risk assessment model. Would FDA accept this kind of diagnostic model? Yes…..they think so.
An outbreak is 2 or more cases. It is an automatic closure during the investigation.
It is providing a little bit of ‘coastal intelligence.’
But what we don’t understand that one oyster is tainted and one isnt’ and they are from the same box,
same area, same harvest. This also happens with HABS.
We see very large shifts in temperature and salinity – getting a seasonal sense of the large scale
variability would be helpful for the regulators. For instance, if you understand what an el nino might
mean for your system. Or if it was a cold winter with a lot of precip, you will know how your system
responds. So – the model can provide additional context.
Where is the real void? In many cases it is in the observations of vibrio in the oysters and in the water
column. Need an ESP – high temporal resolution of virulence. This seems to be the future to inform
the modeling process as a move to figuring out the virulence. One location will cost $600K. Gulf of
Maine has 4 or 6 ESPs and they are having trouble with maintenance.
Raleigh thinks maybe that the model refinements will come if you can bump up sampling strategies, and
that will buy some better forecasts.
They (John) are doing some adaptive sampling in order to validate the surface models. Higher density
T&S would supplement the model.
The model can provide an “outlook.” This is an analogous product as the NWS puts out.
It is relatively cheap to get T&S data…..hundereds of dollars a buoy, not thousands.
Would be interesting to look at the illnesses and tease out the taint is from the water column vs a postharvest problem. Look at the date of illness and look at the T&S and water quality around the harvest.
FDA is trying to put together a large scale pattern system data set with epidemiology.
NOAA Ecological Forecasting Roadmap
2 - 3, 2014
Annual Meeting
Climate Prediction
April
NOAA Center for Weather and
5830 University
Research Court
College
Park, MD 20740
MEETING AGENDA
For in person attendees
Meeting Objectives:
1. Reflect on the successes and challenges of the first year of the Roadmap’s implementation, and
translate lessons learned into informed future strategies;
2. Discuss overall strategy and next steps to advance cross-Roadmap priorities; and
3. Address challenges in executing national infrastructure and modeling framework components.
Day 1 - April 2, 2014
Time
8:30 - 9:30 AM
EDT
Discussion Item
Registration and Coffee
Presenter / Chair /
Session Support
Location
Lobby
outside of
auditorium
9:30 - 9:45 AM
EDT
What is NOAA’s Ecological Forecasting
Roadmap? (10 min)
Paul Sandifer- Chief
Scientist, National
Ocean Service
Auditorium
9:45 - 10:00 AM
EDT
Administrative details and meeting
objectives
Allison Allen, Ecological
Forecasting Roadmap
Portfolio Manager
Auditorium
10:00 - 10:30 AM
EDT
Opening Remarks: Reflections on
Ecological Forecasting
Holly Bamford, Assistant Auditorium
Administrator, National
Ocean Service;
Louis Uccellini, Assistant
Administrator, National
Weather Service
10:30 - 12:30 AM
EDT
Session 1 Plenary Panel: Ecological
Forecasting RoadmapTechnical Team
Progress
Technical Team Leads
Achievements and challenges from
the past year and a national strategy
and vision to move forward; Q&A
10:30 - 10:50
HAB (15 min + 5 min Q&A)
Alan Lewitus, Rick
Stumpf
10:50 - 11:10
Hypoxia (15 min + 5 min Q&A)
Rob Magnien, David
Scheurer
11:10 AM - 11:25
AM EDT
BREAK (15 minutes)
Auditorium
11:25 - 11:45
Pathogens (15 min + 5 min Q&A)
Bob Wood, Geoff Scott
11:45 – 12:05
I&P (15 min + 5 min Q&A)
Chris Brown
12:05- 12:25
Questions and Discussion
Paul Sandifer/Allison
Allen
12:25 - 12:30
Session Wrap-up
Allison Allen
12:30 - 01:30 PM
EDT
LUNCH (1 hour)
01:30 - 01:35 PM
EDT
Orientation to Panel Session II
Paul Sandifer
Auditorium
01:35 - 03:00 PM
EDT
Session 2 Plenary Panel: Cross-cutting
Priorities from each Line Office
Moderator: Tim
Tomastik
Auditorium
Conference
Center or
outside
patio
Optional half-hour tour during lunch
(RSVP requested; Meet at security desk)
Reflect on the Roadmap’s progress
and challenges in FY13-14; discuss
Line Office commitments and
perspectives
1:35 - 1:45
NOS perspectives and commitments Paul Sandifer
1:45 - 1:55
NMFS perspectives and
commitments
1:55 - 2:05
OAR perspectives and commitments Gary Matlock
2:05 - 2:15
NESDIS perspectives and
commitments
Mark Strom
Al Powell
2:15 - 2:25
NWS perspectives and
commitments
Chris Strager
2:25 - 3:00
Q&A for all Panelists
Facilitator: Tim Tomastik
3:00 - 3:15 PM
EDT
Session Wrap-up
3:15 - 03:30 PM
EDT
BREAK (15 minutes)
3:30 - 4:30 PM
EDT
Session 3: Inter-agency Plenary Pannel
Allison Allen
Auditorium
Summary of key strategies and
charge to the breakout sessions
Facilitator: Tim Tomastik Auditorium
Invited speakers TBA:
FDA- Angelo Depaola
EPA- TBD
USGS- TBD
Navy- Gregg Jacobs
Tenative: NASA
4:30 - 5:30 PM
EDT
Session 4: Future Scoping Breakouts
Concurrent Sessions A, B, C
Session 4A: Species and Habitat
Distribution Technical Team
Scoping
Lead: Mark Monaco,
NOS and TBD, NMFS
Facilitator: Ariana
Sutton-Grier
Conference
Center A
Session 4B: Beach Quality Technical Lead: Bob Wood
Team Scoping
Facilitator: Theresa
Davenport
Conference
Center B
Session 4C: Engagement Strategy
cont’d
Auditorium
Lead / Facilitator: Tim
Tomastik
Notes: Sarah Wilkins
5:30 - 7:30 PM
EDT
Optional Networking Event
All are welcome to attend
Sponsored by Department of
Commerce Federal Credit Union
NCWCP –
Lobby
outside of
Auditorium
Day 2 - April 3, 2014
Time
Discussion Item
9:00 - 9:30 AM
EDT
Coffee and Registration
9:30 - 9:35 AM
EDT
Welcome Back and Announcements
Presenter / Chair /
Session Support
Location
Lobby
outside of
Conference
Center
Allison Allen
Conference
Center
9:35 AM - 12:00
PM EDT
Session 5: Cross-cutting Infrastructure &
Modeling Plenary Panel
Conference
Center
The following two panels will address
progress and challenges in developing
a National Infrastructure Framework
and ‘One NOAA’ product, and explore
current efforts and gaps in NOAA’s
ecological forecasting modeling
efforts
9:35 - 10:30
Panel I: Infrastructure & Process
Team Progress – (1) National
Infrastructure Framework,
Beth Turner, Wendy
Levine, Chris Brown
(2) “One-NOAA” Product, and
Moderator:
(3) Research to Operations &
Applications
Frank Parker
Conference
Center
30 min presentations; 25 min Q&A
10:30 - 10:45 AM
EDT
10:45 - 12:00
BREAK (15 minutes)
Panel II: Ecological Modeling
Updates – Reports from the Lines
 NWS
 NOS
 OAR
 NMFS
40 min presentations; 35 min Q&A
Hendrik Tolman, Peter
Stone, Craig Stow,
Howard Townsend
Moderators:
Mary Erickson and
Franklin Schwing
Conference
Center
12:00 - 01:00 PM
EDT
LUNCH (1 hour)
Juli Trtanj
Optional Working Lunch: Health,
Climate, and Ecological Forecasting
Human and Ocean Health and Microbes
groups to also participate
Working
Lunch:
Conference
Center C
Others:
Conference
Center
A or B or
outside
1:00 - 2:30 PM
EDT
Session 6: Technical Team Planning
Breakouts
Tech Team Leads
Concurrent Sessions A, B, C,
Infrastructure team will divide
between the other three teams
Session 6A: HABs Team Strategy
Alan Lewitus, Rick
Stumpf
Conference
Center A
Facilitator: N/A
Notes: CO-OPS
Session 6B: Hypoxia Team Strategy
Rob Magnien, David
Scheurer
Conference
Center B
Facilitator: Ariana
Sutton-Grier
Notes: Sarah Wilkins
Session 6C: Pathogens Team
Strategy
Bob Wood, Geoff Scott
Facilitator: Theresa
Conference
Center C
Davenport
2:30 - 3:00 PM
EDT
BREAK (30 minutes)
3:00 - 4:20 PM
EDT
Session 7: Plenary Report-outs from Day
1 and Day 2 Breakout Sessions
3:00 - 3:10
Species and Habitat Distribution
3:10 - 3:20
Beach Quality
3:20 - 3:30
HABs
3:30 - 3:40
Hypoxia
3:40 - 3:50
Pathogens
3:50 - 4:00
Infrastructure and Process
4:00 - 4:10
Engagement Strategy
4:10 - 4:20
Health
Moderator: Ariana
Sutton-Grier
Auditorium
Auditorium
4:20 - 4:35 PM
EDT
Closeout: What have we
accomplished? What is next?
Allison Allen
4:35 - 4:45
Closing Remarks
Holly Bamford, Assistant Auditorium
Administrator, National
Ocean Service;
Christopher Strager,
Acting Director,
National Weather
Service Office of
Climate, Weather, and
Water Services; Invited
comments from the
Ecological Forecasting
Steering Committee
4:45 - 5:00 PM
EDT
Acknowledgments and Adjourn
Plenary Session Rapporteur: Sarah Wilkins
Paul Sandifer
Auditorium
NOAA Ecological Forecasting Roadmap
3, 2014
April 2 -
Annual Meeting
BREAKOUT SESSION DESCRIPTIONS
Day 1:
Session IA: Species and Habitat Distribution Technical Team Scoping
This breakout will discuss topics and generate alternatives for the proposed species and
habitat distribution technical team. The breakout is intended to scope the team’s mission,
and consider initial priorities.
Session IB: Beach Quality Technical Team Scoping
This breakout will discuss a strategy for a new beach quality forecasting effort under the
Pathogens Team, and identify focus areas. The breakout is intended to scope the teams
mission.
Session IC: Engagement Strategy
This breakout will develop a plan to strategically engage users and partners in NOAA’s
ecological forecasting efforts.
Day 2:
Working Lunch: Health, Climate, and Ecological Forecasting
This working lunch will be an informal discussion to foster collaboration between the health
and microbes related groups, and discuss issues related to health and climate.
Session IIA: Harmful Algal Blooms Team Future Planning
This breakout will discuss the future directions and vision for the HAB technical team,
including operational modeling platforms and enhancing detection capabilities at regional
scales to ensure use of forecasts by resource managers. The breakout is intended to reflect
on FY13 lessons learned and chart potential changes and actions for the future.
Session IIB: Hypoxia Team Future Planning
This breakout will discuss the future directions and vision for the Hypoxia team, including
expansion of efforts to the national hypoxia strategy and an expanded focus on hypoxia
impacts. The breakout is intended to reflect on FY13 lessons learned and chart potential
changes and actions for the future.
Session IIC: Pathogens Team Future Planning
This breakout will discuss the future directions and vision for the Pathogens team, including
next phases of implementation. The breakout is intended to reflect on FY13 lessons learned
and chart potential changes and actions for future efforts.