As the summer of 2011 neared its end, a score of dedicated Lake Wentworth Association shore representatives fanned out along the camp roads distributing notices of an upcoming survey that would invite property owners around Lake Wentworth and Crescent Lake to share information about their homes – all this in the interest of supporting the development of a management plan for the watershed that surrounds both lakes.

In the weeks that followed the notification, those same shore reps revisited their neighbors, this time accompanied by environmental consultants gathering data about the location and age of residential septic systems. With the owner’s permission, the consultants also evaluated each property for signs of erosion and other damaging effects from runoff into the nearby lake or stream.

Threats to the water quality of the two lakes had been previously identified in a diagnostic study undertaken by NH Department of Environmental Services (DES) in 1999, and the study had recommended that a sanitary survey be conducted in order to better understand the role that septic systems may have in determining the water quality of the lakes.

That understanding is important because a failing septic system can be detrimental to human health, aquatic life, and water resources. Septic system effluent typically stores a thousand times the concentration of phosphorus typically found in lake waters, which means that even a small amount of effluent can have a major impact on nearby waters.

In addition, an outdated or improperly maintained septic system can result in the delivery of disease-causing bacteria and nutrients to nearby water bodies, causing gastro-intestinal illness in swimmers or severe ecosystem dysfunction for fish and wildlife. Untreated septic waste can also contain chemicals and hormones used in pharmaceutical and personal care products, which can have severe impacts on aquatic life.

Now, a dozen years after the diagnostic study, the Lake Wentworth Foundation has partnered with the Town of Wolfeboro, DES, and the University of New Hampshire to develop a management plan for the entire Lake Wentworth/Crescent Lake watershed. When completed sometime in the fall of this year, the plan will have identified current and potential threats to the surface waters that feed and make up the two lakes. The hope is that, in subsequent years, funding will be found to begin chipping away at the sources of the nutrients that are slowly undermining the health of the lakes and their tributaries.

Last year’s septic and stormwater runoff surveys were designed to collect baseline information about the state of septic systems within 250 feet of  the lakes and their tributaries. Those survey results can then be used to estimate phosphorus input to the lakes from developed areas in the watershed.

It is estimated that a total of about 2050 pounds of phosphorus enters Wentworth each year from all sources, including erosion, fertilizer use, and atmospheric deposition. About 1091 pounds enters Crescent Lake from all sources.

Approximately 174 pounds of phosphorus leaches into Lake Wentworth each year from the septic systems of shoreline properties. In Crescent Lake, the figure is about 28.6 pounds.

That means that fully 8% of the phosphorous entering Lake Wentworth leaches from septic systems.

Likewise, at least 3% of the phosphorous entering Crescent Lake is from surrounding septic systems. (The lower load at Crescent is a result of the public sewer system along some shores and the overall smaller number of homes around the lake. However, Lake Wentworth contributes another 6% of the phosphorus in Crescent, so that 9% of Crescent’s phosphorus comes from septic systems.)

For the two lakes taken together, 6% of load is from septic systems.

Significantly, estimates from lake modeling indicate that upgrades and regular maintenance of all septic systems in the watershed would reduce the phosphorus load from septic systems by 29% in Crescent Lake and 32% in Lake Wentworth. Those reduction estimates are equivalent to an overall reduction of 3% of the direct input to Crescent Lake (1% of the overall input if input from Lake Wentworth is taken into account) and a 3% phosphorus reduction to Lake Wentworth.

These values represent a small but potentially significant portion of the reductions needed to bring phosphorus levels in Lake Wentworth down by a targeted amount of 10%, which would in turn reduce phosphorus levels in  Crescent Lake enough to bring it back into “High Quality Water” status, according to the DES water quality standards.

General septic survey data

In the course of conducting the septic system survey, representatives from the watershed plan’s consulting firm, Forrest Bell Environmental, identified 625 properties located within 250 feet of the lakes or their tributaries. Of  that number, 552 properties were found to be eligible for surveying. In the 73 other cases, properties were vacant, there was no building on the property, or the landowner refused to participate.

Of the eligible 552 properties, 221 septic surveys were completed in-person. As a follow-up, 39 septic surveys were sent by mail and 12 surveys were sent by volunteers via e-mail. For those surveys that were either left at the door, mailed, or sent by e-mail to the landowner, 63 responded by mail and 18 responded online. A total of 296 septic surveys (54%) were completed for this project.

Most lake residents (75.2%) perceived the water quality of Lake Wentworth to be high. Only a small population of residents (2.7%) viewed the quality of lake water to be relatively poor. Eighty-three percent of residents surveyed used septic as their primary wastewater system; 8% were on town sewer and 6% used outhouses, primarily on the islands.

The age of septic systems in the shorezone was spread across the different age classes of the survey, with as many new systems (21%, 1-10 years old) as old (21%, greater than 25 years old). More than half of the surveyed houses were built prior to 1986 (greater than 25 years old), and 11% of properties were new developments within the last 10 years. In many instances, the home had been recently rebuilt or modified to upgrade an existing dwelling, at which time a new septic system was installed.

The annual usage of these lake properties is fairly equal between seasonal (30%), more than one season (37%), and year round (32%). Average occupancy was primarily couples and individuals (38%), small families (2-4 people, 39%), or seasonal multi-families or public facilities (4-6 and more than 6 people, 23%).

Most septic systems are located more than 50 feet away from a tributary or shoreline (83%), but 6% are within 20-50 feet. These properties tend to be older homes that have been grandfathered in regards to compliance with new septic system rules.

Approximately 35% of homeowners reported that they have their septic systems pumped out every 3 to 5 years; 38% said they have their systems pumped every 1-2 years; 2% indicated that they have their systems pumped out every 10 years or more; and 1% reported never having had their systems pumped.

A majority of homeowners use washing machines and dishwashers, while a smaller percentage use garbage disposals or water softeners. An encouraging 53% of surveyed residents claimed that they always check for no-phosphate labels on detergent products.

Survey findings for the islands

Since many volunteers participating in or assisting with the survey expressed concern about the condition of island sites, septic survey data was extracted specifically for the islands and is presented in  the table below.

Perception of lake water quality and willingness to improve properties rated very high in comparison with the entire watershed. Since all the surveyed island properties had outhouses and/or cesspools, no data was collected for age of system, pump-out frequency, and year of last pump-out. Most of the homes were older (greater than 25 years) and used only seasonally with less than 4 people annually. Due to the small size of the islands, outhouses were located more closely to shore. Awareness of the importance of using non-phosphate products was very high.

Recommendations

With the survey data in hand, the watershed consultants offered a number of recommendations for minimizing the effects of septic system leaching on water quality in the lakes and their tributaries.

For the Lake Wentworth Foundation:

ñ  Prioritize outreach activities to target homes using older systems (39%), landowners within 50 feet of the shorefront (6%), and landowners who rarely, if ever, pump their systems (3%)

ñ  Apply for federal/state grants and other funding sources to help fix potential septic system problems identified in the survey

For individual homeowners:

ñ  Pump septic tanks regularly (every 2 to 3 years for year round residences, 4-5 years for seasonal) and upgrade marginal systems

ñ  Reduce garbage disposal use, which can contribute excess nutrients to water treatment plants, by maintaining a backyard compost heap or an indoor vermicompost for kitchen food scraps

Stormwater survey methodology

Stormwater runoff is water that does not soak into the soil during a rain event but instead flows over the surface of the ground. Stormwater runoff picks up road salts, oil and grease, toxic chemicals, pesticides, bacteria from pet waste, and heavy metals from vehicles before discharging to the nearest waterbody. Additionally, runoff from warm, paved surfaces is a major source of thermal pollution that inhibits cold water organisms and degrades habitat.

The 1999 Lake Wentworth diagnostic study identified areas in the watershed where stormwater runoff, logging, sand pit activities, and beach erosion were a concern for water quality. Many of these sites are still a concern today, and there are many more sites that have not yet been documented.

The 2011 stormwater survey was conducted in conjunction with the septic survey to document sources of pollution on residential sites within the 250 foot shorezone. The survey documented sources of pollution including: roadside runoff into tributaries, direct runoff to the lakes, runoff from development, conversion of seasonal to year-round residences, use of fertilizers, erosion from poorly buffered properties and artificially created beaches, and runoff from parking lots adjacent to tributaries and shorelines. If no stormwater problems were identified on a property, no stormwater field survey sheet was not filled out for the site.

If a stormwater related problem was identified, the survey documented the type of land use activity, a description of the stormwater problem(s), size of exposed or eroded area, recommendations, impact of property to lake/stream water quality, and cost of materials for possible recommendation implementation. Sites with major erosion problems were combined into a common spreadsheet and forwarded to a second watershed plan consultant, Comprehensive Engineering Inc (CEI), for a follow-up visit as part of the larger watershed assessment.

The consultants note in their report that the purpose of the stormwater survey was not to point fingers at landowners with problem spots, nor was it to seek enforcement action against landowners not in compliance with ordinances. Instead, they expressed the hope that the Lake Wentworth Foundation and the Town of Wolfeboro can work with landowners to make improvements to help protect the water quality of Lake Wentworth and Crescent Lake.

Stormwater survey results

The survey team completed stormwater surveys for 481 parcels within the shorezone of the Lake Wentworth/Crescent Lake watershed. The survey team identified 106 sites in the watershed that are currently affecting or have the potential to negatively affect water quality. Only 71 properties were not surveyed for stormwater because the landowner refused or surveyors were unable to locate or access the property All parcels within the shorezone were assessed for stormwater impact, but generally parcels without septic systems did not have noticeable human-generated impacts.

Of the 106 surveys that were filled out because a problem was identified, 49 were completed with the landowner present. The total size of eroded area surveyed was approximately 77,315 sq ft. There were 13 artificially created beaches documented with stormwater issues. This is only a fraction of the total number of artificial beaches that the survey staff identified over the course of the survey, indicating that artificial beach enhancement is a lake-wide issue that requires more attention and education to reduce these areas and mitigate related stormwater issues.

Eighty-eight percent of properties were assessed for pollution resulting from stormwater runoff. The most problematic stormwater problem areas were from residential (37 surveys), beach access (42 surveys), and driveway (13 surveys) land use types.

Properties were fairly evenly split between having (44%) and not having (56%) a grassed lawn area within 100 feet of the water. Of those properties with a lawn, 80% claimed to use no fertilizer, and 19% claimed to use a low or no-phosphate fertilizer on some portion of their lawn within 100 feet of the water. (In a few instances when a landowner reported not using fertilizer, however, visitors subsequently saw the product on the property. The consultants reported that these cases illustrate that elimination of fertilizer use or the use of non-phosphate fertilizers on lawns near the water is an ongoing educational process.)

As illustrated in the table below, each site was rated for its potential impact to the lakes (or streams). Impact was based on slope, soil type, amount of soil eroding, proximity to water or buffer, and buffer size. “Low” impact sites are those with limited soil transport off-site. At “medium” impact sites, sediment is transported off-site, but the erosion doesn’t reach a high magnitude. “High” impact sites are large sites with significant erosion  that flows directly into a stream or the lake.

This sampling draws a fairly accurate picture of land use types in the watershed that are affecting the water quality of Lake Wentworth and Crescent Lake.

A majority of sites (75%) were determined to have a low impact rating. This is good news for landowners because the efforts needed to improve these problems will be minimal. However, the total number of low impact sites signals a concern for “death by a thousand cuts,” which is a common problem on developed lake shores. Every single property is having a small impact which adds up to a large impact.

Approximately 72% of surveyed landowners indicated that they were very willing to make improvements to their property. Individuals expressing a moderate willingness (14%) were concerned with the cost of making improvements.

The cost of labor and materials to fix each site was rated as follows:

ñ  “Low” cost sites were estimated to cost less than $500

ñ  An estimate of $500 to $2,500 was rated “medium”

ñ  If the estimated cost to fix a site exceeded $2,500, a “high” rating was assigned.

According to the consultants’ report, the majority of documented sites can be fixed easily with low-cost rating materials, including native vegetation, mulch or stone. Only two sites (2%) fell within the high cost category, which means that they,  along with a few of the medium cost sites, will likely need engineering to undertake mitigation.

In all, 15 high/medium sites were identified for follow-up assistance by engineers.

The most commonly observed problems were related to surface erosion, bare soil, and lack of shoreline vegetation. Surface erosion, which is exacerbated by bare soil and lack of shoreline vegetation, can originate from a number of places, including unpaved roads and road shoulders, ATV trails and unstable lake or stream banks. Lack of shoreline vegetation (that is, strips of vegetated land left in a “natural” state) can destabilize soil and increase pollutant loading to a lake or stream. Since phosphorous is often attached to soil particles, erosion serves as a fertilizer for lakes and can cause algal blooms.

The remainder of observed polluted runoff problems included artificially created beaches, roof runoff, ditch erosion, unstable access sites, and undersized culverts.

Of the 37 sites associated with residential areas, 34 were low impact, 2 were medium impact, and 1 was high impact. Residential areas were associated with 35% of the identified sources of polluted runoff. Most of these sites can be corrected with easy, low cost fixes.

Of the 42 sites associated with beach access sites, 28 were low impact, 11 were medium impact, and 3 were high impact. Beach access sites were associated with 39% of the identified sources of polluted runoff. Most of these sites can be corrected with easy, low cost fixes.

Of the remaining 27 sites, 13 were driveways, 6 were commercial sites, 5 were boat access sites, and 3 were roads. Commercial sites and roads accounted for 7 of the 8 high impact sites.

Roads are one of the biggest sources of pollution to New Hampshire lakes. Regular maintenance by road associations and town and state road departments is critical.

Stormwater mitigation recommendations

The watershed consultants offered a number of recommendations to landowners for minimizing the effects of stormwater runoff on water quality in the lakes and their tributaries. These include:

ñ  Avoid raking natural mulch (pine needles/leaves) from the shoreline, steep slopes, or paths and let lawn revert back to native plants. Roots help hold the soil in place and prevent erosion.

ñ  Avoid exposing bare soil. Seed and mulch bare areas.

ñ  Re-establish shoreline buffers of native vegetation.

ñ  Know the rules before starting any cutting, beach enhancement or soil disturbance projects.

The town was also encouraged to promote road crews, boards, commissions, and other decision-makers.

In case you didn’t get your set of these helpful brochures, or if you’d like additional copies, you can now download them for viewing and printing.

“Landscaping by the Water” provides advice on the selection, planting, and care of trees, shrubs, and ground covers — most of them native to New Hampshire — that fit settings along a lake shore or stream bank. Not only do these plantings enhance the beauty of a waterside property, but they work well to keep soil in place, helping prevent stormwater runoff that can carry large amounts of phosphorus into the water. Phosphorus acts as a fertilizer for green plants — good for suburban lawns but a source of weed and algae growth when it migrates into a water body.

As an added advantage, use of native plants reduces the amount of care that landscaping requires, since the trees and shrubs naturally thrive in our climate.

A second brochure, “Preventing Non-Point Source Pollution,” provides guidance on avoiding actions that can lead to the contamination of surface waters from residential properties. Non-point source pollution is the type that does not have an easily identifiable source and can arise from broad land areas such as shoreline residential neighborhoods. It can include runoff from roads  (including  poorly maintained gravel roads), erosion of residential yards caused by rain and melting snow, and runoff from farms and lawns.

Pollutants from these sources include: phosphorous-laden sediment, animal wastes and associated bacteria, pesticides, fertilizers, toxic substances, road salt, and fluids from automobiles.

The last brochure, “Septic Systems: How Do They Work? How Do You Maintain Them?” explains the components and the workings of septic systems and provides tips on extending their effective lifetimes. As the brochure explains, poorly maintained or failing septic systems can leach their contents, including pathogens and chemicals, into the soil and underlying groundwater, from where those pollutants can make their way into nearby surface water such as lakes and streams. It is estimated that 5 percent to 10 percent of the phosphorus found in our waters are the result of leaching from nearby septic systems.

Funding for all three brochures was provided in part by a Watershed Assistance Grant from the NH Department of Environmental Services with Clean Water Act Section 319 funds from the US Environmental Protection Agency. The Lake Sunapee Protective Association shared materials used in the preparation of the publications.

The brochures comprise part of the outreach effort connected to the Lake Wentworth/Crescent Lake Watershed Management Plan being undertaken through a partnership of the Lake Wentworth Foundation, the Town of Wolfeboro, and the University of New Hampshire’s Center for Freshwater Biology.

The state Department of Environmental Services is providing assistance and guidance on technical issues. Day-to-day oversight of the project is under the direction FB Environmental of Portland, Maine, and Portsmouth and Comprehensive Environmental, Inc. of Merrimack.

Making the main presentation at the kick-off meeting will be the project consultants: FB Environmental of Portland, Maine, and Portsmouth, who will oversee much of the scientific data collection and analysis; and Comprehensive Environmental, Inc. of Merrimack, who will focus on engineering components in the project.

The August 8 meeting will offer an opportunity for residents to learn how the project can provide the town with data vital to managing some of its major surface water resources. Consultants and steering committee members will also answer questions and provide information about the extent to which residents in the watershed can take part in the project.

The Lake Wentworth/Crescent Lake watershed encompasses 60 percent of Wolfeboro’s land area and is a major tributary to Wolfeboro Bay.

FBE and CEI were selected by the project steering committee from among eight consulting firms and partnerships bidding for the work, which is funded by a $67,800 grant from the NH Department of Environmental Services, up to $30,000 in matching funds from the Lake Wentworth Foundation, and some $50,000 in expected in-kind services from volunteers in the community.

FB Environmental has consulted on a number of similar watershed management plans in New Hampshire, including a project involving the Acton (Maine)/Wakefield (NH) Watersheds Alliance just southeast of Wolfeboro. CEI has designed and implemented restoration work on a number of New Hampshire water bodies, including Baboosic Lake in Amherst and Nutt Pond in Manchester.

The steering committee for the Lake Wentworth/Crescent Lake watershed management project includes Town Planner Rob Houseman, Lake Wentworth Foundation President Jack O’Connell, Planning Board Chair Kathy Barnard, DPW Director Dave Ford, Agricultural Commission Chair Charles Horsken, Don Kretchmer from the Lake Wentworth Association, Bob Craycraft from the University of New Hampshire, and at-large members Joseph Carilli and Richard Masse.

Stream gauge

What you’re seeing is a critical tool in the recently initiated watershed management plan for Lake Wentworth and Crescent Lake – a stream gauge. As the name implies, these gauges, marked in increments of feet and tenths of a foot (rather than inches) measure the height of the water flowing in the stream.

Why is that important? As it turns out, one of the critical aspects of the watershed management plan is getting a handle on how much phosphorous is entering the lakes each year. Phosphorous, you’ll remember, is a plant nutrient that’s great for suburban lawns but highly disruptive to clean lakes like Wentworth and Crescent, because it feeds weeds like milfoil as well as microscopic algae that rob a lake of its clarity.

As it turns out, much of the phosphorous that enters the lakes does so via the streams that feed the lakes. Often, the phosphorous is hitching a ride on sand and other debris washed into the water by runoff from a storm. We’ve all seen the evidence: gravel roads, roadside culverts, and sandy beaches marred by deep trenches where stormwater has eroded the soil and carried it off to a nearby marsh, brook, or even lake.

So how do the stream gauges work? The answer is that, in order to protect a lake, you need to know not only how much phosphorous it currently has but how much is coming in. If, as is the case, with Wentworth and Crescent, a lake is still relatively healthy, you want to know if phosphorous is coming in at a rate that exceeds the lake’s long-term ability to absorb it.

Making that calculation for each stream requires two types of measurements: one determines how much phosphorous the stream is carrying for a given volume of water; the second determines the volume of water actually flowing down the stream. That’s where the gauges come in.

Using special flow meters, scientists can determine how much water the stream is carrying at a given water depth. By taking flow measurements when the stream depth is at different levels, they can use a mathematical calculation to determine the volume at any given height.

From that point on, it’s easy to read a gauge and know how much water is currently flowing – and, by extension, how much phosphorous the stream is carrying down to the lake. By adding those calculations from all tributaries, lake managers can determine the phosphorous “load” that the streams are putting on the lake.

Using funding from the Lake Wentworth Foundation, volunteers have placed gauges in the streambeds of 12 tributaries: Harvey (Hooper) Brook, Hersey (Tyler) Brook, Willey Brook, Fernald Brook, Claypit West, Claypit East, Frost Brook, Heath Brook, Red Brook, Breezy Brook, Townsend East and Townsend West. Warren Brook, while a major tributary to Lake Wentworth, has no gauge because its channel is flat and at the same elevation as the main body of the lake, making flow measurements all but impossible.

As work on the watershed management plan gets under way in earnest in the summer of 2011, the stream gauges will provide invaluable information that will lead to a better understanding of where stormwater runoff poses the greatest threats to the quality of our lakes.

The DES funding will be combined with a $30,000 pledge by the Lake Wentworth Foundation and some $55,000 in matching volunteer labor and materials to create a detailed scientific picture of the surface waters in the watershed. The project is expected to begin in July and last a year.

The Lake Wentworth/Crescent Lake watershed covers some 22,500 acres, encompassing about 60 percent of Wolfeboro’s land area, with smaller portions in Brookfield and New Durham.

Members of the local steering committee, including Town Planner Rob Houseman, LWF President Jack O’Connell, Planning Board Chair Kathy Barnard, and Bob Craycraft, director of the University of New Hampshire’s Lakes Lay Monitoring Program, will oversee the project, which will be conducted by a consortium of environmental consultants.

Selection of the consultants is expected to take place by early July.

The process of creating a management plan for the watershed will begin with an analysis of 25 years of water quality data collected by Lake Wentworth Association volunteers. Based on the outcome of that analysis, a long-term water quality target will be set for the two lakes.

A door-to-door canvass of properties around the lakes and near their tributaries will gather data to help gauge the level of use that septic systems receive as the town’s population ebbs and flows with the seasons. The canvass will also be used to provide educational materials on how to prevent stormwater runoff and how to maintain septic systems in order to minimize phosphorous leaching from residential yards.

Over the course of the management plan project, two workshops are expected to demonstrate the use of native plantings to help prevent runoff from residential properties into nearby streams or lake waters. In exchange for the use of their properties as demonstration sites, volunteer landowners will get the benefit of the labor and plantings needed to create the landscaping work. A call for potential sites will be issued after work on the plan gets under way.

Project consultants will combine information from historical water quality data, satellite and aerial photos, field data, and survey data from residents into a scientific model of the lakes in order to identify sources of unwanted nutrients and to determine the ability of the lakes to absorb those nutrients before water quality begins to degrade.

The consultants and town staff will also review Wolfeboro’s zoning and building ordinances in light of the gathered scientific data and will recommend changes intended to prevent future degradation of water quality throughout the watershed. The plan will assist in evaluating various growth scenarios for Wolfeboro, to provide town officials with information that can guide decisions affecting future development.

Finally, the plan will identify sites throughout the watershed that may pose a threat to water quality and will enable the consultants to develop a priority list for those having the largest impact. Best-practice engineering designs and cost estimates will be developed for dealing with sites identified as contributing to water quality impairment.

Following completion of the watershed management plan, the local partnership is expected to apply for additional grants to implement the recommended engineering installations.

The action comes after members of the management plan Steering Committee compiled a detailed budget and list of objectives for the project. Those materials were then submitted for review in a highly competitive process that put the local project up against communities and non-profit organizations from across New Hampshire. The Wolfeboro project was eventually selected for an intensive interview process that had DES and EPA staff reviewing the goals and proposed methodologies of the local proposal.

Participating on behalf of the Wentworth/Crescent project were Lake Wentworth Foundation President Jack O’Connell, Wolfeboro Town Planner Robert Houseman, University of New Hampshire scientist Bob Craycraft, Wolfeboro resident and limnologist Don Kretchmer, and Wolfeboro resident Rich Masse.

In late September, DES notified O’Connell that the local project had been approved to move forward with a final application for some $68,000 in funding under Section 319 of the Clean Water Act. The local proposal also rests on a commitment of up to $30,000 in matching funds from the Lake Wentworth Foundation and some $55,000 in volunteer services from town employees like Houseman (who would act as fiscal agent for the grant) and assorted volunteers from the local community.

The project still requires final sign-off from DES and EPA as well as approval by the Governor’s Council and Governor John Lynch. Word from DES is expected by early January, with Governor’s Council action coming later in the spring.

Grant awards under this program are administered by NHDES and require a 60/40 division of costs between DES and the local groups receiving the monies.

In addition to the LWF funding, which was approved by the Foundation’s trustees at their most recent meeting, the Wolfeboro Planning Board, whose chair, Kathy Barnard, sits on the project’s steering committee, has thrown its support behind the effort. The board endorsed the project after hearing a presentation from several steering committee members about the project’s value in helping municipal decision-makers evaluate planned growth in the community.

The watershed management project is a collaboration of the Foundation, the Town of Wolfeboro, the Center for Freshwater Biology at UNH, and additional partners from a number of public and private organizations in the area.

Information about the progress of the local watershed management project can be found at www.lakewentworthfoundation.org/watershed.

A watershed can be thought of as a land area that collects water from rainfall and snow and directs it to a lower-lying water body such as a pond or lake. In the case of Lake Wentworth and Crescent Lake, much of the land area in the town of Wolfeboro, including the highlands in the north and east, makes up the watershed. The water that collects in this watershed flows into the two lakes by way of numerous streams and through underground seepage before following the Smith River into Back Bay in downtown Wolfeboro and entering Lake Winnipesaukee.

Both the federal EPA and the New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services have identified watershed-level planning as the most appropriate basis for managing and protecting water resources. A watershed management plan can be used to provide much-needed information about the health of the streams that feed a lake, the condition of wetlands that absorb storm flows and filter passing water, and the location of high-value habitats that provide food and shelter for a variety of bird and animal species.

A management plan can also identify actual and potential sources of unwanted nutrients and other pollutants entering the waters that feed a lake. Those nutrients encourage the growth of weeds, such as invasive milfoil, as well as algae blooms that are both unsightly and, in the case of blue-green algae, potentially dangerous.

The committee, comprising members from the Lake Wentworth Foundation and the Town of Wolfeboro, was formed from a larger group of community stakeholders in late 2009 in order to prepare an application for EPA funds that would be used to develop a management plan for the Wentworth/Crescent watershed.

Among objectives identified by the steering committee are:

• Compilation of existing water quality data for Lake Wentworth and Crescent Lake to determine the ability of the lakes to assimilate phosphorus, an element known to feed algae blooms and weeds in a water body
• Establishing the water quality target for phosphorus and other water quality parameters in Lake Wentworth and Crescent Lake
• Identification of current and future pollution sources in the watershed
• Estimating pollution reductions needed to maintain the water quality target and future watershed conditions
• Determining the actions needed to reduce pollution inflow and maintain water quality goals
• Providing outreach and educational activities to provide public awareness of problems caused by stormwater runoff and inadequate septic systems
• Designing on-site modifications calculated to remedy identified sources of pollution, such as road runoff
• Identification of professional consulting services to oversee development of the watershed plan