Muskie Discussion Forums
| ||
| Moderators: Slamr | View previous thread :: View next thread |
| Jump to page : 1 2 3 Now viewing page 3 [30 messages per page] Muskie Fishing -> General Discussion -> Pewaukee Lake Fisherman Alert! |
| Message Subject: Pewaukee Lake Fisherman Alert! | |||
H.K. |
| ||
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. | ||
| Bob Giblin |
| ||
| 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 | |||
| H.K. |
| ||
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. | ||
| tuffy1 |
| ||
Posts: 3240 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. | ||
| Nancy H |
| ||
| 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. | |||
| Bob Giblin |
| ||
| 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 | |||
| TUFFY |
| ||
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 | ||
| TUFFY |
| ||
Posts: 376 Location: Cudahy, Wisconsin | ttt | ||
| Gander Mt Guide |
| ||
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. | ||
| esox-dan |
| ||
| 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 | |||
| Mikes Extreme |
| ||
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. | ||
| Row Troller |
| ||
| 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. | |||
| Gib |
| ||
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. | ||
| Mikes Extreme |
| ||
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. | ||
| esox-dan |
| ||
| 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. | |||
| esox-dan |
| ||
| 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!! | |||
| Gib |
| ||
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 | ||
| howie -- guest |
| ||
| 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. | |||
| tuffy1 |
| ||
Posts: 3240 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! | ||
| Mikes Extreme |
| ||
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? | ||
| esox-dan |
| ||
| 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 | |||
| Gib |
| ||
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 - 376 downloads) | ||
| Gib |
| ||
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 - 280 downloads) | ||
| Mikes Extreme |
| ||
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. | ||
| Gib |
| ||
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 | ||
| Mikes Extreme |
| ||
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 " | ||
| Don Pfeiffer |
| ||
| ? 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 | |||
| Gib |
| ||
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 | ||
| Gib |
| ||
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 | ||
| Jump to page : 1 2 3 Now viewing page 3 [30 messages per page] |
| Search this forum Printer friendly version E-mail a link to this thread |
Copyright © 2024 OutdoorsFIRST Media |