|
|
Posts: 169
Location: Pewaukee, WI | Pewaukee Lake Fisherman
Be Alert!
On April 19th, 2004 plan on attending a public information meeting from 7:00pm to 9:00pm at the Pewaukee High School cafeteria. Be ready to voice your objections to an ill conceived plan that will destroy 64.5% of the fishery in the eastern basin of Pewaukee Lake. This ill conceived plan is being promoted by a small group of self-serving property owners on Pewaukee Lake to enhance their property values. This plan is being promoted by the Pewaukee Lake Improvement Association, the Pewaukee Lake Management Committee which includes Mayor Jeff Nowak and two Alderpersons from District 1.
Here is their two point management plan:
Point #1 Clear cut 600 acres of fishery in the eastern basin of Pewaukee Lake down the center for recreational boating.
Point #2 Kill the weeds, approximately 66 acres of shoreline out to 150ft. with 2,4D; an aquatic systemic herbicide in the Riparian areas between the piers.
RESULTS: 1,030 total acres in the eastern basin
600 acres targeted to be clear cut. "Cut early & cut deep" PLIA motto 66 acres to be treated with the herbicide 2,4D
THIS ILL CONCEIVED PLAN DESTROYS 64.5% OF THE FISHERY IN THE EASTERN BASIN OF PEWAUKEE LAKE.
If you are upset with this reckless management plan, please do the following:
1. Plan on attending this meeting on April 19lh, 2004 and voicing your objections to this plan.
2. Contact your local DNR person, Shelley Warwick at 262-574-2124 or via email at [email protected]
3. Contact Robert Giblin, President of the Pewaukee Lake Improvement Association at 262-695-1435 or via email at rgiblinfciwi.rr.com
4. Contact Pewaukee City Hall 262-691-0770 Mayor Jeff Nowak 262-695-9363 Administrator Harland Clinkenbeard 262-691 -0770 Alderperson Tony Balistreri 262-695-2811 Alderperson Carolyn Byers 262-691-0055
REMEMBER, PEWAUKEE LAKE IS PUBLIC WATERS AND SHOULD REMAIN FOREVER FREE.
DO YOUR PART TO PROTECT YOUR HERITAGE AND REACT TO THIS ILL CONCEIVED PLAN.
| |
| | |
Posts: 2515
Location: Waukesha & Land O Lakes, WI | Dave,
You may want to double check the email address for Robert Giblin.
3. Contact Robert Giblin, President of the Pewaukee Lake Improvement Association at 262-695-1435 or via email at rgiblinfciwi.rr.com
| |
| | |
Posts: 66
Location: Wales Wi. | I find it hard to believe that the DNR supports this plan due to the fact that they have been fighting for years to restore water plants and marsh on the west end. If the DNR supports this plan they are playing both sides of the fence and that would be something the tax payers need to know. Interesting to find out! Howie. | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| I find it sickening that the same people that are speading lawn fertilizer or are having a lawn service spray their lawns are also the same ones who want weeds removed at all costs.
While it will be long after the April 19 meeting, the Milwaukee Chapter of Muskies Inc. will have Dr. Bruce Thorton, an expert on the Pewaukee Lake Watershed at their meeting on May 25. I think you will be in for an eye opening experience if you hear what the Dr. has to say. | |
| | |
Posts: 169
Location: Pewaukee, WI | Corrected e-mail address for:
Robert Giblin: [email protected]
Shelley Warwick: [email protected]
If you can make it to the meeting that would be great, if not, a call and e-mail would be appreciated.
Thanks
| |
| | |
Posts: 2515
Location: Waukesha & Land O Lakes, WI | Thanks BigO! | |
| | |
Posts: 3242
Location: Racine, Wi | An e-mail will be sent. Unfortuately I work in IL, and wouldn't be able to make it up there. But I will drop them a line. | |
| | |
| Update on Monday the 19th meeting.
-Over 125 Lake association members were in attendence, about a half dozen concerned sportsman...not an impressive showing for concerned anglers
-2 applications are in the DNR's hands, the first for the 2,4D treatment and the second for extensive clear cutting of Milfoil
-The 2,4D herbicide treatment could be approved in as little as 7 days, with application immediatley following
-The harvesting of more than 600 acres would follow the herbicide treatment
-This deal is all but signed, sealed and delivered.
-Now is the time to contact the DNR to express your concerns. The permits are not approved as of yet, so anyone who is concerned about the resource needs to contact:
Gabriel Powers
Water Resources Specialist
262-574-2171
fax 262-574-2117
E-mail: [email protected]
John D. Madsen, PhD, Research Biologist US Army Engineer in his research states (http://www.aquatics.org/pubs/madsen2.htm)
"Although many claim that harvesting is environmentally superior to herbicide use, most neglect to consider that harvesting removes large numbers of macroinvertebrates, semi-aquatic vertebrates, forage fishes, young-of-the-year fishes and even adult gamefishes. The harvester acts as a large, nonselective predator "grazing" in the littoral zone."
The clock is ticking...
| |
| | |
Posts: 3242
Location: Racine, Wi | I just sent an email to that gentleman from the DNR. I hope all that could not attend would do the same. This is a rediculous proposal, and will definitely impact the fishery on Pewaukee.
Thanks for bringing this to light!!!! | |
| | |
Posts: 156
Location: Oconomowoc, WI | Just sent an email to the three people mentioned. It took less than 2 minutes. Keep sending messages guys. | |
| | |
Posts: 1916
Location: Greenfield, WI | Knowing how fanatical the DNR typically is about protecting shorelines and "natural" habitats, this is incredible, if it in fact is true as "all but signed and sealed". Normally, projects of any size are studied to death over a multi-year period with a budgeting aspect within the DNR which is agonizingly slow. This is done even for seemingly insignificant projects, not to mention a project of this magnitude in one of the largest, most heavily used lakes in SE Wisconsin.
Something doesn't smell right here!!
Edited by Steve Van Lieshout 4/21/2004 9:27 AM
| |
| | |
Posts: 156
Location: Oconomowoc, WI | The president of Pewaukee Lake Association just responded to my email with pages of reasons why this is going forward. Also littered in his response was how much he cares for the fishery and how he fishes 10-12 hours a week from his pier, much to his wive's dismay, yada, yada, yada. He even once caught a 49 inch musky that weighed 29 pounds and a local guide told him it weighed so little because there wasn't enough food for the Musky to eat... He claims the treatment will only affect Eurasian Millfoil and not native weeds and it will thus help the lake and fish growth rates, blah, blah, blah. If anyone wants to see his email, let me know, or better yet send him an email and I'm sure you will get the same reply.
Kevin | |
| | |
Posts: 2515
Location: Waukesha & Land O Lakes, WI | I got the same message that Kevin got....BLA BLA BLA, Yada Yada Yada
These guys give Lake Associations a bad name. | |
| | |
Posts: 3242
Location: Racine, Wi | Kevin, could you send me a copy of that e-mail.
My email is
[email protected]
Thanks!!! | |
| | |
Posts: 3242
Location: Racine, Wi | That e-mail is the biggest load of poor excuses that I have ever seen. I love how well he documents his "sources" I would like to see where he got that info.
If these fish are so hungry, and the catch rates are going down so much, then how did Mr. Extreme's client nail a FAT 48.5 last year, not to mention the 46"er that I caught that was well fed.
Man!!!! this bugs me. The water skiers just want to knock down the weeds so they have more room to haul @$$ all over us fisherman.
| |
| | |
Location: Pewaukee, WI | My 2 cents worth
-----Original Message-----
From: Komar, James
Sent: Wednesday, April 21, 2004 1:59 PM
To: '[email protected]'
Subject:
I just wanted to drop you a note on my lunch break regarding the current plan to spray and cut the weeds in Pewaukee lake.
I use this water an average of 3 times per week. I am an avid recreational and tournament fisherman, and also use the water on occasion for other water sports. In addition to Pewaukee lake, I utilize an average of 25 other waters in our state per year as well as travel out of state to numerous destinations.
I bring this up not because I am an expert in lakes but simply to make the point that this topic is very important to me. I grew up in Pewaukee and Pewaukee Lake has been a big part of my life.
I am sure you are aware why I am sending you this today. I wish to express my concerns about the current proposed plan to use chemicals and clear cutting to control the weeds.
My first concern is that I have not heard from any fisheries biologist about the impact this will or will not have on this waterway. This so far has seemed to be centered on one thing....weeds and what will work and what won't. I am concerned that although the chemicals may not kill the fish, that the actual weed kill and subsequent oxygen depletion will. Further, I have been watching the current weed cutters for years and know that even those inevitably kill some fish every year. Now we want to clear cut a rather large area? To what extent will this affect the fish?. Contrary to some non-fisherman's beliefs, there are numbers of game fish that utilize the area targeted to be treated.
My second concern, is that this is a plan from one one community. Not the three communities that make up the lake. I believe it is the responsibility of the DNR to protect the entire watershed for all of it's users. Unfortunately this has been thrown into local politics and I believe the DNR needs to look at the impact a decision like this will have on everyone involved.
Last, I have watched Pewaukee Lake get better over the years. The fishery has remained stable under increasing pressure, launches and services have been rebuilt and maintained, and use of this lake has been in the top 5 per acre for years. Why now, all of a sudden, are we in need of rushing this plan?
The City of Pewaukee recently passed a phosphorus ban on area lawns and this is a start. I believe that if the adjoining communities would follow, this will have an impact however small. I understand the arguments this is tough to enforce, but in the end it can and will help.
The eastern basin of Pewaukee Lake is a flooded marsh......there will always be weeds. We can kill the milfoil and something else will take it's place...until the milfoil returns...and I am sure you are aware it will. A lake with this much usage will continue to spread the weeds forever....so to please a few is it worth the effect on the fishery and the possible long term damage this short term fix could cause?
There is plenty of water for us all to enjoy. There is plenty of water to ski weed free and plenty of weed lines to fish right now.
Thank you for your time.
Jim Komar
Waukesha, WI | |
| | |
| I am forwarding this to the board so everyone knows what was said in the return Email as well as mine.
To: [email protected] ; [email protected] ;
Cc: [email protected] ; [email protected]
Sent: Wednesday, April 21, 2004 11:42 AM
Subject: Pewaukee Lake Management Plan
This is what I wrote:
Dear Specialists,
I am concerned with the Management plan of Pewaukee Lake in the Eastern Basin.
I was unable to attend the meeting on 4-19-04 due to a serious health issue in my family.
I am well aware of the weed growth in the eastern basin. It seems to be getting out of control, with the help by other means it is speeding up the evolution of the established lake.
I am aware of 2,4D and know it kills all vegetation. Is this 100% safe for this water and downriver? Should we be looking at this differently? The application of this I understand will be as early as this spring. I believe we need to study this more and educate the public more before executing! This is when many of the fishes in Pewaukee Lake spawn in the eastern basin. I know many fisherman that have a great deal of questions about this. We all know the fishery has been thriving due to the DNR and Local help and organizations, I would hate to see any of this be in jeopardy. What is the main objective? Is it so recreational boaters or homeowners can use more of the lake? After the application of 2,4D it then needs to be cut. I understand that it needs to be a deep cut. This could be a major problem for the many different species of fish in the lake as they will be there spawning, what kind of impact will this have on the fishery?
Please answer me the following questions:
What is the Objective for this year and beyond?
Who and What will it benefit?
Is the application of 2,4D and Cutting safe for what important species that live in the basin and downriver?
Is there any other way to achieve the objectives?
What will be in jeopardy when this is put into motion?
Is this a good management plan for ALL involved?
This is literally a growing problem, but I am concerned that the fishery will be in jeopardy, Please respect that and help educate me and others about these concerns before starting this project.
Thank You,
Dan White
This is what I recieved back:
Hi Dan
I appreciate you getting in touch with us.
You mentioned that 2,4-D kills all vegetation. That isn't entirely accurate. There is a correlation between the amount of product used and what plants it affects. At a application of 100 pounds per surface acre, 2,4-D is very specific to Eurasian Watermilfoil and lily pads, when done at the proper time and water temperature. We will not be recommending use of 2,4-D in areas where lily pads currently exist.
I literally just got off the phone with one of the potential applicators, and asked about the verbiage of the sign that needs to be posted at the time of treatment. The signage would read something to the effect that you can immediately swim in the water and you can immediately consume the fish that you take out of the water. You don't however, want to irrigate or spray this water on your flowers until after it is reduced to .07 parts per million. Estimate from the applicator is 7-14 days, but it's all based upon testing. This is the same product used to kill dandilions in the lawn, and has been approved by the EPA for over 50 years, and for 60 years in use with agricultural crops. 2,4-D happens to be a plant growth hormone.
There are habitat sensitive areas on Pewaukee Lake that are excluded from chemical treatment according to our plan. Per Charlie Shong of the LPSD, there are two areas on either side of Penninsula Drive that are temporary habitat sensitive zones specifically during the spawning season. These areas cannot be disrupted during spawning season, and Taylor's Bay is for all intensive purposes off limits because it is a habitat sensitive area.
After the application of 2,4-D, you mentioned that it needs to be cut. It is my understanding that the weed actually collapses and can't be cut.
Our objective this year is to begin the process of erradicating Eurasian Watermilfoil from Pewaukee Lake. It will benefit all users of the lake, as well as the rest of the waters of Wisconsin because we will not be providing a distribution mechanism for this invasive species anymore. As you will read in the following response below, reducing the amount of milfoil will actually be good for fishery, as it will allow native vegetation more of the eco-system in which to grow and flourish.
As you may be aware, I have received a number of e-mails from interested parties, and I have included below two of the e-mails I sent out, which I hope will answer a lot of your questions and provide you with additional information about the pilot program......
"Thousands of hours of thought, research, and effort have gone into this
plan. I would be grateful if you would take a minute to read this and give
me your thoughts. Let me apoligize in advance for any redundancy in the
text. Creating an understanding with the users of the lake should help us to
meet our improvement goals of this excellent resource.
By the way, the Town of Delafield and the Village of Pewaukee would not
pass the zero-phosphorous ordinance we asked for. What they thought was a
compromise was actually status quo for the landscapers who have been coming
from as far away as Madison to lobby the communities on Pewaukee Lake not to
pass the ordinance.
With the number of outsiders coming into the area from significant
distances I can only think that they are trying to guard their pocketbooks
at the expense of the health of Pewaukee lake.
1 pound of phosphorous is enough nutrient to grow 400-500 pounds of weeds
and algae in the lake. That is a 40,000% to 50,000% return on weight.
How's that for impact on the water column? I don't know what town you live
in but, a letter to the appropriate elected officials near the lake may give
us a chance to turn this around.
Back to your e-mail....
Thank you for caring about the lake. I am attaching a copy of an e-mail
that I sent out this morning regarding the plan for Pewaukee Lake. It
should give you a perspective on what we are trying to accomplish regardless
of what you may have heard. Please feel free to forward this e-mail to
anyone who is as interested as you in the waters of our lake.
Dear Mr. concerned fisherman:
I'm not sure who you are, and I'm always surprised that someone like
yourself who has strong feelings about Pewaukee Lake does not have their
name on their e-mail. That being said, it is possible that anonymity
allows people a greater level of honesty and eliminates concern of social
repercussions. For that reason, and the importance of these topics, I am
glad to have heard from you. You are aware that everybody knows who I am.
I am very upfront with what I know about the lake eco-system and the necessity
of erradicating Eurasian Watermilfoil (EWM). Also as I mentioned at the
meeting, I want to thank you for caring enough to come to the
informational meeting. You may have missed a few of the crucial points with regard to
fish habitat. If you were to go on to the Muskies, Inc. web site, you
would find a study done by Randy Schumacher from the State of Wisconsin, on
Pewaukee Lake habitat.
With regard to muskies, catch rates and harvest have declined between
1982 and 1998 creel surveys, while angler hours directed at catching muskies
has nearly tripled. Also, with regard to walleyes, catch and harvest rates
have also declined from 1982 to 1998, while angling pressure has doubled. With
regard to bass, according to the study, growth rate of bass is low. Much
of the littoral zone of Pewaukee Lake becomes heavily infested with aquatic
plants, especially Eurasian Watermilfoil, which may be interfering with
prey capture success. Small mouth catch rate dropped by more than 80%, but the
number of hours anglers spent fishing for small mouth increased nine fold.
Catch and harvest rates of all panfish species also declined. Size
structure and growth rate for bluegills were poor. Heavy plant growth
encourages excessive recruitment, which also lowers proportional stock
density ratios and greater competition. Lack of predation on small
bluegills due to heavy aquatic plant growth in much of the lake may be
contributing to poor bluegill size structure. Growth rate of bluegills,
small mouth, and large mouth bass is below average based on records from
fish management reference book. Again, dense aquatic plant growth may be
reducing the efficiency of large mouth and small mouth predation on small
bluegills.
As you can see from this study, a number of times the dense aquatic
plant
growth from Eurasian Watermilfoil was referenced as inhibiting the fishery
and growth rates. I don't know how much opportunity you have had to
research EWM and its effect on the fish population. From everything I
have read, it creates large schools of stunted panfish, and the large important
sporting predators have a difficult time getting access to their food
source. There was a study done in Michigan that said that bass under 200
milimeters grow significantly slower in lakes infested with EWM than in
lakes without infestations of EWM. In large portions of the eastern basin
on Pewaukee Lake, fishing boats literally cannot navigate due to the dense
stands of EWM.
Contrary to what you may have heard, and also something I mentioned at
the meeting, our problem on Pewaukee Lake is a foreign invasive species that
is not being addressed in any aggressive manner, until, hopefully, this year.
We are very much in favor of native weed growth for a number of reasons. It
is our understanding that native aquatic vegetation produces more oxygen for
the water column, and unlike EWM, does not grow as fast and is not spread
by floating pieces which grow roots, sink, and create more dense milfoil
stands.
I happen to be an avid fisherman myself, and to my wife's chagrin, I
spend 10-12 hours a week fishing off my pier. In 1998, I caught a 49 inch, 29
pound musky. I was told by a guide on Pewaukee Lake that the small girth
and weight of this fish meant that it wasn't getting enough to eat.
Virtually all the information we receive through our research at the lake
association comes from aquatic biologists. I don't feel confident enough
to draw my own conclusions since I am not a biologist, so I depend upon the
DNR, various commercial aquatic biology companies, and, as you may have
heard at our meeting, we have a couple of very experienced and talented
scientists on our board of directors.
The portion below is a copy of an e-mail response to a member of
Muskies, Inc. It should answer many of your other questions in your e-mail.
"I appreciate the fact that you copied me on your e-mail to Shelley at
the DNR. I would also like to thank you for your support on the
zero-phosphorous fertilizer ordinance. It may be hard to get all the
facts from our local newspapers, but the Pewaukee Lake Improvement Association
initiated and has been actively lobbying the Town of Delafield and the
Village of Pewaukee to pass a zero-phosphorous lawn fertilizer ordinance.
We were the ones that convinced the City of Pewaukee to pass the
ordinance. It seems that it will be costing landscapers more money to carry two
different formulas of lawn treatments, and they are showing up at these
meetings from 30 miles away. We even had the Executive Director
(lobbyist) from the Wisconsin Landscaper's Association drive all the way from the
City of Madison (where, by the way, they passed a zero-phosphorous fertilizer
ordinance the same day as the City of Pewaukee) come to the Town of
Delafield board meeting to fight an ordinance that will be tremendously
beneficial to the fishery in Pewaukee Lake. Evidently there was enough
controversy that the Town of Delafield decided to limit phosphorous
content in fertilizers to three percent instead of zero. The unfortunate
coincidence is that three percent is exactly what the landscapers
currently use. If we are going to reduce the phosphorous in Pewaukee Lake, we can't
keep doing what we have been doing. We need to reduce the landscapers'
contribution to our weed and algae problems.
I might be asking a lot, but if you could get a letter or e-mail to the
Town of Delafield on Monday, they will possibly be voting on this issue
Monday night. The Village of Pewaukee is addressing this ordinance on
Tuesday night, April 20.
I would like to address a couple of your points with regard to the
herbicide treatment planned for Pewaukee Lake.
1) Our objective is to restore to Pewaukee Lake the natural vegetation
that existed here for thousands of years. Unfortunately, when
international shipping released their bilge water, there was more than
just zebra mussels in their ships. Eurasian Water Milfoil is on the State of
Wisconsin's foreign invasive species list., and has existed in Waukesha
County since the early 60's. It has since spread to roughly 60 counties
in the State of Wisconsin, as well as thousands of lakes around the country.
Eurasian Water Milfoil crowds out native vegetation, grows earlier, grows
faster, and does not release or produce as much oxygen to the water column
as do the native plants.
We will be using a chemical that very specifically kills Eurasian Water
Milfoil, with non-existent impact to the eco-system. That is why the
State of Wisconsin and the DNR will approve use of this particular herbicide in
the waters of the state. In 2003, in the waters of Wauksha County, nearly
8 tons of 2,4-D granular was used to combat this infestation of a plant that
has no natural enemies on the continent of North America.
Over the past few decades, Pewaukee Lake has made a minimal effort to
erradicate this particular species of plant. It is socially irresponsible
to allow this weed to flourish in the quantities that it has for quite a
number of years. The large stands of EWM have accelerated its spread via
boat trailers and watercraft throughout the state of Wisconsin, in what is
a very popular lake for the Southeastern region of the state.
2) Pewaukee has become, like many other lakes, surrounded by
significant human development. That means asphalt, concrete, storm
systems draining into the lake, and fertilizers with high concentrations of
phosphorous being dumped into the water column. Unfortunately, Mother
Nature hasn't had a lot to do with this. These steps that we take are the
first steps in what we see as a continuing process in bringing the lake
back as close as we can to the natural eco-system it deserves to be. We have
already convinced one municipality to pass a zero-phosphorous fertilizer
ordinance, and are working very hard to convince the other two communities
that are contiguous to the lake. Pewaukee Lake has a 15,000 acre
watershed, and is essentially a catch-basin, not being tied into any existing
incoming river system.
3) I don't know how much opportunity you have had to research EWM and
its effect on the fish population. From everything I have read, it
creates large schools of stunted panfish, and the large important sporting
predators have a difficult time getting access to their food source. There was a
study done in Michigan that said that bass under 200 milimeters grow
significantly slower in lakes infested with EWM than in lakes without
infestations of EWM. In large portions of the eastern basin, fishing
boats literally cannot navigate due to the dense stands of EWM.
4) In the plan, you have noted that we are harvesting hundreds of
acres in the eastern basin as the primary recreational boating area. We are not
necessarily doing this so people can go water skiing. Every time a small
piece of EWM is cut from the plant, it becomes what is called a "floater".
This floater will be moved by wind and wave action, grow roots, sink, and
start another stand of EWM.
5) During my research, I found that one of the major experts in the
field, a Dr. Madsen, started off an examination of EWM management with the
following statement:
"the major obstacles to effective management of aquatic plants were
sociological rather than scientific. In most instances, a motivated
resource management group (whether they be a lake association or a local, regional,
state or federal agency) could use a half-dozen of the available options
to manage aquatic plants in their lake. The limitations to effective
management are time, patience, and funds, not the lack of an effective management
tool."
Unfortunately, we are wrestling with political issues, as well as rumors
and hearsay that are truly not based on facts at all. We have done
thousands of hours of investigation and research, and feel that we have
put together a reasonable, safe, and beneficial plan to counteract the human
development issues that exist around this urban lake.
Again, I would like to thank you for your interest in lake issues. It
is more beneficial when I get an e-mail like this and can share our decision
making process, than to have someone out there who thinks we have made
hasty, uninformed decisions. I don't know how this information got into
your hands, but I'm glad it did, and I would greatly appreciate if you
would forward this response to whomever has been communicating with you on this
important topic."
Bob Giblin
President
Pewaukee Lake Improvement Association
| |
| | |
Posts: 4520
Location: Chippewa Falls Wisconsin | I sent my email to the DNR.
This whole thing is just a mess. I cant believe only a few showed up at the meeting. If I was there I would have been kicking and screaming!!!!
We have to stop this!!!....we have a voice too! | |
| | |
Posts: 4520
Location: Chippewa Falls Wisconsin | Tell the Pewaukee lake owners to look at the Fox Chain after it got sprayed.
Do they really want a MUD PUDDLE!!! | |
| | |
| I agree with Jason, this will be so detrimental to Pewaukee Lake. I had class on Monday night, so I was not able to attend the meeting. I did send out e-mails and I am the Muskies Inc member that Bob Giblin replied to. This whole thing just makes me sick and it pretty much sounds like it is a done deal. The best thing to work for now is to stall the permit process long enough to enable the water to warm up and get the fish to move into deeper water before they posion the shorelines. Please keep the pressure on!!!  | |
| | |
| This is interesting it comes from an article in the Lake Country Reporter.
The herbicide treatment can take place when conditions are right for treating milfoil. The right conditions are anticipated during the last weeks of April or beginning of May, said Giblin. Lake water temperatures and height of the milfoil are two of the factors considered.
There is also some concern from residents who say the spray might not be safe.
The DNR has also received applications for herbicide treatment from 47 individual homeowners, most along Kopmeier Drive, for a treatment area that would total less than 10 acres, said Warwick. Some of the homeowners, including Giblin, are village of Pewaukee residents.
The same public informational process is not required for treatment areas of less than 10 acres.
Giblin said the residents submitted applications because, at the time, there was no approval from the DNR and the city had not yet approved the pilot lake weed management program.
If the city's permit is approved, "the duplicate applications from the homeowners will be sent back," said Giblin.
If the DNR does approve the city's application, the public has rights to contest the approval.
Citizens could request a contested case hearing to an administrative law judge, according to state statute. Or citizens could file for a judicial review of the DNR decision with the circuit court, explained Warwick.
| |
| | |
Posts: 1916
Location: Greenfield, WI | I have left a message for Dr. Robert Anderson, of Wisconsin Lutheran College. He was the indivdual who was the technical head of the on-going, now famous, Pewaukee Lake Muskie Study, which the Milwaukee Chapter of Muskies Inc. had sponsored. He is the only individual that I am aware of that I would trust to comment on this program objectively.
Hopefully we will hear from him soon. | |
| | |
Posts: 3242
Location: Racine, Wi | I just spoke with a woman that is opposed to this treatment as well. She is working on having a public forum on this. She said she would contact me with the date and time.
If you would like to contact her, her e-mail is [email protected]
Her name is Barb.
She is trying to see what there is that can be done to prevent this.
I will keep you posted as I hear from her. | |
| | |
Posts: 32933
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Please let me know if you would like a special chat room night to discuss the subject, and if you would like a thread to be locked on top for response and discussion. | |
| | |
| I have also emailed someone that is very knowledgeable with this and will be able to distinguish any problems that could be involved. I hope I get a reply soon. I have wrote numerous other emails with them eluding the concerns I have.
What I am gathering from this is that when they need to apply the 2,4-D is during certain conditions (meaning water temp, time of year, wind, etc.) Many fish will be spawning and in these habitat sensitive areas which are off limits for the application, for now. I have yet to receive a clear answer on what their plan is to do in those areas.
So, my next question is when will they make that application to kill the Eurasian Watermilfoil in these sensitive areas (because you need to rid it all or it is just coming back, just in another place) and with what? 2,4-D? When? When the conditions don't allow for proper application?
As we know that boaters cut the Eurasian Watermilfoil with their props then it floats, sinks and reestablish itself.
My main concern is that I don't believe that they do have a "Master" plan. Which makes me very leary about this whole situation. If they do they are not very willing to share the info for what reason!!?
I try not to get into politics especially small town politics. This is a major part of the battle here. I have been corresponding with Bob Giblin the President Pewaukee Lake Improvement Association. I look at it as he has a job to do. For starters we need to convince him with FACTS that this is not the thing to do especially with the time frame at hand.
I have been keeping my composure thus far. I have been looking for valid arguments for the fisheries defense. I don't believe that we will get anywhere with angry and hateful emails. Believe me, we have their attention. We need facts, and need to be convincing with our arguments. Unfortunately, I believe that if it does go to a public vote that the other recreationalist and lake homeowners will outweigh the fishermen's perspective.
Has anyone out there have any first hand dealings with 2,4-D in Lake applications? What can we expect? What could be some Positives? What are the Negatives? What should we be aware of?
Anyone? Thoughts, concerns, ideas............
We need basis!
Dan
Edited by esox-dan 4/23/2004 2:25 AM
| |
| | |
Posts: 3242
Location: Racine, Wi | Good points Dan! I wish I knew more about the effects of the herbacide. The thing I am concerned with is, first off, what if the wind is blowing, and it blows it to places it was not intended for? Also, this seems to be a temporary fix, that will inevitably go unresolved. You hit it right on the head when you said that the props are going to go through, cut up the weeds, the float to another location, and spread roots again. Seems like a never ending battle. Because the weeds are in other locations than where they are spraying, they are going to come back. I just think they need to think of some alternatives, and also who will this benefit? The skiers, yes. The fisherman, not so much. I will see what kind of info I can get on this. One of the guys I went to school with is a fisheries biologist, I just have to find out where he is, and see if I can get some info from him. | |
| | |
| Here is a website that I came across : www.pesticide.org/24Decological.pdf
| |
| | |
Posts: 1916
Location: Greenfield, WI | Thanks for the offer Mr. Worrall, Locking it at the top of the board for a little while might not be a bad thing. | |
| | |
| Nancy, Good find!
I fwd the link to Bob with this letter. We need more ideas and more people to oppose this. At the moment, I don't know if I am doing the right thing. I don't want to piss people off as to where they start deleting. If I am somehow hindering this opposition, please inform me. I am just posting this letter that I wrote to trigger ideas for others concerned. Which they inturn can write their own.
Dear Bob,
Please respect us in reading this Herbicide Factsheet.
I want to make clear that I am not a "activist" trying to sabotage this plan. I am a concerned fisherman and outdoorsmen with knowledge to detail. I really believe that the effects from this could be very damaging. This needs to be studied more!
Please, we need to consult more experts as they are able to decipher the negative impacts, which we then need to weigh! As you know just because the DNR approves something doesn't automatically make it safe for use anywhere. There will be chronic problems with this and we don't yet know what the magnitude will be.
Your judgment in this case will have long-lasting effects on this watershed. We need you to make the correct decisions.
I believe this link will help in that process.
http://www.pesticide.org/24Decological.pdf
Please respond,
Thank You,
Dan White
Edited by esox-dan 4/23/2004 11:57 AM
| |
| | |
Posts: 3242
Location: Racine, Wi | Great info Nancy!! I am studying as we speak. | |
| | |
| I don't mean to be confrontational, but I don't undersdtand why the "Local Boys" have not expressed an opinion on this topic. At this point I am interested to hear what everybody thinks is best for Pewaukee Lake. This is so near and dear to my heart that I can't believe that there are no other opinions out there. Is everyone just OK with letting this happen before we know that this is the right thing to do? Again, I don't mean for this to be pointing fingers at anyone, but PLEASE, voice your opinions. If you don't want to post here please send a message to me at [email protected]. Thank you! | |
| | |
Posts: 4520
Location: Chippewa Falls Wisconsin | One thought on the issue.
If they take away the weeds, whats going to happen to the east end. You have a large shallow flat of MUD. That mud with a strong west wind will pile up at the far east end. That will make there boating even worse. The lake will also like the fox chain or the mississippi for example.
Why isnt the whole Milw chapter of MI jumping on this issue. Bob from the lake assocation says the fishery is not good...I keep seeing the guides doing as well if not better then the past....this whole thing makes me sick to my stomach.
Also...what reasearch did they do...and WHO are the authors?
I think Sailer Joe and Boater Bob thought long and hard one evening on a bar stool on this issue.....thats who I think authored thier research.
My 2 cents!!! | |
| | |
Posts: 66
Location: Wales Wi. | I remember when they sprayed a herbicide on another area lake, Upper Namahbin. Im not sure if it was 2,4-D but these are simple names given for a long list of complex chemicals. The list on the buckets was at least two paragraphs long and you can bet no one knows the long term effects of all these chemicals. The south end of the lake was a dead sea for the whole summer, not even minnows..it seemed as though all fish avoided that end of the lake. It hardly seemed worth it since all the weeds grew back and two years later it was back to the same weed density. The question I have is who is going to be responsible when they find out pouring poison in a lake was a bad idea? Howie. | |
| | |
| This is the problem that I have with Lake Associations. My experience is that a Lake Association is formed under the guise of "helping the lake" but is mainly there to change the lake to fit SOME OF THE INFLUENTIAL property owners wants. In actuality the Association can only do a few small things to help the lake but can do many outrageous things to harm a lake. I'm sorry to see you having to fight this on Pewaukee.
Luck has it that on my lake up here in Phillips the new Association President has been against the push by some property owners to use chemicals to control aquatic plants. The Association had an aquatic plant management plan done by Blue Water Engineering from Minnesota. The plan identified plant types and location and also recommended if any plants needed to be controlled and specified where and what type of control should be done. A few vocal members really were pushing to have larger areas than recommend be chemically treated so they could have their swimming pool-like frontage. We voted in a new President who, even though he lives in a shallow weedy bay has fought chemical treatment and also any rental or purchase of a weed cutter. If you can believe it, one RESORT OWNER here stated at our Association meeting that we should trap rusty crayfish from another lake and stock them in our lake. This is the kind of bar-stool logic you are fighting against!
The DNR in our case was against chemical use in any of the areas pinpointed in the Blue Water study but would allow weed cutting if a permit was requested.
Good luck in this fight against greed and ignorance, you will find it will be a never ending war.
Buddy | |
| | |
Posts: 2691
Location: Pewaukee, Wisconsin | I am watching this very close but don't have the info I need to make a stink yet.
The Cave Run tournament and Turkey hunting has kept me very buisy up to this point.
Now it time to do some investigating.
Who is going to pay for this?
I know my parents own a house on the lake and 150 ft of frontage on some land on the north shore, they are going to NOT PAY for this.
Two of my brothers are NOT going to pay either.
How many other people are going to PAY for them to screw up the lake.
When the weeds are gone are they going to grow back?
How long will this last?
Where is the $$$ going to come from to do all this?
Where is the infomation on the study and who did it?
This sounds like $$$ is the major contributor to this decision. Home owners and recrational boaters.
The mayor lives on the northeast shore where the water level is only 3 to 4ft, does he think this will make his frontage better?
A better view of the mud flat maybe.
I am worried sick about this !!! | |
| | |
Posts: 4520
Location: Chippewa Falls Wisconsin | And Brother MIKE you SHOULD be worried!!!!!!
You said you hated the fox chain...well my friend if they do this...you will have the fox chain in your back yard....a MUD PIT.
I have been emailing president Bob of the lake assocation with CC to the DNR. He never answers my questions..just sends me form letters. He has one issue...his property value.
Every fishery is unique!!! in its own way. If the state says Pewaukee lake has growth rates in muskies 3 to 4 times higher then the state average....well something must be right. When its right..dont break it. He has not talked to Dr. Anderson...because he is afraid he might be told his is wrong.
The best thing they could do for the lake is make it NO WAKE! and preserve the habitat!
EVERYONE PLEASE EMAIL...
Jason Smith/CTOTPA
Concerned tourist of the Pewaukee Area!!! | |
| | |
Posts: 4520
Location: Chippewa Falls Wisconsin | I want to be the first to coin the phrase......THE BOB GIBLIN DISASTER!!!
Email Bob at [email protected] and express your views as concerned fisherman. | |
| | |
|
I hate to keep posting some of my responses that I recieve, but I believe some of them are educational in dealing with the situation. This way there is more people who can read between the lines. We still need a lot of help... any seasoned protesters out there?
Mr White:
I spent another evening of additional research on the 2,4-D Factsheet you provided to us. The "factsheet" appears to be a comprehensive review of much research information on the fate of 2.4-D in the environment. However, it is largely irrelevent to the issue at hand; that is, the impact of application of Aqua-Kleen or Navigate in Pewaukee Lake.
Please consider the following when reviewing this factsheet:
The "Journal of Pesticide Reform" does not impress me as an unbiased scientific publication.
There are various forms of 2,4-D. Aqua-Kleen and Navigate are a 2,4-D butoxyethyl ester (BEE). Dimethylamine salt (DMA) is another form of 2,4-D. All of the factsheet references to the amine form are not applicable to our situation and many references to 2,4-D in the factsheet do not specify the form that was tested when they talk about adverse affects..
In order to have a positive or adverse affect, the 2,4-D must come into contact with the plant or animal of concern. Since the 2,4-D is applied as granules directly over the water surface, there is no opportunity for it to come into contact with plants and animals (such as birds) living above the water surface. The method of contact with a chemical is also important. For example, the toxicity of water to humans when inhaled in excessive quantities is much different than when swallowed. The same is true for chemical exposures. Injection into chicken eggs will have a profoundly different impact than surface contact with the shell.
The "Factsheet" also points out the differences in response to 2,4-D by different species. Salmon may be highly sensitive to 2,4-D but keep in mind that there are no salmon in Pewaukee Lake. To asume all other fish species may be equally sensitive would be misapplication of these findings.
Concentration is also critically important. Many of the effects reported in the "Factsheet" occur at concentrations far higher than the concentration that is expected in the water column during the application of Aqua-Kleen or Navigate in Pewaukee Lake.
In my opinion, a more independant scientific evaluation can be found at the State of Washington Department of Ecology. They conducted a very thorough look at this issue and published "Herbicide Risk Assessment for the Aquatic Plant Management - Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement" in February 2001. It can be reviewed at the following link:
http://www.ecy.wa.gov/biblio/0010043.html
It is quite detailed and you should not begin reading it around bedtime. However, the publication has substantial merit in that it discusses 2,4-D in Aqua-Kleen and Navigate specifically in the context of surface water applications for aquatic plant management. The WA Department of Ecology recommends the continued use of 2,4-D as a tool in managing the Eaurasian water milfoil problem in that state.
The Pewaukee Lake Improvement Association believes the milfoil problem will not be solved by herbicides alone. We have been strong proponents of reducing the food supply for these weeds with the zero-phosphorus ordinance for lawn fertilizers. Charlie Shong from the Sanitary District supported us on this. Unfortunately, more lawn care companies than PLIA members showed up at the City, Village and Town meetings to express their opinions. Lawns are not the only source of phosphorus entering the lake and the zero-phosphorus ordinance was intended to be only a start. The Sanitary District has funded the Lutheran College to conduct a more comprehensive study on other phosphorus sources entering the lake.
The proposed changes to the strategy for harvesting more weeds beyond the 150 foot shoreline areas are intended to help control milfoil that is now spreading by fragments created by booat props. Everything the association proposes to do is consistent with the recommendations made by the SE Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission's (SEWRPC) "A Lake Management Plan for Pewaukee Lake" (May 2003). You can read the lake management plan on the SEWRPC website at:
http://www.sewrpc.org/publications/
CAPR No. 58 (2nd Edition), A Lake Management Plan for Pewaukee Lake (PDF file)
"This report describes the physical, chemical, and biological characteristics of Pewaukee Lake. It also contains information about the feasibility of various watershed and in-lake management measures which may be applied to enhance water quality conditions, biological communities, and recreational opportunities of the Lake."
The association is trying to hold our elected oficials accountable for implementing the recommendations contained in the Lake Management Plan. I ask that you join us in becoming further informed on the wide range of complex issues affecting Pewaukee Lake. Please join the association so we can send you our emails on what we are trying to accomplish and so you can provide us feedback.
I hope you find the above information of value and would appreciate your forwarding this email to other concerned residents. Please feel free to contact me if I can be of further assistance.
Sincerely,
Bob Karnauskas
His Email is: [email protected]
Edited by esox-dan 4/26/2004 11:41 PM
| |
| | |
Location: Pewaukee, WI | Just got this!!!!!!!!!
Dear Concerned Members of the Public:
Thank you for expressing your concerns with the proposed "Pilot Study" submitted to the Department on April 14, 2004 by the City of Pewaukee.
Due to the large volume of phone, hand written and email contacts, the Department will not be able to respond to each email individually. The contacts Shelley, Jim and I have received will all receive a "mass mailing", which I am hoping will respond to each of the questions asked. We will be reviewing each email and compiling a list of questions/comments/concerns for response. If you feel this "mass response" does not respond to your questions/comments/concerns, then please feel free to contact me. I intend on responding by email by the end of the week, your patience in this matter is greatly appreciated.
Gabriel J Powers
Water Resources Specialist
Fisheries and Habitat
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources
(() phone: (262)574-2171
(() fax: (262)574-2117
(+) e-mail: [email protected]
| |
| | |
Posts: 3242
Location: Racine, Wi | I just got that as well.
Take a look on the Daily News Trawler for an article on this subject. there is a place to put a reply on the site as well, and they are posted for anyone who reads it to see. | |
| | |
Posts: 2691
Location: Pewaukee, Wisconsin | Great stuff Dan !!!
Feel free to post anything and everything you find.
I will talk to you sometime this week or on Saturday.
| |
| | |
| Dan, I can see that there is a large amount of concern out there and I am extremely grateful that regardless of your initial concerns and opinions you are objective enough to forward our e-mails. For those of your associates who have some time there are a few websites that should be visited. Doing the homework on these issues has taken hundreds of hours of my personal time because when we started,I didn't know a lot about these processes. The lake association, for the first six-months, did not take any position on the use of aquatic herbicides until we did our investigation and determined that 2,4-D, a plant growth hormone, would be the best option. Additional info is that 64% of the membership who responded to the survey conducted at the informational meeting we held in October last year said that they wanted the entire lake treated. That simply is not a practical, reasonable, or a feasible approach to this eco-system. By the way, Dan, that was the first time I spoke with Dr. Anderson. He was with Ron the president of Muskies Inc. I also attended the presentation of Dr. Anderson's 2003 study at the Lake Pewaukee Sanitary District. I spent about 8 hours with Jeff Thornton from SEWRPC discussing the most recently produced plan for the lake.
For those of your members who are interested in more info they can e-mail me at [email protected]. I will be very happy to attach the website addresses mentioned earlier in this message.
The bottom line is that an informed, educated lake community is the best for the lake association and the lake. It is very difficult to get the truth out there when some people don't let the facts get in the way of their emotional response.
Once again, Dan, thank you for your objectivity and, While I don't want to sound flippant, "the truth will set us free".
| |
| | |
| Maybe tonights meeting of the Milwaukee Chapter of Muskies Inc. can provide us with some of Dr. Anderson's insights on this matter. The guest speaker at next months meeting is Dr. Thorton of SEWRPC who will be discussing the management of Pewaukee Lake's drainage basin. | |
| | |
Posts: 2691
Location: Pewaukee, Wisconsin | Bob Giblin,
We thank you for your time to read and discuss this post and its replys, feel free to post any info you might have for all to see.
This is a information site and lots of eyes are on this post.
Please update us when you can.
| |
| | |
Posts: 57
Location: Racine WI | I have to express my delight (and, admit it) surprise at how civil and sensible this thread has remained. It makes me hopeful about the human race to see such a hot-button issue calmly debated -- heartwarming! All sides are to be congratulated -- most of all for not *taking* sides in the sense of close-minded din that controversial issues usually degenerate into on almost every website. Thank you, one and all! | |
| | |
Posts: 1916
Location: Greenfield, WI | I will be providing an update of the situation to tonight's Muskies Inc. Meeting. I will update my post entitled, "Pewaukee Lake Weed Poisoning Update", afterwards.
Edited by Steve Van Lieshout 4/27/2004 5:30 PM
| |
| | |
Posts: 66
Location: Wales Wi. | I would also like to thank Bob Giblin for responding on this sight. Besides the obvious concern for the fishery, I am concerned about long term effects of water fowl ingesting this plant growth hormone(and they will) and is there any proof it is not harmful?. I am a state certified wildlife tech and I have only seen studys on pesticides and the effects they have on wildife, but have never seen anything stating that it is safe for water fowl to ingest 2,4-D. This proposed application has far more ramifications than is being looked at. Howie Knapp | |
| | |
| Last night I had an opportunity to speak at your monthly meeting. Someone had canceled and your group asked if I was available to fill in. What a great group you have. There must have been 50+. Your waterfowl question came up during the question and answer period. The 2,4-D we are proposing to use is actually in pellet form attached to clay particles. Once spread onto the water it falls to the sediment and decomposes over a few days. It's not available over time to the birds and because it's on the bottom and they don't have access to it. You can eat the fish you catch that day and you can feel free to swim in it. You just don't want to water your geraniums with it until the DNR removes the posted signs. It is actually a plant growth hormone and it has been described as forcing the plants to eat themselves to death. At 100 pounds per acre it is also specific to Eurasian watermilfoil and will not harm the native vegetation. My e-mail is [email protected]. We have a large amount of info on this weed that is plaguing north america. It can be beaten so the native vegetation can regain their foothold. It is just a matter of someone deciding that it needs to be done.
Our program is designed to encourage the growth of the natives because they are better for the water column. They give off more oxygen, grow slower and are just plain better habitat for the lake. Everything I have read says it is bad for the fishery to have this invasive species in Pewaukee Lake.
Thanks again to your organization for the opportunity to share the facts. Our program, contrary to what you may have heard, will affect 69 acre of shoreline and with one harvester, probably 150 acres in the center of the eastern basin. A lot of the productivity depends upon wind, weather, etc. So that's a total of 219 acres. This year we'll have to leave the rest to the milfoil.
This is a program designed to make some small attempts this year, monitor what effect it has had, and then, based upon our observations, put a plan an approach to be incorporated into the lake plan through amendment. | |
| | |
Posts: 7090
Location: Northwest Chicago Burbs | Thank you for the full explanation of the situation. | |
| | |
| Dear Bob and Bob and Concerned others,
These are the 3 MSDS's (Material Safety Data Sheets) In which I understand from a previous mailing which will be used. The Aqua-Kleen and the Dimethylamine along with BEE. I found them ALL to be disturbing especially the BEE which states it is Harmful in the environment and may cause long term adverse effects along with all the other numerous effects!
Bob G. as you have claimed numerous times that it is safe for swimming in etc. "but should wait until they remove the application signs". Maybe you should look a little closer at whats in these chemicals before you go claiming to the public as to how safe these really are!
Please don't reply with a Web site address as we are dealing with site specifics.
Thank You,
Dan White
Also, Bob, Please verify that these are the chemicals that you intend to use. So we can encourage everyone to go to these MSDS's and read more about the dangers and concerns.
http://ptcl.chem.ox.ac.uk/MSDS/DI/2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic_acid.ht...
http://ptcl.chem.ox.ac.uk/MSDS/DI/dimethyl_acetamide.html
http://ptcl.chem.ox.ac.uk/MSDS/DI/diethylenetriaminepentaacetic_aci...
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
(BEE):
http://ptcl.chem.ox.ac.uk/MSDS/DI/diethylenetriaminepentaacetic_aci...
Safety (MSDS) data for diethylenetriaminepentaacetic acid
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
General
Synonyms: 1,1,4,7,7-diethylenetriaminepentaacetic acid, 3,6,9-tris(carboxymethyl)3,6,9-triazaundecanedioic acid, DTPA, pentetic acid, detapac, detarex, dabeersen 503
Use:
Molecular formula: C14H23N3O10
CAS No: 67-43-6
EINECS No: 200-652-8
Physical data
Appearance: solid
Melting point: 220 C
Boiling point:
Vapour density:
Vapour pressure:
Density (g cm-3):
Flash point:
Explosion limits:
Autoignition temperature:
Water solubility: slight
Stability
Stable. Incompatible with strong oxidizing agents.
Toxicology
Harmful if swallowed. Respiratory and eye irritant. Possible evidence that this material may act as a carcinogen. Toxicology not fully investigated.
Toxicity data
(The meaning of any toxicological abbreviations which appear in this section is given here.)
ORL-RAT LD50 > 2000 mg kg-1
IPR-RAT LD50 587 mg kg-1
Risk phrases
(The meaning of any risk phrases which appear in this section is given here.)
R22 R36 R40.
R22 Harmful if swallowed.
R36 Irritating to eyes.
R40 Limited evidence of a carcinogenic effect.
Environmental information
Harmful in the environment - may cause long term adverse effects.
Transport information
(The meaning of any UN hazard codes which appear in this section is given here.)
UN No 3077. Hazard class 9. Packing group III.
Personal protection
Safety glasses, gloves, adequate ventilation.
Safety phrases
(The meaning of any safety phrases which appear in this section is given here.)
S26 S36 S61.
[Return to Physical & Theoretical Chemistry Lab. Safety home page.]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This information was last updated on February 17, 2004. We have tried to make it as accurate and useful as possible, but can take no responsibility for its use, misuse, or accuracy. We have not verified this information, and cannot guarantee that it is up-to-date.
Safety (MSDS) data for 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Aqua-Kleen:
http://ptcl.chem.ox.ac.uk/MSDS/DI/2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic_acid.ht...
General
Synonyms: 2,4-D, 2,4-D acid, dichlorophenoxyacetic acid, 2,4-dichlorophenoxyethanoic acid, dichlorophenoxyethanoic acid, Agrotect, Amidox, Asgrow Aqua KD, Amoxone, Aqua-kleen, Chloroxone, Crop rider, formula 40, Decamine, Ed-weed, Dicopur, Dicotox, DMA-4, Dormone, Emulsamine BK, Envert DT, Ferminine, Lawn-keep, Miracle, Monosan, Netagrone, pannamine, Weedtox, Weedtrol, Verton, numerous further trade names
Use: herbicide, defoliant, weed killer, fruit drop controller. Component of Agent Orange.
Molecular formula: Cl2C6H3OCH2COOH
CAS No: 94-75-7
EINECS No: 202-361-1
Physical data
Appearance: light yellow crystalline powder
Melting point: 136 - 140 C
Boiling point: decomposes
Vapour density:
Vapour pressure:
Density (g cm-3): 1.56
Flash point:
Explosion limits:
Autoignition temperature:
Water solubility: decomposes
Stability
Stable, but moisture-sensitive and may be light-sensitive. Incompatible with strong oxidizing agents, corrodes many metals. Decomposes in water.
Toxicology
Toxic if swallowed or inhaled. Experimental carcinogen and teratogen. May be harmful by skin contact. May cause CNS damage. Eye, skin and respiratory irritant. NTP lethal dose 700 mg kg-1; acceptable daily intake 0-0.3 mg kg-1.
Toxicity data
(The meaning of any toxicological abbreviations which appear in this section is given here.)
ORL-HMN LDLO 80 mg kg-1
ORL-RAT LD50 370 mg kg-1
SKN-RAT LD50 1500 mg kg-1
ORL-RBT LDLO 800 mg kg-1
SKN-RBT LD50 1400 mg kg-1
Risk phrases
(The meaning of any risk phrases which appear in this section is given here.)
R23 R24 R25 R36 R37 R38.
R23 Toxic by inhalation.
R24 Toxic in contact with skin.
R25 Toxic if swallowed.
R36 Irritating to eyes.
R37 Irritating to respiratory system.
R38 Irritating to skin.
Transport information
(The meaning of any UN hazard codes which appear in this section is given here.)
UN No 2765. Hazard class 6.1. Packing group II.
Personal protection
Safety glasses, rubber gloves. Ensure adequate ventilation.
Safety phrases
(The meaning of any safety phrases which appear in this section is given here.)
S26 S37 S39.
[Return to Physical & Theoretical Chemistry Lab. Safety home page.]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This information was last updated on January 20, 2004. We have tried to make it as accurate and useful as possible, but can take no responsibility for its use, misuse, or accuracy. We have not verified this information, and cannot guarantee that it is up-to-date.
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
DMA:
"The Dimethylamine Salt"
http://ptcl.chem.ox.ac.uk/MSDS/DI/dimethyl_acetamide.html
Safety (MSDS) data for dimethyl acetamide
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
General
Synonyms: N,N-dimethylacetamide, DMAC, dimethylamide acetate, acetyldimethylamine, DMA, U-5954
Molecular formula: C4H9NO
CAS No: 127-19-5
EINECS: 204-826-4
Physical data
Appearance: colourless liquid with a faint ammonia odour (recognition threshold value 47 ppm)
Melting point: -20 C
Boiling point: 166 C
Vapour density: 3
Vapour pressure: 9 mm Hg at 60 C
Specific gravity: 0.937
Flash point: 70 C
Explosion limits:
Autoignition temperature:
Water solubility: moderate
Stability
Stable. Combustible. Incompatible with strong oxidising agents.
Toxicology
Harmful by inhalation, ingestion and through skin contact. Experimental teratogen. Eye irritant. Typical TLV 10 ppm.
Toxicity data
(The meaning of any abbreviations which appear in this section is given here.)
ORL-RAT LD50 5090 mg kg-1
IPR-RAT LD50 2750 mg kg-1
ORL-MUS LD50 4260 mg kg-1
IVN-RBT LDLO 8340 mg kg-1
IVN-MUS LD50 3020 mg kg-1
Risk phrases
(The meaning of any risk phrases which appear in this section is given here.)
R20 R21 R36.
R20 Harmful by inhalation.
R21 Harmful in contact with skin.
R36 Irritating to eyes.
Transport information
Personal protection
Safety glasses, adequate ventilation.
Safety phrases
(The meaning of any safety phrases which appear in this section is given here.)
S2 S26 S28 S36.
[Return to Physical & Theoretical Chemistry Lab. Safety home page.]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This information was last updated on September 5, 2003. We have tried to make it as accurate and useful as possible, but can take no responsibility for its use, misuse, or accuracy. We have not verified this information, and cannot guarantee that it is up-to-date.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
Edited by esox-dan 4/29/2004 7:51 AM
| |
| | |
| I see that there is another thread in discussion concerning some of these issues. I will continue using this thread. | |
| | |
| Bob and Bob,
I have been re-reading some of my mailings. The exact chemicals being used I am a little unsure of for the fact that the comments I have recieved are unclearly worded. The MSDS's above are from what I gather is to be used. Please state the exact chemicals involved with the Pewaukee Lake application. So, We can then post the proper MSDS's IF in need of correction.
I apologize for the haste in this matter.
Thank You,
Dan White | |
| | |
Posts: 66
Location: Wales Wi. | Thanks Bob, after reading all the impact statements I could find on 2,4-D BEE (granular form) it seems that the hormone does not bioaccumulate in water fowl. It is recommended to not use 2,4-D BEE during nesting or migration periods. There are alot of facts that you did not mention and do not serve your interest. #1. 2,4-D BEE is the most toxic form of plant hormone here in the US and it is recomended to use a less toxic form if possible. #2. Sediment Statement, due to the extremely high toxicity of 2.4-D BEE there is potential for adverse impact to the Biota based on the results of laboratory studys. (this toxicity is lessened to some degree in nature. #4.Evidence that Algae numbers increase due to the release of nitrogen and phosphate from decaying plants.(Pewaukee lake already has a Algae problem). This also destroys the food chain in the treated area. As mentioned in another post 2.4-D BEE is a cousin to 2,4,4-T (AGENT ORANGE) without the Dioxin molecule. 30 years later and the side effects of growth hormones are just being uncovered. Yes 2.4-D BEE will kill Eurasion Watermilfoil, but this application is purely cosmetic and does not warrent the future risk to Man and enviroment. The truth will set you free, but sometimes the truth is stranger than fiction. Howie Knapp. | |
| | |
| Here is what the DNR has replied with:
April 29, 2004
Dear Concerned Member of the Public:
The Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (Department) appreciates your concern for the natural resources of this great State. This letter will respond to a number of contacts received about the City of Pewaukee’s proposed Aquatic Plant Management permit applications.
Before issuance of a permit for chemical control of aquatic plants, the Department considers the following: Is the proposed chemical labeled and registered for us? Does it have a current chemical fact sheet? Are the applicants proposing to use the herbicide in a way that in consistent with its registered label? Will the treatment result in a hazard to humans, animals or other nontarget organisms? Will the treatment result in a significant adverse effect on the body of water? Is the proposed chemical treatment beyond 150 feet of shore? Will the treatment significantly injure fish, fish eggs, fish larvae, essential fish food organisms or wildlife, either directly or through habitat destruction? Is the treatment proposed in an area known to have threatened or endangered species, Is the treatment in designated sensitive areas? (per Wis. Adm. Code NR 107)
Before issuance of a permit for mechanical harvesting of aquatic plants, the Department considers the following: Are aquatic plants causing significant impairment of beneficial water use activities? Will the proposed plan for control remedy the water use impairments? Will the control result in a hazard to humans? Will the control cause significant adverse impacts to threatened or endangered species? Will the control result in significant adverse effect on water quality, aquatic habitat or the aquatic community, including the native plant community? Is the control in locations identified by the Department as Sensitive Areas? Will the control result in significant adverse long-term or permanent changes to a plant community or a high value species in a specific aquatic ecosystem? Will the control interfere with the rights of riparians? (per Wis. Adm. Code NR 109)
The chemical 2,4-D does have a chemical fact sheet, which can be provided by the Department upon request. This document explains the manufacturers, formulations, effectiveness and selectivity, use considerations, water use restrictions, registration status, impacts on fish and other aquatic organisms, herbicide degradation, persistence and trace contaminants, and human health impacts from the chemical.
The Department relies on the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Wisconsin Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection to register chemical products for aquatic use. The EPA has determined that “no unreasonable adverse effects” will occur as a result of using 2,4-D according to label instructions. “Unreasonable” in the EPA definition means the risk of using a herbicide does not exceed the benefits. The selectivity of 2,4-D to control Eurasian Water Milfoil and not harm native aquatic pondweeds is considered to be important to the Department. Diverse native plant habitats are preferred to monotypical stands of Eurasian Water Milfoil. Native stands of aquatic plants tend not to grow to nuisance levels and provide better, more diverse habitats for a number of aquatic species.
Fisherman and others concerned about impacts to fish: 2,4-D, depending on application rates, will only impact watermilfoil, coontail, waterlilly, watersheild and bladderwort species. However, if permitted, the Department will be supervising the treatment and will be limiting the use of 2,4-D in areas where it may adversely affect native plant species. The Department will also be ensuring the application takes place in a manner, which will limit the potential for the dissolved oxygen “crashes”. The chemical 2,4-D is not known to affect pondweeds, commonly referred to as “musky cabbage”.
The City of Pewaukee had originally applied for up to 69 acres of selective herbicide treatment and up to 650 acres of harvesting of the invasive aquatic plant Eurasian Water Milfoil. The Department met with the City on Thursday April 29, 2004 to discuss the pending permits. During the meeting, the City presented a reduced proposal for chemical and harvesting treatments.
The current herbicide proposal is the treatment of up to 43.6 acres with the selective herbicide 2,4-D in the granular form, brand name-Navigate. The current mechanical proposal is for the harvesting of up to 100 acres beyond 150 feet from shore, for the purpose of maintaining a navigational channel in the eastern bay. The City has altered their harvesting procedure from a deep cut to a shallow top cut to a depth of 3 feet or less. The City will be issuing a public notice for the amended proposal within the next week as required by Wisconsin Administrative Code NR 107. If five or more people request in writing, to the applicant, that they would like to have a public informational meeting, then the applicant (City) will be required to hold an informational meeting. The purpose of an informational meeting is for the applicant to present the proposed project to the public. This meeting is not a public hearing, but a presentation from the applicant followed by a public question and answer period.
The Department has received multiple phone messages, emails and letters of “objection” and “opposition” to the proposed Aquatic Plant Management practices by the City of Pewaukee. These “objections” cannot be given weight unless they are filed in accordance to Wisconsin State Statute 227. The public has the right to request a contested case hearing pursuant to Wisconsin State Statute 227.42. A request for contested case hearing may be filed prior to a permit decision by the Department and may also be filed up to 30 days after the Department makes a decision. Additionally, the public has the right to request a judicial review pursuant to Wisconsin State Statute 227.52 and 227.53, within 30 days of a Department decision. If a hearing is granted after the Department has issued a permit, the discretion for allowing chemical treatment to proceed before the hearing relies upon the Department.
If the Department issues a permit for chemical application, then two important permit conditions the public should be aware of are: 1) Treatment in permitted areas will not be performed in front of riparian property owners if the property owners indicate they do not want treatment in writing to the applicant (City of Pewaukee). 2) A copy of this decision and the enclosed permit shall be provided to riparian property owners in and adjacent to the treatment area before the treatment may occur. The Department also requires the City of Pewaukee to have several copies of the decision and enclosed permit available for public inspection.
This response was authored to answer a compilation of questions posed to the Department from a variety of individuals. If you feel your question was not properly answered or you would like to obtain further information from the Department, then feel free to contact me at 262.574.2171.
Sincerely,
Gabriel J Powers
Water Resources Specialist
Fisheries and Habitat
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources
(() phone: (262)574-2171
(() fax: (262)574-2117
(+) e-mail: [email protected]
| |
| | |
| Dan,
You only have to wait for the signs to be removed for watering you plants. | |
| | |
Posts: 66
Location: Wales Wi. | Mr. Giblin I have heard that the DNR has denied the application permit and that it has been changed and resubmitted. Would you please confirm or deny this and let us know what changes are proposed. Thanks Howie Knapp. | |
| | |
| Cmon you guys...how is this such a bad thing. I live on the east side of the lake and I do my fair share of fishing and leisure boating. The fishing on the lake has been less than impressive the last few years but the weeds on the east end have been absolutley atroshus (sp). I cant even take my boat for a spin (on the eastside) without having to stop and throw it in reverse to blow the weeds outta my prop. Your concerns are that the poisoning is going to kill off 64.5% of the fish on the east end but ive emailed the dnr about this and recieved quite a lenghty reply regarding the issue. If you go about 10 posts up from this one you will see a reply which another person in this forum got from the dnr regarding the issue and it pretty much says the same thing and the reply i got, the poisoning will not affect the fishing as much as the speculation is. If you want details read that post above, im not gonna copy and paste the same thing twice.
Whats my point ? If the dnr says that poisoning the east end to kill the weeds isnt going to kill off all the fish like all of you think then where are you getting this info that its going to kill off 64.5% ? Alot of you are thinking that im just a water skiier and not a fisherman but im not. I fish the lake religously (being that i live on it) and have had some impressive fish pulled outta the lake but compared to any other lake, especially northbound, the fishing on pewaukee lake is terrible. Ice fishing is my favorite and i have an 10 x 10 shante out from waterfront by the island. I think for all the time i spent in that shack (that i can remember) i had 10 flags all last year. You guys are that serious about the fishing being so good that we cant let this poisoning happen ?
GIVE ME A BREAK !!!
| |
| | |
Posts: 3242
Location: Racine, Wi | I won't get into the details as to why this is a bad idea, as there is enough info to read above. I will let you know that Pewaukee is definitely a first rate fishery right now. For being an urban lake, it puts out plenty of fish, and is one of the top musky fisheries in Wi. If the fish aren't biting for you, maybe you could hang out on the site, and learn some tips. The fishing up north could be considered better, as on any given weekend, there aren't 2000+ people using the lake.
As for Ice fishing, I don't do much, but the one day I was on the lake this winter, we caught 3 walleye, a couple of bass, and 6 or 7 northern. Not too bad for a days fishing.
The east end is going to be weedy, as it is a flooded marsh!!!! The average depth is maybe 5 feet, and that is not with the river channel included. It doesn't take much for the weeds to grow that high. The west end doesn't have that problem as it is deeper.
If we were to turn Pewaukee into what it was 10000 years ago like Bob would like to do, they would dry up the east end, and you would have a 1000 acre lake, as it started. Just the west end would exist. That would be the natural form of the lake.
We are trying to listen to all sides, and are not attacking anyone, we are looking into the proposal, and want what is best for the lake. | |
| | |
| Howie,
The permits were not denied. We met with the DNR on Thursday and were asked to fill in some of the gaps in the permit applications. We were also encouraged to reduce the plan of operation for 2004. In the interest of getting this done, the city representatative and I decided to ammend the plan. We brought the 2,4-D area down by almost half to 43 acres instead of 69. Also the harvest permit application (formally 600 acres) was reduced to 100. We only have the possibility of one harvester so with 2 to 6 inches growth per day of this invasive species, we wouldn't be able to handle much more than that anyway.
Unfortunately for your organization, that won't be helping your fishery much. If you read the posting from the DNR, the eurasion water milfoil does not allow natives like "musky cabbage" to get much of a foothold. I was talking with a biologist about the form letter that was going around the Muskies Inc. meeting and he asked me if you guys knew that this effort was going to be great for the fishing. I had explained that there was an anonymous e-mail going around that was full of misinformation and had generated a lot of concern on the part of the fisherman. Thanks for asking Howie. It is always better to get it from the source. | |
| | |
Posts: 66
Location: Wales Wi. | Thanks Mr. Giblin for the update, I think we all agree that Eurasion Watermilfoil is a bad thing for the Muskie fishery in any lake. I just disagree with the methods to be used because it does nothing for the rest of the lake but raise the Algae numbers and enter you into a cycle of having to reapply 2,4-D because Milfoil spreads so easy. I am not sure how long Pewaukee lake has had Milfoil but the Muskie fishery is in good shape putting out several 50" fish this year (no not me) and I do not have to tell you how much fishing pressure it gets you see it every day..thanks again Howie. | |
| | |
| Howie,
From everything I've read, and that's a lot, EWM can be beaten. All the tools are there, it's just a matter of overcoming the sociological issues.
Here's a few we have been dealing with:
We have three different municipalities with jurisdiction on the lake and political issues with the sanitary district who has been "in charge" of most of the lake for decades. When an organization like ours starts to object to the condition of the lake they would, naturally, get offended by the implication that their services have been inadequate. The anonymous, inflammatory and innacurate e-mails have scared a lot of good people who care deeply about our lake. If I could find out who sent those e-mails I would be able to provide all the info they need to make an informed decision. (Though I suspect that may not have been one of their objectives.) There are a couple of people who hate the City of Pewaukee and will use any tactic to discredit them and it looks like I got caught in the middle. Also, we have landscapers coming from as far away as Madison who successfully lobbied against our zero-phosphorous fertilizer ordinance in two of the three municipalities.
That's what we have been dealing with before we ever get a chance to start working on the lake.
The milfoil has been in four counties in Wisconsin, Waukesha county lakes among them, since the early 1960's. Since that time, the open water area has never been addressed. Pewaukee Lake was literally, because of it's popularity, one of the mechanisms which spread the EWM to more than 60 counties in our state. The only areas in Pewaukee Lake that historically have been cut are the shoreline areas so the owners could get their boats out and swim etc. Our organization is the first group to come out against letting this foreign invasive species flourish in our lake. We can't just wait for a winter snow cover to reduce the problem. We need to gather and use the tools available to eradicate this stuff. As I said before, It's good for the fishery, good for the waters of Wisconsin, and good for the other recreational uses like boating and swimming.
The use of 2,4-D comes under the heading of not reinventing the wheel. This stuff will allow us to get the harvesters out of the shallow areas where they stir up tons of silt and lets us get at the growth areas in the center of the eastern basin that continuously spreads the weed.
I spoke with a number of lake district and lake association officers on friday. Below is an e-mail I received, which is pretty representative of the responses, from someone who has used the product we have selected. By the way, I just found out that Loon Lake has (according to DNA tests) a hybrid of EWM. It didn't seem to respond as well to the plant growth hormone 2,4-D.
Dear Bob,
I am sorry about all the trouble you are having with people against using
2-4-D. We had really good experiences on Wilson and Kusel Lakes with it. The
lake district of which I am president is a three- lake district.
I'll speak first about Wilson Lake. It is about 75 acres and shallow. A few
years ago it had a lot of milfoil also. They treated about 20 acres with
Navigate. Although there were some residents who didn't want it near their
properties. Navigate was not put near those 5 properties. The next year there was
just a few patches where they treated and then in the untreated areas that
was not treated. That year even those five properties wanted it all treated.
It is almost completely gone now. However, curly leaf pondweed came up
abundantly in many places where the milfoil had been. Last summer they treated 10
acres of pondweed and this spring they will retreat those 10 acres. That should
take care of the pondweed.
Kusel Lake, where our cottage is, has a little different history. About 7
years ago the 80 acre lake was so full of milfoil that a duck could have walked
around the lake on the milfoil. Sailboats and canoes could not get through
the stretches. We agreed to participate with U.W. Stevens Point in a study to
see the effectiveness of beetles in eating and destroying the milfoil. Over
that winter most of our milfoil crashed for some unknown reason. There were
just a few patches left. Beetles were put in one patch. That experiment was not
effective in our lake. The beetle population decreased by a lot and the
milfoil continued to grow. The next summer we contracted with Aquatic Biologists
to treat the milfoil. They treated about 8 acres that were near shore. That
same summer Chad did an aquatic plant study for us, so that the next summer we
could treat those areas further out than 100 feet. The next summer we
treated about 8 more acres. Last summer the milfoil that was visible was in very
small patches, so we did not treat at all. This summer we plan to treat those
areas to keep it under control. Kusel Lake property owners were not used to
paying for anything because we had never had any problems until the milfoil
came. WE assess by charges per property on each lake. When we were treating more
acres the charges were higher. Since then we have been collecting about $35
per property and building up a reserve to have available whenever we need to
treat milfoil. That has worked well for us.
Since the initial Wilson Lake treatment we have had no one against
treating. It is almost the opposite now. People will contact me to look at weeds
to see if it is milfoil. If it is, they want it taken care of right away.
That isn't very practical, but this year on Kusel we will take care of what is
there, which should only amount to a couple of acres.
Hopefully this helps. Chad has been good to work with also.
Sincerely,
Barb Nass, President
Kusel, Wilson, & Round Lake Protection &
Rehabilitation District
Sorry about the length of this e-mail but, there's a lot to cover and I need a strong group like Muskies Inc. on my side when I have to deal with the municipalities around the lake.
Thanks again,
Bob Giblin
president
PLIA | |
| | |
Posts: 66
Location: Wales Wi. | Mr. Giblin, thank you for all the effort you have put into this and all the info that you have passed along. I can see how EWM could be controled on a small 80 acre lake when fully treated, but I do not see this happening to Pewaukee lake for all the political reasons you mentioned. I think the scaled back plan will be more acceptable to the DNR and might ease the worry of all the folks who have worked hard at making Pewaukee a great urban fishery. It would be interesting to see the effects to the fish in the treated area say 3 to 4 weeks after "its safe". You are more than welcome to join me since I feel I owe you a outing for your efforts and patience with an old water beater like me. Thanks Howie Knapp. | |
| | |
Posts: 3242
Location: Racine, Wi | I just received this e-mail, that shows that we are getting less than stellar info from the Lake Assoc. This is from the Superintendent of the Lake Pewaukee Sanitary Dist.
It is my understanding that certain comments were made at your meeting relative to the Lake Pewaukee Sanitary District’s position on the Pewaukee Lake Improvement Association’s proposed harvesting and chemical treatment plan for Pewaukee lake. Based on information I have received from several members of your organization our position was misrepresented at your meeting. I would like to make the following points perfectly clear;
The Lake Pewaukee Sanitary District is not working closely with the Improvement Association and the District can not support either the chemical treatment or the open water harvesting plan they are proposing.
I am not working closely with the Improvement Association and do not support the chemical treatment or the open water harvesting plan.
The District has not entered into an agreement with the association for the lease of any equipment. I did report in error in my April Newsletter that an agreement had been reached but a draft proposal for a lease that was presented to the City has never been finalized.
We have asked the Association not to make these statements on at least two occasions but they continue to do so.
The District will not be involved in any activities related to the use of chemicals. The District had used chemicals for forty years from 1945 to 1985. These included copper sulfate (97,829 pounds), Blue Vitriol(30,030 pounds), Cultrine and Cultrine+ ( 6,492 pounds, 2,532 gallons) Sodium Arsenite (arsenic 334,232 pounds) and smaller amounts of Diquat, Endothal and Aquathol. Over a 17 year span, beginning in 1962, the District used a total of 2,390 gallons of 2-4D. In 1985, at the recommendation of the 1984 Lake Management Plan drafted by the Regional Planning Commission, the District discontinued all use of chemicals.
This District’s decision was prompted by three main issues. First, there was no long -term biological improvement in the areas that had been annually chemically treated. Virtually all native plants had disappeared from these areas and they were now dominated by Eurasian water milfoil. Second, while the short-term lethal effects are relatively understood, the long term sublethal effects on a very complex biological system like the lake are relatively unknown. And finally insurance companies had discontinued all liability coverage for the application of chemicals to a lake. There is still no liability coverage available from any company for the deliberate application of chemicals to the lake. The only coverage is for incidents like an accidental spill or over spray.
In 1990 a Citizen Advisory Committee was formed to do research on chemical use. I asked that they do all the research and to develop their own list of contacts so that they were not influenced in any way by the District.
After their research, the group’s recommendation was to not reinstate a chemical treatment program. Their conclusion was that it was not a good long term approach to lake management. Recommendations included working on ways to reduce non-point pollution in the water shed, a wetland purchase program to insure permanent protection of these areas, increased watershed education, and a focus on harvesting. We should also work to bring back native plants as competition for the milfoil. To quote from their report " Focus on lake management rather than weed eradication". We have been following those recommendations.
Working with the Regional Planning Commission, the DNR and Dr. Robert Anderson of Wisconsin Lutheran College, the District completed a new Lake Management Plan in 2003. Plant surveys that were done over the last 15 years are included in that plan. Although milfoil is still the dominant species in the lake, relative densities of various plants shows that in most areas of the lake our native plant communities are slowly recovering. We believe that the management plan we are following is working towards the long-term improvement and balance of the lake aquatic plant system that will benefit the fishery as well.
As with the rehabilitation of any biological system the key word is patience. Systems are very easily disrupted but take a long time to recover. Our concern is that the large scale harvesting and chemical treatments that are proposed will disrupt the progress that has been made towards a balanced ecosystem in the lake.
I can give you contact info if you have any questions on this. | |
| | |
| Park Ave Resident,
Yes, the fishing on Pewaukee Lake is that good that we should not be poisoning it. The past few years have been outstanding for muskie fishing. Last year the Milwaukee Chapter of Muskies Inc members alone caught and released 542 muskies. Of these, over 200 were caught on Pewaukee Lake. There is not one other lake ANYWHERE (including Canada) that produced this many fish for our club members. | |
| | |
| Everyone should know by now that our association has done a lot of homework on the lake issues. There is a very interesting quote from John Madsen Ph.D, who works for the U.S.G.S. He says that public officials will do nothing because that is the safe thing to do.
Doing nothing is easy and risk free. Pewaukee Lake has been part of the problem for the entire state for decades...especially when the avid fisherman go from lake-to-lake constantly, transporting milfoil. Allowing the EWM to flourish as we have for four decades has been socially irresponsible.
The PLIA has gotten three reduced phosphorous ordinances passed in less than a year. What have the public officials been doing?
Nothing.
The PLIA is recommending the use of 2,4-d granular formulation. When did the Sanitary District use this?
Never.
When has the Sanitary District been helpful to the Pewaukee Lake Improvement Association?
Once....when we began the movement to get the phosphorous ordinance passed. That's the only time we worked together. When I say we worked together, what I mean is that we agreed with each other in front of the village board and town board. The LPSD spends more time telling people they are not working with us than they spend on finding better ways to fix the lake. From the perspective of the Lake Association, we think it would be great to be working with the LPSD. We, unfortunately, are stomping on their turf and have not made any secret that we are not happy with the "safe" do-nothing approach. We are the first group in 13 years to question what they are or are not doing. In fairness, I would be threatened by that too.
As I mentioned above about doing nothing, it is not necessarily the LPSD's fault. It's kind of built into the job decription of public officials. We, on the other hand, are not restricted by job security issues. We're all volunteers. Eradication of EWM is our goal and more native vegetation is better for the fish.
Regarding the patience comment. For twenty years (probably forty) nothing has been done in the center of the eastern basin. If you are only managing 6% of the ecosystem and ignoring the rest, how much do you think is going to get accomplished?
Another item. The last time anything chemical was done with a large quantity was 1981 when 303 gallons of 2,4-d was used on 49 acres. It depends upon the concentration of the solution but, that should have been enough to do a couple of hundred acres. The state of Wisconsin passed a law which was enacted in 1987, that you could not use any kind of pesticide or herbicide without being licensed and certified. There is specific training required so you don't end up spraying plant killing agents all over a residents' propert, as people have claimed happened in the past when the LPSD used the liquid chemical.
Things change. We can't be afraid of change. What has not changed in our society in the last 20 years? If medicine said "we tried something 20 years ago and it didn't work, so let's never try it again" ... where would we be today? Chemical companies have made advances and massive amounts of research have been done by the EPA. To cling on to a recommendation made 15-20 years ago is naive and detrimental to the water column. You are all muskie fisherman. Has any of your equipment improved over the last 20 years? Would you throw everything away that you use today and go back to what you used 20 years ago?
I'd like to take a small poll of visitors to this site:
1) Do you think Eurasian Watermilfoil is good for fishing?
2) Do you think native vegetation would be better for the fish?
3) Do you think the DNR would approve permits for chemical treatment if it was bad for the ecosystem?
4) Do you think doing nothing in the center of the eastern basin will help the milfoil problem go away?
5) Do you think the reduced phosphorous ordinances would have been passed if it wasn't for the Pewaukee Lake Improvement
Association? And when do you think that eventually would have happened?
We, at the lake association, are here to get things done. We don't have to worry about job security and the political issues are not insurmountable if we have enough help from organizations like yours and other people who truly care. Over the past four decades most of the resources of lake management have been devoted to cleaning up the shorelines of the property owners. That approach has been sorely inadequate as the milfoil has flourished everywhere else on the lake. We, at the PLIA, are truly taking a very thoughtful approach, with the quality and health of the ecosystem as the top priority.
We have been trying to get the other municipalities to participate in eco-system based management called the Pewaukee Lake Management Committee. I could use your help. If you have any influence or relationships with the Town of Delafield and the Village of Pewaukee, we have empty chairs waiting for their participation. Once we get this committee complete, we will be able to invite the yacht club, Muskies Inc., the DNR, and a number of other organizations to address the committee with their thoughts, concerns, and recommendations regarding Pewaukee Lake. With all three communities present, we can get things done better, easier, and faster.
Thanks for reading yet another embarassingly long e-mail.
Bob Giblin
President
PLIA
| |
| | |
Posts: 376
Location: Cudahy, Wisconsin | Let me ask you fellow musky anglers this- How many of you know that they have been spraying Okauchee lake for 4-5 years now? How many of you have been into Tierny lake recently? They sprayed Tierny 3 years ago and now it has 5 muskies/acre. Before they sprayed it was all milfoil now it is mostly cabbage and no milfoil . The permit for Okauchee says they can spray 150 acres. I talked to a person who works for the DNR and handles these issues everyday and he opened my eyes quite a bit. The reason most people are against it is because Bob Giblin is not very good at "selling" it. Right now I am 50/50 on the subject. I do not support Bob Giblin or his ideas but I think some minds would change if you heard all the pros/cons from a DNR employee.
Edited by TUFFY 5/15/2004 4:12 PM
| |
| | |
Posts: 376
Location: Cudahy, Wisconsin | ttt | |
| | |
Posts: 2515
Location: Waukesha & Land O Lakes, WI | There's a meeting again tonight to discuss this issue....6:30 to 9pm in the Pewaukee HS cafeteria.
510 Lake Street. | |
| | |
| I attended the meeting which we heard many VALID arguments about why this is NOT a good idea at this time. The DNR was there and well spoken along with the aqua biologist. The rest of the people affiliated with the P.L.I.A. were in my opinion wearing blinders and full of hot air while attempting to answer questions to the overwhelming opposition.
Dan White | |
| | |
Posts: 2691
Location: Pewaukee, Wisconsin | Dan, you should have stayed longer to talk to Bob and his Chemical Sidekicks.
I talked to Charlie Shong for about a hour after the meeting and I can't believe that after 40 year of experiance with Pewaukee Lake Sanitary Weed cutting he is not involved in this.
The problem is:
The lake association is made up of lots of people that have plenty of money and just want to get the lake cleared up of weeds. They are looking for this "SILVER BULLET" or "EASY FIX" that they can just write a check and make the weeds go away !!!
This easy fix is not going to happen. Repeated applications are needed to keep this milfoil in check. That is a fact. Do they know about all the extra applications, I doubt it, that will come after the money is raised for the first one.
Second, the DNR has not done any tests with this stuff on Pewaukee Lake to see if it might conlfict with any other native weeds or soils under the water.
Why not take a test patch and see what it can do? Not two shorelines full of spawning Bass and Bluegills in the east end of Pewaukee.
I went to this meeting with a very open mind and came out of it with more confusion.
Lots of very good questions were side stepped.
Why is the DNR not more involved with the fishery part of it.
You can't tell me that if you spread this stuff all over spawning beds of fish doing their part to reproduce it will not affect them. Dirrect applications on spawning beds can't be good for the fishery.
The weed cutting in the middle of the lake is another issue.
Do you think they can sucessfully cut a giant trench in the middle of the East end?
Where will all the weeds go that don't get picked up by the cutters?
Milfoil can reroot its self and will be spread all over the lake while this cutting is being done.
How can this help the lake by spreading the milfoil to other parts of the lake? I know under perfect conditions it could be done with some minor problems. But what if they have to do this under less than perfect conditions.
Who is going to cut this trench?
Charlie crew would be the best bet but he wants nothing to do with this whole mess. He went into great detail with me and a few others after the meeting and he has some great points that need to be addressed before this is done.
Bottom line is: Lots of money from people who don't care about the fishery or future of the fishery are headding this. If the DNR and the residents of Pewaukee Lake don't get involved and learn more about this there could be long lasting effects on Pewaukee Lake and its habitat.
I am all for working a small patch or area this year to see what this stuff can do. Lets not go jump into a large scale prodject.
Tha mayor's house or houses are in the planned area, he is building a new house in a area cleaner and deeper. I believe he is all for this due to the increased value of his 3 or 4 properties he is getting ready to sell and has plenty of other people on his band wagon.
Lets keep a open mind and try this out on a small controled area.
Why are we in such a rush to get it done this year?
The lake has been like this since I was a kid, I remember swimming and getting rashes due to the chemicals they dumped into the lake years ago. I don't think the small amounts of chemicals helped the lake or hurt it. The lake has not changed for the worse, if anything for the better.
The start of sewer was a huge plus for the lake. The controled test of this stuff could be the next step. Who knows, lets give it a small shot and study what it can do for Pewaukee lake. Lets not rush into a huge plan before we know what we are doing.
Bob and his chemical cowboys might have to hold back a year. This will help teach people more about the long lasting effects it could have for Pewaukee Lake. GOOD OR BAD.
I am all for a test patch under a controled DNR watch. Maybe this is good for the lake, if so they could prove it to everyone. What is the hurry this year?
We just don't know enough about this chemical and it long lasting effects on Pewaukee Lake.
Sorry for the long post but I had to vent this morning.
Bob, I believe we need to protect Pewaukee Lake against any quick fix, lets try to work together to inform everyone involved about the pro's and con's with this issue. I didn't get anything out of the meting last night. I did get plenty of quality information out of Charlie Shong after the meeting last night. Lets try to all work together and work out whats best for Pewaukee Lake not the rich snobs that want their property values to grow.
The future of Pewaukee Lake is the issue not property value. | |
| | |
| If you want to hear a true expert on the whole Pewaukee Lake weed issue come to the Milwaukee Chapter of Muskies Inc. meeting on Tuesday, May 24, at 7:30 pm.
Dr. Bruce Thorton who did a study on the Pewaukee Lake Drainage Basin will be there to share his knowledge and answer any questions you might have regarding this issue.
There are many changes that affect our area lakes that we as fisherman and conservationists should be aware off. Many of them we will have no control over, but there are some things that we can do to protect our lakes, rivers, and streams. | |
| | |
Posts: 7
| The following may be of some interest...
http://www.aquatics.org/bmp.htm
This website has the 2004 Best Management Practices handbook. Obviously it backs up our plan. This is supporting documentation on our plan. We just found out about it a week or so ago. It's a much easier document to handle than all the other things we've read. It also doesn't get into the political or sociological problems specific to Pewaukee Lake.
I think that if you look at the credentials of those involved with the handbook you'll find that there isn't anyone in our community that has this kind of expertise.
With regard to the local issues,...none of our plan evolved from a relationship with any of the community leaders. Believe it or not, that is a good thing. It is all very objective. You will find that this 2004 handbook, the most up-to-date research we have, conflicts with information you have received verbally from people who, at this point, unfortunately, have something to lose. Things you hear from people do not qualify as researched evidence. We try to back up everything we have proposed with evidence-based facts. All we are getting in response from our detractors are emotionally-based reactions. If there is a viable reason not to proceed based upon research, not emotion or scare tactics, we have yet to hear it.
Our proposal is an integrated management plan based upon the best thing for Pewaukee lake and the waters of Wisconsin. The fishing, the water quality, the algae, the boating, the native vegetation, the aesthetic value, the reduction of further milfoil spread, the use of local resources--equipment, money, labor, time, and, yes, real estate values have all been taken into account.
The lake association was watching last year when a few of the lake property owners wanted to treat their shore areas with 2,4-d. We thought that would give us a great opportunity to monitor the effects of the treatment as we had not yet taken a position on its use in Pewaukee Lake. Unfortunately someone threatened a law suit and brought the test to a screeching halt. At that time last year we hadn't had enough information to take a position on the products use. That is not the case today. This is not an experiment, it is widely and successfully used and approved. Also, how does 1.7% of the lake comprise a large scale project?
Read the handbook and get back to me. My e-mail is [email protected]. I look forward to hearing from you.
| |
| | |
Posts: 2691
Location: Pewaukee, Wisconsin | Very good stuff Bob !!!
Keep posting what you have good or bad.
Bob, what do you think is going to happen to Pewaukee if the weeds grow higher that usual due to the high water levels?
I know last time it happened the weeds were sticking out of the water when the water returned to normal levels and that will cause plenty of concern from everyone.
What is the status of the project as of today?
Water temps are in the mid 60 on the east end and the weeds are comming on strong.
Is there going to be anything done this year?
Maybe a small scale test in a few areas?
This is going to be a weed choked year if we get lots of hot weather in the next week or two. | |
| | |
| This is my comment on the "hearing" last week.
Mike, I am sorry I missed that, it sounds like it was a little more informative than the meeting itself. I am unfortunately one that can only handle talking to politicians for a short time.
From the beginning I have expressed an interest for the problems with the weeds. I have been skeptical because of the haste in the matter, which was also brought up at the meeting.
People need a piece of mind which means education! Not a bunch of website addresses. We want questions answered not some references from florida with all together different problems!
The way I see it the PLIA wanted to go through this experiment all hush, hush. Why? Is there more to this than what we are informed of? They have NOT said one thing that could be a potential side affect from this application. Its all safe, no harm done to anything, no one, just safe. I don't buy it!
It is hard to keep an open mind when the people who are 'in charge' of this don't. This an experiment, plan a simple. The PLIA does not have all the answers, nor do their partners. They need to make uniform decisions. That includes concerns from everyone that uses the lake. Its our lake! The applicator was there also, he does not know what is in these chemicals, he admitted that he did not know if what he wants to apply is a carcinogen or suspected. I would question his credibility.
Harlen the main question reader said "he would not swim in Pewaukee Lake but did not want to get into that." Will he swim in it after the appication? Also, its OK to have a beach and encourage the public to use it. Sounds a bit hypocritical???
I am also for a small test plot, fenced and buoyed, off limits to boaters. Then from the findings WE can then decide if it is OK to go ahead with a PLAN which is contrary to what there is now. Yes, this would mean advertising the application to all that use the lake. We all have legitimate concerns, which the PLIA has been failing to be convincing with them. We don't need a big "whoops" here. This is a very high profile lake, with consequences that could be devastating if things go overlooked. The speed of this one could question the credibility of this entire project and the ones leading it. I am not against resolving the problems at hand, I just think they are going about it the wrong way.
| |
| | |
| Bob,
This no doubt is the best document that you have delivered thus far. People want answers. When people don't get answers they are skeptical. I am still skeptical... with as you know legitimate concerns!!
| |
| | |
Posts: 7
| Dan,
You may not remember that the representative from the manufacturer explained that the chemical bio-degrades into specific molecules. Chlorine, carbon dioxide etc...
Do you remember when the 2003 lake plan was put together? Do you remember filling out a survey to get your feedback? Me either. To the best of my knowledge there was never a survey done for residents, fisherman, or anyone else for that matter.
On the other hand, the City of Pewaukee and the lake association did surveys and we designed the program around the responses of the residents and their perception of the problems, if any, on the lake. The City survey was done over a year ago and the PLIA did a survey in October of last year at the SEWRPC informational meeting that we held.
Last night Dr. Thornton explained some of the ramifications of Eurasian Watermilfoil to your group and I'll let you get the response from one of your fellow Muskies members.
It's bad for the lake. It's bad for the fishing. It's bad for the beneficial native vegetation. It's bad for the oxygen content of the water column. It's bad for boating. It's bad for the waters of the State of Wisconsin. It's good for algae blooms. It's good for building up silt. Dan, find me one piece of information that says anything good about EWM (other than it's mulch value for farmers) and I will gladly read it thoroghly.
We have not rushed into this plan. We have been looking at the problems for over two years. We obviously have not had everyone in the loop. If you can come up with some practical, cost-effective way to make that happen and get anything done, I'm all ears. We don't own the newspaper so we can't tell them what to cover. That said, they have been pretty good about exposing the issues. We would have to depend upon all interested parties to purchase the papers in the Pewaukee area when they are covering the issue in which they have interest.
Just so you know, we did not expect any resistance from your particular interest group. Everything I have read says that removing EWM will do nothing but good things for the fish. Why would we expect that the fisherman would be in favor of leaving the EWM alone.
Bob Giblin | |
| | |
| Everyone has interests, just like opinions. Based upon that statement, I can't blame either side for working towards their interests. But, the money in this situation will win. It's not an end to the fishery. | |
| | |
Posts: 3242
Location: Racine, Wi | Just to bring a little humor to the subject. I have a great proposal. What if we get some goats, dress them with water wings, and then they can have at it with the Milfoil. This would be relatively environmentally safe. (accept for the waste, but hopefully it floats, and we can just follow them with a net to clean it up.)
This way, there are no chemical repricussions. 
Ok, back to the debate.
Thanks! | |
| | |
Posts: 2691
Location: Pewaukee, Wisconsin | If time runs out and it seems like it has !!!
67 degree water temps and the weeds are growing strong !!!
Why not push for a small scale test plot so we and everyone who uses the lake can see what good it can do?
This would sell it to everyone if it worked out ok and tested clean !!!
I think a area around the mayors house would be ok with me and everyone else. Boui it off and lets see what this stuff can do.
I am all for anything that could improve the lake. Everything I have taken in seems like it is worth a try at least a small test area.
I would like to know how they are going to cut a trench in the east end of the lake and keep all the floaters from spreading all over the lake? | |
| | |
| Bob,
I do remember the representative from the manufacturer explaining the chemical. I commented on his knowledge of it. Why you commented about what it biodegrades into after that, I have no idea.
Why should I get a response from Dr. Thornton's seminar from one of my Muskies Inc. members? I was there, asking questions! He explained things and answered questions clearly. I was enlightened! He is no doubt is very knowledgeable about Pewaukee Lake. He went through the basic ecosystem of the area. I was impressed about what he knows regarding the changes of the surrounding area and how it affects the lake. I was the one that asked the question that this application and harvesting basically speeds up the historical 7 to 11 year cycle in which this runs. We know that we can never rid EWM from Pewaukee Lake. If gone completely untreated using whatever methods it could be possible that it would infest the entire lake. From what I understood at the meeting the zebra muscles that are now there would slow or could eliminate that from ever being the case though.
I have never spoken on behalf of any particular interest group regarding this.
Bob, you look upon this as resistance. I look upon my questions and learning about this matter as doing my duty as a concerned fisherman/outdoorsman.
Dan White
| |
| | |
Posts: 7
| Mike,
The high water we are having this year may or may not be the same as the last time. I don't remember what time of year that was. This has been a cool and wet spring which should be keeping the water temperature down compared to previous years. What we are shooting for is the new milfoil plants being about 18 inches high to treat. If we wait until they hit the surface then there will be a lot more plant matter degrading in the water column. The optimal time to treat is before the plants hit the surface. The temperature of the water is also relavant. The higher the water temp, the more chance there is for an algae bloom. Something we don't want. Also important is the actual amount of treatment area verses the volume of the lake. The area selected is 43 acres with an average depth of about 3 feet. That's 129 acre-feet. There are over 37,000 acre-feet in the lake so the actual treatment area is infinitely small compared to the actual amount of water out there. (approximately 12 billion gallons.)
I'm going to try and attach some pictures to this post of the milfoil floaters from last year and the algae from two years ago which persisted through last year. If I can attach them you will see from the floater picture why the little bit of harvester generated pieces are irrelevant and keep in mind that all of these pieces can turn into new stands of plants. If I am unsuccessful in attaching them I'll be happy to forward the pictures via e-mail to anyone who requests them. [email protected]
Attachments
----------------
 Lake 2-24-02.jpg (134KB - 408 downloads)
| |
| | |
Posts: 7
| This is the Kopmeier shoreline from last year. Representative of what it look like three days a week from the floaters cut by boats, not the harvesters. All of these floaters can turn into new plants of EWM.
Attachments
----------------
Kopmeier weeds-web.jpg (178KB - 317 downloads)
| |
| | |
Posts: 2691
Location: Pewaukee, Wisconsin | Bob, that spot is where most of the weeds usually get blown to on the North East shore line due to a normal West wind.
The area around Bill Brown Island is always the worst for floaters due to the village weed cutting and dominat west winds.
When I was a kid it looked the same, the house is Jim Schmidlings house, I grew up with his kids. This is a extreme example of floaters but they are not all from boats, plenty of these weeds are from cutting in the village and along either shorelines. The wind blows them all to one area after a while if they don't get picked up by the sanitary district.
Most of the residents will pile them up along the shoreline and make a call to Charlie Shong, they would be picked up that day to the next day.
Some residents will push them back out if the wind is at there backs, that way the float to someone elses shoreline.
Anyway, I agree it is a problem and without Charlies crew it would be way out of hand. THAT is why I think if a trench is cut and Charlies crew is not involved it would be more of a problem and not a solution. Charlie Shong and you guys NEED to work together on this one.
The other point is: The East end is the area we are talking about. Why do you keep adding the whole lake into the picture when you talk numbers/gallons/area?
You say small percentage and use the whole lake. The areas involved are all in a 1/3 area of the lake. Cutting and spreading of pellets are all in this area.
I think its a sizable area for the 1/3 of the lake. 129 acre-feet in a 1/3 area with a total depth of 3 to 6 ft deep. That is the way I look at it. Why count the rest of the lake? Of the 2/3 left over 1/3 of that is deep water basin area.
I am all for working on getting a handle on this milfoil problem. Lets all get together and work it out. That includes the Lake Sanitary District !!! Charlie knows the lake better than anyone. Lets get him on THE TEAM !!!
Your job is a hard one for sure, I would be glad to help in any way. My brother Tom is already helping with the fertilizer issue. I would like to be a part of the solution also.
Keep in touch, thank you for all the info you have given us. Good luck with the issues at hand. | |
| | |
Posts: 7
| Mike,
You are correct when you say that the weed floaters arrived on the shore of Kopmeier from all over the lake. It happens that I live in the Village so most of the floaters came from the weed beds that stretched all the way across the lake from Kopmeier to Peterson in the City. I used to watch the boats go flying through the weed beds. It took the village clean-up crew about 5 days to pick up their portion of the picture you see. It would be virtually impossible for the home owners to clean up the tons of weeds that are represented by the photo. Since you have lived here all your life you know how common it is to have this build up of floaters in this location. The only thing that cleans it up is a north wind. That's not a clean up, it becomes someone elses issue.
The position of the PLIA is that we would be glad to be working with the LPSD. Unfortunately, they adopted an adversarial stance from the very beginning of our organization. It's obvious that the members of the association feel that the lake needs improvement and I think that the LPSD may have taken that as an insult. We have heard rumors since we started that they were going to "shut us down". I don't frankly use hearsay to make decisions so we don't address that issue.
During a conversation with Nowacki last year on the phone I asked him why they weren't "taking us under their wing" since we had about 50 people who had volunteered for committees covering everything from water quality to boating safety. Those folks are all willing to help on a volunteer basis. We could use them as a resource to do some excellent monitoring and studies of Pewaukee Lake.
Mike, have you had the opportunity to ask the LPSD why they don't want to work with us? My opinion is that we all want a better lake. It would seem to be a natural fit. If however the LPSD is threatened by our existence then you have to look at their real priorities. Is it a better lake or fear of losing influence?
If you get any feedback I will be very interested to hear what their position is.
Thanks,
Gib | |
| | |
Posts: 2691
Location: Pewaukee, Wisconsin | Bob, your correct about the LPSD, they feel like you are there to do the job they couldn't do.
That is too bad because everyone should jump in on this clean up issue. I will do my best to help all sides come closer together so we can have a TEAM not US and THEM.
What is going on as of today?
The weeds are still low and growing slowly. Temps last night were in the low 60's and cooling off due to the North East wind last night and this morning.
Its too bad everyone is split about this. We all should be working on getting this issue at hand. " MILFOIL PROBLEM "
| |
| | |
| ? for you. In the lakes that the rusty crawfish appeared in years ago has lost much of the weed growth in them, I wonder. Would they make a dent in Ewf problem. I am aware its possable that they could damage all weed growth but Ewf is doing that anyway.
Pfeiff | |
| | |
Posts: 7
| Pfeiff,
I have never heard of the crayfish being a biological control. I suspect that they wouldn't thrive in the eastern basin because of the silty habitat. From what I have heard, in order for a particular species to succeed in a particular ecosystem they need to have a statistically significant number of individuals that can survive and reproduce.
There is a possibility that the other lakes you referred to just have a great crayfish habitat. My brother-in-law has a place on Squirrel Lake in Minoqua. Out in front of his place there are plenty of crayfish along the shoreline riprap but, none farther out in the silty area. A little south of his place there is a large sandy area used for swimming. I was snorkelling the bottom and saw literally hundreds of them on the bottom. They had holes dug into the gravelly sand, probably for safety reasons. That concentration and that habitat must provide a good supply of surviving and reproducing individuals whose spawn gets distributed throughout the lake.
In ten years I have never seen a crayfish, or remnants of one, on my shoreline riprap on Pewaukee Lake. Though I suspect there may be some in the appropriate habitat.(i.e. Rocky Point).
Back to your question, with all that I have read I haven't run across anything that tells me the crayfish is the reason for the demise of the weeds in lakes. Though you may want to call Randy Schumacher or Bob Wakeman at the DNR to see what studies they may have done. The phone number is (262) 574-2100. I believe they would be the experts in our area.
Thats a great observation about the crayfish. Somewhere out there could be an answer and I think it's important that we all put our heads together when the opportunity arises. I don't know if you attended the Jeff Thornton meeting, but, he mentioned that Zebra muscles have been known to attach themselves to EWM and when there is enough of them the plant collapses. I don't remember if it kills the plant or not. Unfortunately the Zebra's, we are told, will be devastating to the food chain. They will literally filter out all the nutrients so the fry of the year won't have anything to eat.
Let me know if you hear anything from the DNR about the crayfish.
Bob "Gib" Giblin | |
| | |
Posts: 7
| Mike,
First, why is my display of your website 20" inches wide?
The status of the LPSD is that they have filed for a hearing on the herbicide use in the lake. We heard a few months ago that there is no supportive precedent for an adjudicator to accept the hearing. Since this stuff is biodegradable, does not persist in the environment, and the usage permitted by the DNR last year is probably over 100 tons in the entire state, a hearing request may not be granted.
It's my impression that the LPSD is just trying to support a position they took 20 years ago. There is literally no credible documentation after 60 years of use in the environment to support them.
The EPA requires continual research on chemicals that it approves. The task force that reviews data for the EPA has a website at www.24d.org. We copied the following paragraph:
"After 50 years of use, 2,4-D is still the third most widely used herbicide in the United States and Canada, and the most widely used worldwide. Its major uses in agriculture are on wheat and small grains, sorghum, corn, rice, sugar cane, low-till soybeans, rangeland, and pasture. It is also used on rights-of-way, roadsides, non-crop areas, forestry, lawn and turf care, and on aquatic weeds. A recently published eight-year U.S Department of Agriculture study (NAPIAP Report NO. 1-PA-96) concluded that, should 2,4-D no longer be available, the cost to growers and other users, in terms of higher weed control expenses, and to consumers, in the form of higher food and fiber prices, would total $1,683 million annually in the U.S. alone. The study also reviewed the 2,4-D epidemiology and toxicology data packages and concluded (page2) that after 50 years of extensive use, "The phenoxy herbicides are low in toxicity to humans and animals (1,9). No scientifically documented health risks, either acute or chronic, exist from the approved uses of the phenoxy herbicides."
Charlie Shong continually says there is no long-term data available. This is 50 years of research.
I may have already posted the fact that the LPSD has unilaterally dissolved their contract with the City. The City is challenging them on this since the LPSD has already been paid. While I am not an attorney, I think most of us know that when you make an agreement and get paid, you can't change the deal after the fact. The Pewaukee Lake Management Plan, that the LPSD commisioned and paid for, recommends the use of herbicides around docks and piers. Now, the LPSD stance is that they won't allow their employees to go in the water where the herbicides have been used. What I still can't understand is why is it okay for the residents to go into the water with the herbicides as the Management Plan, approved by the DNR, indicates, but not Shong's employees? At the Muskies meeting Dr. Jeff Thornton said, when asked, that EWM will "take over" if not addressed. He wrote the Pewaukee Lake Management Plan that the LPSD paid for.
At what point do we start to question the motivations of the LPSD after these conflicting statements and actions? I have a red flag on their objections because they conflict with the research that is available for this product. While we have been deeply involved in reviewing research on these issues, the average resident is not going to spend the hundreds of hours examining the accuracy of the LPSD statements and expects the public officials to have done their homework and accurately represent the issues in the best interest of the public trust.
At a recent LPSD meeting with the City of Pewaukee officials, Charlie was asked by one of the Pewaukee aldermen why he wouldn't allow his employees to go into the water where herbicides had been used when the DNR says you can swim in it that day and eat fish out of it that day? Charlie's response was that he didn't want to get into that conversation. I'm baffled - I just don't find any supporting documentation for the LPSD stance on these issues.
Sorry about the long posting again. I consider my time on this site well spent due to the importance of the fishery and the Muskies Inc. contributions to Pewaukee Lake over the past decades.
Gib | |
| |
|
