Michael Stoolman
FREC480 Dr. Mackenzie
Final Project
17 May 2013
Research Proposal: Nutrient Runoff in the Jersey Shore
SECTIONS
1. Background
2. Literature Review
3. Hypotheses
4. Data
5. Methods
6. Anticipated Results
7. Policy Applications
8. Budget
9. Timeframe
Background
The New Jersey shore is home to many wonderful attractions both man-made and natural.
Yes the shore has become a home for entertainment and amusement, but its true wealth lies in
the natural resources, ecosystems, and wildlife that inhabit it. Countless species of birds,
marshes, and water flowing throughout, all face serious consequences if nothing is done about
the current problem of nutrient runoff. Increased development in areas surrounding the
Metedeconk and Toms rivers are contributing to nutrient-heavy water flow towards the Barnegat
Bay-Little Egg Harbor Watershed, which makes up most of Ocean County, NJ. A dangerous
nutrient involved is nitrogen which can cause heavy growth of algae, reducing light in the ocean,
and hindering growth of crucial sea grasses. Also, the decomposition of algae absorbs much
more oxygen than usual, causing fish and other wildlife to die or migrate to less noxious waters.
This problem often leads to beach closings, which hurt the tourist economy of the Jersey Shore
as well as hurting local fishermen with severely reduced catches. The massive increase in
development in beach counties is to blame and the only way to protect the water quality is to
limit this development. The problem has persisted for several decades. Since 1970, the
population has more than doubled in these areas leading to much more use of the Barnegat Bay
Watershed. “Dead zones” along the coast caused by lack of Oxygen were so severe in 1976, that
there was a loss of $1.33 billion in the seafood industry.
Current policies to control development runoff include the NJ Department of
Environmental Protection’s Stormwater Management Rules, which require that land
development projects follow techniques known as Low Impact Development Best Management
Practices. This includes “reduction of impervious cover, maintenance of natural vegetation, and
reduction of nutrient inputs.” It also includes peak flow reduction requirements similar to the
NJDEP’s Flood Hazard Area Control Act Rules and the New Jersey Department of Community
Affairs Residential Site Improvement Standards. The current situation is that development is not
being curbed, and especially not near the shore area and nutrient run-off is only increasing.
These rules and acts are not stopping the runoff at the source. This is a serious problem worth
researching because the Jersey Shore is home to a wide array of wildlife and an enjoyable
vacation area for many. It is also a huge part of the New Jersey economy, and if this degradation
persists, New Jerseyans will feel serious financial repercussions.
Considering the spatial layout and the proximity to the source of the problem and the
waters being affected, GIS is a prime tool to help mitigate this problem. GIS will give us a
chance to examine and analyze the areas affected and diagnose a remedy for the issue. The data
we will collect will give insight to why, how, and where this problem is worst so that policies
will be more effective in fixing the problem.
Literature
Tony Dutzik of Frontier Group and Doug O’Malley of Environment New Jersey Research and
Policy Center published The Shore at Risk which deals mostly with the problem of development
runoff effecting water quality. They point the finger mostly towards developers in counties along
the shore. “Development brings with it an increase in “impervious surfaces”—roads parking lots,
roofs, etc.—that channel rainwater contaminated with fertilizers, pesticides and other pollutants
into waterways (1). It is also noted that 66% of the nitrogen pollution flowing into the Barnegat
Bay-Little Egg Harbor estuary comes from surface water of the Metedeconk River and Toms
River; two areas that development has recently been drastically increasing. They have used GIS
to monitor the urbanization of the Jersey Shore and are correlating that with development and an
increase in impervious surfaces, thus an increase in nitrogen runoff from chemicals and
fertilizers affecting the ambient water quality of the shore. Here is some of their research done
through GIS.
The figure above shows their finding that from 1986 to 2007, there has been a significant
increase in urban development (dark green) in the shore region of New Jersey.
These maps show the overall decrease in aquatic vegetation (or sea grass) of the Jersey Shore
region from 1968 to 2003 labeled as dark green.
This study shows a strong case for curbing development and uses GIS strongly to show changes
over time. However, one weakness may be the lack of evidence that specific areas are
contributing to the runoff, as I am about to propose, we should look at streams, watersheds,
tidelands and ground water and surface water discharges.
Hypothesis
My hypothesis is that GIS can pinpoint the exact source and route the nutrient contaminated
waters are traveling. I am going to analyze the land/ water near the areas and predict behaviors
based off of data entries from GIS. Here are some questions I am concerned with:
Are the cities near Toms River and Metedeconk River directly affecting the shore waters?
Does stream direction or stream flow affect the nutrient levels being transferred to the shore?
How close in proximity are the ground/ surface water discharges to the shore waters?
In which direction does ambient water quality increase/decrease along the coast?
Does this direction correlate with tidal patterns and if so are tidelands directly affected?
What is the growth of algae compared to other areas of the shore?
Does flooding affect this process significantly/ are areas better protected still experiencing
nutrient runoff?
Data
The data I will need will include the following:
1. Concentration of nitrogen in water samples in both the Toms River area and the Jersey shore
coastline.
2. Concentration of oxygen in the Jersey shore region.
3. Stream flow in m/s.
4. Distance in meters between the development area and each cluster of algae growth.
5. Distance in meters between surface water discharge locations and algae growth.
Much of this data would be collected in the field; however The New Jersey Department of
Environmental Protection has a list of geographic information systems that would be used for the
distance calculations. As for the concentrations, scientists would be hired to test areas. Once
given the appropriate levels, the data would be then put into GIS as raster based and thematic
data representing the different levels of each concentration against the GIS map of the Jersey
shore offering insight as to where these high levels of nitrogen and low levels of oxygen are to a
pinpointed location. As for stream flow and direction, these would be done on ArcMap and
calculated through a raster to understand where the streams are heaviest, where they lead, and
how much nutrients they can carry.
Methods
First, a team will inspect the shore region, specifically near Barnegat Bay and visually note the
lack of vegetation. Environmental scientists will take samples of the most depleted areas of the
water and look specifically for nitrogen, the nutrient responsible for anoxia. We will also find
data for fish production and consumption from local fisheries, especially the tainted areas, and
determine if fish are dying and if so at what rate. We will then travel to the development areas of
Toms River and collect water samples in the river and in the surface water discharge areas.
Back at the lab, we will find the concentration of nitrogen and oxygen in both sets of water
samples. We will correlate these specific locations to a map of the Jersey Shore. We will then put
these values in an attribute table on ArcMap, and create a raster that shows the different thematic
levels of nitrogen and oxygen overlaid on the NJ shore and the Toms River areas.
We will then use the stream flow and direction tools on the Toms River to see exactly how the
river behaves as it lead to the Atlantic. Here we will determine what factors contribute to nutrient
runoff by comparing the heaviest flow to areas determined to have high concentration of nitrogen
and areas where development has taken place.
With our calculated distances from both the River and the discharge areas to the shore, we can
determine how proximity is affecting nitrogen levels and how much more damage is done near
the discharge areas.
We will then look at the clusters of algae growth at the shore and see if these streams filled with
nitrogen lead directly to the clusters or if there are different pathways and other external factors.
Finally, in addition, it would be nice to see if areas protected with flood walls or ones in flood
plains are experiencing the same, less, or more nutrient contaminated water and see if ambient
water quality can be treated with flood protection.
I believe these methods are strong because they will pinpoint where the most damage is being
done. However, one weakness may be overgeneralizing the relationship between the stream flow
and the nitrogen concentrations by proximity, and the data may not correlate as well as foreseen.
Anticipated Results
I expect to find that the nitrogen level is highest at the surface water discharge areas, and that the
concentration remains constant all the way to the shore where the greatest algae growth is
occurring. I also believe stream direction and flow will point out that the heaviest flow is taking
more nitrogen and those areas are in risk of the most damage. I don’t believe tidal zones will
influence the nutrient count as much as stream flow, but do suspect concentrations will slightly
depend on tide behavior. I also think flood prevention mechanisms will prove to control nutrient
runoff effectively and areas with such mechanisms will have less damage and more oxygen in
the water.
Policy Applications
After this process has been completed, I strongly suggest more political action take place and
measures be done to control damages. I suspect the strongest correlation we will find are the high
levels of nitrogen coming from the surface water discharge from development so this will be the
main target of regulation.
I propose either a nutrient trading program or a tax on the materials causing the damage (most
likely fertilizer). The nutrient trading program would be a cap and trade program allowing a
maximum amount of pollution, but the ability to transfer permits through a market incentivizing
less nutrient runoff. Better abating developers can sell their credits to poorly abating developers
in exchange for money and efficiency will eventually be reached, while not placing a tax burden
on anyone.
However, this kind of program may not be wise due to the fact that the efficient level of nutrient
contamination we need to save the Jersey shore may not be clearly known. So I am leaning
towards a tax system where trial and error can determine if this level is too low, too high, or just
right. The NJ government should impose a tax on either developing on these sensitive areas, or
just tax fertilizer heavily until either or both are significantly lowered and external costs are
being paid for. This would also yield a double-dividend as the government can then put the
money towards beach restoration programs that will make the damaged areas of the shore
inhabitable again for both humans and wildlife.
Either policy is better than nothing and something needs to be done to correct the damages done
to the ecosystem before they become irreversible.
Budget
Field Data collectors (2) salary- $150,000
Scientists (3) salary- $300,000
GIS specialist salary- $140,000
Economists/ policy crafters salary (2) - $200,000
Travel expenses to Toms River and Barnegat Bay and all along NJ Shore- $100,000
Computers- $10,000
GIS software- $25,000
Institutional Overhead (40%) - $370,000
TOTAL- $1,295,000
Timeframe
Week 1: Visit the Toms River area and collect Samples.
Week 2: Visit Barnegat Bay area and collect Samples.
Week 3: Run tests in laboratory to determine levels.
Week 4: Apply Data to GIS and analyze
Week 5: Propose Policy after discussion with policy writer and economists
Works Cited
"ArcGIS Desktop Help 9.2 - What Is Raster Data?" ArcGIS Desktop Help 9.2 - What Is Raster
Data? N.p., n.d. Web. 16 May 2013.
<http://webhelp.esri.com/arcgisdesktop/9.2/index.cfm?TopicName=What_is_raster_data?>.
Dutzik, Tony, and Doug O'Malley. "The Shore at Risk." Environment New Jersey Research and
Policy Center (2010): n. pag. Web.
"Impacts of Development on Runoff." New Jersey Stormwater Best Management Practices
Manual. NJ Stormwater, 2004. Web.
"The Jersey Shoreline - A Publication of the New Jersey Sea Grant Consortium." The Jersey
Shoreline - A Publication of the New Jersey Sea Grant Consortium. N.p., n.d. Web. 16 May
2013. <http://www.njseagrant.org/jersey-shoreline/vol27_no2/articles/barnegat-bayrestoration.html>.
"NJDEP GIS - Statewide Digital Data Downloads." NJDEP GIS - Statewide Digital Data
Downloads. N.p., n.d. Web. 16 May 2013. <http://www.nj.gov/dep/gis/stateshp.html>.