|
|
Posts: 3913
| I wanted to start a second Milfoil Invasion thread because I want folks to focus on one particular aspect of this invasive species. First, I think it's important because it involves the waters we all fish. Any and all northern lakes (at least USA) that have public access will get Milfoil. This affects us all. Second, I was strongly opposed to the chemical treatment that was inflicted on the lake where I live. As Bob Marly would advise anyone joining a resistance, I learned some stuff. Check this out.....
Executive Summary: Chemical treatment is an expensive way to damage the lake. There is a very promising (effective and safe) alternative to control Milfoil at a fraction of the cost of the chemical treatment.. Private lakes in my area have done it.
Ok, details...of my understanding....
1. The chemical treatments are exceptionally short-sighted and yet terrifically expensive. The chemicals seriously degrade the lake because: 1) chemicals DO kill local plant species along with some of the existing milfoil; 2) chemicals increase, like a spike, the volume of decaying matter on the lake bottom, which A) provides terrific nutrients for the future growth of more weeds including more Milfoil and B) accelerates the evolution of many shallow lakes into swamps.
Expensive - the treatments are temporary. The chemicals can only kill a batch of milfoil. The chemicals do not prevent regrowth. So, chemical treatments must be repeated as time passes.
2. There are two other "forces" that are also contributing to accelerated weed growth in most of our lakes. First, another invasive species, Zebra Mussles, are serving to clarify the water. Clearer water means sunlight can penetrate deeper and so we're seeing tall/thick weeds growing in deeper water than ever. Second, people are increasingly polluting our waters with fertilizer - lawn care and old leaky, way-undersized, septic systems. Conditions are great for MORE WEEDS.
3. The non-chemical alternative is a type of beetle that only eats Milfoil. An article I read by a local, respected biologist said that the beetles are working on a couple small local, private lakes. The problem with the beetles is this...it takes a couple years for the beetles to multiply and become noticibly effective. Pisses off the non-fishing element on our lake, those skiers and PWC's. But there's a much darker side to why the beetles are not being promoted....read on....
4. The beetles get in the way of folks who are making a lot of money from the harmful practice of repeatedly polluting our waters with ineffective chemicals. Remember, Milfoil regrowth is not just assured, it is actually accelerated by chemical treatments. The more chemicals used, the more weeds you get, and so the more chemicals you'll need. William Burrough's "The Algebra of Need" regarding herion addiction is a terrific fit to this situation. The chemical dudes stand to lose a lot, after all they currently have a corner on the market. The beetles (suppliers) don't have much of a voice because they don't represent big money. Beetle-backers such as myself are the small camp in these conflicts and we played catch up on the propoganda throughout the debates.
*****************************************
So, that's some of the stuff I learned a couple years ago when a minority of lakefront owners lost the fight against expensive and harmful chemical treatments where I live. It is notable that, in our situation, the local attorney under contract to advise the Township Council (who imposed the tax that paid the treatment bill) made a cool $10,000 on the one-time deal. I estimate he took about 8% off the top. It is also notable that it was reported the chemical treatment company has a very shady history; many name changes through the years. Not hard to imagine a mutually lucritive lunch meeting between the attorney and the owner of the chemical treatment outfit.
Ok, sorry this is so long. But I think it's important because it affects us all and it hurts the waters. I'm very interested in comments from the biology types on the board. | |
| | |
Posts: 1335
Location: Chicago, Beverly | 1. The chemical treatments are exceptionally short-sighted and yet terrifically expensive. The chemicals seriously degrade the lake because: 1) chemicals DO kill local plant species along with some of the existing milfoil; 2) chemicals increase, like a spike, the volume of decaying matter on the lake bottom, which A) provides terrific nutrients for the future growth of more weeds including more Milfoil and B) accelerates the evolution of many shallow lakes into swamps.
where i am at they planned for the nutrient release and did one or two treatments for algae. I think that some advances have been made on all fronts for treating milfoil. Used to be that sonar was treatment of choice, it is not any more. Will we ever be completely rid of it? I hope so.. but as long as fisherman and pleasure boaters remain shortsighted and keep on with their lack of concern by not cleaning their boats after taking them out of the water the spread will continue, and i mean get the weeds off your boat and trailer at the lauch, rather then letting fly off on the drive home or to the carwash..
Zebra mussels are a big problem too.. you are right that they have caused weeds tp grow deeper then before, not a good thing.
Fertilizer, our lake asscociation heavily discourages the use of phosphate fertilizers, and provides a brochure every year and alternatives and where to buy them.. some lake areas have banned the use completely(somewhere in wisconsin i was told, would like to see indiana do it too)..
if you have more info on the beetles send it to me.. I'll use it at the next board of directors meeting i go to.
i have a bunch of info somewhere on the weed control and what my lake asscociation is doing.. I'll have to see if i can dig it up.. i personally do not support weed cpntrol accept to control nonnative stuff. but suffice to say that when you can no longer navigate to/from your dock only because of milfoil... something needs to be done. | |
| | |
Posts: 3913
| I'll find and send current info on the beetles, Kevin. I should find out how the beetles are doing, it's been over a year since I last heard anything. Our lake still has significant milfoil, and another, new type of unfamilar weed has popped up. Also, all of a sudden there is lots more muck where there used to be a firm, sand bottom. I've been familiar with this lake my whole life (44).
I hope I didn't come off as some sort of Milfoil or lake evolution expert. My knowledge is limited to only what I learned locally.
Ha! But the beetle conspiricy is true, just ask Dale Gribble (the bug man who lives next to Hank Hill). | |
| | |
Posts: 1906
Location: Oconto Falls, WI | First, I am no biologist but I can't see how adding any type of chemicals into the water is a good thing. I don't care if it kills all the weeds. You have now changed the chemistry of the water by adding foreign matter. The beetles. I was hoping this would have been something that would have solved the problem, but from a lake I know that had them introduced several years ago I don't see good results. They have tried everything on this lake, and they just aren't finding an answer. The lake association thought the beetles would be the answer, but no significant results have been seen.
Hmmm, perhaps rusty crawfish aren't so bad afterall (I am not suggesting anything here.) | |
| | |
Posts: 2091
Location: Stevens Point, WI | I'm all for using beetles or other means vs. chemicals. Ranger, the William Burroughs analogy was great! LOL! I don't care how safe they claim the chemicals are they are not what is found normally in that body of water. I fish some lakes that have a bunch of millfoil and the muskie fishing is great if not better than before. I think the pleasure boaters and less than serious anglers complain about the weeds more than anyone. I have no problems with millfoil on most bodies of water, just need to use different techniques. The lake associations haven't had the balls to totally prevent the use of phosphates, discouraging their use is at the very least USELESS! You know dang well how everyone has to impress everyone else with their golf course lawn that they water 24/7 and fertilize 3-4 times a year. My 2 cents, thanks Ranger for bringing this up. Dude you get the books yet?? | |
| | |
Posts: 1916
Location: Greenfield, WI | Next season will be the first after poisoning Pewaukee Lake. Muskies Inc was able to fight off the permiting for the poisoning two years ago, but we didn't have the staying power or legal muscle to win two years in a row. It was especially noteworthy that the first 100' off of shore, (you know the area that historically in the DNR's opinion was the most important to the young fish of the year) was the area that was allowed to be poisoned. It is amazing what some money and legal muscle can do!?
It will be interesting to see how this spring and summer end up on Pewaukee.
Initially, bringing in beetles would seem to be a very good option, but there should always be a concern that the introduction of a new species will not create an even larger problem. What happens if they do their intended job and multiplying to substantial numbers, what do they go after next? What happens if they find something that they prefer other than Milfoil? What would be needed to control the beetles?
I was on the previous Governor's Taskforce for Invasive Species, (the current governor, not capitolized for effect, didn't see a need for the taskforce and disbanded it on his first day in office), Our studies showed us how sometimes the solution to a problem may be worse than the problem!
Edited by Steve Van Lieshout 12/23/2005 10:04 AM
| |
| | |
Posts: 20263
Location: oswego, il | If you are going to use the beetles, no time like the present, only two of them left! 
Edited by ToddM 12/24/2005 12:12 AM
| |
| | |
| Ranger I agree, Once its in, its in. I have seen data which said that after 10 years or so the densities of milfoil will lessen in some lakes.
Sunfish and bluegills will feed on the beatles and if the sunfish populations are too high they will not be suggested for milfoil control. The beatles utilize milfoil in many aspects of thier life so I can't see them switching to a new weed, especially in milfoil dominated lakes. Good question though, I just have never seen any data suggesting that beatles become over abundant or utilize differant weeds in thier life cycle.
good thread. | |
| | |
| Also forgot to add that the whole food web gets totally screwed up when the lake gets nuked. I've done weed surveys on lakes before and after treatment and it is actually sad to see the results from an ecological view. I'm sure that there are species of benthic invertebreas, zooplankton, and phytoplankton that completley die off after all thier refuge is gone and they will never be able to return. Very harmful to the overall biodiversity. Studies showing this will eventually be done and hopefully this will end the damage being done.
goodluck.
Jake | |
| | |
Posts: 32935
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Chemical treatment isn't my favorite, that's for sure. Poison is poison, and that's that. | |
| | |
| SVL,
Did Pewaukee Lake get treated last spring? Or, are they treating it this spring? Either way, I guess I missed something. Please keep us informed.
Dan | |
| | |
Posts: 1916
Location: Greenfield, WI | Pewaukee was chemically treated last spring as I understand. I attributed the very early algae bloom to the treatment, with the dying weeds contributing the nutrients for the algae.
Edited by Steve Van Lieshout 1/3/2006 12:33 PM
| |
| | |
| I would like to have someone overseeing this besides the Pewaukee Lake yadda, yadda, Improvement Association. Like OSHA? Or some type of outside inspector so the application is done within its 'newly' designed parameters and not OD'd. | |
| | |
Posts: 1916
Location: Greenfield, WI | The WDNR is supposed to be over seeing the permitted activities.
One would hope that this would be more positive than negative. | |
| | |
Posts: 2691
Location: Pewaukee, Wisconsin | I didn't read the above posts due to time but I will add that when they did this to Pewaukee Lake this May the weeds were up to the top by August where there was none weeks after the treatment. What was the purpose in adding all those chemicals for a few months. JUST STUPID.
The weeds will grow back and the damage to the soil will remain. I can't believe all is well after dumping the pelleys and chemicals on that area. Milfoil will always win unless your kill everything. What good is the water then.
I will be back to this thread when I get some time at home to read it.
Keep it going Ranger............ | |
| | |
Posts: 8842
| I see your point, but I don't think using last year as an example is going to do us much good as it was an exceptional year -- 12" below normal rainfall, extreme temperatures, water temps into the 80's by mid June...
Some of the local lakes were completely unfishable from the shoreline, entire bays covered over with weeds.
I'm not saying that chemical treatments aren't a bad idea, just that last year's weed growth was not what you'd find in a typical year. Some of my favorite summer spots were completely inaccessable all season long. Other areas where you would usually run shallow baits had weeds right up to the surface. | |
| | |
Posts: 2691
Location: Pewaukee, Wisconsin | The weeds grew great in some areas and very thin in other areas on Pewaukee Lake. The areas that were treated were bare of weeds for about two months. Thats in 3 to 4ft of water on the North East shore. My brothers house was in the area treated. From the end of his pier to the boui's the weeds were treated up and down the shoreline. Some houses didn't pay for it and the weeds still died. Most of the people were in on it as a group.
The weeds grew back up by August and were the same as last winter when we drilled holes for icefishing. I thought it would be cleaner and more scattered. So much for all those $$$ and chemicals dumped into the lake. All for two months, lets get real.
I watched them do this the Tuesday after Memorial Day. I was out fishing and had to watch for a hour or more just te see how much they were dumping into the lake. I give them credit for working only the areas in front of who paid but I couldn't see where the difference was a month later. The weeds were all dropping. I couldn't help thinking of all the Bass and bluegills that were headding in to spawn through all of these chemicals. We shall see how many come in this May. My brother told me it was the least amount of fish he has ever see around his shore. Maybe this year will be back to normal. If not, why the decline? He has been there for 15 yearas.
Poison is Poison, it can't be good for the fishory. I know it's not worth a few months of clean water. That area is 3 to 4ft and was a rice bed 50 years ago. Now they want it a clean weed free mud flat? For what, to look at, no one is going to swim or ski in that area. Just drive down the lake to a clean area to swim or ski. Maybe buy a house in a good area instead of tring to change a area.
Ranger, you brought up a soar spot. I have vented and feel better. LOL | |
| | |
Posts: 8842
| Mike, you and I both know that the people pushing this initiative don't give a flying f*ck about the fish, the quality of the fishery, the ecosystem or anything ELSE other than wanting the water in front of their property to be free of weeds. WHY? Who knows, maybe their friends will be less impressed with their waterfront mansion if there are weeds in the water.
It's fricken PEWAUKEE, it ain't lake Geneva. Try getting them to stop fertilizing their lawns, try getting them to leave a barrier of natural shoreline vegetation, and what happens? These are smart people, they understand what high phosphorus concentrations do to a lake ecosystem, but do they care?
This is all about image, this is all about a few rich people trying to control the world around them because it benefits them, ecosystems be #*^@ed. | |
| |
|
Milfoil Invasion, Part 2. This is important, I think.