Preventing the panic: being in the know about blue-green algae

The phrase “Harmful Algae Bloom” (HAB) has recently come to the forefront of lake management. Even before the Toledo water crisis made national news this summer, blue-green algae and cyanotoxins were gracing headlines across the Northeastern United States. In the summer of 2013, the Connecticut Department of Public Health (DPH) issued new guidelines to address HABs as a human health concern. The development of state recommendations was expedited by widespread media coverage of a particular blue-green algae bloom in 2012. News of ‘toxic lake water’ is never well-received by lake users, particularly when limited information is coming from local media sources, instead of directly from the municipality or health department. Complicated science is easily botched. Then, all of a sudden, a billowing cloud of distorted details transforms into a public panic: the fear of the unknown. By referencing scientific publications and credible web-sources, this article hopes to dissipate any accumulated haze.

Blue-green algae basics…

Algae and phytoplankton are terms that describe a large group of microscopic photosynthetic organisms that inhabit both fresh and salt water environments. Blue-green algae, now known as cyanobacteria, make up one group of phytoplankton that typically occur in varying numbers throughout water bodies in Connecticut. Blue-green algae utilize the sun’s energy, carbon dioxide, and water to produce their own food. The end-product of this process is oxygen, the life-sustaining compound that jumpstarted evolution and made way for an explosion of life on Earth. We can thank oceanic cyanobacteria for much of the oxygen we breathe today, and it is common knowledge among the scientific community that the oldest cyanobacteria fossils date back to 3.5 billion years! It’s no wonder that these amazing colonies of cells are equipped with highly evolved adaptations enabling them to survive in almost every environment on the planet [3]. 

In addition to light, cyanobacteria also require naturally occurring nutrients (i.e. nitrogen and phosphorus) in order to carry out cellular processes required for growth and replication. Humans accelerate algae and cyanobacteria growth in lakes by increasing nutrients, a process called eutrophication [3]. Anthropogenic, or human-related, sources of nutrients to lakes include domestic and agricultural waste, septic leachate, road run-off, and lawn fertilizers. It is because of this heightened availability of nutrients in lakes that blue-green algae are able to reach extremely high cell densities, referred to as a ‘bloom’ [4,6].

Many cyanobacteria species can form gas vesicles within their cells that allow them to regulate their vertical position in the water column. This adaptation may enable cyanobacteria to out-compete other species of algae that do not have this adaptive advantage. When cyanobacteria cells float to the surface, they are subjected to wind movement, which can then concentrate cells into thick scums along the shoreline. Though a scum does not necessarily mean that there are cyanotoxins present, it is usually a good indicator that cell densities are high enough that potential toxins may pose a significant health threat. The World Health Organization (WHO) published a diagram to illustrate the accumulation of cyanobacterial cells [7]. 

The complicated nature of toxin-producing cyanobacteria and what it means for you!

There are over one-hundred species of known toxin producing cyanobacteria. Understanding species dynamics in lakes, along with toxicological effects relevant to humans, is a daunting task that employs life-long researchers around the world.

Microcystin should not be a novel word to lake residents, but the associated technical language may be off-putting to those less scientifically inclined. Microcystin is one type of toxin produced by numerous cyanobacterial species at varying levels. To further complicate things, microcystin is not the only type of cyanotoxin that affects human activity in lakes [3].

Brace yourself for the slew of consonants that are sure to tie anyone’s tongue: anatoxins, cylindrospermopsins, saxitoxins, nodularins (a select few relevant to Connecticut lakes, courtesy of GreenWater Laboratories, FL). Like microcystin, each type of toxin listed poses a unique health risk to humans and pets, largely through contact and drinking water. Exposure to cyanotoxins may result in skin irritation, vomiting, diarrhea, or in severe instances, damage to the liver and nervous system. There is an extensive amount of research in the area of cyanotoxins, and our knowledge of this field is continually expanding with new scientific discovery.

Management based on what we know so far…

In a previous issue of the newsletter, CFLer Dr. George Knoecklein, spelled out the HAB guidelines provided by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) based on the WHO’s findings. The following table outlines the Probability of Acute Health Effects due to cyanobacteria in recreational water.

(http://www2.epa.gov/nutrient-policy-data/policies-and-guidelines)

Relative Probability of Acute Health Effects	Cyanobacteria (cell/mL)	Microcystin-LR (µg/L)	Chlorophyll-a (µg/L)
Low	<20,000	<10	<10
Moderate	20,000-100,000	10-20	10-50
High	100,000-10,000,000	20-2,000	50-5,000
Very High	>10,000,000	>2,000	>5,000

Referring to the EPA “Acute Health Effects” table, it seems as though a cyanobacteria count of 20,000-100,000 cells/mL would be consistent with 10-20µg/L of microcystin-LR. However, based on field experience and testing of CT lake water, these two do not always match up. Numerous blue-green algae bloom samples from CT have yielded <1µg/L of microcystin-LR, despite cell numbers vastly greater than 20,000 cell/mL. Similarly, a series of scum samples taken just a few feet apart measured 7.8µg/L and 29.0µg/L microcystin-LR – while no toxins were detected about fifty feet away (Greenwater Lab results, FL). If you sit scratching your head at these differences, think back to the way wind can concentrate cells into coves and along shorelines.

While much of the off-shore lake water may pose a low probability of acute health effects, there are bound to be areas where cyanobacteria cells conglomerate, and where toxins may be present at dangerous levels [6,7]. Then, you may recall how there are numerous species of cyanobacteria that produce varying levels of the toxin microcystin. It is important for a professional with cyanobacteria taxonomy expertise to determine which species make up the particular bloom at the time of sample collection. Observation under a microscope will determine if there are toxin-producing species present. It is important to note, however, that because cyanobacteria replicate so quickly, a bloom may consist of relatively benign species one day, and could be dominated by harmful species just days later.

At the time of the 2012 CFL newsletter, Connecticut had not yet developed state guidelines. Since then, the CT DPH has put together their guidance on HABs, based largely on the WHO findings and Vermont’s existing recommendations. Because counting cyanobacteria cells and waiting for toxin testing takes time and money, Connecticut has adopted a visual rank category system that can be used to post a beach during a cyanobacteria bloom. For a better understanding of the CT DPH guidelines, the recommendations are interpreted and broken down into a chronological sequence below.

Step 1. Make initial visual surveillance and determine Category based on the provided table [1].

Visual Rank Category	Observations
Category 1	Visible material is not likely cyanobacteria or the water is generally clear.
Category 2	Cyanobacteria present in low numbers. There are visible small accumulations, but water is generally clear.
Category 3	Cyanobacteria present in high numbers. Scums may or may not be present. Water is discolored throughout. Large areas affected. Color assists to rule out sediment and other algae.

“The initial method for surveillance is visual and based on a Categorization scheme developed and implemented by the State of Vermont [5].” “Reports or complaints from the public or staff require confirmation. Confirmation can be facilitated by consulting someone with prior field experience…a professional Limnologist,” [1]. Validation is important because, to an unfamiliar eye, filamentous algae and surface-growing aquatic plants, like duckweed and watermeal, could all be mistaken for blue-green algae.

                                                                                        

Step 2. Once a visual assessment has been made, the local health department is responsible for following up with cell counts and/or toxin testing to make a determination on the course of action based on the table below [1].

Observations	Notifications	Further Monitoring	Public Posting
Visual Rank Category 1	Not needed	No change	Not needed
Visual Rank Category 2, or blue-green algae cells >20,000/mL - <100,000/mL	Notify CT DPH, CT DEEP	Increase regular visual surveillance until conditions change.	Not needed
Visual Rank Category 3, or blue-green algae cells >100,000/mL	Update/inform CT DPH & CT DEEP and expand risk communication efforts.	Collect samples for analysis and/or increase frequency of visual assessment.	POSTED BEACH CLOSURE: If public has beach access, alert water users that a blue-green algae bloom is present. POST ADVISORY: At other impacted access points.

(http://www.ct.gov/deep/lib/deep/water/water_quality_standards/guidance_lhd__bga_blooms_7_2013.pdf) [1]

Step 3. Monitor algae conditions weekly to determine change in Category.

Step 4. End advisory when conditions are favorable for at least two successive and representative observational rounds one week apart.

To end an advisory and lift a beach posting, the DPH states that, “The recommended protocol for termination may be based on visual observations over time, or a combination of this taken in concert with laboratory data.” Lifting a posting may be justified if either, “Visual assessment remains at the Category 1 condition for at least two successive and representative observational rounds one week apart,” or “Cell count results of the water column indicate that blue-green algal cell abundance has markedly decreased over at least two successive and representative sampling rounds one week apart and is below 70,000 cells per ml.” [1].

Additional advisories may be necessary to effectively contact all recreational lake users. For instance, many homeowners draw water from their lake for washing dishes and showering. If there is a Visual Rank Category 2 or 3 at the town beach, there may be areas around the lake with much higher concentrations of cyanobacteria cells, including personal intake pump locations. Homeowners need to ‘be in the know’ to make their own visual assessments when deciding to use lake water for an evening shower. Even more importantly, there are people who draw lake water in CT to filter and drink (WHO recommends <1µg/L microcystin for drinking water). Most water purification systems do not affect cyanotoxins and it may be necessary for residents to bring in bottled drinking water at certain times of the year. Education and awareness are the tools to combat blue-green algae blooms!

The CT DPH states that their toxin threshold suggestion is <15µg/L, which may or may not correspond to the cell numbers in the guidance tables. There is currently no way to definitively explain when, or if, the cells will be producing toxins [4]. Overall, the WHO, EPA, and CT DPH have all provided their guidance on dealing with blue-green algae blooms. Cell numbers and toxin thresholds are set as recommendations based on previous years of research. These recommendations could change in the future as new science unveils more detail into the nature of ‘why and when’ specific cyanobacteria produce toxins. For now, it is best for residents to become active stewards for lake health by taking responsibility for lowering nutrient inputs to stymie algae and cyanobacteria growth. As the going HAB slogan says, “When in doubt, stay out!”

Citations:

Connecticut Department of Health (CT DPH) and Department of Energy and Environmental Protection (DEEP) 2013. Guidance to Local Health Departments for Blue-green Algae Blooms in Recreational Freshwaters.

Fogg, G.E., Stewart, W.P., and Walsby, A.E.  1973. The Blue-Green Algae. Academic Press, London and New York.

Paerl, H.W. and Fulton, R.S. 2006. Ecology of Harmful Cyanobacteria. Ecological Studies, Vol. 189. Springer- Verlag Berlin Heidelberg.

Vermont Department of Health. 2008. Cyanobacteria (Blue-green Algae) Guidance for Vermont Communities.

World Health Organization (WHO). 1999. Toxic Cyanobacteria in Water: A guide to their public health consequences, monitoring and management. Geneva: E & FN Spon.

World Health Organization, 2003. Guidelines for Safe Recreational Water Environments. Vol. 1 Coastal and Freshwaters, Chapter 8. Geneva. 

Creeping Normality...what we cannot see may be slowly destroying us.

In 2005, Jared Diamond, author of Collapse, introduced the concept of "creeping normality." He suggests that the much of the environmental damage that humans have inflicted upon the world largely goes unnoticed. The way of life is not static, and thus, he argues that slight changes in the way humans interact with nature and use natural resources, have inconspicuously morphed past and present societies into destructive entities.

In simpler terms, consider an old parking lot.... Would you think twice about a new shopping center being built in its place?  Most likely not. But what was the site before it became a parking lot? Several hundred years ago, it was probably a farm field. But what was it before it became a farm? In New England, it might have been an old-growth forest. In previous generations the forest was home to countless woodland species... not exactly what comes to mind when gazing upon the cracked pavement. Long-term environmental degradation becomes more or less invisible over the course of generations. Diamond also describes this phenomenon as "landscape amnesia."

So what is it that we are missing? What horrible environmental damage are we not noticing today? I'd like to introduce three things that many people fail to notice that are a direct result of human disturbances:

1. Stormwater and non-point pollution
2. Invasive species
3. Habitat fragmentation and degradation

“One of the penalties of an ecological education is that one lives alone in a world of wounds. Much of the damage inflicted on land [and the sea] is quite invisible to laymen." - Aldo Leopold


STORMWATER!!!!

It's pouring. The fresh scent of a summer storm fills your nostrils as you make a quick dash to your car after work. You peer out the car window watching the droplets crash and bounce on the pavement. Puddles accumulate in the varied depressions of the uneven black-top and a mini stream rushes along the curb in its journey towards the grated drain.

You may regularly notice the shear quantity of water streaming down the sides of roads during a large rain event, but have you ever paused to think about why? Do you notice the chocolate brown coloring of the rushing stormwater or ponder what pollutants could be transported by this road runoff?

'Impervious surface' is the generic name given to an area covered by solid cement, pavement, or buildings. Water is unable to percolate through these materials and must find an alternate path to complete the hydrologic cycle by returning to the groundwater. Roads are designed so that water does not accumulate on the surface, making it safer for drivers. As a result, rainwater is funneled to the sides where it either creates a gully and runs off into nearby wetland areas, or in more developed regions, makes its way into drains that weave an interconnected web of underground stormwater passage. In most cases, the stormwater makes its way to the nearest river or lake without any treatment. This is referred to as "non-point source" pollution because it is a compilation of small quantities of pollutants over a large area. The opposite is "point source" pollution, where a single source can be tracked, such as an oil spill or chemical company's outfall pipe.

Stormwater runoff, however, is not limited to impervious surface coverage. Manicured lawns or agricultural fields do not have the capacity to retain large quantities of rain water. Some water will infiltrate the ground, but much will run off as "overland flow" into the nearest stream, carrying any pesticides or nutrient-rich fertilizers with it. It is for this reason that many farmers have constructed stormwater retention ponds. Without a way to control runoff, excess nutrients could cause severe algal blooms, leading to anoxic conditions and degraded surface water quality. An individual homeowner living near a waterbody could opt for a rain garden or a vegetated buffer zone to serve a similar purpose.

Next time it rains, take a look at where that stormwater is going and what it picks up along the way!


INTRODUCED SPECIES!!!!

A few more anecdotes for you :) Guess what I am referring to in each!

It's lush, it's green; the vine gently blankets all of the trees along the side of the highway. 

A coastal barrier serving as a distinct separation from road to shoreline. The giant stems rustle in the breeze as hundreds of tiny seeds are whisked into the air.

As you meander across the rocky intertidal area, a stone shifts under your weight. Out scurries a family of tiny crabs, each with a distinguished striped marking on their hind legs.

A regal creature waves it's venomous spines through the water as it hovers in place. It is as if it knows it has no natural predators here. 

If you picked up on my sarcasm, you may have some sort of an ecological degree... If the descriptions of these four different invasive species painted a picture of a specific plant or animal in your mind, there is hope for this world yet! (If you have no idea what I am talking about, familiarize yourself with the following photos.)

Oriental Bittersweet - INVASIVE (in USA)

Yes... Oriental Bittersweet blankets everything. Suffocation might be a more accurate term.

Mile-a-minute Vine - INVASIVE (Northeastern USA)

Similar to Oriental Bittersweet, Mile-a-Minute Vine has crept into Connecticut and in the last ten years has choked out whole forested areas and spread throughout the state! Be aware! http://www.mam.uconn.edu/

Phagmites australis - INVASIVE

Phragmites australis is a tall grassy plant that was introduced to coastal and inland wetlands in the USA. There is a native similar Phragmites species, but it is much smaller and less aggressive than it's foreign counterpart!

Habitat Fragmentation and Degradation:

...I will finish this as soon as it gets colder outside and I don't want to spend every waking minute on the beach or underwater :)

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. 

Trying My Hand at Children's Nature Poems...

When the summer sun comes out to play,

Inside is not where we want to stay.

Sand and surf, wind and waves…

A beach day is just what we crave!

No shoes, no socks, no worries, no cares;

Only a towel and some snacks to share.

Sunscreen, a hat, a big ol’ smile…

“Hello ocean! It’s been a while!”

But just as we get close to the shore,

We spy something that’s hard to ignore.

Plastic trash, litter galore...

Lapping on our foamy floor.

What should we do to help our ocean?

It takes effort, no magic potion.

Quick thinking! Some garbage bins!

We conquer plastic...the sea wins!

Next time you take a trip to the beach,

Pick up the litter within your reach.

Pretty waves, an ocean blue…

It all starts with me and you!