Greater Jefferson German Lake Association

Survey Results

Survey of Homeowners re 2014 Spraying of Invasive Aquatic Weeds

FINAL DRAFT

Introduction: The Lake Association obtained a DNR permit and a grant in an effort to improve the recreational uses of our lake by spraying curly leaf pondweed and Eurasian Milfoil, two fast-growing invasive plant species. All homeowners who participated in the project were asked to complete this survey. The purpose of the survey was to assess the homeowner’s perceived value, comments, suggestions, and problems encountered if any. Small areas in all four lakes were sprayed for a total of 25 acres. Cost was $300 per acre with the DNR grant paying $100 per acre. Homeowners whose property was sprayed shared the difference in cost.

1. Have you sprayed invasive weeds in our lakes before? Yes __6____ No_6____

Number of times__1, 2,1,3,4, many______

2. RESULT? Did you notice any result from the spraying this year? What was it?

  • Yes, less weeds
  • Curly leaf was less; not much change in milfoil
  • Great reduction of weeds off the shoreline
  • Yes, cleaner in the channel area (Middle Jefferson)
  • Two respondents said, “None” or No”.
  • Yes, less weeds where sprayed
  • Yes, I could see the difference with my depth finder on my pontoon. It was very definitive and has spread a little wider than the 50 feet that was sprayed. (Middle Jefferson)
  • I think the spray really attacked the curly leaf. I do not think it had any effect on the milfoil.
  • Yes, reduction of curly leaf pondweed.
  • This year there were fewer weeds and the ones that did come up to the surface were later in the summer than we have observed in the past.

3. WORTHWHILE? Do you feel the spraying was worthwhile and made a positive difference? Please describe:

  • Yes, less weeds.
  • Yes, fewer weed near shore.
  • Absolutely! No issues with fouling props on the boats. Grandkids had a lot of fun in the water. Not choked with weeds.
  • I think it needs to continue, and eventually we will get ahead of the weeds.
  • Yes, takes some time.
  • Yes, portions of our water area were much cleaner, & more conducive to recreation and the pockets of weeds & vegetation remaining were better for fishing.
  • We felt it was worthwhile and we would like to see it expanded.
  • Yes, I will do it again next year. I hope they can come up with a spray for effectively killing of milfoil.

4. PROBLEMS ENCOUNTERED? Did you experience any problems from the spraying? Please explain:

  • One respondent said, “Did not affect the milfoil; did not go close enough to shore.
  • Another: Yes. The wind blew tremendous amounts of dead vegetation on our shore. It was a one-time event but took weeks to clean out.
  • All other respondents said, “None”.

5. QUESTIONS:

  • Is it permissible to transplant pencil weeds on our side of the lake?
  • Can we spray closer to shore?

6. NEXT YEAR. Would you like to spray again next year? Yes___ No___

Why or Why Not?

  • All respondents said “Yes”.
  • The program needs to be changing to achieve long term control of the weeds.
  • Much improved fishing, swimming, boating. Less time spent cleaning beach.
  • This is a process that should continue for several years to gain optimum results.
  • Control weeds.

7. NEXT YEAR. Please indicate on the following map where you think the highest priorities for spraying are:

8. COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS? (Please use back of sheet as necessary)

  • Looking good. Let’s keep trying. Nice to get approval to transplant pencil weeds on west shore of lake.
  • We will contract privately, if not eligible for grant.

Respectfully submitted,

Arne Jessen, Secretary