Sustaining Lakes in a Changing Environment (SLICE) Sentinel Lakes Program Ray Valley and Don...

transcript

Sustaining Lakes in a Changing Environment (SLICE)

Sentinel Lakes Program

Ray Valley and Don Pereira

Talk Outline The Why - History, motivations, and

aims of program

The What - Program design and sentinel lake selection

The How - Data collection activities

and partnerships

The So What - Lessons learned

aims of program

and partnerships

Why Focus on Lakes?1. Minnesota is known for her

lakes2. Lakes don’t flush3. Focal integrators of time and

Why – Glacier-like changes to landscape and climate

Shoreline and nearshore transformations

Impervious surfaces Hydrological transformations Human accelerators of species

spread Climate change

Scheffer and Carpenter 2003

System “state”

Consequences on Resilience

• Cumulative impacts of stressors

• Stressors to watersheds• Ditching, draining, channeling,

• Impervious surface

• Withdrawing & damming

• Alterations to lakes• Overharvest/Overstocking

• Removal of structure

• Disturbance from watercraft

• Time Lags

• Hysteresis – “can’t go back”• Positive feedbacks

Reality Bites!

In a lot of systems there’s no “going back.” Our expectations and

management approach for these systems should be

different for systems largely “intact”

Enter SLICE – informing expectations and appropriate mgt responses

We ask:1. In highly altered systems, how can we

realistically improve water quality and provide a self-sustaining recreational fishery?

2. In high integrity systems, what watershed and in-lake factors are contributing to their resilience, and how can we keep those resilience mechanisms intact?

3. Early Detection and Rapid Response indicators What indicators tell us “all is not well” and indicate whether our responses are making a difference?

Program aims to: Timely detect change to

habitat conditions and species population communities

Understand and project what is/will come into our lakes (watershed modeling)

Understand and project the ultimate fate of external and internal loads (limnological modeling)

Facilitate structured decision-making and adaptive management

Sustaining Lakes in a Changing Environment (SLICE)

aims of program

and partnerships

Phase 1 (Pilot; 2008-2011): Pilot phase Establish

network of sentinel lakes

Partnership and infrastructure building

Independent research projects to assess specific questions

Indicator ID

Phase 2 (2012-2016) Using lessons

learned in Pilot to guide operational program

Eating the elephant one bite at a time!

chrisnierhaus.com

Adaptive Management Process

Assess problem

Evaluate

Adjust

Implement

Design

Monitor

Phase 1: Oct – Jan 2006/2007

May-Jun 2007

Apr. 2008

2008-2011

Phase 2 2013

Phase 1 Op plan

2011-12

Oversight

DNR Fisheries1

Project Coordination2

Ray Valley

Implementation

DNR Fisheries Implementation

Recommendation of direction Informatio

n base

Analysis and Evaluation

Analysis Teams

Syntheses of trends

Technical Advisory Team

Eco and Waters Implementation

PCA Implementation

Local Partners

Citizen Volunteers

Public Information and Outreach

MDH Implementation

DNR Area Staff

Local trends

Local Partners

Local trends

PCA Water Monitoring Unit

Local trends

Ancillary Investigations

Strategic Advisory Team

Planning and Decision Framework

Experimental Design

Three R’s of Statistical Study Design• Realism

• Randomization• Representation

Population Sample

Inference

Questions for us here to consider: At what spatial scale do we want to

draw inference? How much of the state do we want

to cover or how “representative” do we want to be?

How quickly do we want to detect change and “check in on status?”

The answers to these questions will guide the appropriate statistical design

Objective of SLICE:

Annual inference of status and trends in lake indicators at the

Landscape Scale

Sentinel Lake Selection

1. Landtype x 4

Sentinel Lake Selection Stratified Approach

2. Mixing x 2

3. P-Concentration x 3

Other considerations with final candidate pool

PCA “reference” lake Other historical datasets

• Paleolimnology• Rich lake survey history

Unique partnership opportunities• Active local water monitoring

programs

The Sentinel Lakes

SLICE is more than Sentinel Lakes – “Split-

Panel” Design

Panel 1: Sentinel Lakes (2008 - )

= The network of sentinel lakes

• Stratified sampling design

• Figurative Approach: “6-in wide, 1 mile deep”

• Monitoring system-wide changes at a fine temporal resolution in a small number of systems spread across the state

• Synchronous trends - are things behaving similarly across large scales?

• Cause-effect inference

• Forecast modeling w/ cont. verification

Panel 2: “Random” surveys (2013 - )

• Approach: “1 Mile-wide 6” deep”

• Focus is on maximizing lakes sampled, minimal time spent at each one.

• Combination with Sentinel panel is powerful for robust inference of status across time and space

• Will focus on utilizing datasets from other ongoing monitoring programs

= Group of Lakes

Sentinel Lake Characteristics (ranges)

Min MaxWatershed Size (acres) 278 595,864Lake Size (acres) 91 5,047Lake Max Depth (ft) 11 208Avg Total P (ppb) 6 (O) 278 (HE)Avg Secchi (ft) 2 19GS Length 2009 (d > 5C) 185 236Avg. Epi Summer Temp (C) 18.4 22.1Alkalinity (mg/L CaCO3) 13 317# on 303d impairment list 6

Sentinel Lake watershed sizes are skewed

Median = 31 km2

Median = 9

Are these watersheds representative of other Minnesota lake watersheds??

Median = 12 km2

Median = 12km2

Median = 10

Sentinel Lake watershed sizes are representative!

Median = 31 km2

Median = 9

aims of program

and partnerships

Question:What data do we need

and who’s going to collect it?

Started with a conceptual model of

system behavior

Right partners for the right job1. PCA, DNR, SNF, Citizen Volunteers, local

units of govt, researchers efficiently deployed

2. Research staff evaluating:• Indicator “vetting” – signal:noise• Appropriate lake and watershed models• Reconstructing past conditions• Efficient sampling methodology

3. Reporting and data management structures in place.

4. Leveraging multiple funding sources

“If you build it, they will come” A platform for interdisciplinary study of

lakes Independent “off-shoot” projects focused

on:• Cold-water fish and habitat• Historical reconstructions of water quality and

zooplankton• Zooplankton patterns• Groundwater-surface water interactions

“Free” Analysis off of our “Free” data Projects, investigators, lakes involved, and

contact info is being tracked on SLICE web page

aims of program

and partnerships

Lessons Learned – Successes Eating an elephant one

bite at a time Right partners doing

the right job We built it and now

they are coming Structured-decision

making and adaptive learning process

Lessons Learned – Mulligans

Take logistics as seriously as strategy

Designating a project/program “Coordinator” is a no-brainer and something the state does

The logistics of who they are coordinating is another matter

entirely that rarely receives sufficient attention

Span of Control Issues: Herding Cats

Getting dozens of staff to be all doing the same thing is not easy!

Other Admin Issues to consider

Data QA/QC Data management and dissemination Appropriate staffing for the

workloads Communication plan

Departing thoughts… Stressors are slowly wearing away the resilience of

our water and fisheries resources Greater urgency with lakes – they are our legacy

and they don’t flush. Most MN lake watersheds are small – good from a

management standpoint. The interdisciplinary partnerships are the backbone

of SLICE Advice for sentinel watershed planning – give

logistic operations of carrying out a program its due during the planning process.

Funding and Partners

Sustaining Lakes in a Changing Environment (SLICE) Sentinel Lakes Program Ray Valley and Don...

Documents