Wednesday, June 3, 2009

Chemical Management Tools

The unfortunate letter, titled ‘Chemicals,’ in last week’s edition (June 2, 2009 Lakeshore Weekly News) contained numerous factual errors and mis-representations and was therefore misleading.

The authors were correct in citing me, representing the Lake Minnetonka Association, Minnesota Waters and the North American Lake Management Society, where I am an executive in all three organizations, as an advocate for the comprehensive protection and management of Lake Minnetonka and lakes in general. Specifically, I have advocated controlling Eurasian watermilfoil (and other invasive plants) and protecting native plants in lakes. Based on my background with a graduate degree in aquatic ecology, a certified lake manager (one of only 60 in the world), 30-years’ experience in managing lakes and holding leadership and executive positions in state, national and international professional lake management organizations – it is my opinion that the approach being used and advocated on Lake Minnetonka is safe, restorative and fully consistent with scientific, government and industry standards.

I do not begrudge the authors for their obvious distaste for the use of herbicides in lakes. However, in public discourse, it is important to rely on objective information based on sound science.

Errors in fact include an inappropriate reference to 2,4-D as being synonymous with the “notorious Agent Orange.” Agent Orange contained dioxin, a chemical found to be hazardous and banned long ago. Because dioxin is also known as 2,4,5-T, which appears similar to 2,4-D, it is often confused. However, 2,4-D has not been found to be unsafe and is widely used. Indeed, even the study cited in the letter has been refuted by later, more rigorous studies and to-date there has been no association between 2,4-D and public health concerns.

In fact, 2,4-D has been used for decades in hundreds, perhaps thousands of Minnesota lakes. I am not aware of any known ill effects to people or the environment. The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) permits its use.

The Lake Minnetonka milfoil control project was developed with expert input and consensus by numerous public agencies including the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District, the University of Minnesota, the US Army Corps of Engineers, Three Rivers Park District, Hennepin County Environmental Services and the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. The two herbicides that have been used, endothall and triclopyr, are registered for use in lakes by the US Environmental Protection Agency and are permitted for use by the DNR. In fact, the DNR, Lake Minnetonka Conservation District and several Cities have provided grants toward the project.

The authors erroneously state the Lake Vegetation Management Plan (a DNR document) allows the killing of vegetation other than milfoil. In fact, the explicit objective of the plan is to protect and restore native plants that milfoil has displaced and intensive monitoring conducted by an independent federal agency has confirmed this. Indeed, the management plan is intended to be restorative by controlling milfoil – because the milfoil in Lake Minnetonka, when not controlled, has harmed native vegetation in the lake.

The principals, partners and experts in this project recognized a real problem and sought solutions. The expert team concluded that the use of herbicides was the only safe and feasible management tool that would accomplish the objective of controlling milfoil and protecting and enhancing native plants in Lake Minnetonka.

The authors may not like using chemicals, but they have not offered any feasible alternatives. It is unfortunate reality that aquatic invasive species must be dealt with, but I believe, their impacts are increasing and Lake Minnetonka as well as other Minnesota lakes are gravely threatened.

The Lake Minnetonka Association has also advocated strong measures to prevent new invasive species from entering the lake, because of the great impacts they will cause. Unlike milfoil, which can be controlled, most other invasive species have not controls – so keeping them out must be the top priotity.

Lake Stewardship

Elitism. That word has gotten tossed around recently following the Lake Minnetonka Association’s recommendation that inspection fees be charged to help pay for inspections and other aquatic invasive species programs. I have offered our rationale and justification for this recommendation as well as described a comprehensive protection plan in previous columns.

Unfortunately, an accusation of elitism is usually meant to stop dialog and is seldom constructive. Lake Minnetonka has its share of wealth among its lakeshore residents, but probably not more than many other Minnesota lakes. As well, there is a very large portion of middle-income residents on the lake.

Lakeshore owners on Lake Minnetonka – individually and collectively - are good stewards of the lake and are motivated buy a sincere desire to protect this beautiful lake.

Lakeshore owners and members of the Lake Minnetonka Association care about Lake Minnetonka. I have worked with hundreds of lake associations in Minnesota and other states and my experience is this trait – a high level of stewardship and affinity for the lakes people live on – is common to all lakeshore owners.

Lakeshore owners’ investment in their lakeshore properties is much more than financial. Their investment is emotional, environmental and spiritual. That is why they want to take care of their lake and they expect visitors and public agencies to share in that stewardship responsibility.

I sometimes hear criticism that if lakeshore owners on Lake Minnetonka really cared, they would not have rip rapped lakeshore, manicured turf lawns or weed removal in their beaches. We need to consider these charges in the context of Lake Minnetonka being a large, popular, urban lake – indeed the most highly used recreational lake in Minnesota.

Nearshore waves cause damage to unprotected lakeshore and some kind of stabilization is needed to protect the shore. Rip rapping and other structural methods are one way to protect the shore and these are permitted by regulatory agencies. The Lake Minnetonka Association encourages the use of lakescaping, a more natural method, but on a voluntary basis and where it is feasible. We see this trend beginning to become more popular.

Similarly, turf lawns are the norm for urban areas. Lakeshore turf areas are no different that residential lawns away from the lake - both drain to the lake. Also, Minnesota has restricted the use of phosphorus in lawn fertilizers, so the concern with phosphorus in runoff from fertilized lawns is greatly reduced.

Weed control in areas adjacent to lakeshore properties is a common practice – as in hundreds of other Minnesota lakes. This activity, again permitted by regulatory agencies, represents a small overall impact, especially compared to the impact of the milfoil infestation. The Lake Minnetonka Association supports moving to a new model where invasive plants are controlled and native plants are protected. This is the approach being used in the Three Bay milfoil control project and one we hope will be adopted lake-wide.

We should also highlight the fact that lakeshore owners have made personal investments of time and money in these stewardship activities:

- they clean up after ice fishing season
- they clean up after the harvesters go through
- they clean up boat launches
- they protect their shoreline due to intense boating activity
- they make substantial contributions to the Three Bay milfoil project

Lake Minnetonka lakeshore owners do all of this because they love and care about the lake. It is frustrating and disheartening when they do not see the same level of care, commitment or investment from lake visitors and public agencies.

We all have a responsibility to be good stewards of Lake Minnetonka. Lakeshore owners as well as visitors and public agencies can all certainly make improvements in our stewardship of the lake. So, in a sense, Lake Minnetonka lakeshore owners are elitists - elite stewards of the lake.

We Must Step Up Now

Zebra mussel is near! The breaking news that zebra mussel is now in Prior Lake reminds us that our concerns are validated - Lake Minnetonka is a big target. We must now step up our efforts and be vigilant.

Efforts have been and will continue to be increased to protect Lake Minnetonka. Specifically, the Lake Minnetonka Association and the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District are joining forces to increase the inspector hours at public launches. The MN Department of Natural Resources will be increasing enforcement efforts at Lake Minnetonka as well as Prior Lake and Mille Lacs Lake. All three agencies will continue and expand their public awareness programs to make sure we are all taking actions to keep zebra mussels form getting into the lake.

First of all, to the best of anyone’s knowledge, zebra mussels are not now in Lake Minnetonka. Secondly, I believe we can, with a comprehensive, coordinated effort, keep zebra mussels out. Here are what lakeshore owners and lake users can do.

1. All boaters should follow the MN DNR recommendations, which are:

• inspect and remove all visible aquatic plants, animals and mud from boats, trailers and equipment such as anchors before leaving a water access;
• inspect and remove all visible aquatic plants, animals or mud from docks, boat lifts and swim rafts before transporting to another water;
• drain all water from boats - including live wells, bilges and bait buckets - before leaving a water access;
• spray or rinse boats with high pressure and/or hot water, or let them dry thoroughly for five days before transporting to another water.

2. Zebra mussels may be introduced if attached to used docks and boat lifts. Lakeshore owners who have purchased a used dock or boat lift and suspect it has come from an infested lake, please make sure it is free of zebra mussels before putting it into Lake Minnetonka.

3. Lakeshore owners should routinely check their shoreline for suspicious-looking shells. Call me if you have any questions or would like to know what to do if you find anything suspicious.

The threat of zebra mussels is imminent and serious. If zebra mussels get into Lake Minnetonka, the results will be disastrous. Impacts will include property devaluation, boat damage and increased maintenance costs, beach closures, and expanded milfoil infestations.

We can – we must – marshal our efforts and investments to protect Lake Minnetonka. Our investments now will also help protect Lake Minnetonka from other exotic plants, animals and viruses, which while not as imminent, are also coming this way. Each new aquatic invasive species that gets into the lake will magnify the impacts.