Boston Globe Article

[Donzi Minx]

I have not been in Lake water for about a year, I miss it and could not ever imagine not being able to plunge.
Front page news felt like a bomb going off.

[Mr. V]

Originally Posted by Donzi Minx

I have not been in Lake water for about a year, I miss it and could not ever imagine not being able to plunge.
Front page news felt like a bomb going off.

What are you talking about?

[Descant]

Outside of Rockingham County, not many people read the Boston Globe. Perhaps a hint? No links- they have a pay wall.

[Bear Guy]

The online link to "today's paper" has the second article on Lake Winni:

[John Mercier]

NH upgraded a bunch of laws in January.
I think it will take time to see any results from those.

[FlyingScot]

Originally Posted by John Mercier

NH upgraded a bunch of laws in January.
I think it will take time to see any results from those.

I'm not aware of any new state laws that will help with the cyanobacteria situation, and I watch pretty closely. We need to push our towns and the state to enforce development codes near the lake, maintain septic systems, get rid of phosphorous fertilizer, and invest in projects to reduce runoff into the lake. Lake Winnipesaukee Alliance is doing all those things, but everybody has to help or, as the article says, we'll lose the lake

[DesertDweller]

Originally Posted by FlyingScot

I'm not aware of any new state laws that will help with the cyanobacteria situation, and I watch pretty closely. We need to push our towns and the state to enforce development codes near the lake, maintain septic systems, get rid of phosphorous fertilizer, and invest in projects to reduce runoff into the lake. Lake Winnipesaukee Alliance is doing all those things, but everybody has to help or, as the article says, we'll lose the lake

Very well said. Septic systems are a huge part of the problem in my opinion and a lot times the only time they get looked at is when a home sells.

[John Mercier]

Originally Posted by FlyingScot

I'm not aware of any new state laws that will help with the cyanobacteria situation, and I watch pretty closely. We need to push our towns and the state to enforce development codes near the lake, maintain septic systems, get rid of phosphorous fertilizer, and invest in projects to reduce runoff into the lake. Lake Winnipesaukee Alliance is doing all those things, but everybody has to help or, as the article says, we'll lose the lake

HB1113 and HB1139 for septic systems.
HB1293-FN for the fertilizer.

[John Mercier]

Also this was in the budget bill HB2:

485-A:61 Cyanobacteria Mitigation Loan and Grant Fund Established. There is hereby established in the department of environmental services the cyanobacteria mitigation loan and grant fund which shall be maintained by the state treasurer in distinct and separate custody from all other funds. The state treasurer may invest the fund in accordance with RSA 6:8. Any earnings on fund moneys shall be added to the fund. All moneys in the fund shall be nonlapsing and continually appropriated to the department of environmental services. The cyanobacteria mitigation loan and grant fund shall be used to fund loans, grants, and reimbursements in accordance with this subdivision. Funds from any bond proceeds, grants, loan repayments, legislative appropriations, donations, "Love NH Lakes" number plates under RSA 261:97-g and RSA 261:97-i, and other funds shall be credited to this fund.

168 Water Management and Protection; Water Pollution and Waste Disposal; Sewage Disposal Systems; Fees. Amend RSA 485-A:30 to read as follows:

485-A:30 Fees.

I. Any person submitting plans and specifications for a subdivision of land shall pay to the department a fee of [$300] $450 per lot. Said fee shall be for reviewing such plans and specifications and making site inspections. Any person submitting plans and specifications or an application for a permit by rule as provided in RSA 485-A:33, IV for sewage or waste disposal systems shall pay to the department a fee of [$290] $450 for each system. Said fee shall be for reviewing such plans and specifications or application for permit by rule, making site inspections, the administration of sludge and septage management programs, and establishing a system for electronic permitting for waste disposal systems, subdivision plans, and permits and approvals under the department's land regulation authority. The fees required by this paragraph shall be paid at the time said plans and specifications or application for permit by rule are submitted and shall be deposited in the subsurface systems fund established in paragraph I-b. For the purposes of this paragraph, the term "lot" shall not include tent sites or travel trailer sites in recreational parks which are operated on a seasonal basis for not more than 9 months per year.

I-a. In addition to fees required under paragraph I, any person submitting plans and specifications or an application for a permit by rule as provided in RSA 485-A:33, IV for sewage or waste disposal systems shall pay to the department a fee of [$10] $25 for each system for use in the septage handling and treatment facilities grant program to municipalities under RSA 486:3, III. The fees required by this paragraph shall be paid at the time said plans and specifications or application for permit by rule are submitted and shall be deposited in the septage management fund established in paragraph I-c.

I-b. The fees collected under paragraph I shall be deposited in the water resources fund established in RSA 482-A:3, III for the purpose of paying all costs and salaries associated with the subsurface systems program and other land resources management programs.

I-c. There is hereby established the septage management fund into which the fees collected under paragraph I-a shall be deposited. The fund shall be a separate, nonlapsing fund, continually appropriated to the department for the purpose of paying costs associated with the septage handling and treatment facilities grant program or for research, engineering analysis, or septage sampling and analysis by the department to advance septage management in the state of New Hampshire.

[thinkxingu]

Originally Posted by FlyingScot

I'm not aware of any new state laws that will help with the cyanobacteria situation, and I watch pretty closely. We need to push our towns and the state to enforce development codes near the lake, maintain septic systems, get rid of phosphorous fertilizer, and invest in projects to reduce runoff into the lake. Lake Winnipesaukee Alliance is doing all those things, but everybody has to help or, as the article says, we'll lose the lake

What's really, REALLY crazy to me is everytime sentiments like this get posted on the iboat Winnipesaukee Facebook page, there are more comments attacking the posters/"hippies"/"Karens" than supporters of the lake.

This shouldn't be political given the clear source of the issues, but it totally is.

Sent from my SM-S931U using Tapatalk

[TiltonBB]

How does this impact building on lots that are on municipal sewer?

If the fee is paid with every application, do they refund your money if the building or project is rejected for other reasons, say zoning?

[FlyingScot]

Originally Posted by John Mercier

Also this was in the budget bill HB2:

485-A:61 Cyanobacteria Mitigation Loan and Grant Fund Established. There is hereby established in the department of environmental services the cyanobacteria mitigation loan and grant fund which shall be maintained by the state treasurer in distinct and separate custody from all other funds. The state treasurer may invest the fund in accordance with RSA 6:8. Any earnings on fund moneys shall be added to the fund. All moneys in the fund shall be nonlapsing and continually appropriated to the department of environmental services. The cyanobacteria mitigation loan and grant fund shall be used to fund loans, grants, and reimbursements in accordance with this subdivision. Funds from any bond proceeds, grants, loan repayments, legislative appropriations, donations, "Love NH Lakes" number plates under RSA 261:97-g and RSA 261:97-i, and other funds shall be credited to this fund.

168 Water Management and Protection; Water Pollution and Waste Disposal; Sewage Disposal Systems; Fees. Amend RSA 485-A:30 to read as follows:

485-A:30 Fees.

I. Any person submitting plans and specifications for a subdivision of land shall pay to the department a fee of [$300] $450 per lot. Said fee shall be for reviewing such plans and specifications and making site inspections. Any person submitting plans and specifications or an application for a permit by rule as provided in RSA 485-A:33, IV for sewage or waste disposal systems shall pay to the department a fee of [$290] $450 for each system. Said fee shall be for reviewing such plans and specifications or application for permit by rule, making site inspections, the administration of sludge and septage management programs, and establishing a system for electronic permitting for waste disposal systems, subdivision plans, and permits and approvals under the department's land regulation authority. The fees required by this paragraph shall be paid at the time said plans and specifications or application for permit by rule are submitted and shall be deposited in the subsurface systems fund established in paragraph I-b. For the purposes of this paragraph, the term "lot" shall not include tent sites or travel trailer sites in recreational parks which are operated on a seasonal basis for not more than 9 months per year.

I-a. In addition to fees required under paragraph I, any person submitting plans and specifications or an application for a permit by rule as provided in RSA 485-A:33, IV for sewage or waste disposal systems shall pay to the department a fee of [$10] $25 for each system for use in the septage handling and treatment facilities grant program to municipalities under RSA 486:3, III. The fees required by this paragraph shall be paid at the time said plans and specifications or application for permit by rule are submitted and shall be deposited in the septage management fund established in paragraph I-c.

I-b. The fees collected under paragraph I shall be deposited in the water resources fund established in RSA 482-A:3, III for the purpose of paying all costs and salaries associated with the subsurface systems program and other land resources management programs.

I-c. There is hereby established the septage management fund into which the fees collected under paragraph I-a shall be deposited. The fund shall be a separate, nonlapsing fund, continually appropriated to the department for the purpose of paying costs associated with the septage handling and treatment facilities grant program or for research, engineering analysis, or septage sampling and analysis by the department to advance septage management in the state of New Hampshire.

Both good. But both small compared to the problem

[John Mercier]

There is probably a lot more than I posted as HB2 is a catch-all in the budget for changes in costs.

[SAB1]

Anything that can be done hopefully helps. IMO there are all kinds of issues the point to the problem but in reality there’s just to many people, development in the form of houses as well as commercialization, runoff and to many boats etc enjoying the lake. You can only wash so many dishes in the dish pan before the water gets dirty.

[Tofu]

Originally Posted by thinkxingu

What's really, REALLY crazy to me is everytime sentiments like this get posted on the iboat Winnipesaukee Facebook page, there are more comments attacking the posters/"hippies"/"Karens" than supporters of the lake.

This shouldn't be political given the clear source of the issues, but it totally is.

Sent from my SM-S931U using Tapatalk

If people would have payed a little more attention to NITROVANDAM on 6/21/19's thread about " Moving out of New Hampshire " Lake pollution (Fertilizer ) was one of his concerns, However he called it in 2019 and all it turned out to be was everyone calling him a " Karen " . If people would have just listen then, Maybe, just maybe the Lake would not be in this condition.


Nitrovandam, must have seen the Lake from a different perspective.



This was written June 21, 2019


Moving out of New Hampshire.
Just want to Thank all of you out of Stater's for coming up here and ruining this once great State we once had. Thank you for bringing up you Crap political believes and changing the State from Red to Blue. Thank you for your ****ty attitudes and bad driving skills. Thank you for you Phoney love for people, and please keep the attitude of " as long as I am not inconvenienced, everything is good ". Thank you for ruining Winnie with a speed limit. Thank you for polluting it with all the Lawn fertilizers and claiming ' It's not ME ". Thank you for Driving prices thru the roof, You guys are awesome. Just wish you'd have stayed in your own state and continued to bring it all the way down the toilet. Trust me when I say, Local's, Really don't and never did want you here.

[Biggd]

Originally Posted by Tofu

If people would have payed a little more attention to NITROVANDAM on 6/21/19's thread about " Moving out of New Hampshire " Lake pollution (Fertilizer ) was one of his concerns, However he called it in 2019 and all it turned out to be was everyone calling him a " Karen " . If people would have just listen then, Maybe, just maybe the Lake would not be in this condition.


Nitrovandam, must have seen the Lake from a different perspective.



This was written June 21, 2019


Moving out of New Hampshire.
Just want to Thank all of you out of Stater's for coming up here and ruining this once great State we once had. Thank you for bringing up you Crap political believes and changing the State from Red to Blue. Thank you for your ****ty attitudes and bad driving skills. Thank you for you Phoney love for people, and please keep the attitude of " as long as I am not inconvenienced, everything is good ". Thank you for ruining Winnie with a speed limit. Thank you for polluting it with all the Lawn fertilizers and claiming ' It's not ME ". Thank you for Driving prices thru the roof, You guys are awesome. Just wish you'd have stayed in your own state and continued to bring it all the way down the toilet. Trust me when I say, Local's, Really don't and never did want you here.

Anyone that writes something like this, all I can say is, I'm glad he left.
That's not someone I want to associate with, JMO. If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem.
I've only blocked 2 or 3 people on this forum and he was one of them. He sent me a nasty PM.

[Tofu]

Originally Posted by Biggd

Anyone that writes something like this, all I can say is, I'm glad he left.
That's not someone I want to associate with, JMO. If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem.
I've only blocked 2 or 3 people on this forum and he was one of them. He sent me a nasty PM.

Were you one of the people he was referring to? I noticed you mention Waltham.

[Biggd]

Originally Posted by Tofu

Were you one of the people he was referring to? I noticed you mention Waltham.

I live in Ma and have a home on Waukewan. I don't have a McMansion and I bought on Waukewan because I like the cleaner quieter lake. I've been coming up to the lakes region for over 50 years and have owned 3 homes up here over that time.
Just because I live in Waltham is no reason to send me a trashy PM! If you don't like my views or posts, block me, but don't send me a trashy PM.
I do my part to be part of the solution not part of the problem.
I feel bad for his new neighbors, wherever he moved too!
IMO, he made NH a better place by moving out!

[Donzi Minx]

I did not intend to turn this into a **** sling. I absolutely disdain the Boston Globe and its ideology, chief thundercloud likes the paper so we still get it. I was a kid when my family owned property on the lake in West Alton wicked early 60's . By the time my uncle sold in 2008 water quality to the untrained seemed visibly different. My initial foray was a thread on crayfish many years ago. I hope we can turn it around. Look what they did for the Merrimack. It will always be pristine to me!

[John Mercier]

Originally Posted by FlyingScot

Both good. But both small compared to the problem

I think it will be education and enforcement at the retail levels.

Scotts Starter for 5000 square feet is 15lbs.
So roughly administering 3lbs per 1000 square feet.

It has an advertised N-P-K of 24-25-4.
So roughly 24% Nitrogen, 25% Phosphorus, 4% Potassium, and 47% inert filler.

3lbs would contain .75 lbs of Phosphorus, if my math is correct.

That would violate the .5 lbs annually allowed by the new law.

Other than new lawn, repair, or one tested and found to be deficient in phosphorus is to use Starter; and the remainder is supposed to be no phosphate.

We also have application restrictions based on conditions.

Not sure how much tighter they could go.