Protecting Big Pond

Ken Wagner, Ph.D., CLM

Water Resource Services, Inc.

kjwagner@charter.net

Background In 2014 the Big Pond Association hired Ken Wagner to

conduct a follow up to the Lake Diagnostic and feasibility

study conducted previously by the state of Massachusetts. The

goal was to identify any potential threats to the health of Big

Pond as well as initiate the steps for a action plan if an

invasive was found. This presentation was given at the BPA

Annual Meeting that year.

-Jarrod Orszulak

May 2016

Key Elements:

Set realistic goals

Involve all relevant parties

Apply sound science

Prevention before rehabilitation

Organize, prepare, anticipate

Focus and persevere

Adequately fund actions

Publicize and recognize

Monitor and follow up

Science – Economics – Social acceptability

Hang on and we’ll go for a ride!

2004 vs 2014 WQ Comparison

Water Quality Considerations

• Moderate fertility, apparently fairly stable, but data limited

• Main sources are developed edge land and upstream wetlands

• High bacteria concentrations from large wetlands during

storms

• Possibly some problem septic systems, gradually improving

• Relatively few heavily fertilized lawns or cleared landscapes,

but there are some and impacts are evident

• Internal recycling appears limited; total P in sediment is

moderate, but iron levels in deep water are high and tend to

inactivate P when moved into shallower water – but data are

limited

• Oxygen is low near the bottom in deeper water, but this is a

small portion of the pond area (<25%) or volume (<10%)

• Turbidity and suspended solids can be high, clarity lower than

it might be; combination of algae (due to P) and suspended

silts (wind and boating).

June 2014 Phytoplankton

• Similar amounts and types as in 2004.

• Dominated by diatom Tabellaria.

• Possible problem forms sometimes abundant late in summer

June 2014 Zooplankton

• Similar amounts and types as in 2004.

• Dominated by large cladocerans – a good thing.

• Summer shift toward copepods – very common, related

to predation by fish

Plants

Golden club as state listed species – will get NHESP

involved in virtually any lake management proposal,

and, by extension, Division of Fisheries and Wildlife

Plants Minimal in water >10 ft deep

Observed on 6/20/14:

Golden club

Phragmites (very little)

Rushes and sedges

Arrowhead and pickerelweed

White and yellow water lilies

Watershield

Burreed

Multiple species of pondweed

Waterweed

Water celery

Several species of bladderwort

No known submergent or floating

invasive species

Perception of fewer plants

now than 20+ years ago.

Some rocky and steep

areas which discourage

growth, but much suitable

area with minimal plant

growth

Natural color limits light,

turbidity can be high

Boat impacts possible but

no evidence of increased

turbidity from them

Fish Generally a warm water community; limited trout water due

to high temperature in upper layer, low oxygen in lower layer

Bass and pickerel as top carnivores, perch and sunfish as

common panfish, killifish around edge, probably 5+ other

species (catfish, suckers, chubs, maybe carp) – no recent

surveys, but one in progress on June 20, 2014!

Fish communities shift and

oscillate over time, 5 years

is a reasonable interval for

assessment

Management Issues More about protection that rehabilitation; easy to assume that

things will stay the same, but that is a bad assumption

Invasive species and accumulating phosphorus are biggest

threats

Lovell’s Pond

Woodridge Lake

Management Issues • Boat access remains a big issue in MA

• Documented as primary mode of species transport

• New law in MA prohibits transfer of species among lakes

• Limited access to Big Pond, main input point is

downstream – great but not perfect protection arrangement

• No washing facilities

• No control over where “resident” boats have been

• Birds as a secondary and less documented vector – some

clear cases, but control is even harder than for boats

Management Issues • Zebra mussels unlikely to survive in Big Pond – but not

impossible

• Several invasive species common to eastern part of state

could cause problems, but Big Pond is physically isolated,

probability low – but low is not equal to zero!

• Accumulated P in sediment is a very real threat; anything

that can be done to slow that accumulation is highly

desirable. It is highly probable that late summer

cyanoblooms are linked to such accumulations

• The few lawns that fertilize or clear vegetation to edge of

pond really stand out – this is not responsible lakeside

management

• Not necessary to wait for property sale to upgrade septic

systems

Nearshore Property Management • Land within 300 ft of the pond has a

disproportionately high impact on WQ

• Maintenance of buffer zone is critical

• Erosion control is essential

Management Planning

• Recommend 5-year plan and 20-year plan

as minimum timeframes for consideration

– even if no problems are imminent

• Vigilance is the price of freedom…from

costly rehabilitation - prevention of

problems is a never ending task

• Follow-up is critical to minimizing long-

term costs and protecting any investment;

this may mean more actions or just

monitoring

Monitoring Limited data for Big Pond is somewhat shocking – this is too

valuable a resource to not have periodic checks on condition

Routine program – water clarity, temperature-oxygen profiles,

pH, alkalinity, conductivity, turbidity and nutrient levels at

least twice a year (late spring and late summer). Get

phytoplankton and zooplankton at same time.

Plant assessment – need to look for invasive species; check all

access points, length of outlet channel, near inlets, and

anywhere birds or boats congregate. A lap around the lake in

shallow water is worthwhile every year or two.

Filling gaps – no data on iron-bound P in sediment, critical to

internal recycling. Worth testing.

Back to Science – Economics – Acceptability

• Science – covered extensively in previous

slides

• Economics – no such thing as too much

money in the bank; essential to save for

emergencies, expenses in excess of $100K

not unusual

• Acceptability – important to get lake

community involved, even when there is no

obvious problem. This is the biggest

challenge at Big Pond. Avoid complacency.

Working Toward Acceptability

• Most lake problems are people problems.

• We love our freedom, but limits apply when the lake pays

the price or enough other users are impacted.

• Discussing issues, even potential ones not yet reality for the

lake, is worthwhile; having a response plan before it is

needed will save time and money.

• Bear in mind that NHESP will be involved in almost any

management decision and needs to be convinced.

Questions and Comments