Panther Lake. a Management Plan Is Only As Strong As the Data Collected

The State of Panther Lake, 2014 & The Management of Panther Lake and its Watershed

Derek K. Johnson

Bathymetric map of Panther Lake. Gloeotrichia echinulata collected from Panther Lake, Oswego County, NY.

Occasional Paper No. 46

STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK COLLEGE AT ONEONTA

OCCASIONAL PAPERS PUBLISHED BY THE BIOLOGICAL FIELD STATION

No. 1. The diet and feeding habits of the terrestrial stage of the common newt, Notophthalmus viridescens (Raf.). M.C. MacNamara, April 1976 No. 2. The relationship of age, growth and food habits to the relative success of the whitefish (Coregonus clupeaformis) and the cisco (C. artedi) in Otsego Lake, New York. A.J. Newell, April 1976. No. 3. A basic limnology of Otsego Lake (Summary of research 1968-75). W. N. Harman and L. P. Sohacki, June 1976. No. 4. An ecology of the Unionidae of Otsego Lake with special references to the immature stages. G. P. Weir, November 1977. No. 5. A history and description of the Biological Field Station (1966-1977). W. N. Harman, November 1977. No. 6. The distribution and ecology of the aquatic molluscan fauna of the Black River drainage basin in northern New York. D. E Buckley, April 1977. No. 7. The fishes of Otsego Lake. R. C. MacWatters, May 1980. No. 8. The ecology of the aquatic macrophytes of Rat Cove, Otsego Lake, N.Y. F. A Vertucci, W. N. Harman and J. H. Peverly, December 1981. No. 9. Pictorial keys to the aquatic mollusks of the upper Susquehanna. W. N. Harman, April 1982. No. 10. The dragonflies and damselflies (Odonata: Anisoptera and Zygoptera) of Otsego County, New York with illustrated keys to the genera and species. L.S. House III, September 1982. No. 11. Some aspects of predator recognition and anti-predator behavior in the Black-capped chickadee (Parus atricapillus). A. Kevin Gleason, November 1982. No. 12. Mating, aggression, and cement gland development in the crayfish, Cambarus bartoni. Richard E. Thomas, Jr., February 1983. No. 13. The systematics and ecology of Najadicola ingens (Koenike 1896) (Acarina: Hydrachnida) in Otsego Lake, New York. Thomas Simmons, April 1983. No. 14. Hibernating bat populations in eastern New York State. Donald B. Clark, June 1983. No. 15. The fishes of Otsego Lake (2nd edition). R. C MacWatters, July 1983. No. 16. The effect of the internal seiche on zooplankton distribution in Lake Otsego. J. K. Hill, October 1983. No. 17. The potential use of wood as a supplemental energy source for Otsego County, New York: A preliminary examination. Edward M. Mathieu, February 1984. No. 18. Ecological determinants of distribution for several small mammals: A central New York perspective. Daniel Osenni, November 1984. No. 19. A self-guided tour of Goodyear Swamp Sanctuary. W. N. Harman and B. Higgins, February 1986. No. 20. The Chironomidae of Otsego Lake with keys to the immature stages of the subfamilies Tanypodinae and Diamesinae (Diptera). J. P. Fagnani and W. N. Harman, August 1987. No. 21. The aquatic invertebrates of Goodyear Swamp Sanctuary, Otsego Lake, Otsego County, New York. Robert J. Montione, April 1989. No. 22. The lake book: a guide to reducing water pollution at home. Otsego Lake Watershed Planning Report #1. W. N. Harman, March 1990. No. 23. A model land use plan for the Otsego Lake Watershed. Phase II: The chemical limnology and water quality of Otsego Lake, New York. Otsego Lake Watershed Planning Report Nos. 2a, 2b. T. J. Iannuzzi, January 1991. No. 24. The biology, invasion and control of the Zebra Mussel (Dreissena polymorpha) in North America. Otsego Lake Watershed Planning Report No. 3. Leann Maxwell, February 1992. No. 25. Biological Field Station safety and health manuel. W. N. Harman, May 1997. No. 26. Quantitative analysis of periphyton biomass and identification of periphyton in the tributaries of Otsego Lake, NY in relation to selected environmental parameters. S. H. Komorosky, July 1994. No. 27. A limnological and biological survey of Weaver Lake, Herkimer County, New York. C.A. McArthur, August 1995. No. 28. Nested subsets of songbirds in Upstate New York woodlots. D. Dempsey, March 1996. No. 29. Hydrological and nutrient budgets for Otsego lake, N. Y. and relationships between land form/use and export rates of its sub -basins. M. F. Albright, L. P. Sohacki, W. N. Harman, June 1996. No. 30. The State of Otsego Lake 1936-1996. W. N. Harman, L. P. Sohacki, M. F. Albright, January 1997. No. 31. A Self-guided tour of Goodyear Swamp Sanctuary. W. N. Harman and B. Higgins (Revised by J. Lopez),1998. No. 32. Alewives in Otsego Lake N. Y.: A Comparison of their direct and indirect mechanisms of impact on transparency and Chlorophyll a. D. M. Warner, December 1999. No.33. Moe Pond limnology and fish population biology: An ecosystem approach. C. Mead McCoy, C. P. Madenjian, V. J. Adams, W. N. Harman, D. M. Warner, M. F. Albright and L. P. Sohacki, January 2000. No. 34. Trout movements on Delaware River System tail-waters in New York State. Scott D. Stanton, September 2000. No. 35. Geochemistry of surface and subsurface water flow in the Otsego lake basin, Otsego County New York. Andrew R. Fetterman, June 2001. No. 36 A fisheries survey of Peck Lake, Fulton County, New York. Laurie A. Trotta. June 2002. No. 37 Plans for the programmatic use and management of the State University of New York College at Oneonta Biological Field Station upland natural resources, Willard N. Harman. May 2003. No. 38. Biocontrol of Eurasian water-milfoil in central New York State: Myriophyllum spicatum L., its insect herbivores and associated fish. Paul H. Lord. August 2004. No. 39. The benthic macroinvertebrates of Butternut Creek, Otsego County, New York. Michael F. Stensland. June 2005. No. 40. Re-introduction of walleye to Otsego Lake: re-establishing a fishery and subsequent influences of a top Predator. Mark D. Cornwell. September 2005. No. 41. 1. The role of small lake-outlet streams in the dispersal of zebra mussel (Dreissena polymorpha) veligers in the upper Susquehanna River basin in New York. 2. Eaton Brook Reservoir boaters: Habits, zebra mussel awareness, and adult zebra mussel dispersal via boater. Michael S. Gray. No. 42. The behavior of lake trout, Salvelinus namaycush (Walbaum, 1972) in Otsego Lake: A documentation of the strains, movements and the natural reproduction of lake trout under present conditions. Wesley T. Tibbitts. No. 43. The Upper Susquehanna watershed project: A fusion of science and pedagogy. Todd Paternoster. No. 44. Water chestnut (Trapa natans L.) infestation in the Susquehanna River watershed: Population assessment, control, and effects. Willow Eyres. No. 45. The use of radium isotopes and water chemistry to determine patterns of groundwater recharge to Otsego Lake, Otsego County, New York. Elias J. Maskal.

Annual Reports and Technical Reports published by the Biological Field Station are available from Willard N. Harman, BFS, 5838 St. Hwy. 80, Cooperstown, NY 13326.

The State of Panther Lake, 2014 & The Management of Panther Lake and its Watershed

Derek K. Johnson

Biological Field Station, Cooperstown, New York bfs.oneonta.edu

STATE UNIVERSITY COLLEGE AT ONEONTA

The information contained herein may not be reproduced without permission of the author(s) or the SUNY Oneonta Biological Field Station

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ABSTRACT ...... 3 INTRODUCTION ...... 4 SOCIOECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS ...... 5 DRAINAGE BASIN ...... 6 WATERSHED ...... 6 GEOLOGY ...... 6 SOILS ...... 7 LIMNOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS ...... 10 PHYSICAL LIMNOLOGY ...... 10 Water Level ...... 10 Temperature ...... 10 Transparency (Clarity) ...... 12 Dissolved Oxygen ...... 13 CHEMICAL LIMNOLOGY ...... 14 pH ...... 14 Specific Conductivity ...... 17 Nutrients ...... 18 DESCRIPTIVE ECOLOGY ...... 20 PHYTOPLANKTON ...... 20 ZOOPLANKTON ...... 21 SEASONAL SUCCESSION OF PHYTOPLANKTON AND ZOOPLANKTON ...... 22 SUBMERGED AQUATIC MACROPHYTES ...... 23 NEKTON (THE PANTHER LAKE FISHERY) ...... 30 Stocking History ...... 31 Electrofishing Equipment ...... 31 Species Collected ...... 32 Abundance ...... 34 Length Frequency ...... 35 Stock Density Indices ...... 39 Conclusions About the Fishery ...... 40 2012- 2013 LAKEWIDE STAKEHOLDER SURVEY RESULTS ...... 40 MANAGEMENT OF PANTHER LAKE AND ITS WATERSHED ...... 45 MANAGEMENT PLAN SUMMARY ...... 45 STAKEHOLDER PERCEIVED PLANNING PRIORITIES ...... 47 LAKE RESIDENT CONCERNS: MANAGEMENT CONTROLS ...... 49 PREVENTING EUTROPHICATION ...... 50 What is Eutrophication? ...... 50 Approaches to Reduce Eutrophication ...... 50 IN-LAKE STRATEGIES ...... 52

CONTROLLING NUISANCE WEED GROWTH (A SYMPTOM OF EUTROPHICATION) ...... 52 Approaches to Control Nuisance Weed Growth ...... 53 CONTROLLING ALGAE GROWTH (ANOTHER SYMPTOM OF EUTROPHICATION) ...... 59 Approaches to Control Algae Growth ...... 59 OTHER AVAILABLE MANAGEMENT OPTIONS ...... 60 LAKES COMPARABLE TO PANTHER LAKE ...... 61 LONG TERM MONITORING ON PANTHER LAKE ...... 62 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ...... 63 REFERENCES ...... 63 APPENDICES ...... 67 APPENDIX A. RELATIVE EFFECTIVENESS OF AQUATIC HERBICIDES ...... A-1 APPENDIX B. HERBICIDE TRADE NAMES ...... B-1 APPENDIX C. NUTRIENT DATA ...... C-1 APPENDIX D. PERTINENT GPS COORDINATES ...... D-1 APPENDIX E. LAKE WIDE SURVEY ...... E-1 APPENDIX F. WATER USE RESTRICTION AFTER AQUATIC HERBICIDE USE ...... F-1 APPENDIX G. AVERAGE CALCIUM LEVELS...... G-1 APPENDIX H. PHYSIOCHEMICAL WATER DATA ...... H-1 APPENDIX I. GLOEOTRICHIA ECHINULATA NEWSLETTER ...... I-1 APPENDIX J. METHODS OF WATER SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS...... J-1

ABSTRACT

This contribution is made up of two major components; One, ”The State of Panther Lake,” which includes classic limnological data collection to characterize the lake and its ability to respond to various management strategies, as well as a watershed wide stakeholder survey to enable prioritization of goals deemed important to the community, and two, “The Management Plan” including the tabulation of a series of management activities that may be potentially used to mitigate concerns as well as suggested techniques derived from evaluation of the data collected in the first section. A lake wide survey was sent out to all residents in November 2012. Overall, 54 out of 211 surveys were returned. Based on the survey, stakeholders determined that the plan should focus on three critical priorities:

1. To develop a lake-wide monitoring program based on the New York State Federation of Lakes Association/New York State Departments of Conservation (NYSFOLA/ NYSDEC) Citizen Statewide Lake Assessment Program (CSLAP) protocols with added components including the acquisition of data regarding seasonal hypolimnetic oxygen concentrations and ongoing evaluation of the status of the submergent aquatic macrophyte communities. 2. Focus on stabilizing the rate of eutrophication through long-term watershed and in-lake based alternatives for reduction of phosphorus bioavailability. 3. The continued management of the fisheries with a major priority of assessing the success of previous stocking of grass carp (Ctenopharygodon idella) for Eurasian milfoil (Myriophyllum spicatum) control.

Most of the empirical research was done in 2013, but continued sporadically throughout 2014. Limnological characteristics such as temperature, dissolved oxygen, pH, and specific conductivity were measured at the deepest point in the lake with a YSI 556™ multiprobe system. The amount of calcium, total nitrogen, and total phosphorous in the water were done in lab, using a standard set of protocols (Per. Comm. Albright). Aquatic macrophytes were sampled three times throughout the summer using the rake toss method. This was performed by throwing a double sided rake and pulling it back to the boat to assess species present. This was done to document known species and to make inferences about the seasonal changes in the plant community. To determine the current state of the fisheries, a fish survey was conducted in October 2013 using an electrofishing boat (DC-500 volts, 10 amps, 60 pulses/sec) from SUNY Cobleskill. The research indicates that more limnological data need to be collected. It is difficult to assess the statistical significance of many of the physical characteristics in Panther Lake with the limited data set, so it is suggested that additional monitoring be done over time to make more meaningful conclusions. To assess to progress of the triploid grass carp it is suggested that a survey of milfoil’s distribution and abundance be done in the near future. This should be repeated every 2-3 years so the Panther Lake Association can ascertain the effectiveness, or lack thereof, of the stocking. The electrofishing data over time has documented a steadily increasing quality of the largemouth bass (Micropterus salmoides) and other game fish populations. It should be understood that the data collected in this report serves as a baseline for future

3 management activities. By monitoring for longer periods of time, the Panther Lake Association will become more sensitive to changes and plan accordingly.

INTRODUCTION

With a holistic view of lake ecology and surrounding factors that are impacting lake health, the Panther Lake Association has the opportunity to choose effective strategies that will prevent or solve in-lake problems, rather than merely applying temporary “Band-Aids”. The comprehensive lake management plan presented here will help the stakeholders work towards long term goals and give them more realistic expectations for their activities based on the science and their input of priorities for use. The management plan can also serve as a gateway for grant funding and other resources from State and Federal agencies to implement activities in an effort to achieve their management goals and help them find more effective strategies that are suited to the unique qualities of Panther Lake.

This report will frequently refer to a water column in three major parts. The top waters are the epilimnion, below that is the metalimnion, and the deeper waters are called the hypolimnion (Figure 1). Panther Lake is a NYSDEC class B lake, meaning the primary use is fishing and contact recreation. The lake is located in the Oswego County Towns of Constantia and Amboy, (N 43° 19', W 075° 54'). It has a surface area of 53 hectares (131.5 acres), a mean depth of 5 meters (17 feet) (Petreszyn, 1990), and a maximum depth of 8 meters (26 feet) (Panther Lake Assn. undated map). Other physical features of the lake are provided in Table 1.The lake is tea colored and reduced transparencies limit the rooted macrophytes to areas shallower than 4 meters (14 feet). The lake has a specific conductivity varying around 80 mS/cm. The littoral zone accounts for approximately 50% of the surface area of the lake and is dominated by submersed vegetation. The fish community is characterized by a moderately abundant, slow growing population of largemouth bass (see Table 6 for scientific names of all species collected), and pumpkinseed and bluegill populations that have growth rates which are near average for New York. The shoreline is approximately 70% developed with the remaining area being mixed deciduous and coniferous forest and bog.

Figure 1. Depiction of a stratified lake. These terms will be used throughout the state of the lake report and the management plan. (http://hatch.cehd.umn.edu/1112/Mod4_ Interp Phys_files/image004.png)

Table 1. Physical characteristics of the Panther Lake basin

Maximum Length 1.64 km 1.02 mi Maximum Effective Length 1.64 km 1.02 mi Maximum Width 0.615 km 0.38 mi Maximum Effective Width 0.615 km 0.38 mi Maximum Depth 7.92 m 26 ft. Mean Depth 4.57 m 15 ft. Surface Area 53.01 ha 131 ac Volume 1,506,500 m3 53,203,000 ft3 Total Shoreline Length 6.672 km 4.15 mi

SOCIOECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS

There are 211 homes in the Panther Lake watershed. According to the 2013 lake wide survey, most residents have been on the lake an average of 37 years. One said his family had been on the lake 103 years. The individual with the shortest time of residence was 4 years. Most are seasonal. Based on a visual census of boats, most own at least one boat and every responder to the survey said that they owned at least one boat with or without a motor. The median annual income and education levels of residents around Panther Lake reflect the Oswego County averages. The median annual income for Oswego County is $47,288. The number of residents in the county that are high school graduates or higher is 86.7% and residents with bachelor’s degrees or higher is 16% (US Census Bureau 2014).

DRAINAGE BASIN

WATERSHED The Panther Lake watershed is approximately 700 acres (Figure 2). Most of the surrounding land is either mixed deciduous and coniferous forest or wetland. It is important for residents to know their watershed for management planning. A watershed map will help the Panther Lake Association, as well as residents, recognize sensitive areas that could be prone to point source pollution and flooding.

Figure 2. Map depicting the Panther Lake watershed and surrounding terrain. Black outline represents watershed boundaries. 1 cm = 0.23 km (1” = 0.37 mi).

GEOLOGY Panther Lake possesses steep shores and a bathtub-shaped basin (Figure 3). The underlying bedrock was formed during the Upper Ordovician – Lower Silurian age (approximately 440 – 450 million years ago) (https://www.nysm.nysed.gov/gis/). The lake basin itself was formed from shale and sandstone glacial tills approximately ten thousand years ago.

There are no surface inlets into the lake and only one small (1m wide) outlet on the east end of the lake.

Figure 3. Bathymetric map of Panther Lake. Contour lines are in feet. All samples were taken at N43.32747, W075.90440 (N 43° 19', W 075° 54') (Panther Lake Assn. Undated. Bathymetric map). Scale: 1inch = 1,100” (1 cm = 132 m) feet

SOILS The lake basin was formed in glacial moraine. The west end of the lake is dominated by swampy soils. They are between two and twenty meters thick, mainly comprised of peat-muck, organic silt and sand in poorly drained areas. These soils tend to overlie marl and silt. These areas also represent potential land instability where building foundations may be at risk. The majority of the lake basin is comprised of glacial till. They are from one to fifty meters thick and tend to have variable textures (boulders to silt). The soil is usually poorly sorted and sand-rich and the permeability varies with compaction. South of Panther Lake are moraine soils from sedimentation along the margin of the glacier. These have variable texture (size and sorting) and generally low permeability. To the north of the lake there are glaciofluvial soils, which are stream deposited soils adjacent or in front of the ice. These soils tend to be coarse to fine gravel with sand (Figure 4).

Figure 4. Geology of the soils around Panther Lake. Soils are defined in the corresponding key (USDA 2014).

Figure 4 (continued). Geology of the soils around Panther Lake. Soils are defined in the corresponding key (USDA 2014).

LIMNOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS

PHYSICAL LIMNOLOGY Statistical analysis is typically performed to evaluate what is actually occurring in a population or sample. It is difficult to assess the statistical significance for many of the physical characteristics in Panther Lake. For future endeavors, additional sampling should be done throughout the year to make more meaningful statistical conclusions. The data collected in this report serves as a “snap-shot” over a two year period. By monitoring changes on a larger time scale, the Panther Lake Association can become more aware of changes.

Water Level Water levels are important in Panther Lake because water level retention relative to large amounts of precipitation leads to increased periods of high water causing shoreline erosion and damage to property. Annual water levels historically fluctuate between 183 m (600 ft.) and 183.5 m (602 ft.) above sea level (Bruce Walters Per. Comm.). Recently, the water levels have been recorded as high as 184 m (603 ft.) above sea level due to beavers (Castor canadensis) damming the wetland on the outlet.

Temperature Most aquatic organisms are unable to internally regulate their core body temperatures (i.e. they are poikilothermic or “cold-blooded). Temperature can exert a major influence on the biological activity and growth of aquatic organisms because temperature can affect the distribution and abundance of phosphorous and dissolved oxygen (See Dissolved Oxygen section and Plant Nutrients section). To a point, the higher the water temperature, the greater the biological activity (NYSFOLA 2009). Some compounds used as management tools are more toxic to aquatic life at higher temperatures and therefore need to be used with caution.

Monitoring was done at the deepest point in the lake (Figure 3) on a bi-weekly basis through the summer months and continued sporadically throughout the winter months in 2012- 2014. A YIS 556™ multiprobe system was used for all sampling. This sampling was done for all future mentioned parameters and are mentioned in the text. Like most lakes in the northern temperate zone of the United States, Panther Lake is dimictic, which means that it mixes (turns over) twice a year, once in the fall and once in the spring. Throughout the sampling period, water temperatures in Panther Lake ranged from 0.0°C to 27.8°C with a mean water column temperature of 16.0°C at the sampling point. The maximum hypolimnion/profundal bottom temperatures were 18.7°C and 16.7°C and recorded on 9/8/2013 and 10/4/2013, respectively, at the maximum depth of 7m. The minimum hypolimnion/ profundal bottom temperature was 5.3°C on 2/8/2014 at the maximum depth of 7m. During the summer of 2013, surface water temperatures ranged from 16.2°C to 27.8°C. Water temperatures steadily declined until fall turnover. As turnover occurred during the second week of October, the average water temperature was 14.0°C throughout the entire water column. This lasted until the end of November. Surface temperatures steadily dropped after fall turnover as the air temperature dropped. During the winter months surface temperatures ranged from 0.0°C to 1.2°C until spring turnover occurred. Spring turnover occurred during the second week 10

in April and temperatures averaged 12°C throughout the entire water column. Weekly temperatures steadily increased until the summer maxima at a rate of approximately 2.0°C per week (Figure 5). The entire lake has experienced annual total ice coverage. Ice coverage generally begins during the second week in December and the lake remains completely covered until the last week in March. Almost immediately after the ice breaks up, spring turnover occurs. Ice damage on Panther Lake is minimized due to the fact that most residents remove their docks from the water. As the ice becomes weak and begins to shift, it breaks up into pencil-shaped columnar crystals (Harman et al 1997). If the ice begins to shift before the structural integrity is weakened, extensive damage to breakwaters and docks may occur.

Figure 5. Seasonal temperature values, Panther Lake, 2012-2014. Isopleths in degrees celcius. An isopleth is a line drawn on a map through all points having the same numerical value. For example, at 3 meters depth in July, the water temperature was 26 degrees celcius. There was strong stratification during this time as shown by the crowded horizontal isopleths. During the times of mixing, when the temperature was uniform, the lines are vertical (Harman et al 1997).

Transparency (Clarity) Transparency is a measurement of how far sunlight penetrates through the water column. It can be affected by the color of the water, distribution and abundance of algae, and prevalence of suspended sediments. Transparency decreases as color, suspended sediments, or algal abundance increases. Algae are non-vascular aquatic organisms whose abundance is related to the amount of plant nutrients, especially phosphorus and nitrogen. Therefore, transparency can also be an indicator of the impact of human activity on the land surrounding the lake because of cultural eutrophication. Transparency can vary considerably both seasonally and spatially. It is measured using a Secchi disk, a 20 cm round, black and white disk that is lowered into the water. When the disk reaches a depth where it is no longer visible, that depth is considered the transparency. This is not a precise measurement but it can be a useful tool in showing seasonal fluctuations. Panther Lake remains a tea colored (dystrophic) lake year round due to the high concentrations of tannins leaching out of dry leaf matter, reducing transparency. The latter is not a serious pollutant, but actually often indicates a more oligotrophic watershed condition feeding the lake. The area of greatest clarity occurs in the middle parts of the lake. Figure 6 illustrates the seasonal changes in transparency at the deepest part of the lake. The lower transparency in late spring may be due to excess nutrient loading and warmer water temperatures increasing algae population densities. The decreasing transparency in late July may be due in part to a Gloeotrichia echinulata bloom during that time. The continued decrease in transparency is due to the seasonal succession of phytonplankton species (See Seasonal Succession of Phytoplanton section).

Date May 26 Jun 9 Jun 22 Jul 12 Jul 25 Aug 7 Sep 8 Oct 4 0

4 Secchi Transparency (m) Transparency Secchi 5

Figure 6. Monthly readings of Panther Lake Secchi disk transparency, collected at the deepest part of the lake (7m or 26 feet) during the 2013-2014 sampling year.

Dissolved Oxygen Dissolved oxygen (DO) is the amount of oxygen in solution that is available to organisms in the water. It is measured in milligrams per liter (mg/L). Just like humans, all multicellular life, from the fish that swim through the water, to the invertebrates drifting in the water column (zooplankton) and those that bury themselves in its muddy bottom, need oxygen to survive. Humans use their lungs to inhale oxygen from the air. However, worms, fish, and other underwater animals use gills and thin membranes on their body surface for oxygen diffusion from the water. As water moves across an animal’s gills, oxygen is removed and passed into the blood. Gills are more effective when there is an abundance of oxygen in the surrounding water. As dissolved oxygen levels decrease, it becomes harder for animals to get the amounts they need for survival. Dissolved oxygen can be affected by factors such as temperature. Colder waters can hold more oxygen during winter than during the hot summer months. However, even at the warmest temperatures observed in Panther Lake (around 86 oF, 30 oC), water is capable of having dissolved oxygen concentrations of 6-7 mg/L Although high temperatures can influence dissolved oxygen levels, temperature is not a major cause for concern. An excess of nutrients in the water resulting from natural and manmade sources (called eutrophication) can influence oxygen levels. The nutrients result in abundant algae growth. Zooplankton, freshwater mussels and other filter feeders digest a portion of the excess algae, but much of it is not consumed. The remaining algae die and sink to the lake bottom where they are decomposed by bacteria. During this process, bacteria consume oxygen until there is little or none left in the bottom waters. Loss of dissolved oxygen in the hypolimnion is characteristic of a eutrophic lake. The dissolved oxygen in the surface waters of Panther Lake remain saturated or near saturation throughout the year; these conditions persist under the ice as well (Figure 7). Spring turnover usually occurs around the middle of April and lasts for about four weeks. During this time, the entire water column is well aerated from top to bottom exhibiting about 9 mg/L of dissolved oxygen. During the summer months, the concentrations varying in the epilimnion remain well saturated with 6mg/L and greater, the hypolimnion becomes anoxic with concentrations from 4mg/L to less than 1 mg/L. These concentrations are below the threshold most fish can stand and are not habitable. Dissolved oxygen concentrations for a typical warmwater fish species need to be 5mg/L or greater in order to survive (Sloat and Osterbak 2013). Fortunately, during this time, fish are able to migrate out of the oxygen poor hypolimnion and into the epilimnetic waters. Fall turnover usually occurs from mid-October to mid-November. During fall turnover, the water column is once again saturated with oxygen from top to bottom. During the winter, the epilimnion remains well saturated while the hypolimnion remains at approximately 7 mg/L until spring turnover. In early May of 2013, there was a weekend when documented winds exceeded 20 mph (Pers. Obs., Johnson, local weather station). Due to the west to east orientation of Panther Lake, this constant wind action coming from the west caused an almost complete mixing in the lake. During this time, oxygen concentrations in the lake became uniform from the surface waters to 5m (Figure 7).

CHEMICAL LIMNOLOGY

pH The measure of how acidic or basic a solution is pH. Solutions with a pH less than 7 are said to be acidic and solutions with a pH greater are basic or alkaline. Pure water has a pH very close to 7. The pH in lakes and streams often changes naturally throughout the day due to photosynthetic activity. Primary producers (plants and algae) use the available CO2 in their metabolism. These primary producers are then eaten by animals in higher trophic levels. Thus, changing the concentrations of inorganic and organic molecules may have a "cascading" impact on all the species in that system by reducing plant production. For example, some ponds with poorly buffered (low alkalinity) water, may have a pH of 7 in the early morning and increase to 9 or more in the afternoon (Boyd 1990). A consequence of changing pH in an aquatic system effects the concentrations of phosphates, nitrates, and organic materials dissolved in the water. The following information is referenced in Tucker (2008).

Figure 7. Seasonal values of dissolved oxygen, Panther Lake, 2013-2014. Isopleths in mg/L. For example, at 6 meters depth in July, the lower 1.5 meters has less than 1mg/L of dissolved oxygen (D.O.), deeming it anoxic. These conditions lasted throughout the entire summer until fall turnover. There was strong stratification during this time as shown by the crowded isopleths. During the times of mixing, when the D.O. was uniform, the lines are vertical (Harman et al 1997).

When plants or algae grow rapidly in a freshwater environment, high pH is due to there being more carbon dioxide added each day by photosynthesis which then is removed each night by respiration. As a result, pH levels may rise to become more basic and less habitable to most aquatic life. Juvenile fish and shallow water crustaceans are particularly susceptible to damage from high pH levels. Older fish are better able to regulate high pH levels, typically by moving to deeper waters where the pH is lower. Scientists most often attribute low pH concentrations to acid precipitation. A freshwater system is considered to have a low pH when the levels are at or below 5. As pH falls, fish cannot reproduce, juvenile fish begin to die and mature fish die of suffocation. Aquatic invertebrates that serve as an important food source for fish will fail to reproduce. The aquatic invertebrates may be able to tolerate lower pH for a longer amount of time. The ecosystem continues to change as new species of plants and algae invade and the system’s original plant, invertebrate, and fish populations are unable to survive. As acidity increases, pH levels drop. As a result of the increased acidity, heavy metals present in the soils, such as aluminum ions, are dissociated and released into the water. Heavy metal ions burn the gills of fish, accumulate in their organs and eventually lead to death. Rapid changes in pH can stress or kill aquatic life, even when the changes occur within a pH range they typically tolerate. Certain species, such as brown bullhead (Ameiurus nebulosus), are more susceptible to this phenomenon, and all juvenile fish are particularly vulnerable. The pH levels in Panther Lake remain fairly constant throughout the entire year. The pH ranges from 7.6 to 8.7 in the epilimnion, 7.5 to 8.5 in the metalimnion, and 6.8 to 8.0 in the hypolimnion (Figure 8). These small changes throughout the year suggest that the lake is fairly well buffered from acid precipitation and other watershed inputs that could affect the pH.

pH 6 6.5 7 7.5 8 8.5 9 0

4 Depth (m) Depth

3/2/2013 5/26/2013 6/9/2013 6/22/2013 7/12/2013 7/25/2013 8/7/2013 9/8/2013 10/4/2013

Figure 8. pH changes with depth in Panther Lake throughout the 2013 sampling year

Descriptive statistics showed that pH fluctuated more at deeper depths. However, this could have been due to natural variance. In order to clarify a Two-Way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) was performed. This approach is used for studying the relationship between a quantitative dependent variable and two qualitative independent variables and the result is given as a p-value. A researcher will often "reject the null hypothesis" when the p-value turns out to be less than the significance level, often 0.05. We were interested to see if pH, the quantitative variable, varied with depth (deep vs. shallow) and time (early summer vs. late summer), the two qualitative variables. The pH change with depth was shown to be statistically significant (p- value = <0.001) which means that the change in pH was not due to chance. The pH change with time (seasonality) was also statistically significant (p-value = 0.01) which means that pH is also affected by the time of year (Table 2). Both of these factors may be affected by the biological processes previously described in this section since they can vary with depth and time.

Table 2. Two-factor ANOVA to compare change in pH with time and depth in Panther Lake throughout the 2013 sampling year.

Mean Variance p-value Significant? Time 0.01 Yes Early Summer 7.9 0.14 Late Summer 7.5 0.31 Depth 0.0002 Yes Shallow 8 0.08 Deep 7.4 0.19

Specific Conductivity Specific conductivity, a measure of electrical current flow through a solution, is expressed in units of milliSiemens/cm (mS/cm). Conductivity is the reciprocal of electrical resistance (ohms). Since conductivity increases nearly linearly with increasing ion concentration, we can use conductivity measurements to estimate ion concentrations in solutions. The greater the conductivity, the higher the ion concentration. For example, seawater is very conductive, at about 5000 mS/cm, tap water is about 100 mS/cm, and distilled water is near 0 mS/cm. Specific conductivity can tell us a lot about the nature of the lake. Low-conductivity lakes typically have less groundwater input than high conductivity streams, i.e., they are "precipitation-dominated” (Talling 2009). Organisms in precipitation-dominated aquatic ecosystems, indicated by low conductivity, must be able to withstand floods, drying, and scouring by anchor ice. Many have adaptations to persist through stressful periods in a state of quiescence or to seek refuge in protected microhabitats. Most animals in low-conductivity lakes must also maintain high internal ion concentrations relative to those in the surrounding environment. Since these animals are extremely hyperosmotic (containing a higher concentration of salts or other dissolved materials than normal tissues), there is a tendency for uptake of water and loss of ions, especially across respiratory surfaces, which are necessarily permeable. Therefore, osmoregulation involves the elimination of water, the retention of ions, and active transport of ions from the external medium into the animal. Freshwater animals exhibit numerous structural and physiological adaptations to minimize the costs associated with osmoregulation, but still these adaptions account for more than 30% of energy expenditures for some aquatic organisms (Talling, 2009). Panther Lake has a distinctive situation regarding specific conductivity. Panther Lake has a groundwater and watershed driven runoff but has a low conductivity (Figure 8). As stated above, groundwater systems tend to have a higher conductance and precipitation based systems have a low conductance.

Specific Conductivity (mS/cm)

Figure 8. Specific conductivity changes with depth in Panther Lake throughout the 2013 sampling year.

Nutrients Eutrophication occurs when freshwater is enriched by nutrients such as phosphorous and nitrogen. Although eutrophication is a natural process in the aging of all lakes, human activity can greatly accelerate eutrophication by increasing the rate at which nutrients and organic substances enter aquatic ecosystems from their surrounding watersheds. These human activities can include fertilizers, sanitary wastes, or other excess nutrients introduced by humans. Nutrient introduction is particularly evident in slow-moving rivers and shallow lakes as a result of higher retention times. Increased sediment deposition can eventually raise the level of the bottom of the lake or river bed, allowing land plants to colonize the edges, and eventually converting the area to dry land.

One immediate effect of eutrophication may be large algal blooms. These can produce unpleasant taste and odor problems as well as a reduction in water clarity. This decreased transparency prevents sunlight and limits the amount of photosynthetic activities by the plants and algae and restrict zooplankton and their own populations to surface waters. When the algae die, the oxygen supply in the water is reduced by decomposition. Other common consequences of eutrophication include increased rate of sedimentation, a possible decrease in biodiversity and a shift in dominant biota.

Sampling nutrients such as phosphorous will allow a lake manager to gain a better understanding of the internal loading within the water column and how it changes throughout the year. The amount of phosphorous and the time at which it is released could create its own management implications. Once present in the lake, it is possible that even under natural conditions, a lake will experience extended effects due to the cycling of phosphorous between the water column and sediments (NYSFOLA 2009).

Throughout the year phosphorous concentrations fluctuate in the water column due to thermal stratification and loss of oxygen, impacting the distribution and abundance of plankton. During the summer months, the highest phosphorous concentrations are at the top and the bottom layers (Table 3, Figure 10). When hypolimnetic waters become anoxic, the reducing environment causes the reduction of iron and the subsequent release of this soluble iron as well as the phosphorus that had been associated with its previous oxidized form (Bostrom et al. 1982). Following fall overturn, this phosphorus may be available for algal uptake.

Table 3. Total phosphorous (ug/L) in Panther Lake in 2013. Sampling was done with a Van Dorn sampler at one meter depth intervals. High variances in total phosphorous (TP) may be due to sampling at different times and depths. For example, in August, at 4m, TP was 9 ug/L and at 5m, it was 33 ug/L. This may have been due to the anoxic hypolimnion causing an excess release of phosphorous (as described above).

Total Phosphorus (ug/L) Depth July August September October 0 23 5 15 18 1 36 19 16 26 2 30 12 19 23 3 23 10 19 50 4 28 9 15 35 5 40 33 17 28 6 48 54 47 23

Total Phosphorus (ug/L) 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 0

Depth (meters) 4

6 July August September October

Figure 10. Total phosphorous (ug/L) in Panther Lake in 2013. Arrow indicated metalimnetic maximum.

In Panther Lake there is a large metalimnetic phosphorous maximum in October that is believed to be due to the phosphorous level contained in the population of Gloeotrichia echinulata, a blue green algae (represented by the arrow in Figure 10).

DESCRIPTIVE ECOLOGY

PHYTOPLANKTON Phytoplankton are non-vascular primary producers. They are extremely important to life on Earth as a major source of most oxygen and a food for life in freshwater systems. Often phytoplankton are so small, you cannot see them with the naked eye. When they mass together, they can make lakes look green or cause dark spots in the water when seen from above.

The word plankton comes from the Greek word "planktos" which means wandering, or drifting, which is just what phytoplankton do. They drift throughout the water column, carried by currents. Phytoplankton contain chlorophyll and other photosynthetic pigments which convert sunlight and nutrients such as phosphates, nitrates and sulfur into proteins, carbohydrates

20 and lipids. While doing this, phytoplankton release oxygen into the water. They are the base of the food chain for aquatic life.

ZOOPLANKTON Zooplankton are heterotrophic organisms, which means they obtain their energy from consuming primary producers such as algae or other smaller consumers. Like phytoplankton, they float, drift or weakly swim in the water. Some zooplanktors, such as dinoflagellates (sometimes considered phytoplankton), may also be fully or partially photosynthetic, gaining their energy from sunlight.

Freshwater zooplankton are found in the water in a diversity of wetland areas such as lakes, ponds, swamps, marshes, and streams. They are most abundant near the surface as they harvest the phytoplankton which needs light to photosynthesize. Many species move into shallower waters at night to feed, avoiding UV rays and/or predators (Harman et al. 1997). Zooplankton are a vital component of freshwater food webs. Herbivorous zooplankton graze on algae, and have an impact on the distribution and abundance of algae (Figure 11). The smallest zooplankton are eaten by the larger zooplankton which, in turn, are eaten by aquatic invertebrates and small fish.

Phytoplankton and zooplankton are often collected using a net with a very fine mesh size. A 63 µm mesh is typically used in temperate regions (Per. Comm., Albright). Nets can either be towed horizontally from a boat or pulled vertically from a fixed platform. When the net is hauled to the surface the plankton accumulates in the codend, a removable container that can be emptied into a jar for storage. Samples can be preserved with an iodine solution such as Lugols solution which kills and stains the organisms for easy counting and identification (Sime 2004).

Figure 11. A common food web showing the trophic levels in a freshwater system such as Panther Lake (modified from Harman et al. 1997).

SEASONAL SUCCESSION OF PHYTOPLANKTON AND ZOOPLANKTON The temperate pattern of succession of planktonic organisms involve a winter minimum of small flagellates adapted to low light and temperature, followed by a spring bloom of diatom activity and biomass, and then rapidly by a smaller development of green algae (Harman et al. 1997). Usually there is a transitional lull between spring and summer. Summer populations vary in relation to the trophic status of the lakes, but can include either another diatom development in less productive lakes by late summer and early autumn or increases in nitrogen-fixing blue-green algae in eutrophic lakes (Scavia and Fahnenstiel 1987), such as Panther Lake.

Many people assume that winter productivity is insignificant. However, rates of primary production under ice cover can constitute a very significant portion of the total annual primary productivity of the phytoplankton. Increasing light is the dominant factor contributing to the development of a spring bloom, because water temperatures are still low. The spring epilimnetic maximum is frequently dominated by a few species of diatom, such as Fragilaria spp. (Table 4).

The decline of the spring maximum of phytoplankton and onset of reduced summer populations in temperate lakes is associated with a complex interaction of physical and biotic parameters. In many cases, reductions of nutrients in the photic zone of the epilimnion is responsible for slowing the growth of algae populations (Sime 2004). Since diatoms are often

the dominant component of the spring maximum in temperate lakes, silica concentrations are often reduced to limiting levels (<0.5 mg/l) in a few weeks (Scavia and Fahnenstiel 1987).

As silica concentrations are reduced in productive lakes such as Panther Lake, diatom populations are often succeeded by a preponderance of green algae and later blue-green algae + (cyanobacteria). Growth in eutrophic lakes can be so intense that soluble nitrogen (NO3, NH4 ) sources are reduced to below detectable concentrations (Scavia and Fahnenstiel. 1987). These undetectable concentrations appear to occur in Panther Lake (Appendix C). This often happens by midsummer when the warmest epilimnetic temperatures occur. When this happens, blue- green algae with efficient capabilities for fixing atmospheric nitrogen, such as Gloeotrichia echinulata, have a competitive advantage.

Table 4. Common zooplankton and phytoplankton found at various times throughout the year in Panther Lake in 2013

Order Family (If Genus and species (If

Fragilariales Fragilariaceae Fragellaria Chlorococcales Micractiniaceae Golenkinia Nostocales Rivulariaceae Gloeotrichia echinulata Nostocales Nostocaceae Anabaena Sphaeropleales Selenastraceae Ankistrodesmus Volvocales Chlamydonadaceae Chlamydomonas Peniculida Parameciidae Paramecium Ploima Brachionidae Keratella Calanoida - - Cyclcopoida - -

SUBMERGED AQUATIC MACROPHYTES Aquatic macrophytes are large, usually vascular plants. They provide food and cover and/or enhance oxygen concentrations for all of the organisms that make up shallow (littoral) water (Figure 12) aquatic communities. They are the basis of aquatic food webs in those areas, providing indispensable links between the sun's energy and the animals that eat plants which are, in turn, eaten by predators (Hutchinson 1975). In these ways, plants regulate the size and character of game fish and waterfowl populations as well as impact other important biotic resources.

Panther Lake has a rich mix of nine species of submerged and emergent aquatic macrophytes creating a diverse littoral community which undergoes successional change during the growing season. The macrophytes provide a constantly changing physical structure (physiognomy) analogous in many ways to the groundcover, understory and canopies typical of forest ecosystems (Figure 12). There are four community types that are common for northeastern lakes (Figure 13-15) (Vertucci et al. 1981). The extent to which shallow aquatic macrophytes attain the surface varies from year to year. These changes are normal and should be expected. An aquatic macrophyte survey was done in 2013 using a simple rake toss method. In the survey, thirty selected sampling sites (Figure 16) were picked within 15 feet from the shoreline. Sampling followed the Point Intercept Rake Toss Relative Abundance Method (PIRTRAM), outlined by Lord and Johnson 2006). A two sided hard rake was thrown out 40 feet from the boat and pulled back in slowly. The species and amount of plant matter collected on the rake was recorded for each site. Relative abundance estimates were made based upon field measurements of collected samples.

Figure 12. A diagrammatic view of the vertical structure of community type I (Vertucci et al. 1981)

Figure 13. A diagrammatic view of the vertical structure of community type II (Vertucci et al. 1981)

Figure 14. A diagrammatic view of the vertical structure of community type III (Vertucci et al. 1981)

Figure 15. A diagrammatic view of the vertical structure of community type IV (Vertucci et al. 1981)

Comparing the species lists presented in 1990 (Petreszyn 1990) and 1998 data (Harman 1998), with the species found in 2013 indicates several changes (Table 5). The water lilies, Nuphar advena and Nymphaea odorata are present in Panther today; Petreszyn listed Nuphar advena and Nymphaea tuberosa. The latter may represent a synonymous taxon. Coontail (Ceratophyllum demersum), which was present in 1990 and missing during the 1998 survey, was observed in the most recent survey. Whitestem pondweed (Potamogeton praelongus) was recorded by Petreszyn, butwas not encountered in 2013 nor the 1998 survey. Three other pondweeds were observed in 1998 (P. epihydrus, P. pusillus, P. angustifolius) that were not observed in the 2013 survey. However, flat stem pondweed (P. compressus), bushy pondweed (Najas flexilis), water shield (Brasenia schreberi), bladderwort (Utricularia vulgaris) and the stonewort (Nitella hyalina) were all observed in 1998 and 2013.

Figure 16. The 30 selected plant survey sampling sites on Panther Lake in 2013 (GPS coordinates in Appendix D).

Further comparisons are difficult to assess. The subjective terms, scarce and moderate, as Petreszyn (1990) used them, are difficult to rectify with plant abundance expressed as percent cover, particularly with diver vs. surface observations in 1998. Temporal changes between 6/3/98 and 7/31/98 indicate seasonal changes in growth between species. This seasonal growth was observed again in the 2013 sampling year (Figure 17). Fern pondweed (P. robbinsii) appeared more abundant in the qualitative samples taken in June than the quantitative work in July indicated. Eurasian milfoil (Myriophyllum spicatum) was less obvious in June than in July. Individuals of this species showed evidence of pathology that may indicate current unauthorized herbicide use. It should be noted that, although not seen in 2013, yellow starflower (Zosterella dubia), a problem species in late summer in many lakes, presents no concerns in Panther Lake. Two other plants that often present problems in other lakes, sago pondweed (P. pectinatus = Stuckenia pectinatus) and curly leaved pondweed (P. crispus), were not seen in the lake in the recent 2013 survey. The latter, another introduced exotic, commonly causes as many problems as Eurasian milfoil, though much earlier in the growing season. The only aggressive exotic present in Panther Lake is Eurasian milfoil (M. spicatum), which in the summer of comprised approximately 50% of the plant biomass on each of the three survey dates (Figure 17).

350

300 Chara spp.

P. illinoensis 250 Elodea

200 Valisneria americana

Nitellopsis spp.

150 PointWeight Dry (g/m^2)

- P. zosteriformis

P. robbinsii 100 Mean Mid Mean P. amplifolius

50 Myriophyllum spicatum

0 June July August

Figure 17. Changes in submerged aquatic macrophytes throughout the summer season in Panther Lake, Oswego Co., NY in 2013.

Table 5. Species of submerged aquatic macrophytes present in Panther Lake, Oswego Co., NY in 1990, 1998, and 2013. Abundance (S) =Scarce, (M) =Moderate. [1], [2], [3], [4], denotes the communities of Vertucci, et al, 1981

1990 (from Petreszyn 1990) 1998 (from Harman 1999) 2013 Chara sp. (S) Chara sp. [4] Chara sp. [4] (S) - Nitella hyalina [3] - Nuphar advena (S) Nuphar variegatum [1] Nuphar advena [1] (S) Nymphaea tuberosa (S) Nymphaea odorata [1] Nymphaea odorata [1] (S) - Ranunculus aquatilis [1] - - Brasenia schreberi [1] Brasenia schreberi [1] (S) - Najasj flexilis [4] Najasj flexilis [4] (S) - Potamogeton pusillus [4] - Potamogeton robbinsii (M) Potamogeton robbinsii [4] Potamogeton robbinsii [4] (M) Potamogeton amplifolius (M) Potamogeton amplifolius [4] Potamogeton amplifolius [4] (M) Potamogeton praelongus (M) - - - Potamogeton zosteriformis [2] Potamogeton zosteriformis [2](S) - Potamogeton epihydrus [2] - - Potamogeton angustifolius [2] - Myriophyllum spicatum (M) Myriophyllum spicatum [2] Myriophyllum spicatum [2] (M) - Utricularia vulgaris [2] - Elodea canadensis (S) Elodea canadensis [2] Elodea canadensis [2] (S) Ceratophyllum demersum (S) - Ceratophyllum demersum [2] (S)

NEKTON (THE PANTHER LAKE FISHERY) Angler complaints stemming from a perception of a lack of large bass in the lake led to a preliminary survey in 1984. The survey, done by the New York State Department of Conservation revealed the poor growth rates of largemouth bass (Micropterus salmoides). A second, more comprehensive survey was conducted in 1990 which confirmed the findings of the earlier survey. The results of these surveys led to an experimental removal of the minimum size limit on bass in Panther Lake in October 1991. An annual stocking of tiger muskies (Esox masquinongy) was also initiated in 1990 in an attempt to establish a trophy fishery for that species. A follow up survey and report was completed in 1995 to determine the effects of the management actions taken earlier in the decade. There was little change in the stock density indices of any species and the slow growth rates of bass continued in spite of the removal of a size limit. The stocking of tiger muskies did provide a small but popular fishery (Prindle 2009). Poor fisheries complaints once again prompted another fisheries survey to be done in October 2013. This survey was done for all species and their population sizes in Panther Lake and is reported below.

Stocking History The information presented here was referenced in the 2009 centrarchid survey (Prindle 2009). Walleye (Sander vitreus) were stocked in the lake in the 1940’s, which was successful in establishing a fishery. Based on a netting in 1948, the Conservation Department documented the walleye as the dominant game fish in the lake. Growth rates were very good for the first three years of life, declining rapidly thereafter. The management biologist at the time suggested that due to the lake’s small size managing it for smallmouth bass (Micropterus dolomieu) would be the best long term plan. Walleye stocking ceased in 1949 in favor of rainbow trout (Onchorynchus mykiss) as requested by the lake association. As a result, by the mid-1950’s walleye were scarce in the lake, which would indicate that there was little if any natural reproduction. The rainbow trout stocking was determined to be expensive and ineffective and was therefore eliminated. Stocking walleye was again considered. The DEC district fish manager at the time felt that it was unlikely that Panther Lake would be able to produce and sustain a substantial walleye fishery because there were fairly large and self-sustaining populations of largemouth and smallmouth bass, as well as chain pickerel (Esox niger). Despite the DEC recommendation, walleye were considered a desirable sport fish by the association and the decision was made to continue stocking fry. The continuation of walleye fry stocking failed to produce a reproducing population. By 1990 tiger muskies were being stocked instead of walleye to try and reduce the populations of bass and sunfish so that growth rates would improve for those species and provide a trophy fishery for tiger muskies. The tiger musky stocking program has since been suspended because of a lack of interest. In May 2012, the Panther Lake Association stocked 300 triploid grass carp (Ctenopharyngodon idella) as a means of control of Eurasian milfoil (Myriophyllum spicatum). The initial size of each young carp ranged from 7 to 9 inches (177 to 228 mm) (Per. Comm., Walters). During the 2013 electrofishing survey, three carp were netted and their sizes ranged from 23 to 28.5 inches. This suggests that the conditions in Panther Lake are adequate enough for the longevity of the carp as they continue to act as a biological control for Eurasian milfoil. Electrofishing Equipment The 2009 Panther Lake fisheries survey was conducted in early June using the DEC Region 7 electrofishing boat (DC-220 volts, 3 amps, 60 pulses/sec.) (Prindle 2009). The sampling gear and methods used in the 1985, 1990, and 1995 surveys are described in Bishop and Hurst (1996). Electrofishing was conducted using five transects, similar to the design of the 1990 and 1995 surveys. The exact transects were not replicated due to the much larger catches encountered in 2009, possibly caused by a cool spring resulting in the fish remaining inshore longer (Prindle 2009). Transects 1-4 were all-fish runs, where all fish were netted and identified. Transect 5 was a much longer game fish only run, where just largemouth and smallmouth bass, chain pickerel, and tiger musky were captured. The 2013 Panther Lake fisheries survey was carried out on October 15, 2013 using the SUNY Cobleskill electrofishing boat (DC-500 volts, 10 amps, 60 pulses/sec). Electrofishing was conducted using four transects, similar to the design in the 2009 survey. This survey was different because transects were not replicated and it was an all-fish survey. Scale samples were taken from up to 30 individuals per 10mm length interval for selected species. This was done to examine age structures and growth rates of these species. The differences in site locations, times of day, and some repeated runs in all surveys preclude a direct spatial comparison between years.

Species Collected Fish species and their respective size ranges are presented in Table 6. The quantity collected during the 2013 survey are in Table 7, along with the results from the earlier surveys (Figure 18). Relative abundance for each species collected is presented in Figure 19. The most notable shifts in the fish community were the large increase in the numbers of bluegill and an increase in the chain pickerel catch. The remaining species did not have any notable change in numbers. Largemouth bass and chain pickerel were the most abundant predators in Panther Lake in 2013, as in the past. The 2013 survey did not document any tiger musky. It is likely that this species is no longer in the lake. There has been recent discussion about whether or not to stock fathead minnows (Pimephales promelas) as a food source for game fish. It should be noted that there are a diversity of forage fish species in the lake. Four different species of forage fish were found during the 2013 survey, the tessellated darter (Etheostoma olmstedi), spottail shiner (Notropis hudsonius), emerald shiner (Notropis atherinoides), and golden shiner (Notemigonus crysoleucas). The population numbers for these species are more than adequate food source for the targeted game species in Panther Lake.

Table 6. Lengths of species collected during the 2013 electrofishing survey (lengths are in mm). Number Species Caught Mean Median Mode St. Dev. Grass Carp 3 676 703 N/A 72 Golden Shiner 29 109 82 82 96 1 Lake chubsucker 314 314 314 0 5 Yellow Bullhead 262 262 #N/A 31 3 Brown Bullhead 281 304 304 40 132 Chain Pickerel 222 198 184 119 112 Pumpkinseed 148 169 56 69 537 Bluegill 67 87 29 118 12 Smallmouth Bass 224 231 N/A 74 129 Largemouth Bass 188 184 56 96 18 Black Crappie 125 102 51 78 27 Yellow Perch 104 61 56 76 4 Tessalated Darter 47 52 56 13 19 Spottail Shiner 58 56 66 11 4 Emerald Shiner 59 58 N/A 18

Table 7. Fish species and number collected during the 2013 electrofishing survey compared to previous surveys. EF = Electrofishing, GN = Gillnetting (only done in 1984) (Prindle 2009).

1984 1990 1995 2009 2013 SPECIES EF GN EF EF EF EF Common Shiner 0 1 0 0 0 0 Golden Shiner 131 131 23 1 3 29 Bluntnose Minnow 0 0 0 1 0 0 Lake chubsucker 1 0 0 1 0 1 Yellow Bullhead 6 6 0 0 0 5 Brown Bullhead 2 2 64 18 27 3 Chain Pickerel 6 0 8 6 53 132 Tiger Musky 0 0 0 1 3 0 Pumpkinseed 31 10 74 40 97 112 Bluegill 29 17 13 48 280 537 Smallmouth Bass 2 2 0 6 4 12 Largemouth Bass 23 15 149 75 113 129 Black Crappie 1 1 3 1 6 18 Yellow Perch 35 32 5 0 13 27 Walleye 0 0 1 0 0 0 Logperch 0 0 0 0 1 0 Tessalated Darter 0 0 0 0 0 4 Spottail Shiner 0 0 0 0 0 19 Emerald Shiner 0 0 0 0 0 4

Figure 18. Fish species and number collected in Panther Lake during the 2013 survey compared to previous surveys. EF = Electrofishing

Abundance Relative species abundance and species richness are important elements of biodiversity. Relative species abundance refers to how common or rare a species is relative to other species in a given location or community. Usually relative species abundances are described for a single trophic level (e.g. primary consumers). Since similar species occupy the same trophic level they will potentially or actually compete for similar resources. Figure 19 shows the relative abundance of fish that were collected electrofishing in Panther Lake in 2013. Centrarchid species such as bluegill, pumpkinseed, and largemouth bass are the most abundant. This is typical of a warmwater fishery which supports fish that are able to tolerate water temperatures above 80 oF (26.7 oC). During the 2013 survey, the electrofishing catch rate of largemouth bass in Panther Lake was 77 per hour. The catch rate of smallmouth bass was 7.2 fish per hour. The catch rate of these larger basses have increased slightly between each the three most recent surveys. Both the pumpkinseed and particularly the bluegill catch rates increased considerably on the most recent survey (Figure 18, Table 7).

Emerald Shiner 4 Spottail Shiner 19 Tessalated Darter 4 Golden shiner 29 Brown bullhead 3 Yellow Bullhead 5 Yellow perch 27 Smallmouth bass 12 Largemouth bass 129 Pumpkinseed 112 Black Crappie 18 Bluegill 537 Chain Pickerel 132

Figure 19. Total fish caught in Panther Lake from the fisheries survey, October 15, 2013.

Length Frequency Fish length frequency histograms from research surveys are of prime importance for identifying habitats of different life stages, as well as for stock assessment. Fish length data were collected during the electrofishing surveys in each year. In many of these figures, the different age classes are clear (Figure 20-22).

30 1984

Frequency 0

Length (mm)

30 1990

Frequency 0

Length (mm) 30 1995

10 Frequency 0

Length (mm) 30 2009

10 Frequency 0

Length (mm) 30 2013 20

Frequency 0

Length (mm)

Figure 20. Length frequency distributions of largemouth bass sampled in Panther Lake by year.

1984 30

10 Frequency

Length (mm) 1990 30

10 Frequency 0

Length (mm)

30 1995

10 Frequency 0

Length (mm)

30 2009

10 Frequency

Length (mm)

2013

10 Frequency

Length (mm)

Figure 21. Length frequency distributions of pumpkinseed sampled in Panther Lake by year.

30 1984

10 Frequency

Length (mm)

1990 30

10 Frequency

Length (mm)

30 1995

10 Frequency

Length (mm)

30 2009

10 Frequency 0

Length (mm)

2013

30 20

Frequency 10 0

Length (mm)

Figure 22. Length frequency distributions of bluegill sampled in Panther Lake by year.

Triploid grass carp (Ctenopharyngodon idella) are notoriously known for being difficult to catch during electrofishing. Like most fish species, they are able to sense an electrical current in the water. Unlike most fish that will sense the electricity in the water and swim towards the current, carp will swim away. This is one of the reasons why managers are hesitant to suggest putting large amounts of carp into a body of water. It is much easier to put carp in than take them out. At the time the lake was electrofished, it was assumed to have 300 carp present and only three were caught. This should give the residents an indication of the difficulty in catching them. Initially the carp were stocked with an average length of about 100 mm. During the 2013 electrofishing survey, three fish were caught with an average length of 590 mm (Figure 23). Stock Density Indices Proportional stock density (PSD) is a measure of species size structure that is expressed as a ratio between the number of quality-sized individuals (or larger individuals) and stock-sized individuals (Anderson 1980). The relative stock density (RSD) is the percentage of fish of any designated length-group in a sample of fish. PSD was fairly high for largemouth bass, bluegill, and pumpkinseed in 2013 (Table 8), with bass increasing substantially from the 1990 and 1995 estimates. Consistent with previous studies, bluegill and pumpkinseed over 8 inches (203 mm) in length were also uncommon. RSD increased for largemouth bass from 1984 to 2013. This would suggest that the population of individuals over 8 inches (RSD8) is increasing. RSD for bluegills is decreasing suggesting that the population is mainly comprised of smaller fish.

Table 8. Size structure characteristics and catch rates of centrarchids in Panther Lake by survey year. a = Parameters for 1984 fish include fish sampled by electrofishing and gillnets. The 1990, 1995, 2009, and 2013 surveys were electrofishing only. Density estimates and CPUE’s for largemouth bass are from runs where “game fish” and “all fish” were targeted. CPUE’s for pumpkinseed and bluegill were based on “all fish” runs only. RSD = Relative Species Density, PSD = Proportional Species Density. RSD8 represents fish larger than 8 inches. Species Parametera 1984 1990 1995 2009 2013

Largemouth bass PSD 37.5 5.5 15.4 52.4 133.3 Largemouth bass RSD15 0 0.7 1.5 3.8 6.1 Bluegill PSD 88.6 53.8 43.3 32.7 7.6 Bluegill RSD8 13.6 0 6.8 7.1 0 Pumpkinseed PSD 53.7 81.1 75 51.7 20 Pumpkinseed RSD8 0 0 0 3.4 0 LMB >=10 in. (254mm) CPUE (fish/hour) NA 14.4 23.6 34.2 77.7 Bluegill CPUE (fish/hour) NA 9.6 22.1 239.3 323.3 Pumpkinseed CPUE (fish/hour) NA 59.2 18.4 82.9 67.4 Pickerel CPUE (fish/hour) NA NA NA NA 79.4

Examining the PSD values of the pan fish and largemouth bass populations suggests a fairly balanced population in Panther Lake (Green et al. 1986). This is an improvement over the situation described in Bishop and Hurst (1996), where there was excessive largemouth bass recruitment that resulted in prey fish populations to diminish. While the largemouth bass electrofishing catch rate in 2013 was well above the NYS average, the growth rate was below the mean NYS slow growth rate. Based on the results of the 2013 sampling, it appears that the most appropriate plan for Panther Lake would be to continue managing the lake as a warmwater fishery. One action that would benefit the fishing in Panther Lake would be to encourage the harvest of largemouth bass. The remaining bass would then have an opportunity to increase in size once they are no longer competing for resources with larger bass. That should have a positive effect on the growth rate of the remaining individuals. Conclusions About the Fishery Many residents voiced concerns that the quality of fishing in the lake was declining. Based on the most recent electrofishing survey, the largemouth bass population in Panther Lake is the best it has ever been (Figure 19). There is a healthy diversity of length classes in the lake and the bass have plenty to eat. The Centrarchid population, the main food source for bass, is showing healthy recruitment (Figure 20-21).

Based on the electrofishing survey, the Panther Lake fishery appears optimal. The grass carp are acclimating well to the conditions in the lake. It should be noted that the grass carp, if overstocked, may have negative impacts on the rest of the system. The carp are effective in reducing vascular plant populations. The bass are numerous and growing rapidly because the panfish populations are healthy. The panfish (bluegill and pumpkinseed), along with the other species of forage fish rely on the diversity of aquatic plants for habitat. If the grass carp are overstocked, the lake may lose vital habitat to support the remainder of the fish communities.

2012- 2013 LAKEWIDE STAKEHOLDER SURVEY RESULTS

In late 2012, a lake wide Panther Lake survey (Appendix E) was sent out to gain a better understanding of stakeholder demographics and concerns. There was approximately a 27% return rate from stakeholders around the lake (54 out of ~ 211 camps). Based on the survey, the top items of concern for the stakeholders are symptoms of eutrophication; sanitary wastes from camps, noxious algae growth and nuisance weed growth (Figure 23). The majority of other concerns are also derived from excess nutrients. These conclusions have been taken into consideration regarding the creation of a management plan that will best suit the needs of the lake community.

Sanitary Waste From Camps Algae and Weed Growth Undesirable Intro of Flora and Fauna Other Household Wastes Loss of Fish Habitat Water Clarity Depletion of Fisheries Aestetics Eroding Shorelines Home Density Water Levels Water Potability Runoff From CoRt 17 Motor Boats Road Salts 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45

Figure 23. Items of stakeholder concern based on the 2012 lake wide survey from Panther Lake.

In the survey, stakeholders were asked how they perceived the change in water quality since they came to the lake (Figure 24). The majority of stakeholders think that the water quality has either stayed the same or declined. This suggests that the management plan should be devoted to addressing water quality, another symptom of eutrophication. Over the history of the lake, many management options have been suggested in regards to the short-term management of noxious weed growth, mainly Eurasian milfoil (M. spicatum). The stakeholders were asked to pick from a list of management options they felt would be most beneficial. An overwhelming majority of responders said that they felt the triploid grass carp would be the best for this management approach (Figure 25). Many commented on the survey that the mechanical harvester was just making the problem worse. A few responders suggested that manual removal by divers would be the most effective, however they also commented that this would be the most costly and most likely exceed the budget of the association.

Improved 3%

Declined 46% Stayed the Same 51%

Figure 24. Stakeholder perception of water quality changes (n=54).

In addition to the preferred method, stakeholders were then asked how effective they thought the grass carp would be (Figure 26). The majority felt that the carp would be some degree of effective for the control of the Eurasian milfoil. However, a few responders felt that the fish would not be effective at all. This can help to show the strength of stakeholder approval of the Panther Lake Association’s actions and help to show a predominantly unified community regarding grass carp introduction.

Aquatic Herbicides 14% Mechanical Manual Removal Harvester by Divers 10% 10%

Aquatic Insect 0%

Triploid Grass Carp 66%

Figure 25. Stakeholders preferred method of Eurasian milfoil control (n=54).

Number of of Number Responses 4

0 Very Effective Moderately Somewhat Effective Little Effective No Effect Effective

Figure 26. Stakeholder opinion concerning the effectiveness of the grass carp on Eurasian milfoil control (n=54).

The ensuing question was how effective did stakeholders perceive the mechanical harvester for Eurasian milfoil control (Figure 27). Not a single respondent thought the mechanical harvester was a very effective management option. The overwhelming majority perceived the harvester having little to no effect as a management option.

Number of of Number Responses 10

0 Very Effective Moderately Somewhat Effective Little Effective No Effect Effective

Figure 27. Stakeholder opinion concerning the effectiveness of the mechanical harvester for Eurasian milfoil control (n=54).

Since the beginning of the management activities at Panther Lake, many stakeholders have had concerns regarding the fisheries in the lake. This prompted the question, "How has the fishing changed in Panther Lake?” A majority perceived the fishing as staying about the same. However, a sizable portion of the responders believe that the fishing has declined (Figure 28). This misconception is often attributed to the changing food and cover (macrophyte growth) which necessitates a change in technology for successful angling. Comparing the perceived fishing with the historical and recent fishing survey suggests that the populations in the lake are changing, but not declining in quantity or quality (See Nekton).

Improved 5%

Declined 39%

Stayed the Same 56%

Figure 28. Stakeholder perceptions of how sport fishing has changed on the lake (n=54).

The survey included a few questions to gain a better understanding of the demographics around the lake. The survey showed that the average resident has been on the lake for 37 years. This can help to show that the community around the lake has been sensitive to change and may lead to unanimity regarding management options.

MANAGEMENT OF PANTHER LAKE AND ITS WATERSHED MANAGEMENT PLAN SUMMARY Stakeholders have determined that the plan should focus on three critical priorities: 1. Developing a lake-wide monitoring program based on the NYSFOLA/ NYSDEC Citizen Statewide Lake Assessment Program (CSLAP) protocols with added components including the acquisition of data regarding seasonal hypolimnetic oxygen concentrations and ongoing evaluation of the status of the submergent aquatic macrophyte communities. 2. Stabilizing the rate of eutrophication through long-term watershed and in lake based alternatives for reduction of phosphorus bioavailability. 3. Continued management of the fisheries with a major priority of assessing the success of previous stocking of grass carp (Ctenopharygodon idella) for Eurasian milfoil control.

• Long Term Monitoring o The purpose of long-term monitoring is to observe the ongoing limnological character of the lake, to keep aware of any relevant changes such as the introduction of nuisance aquatic exotic species and to ascertain the success of problem mitigation through management, therefore, being in the best position to respond to a changing environment.

• Stabilizing the Rate of Eutrophication o Using point source and non-point source controls to mitigate nutrients coming into the lake from sources in the lake and watershed. Point source control may involve diversion of the pollutant, technological or operational adjustments, and/or prevention plans such as storm water collection and treatment. Non-point controls may involve the elimination of land uses or activities that release excess nutrients such as the clear cutting of trees or increasing residential sprawl. Controls can range from physical, chemical, and biological treatments to regulations and standards set forth by the association working through local, state and federal planning and regulatory agencies. This approach may involve alternative product use, as requiring low phosphate detergents and minimal use of fertilizers. o Using non-point source traps to catch nutrients before they can enter into the water body. Traps involve restoring vegetative buffers along watercourses and the construction of retention ponds above grade from the water body to collect the nutrients. Constructed wetlands may prove useful. • Management of Nuisance Aquatic Plants o Using biological introductions such as triploid grass carp that were introduced in May 2012 can be an effective strategy in Panther Lake. The drawbacks with carp are that there is little control over what plants are grazed and impacts may not be as fast as many residents expect. Therefore, overstocking can be a problem since complete elimination of plants can result in an algal dominated system. There should be concern in Panther Lake because the apparent target plant, Eurasian milfoil, is not recognized is a preferred plant by grass carp in the northeast. o Hand pulling is one of the most effective and selective techniques for getting rid of weeds. This activity is labor intensive and if divers are hired to do the job, it can become expensive. o Using benthic barriers of variable composition that are laid on the bottom of target areas: These mats can cover areas permanently, or more commonly, for as little as several weeks. It is suggested that porous or loose-weave synthetic materials be used around dock and recreational areas. These types of materials are usually anchored down and may be taken out and cleaned once a year for maximum effectiveness. Another suggestion is non-porous materials. These are applied the same way but tend to be more permanent. Since gasses may build up underneath from decomposition, anchors must be heavier and thus, removal can be difficult. o Using herbicides to kill plants or limit growth: Herbicides are typically either contact or systematic and come in liquid, pellets, or powder. Application is usually every 1-5 years. Each chemical has its own advantages and disadvantages and relative effectiveness depending on target species (Appendix A). Many chemicals have multiple trade names and have a wide range of prices associated with each (Appendix B). Since the Eurasian milfoil is the target species on Panther Lake, it is suggested that using pelletized 2,4-D spot treatments around docks would be best for recreational areas. The resident would have the most control over the areas they wanted clear for swimming and boating. 2,4-D is a broad spectrum, systemic herbicide that will eradicate all plants in the areas in which is applied. A common trade name for this is Aquacide. However, a permit is required by the New York State Department of Conservation for application.

• Control of Algal Blooms o Using phosphorous inactivation techniques with chemicals and/or aeration will help limit the available nutrients in the water column and sediments. Since phosphorous is the limiting nutrient in the water, inactivation would prevent further growth. Many of the products on the market right now are aluminum sulfate compounds (alum). These act as rapid phosphorous binders to decrease the concentrations in the water column and to minimize release from sediments. Alum will lower the pH in a water body through the chemical binding of the phosphorous creating a concern about toxicity to fish and invertebrates from the fluctuations in pH which often necessitates the use of buffering compounds. Lanthanum, under the brand name “Phoslock” is a recently developed product that removes phosphorus from the water by binding to phosphate molecules forming a highly stable mineral, rhabdophane (LaPO4.nH2O). Rhabdophane will become a permanent contributor within the existing water body sediments and will not affect pH. However, at this time it is relatively expensive. o The modes of operation of many algaecides work as, and are not mutually exclusive from, herbicides because of their toxicity to algae (See Herbicides). • Managing the Fisheries o At this time I would suggest not altering the Panther Lake fishery in any way. Electrofishing data over time has documented steadily increasing quality of the largemouth bass populations. There is a diversity of abundant forage species of fish in the lake and thus, enough food to sustain the bass populations. As the environment in the lake has changed, due to excessive plant production, fish behavior has apparently changed adapting to the conditions. The perceived view of some stakeholders of a poor fishery in the lake may stem from those changes in environment. Angling methods that once worked in the past, may be rendered ineffective. • Assessing the Success of Previous Triploid Grass Carp (Ctenopharygodon idella) Stocking o The primary goal of stocking the carp was to control the problem of excess growth of Eurasian milfoil (Myriophyllum spicatum). It is suggested that a survey of milfoil’s distribution and abundance be done in the near future to be repeated every few years so the Panther Lake Association can ascertain the effectiveness, or lack thereof, of the stocking. As those impacts become recognized further management activities can be undertaken.

STAKEHOLDER PERCEIVED PLANNING PRIORITIES The data acquisition necessary for the development of The State of Panther Lake was the first step in the process of designing and implementing a management plan for the lake and watershed. Six meetings were attended to meet with residents on a more personal level and let them voice their comments, observations, and concerns about Panther Lake. These meetings are key and can play an important role in the harmonizing of demands from various users of the land and water. Lake management is the responsibility of the lake association, residents, local organizations, and other groups of users on the lake and in its watershed (NYSFOLA 2009). Human activities combined with naturally occurring processes can create conditions that exceed the natural capability of a lake to mitigate problems without intervention. Lake and watershed property owners must understand natural processes, the limitations of science, tradeoffs, and how to work with other residents. This management plan accounts for the current conditions in

Panther Lake and based on the data, suggests a systematic approach to mitigating and controlling the perceived stakeholder priorities.

An important part of the management process is to gather information regarding citizen concerns and perceptions about issues in and around the lake. Lake and watershed management is only possible when the perceived stakeholder priorities are taken into account. For example, residents with lawns that are groomed right up to the lake shore may find a way to get rid of excess aquatic plants using a weed cutter, a process that must be repeated every few weeks. Longer relief, however, means recognizing that the weeds are really a symptom of eutrophication and the cause may be soil and fertilizer runoff from shoreline lawns. Information gathering from the residents also provides the socio-political characteristics of the human population in the watershed. Concurrently, a systematic monitoring program was initiated to gather reference conditions in the lake (CSLAP), recognize management successes or failures, and create early detection/rapid response initiatives. A majority of the changes most seriously affecting the recreational use of Panther Lake over the last few decades have been the direct result of introductions of exotic organisms taking advantage of excess nutrient loading (eutrophication). It is important for residents to understand that chronic impacts by one invading species after another impede even the brief stability necessary to maintain an ecosystem's integrity and sustainability (Woodley et al. 1993). The changes that occur by the introduction of invasive species may compromise the lake as an ecological and economic resource. Another important component of any management strategy is to ensure the present viability of the resource. In the case of Panther Lake, the implementation of means to reduce phosphorus loading is suggested. Phosphorous loading can occur as a result of external loading from the watershed or internal loading from the sediments. Internal loading occurs during the summer months when deep waters and the underlying sediments reach a state of anoxia and sediment-bound phosphorus is released into hypolimnetic waters. This occurs due to the natural affinity for phosphorous to attach to the iron in the sediments using the available oxygen. When the oxygen is depleted, the iron bound phosphorous is released. Following overturn, the phosphorous is made available to organisms higher in the water column as the bottom waters begin mixing. Increases in phosphorus due to internal loading can be extensive enough to render ineffective comparatively inexpensive, normally recommended non-point source pollution strategies to minimize in-lake availability of phosphorus (Bostrom et al. 1982; Carr 1962; Cooke et al. 1993; Cullen and Forsberg 1988; Sas et al. 1989). These include land use regulations with provisions for nutrient management, agricultural, silvicultural, and residential, "Best Management Practices" (including effectively reducing the impacts of sanitary wastes) and recreational use legislation. Eutrophic conditions caused from excess nutrient loading may often times result in large cyanobacteria populations. These populations cause undesirable tastes, odors, and colors to the lake water, and also the associated organic molecules may react with chlorine during disinfection processes to form potentially carcinogenic or mutagenic trihalomethanes (Cooke et al. 1993). If Panther Lake is to retain the characteristics that have made it the environmental and cultural focus of human endeavor in our region, it is imperative that existing phosphorus sources,

as well as those resulting from actions that could increase its loading or availability, be aggressively mitigated. This management plan accounts for the current conditions in Panther Lake and suggests a systematic approach to mitigating and controlling these stakeholder priorities based on intensive review of the available data.

LAKE RESIDENT CONCERNS: MANAGEMENT CONTROLS This plan has been developed for the benefit of the public and for the common good of Panther Lake and the surrounding watershed. Based on the resident input (Figure 29), the goals of the plan are to: 1. Prevent eutrophication (See “What is Eutrophication?”) in the lake: a. Sanitary system review b. Control the Eurasian milfoil (Myriophyllum spicatum) and other potential nuisance aquatic macrophytes in the lake (symptom of eutrophication). c. Preventing noxious algae growth (another symptom of eutrophication). 2. Fish Management: a. Manage for largemouth bass (Micropterus salmoides) populations. b. Keep track of triploid grass carp (Ctenopharyngodon idella) progress.

Eutrophication Eutrophication

SANITARY WASTE FROM CAMPS 43 Management

ALGAE AND WEED GROWTH 41

INDESIRABLE INTRO OF SPECIES 33

Management

LOSS OF FISH HABITAT 30 Fishery

DEPLETION OF FISHERIES 29

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50

Figure 29. Items of the greatest concern on Panther Lake as perceived by survey respondents in 2013.

There are five main questions a lake association must ask when evaluating each technique in relation to a given problem: 1. How effective is the technique likely to be? 2. How rapidly will it achieve results and how long will those results last? 3. What desirable or undesirable side effects might be expected? 4. How much will it cost over the duration of the management period? 5. Will a balance of appropriate use be achieved by the proposed action(s)?

PREVENTING EUTROPHICATION What is Eutrophication? Eutrophication is the process by which lakes naturally age over time. These changes occur as inorganic plant nutrients, such as phosphorous and other organic matter, silt, and sand increase on the bottom of the lake (Harper 1992; Holdren et al. 2001) (Table 9). Eutrophication can occur one of two ways; natural or cultural. Natural eutrophication results from changes that occur in a lake that are not due to human interactions. Cultural eutrophication is the accelerated aging of lake due to anthropomorphic (human) activities. Cultural eutrophication can be caused by residential and urban development, forestry, or agricultural activities in a watershed.

Table 9. Summary of eutrophication related factors. Panther Lake’s total phosphorous averages around 18 ug/L, Chlorophyll-a ranges around 8 mg/m^-3, and transparency is 3m. Panther Lake would be considered a mesotrophic lake based on this data (Holdren et al. 2001).

Parameter Trophic State

Oligotrophic Mesotrophic Eutrophic

Total Phophorous 10 ug/L 11-20 ug/L >20 ug/L

Chlorophyll a 0-4 mg/m^-3 4-10 mg/m^-3 10-100 mg/m^-3

Secchi Disk > 6m 3m-6m < 3m

Approaches to Reduce Eutrophication 1. Management for nutrient input reduction (i.e. residential runoff) Course of action – Includes watershed and lake edge activities intended to eliminate nutrient sources or reduce delivery to lake. This is an essential component of aquatic macrophyte and algal control where internal recycling is not the dominant nutrient source, and desired even when internal recycling is important. Advantages – Mitigates the original source of nutrients. Creates sustainable limitation on growth. May control delivery of other unwanted pollutants to lake. Facilitates an ecosystem management approach which considers more than just alga or aquatic macrophyte control. Disadvantages – May involve considerable lag time before improvement is observed. May not be sufficient to achieve goals without some form of concurrent in-lake management. Reduction of overall system fertility may impact fisheries. Applicability to Panther Lake -- Residents expressed concern in late fall about an odor emanating from the lake. Increased nutrients in the lake in autumn may be due to the response to the fall die off of in-lake species of macrophytes and algae. There is a concern of nutrient loading and pollution runoff from the surrounding camps. The limiting nutrient in

most aquatic systems is phosphorous. This means that growth of organisms that utilize the phosphorous, such as plants and algae, will be limited to phosphorous concentrations in the environment (Figure 30).

Figure 30. Representation to show how the limiting nutrient in aquatic systems (phosphorous) affects the ecosystem (Image: www.faculty.yc.edu).

Action(s) need to be taken to reduce the phosphorous loading in the lake. The following strategies have been condensed from Managing Lakes and Reservoirs (Holdren at al. 2001):

• Point source controls may involve diversion, technological or operational adjustments, and/or prevention plans such as storm water collection and treatment and adopting advanced wastewater treatment systems.

o Advantages – Point source controls often provide major input reduction if one can identify the source. For this reason it is a highly efficient approach in most cases. Success with these approaches can be easily monitored.

o Disadvantages – Point source controls may be very expensive in terms of capital and operational costs.

• Non-point source controls reduce nutrients via best management practices such as strip cropping or avoidance of clear cutting of trees, reducing sprawl, and may involve elimination of land uses or activities that release nutrients. This approach may involve alternative product use, as with no-phosphate fertilizer.

o Advantages – This approach may remove the source and limit ongoing costs associated with the problem.

o Disadvantages – This approach may require purchase of the land or reduction of permitted activities by land use regulation. It may be viewed as limitation of “quality of life” by many. It usually requires raising awareness of stakeholders and gradual implementation.

• Non-point source pollutant trapping and fixing of nutrients approaches consist of capturing the pollutants between source and lake. This differs from control because the runoff has already been generated. The goal is to prevent it from entering the lake. It may involve drainage system alteration such as silt traps along roadsides and often involves wetland treatments. It may also involve storm water collection and treatment as with point sources.

o Advantages – Minimizes interference with land uses and activities. Allows diffuse and phased implementation throughout watershed. This is a highly flexible approach and tends to address a wide range of pollutant loads.

o Disadvantages – Does not address actual sources. It may be expensive to implement on necessary scale. It may require substantial maintenance. a. Required Information – Target load reduction, physical limits on detention, treatment processes needed to achieve target reduction, inflow rate, and inflow quality. b. Important Water Concerns – Variability in flow and quality of incoming water and flooding adjacent to detention areas. c. Important Sediment Concerns – Need for removal of accumulated sediment from detention area. d. Important Biological Concerns – Habitat value of newly created detention areas and the potential for the loss of open, contiguous water area through partitioning. e. Important Public Relation Concerns – Access and safety concerns. f. Important Cost Factors – Cost of engineering design, cost of materials and construction, maintenance costs, and a monitoring program must be put in place. Actual costs are difficult to assess because each situation is different.

IN-LAKE STRATEGIES

CONTROLLING NUISANCE WEED GROWTH (A SYMPTOM OF EUTROPHICATION) If lake users are not satisfied with the current in-lake situation, physical removal (by hand) or benthic barriers (described below) for the control of problem plants around docks and in swimming areas can be undertaken. Attempts to bury shallow water plants by introducing sand in beach areas (which has apparently been done in the past) is ineffective and, in the long run, will worsen the situation by artificially increasing the rate of eutrophication. It is obvious that non-specific herbicides are in use around the lake, and may potentially be dangerous to the sustainability of the present littoral community. Figure 31 summarizes the survey results pertaining to preferred methods of plant control in Panther Lake.

Figure 31. The preferred method of aquatic macrophytes control from responders in the 2013 Panther Lake lake-wide survey.

Approaches to Control Nuisance Weed Growth 1. Herbicides – Liquid or pelletized herbicides can be applied to target area or to plants directly. They can be contact or systematic chemicals that kill plants or limit growth. They typically requires application every 1-5 years. Many chemicals have multiple trade names (Common names can be found in Appendix B). For example, there are over 100 different names for glyphosate and 2, 4-D. Relative effectiveness of aquatic herbicides will vary with the character of the water, concentration of the solution, and the type of plant being targeted (Appendix A). When calculating whole lake treatments, a manager must know the volume of a lake. When you begin dealing with large amounts of an active compounds, the prices may seem staggering. a. Required Information – Lake bathymetry and volume, flushing rate, choice of chemical, form of chemical to be used (pellets, powder, or liquid), chemical concentration needed, amount to be used, duration of exposure, timing and frequency of treatments, and outlet control features of the waterbody. b. Important Water Issues – Persistence of chemical and degradation products, effects on oxygen, potential for nutrient release, and other indirect water quality impacts. c. Important Sediment Concerns – Accumulation of contaminants and organic matter. d. Important Biological Concerns – The anticipated impacts on target and non-target species, the potential migration of chemical into hydraulically connected wetland areas, the association of fauna with area to be treated, presence of protected species, distance downstream at which chemical can be detected, and the possible impacts to downstream biotic assemblages.

53 e. Important Public Relation Concerns – Use restrictions following treatment, alternative water supplies, and fishing limitations following treatment, depending on the compound used (Appendix F). f. Important Cost Factors – Cost of chemical, application method, application labor, and a monitoring program to ascertain impacts must be put in place. Advantages – Wide range of control possible. May be able to selectively control species. Disadvantages – May be toxic to non-target species of plants/animals. Possible downstream impacts; may affect non target areas within lake. May restrict water use for varying time after treatment. May increase oxygen demand from decaying vegetation. May cause recycling of nutrients to allow growth of other plants or algae. Applicability to Panther Lake – There are hundreds of herbicides with different trade names. Most of these products are actually just a handful of different products with minor differences in their chemical compositions and combinations to address specific differences in the macrophytes of the treated water bodies. The public opinion of chemical herbicides around the lake tends to be negative. With the proper treatment and control, many stakeholders will see that herbicides can be a cost effective approach to plant control within Panther Lake. Based on observations during the summer, it is obvious that many residents around the lake already employ some sort of herbicide around their docks and swimming areas. There are multiple types of herbicides that can be beneficial or undesirable in the perception of Panther Lake residents.

• Copper is a contact herbicide meaning it has to actually touch the plants surface to be effective. This is done as a cellular toxicant that disrupts the membrane transport within the plant. Copper compounds are often applied as a wide variety of liquid or granular formulations, often in conjunction with surfactants or other herbicides. Costs are usually around $5 per pound. o Advantages – Moderately effective control of submersed plant species. o Disadvantages – Toxic to aquatic fauna as a function of concentration, formulation, and ambient water chemistry. Ineffective at colder temperatures. Copper is persistent, meaning it will accumulate in lake sediments or move downstream. • Endothall is also a contact herbicide. It works by inhibiting protein synthesis and causes structural deterioration of the plant. It is applied as liquid or granules. Costs are usually around $25 per pound. o Advantages – Exerts moderate control of some immersed plant species, moderately to highly effective control of floating and submersed species. Has limited toxicity to fish at recommended dosages. Acts rapidly. o Disadvantages – Non-selective in treated area. May be toxic to aquatic fauna. Time delays are necessary on use for water supply, agriculture, and contact recreation. • Diquat is a contact herbicide. It is absorbed through foliage but not roots. It is a strong oxidant that disrupts most cellular functions within the plant. It is usually applied as a liquid, sometimes in conjunction with copper. Costs are usually around $125 per gallon. o Advantages – Exerts moderate control of some immersed plant species, moderately to highly effective control of floating and submersed species. Has limited toxicity to fish at recommended dosages. Acts rapidly.

o Disadvantages – Non selective in treated area. Sometimes toxic to zooplankton at recommended dosage. Inactivated by suspended particles; ineffective in muddy waters. Time delays are necessary on use for water supply, agriculture, and contact recreation. • Glycophosphate is a contact herbicide. It works by being absorbed through the foliage and disrupting enzyme formation. It is applied as a liquid formulation. Costs are usually around $20 per gallon. o Advantages – Exerts moderately to highly effective control of immersed and floating plant species. Can be used selectively, based on application on individual plants. Acts rapidly. Low toxicity to aquatic fauna at recommended dosages. No time delays needed for use of treated water. o Disadvantages – Non-selective in treated area. Inactivated by suspended particles; ineffective in muddy waters. Not for use within 0.5 miles of potable water intakes. Highly corrosive; storage precautions necessary. • 2, 4-D is a systemic herbicide, meaning it enters the plant and eventually works its way into the root system. 2, 4-D is readily absorbed and disperses throughout the plant. It works by inhibiting cell division in new tissue, stimulates growth in older tissue, resulting in a gradual cell disruption. It is typically applied as liquid, granules, or pellets, frequently as part of more complex formulations. It is preferably applied during the early growth phase of plants. This is what is most likely being applied by residents around the lake in pellet form. Costs are usually around $10 per pound. o Advantages – Moderately to highly effective control of a variety of immersed, floating, and submersed plants. Can achieve some selectivity through application timing and concentration. Fairly fast acting. o Disadvantages – Has variable toxicity to aquatic fauna, depending upon formulation and ambient water chemistry. Time delays are necessary for use of treated water for agriculture and contact recreation. Not for use in water supplies. • Fluridone is also a systemic herbicide. It acts by inhibiting the carotenoid pigment synthesis which is required for photosynthesis. This is best applied as liquid or granules during early growth phase of plants. Costs are usually around $600 per quart. o Advantages – Can be used selectively, based on concentration. Gradual deterioration of affected plants limit impacts of oxygen reduction in the water column. Effective against several difficult-to-control species. Low toxicity to aquatic fauna. o Disadvantages – Impacts on non-target plant species possible at higher doses. Extremely soluble and mixable; difficult to perform partial lake treatments. Requires extended contact time (40 days is recommended). • Triclopyr is a systemic herbicide. It is readily absorbed by foliage and translocated throughout plant. It works by disrupting enzyme systems specific to plants. It is applied as a liquid spray or subsurface injected liquid. Costs are usually around $85 per gallon. o Advantages – Effectively controls many floating and submerged plant species. Can be used selectively; more effective against dicots, including many nuisance species. Effective against difficult-to-control species. Low toxicity to aquatic fauna. Acts rapidly. o Disadvantages – Impacts on non-target plant species possible at higher doses. Current time delay of 30 days on consumption of fish from treated areas. Necessary restrictions on use of treated water for supply or contact recreation.

2. Benthic barriers – Mats of variable composition that are laid on the bottom of target areas. These mats can cover areas for as little as several weeks to permanently. Routine maintenance will improve the effectiveness. These types of mats are mainly used in swimming areas and around docks. a. Appropriate Uses – This technique can be used to reduce sediment-water interactions, algal control, rooted plant control, and improved recreational appeal. b. Required Information – Physical sediment features, chemical sediment features, area to be treated, water depth, and the material used for sealing. c. Important Water Concerns – Interaction of treatment with water column. d. Important Sediment Concerns – Longevity of effects. e. Important Biological Concerns – Impacts on benthic organisms, facilitation of colonization by new organisms, and impacts on biota of water column. f. Important Public Relation Concerns – Use restrictions to protect barrier and safety concerns for contact recreation in barrier area. g. Important Cost Factors – Cost of materials, cost of application, cost of maintenance, and a monitoring program must be put in place. General costs are roughly $0.22 to $1.25 per square foot. Advantages – The mats prevent plant growth, reduce turbidity from the soft sediments, can cover undesirable substrate, and potentially improve fish habitat. Disadvantages – The mats may cause anoxia at sediment-water interface from the decomposing organic matter. The mats may limit benthic invertebrates used as a food source for many fish species. They may interfere non-selectively with plants in target area. They may inhibit spawning or feeding by some fish (such as the bluegills). Applicability to Panther Lake – Benthic barriers would be beneficial to local areas in Panther Lake because most rooted aquatic macrophytes are limited to a depth of 15 feet. It is obvious that many camps import sand into the lake themselves. Not only is this illegal without the proper permitting, but the residents are essentially filling in the lake. Benthic barriers would be a similar, but less harmful alternative that give residents a higher level of control over their individual plant control without leaving a lasting impact on the lake. These barriers are fairly inexpensive and can be made out of many different materials. These mainly consist of, but are not limited to:

• Porous or loose-weave synthetic materials are types of barriers that are laid on the bottom and usually anchored by sparse weights or stakes. For maximum effectiveness, these mats should be flipped and repositioned at least once a year

o Advantages – This material allows some escape of gases which may build up underneath. The panels may be flipped in place or removed for relatively easy cleaning or repositioning.

o Disadvantages – Allows some growth through the pores and gases may still build up underneath in some cases.

• Non-porous or sheet synthetic materials are types of barriers that are laid on the bottom and usually anchored by sparse weights or stakes. These types of mats are not typically removed, but may be swept or blown clean periodically.

o Advantages – This material prevents all plant growth until buried by sediment and minimizes interaction by sediment and water column.

o Disadvantages – There may be gas buildup cause barrier to float upwards. Strong anchoring makes removal difficult and can hinder maintenance.

• Sediments of a desirable composition may be added on top of existing sediments and plants. Use of sand or clay can limit plant growths and alter sediment-water interactions. Sediments can be applied from the surface or suction-dredged from below much layer (reverse layering technique).

o Advantages – Plant biomass can be buried. Seed banks can be buried deeper. Sediment can be made less hospitable to plant growths. Nutrient release from sediments may be reduced. Surface sediments can be made more appealing to human users. Reverse layering requires no addition or removals of sediments.

o Disadvantages – The lake depth may decline. Sediments may sink into or mix with underlying sediments. Permitting for adding sediment is difficult. Addition of sediment may increase turbidity initially. New sediment may contain nutrients or other contaminants. Generally too expensive for large scale application.

3. Hand Pulling – Plants are uprooted by hand and preferably removed. Advantages – Highly selective technique. Disadvantages – Labor intensive and can be very expensive if contracted out. Applicability to Panther Lake – Residents would have the most control over plant selection. This approach tends to be the most labor intensive for the resident. If divers are hired, the process can become very expensive. Most dive companies charge roughly ~ $25/ square foot.

4. Biological Introductions – Fish and insects that feed on or parasitize plants are added to system to effect control. Advantages – Provided potentially continuing control with one treatment. Harnesses biological interactions to produce desired conditions. May produce potentially useful fish biomass as end product. Disadvantages – Typically involves introduction of non-native species. There should be an intensive biological survey completed before such introductions to minimize the potential of uncontrollable impacts. Plant selectivity may not match desired target species. May adversely affect indigenous species. Applicability to Panther Lake – In May 2012, The Panther Lake association put in 300 sterile triploid grass carp (Ctenopharyngodon idella) as a means of control for the Eurasian milfoil.

The residents feel that this was a good move on the Association’s part and fully supported their decision (Figure 31). The public opinion of the effectiveness of the carp was fairly consistently positive (Figure 32). There was some support for the use of aquatic insects. However, the results from the 2013 electrofishing survey showed a very large bluegill population. A fish population this large would find the insects to be a food source before they could control the target species (Prindle 2009). Another reason that insects would be a poor choice is the lack of overwintering ground on the lake. Most residents have built up retaining walls on their properties. The aquatic insects utilized for control of macrophytes require shoreline and zones of detritus to overwinter.

16 14

12 10 8 6 4 Number of of Number Responses 2 0 Very Effective Moderately Somewhat Little Effective No Effect Effective Effective

Figure 32. How residents perceived the effectiveness of the grass carp and a means of Eurasian milfoil control; based on the 2013 lakeside survey responses.

• Herbivorous Fish – Sterile juveniles stocked at a density that allows control over multiple years. Panther Lake stocked approximately two fish per acre. The growth of individuals offsets losses or may increase herbivorous pressure.

o Advantages – The carp may greatly reduce plant biomass in single season and may provide multiple years of control from single stocking. The sterility of the carp is intended to prevent population perpetuation and allow for later adjustments.

o Disadvantages – May eliminate all vascular plant biomass or impact non-target species more than target forms. Funnels energy into largely unused fish biomass and algae. May drastically alter habitat. May escape to new habitats downstream. Other lake management actions may interfere with success.

o Important Cost Factors – Triploid grass carp cost $12 to $15 per fish. • Herbivorous Insects – Larvae or adults stocked at density intended to allow control with limited growth. Intended to selectively control target species. Milfoil weevils are becoming a popular option.

o Advantages – May involve species native to region, or even the targeted lake. Expected to have no negative effect of non-target species. May facilitate longer-term control with limited management.

o Disadvantages – Population ecology suggests incomplete control likely. Oscillating cycle of control and re-growth likely. Predation by fish may complicate control. Other lake management actions may interfere with success.

o Important Cost Factors – ~ $1,200 per thousand insects. This is enough to effectively start a self-sustaining population.

CONTROLLING ALGAE GROWTH (ANOTHER SYMPTOM OF EUTROPHICATION) Approaches to Control Algae Growth 1. Algaecides – Many algaecides modes of operation work as, and are not mutually exclusive from, herbicides because of their toxicity to algae (See Herbicides). 2. Phosphorous inactivation – This is typically done with salts of aluminum, iron, or calcium and are added to the lake as a liquid or powder. Phosphorous in the treated water column is complexed and settled to the bottom of the lake. Phosphorous in the upper sediment layer is also complexed, thus reducing the release from the sediments. How permanent the binding of the phosphorous is varied by the binder in relation to redox potential and pH. Advantages – Can provide rapid, major decrease in phosphorous concentrations in water column. Can minimize release of phosphorous from sediments. May remove other nutrients and contaminants as well. Flexible with regard to depth of application and speed of improvement. Disadvantages – Possible toxicity to fish and invertebrates, especially by aluminum at low pH. Possible release of phosphorous under anoxia or extreme pH. May cause fluctuations in water chemistry, especially pH, during treatment. Possible resuspension of floc in shallow areas. Adds to bottom sediment, but typically an insignificant amount. Phosphorous inactivation by aeration (oxygen addition) – This technique can be used to control algae by reducing the phosphorous release in the sediment by preventing anoxic conditions, improve fish habitat, and create deeper zooplankton refugia (places where predation is limited by light or temperature). a. Required Information – Hypolimnetic oxygen demand, sediment oxygen demand, relative resistance to thermal mixing, area and depth of epilimnion and hypolimnion, annual phosphorous release, and the concentrations of forms of phosphorous, iron, and manganese. b. Important Water Issues – Restrictions on destratification and the longevity of effects. c. Important Sediment issues – Longevity of effects and the potential for resuspension of sediments. d. Important Biological Issues – The potential for enhanced habitat, the potential for gas bubble disease in which deadly gas bubbles form in the fish’s blood stream, and the potential for thermal impacts through mixing. e. Important Public Relation Issues – Potential for interference with recreation.

f. Important Cost Factors – Equipment and oxygen costs, power supply, installation costs, long-term operational costs, and a monitoring program needs to be put in place.

OTHER AVAILABLE MANAGEMENT OPTIONS The following options are in a large part derived from the lake management literature (Managing Lakes and Reservoirs (Holdren et al 2001), Restoration and Management of Lakes and Reservoirs (Cooke et al 1993), Diet for a Small Lake (NYSFOLA 2009)) and local management experience (State of Canadarago Lake (Albright and Waterfield 2012), State of Otsego Lake (Harman et al 1997), and Management of the Otsego Lake Watershed (Anon 1998). There are generally considered 12 additional management options within lakes that are available to address any particular problem at the source. It is very important to know the factors that go into determining which management technique will work the best for the given problem. Many of these approaches will not necessarily be viable on Panther Lake because of the lake’s unique characteristics. However, it is important for the Panther Lake Association and all the residents to know that these approaches may have potential for future use. Refer to Managing Lakes and Reservoirs (Holdren 2001) for more detailed descriptions of each: 1. Artificial or augmented circulation – This technique involves using water movement to enhance mixing and/or prevent stratification. 2. Biomanipulation – Facilitation of biological interactions to alter ecosystem processes. 3. Chemical sediment treatment – Addition of compounds that alter sediment features to limit plant growth or control chemical exchange reactions. 4. Dilution and/or flushing – Increased flow to dilute or minimize retention of undesirable materials. 5. Dredging – Removal of sediments under wet or dry conditions. 6. Dye addition – Introduction of suspended pigments to create light inhibition of plant growth. 7. Mechanical Removal – Plants are reduced by mechanical means, possibly with disturbance of soils. Collected plants may be placed on shore for composting or other disposal. Wide range of techniques employed, from manual to highly mechanized. Application once or twice per year usually needed. • Hydroraking or rotovation – Plants, root systems, and surrounding sediment and debris disturbed by mechanical rake; part of material usually collected and removed from rake. • Harvesting (With collection) – Plants cut at depths of 2-10 feet and collected for removal from lake. 8. Nutrient supplementation – Addition of nutrients to alter nutrient ratios to affect algal compositions. 9. Other Chemical treatments – Addition of chemicals to adjust pH, oxidize compounds, flocculate and settle solids, or affect chemical habitat features. 10. Rules and regulations – Restrictions on human actions directed at minimizing impacts on lakes and lake users. 11. Selective withdrawal – Removal of target waters for discharge (undesirable features such as high nutrients) or intake (desirable features such as low algae).

12. Water level control – Lowering and raising the water level to create an inhospitable environment for some or all aquatic plants. This technique disrupts plant life cycle by desiccation, freezing during the winter months, or light limitation.

LAKES COMPARABLE TO PANTHER LAKE

Conductivity and pH in Panther Lake are not indicative of Adirondack lakes nor hard water lakes in central NY. Watershed soils are typical of moraine and outwash plain deposits draining the Adirondack highlands overlying the more basic bedrock of the Ontario Lake Plain. Other nearby lakes that may appear to be valid reference lakes have not been studied enough to make reasonable comparisons. Lincoln Pond is approximately 180 miles north. It is a 720 acre, class B lake found in the Town of Elizabethtown in Essex County, in the northeastern region of the Adirondacks in New York State. Crooked Lake is approximately 54 miles to the southwest. It is a 115 acre, class B lake found in the Town of Tully in Onondaga County, just east of the Finger Lakes region of New York State. These two lakes are comparable to Panther Lake in water chemistry and the dominant aquatic nuisance macrophyte, Eurasian milfoil (Myriophyllum spicatum) (Table 10). Lincoln Pond is currently experiencing excessive growth of Eurasian milfoil that is threatening the biological diversity and the recreational activities in the lake (CSLAP 2004). The Lincoln Pond lake association has a history of using the aquatic macrophyte moth (Acentria ephemerella) in order to control the milfoil. Initial studies have shown the moth to be an effective tool. They hypothesize that there is enough cover in Lincoln Pond to allow the moth to escape predation and graze on the milfoil at the same time. There is little information at this time about the current watershed conditions around Lincoln Pond. Crooked Lake currently has very limited historical data and it is not known if the lake association is managing the lake and/or watershed to any extent (CSLAP 2011). However, it is known that Eurasian milfoil is dominating the system with little management. It is important for the Panther Lake Association to know about other lakes with similar issues and how those associations have dealt with them. Lincoln Pond may provide an example of an alternative biological control for Eurasian milfoil and how it may react in Panther Lake. Crooked Lake can provide an example of how the Eurasian milfoil could potentially act in a similar environment if left uncontrolled. The association should continuously search for other lakes with similar water chemistry and issues to provide themselves examples of how other management options could affect their lake.

Table 10. Summary of Lincoln Pond and Crooked Lake as comparable water bodies to Panther Lake based on water chemistry.

Lincoln Pond Crooked Lake Parameter (CSLAP 2004) Panther Lake (CSLAP 2011) Surface Area (acres) 720 133 115 Max Depth (m) 7 8 19 Mean Depth (m) 4 5 5 Dominant Macrophyte Eurasian Milfoil Eurasian Milfoil Eurasian Milfoil Distance from Panther Lake 179 mi North -- 54 mi South

Min Max Avg Min Max Avg Min Max Avg Water Clarity (m) 2.0 3.0 2.8 2.0 4.5 3.3 2.1 9.3 3.5 pH (std unit) 6.16 7.65 7.13 6.79 8.70 7.78 6.33 9.00 7.55 Chl. a (mg/m^-3) 0.40 1.60 0.97 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.15 39.40 6.73 Specific Conductivity 110 182 139 89 177 103 87 173 139 (µmho/cm) Total Phosphorous (mg/L) 0.006 0.024 0.011 0.005 0.054 0.026 0.005 0.034 0.019 Calcium (mg/L) 10.8 10.8 10.8 12.8 15.2 14.1 16.9 19.6 18.3

LONG TERM MONITORING ON PANTHER LAKE

Panther Lake re-entered the Citizens Statewide Lake Assessment Program (CSLAP) in early 2014. CSLAP is funded and managed by the New York State Federation of Lakes Association (NYSFOLA). The CSLAP program is the first step in setting up a long term monitoring program for Panther Lake. A management plan is only as strong as the data collected. The better the data, the more informed management approaches to watershed and in- lake problems. It should be the responsibility of the Panther Lake Association to install and maintain a functioning monitoring program. Another crucial activity for the Association is to facilitate the assignment of roles to agencies, stakeholders, organizations, volunteer, residents, etc. on the lake. These groups may be, for example, the Oswego County Planning Board, Amboy/ Constantia Planning Board, local natural resource conservation groups, and fish and game clubs.

Watershed Planning Long-term planning should involve land use regulations to minimize nutrient (phosphorus) runoff from the watershed from compacted surfaces (roofs, paved roads and driveways, patios, etc.) near the lake and septic systems. Sewage problems are not documented, but homes with small setbacks from shorelines on sandy soils are indicative of high nutrient loading potential and should be examined.

Public Education Public education programs are also recommended to assure that stakeholder expectations for Panther Lake are consistent with realistic management goals. These programs may minimize the introductions of other nuisance species such as curly leaved pondweed (P. crispus), which is currently in nearby water bodies (Hohenstein et al 1997). Public outreach techniques may vary from simple signage to lake stewardships at launch sites.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

These contributions, “The State of Panther Lake, 2012-1014” and “A Plan for the Management of the Panther Lake Watershed, 2012-2014”, have been assembled to provide information characterizing Panther Lake and its watershed. This is the result of two years of research at the State University of New York College at Oneonta’s Biological Field Station and a compiling of historical data from the New York State Department of Conservation and Citizens Statewide Lake Assessment Program. The Panther Lake Association and Robert Kemper provided the necessary funds for the research and these funds were matched by the Scriven Foundation through the SUNY Oneonta Foundation. For their timely, thoughtful, and thorough reviews, I wish to thank: Dr. Willard Harman, director of the Biological Field Station and Distinguished Service Professor of Biological Sciences at SUNY Oneonta, Dr. Donna Vogler, Chair and Associate Professor of Biological Sciences at SUNY Oneonta, and Dr. David Wong, Assistant Professor of Biological Sciences at SUNY Oneonta. I wish to also thank Mr. Mark Cornwell, SUNY Cobleskill, for his fisheries expertise to complete the fisheries portion of this project. I would also like to thank all the residents of Panther Lake that took the time to fill out the lake wide survey. Without the resident’s input, a management plan could not have been done. Lastly, special thanks to Jason Luce and Carter Bailey, fellow colleagues in the Lake Management Program, whose efforts and support were essential to the completion of this report.

REFERENCES

Albright, M. F. 2014. Personal communication. Email: [email protected]. 5838 State Hwy 80 Cooperstown, NY 13326 Phone: 607-547-8778

Albright, M. F. and H.A. Waterfield. 2012. The state of Canadarago Lake, 2011. Biological Field Station Technical Report #30.

Anderson, R. O. 1980. Proportional stock density (PSD) and relative weight (W): Interpretive indices for fish populations and communities. American Fisheries Society New York Chapter.

Bostrom, B., M. Jansson, and C. Forsberg. 1982. Phosphorous release from lake sedimentation. Ach. Hydrobiol. Beih. Ergebn. Limnol. 170:229-244.

Borman, S., Korth R., and Temte I. 1997. Through the looking glass: A field guide to aquatic plants. Wisconsin Lakes Partnership.

Boyd, C.E. 1990. Water quality in ponds for aquaculture. Alabama Agricultural Experiment Station, Auburn University, Auburn, Alabama. Birmingham Publishing Co., Birmingham, Alabama.

Carr, J. F. 1962. Dissolved oxygen in Lake Erie, past and present. Publ. Great Lakes Res. Div., Univ. Mich.

Citizens Statewide Lake Assessment Program 2004 Interpretive summary: Lincoln pond. (2005, August 1). Retrieved July 28, 2014, from http://www.lincolnpond.org/2004-cslap-report- lincoln-pond-135.pdf

Citizens Statewide Lake Assessment Program 2011 Lake water quality summary: Crooked lake. (2011, January 1). . Retrieved July 28, 2014, from http://www.dec.ny.gov/docs/water_pdf/cslrpt11crookedl.pdf Cooke, G.D., E.B. Welch, S.A. Peterson, and P.R. Newroth. 1993. Restoration and management of lakes and reservoirs, 2nd Ed. Lewis Publishers, Ann Arbor, MI.

Cullen, P. and C. Forsberg. 1988. Experiences with reducing point sources of phosphorous to lakes. Hydrobiologia. 170:267-284.

Green 1986. Unpublished data. New York State Department of Environmental Conservation.

Harman, W. N. Personal communication. Email: [email protected]. 5838 State Hwy 80 Cooperstown, NY 13326. Phone: 607-547-8778

Harman, W.N., Sohacki, L.P., Albright, M.F., and Rosen, D.L. 1997. The state of Otsego Lake, 1936-96. Occasional Paper No. 30. Biology Department, State University College at Oneonta.

Harman, W. N., Albright, M. F., Lord P. H., and King, D. 1998. Panther lake aquatic macrophyte management plant facilitation: 1998 update on the distribution of nuisance plants. Technical Report #4 State University of New York at Oneonta.

Harper, D. 1992. Eutrophication of freshwaters: Principles, problems, and restoration. Chapman and Hall.

Hipkins, P. L. 2014. Aquatic weeds (Weed control in ponds and lakes). Low-Management Crops and Areas: Aquatic Weeds. Horticultural & Forest Crops. Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, Virginia.

Hohenstein, B.R., G. Gallinger and S. A Kishbaugh. 1997. 1996 interpretive summary: New

York citizens statewide lake assessment program (CSLAP), Panther Lake. NYSDEC Div. of Water.

Holdren, C., W. Jones, and J. Taggart. 2001. Managing lakes and reservoirs. N. Am. Lake Manage. Soc. And Terrene Inst., in cooperation with Off. Water Assess. Watershed Prot. Div. U.S. Environ. Prot. Agency, Madison, WI.

Hutchinson, G. E., 1975. A treatise on limnology, Vol. III. Aquatic macrophytes and attached algae. John Wiley and Sons, Inc. New York

Johnson. D. 2014. Personal Observation. Email: [email protected]

NYSFOLA. 2009. Diet for a small lake: The expanded guide to New York state lake and watershed management. New York State Federation of Lake Associations, Inc.

Otsego Lake Watershed and Council 1998. A Plan for the management of the Otsego Lake watershed. The Otsego Lake Watershed Council, Otsego County, NY.

Panther Lake Assn. Undated. Bathymetric map of Panther Lake

Petreszyn, 1. M. 1990. Oswego county aquatic vegetation management program, 1990 County wide assessment. Report No.1: 1-50.

Prindle, S. E. 2009. Panther lake centrarchid survey 2009. Region 7 New York State Department of Environmental Conservation.

Rydin, Emil. 2000. Potentially mobile phosphorus in Lake Erken sediment. Water Res. vol. 34 No. 7. pp. 2037-. 2042

Sas, H., I. Ahlgren, H. Bernhardt, B. Bostrum, J. CLasen, C. Forsberg, D. Imboden, L. Kamp- Lielson, L. Mur, N. deoude, C. Reynolds, H. Schreurs, K. Seip, U. Sommer, and S. Vermij, 1989. Lake restoration by reduction of nutrient loading: Expectations, experiences, extrapolation. Academia-Verlag, Richarz, St, Augustinem Germany.

Scavia, D., Fahnenstiel, G.L. 1987. Dynamics of lake Michigan phytoplankton: Mechanisms controlling epilimnetic communities. J. Great Lakes Re. 6:275—289

Sime, I. 2004. The freshwater algal flora of the British isles: An identification guide to freshwater and terrestrial algae, edited by David M. John, Brian A. Whitton and Alan J. Brook. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Sloat, M. R., Osterback, A. K. 2013. Maximum stream temperature and the occurrence, abundance, and behavior of steelhead trout (Onchorhynchus mykiss) in a southern California stream. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Science.

Talling, J.F. 2009. Electrical conductance – A versatile guide in freshwater science. The Freshwater Biological Association, The Ferry Landing, Ambleside, Cumbria, UK. Freshwater reviews (2009). pp. 65-78.

Tucker, C. S. and D’Abramo, L. R. 2008. Managing high pH in freshwater ponds. Southern Regional Aquaculture Center. SRAC Publication No. 4604.

U.S. Census Bureau; using American FactFinder; ; (July 2014).

United States Department of Agriculture. 2014.

Vertucci, F. A, W. N. Harman and I. H. Peverly. 1981. The ecology of the aquatic macrophytes of Rat Cove, Otsego lake, NY. SUNY Oneonta Bio. Fld. Sta., Occas. Pap. 8:1-210. SUNY Oneonta

Walters. B. 2014. Personal communication. Email: [email protected].

Woodley, S., J. Kay, and G. Francis. 1993. Ecological integrity and the management of ecosystems. St. Lucie Press, New York.

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A. RELATIVE EFFECTIVENESS OF AQUATIC HERBICIDES

Recommended for control of selected weeds in Panther Lake (Hipkins 2014 and various literature, brochures, and pamphlets).

Endothall 2, 4-D

Aquatic Plant Copper Diquat Aquathol Hydrothol Granular Liquid Fluridone Glyphosate Tryclopyr Imazapyr Carfentrazone Flumioxazin Algae Chara, Nitella G G G Filamentous G G G G Planktonic G Submersed Weeds Coontail E E E G E G G Pondweeds G E E E Small Naiad G P P-G Eurasian G-E* E E E G-E G-E G G watermilfoil Emersed Plants Watershield F E F-E E E E Waterlilly G G E G E Phragmites G F E (Comn. reed) Cattail G F F E F E Bull Rush P G F G E = Excellent, G = Good, F = Fair, P = Poor *Copper sulfate, copper complex, or copper cabonate may be added to improve Eurasian milfoil control with diquat

A-1

APPENDIX B. HERBICIDE TRADE NAMES

See specific label for use (Hipkins 2014 and various literature, brochures, and pamphlets).

Aquatic Herbicide Common Trade Names Copper* Komeen, Nautique, Captain, Clearigate, Cutrine Plus, K-Tea Diquat Reward, Weedtrine, Eliminator Endothall Inorganic Salts Aquathol K, Aquathol Super K Endothall Amine Salts Hydrothol 191, Hydrothol Granular 2, 4-D Aquacide (Too many trade names and formulations to list, check label) Fluridone Sonar, Avast! Glyphosate Too many trade names and formulations to list, check label Tryclopyr Renovate 3, Garlon 3A Imazapyr Habitat Carfentrazone Stingray Flumioxazin Clipper *Copper products may be formulated as copper sulfate pentahydrate, copper complexes, or copper carbonate

B-1

APPENDIX C. NUTRIENT DATA

June 2013- October 2013

nitrate+nitrite Total Nitrogen total phosphorus date depth (mg/L) (mg/L) (ug/L) 6/23/2013 1M bd 0.34 7 6/23/2013 2M bd 0.29 11 6/23/2013 3M bd 0.35 12 6/23/2013 4M bd 0.41 340 6/23/2013 5M bd 0.35 22 6/23/2013 6M bd 0.43 27 6/23/2013 7M bd 0.47 28 7/13/2013 0M bd 0.45 29 7/13/2013 1M bd 0.33 51 7/13/2013 2M bd 0.34 41 7/13/2013 3M bd 0.42 29 7/13/2013 4M bd 0.49 11 7/13/2013 5M bd 0.39 53 7/13/2013 6M bd 0.62 54 7/27/2013 0M bd 0.28 17 7/27/2013 1M bd 0.32 20 7/27/2013 2M bd 0.31 19 7/27/2013 3M bd 0.31 16 7/27/2013 4M bd 0.63 45 7/27/2013 5M bd 0.58 28 7/27/2013 6M bd 0.89 42

C-2

Appendix C. Nutrient data June 2013- October 2013

nitrate+nitrite Total Nitrogen total phosphorus date depth (mg/L) (mg/L) (ug/L) 8/7/2013 0M bd 0.34 5 8/7/2013 1M bd 0.38 19 8/7/2013 2M bd 0.37 13 8/7/2013 3M bd 0.42 10 8/7/2013 4M bd 0.37 9 8/7/2013 5M bd 0.52 33 8/7/2013 6M 0.02 0.80 54 8/7/2013 7M 0.02 0.83 49 9/8/2013 0M bd 0.41 15 9/8/2013 1M bd 0.35 16 9/8/2013 2M bd 0.38 19 9/8/2013 3M bd 0.39 19 9/8/2013 4M bd bd 15 9/8/2013 5M bd 0.37 17 9/8/2013 6M bd 0.76 47 10/2/2013 0M bd 0.43 18 10/2/2013 1M Bd 0.41 26 10/2/2013 2M Bd 0.37 23 10/2/2013 3M Bd 0.71 50 10/2/2013 4M Bd 0.55 35 10/2/2013 5M Bd 0.40 28 10/2/2013 6M Bd 0.41 23 10/2/2013 7M Bd 0.41 26

C-2

APPENDIX D. PERTINENT GPS COORDINATES

YSI Sampling location

Center N43.32747 W075.90440

GPS coordinates for the 30 selected sampling sites used for the 2013 plant survey (PS#)

PS1 N43.32674 W075.90545 PS2 N43.32653 W075.90457 PS3 N43.32626 W075.90399 PS4 N43.32584 W075.90345 PS5 N43.32541 W075.90300 PS6 N43.32622 W075.90133 PS7 N43.32690 W075.90052 PS8 N43.32795 W075.89997 PS9 N43.32895 W075.89976 PS10 N43.32902 W075.90148 PS11 N43.32831 W075.90285 PS12 N43.32870 W075.90388 PS13 N43.32911 W075.90504 PS14 N43.32991 W075.90646 PS15 N43.33005 W075.90759 PS16 N43.33028 W075.90887 PS17 N43.33076 W075.91015 PS18 N43.33143 W075.91140 PS19 N43.33245 W075.91322 PS20 N43.33308 W075.91424 PS21 N43.33364 W075.91547 PS22 N43.33382 W075.91696 PS23 N43.33317 W075.91653 PS24 N43.33218 W075.91572 PS25 N43.33092 W075.91445 PS26 N43.32945 W075.91427 PS27 N43.32882 W075.91427 PS28 N43.32820 W075.91289 PS29 N43.32787 W075.90988 PS30 N43.32735 W075.90764

D-1

APPENDIX E. LAKE WIDE SURVEY Camp Address______

• Name______• Age______• How long have you or your family been coming to the lake? ______• Do you reside in Oswego County o Yes No • Residency o Summer/Temporary 0r Permanent/ year-round • Do you own a boat? o Yes No • If you own more than one boat, how many? ______• Types of boats o Inboard o Rowboat, paddle boat, or canoe o Outboard o Personal watercraft o Inboard-Outboard o Pontoon Boat o Sailboat with auxiliary power o Other: o Sailboat without auxiliary power • What recreational activities on and around the lake are you involved in? 1. Motor cruising 7. Fishing 2. Sailing 8. Ice fishing 3. Rowing/canoeing 9. Swimming 4. Personal watercraft 10. SCUBA diving 5. Water skiing/wake boarding/ knee 11. Relaxing at residence boarding 12. hiking 6. Tubing 13. Other: • To what extent are the below listed items of concern to you relative to Panther Lake Great Concern Moderate Concern Little Concern I don't know Strip development (Home density) Sanitary waste from camps Other household wastes Runoff from County Route 17 Road salts Motor boats Eroding Shorelines Undesirable introductions of plants and animals Algae and weed growth Water clarity Potability (Drinkability) Fecal pollution Water levels Loss of wildlife (Fish) habitat Depletion of fisheries Aesthetics

E-1

Appendix E. Lake wide survey sent out to all residents in the Fall of 2012.

• How effective do you feel the introduction of Triploid Grass Carp will be to manage the Eurasian Milfoil? (Where 1 is Very Effective and 5 is None at all) o 1 2 3 4 5 not sure • Are you interested in the Citizen Statewide Lake Assessment Program (CSLAP) o Yes No not sure • Do you draw water from the lake for: o Showers o I do not draw water from the o Washing lake o Plumbing/toilets o Other: o Drinking • How has the water quality changed over the last 5 years? o Improved o Stayed about the same o Declined • How effective was the mechanical harvester for the long term management of the Milfoil? (Where 1 is Very Effective and 5 is None at all) o 1 2 3 4 5 • Do you think that the removal of the public boat launch helped with the Eurasian milfoil problem o Yes No Maybe o Other: • Given the choice, your preferred method for managing Eurasian Milfoil o Mechanical Harvesting o Manual removal by divers o Triploid Grass Carp o Aquatic herbicides o Aquatic insect herbivores o Other: • What is the quality of fishing in Panther Lake? o Excellent o Good o Fair o Poor o I don't know o I don't fish o Other:

E-2

APPENDIX F. WATER USE RESTRICTION AFTER AQUATIC HERBICIDE USE

(Hipkins 2014 and various literature, brochures, and pamphlets).

Water Use Restriction (Days) Aquatic Herbicide Fishing Swimming Potable Copper sulfate 0 0 0 Copper complex 0 0 0 Diquat 0 1 3-5 Aquathol K 3 1 7-25 Aquathol G 3 1 7-25 Hydrothol 0 1 7-25 2, 4-D * * * Endothall * * * Fluridone 0 0 * Glyphosate 0 0 * Tryclopyr 0 0 * Imazapyr 0 0 * Carfentrazone 0 0 0 Flumioxazin 0 0 0 0 = No restriction *Varies, refer to label before use

F-1

APPENDIX G. AVERAGE CALCIUM LEVELS Panther Lake from 15 sampling site around the lake in 2013.

Calcium Sampling Sample mL Amount Ca Sample of (mg/l) titrant 1 50 1.6 12.83 2 50 1.8 14.43 3 50 1.7 13.63 4 50 1.9 15.23 5 50 1.8 14.43 6 50 1.6 12.83 7 50 1.8 14.43 8 50 1.9 15.23 9 50 1.8 14.43 10 50 1.7 13.63 11 50 1.8 14.43 12 50 1.8 14.43 13 50 1.6 12.83 14 50 1.7 13.63 15 50 1.8 14.43

AVG 14.05

Ca (mg/l) = mL(0.01M titrant) x 400.8 / (mL sample)

G-1

APPENDIX H. PHYSIOCHEMICAL WATER DATA Measurements for Panther Lake collected with a YSI unit between October 2012 and October

2013

10/17/2 3/2/2 5/26/2 6/9/2 6/22/2 7/12/2 7/25/2 8/7/2 9/8/2 10/4/2 012 013 013 013 013 013 013 013 013 013

Temper ature Depth (m) 0 12.1 -0.02 16.17 18.36 22.67 27.79 27.0 23.8 21.92 17.98 1 12.19 1.72 16.17 18.26 22.67 27.27 25.8 23.4 21.92 17.68 2 12.17 2.89 16.1 18.21 21.35 26.74 25.4 23.2 21.88 17.61 3 12.14 3.54 16.03 18.05 20.24 26 25.1 22.9 21.88 17.56 4 12.08 4.18 16.03 18.02 19.04 20.9 22.5 22.6 21.85 17.26 5 12.07 4.64 16.03 17.06 18.15 18.2 18.2 20.5 21.36 17.06 6 12.07 4.87 15.94 15.57 17.05 16.6 16.7 17.0 19.46 16.92 7 12.15 5.27 15.3 14.83 15.6 16.16 16.2 16.0 18.70 16.73

DO (mg/l) Depth (m) 0 10.48 13.1 9.79 9.4 9.93 8.4 8.91 8.34 6.63 9.24 1 10.39 12.81 9.75 9.42 9.56 8.45 8.41 8.44 6.58 9.22 2 10.37 11.67 9.73 9.41 9.99 8.56 8.27 8.34 6.56 9.13 3 10.36 10.46 9.69 9.38 10.01 8.35 8.17 8.03 6.55 9.06 4 10.32 8.63 9.66 9.38 8.6 6.7 7.41 6.93 6.57 7.4 5 10.29 6.75 9.66 7.41 5 1.25 1.45 2.0 6.25 5.39 6 10.27 5.48 9.65 5.33 1.8 0.39 0.56 0.9 6.23 4.56 7 8.55 4.22 9.6 0.95 0.37 0.23 0.38 0.5 0.32 0.65

H-1

Appendix H. Physiochemical water quality measurements for Panther Lake collected with a YSI

unit between October 2012 and October 2013

10/17/2 3/2/2 5/26/2 6/9/2 6/22/2 7/12/2 7/25/2 8/7/2 9/8/2 10/4/2 012 013 013 013 013 013 013 013 013 013

Sp. Cond (mmho/ cm) Depth (m) 0 0.099 0.07 0.096 0.094 0.094 0.098 0.099 0.102 0.092 0.101 1 0.099 0.089 0.096 0.094 0.094 0.098 0.099 0.102 0.093 0.1 2 0.099 0.098 0.096 0.094 0.093 0.098 0.098 0.102 0.093 0.101 3 0.099 0.101 0.096 0.094 0.093 0.098 0.098 0.102 0.093 0.1 4 0.099 0.109 0.096 0.094 0.092 0.096 0.097 0.102 0.093 0.101 5 0.099 0.121 0.096 0.095 0.092 0.105 0.114 0.111 0.096 0.101 6 0.099 0.127 0.096 0.098 0.098 0.119 0.129 0.143 0.126 0.102 7 0.129 0.145 0.096 0.104 0.118 0.125 0.134 0.171 0.177 0.107 pH Depth (m) 0 8.7 7.62 8.22 8.35 8.63 8.06 7.68 7.97 7.94 8.59 1 8.28 7.57 8.26 8.12 8.52 8 7.84 7.75 7.76 8.08 2 8.19 7.53 8.24 7.99 8.52 8 7.84 7.72 7.74 7.95 3 8.16 7.49 8.22 7.94 8.51 7.98 7.84 7.65 7.73 7.89 4 8.12 7.36 8.17 7.92 8.22 7.98 7.66 7.48 7.73 7.74 5 8.09 7.28 8.15 7.74 7.92 7.42 7.13 7.12 7.65 7.59 6 8.07 7.22 8.15 7.43 7.67 7.14 6.88 6.87 7.34 7.37 7 7.69 7.15 8.15 7.1 7.34 6.93 6.84 6.79 7.22 7.16

H-2

APPENDIX I. GLOEOTRICHIA ECHINULATA NEWSLETTER

TO: The Panther Lake Association

FROM: Derek Johnson

DATE: August 1, 2013

RE: Blue green algae (Cyanobacteria) in Panther Lake

Hello all,

As many of you have noticed in the last couple of weeks, there has been an odor and a slight cloudiness to the water in Panther Lake. This odor and cloudiness may be due to the increasing presence of a cyanobacteria. Cyanobacteria are toxic, blue green algae that have been linked to certain health concerns in aquatic life and humans when in high concentrations. I have identified the blue green algae in our lake as being a member of the genus Gloeotrichia.

A point that I should make right away is that Gloeotrichia does not necessarily indicate poor water quality. The two main driving factors for any algae bloom is warm water and nutrient levels (in lakes, the limiting nutrient is phosphorous). Our lake generally maintains low phosphorus levels, so most algae do not grow prolifically. However, Gloeotrichia over-winters as resting cells on the lake's bottom, and then grows its summer colonies (groups of similar cells bound together) on the sediment surface where light can reach it. Through a chemical process, as the bottom of the lake becomes anoxic (loses oxygen), the potential for large amounts of phosphorous are released from the sediments. These colonies absorb the excess phosphorus during this process. When they are well developed, these algae release from the sediment and float to the surface, where they multiply their colonies in the lighted surface waters.

For in-lake species, Gloeotrichia has also been shown to disrupt existing food webs in lakes if they maintain high concentrations for extended periods of time. This disruption in the food web occurs when the Gloeotrichia outcompetes other algae for resources, thus negatively affecting species dependent upon those algae for food. For humans, there are reports in the literature that it may cause a skin irritation that could be mistaken for swimmers' itch. Ingesting a lot of it can cause an upset stomach. While most of us would not drink lake water anyway, children should be always cautioned not to swallow water while swimming (and not just because of algae). Gloeotrichia is not a health concern for our lake at this time and I will be monitoring the current state very closely for any changes.

I-3

The current condition may indicate that our lake bottom has enough nutrients to sustain repeated growths of Gloeotrichia. I believe this algae has been in the lake for some time but with the overall awareness of lake changes by the residents increasing, we are really just now, noticing its presence. This increased awareness should prompt us to do everything we can to prevent nutrient and phosphorus loading from run-off sites from around the lake and in the watershed. While such preventative actions may not affect Gloeotrichia blooms in the short term, they could help over time and are absolutely needed to avoid any potential noxious, lake- wide algae blooms in Panther Lake.

Below you will find two pictures I took of the algae in our lake. The long cilia (hair-like structures) are what anchor the algae to the sediments until its ready to be released into the water column. Later in the season these cilia will begin to die and be replaced with thicker, heavier appendages. This will cause the algae to sink back to the bottom where it will over winter in the sediments until next year.

Figure 1. Gloeotrichia echinulata from Panther Lake, taken in July 2013. Left picture is 20x magnification and the right picture is 40x.

I-3

APPENDIX J. METHODS OF WATER SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS.

Transparency was measured using a Secchi disk at the deepest point on the lake (N43.32747, W075.90440).

Temperature, pH, specific conductivity, and dissolved oxygen were measured at the deepest point with a YIS 556™ multiprobe system at 1 meter intervals from top to bottom of water column.

Phosphorous, total nitrogen, and chlorophyll-a were sampled with a Van Dorn sampler at the deepest point on the lake at 1 meter intervals from top to bottom of water column. Sampled were preserved. Using a Lachat sampling system, analysis was done on the samples.

Calcium was determined by using 500mL of surface water from various areas around the lake. Using standard methods for titration, average calcium levels in the lake were averaged.

J-1