The Minnehaha Creek Watershed District is proposing to amend its management plan to establish an aquatic invasive species (AIS) control and management plan throughout Minnehaha Creek Watershed, which includes Lake Minnetonka. In light of discoveries of Zebra Mussels and Flowering Rush in our lake, this proposed program is aggressive, timely and needed – more AIS are coming. The Lake Minnetonka Association, which serves as the voice of Lake Minnetonka lakeshore owners and businesses, supports this idea.
The Minnehaha Creek Watershed District is best suited to this task in the watershed as they have the needed financial resources and staff scientific expertise. The District has also demonstrated an awareness of and positive actions toward the ecological stewardship of our water resources.
According to the District, preventing the introduction and spread of invasive species is imperative due to the “irreversible damage they have on our lakes and streams, plants and fish and recreational, property and commercial value of our water resources.”
Specifically, the proposed plan amendment would allow the District to conduct a rulemaking process with possibility of requiring anyone wishing to place a watercraft, dock, boat ramp or other equipment in a lake to obtain a permit. The permit could require a demonstration that such placement of boats and equipment into a lake be free of AIS. The permits could require a fee. The District plan could also establish a District-wide inspection and decontamination system. Education and outreach would be elements of the plan as well.
The proposed plan amendment makes a case for and seeks authority to implement the most extreme measures; however, the particular implementation elements would be subject to a highly public rule-making process that would follow the proposed plan’s approval. Even though the final details will need to be developed, the proposed plan frames possible future rules.
There will be challenges to this proposal, particularly regarding the ‘legality’ of charging permit fees, especially for watercraft entering lakes. The District claims to have the legal authority to implement this plan. The Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources, the state oversight agency for watershed districts, will make the final determination regarding the adoption of the District’s plan amendment. As well, the Attorney General’s office will be weighing in on any legal aspects of this proposal.
There may be other concerns. For example, this is a state-wide problem, so the District’s plan is out of context. If this is a state-wide problem, we challenge the state to propose and implement a comparable plan to obviate the need for District’s proposal. Until then, we like the District’s proposal.
According to Minnesota Waters in the AIS Position Paper (April 2009), AIS are referred to as an ‘aquademic’ and “The AIS management system in Minnesota is constrained by outdated laws and cultural norms ...” Further, Minnesota Waters says, “Unless we transform our approach, AIS will steadily overrun Minnesota’s lakes and rivers – with devastating results for our state’s businesses, communities and recreation.”
The Lake Minnetonka Association, Minnesota Waters and many other lake associations have been leaders in advocating for aggressive, comprehensive AIS prevention and control. The District proposed plan appears to fit this bill. We applaud the District for the leadership, courage and commitment to confront this serious threat to our lakes.
MCWD’s proposal is truly transformative and merits our communities’ consideration and support.
Sunday, December 19, 2010
Sunday, November 14, 2010
Lake Minnetonka - Neat
There are fewer and fewer days ice cover on Lake Minnetonka each winter. Long-term trends show that ice cover begins later and ice-off is earlier. This means fewer days per season of ice cover.
These same trends are occurring on lakes throughout the northern latitudes. According to one study which has investigated long-term trends (greater than 100 years) in ice cover, ice-on dates are later by about six days per hundred years and ice-off dates are between six and seven days earlier per hundred years. This means ice cover is almost two weeks less than it was one hundred years ago. The trends are continuing.
Most scientists, including me, attribute this to climate change, which has resulted in warmer temperatures in the northern latitudes.
For Lake Minnetonka, this means (on average) losing more than a day of ice cover each decade. In fact, in 21 of the past 30 years, Lake Minnetonka’s ice-off dates have been earlier than the long-term average ice-off date (April 15).
While longer periods of open water may be a blessing for those who enjoy summer boating activities, there are other worries to consider.
University of Minnesota scientists point out that earlier ice-off dates may disrupt fish spawning and make fish, such as walleye, less successful in recruiting young fish. As well, because more open water periods also means warmer water, many cold-water fish species may be displaced and replaced with warmer water species. These changes of course do not happen rapidly, but as these trends continue, we expect the fisheries in our lakes to be altered.
Longer ice-free periods and warmer waters also give aquatic invasive species (AIS) and edge over native plants and animals. This is a concern because AIS already have an advantage over native species – that is why they are invasive in the first place. This means they are getting help becoming even more invasive. In addition, longer ice-free periods provide more time for AIS to move about on boats and trailers each year.
Yikes - our task of keeping AIS out, minimizing their effects and mitigating their impacts gets more and more difficult.
Enjoy winter activities on Lake Minnetonka – Spring will be here all too soon.
These same trends are occurring on lakes throughout the northern latitudes. According to one study which has investigated long-term trends (greater than 100 years) in ice cover, ice-on dates are later by about six days per hundred years and ice-off dates are between six and seven days earlier per hundred years. This means ice cover is almost two weeks less than it was one hundred years ago. The trends are continuing.
Most scientists, including me, attribute this to climate change, which has resulted in warmer temperatures in the northern latitudes.
For Lake Minnetonka, this means (on average) losing more than a day of ice cover each decade. In fact, in 21 of the past 30 years, Lake Minnetonka’s ice-off dates have been earlier than the long-term average ice-off date (April 15).
While longer periods of open water may be a blessing for those who enjoy summer boating activities, there are other worries to consider.
University of Minnesota scientists point out that earlier ice-off dates may disrupt fish spawning and make fish, such as walleye, less successful in recruiting young fish. As well, because more open water periods also means warmer water, many cold-water fish species may be displaced and replaced with warmer water species. These changes of course do not happen rapidly, but as these trends continue, we expect the fisheries in our lakes to be altered.
Longer ice-free periods and warmer waters also give aquatic invasive species (AIS) and edge over native plants and animals. This is a concern because AIS already have an advantage over native species – that is why they are invasive in the first place. This means they are getting help becoming even more invasive. In addition, longer ice-free periods provide more time for AIS to move about on boats and trailers each year.
Yikes - our task of keeping AIS out, minimizing their effects and mitigating their impacts gets more and more difficult.
Enjoy winter activities on Lake Minnetonka – Spring will be here all too soon.
Tuesday, October 19, 2010
We Know What the Problems Are
The problems are: a) aquatic invasive species (AIS) hitchhike on boats and trailers and exploit new ecosystems where they are introduced, b) there is not a widespread appreciation that AIS are harmful, c) we have a culture and worldview that cannot adequately reconcile that easy and unimpeded access to and between lakes is exactly the pathway that AIS best exploit.
Unless we are collectively willing to confront these problems, new invasive plants, animals and viruses will continue to infest and damage our lakes.
AIS are harmful.
Recent reports from Prior Lake show the explosion in zebra mussels, only one year after they were discovered. Zebra mussels in Prior Lake are encrusting docks, lifts and boats as well as clogging water irrigation and boat engine cooling intakes. We also expect impacts to the lake’s ecology.
In another example, as Eurasian watermilfoil in Christmas Lake has increased, eight species of native plants have decreased.
Once we recognize that AIS really are harmful, we must confront the reality that preventing their movement requires changes in behaviors, attitudes and values - a significant cultural shift in thinking and behaving. It is human nature to wish away a problem rather than to confront it. We lack clear leadership to recognize and confront the AIS problem facing our lakes.
Even after lakes become infested, there is a tendency toward minimization, rationalization and denial. Last year, just after the discovery of zebra mussels in Prior Lake, I spoke with a homeowner to gauge their level of concern. They were not so concerned because they did not even see the zebra mussels in the lake - and they had been told that zebra mussels could even be fish food. Zebra mussels are certainly not fish food and unfortunately, we now know that zebra mussels are exploding in Prior Lake. I am afraid Lake Minnetonka faces the same fate.
We must take the AIS threats seriously and take aggressive prevention actions if we value our lakes.
We have become complacent, thinking that we are doing enough. Our protection system is largely permissive and a significant number of boaters are not even complying with current laws. The Minnesota DNR reports that extra efforts have occurred this year, especially at newly infested lakes. Intensive education, enforcement and inspections have logged 6,800 contacts at boat ramps and of these they issued over 320 warnings and about 120 citations – indicating that there is over 6% noncompliance with state laws, and that is with DNR uniformed personnel present. My personal observations on Lake Minnetonka indicate this rate of noncompliance is much higher, especially when inspectors are not present.
A large number of boaters are indeed aware of and in compliance with our AIS laws – thank you. Unfortunately, given the millions of boater trips that occur between Minnesota lakes, even a small percentage of noncompliant boaters translates into a very large risk of moving AIS.
We need even more funding, stronger laws, more enforcement and stiffer penalties. We need to take the AIS threat seriously.
We also need to profile and prioritize are prevention program.
As of this season, there are now four ‘superspreader’ lakes in Minnesota (Alexandria chain, Gull, Mille Lacs and Minnetonka) for zebra mussels. These lakes have (or soon will have) high densities of zebra mussels and large volumes of boat traffic. While increased protection efforts have occurred, they are unfortunately, still too small an effort.
Fishing tournaments and tournament participants represent a high risk category. I do not think it is a coincidence that five of the six most recently infested zebra mussel lakes (Alexandria chain, Gull, Mille Lacs, Pelican and Minnetonka) are all in the highest prize category (greater than $10,000) of permitted fishing contests in Minnesota. These lakes are also very highly visited, but many other highly visited lakes do not have zebra mussel.
I often hear criticisms of the MN DNR when the topic of protecting our lakes from AIS arises. In my experience, the DNR staff are professionals and are doing the best job possible with preventing AIS impacts, given the funding and policy constraints they must work within.
We need to ask – no expect – our elected leaders to give the DNR more resources and clear policy direction to really protect our lakes.
Unless we are collectively willing to confront these problems, new invasive plants, animals and viruses will continue to infest and damage our lakes.
AIS are harmful.
Recent reports from Prior Lake show the explosion in zebra mussels, only one year after they were discovered. Zebra mussels in Prior Lake are encrusting docks, lifts and boats as well as clogging water irrigation and boat engine cooling intakes. We also expect impacts to the lake’s ecology.
In another example, as Eurasian watermilfoil in Christmas Lake has increased, eight species of native plants have decreased.
Once we recognize that AIS really are harmful, we must confront the reality that preventing their movement requires changes in behaviors, attitudes and values - a significant cultural shift in thinking and behaving. It is human nature to wish away a problem rather than to confront it. We lack clear leadership to recognize and confront the AIS problem facing our lakes.
Even after lakes become infested, there is a tendency toward minimization, rationalization and denial. Last year, just after the discovery of zebra mussels in Prior Lake, I spoke with a homeowner to gauge their level of concern. They were not so concerned because they did not even see the zebra mussels in the lake - and they had been told that zebra mussels could even be fish food. Zebra mussels are certainly not fish food and unfortunately, we now know that zebra mussels are exploding in Prior Lake. I am afraid Lake Minnetonka faces the same fate.
We must take the AIS threats seriously and take aggressive prevention actions if we value our lakes.
We have become complacent, thinking that we are doing enough. Our protection system is largely permissive and a significant number of boaters are not even complying with current laws. The Minnesota DNR reports that extra efforts have occurred this year, especially at newly infested lakes. Intensive education, enforcement and inspections have logged 6,800 contacts at boat ramps and of these they issued over 320 warnings and about 120 citations – indicating that there is over 6% noncompliance with state laws, and that is with DNR uniformed personnel present. My personal observations on Lake Minnetonka indicate this rate of noncompliance is much higher, especially when inspectors are not present.
A large number of boaters are indeed aware of and in compliance with our AIS laws – thank you. Unfortunately, given the millions of boater trips that occur between Minnesota lakes, even a small percentage of noncompliant boaters translates into a very large risk of moving AIS.
We need even more funding, stronger laws, more enforcement and stiffer penalties. We need to take the AIS threat seriously.
We also need to profile and prioritize are prevention program.
As of this season, there are now four ‘superspreader’ lakes in Minnesota (Alexandria chain, Gull, Mille Lacs and Minnetonka) for zebra mussels. These lakes have (or soon will have) high densities of zebra mussels and large volumes of boat traffic. While increased protection efforts have occurred, they are unfortunately, still too small an effort.
Fishing tournaments and tournament participants represent a high risk category. I do not think it is a coincidence that five of the six most recently infested zebra mussel lakes (Alexandria chain, Gull, Mille Lacs, Pelican and Minnetonka) are all in the highest prize category (greater than $10,000) of permitted fishing contests in Minnesota. These lakes are also very highly visited, but many other highly visited lakes do not have zebra mussel.
I often hear criticisms of the MN DNR when the topic of protecting our lakes from AIS arises. In my experience, the DNR staff are professionals and are doing the best job possible with preventing AIS impacts, given the funding and policy constraints they must work within.
We need to ask – no expect – our elected leaders to give the DNR more resources and clear policy direction to really protect our lakes.
Monday, September 20, 2010
What Next?
Now that zebra mussels are in Lake Minnetonka to stay, we will have to learn to cope with their impacts. We have an opportunity to learn from this and make adjustments to keep new and forthcoming other aquatic invasive species (AIS) out of Lake Minnetonka. Unfortunately, zebra mussels will not be the last AIS to threaten Lake Minnetonka.
The nature of the AIS issue makes this a large challenge on many levels, but a challenge we ought to confront.
The Lake Minnetonka Association has been urging protection against zebra mussel for about ten years. Perhaps by using zebra mussel as our poster AIS, we have not given enough emphasis to other AIS nearing Lake Minnetonka. We cannot afford to let down our guard because new AIS, such as hydrilla, spiny waterflea, VHS and many more, all will damage our lake should they get in.
We have learned that current protections – local and statewide are not adequate.
According to a position paper from Minnesota Waters, a statewide advocacy organization, “ Minnesota’s response to the AIS problem has evolved over the past two decades in a piecemeal fashion. As a result, we lack a comprehensive management system, and we lack a sense of urgency.” And “We need to change the game.”
An effective AIS protection system requires both statewide and local elements.
The protections now in place are largely permissive, relying on public awareness and voluntary actions. There are laws, which are enforced somewhat, but not nearly enough. At the local level, there have been ramped up inspection efforts, but these too have not been sufficient. For example, the LMCD’s Strategic Plan says 19,000 inspection hours (per season) are needed. This season, there were approximately 4,000 hours of inspections.
The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources is hosting a series of stakeholder meetings this Autumn and the Lake Minnetonka Association has been invited to participate. A similar series of meetings occurred last year and one outcome was the new law requiring all boats to drain their water reservoirs after leaving any lake or river. Additional steps must be taken soon and our hope is these will be embraced in the upcoming legislative session.
We must recognize however, additional protection measures may be controversial or face obstacles. New funding of any kind will pose challenges in this economic climate. The Lake Minnetonka Association supports a fee system like that in place on Lake Tahoe, where boaters pay fees on two tiers – those using only Lake Tahoe and those visiting other lakes. These fees pay for inspections. For Minnesota, a version of this two-tier boat license system is being considered by the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District for possible introduction to the state legislature.
Another challenge we will encounter is there are angling and boating interests who may object to the cultural changes embodied by a more comprehensive protection system. Many individuals and groups have expressed concerns regarding the increased intrusiveness of additional laws, fees or inspections. These groups will be represented in the DNR’s stakeholder meetings and we will work to reach common understandings of the AIS challenges and impacts so we can come to consensus regarding meaningful and effective protections while allowing all Minnesotans to enjoy our lakes.
Given that several dozen new AIS have been identified by the DNR as having potential to impact Minnesota lakes, we must not let down our guard.
To do this, we must develop:
• Comprehensive protection with both state and local elements
• A systemic overhaul, rather than incremental changes
• An attitude and culture that AIS pose serious, permanent threats that must be addressed
• All Minnesotans being invested in the protection of our lakes
The Lake Minnetonka Association believes that if our local and state leaders can get on board with these guiding principles, then the details will follow. The Lake Minnetonka Association, partnering with Minnesota Waters and local leaders is prepared to offer specific recommendations.
The nature of the AIS issue makes this a large challenge on many levels, but a challenge we ought to confront.
The Lake Minnetonka Association has been urging protection against zebra mussel for about ten years. Perhaps by using zebra mussel as our poster AIS, we have not given enough emphasis to other AIS nearing Lake Minnetonka. We cannot afford to let down our guard because new AIS, such as hydrilla, spiny waterflea, VHS and many more, all will damage our lake should they get in.
We have learned that current protections – local and statewide are not adequate.
According to a position paper from Minnesota Waters, a statewide advocacy organization, “ Minnesota’s response to the AIS problem has evolved over the past two decades in a piecemeal fashion. As a result, we lack a comprehensive management system, and we lack a sense of urgency.” And “We need to change the game.”
An effective AIS protection system requires both statewide and local elements.
The protections now in place are largely permissive, relying on public awareness and voluntary actions. There are laws, which are enforced somewhat, but not nearly enough. At the local level, there have been ramped up inspection efforts, but these too have not been sufficient. For example, the LMCD’s Strategic Plan says 19,000 inspection hours (per season) are needed. This season, there were approximately 4,000 hours of inspections.
The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources is hosting a series of stakeholder meetings this Autumn and the Lake Minnetonka Association has been invited to participate. A similar series of meetings occurred last year and one outcome was the new law requiring all boats to drain their water reservoirs after leaving any lake or river. Additional steps must be taken soon and our hope is these will be embraced in the upcoming legislative session.
We must recognize however, additional protection measures may be controversial or face obstacles. New funding of any kind will pose challenges in this economic climate. The Lake Minnetonka Association supports a fee system like that in place on Lake Tahoe, where boaters pay fees on two tiers – those using only Lake Tahoe and those visiting other lakes. These fees pay for inspections. For Minnesota, a version of this two-tier boat license system is being considered by the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District for possible introduction to the state legislature.
Another challenge we will encounter is there are angling and boating interests who may object to the cultural changes embodied by a more comprehensive protection system. Many individuals and groups have expressed concerns regarding the increased intrusiveness of additional laws, fees or inspections. These groups will be represented in the DNR’s stakeholder meetings and we will work to reach common understandings of the AIS challenges and impacts so we can come to consensus regarding meaningful and effective protections while allowing all Minnesotans to enjoy our lakes.
Given that several dozen new AIS have been identified by the DNR as having potential to impact Minnesota lakes, we must not let down our guard.
To do this, we must develop:
• Comprehensive protection with both state and local elements
• A systemic overhaul, rather than incremental changes
• An attitude and culture that AIS pose serious, permanent threats that must be addressed
• All Minnesotans being invested in the protection of our lakes
The Lake Minnetonka Association believes that if our local and state leaders can get on board with these guiding principles, then the details will follow. The Lake Minnetonka Association, partnering with Minnesota Waters and local leaders is prepared to offer specific recommendations.
Saturday, August 7, 2010
Sad News - Zebra Mussels in Our Lake - What Do We Need to Know and What should We Be Doing Now?
Everybody by now probably knows that zebra mussels have been found in Lake Minnetonka. I and everybody else who loves Lake Minnetonka hoped this day would never come. It is truly sad news for everyone. But, now that they are here, what next?
As of now, it appears the infestation is limited to Grays and Wayzata Bay and the Lower Lake south to Big Island. All appearances are that we are very early in the infestation. Crews from the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources and the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District have and will continue to monitor the lake and more up-to-date information will be available in the weeks to come. The DNR will have a special page on their website dedicated to the Lake Minnetonka zebra mussel situation 9search ‘zebra mussel’).
Also as of this time, the agencies are exploring whether any kind of containment may be possible. The Lake Minnetonka Association will work with the agencies to explore all options. Again, more information will be forthcoming in the next month or two.
Typically, zebra mussel populations expand very slowly for the first two or three years, then multiply explosively.
Given this assessment and the way zebra mussel populations typically expand, I would expect the full impacts may take two to four years to be realized.
Zebra mussels will encrust hard surfaces – hard or firm lake bottoms, boat hulls, mooring buoys, inside mechanisms in boat motors, water toys, docks and lifts. Here are some precautions that should be taken.
At the end of the day, unfortunately, zebra mussels will be in Lake Minnetonka forever. So, we must learn to cope with them.
What should boaters and lakeshore owners do?
1. When swimming or wading, wear protective footwear to minimize cutting your feet, as zebra mussel shells are razor-sharp.
2. Remove irrigation intakes from the water and drain completely when not in use, as the immature forms will encrust the intakes and pipes.
3. If possible, keep your boat and motor completely out of water (when not in use) to minimize the encrustation of zebra mussels.
4. If it is not possible to store your boat out of water, contact a marina to inquire about protective paints and annual maintenance.
5. Run you boats long enough to reach operating temperatures. The immature zebra mussels are very sensitive to heat, so a hot engine will kill them as they are flushed through the cooling system. Drain all water reservoirs after each use.
6. Help prevent the spread to other lakes and rivers. If you take your boat out of Lake Minnetonka, thoroughly clean your boat and trailer inside and out and let it dry for at least five days. Scrape off any encrustations, wash with high pressure, hot water (120 degrees), then drain and dry all water reservoirs.
7. If you sell used docks, structures or water toys, be sure they are decontaminated and cleaned before they leave the area.
We expect zebra mussels will affect the overall health of the lake and the fisheries. As the infestation develops, agencies charged with managing Lake Minnetonka’s environmental health – MN DNR and the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District - will be reporting to the community.
I am saddened by this news, as I know all of you are as well. The Lake Minnetonka Association remains committed to being advocates for AIS prevention. While zebra mussels are here, there are dozens of other invasive plants, animals and pathogens coming toward of Lake Minnetonka.
As of now, it appears the infestation is limited to Grays and Wayzata Bay and the Lower Lake south to Big Island. All appearances are that we are very early in the infestation. Crews from the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources and the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District have and will continue to monitor the lake and more up-to-date information will be available in the weeks to come. The DNR will have a special page on their website dedicated to the Lake Minnetonka zebra mussel situation 9search ‘zebra mussel’).
Also as of this time, the agencies are exploring whether any kind of containment may be possible. The Lake Minnetonka Association will work with the agencies to explore all options. Again, more information will be forthcoming in the next month or two.
Typically, zebra mussel populations expand very slowly for the first two or three years, then multiply explosively.
Given this assessment and the way zebra mussel populations typically expand, I would expect the full impacts may take two to four years to be realized.
Zebra mussels will encrust hard surfaces – hard or firm lake bottoms, boat hulls, mooring buoys, inside mechanisms in boat motors, water toys, docks and lifts. Here are some precautions that should be taken.
At the end of the day, unfortunately, zebra mussels will be in Lake Minnetonka forever. So, we must learn to cope with them.
What should boaters and lakeshore owners do?
1. When swimming or wading, wear protective footwear to minimize cutting your feet, as zebra mussel shells are razor-sharp.
2. Remove irrigation intakes from the water and drain completely when not in use, as the immature forms will encrust the intakes and pipes.
3. If possible, keep your boat and motor completely out of water (when not in use) to minimize the encrustation of zebra mussels.
4. If it is not possible to store your boat out of water, contact a marina to inquire about protective paints and annual maintenance.
5. Run you boats long enough to reach operating temperatures. The immature zebra mussels are very sensitive to heat, so a hot engine will kill them as they are flushed through the cooling system. Drain all water reservoirs after each use.
6. Help prevent the spread to other lakes and rivers. If you take your boat out of Lake Minnetonka, thoroughly clean your boat and trailer inside and out and let it dry for at least five days. Scrape off any encrustations, wash with high pressure, hot water (120 degrees), then drain and dry all water reservoirs.
7. If you sell used docks, structures or water toys, be sure they are decontaminated and cleaned before they leave the area.
We expect zebra mussels will affect the overall health of the lake and the fisheries. As the infestation develops, agencies charged with managing Lake Minnetonka’s environmental health – MN DNR and the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District - will be reporting to the community.
I am saddened by this news, as I know all of you are as well. The Lake Minnetonka Association remains committed to being advocates for AIS prevention. While zebra mussels are here, there are dozens of other invasive plants, animals and pathogens coming toward of Lake Minnetonka.
Monday, July 19, 2010
Milfoil is Bad - Really
We have been starting to hear from the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources that milfoil can be good for lakes. Over the past month, I have heard and seen in various media that milfoil may be good fish habitat, milfoil may help to keep suspended sediments out of lakes, and milfoil may help keep lakes clear. I have also heard that overly aggressive control may do more harm than good.
There may be some truth to these statements in a very narrow context, but mostly milfoil is bad for lakes.
The DNR is concerned about protecting the health and integrity of lakes – we all are. However, when these concerns are framed inappropriately, they may be misleading. While milfoil control is high on Lake Minnetonka’s radar screen and keeping the lake healthy is in everyone’s interest, I think it is time to step back and examine these concerns.
The various statements from the DNR are true, but only in extreme cases. For example, milfoil is good fish habitat – but only when there are no other native plants in the lake. That is not the case in Lake Minnetonka. Lakes can become turbid and clouded with suspended sediment and algae, but this has only been observed in lakes where all plants have been removed, which has happened in only one or two lakes. That has not happened in Lake Minnetonka. Aggressive control, when it leads to total plant removal, can cause harm – again this has not happened in Lake Minnetonka.
We have heard with respect to the Lake Minnetonka milfoil treatments that the yardstick being used to evaluate this project is that the treatments will not cause more harm than good. This is an appropriate standard, but I have not seen any assessment weighing the relative harm versus good in Lake Minnetonka.
I believe the treatments on Lake Minnetonka have indeed been beneficial. Lake Minnetonka contains a variety of native plants, which by themselves provide beneficial fish habitat. Milfoil diminishes the quality of that habitat. Therefore, removing it is beneficial – as long as we do not also remove native plants.
Have we damaged native plants in this project?
The proposed Gideon and St. Albans Bay treatments were denied because the treatments in 2009 appear to have damaged native plants, “though no tests of the possible statistical significance of the apparent trend were reported.” In Grays Bay in 2009, three species of pondweeds had declined, which is accurate. Several species increased too. As well, in Carmans Bay, one of these plants decreased and there was no treatment in 2009. However, there is no objective basis to conclude, as the DNR points out, that the treatments were the cause.
Because we lack baseline information to indicate whether or not these plants normally increase and decrease in lakes without treatments, we do not know if the declines in some species are within normal ranges.
There is evidence that the opposite may also be true. Milfoil growth, if unchecked, can cause harm to native plants in lakes. Eurasian watermilfoil began becoming problematic on Christmas Lake in about 2001. Since that time, the DNR conducted surveys and found an increase in milfoil and a corresponding decrease in about a dozen native plant species. Overall, the habitat quality has diminished in Christmas Lake as a result of advancing milfoil growth. Good versus harm ought to be weighed on this scale too – it may be harmful doing nothing.
Milfoil is bad for lakes. While that does not mean we are compelled to treat it, if we desire to treat it, as we do in at least five bays on Lake Minnetonka, we should do so in a manner that is protective of the lake’s health and we should evaluate the relative benefits in the largest context possible.
There may be some truth to these statements in a very narrow context, but mostly milfoil is bad for lakes.
The DNR is concerned about protecting the health and integrity of lakes – we all are. However, when these concerns are framed inappropriately, they may be misleading. While milfoil control is high on Lake Minnetonka’s radar screen and keeping the lake healthy is in everyone’s interest, I think it is time to step back and examine these concerns.
The various statements from the DNR are true, but only in extreme cases. For example, milfoil is good fish habitat – but only when there are no other native plants in the lake. That is not the case in Lake Minnetonka. Lakes can become turbid and clouded with suspended sediment and algae, but this has only been observed in lakes where all plants have been removed, which has happened in only one or two lakes. That has not happened in Lake Minnetonka. Aggressive control, when it leads to total plant removal, can cause harm – again this has not happened in Lake Minnetonka.
We have heard with respect to the Lake Minnetonka milfoil treatments that the yardstick being used to evaluate this project is that the treatments will not cause more harm than good. This is an appropriate standard, but I have not seen any assessment weighing the relative harm versus good in Lake Minnetonka.
I believe the treatments on Lake Minnetonka have indeed been beneficial. Lake Minnetonka contains a variety of native plants, which by themselves provide beneficial fish habitat. Milfoil diminishes the quality of that habitat. Therefore, removing it is beneficial – as long as we do not also remove native plants.
Have we damaged native plants in this project?
The proposed Gideon and St. Albans Bay treatments were denied because the treatments in 2009 appear to have damaged native plants, “though no tests of the possible statistical significance of the apparent trend were reported.” In Grays Bay in 2009, three species of pondweeds had declined, which is accurate. Several species increased too. As well, in Carmans Bay, one of these plants decreased and there was no treatment in 2009. However, there is no objective basis to conclude, as the DNR points out, that the treatments were the cause.
Because we lack baseline information to indicate whether or not these plants normally increase and decrease in lakes without treatments, we do not know if the declines in some species are within normal ranges.
There is evidence that the opposite may also be true. Milfoil growth, if unchecked, can cause harm to native plants in lakes. Eurasian watermilfoil began becoming problematic on Christmas Lake in about 2001. Since that time, the DNR conducted surveys and found an increase in milfoil and a corresponding decrease in about a dozen native plant species. Overall, the habitat quality has diminished in Christmas Lake as a result of advancing milfoil growth. Good versus harm ought to be weighed on this scale too – it may be harmful doing nothing.
Milfoil is bad for lakes. While that does not mean we are compelled to treat it, if we desire to treat it, as we do in at least five bays on Lake Minnetonka, we should do so in a manner that is protective of the lake’s health and we should evaluate the relative benefits in the largest context possible.
Saturday, June 12, 2010
Strong Medicine
By the time this reaches the paper, the Lake Minnetonka Association’s 9th Annual Clean Up event will be over. During the event, volunteer SCUBA divers search various areas of the lake bottom and bring in trash and treasures. This event highlights the need for us all to do our part in keeping Lake Minnetonka clean.
This event requires a Special Event Permit from the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District. The permit requires the submission of an Aquatic Invasive Species Prevention Plan to assure all necessary steps are taken to keep unwanted invasive species out of our lake – a good thing.
The prevention plan I submitted with the permit application included a requirement that all watercraft not already residing on Lake Minnetonka arrive clean and dry (inside and out), that all divers’ gear arrive clean and inspections of both. Upon review, LMCD Executive Director Greg Nybeck called me and said he was concerned because Prior Lake’s Clean Up event was the week prior and many of the divers would be participating in both events. Prior Lake is infested with zebra mussels. He said he would add the requirement that no boats participating in Prior Lake’s event the week before the Lake Minnetonka event would be allowed to participate in the Lake Minnetonka event. Greg asked if I would be agreeable to that, and after a few seconds’ thought – yes of course I would.
First of all, thanks to Greg and the LMCD. The Lake Minnetonka Association has been calling for agencies to step up and aggressively protect Lake Minnetonka for years. Greg’s action is a clear demonstration of what we have been advocating. Secondly, thanks to Greg for setting a high standard for future action for the LMA and others to follow.
As we have notified the divers, I have been receiving some pushback. (“Divers do not transport zebra mussels! What gives the LMA the right to require more than the MN DNR recommends? This is a public lake – you cannot prevent us from entering.”).
While there is some truth in all of these sentiments, these are exactly the reasons zebra mussels and other aquatic invasive species (AIS) are moving – it always seems to be someone else’s issue.
Over the years, it seems every group I speak to or encounter – lakeshore owners, anglers, boaters, SCUBA divers, sailors, marina operators, transporters, dock installers, etc. – claim their group is clean and others’ are the carriers. The LMA does not have explicit ‘rights’ in a case like this, but we do have responsibilities and obligations to set an example. And Lake Minnetonka is a public lake, but when the LMA hosts or the LMCD permits an event inviting participants who could be bringing AIS, we have a trust to uphold and we should set an example.
Please, don’t become complacent, as I had. Please, all lake users, take the extra steps – every time you come to enjoy Lake Minnetonka. Make sure your boats, trailers, equipment are clean and thoroughly dry at least five days after leaving another lake (infested or not). Please everybody, urge your fellow lake users to adopt this ‘strong medicine’ ethic. This is what it will take to make sure Lake Minnetonka remains clean for all to enjoy.
This event requires a Special Event Permit from the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District. The permit requires the submission of an Aquatic Invasive Species Prevention Plan to assure all necessary steps are taken to keep unwanted invasive species out of our lake – a good thing.
The prevention plan I submitted with the permit application included a requirement that all watercraft not already residing on Lake Minnetonka arrive clean and dry (inside and out), that all divers’ gear arrive clean and inspections of both. Upon review, LMCD Executive Director Greg Nybeck called me and said he was concerned because Prior Lake’s Clean Up event was the week prior and many of the divers would be participating in both events. Prior Lake is infested with zebra mussels. He said he would add the requirement that no boats participating in Prior Lake’s event the week before the Lake Minnetonka event would be allowed to participate in the Lake Minnetonka event. Greg asked if I would be agreeable to that, and after a few seconds’ thought – yes of course I would.
First of all, thanks to Greg and the LMCD. The Lake Minnetonka Association has been calling for agencies to step up and aggressively protect Lake Minnetonka for years. Greg’s action is a clear demonstration of what we have been advocating. Secondly, thanks to Greg for setting a high standard for future action for the LMA and others to follow.
As we have notified the divers, I have been receiving some pushback. (“Divers do not transport zebra mussels! What gives the LMA the right to require more than the MN DNR recommends? This is a public lake – you cannot prevent us from entering.”).
While there is some truth in all of these sentiments, these are exactly the reasons zebra mussels and other aquatic invasive species (AIS) are moving – it always seems to be someone else’s issue.
Over the years, it seems every group I speak to or encounter – lakeshore owners, anglers, boaters, SCUBA divers, sailors, marina operators, transporters, dock installers, etc. – claim their group is clean and others’ are the carriers. The LMA does not have explicit ‘rights’ in a case like this, but we do have responsibilities and obligations to set an example. And Lake Minnetonka is a public lake, but when the LMA hosts or the LMCD permits an event inviting participants who could be bringing AIS, we have a trust to uphold and we should set an example.
Please, don’t become complacent, as I had. Please, all lake users, take the extra steps – every time you come to enjoy Lake Minnetonka. Make sure your boats, trailers, equipment are clean and thoroughly dry at least five days after leaving another lake (infested or not). Please everybody, urge your fellow lake users to adopt this ‘strong medicine’ ethic. This is what it will take to make sure Lake Minnetonka remains clean for all to enjoy.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
