LAKE SANTA FE TIME FOR RENEWAL

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)