Lake Fred Watershed Management Plan

Nick Snyder
Stockton University

ENVL 3241: Environmental Pollution and Regulation

Tait Chirenje
Watershed Management Plan 2

Abstract

Lake Fred, within Stockton Universities' campus, has slowly accumulated high nitrate
concentrations. A watershed management plan has now been proposed to counter this problem.
Nitrates are a pollutant that derive from natural sources, waste materials, and agricultural
practices. Nitrates are toxic when concentrated at high levels that could result in potential long
term illness and health hazards for humans and wildlife. An 80% annual reduction of inputs is
the set goal for this proposal that will stem from a more natural approach to maintaining and
preserving the lakes quality and integrity. Upon discovering and prioritizing the sources of the
issue, regulations will be implemented as soon as possible. Education for students and faculty
alike will be available and open for student/campus interaction in the overall improvement of
campus water quality. With lowered costs after these new regulations have been enforced,
issues such as: chemical runoff, wildlife interaction, waste accumulation, and human interference
should be reduced greatly.

Watershed Management Plan 3

Introduction

Lake Fred, the environmental focal point of Stockton University, over the years has
undergone a substantial increase in Nitrate concentrations. Nitrates are a common pollutant that
are typically devised amongst four categories. These categories include: natural sources, waste
materials, row crop agriculture, and irrigated agriculture. When viewing Stocktons lake it is
clear which categories the campus falls under.
Lake Fred suffers from growing Nitrate problems due to natural sources, waste materials,
and runoff of pesticides and fertilizers. Nitrates create a serious negative impact and can be very
toxic as the levels increase. Nitrates are linked to many diseases such as Methaemoglobinemia,
also known as blue baby syndrome, and cyanosis which could be highly toxic upon
consumption or exposure. Methemoglobin cannot carry molecular oxygen therefore if it is
produced at a higher rate than the body is able to convert back to hemoglobin, this can lead to
cyanosis, tissue hypoxemia and in severe cases, death (Manassaram 1). Nitrates also have high
eutrophication potential that could lead to negative algal blooms and resulting dead zones within
the lake.
Overall a plan has been proposed to hopefully reduce the level of Nitrate inputs within
Lake Fred by 80%. With constant monitoring, agricultural changes, and habitat alterations this
long term goal can be possible.

Watershed Management Plan 4

Sources of Nitrates

Nitrates (NO3) are generally a source of Nitrogen for plants. Nitrates are typically
recognized amongst four categories: natural sources, waste materials, row crop agriculture, and
irrigated agriculture. When assessing Lake Fred, addressing and prioritizing potential source
inputs is essential to an efficient plan. Campus maintenance and landscaping activity is a
definite source of nitrates. By pumping fertilizers and other pesticides into the surrounding
landscape we therefore increase a point source of pollution. Stockton usually deals with frequent
rainfall, even though this years precipitation rates have been lacking, which would induce runoff
of these fertilizers within Lake Fred. In addition to this ongoing problem, waste materials from
wildlife are also a major concern to nitrate concentrations. The geese population and activity
around the Universitys campus is highly prominent and is without question a key factor to the
nitrate dilemma. The more geese that remain active surrounding the lake and its stream flow
inputs, the more waste will overall accumulate and eventually seep into either the soil to
eventually move via runoff or directly runoff into the lake during heavy rain and winds. Human
activity and interference can also lead to a source of nitrates. We as humans routinely practice
such processes such as landscaping, maintenance, etc. without the proper awareness and
education that needs to be addressed with this ongoing problem.
When prioritizing such sources the major concern would be the runoff input of fertilizers
and chemicals. By addressing this as the primary source, a best management practice for this

Watershed Management Plan 5

could create a following solution to the lingering waste materials and then eventually be enforced
and counteracted with enhanced monitoring and education.

Solutions
Collectively a watershed management plan has been developed to counteract the
increasing Nitrate input levels with a goal rate of 80% reduction. The active use of landscaping
and fertilizers that are spread on the grounds surrounding Lake Fred are the primary source of
Nitrate concentrations. Therefore by implementing regulations regarding fertilizer use within a
certain distance of the lake to where the runoff cannot affect the lake in any way is essential. The
universitys landscaping division must abide by the proposed regulations and refrain from
fertilizer use within a calculated radius of the lake that is deemed safe. By giving a more natural
aspect on the surrounding the lake the University can maintain the environmental integrity it is
known for. In addition to this, modifying the local habitat to an extent that could limit geese
activity is a major factor. Geese are grazing birds that prefer short, green grass or other
herbaceous vegetation for feeding. Well-manicured lawns and newly seeded areas provide
excellent habitat for these grazing birds. Wherever possible, let grass or other vegetation grow to
its full height (10-14") around water bodies so that it is less attractive to geese (Cornell, 1).
Critical areas where regulations must be met are all surrounding inputs of the lake on campus as
well as the entire wetted perimeter and banks encompassing the watershed. Further actions

Watershed Management Plan 6

including the installation of scaring devices for geese (wooden dogs) and bright light installation
surrounding the perimeter to reduce late night activity.

Data from this will be collected weekly via water quality/soil monitoring practices and
assessed at the end of the first year after implementation. Landscaping and maintenance crews
must abide by all new regulations as well as all students regarding wildlife interaction. There
will be no wildlife interaction (feeding, sheltering, etc) or else consequences will result of such
activity. Signs will be placed surrounding the lake as a reminder that include the fine necessary
for punishment.

Implementation
All protocols and procedures must be reviewed and executed within a month deadline
upon proposal. Maintenance workers will be required to install and tend to the surrounding
lakes features and inputs. From there weekly monitoring and monthly results will be calculated
with a goal of about a 6-7% nitrate reduction; therefore achieving the annual 80% reduction goal.

Finances
Funding to carry out these practices should be minimal. With minimal costs such
practices can be implemented as soon as possible. The Universitys main expenses towards
construction, employees, and maintenance will not suffer simply by cutting expenses on
fertilizers and chemicals that would normally be used and putting them toward the habitat

Watershed Management Plan 7

modifications mentioned prior for the geese and other wildlife. By cutting back with a more
natural approach it gives us insight on whether or not a larger budget is necessary.

Education
Education practices will be demonstrated as regulations become enforced. Students will
receive emails regarding the changes as well as an open invitation to a scheduled information
meeting held on campus if any concerns. Environment clubs on campus will be capable of
volunteer efforts with regards to additional monitoring or maintenance. This includes potential
research project opportunities for ENVL students willing to collaborate.

Watershed Management Plan 1

Table of Contents

Abstract................Pg 2

Introduction..........Pg 3

Sources of Nitrates..Pg 4

Solutions................Pg 5

Implementation......Pg 6

Finances..................Pg 6

Education................Pg 7

References...........Pg 8

Watershed Management Plan 8

References

GeeseControlUsingBehaviorModification.(n.d.).RetrievedOctober13,2015.
Beatley,T.(1995).Planningandsustainability:Theelementsofanew(improved?)paradigm.
JournalofPlanningLiterature,9(4),383395.
Richard,A.,Diaz,J.,&Kaye,A.(n.d.).ReexaminingtheRisksofDrinkingWaterNitrateson
PublicHealth.RetrievedOctober13,2015.
Mayer, B., Boyer, E. W., Goodale, C., Jaworski, N. A., Van Breemen, N., Howarth, R. W., ... &
Paustian, K. (2002). Sources of nitrate in rivers draining sixteen watersheds in the northeastern
US: Isotopic constraints. Biogeochemistry, 57(1), 171-197.
Almasri, M. N., & Kaluarachchi, J. J. (2004). Assessment and management of long-term nitrate
pollution of ground water in agriculture-dominated watersheds. Journal of Hydrology, 295(1),
225-245.