Handler Amalia M, Weber Marc, Dumelle Michael, Jansen Lara S, Carleton James N, Schaeffer Blake A, Paulsen Steven G, Barnum Thomas, Rea Anne W, Neale Anne, Compton Jana E
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, Pacific Ecological Systems Division, Corvallis, OR 97300, USA.
Oak Ridge Institute for Science and Education Fellow c/o U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, Corvallis, OR 97300, USA.
Ecol Indic. 2025 Apr 1;173:113402. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2025.113402.
Mountain lakes provide cultural, aesthetic, and recreational services across the globe. Despite their recognized importance, there is no consistent definition of a mountain lake, which hampers describing them individually as well as in aggregate. Additionally, it makes it difficult to study and manage this unique population. We develop a rules-based approach for classifying mountain lakes according to the topography of the area draining directly to the lake. We apply the approach to the data from the United States National Lakes Assessment, for which the population is defined as lakes that are at least 1 ha in surface area and at least 1 m deep in the conterminous US (CONUS). Leveraging this national assessment allows for evaluating the condition of mountain lakes relative to all lakes in the CONUS. There are an estimated 12,353 (95 % C.I. 10,529-14,177) mountain lakes that account for 6.4 % of the lake population in the CONUS. Mountain lakes are in better condition than non-mountain lakes for 11 of 12 physical, chemical, and biological indicators (acid neutralizing capacity was the one exception). Approximately 25 % of mountain lakes are classified as eutrophic or hypereutrophic, and nearly 50 % are in fair or poor condition with respect to riparian vegetation and lakeshore disturbance. Mountain lake watersheds have lower proportions of developed land cover (mean ± 95 % CI: 0.8 ± 0.1 %) compared to non-mountain lakes (6.7 ± 0.3 %); however, developed land cover is more concentrated closer to the lakeshore for mountain lakes compared to non-mountain lakes. Coupled with characteristics such as high runoff, low hydraulic conductivity, and shallow bedrock depths, mountain lakes may be more susceptible to the adverse effects of human development and climate change compared to non-mountain lakes. These findings underscore the need for targeted monitoring, conservation, and management strategies to protect these valuable and sensitive lake environments.
高山湖泊在全球范围内提供文化、美学和娱乐服务。尽管它们的重要性已得到认可，但对于高山湖泊并没有一致的定义，这妨碍了对它们进行单独描述以及整体描述。此外，这使得研究和管理这一独特的湖泊群体变得困难。我们开发了一种基于规则的方法，根据直接排水到湖泊的区域地形对高山湖泊进行分类。我们将该方法应用于美国国家湖泊评估的数据，该评估中的湖泊群体定义为美国本土（CONUS）表面积至少为1公顷且深度至少为1米的湖泊。利用这一全国性评估能够评估高山湖泊相对于美国本土所有湖泊的状况。据估计，美国本土有12353个（95%置信区间为10529 - 14177个）高山湖泊，占美国本土湖泊群体的6.4%。在12项物理、化学和生物学指标中，有11项指标显示高山湖泊的状况优于非高山湖泊（酸中和能力是唯一例外）。大约25%的高山湖泊被归类为富营养化或超富营养化，并且就河岸植被和湖岸干扰而言，近50%的高山湖泊状况一般或较差。与非高山湖泊相比，高山湖泊流域的开发土地覆盖比例较低（平均值±95%置信区间：0.8±0.1%）；然而，与非高山湖泊相比，高山湖泊的开发土地覆盖在湖岸附近更为集中。再加上高径流、低水力传导率和浅基岩深度等特征，与非高山湖泊相比，高山湖泊可能更容易受到人类开发和气候变化的不利影响。这些发现强调了需要有针对性的监测、保护和管理策略来保护这些宝贵且敏感的湖泊环境。
