Loading...
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 ".-