BMLM19940321"- BIG MUSKE GO LAKE/BASS BAY PROTECTION & REHABILITATION DISTRICT
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
MINUTES OF SPECIAL MEETING HELD MARCH 21, 1994
The meeting was called to order at 7:33 PM by Mayor De Angelis.
Also present were Commissioners Patterson, Dumke, Misko,
Sanders, Schneider, Taube and Woodard, City Clerk Marenda and
Deputy Commissioners Pilak, Herda, Klenz, Kreiser and Sorenson.
Deputy Commissioner Pilak introduced DNR representatives: Jim
Jackley, Project Coordinator; Randy Schumacher, Fisheries
Biologist; Mark Anderson, Wildlife Biologist; Sue Schumacher,
Water Regulations and Zoning, Mr. Becker and Dan Helsel.
Deputy Pilak thanked the DNR for publication and mailing of the
Newsletter, Senator Lynn Adelman for his efforts in this project
and who couldn't be here tonight, JoAnne Gillespie of Country
Wetlands nursery and the Deputy Commissioners for many meetings
during the last six months. He stated the newsletter should
have answered 90% of any questions.
-
Deputy Pilak presented the history. At the 1992 Annual meeting,
Lake Management alternatives were requested. In 1993 a survey
was handed out asking for comments on such things as usage of
the lake, environmental trouble the lake was in, etc. The
Deputies were directed to take these needs and concerns and come
up with a plan that would correct the problems in the
environment and enhance the use of the lake. Main interests
were 1) boating; 2) fishing; 3) aesthetics; 4) swimming; 5)
winter use; 6) duck hunting. The Deputies reviewed many studies
and "what ifs". Also considered this is a public lake and we
need to meet certain criteria along with your needs and wants,
considered cost effectiveness and practicalities. This program
is going hand-in-hand with the Priority Lakes Watershed Program.
Deputy Pilak stated the Deputies' recommended strategy is a long
term drawdown for 1) rough fish eradication; 2) facilitate
oxidization of rotting material; 3) increase depth of the Big
Lake; 4) create better habitat for wildlife; 5) quality and
clarity of water improvement. Disadvantages could include
possible nutrient pulse the following year; one summer boating
season impacted; 2 fall hunting seasons affected and temporary
expansion of cattails likely in some areas. He stated your main
concern was cattail encroachment. The newsletter section on
cattail control and management was reviewed.
-
Deputy Pilak reviewed the Secondary in-lake management strategy
of a winter drawdown, listing the Advantages as 1) Provides some
carp and bullhead control; 2) Limited compaction and oxidation
of sediments; 3) Provides some time for shoreline improvement
efforts; 4) Freeze-intolerant plants such as milfoil will be
reduced while most of the desirable plants will survive. The
Disadvantages listed were: 1) No substantial increase in depth
BIG MUSKEGO LAKE/BASS BAY PROTECTION
AND REHABILITATION DISTRICT SPECIAL MEETING
MARCH 21, 1994
PAGE 2
,,-. expected; 2) More variability in rough fish control; 3) Limited
time for shoreline improvement efforts; 4) No opportunity to
reduce existing cattail stands; 5) Less fish and wildlife
habitat improvement.
Deputy Pilak reported there is $400,000 possibly available for
long term drawdown. The answer to why not just dredge the lake
would be the $60-80 million cost. Why not just leave it alone?
After 100 years of punishment, it won't come back by itself. As
to the question of who pays for the district's $35,000 share,
the Lake District does have some funds. There are grants
possible. We're looking at possibly a higher assessment and a
two-tier system.
Deputy Pi1ak stated the Deputy Commissioners are an advisory
group. After review and study, the Deputies are recommending
that the Commissioners put the Long Term Drawdown Management
Strategy into effect.
Commissioner Misko complimented the Deputies on an excellent
newsletter which was very informative. He asked if there was a
plan to cut all the cattails down. Pilak responded that the
shorelines would be the property owners responsibility. The
Deputy Commissioners will be extremely busy doing implementation
of this plan and unable to coordinate that effort.
.-. Commissioner Taube asked if the DNR would allow any other form
of shoreline improvement other than round rocks. Sue Schumacher
of the DNR stated she would look at each property on a
case-by-case basis. If you can prove a situation where you
absolutely need a retaining wall to protect your property, we
may consider it. You mayor may not get a permit. Taube
questioned the use of broken concrete or concrete cylinders.
Schumacher said they would consider clean fill but only on a
case-by-case basis.
Commissioner Dumke asked if it was true you could cut cattails
and haul them away but cannot pull them out by roots.
Schumacher stated that was correct.
The funding for the project was clarified to indicate $400,000
could be available from DNR, $87,000 EPA Grant, $56,000
Non-point Grant and $42,000 additional lake grants might be
available. Total project cost approximately $607,000.
Commissioner Pilak pointed out disadvantage to long term
drawdown - submersive weeds. We have always had a weed problem
by mid-summer. The weeds we're promoting after the drawdown are
"good" weeds which will promote wildlife habitat. Channels will
be continued. Also, shallow water boat launch. Nothing big
will be able to be launched there. Also, Deputy Commissioners
recommend long-term drawdown, but one deputy does have several
concerns. Not everybody agreed.
.-..
BIG MUSKEGO LAKE/BASS BAY PROTECTION
AND REHABILITATION DISTRICT SPECIAL MEETING
MARCH 21, 1994
PAGE 3
,- Mayor De Angelis asked for comments or questions on the
preferred strategy or secondary strategy.
Dick Bennett, Boxhorn Gun Club stated he has 2700' of lake
frontage. He expressed concern about rip rap solutions due to
problems he has had with ice heaves. Sue Schumacher suggested
anyone with a rip rap questions should call to make an
appointment at 263-8677. She cannot offer solutions without
seeing the property, the slope of the shoreline, etc.
Keith Jahns, Groveway Lane, stated he didn't think there was
anything the DNR can tell us that rip rap will do any good due
to the 4-10' ice dams. He wished the DNR had reviewed the
shorelines prior to this meeting. He stated we're talking about
a huge amount of dollars being spent. He said he owns property
directly on the lake and understands that makes it more
valuable. He pays City tax increases with the same income as
last year. He wants to know exactly what costs would be his.
Deputy Pilak stated the cost to the District is about $35,000,
with approximately $25,000 available in the District's current
funds, and probably two more assessments levied. There is
approximately $10-15,000 collected annually. There is also a
group that wants to donate some money which we would like to
save for other projects. Jahns asked, what is our dollar amount
per property owner? Mayor responded, approximately $90.00.
- Gary Stewart, Holz Drive, asked about the mechanics of the
drawdown-how does it work? Also, how is the elevation of the
lake established? Jim Jackley of the DNR stated the dam would
be opened in September and also will pump and that is what the
EPA Grant is for. The more water taken out the more compaction.
The elevation was established in 1915 by the Railroad
Commission.
John Wiederhold said the lake has been filling with silt and if
we draw down, we will have compaction and clarity of water.
What's likelihood that we'll have silt again? When we kill
fish, how do we get rid of them along with the smell and odor?
How did Lake Sinnissippi turn out? Is it a live lake again? Is
it clear?
,-
Jim Jackley, DNR, the compaction and oxidation would be about
one foot, per SEWRPC. Depends on how dry it gets. The clarity
will continue for several ~easons. The carp will be gone and
won't stir up. Sediment solid. To keep silt out of lake, the
Priority Lakes Watershed program is spending up to $8,000,000 on
that problem. The program discussed tonight addresses in-lake
management. Fish removal will be in the fall, with application
of chemicals. Lake Sinnissippi had two summers of drawdown.
First summer'was very wet, so drawdown continued. Cattails
expanded. Wildlife and fisheries flourished. On the other
hand, people who wanted open large expanses of water were upset.
As to Big Muskego Lake, survey showed aesthetics desired. Best
use of lake is aesthetics, fishing and wildlife.
BIG MUSKEGO LAKE/BASS BAY PROTECTION
AND REHABILITATION DISTRICT SPECIAL MEETING
MARCH 21, 1994
PAGE 4
- Scott Gillespie asked about carp removal. We've tried netting
and are looking for alternatives. How is shocking? Randy
Schumacher, DNR, stated it would take an army of shocker boats
and people. They would reproduce as fast. If there would be
another way we would try it. They're trying everything across
the country. Rotenone is the time-tested way to do it and the
most cost effective.
Jan Flancher, former Deputy Commissioner, asked where has this
been done on a lake similar to our with success and length of
benefits? I thought Sinnissippi was a horror story. Most of
the people in our survey wanted boating. Jim Jackley, DNR, said
Sinnissippi was two years. They did have an extreme cattail
expansion. We don't expect it here because it will be one year.
There is going to be vegetation. Bass Bay is the only boating
recreational site with deep water. Big Muskego Lake is best
used for boating lanes for viewing scenery and wildlife. If the
lanes don't work they're going to look at harvesting or dredging
these lanes. As to length of benefit, it's hard to say how long
it will last. We feel it will last long enough to justify the
expenditure. The DNR is looking at all the alternatives. If the DNR funds this, we have to sell it to them and it is
justifiable. They want a long term solution. It may have to be
drawn down again as carp get out of control or there is more
wind action than anticipated - hope 8-10 years, or could be 5
years. -
Dick Bennett stated that 62% of people want boating. I live on
the lake and look at it and don't see many boats. I don't see
Big Muskego Lake as a boating lake and never have. It is my
belief that we have an opportunity today to make a very rare
contribution to wildlife in our area. We have many boating
lakes in the State of Wisconsin. We don't have a wildlife area
in this area for wildlife and fish. I don't believe a high
water level was ever in the Big Muskego area. Once you have a
boating channel you'll get the big boats. I would like it
restored to a wildlife area. I'd like no motors, no man-made
blinds.
~
Jeff Behrs, Kurtze Lane, stated he reviewed the map at the
Library and noted there are 43 parking spaces proposed. They'll
be coming from Bass Bay to enter the lake through the lanes.
Next we'll have to buy a weed harvestor. They're about
$100,000. He noted in 1978-79 aerators were placed in the lake.
Carp were coming up and scooped out. Next spring there was a
clear lake. Why if a short term drawdown can't they kill the
carp in the Bay? Jim Jackley, DNR, responded to question on
lake access and number of sites for parking. Right now there
are at least 60 stalls which charge under the State recommended
fee. People can get on the lake. These lanes are somewhat
followed now. The other thing we're looking at, which is in
final draft form, is a rule that takes into consideration
shallow areas and irregular type lakes and can design an
alternative access policy which could have fewer parking spaces
.-
.-
,-
BIG MUSKEGO LAKE/BASS BAY PROTECTION
AND REHABILITATION DISTRICT SPECIAL MEETING
MARCH 21, 1994
PAGE 5
available. The public access is going forward and it will not
be dependent on this vote tonight. You'll vote on the
recommended strategy or the secondary strategy. The weed
harvestor is not being voted on tonight. Tonight, if you want
to improve the quality of the lake, that is what's being
decided. The other aspect of netting carp or other activity,
short term drawdown doesn't achieve many benefits as reviewed
earlier. You would have some water quality improvement but it just wouldn't be as much.
Leah McConaghy, Bass Bay, expressed appreciation to the Deputy
Commissioners and the DNR for their time and skill.
James Luskey, Holz Dr., asked how settling will improve water
quality. The DNR uses sweet lime in the northern part of the
State. Why not sweeten it? Cattail problem, only way to
eradicate them is get them on solid ground. Going to be a
constant program to keep channel to boat launch open. Dan
Helsel, DNR, stated USGS has been monitoring lake quality for 15
years. Limestone does work in other parts of the State and in
deep water areas. It does not work in this part of the State.
We want to promote beneficial growth of aquatic plants. Using
best information available to deputies to make proposals. Now
is our opportunity for the department to go to Madison to obtain
funding.
Paul Conrardy, Bass Bay, asked question regarding boating access
and wind action. How much movement of sediment will be caused
by boating channels? What are hazards to boaters and swimmers
from Rotenone? Dan Helsel, DNR, regarding motor boats, DNR
concerned and doing research on this. Gathering data.
Alternative boating access policy would be beneficial. We need
to restrict amount of boating activity on this lake. Randy
Schumacher, DNR, stated that regarding Rotenone he can state
with certainty that you won't find a chemical that has had more
studies done on it. It is a naturally occuring substance. It will degrade in one to two weeks. It's about as safe a chemical
as you can find.
Craig Lawdanski felt the Deputy Commissioners have done their
homework, and he would be voting with the deputies.
Barbara Bing asked since this is only the second meeting that
was called, how did we get to this point so fast to make a
decision. Also questioned rip rap. Sue Schumacher responded
there is going to be heaving and repairs needed. In some areas
rip rap will not work. The process of making the recommendation
by the deputies was explained.
Commissioner Dumke stated you've got nothing now. You can only
do better. I'm willing to personally donate $500 for this
project.
BIG MUSKEGO LAKE/BASS BAY PROTECTION
AND REHABILITATION DISTRICT SPECIAL MEETING
MARCH 21, 1994
PAGE 6
- Mayor De Angelis thanked the Deputy Commissioners for the amount
of time spent on this project.
Balloting took place at this time.
follows:
The vote was tallied as
64
1
19
Recommended Lake Management Plan (Full Year Drawdown)
Alternative Lake Management Plan (Winter Drawdown)
Do Nothing
Mayor De Angelis announced the vote and thanked the DNR for
preparation for this meeting and looked forward to working with
the DNR on this plan.
Commissioner Dumke moved to approve the Recommended Lake
Management Plan for a Full Year Drawdown. Commissioner Taube
seconded the motion. Motion carried 7-0.
Deputy Commissioner Pilak thanked everyone for coming and asked
that they get involved to help with the project.
Commissioner Misko moved to adjourn at 9:33 PM.
Woodard seconded. Motion carried.
Commissioner
,-
Respectfully submitted,
~C0V t: Ir7 t/./ìß~ an K. Marenda, CMC
ty Clerk
jm
".-