1 / 21

LAKE SANTA FE TIME FOR RENEWAL

LAKE SANTA FE TIME FOR RENEWAL. EUTROPHIC LAKE “Lake with high primary productivity resulting from high nutrient content”. HISTORY. Original construction around 1972 Approximately 18 surface acres Current maximum depth 45’ Inlet dredged twice Cofferdam (at inlet side) is due for dredging.

arva
Download Presentation

LAKE SANTA FE TIME FOR RENEWAL

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. LAKE SANTA FE TIME FOR RENEWAL EUTROPHIC LAKE “Lake with high primary productivity resulting from high nutrient content”

  2. HISTORY • Original construction around 1972 • Approximately 18 surface acres • Current maximum depth 45’ • Inlet dredged twice • Cofferdam (at inlet side) is due for dredging

  3. THE PROBLEM • Filamentitious Algae (the floating smelly weed mat that you see) • Naiads (the fern like weeds that emerge to the surface in mid to late summer) • “Muck” bottom built up over years of decomposition

  4. THE NUTRIENT SOURCE(S) • Natural aging of the lake • Nutrient flow from the inlet watershed • Decaying organic materials (leaves, algae, weeds, fish, birds/animals and the effluent from old grass carp) • Phosphorous and nitrogen based fertilizers • Effluent from septic systems. The septic effluent makes the LSF situation unique to other area lakes (i.e. White Oak Lake) because it is a prime source of nutrients.

  5. REGARDING DREDGING • The last dredging project took years to get approved and funded • The results have been criticized • IF the dredging hadn’t been done, the inlet (East) end of the lake would be a swamp by now • The dredging project was compromised by funding and inability to drain down prior to dredging • Our Proposal addresses the entire lake

  6. PROPOSAL FOR HOLISTIC APPROACH TO REMEDIATION • Combined approach - all elements interact to accomplish the following OBJECTIVES: • Visually pleasing lake • Minimize chemical treatment • Transformation of muck bottom • Reduction of built-up nutrients • Tactile improvement for swimmers and waders • Significant reduction of algae • Reasonable control of Naiads and other weed growth • Fisheries Management

  7. PROPOSED APPROACH • Aeration (has been proposed to current and previous LSF Boards) • Digestion/Enzyme Treatment • Colorant/Dye • Spot Treatment with chemical controls • Annual fish stocking • Each element will be discussed separately

  8. BEFORE WE BEGIN • The LSF Conservation Committee has worked very hard to move toward the stated objectives. • We have accomplished much in an aging eutrophic lake within a limited budget. • We are asking for your financial and personal assistance. • Our proposal is BUDGETARY but also realistic. Once we have your approval, we will conduct full research to find the best and most cost-effective solutions and products. We promise.

  9. Aeration • Assists in natural aerobic digestion of decayed organic matter • Improved dissolved oxygen in the water throughout the stratification layers • Improves effectiveness of digestion/enzyme treatments • Improved fishery due to improved water quality

  10. DIGESTION/ENZYME TREATMENT • Aggressive approach for the most efficient removal of sediment muck. • Most effective in conjunction with aeration • Bacterial treatment that reduces excessive nutrients, sludge, contamination and odors • Recommended rate 50#/acre

  11. COLORANT/DYE • Non-toxic • Stratifies on the top 3 to 4 feet of the surface • Blocks sunlight penetration to prevent weed emergence and seed germination • Pleasing to the eye blue color • Spring application intended primarily for pre-emergence • LSF has too much flow to expect to maintain colorant for duration of summer • Gives the digestion/enzyme treatment a better chance to work • May be utilized annually depending on results

  12. SPOT CHEMICAL TREATMENT • Same chemicals available as a commercial applicator • LSF personnel will do application • Not paying profit margins and mark-up of a for profit corporation • Boat and FOUR CYCLE (clean burning outboard) on loan to LSF for weed control (An outside contractor will also use a gas powered outboard for treatment) • Spot treatment should be minimal if the other controls are effective • Have the option to leave a natural area (at the dam?) to allow weed growth and encourage fish and amphibian reproduction.

  13. FISH STOCKING • Attempting to maintain balance between • Quality of fish • Quantity of fish • Variety of fish • Intending to implement catch size and harvest limits • Pan fish highly pressured – immediate focus on stocking pan fish to assist natural reproduction rates • LM bass recovered nicely from harvest management – quality and quantity is seeking a good balance

  14. $$$$$$$$$$$$WE$$$$$$$$$$$$$$NEED$$$$$YOUR$$SUPPORT$$$$$ • Remember that this is a budgetary proposal. We are also investors and intend to spend the resources wisely.

  15. AERATION ESTIMATE • We may require assistance from a few homeowners to avoid running electrical power to the pump stations. • Planning a re-imbursement program for electrical usage • The pumps will likely be ¾ hp units with weighted air hose • Number and placement of units to be determined (two stations with 3 to 5 aerators anticipated) • Equipment cost estimated to be $8,000 to $12,000 • Installation by LSF • 6 month operational cost should not be significant

  16. DIGESTOR/ENZMYE TREATMENT ESTIMATE • RECOMMENDED INITIAL RATE OF APPLICATION IS 50#/ACRE • Estimated cost is $3,500

  17. COLORANT ESTIMATE • There is a new product on the market that will treat 4 acres with one quart. (NT MAX Colorant) • Estimated cost $250.00 • The product dilution rate will depend on the flow • Harmless to humans pets and fish

  18. CHEMICAL SPOT TREATMENT ESTIIMATE • Costs for chemicals (Free labor) has averaged approximately $1100 per year for the last three years. • We anticipate that this cost will be reduced by 50%

  19. FISH STOCKING • THE LSF Conservation Committee requests an annual budget of $800 to maintain the stocking program.

  20. WHAT ELSE CAN YOU DO TO HELP • Maintain septic system per local codes and LSF Regulations • Replace with evaporative system when replacement is necessary (or before) • Allow buffer strip at lake edge to absorb nutrients and minimize erosion • Use phosphorous free fertilizers • No fertilizer within 20 feet of shoreline • Mechanical removal of weeds (a weed rake is available) • Individual chemical application by homeowners is strictly prohibited

  21. BOTTOM LINE AND QUESTIONS • We will request that the LSF Board assist homeowners with funding this project. • If the total budgetary amount of $20,000 is necessary, the assessment would be $500.00 per household. • We will ask the Board to allow homeowners (upon special request) to pay the assessment in five payments of $100 over the course of the summer. • Questions?????? And Thank You. • Respectfully Submitted, • The Lake Santa Fe Conservation Committee. (ALL are welcome to participate)

More Related