Source Water Protection 2 PROBLEMS

A publication of the North American Lake Management Society

LAKELINEVolume 39, No. 3 • Fall 2019

Source Water Protection 2 PROBLEMS. 1SOLUTION.

FAST SOLUTION FOR ZEBRA MUSSEL CYANOBACTERIA TREATMENT & ALGAE CONTROL

. Kills cyanobacteria Fast! 24-48 hours . EPA Registered . Prevents harmful algal blooms (HABs) . Complete mortality in adult quagga & zebra mussels . Reduces taste & odor compounds— geosmin . Lakes, ponds & reservoirs . Durational algae control - Up to . WTP intake screen & pipeline protection 30 days/application . Effective and affordable molluscicide . Rapid dispersion . Creates no disinfection by-products . Easy application, stays in solution . Can be used in fish bearing waters . No immediate cell lysis

EarthTecQZ.com 800.257.9283 ake ine Contents L L Published quarterly by the North American Lake Management Society (NALMS) as a medium for exchange and communication among all those Volume 39, No. 3 / Fall 2019 interested in lake management. Points of view expressed and products advertised herein do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of NALMS or its Affiliates. Mention of trade names 2 From the Editor and commercial products shall not constitute an endorsement of their use. All rights reserved. 3 From the President NALMS Officers President Source Water Protection Sara Peel Immediate Past-President 5 Protection of Lakes and Reservoirs as Drinking Water Supply Frank Browne Sources President-Elect Elizabeth “Perry” Thomas 10 Collaboration Protects Sources of Drinking Water Secretary 13 Addressing Changing Water Quality in Water Supply Amy Smagula Treasurer Reservoirs Todd Tietjen 17 Collaborate, Plan, and Prepare – A Utility’s Role in Source Water Protection NALMS Regional Directors Region 1 Ellen Kujawa 22 Lake Appreciation Month and Secchi Day on Beaver Lake, Region 2 Chris Doyle Region 3 Lisa Borre Northwest Arkansas Region 4 Erich Marzolf Region 5 Eugene Braig 26 Forest Conservation and Management to Protect Sources of Region 6 Victoria Chraibi Drinking Water Region 7 Michelle Balmer Region 8 Steve Lundt Region 9 Ellen Preece 31 Source Water Protection Challenges in NH’s Multi-Use Region 10 Mark Rosenkranz Water Supply Lakes Region 11 Kris Hadley Region 12 Colleen Prather 35 Closing the Human-Nature Feedback Loop At-Large John Holz Student At-Large Sarah Burnet 39 Student Corner: Aquatic Invasive Species LakeLine Staff Editor: Amy P. Smagula Advertising Manager: Alyssa Schulte Production: Parchment Farm Productions

Address all editorial inquiries to: Amy P. Smagula 29 Hazen Drive Concord, NH 03301 Tel: 603/419-9325 [email protected] Advertisers Index Address all advertising inquiries to: Alyssa Schulte Aquarius IBC North American Lake Management Society PO Box 5443 • Madison, WI 53705 Cruise Planners 21 [email protected] Earth Sciences Lab IFC On the cover: Payments: Heart Lake –Adirondack Mountains, Kisters North America 38 PO Box 7276 • Boulder, CO 80306-7276 New York. Photo by Bill Harman, Medora Corporation 30 Tel: 608/233-2836 Director, SUNY Oneonta Lake Onset Computer Corporation BC Management graduate degree programs.

Fall 2019 / NALMS • LAKELINE 1 From Amy Smagula the Editor

s multi-use pressures increase Josh Weiss, Bill Becker, Jim source water in multi-use water supply across our landscape, it becomes DeWolfe, Christine Owen, Wendy lakes. While some waterbodies are Aeven more critical to protect vital Krkosek, and Graham Gagnon outline exclusively used for drinking water supply sources of freshwater a decision support framework used in and all other uses are restricted, many are to maintain quality addressing changing water quality in multi-use systems with competing uses systems. We can reservoirs. They discuss how real time and and demands. They discuss regulatory each likely think of evolving conditions in source water, like frameworks implemented to protect our own examples turbidity, algae and organic matter, drive the supply in these multi-use systems, of competition over change at the operational level in drinking including how some overlap in protections a resource, and water treatment plants, and how those can be useful, and how a patchwork of the compounded plants need to be dynamic in adjusting for different approaches can quickly become effects of overuse changing conditions real-time. complicated and confusing. They also or mismanagement of a system. In many Next we hear from two water discuss LakeSmart, a program intended to cases, this results in degraded water utilities on how they are actively involve the community in lake protection quality and impairments in the designated addressing source water protection in and stewardship activities. uses of waterbodies. Protecting those their watersheds. Kate Dunlap and Finally, V. Reilly Hanson, Kelly resources from impacts becomes even Michelle Wind discuss watershed Coburn, Cayelan Carey, Kevin Boyle, more critical, particularly for those management activities in Colorado Michael Sorice, Nicole Ward, and waterbodies used as a drinking water for the City of Boulder water supply. Kathleen Weathers provide some supply. In this issue of LakeLine, we They review specific threats they face insights that can be useful in educating focus on source water protection (SWP) in their watershed, and monitoring and and motivating individuals about from a number of angles, to stress the collaborative efforts to protect their protecting lakes. In their article they look importance of protecting the resource source in order to ensure quality drinking at human response to changing lakes, and from degradation, and the programs that water for their customers. Pierce Rigrod evaluate those to help resource managers exist to protect these important systems. and John O’Neil discuss the importance in making compelling motivators for NALMS recognizes that SWP is an of forest management as it relates to protecting resources. important issue, and has developed both source water protection in the Lake In our Student Corner, we welcome a white paper and a position statement Massabesic watershed in New Hampshire, an article from Sarah Coney on her work on the subject. Additionally, NALMS is highlighting different examples of forest and experience with aquatic invasive connected through its membership with change, and resulting downstream impacts species, and the impacts that these have in a network of interest groups, including in that state and beyond. our freshwater systems. the Source Water Collaborative. In Collaboration and buy-in are critical This is one of the bigger issues of recent interactions with that group, in this landscape level approach at source LakeLine we have had in a while, but the development of a themed issue of water protection, and there are some very source water protection is an expansive LakeLine on source water protection was good examples of outreach and education topic, and one with many angles. We hope born. to encourage stewardship of source waters you find the information in this issue to be We start off with a lead in article from and their watersheds. Matthew Rich, useful and informative. Chi Ho Sham with the Eastern Research Becky Roark, and Brad Hufhines detail Group, Inc., who provides and overview some creative outreach and education of SWP, what it is, and the regulatory activities they have found useful in Amy Smagula is a limnologist with the New framework related to source water educating their watershed residents about Hampshire Department of Environmental protection. source water protection in the Beaver Services, where she coordinates the Exotic Dan Yates, co-chair of the Source Lake watershed in Northwest Arkansas, Species Program and special studies of the Water Collaborative and director of the building on NALMS’ Lakes Appreciation state’s lakes and ponds. c Ground Water Protection Council, outlines Month and Secchi Dip-In events each the goals of that group, and highlights July. the importance of collaborations among Paul Susca and Tom O’Brien various partners to protect source water. highlight challenges faced in managing

2 Fall 2019 / NALMS • LAKELINE From Sara Peel the President

n this, my last LakeLine as the NALMS manage a source water protection assess water quality. Figures 1 and 2 president, we turn our focus to the program. Through their partnerships with included here highlight some of the scenes Iprotection and enhancement of one of the West Fork White River Watershed from their events, and you can read more our most precious Initiatives Regional Conservation about their efforts in their article in the resources – drinking Partnership Program, Beaver Watershed following pages. water. Source water Alliance and other local, regional and These efforts are a great example of protection is a state partners, leveraged more than $8.7 the NALMS Source Water Protection program, usually million in on-the-ground conservation Position Statement. It is the North initiated by a water efforts including agricultural best American Lake Management Society’s utility to maintain or management practices, habitat restoration position that: enhance water quality and streambank stabilization efforts. The in streams, lakes, Beaver Watershed Alliance hosted more • Source water protection programs, reservoirs, and groundwater that provides than 100 events over the last year focused source water management, optimized source water for water treatment utilities. on connecting Beaver Water users to their water treatment, distribution system Surface water is the source for over 220 local streams and Beaver Lake. And the management, and water quality million North Americans, and a supply of Beaver Water District hosted their 14th monitoring are essential components to safe and abundant potable water is Annual Secchi Day connecting local provide safe potable water. essential for protection of public health residents to Beaver Lake through • When lakes or reservoirs are used as and maintaining the economy. educational booths while deploying more source waters, water supply is the The preservation of our drinking than 30 volunteers across the lake to highest priority use of the water body water or source water protection involves more than management of the surface waterbody. The engagement of lake users, watershed residents, and partner groups is necessary to protect our drinking water sources. As part of this effort, NALMS developed a Source Water Protection position statement and serves on the Source Water Collaborative. NALMS participates in the Source Water Collaborative – a 29-member organization which operates with the goal of protecting water at its source. NALMS’ mission to foster the management and protection of lakes and reservoirs for today and tomorrow is in perfect alignment with the Source Water Collaborative and its goal. The Source Water Collaborative is working to develop tools and programs to assist local residents, drinking water managers and watershed groups protect their drinking water at its source. One NALMS member, the Beaver Water District, serves as a great example of the engagement and partnerships necessary to successfully implement and Figure 1. Beaver Water District hosted their 14th annual Secchi Day, including educational booths like this one.

Fall 2019 / NALMS • LAKELINE 3 WFWR Watershed Initiative: Restored Streambank on Rock Creek Using EQIP Funding and non-compatible uses should be minimized in the lake and along the shoreline. • Source water protection programs should identify management strategies that will minimize nutrients, algae, turbidity, and organic loading. • Source water protection programs should manage watersheds to prevent degradation of water quality from point and nonpoint sources of pollution, chemical spills, wildfires, storm impacts, and emerging contaminants. • Water utilities should assess their watersheds for potential sources of contamination, impacts from upstream/nearby activities and land uses, emergencies, and extreme weather events. • Water utilities and their customers are beneficiaries of SWP efforts and should help finance the cost of the SWP program.

Sara Peel, CLM, is the NALMS president, previously serving as the director at large, two terms as secretary, and one term as the Region 5 director. Sara received her B.S. in biology and Chemistry from Alma College and her M.S. in environmental science from Indiana University School of Public and Environmental Affairs. Sara is the lead scientist and co-owner of Arion Consultants – a regionalFigure Figure 1 Upper 2. West photo Fork is site White prior toRiver restoration Watershed showing Initiatives: eroding cutrestored-bank; streambackMiddle photo on shows Rock restored Creek usingstreambank with toe- environmental consulting firmwood EQUIP structure funding. and revegetated Upper photo constructed is site prior soil lifts; to restorationbottom photo showing shows revegetated eroding cut-bank; terraces middleplanted photowith native shows trees, shrubs, and grasses and seeded with native grasses and wildflowers. with a focus on lake and restored streambank with toe-wood structure and revegetated constructed soil lifts; bottom photo shows watershed management. She revegetated terraces planted with native trees, shrubs, and grasses and seeded with native grasses and is an experienced leader in wildflowers. water quality and watershed management. c

4 Fall 2019 / NALMS • LAKELINE Source Water Protection

Protection of Lakes and Reservoirs as Drinking Water Supply Sources

Chi Ho Sham

Challenges and Solutions Drinking water sources are subject to Types of contaminants a variety of sources of pollution. SWP Urban Stormwater What is source water protection? programs help maintain, safeguard, and/or The collective impacts of rooftops, ource water protection (SWP) is improve the quality of a given source sidewalks, roadways, and other often referenced as the front-line water. Benefits of SWP programs include impervious surfaces on surface water Sbarrier in the multiple barrier reduced water treatment costs, increased bodies can be divided into two categories, approach to protect drinking water public health protection, improved those attributed to changes in hydrologic (Morgan et al. 2019). Spatial variabilities environmental conditions, and other social response and water quality impacts associated with geography, history, benefits such as improved relations with resulting from human activities. The ecosystem dynamic, land use, and policy stakeholders. Furthermore, SWP provides hydrologic response of an urban area make SWP a highly site-specific process a way to respond to uncertainties changes when drainage areas become that reflects the inherent diversity of presented by unknown or unregulated increasingly impervious, causing natural waters and the areas from which microbiological and chemical stormwater runoff volumes, flows, and they are derived, along with other drivers contaminants (i.e., preventing velocities to increase while base that affect source water quality. contamination that treatment may not groundwater flows decrease. Small annual American water utilities spend remove), avoiding costs for monitoring storm events that would ideally be millions of dollars each year on SWP and and remediating contamination, and captured by vegetation and soils of an related measurements. They understand greater likelihood of complying with undeveloped landscape are instead the importance of SWP for maintaining a drinking water regulations. delivered quickly and efficiently through reliable water supply of optimal quality. Pollution prevention is preferable to the receiving pipe network to surface They also appreciate that, by dedicating remediating or treating contaminated water bodies. Human activities in the city, resources to SWP, they are in turn saving source water. SWP programs provide a such as heavy automobile traffic and resources that would otherwise have to be means toward a more sustainable and chemical uses, generate increased spent on water treatment or using resilient future for source water. Many pollutant loads to receiving waters. alternative, more expensive, and less people are aware of the recent concerns During dry weather, locally generated convenient supplies. about Poly- and Perfluoroalkyl Substances pollutants and atmospheric deposition of According to the U.S. Census Bureau (PFAS) in source water across the U.S., pollutants from remote locations (2011), 70 percent of Americans are which made headlines at the national and accumulate on impervious surfaces where served by community water systems using state levels in the last couple of years (see rain and snow-melt events would mobilize surface waters as their source for raw https://www.epa.gov/pfas/basic- them into surface water bodies. water. These sources include rivers, information-pfas). The problems posed by Pollutants found in stormwater runoff streams, lakes and reservoirs. Because of these substances will cost billions of from urban, industrial, and commercial the need to protect drinking water sources, dollars to remediate. In other words, it is land uses can have diverse adverse effects water utilities are a valuable partner for logical to prevent the introduction of any on a water supply; examples include: actual or potential contaminants into local surface water management • Eutrophication – Stormwater runoff source water. Furthermore, certain programs. Local utilities may be a direct from virtually every category of land contaminants can trigger biogeochemical source of funding for lake protection use affected by human activities (as activities that degrade source water and efforts, but more importantly, public well as under some natural conditions) introduce serious public health risks. support for protection efforts can be often contains elevated concentrations Contaminant sources that challenge SWP greatly enhanced by placing emphasis on of nitrogen and phosphorus, which can programs are wide ranging. This article drinking water protection. An opinion poll accelerate eutrophication (excessive will cover issues associated with conducted by the Trust for Public Land in growth of phytoplankton and algae), stormwater runoff and agricultural 2004 showed overwhelming support for leading to a host of problems including practices on surface water supply sources. conservation of land that protects drinking taste and odor, disinfection byproducts water (TPL 2004).

Fall 2019 / NALMS • LAKELINE 5 formation, plant operation, and health serving populations of 100,000 or more), stormwater BMPs, along with education risks industrial activities, and construction and outreach of stakeholders and the • Elevated turbidity and sediment – activities that disturbed five acres or more public. In addition, funds from Section Stormwater runoff from construction of land. The Phase I part of the program 604b of the CWA are available to conduct sites, unvegetated open space, and was implemented on November 5, 1990. water quality assessment and watershed unprotected areas often has high The Phase I permitting process required management planning, BMP design, and turbidity and sediment load, which can these larger cities to develop and development of stormwater utilities. pose problems for water treatment and implement a stormwater management Furthermore, Clean Water State affect finished water turbidity, program, and to address stormwater Revolving Fund (CWSRF) loans are appearance, and, potentially, chemistry, management at specific municipal available to communities for stormwater depending on which pollutants are facilities at which “industrial” activity management planning, BMP design and associated with sediment inflows. took place. It also required certain construction, and formation of stormwater industries as well as any construction utilities. Additional state and local funding • Synthetic Organic Compounds – This project greater than five acres to obtain sources are available to communities to broad category of pollutants includes NPDES permit coverage through the manage and control stormwater runoff. compounds such as pesticides, solvents, development and implementation of oil and gas-production related stormwater pollution prevention plans that Agriculture Practices chemicals, hydraulic fluids, and others, would control erosion and sedimentation The advancements of food product which are often found in stormwater as well as pollutant discharges. systems have led to the increasing reliance runoff and periodically reach water On December 8, 1999, the NPDES of agrichemicals and scale of production supply intakes via spills. This class of Phase II Stormwater Rule was published to enhance crop yields and low prices. A chemicals poses concerns related to in the Federal Register by EPA. The variety of chemicals, ranging from public health because basic water NPDES Phase II Stormwater requirements phosphorus, nitrogen, and pesticides have treatment facilities are not equipped to focused on small Municipal Separate been used intensively across the handle them. Storm Sewer Systems (MS4s) (usually agriculture landscape. • Bacteria – Concentrations of bacteria cities with populations of less than As mentioned earlier, the increasing in stormwater runoff from various 100,000) and small construction activities levels of nutrients (e.g., phosphorus and sources (e.g., pet waste, bird dropping, (construction activity that disrupts one or nitrogen) in surface water bodies, and sewer overflow can be elevated and more acres of land). The basis of this coupling with higher temperature and pose concern for public health. Phase II approach was to design a residence time, can lead to increased stormwater management program that primary productivity (eutrophication) and • Metals – High concentration of metals focused on six minimum control measures natural organic matter that are precursors in certain categories of stormwater that include: of disinfection byproducts in typical discharges, such as from some surface water treatment plants. When industrial sites, may cause public health • Public Education and Outreach water is chlorinated to make it safer for concerns and treatment concerns. Many • Public Participation and Involvement consumption, the chlorine can react with metals are regulated under the Safe organic material and form potentially Drinking Water Act (SDWA) because • Illicit Discharge Detection and harmful disinfection byproducts, such as of their potential adverse health effects. Elimination trihalomethanes and haloacetic acids, • Construction Site Runoff Control In 1972, the Federal Water Pollution which may he carcinogenic. In addition, Control Act, also known as the Clean • Post-Construction Site Runoff Control more eutrophic waterbodies are also Water Act (CWA), was amended to make • Pollution Prevention and Good associated with cyanobacterial blooms illegal the discharge of any pollutant as a Housekeeping at Municipal Operations like the one on Lake Eerie shown in point source to any water body in the U.S. Figure 1 (commonly referred to as without authorization by a National The NPDES Phase II program harmful algal blooms) that are linked to Pollutant Discharge Elimination System requires the development of best the releases of cyanotoxins (such as (NPDES) permit. Pollution control management practices (BMPs) for each of microcystins and cylindrospermospsin) measures were first implemented in the minimum control measures and the affecting the nervous system industrial wastewater operations and development of an implementation (neurotoxins), the liver (hepatotoxins), municipal sewerage systems; however, it schedule and measurable goals throughout and the skin (dermatoxins). became apparent that more regulations the five-year permitting period. Regulated Pesticide runoff from agricultural were needed to include the identification entities are required to submit progress lands can enter and has the potential to of stormwater drainage systems as a point reports annually and are subject to contaminate surface waters. Depending on source. In 1987, the CWA was amended to enforcement action as described in the the toxicity and concentration of specific implement a two-phase approach to the CWA if they fail to implement the pesticides, along with the exposure of the reduction of stormwater discharges. selected BMPs. population to these pesticides, many The first phase was aimed at large States are providing funds under pesticides are regulated under SDWA. and medium municipal separate Section 319 of the CWA for the Along with the states and tribes, EPA sets stormwater systems (typically systems assessment, design, and construction of

6 Fall 2019 / NALMS • LAKELINE Figure 1. Harmful Algal Bloom in Lake Erie (source: NOAA; https://oceanservice.noaa.gov/news/weeklynews/july13/lake-erie-habs. html. and implements regulations that protect seeks to regulate public drinking water for source water contributing areas, identify our drinking water from source to tap. public health protection. While the SDWA potential sources of contamination, National Primary Drinking Water does a relatively good job addressing determine the susceptibility of the water Regulations (NPDWRs) for numerous goals related to drinking water quality, it supplies to contamination, and pesticides can be found at https://www. deals very little with the issue of water disseminate the results to the public. epa.gov/ground-water-and-drinking- quantity and source water quality. Issues Although most of the source water water/national-primary-drinking-water- surrounding water quantity are left largely assessments were completed (U.S. regulations to protect public health by to state and regional authorities; whereas Environmental Protection Agency 2006), limiting the levels of pesticides and source water issues are generally apart from a handful of states, SWP pesticide residuals in treated drinking addressed at the local level where activities are generally not required of water. It should be noted that treatment decisions and actions are needed to ensure public drinking water supplies. In other technologies to remove pesticides to meet the availability of safe, reliable, and words, SWP is voluntary in nature at the various regulatory standards can be sustainable drinking water. national level. Nevertheless, the expensive (e.g., the use of activated Section 1453 of the 1996 SDWA information developed under SWAPs has carbon and nanofiltration). Amendments required states to develop become a useful tool to help local and implement Source Water Assessment stakeholders develop and implement SWP and the Safe Drinking Water Act Programs (SWAPs). States were required voluntary SWP programs to protect source The SDWA, authorized by Congress to identify the sources for all public water quality. in 1974 and amended in 1986 and 1996, drinking water supplies, delineate the

Fall 2019 / NALMS • LAKELINE 7 The 1996 SDWA Amendments are examples of some of the cities that Incentives Program, Conservation recognize the direct connection between have Filtration Avoidance Waivers. Stewardship Program, Agricultural watershed protection and safe drinking Note: The nine minimum elements in Conservation Easement Program, water, and authorized funds to implement watershed-based plans under Section 319 Healthy Forests Reserve Program, PL state drinking water programs and help of the Clean Water Act (U.S. 83-566 Watershed Program, and the states provide revolving loans to assist Environmental Protection Agency 2013) Conservation Reserve Program. RCPP public water systems in improving and the six primary components of projects start with an application by an drinking water infrastructure using the successful SWP programs (American eligible partner (e.g., agricultural or Drinking Water State Revolving Fund Water Works Association 2007) can easily silvicultural producer associations, (DWSRF). States may use up to 10 be cross-referenced and they cover farmer cooperatives or other groups of percent of their annual DWSRF grant for essential the same concerns under the producers, state or local governments, SWP program, or to provide loans to watershed or SWP programs. American Indian tribes, municipal acquire land or conservation easements, water treatment entities, water and and an additional 10 percent of its Selected challenges and solutions irrigation districts, conservation-driven DWSRF allotment to administer or associated with surface water source non-governmental organizations and provide technical assistance through SWP protection institutions of higher education, and programs. In general, since the 1996 SDWA conservation districts). Selected In addition, EPA’s Long-Term 2 Amendments, SWP has been discussed partners work alongside NRCS to help Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule and promoted in an ad hoc fashion by agricultural producers and forest (LT2ESWTR) includes a provision different organizations at the national, landowners implement conservation whereby a water utility may qualify for a regional, state, and local levels. The activities that address natural resource 0.5-log disinfection credit as a result of an site-specific nature of SWP has made priorities on eligible lands (e.g., any effective SWP program (Sham and these programs bottom-up exercises. A agricultural or non-industrial private Morgan 2011). lack of awareness and recognition at the forest land, or associated land on which On July 26, 2019, EPA issued a national level and the largely voluntary USDA determines an eligible activity memorandum in response to an nature of SWP have made SWP programs would help achieve conservation amendment to Section 1452(k) of the Safe a low priority or invisible to the decision benefits). Drinking Water Act (SDWA), which is makers and general public. The prospect • National Water Quality Initiative included in the 2018 America’s Water of potentially prioritizing limited (NWQI) Source Water Protection Infrastructure Act (AWIA), to expand resources between treatment and Area Project – focusing on addressing source water protection-related protection activities, along with the sense specific agriculturally related source eligibilities under the Drinking Water of helplessness felt by many water utilities water protection needs by channeling State Revolving Fund (DWSRF) program. that do not control activities and land use NRCS conservation program funding to This expansion includes the use of in their contributing watersheds, have agricultural producers in identified DWSRF’s 15 percent set-aside for made SWP a complex and challenging watersheds to implement practices that additional source water protection issue. Obstacles to successful SWP help to protect sources of drinking activities at the local and state levels, i.e., typically are not technical, but rather water. Due to the fact that the NWQI (1) updates to source water assessments social, political, financial, or regulatory. contains both an implementation phase and (2) expenditures to implement source In 2018, the Agriculture Improvement and a readiness phase, utilities water protection activities (under Section Act was signed into law and it directs U.S. interested in working with NRCS on an 1452(k)(1)(D)). The availability of these Department of Agriculture (USDA)’s NWQI project do not need to have funds can be used to leverage other Natural Resources Conservation Service every detail of a proposed project funding sources such as the Clean Water (NRCS) to allocate at least 10 percent of solidified prior to applying for funding. State Revolving Fund (CWSRF), Clean their conservation title funds to projects Identification of source water protection Water Act (CWA) Section 319 funding, that protect drinking water sources. The areas and source water concerns related and conservation funds from the Natural allocation total over five years is $4 to agriculture is sufficient to get the Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) billion, or roughly $800 million per year. application processes moving. A State as authorized under the Agriculture Water utilities can tap into these funds by Conservationist can provide Improvement Act of 2018. working with their local conservation information on the requirements for Finally, drinking water utilities that districts and NRCS. The next article in NWQI proposals. obtain their source water from relatively this issue includes some helpful guidance pristine surface water supplies may apply and resources to consider. Some of the To effectively prioritize and spend to EPA for a Filtration Avoidance Waiver NRCS programs that are included for these funds for the greatest benefit to which, if granted, would release them source water protection are: utilities and water quality, eligible partners such as water utilities, irrigation from the filtration treatment requirements • Regional Conservation Partnership of the SDWA and instead require SWP districts, and conservation-driven Program (RCPP) – including activities watershed organizations need to be activities. New York, Boston, Syracuse associated with other USDA programs (New York), Seattle, and San Francisco involved. NRCS decisions are made more such as the Environmental Quality in the state offices than in the national

8 Fall 2019 / NALMS • LAKELINE office. In this decentralized model, water Standard G300-14. Source Water U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. utilities and local partners are the key Protection. Denver, Colo.: AWWA. 2013. A QUICK GUIDE to Developing players to make things happen by: Morgan, Robert, Jennifer Heymann, Watershed Plans to Restore and Protect • Developing a relationship with the Margaret Kearns, and Stephanie Ishii. Our Waters. D.C.: USEPA Office of NRCS state conservationist, the top 2019. “The First Step of Water Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds. official for NRCS in each state. These Treatment: Source Water Protection.” Available: https://www.epa.gov/sites/ individuals have considerable authority Journal of AWWA: 111(6): 84-87. production/files/2015-12/documents/ in prioritizing and focusing Sham, Chi Ho and Robert Morgan. 2011. watershed_mgmnt_quick_guide.pdf. conservation programs within their Examining the AWWA Standard G300. respective states. They are often the LakeLine 31(3): 12-15. focal point of information and ideas. TPL. 2004. Source Water Protection Dr. Chi Ho Sham is a Conservation districts, agricultural Handbook; Using Land Conservation to vice president and the groups and many others frequently Protect Drinking Water Supplies. Trust chief Scientist of bring concerns and ideas to them. By for Public Land, San Francisco, CA, Eastern Research getting to know them – organizing a and the American Water Works Group, Inc. (ERG), meet-and-greet with utilities, bringing Association, Denver, Co. leading the drinking specific concerns to their attention, U.S. Census Bureau, 2011. Historical water and source water inviting them to talk at your conference, Census of Housing Tables. Available: protection practice. He or otherwise engaging them – you can ftp://ftp.census.gov/library/ is an active member of the American Water Works Association (AWWA) develop important relationships that publications/2010/compendia/ and is currently the chair of its Technical and will serve your communities. A current statab/130ed/tables/11s0955.pdf, Educational Council (TEC). He received his B.A. list of NRCS state conservationists can U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. from the University of Regina in Canada and his be found at: www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/ 2006. How-to Manual: Update and M.A. and Ph.D. from the University at Buffalo in portal/nrcs/main/national/contact/states/ Enhance Your Local Source Water Protection Assessments. D.C.: USEPA New York. Currently, he is an adjunct professor • Attending and joining the State Office of Ground Water and Drinking and a senior research fellow at Clark University Technical Committee and applicable Water. Available: https://www.epa.gov/ in Worcester, Massachusetts. c local workgroups. The State Technical sites/production/files/2015-09/ Committee (STC) is where formal documents/2006_09_27_sourcewater_ recommendations to the state update_enhance_assessments.pdf. conservationist are made; whereas local workgroups cover smaller areas and provide more local and specific information to the STC on specific at source water protection needs at the water utility and watershed level. Get BUSY NALMS Involvement in the STC and/or local workgroups will raise the profile of PROGRAMS source water protection and help to • Inland HAB Program assure that local concerns are addressed • Lakes Appreciation Month • Encouraging utilities with source water • Professional Certification concerns to reach out to NRCS to form • Student Awards partnerships. There is a single pathway to implementing a project with NRCS. • Student Programs There are several different conservation programs (such as the NWQI and COMMITTEES RCPP) that work differently and are built to address different types of • Articles of Incorporation and Bylaws concerns. The state conservationist is an • Financial Advisory expert in matching concerns to • Grants, Marketing, and Fundraising programs. The state conservationist • Nominating may identify other potential partners • Policy such as conservation districts or local • Publications producers’ associations. • Outreach and Education References AWWA (American Water Works GET MORE INFORMATION ONLINE AT AT WWW.NALMS.ORG Association). 2014. ANSI/AWWA

Fall 2019 / NALMS • LAKELINE 9 Source Water Protection

Collaboration Protects Sources of Drinking Water

Dan Yates and Alan Roberson

re you interested in accessing defined by one core information and potential partners to principle: that by working Source Water Collaborative Members Aadvance your source water together and combining American Planning Association protection efforts? The national Source our strengths, resources American Rivers American Water Works Association Water Collaborative can help. and will to action, our Association of Clean Water Administrators diverse set of member Association of Metropolitan Water Agencies Why collaborate for source water? organizations can realize Association of State and Territorial Health Officials Water sources cross state and other greater successes than by Association of State Drinking Water Administrators jurisdictional boundaries, and water working alone. Clean Water Action / Clean Water Fund quality affects all communities, but there The SWC Environmental Finance Center Network is no federal requirement to protect helps promote effective Ground Water Protection Council sources of drinking water. No single working relationships with Groundwater Foundation system connects all the agencies and a variety of programs that National Association of Conservation Districts professionals involved in protecting the affect source water quality, National Association of Counties nation’s drinking water sources at the including the Clean Water National Environmental Services Center federal, state, and local levels. That’s why Act and multiple National Ground Water Association the Source Water Collaborative (SWC) conservation programs in National Rural Water Association North American Lake Management Society was formed – to help fill these gaps by the U.S. Department of River Network sharing information and opportunities. In Agriculture. Once the new Rural Community Assistance Partnership the past 14 years, the SWC has expanded Farm Bill was signed into Smart Growth America to include 29 nationally prominent law in December 2018, Soil and Water Conservation Society organizations representing drinking water SWC members shared The Trust for Public Land utilities; conservation districts; state information at national U.S. Department of Agriculture – Farm Service Agency drinking water and groundwater meetings to encourage U.S. Department of Agriculture – Natural Resources protection programs; federal government stakeholders to connect Conservation Service agencies focused on environmental and Farm Bill conservation U.S. Endowment for Forestry and Communities public health, agriculture, and geological provisions with state and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency science; planners; agriculture; and other local SWP opportunities; U.S. Forest Service (Northeastern Area) organizations committed to water quality, provided input to SWC U.S. Geological Survey including the North American Lake member Natural Resources Water Systems Council Management Society. Conservation Service (NRCS) for source water provision approach has helped communities address We provide source water information to implementation; and met with SWC priority water quality issues in priority those positioned to act member US Forest Service (USFS) to areas and with multiple benefits and Challenges to securing clean drinking discuss opportunities to promote SWP partners. Two of these programs, the water are becoming more complex and through Farm Bill Title VIII, Forestry. Resource Conservation Partnership more interdependent across sectors and Most recently SWC hosted a webinar Program and the National Water Quality geographies. Emerging contaminants, “Working with NRCS and Agricultural Initiative are continuing under the new multiple contaminant sources, land use Partners to Protect Drinking Water Farm Bill and specifically include both changes and management challenges, Sources.” ground and surface water sources of increasing water demand, and extreme The SWC continues to work with drinking water. weather, are taxing capacities and driving federal agencies to share information up the cost of water treatment, about programs that offer technical and We help people work across underscoring our dependence on a secure financial assistance to address and organizational lines water supply and the urgency of source implement practices on agricultural lands The SWC makes it easier for water protection (SWP). The SWC is that benefit SWP. This type of new members to work outside jurisdictions and

10 Fall 2019 / NALMS • LAKELINE across geographical and organizational concerns and priorities, and to good way to meet local landowners boundaries. Are you interested in getting understand how the Committee and operators (farmers, ranchers, more agricultural conservation on the develops recommendations for the forested land owners) and district ground to help protect sources of drinking NRCS State Conservationist’s staff, and to hear their perspective on water? An important natural ally is SWC funding decisions. Each State local issues “on the ground.” member, the National Resources Technical Committee meeting has a Recommendations for decisions Conservation Service (NRCS, U.S. different dynamic. Some can be very about USDA-NRCS local funding Department of Agriculture), which formal so it is best to respect the distribution are developed at these includes the State Conservationist’s or process and observe more in the meetings. District Conservationist’s offices. Another beginning, to develop your Be persistent. It is important to “keep key set of allies is conservation districts understanding. There may be a showing up” at agriculture meetings in – important partners at the local level, chance during a “round robin” part of your state or at the county level if you’re who also have helpful contacts at the state the agenda to briefly describe your interested in a specific geographic area. If level – represented by SWC member, the role in drinking water protection. If conservation district staff and NRCS staff National Association of Conservation you have limited time, introduce see you showing up regularly at their Districts (NACD). priority geographic areas for meetings, it will demonstrate that you are As a result of extensive collaboration protecting drinking water sources, genuinely interested in working with between members of the Source Water and express your interest in working them. You will start to receive other Collaborative, NACD and the NRCS, we with conservation districts. invitations and be afforded opportunities developed toolkits that offer a step-by- • Conservation districts often to participate more. step approach for collaboration and participate in State Technical insightful tips based on advice we Committee meetings. Be sure to Collaborative resources received from NRCS and NACD, and express your interest in meeting with In addition to some of the toolkits from state and regional source water conservation districts, and suggest a mentioned above, the SWC has developed coordinators based on their experience follow-up meeting with those actionable resources for creating and fostering effective partnerships. Here are a interested. If the next State Technical sustaining key partnerships. few tips from our conservation toolkits. Committee meeting will not be held • The How-to-Collaborate toolkit takes for a while, you may want to reach Key opportunities to connect with users step-by-step through the out first to schedule a meeting with creation of a collaborative partnership agricultural partners at the state level the State Executive Director, or other Looking to share information about – from the brainstorming stage to recommended state contact listed on how to maintain relationships long- your source water concerns and to have a the NACD website. voice in identifying priority opportunities term, including funding options. The in your state? toolkit can be applied to any issue Key opportunities to connect with that is ripe for collaboration and is • Get to Know Your Associate State agricultural partners at the local level free to use. Conservationist for Programs. They • Get to Know Your Local have information about how the state • The SWC created the Learning Conservation District. The size of the Exchange, an information-sharing NRCS office sets priorities and makes conservation district staff varies by funding decisions, and they can make platform, features webinars that district. Some have no staff – in that harness the power of its diverse sure you receive notification when case, contact your conservation funding opportunities become members to provide a dynamic venue district board member. Each for collaboration on vital issues of available. Ask how the state NRCS conservation district has an annual office plans to address source water water security and safety. Topics workplan or report, which can be a include: protection in its ranking criteria for helpful resource to help you identify conservation programs. This their priority issues and areas. Check o Linking SWP to Emergency infographic with the 2018 Farm Bill the conservation district’s website to Preparedness source water provisions might be see if the annual plan is available. If o Funding for SWP helpful in making your case for it’s not on the web, contact their state SWP Through Conservation source water protection projects. office to request a copy. The o Funding • Participate in Your State Technical conservation district may be assisting Committee Meeting. Contact your landowners in developing o Nutrient Reduction Successes State NRCS office and ask to be on conservation plans with practices that o Multi-Purpose Decision Support the email list to attend a State can help protect drinking water Systems for SWP Strategies Technical Committee meeting. This sources. Sharing your source water public meeting is a great place to data and maps can help inform this o Creative Partnerships make a variety of connections with planning process. o Forming and Sustaining agriculture leaders in one place, to • Attend a Local Working Group Collaboratives become familiar with their priorities Meeting. This NRCS meeting is a and concerns, to share source water

Fall 2019 / NALMS • LAKELINE 11 Do you know your local or regional • Sign up to receive source water updates Dan Yates is the co- source water collaborative? from the SWC (scroll to bottom of chair of the Source The SWC has been a model for home page) Water Collaborative and bringing diverse groups together to create • Find your conservation district via this the associate executive solutions that work for communities. This directory director of the Ground model is being replicated across the • Find your Associate State Water Protection country at the local, state and regional/ Conservationist for Programs Council. watershed level. A wide variety of • Use the How-to-Collaborate Toolkit collaboratives are working around the • Use the Conservation Partners Toolkit Alan Roberson is country on drinking water issues at local, • Use the infographic on commonalities executive director of the state, and regional levels. The SWC’s with State Conservationist Association of State website features the work of 30+ • Connect with a Source Water Drinking Water collaboratives across the country (Figure Collaborative member Administrators (ASDWA) 1). Visit today to find a collaborative near • Find a SWC in your area ASDWA’s members (the you or to feature your work. state drinking water Contact Us agencies) are co- Resources We welcome your questions, updates and regulators with the • Visit the Source Water Collaborative information: info@ Environmental Protec- website sourcewatercollaborative.org tion Agency (EPA). He has over 27 years of experience in the development of drinking water policy and federal drinking water regulations. c

Figure 1: Collaboration map from www.sourcewatercollaborative.org.

12 Fall 2019 / NALMS • LAKELINE Source Water Protection

Addressing Changing Water Quality in Water Supply Reservoirs

Josh Weiss, Bill Becker, Jim DeWolfe, Christine Owen, Wendy Krkosek, and Graham Gagnon

Using Decision Support Framework increase the production of disinfection or more than a century, surface water conventional filtration plants must by-products upon chlorination. reservoirs have served as a critical maintain finished water turbidity less than Because the design and performance Fsource for public drinking water 1 NTU at all times and less than 0.3 NTU of a drinking water treatment process train supplies. Conventional drinking water in 95 percent of samples each month. depends upon the raw water treatment processes have been employed Elevated turbidity in raw or treated waters characteristics, particularly the to protect the public health from is often indicative of conditions under concentrations of particles, NOM, and pathogenic microorganisms and other which microorganism transport is cyanobacteria, changing source water contaminants present in surface waters. In enhanced. Additionally, high particle quality can present a serious challenge to conventional treatment, the overall concentrations in raw water can challenge drinking water treatment plant operations strategy is to chemically promote the overall treatment and result in high solids staff. Short term fluctuations due to aggregation of raw water particles and residuals production and treatment cost. extreme storm events can typically be dissolved substances and remove the Natural organic matter is typically managed, for example by optimizing aggregates by physical means. measured as total and dissolved organic coagulant dosage, adding powdered Aggregation is accomplished by adding a carbon (TOC and DOC) and is comprised activated carbon (PAC), or making other chemical coagulant that neutralizes of precursors of disinfection by-products temporary adjustments. However, more negative charge on the surfaces of raw (DBPs). DBPs are a result of reactions of frequent occurrence of extreme events and water particles and converts dissolved NOM with chlorine and other long-term changes in source water quality natural organic matter (NOM) into a solid disinfectants and include compounds that can result in raw water conditions that are phase for subsequent removal. This is are known or suspected carcinogens. substantially different than those under accomplished via processes known as NOM is also a source of negative particle which a treatment plant was meant to coagulation and flocculation. The largest charge that must be neutralized during the operate. Maintaining the desired level of aggregates, known as flocs, can then be coagulation process and often drives the treatment under such conditions often removed by clarification via amount of coagulant required for requires capital investments to upgrade sedimentation or flotation. The remaining treatment. In fact, for most waters, it is existing treatment or add additional finer particle aggregates are captured via NOM that controls the optimum coagulant treatment processes. granular media filtration. Accordingly, dose. NOM that remains in finished Many utilities in northeastern North drinking water process selection and drinking water can impact corrosion America and parts of Europe face a performance are largely driven by raw processes in the water distribution system unique set of conditions in which water concentrations of particles (as and is a source of carbon for the growth of successful efforts to reduce atmospheric measured by turbidity), NOM, and other biofilm on pipes. pollution have led to the phenomenon of constituents (e.g., algae and Blooms of cyanobacteria are a source lake recovery, or “browning” (Anderson cyanobacteria). of taste and odor compounds in reservoirs, and in some cases can lead to the release et al. 2017). This condition leads to Key drivers of drinking water treatment of harmful cyanotoxins, which can be increases in pH, NOM, and cyanobacterial process selection and performance challenging to remove through blooms in surface water supplies. These long-term changes are problematic for While most particles that comprise conventional drinking water treatment treatment plants that were designed under turbidity in natural waters are not a health processes. Because of their low density, fundamentally different water quality hazard themselves, turbidity is used as an cyanobacteria cells cannot be readily conditions, leading to increased treatment indicator or surrogate for pathogenic removed by settling processes and require and residuals handling costs and reducing microorganisms and is a regulated a higher coagulation dose or alternative operational reliability and resilience. parameter in the United States and clarification process (e.g., dissolved air Changes in climate and the occurrence of Canada. Per the U.S. EPA’s Surface Water flotation) for effective removal. Cells are extreme events likewise pose an acute Treatment Rule, utilities with also a source of NOM and can therefore

Fall 2019 / NALMS • LAKELINE 13 challenge to water utilities. The critical Further influencing water quality of by filtration, without a clarification step. questions utility managers must answer these sources are long-term changes in Direct filtration is appropriate for source now are: climate. It has been well established that waters with low concentrations of • What is the new normal for source temperature, precipitation, and hydrology particles and organic matter. Under water quality and how will we know are important factors in the production average conditions, direct filtration is when we are there? and transport of terrestrial NOM to recommended for sources with less than 5 surface waters. NOM concentrations have NTU turbidity and less than 3 mg/L of • When is the right time to make capital been known to increase with temperature, TOC (Valade et al. 2009). Recent investments? as NOM decomposition and solubilization observations show Pockwock Lake water To answer these questions, utilities rates are more rapid at higher nearing or exceeding those need data and tools to help them better temperatures. It is also well understood recommendations at least part of the year. understand the nature of long-term that extreme rainfall can correlate with Meanwhile, climate change projections changes due to lake recovery, climate, and increased contamination of surface water indicate increasing temperature and other drivers to help them better initiate sources from releases of microbial precipitation for Nova Scotia. These responses across the spectrum of planning contaminants, nutrients, and pesticides. trends will further exacerbate water horizons, from near-term operational Increases in temperature, precipitation, quality conditions through changes in responses to long-term capital planning and atmospheric CO2 have been linked to forest ecology, primary production, and decisions. Accordingly, the Water increasing primary productivity and increasing occurrence of cyanobacteria Research Foundation is funding the biomass, which can affect both the blooms. development of a Decision Support amount and the character of SOM. Framework (DSF) to support utility Variability in runoff timing and patterns Improving source water quality response to lake recovery, climate change, have likewise been found to be major management and other drivers of water quality change influences on water quality parameters. The complex interplay between lake (Water Research Foundation Project Increasing temperatures and transport of recovery, climate change, land cover, #4920: Decision Support Framework for nutrients can lead to eutrophic conditions nutrient dynamics, and other drivers of Drinking Water Treatment Plants and a rise in the frequency of algal water quality change call into question Experiencing Lake Recovery). The DSF blooms. whether conditions will simply revert to will aid utilities in identifying controls at the pre-industrial baseline or whether a the watershed, source water, and treatment Case study: Halifax Water, Nova Scotia, new equilibrium will lead to conditions plant to ensure reliable and cost-effective Canada heretofore unseen. Increasing lines of maintenance of water quality objectives. Halifax Water is a regulated drinking evidence suggest the latter. The impacts of water, wastewater and storm water utility, a specific combination of factors leading Impacts of lake recovery and climate with 84,000 service connections, serving to water quality changes can be difficult, change on source water quality the Halifax Regional Municipality on the if not impossible, to fully understand. For Lake recovery is a leading factor in east coast of Canada. Halifax Water waters experiencing lake recovery and the long-term increase in DOC operates two large-scale surface water climate change, studies have highlighted concentrations in surface waters in treatment plants, and several smaller scale several observations that have important northeastern North America and parts of surface and groundwater treatment plants. ramifications for developing a Europe. Evidence from several studies has Halifax Water’s two major water sources, comprehensive response strategy: indicated that leaching of terrestrial NOM Lake Major and Pockwock Lake, receive • Long-term changes in surface water due to decreasing soil acidity is a key stream flows from largely forested, DOC for systems experiencing lake mechanism driving the increased DOC protected watersheds that receive no recovery appear to be most strongly levels observed in these lake systems, wastewater discharges. Historically, the related to changes in atmospheric with important implications for lakes are low pH, low turbidity and low deposition chemistry rather than climate treatability, process efficacy, and the alkalinity sources, but, recent data change. formation of DBPs. Increasing DOC in indicate water quality changes consistent surface waters can reduce water clarity, with lake recovery and climate change. • Climate change impacts on temperature which can enhance thermal stratification, Over the last 20 years, both lakes have and precipitation patterns have a strong potentially further reducing water quality. seen a dramatic rise in pH, color, DOC, influence on seasonal variability in Increased mobilization of N and P and taste and odor events which have surface water DOC and other water associated with soil organic matter (SOM) resulted in increased treatment chemical quality parameters. can help to stimulate cyanobacteria usage, and decreased filter run times • Both lake recovery and climate change growth. Reduced acidity as surface waters (Anderson et al. 2017, and Figure 1). are factors in the increase in the recover has been linked to changes in Of particular concern is the water occurrence of blooms of cyanobacteria, phytoplankton community structure, with treatment process at the JD Kline Water resulting in increased risk for issues higher pH favoring cyanobacteria, some Supply Plant, which treats water from with T&O compounds and toxins. Pockwock Lake and employs a direct species of which produce chemical These complex interactions highlight filtration process. In direct filtration, compounds that cause taste and odor the need for a better understanding of problems. coagulation and flocculation are followed

14 Fall 2019 / NALMS • LAKELINE Dr. Josh Weiss is Hazen and Sawyer’s director of Water Resources Innovations. He specializes in water resources planning, source water quality, modeling, hydrology, climate change, and applications of remote sensing and forecasts for water resources management. He works with water utility operations staff and Figure 1. Example of water quality trends at Halifax Water’s Lake Major and Pockwock Lake. managers to integrate the latest data sets and tools into their decisionmaking toolboxes. source water quality dynamics and better water quality due to a variety of drivers. tools for identifying subtle temporal and While the issue of lake recovery is unique Dr. Bill Becker is the spatial trends across a watershed. to specific regions, long-term water Corporate Drinking Traditional approaches to source water quality changes and increasing frequency Water Practice Leader monitoring, which are typically limited to of extreme events due to climate change for Hazen and Sawyer. periodic sampling at a few key locations, and other factors is universal. Utilities He is a nationally and often ignore the greater watershed across North America and abroad respected water supply completely, are increasingly proving recognize increasing uncertainty about and treatment expert insufficient to support robust decision- what the future holds and the impacts that and has published and making. Further, source water quality this uncertainty has on their capital presented significantly monitoring and treatment process planning efforts. While the DSF will be on a wide range of drinking water topics. He is performance monitoring are often siloed, designed and tested for the specific case an expert in water process technology and the with watershed managers and treatment of lake recovery, the source-to-tap impacts of source water quality on treatment plant operators making separate decisions approach, analytical tools, and guidance plant performance. with few opportunities for joint, holistic materials will be widely applicable for the decision-making. drinking water and lake management Jim DeWolfe is Hazen To address these challenges, the DSF communities. and Sawyer’s Water under development is envisioned as a Treatment Operations multi-platform watershed, source water, Acknowledgements Leader. He works with and treatment process monitoring tool The authors acknowledge the treatment plant with advanced data analytics and financial support of the Water Research operations staff to visualizations that will support holistic, Foundation under Project #4920: implement process data-driven decisions (Figure 2). Utilities Decision Support Framework for optimization and filter like Halifax Water need a framework for Drinking Water Treatment Plants surveillance developing a robust plan for responding to Experiencing Lake Recovery. techniques to help assure consistent and water quality changes due to lake confident operations. For Halifax Water, Jim has recovery, climate change, and other References performed process audit and recommended critical drivers. They further require Anderson, L.E., W.H. Krkosek, A.K. improvements to address shortened filter run quantifiable metrics for ensuring Stoddart, B.F. Trueman, and G.A. times induced by source water quality changes. achievement of plan objectives. The DSF Gagnon. 2017. Lake recovery through will enable the development of triggers reduced sulfate deposition: A new Christine Owen is the and thresholds that can be used to guide paradigm for drinking water treatment. director of Water and implementation of a system-wide water Environmental science & technology, Reuse Innovations for quality protection strategy both for the 51(3), 1414-1422. Hazen and Sawyer. She short term, operational, and longer capital Valade, M.T., W.C. Becker, and J.K. has 29 years of planning horizons (Figure 2). Edzwald. 2009. Treatment selection experience in the Though being developed and piloted guidelines for particle and NOM technical and policy for Halifax Water, the DSF is intended to removal. Journal of Water Supply: aspects of potable be a widely applicable tool for managers Research and Technology-Aqua, 58(6), water quality, research, and operators of reservoir drinking water 424-432. treatment and regulatory compliance. Prior to supplies that are experiencing changes in

Fall 2019 / NALMS • LAKELINE 15 Figure 2. Illustration of the decision support framework. joining Hazen and Sawyer, she managed the problems, improve treatment methodologies, water research and has published more than Water Quality Work Group at Tampa Bay Water, and develop and implement water quality plans. 150-peer review articles related to drinking directing water quality discussions, research Wendy received her BASc in Civil water quality and treatment. Working with efforts and regulatory efforts for the agency and (Environmental) Engineering from the Halifax Water, Graham’s team identified lake its member governments. University of Waterloo, followed by a Ph.D. in recovery processes that have been impacting Civil Engineering at Dalhousie University. water reservoirs in Halifax and Nova Scotia for Wendy Krkosek, Ph.D., the past decade or more. c P.Eng., is the water Dr. Graham Gagnon is quality manager with associate vice Halifax Water where president of research she works with and NSERC/Halifax treatment, water Industrial Research quality and distribution Chair at Dalhousie operations staff to University. Dr. Gagnon conduct water quality has over 25 years of research, solve water quality and treatment experience in drinking

16 Fall 2019 / NALMS • LAKELINE Source Water Protection

Collaborate, Plan, and Prepare – A Utility’s Role in Source Water Protection Kate Dunlap and Michelle Wind

n Boulder, Colorado, the tap water comes from mountain streams and Ireservoirs fed predominantly by snow melt. To maintain water quality, most raw water is piped directly from the source to the water treatment plants. Boulder owns a portion of the watershed near the Continental Divide and public access has been prohibited in that area since 1920. Therefore, we can sit back, relax, and let the pure water nourish our community without a second thought, right? Not so much. Maintaining this high quality water involves water quality monitoring and evaluation, planning and preparation, and most importantly, a lot of collaboration. The portion of the watershed owned by the city only represents 12 percent of the land area. Like other communities, water quality can be impacted by a variety of sources such as wastewater effluent; leaking septic systems; discharges from abandoned mines; lawn, road, and agricultural runoff; post-fire erosion and sediment transport; atmospheric deposition; and climate change. Boulder staff works with local, state, and federal land managers to implement projects and policies that help to provide operational flexibility and ensure a resilient, reliable, and high quality water supply for residents.

Boulder’s water supply Boulder, Colorado, located 30 miles northwest of Denver, has a service area population of 120,000, expected to grow to 136,000 by the year 2040. Boulder’s Figure 1. Boulder’s source water supply watershed map. water supply comes from the following sources (one-third each): the North Boulder Creek Watershed, the Middle transfers water through a series of miles north of Boulder. By 2020, the open Boulder Creek Watershed, and Upper reservoirs, canals, and pipelines from the channel delivery system from Carter Lake Colorado River diversions (Figure 1). The Upper Colorado River to eastern slope to Boulder’s water treatment plant will be trans-mountain diversions are part of the communities. Boulder’s share of the replaced with a pipeline to maintain water Colorado-Big Thompson Project, which diversions is delivered via Carter Lake, 20 quality and improve resilience.

Fall 2019 / NALMS • LAKELINE 17 Monitoring and analyzing source water quality Water quality monitoring is the cornerstone of Boulder’s source water protection program. Water supply reservoirs and tributaries are sampled routinely for a suite of constituents including basic chemistry, nutrients, metals, organic carbon, total suspended solids, volatile organic compounds, and phytoplankton (Figure 2). Staff also monitor for more than 100 pesticides, pharmaceuticals, personal care products, hormones, and other unregulated organic chemicals on a less frequent basis through a multi-utility collaborative to reduce costs. A team of water staff evaluate and update the monitoring program annually. Throughout the year, staff analyze water quality data to understand trends or changes, and report on key findings to Utility’s staff via a Monthly Water Quality Update. The mini-newsletter is developed in PowerPoint and filled with bullet point Figure 2. Boulder staff collecting reservoir samples. After lab analyses, staff analyze text, figures, maps, and infographics to water quality data to understand trends and changes in the source water. inform water treatment, monitor changes during spring runoff and fall reservoir quality impacts. The SWPP identified key treatment costs. While forest thinning stratification, and educate staff more threats to the water supply (e.g., post- projects are a common approach to broadly about the water supply and wildfire erosion and climate change), and reducing or preventing severe wildfires, reservoir health (Figure 3). Data are also potential sources of contamination (e.g., they take years to implement and a variety used to assess event-related changes (e.g., abandoned mine discharges, illegal of factors make any large-scale forest reservoir chemistry changes caused by the hazardous waste dumping). The benefits thinning projects not practical in 2013 flood), or evaluate the effectiveness of the SWPP process are two-fold: first, Boulder’s source watersheds in the near of source water protection investments the SWPP has helped staff prioritize term. (e.g., reductions in reservoir nutrient efforts and more efficiently allocate Recognizing that there could be a levels since investing in phosphorus resources; second, and perhaps more wildfire in the watersheds at any time, removal at a small upstream wastewater importantly, the process was stakeholder- Boulder teamed up with the Colorado treatment facility). The updates also driven and allowed staff to further Forest Restoration Institute to build a provide a record of issues, actions, and develop working relationships with local, pre- and post-wildfire planning tool for outcomes. state, and federal agencies, businesses, water supply protection. The Wildfire and landowners in the watersheds. Erosion and Sediment Transport Tool Developing a source water protection Contact your state’s environment or (WESTT), simulates wildfires; predicts work plan public health agency to learn about SWPP post-fire sediment transport under varying Over the years, Boulder has grant funding availability. A list of state fuel dryness conditions and rain developed a number of watershed source water contacts is maintained here: intensities; recommends rehabilitation management plans, a Source Water Master https://www.asdwa.org/ plans to stabilize hillslopes and trap Plan, and reservoir impact assessments. sourcewatercontacts/. sediment upstream from intakes; and To better coordinate and prioritize estimates the cost of implementing the watershed protection efforts, Boulder Planning and preparing for wildfire watershed rehabilitation efforts such as embarked on a stakeholder-driven process Like many communities in the West, wood mulch, straw mulch, and installing to develop a Source Water Protection Plan wildfire is a key threat to Boulder’s wattles. Staff members from U.S. Forest (SWPP), finalized in 2017. Over the forested water supply. Specifically, Service (USFS) and U.S. Geological course of a year, staff and dozens of erosion and sediment transport during Survey (USGS), among other partners stakeholders met monthly to identify post-fire rain events can fill reservoirs and were involved throughout WESTT potential sources of contamination to the reduce water storage capacity (a critical development to help ensure the tool is water supply, delineate protection zones, component of western water supply scientifically sound and useful to all and prioritize specific strategies and management), cause short- and long-term partners including any USFS Burned Area programs to minimize or prevent water water quality issues, and increase water Emergency Response Team that may be activated post-fire.

18 Fall 2019 / NALMS • LAKELINE Monthly Water Quality Update April 2018 General Updates University Camp Snowpack • During the week of April 30th, Betasso will run performance tests on the new basins and 63rd will shut (% of Median) down for ~2 weeks. 63rd is expected to come back online on May 14th and begin treating Boulder Feeder Canal (BFC). • Northern Water has set the Colorado-Big Thompson Project quota at 80%, meaning that 80% of C-BT water will be available to allottees this year. The allocation is based on high C-BT storage levels and 91% below average winter precipitation. Learn about the quota system here.

Boulder Feeder Canal • Boulder Feeder Canal flow has been steady in recent weeks, with a current discharge rate of 25 cfs. • BFC basic water chemistry is shown for 2018 and the previous two years in the figures below.

BFC Inflows 40

Flow (cfs) Flow 10

0 4/1 4/8 4/15 4/22 4/29

3A 1

Nutrient Interim Values

• The Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE) performs basin-wide water quality assessments on a four-year rotational cycle. The South Platte River Basin will be assessed in 2019.

• CDPHE reviews water quality data to determine whether waterbodies are achieving their designated use (e.g., recreation, water supply) through attainment of water quality standards. 2019 will be the first year the South Platte River Basin is assessed for total phosphorus (TP) and chlorophyll-a (chl-a), which is a measure of algal growth. • Total nitrogen (TN) will be considered for adoption in the South Platte River Basin in 2027.

• Waterbodies will be classified as impaired or on the monitoring and evaluation list if summer average* concentrations exceed the standards more than once in five years. How do nutrient levels stack up in Barker Reservoir?

• Barker Reservoir is in compliance with the Barker Reservoir Average Nutrient Levels TN, TP, and Chl-a interim values. 30 0.5 TP standard = 25 ug/L; TN standard = 0.426 ug/L 25 • While not readily visible from the summer 0.4 average values shown in the figure, TN and 20 TP have been significantly declining since 0.3 the Nederland WWTF upgrades in 2013. 15 Chl-a

or Chlorophyllor a (ug/L) standard 0.2 10 = 8 ug/L

0.1 Total Nitrogen (mg/L) 5

0 0.0

Total Phosphorus 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Average TP (ug/L) Average Chl-a (ug/L) Average TN (mg/L)

3B * Summer = July 1 to Sept. 30 for TP and TN or March 1 to Nov. 30 for Chl-a.

Figure 3. A-D above and on following page. Examples of information conveyed in monthly water quality updates.

Fall 2019 / NALMS • LAKELINE 19 So….what’s driving algal growth in Barker Reservoir? 3C Analyses suggest that Barker Reservoir chl-a (i.e., algal growth) is most strongly influenced by reservoir residence time and TP concentrations (see methods in footnote). Residence time is the amount of time a molecule of water stays in Barker Reservoir before being flushed out.

Model Predicted vs. Actual Barker Reservoir What Do the Model Results Mean? 20 Chl-a Values

16 The model can be used to predict Barker chl-a levels Chl-a (see close alignment of grey and blue lines on the 12 standard figure). Peak chl-a measurements are typically in = 8 ug/L a (ug/L) November, or April. - 8 Chl Reservoir residence time is a function of water rights, 4 season, and water demand. Therefore, it’s not something that can be easily manipulated. 0 Feb-16 Feb-15 Feb-14 Feb-17 Aug-15 Aug-14 Aug-13 Aug-16 Aug-17 Nov-15 Nov-14 Nov-13 Nov-16 May-16 May-15 May-14 May-13 May-17

Predicted Chl a (ug/L) Measured Chl a (ug/L) Model Results: Probability value – this means that there is less than a 0.01% chance that the relationship is due to chance. P values <0.05 P value = <0.0001 indicate statistically significant relationships.

R-squared value – this means that residence time and TP concentrations explain 68% of the variation in chl-a levels in the R2= 0.68 reservoir. The R2 value assesses how well the model fits the data. Values closer to +1 or -1 (positive or negative relationship) indicate stronger models. 0.68 is a very good R2 value.

Spearman Rho Rho – these measure the strength of the relationship to chl-a within the model (similarly to R2, values closer to +1 or -1 • Res. Time = 0.63 indicate a stronger relationship). The higher rho value for residence time indicates that it explains more variation in chl-a • TP = 0.38 than TP (i.e., it’s a more important component of the model).

Methods: Ran non-parametric spearman rank correlations between log-transformed water quality and environmental data from the 2013-2017 period (post-WWTF upgrades). Parameters included: reservoir and WWTF nitrogen (NH4+, NO3-, TKN) and phosphorus (ortho, dissolved); reservoir contents (acre-ft); air temperature; snow-water equivalent; precipitation. Then ran multiple linear regression models using the significantly correlated parameters (p<0.05) to find the best fit model that explains chl-a concentrations. Checked for 3 autocorrelation – TP and residence time were not correlated with each other (p = 0.773). Contact Kate Dunlap if you have more questions about the methods and results.

Chlorine Residual in the Distribution System Distribution System Characteristics Taret hlorine esidal nterin istro . m. eired hlorine esidal in istro . m Water Demand

ne ne ear erae a of the onth

erae residence time is 51 hours

a decrease from last month’s 74 hours

Average % Tank Turnover ooton hataa eils ohler awell narrel

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%

P recommends Tan Trnoer 3D *Click here for definitions and goals related to distro characteristics

20 Fall 2019 / NALMS • LAKELINE Collaborating and sharing information source water protection projects And one last thought – always serve Despite all of the sampling and recommended by other utilities. cookies or lemon bars at your meetings. analyses Boulder staff do internally, we We’ve analyzed it, and the chances that could never achieve any measurable level Conclusion fellow staff and stakeholders will attend of source water protection without No matter where your drinking water your meetings and offer insightful collaborating with external partners, comes from, implementing a source thoughts and ideas, significantly increases landowners, and businesses. Water quality water protection program is paramount. (p-value <0.001). staff take advantage of the fact that From one water provider to another, Boulder is home to more than a dozen here are some thoughts: federal labs including the Institute of • Monitoring = Sampling + Analysis. Kate Dunlap has 15 Arctic and Alpine Research, National What good is a database of water data if years of experience in Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, no one is looking at it? Reviewing your water resource and the National Weather Service, as well data can help you understand baseline management in the as key USFS and USGS offices and the conditions, identify trends, and potential private and public University of Colorado, Boulder. When pollutant sources. Seek guidance from sectors and an M.S. in planning projects, Boulder staff frequently local university professors, USGS staff, Water Resources. To consult with and involve experts from or other water providers to formulate protect and preserve these entities. For example, to characterize hypotheses and conduct analyses. At a Boulder’s source water potential impacts from two discharging minimum, preparing a timeseries quality, she collaborates across sectors, inactive mines, Boulder consulted with scatterplot in Excel can tell you a fair analyzes environmental data, and communicates results to inform special scientists from USGS and the Colorado amount about your source water. Division of Reclamation and Mining projects and policies. • Try not to reinvent the wheel. More than Safety to design and implement the study. likely, other water providers in your Due to the partnership in this effort, Michelle Wind manages area are facing similar threats to their Boulder received a grant to fund the the City of Boulder water supplies, developing similar sampling and lab analysis costs for this Drinking Water Quality plans, and encountering similar issues project. Program that provides regarding source water protection. Staff time and monetary resources are technical support to Contact them to share information and limited, and we can all benefit by sharing protect, maintain, and lessons learned, and perhaps collaborate information, lessons learned, and plans optimize the city’s on projects to spread out the costs. that can be used by others. Recently while drinking water quality we were evaluating and updating the • Planning and stakeholder involvement. from source to tap. water quality monitoring program, staff Get to know the local, state, and federal Michelle is an environmental engineer with 25 asked what other Colorado utility staff who own or manage the land in the years of experience in water quality and programs look like. What are other water source watershed. Developing these watershed management. c providers monitoring? Where do they relationships in advance will facilitate sample and how often? To what extent do working together post-natural disaster they perform statistical analyses on their to implement projects and secure water quality data and report to staff and funding. the public on findings? What are some key threats or pollutant sources to other water supplies and how are water providers planning and adapting? To answer these questions, Boulder staff developed an online survey in travel the world Google Forms and sent it to water providers across the state. Twenty-one providers with service area populations ranging from 4,000 to 1.4 million, responded to the survey. Staff analyzed the responses and presented the survey results at a Colorado Lake and Reservoir Management Association (CLRMA) luncheon – a NALMS affiliate. Aggregate CCC - t ropnevaD moT ropnevaD t - CCC results have also been provided to 7315-607-912 interested water providers. Learning from .www tcamus evar l vres i sec . moc others has helped Boulder improve the ropnevad.mot urc@t i lpes srenna . moc monitoring program and embark on #TSLF 86093 • #TSC 05-8644302 • #TSH -RAT 8507 • #TSAW 405-993-306

Fall 2019 / NALMS • LAKELINE 21 Source Water Protection

Lake Appreciation Month and Secchi Day on Beaver Lake, Northwest Arkansas

Matthew Rich, Becky Roark, and Brad Hufhines

Connecting source water to tap water

orthwest Arkansas (NWA) is a Month. July 2019 marks the eighth year through social media and digital media rapidly growing metroplex where to receive the statewide proclamation. channels, promoting the month’s Nmany residents take potable water Fellowing are the key points in the activities. Television crews and newspaper and source water quality for granted. This proclamation application: reporters attended several events and story plays out not only in NWA, but “With over a half-million acres broadcasted the campaign, increasing around the nation and many other places of reservoirs in Arkansas, summer is a outreach efforts for Lakes Appreciation. in the world. In relation to the value of great time to encourage all Arkansans The BWA Lakes Appreciation Month the service, the low price of high-quality to appreciate the lakes of the Natural activities included taking a group of Girl potable water that meets or exceeds all State by participating in recreational Scouts paddling 5 miles of the pristine regulatory requirements expands the activities such as swimming and boating, cool waters of the White River, generated disconnect between source and tap. Lakes taking care of lakes, and enjoying the from the Beaver Lake Dam (Figure are a reflection of their watersheds. Lakes scenic beauty and benefits provided by 1). These fun outings provide a great Appreciation Month and Secchi Day on them – including drinking water for educational opportunity to talk about the Beaver Lake provide a platform to engage much of the state. In addition to Lakes White River and its tributaries and the and inform the public about these issues. Appreciation Month being a time to many benefits the dam and Beaver Lake Many people do not realize where their appreciate lakes, it is a time to think about provide NWA. The group also practiced potable water comes from, or that human where communities would be without Leave No Trace principles and conducted activities on land affect water quality their water, and the threats facing lakes a river cleanup along the way, removing at the source. A partnership between and reservoirs. These threats include over 60 pounds of trash. Events targeting like-minded organizations to promote sediment and nutrient loads, population youth from underserved communities educational and outreach opportunities growth, development, and invasive included: “kayaking 101” around a for the public best utilizes resources and plant and animal species that put stress quiet cove of Beaver Lake, snorkeling expertise. on waterbodies. The importance of in search of underwater aquatic life, and protecting these lakes and reservoirs for exploring the Hobbs State Park Visitor Lake Appreciation Month future generations is critical to Arkansas’ Center. Many of the program attendees Beaver Watershed Alliance (BWA) quality of life, communities, wildlife, and had not experienced an opportunity like is a nonprofit watershed organization potential for future growth and economic that before. Beaver Watershed Alliance located in NWA that is working to educate development.” spent time discussing with students the community and protect and restore why the lake was important and what Beaver Lake and its watershed. In July of In July 2018, the BWA led over positive, individual actions can be taken 2018, BWA celebrated another successful 17 programs, with more than 120 to protect water quality. Many of the Lakes Appreciation Month. Beaver Lake people participating in stewardship summer students remarked that they were is the drinking water source for 1 in 6 activities, outdoor watershed education “definitely coming back to Beaver Lake” Arkansans. The Beaver Lake watershed and recreation programs, and citizen and wanted to share it with their families covers over 3,087 km2 of land (Tetra Tech science programs within the Beaver and friends. 2012). As part of the BWA mission to Lake watershed. A media campaign for Citizen science activities included raise awareness of watershed concerns, Lakes Appreciation Month included five Secchi Dip-In events, where BWA BWA is proud to partner with NALMS to a customized commercial aired at gas staff met volunteers at local lakes to promote Lakes Appreciation, not only for station pump top advertising and indoor collect Secchi measurements. Secchi Beaver Lake, but across the state. Each billboards at various locations around data were uploaded to the Secchi Dip-In year, BWA and partners submit a request the region – the reach was estimated database using the Lake Observer App to the Arkansas State Governor asking at 335,000 people. Beaver Watershed and will help BWA and other interested to proclaim July as Lakes Appreciation Alliance also connected with stakeholders partners monitor water transparency

22 Fall 2019 / NALMS • LAKELINE correctly knew the answer to the same question in 2018. In an effort to garner support from the citizens of NWA toward preserving a safe drinking water source, BWD Lake Appreciation Month and Secchi Day has initiated a citizen science outreach program entitled “Secchi Day on Beaver Lake.” With this citizen science program, on Beaver Lake, Northwest Arkansas we aim to bridge the gap between source and tap. Secchi Day is a citizen science Matthew Rich, Becky Roark, and Brad Hufhines engagement tool, always held on the third Saturday of August, that educates the public about the source of their drinking water and provides water science-based educational activities for kids and adults of all ages (Figure 2). The first Secchi Day was held in 2006 and was intended to mimic a fishing tournament-style activity where participants launched from central locations, collected water quality data and samples, and then returned for a data “weigh-in.” In 2006, the inaugural Secchi Day began with $1,500 of seed money Figure 1. Lauren Ray, Park Ranger (Interpretation), Upper Buffalo District, Buffalo plus in-kind donations, 27 sampling National River, assists Beaver Watershed Alliance with teaching Leave No Trace teams, approximately 100 participants, principles to NOARK Girl Scout Campers out of Huntsville, AR, before their five-mile and only one program partner. Fast float on the White River. forward to the 2017 event where funding exceeded $23,000 plus in-kind donations, in nearby lakes. This was also a great understand the link between source water 35 sampling teams, 731 participants, 13 way to inform volunteers about the and tap water. Results from BWD’s long- program partners, and 21 sponsors were annual Secchi Day on Beaver Lake range strategic plan surveys suggest that mobilized. hosted by Beaver Water District (BWD). in 2006, only 36 percent of respondents On August 18, 2018, BWD held By leveraging local partnerships and correctly identified BWD as their drinking its 13th annual Secchi Day on Beaver resources, BWA was able to provide these water supplier, whereas 76 percent Lake. A total of 712 people participated, programs at no cost to the public, which is a great incentive to get the community engaged and thinking about watershed appreciation.

Secchi Day on Beaver Lake Understanding the source of one’s drinking water is crucial in maintaining that resource for future generations. Without public buy-in, protecting source water against cultural eutrophication would not be possible. Beaver Water District, the wholesale drinking water supplier to more than 350,000 commercial and residential customers in NWA, does not own nor maintain a distribution network. Instead, the four major cities of Bentonville, Rogers, Springdale, and Fayetteville purchase drinking water from BWD to distribute and sell to their customers though each city’s independent distribution network. Because commercial Figure 2. Secchi Day on Beaver Lake - As part of Secchi Day on Beaver Lake, kids can and residential water bills are not paid experience hands-on activities that are meant to inspire thought-provoking ideas. Here, to BWD, residents of NWA may not kids use a spray bottle to simulate a rain-making event on a Beaver watershed model that helps them understand how pollutants on the landscape can travel to Beaver Lake.

Fall 2019 / NALMS • LAKELINE 23 which included 494 attendees and 218 volunteers. Volunteers were comprised of 72 on-lake samplers, and 146 volunteers, including BWD staff, that assisted with a water quality-type science festival held at the Prairie Creek marina. In 2018, 36 on-lake volunteer teams were dispatched from one-of-four launch sites along the 80 km transect (Figure 3). Armed with a Secchi Disk, two 1-litre bottles, and GPS coordinates, volunteers were asked to measure Secchi depths at two different sites, and to collect two samples just below the surface at both sites. In order to minimize sampler error, each of the 35 lake sampling sites were sampled in duplicate by different sampling teams. Secchi transparency values from every site across the riverine-to-lacustrine continuum were thereafter relayed to BWD personnel at Prairie Creek and displayed on a large data board known as “The Great Wall of Secchi.” By having results displayed in real time, those attending the water science festival could see how the transparency of Beaver Lake changes from the riverine zone (e.g., 0.8 meters), near the White River and War Eagle Creek inflows, to the lacustrine zone (e.g., 7.5 meters) near the Beaver Lake Dam (Figure 4). Meanwhile, collected water samples were then returned to BWD staff to be analyzed at an in-house water quality laboratory. The ability to analyze water quality constituents in-house is why BWD was able to establish such a large-scale event at a reasonable price. One sample, collected in a light-resistant amber colored bottle, was used to evaluate chlorophyll-a concentrations, the second Figure 3. Map showing location of Secchi Disk readings on Beaver Lake. sample, collected in an opaque bottle, was used to evaluate total phosphorus, and Arkansas Land Trust, Arkansas Master made possible by partnerships with local total nitrogen. Secchi and chlorophyll-a Naturalists, University of Arkansas Spanish-speaking radio stations such as data were then used to calculate Carlson’s Division of Agriculture Research and La Zeta Radio and reaching out to local (1977) trophic state index values for each Extension, USGS, and many others, held Latino and Marshallese organizers such of the 35 sites. These data, along with hands-on activities meant to inform about as One Community. Highlighted features total phosphorus and total nitrogen data, water quality and ecology of Beaver of such cultural outreach have resulted in were later used to build spatial maps of Lake and the surrounding watershed. Past Marshallese dance troops and crafts being each water quality parameter along the activities have included viewing diatoms featured at Secchi Day on Beaver Lake. entire transect Beaver Lake. Secchi depth through a microscope, making their own This effort, along with outreach material data are also uploaded to the Secchi Dip- take home Secchi disk, taking a kayak printed in three languages, ensures that in database. test drive, rain barrel building workshops, underserved communities in NWA are Back at Prairie Creek marina, the water fun fact scavenger hunts, and many included in the education effort. home base for Secchi Day on Beaver more. Since 2015, Secchi Day organizers The partnership between BWA and Lake, more than 30 exhibitors from have diversified the event through BWD is working toward the common partner organizations such as NALMS, outreach to the Latino and Marshallese goal of source water protection through Beaver Watershed Alliance, Northwest communities of NWA. This effort is activities such as Lakes Appreciation

24 Fall 2019 / NALMS • LAKELINE Sustainability and has designed and installed over 75 rain gardens in both the Beaver Lake and Illinois River Watershed, helping to increase green infrastructure technologies for this region. Becky is passionate about watershed protection, education and the preservation of natural areas, serves on the Fayetteville Natural Heritage Board, enjoys kayaking and bass fishing, and spending time with her two children, Luke and Abby. Becky can be reached at [email protected] or by phone at 479-750-8007.

Brad Hufhines, an environmental specialist with Beaver Water District, received his BS and MS degrees from the University Figure 4. Changing transparency of Beaver Lake from the riverine zone (e.g., 0.8 of Arkansas. He holds meters), near the White River and War Eagle Creek inflows, to the lacustrine zone (e.g., Water Treatment, Water 7.5 meters) near the Beaver Lake Dam. Distribution, Wastewater Treatment, and Industrial Wastewater Treatment licenses in the state of Arkansas. Brad serves on Month, the Secchi Dip-in, and Secchi Matthew Rich, an the Arkansas HABs workgroup and the Arkansas Day on Beaver Lake. Whether for environmental specialist Forestry and Drinking Water Collaborative flood control, hydropower generation, with Beaver Water steering committees. c domestic drinking water supply, or District, received his recreation such as fishing, swimming, or BS and MS degrees boating, preserving this finite resource from the University of is imperative for the health of citizens Arkansas. Between his and the growth of NWA. Together, BWA time as a bachelor’s UPCOMING IN and BWD are proud to work in tandem and master’s student, to serve and educate the community. he spent time as a research associate and LAKELINE – Beaver Watershed Alliance and Beaver lab manager at the Louisiana Universities Water District appreciates and thanks all Marine Consortium (LUMCON) researching LAKELINE WINTER 2019: partners, sponsors, and volunteers who the effects of oiling to Louisiana marshes, as “Emerging Contaminants” is the made Lakes Appreciation Month and well as annual hypoxia in the northern Gulf of theme of the winter issue of LakeLine. Secchi Day on Beaver Lake successful Mexico. Currently, he works on source water Articles will cover a range of programs. protection issues, along with citizen science To learn more, check us out on engagement efforts like Secchi Day on Beaver contaminants, regulatory frameworks Facebook or either organizations Lake. He enjoys spending time in the woods and surrounding emerging contaminants, websites: canoeing with Gus, his English Bulldog. monitoring programs, and more. We • Beaver Watershed Alliance – www. will be accepting articles through beaverwatershedalliance.org Becky Roark joined December 1, 2019 • Beaver Water District – www.bwdh2o. the Beaver Watershed for the winter issue. org Alliance in December 2016. She holds a References B.S. in Landscape LAKELINE SPRING 2020: Carlson, R.E. 1977. A trophic state index Architecture from the “Lake Browning” will be the for lakes. Limnol. Oceanogr. 22: 361- University of Arkansas. theme of the spring LakeLine. 368. She has worked within The issue will include an overview of Tetra Tech. 2012. Beaver Lake Watershed the water quality and lake browning caused by increased Protection Strategy. May 2012 conservation fields since 2010, helping to Revision. [Online] Available at https:// develop the Low Impact Development Manual dissolved organic carbon content in www.beaverwatershedalliance.org/ – A Design Manual for Urban Areas, while surface waters, and the chemical, (Verified 1 October 2018). interning at the U of A Community Design biological and ecological implications Center, she served as an Americorps Volunteer of browning. with the University of Arkansas Office of

Fall 2019 / NALMS • LAKELINE 25 Source Water Protection

Forest Conservation and Management to Protect Sources of Drinking Water

Pierce A. Rigrod and John M. O’Neil

Forest management and conservation: demonstrated the degree to which forest including the White Mountain National A brief history cutting and burning reduced stormwater Forest in northern New Hampshire in orests play a key role in protecting infiltration, lowered base flow and caused 1911. National forest research centers water quality and stabilizing volume streamflow to increase more rapidly today, including Hubbard Brook in New Fwithin lakes, reservoirs and rivers. during storms. Over the following century, Hampshire, continue innovative The importance of forest cover in forest research has been crucial to research concerning biomass/bioenergy, maintaining water quality and volume has improving water quality in lakes and climate change and watershed been recognized as far back as 1700 BC in rivers through better forest management management and restoration within ancient Greece (Neary 2017). Trees, forest practices. national forests (USFS, R&D Priority litter and soils are particularly well suited Areas). to deliver high quality water to streams Looking back to when the forests roared and in moderating stream hydrology. This Forest management today can be Forests are essential presumes forests remain intact and are traced back to the negative experiences for safe drinking water well managed. associated with uncontrolled forest cover Forested lands are the source of more In the United States, the impetus to removal, wildfires and soil erosion in than half of the surface water supplies in improve forest management was born out many areas: the United States and provide drinking of the need to control wildfires in the • Over 100 years ago the White Mountain water to about 212 million Americans, west, serve recreational interests in the region of New Hampshire was “stripped through public and private water systems. east and meet the growing need for safe of trees from what was once virgin Treating “raw” source water to comply drinking water in growing cities. These forest, streams choked with silt from with federal and/or state drinking water priorities were framed within arguments eroding hillsides . . . .” quality standards is complex and sensitive supporting the passage of Forest Reserve (WhiteMountainHisotry.org) to water quality changes. Act of 1891 and the Organic Uncontrolled logging led to flooding, Regulatory compliance with health- Administration Act of 1897. The Forest low stream flows and blackened slopes based and aesthetic standards depends Reserve Act gave the president authority affecting downstream mills, tourism largely upon the quality of the water to “set apart and reserve” forested lands, and a variety of other interests. entering a public water system’s water leading to the creation of today’s national treatment plant. Approximately 90 forests. • In 1907, catastrophic flooding on the chemical, radiological, and microbial Early research completed through the Monongahela and Ohio Rivers was contaminants have water quality standards United States Department of Agriculture’s traced directly to the cut-over condition regulated under state and/or federal Safe (USDA) Forest Service Office of Silvics of the upstream watersheds in Drinking Water Acts. Maximum characterized how forests, forest litter and Pennsylvania and West Virginia. Contaminant Levels (MCLs) establish the soils influence streamflow, control floods, • In 1910, wildfires devastated Idaho and maximum permissible level of and affect water quality. In 1910, the U.S Montana. The flood damage from large- contamination allowed in drinking Forest Service (USFS) conducted the first scale removal of northern forests and provided by water public water systems. “watershed” study, comparing two similar wildfires eventually led to passage of watersheds in Colorado (Wagon Wheel the Weeks Act, referred to by some as A Forest Service study estimates Gap Project) by denuding one of the the “single most important law in the that for each square kilometer (KM2) watersheds of its forest and measuring creation of national forests in the of forest land converted from forest streamflow, then comparing that eastern United States” (USFS, to urban cover within the Conserve streamflow against the streamflow in the Celebrating a Century of Conservation) Reservoir serving Mobile Alabama, “control” watershed having an intact The Weeks Act was preceded by 20 TOC concentrations at the source forest. Not long after, a research project years of forest research, advocacy and water intake will increase the monthly completed in northern New Hampshire (at debate leading to the federal purchase median TOC concentrations between the Hubbard Brook Experimental Forest) of over 20 million acres in 26 states, 33 percent and 49 percent.

26 Fall 2019 / NALMS • LAKELINE The vast majority of Public Water among both state and water utilities on the plant in this study…”. For public water Systems (PWSs) using surface water must response to HCBs. systems, AWWA’s report adds weight to install sophisticated treatment systems to Retention of well managed forests the notion that there are tangible day-to- remove total suspended solids (TSS), reduces nutrient loading and helps to limit day financial benefits from forest parasites (Giardia), microorganisms the need for more complex and expensive ecosystem services. (Escherichia coli, or E.coli) and a range treatment. In the northeast, Lake Sebago of inorganic and organic compounds. (serving Portland, Maine) and the Forest management within Lake Organic material in souce water can Catskill/Delaware reservoir system Massabesic’s watershed create harmful compounds when raw (serving New York city), both pristine Manchester Water Works (MWW), a water is treated with a disinfectant, such sources, provide drinking water with more large public water system operated by the as chlorine. Natural organic matter, limited treatment. Both water systems City of Manchester, New Hampshire, was (NOM) from decaying plant and animal receive Filtration Avoidance established in 1871. Soon after, the MWW matter, reacts with disinfectants, creating Determinations (FADs) because their began to purchase land along the lake’s hundreds of disinfection byproducts surface water sources meet strict criteria shoreline, tributaries and up-gradient pond (DBPs), some of which pose serious for turbidity, coliform and total system in the watershed. Much of the threats to human health and have trihalomethane MCLs. Avoiding property purchased during the late regulatory limits. DBPs including additional treatment saves the Portland nineteenth century previously was being Haloacetic acids (HAAs) and Water District approximately $155 million used for sheep farming, and consisted of Trihalomethanes (THCs) are known to be pastureland surrounded by stone walls. carcinogenic at elevated levels. NOM Forests cover approximately 90 per- MWW began to reforest grazing areas by increases Total Organic Carbon (TOC) cent of New York’s Catskill/Delaware planting tree seedlings to accelerate that can affect taste and odor of treated watershed. (New Your City Watershed reforestation. This went on for decades drinking water and shorten the lifespan of Forest Management Plan, 2017) with over one million seedlings planted treatment media, increasing the need for between 1871 and 1935. The majority of coagulants and disinfectants. these were Eastern White Pine (Pinus Converting forests to urban dollars. U.S. EPA FADs come with strobus) as seen in Figure 1. By 1935, the landscapes is estimated to increase annual conditions to implement watershed MWW owned nearly 6,000 acres of phosphorus loading to a lake by a factor control programs that implement forested land within the 24,000-acre of ten (Horne 1994). Nutrient-rich comparatively cost-effective land watershed. Not long after MWW conditions in lakes and reservoirs support conservation investments, non-point purchased an additional 2,000 acres. algal growth and are associated with pollution controls and forest management Efforts to reforest previously cleared Harmful Cyanobacteria Blooms (HCBs), practices. As New York’s Commissioner areas and institute forest management a growing concern for water suppliers. of the Department of Environmental practices have yielded a healthy and Cyanobacteria was recently identified by Protection statement implies, high quality vigorous forested landscape across the the Association of State Drinking Water source water doesn’t happen by accident. watershed. Management objectives have (ASDWA, November 2018) as one of the “Since the City received its first changed over time. Initially, pine top three concerns for state source water filtration waiver in the early 1990s we dominated forests were managed to protection programs. Microcystis, a genus have protected open space around our provide maximum tree growth potential of freshwater cyanobacteria, currently reservoirs, invested in wastewater (height and girth). Forests were thinned to being considered for future regulation and upgrades, forged partnerships with remove the poor quality trees in favor of listed on U.S. EPA’s Contaminant watershed farmers, and focused the healthy crop trees to ensure the best Candidate List (CCL 4), can produce a considerable attention on the forests, overall forest health. Dominated by class of toxins referred to as Microcystins, streams and wetlands that comprise mature, well stocked, Eastern white pine harmful or fatal to humans, pets and the natural infrastructure of our water timber during the second half of the last wildlife when present at high supply” (Official Website of the City century, forested areas had very little concentrations. of New York 2017). stocking in the mid-story or understory. Without water treatment processes While it would seem obvious, losing An overstocked (“stocking” is the degree capable of removing cyanobacteria cells, forest cover in water supply watersheds of utilization of land by trees), mature potentially harmful toxins within the cells appears to correlate with increasing water forest is especially susceptible to major can enter into finished drinking water. In treatment costs. (American Water Works storm damage during extreme weather New Hampshire and beyond, recent 2016). Based on a national survey of cyanobacteria blooms in water supply public water systems located within Well-managed forests are able to reservoirs and lakes, that previously did forested areas, the results “imply contribute to the protection, availability not have one on record, have elevated converting 10 percent of the watershed and sustainability of high quality, concerns. This has created a greater focus from forest cover to developed area cost effective drinking water (New on reducing nutrient loading from the increases chemical treatment costs by 8.7 Hampshire Forest Resource Strategies: watershed, monitoring bloom-forming percent” equating to “an annual increase A Component of the 2010 Forest conditions and improving coordination of over $65,000 for the typical treatment Resources Plan).

Fall 2019 / NALMS • LAKELINE 27 openings made through “group cuts/patch cuts” enhance species variety and create a young age class, while single tree harvesting enhances addition forest growth. Forest growth is accelerated due to the availability of new growing space, water and nutrients and reduction in adjacent tree competition. This approach reduces the release of nutrients into streams and to the lake. Today, 8,000 acres of high-priority water supply lands, 35 percent of the Lake Massabesic watershed, is protected by the MWW through conservation easements, yet the remaining watershed forests are highly vulnerable to development pressure.

Forest vulnerability and loss In the northeast, much of the land cleared during the first 200 years of European settlement has reforested itself. According to the Society for the Protection of New Hampshire Forests, Figure 1. Mature white pine forest. Maine, New Hampshire and Vermont are events, while younger forests are more to create openings of ¼ to 2 acres that currently the three most heavily forested resilient, something to consider in our mimic a wind/storm event and harvesting states in the country (Table 1). New changing climate. Today, MWW single trees to mimic natural mortality Hampshire’s forests cover 84 percent of implements both an “even-aged” and (Figure 3). the state and have largely been at this “uneven-aged” forest management When used together Even- and level since the 1980s. Unlike during the th th approach. Uneven-Aged Management benefit forest 19 and 20 century, forest loss in New Even-aged forests often result from a health and diversity, increase the number Hampshire today is occurring through past harvest or clearing for pasture that of species, and stratify age classes and relatively small and progressive cutting to has re-grown, resulting in trees of vertical structure. Shade-tolerant and accommodate housing and commercial approximately the same age (Figure 2). -intolerant species regenerating within the development, reducing the connectivity Management involves continuously removing the smaller diameter trees (less vigorous) and leaving the larger diameter trees (more vigorous) until the final harvest (clear cut). This had been a widely used forestry practice up to the early 1990s, but it has challenges arising from a closed canopy forest with a majority dominant over-story (i.e., no understory or mid-story) that can be very susceptible to wind throw and disease. These forests often lack species diversity as well as structural diversity, and harvesting often releases relatively more nutrients into the system in the short term. To address these challenges, MWW uses an alternative approach referred to as Uneven-Aged Management. This approach is now considered a sustainable forestry approach. It involves forest harvesting operations similar to natural forest succession and disturbance(s) including harvesting trees in small areas Figure 2. Single age class forest cover.

28 Fall 2019 / NALMS • LAKELINE meet their needs and values (Penn State Extension) USFS defines sustainabilty in terms of the impacts from decisions made by natural resource managers upon the environment, society and economy, i.e., the “triple bottom line” (Elkington, 1994) Sustainable forestry balances society’s demands for land and forest products with the preservation of forest health and diversity. Changes within the 2018 Farm Bill now encourage and incentivize private landowners to make sustainable forestry decisions that better protect

Strategies for Sustainable Forest Management

• Maintain a stable forest land base • Maintain diverse forest composition • Maintain or increase forest biodiversity • Maintain or increase the quality and quantity of water from forest Figure 3. Mixed age class forest cover. ecosystems.

ability to produce clean water, the Table 1. Table of Forest Loss in NH. Strategies for Sustainable Forest importance/reliance upon forest lands for Management (USFS) Year Forest Loss Acres (NH) drinking water and threat of forest 2007 628,356 conversion based primarily upon 2011 643,769 population and housing density. Out of sources of drinking water. 540 watersheds, the Merrimack River 2017 642,597 The 2018 Farm Bill dedicates $4 watershed in New Hampshire ranked as billion dollars over the next 10 years, U.S. Forest Service, Durham, 2019 the fourth-most-threatened watershed. increasing the financial reach of United In another USFS report, Private States Department of Agriculture’s and quality of forests. Small and Forests, Public Benefits: Forests on the (USDA) to improve forest practices incremental forest loss attracts little public Edge (Stein et al. 2009), the Merrimack within source protection areas. The law response and is a bit like the fable of a River Watershed (comprising 5,010 tasks USDA through Natural Resources frog in a tepid pot of water that gradually square miles in southern New Hampshire Conservation Services to engage public comes to a boil. It didn’t end well for the and Massachusetts) ranked as the most water systems. Yet, land conservation frog. vulnerable watershed of the 15 watersheds within developing areas is expensive and In 2009 the USFS published a report located in the eastern U.S. in terms of the forest management is less relevant as evaluating the risk of losing forested lands potential timber volume loss due to future forests are lost to make way for other land increases in housing density, modeled uses. through the year 2030. Protecting More than 2,000 acres of forest land Source water protection is largely vulnerable forests contributing source voluntary in most states and for large are cleared for development each water to public water systems, like Lake day in the United States, and growth geographic areas like a watershed, can be Massabesic and others, is going to require a heavy lift. Collaborative efforts among projections suggest that as many as 138 a more robust and coordinated effort. million acres of private forest land will water utilities, local, state and federal Locally for New Hampshire, between partners to share expertise and resources be threatened by development between 2001 and 2016, US Forest Services 2005 and 2030 (Stein and others 2005). has been an effective approach. Echoing reports 45,000 acres of forested land, an the U.S Forest Services’ Forest-to-Faucet area of 70 square miles was lost within the Partnership (Gregory and Barten, 2008) within water supply watersheds in the New Hampshire portion of the Merrimack study of population growth trends and northeast and mid-west. Water and River Watershed. vulnerability of drinking water supplies, People: Drinking water supply and forest protecting forests within water supply Sustainable forests: lands in the Northeast and Midwest watershed will entail raising public The future is . . . to be determined United States (Barnes et al., June 2009). awareness about the value of forest This study ranked watersheds across a Sustainable forestry ensures that ecosystem services, targeting resources to 20-state study area according to their future generations will have forests to support sustainable forest practices and

Fall 2019 / NALMS • LAKELINE 29 accelerating preservation of forested lands within the most vulnerable water supply watersheds.

References Don’t let cyanobacteria American Water Works Association ruin your summer. Source Water Protection Challenges in (AWWA). 2016. Forest Cover and its Effect on Water Treatment Costs, Connections Articles (online; August 3). NH’s Multi-Use Water Supply Lakes Barnes, M. et al. (2009). Drinking water supply and forest lands in the Northeast Paul Susca and Tom O’Brien and Midwest United States, NA- FR-01-08, United States Forest Service. Elias, Emile et al. 2016. Impacts of Forest to Urban Land Conversion and ENSO Phase on Water Quality of a Public Water Supply Reservoir, USDA Agriculture Forest Services. Gregory, P.E. and P.K.Barten. 2008. Public and Private Forests, Drinking Water Supplies, and Population Growth in the Eastern United States, United States Forest Service (online).

Horne, A.J. and C.R. Goldman. 1994. “We have had SolarBees for four years, Chapter 1, Limnology. Lake Ecology and I am happy to report that we have Overview, 2nd edition. McGraw-Hill not had an algae bloom since they Co., New York, New York, USA. have been installed!” Neary, D.G et al. 2017. Forest For more of our customer experiences, SolarBee® lake circulators help visit www.medoraco.com/goldstar Management and the impact on water keep your lake in the clear. resources: A review of 13 countries, Chapter 13, pg. 181. The threats posed by cyanobacteria blooms and their associated toxins are real and should Official Website of the City of New York. not be taken lightly. SolarBee lake circulators have proven success in over 400 freshwater 2017. High Quality NYC Tap Water lakes and reservoirs. Receives New Filtration Waiver. We can help your lake, too. United States Forest Service. 2011. Celebrating a Century of Conservation: See our new educational whiteboard video series to learn more on how SolarBees The Weeks Act Turn 100, pg. 4. circulate your lake and help control cyanobacteria. Watts, A.W. 2018. What is Our Water Trusted solutions for over 40 years Worth and What Does Our Water Cost? A Review of economic data on water in www.medoraco.com/lakes New Hampshire, pg. 8. MEDORA 855-960-1100 • [email protected] corporation Stein et al. 2009) Private Forests, Public Benefits: Forests on the Edge, General Technical Report PNW-GTR-795, United States Forest Service.

Pierce Rigrod oversees John O’Neil is the Bachelor of Science Forestry (BSF) from the source water protection current Watershed Land University of New Hampshire in Durham and programs for New and Property Manager is a New Hampshire licensed professional Hampshire Department at the City of forester. c of Environmental Manchester, NH, Water Services’ Drinking Water Works Department. He and Groundwater is responsible for Bureau. He has worked activities on the 24,000- on local and state water acre Massabesic supply protection activities for over a decade Watershed and, with the exploration of a new and has a background in environmental intake on the Merrimack River, the 3.2 million- planning and community development. acre Merrimack River Watershed. John has a

30 Fall 2019 / NALMS • LAKELINE Source Water Protection

Source Water Protection Challenges in NH’s Multi-Use Water Supply Lakes

Paul Susca and Tom O’Brien

hat happens when we play in the water supplier lacks the political • “No dung either human or animal, same water bodies we tap for jurisdiction or clout to control watershed kitchen waste, swill, or garbage shall be Wdrinking water? Are water development, access, and other uses. thrown into or deposited in said lake....” utilities and other lake users bound to • “A person shall not deposit or allow come into conflict? The potential is there, Examples: A patchwork of regulations sawdust, shavings, apple pomace, or but the two have more reasons to work in New Hampshire waste from mills or factories to fall into together than to be at odds. The source of Of the nearly 1,000 lakes, large said reservoir...” the potential conflict is clear: a drinking ponds, and reservoirs in New Hampshire, water supply source that is as clean and about two dozen are used as public water • “No person shall bathe in said lake...” consistent in quality as possible keeps supplies. Roughly half of those are used • “A person shall not drive, ride, or race treatment costs down, and keeps both exclusively – or nearly so – as water any cattle, horses, or other animals used customers and regulators happy. On the supplies, while the others are at least for teaming, riding, or racing on the ice other hand, keeping a lake as clean as partially open to recreational uses, most ...” possible means no water-based recreation, often boating. Swimming is allowed in Reading the rules also makes it clear no shoreline development – no only a handful of those lakes and ponds, that some water systems and development at all in the watershed. The and in almost all of those cases some part municipalities simply used other towns’ challenge is to keep the lake as clean as of the water body – near the water supply rules as templates for their own water possible for water supply while everyone intake – is completely closed to supplies, while others thoughtfully crafted enjoys the lake in other ways as well. recreation. To explain this patchwork of protections to accommodate certain There’s no question that recreation allowed and restricted uses, one only existing uses of their lakes and – especially of the body-contact variety, needs to recognize that the multi-use watersheds, while limiting or banning compromises the quality of drinking water water supply lakes were tapped as water others. supplies. Water quality monitoring data supplies at a time when the existing Looking beyond those rules at how from Sebago Lake – the source for recreational uses were not seen as posing each lake is managed, a couple of Portland, Maine’s water system – a likely threat to the safety of the water examples help show how each situation is demonstrate that fecal bacteria levels drop supply, and the compromises made since unique – not only in terms of each lake’s the further one goes from swimming that time reflect each community’s natural characteristics (depth, flushing beaches. And studies by the Water attempt to balance the desire for a safe rate, etc. – regardless of whether they are Research Foundation, the Trust for Public water supply with the interests of natural lakes or impounded), but in terms Land, and others show that both turbidity waterfront land owners, and in some cases of each lake’s recreational value, history and water treatment costs increase as a the larger community’s interest in a of shoreline development, and the water watershed shifts from forest to other types recreation-based economy. utility’s response to water quality of land cover. While some water utilities Rather than having uniform statewide concerns. can achieve the ideal of an undeveloped restrictions on water supply lakes (and Lake Massabesic, the subject of a watershed and a water supply lake or rivers), New Hampshire water suppliers or separate article in this issue, is a reservoir closed to all activity, in most municipalities can ask the State to adopt sprawling, impounded lake that has long cases water supply and other uses have to waterbody-specific restrictions under an served as the sole water supply source for coexist. It might be because people were 1899 statute that was prompted by typhoid state’s largest city, Manchester, and some enjoying the lake for other uses before the outbreaks during the years preceding the adjacent areas. Massabesic is closed to all water supplier came along, or the water enactment of the law. Reading those rules body-contact recreation, but boating and quality and public health implications of today, you can see what the water quality fishing are allowed except in an area other uses were not understood when the concerns of the day were: surrounding the water supply intake. water supply was developed, or the water • “No privy, pig-pen, stable, or other Manchester Water Works owns nearly all utility didn’t have the money to lock up building . . . in which horses, cattle, of the land with frontage on the lake as the lake and its watershed early on, or the swine . . . or fowls are kept . . .” well as extensive holdings elsewhere in

Fall 2019 / NALMS • LAKELINE 31 Figure 1. Manchester Water Works’ land holdings include the watershed of Tower Hill Pond (shown here), whose discharge is managed to recharge Lake Massabesic, the system’s main reservoir. the watershed (Figure 1). Both the lake control invasive aquatic plants in portions At the state level there are several and the Water Works lands are important of the lake upstream from the intake. For environmental regulatory programs recreational resources (Figure 2), its part, the City has taken the initiative to designed primarily to protect water particularly given their proximity to the improve the management of stormwater in quality or water resources (e.g., Wetlands, state’s largest population center, and are some of Laconia’s more developed areas Shoreland, Subsurface Septic, and monitored by the only water utility near the lake, takes an active role in Alteration of Terrain Permit Programs). “watershed patrol” force in the state. reviewing proposals to treat invasive But within the political and economic In contrast to Lake Massabesic, aquatic plants with herbicides, and works context and processes by which which is managed primarily as a water with lake associations and others in an environmental laws are made (and supply, the state’s largest lake, 72-square- ongoing sub-watershed approach to lake strengthened or weakened as time goes mile Lake Winnipesaukee, is one of the planning and management. by, more data becomes available, or state’s most significant recreational This joint effort, or community-based legislative priorities shift), the result is resources. Its shoreline is heavily approach, between government, private that these state laws usually establish, developed, and its use as the City of groups and businesses, and citizen from an environmental protection Laconia’s sole water supply is treated as volunteers, is an intentional design on the perspective, just minimum standards that almost incidental. Only the area within part of New Hampshire to, among other have to be met. In addition, due to other about 1,000 feet of the intake, near the things, protect and conserve its water demands on state environmental agency lake’s outlet, is closed to recreation. While resources. While there are state staff (such as emerging contaminants) the lake’s overall quality is very good, environmental statutes and municipal enforcement of existing environmental there has been a trend toward beach ordinances designed to protect water laws affecting lakes may be limited to closings due to E. coli bacteria, increasing resources, state agencies such as the New only the most egregious violations. This is milfoil infestations, blooms of algae and Hampshire Department of Environmental where municipalities can and do step in, cyanobacteria, and a decline in fish and Services place a high value on engaging to greater and lesser extents, to adopt loon populations. The increased frequency and working with stakeholder more restrictive lake-friendly ordinances of noticeable cyanobacteria blooms in communities, both professional and and adopt best management practices some of Winnipesaukee’s coves and bays citizen volunteer, to effectuate on-the- (such as with road deicing). is a source of concern for Laconia’s water ground protection and conservation. In New Hampshire, municipal department, as is the use of herbicides to ordinances need to fall within existing

32 Fall 2019 / NALMS • LAKELINE Safety (NHDOS). An and lake to lake. This makes it challenging example of a safety- for state environmental regulators, driven rule that can have municipal code enforcement officers, environmental contractors and other permit applicants, consequences is the lakefront property owners, and visitors to elimination of group understand and comply with all the laws, mooring of boats near a ordinances, and rules. And, even when dam or a public access there are adequate protections provided boat ramp. Creating through these public policies and rules that prohibit such practices, we know from experiences “mooring fields” may be across the United States and over the driven primarily by decades that, when a watershed is safety concerns but, populated with people and their associated depending on the human enterprises, a cooperative, circumstances, may community-based approach to source have water quality water protection may be a necessary and benefits as well. important complement to an environmental regulation framework. Nonprofit partners – statewide and local Engaging landowners in lake protection NH LAKES is a through LakeSmart statewide nonprofit In New Hampshire there are several organization whose programs directly or indirectly mission is to keep New administered by government agencies or Hampshire’s lakes clean public universities which rely on the and healthy, now and in voluntary participation of private citizens the future. This group and groups concerned about the long-term has been an important health of New Hampshire’s 1,000 lakes. partner in many lake and These lake water quality programs cover watershed related water quality monitoring, aquatic invasive initiatives in the state. species (prevention education, early One of the ways that NH detection, and management), and LAKES works to ensure watershed assessment and pollution good lake water quality mitigation. One such program, directed is by helping its local primarily at reducing polluted runoff from lake association partners private property around lakes, is and other conservation LakeSmart. It is the newest program in groups get lake-friendly our water quality toolbox, but one that is ordinances and other voluntary, non-regulatory, and which best management involves private property owners within Figure 2. Manchester Water Works’ watershed lands are an practices adopted at the and near the lake “shoreland” area (within important recreational resource. municipal level. In 250-feet of shore). addition, NH LAKES At its inception in 2004, LakeSmart state law to the extent that state statutes facilitates, with its local association was a program of the Maine Department enable more restrictive local ordinances. partners, public participation in the of Environmental Protection (DEP). In Lake-friendly ordinances that process by which the NHDOS is 2012, the Maine DEP handed over the municipalities have adopted in New petitioned and which, as mentioned, may ownership of the program to nonprofit Hampshire address steep slope set rules for each lake and which may groups, and it now functions as a program development restrictions, increased have environmental benefits. So, we have of the Maine Lakes Society, a statewide shoreline or wetland setback distances for a tiered source water protection public nonprofit organization. LakeSmart is a septic systems or other development policy framework in New Hampshire that voluntary, non-regulatory program in disturbance, and restrictions on the has both strengths and weaknesses. Maine and participation is free. Maine application of road salt. In addition, One of the unintended consequences DEP recognized the limitations of a restrictions can be placed on any lake in associated with this tiered framework of getting private property owners to New Hampshire, either through statute or, state laws, municipal ordinances, and enthusiastically allow officials from a in the case of safety-related rules (which lake-by-lake restrictions, is that New regulatory agency to come on to their may have environmental effects), by way Hampshire now has a patchwork of private property. The agency recognized of a citizen petition process administered standards, permit processes, and allowable that they could increase participation in by the New Hampshire Department of uses from place to place, town to town, the program by transferring the program

Fall 2019 / NALMS • LAKELINE 33 to a private nonprofit organization. Since through dozens if not doing so, the program has really taken off. hundreds of other In 2012, the last year of DEP program voluntary, non-regulatory ownership, ten lake communities were conservation efforts by participating. Since being handed over to private property owners. the Maine Lakes Society, the program LakeSmart in Maine was now has over 60 participating lake groups built on this premise and it – what we call in New Hampshire “lake has worked swimmingly. communities.” We talk about it in terms of Now, in 2019, the program community because that is who we work has been adapted by NH with and how we get it done – by LAKES in New Hampshire engaging with communities who have a and is underway with ten vested interest in ensuring the long-term pilot groups participating health of our lakes. and many more queuing up Not unlike other major watershed to get involved. programs in the U.S. today, LakeSmart is New Hampshire is one built upon concepts of community-based of many places that figured social marketing. Whether it is through out a long time ago that coffee and conversation in kitchens and private citizens can and backyards overlooking the lake, or should play a pivotal role in sessions at NH LAKES’ annual Lakes the conservation of our Congress, highly motivated early adopters special places and shared self-identify in each lake community. natural resources, including These folks are provided with the training, our water supplies. With tools, and resources they need by NH our land ownership model LAKES to assess how lake-friendly their resulting in the majority of property is – what the potential is for their lakefront property – property to negatively impact water including the shoreland of quality. With their self-assessment scores, many water supply lakes and in many cases with follow-up on-site – being in private Figure 3. Properties with LakeSmart signs carry a visits by LakeSmart Evaluators from NH ownership, it simply makes cachet of social responsibility. LAKES or the local community, sense for New Hampshire participants can then make upgrades to to augment its environmental laws, organizations focused on drinking water become more lake friendly and improve municipal ordinances, and other public protection, including the Ground Water their score, ultimately scoring high policies and practices with a voluntary, Protection Council and the AWWA Research enough to become LakeSmart. With that non-regulatory (cooperative conservation) Foundation. He currently chairs the Source recognition comes certification and a sign model to ensure the long-term health of its Water Protection Committee of the Association (Figure 3) from the LakeSmart program. lakes. It also makes sense for source water of State Drinking Water Administrators. This recognition has its own social, and protection strategies to encompass that maybe even economic, value and is model. In this way, on previously Tom O’Brien has been designed to inspire others to participate. developed lands, we can reduce the the president of NH The social marketing piece here is inevitable impacts to water quality that LAKES since 2011. Prior based on the fact that the early adopters shoreland property development might to that he was the (you know, those people in your otherwise bring, and make it possible for executive director of the neighborhood who are always trying out water supply and other uses to continue to Network of Oregon new things) will pave the way, or un-pave coexist. Watershed Councils and it as the case may be. Then they can the executive director of model their properties in any number of the Watershed ways – again all voluntarily – with the Paul Susca supervises Agricultural Council in the New York City water hope and expectation that others will the Planning, Protection supply watersheds. This nonprofit executive follow. This is not just theory but proven & Assistance section of experience was preceded by 20 years of public in practice by both social psychologists the Drinking Water and service as a natural resource manager in and, more importantly, by countless Groundwater Bureau at Massachusetts. His professional passion is numbers of cooperating conservationists the New Hampshire helping local groups around the lakes of New over the last 80-90 years with the US Department of Hampshire improve their capacity, impact, and Department of Agriculture, County Soil Environmental Services. sustainability. c and Water Conservation Districts, and the He has served in Cooperative Extension Service, and leadership and advisory capacities with national

34 Fall 2019 / NALMS • LAKELINE Source Water Protection

Closing the Human-Nature Feedback Loop

V. Reilly Henson, Kelly M. Cobourn, Cayelan C. Carey, Kevin J. Boyle, Michael G. Sorice, Nicole K. Ward, and Kathleen C. Weathers

Understanding people’s responses to changing lakes

Introduction lake water quality, but there is still much research to better understand this response umans are entwined in reciprocal to learn about this feedback loop. A great by working to model the relationship – and often complex – relationships deal of research has focused on lakes’ between people and lakes. We are a team Hwith lakes. When a community, chemical, physical, and biological of social scientists, ecologists, and agency, or individual makes a land responses to people’s actions. Yet physical scientists, who collaborate by management decision, it can impact lake significantly less attention has been paid sharing our disciplinary knowledge about water quality by affecting drinking water to how people respond to changes in components of the human-lake supplies, ecosystem health, and recreation lakes, and how their responses can relationship, and work to link those opportunities. When negative impacts influence lake water quality in the future. components together to understand the become great enough that the public The way that lake ecology affects human complete feedback loop. begins to observe them, it can inspire decisionmaking represents a considerable individuals and communities to act to gap in our knowledge (Troy et al. 2015). The importance of protect the lakes they love and rely upon. This knowledge gap, which is understanding behavior We think of this relationship as a feedback captured by the brown and yellow arrows Understanding the feedback loop loop, in which people affect lakes, and in Figure 1, represents the ways in which between people and their environment is lakes in turn affect people (see Figure 1). people respond to changes in water critical to achieving environmental, social, The scientific community has made quality. Our team is currently conducting and economic goals over the long term great progress in understanding the (Matson et al. 2016). However, relationship between human decisions and decisionmaking and policies usually address only one part of the feedback loop (a single arrow in Figure 1), which can result in unintended, often negative consequences (Matson et al. 2016). For example, if a policy requiring erosion control on personal property does not improve water quality the way that people expect, people may reject future policies under the assumption that they are ineffective. The overarching goal of our project is to understand the full feedback loop between people and lakes, paying particular attention to the human behavioral response to changes in a lake ecosystem. This behavioral response occurs when people make decisions based on knowledge gained from past experiences, as well as predictions they make about the future. For instance, if residents observe cloudy lake water near shoreline areas with sparse vegetation Figure 1. An illustration of how our project conceptualizes the feedback loop between after storms, they may choose to add lakes and people. plants or other features to reduce erosion,

Fall 2019 / NALMS • LAKELINE 35 either individually or by working together the monetary value of nearby properties. may tend to be more accepting of low to implement a policy. By understanding This is a phenomenon that economists water quality, making them less likely to what kinds of changes in a lake inspire study by analyzing trends in property actively protect the lake. This dynamic behavioral response, and how those prices. Another way people respond to has been observed in some contexts, such behavioral responses in turn influence degradation is to organize efforts to as with amenities like open space, though lakes, our research supports lake sustain lake water quality, which social more research is needed on its occurrence management decisions that are more scientists study by examining the types of specifically around lakes. likely to achieve short and long-term action people take as a group to protect Though scientists most often study goals. lakes, as well as their motivations for how degradation in water quality affects acting. Studying responses from these people, improvements in lake water Types of behavioral responses different disciplinary perspectives leads to quality also affect human decisionmaking Changes in lake water quality can a richer, more complete understanding in potentially unexpected ways. For affect people through a variety of than any one scientific discipline can example, improvements in water quality mechanisms, and people respond to provide. make the lake and surrounding landscape changes in a variety of ways (see Figure more attractive to developers, who build 2). These mechanisms – such as changing Changes in property values housing, businesses, and other structures. property values and effects on an When water quality noticeably As more land in the watershed is individual’s personal connection with a decreases, it can make lakefront homes developed, the increase in impervious lake – may interact with one another, less desirable, and nearby businesses may surface and changes in land-use practices producing complex social and economic suffer if people do not visit the lake for (e.g., lawn fertilization) may create a new dynamics. Behavioral responses can take recreation (Nichols and Crompton 2018). source of nutrient loading that degrades place at an individual or group level, or Property values decline due to diminished water quality anew. Through our research, some combination of the two. An example lake aesthetics, recreation quality, and we aim to understand and anticipate more of group behavior might be the formation other negative conditions. By using data of the unexpected responses to changes in of a civic organization whose mission is on changes in property values alongside lake water quality, including how those to protect lakes; an example of individual water quality data, it is possible to unexpected responses may affect the full action would be if a resident reduced the measure how strongly a decrease in water feedback loop between people and lakes. amount of fertilizer applied to their yard quality negatively influences property in the hopes of reducing runoff into the prices. Conceptually, this measures how Changes in recreation lake. much property owners are willing to pay Just as property values tend to The most pronounced behavioral to avoid a decline in water quality. This decrease with poorer water quality, so do changes occur in response to lake water “willingness to pay” is often a helpful tourism and recreation. When people visit quality degradation, which is often due to figure when making policy and from out of town to fish, boat, or sightsee, eutrophication. That could mean, for management decisions, because it they often spend money at local example, that the water becomes cloudier, provides an economic justification for businesses, including restaurants, there are longer periods of hypoxia (low protecting lake water quality. recreational supply stores, and more. This oxygen) that lead to fish kills, or that algal More complicated behavioral boosts the economy of the community blooms become more frequent. dynamics can also occur when a lake surrounding the lake. When decreased Identifying the mechanisms by which exhibits a pronounced shift in water water quality causes these people to visit these changes affect people is a key step quality. For instance, as water quality less often (perhaps choosing to visit a in studying the relationship between declines, people living near the lake who different lake instead), the community people and lakes. One such mechanism is value water quality may decide to move loses this economic benefit, providing yet that decreased water quality can reduce away. The people who move in after them another economic incentive to protect lakes (Keeler et al. 2015). Additionally, if lower water quality reduces the number of people who visit the lake for recreation, it may contribute to a public perception that the lake is only an amenity for lakefront property owners. This will further reduce the amount of support for lake protection in the broader community, potentially reducing the degree to which land and lake managers adopt best practices Figure 2. Examples of mechanisms by which changes in water quality can lead to behavioral for water quality. responses.

36 Fall 2019 / NALMS • LAKELINE Citizen engagement through aligned with each other, or there may not University Press: Princeton, New lake associations be enough available scientific information, Jersey. Sometimes people react to the which can delay response further. To Nicholls, S. and J. Crompton. 2018. A observed change in water quality on an address this, our project focuses on lakes Comprehensive Review of the Evidence emotional, psychological, and even that have extensive, long-term data, of the Impact of Surface Water Quality spiritual level, which occurs when people meaning that a change in the lake could on Property Values. Sustainability form an attachment to lakes because of still be linked to a behavioral response, 10(2):500. the meaning the lake holds for them. For even many years later. This approach can Stedman, R.C. 2002. Toward a social instance, a person who grew up near a provide insights for other lakes, where psychology of place: Predicting lake may consider that lake to represent less information may be available, about behavior from place-based cognitions, who they are as a person, their family how proactive actions to protect lakes attitude, and identity. Environment and heritage, or their livelihood. When people unfold. Behavior 34(5):561-581. feel strongly connected to a lake in this Troy, T.J., M. Konar, V. Srinivasan, and S. way, it makes them more likely to take Conclusion Thompson. 2015. Moving action when their lake is threatened People’s behavioral responses to sociohydrology forward: a synthesis (Stedman 2002). These bonds that people changes in lakes can be complex, to say across studies. Hydrology and Earth form with lakes and their communities, the least. Yet understanding these System Sciences 19:3667–3679. along with reductions in property values responses is critical to revealing the full and diminished recreation opportunities, dynamic relationship between humans and can motivate homeowners and people lakes. The better we understand coupled V. Reilly Henson works who recreate on a lake to join in civic human-lake systems, the greater our as a project manager for action. Often, this action is in the form of ability to predict what management the research team. Her citizen-formed lake associations. actions will work best, and when. Our primary focus is on Our project uses data on water project demonstrates a way to incorporate communicating the quality, along with observations of lake multiple disciplines to better understand science, and helping to associations, to examine how changes in a human behavior, and this type of work is make information about lake coincide with levels of civic becoming more widespread in the the project – including engagement over the course of years or scientific community. As this work its data – accessible to even decades. Lake associations can progresses, we will better understand the researchers and public audiences alike. represent a variety of stakeholders, complex human-lake relationship, which missions, and activities, often serving to will directly inform improved lake Kelly M. Cobourn educate the public, advocate for policies, management. studies natural resource and even help to bring science into economics from a community land-use planning and lake Acknowledgements variety of angles, management. To understand what lake This work was supported by the including water quality associations do, as well as how and why National Science Foundation as part of the degradation, land use, they do it, our project tracks their efforts Dynamics of Coupled Natural and Human and invasive species over time using their newsletters, Systems (CNH) Program award number management. She leads websites, and mission statements. By 1517823. The authors extend special the development of this systematically searching for key themes thanks to our network of collaborators, project’s economic model of land use and and events, researchers compare changes including the Clean Lakes Alliance, the management, which draws connections in lake associations with changes in the Oneida Lake Association, and the Lake between environmental conditions and lakes themselves over a given time period. Sunapee Protective Association. To keep agricultural decisionmaking. up with the project, and to learn more, Challenges to studying please visit http://www.cnhlakes.frec.vt. Cayelan C. Carey behavioral responses edu/. studies nutrient An interesting challenge arises when pathways and microbial aligning ecological changes with human Selected References communities in lake responses. It can take a long time for Keeler, B.L., S.A. Wood, S. Polasky, C. ecosystems. Her main people to perceive the effects of a change Kling, C.T. Filstrup, and J.A. Downing. focus is on how humans in water quality, because changes are 2015. Recreational demand for clean affect freshwater often gradual. It can take even longer for water: Evidence from geotagged systems. In her role on people to formulate and enact a response photographs by visitors to lakes. this project, she uses to these changes. This requires them to Frontiers in Ecology and the software to model lake dynamics, including the work together at multiple levels (local, Environment 13(2):76–81. causes and effects of eutrophication. state, and even national) to agree upon Matson, P., W.C. Clark, and K. Andersson. and implement actions. Sometimes 2016. Pursuing Sustainability: A Guide different stakeholders’ interests are not to the Science and Practice. Princeton

Fall 2019 / NALMS • LAKELINE 37 Kevin J. Boyle’s research evaluates the best methods for economists to measure the value people place on environmental resources. He develops hedonic property value models for this project, which investigate the relationship between water quality and home prices.

Michael G. Sorice investigates how and why people engage in pro-environmental behaviors, and why humans tend to prioritize short-term benefits over long-term sustainability. As part of this project, he studies civic engagement in the form of lake associations.

Nicole K. Ward studies human-freshwater interactions. She is particularly interested in the intersection of decisionmaking, land use, and water quantity and quality. In this No carping about poor project, she uses a lake water data management ecosystem model to simulate water quality now that WISKI integrates outcomes of land use decisions. hydrology, water quality, Kathleen C. Weathers and ecological data. Holistically assess water quality conditions with studies the ways in point-in-time samples as well as biological surveys and counts. Study which living organisms flow-ecology relationships using advanced software and GIS tools to influence biogeochemical cycling, compare water quality datasets with hydrology and meterological data. especially across +1 916.723.1441 | [email protected] | www.KISTERS.net multiple landscapes and systems. She leads this project’s efforts to work closely with lake associations, and to communicate its results to related organizations. c WE’D LIKE TO HEAR FROM YOU!

Tell us what you think of LakeLine. We welcome your comments about specific articles and about the magazine in general. What would you like to see in LakeLine?

Send comments by letter or e-mail to editor Amy Smagula.

38 Fall 2019 / NALMS • LAKELINE Sarah Coney Student Corner Aquatic Invasive Species

rom pristine mountain top lakes to eradicate native populations in areas people simply dump their aquariums gently flowing brooks, North America where they are introduced (USDA 2019). into whatever waterbody is closest. Fis home to a multitude of beautiful But how have so many of these While many species will die, those lakes and rivers. Many people appreciate non-native and exotic species made it to that do manage to survive in this new waterbodies for their recreational uses North America? AIS have been introduced environment thrive. Goldfish Carassius( or for their picturesque views. But what through a multitude of vectors including auratus) are a prime example of cute happens when our love for our waters ballast water, the aquarium trade, transient pets wreaking North American native ends up irreparably harming them? One watercraft and other recreational gear. ecosystems. Goldfish and koi are in the of the biggest threats North American Unfortunately, more AIS are always being same genus as the invasive common waterbodies face is from aquatic invasive discovered. carp (Cyprinus carpio) and same family species (AIS). The Great Lakes are a hot spot for (Cyprinidae) as Silver and Bigheaded For the last three years I have been North American introductions due to the carp (Hypophthalmichthys molitrix and working as the assistant director of high volume of ships moving in and out of H. nobilis) and can be just as destructive the Catskill Regional Invasive Species those basins. Many larger ships use ballast when released. Carp are voracious Partnership’s (CRISP) Watershed Steward water to provide stability, taking in or herbivores or omnivores, disturbing Program (WSP) to help prevent the spread releasing water to adjust as the boat needs. benthic sediments as they forage and of AIS in NY waterways. We have a When these ships take in water they can physically altering ecosystems to which dedicated team of stewards who seek to also take in and transport plants and they are introduced. educate the public about the threats AIS animals (USDA 2019). Zebra mussels, Asian clams (Corbicula fluminea), pose, and to help them clean, drain, and native to the Black Sea in Eastern Europe, originally brought over as a food source treat to prevent the spread of AIS. I also were brought to the Great Lakes in the by Asian immigrants (USDA 2019), were work with the invasive Rusty Crayfish 1980s through ballast (Ecochlor, n.d.). quickly adopted by aquarists as excellent (Faxionus rusticus) as part of my thesis Another native to the Black Sea, the water filterers. However, they are studying American eel (Anguilla rostrata) Round Goby (Neogobius melanostomus) simultaneous hermaphrodites (having both and native pearly mussels. Preventing the was also brought into the Great Lakes male and female reproductive systems) spread of AIS and educating the public through ballast water and has since and reproduce rapidly. A single mature about their dangers has been a major part become an aggressive invasive species in clam can create and fertilize thousands of my life for the last four years and it is a that system. Luckily, the threat that ballast of eggs per day. The environmental and topic I love to talk about. poses to our waterbodies was recognized economic impacts of Asian clams are An invasive species is any non- and the International Convention for the astonishing: they out compete native native species that causes environmental Control and Management of Ships’ Ballast bivalves, smother the benthic habitat, and or economic damage or are harmful to Water and Sediments was established cost billions of dollars for control and human health. Invasive species often cost in 2004 by the International Maritime damage mitigation. Many states in the U.S millions of dollars to control or eliminate. Organization (IMO, n.d). All ships are have banned their sale but stores still sell Invasive species tend to reproduce now required to meet ship-specific ballast them under various names (golden clams, quickly and establish populations rapidly. water and sediment standards to reduce filtering clams, etc.) and online. AIS have no controlling herbivores or the risk of introductions (IMO, n.d). Animals are not the only threat predators in the native ecosystem which Posing just as much a threat, if not stemming from pet stores; invasive allows their populations to grow out greater, to North American waters is the plants are regularly found being sold in of control. These introduced species exotic pet trade. Many people delight pets stores or online. Perhaps the most will then compete with native species in brightly colored foreign flowers well-known plant introduced through within the same niche for resources, and unique exotic pets, however, what the aquarium trades is widely spread often outcompeting the native species. happens when we get bored of our Brazilian elodea (Egeria densa). Sold Invasive species can lead to declines in aquariums or they’re too expensive as a good oxygenator, it became popular biodiversity, alter habitats, and can even to maintain? Unfortunately, many in aquaria and was quickly spread

Fall 2019 / NALMS • LAKELINE 39 throughout North America. Brazilian large mats at the surface and shading out expensive than NaCl, is less corrosive to elodea grows fast and creates dense mats the competition. What makes Hydrilla metal. Using KCl in a saturated solution that negatively impact the ecosystem and so threatening is its ability to spread (KCl + water, crystals aren’t completely recreation (USDA 2019). It was further by fragmentation. Hydrilla is a fragile dissolved) to dunk gear or wipe down spread by motor boats, becoming tangled plant that breaks apart with the slightest surfaces is a great way to prevent the in props and boat trailers and hitchhiking disturbance, those fragments float along spread of AIS. to new waterbodies. the current before growing roots and Many states and providences have Recreational boats and gear are eventually sinking, creating a new bed programs dedicated to stopping the spread another major vector for the transport of hydrilla far down stream or on the of AIS. Becoming involved in your local of AIS. Boats offer all sorts of nooks opposite side of the lake. programs can make a difference and and crannies in which invasive species So, what can you do to prevent the preserve North American lakes and rivers can stow away. While some are obvious spread of AIS? Always remember to for years to come! (plants entangled in a prop or on your Clean, Drain, and Treat! trailer, zebra mussels attached to your References hull, etc.) others are far less noticeable. Clean Ecochlor. 2019. Ballast Water & Invasive Small bodied invertebrates are easy to Remove any visible debris (plants, Species. Retrieved from ecochlor: miss but can have huge impacts on North mud, etc.) and either wash or treat your https://ecochlor.com/ballast-water- American waters. Invasive bivalves start watercraft and gear. Washing any mud invasive-species/ as small larvae, called veliger larvae, or debris off your watercraft and gear Gray, C. 2014, December. Monoecious vs. and are nearly impossible to see without and leaving it out to dry in five full days Dioecious Hydrilla. Reflections. a microscope. They can be found on of sun helps to prevent any AIS from International Maritime Organization. watercraft hulls, in any pools of water, hitching a ride to (or from) your favorite n.d. International Convention for the or even in gear that can hold water and lake or river. Many lakes have boat Control and Management of Ships’ they can persist for about a week in a washing stations on or near their launches Ballast Water and Sediment. Retrieved wet environment. Spiny (Bythotrephes to help prevent the spread of AIS. from IMO.org. longimanus) and Fishhook (Cercopagis United States Department of Agriculture. pengoi) waterfleas, both introduced to the Drain 2019. Species Profiles. Retrieved from Great Lakes from Eurasia, have rapidly Always be sure to drain any standing invasivespeciesinfo.gov. spread throughout Northeastern North water in your boat. Be sure to drain your America due to their small size, which live and bait-wells, pull your bilge plug, makes them very hard to spot. They pose and drain your engine of any excess water. Sarah Coney is a a significant threat to native ecosystems Canoes and kayaks are just as capable master’s student at by changing zooplankton community of transporting AIS as motor boats and SUNY Oneonta in NY structure and competing with small native are a bigger threat than most realize. studying the American fish (USDA 2019). Waterfleas are hard Canoes and kayaks are easy to transport eel (Anguilla rostrata, to see on their own but tend to become and launch and can be brought to remote A.K.A best fish) and stuck on lines dragged through the water locations easily. Most kayaks have a dry pearly mussels. (i.e., fishing lines, mooring lines, etc.) compartment that never seems to stay dry She has also been and accumulate, forming translucent and offers an opportunity for small AIS to involved in the Catskill blobs. Fishing line is the main culprit for leap to new waterbodies inaccessible to Regional Invasive Species Partnership (CRISP) transport of waterfleas, which can persist motorboats. Watershed Steward Program (WSP) for the last up to two weeks in a wet environment. three years. c Both species can reproduce sexually or Treat by parthenogenesis (females can produce Five full days of sun is not always genetic clones) and do so rapidly. an option in the summer and when that Invasive plants have been spread happens treating with solutions is always efficiently by boats as well. Hydrilla an option. The four most commonly (Hydrilla verticillata) was first introduced used solutions are: bleach, vinegar, Please take a moment to ensure to Florida in the 1960s (possibly by sodium chloride (NaCl), and potassium NALMS has your correct email aquarists) and has since spread rapidly chloride (KCl). Bleach is effective in and mailing address. Log into the (Gray 2014). While many thought hydrilla killing AIS (except waterflea) but leaves member-only area of www.nalms.org would be confined to warmer waters, a nauseating smell and stains easily. to view the information we a monoecious (having both male and Vinegar is effective but takes about 15 female reproductive organs) biotype minutes to disinfect and has a noticeable currently have on file. was introduced in the 1980s and has odor. NaCl is effective in killing AIS and since spread rapidly north (Gray 2014). can be bought in large quantities cheaply, Send any corrections to Hydrilla grows aggressively and can however, it quickly corrodes metal. KCl is [email protected] easily out compete native species, creating highly effective, and while slightly more

40 Fall 2019 / NALMS • LAKELINE NALMS Membership Form

Mailing address I am ...    ______... a New Member ... a Renewing Member ... purchasing a gift Name Individual  College Student ...... $46 ______Company  Early Career* ...... $85

 Professional ...... $144 ______ Lake Leader ...... $75 Address *For individuals with less than 5 years in the field - the stepping stone to the Professional level! ______Organization  Affiliate** ...... $334 ______ Lake/Watershed Association*** ...... $165 City ST/Prov. Postal Code  Non-Profit*** *...... $334 ______ Corporate ...... $662 Country **For approved organizations only - call 608.233.2836 before joining as a new member *** For organizations with a yearly budget of under $50K ****For organizations with a yearly budget of over $50K ______Phone Do you want to help protect lakes? A donation will help ______ensure that NALMS’ mission to foster the management Email and protection of lakes continues. Eberhardt Memorial Student Fund ...... $ Billing address check if same as above G. Dennis Cooke Symposium Fund ...... $ ______Name Lake Givers Club (for general donations) ...... $

______Company Payment Information ______ Check or money order enclosed in the amount of US$______Address  Charge the amount of US$ ______to the following credit ______card:  VISA  MasterCard | Is this a business card?  Yes  No

______Card Number Exp. Date V-code* City ST/Prov. Postal Code ______PRINT Card Holder’s Name Country X______Card Holder’s Signature Phone

______*The 3-digit veriﬁcation code is located on the back of your card in the signature box. Email

Mail or fax application and payment in US funds to: NALMS, PO Box 5443, Madison, WI 53705

Rev. 1/19 LAKE and RESERVOIR MANAGEMENT

A scientific publication of NALMS published up to four times per year solicits articles of a scientific nature, including case studies.

If you have been thinking about publishing the results of a recent study, or you have been hanging on to an old manuscript that just needs a little more polishing, now is the time to get those articles into your journal. There is room for your article in the next volume. Don’t delay sending your draft article. Let the editorial staff work with you to get your article ready for publishing. You will have a great feeling of achievement, and you will be contributing to the science of managing our precious lakes and reservoirs.

Anyone who has made or plans to make presentations at any of the NALMS conferences, consider writing your talk and submitting it to the journal. It is much easier to do when it is fresh in your mind.

Send those articles or, if you have any questions at all, contact: Ken Wagner, Editor, Lake and Reservoir Management; [email protected].

If there is anyone who would like to read articles for scientific content, please contact Ken Wagner. The journal can use your help in helping the editorial staff in editing articles.

42 Fall 2019 / NALMS • LAKELINE LakeLine Needs YOU LakeLine is a great way to share studies, information, and stories.

Help us help you get information out! • What topics would you like to see included in upcoming issues of LakeLine magazine? • Do you have an article that you would like to submit to LakeLine, but the topic does not match one of the upcoming themes? No worry! We can find a way to include your article, build a themed issue around your article, or simply hold it until we get around to that theme. So, don’t hesitate in sharing your piece now! • Advertise in LakeLine. Simply contact Alyssa Schulte at [email protected] to learn more about advertising opportunities in LakeLine. • Have you recently read a new book about some aspect of lakes or lake management? If so, why not submit a book review for publication in LakeLine, to share the word? • NALMS Affiliates- LakeLine is a great place to share an update about the work that your affiliate is doing, or a successful event that worked well. We all learn from each other, so why not toot your own horn and inform other LakeLine readers about what you’re doing?

LakeLineTo submit an article, editorial, review or to suggest a topic, simply send an email to [email protected]. Monitoring Water Quality for Over 35 Years

With a proven history of reliable, accurate data logger performance, customers worldwide trust Onset’s HOBO product line to monitor conductivity, pH, dissolved oxygen, and much more. Check out all of our water quality products at: on.onsetcomp.com/waterloggers.

® Visit on.onsetcomp.com/waterloggers to learn all about it, or contact us today! HOBOby Onset [email protected] (866) 244-3197

Onset-Computer-Lakeline-9-19.indd 1 10/3/19 11:25 AM