The multiple stressor ecological risk assessment for the mercury-contaminated South River and upper Shenandoah River using the Bayesian network-relative risk model.

We have conducted a regional scale risk assessment using the Bayesian Network Relative Risk Model (BN-RRM) to calculate the ecological risks to the South River and upper Shenandoah River study area. Four biological endpoints (smallmouth bass, white sucker, Belted Kingfisher, and Carolina Wren) and 4 abiotic endpoints (Fishing River Use, Swimming River Use, Boating River Use, and Water Quality Standards) were included in this risk assessment, based on stakeholder input. Although mercury (Hg) contamination was the original impetus for the site being remediated, other chemical and physical stressors were evaluated. There were 3 primary conclusions from the BN-RRM results. First, risk varies according to location, type and quality of habitat, and exposure to stressors within the landscape. The patterns of risk can be evaluated with reasonable certitude. Second, overall risk to abiotic endpoints was greater than overall risk to biotic endpoints. By including both biotic and abiotic endpoints, we are able to compare risk to endpoints that represent a wide range of stakeholder values. Third, whereas Hg reduction is the regulatory priority for the South River, Hg is not the only stressor driving risk to the endpoints. Ecological and habitat stressors contribute risk to the endpoints and should be considered when managing this site. This research provides the foundation for evaluating the risks of multiple stressors of the South River to a variety of endpoints. From this foundation, tools for the evaluation of management options and an adaptive management tools have been forged. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2017;13:85-99. © 2016 SETAC.

Using the Bayesian network relative risk model risk assessment process to evaluate management alternatives for the South River and upper Shenandoah River, Virginia.

We have conducted a series of regional scale risk assessments using the Bayesian Network Relative Risk Model (BN-RRM) to evaluate the efficacy of 2 remediation options in the reduction of risks to the South River and upper Shenandoah River study area. The 2 remediation options were 1) bank stabilization (BST) and 2) the implementation of best management practices for agriculture (AgBMPs) to reduce Hg input in to the river. Eight endpoints were chosen to be part of the risk assessment, based on stakeholder input. Although Hg contamination was the original impetus for the site being remediated, multiple chemical and physical stressors were evaluated in this analysis. Specific models were built that incorporated the changes expected from AgBMP and BST and were based on our previous research. Changes in risk were calculated, and sensitivity and influence analyses were conducted on the models. The assessments indicated that AgBMP would only slightly change risk in the study area but that negative impacts were also unlikely. Bank stabilization would reduce risk to Hg for the smallmouth bass and belted kingfisher and increase risk to abiotic water quality endpoints. However, if care were not taken to prevent loss of nesting habitat to belted kingfisher, an increase in risk to that species would occur. Because Hg was only one of several stressors contributing to risk, the change in risk depended on the specific endpoint. Sensitivity analysis provided a list of variables to be measured as part of a monitoring program. Influence analysis provided the range of maximum and minimum risk values for each endpoint and remediation option. This research demonstrates the applicability of ecological risk assessment and specifically the BN-RRM as part of a long-term adaptive management scheme for managing contaminated sites. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2017;13:100-114. © 2016 SETAC.

Ecosystem services in the Great Lakes.

A comprehensive inventory of ecosystem services across the entire Great Lakes basin is currently lacking and is needed to make informed management decisions. A greater appreciation and understanding of ecosystem services, including both use and non-use services, may have avoided misguided resource management decisions in the past that have resulted in legacies inherited by future generations. Given the interest in ecosystem services and lack of a coherent approach to addressing this topic in the Great Lakes, a summit was convened involving 28 experts working on various aspects of ecosystem services in the Great Lakes. The invited attendees spanned a variety of social and natural sciences. Given the unique status of the Great Lakes as the world's largest collective repository of surface freshwater, and the numerous stressors threatening this valuable resource, timing was propitious to examine ecosystem services. Several themes and recommendations emerged from the summit. There was general consensus that 1) a comprehensive inventory of ecosystem services throughout the Great Lakes is a desirable goal but would require considerable resources; 2) more spatially and temporally intensive data are needed to overcome our data gaps, but the arrangement of data networks and observatories must be well-coordinated; 3) trade-offs must be considered as part of ecosystem services analyses; and 4) formation of a Great Lakes Institute for Ecosystem Services, to provide a hub for research, meetings, and training is desirable. Several challenges also emerged during the summit, which are discussed in the paper.

A general risk-based adaptive management scheme incorporating the Bayesian Network Relative Risk Model with the South River, Virginia, as case study.

Adaptive management has been presented as a method for the remediation, restoration, and protection of ecological systems. Recent reviews have found that the implementation of adaptive management has been unsuccessful in many instances. We present a modification of the model first formulated by Wyant and colleagues that puts ecological risk assessment into a central role in the adaptive management process. This construction has 3 overarching segments. Public engagement and governance determine the goals of society by identifying endpoints and specifying constraints such as costs. The research, engineering, risk assessment, and management section contains the decision loop estimating risk, evaluating options, specifying the monitoring program, and incorporating the data to re-evaluate risk. The 3rd component is the recognition that risk and public engagement can be altered by various externalities such as climate change, economics, technological developments, and population growth. We use the South River, Virginia, USA, study area and our previous research to illustrate each of these components. In our example, we use the Bayesian Network Relative Risk Model to estimate risks, evaluate remediation options, and provide lists of monitoring priorities. The research, engineering, risk assessment, and management loop also provides a structure in which data and the records of what worked and what did not, the learning process, can be stored. The learning process is a central part of adaptive management. We conclude that risk assessment can and should become an integral part of the adaptive management process. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2017;13:115-126. © 2016 SETAC.