The Albemarle-Pamlico NEP does great things, but is it successful in creating a healthy ecosystem?

Kim Rosov is a student in the Masters of Coastal and Ocean Policy program at UNC Wilmington. She has been working at the UNCW Center for Marine Science since receiving her Masters of Marine Science degree in 2009. By developing a knowledge base of both disciplines, she hopes to become a liaison between science and policy, working to apply science to conservation and environmental issues that are becoming increasingly important in our society.

Albemarle-Pamlico National Estuary (Photo Credit: APNEP Facebook page)

In recent years, the demand for clean water in these areas has highlighted the need maintain and sustain ecological health. Since the mid-20th century, North Carolina residents and policy makers considered the economic benefits of coastal urban development to outweigh resulting environmental degradation. North Carolina has one of the largest estuarine systems in the United States. This system has recreational, economic and cultural significance to midatlantic states, particularly residents near the Virginia-North Carolina border.

The Albemarle-Pamlico National Estuary Partnership (APNEP) operates as a cooperative effort between the US Environmental Protection Agency and NC Department of Environmental Quality in order to identify, protect, and restore the significant resources of the Albemarle-Pamlico estuarine system (Figure 1, www.apnep.nc.gov). 

Figure 1: River Basins and major sounds of the Albemarle-Pamlico Estuarine System (Image from Carpenter and Dubbs 2012)

APNEP is part of the National Estuary Program, created in 1987 to protect and restore the water quality and ecological integrity of estuaries of national significance (www.epa.gov).

Over the past 30 years, APNEP received over $16 million from the EPA alone (plus leveraging funds) to pursue their mission (APNEP Program Evaluation Package 2018). They have had many successes, ranging from extensive seagrass monitoring to oyster restoration projects to facilitating partnerships with a variety of public and non-profit entities across two states. Yet with only one Ecosystem Assessment (2012), APNEP has no barometer on the current health of the ecosystem.

One challenge in APNEP’s ability to make headway is its focus on “ecosystem health.” 

Though a noble goal, the concept of ecosystem health is unwieldy and different people conceptualize and measure it in different ways. So, meeting the goal of ecosystem health as construed by a number of users leaves APNEP mired in data collection on almost anything and everything. The resource and time demand for such data collection are burdensome if not simply impractical leaving APNEP doomed to another 10 years of inadequate understanding on which to move forward.

The current Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan (2012-2022) addresses 24 ecosystem indicators that APNEP intends to measure and chart the course for their activities over the next decade. These metrics support ecosystem outcomes that correlate to three overarching goals that, if fully met, would reflect a healthy Albemarle-Pamlico estuarine system.

These management goals are:

• A region where human communities are sustained by a functioning ecosystem

• A region where aquatic, wetland, and upland habitats support viable populations of native species

• A region where water quantity and quality maintain ecological integrity

The 24 ecosystem indicators range from water quality standard violations to firefly populations (Table 1). But these indicators are currently in development.  This means that APNEP still does not have a clear analysis of Ecosystem Health.

Table 1: Examples of ecosystem indicators addressing 3 APNEP goals to achieve ecosystem health, found in the APNEP Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan

Because many ecosystem benefits (economic, environmental, and social) are tied to the cycling of nutrients in the watershed, we can analyze trends in nutrient dynamics as a proxy for overall health of the estuary. Excessive nutrient loading is often linked directly to anthropogenic sources and is associated with excessive algal blooms and low biological oxygen demand that can impair the biotic communities throughout the estuary. 

Therefore, addressing excessive nutrient loading can have secondary effects on various components of the ecosystem. Simply by focusing on already existing data about excessive nitrogen in the water or rather, “Total Nitrogen” (TN) we can see that the water quality in the Neuse and Tar Rivers (a larger percentage of the total APNEP management region) is poor.  As a result, larger orders of ecosystem health of the estuary is not possible.

Figure 2: Average TN loads over time at one station on the Neuse River (Ft. Barnwell), paired with the yearly mean flow rate.  Average TN loads increase by 11% between the baseline period and the post-implementation period.  Image found in Deamer 2009

Figure 3: Differences in N species domination of TN composition between 1988-2000 and 2001-2013. Image from Ludwig-Monty 2015

APNEP has several available options available to more effectively position its resources towards meeting the goals the EPA has set out for it.

• Limit monitoring to one metric, Water Quality, to meet the National Estuary Program mission to restore and protect WQ.

• Use already existing water quality data on TN loading, chl a violations, DO violations, or shellfish bed closures. Where necessary supplement existing monitoring efforts so this data is available on a more regular basis, at a minimum annually. Measure and/or compile information annually to infer and track the health of the ecosystem.

• Design a management strategy to combat the decline in water quality; this effort will meet their secondary goals related to human use and sustainable biotic communities.

• Narrow the scope of their mission to ecosystem restoration, community outreach, or outdoor education or adjust their mission to program facilitation in order to direct resources to appropriate people/issues/governments.