Puget Sound Nutrient Watch: Algal Blooms

Welcome to our fourth installment of “Puget Sound Nutrient Watch,” an ongoing series of blogs that will focus on the problem of excess nutrients in Puget Sound.

Noctiluca scintillans bloom at Saltwater State Park in Des Moines June 4, 2018. Photo by Laura Hermanson.

During the first week of June, Laura Hermanson from the Department of Ecology BEACH Program noticed a red algae – Noctiluca – bloom during regular weekly bacteria monitoring at Saltwater State Park in Des Moines. 

Other blooms were also recently reported to Ecology. There was one reported to us at Seattle’s Alki Beach on June 2. And staff from our marine monitoring program, Eyes Over Puget Sound, also found presence of Noctiluca blooms present at Budd Inlet, Central Basin and Whidbey Basin during their regular fly overs of Puget Sound.

So what is this tomato soup looking stuff near our shorelines? What causes it? Is it harmful? 

Is this part of a natural cycle or abnormal?

We learned in our third installment of “Puget Sound Nutrient Watch: What is the Problem with Nutrients?” that excess nutrients can cause an explosion of algae growth called algal blooms. This rapid growth of algae can starve the aquatic environment of light and dissolved oxygen, compromising its ability to support aquatic life.

What causes these spring and summer blooms?

Each spring, Puget Sound receives an influx of fresh water from melting snow fueling our rivers. This less dense fresh water flows into the Puget Sound mixes with salt water to create a warm, nutrient-rich, surface layer that supports growing plankton populations. Spring and summer in the Pacific Northwest are marked by long days, warmer temperatures, and few storms. All of these factors contribute to slow circulation of water and an increase in layering within the water, called stratification.

Extra nitrogen and other nutrients that enters Puget Sound from human and natural sources, help feed these plankton populations until their populations grow to a bloom. Eventually the plankton bloom will use all the nutrients in the surface waters, their growth will slow until they die and sink deeper and some to the ocean floor to decay.

Budd Inlet taken from an Eyes over Puget Sound flight June, 2018.

Is this harmful?

An increase in the abundance of Noctiluca is an indication of an unbalanced system, and while the plankton is not toxic itself, their presence creates a cascade of effects in the marine food web. 

Please visit the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration website if you are interested or have concerns about Harmful Algal Blooms or other Marine Biotoxins.

What is it?

Noctiluca is a single-celled organism, in a group called dinoflagellates, that eats smaller phytoplankton and planktonic larvae that make up the base of a healthy marine food chain. Noctiluca contains high concentrations of ammonia which make them unappetizing prey in the food chain. Studies have shown this ammonia has a negative impact on juvenile fish within the population.

An Ecology study conducted from 2011-2015 explored the conditions in the Puget Sound that led to Noctiluca blooms by affixing sensors to ferry vessels to continuously measure plankton populations between Seattle and Victoria B.C.. When large blooms of Noctiluca exist in Puget Sound, their ravenous feeding patterns lead to a boom-and-bust of the plankton populations. 

While Noctiluca are naturally occurring and blooms have been observed and recorded in Puget Sound since the 1940’s, there is growing concern that human-caused nutrient over-enrichment is increasing the intensity, changing the timing, and increasing the spatial distribution of Noctiluca blooms.

What is being done?

Eyes over Puget Sound takes to the air once a month to obtain high-resolution aerial photographs, record observations, and gather water quality data at 37 remote marine monitoring stations to track and record how weather and climate are shaping Puget Sound water quality. Their June monitoring showed Noctiluca blooms present in Budd Inlet, Central Basin and Whidbey Basin. This recording and communication of large scale influence and impacts has helped inform Ecology’s nutrient reduction work.

The Puget Sound Nutrient Reduction Project aims to use science and collaboration to develop a plan to restore and protect Puget Sound water quality from local human sources of nutrient over-enrichment which feed algae growth. The Puget Sound Nutrient Forum is a collaborative stakeholder process that is actively seeking additional community involvement. To learn more and sign up for updates regarding the Puget Sound Nutrient Forum, visit our website. 

To learn more about Noctiluca and eutrophication, read “Dead plankton leave clues to a food-web mystery” by Christopher Dunagan at the Encyclopedia of Puget Sound.

By: Samantha Russell, Water Quality Program

Reflections on first Puget Sound Nutrient Forum

Next forum on May 30 continues conversation on finding water quality solutions

Padilla Bay

On April 25, key decision makers, scientists, and practitioners met at the first Puget Sound Nutrient Forum to form an advisory workgroup, to learn about what’s threatening Puget Sound water quality, and suggest ways to reduce human sources of nutrients.

“There were a lot of questions on the science.  What is the science saying about the problem and why do we need to do something about it? It was very encouraging to hear,” said Ecology’s Dustin Bilhimer.

Bilhimer is our manager for the Puget Sound Nutrient Source Reduction Project.  The project aims to use science and collaboration to develop a plan to restore and protect Puget Sound water quality with respect to nutrient over-enrichment.

What’s the problem?
Stormwater runoff containing fertilizers, human waste leaking from septic tanks, and outfalls of sewage, processed or not, creates a nutrient-rich environment in Puget Sound that feeds algae growth and chokes out important aquatic life.

As our regional population continues to grow, our impacts on the Sound intensifies. We are seeing signs throughout Puget Sound. And the situation will only worsen unless we take steps over the next decade to address growth and development in ways that won’t degrade water quality and impair the ability of marine species to survive and thrive.

We must support and improve the ecological systems that make Puget Sound more resilient to the effects of population growth and climate change.

Puget Sound and Seattle

Looking for collaborative solutions
The workgroup includes of members of the wastewater treatment plant and stormwater regulated community, environmental groups, tribes as well as local, state, and federal agencies. Many members of the public also attended.

By convening the first forum, Bilhimer hoped to create a space for collaboration on options for nutrient reductions in the Sound. He was pleased there was so much interest in the first meeting and knows this is only the beginning.

“The feedback was all very good.  Folks appreciated the opportunity for input. They appreciated the method we were using to get feedback from the public, industry and tribes. I want to make sure the meetings are meaningful and we get meaningful feedback from the participants. We are using that feedback to structure the next meeting.”

Bilhimer is encouraging anyone who is interested to be a part of the next event, scheduled for 10 a.m. to 3 p.m. May 30th at the SeaTac Red Lion. He is looking for people from local areas, industry, tribes, recreational groups, conservation districts, salmon recovery groups, or anyone else.

“We need to keep educating people so they understand why nutrients are a problem what is needed to correct that problem, and to be a part of the solution. We want to bring scientists from Ecology and from other places together to help get the full picture of what is happening in the Sound. It’s going to be a long process.”

The next series of forum gatherings will include more on the science of Puget Sound, including trends, aesthetic uses, and climate change impacts, the food web, and acidification. Future meetings will also look at what we are doing about the nutrient issue, including modeling, measuring recovery, source control options, permitting, learning from similar efforts in other states, implementing solutions, affordability and funding sources.

All forums are open to the public and we will be posting materials on our website.  Those who can’t attend in person can participate via webinar.

 “Ideally at the end of this project we will have a plan, supported by stakeholders, that Ecology can implement through our regulatory authority and that achieves our water quality improvement goals and meets standards,” said Bilhimer.

For more information on the Puget Sound Nutrient Forum, visit our website.

The Sound at sunset

Update about making Puget Sound a No Discharge Zone for vessel sewage

By Sandy Howard, communication manager, Water Quality Program

It’s time to get back to you about our idea to ask that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency make Puget Sound, including Lake Washington, Lake Union and the Lake Washington Ship Canal, off limits to discharging sewage from vessels.

The proposed no discharge zone is part of the state Puget Sound Partnership’s Action Agenda to restore and protect water quality in Washington’s inland marine waters.

One of many actions to help Puget Sound

We are taking on pollution problems on many fronts. This move would join other pollution prevention tactics we’re using, such as finding and fixing failing septic systems, dealing with pet waste, treating our municipal wastewater, and managing our polluted stormwater runoff.

In April, Ecology completed its public comment period on the proposal to potentially establish a no discharge zone. We received more than 26,000 comments in support and about 600 who identified concerns.

We’re currently summarizing the comments. And we’re continuing to work with people who have a variety of viewpoints on the topic.

It will take time

Our goal is to shape a thoughtful proposal. It will take time to do this right. We currently estimate it will be about a year before we make our recommendation to EPA on whether we'll move forward with a no discharge zone or what form it should take.

We plan to consider all input to inform our decision. And, we expect EPA to convene its own public process prior to making a final decision on any no discharge zone.

Thanks for your comments

Most of all we thank everybody for taking time to let us know your thoughts.

Here are a few points we’d like to reiterate:

• There are more than 80 no discharge zones in 26 states. This would be the first one for Washington.
  
• Boat sewage may be small in volume compared to other pollution sources, but this pollution source is not stationary – vessels and their sewage discharges can move into or near sensitive waters placing water quality and public health at risk.
• The draft proposal would affect a limited number of boats overall that need to retrofit. We plan to give vessels the time they need to comply. For example, we propose that tugs and commercial fishing vessels have three years to retrofit their boats with holding tanks, allowing for costs to be phased in and financed over time.
• Some have suggested a partial no discharge zone be adopted – and only make certain areas off limits to vessel sewage. Research tells us that this piecemeal approach has not worked well in other states as it tends to create “dumping zones.”
• Research shows that there is more than adequate pump-out capacity for recreational boaters. For commercial boaters, most discharge at sea and others can use mobile pump-outs, certain dedicated pump-outs, or pumper trucks.
• And, we are exploring options to include more commercial, stationary pump out facilities.

Most boaters already practice good stewardship and keep their vessel sewage discharges from getting into our waters. Establishing a no discharge zone would ensure that is true for all vessels.

After all, when it comes down to clean water, we’re all in the same boat.

---