|
|
Posts: 1916
Location: Greenfield, WI | Steve Worrall has the flu and will not be speaking tonight at the Milwaukee Chapter of Muskies Inc.
I will be providing an update on the Poisoning Project's meeting which was held with the DNR yesterday. There is a process to attempt to beat this program. | |
| | |
Posts: 1916
Location: Greenfield, WI | Please make this post stick atleast for today and tomorrow. | |
| | |
| I assume this means that the DNR has approved the permits? | |
| | |
| Steve and others. Bob Giblin of the PLIA will be at our meeting tonight so you can ask him all the pertinent questions concerning the lake.
Rick Wyrwas | |
| | |
Posts: 1916
Location: Greenfield, WI | Our scheduled speaker, Mr. Worrall, was unable to attend last nights meeting which is good because had he been there I would just be getting home now!
The Lake Association President and his consultant came to our meeting on very short notice and presented a brief summery of their position and the science which they are basing their application upon. I say "brief" in that a complete presentation could take many, many, many hours. They took questions afterwards. Emotions, although spirited, remained very civil. I will let the Association represent and summerize their position at the meeting if they should choose to on this website.
My presentation was intended to summerize the Application Presentation Meeting that took place Monday with the DNR.
Before I get into that summery I have a few observations:
1) The Lake Association has the right to apply to perform this project. They are apparently following the system in place with the DNR to legally proceed with this program, should the permit application be approved;
2) The Lake Association is using existing science and published studies as a basis for their application. Parties can disagree with the validity of the application of that science;
3) The DNR, legally, must accept a permit application from any group for any project, without regard for their own management opinion. Accepting an application does not mean that they automatically approve of the project;
4) The management of Pewaukee is based upon a 1991 Management Criteria. By the DNR's own admission, this criteria is very vague. Under this criteria, the Lake Association's project could be undertaken with the DNR's approval.
-The Monday meeting identified that the initial application was not completed to the DNR's satisfaction. The Lake Association has retained a consultant to prepare the application and provide any special requirements of the application, if necessary, such as plant studies.
-Any citizens group can file an formal objection to a proposed project through the DNR. If the objection would be accepted, it would take the DNR out of the application and permit process.
The process would be turned into a legal process which would require public hearing(s). I have requested a copy of the required paperwork for this objection process to review.
-The chemical application, as I understand it, has a water temperature ceiling above which the application is not recommended. The time window for this project this year is very limited and imminent. The mandates of notice of a public hearing would probably delay the project, if it went ahead, into next year.
-If this formal objection occurs, the DNR could become an expert witness in the proceedings with whatever their position would be;
-Typically, a very small pilot program would be undertaken, studied, and if deemed appropriate, the major portion of the project would occur the following year. This project seems to be attempting to undertake the full program right from the start.
-I had given my notes to a representative of Muskies Inc. who was attempting to record the meetings comments, so my information is coming from memory. I should have my notes back soon and I will add to this post if necessary at that time.
A number of points were made at last night's meeting that were new to me.
-The Lake Association identified that a major program has already been applied for at Okauchee Lake, similar to that proposed for Pewaukee Lake.
-The Lake Association distributed a list of lakes in SE Wisconsin which had undergone major chemical weed control.
-Many of the meeting attendees were all to familiar with some of the lakes on the list, and how in their opinion, the fishing had grossly declined at those lakes from times prior to the teatment.
-Both parties agreed that the prohibition by the area municipalities of the use of phospherous from the landscaping applications would by itself cause exponential improvements in the water quality. The landscaping companies had todate been able to sucessfully fight this prohibition.
Edited by Steve Van Lieshout 4/28/2004 8:40 AM
| |
| | |
Posts: 3242
Location: Racine, Wi | Since the contracters that are opposing the phospherus are so numerouse, and this would improve the water quality substantially, why don't we consider siding with the proporty owners to get the no phospherous law passed. I would think it is in both of our interests.
I won't comment in this post about the weed poisoning, but the other point on banning the phospherous should be considered. Between us (the fisherman) and the proporty owners, we should be able to get some clout to get the ban passed. Just a thought.
Thanks for keeping us updated Steve. | |
| | |
Posts: 1769
Location: Algonquin, ILL | Excellent point Joel !!!!!
| |
| | |
| Bob's e-mail to me indicated that the City of Pewaukee does have a zero-phosphorous fertilizer ordinance but the Village of Pewaukee and the Town of Delafield do not. I think Delafield had a vote on Monday, April 19 and the Village of Pewaukee's meeting was Tuesday, April 20. | |
| | |
Posts: 336
Location: Lino Lakes, MN | Hey,
Just wanted to point out a few things that I observed from last nights meeting. When Bob started his presentation, he said that the biggest problem with the lake's algae bloom was the milfoil plant that they are trying to poison, but just a few minutes later, he went on to talk endlessly about how the phosphorous was the biggest problem facing the lake. He seemed to have his entire presentation based upon the phosphorous proposal instead of the milfoil and 2,4-D application. I know that most, if not all of us in attendance agree that the phosphorous is the biggest problem, but if the Association feels the same way, why are they going so hard for the 2,4-D application? He also repeated many times that the Association needs all of us behind them to get rid of this milfoil problem, and in a way made it seem like they tried to bring this out to the public, but I cannot remember hearing a single thing about it till just a few days before the meeting for the permits. Sounds to me like they were trying to sneak one by us...pretty similar to what is going on with Okauchee. Another thing that was brought up was the cutting of lanes through the eastern basin of the lake....I can't see what good this could possibly do, because if we are supposed to believe everything that Bob is saying, the weeds grow at a rate of 4-6 inches per day. What good is cutting going to do with a growth rate like this? Everything will be back to full grown in a couple of weeks. The other thing that I cannot understand is how this herbacide is going to do any good at all with the constant growth of the milfoil over other parts of the lake. As I understand it, milfoil that is cut up will drift across the lake and plant its roots wherever it may sink to the bottom. If this is the case, are we going to have to spray the lake multiple times a month in order to keep up with the re-growth of the milfoil that has drifted from other areas of the lake? Before I end this little rant, I will just bring up a few other things that I have found while researching 2,4-D;
From the U.S. Congress, Senate House Oversight Committee, GAO, and the International Agent Orange Committee:
"This pesticide is a known carcinogen and is linked to Non-Hodgkings Lymphoma and soft tissue sarcoma cancers. It is an ingredient in Agent Orange, and has 22 KNOWN contaminents contained within";
octachlorobisfirone,
xanthen-9-ones,
mono, di, tri, and tetradioxins,
furans,
n-nitrosomethylamines,
n-nitrosodiethylamines,
ortho and para monochlorophenol isomers,
n-nitrosodiethanolamine,
and 3 chlorophenoxymethanes
As Bob suggested last night, I went and did some homework of my own. This is just one of many scary things that I have come up with....one of the many things that I am sure the Lake Association forgot to mention in their presentations and plans that they have developed. It seems odd to me that in all of the time it took to research, things like these were not found. Pretty easy to do when you have your blinders on I guess. Sorry to rant there guys/gals. This just really got me fired up, and I felt that I should share a bit of what I found with you. If anyone wants the links to any further info, drop me a line at [email protected]. Thanks a bunch for reading this far. All I hope is that our voice will be heard, and all of the harmful effects of this plan will come to light before it is too late. Have a good one.
Eric Lazenby
[email protected] | |
| | |
| Eric,
We actually knew that 2,4-D is an ingredient in agent orange. It kills plants. That is actually the point. What you can't do is ignore the rest of the 21 other chemicals the are included like three different types of Dioxin. The gentleman who attended your meeting with me is an environmental scientist. They have 40 scientists working for them, and their job is to clean up ground water, environmentally contaminated sites, and river systems. I am not a scientist, and we depend upon people like Bob (our PLIA vice president) to assist us with making reasonable, scientifically based decisions. He's been at this 30 years, and I would never presume to know more than he does about these issues.
Eric, no one is trying to hide anything. We actively pursue any kind of newspaper coverage we can receive, and unfortunately are at the mercy of the editors to decide when to print our stories. However, there have been stories in the Journal/Sentinel, Lake Country Reporter, and Waukesha Freeman about this project and the PLIA activities. The Town, City and Village Boards have had us on their agenda over the past 12 months, which is a pretty significant public forum. If you can get us additional coverage, we are always grateful to have the opportunity to provide information and education on these topics so people can make truly informed decisions.
Bob Giblin
President
PLIA | |
| | |
Location: Athens, Ohio | I received this message from a co-worker in response to my request for websites that have info on 2,4 D. As you may recall this chemical, added to 2,4,5 T was the Agent Orange defoliant. I think most of the dioxin problems were associated with the 2,4,5 T. I hope this helps, m
They might want to go to epa.gov and search USEPA's site. I couldn't quickly find anything but I'm sure more has to be there. Let me know if you need more, Jim 
Document by Mass DEP on use of 2,4-D to control milfoil.
http://www.state.ma.us/dfa/pesticides/water/Aquatic/ORS%202,4-D.doc
EPA fact sheet
http://www.epa.gov/safewater/contaminants/dw_contamfs/24-d.html
I don't know who sponsors this web page and can't vouch for it. It may be great it may not be I've just not researched on this page before. Looks good, tho.
http://www.pesticideinfo.org/Detail_Chemical.jsp?Rec_Id=PC33440 | |
| | |
| I posted this update on the Lake alert "thread"(?)
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 (formerly 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. | |
| |
|
Pewaukee Lake Weed Poisoning Update