State of the Estuaries in the Mid-Atlantic Region of the United States

The U.S. EPA has prepared a State of the Region Report for Mid-Atlantic Estuaries to increase knowledge of environmental condition for improved environmental management. Sources of information included the National Estuary Programs, the Chesapeake Bay Program, the state monitoring programs in Delaware, Maryland, and Virginia, Federal programs such as National Status & Trends, National Shellfish Register, National Wetlands Inventory, the Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Program, and other primary literature sources. The state of the estuarine environment was summarized using indicators for water and sediment quality, habitat change, condition of living resources, and aesthetic quality. Each indicator was briefly discussed relative to its importance in understanding estuarine condition. Wherever possible, data from multiple programs were used to depict condition. Finally, an overall evaluation of estuarine condition in the region was determined. The usefulness of monitoring programs that collect consistent information with a well-defined sampling design cannot be overemphasized.     

Condition of the Mid-Atlantic Estuaries: Production of a State of the Environment Report

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has released a report entitled Condition of the Mid-Atlantic Estuaries. That report summarizes the findings of several studies conducted by federal and state agencies and academic institutions in Chesapeake Bay, Delaware Estuary, and the coastal bays of Delaware, Maryland, and Virginia, and simultaneously addresses two distinct audiences: environmental managers and the general public. This paper documents the process of preparing the Estuaries Report, emphasizing the lessons learned in merging information from a wide-variety of sources and in reporting the results to multiple audiences. The major difficulties in preparing the report included: 1) choosing a format and topics that adequately addressed both environmental managers and the public, 2) resolving spatial and temporal disparities in the assembled data sets, and 3) establishing threshold values that distinguished between acceptable and unacceptable conditions in indicators. Our solutions to these challenges and alternatives are discussed. We conclude that a small team of knowledgeable scientists can effectively merge the information of diverse sources into a document that is useful to both environmental managers and the interested public. However, considerable interaction between the team and other scientists was necessary to resolve ambiguities and assure relevancy and accuracy. These findings support the proposition that the vast sources of existing environmental information can be easily and effectively used to assess the ecological condition across large regions.