Deciphering "green" (or "blue")

"Green" advertising is good advertising.

Studies have shown that the new wave of consumers will, given the choice between two products of equal price and value, usually choose the product that is marketed as "environmentally friendly," over the other that is not. Why is this? My hope is that people are jumping on the band wagon of environmental consciousness, but it may not be a result of their new-found appreciation for nature. Instead, it's likely fueled by the overgeneralized "green is good" attitude.

Jumping back to the first Earth Day in 1970, youth culture in America was frustrated with every aspect of the Vietnam War, the Santa Barbara oil spill recoils still rung in the ears of those discontented with 'big businesses' violently polluting our rivers, and Senator Gaylord Nelson had sprung his "national teach-in on the environment." The media ate ALLLL up.

Obviously I have no first hand account of the matters and am relying on textbooks and late 60s-early 70s propaganda. But that's just it; the commercials, posters, political cartoons, and photos of the time were famed and frozen. A quick #Youtube or #Google search will land you smack in the center of the gatherings, like you were actually there to witness the events unfold.

Well, unfold they did and on people went... leaving a stream of litter kicked up by the herding heels as the masses filed back to their regular lifestyles. You have to scroll past the first few pages of your "Earth Day" Google search to get to any such images.

In stopping myself from dwelling on the fact that the American mindset has not changed much since this day, I'm going to say that: 1. People have a lot of energy and CAN accomplish amazing things together, and 2. the media has an insane amount of power over those people!

What I am really saying is that, in order to get people to care about the environment, the message needs to be driven by the media.

Yes. The media: television, magazines, the newspaper, billboards, Facebook Ads, and all those creepy online cookies that advertising companies use to track and target your every click through the internet. No matter how many 'opt-out' options that web browsers may offer, you are and will continually be bombarded, persuaded, and influenced by advertising. I am every day. The media is beginning to grab hold of the notion that many people are jumping to purchase "green" goods -- usually in the place of actually changing their lifestyles, but nonetheless, it's a start. -- This means that "eco" advertising campaigns are starting to pop up everywhere we look.

If a car commercial portrays a healthy young couple frolicking through the farmers market before packing up their trunk with reusable bags of locally grown groceries, that sedan will radiate, 'I support the health of the environment so you should BUY ME!' And if you incorporate a leaf into the new logo of a brand of clothing, many people will automatically believe that the brand is environmentally conscious despite products being manufactured in unsanitary Haitian factories that pour industrial waste into the sea at rates intolerable in the US. Out of sight out of mind, right?

The consumer has to wade through the hype to make informed purchases...

The same goes for companies that claim to be in the environmental business. Engineering and consulting firms, water companies, landscape architectural businesses, farmers, fishermen.... who can you trust? Who actually has the best interest of the environment at the forefront of their business model? The desire to care for the environment is usually there, and the intent to improve the Earth is often a driving factor in business decisions. However, misguided management, or insufficient experience in other realms of science, may lead a good-natured effort astray...

Like everyone else searching for their place in the world, I have hopes for the future. My hope is to someday utilize the power of the media to slowly condemn unsustainable practices; the American society has been shaped around wasteful grandeur long-enough... Idealistic environmental goals will morph into reality when conservation slips into the public psyche!

"People protect what the love." - J. Cousteau

More Community Conservation!!!

This is not really a typical Hillarybythesea blog post... I work in lake management and was asked to give a presentation at a conference this weekend. I spoke about the social aspects of lake management in a summary of what I have learned in the past year working for Northeast Aquatic Research, LLC. Because this specific conference encourages homeowners and lake residents to attend, I thought I would have the perfect audience to deviate from the strict science that limit most professional gatherings.

In order to organize my sporadic and philosophical thoughts, I decided to write everything down for myself. Here are my (quite lengthy) musings...

Hillary Kenyon

NECNALMS Talk (written blog post)

June 2014

A Community Approach to Conservation

A great deal of my presentation stems from personal observations in the field and at lake group meetings, but that some of the central components have arisen from the long car rides and philosophical conversations about lake management with my boss and co-workers. We love studying lakes, and we love pondering ways to improve people’s connection to and understanding of the unique landscapes. Lakes provide an incredible assemblage of natural resources, which require cooperative conservation efforts.

To start, let’s identify some of those resources:

·        -  A place for recreation: swimming, kayaking, boating, fishing, birding, etc.

·         - Increased property value, which is also tied to recreation, and overall aesthetic value.

·        -  Some lakes were created for the purpose of flood control.

·         - Others were created to form drinking water reservoirs for highly populated areas.

·         - A few lakes in the Northeast provide hydroelectric power.

·         - Habitat that preserves species biodiversity and balances local ecosystems (intrinsic value of nature).

·         - Drivers of local economies. People come to use the lake…but they stay to rent kayaks, have lunch, and drop by the convenience store.

Now that we've specified how lakes provide for us and what resources we need to conserve, what are the threats to lakes?

Well…we all come to this conference expecting to learn about the common ecological threats:

1.      Nutrient enrichment causing algae and cyanobacteria blooms.

2.      Invasive aquatic species.

3.      Sediment deposition.

But what about social threats? (Yes they link to the ecological threats..)

·         Lack of Responsibility – “The DEEP comes and cleans up.”

“The CT Ag. Station studied our lake ten years ago, why do we need another study?”

“My property doesn't contribute to runoff; my neighbor uses more fertilizer than I do.”

“Why should I spend the money to plant a vegetated buffer when no one else will?”

·         Lack of organization – What are the specific management goals? Are these conditions normal? Is volunteer monitoring working? Are things getting better or worse? Are all involved parties effectively communicating?!

·         Apathy – An underlying social indifference to the fact to human actions are detrimental to lakes. You may not see any problems now, but what about the future?

A community approach to conservation aims to curtail social threats!

To delve into each of the main points, I want to draw upon things I have personally noticed during the past year: good and bad. First, I’ll pinpoint a few observed shortcomings, and then I’ll try to identify a few plausible solutions that are currently modeled by successful lake management programs.

Lack of responsibility:

Public lakes versus private lakes. The difference is that a lake is either owned by the state or the town and has public access through some form of a boat ramp, or it is considered privately owned by the lakeside residents whose properties border the water. When we work on private lakes, we very rarely find any trash or litter strewn along the shores. The obvious reason is because people tend not to litter on their own property. Yet when we visit lakes that do have public access, there is always litter scattered throughout public spaces. Whether it is a lakeside park, a sidewalk, a road bordering the lake, or a boat ramp…publicly used lakes have more litter. You might argue that this is because more people use the lake and there will inevitably be more trash. So yes, I agree with you, but I also believe that there is only trash in the first place because the increased number of people using the lake feel absolutely no ownership and thus no responsibility. That lack of responsibility manifests itself in more careless behavior and less regard for the environment.

Now, I know that it is not the litter that’s fueling declining lake condition. It’s not fishing line or beer cans, or candy wrappers or plastic bags that cause eutrophication, sedimentation, and invasive species. But it all really relates to that same carelessness and lack of responsibility. I feel like lake management can be likened to Garrett Hardin’s, “Tragedy of the Commons.”

If you skip over the littering phenomenon, the lack of responsibility extends to private lakes as well. Homeowners do not each have their own little slice of the water that they can take care of. Lake management doesn’t work like that; it works when all involved parties commit to a holistic plan backed by sound science. Such a plan involves time, money, professional involvement, and dedicated and responsible individuals to uphold watershed standards while promote education.

But who pays for that? Who takes the time out of their busy schedule to organize lake planning meetings and educational events? –---- In many cases, that would be you guys! (**Points to audience**) You are all here because you care; you are all here because you know that your lake and the resources it provides depend upon effective lake management.

There would be no way to manage lakes without responsible people like you, but now you need to spread the word and hold everyone else responsible for their actions as well. This doesn’t always mean pointing fingers at people who've built extensive rock walls along their property or those who dump thousands of bags of sand into the lake every summer so they can have a “beach.” Sometimes it’s as simple as identifying dense filamentous algae beds, while simultaneously making it known that algae problems arise from elevated nutrient levels. If you bring septic leachate and lawn fertilizers into the picture, people will often get the hint, and take action themselves because they don’t want people to point fingers at them.

Lack of organization:

In the past year, I have seen the profound difference between lakes with well-organized management programs and those that are still in the works. There are some instances where Lake Associations and towns come to us in search of guidance and request a study of their lake. The kicker here is that, more often than not, the lake has already had several studies from different consultants or environmental engineering companies that all conclude the same thing… “Specific problem areas have been identified, effort should be put into managing invasive species and these are your options…, milfoil coverage may be spreading and internal loading of Phosphorus may be a concern, but FURTHER STUDIES NEED TO BE CONDUCTED.”

Then why is there frequently gaps in the type of data collected? Why do lake residents let five to twenty years pass between collecting and analyzing water samples from in and around the lake? Why do people continue to treat the lake with copper to kill algae when there has been no effort to control internal loading or watershed nutrient inputs? Why do invasive aquatic plants come to dominate whole littoral zones? --- Because no one was watching them as they slowly overran all other native species? --- Or if it was noticed, nothing was done in rapid response.

Those questions are the kinks that need to be worked out for an effective lake management plan. The most successful and organized programs that we work with have specific management goals and a means to compare progress. It goes back to responsibility.

For example: Some lakes recognize that they are eutrophic and that nutrient inputs are causing severe cyanobacteria blooms at the end of the summer and into the fall. They decide that clarity is important to them and set a goal to have at least 3-meters of clarity by reducing nutrient flow into the lake. They commit to a long-term, monthly monitoring plan and the funding to support scientific analysis of the data for the future. The data is collected throughout the growing season over many years and, at first, serves as a baseline to determine normal conditions, and then as a way to track progress.

The next thing to touch upon regarding organization is volunteer monitoring. Volunteer water quality monitoring and sample collection is an amazing way to reduce the costs of long-term lake management. However, the program must be held to scientific standards and should have a professional scientist to oversee protocols. There is no sense in paying a lab lots of money for them to only analyze total phosphorus from a surface grab next to your dock. The Secchi disk reading at the town beach is usually not indicative of the whole lake. And when it comes to measuring temperature and oxygen profiles, you must do it so that the probe isn't extended at a thirty degree angle as you drift in the wind. Finally, when it comes to phytoplankton counts and making sense of the nutrient data, it is usually good to leave that to a professional -- I studied science for four years at UCONN and I work nearly every day out on lakes, and I am still confused by what certain Ammonia levels indicate and could not tell you the difference between Planktothrix and Oscillatoria…(**They are actually the same thing, haha**)

That last point leads into my next social threat…

Believing you know all there is to know:

There is no definitive way to predict exactly what the lake is going to do next season… An algae bloom could result from increased nutrient runoff from a huge rain storm; the fanwort may not explode to 100% cover or ‘top-out’ in ten feet of water if herbicide treatment is delayed for a year; bottom-water phosphorus could be astronomical one year and back to normal the next… When we say, “complex ecosystems,” we mean it! Lakes condition is highly variable and it is critical to collect as much data as possible to identify positive or negative trends over long periods of time.

If you want to conserve the resources that your lake provides, it is wise not to skimp out on management because your lake is oligotrophic and you have never had a problem with invasive plants. You don’t know what will happen in the future. A preventative penny is worth thousands of dollars in “cure.”

Apathy:

Apathy hinders positive change. It is virtually impossible to force people to care about the environment. People must find a personal connection to the lake on their own. Individuals have to reach the realization that their actions do affect the lake (both good and bad).

Like I said before about the preventative penny, putting things on the back burner leads to greater future problems and spending more money. So how do you tie in the responsibility as lake leaders, recognizing the need for an organized lake management program for the years to come, and a possible public indifference? – Create incentives, give people a sense of importance, and let them copy you!

Some of the lakes that we work with have created the simplest incentives yet, “You don’t like milfoil surrounding your dock and tying up your prop? Well you should probably help us fund a management plan to take care of that…” People have been calling the toxic blue-green algae (cyanobacteria) blooms a ‘wake-up call,’ but what they really mean is that it is a public health incentive to manage nutrient issues. Incentives overcome apathy and fuel the economic support that sustains effective lake management.

Giving people a voice, making people feel connected to the lake community, and making people feel like their opinion and concerns matter, is critical to lake management. As previously emphasized, management is a collective effort. It needs the scientists from the DEEP, consulting companies, and herbicide application firms, but management plans will collapse without community involvement and dedication. Excluding some residents from planning meetings and discouraging new ideas does not encourage responsible lake behavior. Why should someone respect what you suggest as a way to help the lake, if you do not return the favor? It might take more time to make decisions and get through meetings, but an educated response to an idea is a hundred times more productive than trivializing concerns and shooting down a person’s thoughts on the matter.
 

If you want to truly make a difference; the easiest way to overcome apathy is to slowly change a social norm. What does your lake look like? Can you see the houses from the lake, or is there a thick woody vegetated buffer? Are there more rock walls and manicured lawns, or does the general landscape design reflect more attention to managing stormwater runoff and maintaining shrubs and wetland plants along the shoreline? What I have personally noticed, is that each lake has a standard to which the residents adhere. On lakes where there are many houses built right up to the shoreline, new houses are also being built that close. And if there is a rock wall lining a portion of the lake, it usually extends at least three or four properties…. Did the neighbors all get together and hire the same person?!

What am I getting at here? Peer pressure.

I’ve been reading a number of books on Conservation Psychology. One book, written by Niki Harre of New Zealand, mostly refers to strategies to inspire sustainability. Of all of the points, I find her research on social identities and positive ‘copying’ the most interesting and applicable to lake management. Based on her sustainability tactics, if you want to promote more lake-friendly actions and infrastructure, you must model the behavior that you want people to copy. In theory, others will slowly catch on and through peer pressure, begin to change their practices as well. Eventually, a lake community can be transformed into one where it is only socially acceptable to have rain gardens and native vegetative buffer zones. The residential norm will slide into one where there is more social pressure on maintaining a cleanly boat ramp, and where everyone entering and exiting the lake actually inspects the bottom of their boat and trailer for aquatic hitchhikers. No one would want to be seen flicking a cigarette butt on the ground or forgetting to check their boat. That kind of mentality will translate into other aspects of lake management as well. If you identify with being involved in your lake association and people expect you to part-take in an educational “lake day” program, you best be clearing your schedule because “everyone” will be there.  

To conclude, my ultimate goal really was to stress the importance of social science in natural resource conservation and lake management. If we shift our collective approach to conservation to the combat social threats (lack of responsibility, lack of organization, and apathy), a healthier ecosystem will follow and we can continue utilizing the lake's resources.