Merriam-Webster Defines resilience as an ability to recover from or adjust easily to misfortune or change. Eminent University of Wisconsin-Madison Ecologist Dr. Steve Carpenter further adds that resilience is the ability for a system to withstand a “shock” without losing its basic functions, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=msiIV5NdLVs.
Resilience is a relatively easy concept to understand, but it can be difficult to measure in lakes without monitoring subtle changes over time. This stresses the importance of long-term monitoring and being on guard for new changes to water quality, aquatic plants, and fish. Volunteer networks and agencies across the country are making great strides in monitoring water quality by dropping a disk in the water and scooping up some water and sending it to a lab for analysis. In essence, taking the lake’s “blood” sample. Indeed, water quality samples can be very telling. But what is happening to the rest of the lake “body”? How is it changing in relation to its liquid diet of runoff or medication to treat invasive species? Unfortunately, until now, natural resource agencies, lake managers, and volunteers have not had the capabilities to objectively and efficiently assess these changes without time-intensive, coarse surveys of vegetation cover.
Your body’s immune system is the engine of resilience. When your immune system becomes compromised, you become vulnerable to a wide range of ailments that may not be a threat to someone with a healthy immune system. The same goes for lakes. In the glaciated region of the Upper Midwestern US and Canada, healthy lakes are those that have intact watersheds where the hydrologic cycle is in balance. Without going into great depth, keeping water where it falls (or at least slowing it down), goes a long way in keeping the hydrologic cycle in balance. Healthy glacial lakes also have clear water, a diverse assemblage of native aquatic plants, and balanced fish communities. When humans or the environment alter any one of these components, the lake must adjust in order to compensate for those alterations and remain in a healthy state. The ability of the lake to do so is this concept of resilience (Figure 1).
 |
| Figure 1. Conceptual diagram of a resilient system. The height of the slope and the deepness of the valley are the compensatory mechanisms that bring a lake back to some resilient baseline condition after a short-term “shock” like a flood or a temporary septic failure. Lakes with forested watersheds, clear water, native aquatic plants, and balanced fish communities are typically in this condition. |
Slowly, as more curb and gutter goes in, green lawns replace native grasses, personal swimming beaches replace marshes, fish are overharvested or overstocked, or invasive species are introduced, the lake slowly loses its ability to compensate (Figure 2). All of a sudden you hear “I’ve never seen that before” become more common when people describe a phenomenon on the lake that well, they’ve never seen before. You may start to observe more algae blooms, more attached algae on rocks and plants, plants growing where they’ve never grown before, invasive species taking hold and thriving. This is an example of the lake losing resilience and succumbing to the vagaries of the environment. Under these circumstances, the lake can’t compensate anymore and you never know what you will see from year to year. With no baseline, objective assessment of aquatic plant abundance and no monitoring of change in abundance and cover from year to year, it makes it even harder to know how much the lake has actually changed and what you need to try to get back to with implemented best management practices .
 |
| Figure 2. An example of the consequences of the cumulative impacts of environmental and human stressors on lake resilience. As lakes become more impacted by various watershed and in lake practices and invasive species, resilience is slowly worn away. The valley becomes more shallow and a new “domain” enters the picture. Lake conditions slosh around from one state to the next depending on the vagaries of weather and other disturbances. Not knowing to expect from one year to the next becomes the norm. |
A demonstration of the difference between a resilient lake and one that is losing resilience can be found in a paper published by Valley and Drake in Aquatic Botany in 2007 entitled “What does resilience of a clear-water state in lakes mean for the spatial heterogeneity of submersed macrophyte biovolume?” Valley and Drake found very consistent patterns of vegetation growth from one sampling period to the next over three years in a clear lake (Square Lake, Washington Co. MN USA; Figure 3). Each survey in Figure 3 took two days to survey and another week to make these plots. Not including time on the water, ciBioBase produces these same plots in an hour.
 |
| Figure 3. Submerged aquatic plant biovolume (% of water column inhabited by plants) as a function of depth in Square Lake, Washington Co., MN USA. Notice the consistency of the pattern of vegetation growth from one time period to the next (study took place for 3 years from 2002-2004; Valley and Drake 2007). Water clarity in Square Lake is high with diverse aquatic plants. |
In contrast, patterns of vegetation growth were quite variable in a moderately turbid lake with abundant Eurasian watermilfoil; West Auburn Lake, Carver Co. MN USA; Figure 4). For example, in summer 2003, a bloom of attached algae formed on Eurasian watermilfoil stems and effectively weighed down the stems and prevented them from reaching the surface. This bloom was unique to 2003 and was not observed at any other time during the study.
 |
| Figure 4. Plant growth as a function of depth in a moderately turbid Minnesota Lake with abundant Eurasian watermilfoil (West Auburn Lake, Carver Co. MN USA; Valley and Drake 2007). Plants grew shallower and more variable in this more disturbed lake. |
If stressors continue unabated, then the lake can “tip” into a new, highly resilient domain of poor health (Figure 5). The feedback mechanisms that used to keep the lake in a healthy state have now switched to new feedback mechanisms that are keeping it in an unhealthy state. Algae begets more algae, carp beget more carp, stunted bluegill beget more stunted bluegill, if invasive plants are lucky enough to grow, they beget more invasive plants. Getting the lake back to the original state is nearly impossible at this point. It’s like Sisyphus rolling the rock uphill only to have it roll right back down again! Although controversial, at some point, citizens, regulators, and lake managers need to start rethinking expectations and adapting management approaches in highly degraded systems. Rather than trying to restore a lake to a Pre-European settlement condition through expensive, risky, and Draconian measures, it may be more reasonable to ask: “How can we have good enough water quality to support naturally reproducing stocks of game fish?” “Can we manage invasive plants in a way that maintains fish habitat AND recreational opportunities?” After the wailing and gnashing of teeth subsides and some agreement is reached on objectives and management strategies, then it becomes essential to determine whether implemented management practices are having their desired effect. It doesn’t take two weeks and $10’s of thousands of dollars to do a vegetation survey. Volunteers can do it, lake consultants can do it, state agencies can do it and they’ll all do it the same objective way with ciBioBase and they can all work together!
 |
| Figure 5. Example of a lake that has flipped into a degraded regime regulated by new feedback mechanisms that keep it in the degraded state. |
The Upshot
Resilience is an easy concept to understand on a basic level, but hard to measure in lakes and changes slowly over time. This stresses the importance of long-term monitoring and being on guard for those things “you’ve never seen before.” Uploading data to ciBioBase every time you are on the water gives an objective and quantitative snapshot of the current conditions in your lake of interest. Be watchful for anomalies in monitored areas. Vegetation growth should follow a relatively predictable pattern from year to year and if it doesn’t, that may be the first indication that the lake is losing resilience and precautionary conservation measures should be taken. Conservation measures may include better onsite storm water infiltration (e.g., rain gardens, nearshore vegetation buffers), maintaining a modest amount of aquatic plant growth in the lake, maintaining a balanced fish community in terms of species, size, and abundance. These efforts will go a long way in protecting the long-term integrity of our beloved lakes!
Suggested Readings:
Carpenter, S.R., 2003. Regime shifts in lake ecosystems: pattern and variation. In: Excellence in Ecology, vol. 15, Ecology Institute Oldendorf/Luhe, Germany.
Scheffer, M., 1998. Ecology of Shallow Lakes. Chapman and Hall, London.
Valley, R.D. and M.T. Drake 2007. What does resilience of a clear-water state in lakes mean for the spatial heterogeneity of submersed macrophyte biovolume? Aquatic Botany 87: 307-319.