articles from March, 2004 newsletter:

** President's Message
** NEED A BOAT
** Continuing Thoughts on Fishing Tournaments
** The Vermilion Dam Update Continues...
** Lake Outlet Dams
** The Loons Cry "Help!"
** Navigation Aid Lights
** Exotic Spiny Waterflea Found in Saganaga Lake on Minnesota Border
** What happens to tournament bass??
** New Study Links Water Quality to Property Value
** Development Isn't a Dirty Word




back to table of contents

President's Message


As your newly elected President, I would like to thank Ray Harris for the fine job he has done for the last two years. I also want to congratulate the newly elected VP John Zwieg and the re-elected officers Paula Bloczynski, Secretary; Bob Wilson, Treasurer; and Cathy Raps, Membership Records. We also have newly elected board members to welcome: Mardy Jackson, Mel Hintz and Joe Panichi. Altogether, I think the club's board represents a diverse cross section of the lake population. Working together we should be able to fulfill our mission statement: to promote and enhance the outdoor experience, to protect and improve water quality and to educate club members and the public of the issues impacting Lake Vermilion.

At present we have two issues that will definitely affect Lake Vermilion for both the short term and long term.

The first issue is the Lake Vermilion Development Plan. Under auspices of St. Louis County, a steering committee comprised of the various governmental bodies and organizations has been working for the past two years developing guidelines for development around Lake Vermilion. Your club has been actively involved in this committee and has contributed much to this effort. By this spring of 2004, this plan should be ready for presentation to the County Commissioners for approval and adoption. The Sportsmen's Club Board has worked diligently to make sure that the plan includes provisions for protecting the shoreline and mitigating developmental impact.

The second issue that is impacting the lake is Fishing Tournaments. The SCLV Board has proposed guidelines for conduct of fishing tournaments on Lake Vermilion. These guidelines combine existing fishing, boating, and tournament state laws and have proposed changes that would make some toumament conditions mandatory rather than optional. The gist of the proposed guidelines is to reduce the number of tournaments allowed per month from 5 to 3 and to reduce the number of large tournaments (over 50 boats) allowed per month from 3 to 2. The proposal also seeks to set specific Uno fishing" dates depending on the season opener date and/or the normal spawning season dates. It also proposes specific numbers of pre-fishing days depending on the species. The SCLV realizes that these proposed changes may be controversial to some, but the feedback we have received thus far indicates good support. The SCLV is not trying to eliminate tournaments per se, rather we look at this as part of our Mission Statement to educate. We will be refining this document over the next few months, so if you have any comments or inputs, we would like to hear them

Thank you,
Walt Moe



back to table of contents

NEED A BOAT



Oonce again this year The sportsmen's Club of Lake Vermilion wil put up for bids a fishing boat and outboard motor package which has been on loan to the Department of Natural Resources Fisheries. The Club purchased the unit new in April of 2002. The DNR has used it in their Large Lake Creel Survey on Lake Vermilion for the past two fishing seasons. The boat and motor have been well maintained and are in very good condition. The boat is a 2002 Lund SSV-16 fishing boat with a 20-inch transon; the outboard motor is a 2002 25-hp Yamaha 4-stroke, long shaft with electric start and tiller steering (model #F25ELHA). The boat and motor will be sold as a unit (without a trailer) and will be available for inspection at board member Mel Hintz's residence on Pike Bay beginning May 1, 2004. Please call Mel at 218-753-2401 to make an appointment to try it out.

You must be a current Sportsmen's Club member in order to bid. Sealed beds must be received no later than 5 p.m. on Wednesday, June 9, 2004. Mail or deliver your bid to: Mel Hintz, 6119 Pike Bay Drive, Tower, MN 55790. Bids will be opened at the regular meeting of the Sportsmen's Club Board of Directors on June 9, 2004, at 7:00 p.m. There is a $3,500.00 minimum bid required. The Board of Directors reserves the right to reject any and all bids.



back to table of contents

Continuing Thoughts on Fishing Tournaments


The Sportsmen's Club proposal to modify existing Minnesota fishing tournament regulations was presented to the Lake Vermilion Plan Steering Committee at an evening meeting in the Tower Civic Center on January 28. The Lake Vermilion Plan is attempting to put in place revised and additional controls on how lakeshore will be developed in the years ahead. The Sportsmen's Club is proposing modifications to existing Minnesota Fishing Tournament Regulations also for the future protection and betterment of the Lake. Because the overall goals are similar, the Club feels the revised toumament regulations should become a part of the new future plan for Lake Vermilion.

Following are some of the more significant changes to existing Fishing Tournament regulations the Club would like to see adopted:
The Vermilion Plan Steering Committee was generally accepting of the Club's proposal. However, one of the controversial issues was "practice fishing," otherwise known as pre-fishing. Large bass tournaments in particular, with big money prizes, want to be able to prefish perhaps as much as two weeks prior to the start of the tournament. If the tournament itself lasts four days and pre-fishing takes place in the prior two weeks, this event alone would tend to consume a good part of a month and affect many parts of the Lake. Several variables could be considered in determining how much pre-fishing should be allowed such as the number of contestant boats in the tournament, the time of year the contest is held and the number of tournaments scheduled in a given month. Any enforcement of a limited prefishing regulation would of course be very difficult unless the tournament organizer fully cooperated. The Club will be discussing the pre-fishing issue again to try to achieve a balanced arrangement for all concerned.

A full and complete endorsement by the Vermilion Plan Committee will require some minor adjustments in the proposal to better define issues like pre-fishing. The endorsement by the Committee and the County would add credibility to the revised regulations when they are presented to local legislators, the DNR and other Lake Associations.

If you have comments on this subject send them to the Sportsmen's Club of Lake Vermilion, 1501 Echo Point, Tower, MN 55790 or WCR4@Yahoo.com on e-mail. Thanks to many of you for already providing comments about fishing tournaments as mentioned in the November 2003 Vermilion Sportsman.

by Bob Wilson, Board Member



back to table of contents

The Vermilion Dam Update Continues...


In the last newsletter it was reported the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources did not have a high priority to make any improvements to the Lake Vermilion Dam. They were willing to patch some weathering to the dam's crest on the western side. They were also going to monitor any movements of pieces that have separated from the bottom of the dam. The DNR has over 400 dams that it is responsible to maintain. The Governor is requesting $1,000,000 for the highest priority dam safety projects. They feel many of them are in more need of repair than the Lake Vermilion Dam.

January 6, 2004 state senator Tom Bakk, Ray Harris and I went to St. Paul to meet with Dana Gauthier and Mel Sinn, both DNR dam safety engineers. Our purpose was to see if more could be done to make some repairs to the dam. One concern is the lake level and the effect of water leakage under the dam. The DNR says that evaporation is the main factor that controls the lake level. Plus, the last three years we have had less than normal precipitation. Our group agreed this is probably true, however the perception is that many people feel the water going under the dam is a major concern to the lake level. The DNR said they will try to measure the leakage under the dam next year. Another issue is there are some voids between the "toe" of the dam and the lake bottom on the upstream side. In June of 2003, Dana Gauthier did an inspection using a long probe and found a cavity in one spot.

Senator Bakk said he felt confident about getting some money from the current legislative session for the Lake Vermilion Dam. The DNR said if Bakk could get this money without using the $1,000,000 requested for other dam projects, they would support doing some upgrading on the dam. They roughly estimated the cost in the range of $25,000 to $50,000. This would be for: 1 ) placing grout along the upstream face of the dam in the openings between the dam and the pieces that have separated from the dam, and 2) repairing the damaged concrete on the west end of the dam crest. Actual cost would depend on the specifications and the bids received.

This is very encouraging news, but is dependent on whether we get money designated for our dam. Senator Bakk has been very pro-active concerning this project and wants to work closely with the Lake Vermilion Sportsmen's Club. If this project gets the go-ahead, there would be an in-depth study of the dam by engineers, and we would know for sure how much damage there is to this dam.

If anyone has questions, you can call me at 666-5008 or e-mail me at jczwieg@lcp2.net

John Zwieg - Board Member



back to table of contents

Lake Outlet Dams


History

The DNR/Division of Waters owns and maintains 300+ dams in Minnesota. Most were built in the 1930s for two reasons: to conserve water during the drought years and to provide work for the unemployed during the Great Depression. Dams generally featured several 5' wide openings called bays with provisions to add and remove wooden stop logs (see diagram on page 5). The level of the water maintained by a dam was dependent on the number of stop logs placed in each bay.

Stop logs were adjusted by local observer/operators at each lake for 10-12 years after these dams were built. However, when precipitation suddenly (and unpredictably) returned to normal and above normal, flooding occurred around many lakes resulting in claims for damages by lakeshore property owners. It became apparent that operation of these small dams could not maintain uniform lake levels, which fluctuate due to variable water supply (rain and snow) and other natural conditions (drought). Complaints of damages continued until a decision was made to stop dam manipulation, either by leaving them open (without stop logs) or permanently setting stop logs at a specific runout elevation.

The decision to set an authorized stop log elevation for each dam was preceded by an inspection of the dam, an examination of the shore of the affected lake and an analysis of all water level records and other information about the lake. The goal was to set the stop logs at an elevation that would retain as much water as possible, yet eliminate complaints of high water and the associated claims of damage from flooding. The authorized stop log setting for each dam has been maintained by the Division of Waters for over 40 years and is the legal runout elevation.

Legal Considerations

The Division of Waters is obliged to maintain each of its 300+ dams in a safe and functional condition. Since 1946-1947, the Division has attempted to maintain a set runout elevation with free flowing conditions at each dam. The primary goals of this management plan are to protect existing shoreland owners' rights as well as downstream owners' rights to water available within natural precipitation variations. Regular inspections of all dams are conducted in order to restore the authorized stop log setting, repair/replace damaged or worn out appurtenances and remove obstructions as necessary.

It is the goal of the DNR to maintain natural flow and natural water level conditions to the maximum feasible extent. When a dam with a set runout has changed the natural level of a lake for a long period of time (more than 15 years), then the runout elevation maintained by the dam becomes the legal runout for the lake. Unauthorized tampering with set runouts is an ongoing problem at dams in Minnesota. According to Minnesota Statutes Chapter 103G, it is unlawful to change the runout elevation of a dam without prior permit authorization from the DNR. Persons found to. be responsible for unauthorized changes to a dam are subject to criminal enforcement action. Along with the criminal action is the potential of lawsuits brought by aggrieved shoreland owners for flooding, lack of access or downstream damages due to flow changes resulting from the illegal tampering.

Permit Requirements

The state cannot legally alter a stop log elevation in response to individual requests due to high or low water level conditions. To raise a runout would cause water to cover land it did not previously cover which may be a taking of land without compensation. It is unconstitutional for government to take private property without due process. The Division's position and legal obligation is to maintain the authorized stop log setting and allow water levels to fluctuate in response to precipitation that falls within a lake's watershed.

A formal permit process exists for those shoreland owners who may wish to pursue a permanent change in a runout elevation. It must be clearly understood that no permit decision by DNR is required until complete information is provided by the applicants.

The following steps are not all inclusive, but do set forth essential permit application requirements:
  1. A permit application signed by a majority of riparian owners requesting a permanent change in runout elevation.

  2. Engineering plans that show the proposed changes to the dam.

  3. A hydrologic/hydraulic analysis to document anticipated changes in lake levels and stream flows.

  4. Surveys showing all shoreland and existing development that would be impacted by the proposed change. These surveys must identify compliance with shoreland ordinance standards for both the existing and proposed runout in terms of lot size, structure and sewer system setback, and structure and sewer system elevations above the highest proposed water elevation.

  5. Purchase or donation of flowage easements and consents from owners of ALL land riparian to the lake and any connected waters that would also be impacted.

  6. An environmental assessment documenting impacts to wetland habitat, fish spawning areas, waterfowl and songbird nesting areas as well as strategies to address shore erosion due to wave action and winter ice push.
Costs associated with design, engineering, flowage easements and structure improvements are the responsibility of the applicants, or a local governmental unit acting on behalf of the applicants.

Summary

Proposals to change water levels are difficult to accomplish due to the legal, environmental and financial realities. Shoreland owners have varied opinions about "desirable" lake levels and each tends to favor a specific range of acceptable levels. There are potentially serious consequences in changing a dam's run-out elevation such as navigation problems, shore erosion, ice damage and flooding. Changing a runout to solve a problem generally creates new problems which may be unacceptable to other owners or future owners. Regardless of the runout elevation, lake levels will continue to fluctuate due to variations in precipitation which cannot be controlled.



back to table of contents

The Loons Cry "Help!"


How often we've said to ourselves or sometimes out loud, "I'd sure like to make a difference in my life," but easily cast the thought off as, "Yeah sure, I'm just an ordinary person with talents that are no great shakes to the worldso what could I do?" Well, listen up you fisher folks (and those who know them), there is something you can do that will make a big difference to the loons of the world.

Open up most tackle boxes in Minnesota and you're likely to find lead sinkers and jigs. Do the same to dead loons and you're likely to find the same. Most of the 2.1 million people who fish in Minnesota use lead sinkers and jigs. No one knows how much of their tackle ends up in the lakes, but everyone has snags that break off tackle that vanishes in the waterways. Lead sinkers have been found in four different species of waterfowl. Minnesota is the summer home of about 12,000 loons, the most of any state except Alaska.

There are several ways loons ingest lead:
  1. eating minnows still attached to broken-off lead tackle;

  2. ingesting lead tackle by eating fish that have swallowed some;

  3. picking them up from the bottom of the lake, mistaking them for the pebbles they need in digestion. (Autopsies have even found 6-inch lures in them.) A 1/ 16 ounce lead sinker or jig can kill a loon within a few weeks.
Now hear this: Of the dead adult loons recovered and studied in Michigan, 25 percent died of lead poisoning. In some heavily fished lakes in the Eastern states, up to 85 percent of examined loons died of lead poisoning. There hasn't been a comprehensive study of loon mortality in Minnesota, but a 1995 report by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency showed that 7 percent of the 95 loons brought to research centers for autopsies had died from lead poisoning. But the death of any loons, when preventable by switching tackle, is enough to spur some people to make the switch. Wouldn't you feel awful if you saw a dead loon on the lake and thought maybe one of your jigs or sinkers was responsible for its painful death?

Now look what's happening. The information on loon deaths has spurred the Department of Natural Resources and state Office of Environmental Assistance to try to educate anglers about nontoxic alternatives. In January, Senator Yvonne Prettner Solon and Representative Bill Hilty introduced legislation to ban the use and sale of lead jigs and sinkers weighing 1 ounce or less in Minnesota. Three states have passed laws governing the use of lead tackle: New York, New Hampshire and Maine. It's also banned in Yellowstone National Park and 13 wildlife refuges under control of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Canada also banned use of small lead sinkers and jigs in national parks and wildlife areas. Great Britain banned the use of all lead sinkers in 1987.

But listen to this! Using federal money, the "Let's Get the Lead Out" campaign will give away 15,000 free samples of unleaded jigs and 400 pounds of sinkers (made from tin, tungsten, bismuth, iron and other nontoxic materials) at fishing tournaments, sporting goods stores, sport shows and popular lakes on holiday weekends.

It's tough when anglers want to make the switch, but don't know where to go. According to Kevin McDonald, OEA waste reduction team leader, WalMart' Cabela's, Target and other large retailers are starting to offer a few alternatives. Mitch Lushenko, owner of Warrior Sporting Goods in Sherwood, Ore., came out with a new Duck Crossing tin jig which you can purchase right here in our own backyard at Wilderness Outfitters in Ely. They have special ordered these jigs because their clients asked for them! Hooray for some Northeastern Minnesota anglers!

So folks, you can make a difference! Here's what you can do:
  1. remove lead sinkers and jigs from your tackle box;

  2. stock up on nontoxic alternatives - ask your favorite sporting goods store to stock them (if you can't find them in stores, check web sites or catalogues);

  3. outfit kids' tackle boxes with non-lead weights and jigs (they're safer for them to handle);

  4. tell your fishing friends about the problem and where they can buy the non-lead tackle;

  5. visit www.moea.state.mn.us/reduce/sinkers.cfm or call 800-657-3843.
Why not jump on the bandwagon of the "Get the Lead Out" campaign to help save the lives of our precious, beautiful loons? It will really make you feel proud.

by Mardy Jackson, Board Member
(Excerpted from an article by John Myers in the DNR's Minnesota Conservation Volunteer magazine, May-June 2003)



back to table of contents

Navigation Aid Lights


Navigation lights are an aid to night navigation only, and are not hazard markers. The new solar-powered lights are brighter and do not need the attention that the battery-powered ones do, but solar lights do not work at all locations, as they need full sunlight to work. The solar lights are also very expensive, so we are adding only four a year and putting them in places that are hard to service and are on main traffic routes. Another advantage of solar lights is they can be left out during the winter to aid snowmobilers.

We are grateful for the volunteers who change batteries and tend lights. If you have a light near your home that you might like to service, please call Walt Moe on the Tower end or call me on the Cook end.

Also, if you see a Hazard Marker or Navigation Buoy that is missing or out of place, call Mark Eyre at 666-2758.

If you notice a light that is not working, please let me or another board member know the location so it can be fixed.

Ray Harris, Board Member - Light Keeper Committee



back to table of contents

Exotic Spiny Waterflea Found in Saganaga Lake on Minnesota Border


Biologists with the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) confirmed the discovery of the harmful exotic spiny waterflea in Saganaga Lake in Northern Minnesota's Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness (BWCAW) after studying samples collected by a summer resident.

Saganaga Lake, located at the end of the Gunflint Trail in northern Cook County, is the third inland water body in the state to be infested with the tiny exotic zooplankton since it was discovered about 20 years ago in Lake Superior. Shortly after its discovery in Lake Superior, the spiny waterflea was also found in Island Lake and Fish Lake. Both of these lakes are about 20 miles northwest of Duluth and popular destinations for anglers who also fish Lake Superior.

The spiny waterflea takes its name from the barbs on a long tail filament, which can catch on fishing lines and downrigger cables. These tiny barbs can also stop small fish from eating this animal.

Biologists hope to monitor the lake to see if the tiny (less than 1/2 inch long) exotic affects fish populations or other aquatic life in the lake. "We can't really predict what impacts this exotic may have in Saganaga Lake," said Gary Montz, DNR aquatic invertebrate biologist. "Spiny waterflea can compete with other zooplankton in lakes. They may reduce the numbers of other native waterfleas preferred by fish." Smaller fish can't eat spiny waterfleas, so large numbers of spiny waterflea could have impacts in the food chain. However, larger fish can eat this exotic, so the impacts from this infestation are difficult to predict.

Because of the potential impacts on aquatic life it is important that people visiting infested waters take time to avoid spreading this harmful exotic species. Clumps of spiny waterflea can become entangled in fishing lines or down rigger cable. It is important to clean off any equipment that may have spiny waterflea attached to prevent moving these resting eggs, which can create new populations.

In Minnesota, the spiny water flea is a regulated exotic species and may not be introduced in state waters. State regulations require that anglers drain all lake water from their boats, including live wells, bait buckets and bilge areas before leaving the access of waters infested with spiny waterfleas. Signs reminding anglers and boaters of these preventative actions will be posted at public access areas. Spiny waterflea identification cards are available from the DNR Information Center at 1-888-MINNDNR (646-6367) and the Minnesota Sea Grant Program at (218) 726-8712.

MNDNR Press Release



back to table of contents

What happens to tournament bass??


Studies continue to determine the effect of competitive fishing tournaments across the nation. One of the areas that has not received a lot of attention yet deals with how and whether tournamentcaught fish travel back to where they were caught. At many tournaments, the fish are released right at the weigh-in site, and often many miles from where they were caught.

Gene R. Wilde, an associate professor in the Wildlife and Fisheries Management Institute at Texas Tech University in Lubbock, Texas, summarized 12 studies done on this subject in the recent issue of Fisheries. He focused on trying to answer these five questions: Bass of both species were tagged before release. Average distance of dispersal by largemouth bass following release was just more than two miles, and smallmouth bass moved about twice as far, four miles. River fish tended to move slightly farther than lake fish.

Once released, an average of 21.9 percent of largemouth bass and 14.5 percent of smallmouth bass were recaptured by anglers. Wilde considers these figures minimums, because not all anglers returned the tags. He makes these two statements in his discussion.

"The available evidence does not support the notion that tournament-caught black bass return to their capture sites after weigh-in and release. On average, 51 percent of largemouths and 26 percent of smallmouths captured and released in tournaments remained within one mile of the release sites, and only 14 percent of largemouths and 32 percent of smallmouths returned to their capture sites.

"The failure of tournament-caught black bass in general, and largemouth in particular, to return to their capture sites may be an effect of tournament capture and handling. After release, an average of 23 percent of tournament-caught black bass die (Wilde, 1998) which suggests that released fish are not in the best of condition."

Other investigators have suggested that tournament-caught bass might be susceptible to angling after release, and some bass have been caught as quickly as minutes or hours after release. Since anglers are knowledgeable of these release sites, they can exploit the focal concentration of tournament-released bass. Recapture of this released fish must be considered in addition to normal handling mortality to fully understand the effects of fishing tournaments on black bass populations.

So what does all this mean to us here in the Midwest? One thing for sure: Yanking a male smallmouth off his bed and running him several miles away for release means he may never make it home, much less in tim to save his nest, which will be raided by crayfish and panfish within minutes. In the same vein, releasing all of the largemouth bass from a Mississippi River contest in or area will certainly lead to higher harvest b, other anglers than would normally occur.

Tournament directors have made good progress in many areas to minimize their effect on fisheries. Swift, efficient handling of fish and limiting their contests to cool-water periods have no doubt helped reduce postcontest mortality. But the fish dispersal issue still remains. In contests where anglers can run 20 miles to fish, there should be multiple weigh-in sites so those fish can be put back from where they came. I understand that crowds at the main weigh-in like to see the fish, but if we don't take care of the fish first, what does that say about us as sportsmen?

by Lee Kernen, Retired Fisheries Director, Wisconsin DNR
(Reprinted from Outdoor News, Dec. 5, 2003)



back to table of contents

New Study Links Water Quality to Property Value


A recently completed study by researchers at Bemidji State University has found a direct correlation between lakeshore property values and water quality. The study, which looked at more than 1,200 residential property sales on lakes in the Upper Mississippi River Basin, calculated how much property values would rise or fall on 37 lakes if water clarity improved or worsened.

For example, if one could see down an extra 3 feet (down to 13 feet) on Leech Lake, a 40-foot lake property's value would increase by nearly $17,000. If the lake's clarity is reduced by more than 3 feet, that would reduce values by $23,760. Read the study on-line at: info.bemidiistate.edu/news/currentnews/lakestudy/lakestudy.pdf.

From "Friends of Mississippi River" newsletter



back to table of contents

Development Isn't a Dirty Word


Paula West, MLA Executive Director

This is the last of three issues of the Reporterfocused on the changing face of lakeshores and the cumulative impacts of development. This issue will continue the discussion on development, highlight the actions of several lake associations who have challenged their local governments over development decisions, and offer examples, choices and tools available to do our part to protect the future quality of Minnesota's lakes.

It's a fact - development in lake county is going to continue.

According to state demographic projections highlighted in the article "State of the Lakes" in the July/August DNR Volunteer magazine. Crow Wing, Cass, and Aitkin countiesretirement magnets - will grow 65 percent as boomers retire and younger workers take their laptops to their lake home. The five-county lakes region surrounding St. Cloud will grow 46 percent. The popular lake regions in Douglas and Otter Tail counties will grow 38 percent by 2030, compared with 27 percent statewide. In Cass County alone, building permits increased from 1,300 in 1995 to 2,100 in 2002, according to John Sumption, deputy director of the county's Environmental Services Division. In 2002,566 new buildings were erected in Cass County, 80 percent on lakeshore.

The challenge facing state and local governments, developers, realtors, lake associations and individuals is creating responsible development that allows for growth, but protects the lakes that are essential to the ecological, economic and cultural health and well being of the State of Minnesota, its communities and its citizens.

What is the problem?

Much of the high quality lakeshore in Minnesota is already developed and redevelopment of priority lakeshores is rapidly occurring in some parts of the state. Cabins with tree-lined shores and abundant fish and wildlife that have attracted people for years are being replaced with suburban-style homes and lawns and multiple dwelling housing units. With these new upscale homes and planned unit developments (PUDs), the amount of impervious surface per lot has dramatically increased creating more opportunity for runoff to the lake while at the same time native vegetation that has the capacity to adsorb water runoff is decreasing. The resulting runoff increases the potential for water pollution, shoreline erosion, loss of habitat, poor groundwater discharge, and flooding.

In addition, undeveloped marginal lakeshores of shallow, ecologically sensitive lakes or bays of larger lakes are facing increasing development pressure as people seek affordable lakeshore and/or what undeveloped lakeshore is left. Where lakeshore is not available, people often seek to live close to the lake creating tiers of development within the shoreland protection zone. As shoreland areas develop, the surrounding communities continue to grow. More commercial and industrial development creates an increased demand for wastewater treatment, roads, and other infrastructure. Increased stormwater runoff from lawns, roads, parking lots, and homes; destruction of wetlands eliminating their important pollution filtering and flood control capacity; urbanized lawn practices; and wastewater treatment are threats to water quality from increasing development. Ultimately, the greatest threat to Minnesota's lakes is Minnesotans themselves.`!'

However, development isn't a dirty word

With creative thinking, a willingness to collaborate in state, local, and private partnerships, and a vision beyond individual property rights to concern for the quality of the public resource, development can be a win: win situation for all involved, and the lake wins, too. As Dan Steward, Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources Conservationist, has reminded me, "If the developer, be it a business or an individual, gets something they want in developing the lakeshore, the lake should get something in returnprotection." That seems reasonable to me.

What will it take to protect our lakes from the cumulative impacts of development while allowing growth and continued recreational enjoyment?

It will require comprehensive state and local regulations and ordinances to guide responsible development and better enforcement of the rules. State agencies will need to cooperate among themselves and within their own internal divisions with a coordinated approach and common vision regarding lake management. They will need to partner with local governments and citizens without concern about turf.

Many legislators must cast aside party politics and strong business lobbyists and listen and vote in support of the concerns of the constituents who elected them. The State Legislature must create a policy for surface water protection and back it up with the financial resources needed to protect and restore Minnesota's lakes and rivers.

Because water crosses municipal and county boundaries, it will mean local governments working collaboratively to develop and enforce multiple jurisdiction policies and regulations. Local governments should be willing to place the protection of their water resources above short-term tax revenue gains, keeping in mind that the long-term economic sustainability of many counties is dependent on clean water. Agriculture and business interests must balance the importance of water quality with economic gain.

Protecting our lakes will require reducing the flow of nutrients from stormwater, agricultural lands, and substandard septic systems, and new and innovative building and landscaping practices. Elected and appointed officials, professionals, citizens, and lakeshore property owners must gain a better understanding about how our activities on land impact the quality of our waters. And lastly, "best practices" to protect water resources must be promoted, adopted and practiced by ali from government to the private sectors.

Can We Do It?

As a growing, more mobile, and more prosperous population escapes to our lakes, some experts warn that the state laws and agencies (and its citizens) may not be up to the task of protecting Minnesota's most famous resources. ''Only future generations will tell us with certainty if we arise to the challenge. But this I do know...the time is now or it will be too late.

Twenty years from now do we want Minnesota lakes that are... cleaner and clearer than they are today... abundant with fish and wildlife... a peaceful place to recreate and enjoy nature...a treasure that our grandchildren and future generations can enjoy? If the answer is yes, it's not too late. Working together we can make that happen.

(1) "State of the Lakes" by Greg Breining, July/August DNR VolunteerMagazine. To read the full article, see www.dnr.state.mn.us/volunteer/julaugO3/stateoflakes.html or call the DNR Information Center at 888-646-6347.

(2) Margin of Error: Human Influence on Wisconsin Shores, a production of the Wisconsin Lakes Partnership Copyright 1999 Univ. of Wl. Authors Robert Korth and Paul Cunningham.

(The following is excerpted from an article by Paula West, executive director of the Minnesota Lakes Association, appearing in the January 2004 issue of the MLA Reporter.)



back to table of contents

want to go back to the main newsletter directory ?

want to go back to the Sportsmen's Club Home Page ?