THIS IS AN ARCHIVE OF LAKE TAHOE NEWS, WHICH WAS OPERATIONAL FROM 2009-2018. IT IS FREELY AVAILABLE FOR RESEARCH. THE WEBSITE IS NO LONGER UPDATED WITH NEW ARTICLES.

Significant improvement to Lake Tahoe’s clarity confounds scientists


image_pdfimage_print

By Kathryn Reed

Another year of data about Lake Tahoe’s clarity provides more confusion for scientists.

“This last year has defied conventional wisdom in many ways,” Geoffrey Schladow, director of the UC Davis Tahoe Environmental Research Center, said in a statement. “In the past, very wet years have led to decreases in lake clarity, whereas we are now seeing the opposite. This only reinforces the fact that the underlying, driving forces are themselves starting to change.”

The “Tahoe: State of the Lake Report 2012” was released Aug. 9 by the Tahoe Environmental Research Center at UC Davis.

Summer clarity of 51.5 feet in 2011 was the second worst on record. Winter clarity of 84.9 feet was an improvement of 11.9 feet. Overall, the 2011 average lake clarity improved 4.5 feet from 2010.

Scientists speculate the winter improvement was from efforts to reduce fine sediment from reaching Lake Tahoe. However, they also stressed that monitoring is the only way to prove that statement.

A Secchi disc, which looks like a white dinner plate, has been used since 1968 to figure out how clear Lake Tahoe is. Researchers drop the disc overboard and use their naked eye to see how far down the disc goes.

For most of those years the clarity has been decreasing. Throughout these 44 years the reasons why keep changing. The latest thinking is fine sediment is the main culprit. That is why every project that is proposed in the basin must have an environmental component that would reduce the amount of sediment reaching the lake from that particular parcel.

That is why close to $2 billion has been pumped into what is called the environmental improvement program. The EIP was established after President Bill Clinton and Vice President Al Gore came to Tahoe for the first Lake Tahoe Environmental Summit. (The next one is Aug. 13, 10am at Edgewood Tahoe, Stateline.) Much of that money came through the Lake Tahoe Restoration Act. Reauthorization of it is not expected any time soon. Other money has come from the Southern Nevada Public Lands Management Act.

With the tap dry on both those sources, local jurisdictions and regulatory agencies are scratching their heads as to how future projects will be get paid. And with the Lahontan Regional Water Quality Control Board and Nevada Department of Environmental Protection Agency implementing the total maximum daily load protocols, the gauntlet has been laid down for the five counties, one city, U.S. Forest Service and two state transportation agencies.

Clarity readings since 2000

Lake Tahoe's clarity improved in 2011, but why remains unknown. Photo/LTN file

  • 2011: 68.9 feet
  • 2010: 64.4 feet
  • 2009: 68.1 feet
  • 2008: 69.6 feet
  • 2007: 70.1 feet
  • 2006: 67.7 feet
  • 2005: 72.4 feet
  • 2004: 73.6 feet
  • 2003: 71 feet
  • 2002: 78 feet
  • 2001: 73.6 feet
  • 2000: 67.3 feet                                    Source: UC Davis

Other data from the latest clarity report:

• Despite the cold winter and a cool July, the annual average surface water temperatures rose by 0.6 degrees.

• The length of time a summerlike stratification — where layers of water form with different temperatures — persists has increased by almost 20 days, a likely outcome of climate change. Researchers fear if this trend continues, oxygen replenishment to the bottom of the lake will become less frequent.

• A potential culprit to reduced summer clarity is a microscopic algae cell called Cyclotella. The tiny cells have grown exponentially in the past five years, scattering light and reducing clarity. Research shows that times of the highest concentrations of Cyclotella coincide with the lowest summer clarity levels.

• The 2007 Angora Fire, which burned 9 percent of the Upper Truckee River drainage, had almost no effect on lake water quality.

• An experiment using rubber mats on a half-acre site in the southeast portion of Lake Tahoe to control the spread of Asian clams appears to be effective.

 

image_pdfimage_print

About author

This article was written by admin

Comments

Comments (13)
  1. Dogula says - Posted: August 9, 2012

    No spring runoff this year.

  2. Biggerpicture says - Posted: August 9, 2012

    “Overall, the 2011 average lake clarity improved 4.5 feet from 2010.”

    Dog, this survey doesn’t factor in for this year yet. Survey numbers are from 2011 (although the report was issued in 2012).

  3. KnowBears says - Posted: August 9, 2012

    I can’t help wondering about the method of measurement — viewing a submerged disk with the naked eye. Whose naked eye? Has it been the same naked eye for years and then that naked eye had cataract surgery and suddenly the disk is viewable at a greater distance? Do they use a group of naked eyes and average out their individual findings?

    My naked eye can’t recognize my own spouse or offspring if they’re more than ten feet away. Taking it less literally, my corrected vision can’t reliably recognize my spouse or offspring from across a large room. Eyes change, even from day to day, with age, medications, allergies, amount of sleep, etc.

    Don’t misunderstand me. Increased clarity can only be a good thing. I just would have thought there’d be a more scientifically stable and reproducible method of measurement by now. How can I trust these numbers?

  4. earl zitts says - Posted: August 9, 2012

    Geoff, your getting better at mumbo jumbo. The second paragraph is mj at its best.
    And now I can’t sleep knowing the Cyclotella is about to take our precious clarity.
    What’s next? Someone will pull the plug at the lake’s bottom.

  5. Dave says - Posted: August 9, 2012

    I wonder if rather than 2011 being a confounding number, maybe 2010 was the number that doesn’t fit? If you look at 2000 through 2011, the clarity numbers are fairly consistent with the exception of 2002 and 2010. Just sayin’.

  6. nategoddess says - Posted: August 9, 2012

    I am hopeful with the release of this report that environmental thresholds are improving. But keep in mind that the recent TRPA report showed that the shorezone is still of utmost concern, and the issues in that area are not measured with a secchi disk.

  7. Tobaccodeath says - Posted: August 9, 2012

    Amazing! Yet the water near Timber Cove Lodge was so murky and green today that I could barely see 3 INCHES deep. Worse, there were miniature toxic waste dumps scattered all over the beach. In fact, I could not even take ONE step along that beach without stepping on a cigarette butt, and couldn’t take a deep breath without inhaling the stench of toxic tobacco smoke. Where on earth is “Keep Tahoe BLUE”???? Why isn’t the $1,000.00 LITTER law being enforced? Cigarette butts are TOXIC WASTE containing cadmium, acetone, arsenic, cyanide, formaldehyde, Drano, ammonium hydroxide, polonium 210, and nicotine among the 4,000 to 8,000 chemicals! These miniature toxic waste dumps are not only destroying our air quality, but are destroying our drinking water! And no one in Tahoe seems to be doing ANYTHING about it!

  8. Bob says - Posted: August 10, 2012

    Maybe now the DOT could add a little more paint to the road so we don’t have to follow the road striper around every month. What a joke.

  9. Cheva Heck says - Posted: August 10, 2012

    The Forest Service picked up the gauntlet on water quality before it was even dropped. We have not waited for the establishment of the TMDL for Lake Tahoe to implement stream channel restorations,install BMPs at our campgrounds and resorts and design and build our roads and trails to minimize erosion and run-off. A quick read of the research reveals that while the Forest Service manages 75 percent of the land in the Lake Tahoe Basin, the overwhelming majority of the water quality concerns are generated by the urban areas. That’s why we also work with local governments to implement erosion control projects in communities.

  10. KnowBears says - Posted: August 10, 2012

    Tobaccodeath, we pick up cigarette butts everywhere we go. We aren’t smokers, but one of us is a reformed smoker, and neither of us can figure out why smokers don’t think of butts as litter.

    Some smokers will take the trouble to pick up after themselves, yet leave the butts. It’s disgusting, and it’s a back-breaking and/or knee-killing job for us old folks to pick them up (yet I wouldn’t ask children to pick up these toxic items for us!)

    We’ll have to tape a cheap strainer to the end of a pole to sift that stuff out of the sand, along with pop tops, juice box straws and disposable floss picks. Blech!

    What are people thinking?? Nobody wants to see it, step on it, smell it or touch it. It’s not that hard to stick a plastic bag in your gear to carry your litter to the nearest can.

    Don’t even get me started on doggie doo, fishing line and fish hooks!

  11. earl zitts says - Posted: August 10, 2012

    Back in my service days we were told to scatter the remaining tabacco into the wind and eat the filter.

  12. KnowBears says - Posted: August 10, 2012

    Lovely, Earl. It makes sense in a war zone, of course, but think of all the toxins that left lying around. Ugh!

  13. nature bats last says - Posted: August 14, 2012

    Any and I mean any measurable improvement in Lake Tahoe clarity should be applauded! Keep pushing the bar up until we are back to 100ft of clarity!