Water Quality and the Costs - Say $51 Million

[Just Sold]

With all the discussion about the Shoreland Protection Act changes and Milfoil I think a read of an article on this recently released report on what will happen if the water quality goes down and more related items. Click on the link for an article on what can happen if we do not protect all of our lakes, ponds, streams and rivers. http://www.nh.com/apps/pbcs.dll/arti...IEW30/70529012

[Lakegeezer]

The study is hard to accept.

The linked article says "that residents and visitors who fish, boat and swim the state’s freshwater lakes and rivers would decrease their use — and their spending — if they perceive deterioration in any of four key areas: water clarity and purity; natural views and scenery; crowding; and water levels and flows."

Rather than projections, why not look at where we are today compared to 15 years ago.

1. The water clarity and purity has decreased signficantly in 15 years. Where is the loss of revenue?
2. We have already had changes in water levels and flows. Three 100 year floods in 18 months and wildly running rivers. Can the damage be calculated (beyond repairing washed out roads)?
3. Changes in natural views and scenery have already occurred. Red hill and the Ossipee mountains have development where there was none. Ridges along the Western shore of Winnipesaukee have been adorned with condos. Has this decreased spending?
4. We have increased crowding of the few good rafting spots, but how the heck can more people cost $19M in declined tourist dollars?

Call me skeptical, but if the study showed that the Lakes Region economy would be $51 million richer today if the quality of the lakes and development were as they were 15 years ago, I'd be more inclined to buy their projections into the future.

[Dave R]

Kinda funny that "crowding" is listed as one of the things that would keep people away. If it's crowded, isn't that an indication that people decided not to stay away???

[Lake Fan]

Nobody goes there anymore, it's too crowded!

[Phantom]

Not to get into a debate over the subject -- but We live on a relatively small lake here in Mass which does have a milfoil problem and has been ever growing for the past 20+ years. It's effect can be seen clearly here as areas that use to be weed free and swimable are now choked off to weeds to such a degree you can't even boat in these areas! There have been several attempts in the past to treat the lake but they were met with local groups (probably similar to NH) who vehemently opposed -- thus tying the process up until State matching funds had expired.

We are once again embarking on a Treatment plan which has proven itself safe in many other lakes and ponds -- perhaps this time it will finally happen.

My point -- imagine buying a waterfront home and 15-20 years later you can't swim off your own beach or navigate a boat to your dock ----- This has happened !! Imagine what the re-sale of that property would be like.

[ApS]

(My comments in red).

Originally Posted by Lakegeezer

"...Rather than projections, why not look at where we are today compared to 15 years ago.

1. The water clarity and purity has decreased significantly in 15 years. Where is the loss of revenue?
   
   The first use of milfoil in aquariums was to hide newborns and fry from predators. Bass, at least, manage well in the waters of murky southern lakes which are loaded with exotic milfoil. Expect a net gain of revenue from visiting fishermen.
   
   Any loss of revenue would be due to the growth of milfoil in popular swimming/rafting areas or where replacements of tear-downs "doesn't happen" due to milfoil. Visiting boaters could care less about water quality/clarity, and might even appreciate a lake full of blue anti-freeze instead!
   
   There might be a net gain of revenue here from degradation: the number of permanent lakeside swimming pools installed is on the increase!
   
   
2. We have already had changes in water levels and flows. Three 100 year floods in 18 months and wildly running rivers. Can the damage be calculated (beyond repairing washed out roads)?
   
   Every cubic yard of dirt, duff, loam, fertilizer and mulch that gets washed from driveways and roadsides ends up eventually as undesirable pollutants and silt "downhill"—and gets replaced with still more of the same every year. Silt is milfoil's favorite home.
   
   A rough way to calculate runoff damage would be to total all the cubic yards of replacement dirt, loam, soil, fertilizer, rip-rap and mulch purchased "uphill".
   
   While tourism is not largely affected, this Spring's rain/snowmelt damage to docks is a net increase to the state's employment numbers—and revenue. Landslide damage to shorelines this year is disturbing.
   
   
3. Changes in natural views and scenery have already occurred. Red hill and the Ossipee mountains have development where there was none. Ridges along the Western shore of Winnipesaukee have been adorned with condos. Has this decreased spending?
   
   If enough forest is cut down, you can see the lake better—increasing revenue.
   
   
4. We have increased crowding of the few good rafting spots, but how the heck can more people cost $19M in declined tourist dollars?

The languid town of Tuftonboro builds about 80 new homes every year, while buying land for public "open-spaces". That is a net gain of revenue on the "quiet side" of Lake Winnipesaukee. It's being lost elsewhere.

Call me skeptical, but if the study showed that the Lakes Region economy would be $51 million richer today if the quality of the lakes and development were as they were 15 years ago, I'd be more inclined to buy their projections into the future.

An ongoing 15-year peak in crowd revenue, such as "Bike Month" probably sours some tourists and new wealthy year-round residents from the region. How many potential "Meredith Bay" (Akwa Soleil) homesite-buyers will be repulsed by the noisy crowds during the month of June?

How do you compute a net tourism gain or loss from such passing events that involve crowds totally uninvolved in lakewater quality—and are even invisibly contributing to the lake's degradation?

[MAXUM]

I'd like to see some sort of natural solution to the problem of milfoil be figured out. Not that I'm a tree hugger or anything, but chemically treating areas infested may result in a short term, and I understand a VERY short term solution, a natural preditior to take care of the problem permanently would be nice. Hopefully that solution is not to far away - but in the grand scheme of things, milfoil is one of a many potentially exotic threats that I think are just a matter of time away from infesting not just Winni, but other lakes as well. I dread the day when zebra mussels make thier way into the lake. I hear those things are nasty.

I've read somewhere that some fish is supposed to eat that crap and it's effects are currently being studied to see what it's introduction would have. Wouldn't it be nice if that's all it took.

[Dave R]

Originally Posted by MAXUM

I'd like to see some sort of natural solution to the problem of milfoil be figured out. Not that I'm a tree hugger or anything, but chemically treating areas infested may result in a short term, and I understand a VERY short term solution, a natural preditior to take care of the problem permanently would be nice. Hopefully that solution is not to far away - but in the grand scheme of things, milfoil is one of a many potentially exotic threats that I think are just a matter of time away from infesting not just Winni, but other lakes as well. I dread the day when zebra mussels make thier way into the lake. I hear those things are nasty.

I've read somewhere that some fish is supposed to eat that crap and it's effects are currently being studied to see what it's introduction would have. Wouldn't it be nice if that's all it took.

I would not count on adding yet another species to the lake as a good idea. Humans seem to have a poor record of trying to "manage" nature.

.

[Gavia immer]

Originally Posted by MAXUM

Not that I'm a tree hugger or anything, but chemically treating areas infested may result in a short term, and I understand a VERY short term solution, a natural preditior to take care of the problem permanently would be nice. Hopefully that solution is not to far away - but in the grand scheme of things, milfoil is one of a many potentially exotic threats that I think are just a matter of time away from infesting not just Winni, but other lakes as well. I dread the day when zebra mussels make thier way into the lake. I hear those things are nasty.

I've read somewhere that some fish is supposed to eat that crap and it's effects are currently being studied to see what it's introduction would have. Wouldn't it be nice if that's all it took.

Tree hugger! Tree hugger!

(Just kidding)

Maybe gene splicing to make milfoil taste like iceberg lettuce? Move the job market from California to New Hampshire?

Milfoil is dormant in cold weather. How about a controlled test area using sheets of black agricultural plastic to cover the ice where it's growing? No sun = no milfoil.

[Mee-n-Mac]

I hear VT is looking into weevils that eat milfoil. I wonder what eats the weevils ? Do weevils wobble ? I hear there are some carp that eat milfoil. I wonder how well they'd work in Winni? Then again people would carp about a new fish in the lake. Perhaps we can get a form of zebra mussel that only survives on milfoil. Betcha Winni would get a real commercial then !