Quote:
Originally Posted by BroadHopper
I think they are on the right track with the zoning ordinances on top of the $200,000 allocation. I'm just wondering what the state is doing with the money they are collecting off boat registration? Shouldn't the state be helping?
|
Agree this is the right thing and the select board is to be commended for its courage to recommend such an expensive warrant in tough times. $200K is a good start, but just a start. $100K would be a waste of money. The area to be treated is a headwater of the lake, and a source of much milfoil spread to other parts of the lake as water flows south towards the Weirs
The state funds are limited, and are given out in a sharing arrangement. If the proposed level of committment is granted by the voters, Moultonborough will show it is serious and that should attract more of the state funds.
There are good but localized efforts around the lake and the state is starting to pull the towns together into a coordinated effort. There is a information sharing, but the state does not have the funds or authorization to take charge. That could change if the lake slips from the classification of pristine to transitional (oligotrophic to mesotrophic are the scientific terms). As a benchmark, in a pristine lake you can see objects at greater than 12 feet. Visibility in a transitional lake is 7-12. Enriched (eutrophic) visibility is less than 7 feet. At the Lees Mills ramp, visibility is already down to 3-5 feet.
Moultonborough's action will be noticed by other towns, no matter which way the vote goes. No other town is even in the ball park of budgeting $200K and treating it as a town wide project. This could be the spark that unites the lake against the weed. If nothing else, it recalibrates people's thinking of the cost to do it right.
There are also warrants for steep slope construction restrictions and other run-off reduction to be voted on. This comes on the heals of the shoreline protection act, which is also designed to keep plant food out of the water. The town is looking at the whole picture, but putting in a sewer system isn't on the table. That kind of money just isn't available. The new rules about septic systems are pretty effective, but indeed, a sewer system would be nice.
Better water quality may be wishful thinking though. It depends on the non-shoreline owners of Moultonborough to vote for it. What is really needed is a "get-out-to-vote" effort for those who favor this funding. As the March town meeting approaches - expect to hear a lot of noise about that.