The Power of Citizen Journalism
Post News ($)»     Post Blog»     Upload Image»     Groups»     Events»     Alerts»     User Benefits»
Email Print Share

Email this article

Recipient email:
Your email:
optional
Message:
optional

article imagePlans To Eradicate Milfoil With Renovate In Lakes Being Considered

Posted Apr 11, 2008 by  Debra Myers (skyangel) in Environment | 14 comments | 356 views
Advertising
The Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) is considering using Renovate, a chemical designed for European milfoil, to kill the invasive seaweed. Although the DEC says that it should control the milfoil, but not completely eradicate it.
Bath, NY - Between two of the Finger Lakes, Keuka and Seneca, lies two smaller lakes, Lamoka and Waneta, where many people, live, vacation, boat, fish and swim. But with the lake's usage, came unwanted invasive species of plants, namely European milfoil.

European milfoil has clogged these lakes every year, becoming a danger to both boaters and swimmers. The Lamoka-Waneta Lakes Association vice-president, Dennis Fagan, told Steuben County officials Monday that plans were again being considered to eradicate the non-native weed this year. The Department of Environmental Conservation is considering the use of a chemical called "Renovate" (pdf) to kill the weed.



Keuka Lake
nysparks.state.ny.us (Public Domain)




Seneca Lake
www.empire.state.ny.us (Public Domain)




In 2003, the herbicide SONAR (pdf) was used, and it took 59 days to kill the weed, but there was a problem. SONAR did not dissipate. Instead,
“It stayed in the lake and eradicated all the weeds, even the native plants,” Fagan said. “The (state Department of Environmental Conservation) guys were very upset.”


The following year, Lamoka was slated to get the same treatment, but it never happened. Since 2003, however, all but two of the 17 native plants have reappeared in Waneta Lake, along with the milfoil. Already this year, the milfoil is growing rapidly at certain points in the lakes.

It's believed that Renovate should take less time to rid the lakes of most of the milfoil in about 3 days. However, there are a few issues that will be dealt with.

The first is that there's the fact that with the lakes being treated, the
"water will exceed the EPA’s guidelines for drinking water for a short period of time. The level only affects six cottages and the association has offered to buy bottled water for any residents while the lakes are monitored," Fagan said.


Secondly, DEC official John Cole says that there are also 5,000-feet setbacks required from any area that could be a source for drinking water. But it should not stop people from swimming in the two lakes.
“They should all be good to go within a week.”


So far there has only been one complaint about this during a public comment period. That period will end April 21. The association is hosting a DEC open house from 6-9 p.m. Wednesday at the Tyrone Town Hall, where people can browse through available information and ask questions about the plan.
Fagan told the committee there have been few objections to the treatment, but predicted there will be complaints “from the tree-hugger types.”


The total cost of this treatment will be $600,000 for the next two years, and will be paid for through special water district taxes, state funds and reserve funds set up by Steuben and Schuyler counties. A small portion of Lamoka Lake lies in Steuben County, which contributes $16,000 annually in the reserve.
article:253047:6::0

3 subscribers
Subscribe To This Thread[?] :
  • avatar Posted Apr 11, 2008 by  Debra Myers (skyangel)
    #1
    My concern is that Waneta Lake is where we go sswimming every year. I don't buy their hopes that this chemical will dispate in a weeks time.

    In the Renovate pdf, I found this:

    Under certain conditions, treatment of
    aquatic weeds can result in oxygen depletion or loss due to
    decomposition of dead plants, which may contribute to fish
    suffocation. This loss can cause fish suffocation. Therefore, to
    minimize this hazard, do not treat more than one-third to one-half of the water area in a single operation and wait at least 10 to 14 days between treatments. Begin treatment along the shore and proceed outwards in bands to allow fish to move into untreated areas.
  • Sue D. Posted Apr 11, 2008 by  Sue D.
    #2
    I would be worried about that as well.
  • avatar Posted Apr 11, 2008 by  Debra Myers (skyangel)
    #3
    @ Sue D.
    I would be worried about that as well.


    This stuff is horrid...milfoil, I mean. It's what we call seaweed...although there's no "sea" to it. It's stem is tough and the branches have fine hair-like qualities to it...it just gets all over.

    Hopefully, they will treat the lakes before the swimming season gets here...to give it time to clear itself up. I imagine though, that the edges of the lakes are going to have a big mess to get cleaned-up.
  • Sue D. Posted Apr 11, 2008 by  Sue D.
    #4
    @ Debra Myers (skyangel)
    This stuff is horrid...milfoil, I mean. It's what we call seaweed...although there's no "sea" to it. It's stem is tough and the branches have fine hair-like qualities to it...it just gets all over.

    Hopefully, they will treat the lakes before the swimming season gets here...to give it time to clear itself up. I imagine though, that the edges of the lakes are going to have a big mess to get cleaned-up.


    Not to mention the costs associated with doing so.
  • avatar Posted Apr 11, 2008 by  Debra Myers (skyangel)
    #5
    @ Sue D.
    Not to mention the costs associated with doing so.


    True.
  • avatar Posted Apr 11, 2008 by  Cynthia T. [Picasso]
    #6
    Seaweed is terrible in any lake and is a real problem.
    So can chemicals be a problem to rid lakes of the foreign stuff and not harm or kill what should be there.
    If they are sure this stuff will work it should be done before the lakes warm up and people start swimming in the lakes.

    Good report Deb
  • avatar Posted Apr 11, 2008 by  Nikki W (karateblossom)
    #7
    Sigh....Anytime chemical and natural resource come together, it isn't good.

    One side has "great results" - years later, we have cancer and mutations and all kinds of reports that weren't studied (studies cost MILLIONS and no one is forking out MILLIONS, especially not the makers of the compounds).

    So.....swim in a pool with chlorine? That turns hair green and might be the cause of whats wrong with our kids today.

    Or.....take a chance in the lake.......

    This is sad, Deb. Quite the crossroads not only for your grandbaby, but for those around you.

    Good report. Very thought provoking about our environment and what we deal with every day.
  • avatar Posted Apr 11, 2008 by  Debra Myers (skyangel)
    #8
    @ Cynthia T. [Picasso]
    Seaweed is terrible in any lake and is a real problem.
    So can chemicals be a problem to rid lakes of the foreign stuff and not harm or kill what should be there.
    If they are sure this stuff will work it should be done before the lakes warm up and people start swimming in the lakes.

    Good report Deb


    thanks, Cynthia. One of my links references the great lakes where this seems to be a problem as well.


    @ Nikki W (karateblossom)
    Sigh....Anytime chemical and natural resource come together, it isn't good.

    One side has "great results" - years later, we have cancer and mutations and all kinds of reports that weren't studied (studies cost MILLIONS and no one is forking out MILLIONS, especially not the makers of the compounds).

    So.....swim in a pool with chlorine? That turns hair green and might be the cause of whats wrong with our kids today.

    Or.....take a chance in the lake.......

    This is sad, Deb. Quite the crossroads not only for your grandbaby, but for those around you.

    Good report. Very thought provoking about our environment and what we deal with every day.


    Thanks, KB. I worry about this business because it doesn't sound to me that these officials are certain there will be no residue left and what could happen if the water ends up in our systems. Then I have to wonder if the fish will survive and what the impact on them will be...will they be okay to eat?
  • avatar Posted Apr 12, 2008 by  Chris V. (cgull)
    #9
    @ Cynthia T. [Picasso]
    Seaweed is terrible in any lake and is a real problem.
    So can chemicals be a problem to rid lakes of the foreign stuff and not harm or kill what should be there.
    If they are sure this stuff will work it should be done before the lakes warm up and people start swimming in the lakes.

    Good report Deb
    I agree it will affect others also. There should be some natural predators in nature.
  • avatar Posted Apr 12, 2008 by  Bob Ewing
    #10
    The treatment may be worse than the problem.
  • avatar Posted Apr 12, 2008 by  Debra Myers (skyangel)
    #11
    @ Chris V. (cgull)
    I agree it will affect others also. There should be some natural predators in nature.


    Well, it's too bad that between the milfoil and the zebra muscles they wouldn't cancel each other out.
  • avatar Posted Apr 12, 2008 by  Debra Myers (skyangel)
    #12
    @ Bob Ewing
    The treatment may be worse than the problem.


    I agree...and that's what bothers me.
  • avatar Posted Apr 12, 2008 by  Bob Ewing
    #13
    an interesting site.
  • avatar Posted Apr 12, 2008 by  Debra Myers (skyangel)
    #14
    Thank you, Bob.

    It was interesting to read:

    Once milfoil becomes well-established within a waterbody, it is difficult or impossible to remove. Other control methods include: Harvesting, rotovation (underwater rototilling), installation of bottom barriers, diver hand pulling, diver dredging, and in some very limited situations the use of triploid (sterile) grass carp. We are investigating other biological controls such as the milfoil weevil. The management of milfoil costs the state and private individuals up-to-one million dollars per year.


    What they used was the SONAR. Doesn't sound too promising, does it?

Add a Comment

emptyAdd a Comment or Login/Register empty