Gulf Monitoring Network › files › projects › files › ...Gulf of Mexico Alliance Nutrient Monitoring Design Workshop Sept. 10-12, 2012 Sarasota, FL v List of Design Workshop

Gulf of Mexico Alliance

Water Quality Team

Gulf Monitoring Network

Monitoring Design - Nutrients

January 2013

By Kate Muldoon, Steve Wolfe, and Raymond E. Leary

Important Note: This living report describes the initial phase

of the Gulf Monitoring Network, and is expected to be

modified in the coming months as additional GOMA

monitoring goals are addressed during the design-

development process

To obtain the full workshop report on the Gulf Monitoring Network,

please visit the GOMA website,

Gulf Monitoring Network: Nutrient Monitoring Design Workshop,

September 10-12, 2012

Gulf of Mexico Alliance Nutrient Monitoring Design Workshop Sept. 10-12, 2012 Sarasota, FL

ii

Acknowledgements

Workshop Steering Committee:

Alice Dossett, Mississippi Dept. of Environmental Quality

Natalie Guedon-Segrest, Mississippi Dept. of Environmental Quality

Jennifer Haslbauer, Alabama Dept. of Environmental Management

Dr. Ann Jochens, Gulf of Mexico Coastal Ocean Observing System, Regional Assoc.

Fred Leslie, Alabama Dept. of Environmental Management

Dr. Troy Pierce, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Gulf of Mexico Program

Office

Lynn Sisk, Alabama Dept. of Environmental Management

Gail Sloane, Florida Dept. of Environmental Protection

Dr. Amber Whittle, Florida Fish and Wildlife Research Institute

Steve Wolfe, Florida Institute of Oceanography

Laura Yarbro, Florida Fish and Wildlife Research Institute

Breakout Facilitation

Dr. Barb Kirkpatrick, Mote Marine Laboratory

Dr. Amber Whittle, Florida Fish and Wildlife Research Institute

Steve Wolfe, Florida Institute of Oceanography, Gulf of Mexico Alliance

Workshop Support:

Dr. Barb Kirkpatrick, Mote Marine Laboratory

Rusty Holmes, Mote Marine Laboratory

Paula Clark, Mote Marine Laboratory

Henry Luciano, Mote Marine Laboratory

Joe Nickelson, Mote Marine Laboratory

Vicki Weise, Mote Marine Laboratory

Meeting Notes:

Carol Parsons Richards, Louisiana Coastal Protection and Restoration Agency

Special thanks to Mote Marine Laboratory for use of their excellent meeting facilities

and support staff, and contributions from scientific staff, during the meeting in which

this design was created.


iii

Table of Contents

Acknowledgements ....................................................................................................................................... ii

List of Design Workshop Participants .......................................................................................................... iv

Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................................... 1

Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 3

Priority Nutrient-Monitoring Questions ....................................................................................................... 5

Summary and Results.................................................................................................................................... 7

Scale .......................................................................................................................................................... 7

Creation of Draft Design Templates for Estuary and Coastal-Segment Monitoring ................................. 8

A. Creation of Template for Estuary Monitoring .............................................................................. 8

B. Creation of Template for Coastal-Segment Monitoring ............................................................. 10

Creation of Draft Designs for Shelf and Deep-Gulf Areas ....................................................................... 12

C. Design of System for Shelf Monitoring ....................................................................................... 12

D. Design of System for Deep Gulf Monitoring ............................................................................... 14

Next Steps ................................................................................................................................................... 16

Implementation Challenges ........................................................................................................................ 16

Appendix 1A. GOMA GMN, Estuary Template ........................................................................................... A1

Appendix 1B. Estuary Analytes and Measurements ................................................................................... A2

Appendix 2A. GOMA GMN, Coastal Segment Template ............................................................................. A4

Appendix 2B. Coastal Segment Analytes and Measurements .................................................................... A5

Appendix 3A. GOMA GMN, Shelf Transects ............................................................................................... A7

Appendix 3B. Shelf Analytes and Measurements ....................................................................................... A8

Appendix 4A. GOMA GMN, Deep Gulf Stations ....................................................................................... A12

Appendix 4B. Deep Gulf Analytes and Measurements ............................................................................. A13


iv

List of Design Workshop Participants

STATE AGENCIES ALABAMA Jennifer Haslbauer, Environmental Engineer, Water Quality Branch, Alabama Dept. of Environmental

Management [email protected]

Fred Leslie, Chief, Montgomery Branch, Alabama Dept. of Environmental Management [email protected]

FLORIDA Charles Kovach, Chief Scientist, Southwest District Office, Florida Dept. of Environmental Protection

[email protected]

Ray Leary, Assistant Coordinator, GOMA & Florida Dept. of Environmental Protection [email protected]

Kate Muldoon, Environmental Manager, GOMA & Florida Dept. of Environmental Protection [email protected]

Dr. Amber Whittle, Habitat Research Administrator, Florida Fish and Wildlife Research Institute [email protected]

Steve Wolfe, Coordinator, Gulf of Mexico Alliance, Florida Institute of Oceanography [email protected]

Laura Yarbro, Research Staff, Florida Fish and Wildlife Research Institute [email protected]

LOUISIANA Carol Parsons-Richards, Coastal Resources Scientist Supervisor, Louisiana Coastal Protection and

Restoration Agency [email protected]

MISSISSIPPI Alice Dossett, Chief, Surface Water Monitoring Section, Mississippi Dept. of Environmental Quality

[email protected]

TEXAS Robin Cypher, Aquatic Scientist, Surface Water Quality Monitoring, Texas Commission on Environmental

Quality [email protected]

FEDERAL AGENCIES

U.S. EPA Dr. Ed Decker, Nutrient Regional Coordinator, Region IV, Atlanta, GA [email protected]

Dr. Jan Kurtz, Research Biologist, Gulf Breeze Environmental Research Laboratory, Gulf Breeze, FL [email protected]

Tim Wool, Senior Water Quality Modeler, Region IV, Atlanta, GA [email protected]

- Continued -

mailto:[email protected]















v

List of Design Workshop Participants (concluded)

NOAA David Kidwell, Program Manager: Hypoxia Programs, Center for Sponsored Coastal Ocean Research,

Silver Spring, MD [email protected]

Dr. Chris Sinigalliano, Director, Environmental Microbiology Program, Atlantic Oceanographic & Meteorological Laboratory, Miami, FL [email protected]

USGS Dr. Alyssa Dausman, Coordinator, Gulf Coast Science Coordination Office [email protected]

Richard Rebich, Chief, Investigations Section, Mississippi Water Science Center [email protected]

Dr. Greg Steyer, Branch Chief, National Wetlands Research Center [email protected]

U.N. Gulf of Mexico Large Marine Ecosystems Project- Mexico Dr. Virginia Y. Garcia Rios, Co-Coordinator, Monitoring Pilot Project [email protected]

UNIVERSITIES

Larry Lloyd, Research Specialist, Texas A&M Univ. – Corpus Christi [email protected]

Dr. Kyeong Park, Associate Professor, Department of Marine Sciences, Univ. of South Alabama [email protected]

Dr. Ernst Peebles, Associate Professor, College of Marine Science, Univ. of South Florida [email protected]

Evan Turner, Researcher, Texas A&M Univ. – Corpus Christi [email protected]

Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) Dr. Kellie Dixon, Senior Scientist, Mote Marine Laboratory [email protected]

Dr. Ernest Estevez, Senior Scientist, Emeritus, Mote Marine Laboratory [email protected]

Dr. Barbara Kirkpatrick, Senior Scientist, Program Manager-Environmental Health, Mote Marine Lab [email protected]















1

Executive Summary

The Water Quality Team (WQ Team) of the Gulf of Mexico Alliance (GOMA) consists of state,

federal, non-governmental-organization (NGO), and private members. The WQ Team, which is

one of six GOMA teams, works to implement the water-quality portions of the GOMA

Governors’ Action Plan II.

The WQ Team is composed of four workgroups, with one focused on monitoring; the remaining

workgroups are focused on Mercury, Pathogens, and Harmful Algal Blooms (HABs). The

Monitoring Workgroup’s Action Plan includes creation of a framework to support Gulf-wide

monitoring. As part of this effort, the Workgroup has collaborated with the agencies and

entities that make up GOMA as well as the Gulf Coast Ecosystem Restoration Task Force

(GCERTF), the Hypoxia Task Force, and the Gulf of Mexico Coastal Ocean Observing System

(GCOOS) to create an organizing structure for the Gulf Monitoring Network (GMN).

On September 10-12, 2012, the GOMA WQ Team, in concert with the GOMA Nutrients Team

and the GCERTF, held the Gulf Nutrient-Monitoring Design meeting at Mote Marine

Laboratory and Aquarium in Sarasota, FL. The purpose was to develop a draft monitoring

network design to address priority questions developed by the Nutrients Team. Participants

included State representatives from the WQ Team and Nutrients Team, monitoring design

experts, GOMA federal partners, and water quality modelers. Participants developed

monitoring system designs for both Gulf-wide and regional scales, and provided insight and

templates to guide the design of the two smaller-scale monitoring systems addressing coastal

segment and estuarine areas. For each scale, participants were provided with an overview of the

existing knowledge about nutrients in the Gulf, factors to consider in designing the monitoring

by scale, and GOMA nutrient monitoring priority questions, after which they separated into

breakout sessions to address the issues.

The resulting monitoring strategy includes meshed monitoring designs for each scale of the

Gulf: the estuaries, the coastal areas (coastline out to the 10 m contour), the shelf (10 m to the

edge of the Continental Shelf), and the deep Gulf. The draft monitoring designs complement

and feed into each other to provide a basic overall understanding of Gulf drivers, such as

circulation patterns and vertical and horizontal processes. More specifically, the designs also

focus on how nutrient flux, transport, fate, and sources and sinks respond to these drivers and

processes. The larger-scale shelf and deep-Gulf designs are proposed to use a combination of

remote sensing, fixed stations, and flow-through meters on ships to obtain a clearer

understanding of the larger ecosystems. The smaller monitoring scales, estuaries and coastal

segments, are designed as templates to both support design of the estuary monitoring system

that integrates with the Gulf Monitoring Network or—if sufficient information is unavailable—

provide a starting point for intensive studies. Such studies can assist local decision-making to

inform permanent station placement, sampling frequency, and required analytes and

measurements needed to integrate with the Gulf-wide network.


2

The design is a monitoring strategy using satellite imagery as a backdrop to develop models of

water circulation and nutrient transport and fate, with fixed pilings/buoys collecting continuous

data at key locations to add information about depth-related factors, to ground-truth the

satellite data, and to validate the models. The strategy incorporates additional information

collected during trips to maintain the pilings/buoys, with collections at both fixed intermediate

stations and via flow-through measurements between buoys. In shallower parts of the Gulf,

this basic data collection scheme is augmented by probabilistic sampling to improve the ability

to detect change over time.

The overall conclusion is that monitoring of the open Gulf and continental shelf areas are

required to properly understand and predict nutrient loads and effects in coastal and estuarine

waters. Most importantly, participants emphasized that coastal and estuarine models need to

properly account for nutrient inputs transported from Gulf upwelling events and coastal

watersheds, as well as those from uplands and rivers draining to the area of interest.


3

Introduction

The Water Quality (WQ) Team of the Gulf of Mexico Alliance (GOMA) consists of state, federal,

non-government-organization (NGO), and private members. The WQ Team, one of six GOMA

teams, works to implement the water quality portions of the GOMA Governors’ Action Plan II.

The Team is composed of four workgroups, one of which is focused on monitoring. The

Monitoring Workgroup’s Action Plan includes creation of a framework to support Gulf-wide

monitoring. As part of this effort, the Workgroup has collaborated with the agencies and

entities that make up the Alliance as well as the Gulf Coast Ecosystem Restoration Task Force

and the Hypoxia Task Force to create an organizing structure for the Gulf Monitoring Network

(GMN).

Working toward implementing a GMN has been designed as a step-wise process:

1) Identify a structure to organize the development and implementation;

2) Identify the most important GOMA water quality monitoring issues for the Gulf;

3) For each of those issues, identify and rank the highest priority questions (that monitoring

can address);

4) Design the minimum monitoring system necessary to address the priority questions;

5) Perform a ‚gap analysis‛ comparing the necessary monitoring to that already in

existence;

6) Prepare an implementation plan, including funding, for putting a monitoring network in

place in the Gulf to address GOMA priorities;

7) Implement.

The design process has been expedited in preparation for the potential funding support for

some portions of the GMN from RESTORE Act penalties stemming from the BP Deepwater

Horizon oil blowout in 2010.

System design for the GMN is intended to provide answers to specific monitoring questions

(‚priority monitoring questions‛). The organizing structure relates monitoring system design to

the physical scale of the monitoring required to address the monitoring question. The WQ

Team has identified four scales around which to organize the GMN, three of which are of direct

interest to the WQ Team. The fourth (local scale) was defined for continuity with river and

stream monitoring, but is not directly addressed by the GMN. The three scales of interest to the

WQ Team are:

Estuary or Similar-Size Coastal Segment scale – answering the monitoring question

requires monitoring of a single estuary or a similarly-sized segment along the coast. This

scale tends to be based on coastal drainages. Examples: What are the trends in nutrient

concentrations in an estuary (or in each of many estuaries)? How are chlorophyll

concentrations related to specific nutrient regimes?


4

Regional scale – answering the monitoring question requires monitoring of a specific

region of the Gulf. The WQ Team has defined a ‚region‛ as anything smaller than the

Gulf-wide scale but larger than the Estuary or Similar-Size Coastal Segment scale.

Examples: What is the timing and size of hypoxic and anoxic waters in the Gulf Hypoxic

Zone off the Mississippi River? What is the distribution of primary red-tide-supporting

nutrients on the West Florida Shelf?

Gulf-wide scale – answering the monitoring question requires monitoring of the entire

Gulf of Mexico. Examples: What is the seasonal distribution and density of red tide

blooms in the Gulf of Mexico, and what is the trend over time? What is the monthly

distribution of nitrogen and phosphorus nutrients across the Gulf and what is their trend

over time?

The GOMA water quality monitoring priorities identified during the 2011 Monitoring Forum

are:

1. Nutrients

2. The GOMA human health priorities (of equal rank): Harmful algal blooms (HABs),

pathogens, and mercury in seafood.

A decision was made by the WQ Team to first develop monitoring designs for nutrients at all

scales (contained in this report), then to modify that design to accommodate the GOMA human

health priorities.

The GOMA Nutrients Team participated by identifying the highest priority nutrient monitoring

questions for the three scales of interest. These questions are listed separately in the report. The

monitoring design efforts of this workshop were focused on designing the minimum

monitoring system needed to properly address those questions, and this report describes the

results of that effort, including maps and monitoring matrices.

During the workshop, it became clear that the design of the GMN, including station location,

parameters monitored, or frequency required a modified framework. Questions were originally

framed addressing ‚Gulf-wide‛ or ‚Regional‛ scale monitoring; however, monitoring over the

continental shelf requires a different design than that for deep water. As a result, the physical

system design for answering the priority monitoring questions evolved into a meshed system of

monitoring system designs for estuary, coastal (out to the 10 m contour), shelf (10 m to the edge

of the Continental Shelf), and deep Gulf (beyond the shelf edge) systems. Together, these

provide the integrated monitoring system necessary to collect the data required to answer the

priority questions. These are discussed in more detail in the body of this report.


5

Priority Nutrient-Monitoring Questions Product of GOMA Nutrient Team

With added input from HABs Workgroup (in blue)

Estuary or Coastal Segment scale

High priority

1) What is the spatial and temporal variation in nutrient (carbon, nitrogen, phosphorus,

silicate) concentrations in the estuary or coastal segment?

For HABs physiology, it is essential to collect data on the nutrient species (i.e., NO2, NO3,

NH4, PO4, SIO2, urea, etc.).

Will micro-nutrients (vitamins, minerals, CDOM, etc.) be included?

Need to include measurements of nutrient flux and extend from freshwater through brackish

regions.

2) What is the long term trend in nutrient loading to the estuary or coastal segment?

3) Which biological/chemical/physical indicators are most susceptible to nutrient

enrichment in the estuary or coastal segment?

4) What is the long term trend in nutrient export from the estuary or coastal segment?

Retention is an important factor for HABs.

Medium priority

1) Are nutrients contributing to harmful algal blooms (HABs) within the estuary or coastal

segment?

Since nutrients are linked to phytoplankton dynamics, it may be more important to look at

anthropogenic loading or watershed loading.

2) What is the temporal variation in nutrient loading to the estuary or coastal segment?

HABs respond to nutrient fluxes rapidly, and therefore require near-real time sampling

frequencies.

3) What is the long term trend in biological or chemical responses to nutrients in the estuary

or coastal segment?

Low priority

1) Is groundwater a significant source of nutrients to the estuary or coastal segment?

2) Which nutrient(s) is limiting the biological/chemical/physical response within the estuary

or coastal segment?


6

Gulf-wide scale (In order of priority)

1) Which biological/chemical/physical indicators are most susceptible to nutrient enrichment

in the Gulf of Mexico?

2) What is the spatial and temporal variation and trends in nutrient concentrations within

the Gulf of Mexico?

3) How do circulation patterns in the Gulf of Mexico affect nutrient concentrations?

Regional scale (In order of priority)

1) What is the spatial and temporal variation and trends of nutrient loadings and

concentrations within the region?

2) Which biological/chemical/physical indicators are most susceptible to nutrient

enrichment within the region?

3) What is the long term trend in biological/chemical/physical responses to nutrients in the

region?

4) What is the relationship between nutrient loadings and the development of hypoxic

zones within the region?

5) What are the trends in the size, frequency, and duration of hypoxic water within the

region?

6) Are nutrients contributing to harmful algal blooms (HABs) within the region?

Need to develop monitoring system that includes measurements of nutrient fluxes

(upwelling, runoff, groundwater, recycled nutrients) to determine role of nutrient sources in

promoting bloom formation, sustenance, and expansion.


7

Summary and Results

The essential design concept at all scales is for the monitoring system to provide data needed to

determine the health of the resource with respect to nutrients. The key objectives of the design

are: 1) to estimate nutrient fluxes between different key parts of the Gulf system, and 2) to

support understanding of the nutrient processes occurring between flux points to clarify the

relationship between nutrient fluxes and endpoints of concern. A simplified example would be

to measure the nutrient flow into an estuary from a river (a flux point), the movement of

nutrients both out of and into the estuary through its mouth (another flux point), and develop

an understanding of the processing of nutrients between those flux points; e.g., monitoring can

be used to identify the nutrient fluxes responsible for changing conditions, such as the

replacement of nutrient uptake by seagrass beds with that of phytoplankton becoming the

primary nutrient consumer.

This report presents the nutrient-monitoring design for the Gulf Monitoring Network. This

design is intended to be modified to accommodate the remaining GOMA human-health

monitoring priorities; coastal pathogens, harmful algal blooms, and mercury in seafood.

Scale

Workshop participants decided that the scales of the physical system design should be

somewhat different than the scales used to organize the priority monitoring questions. Physical

features have a major effect on monitoring system requirements. As a result, the design laid out

in this report has evolved into a cohesive, interlocking monitoring design that better supports

the development of an integrated set of models able to predict the water quality between

sampling locations.

Participants realized that water-quality status and trend monitoring sufficient for good

management decisions is cost-prohibitive at this scale; therefore, models must be employed to

capture between-station conditions to address management needs.

The physical design consists of four meshed components: estuaries, coastal segments, shelf, and

deep-Gulf monitoring systems. The GMN monitoring area for estuaries was defined as starting

at the lowest point in the tributaries to the estuary where river flux can be measured. Coastal

segments comprise the waters lying along the coast out to the 10m contour line. Coastal

segment lengths are generally driven by coastal drainages and bathymetry and locations of

segment boundaries will be decided locally. The shelf consists of those areas from 10m to the

edge of the Continental Shelf. The deep Gulf includes the Continental Slope and the abyssal

areas. These four components reflect the fact that the factors controlling circulation are

significantly different in each. As a result, the hydrodynamic and water quality models for each

must be different and the monitoring systems that feed data to the models have different

designs.


8

Within this approach, participants also designed the network to incorporate any monitoring

planned for implementation by the Gulf of Mexico Hypoxia Task Force in the northern Gulf

("Gulf of Mexico Hypoxia Monitoring Implementation Plan", found at

http://www.ncddc.noaa.gov/activities/healthy-oceans/gulf-hypoxia-stakeholders/).

Creation of Draft Design Templates for Estuary and Coastal-Segment Monitoring

The rationale for developing templates for both estuarine and coastal segments around the Gulf

is that the incredible variability of these systems will require locally-driven development of a

design for each. Hence, meeting participants developed templates to ensure these designs

would capture a core of basic nutrient fluxes within the system, especially inputs and outputs,

to provide cross-Gulf comparability. The templates will assist local monitoring entities with the

minimum sampling locations necessary to be consistent with the coastal monitoring aspect of

the GMN.

A. Template for Estuary Monitoring

For the purposes of the Gulf Monitoring Network, estuaries were defined as starting at the

lowest point in the tributaries to the estuary where river flux can be measured. Location of the

seaward boundaries is a local decision, but they must align with the inshore boundary of coastal

waters so that there are not gaps in model coverage.

The rationale for the estuary template is to understand the nutrient fluxes into and out of the

estuary, whether from tributaries, runoff, or tidal exchange with coastal waters, and to tie them

into the adjoining coastal model to relate them to nearshore processes. The design of additional

estuarine sampling is locale-specific, is envisioned as a local process for collecting data, and

serves to guide nutrient-criteria development to protect aquatic resources (Figure 1 and Appendix

1A). To inform the local process, the meeting participants proposed an estuary monitoring

template initially designed to detect a 10% change over a two year period based on the response

of sensitive, rapidly-responding indicators tied to primary production. In the absence of pre-

existing information, early intensive monitoring may be needed to determine the siting of

monitoring stations, with the emphasis on relating to the coastal-segment monitoring stations.

The proposed template also focuses on quantifying flux, both into the estuary from tributaries

and runoff as well as into and out of the estuary mouth as a result of tidal exchange. Employed

models must include tidal fluctuations. The template requires a minimum number of fixed-site

buoys or piling-mounted instruments to be deployed within the estuary to collect data daily,

weekly, or monthly. In most cases, these will include deployments at the mouths of primary

tributaries, at locations where significant changes in estuary dynamics take place, such as the

flow ‚choke points‛. The buoys or pilings will be located to support the development of

estuarine water quality models, including those for determining critical nutrient loads.

The template proposes both buoys/pilings and boat-based monitoring at the surface (0.3m) and

the bottom, thereby providing a greater resolution of water column processes, including

http://www.ncddc.noaa.gov/activities/healthy-oceans/gulf-hypoxia-stakeholders/


9

Figure 1. GOMA GMN, Estuary Template

subsurface flow and chemistry. In addition to the required field measurements, the analyte list

includes the basic suite of marine nutrient analytes, as well as supporting parameters and

isotopes for additional data. Buoy/piling measurements will be made in 15-minute intervals to

assist in ground-truthing remote sensing data and assessing variability to optimize associated

periodic sampling.

Boat–mounted flow-through sensors operated between the fixed stations provide

complementary monitoring data to assess and identify changes in nutrients during transit

between flux points (i.e., as they move to the coastal area). The list of analytes needed to

accomplish this focuses at a minimum on the chemical suite listed for buoy/piling stations,

including surface and bottom measurements (see Estuary Monitoring matrix, Appendix 1B).

The local monitoring design process should address biologic indicators that show nutrient

impacts most quickly, such as seagrass, phytoplankton, or oysters. Additionally, the local

design process should also consider local geological issues, such as karst topography resulting

in groundwater inputs, to better understand estuarine processes.


10

Complete meteorological parameters (e.g., wind speed and direction, humidity, barometric

pressure, temperature), plus atmospheric deposition of nitrogen, iron and mercury, would be

included to complement the coastal monitoring of nutrient fluxes and mercury sources. The

design includes sediment monitoring of nutrients and markers for the overlying phtyo- and

zooplankton communities during the first two years and every five years thereafter to

understand sediment oxygen demand, nutrient flux, and nutrient-based changes in community

composition and abundance.

B. Template for Coastal-Segment Monitoring

‚Coastal‛ is defined as that area between the coastline and the 10m contour. The segment

boundaries are determined locally, but would generally be driven by coastal drainages and

local hydrography. Where estuaries adjoin a coastal segment, the two must share a common

boundary to prevent gaps in model coverage and promote good boundary-exchange

information.

The rationale for the coastal segment template is to understand the relationships between

discharges to the coast and the nutrient regimes and processes on the continental shelf beyond,

Figure 2. GOMA GMN, Coastal Segment Template


11

including those of estuarine discharges and flows to and from nearshore and offshore processes.

The design of coastal monitoring (Figure 2 and Appendix 2A) is envisioned as a local process to

create a system for collecting data to guide nutrient criteria development to protect aquatic

resources and other local needs. To inform the local process, the meeting participants proposed

a coastal segment monitoring template initially designed to detect a 10% change over a two-year

period in the response of sensitive, rapidly-responding indicators tied to primary production. In

the absence of pre-existing information, early intensive monitoring may be needed to determine

the siting of long-term monitoring stations, with the emphasis on tying into the continental shelf

monitoring stations. The proposed template focuses on quantifying flux in a tidal environment,

with the assumption that the accompanying models include tidal fluctuations. The template

requires a minimum number of fixed-site buoys to be deployed within the coastal segment area

to adequately characterize the state of coastal waters; these would collect data daily, weekly, or

monthly. In many cases, the most shoreward shelf buoy (i.e., at the 10m contour) will also serve

as the seaward station for the coastal scale design. A 10m contour line more than three (3) miles

from shore, which characterizes the Yucatan, parts of the west Florida shelf, and parts of

Louisiana, may require additional buoys located between the 10m line and the coastline to

properly capture nutrient transport processes. These intermediate buoys will be repeated

alongshore at a frequency determined in the local design process to support the development of

coastal models, including the determination of critical nutrient loads (see Coastal Segment Stations

map, Appendix 2A). The template proposes both buoys and ship monitoring at surface (0.3 m)

and the bottom, thereby providing a greater resolution of water column processes, including

subsurface flow and chemistry. In addition to the required field measurements, the analyte list

includes the basic suite of marine nutrient analytes, as well as supporting parameters and

isotopes for understanding nutrient processes. Complementary deterministic and probabilistic

monitoring by boats traveling along transects between the fixed stations using flow-through

sampling and measurements is needed to assess and identify changes in the way in which

nutrients are processed during transit between the flux points (i.e., as they move to the shelf or

from offshore upwelling or longshore-transport sources into the estuary). The list of analytes

needed to accomplish this focuses at a minimum on the chemical suite listed in the table for

buoy/piling stations, including surface and bottom measurements (see Coastal Segment matrix,

Appendix 2B).

In coastal segments where the bottom is in the photic zone, the local monitoring design process

should address biological indicators, such as seagrass, phytoplankton, oysters, or other primary

producers/consumers that will rapidly show nutrient changes. Additionally, the local design

process should also consider local geological issues, such as karst topography resulting in

groundwater inputs, to better understand coastal segment processes.



included at those locations where such information is not available to complement the coastal


12

monitoring of nutrient fluxes and mercury sources. The design includes sediment monitoring of

nutrients and phyto- and zooplankton communities during the first two years and every five

years after to understand sediment oxygen demand, nutrient flux, and nutrient-based changes

in community composition and abundance.

Creation of Draft Designs for Shelf and Deep-Gulf Areas

C. System for Shelf Monitoring

The Shelf is defined as that area from the 10 m contour out to the edge of the Continental Shelf.

The rationale for the proposed station locations (Figure 3 and Appendix 3A), monitoring

frequency, and parameters selected for the Shelf scale was to provide information on boundary

conditions to coastal and deep Gulf models, understand nutrient status and trends as well as

fluxes delivered to and from the shelf, and identify and better understand circulation patterns

(and how circulation patterns affect nutrient fate and transport). As proposed, the Shelf

monitoring design would include a series of transects consisting of four (4) fixed station buoys

from nearshore (near significant nutrient inputs) to the shelf edge at the 10m, 50m, 100m, and

Figure 3. GOMA GMN, Shelf Transects


13

200m isobaths. Lateral buoys would be sited along the 100m isobaths half way between each

transect to measure hydrodynamics as well as nutrient concentrations (these lateral stations are

not displayed on the Shelf Stations map, Figure 3 and Appendix 3A). The rationale for this

siting is to support design of nutrient water quality models, facilitate statistical comparisons

between and among stations, monitor nutrient inputs from estuarine areas to the shelf, and

understand nutrient transport across the shelf. Note that shelf buoy locations will be reviewed

and modified as appropriate by a panel of physical oceanographers so they best achieve the

nutrient monitoring goals laid out in this report.

The Shelf component of the GMN is designed to include complementary deterministic (trend)

sampling at and between the fixed stations (buoys and ship sites), and probabilistic stations

sampled by ship. A power analysis based on information from monitoring the Gulf Hypoxic

Zone would be used to conservatively identify the station density needed for probabilistic

monitoring on the shelf. This is based upon the workshop participants’ understanding that the

Gulf Hypoxic Zone is one of the most variable of the shelf environments. Additional or

subsequent data collection may allow regional shelf station densities to be reduced.

The rationale for using a variety of monitoring strategies, such as buoys, ships, remote sensing,

etc. is to provide both interpolation of data between fixed stations and ‚ground-truthing‛ of

both models and remotely-sensed data. Stationary buoys would monitor continuously or at

periodic intervals, with flow-through ship-based monitoring occurring along transects between

buoys on a monthly basis during buoy maintenance. The design proposes both buoys and ships

monitoring at surface (0.3m), mid-depth, and 3 m from the bottom, thereby providing a greater

resolution of water column processes, including subsurface flow and chemistry.

In addition to the required field measurements, the analyte list includes the basic suite of

marine nutrient analytes, as well as supporting parameters and isotopes needed for

understanding nutrient processes. The same list of analytes, except for isotopes, is proposed

for the probabilistic sampling, with the frequency determined by the amount of change that

must be detected and based on the above-mentioned power analysis (see Shelf Monitoring matrix,

Appendix 3B).



included to complement regional monitoring of nutrient fluxes and mercury sources. The

design includes sediment monitoring once every five years to understand sediment oxygen

demand, nutrient flux, and nutrient-based changes in community composition and abundance-

based analyses of phyto- and zooplankton communities to improve existing models and to

inform inferences on regional processes.


14

The rationale to define discrete monitoring regions in the Gulf will be determined as part of the

design process. Each discrete region must be meaningful, and selected to answer priority

questions raised by the Nutrients Team or Pathogens, HABs, or Mercury workgroups. One

proposed strategy is to perform a power analysis on the Gulf Hypoxia Monitoring data to

determine sampling design: that is, the density and frequency of monitoring required to detect a

particular change, e.g. 25%, in nutrient concentrations over a 5-year period.

Note: The paucity of stations west of the Yucatan in Mexico reflects gaps in knowledge of that

area among meeting participants. It is the intent to encourage location of similar stations in that

area following the same rationales.

Selected transects depicted on the map in Appendix 2A include an additional inshore station if

the 10m contour is greater than 3 mi. from shore; the purpose of this additional station is to

support modeling where the coastal segment is exceptionally wide.

The paired transects west of the Yucatan reflect a lack of certainty concerning the final selection

of significant features in that area. The transect(s) selection will be finalized later in the process

by Mexico.

D. System for Deep Gulf Monitoring

The rationales for selection of proposed station locations, monitoring frequency, and parameters

selected for the deep-water design were to a) relate nutrient changes to ecosystem shifts (and

changes in ecosystem services), b) provide data on boundary conditions for shelf models, c)

understand nutrient fluxes between deep water and the shelf, and d) identify and better

understand circulation patterns. Of critical interest is the need to characterize inflows and

outflows/cross sections (between Yucatan and Cuba and between Florida and Cuba) to

understand patterns and magnitude of nutrients flowing into and out of the Gulf, as well as the

inflow that bypasses the Gulf entirely (Figure 4 and larger version in Appendix 4A). Single stations

shown at the Gulf entrance and exit represent what is expected to be a more complex set of

stations needed to accomplish these goals. The proposed placement of the more centrally-

located stations informs the effort to understand basic fate and transport mechanisms within the

major Gulf Loop Current and its large eddies. Specifically, one centrally-located station is

intended to monitor the western boundary of the normal Loop Current; another is located more

towards the actual ‘center’ of the Gulf to support a better water quality model. Proposed

stations are situated to capture key upwelling zones along the deep-water shelf interfaces in the

Gulf, and to understand transport mechanisms by which nutrients move horizontally and

vertically. Note that shelf buoy locations will be reviewed and modified as appropriate by a

panel of physical oceanographers so they best achieve the nutrient monitoring goals laid out in

this report. As proposed, the deep-water part of the Gulf monitoring network would employ a

deterministic (fixed station network) network, ship-based sampling during buoy-maintenance

trips, and remote sensing. The workgroup proposed using a variety of monitoring strategies,


15

Figure 4. GOMA GMN, Deep Gulf Stations

such as buoys, ships, remote sensing, etc. to provide both interpolation of data among fixed

stations and ‚ground-truthing‛ of models and remotely-sensed data.

Stationary buoys would monitor continuously or at periodic intervals, with ship-based

monitoring using flow-through systems along transects between buoys during quarterly buoy

maintenance. The design proposes both buoys and ships to monitor at surface (0.3 m), mid-

depth (but still within the photic zone), and ‚bottom‛ (or as deep as available sensor technology

allows), thereby providing a greater resolution of water column processes, including subsurface

flow and chemistry.

In addition to the required field measurements of temperature, pH, conductivity, salinity and

dissolved oxygen (D.O.), the analyte list includes the basic suite of marine nutrient analytes as

well as supporting parameters and isotopes needed for understanding nutrient processes (see

Appendix 4B).


pressure, temperature) plus atmospheric deposition of nitrogen, iron and mercury, would be

included to complement pelagic monitoring of nutrient fluxes and mercury sources. The design

includes same-station monitoring of sediments once every five years for nutrients and


16

information on the overlying phyto- and zooplankton communities to establish background

sediment oxygen demand, nutrient flux, and nutrient-based changes in community composition

and abundance.

Note: The approximate station locations in the deep Gulf and on the continental shelf will be

reviewed by a panel of physical oceanographers to optimize their locations. In addition, the

paucity of stations on the maps west of the Yucatan in Mexico is due to gaps in knowledge of

that area among meeting participants. It is the intent to encourage location of similar stations in

that area following the same rationales.

Next Steps

The next steps in the process of developing a Gulf-wide monitoring network include:

Sponsoring a second joint workshop to incorporate and dovetail monitoring for

human health concerns, such as beach pathogens, harmful algal blooms, and

mercury in seafood, into the Gulf monitoring network.

Developing and submitting a white paper on the status and recommendations for

Gulf monitoring to the Gulf Restoration Council, the Centers for Excellence and other

funding pathways.

Holding a third joint workshop to refine the Gulf-wide Monitoring Network by

collaborating with additional Gulf partners to develop an implementation plan for

the network.

Facilitating the Gulf States’ development of estuarine and coastal segment

monitoring plans.

Implementation Challenges

Implementation challenges include:

Selecting the most cost–effective equipment and sensors, analytical methods, and field

logistics;

Collaborating with States, federal partners, NGOs, businesses, GCOOS, coastal

managers, Mexico, and other stakeholders to review, modify, and leverage the Gulf-wide

Monitoring Network design; and

Obtaining long-term funding to support the Gulf-wide monitoring network, potentially

through three of the five funding pathways detailed in the 2012 RESTORE Act.

Gulf of Mexico Alliance - Nutrient Monitoring Design Workshop Sept. 10-12, 2012 Sarasota, FL

A1

Appendix 1A. GOMA GMN, Estuary Template


A2

Appendix 1B. Estuary Analytes and Measurements

Monitoring

by:

Mon. type Frequency of Mon. Depth Analyte group Analyte group

goal

Analyte Notes

Remote

sens ing

Determinis tic Satel l i te schedule - da i ly,

weekly, monthly

Surface to

fi rs t optica l

depth

Phys Phys ica l s tate of

the ocean at

synoptic sca le.

Sea surface temperature (SST) Same as "Coastal"

Bio-optica l Ocean biomass ,

primary

productivi ty, and

optica l water

qual i ty at

synoptic sca le

Chlorophyl l , surface

photosynthetica l ly ava i lable

radiation (PAR), l ight

attenuation, water clari ty, water

turbidi ty

Same as "Coastal"

Buoy/pi l ing-

mounted, at

head of tide

in estuary

tributaries

Determinis tic 15-minute time steps for

phys ica l properties and for

typica l chemistry for load

ca lculations (where

sensors avai lable).

Monthly max, da i ly or

weekly i f poss ible when

grab samples required.

Water

column

Phys-chem Establ ish input

fluxes to estuary

Water temperature, pH,

a lka l ini ty, conductivi ty, dissolved

oxygen, flow.

Bedload nutrients needed

to feed model , but not a

required monitoring

parameter

Water clari ty &

characteris tics

Establ ish input

conditions to

estuary

Water clari ty (TSS and/or

Turbidi ty), Color (CDOM),

chlorophyl l

Nitrogen

nutrients

Nutrient fate and

process ing

Ammonia (NH3-N), TN, NO2, NO3,

urea

Phosphorus

nutrients

Nutrient fate and

process ing

Ortho P, Total P

Trace nutrients Nutrient fate and

process ing

Si l ica , Dissolved

Carbon Biologica l

process ing of

nutrients

TOC, DOC

Meteorology Water ci rculation

drivers

Wind speed, di rection,

atmospheric pressure, ra infa l l

Add met sensors i f nearest

avai lable instruments too

far away.

- Continued -

Gulf Monitoring Network, analytes & measurements for Estuaries portion of monitoring network


A3

Appendix 1B. Estuary Analytes and Measurements (concluded)

Monitoring

by:

Mon. type Frequency of Mon. Depth Analyte group Analyte group

goal

Analyte Notes

Buoy/pi l ing-

mounted, at

discharge

from estuary

to Gul f

Determinis tic 15-minute time steps for

phys ica l properties and for

typica l chemistry for load




weekly i f poss ible when

grab samples required.

Tida l conditions : spring

and neap tide conditions

(wet and dry seasons), ful l

moon, ideal ly would have

total tida l cycle.

Surface and

bottom

Phys-chem Interpolate data

between buoys ,

especia l ly at

depth

Water temperature, pH,

a lka l ini ty, conductivi ty, dissolved

oxygen, ADCP

Water clari ty &

characteris tics

Biologica l

process ing of

nutrients

Water clari ty (TSS and/or

Turbidi ty), Color (CDOM),

chlorophyl l

Nitrogen

nutrients

Nutrient fate and

process ing

Ammonia (NH3-N), TN, NO2, NO3,

urea

Phosphorus

nutrients

Nutrient fate and

process ing

Ortho P, Total P

Trace nutrients Phytoplankton

community

Si l ica , Dissolved

Carbon Biologica l

process ing of

nutrients

TOC, DOC, DIC


drivers



Add met sensors i f nearest

avai lable instruments too

far away.

NA Atmospheric

depos ition

Nutrient source

quanti fication

Atmospheric depos ition: TN,

Iron, Mercury?

Gulf Monitoring Network, analytes & measurements for Estuaries portion of monitoring network (concluded)


A4

Appendix 2A. GOMA GMN, Coastal Segment Template


A5

Appendix 2B. Coastal Segment Analytes and Measurements

Monitoring by: Mon. type Frequency of Mon. Depth Analyte group Analyte group goal Analyte Notes

Remote

sens ing

Determinis tic Satel l i te schedule -

da i ly, weekly, monthly

Surface

to fi rs t

optica l

depth

Phys Phys ica l s tate of the

ocean at synoptic

sca le.

Sea surface temperature (SST) Dropped SSHA and SSS

from "Deep Water" and

"Shel f" as these cannot

be derived rel iably from

satel l i tes for coasta l

waters

Bio-optica l Ocean biomass ,

primary productivi ty,

and optica l water

qual i ty at synoptic

sca le

Chlorophyl l , surface photosynthetica l ly

ava i lable radiation (PAR), l ight

attenuation, water clari ty, water

turbidi ty

Added water clari ty and

turbidi ty to "Deep

Water" and "Shel f"

Buoy/pi l ing-

mounted

Determinis tic 15-minute time steps

for phys ica l properties

and for typica l

chemistry for load




weekly i f poss ible

when grab samples

required.

Surface,

bottom

Buoy/pi l ing

mountable

sensors

Frequent

measurements to

ground truth remote

sens ing and assess

variabi l i ty to optimize

associated periodic

sampl ing.

ADCP, as many of measurements

sampled during vis i ts as sensor

technology a l lows.

Monthly maintenance


drivers

Wind speed, di rection, atmospheric

pressure, ra infa l l

Add met sensors i f

nearest avai lable

instruments too far

away.

Boat-based,

fixed s tations

Determinis tic Monthly, sampled

during buoy-

maintenance vis i ts

Surface,

bottom


between buoys ,

especia l ly at depth

Water temperature, sa l ini ty, pH,

a lka l ini ty, conductivi ty

Phytoplankton

community

Nutrient fate and

process ing

Chlorophyl l , DO, HPLC phytoplankton

community

Water clari ty &

characteris tics

Biologica l process ing

of nutrients

Water clari ty, secchi depth, TSS and/or

Turbidi ty, TDS; Color (CDOM); Optica l

parameters : red/blue backscatter,

transmissometer, attenuation

coefficient (Kd), PAR. - Continued -

Gulf Monitoring Network, analytes & measurements for Coastal (0m-10m) portion of monitoring network


A6

Appendix 2B. Coastal Segment Analytes and Measurements (concluded)


Ni trogen

nutrients

Nutrient fate and

process ing

DIN, ammonia (NH3-N), TN, TKN, NO2,

NO3, Dissolved NO3+NO2, Dissolved TN,

Dissolved NH3, urea, Particulate N

Phosphorus

nutrients

Nutrient fate and

process ing

Particulate P, Ortho P, DIP, TP, Dissolved

Total P


community

Si l ica , Dissolved and Particulate;

Trace nutrient metals (l i s t)

Carbon Biologica l process ing

of nutrients

TOC, DOC, DIC, Particulate Carbon,

hardness

Atmospheric

depos ition

Nutrient source

quanti fication

Atmospheric depos ition: TN, Iron,

Mercury?

Annual ly Bottom Sediments Biologica l process ing

of nutrients

Phytoplankton community s tructure,

zooplankton community s tructure, some

sediment profi l ing, TOC, TN, TP, s table

i sotopes , sul fur

Gulf Monitoring Network, analytes & measurements for Coastal (0m-10m) portion of monitoring network (concluded)


A7

Appendix 3A. GOMA GMN, Shelf Transects


A8

Appendix 3B. Shelf Analytes and Measurements


Remote

sens ing

Determinis tic Satel l i te schedule -

da i ly, weekly,

monthly

Surface to fi rs t

optica l depth

Phys-chem Phys ica l and

chemical s tates of

the ocean at

synoptic sca le.

Sea surface temperature (SST),

sea surface height anomaly

(SSHa), sea surface sa l ini ty

(SSS)

Same as "Deep Water"

Bio-optica l Ocean biomass and

primary productivi ty

at synoptic sca le




attenuation

Same as "Deep Water"

Buoy-mounted Determinis tic Continuous or

periodic sens ing

(depending on

avai lable

technology).

Sensor packages at

surface, 2-3 meters

from bottom, and at

ha l f water depth.

BSOP of poss ible.

Buoy

mountable

sensors

Frequent

measurements to

ground truth remote

sens ing and assess

variabi l i ty to

optimize associated

periodic sampl ing.

ADCP, as many of

measurements sampled

during vis i ts as sensor


Foul ing not expected to

a l low quarterly

maintenance.

Meteorology Ocean ci rculation

drivers



Add met sensors i f

nearest avai lable

instruments too far away.

Ship-based,

fixed s tations

a long transects

(at buoys and

hal f way

between)

Determinis tic Monthly, sampled

during buoy-


Surface, 3 meters

from bottom,

intermediate


between buoys ,


Water temperature, sa l ini ty,

pH, a lka l ini ty, conductivi ty

Buoys l ikely to need

greater than quarterly

maintenance closer to

shore. Can sample

transects monthly even i f

maintenance can be

quarterly.

Phytoplankton

community

Nutrient fate and

process ing

Chlorophyl l , DO, HPLC

phytoplankton community

Water clari ty &

characteris tics

Biologica l

process ing of

nutrients

Water clari ty, secchi depth,

TSS and/or Turbidi ty, TDS;

Color (CDOM); Optica l

parameters : red/blue

backscatter, transmissometer,

attenuation coefficient (Kd),

PAR. - Continued -

Gulf Monitoring Network, analytes & measurements for Continental Shelf (10m-200m) portion of monitoring network


A9

Appendix 3B. Shelf Analytes and Measurements (continued)


Nitrogen

nutrients

Nutrient fate and

process ing

DIN, ammonia (NH3-N), TN,

TKN, NO2, NO3, Dissolved

NO3+NO2, Dissolved TN,

Dissolved NH3, urea,

Particulate N

Phosphorus

nutrients

Nutrient fate and

process ing

Particulate P, Ortho P, DIP, TP,

Dissolved Total P


community

Si l ica , Dissolved and

Particulate;

Trace nutrient metals (l i s t)

Carbon Biologica l

process ing of

nutrients

TOC, DOC, DIC, Particulate

Carbon, hardness

Atmospheric

depos ition

Nutrient source

quanti fication


Iron, Mercury?

Perhaps every 5 yrs?

Depends on

variabi l i ty. Use

ini tia l results and

NRDA study results to

help determine

frequency after

ini tia l sampl ing.

Bottom Sediments Biologica l

process ing of

nutrients

Sediment cores with

biomarkers of phytoplankton

community s tructure, some

sediment profi l ing, TOC, TN,

TP, s table i sotopes , sul fur.

Sediment oxygen demand,

Sediment nutrient flux (?)

After ini tia l sampl ing and

cons idering results from

ongoing NRDA studies ,

parameter l i s t and

frequency for core

sampl ing wi l l be decided.

Sediment record very

va luable and info can be

col lected no other way.

Sediments are priori ty for

s table i sotope analys is .

Is SNF a s tandard

measurement, or some

suite of measurements?

TBD Isotopes Nutrient fate and

process ing

Isotopes : frequency and

dis tribution TBD

- Continued -

Gulf Monitoring Network, analytes & measurements for Continental Shelf (10m-200m) portion of monitoring network (continued)


A10

Appendix 3B. Shelf Analytes and Measurements (continued)


Ship-based,

underway,

a long transects

between fixed

s tations

? Monthly, sampled

during buoy-


Surface and ?? Phys-chem Interpolate data

between buoys ,


ADCP (towed or ship-

attached), water temperature,

sa l ini ty, pH, a lka l ini ty,

conductivi ty

Buoys l ikely to need

greater than quarterly

maintenance closer to

shore. Can sample

transects monthly even i f

maintenance can be

quarterly.

Phytoplankton

community

Nutrient fate and

process ing



Water clari ty &

characteris tics

Biologica l

process ing of

nutrients

Water clari ty, TSS and/or

Turbidi ty, TDS; Color (CDOM);

Optica l parameters : red/blue



PAR.

Nitrogen

nutrients

Nutrient fate and

process ing





Particulate N

Phosphorus

nutrients

Nutrient fate and

process ing


Dissolved Total P

Carbon Biologica l

process ing of

nutrients

TOC, Particulate Carbon (is this

depos ition?), hardness

NA Atmospheric

depos ition

Nutrient source

quanti fication


Iron, Mercury

Ship-based,

probabi l i s tic

s tations

Probabi l i s tic Biannual ly? Use

Hypoxia Zone data to

assess frequency

and dens i ty needed

to detect des ired

amount of change.

Water column Phys-chem Interpolate data

between buoys ,


ADCP (towed or ship-

attached), water temperature,

sa l ini ty, pH, a lka l ini ty,

conductivi ty

- Continued -

Gulf Monitoring Network, analytes & measurements for Continental Shelf (10m-200m) portion of monitoring network (continued)


A11

Appendix 3B. Shelf Analytes and Measurements (concluded)


Phytoplankton

community

Nutrient fate and

process ing



Water clari ty &

characteris tics

Biologica l

process ing of

nutrients






PAR.

Nitrogen

nutrients

Nutrient fate and

process ing





Particulate N

Phosphorus

nutrients

Nutrient fate and

process ing


Dissolved Total P

Carbon Biologica l

process ing of

nutrients


Carbon (is this depos ition?),

hardness

Gulf Monitoring Network, analytes & measurements for Continental Shelf (10m-200m) portion of monitoring network (concluded)


A12

Appendix 4A. GOMA GMN, Deep Gulf Stations


A13

Appendix 4B. Deep Gulf Analytes and Measurements


remote sens ing Determinis tic Satel l i te schedule -

da i ly, weekly,

monthly

Surface to fi rs t

optica l depth

Phys-chem Phys ica l and

chemical s tates of

the ocean at

synoptic sca le.

Sea surface temperature (SST),

sea surface height anomaly

(SSHa), sea surface sa l ini ty

(SSS)

Same as "Shel f"

Bio-optica l Ocean biomass and

primary productivi ty

at synoptic sca le




attenuation

Same as "Shel f"

Buoy-mounted Determinis tic Continuous or

periodic sens ing

(depending on

avai lable

technology).

Sensor packages at

surface. deep, and

intermediate.

"Deep" is to l imit of

technology. Middle

to be chosen by phy

ocn at s table

dens i ty cl ine. BSOP

i f poss ible.

Buoy

mountable

sensors

Frequent

measurements to

ground truth remote

sens ing and assess

variabi l i ty to

optimize associated

periodic sampl ing.

ADCP, as many of

measurements sampled

during vis i ts as sensor


Meteorology Ocean ci rculation

drivers



Add met sensors i f

nearest avai lable

instruments too far

away.

Ship-based,

fixed s tations

a long transects

(at buoys and

hal f way

between)

Determinis tic Quarterly, sampled

during buoy-


(more frequent at

Gul f entrance/exit

s tations)

Surface, mid-depth

(focused on photic

zone), bottom.

Profi le i f technology

a l lows.


between buoys ,


Water temperature, sa l ini ty,


Phytoplankton

community

Nutrient fate and

process ing



- Continued -

Gulf Monitoring Network, analytes & measurements for Deep Water (>200m) portion of monitoring network


A14

Appendix 4B. Deep Gulf Analytes and Measurements (continued)


Water clari ty &

characteris tics

Biologica l

process ing of

nutrients

Water clari ty, secchi depth, TSS

and/or Turbidi ty, TDS; Color

(CDOM); Optica l parameters :

red/blue backscatter,

transmissometer, attenuation

coefficient (Kd), PAR.

Nitrogen

nutrients

Nutrient fate and

process ing





Particulate N

Phosphorus

nutrients

Nutrient fate and

process ing


Dissolved Total P


community

Si l ica , Dissolved and

Particulate;

Trace nutrient metals

Carbon Biologica l

process ing of

nutrients


Carbon, hardness

Atmospheric

depos ition

Nutrient source

quanti fication


Iron, Mercury

Depends on

variabi l i ty perhaps

every 10 years ). Use

ini tia l results and

NRDA study results

to help determine

frequency after

ini tia l sampl ing.

Bottom Sediments Long-term trend in

nutrient loading

Cores with biomarkers for


s tructure, some sediment

profi l ing, TOC, TN, TP, s table

i sotopes of N, sul fur.

After ini tia l sampl ing

and cons idering results

from ongoing NRDA

studies , parameter l i s t

and frequency for core

sampl ing wi l l be

decided. Sediment

record very va luable and

info can be col lected no

other way.

TBD Isotopes Nutrient fate and

process ing

Isotopes : frequency and

dis tribution TBD

- Continued -

Gulf Monitoring Network, analytes & measurements for Deep Water (>200m) portion of monitoring network (continued)


A15

Appendix 4B. Deep Gulf Analytes and Measurements (concluded)


Ship-based,

underway

between fixed-

station

transects

Determinis tic Quarterly, sampled

during buoy-


? Phys-chem Interpolate data

between buoys ,


ADCP (towed or ship-attached),

water temperature, sa l ini ty,


Phytoplankton

community

Nutrient fate and

process ing



Water clari ty &

characteris tics

Biologica l

process ing of

nutrients






PAR.

Nitrogen

nutrients

Nutrient fate and

process ing





Particulate N

Phosphorus

nutrients

Nutrient fate and

process ing


Dissolved Total P

Carbon Biologica l

process ing of

nutrients

TOC, Particulate Carbon,

hardness

Atmospheric

depos ition

Nutrient source

quanti fication


Iron, Mercury

Gulf Monitoring Network, analytes & measurements for Deep Water (>200m) portion of monitoring network (concluded)

Documents

Gulf Monitoring Network › files › projects › files › ...Gulf of Mexico Alliance Nutrient Monitoring Design Workshop Sept. 10-12, 2012 Sarasota, FL v List of Design Workshop