Project Summary

1. Project ID
Name	HAB Monitoring, AL
Region	Gulf of Mexico Region
State	AL
Location	Mobile and Baldwin Counties
Date of this update	8/3/00

Habitat Restoration/Protection
Wetlands
River systems
Beaches/Dunes
Offshore areas
Mangroves
Assisting Species at Risk
Pollution Mitigation
Non-Point Source Pollution
Other (describe)

3. Project description (100 words or less)

Harmful algal blooms (HABs) occur naturally in U.S. coastal waters regularly threatening living resources, restricting fish and shellfish harvests, and depressing recreational and service industries. The frequency, intensity, and distributions of HABs seem to be increasing and HABs have now been reported in every coastal state from Maine through the Gulf Coast and north to Alaska. Pfiesteria piscicida, a toxic dinoflagellate first identified in 1991 at a fish kill in the Pamlico River in North Carolina, is a particularly menacing species that has been the subject of much notoriety in recent years. Although Pfiesteria piscicida has not been found in any of the smaller estuaries within Mobile Bay and in surrounding smaller estuaries outside of Mobile Bay, these estuaries have similar characteristics (e.g. low flowing, shallow, slightly saline) to those estuaries where Pfiesteria piscicida has been found. In addition, Pfiesteria -like species have been found in East Coast and Gulf Coast estuaries, including Mobile Bay. However, it is not yet known if any of these Pfiesteria-like organisms produce toxins or impact fish populations or other resources to the extent that Pfiesteria piscicida has impacted them.

Each of the three cooperating state agencies has an interest in the coastal aquatic environment and marine and estuarine living resources. These interest range from water quality and point and non-point source pollution to fish mortality and harvesting management to the safety of shellfish for harvest and consumption to human exposure. Pfiesteria piscicida and PLO/HAB cross each of the areas of interest and responsibility, being triggered by nutrient enrichment, causing fish mortality and endangering human health. The State of Alabama proposes to undertake an effort to develop a contingency and response plan for occurrences of pfiesteria like organisms and other harmful algal blooms.

The effort will consist of the following general elements:

1. Review of existing state and federal programs on monitoring, identification and response to PLO/HAB;
2. Review of existing State monitoring and contingency plans for integration with a PLO/HAB program;
3. Identification of the higher probability areas and times for occurrences of PLO/HAB in coastal Alabama; (The Alabama Department of Public Health [ADPH] will conduct routine monthly sampling to determine levels of dinoflagellates at approximately 38 key sites in Alabama coastal waters.)
4. Developing a data management and reporting and information exchange strategy compatible with existing state systems; (The ADPH-Seafood Branch will maintain a database of routine environmental parameters and dinoflagellate concentrations.)
5. Identification of additional resource needs to provide adequate response and public outreach;
6. Drafting of a multi-agency plan for detecting and responding to occurrences of PLO/HAB; and
7. Secure additional training and, within the limits of funding, essential equipment to begin implementation to the extent possible.

The final work product would be an agreed upon comprehensive plan of actions to be undertaken by the State to monitor for and respond to outbreaks of PLO and HAB, detailing each agency's responsibilities and planned actions. The plan would incorporate the on-going federal efforts to standardize monitoring protocols, to the extent practical, and seek the economies of being folded into existing state monitoring efforts. The on-going efforts of the Mobile Bay NEP and Gulf of Mexico Program would be considered throughout plan development. Additionally, a resource assessment would be conducted and efforts made to further develop the state's existing capabilities to implement the plan, within the constraints of the funding for this request, and to determine additional resource and response needs and potential funding sources. Potential public outreach efforts on the issue would be explored, evaluated and incorporated in to the plan sufficient to insure notification of the potential health threats associated with an outbreak.

4. Goals/Benefits (quantify where possible using measures of success list) Was a cost-benefit study conducted for this project? yes/no If yes, provide a summary of findings.

5. Partners (include each participant's responsibilities - funding, permitting, etc.)

6. Funding/Contributions (organization and amount)

	  Cash	Federal	estimated: $50,000
			Non Federal 	State government  estimated: $5,600
					Local government
					Private industry
					Public interest groups
			Total	Estimated: $55,600


	  In-Kind Services (hours, equipment, or other forms of assistance and estimated dollar value)
	
	  Volunteers (number of people and hours, and estimated dollar value)
                

7. Legislative authorities used by each participant

8. Value added by Coastal America Partnership including Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) goals achieved through this collaboration (500 words or less)

9. Project Status

• Initiation date:
• Completion date:
• Current stage (Initiated - I, Underway - U or Completed - C)

10.Contacts

11. Any additional information/comments