USGS Science⌕ Search

USGS · 70231680

Major point and nonpoint sources of nutrient pollution to surface water have declined throughout the Chesapeake Bay watershed

Abstract

Understanding drivers of water quality in local watersheds is the first step for implementing targeted restoration practices. Nutrient inventories can inform water quality management decisions by identifying shifts in nitrogen (N) and phosphorus (P) balances over space and time while also keeping track of the likely urban and agricultural point and nonpoint sources of pollution. The Chesapeake Bay Program's Chesapeake Assessment Scenario Tool (CAST) provides N and P balance data for counties throughout the Chesapeake Bay watershed, and these data were leveraged to create a detailed nutrient inventory for all the counties in the watershed from 1985–2019. This study focuses on three primary watershed nutrient balance components—agricultural surplus, atmospheric deposition, and point source loads—which are thought to be the leading anthropogenic drivers of nutrient loading trends across the watershed. All inputs, outputs, and derived metrics (n=53) like agricultural surplus and nutrient use efficiency, were subjected to short- and long-term trend analyses to discern how sources of pollution to surface water have changed over time. Across the watershed from 1985–2019, downward trends in atmospheric deposition were ubiquitous. Though there are varying effects, long-term declines in agricultural surplus were observed, likely because nutrients are being managed more efficiently. Multiple counties' point source loads declined, primarily associated with upgrades at major cities that discharge treated wastewater directly to tidal waters. Despite all of these positive developments, recent increases in agricultural surpluses from 2009–2019 highlight that water quality gains may soon be reversed in many agricultural areas of the basin. Besides tracking progress and jurisdictional influence on pollution sources, the nutrient inventory can be used for retrospective water quality analysis to highlight drivers of past improvement/degradation of water quality trends and for decision makers to develop and track their near- and long-term watershed restoration strategies.

Explore related subjects

90° N90° S · 180° W ← longitude → 180° E
Source-reported bounding extent: 36.48314061639213° to 42.98053954751642° latitude; -80.771484375° to -74.278564453125° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Robert D. Sabo, Breck Maura Sullivan, Cuiyin Wu, Emily M. Trentacoste, Qian Zhang, Gary W. Shenk, Gopal Bhatt, Lewis C. Linker. 2022-05-06. Major point and nonpoint sources of nutrient pollution to surface water have declined throughout the Chesapeake Bay watershed. https://doi.org/10.1088/2515-7620%2Fac5db6

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

Reassessing water availability in the Nile River Basin using satellite-based irrigation water use accounting

Existing estimates of irrigation areas and water use in the Nile River Basin vary widely and are based on inconsistent data and methodologies. This study leverages advances in remote sensing to provide an up-to-date and consistent basin-wide reassessment of water use in the Nile River Basin. Land cover and actual evapotranspiration data from 2013 to 2022 were used to quantify irrigated areas, irrigation water use, and the average naturalized water yield. Across the basin, 7.1 million hectares of irrigated land consume an average of 72.5 ± 2.6 billion cubic meters (BCM) of blue water annually. Egypt and Sudan together account for 92% of the irrigated area and 97% of the irrigation water use. The basin’s average naturalized yield, evaluated at Dongola station, is determined to be between 108 and 114.4 ± 3.2 BCM. Although conservative, this updated analysis indicates the basin’s average naturalized yield is 14%–20% higher than the previous naturalized yield estimate (95 BCM) and 29%–36% higher than the commonly cited observed flow of 84 BCM, which is frequently treated as the total basin-wide available water. Importantly, the study underscores that the 84 BCM represents flow at the Aswan gauging station after upstream consumptive uses, not the total water available in the basin under naturalized conditions. This distinction is critical for accurate water accounting, planning, and governance in this water-scarce basin. This study demonstrates the value of open-source remote sensing resources in data-scarce regions while emphasizing the need for region specific validation and bias correction for improved accuracy.

Nile River Basin↗

The effect of solar energy development on plant diversity across spatial scales

Utility-scale solar energy development is a novel and rapidly expanding land-use with largely unknown consequences for plant diversity. Construction disturbance and associated increases in environmental heterogeneity in solar facilities relative to undisturbed ecosystems can affect plant diversity at multiple spatial scales. We assessed the effects of modified construction methods, designed to reduce impacts of a utility-scale solar facility, on plant diversity across spatial scales (1–4000 m 2 ) in the Mojave Desert, USA one year after construction. Vegetation surveys across three soil–vegetation types revealed that species richness and evenness were largely unaffected by solar infrastructure at local scales in two of the three soil–vegetation types, but in creosote bush ( Larrea tridentata )-white bursage ( Ambrosia dumosa ) communities with deep soils, both metrics increased. Beta diversity remained unchanged by solar infrastructure while gamma diversity (4000 m 2 ) increased or had a small reduction depending on the soil–vegetation type. These results suggest that low-impact construction can have neutral to positive effects on plant diversity.

Nevada↗

Salt marsh establishment controlled by sediment availability, landscape position, and anthropogenic history

Anthropogenic actions have directly and indirectly modulated salt marsh extent globally. For example, direct actions such as draining and filling of marshes for agriculture were common before the early 20th century, while development on barrier islands has indirectly reduced the capacity of back-barrier marshes to evolve in response to coastal processes. Similarly, restoration efforts span a spectrum between direct actions such as hydrologic reconnection and sediment placement to indirect actions such as shoreline protection and facilitation of upland migration. With a combination of remote sensing and synoptic in-situ observations, we demonstrate that the vegetative establishment of two disparate salt marsh complexes are strongly linked to their access to external sediment supply, position in the coastal landscape, and anthropogenic history. A marsh complex fringing Delaware Bay, in a former agricultural reclamation area, was directly modified through re-introduction of tidal forcing; vegetative establishment occurred rapidly (3% y −1 increase in vegetative cover) due to a high flood-ebb suspended sediment differential (+32 mg l −1 ), indicating sediment import. The other marsh complex, behind a sand spit fronting the Atlantic Ocean, vegetated indirectly in response to updrift beach nourishment which provided a sheltered environment for expansion. The lower suspended sediment differential (+1.3 mg l −1 ) led to a slower vegetation establishment rate (1.7% y −1 ). The directly modified and restored complex responded more rapidly than the indirectly modified and restored complex due to sediment availability. Direct restoration may be more rapid than indirect methods, and reversing anthropogenic impacts is possible on relatively short timescales, if sufficient external sediment supply exists. Siting of restoration projects can therefore leverage external forcing to accelerate recovery and enhance resilience. In light of ongoing coastal transgression, these examples also demonstrate a potential difference in return-on-restoration-investment between back-barrier marshes undergoing coastal squeeze and estuarine fringing marshes that are naturally transgressing across the coastal landscape.

New Jersey↗