.jpg) |
 |
Lake update
Had a meeting on Thursday Sept. 27th with Glenn Sullivan from Allied Biological, and Anthony Graves from Brookhaven Town Environmental. We met at the lower lake, and saw from the dam the condition of the lake from that vantage point. From there, we went to my house and saw the weeds from my dock. Allied Biological is the company from NJ that treated Peconic.
Glenn appears to be a very knowledgable person in the treatment of invasive weeds, and knows his job well. His company has a long track record of lake treatments throughout NY and the rest of the Northeast. We had a great discussion about all the different species he saw. Both native and non native. I got an education about many different types of plants, both good and bad, and how they react to the river/lake system. Treating the lakes the same way as Peconic seems to be the most logical way to go at this point. There are several things to be done in order for this to happen by next year.. Surveys, studies, etc. But the most pressing is the permits. As per Glenn Sullivan, they need to be filed with the DEC by Nov.1st.
I also spoke to Connie Kepert on Monday the 1st. We discussed ideas and I reminded her of this important deadline. If it is not done by Nov. 1, we are certain to loose another year without the use of the lakes. All other things can be done in time. The permit fees appear to be comparitively inexpensive. So, it should be easy to get at least that done.
I believe that enough time has passed, and enough information has been discussed, that we should be setting up a town meeting. I will be calling her this week and trying to make that happen. I don't mind being the messenger, but this way everyone can ask all their own questions and get their views and ideas made public.
Chad
Coalition to Save the Lakes
We have formed a Coalition to save the lakes and to clean up the entire Carmen River system. We want to research and explore any and all options to clean up our lakes and to fight the removal of the dams at the upper and the lower lakes.
We have several options available to us .We have dredging, harvesting, chemical, drawdown and covering the lakes in areas to block out the light thus killing off the weeds. The final solution may be one or all of these options.
As you may or may not know, there is an effort under way to remove the dams at the upper and lower lakes. In recent weeks over a thousand people have signed a petition, people who want to save the dams and preserve the lakes the way they are. These same people want the lakes cleaned up and restored to their natural beauty.
The groups who are taking the lead in the effort to remove the dams are the Nature Conservancy, Trout Unlimited along with The Environmental Defense Fund.
They are going to build fish ladders at the South Haven County Park dam. Why can’t they also build these same fish ladders at the upper and lower lake dams?
Trout Unlimited claims to be an environmental group. To us they are only an environmental group when it suits their needs.
We are very disappointed in the Nature Conservancy that they would support a group that has its own agenda. We always thought that the Nature Conservancy was a group that conserves the environment not a group that wants to create an environment.
The Town of Brookhaven owns the river bottom and they must take the lead in cleaning up our lakes.
The people of Yaphank want our lakes back. We want the lakes cleaned up and restored to their natural beauty.
Robert Kessler
The Lake Meeting with the Politicians - Nov 14th
Thanks to the folks for a good turnout at the Nov 14th meeting. The elected officials have seen first hand that the town is very interested in this important issue. I have been in constant contact with the local politicians, Town, County and State, and they are firmly behind a timely solution to the problem.
That being said, I believe, due to Peconic's success, we are heading toward a similar solution. Many options have been discussed, and it still looks like treatment with the herbicide is the most viable solution. While some form of dredging is a great idea, I believe KILLING THE WEEDS is the first step.
Keep in mind that my views and opinions have changed over time, due to a continuing education of the problem, and conversations and consultations with various experts in the field, and also first hand experience with a local project.
The officials want to make sure that the majority of people are in favor of this solution. So.... a survey is going to be distributed to the residents on and around the lakes to show all options, as well as their pros and cons, so that they can be certain that they are doing what the community wants.
Town Councilwoman Kepert has taken the lead on this, and she and her staff are working diligently with various agencies toward a solution.
Legislator Browning and her staff, Josh Slaughter inparticular, have put together a very informative survey that lays out the pros and cons of each viable solution.
Assemblyman Marc Alessi has been terrific, and has assured me that he is fully aware of what the community wants, (The Lakes Restored) and will work on his end to make sure things move smoothly on the State side.
Unfortunately, there is still pressure from the groups that want to "restore" the lakes back to a trout stream. DO NOT underestimate their power and political influence. They will work to undermine everything that we are trying to achieve, completely apathetic to our way of life here in Yaphank.
We need to stay united, and informed, and continue to move toward a solution that will give us our lakes, and our way of life back.
Chad Trusnovec
Yaphank Lakes Update
Connie Kepert, Kate Browning, and Mark Alessi, representing town, county, and state, had a meeting several weeks ago with the DEC, and The Nature Conservancy. They discussed ideas, and one proposal prosposed by Yaphank resident, Chad Trusnovec who has been working to get the Town to do something about the abysmal Cabomba problem in the Yaphank Lakes. They [Kepert, Browning, and Alessi] have scheduled a conference call on Tuesday July 17th with the DEC and the town's Environmental Defense Fund. Connie Kepert has asked Chad Trusnovec to participate in this discussion. They say that, after this meeting, they are going to schedule a meeting with town residents. More as it develops....
LAKE UPDATE! PLEASE READ!
Connie Kepert, our Town Councilwoman, has assembled a group of 20 people, and/or groups to address the invasive weed problem that we have in the lakes. It consists of a 20 seat panel of community residents, environmental groups, and various political offices. Specifically:
Representing Yaphank- Chad Trusnovec, Steve Trusnovec, John Stehle, Bob Kessler
Non Profit Agencies- Trout Unlimited, The Nature Conservancy, The Open Space Council, The Citizens Campaign for the Environment.
Community Organizations- Fran Hurley, Johan McConnell, representing Yaphank and South Yaphank Civics; respectively
Political Offices- Town Coucilwoman Kepert, County Legislator Browning, State Assemblyman Alessi,State Assemblywoman Eddington, State Senator LaValle
Environmental- Anthony Graves from the TOB, NYSDEC, Suffolk County DPW, SC Environment and Energy, SC Dept of Health.
As you can see, there is a great deal of diversity on this board. My concern is that there is still a great amount of push to remove the dams. I believe, from a community standpoint, that dam removal should be removed from the list of options. While community opposition has been large, we need to keep up the pressure on all parties involved. That is why I'm asking all people reading this to go to the next meeting of the working group. It will be at the Brookhaven Town Hall in Farmingville, Thurs, Jan 31st, 6:30 PM, 2nd Floor media room.
Please bring the kids,.... This is as much about the future generation as anything in our lives.
Chad Trusnovec
Carmans River Proposal (Trusnovec)
First, let me say thank you for allowing me to present these ideas to you. Second, I would like to express to you that these ideas that I have, have no background in river or wildlife management of any sort. What they do have is 20+ years of construction, trucking, and heavy equipment experience, as well as a common sense approach to a problem that has been allowed to get completely out of control.
The Cabomba weed is a Non-Native plant that is STILL being sold in pet stores. It needs to be outlawed completely! (Your Guppy is going to have to swim around a plastic plant. Sorry! ) There have been states that have done this. To my knowledge,
First, it is important to remember, that nothing in this river system is an endangered species. And while the short term loss of habitat for many animals and other creatures that inhabit this river will be difficult, the cost of doing nothing is far greater. Also, while the river is physically located in Yaphank and the adjoining area, this is not just a local problem. The
This past April 1st, there were a few people. The first Saturday after that, there were two people fishing from shore, since then, I’ve seen virtually no one. By mid May, this lake was unfishable.
I, of course, was one of the lucky ones to grow up on this river, so it bothers me greatly to see this once pristine body of water, turn into a virtually unusable swamp. I have 3 children who don’t know what it was like, and that bothers me more than I can express to you. The Cabomba weed is known to thrive in slow moving, warm water.
· Step one is to drain the upper
· After the drying out period, A large bulldozer can be brought in, and start pushing in the edges. I believe this should take about a month. After this time, a second Bulldozer can be brought in, as well as a large pay loader to start taking out material. There are several access points on the upper lake that make this first part of the process more feasible.
I have figured a square yardage assessment based on this method: 10,000 ft. of river, times 150 ft. wide, (wider in some areas, narrower in others ) times 3 ft. of material that needs to be removed.
Length x width x depth / 27 = 167,000 yds. This includes both the upper and lower lakes.
The key to this project, is the Brookhaven Town Landfill, or other close area accepting this material free of charge.
Trucking - 4 dump trailers, 10 loads each, 35 yds.= 1400 yds. daily.
125 work days @ 1400 yds per day = 175,000 yds.
5000 loads for the entire project, at $110 = $550,000.00
5000 loads @ 35yds = 175,000 yds of material.
Equipment- Two D-8 Cat bulldozers and a Cat 980 Pay loader.
Approximately $12,000 each, monthly rental =$ 216,000 for 6 months. I believe this number is high, because you wouldn’t need all three machines for the entire 6 months.
Fuel - 100 gals. A day, times $3.00 a gal., times 3 machines, times 125 days = $112.500
Again, this number I believe is high, for the same reason as above, also I believe fuel consumption will be lower.
Salary- Difficult to assess, because different companies are going to pay different rates.
Assuming $250 a day, times 3 machine operators, times 125 days, we’re talking about $94,000. For the reasons stated above, this is only an estimate.
Logistically, I believe that the initial process of removing material would start out slow. Maybe two trucks a day, and see how fast or slow the process can move. Then bring the operation up to an efficient pace.
The lower Yaphank lake is in much worse condition. I personally live on the lower lake, and would like nothing more than to see this part of the river tackled first. However, handling the upper part first is a much more logical place to start, for a couple of reasons.
1. The upper lake is much more accessible to trucks and equipment. This is town property with an open beach area that would give access for much of this part of the project. This gives valuable experience to the project operators as to how the river bottom will react to trucks and equipment.
2. Any wild life removed from the upper lake could be easily transported to the lower lake while this project takes place, and vice-versa when the next step takes place. Hopefully, the lower lake will still sustain life for the fish at that time.
3. Doing the lower lake first creates the issue of the weed flowing downstream and contaminating a clean area.
The time frame for this project, I believe, would need to be as such:
Begin draining NOW! As everyone rocks back in their chairs with their hands up saying ”Whoa, we can’t do this now”, I say, Why Not? Precious time has been lost over the years, and I believe we are on the verge of dead fish on the lower lake. Another year lost could prove disastrous, if a large scale fish die-off is imminent. The lake needs to be drained in the warm weather, as during the winter, many species have burrowed into the mud for hibernation, and would not be able to be removed.
6 months of drying out puts us into the winter. Most trucking and equipment companies are slow in the winter, and these services would be easier to come by at that time of the year. While I am fully aware of weather concerns in winter, weather delays would still put the entire project back to late spring, early summer.
The final step, after refilling the lake, would be to treat the entire area with a Herbicide. As much as cancer patients must endure chemo- therapy after surgery, this will ensure that the entire problem is gone for good. As I’m sure you may be aware, there is a local project that is being conducted as we speak. It is 38 acres, and it cost around $75,000. That is a very affordable insurance policy.
In closing, I would like to say thank you again, and I look forward to speaking with you, and hopefully working with you in the near future to solve this very difficult problem.
(631) 872-7086
112huntr@optonline.net
Details of Conference Call on Yaphank Lakes
The conference call was lengthy, an hour and 15 minutes, and was attended by many people. It was difficult to assess at times, but by my account, it was 14 plus myself. I wrote it down as it was happening. The agencies involved were: Town council, County legislator, State assemblyman, NYSDEC, The Nature Conservancy, SC Dept of Health, SC Exec. and a couple of interagencies, ie: Town Environmental Protection, State Habitat Protection, and the Environmental Defense Fund, who I really don't understand who they are affiliated with. I believe the Town, but I'm not sure.
The first 45 minutes was exhausting. I heard so many people come up with so much BS, I had to really sit back in my chair to understand what was going on. I heard every agency talk about how many studies had to be done: Environmental Impact, Feasibility Study, Lake Inventory, Water Quality Test,.... there were a couple more, but I can't think of them now. I was trying hard not to scream at them that this has been going on for years, " Why hasn't this stuff been done already??? We've talked about this for years.!!!"
Anyway, I maintained my composure, and after much discusion I asked, "Who is ultmately responsible for the decision making for what happens with the lake.....The Town...Right?" After a slight delay, Connie Kepert said YES!!! Pete Scully finally said that the DEC is there to regulate, moniter, and advise,.. it is up to the responsible party : ie: The Town, to come up with a plan to address the problem.
Now for the plans.... I specifically asked Connie Kepert, Kate Browning, and Marc Alessi if they liked and/or were in favor of my idea of a physical solution to the problem, meaning draining the lake, and removing material from the river bottom, and ALL said yes. That did not say every position of my plan, but it did mean exactly what I said... A physical solution to the problem.
There were several solutions that were discussed: My plan; simply treating it with a herbiside; draining the lake and leaving it that way; ( Of which I /We are vehemently oppossed to); draining the lake, letting the weed die, and then refilling; weed eating Carp ( off the table); weed cutting machine; and several variations and combinations of all these ideas.
The way I believe we left off was, the Town was going to look into all solutions, and come up with a plan to address the situation. My gut feeling is that they are in favor of my plan, or certainly some variation of it. There will be alot of opposition along the way. There will be several groups that will trash this idea, and give us a hundred reasons why it's no good. My feeling is,... we will need to hold their feet to the fire as to WHY they believe this idea is no good, and counter everything that they say. I have plenty of reasons for dredging,.. they need to come up with more reasons why they're against, as well as a better solution for years of neglect
Chad Trusnovec
.
A Carman's River E-mail Exchange Between Trusnovec and J Kritzer of environmentaldefense.org
Wed, 07/25/2007 - 12:00am — ebremerJake,
I appreciate your input, but I stand by my statements that I, and the rest of the community are against your ideas. I have spoken to virtually no one that is in favor of restoring it back to a stream.
In order for me to intelligently discuss your ideas, I need to know much more about you, your background, your affiliations, and your motivations.
My background and my motivations are worn on my sleeve. I have nothing to hide. I have lived on the river all of my life. It disgusts me, as well as the rest of the community, to see this happen before our eyes, and it seems few people care but us.
I will welcome ALL viable options to address this problem. And I know that all interseted parties will do the same.
I may be naive , but I fail to see a positive change for the "overall good" and the "benefits" to a body of water that has been part of the local community , as well as a large portion of the Island for over two centuries!
Please contact me anytime. I look forward to any discussion that is a positive step forward to addressing this problem.
My cell phone number is on the web site, on the proposal. Sometimes that is the best way to get in touch with me. E-mail is fine, but sometimes, due to my work schedule, it may be a day or two before I get back to you.
Also, please be advised, I am forwarding this message to the webmaster of the Yaphank web-site.
This is not personal in any way. This is sent to inform the residents of the town, as I am trying to lead the way to a solution, and keep the residents advised of all corespondance of such.
Please let me know if you would like to meet. I welcome the discussion.
Chad Trusnovec
---- Original Message -----
From: Jacob Kritzer
To: Chad Trusnovec
Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2007 2:56 PM
Subject: RE: Carmans River
Dear Chad,
I read your report on the Yaphank lakes conference call on the yaphank.org website, and I certainly share a lot of your frustration with how the call went. I was also a bit dismayed to read of your "vehement" opposition to restoring the river. Believe me, I understand the initial unease you and others have with the approach. It's a drastic change, to be sure, but overall a very positive one. It would be naïve to expect immediate support, and perhaps it's an idea you will never support. But, to the best of my knowledge, it's an idea that has not been given anywhere near adequate consideration. You and I had a brief conversation about it some time ago (way back last fall, based on our correspondence below), and others have told me of similar informal discussions here and there. But I don't think the case for river restoration has really been made to the local community. I don't think people have really heard of the many benefits of this solution and have not really carefully thought about whether it might be for the overall good of the local residents, the larger community, and the environment. Conversely, I don't think we've had a true discussion about your proposal, and that too would also be worthwhile. If our case were to be made and you are not swayed, well, that is what it is. But I'd simply ask that the idea gets a fair hearing first.
Best,
Jake