**2.4 Communicating results**

The approaches used to communicate survey results in summary reports reflect how the coastal survey approach evolved and innovated. Early regional EMAP surveys were essentially data reports prepared for a technical audience of monitoring practitioners. These terse reports emphasized methodology and reported results in tables, weighted-CDF plots, and bar plots e.g., [11]. While invaluable to technical staff and managers, these statistical summary reports attracted little public attention. In contrast, the national reports summarizing the EMAP-NCA surveys—the National Coastal Condition Reports NCCR I–IV [16–19]—were primarily prepared to be informative and understandable to the general public. These attractive and sizable documents were organized by region, featured highlights about local issues and showcased abundant photos and illustrations, as well as were available in hardcopy. In particular, NCCR-II and NCCR-III presented maps with site conditions portrayed by color-coded symbols. The NCCR reports' use of pie charts conveyed assessment results concisely and intuitively, but without adequate expression of uncertainty.

Beginning with the NARS-NCCA 2010, the reporting strategy changed substantially to accommodate the approach of conducting relatively standardized assessments on a regular schedule. The reports focused on delivering assessment results

#### **Figure 3.**

*Examples of coastal survey summary graphics from NCCA national reports highlighting national status in 2010 (A), trends 1999 to 2010 (B), and "dashboard" approach of reporting results (C).*

**139**

*Lessons Learned from 30 Years of Assessing U.S. Coastal Water*

concisely and quickly, primarily tailored for a technical audience of environmental managers. The reports are only accessible online and include fewer highlightsections or explanatory graphics but continue to present material intuitively for public viewing. Graphics prominently display estimates of uncertainty and express change over time (**Figure 3**). The online 2015 NCCA report (in preparation) notably features an interactive "dashboard" graphic that allows the viewer to select the results in summary form as well as to access the data associated with the display. Importantly, the coastal reporting format is evolving in concert with the reporting approaches of other NARS surveys, thereby facilitating cross-resource assessment

In this section we take a closer look at the methods used to assess the major components of coastal ecosystems—the water column, sediment, and benthic and fish communities. One issue was recognized early in the NCA program when national-scale surveys were undertaken—the U.S. coastal regions are extraordinarily diverse. The northeastern states reflect relatively late deglaciation, featuring minimal run-off from small watersheds into well-mixed coastal waters. Large drowned-river estuaries dominate the mid-Atlantic states, where environmental conditions are heavily influenced by the densely populated coastal communities. Estuaries along the southeastern states and the Gulf of Mexico reflect interaction with large, flat watersheds; these regions are subject to distinct sub-tropical biophysical processes. In contrast, there are far fewer estuaries along the Pacific coast because of the absence of a coastal plain, and coastal processes there are uniquely affected by strong ocean currents and upwelling of cold, nutrient-rich water. How should surveys account for such diversity and differentiate natural from anthropo-

In response to these challenges, survey planners initially relied on the advice of regional estuarine experts convened to suggest assessment indicators and provide benchmark values used to distinguish good, fair, and poor conditions. In reports we emphasized that these cut-points were appropriate for the surveys only, and generally distinct from regulatory thresholds. For each component assessment, several indicators of condition were evaluated separately and then combined into an overall index. In some cases, as is described below, the initial suite of indicators, indices, and benchmark values were modified and refined based on lessons learned. For instance, local benthic indices were replaced with a single index applicable nationwide; the fish community index was refashioned to better reflect ecological rather than human health conditions; and several human-health indicators were introduced. In the following sections, we describe the indicators and thresholds currently specifically employed in the NCCA surveys while highlight lessons learned

The water column is a notoriously dynamic environment. Physical and biological process interact to create rapid and highly localized interactions of light, nutrients, algal growth and predation, and a host of quickly changing abiotic factors. Despite these challenges, deepening concerns regarding cultural eutrophication in coastal waters motivated survey planners to devise a strategy for assessing coastal water quality. Cultural eutrophication is the detrimental degradation of water quality often associated with nutrient over-enrichment [28, 29]. The NCCA assessment

from 30 years of experimenting and refining techniques.

*DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.92326*

and modeling efforts.

**3. NCCA method highlights**

genic sources and responses?

**3.1 Assessing water quality**

*Lessons Learned from 30 Years of Assessing U.S. Coastal Water DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.92326*

concisely and quickly, primarily tailored for a technical audience of environmental managers. The reports are only accessible online and include fewer highlightsections or explanatory graphics but continue to present material intuitively for public viewing. Graphics prominently display estimates of uncertainty and express change over time (**Figure 3**). The online 2015 NCCA report (in preparation) notably features an interactive "dashboard" graphic that allows the viewer to select the results in summary form as well as to access the data associated with the display. Importantly, the coastal reporting format is evolving in concert with the reporting approaches of other NARS surveys, thereby facilitating cross-resource assessment and modeling efforts.
