IceShanty.com's Ice Fishing Community

Indiana => Ice Fishing Indiana => Topic started by: Retired-UAW on Feb 27, 2008, 09:01 PM

Title: Lake Manitou.Near Rochester,Fulton County.
Post by: Retired-UAW on Feb 27, 2008, 09:01 PM
Can`t believe nobody`s asking about this lake.
Title: Re: Lake Manitou.Near Rochester.Fulton County.
Post by: abishop on Feb 27, 2008, 09:05 PM
I know with the weed problem they banned all fishing unless you had a boat docked on the lake. I heard 4 3 years. Next year will be the third year. Havent heard if you could ice fish. Guess you could. Good crappie and gill lake . But you know what happens when they kill off all the weeds. Might be really hard to catch them now. imo
Title: Re: Lake Manitou.Near Rochester.Fulton County.
Post by: coondog59 on Feb 27, 2008, 09:17 PM
friends from work fishing it, park behind casey's gas station on north side of lake and fish bay right there. Coondog
Title: Re: Lake Manitou.Near Rochester.Fulton County.
Post by: AlgaeKilla on Feb 27, 2008, 10:07 PM
I know with the weed problem they banned all fishing unless you had a boat docked on the lake. I heard 4 3 years. Next year will be the third year.  But you know what happens when they kill off all the weeds. Might be really hard to catch them now. imo

Last year '07 was the first year they restricted boat traffic due to the hydrilla discovery. The low doses of Floridone should not kill eel grass, coontail and most native "pond weeds". I should eradicate the hydrilla and Eurasian water milfoil. The milfoil will probably bounce back in a few years, if not all the better. More cabbage and less garbage. The gill population should boom in the next year or two with less being pulled off the beds. Then the size structure will probably crash due to population dynamics. With more small gills the bass will grow big fast, eventually it will all balance out. Of course none of this is guaranteed, but that's what is supposed to happen. IMO
Title: Re: Lake Manitou.Near Rochester.Fulton County.
Post by: lakehopper on Feb 28, 2008, 01:59 PM
even tho it may be safe i wouldn't eat any thing outta there for awhile with all that weed spray they are using
dint wont to look back 20 years from know and hear them say it causes cancer
Title: Re: Lake Manitou.Near Rochester.Fulton County.
Post by: AlgaeKilla on Feb 28, 2008, 05:46 PM
Its not the 1950's here. lol The chemical companies spends millions of dollars researching there products. And believe me the EPA would not allow anything to be put in the water that was not safe. The dosage rates being used are less than 6 parts per billion. Just for an example, FDA allows about 5 times that concentration of rodent feces in food production. Besides, floridone, the active ingredient of Sonar, is a chlorophyll inhibitor not a contact killer.  Humans don't produce chlorophyll or we would all be green. lol
Title: Re: Lake Manitou.Near Rochester.Fulton County.
Post by: musky8it on Feb 28, 2008, 10:54 PM
Its not the 1950's here. Lil The chemical companies spends millions of dollars researching there products. And believe me the EPA would not allow anything to be put in the water that was not safe. The dosage rates being used are less than 6 parts per billion. Just for an example, FDA allows about 5 times that concentration of rodent feces in food production. Besides, floridone, the active ingredient of Sonar, is a chlorophyll inhibitor not a contact killer.  Humans don't produce chlorophyll or we would all be green. Lil

I am sorry to say, but the DNR could care less about what happens to Indiana lakes(IF you have enough money to PAY THEM OFF or a politician in your back pocket)....Just go look at Bass and Maxinkuckee. The big weed beds we had yrs ago are all gone, especially on Max...

WHY????...Cause the DNR lets the Lake Associations kill them cause those people are RICH and have political pull. On Max the weeds clogged up their jetskiis and BIG boats. Plus the keels on the big sailboat(Culver Military) would catch on the weeds....SO.... Since the 70's, the lake association has been killing weeds.....Mrs. Honssong(Executive Director
Lake Maxinkuckee Environmental Fund, Inc) calls it cleaning up the overflow of nutrients....

The next post I will add a reply letter from here....Its all bull to me, The Max. Lake Assoc. only wanted to kill weeds for their recreation
Title: Re: Lake Manitou.Near Rochester.Fulton County.
Post by: musky8it on Feb 28, 2008, 11:00 PM
Here is that letter I got from her. If you have enough money and polictical pull, the DNR will turn their backs and let the Lake Assoc. kill all your weeds...There used to be a big cabbage weed patch just left of the ramp on Max., its gone along with all the rest of the cabbage. At least I can't find any.


*************************

My name is Tina Hissong and I am the director of the Lake Maxinkuckee
Environmental Council (LMEC).  We are conservationists also.

The water quality of our lake is considered good, but that was not always
so.  In the late 1970šs and early 1980šs residents noticed the water quality
was declining and decided to do something about it.  A group of concerned
residents hired a professor from the University of Florida to study the
lake.  That study, The Historical Analysis of the Cultural Eutrophication of
Lake Maxinkuckee, Indiana, was the first of its kind in the State and
contained the guidelines for saving our lake and restoring the beautiful
water we had enjoyed.  The Lake Maxinkuckee Environmental Council was formed
to implement the recommendations in the study and we have been working ever
since. 

We celebrated our 20th Anniversary in 2001.  In those 20 years we have
accomplished many projects to save the lake.  Three wetlands were
constructed to reduce the flow of nutrients and sediment into the lake.
Education campaigns are on-going to educate residents on the best way to
live around a lake and preserve its health.  Stormwater treatment units have
been installed in the Town of Culver to reduce the nutrient and sediment
loading in the stormwater runoff from the Town as well as many other smaller
projects.  We have an nice list of accomplishments under our belt, but we
are not finished yet. There are still areas of concern. Lake and watershed
management requires diligence and a long term commitment, a commitment the
residents of Lake Maxinkuckee renew each year in our fund drive.

In addition to the projects listed above we have cooperated with the DNR on
fish surveys and we had an aquatic vegetation survey conducted in 1999.  You
are correct in your observations that there are fewer aquatic plants than
decades ago, but that is not all bad.  Excessive weed growth is a sign of a
lake in danger, that too many nutrients are coming into the lake

Here is a quote from the aquatic vegetation survey we had conducted in 1999:

"The diversity of aquatic plants in the lake is typical of marl lakes of
Indiana.  Compared to the survey on 1991 several noteworthy changes are
evident in the aquatic plant flora.  The most pronounced change is the
decrease in abundance of Eurasian Milfoil that was far more widespread at
the time of the last survey. Eurasian Milfoil tends to prefer eutrophic
lakes, out-competing native species as nutrient loading increases."

While the reduction of Eurasian Milfoil is a good sign, we also recognize
there are not the same number of plants as before.  The Lake Maxinkuckee
Environmental Council is working to restore our lake by implementing best
management practices around the lake and in the watershed. We are also
educating lakeshore property owners on stewardship responsibility of being a
lake shore property owner.  When a lake is a good fishery, that means it is
experiencing good water quality.  We want to see the lake's fish habitat
thrive.  I have been told by many that Lake Maxinkuckee is a good sport
fishing lake. 

I am disappointed you had a bad encounter with one of the residents.  I have
never heard of any illegal chemical use and would not support it. I do
however support permited chemical use by a licensed applicator for the
control of invasive species.  Proper lake management has to include this
technique as a management tool to restore the native plants.
Please contact me if you would like more information or have more questions.

Sincerely,

Tina Hissong


--
Tina M. Hissong, Executive Director
Lake Maxinkuckee Environmental Fund, Inc.
Title: Re: Lake Manitou.Near Rochester.Fulton County.
Post by: stanton21 on Feb 29, 2008, 01:57 AM
What a Bull%%%% Letter,skiers from ill.rule.No mention of the zebra musel invasion..Somthing happened in the last 3 years.On the east side on the big flat there was good weed growth all the way to the top of the water..There killing the weeds so boaters with there 60 thousand dollor boats can cruse around...I say all the time..If there going to stock a lake with our license money we should have a say when applying for a permit to control weeds..DNR stop wasting our money,Max is a all sports lake.There are lakes east of here that are 10 mph lakes and there  the  best fishing lakes around with great catches with no end.Weed growth and beds are out standing.
We need to stand up and fight for what is right and stop big goverment runing our lives.I fight ever chance i get but we need  more people to voice there opinian.

Just my 3 cents.
Title: Re: Lake Manitou.Near Rochester.Fulton County.
Post by: Derslayer1 on Feb 29, 2008, 05:58 AM
It was less than 2 years ago, you could park on any weedline on either bass or Max.  Now....I can jig up the dead weedline with a jigrap, and its dead. There is still some weeds but good luck finding a big weedline. The timeframe I am talking about, you could drill a hole, after shooting it for weeds, drop a jig down, a pull GREENAGE out bigtime. I know this has been happening for quite some time but the last 2 years something happened. On bass, there are no more fields of green, same on max. I agree with Stanton, anglers monies go into stocking programs and lake enhancement, we SHOULD have a say in chemical spraying. Online letters to representatives, DNR, home owner associations and the like, fall on deaf ears.
Title: Re: Lake Manitou.Near Rochester.Fulton County.
Post by: bret on Feb 29, 2008, 06:17 AM
Munskyman,  What do you think?  What has your experience been with the DNR, lake property owners and the treatment of aquatic weeds?
Title: Re: Lake Manitou.Near Rochester.Fulton County.
Post by: abishop on Feb 29, 2008, 09:22 AM
I agree the next time the council has their meeting to eliminate weedgrowth-we the fishermen need to be there so our voice can be heard. If no one is there to say NO they will be given whetever they want. Good article.
Title: Re: Lake Manitou.Near Rochester.Fulton County.
Post by: wax_worm on Feb 29, 2008, 09:51 AM
Not defending the lake association, but to hold that lady accountable for all the weed loss on Maxi is crazy.  Sounds like the lake association went thru the proper channels to get the permits.  The dnr is granting them becuase no one organizes an opposition.  Instead they b***h about it here on blog that does no good.  The permits that are granted are very specific as to what weeds and where they can be sprayed by licensed applicators.  They do not say kill all weeds in lake maxi!  I think what you are seeing are individuals doing their own weed kills and not getting caught.  If you know how, you can get SONAR and other weed killers.  It only takes a few minutes to kill alot of weeds with some of that stuff.  Until someone catches them doing it illegally, it will continue.

Also has the DNR done a study on Maxi recently and shown a decline in fish populations?  Just becuase you can't find them where your favorite weedbed used to be, does not mean they are not in the lake.  Lakes change and fish adapt...fishermen need to also.  Until an organized opposition is formed the weed kills will continue.
Title: Re: Lake Manitou.Near Rochester.Fulton County.
Post by: abishop on Feb 29, 2008, 10:10 AM
Lets organize/unionize get her dun. I am in say when and where.
Title: Re: Lake Manitou.Near Rochester.Fulton County.
Post by: AlgaeKilla on Feb 29, 2008, 06:05 PM
I don't know what you are calling "cabbage", but I can tell you that no aquatic herbicide kills true cabbage, Potamogeton richardsonii also known as Richardson's or clasped leaf pondweed. And the statement
the DNR could care less about what happens to Indiana lakes
is simply not true. Ed Braun of the Indiana Department of Natural Resources works closely with lake associations, licensed aquatic applicators, and yes fisherman to ensure that our native aquatic plants are  protected. He is known as the "Coontail King" for his efforts in preserving the good plants that grow naturally in our waters.
we should have a say
You do have a say. Get involved. Go to a freaking meeting. Ed and others frequently attends fishing club meeting to help educate and listen to the opinions of people like you. If you want to stand up and fight the power you'd better educate yourselves on what you really want. Eurasian water milfoil and curly leaf pondweed are plants that were introduced in America through the aquarium plant trade. These plants out compete native species and harm water quality. Be water quality I am speaking of ph levels, nutrient loading, dissolved oxygen levels, and predator prey relationships. Large scale "weed kills" are designed to target these invasive species and cause minimal damage to natives. The goal is to eradicate the weeds that out compete the good plants in order for the good plants to bounce back to there natural state. If you see a "total" lack of weeds it is likely because it can take up to a year for native species to regain there populations in suitable substrate that was over run by invasives. It is not likely due to people are illegally killing weeds. Yes anyone can purchase aquatic herbicides, but not every one can make them work. I guarantee no one is paying the $1,400 for a gallon of sonar and dumping it in on top of a weed bed. It simply wouldn't work. There are contact herbicides that are less expensive and require less exposure time, but even if used properly on Eurasian water milfoil the plant would only be burnt back and would regrow likely within a couple weeks. I don't like selfish property owner,jet skiers, and pleasure boaters any more than you do, but I do know that they're money doesn't control the DNR's lake management plans. i don't always agree with the DNR's decisions on lake management, but they do a great job a trying and despite popular opinion they,re main driving force is the opinions of those that purchase licenses along with their educations of biological matters.     
Title: Re: Lake Manitou.Near Rochester.Fulton County.
Post by: bret on Feb 29, 2008, 07:05 PM
When you say "go to a meeting" ....what meetings are you talking about?  And the other question...what's a good way to get "educated"?  I assume you mean learning a little about aquatic weeds and how they affect our lakes, learning how/why the DNR treats our lakes and why the lake property owner's seem to have a louder voice than us fishermen/sportsmen?

BTW tell us a little about your expertise in this area.  Thanks
Title: Re: Lake Manitou.Near Rochester.Fulton County.
Post by: AlgaeKilla on Feb 29, 2008, 08:27 PM
The meeting in question all depend on the individual lake. Some have fishing clubs meetings that DNR attend.  Most has lake associations. Maxi for example has an Envirnmental Council http://culverlmec.com/Pages/history.html (http://culverlmec.com/Pages/history.html) as well as an association which actually has a message forum (they're home page is currently under constrution) http://genwiz.genealogenie.net/lake_maxkinkuckee/_forum/index.php?sid=457eb57263d0df9eed1866bb855ae784 (http://genwiz.genealogenie.net/lake_maxkinkuckee/_forum/index.php?sid=457eb57263d0df9eed1866bb855ae784). You can also attend meeting held by or research some of these; Indiana Lake Management Society meetings http://www.indianalakes.org/ (http://www.indianalakes.org/),Water Agency Team for Enhanced Resources http://www.in.gov/indianalakes/sources/contacts/contact2.html (http://www.in.gov/indianalakes/sources/contacts/contact2.html)Midwest Aquatic Plant Management Society http://www.mapms.org/ (http://www.mapms.org/), Aquatic Ecosystem Restoration Foundation http://www.aquatics.org/ (http://www.aquatics.org/), office of Indiana State Chemists http://www.aquatics.org/ (http://www.aquatics.org/), Center for Aquatic and Invasive Plants http://aquat1.ifas.ufl.edu/ (http://aquat1.ifas.ufl.edu/), Lake and River Enhancement Program http://www.in.gov/dnr/fishwild/lare/ (http://www.in.gov/dnr/fishwild/lare/) and Indiana Lake Management Work Group to name but a few.

As for my "expertise". I'm in lake and pond management. I'm a licensed aquatic applicator. I build application equipment, selll, service, and install aeration systems, do plant and fish surveys. I am a member of IPLLA, MAPMS, ILMS, NAPMS, BASS, HMH, and Muskies Inc. I have attended many conferences attended by or put on by the IDNR.

And for those of you who think the lake property owners have more say so look and the Manitou issue. Do you really think the lake lot owners wanted to be restricted as to taking they're boats in and out of the lake. I don't think so. IDNR took action to protect our lakes from hydrilla (A weed that Florida spends 10 million dollars a year trying to control). Not so people could water ski, but so our native fish species could thrive and so our lakes don't look like this.
(http://i158.photobucket.com/albums/t88/AlgaeKilla/hydrilla_big.jpg)   
Title: Re: Lake Manitou.Near Rochester.Fulton County.
Post by: bret on Feb 29, 2008, 08:45 PM
Thanks Ryan!
Title: Re: Lake Manitou.Near Rochester.Fulton County.
Post by: abishop on Mar 01, 2008, 10:06 AM
I will wait until it is cleaned up a bit. Until then the crappies will have 2 wait.
Title: Re: Lake Manitou.Near Rochester.Fulton County.
Post by: ispoman on Mar 01, 2008, 10:56 AM
howcome they dont just rake the weeds out?
Title: Re: Lake Manitou.Near Rochester.Fulton County.
Post by: AlgaeKilla on Mar 01, 2008, 11:31 AM
Raking or mechanically harvesting hydrilla or Eurasian water milfoil results in spreading the population around. Both these invasives propagate by fragmentation. Bits and pieces of the plants will float around and take up root in new areas. As a matter of fact a single "hair" from a EWM leaf can be dried out for up to 7 days and will still grow into a complete plant if reintroduced into the water. This is why you will see the "Stop Aquatic Hitchhikers" signs at all public boat ramps, because the IDNR is taking the hydrilla threat very seriously. Because nothing was done when EWM was introduced 90% of our lakes and reservoirs now have it. In Minnesota, Wisconsin, and I believe Michigan you will be fined if caught "in possession" (on your boat trailer for example) of invasive weeds. Hopefully we as fisherman and boaters will do what we can to slow or stop the spread of fish and  habitat destroyers like hydrilla, zebra mussels, Asian carp, and VHS .
Title: Re: Lake Manitou.Near Rochester.Fulton County.
Post by: tarantula on Mar 01, 2008, 01:34 PM
To get back on the subject at hand. As a lifetime member
to B.A.S.S. I recieve a newspaper type magazine called
B.A.S.S. Times. I want to say that a couple months ago
I in fact read an article about our beloved Lake Manitou.
Don't quote me, but I do remember them saying that it has
a total infestation of hydrilla. That also there would be a
weed kill on the lake. There was a restriction on fishing
except for people who lived on the lake. If you
were to load a boat onto the lake, it had to be inspected
after removal. Hydrilla is an invasive aquatic vegitation
therefore the purpose of the big weed kill off and stringent
inspections of watercraft.

In my opinion, I have learned more about invasive species
from B.A.S.S. Times than I have any other place. It is very
informational on how much us outsdoorsmen can actually
make a difference.
Title: Re: Lake Manitou.Near Rochester.Fulton County.
Post by: AlgaeKilla on Mar 01, 2008, 02:04 PM
BASS Times is a great newsletter.  Do you know if it is available to non members?  I have several customers that would be interested in the periodical, but are not BASS members.
Title: Re: Lake Manitou.Near Rochester.Fulton County.
Post by: wax_worm on Mar 02, 2008, 11:15 AM
Bass Times in not available unless you are member of BASS.  Maybe contact BASS about getting copies of old issues.  If you tell them what it is for, they may be willing to part with issues that are 1 or 2 months old.
Title: Re: Lake Manitou.Near Rochester.Fulton County.
Post by: musky8it on Mar 03, 2008, 06:15 AM
I agree the next time the council has their meeting to eliminate weedgrowth-we the fishermen need to be there so our voice can be heard. If no one is there to say NO they will be given whetever they want. Good article.

You can't get into the lake associations meetings unless you own property on the lake. I imagine they send request to the DNR asking for permits, you never know when or what the request says. And, on Max., there is allot of political people who know what to do to get the request oked to kill the weeds....And I really feel that when, or if the DNR denies a weed kill request. That some lake owner slips out after dark and dumps in chemicals to kill weeds...I tired for a yr, emailing back and forth with the DNR. All I get is allot of double talk  and long explanations. Bottom line, it will take a politician who is a fisherman to stop it. But most aren't and they like their back pockets padded by lake associations. The DNR officials don't care, I really believe that!!!
Title: Re: Lake Manitou.Near Rochester.Fulton County.
Post by: musky8it on Mar 03, 2008, 06:33 AM
Not defending the lake association, but to hold that lady accountable for all the weed loss on Maxi is crazy.  Sounds like the lake association went thru the proper channels to get the permits.  The dnr is granting them because no one organizes an opposition.  Instead they b***h about it here on blog that does no good. 

Sorry, but you don't have a clue. I spent allot of time back in 2002. I argued and explained the fishermans case with the DNR and got no where....Below I will post some of the emails I got from the DNR investigator and Biologist. To post all of them would be a long list, so i will not post all of them....I also contacted the bait shop on HWY10 west of Bass lake I believe in Jan 2002, made up a petition and put it on their door. At least I tried!




Title: Some emails I recieved from a DNR investigator
Post by: musky8it on Mar 03, 2008, 06:35 AM
I'm not sure I follow your message. This bill (SB 230) would increase the restrictions on weed control in several ways. The bill would result in less weed control.
 
First, the area that a landowner can treat without even requesting a permit would be reduced. Currently, it is one-half of the vegetation or one-half acre, whichever is smaller. Under the bill, a resident can only eliminate vegetation in an area that is 625 sq ft (25 ft by 25 ft). This is significantly less weed control without a permit.
 
Second, there is currently no requirement for a permit for any methods of control other than chemical control. Anyone can use a weed harvester or release plant-eating insects to kill vegetation without a permit. Under the bill, these activities would require a permit.
 
Senator Meeks bill would allow the department to have more review over weed-control activities that are currently taking place without permits.


--------------------------------

Thank you for your response and further explanation of the situation. As
indicated, we are taking several steps to address the necessary balance
between aquatic plants and other uses of the lake.

Our records show that last year 2001, the DNR issued one permit for aquatic plant
control on Lake Maxinkuckee. It allowed use of chemicals to remove milfoil
and pondweeds from two channels on the south side of the lake (total of 2.3
acres). No permits have been issued for chemical control of aquatic plants
in Bass Lake, Starke County, since 1998. If you have evidence of a crime
being committed or witness an incident, please call the county sheriff so
the information can be referred to a DNR Conservation Officer for
investigation.

In shallow lakes like Bass Lake, power boating can also have a significant
negative impact on growth of aquatic plants. A law was passed last year that
allows the DNR to establish quiet zones on lakes for the purpose of
protecting aquatic plants. We are considering the most effective and
equitable use of these rules on several northern Indiana lakes.
Implementation of these kinds of rules requires the support of organized
lake residents and users. We continue to work with the district fisheries
biologist, LARE biologist, lake associations, and other interested residents
to see what can be done to improve the aquatic environment for fisheries and
other uses of Bass Lake and Lake Maxinkuckee.

As you state, it is difficult to eradicate invasive exotic weeds while
providing a suitable environment for regrowth of native plants. Research on
appopriate use of chemicals for selective control of aquatic plants is
ongoing. Lake Webster is an excellent example of a lake where Eurasian
milfoil had become so abundant as to deplete the rest of the plant
community. Use of low dose Sonar in a lake-wide treatment has brought much
of the milfoil under control and appears to be allowing regrowth of native
aquatic plants. The LARE program is working with the lake association to
fund an extensive survey of the aquatic plant diversity and growth in that
lake. The Fisheries Biologist has done tracking work with muskie there to
determine which areas of the lake are most used by muskie and potential
relationships with aquatic plants or other characteristics of the lake.

There are no simple answers to these problems. Every lake responds
differently to management. We welcome your participation in the public
process as we try to determine the best means of managing these lakes into
the future.

Gwen


--------------------------------

Thank you for your interest. I have also emailed Tina Hissong, of Lake Maxinkuckee, who may have additional historical information on the aquatic plants in that lake to send to you.
 
Gwen

--------------------------------



What is the DNR doing to address aquatic plant problems in northern Indiana
lakes, including Bass Lake and Lake Maxinkuckee? Your recent message
[appended below] to several programs within the DNR was forwarded to me for
a comprehensive response.

The Lake and River Enhancement Program (LARE) and Riverwatch Volunteer Water
Quality Monitoring program are administered by the DNR Division of Soil
Conservation. They provide funding for volunteer water quality monitoring in
streams, IDEM provides training for volunteer water quality monitoring in
lakes, and the LARE program conducts comprehensive studies of lake water
quality and aquatic plant management, followed by prescriptions of land,
water or plant management activities (such as wetland reconstruction or
shoreline stabilization) that improve lake quality.

Many lake associations and other groups of residents have participated in
the LARE program, including both Bass Lake and Lake Maxinkuckee.  If you are
very interested in working on lake issues, the program may be a good avenue
for continuing work at your lake.  To pursue further water quality
management projects, you may contact Jill Hoffmann, LARE biologist, at
[email protected]. Their information is also on the web at (click
the picture of a pink lily in the upper right to get more links for the
program): http://www.state.in.us/dnr/soilcons/lare.htm

On the issue of aquatic plant management, many people inside and outside the
agencies recognize the limitations of the older laws and rules that provide
regulation for aquatic plant management. Permits are issued by the Division
of Fish & Wildlife for treatment of small areas of exotic and invasive
plants that harm the native plant diversitiy and interfere with sound
fisheries management. We have to work within the context of those laws until
they are changed by the pressure of the people and legislature. 

Current law allows an individual to treat a rather extensive area of their
lakefront without a permit. Much of the change that you see in your lake may
be from individuals who are legally treating their frontage under a permit
exemption. While they are required by law to use chemicals that are approved
for aquatic use, we don't have enough law enforcement officers to have
someone there everytime a resident sprays their lakefront.  Like most other
laws, such as speeding in residential areas, legal compliance relies most
often on a sense of responsibility in the citizen.  When we are aware of
larger lake areas that look like they've been burned down by a chemical, the
Division of Law Enforcement pursues the situation.

There is a bill currently going through the state legislature that would
reduce the area of frontage that an individual resident is allowed to treat
without a permit. The bill unanimously passed the Senate on 1/24/02 and is
sponsored in the House by Representatives Adams and Kruse. If you would like
more information on this or any other bill, enter the bill number on the
following webpage:
http://www.state.in.us/serv/lsa_billinfo?year=2002&session=1&request=live

We are also working with lake associations to provide information to
residents about the critical importance of aquatic plants and plant
diversity.  The DNR Division of Nature Preserves is funding the first
comprehensive biological surveys of aquatic plants in northern Indiana lakes
by a professor from Purdue North Central.  At nearly every one of the recent
annual conferences of the Indiana Lakes Management Society (ILMS), leaders
of lake associations and any interested participants have learned how to
identify aquatic plants.  The next annual meeting will be at the Radisson
Hotel in Merrillville on April 5&6.  All lake residents interested in
improving management of their lake are welcome to attend.  Registration
information is available from Mark Mongin at 317-580-8299 or
[email protected].

A new publication from the DNR covers information on lake plant appreciation
and management.  I can send it to you in hard copy or you can download it
from the web by selecting the link "aquatic plants in Indiana lakes
brochure": http://www.state.in.us/dnr/soilcons/lare/plantcon.htm


The DNR does issue a number of permits for control of plants in lakes,
almost exclusively for the control of Eurasian watermilfoil.  This is a
nationwide problem, probably initiated by people dumping exotic plants from
their aquaria or outdoor ponds into local public waters. As far as I am
aware (and I now sign these permits), the DNR very rarely approves chemical
treatment of any emergent plants, including water lilies.  The Fisheries
Section and LARE program worked together with outside consultants to develop
an analyze a database of permits for chemical and target plants to determine
the extent of treatment and perceived problems on lakes.  A summary of this
project is available by selecting the links "invasion of Eurasian
watermilfoil" and "map of watersheds" on the internet at:
http://www.state.in.us/dnr/soilcons/lare/plantcon.htm


I have been in the boats with aquatic plant control companies as they apply
chemicals.  District fisheries biologists work with these companies to
maximize control of the invasive exotic plant Eurasian watermilfoil, while
minimizing the impact of the chemical on native species.  If Eurasian
milfoil is not controlled, the biodiversity of plants in our lakes will
continue to decrease until there is very little fish habitat or recreational
use left.  At this point in time, the only proven way to control the plant
is through chemicals.  The LARE program funded an experimental project last
year to test the use of weevils to control milfoil without chemicals.  This
project is in its second year and should be showing signs of success or
failure within the next 3-5 years.  A summary of this project is on the
internet at:
http://www.state.in.us/dnr/soilcons/lare/weevils.htm

So, I hope you can see that we are not ignoring these issues, and we
recognize the significant connections between aquatic plants and
fisheries--particularly muskellunge.  However, it's not going to be easy to
find the best combination of solutions for the multiple uses of our northern
Indiana lakes.

Gwen White, Ph.D.
Fisheries Program Specialist


--------------------------------

I apologize again for the initial misinformation. A state law enforcement officer is investigating this situation. I am providing him with copies of the permits that we have to assist him in this process.
 
The database that you searched is for Division of Water permits for shoreline alteration. Electronic data on plant control permits is not on the internet yet. They are issued out of this office. So, I suspect that you are not hearing from others at DNR because they know that I am corresponding with you about our permit file.
 
If you would provide me with a mailing address, I can send you copies of all permits that we have on file for Bass and Maxinkuckee Lakes since the early 1990s. What you refer to as the "south basin" is the area I was calling the "west basin." The permits have maps showing the areas of the lakes to be treated.
 
I talked to Mr. Scott Shuler of Aquatic Control by telephone on Friday. They conducted the treatment at Bass Lake according to the permit they held in 2000. There was also a herbicide treatment and permit in 1998 but not in 1999. He indicated that they have not treated, and there have been no permits issued, since 2000. They do not plan to treat there during the summer of 2002.
 
The chemical used was a low dosage of Navigate (2,4-D) to selectively remove Eurasian watermilfoil. There were few if any native species in those areas. Most treatment was 300-400 feet offshore to remove exotic weeds that interfere with boating and eliminate native plant diversity. Only one area along a dock was treated as close as 100 feet from shore. No areas immediately near the shore were treated. The area treated appears large, but is only about 10 percent of the total surface area of the lake.
 
I can also send you information on the biological impacts of Navigate (2,4-D) which is the granular chemical used for treatment. According to Purdue University, "the granular ester formulations are much less hazardous to fish than are the liquid ester formulations." This is because the granules sink to the bottom of the lake where fish are less likely to contact the product and uptake by plants through their roots is more efficient. Purdue also states that "most herbicides are nontoxic to fishes when properly applied at recommended rates. Fish kills are more likely to occur when excessive amounts of vegetation are treated, then decompose, resulting in oxygen depletion." The EPA spec. label describing ecological safety and MSDS sheets on human safety can be accessed from the following webpage: http://www.appliedbiochemists.com/navigatefs.html
 
If you wish to ask the lake management company about more detailed description of the methods and reasons for treatment, their telephone number is 812-497-2410 or [email protected].
 
As with any DNR permit or location, any member of the public can request information on the permit application and submit comments regarding the state's response. If a permit is requested for treatment at either of these two lakes this summer, I would be glad to send you a copy of the application and allow a 15-day public comment period. During that time, you may recommend conditions to be placed on the activities or suggest that the DNR deny the permit. These comments are coordinated through the Trilakes Fisheries Station, 5570 N. Fish Hatchery Road, Columbia City, IN  46725, tel. 219-691-3181 or you may send them directly to Bob Robertson, the District Fisheries Biologist for that area, or to me.
 
Finally, if you wish to organize a meeting, I would be willing to come up to Bass Lake or another location of your choice to meet with you and any other interested individuals to discuss aquatic plant management strategies and the DNR permit process.

Gwen
 
Gwen White, Ph.D.
Fisheries Program Specialist
Title: email from DNR Bioligist Bob Robertson in 2002
Post by: musky8it on Mar 03, 2008, 06:39 AM
I agree with you concerning the relatively few aquatic plants that are found in Bass Lake.  I have lived near Bass and Maxinkuckee for the last 35 years while serving as the district fisheries biologist for north-west Indiana (currently 16 counties).  I have spent hundreds of hours working on both lakes, and probably even more time fishing, swimming, boating, and sailing on these two lakes.  However, at least over the last 35 years, Bass Lake has never had much aquatic vegetation.

 Recently, the majority of vegetation we see at Bass Lake is the invasive, non-native Eurasian millfoil that has become a major problem at many midwestern lakes.  While some E. millfoil is also found at Maxinkuckee, the majority of the plants there are native species.  Over the years very little weed control has been done at either lake.  While a large treatment for E. millfoil was done at Bass a few years ago, little chemical control has been done on an annual basis.  On Lake Maxinkuckee, most of the chemical control has been confined to just a couple of the channels at the south end of the lake.

Over the years these two lakes have experienced changes, but I don't think chemical weed control has played a major or adverse role at either lake.  At the very shallow Bass Lake, I believe that large motors and increased boat traffic has more to do with the presence or absence of aquatic vegetation than many people are willing to admit.  At most lakes in our state, the "idle zone" extends from the shore out to 200 feet.  The law actually states that boats are not even allowed to operate (except for trolling) in this area unless they are going to or from a dock.  At Bass lake this zone has been legally extended to 350 feet.  Protection of this area of  our public lakes should help keep sediments from being stirred up, protect spawning areas, provide safety for swimmers, and allow vegetation to develop.

A new law may allow the DNR to further protect some areas of the lake by prohibiting all boat traffic within a special defined zone.  We are currently looking at that new law to see if any lakes in our district (including Bass and Maxinkuckee) could benefit from a closure of a small bay, wetland, etc.  We are still concerned with E. millfoil wherever it exists because it tends to crowed out many more desirable native species.  This plant also spreads by fragmentation.  When boat action rips and cuts these plants they float around to other parts of the lake where they take root and establish a new bed.  We still feel that some chemical control of E. millfoil is a good idea and will help keep the plants from spreading.

I have heard many good comments about the fishing at both Bass and Maxinkuckee.  Walleye stocking programs that the DNR started at both lakes back in the 80's have been well received.  A perch fishing friend of mine from Culver said that last year was one of the best for perch that he can remember.  This fellow is retired and has fished at Maxinkuckee most of his adult life.  Tournament fishermen continue to flock to Maxinkuckee.  One of the biggest complaints we get from Maxinkuckee fishermen is that we need to have a larger public access site.  We continue to try to find another site, but property is expensive and we still have not found a willing seller. Our last creel survey (fisherman harvest) conducted at Bass Lake showed a harvest of over 8,000 crappie of up to 14 inches in length.  Fishermen report that last year's walleye catch has also greatly improved in both numbers and size.

We continue to value both Bass and Maxinkuckee as two of the most important lakes in this district.  Both lakes have received a lot of our time and attention in the past, and both lakes will continue to receive this attention in the future.  Again this spring, the DNR will stock walleye into both of these lakes, and we will continue to look for more access to Maxinkuckee.
Title: My last email to Maxinkucke's Lake Owner Director, I got no reply back from her
Post by: musky8it on Mar 03, 2008, 06:42 AM
All lakes go through natural aging processes, I believe its called eutrophication. The stage that Maxinkuckee is in, is between Oligotrophic and Mesotrophic. That's where the lake is fairly clear and the sediment in the lake is very little to average. The last stage of a lake aging is called Eutrophic. That is where the lake is very shallow,it has murky water, and sediments have filled in the basin of the lake. By nature, it takes thousands of years to go from the first stage to the last. Man  causes Eutrophication to rapidly increase. With all mans pollutants and waste, lakes age very fast. The nutrients and weeds is not what is causes lakes to age quickly!!!!!!  If the nutrients in the water are taken away, all you have left is an infertile lake. And that is what is happening to Maxinkuckee. It is going backwards to the Oligotrophic stage where it is infertile. That is the type of lake the lake owners want. Where the fish and weeds are all gone!! That way they can run their expensive boats all over the lake without having to steer clear of the fishing boats.
 
Sure the DNR is going along with what you are doing. That's because the DNR don't have to pay for the weed killing. The lake owner are playing for it. Plus the lake owner want all the weeds gone. And there are state politicians that have summer homes on the lake. Answer this question. Do you fish or are you just one of the many lake side owners who just like to water ski or jet ski? I am felling that you are probably the later of the 2. I feel that is what your group is all about. You are for only the boaters and jet skiers and not the fishermen !! 
 
Mark my word, The fisherman of this state are taking back the lakes !!!!!   There is to many environmental groups out there that will fight the things that are being done to our lakes !!!  Let nature take its course. When man interferes, he screws up nature and that is bad news. If what is being done keeps at the pace it is going. Maxinkuckee in 100yrs, will only have pleasure boats on it. Because all the fish will have dyed out for lack of oxygen,nutrients, and pollutants!!!
Title: Bottom line, you can fight lawyers and politicians
Post by: musky8it on Mar 03, 2008, 07:15 AM
I tried and I got no where. You can't fight bureaucrats and politicians. And many of them own around Max., and they are not fisherman. I don't have the funds or the knowledge. The people killing all the weeds do. They can talk circles around regular fisherman like myself. With their long explanations as to why they needed to kill the weeds. More or less they are saying they are trying to make the lake better and cleaner. Well, cleaner is right. They have killed all the good weeds while they where treating the bad weeds....Therefore making a cleaner lake to run their Big Buck boats on.
Title: Re: Manitou.
Post by: abishop on Mar 03, 2008, 08:46 AM
Good report. It is good to know someone like yourself has addressed the issue. Someone out there must know someone who lives on these lakes. We as fishermen need to campain to these few land owners on the lake and sway them to come to our side. WE ALL MEED TO FIGHT THIS THING TO HAVE ANY RESULTS.
Title: Re: Lake Manitou.Near Rochester.Fulton County.
Post by: wax_worm on Mar 03, 2008, 10:59 AM
Sorry, but you don't have a clue. I spent allot of time back in 2002. I argued and explained the fishermans case with the DNR and got no where....Below I will post some of the emails I got from the DNR investigator and Biologist. To post all of them would be a long list, so i will not post all of them....I also contacted the bait shop on HWY10 west of Bass lake I believe in Jan 2002, made up a petition and put it on their door. At least I tried!

LMAO!!  Sending a few emails and posting a petition on the door of a lone bait shop is not organizing an opposition.  Did you contact any of the BASS or FLW clubs in the area to leverage their resources and get their opinions of the fisheries?  Did you research any fish surveys from either lake to show that the fish population is suffering due to weed kills?  Does the DNR agree the fish are suffering in these lakes due to the weed kills?  Do you have proof weed kills are being done without a permit?  Without, any facts or backing for your position you are like the crying baby in a restruant......annoyin g....

I can see why you get no where.  Reading your emails, you provide few, if any, facts; only your observations (which are not fact) and then you follow that up with bad mouthing the lake residents because some are politicians, have expensive boats, can afford to live on the lake, and hate fishermen.  I have fished there several times and never had a single issue with the lake residents or boaters.  Is your method getting you anywhere?  All the responses to your emails are informative, provide facts, explain the process and why the are doing it, and provide links to documents, etc.  You call all that 'double talk' because you did not get your way or don't understand the process.  I think you better reread muskymans posts about how the weed kills are granted, applied and by who, and what they specifically target.  They are not killing the native weeds.  The invasive weeds are killing and overrunning the native weeds.  You have to treat the invasive weeds to allow the native weeds to get a foothold again.  It is a proven process, being used by aquatic biologists in many states, but you refuse to see how it works. 


Title: Re: Lake Manitou.Near Rochester.Fulton County.
Post by: musky8it on Mar 04, 2008, 05:43 AM
LMAO!!  Sending a few emails and posting a petition on the door of a lone bait shop is not organizing an opposition.  ..........

I can see why you get no where.  Reading your emails, you provide few, if any, facts; only your observations (which are not fact) and then you follow that up with bad mouthing the lake residents because some are politicians, have expensive boats, can afford to live on the lake, and hate fishermen. ..........



waxworm....I sent more than a few emails, at least 30-40 or more. To allot of DNR officials, and got only two replies which was a DNR investigator and Biologist. The bait shop owner had information about a week kill in either 1999 or 2000. I sent to the DNR investigator. Who said that the DNR did not give out any permits for weed kill at Bass lake that yr. I did way more than I posted here. What I posted is only a small percent of what I tried. Reporting illegal activity is part of it, not just contacting fishing groups. What I did was report. No I never contacted any fishing groups, I didn't know any. So please get off my back, you have no idea how much energy and time I spent. All Hissong and the DNR did was run me in circles. Wonder why??????

And to reply to your 2nd paragraph. All but one of the emails I posted on this thread, are emails I received, not emails I sent. They are emails I received from the DNR Investigator, DNR Biologist, and Mrs. Hissong.  So I don't see how you can say "Reading your emails, you provide few, if any, facts. I only posted one of my emails here, the rest are emails sent to me from so called experts!
Title: Re: Lake Manitou.Near Rochester.Fulton County.
Post by: musky8it on Mar 04, 2008, 05:53 AM
They are not killing the native weeds.  The invasive weeds are killing and overrunning the native weeds.  



This is not what happened to all the cabbage beds(native weeds) at Max.. Invasive weeds did not overtake the cabbage beds. The chemical treatments killed all the cabbage beds at Max. I fished there back in the 70's and there used to be a big one just left of the ramp, its not there anymore....If you talk to Mrs Hissong, she'll tell you they started treating Max because of to much nutrients in the water. She states that very clearly in her email.

Chemical treatment at Maxinkuckee killed all the native weeds, and that is a fact! I don't know what Bass lake had back in the 70-80's. I never fished there back then. But I know what Max had back in the 70-80's. And its not there anymore. And invasive weeds did not rid Max. of its native vegetation, the lake owners did.
Title: Re: Manitou.
Post by: musky8it on Mar 04, 2008, 06:03 AM
Good report. It is good to know someone like yourself has addressed the issue. Someone out there must know someone who lives on these lakes. We as fishermen need to campain to these few land owners on the lake and sway them to come to our side. WE ALL MEED TO FIGHT THIS THING TO HAVE ANY RESULTS.

I don't know about Bass lake owners. But you will never sway Max. lake owners to our side. Max. lake owners and that town,in general, do not like outsiders on THEIR so called lake!!!  They have made allot of effort to run/keep bait shops out of town(that's a fact I talked to one yrs back). They also stopped the land owner just across from the ramp from turning a field into a big "PAY" parking lot for boaters(that's a fact my brother talked to them). As I stated before, if you got the money and know the right people. You can get away with what the Maxinkuckee Lake Association has done.
Title: Re: Manitou.
Post by: abishop on Mar 04, 2008, 08:45 AM
Like the old saying goes, "money talks and -------- walks." aint it true. The rich get richer and the poor get poorer.
Title: Re: Lake Manitou.Near Rochester.Fulton County.
Post by: wax_worm on Mar 04, 2008, 11:17 AM
waxworm....I sent more than a few emails, at least 30-40 or more. To allot of DNR officials, and got only two replies which was a DNR investigator and Biologist. The bait shop owner had information about a week kill in either 1999 or 2000. I sent to the DNR investigator. Who said that the DNR did not give out any permits for weed kill at Bass lake that yr. 
I appluad your effort of reporting an unpermitted weed kill to the DNR investigator.  I have to assume there was not enough or no evidence they could act on if nothing was done.

Quote
I did way more than I posted here. What I posted is only a small percent of what I tried. Reporting illegal activity is part of it, not just contacting fishing groups. What I did was report. No I never contacted any fishing groups, I didn't know any. So please get off my back, you have no idea how much energy and time I spent. All Hissong and the DNR did was run me in circles. Wonder why??????
  Too bad you feel you wasted your time.  I am not 'on your back' for your efforts, but your generalizations that all lake property owners are a$$holes, the DNR will do whatever pads their pockets with money instead of what is legal and good for our lakes, and that you are right and those with degrees in water managment, natural resources, and licensed in weed erradication and management are wrong!!

Quote
And to reply to your 2nd paragraph. All but one of the emails I posted on this thread, are emails I received, not emails I sent. They are emails I received from the DNR Investigator, DNR Biologist, and Mrs. Hissong.  So I don't see how you can say "Reading your emails, you provide few, if any, facts. I only posted one of my emails here, the rest are emails sent to me from so called experts!
My comment was to the only email you posted on here.  Why would the lake association respond to an antogonistic email with no facts to support your points?

Quote
This is not what happened to all the cabbage beds(native weeds) at Max.. Invasive weeds did not overtake the cabbage beds. The chemical treatments killed all the cabbage beds at Max.
That is odd, Muskyman who is licensed and contracts and kills weeds for a living, says there is no chemical designed to kill real cabbage, yet you are sure that is what killed them!

Quote
I fished there back in the 70's and there used to be a big one just left of the ramp, its not there anymore....If you talk to Mrs Hissong, she'll tell you they started treating Max because of to much nutrients in the water. She states that very clearly in her email.
  It is 2008, you are talking about 30-40 years since the 70's.  Lakes change with time.  You don't treat a lake for nutrients in the water by dumping chemicals in it.  You prevent field runoff, septic tank runoff, farm manure, yard fertilizer, etc from entering the lake, by putting in wetlands, hooking resdients up to a municipal sewer, educating lake residents to use yard fertilizer sparingly, etc.  Nomally lakes that have too many nutrients are off color and not clear as algae loves the nutients and thrives, clouding the water.  I think you will agree, maxi is one of the clearest lakes around.  It is possible the reduction of nutrients caused your cabbage bed to die, but I doubt it.  Clearer water usually allows weeds to survive and grow deeper cause of the light penetration is better.

Quote
Chemical treatment at Maxinkuckee killed all the native weeds, and that is a fact!  But I know what Max had back in the 70-80's. And its not there anymore. And invasive weeds did not rid Max. of its native vegetation, the lake owners did. 
  Fact is the weeds in Max are not the same as they were 30-40 years ago.  I think you will find this in about any lake you look at.  It is not a fact that chemical treatment and the lake owners killed the native weeds.  You have no supporting evidence that backs up your statements and accusations.  You are making an assumption that becuase they have recieved permits to kill invasive weeds (which are granted to many lake association to help control milfoil and other invasives) and are trying to reduce nutrients in the lake, they are to blame for the weed changes.  The real question is the fish poplation declining in Maxi?  If not, what is the issue?
Title: Re: Manitou.
Post by: abishop on Mar 04, 2008, 11:36 AM
Good points. I dont fish Max as much as I would like. It is very hard with all the structure. I did buy a gps and after ice out I will be plotting in some wavepoints. However, I do believe that the fishing hasnt been affected by the weed removal. They are just harder to find. Same thing on Bass. They are still there it just takes a lot of looking. Whatever you catch on Maxi is usually a large fish. They have some of the biggest fish of all species that are there.
Title: Re: Manitou.
Post by: Zoojunkie782 on Mar 04, 2008, 01:16 PM
Doesn't look like fishing's doing too bad there-

http://www.iceshanty.com/ice_fishing/index.php?topic=80474.0 (http://www.iceshanty.com/ice_fishing/index.php?topic=80474.0)

Its good you are concerned Musky8it, but you need to get facts straight before exploding like this. Throwing out accusations that aren't fact-based is pretty low. Like was said before, go to meetings conducted prior to permit submittals- they are usually conducted by implementers like JFNew or applicators AND you don't have to be part of the lake association to have a say in plant treatment. Its true that property owners are the majority at meetings, but thats because no fisherman show up. I went to a meeting at Sylvan last fall and I think I was the only fisherman- the only discussion that went on was nit-picking over people's beaches. More fisherman = more resistance to treat. Remember, its a public lake, and everyone has a say- but they need to be seen AND heard. Saying that the DNR is fueled by money is not a way to represent your opinion or opinions of us fellow fisherman.
Title: Re: Manitou.
Post by: Edge on Mar 04, 2008, 05:15 PM
Good Discussion....for the most part.

The bottom line is go to these meetings and voice your opinion.  There are public meetings every fall regarding plant treatments at various lakes.  If there is no public meeting at your lake, give the district biologist a call and let them know how you feel.

I believe the biologists are trying to do what's best for the lakes.  However there are a lot of people who want to remove every weed they can, and unfortunately they're very vocal.

It's true most of these applications are for the treatment of exotics, but if you've seen the results of a sonar or any other aggressive treatment you know that the damage to natives like coontail can be high.   And in some cases the relief of milfoil is only temporary. 
 
We need to speak up and force a more conservative approach.  Speak UP!

 

 
Title: Re: Manitou.
Post by: abishop on Mar 04, 2008, 06:59 PM
We need to know when these meetings are so we the fishermen can voice our opinions. Does anyone know how to find out when and where?
Title: Re: Manitou.
Post by: Edge on Mar 04, 2008, 07:35 PM
Good Question!  The district biologists would know.  I think the majority if not all of them take place in the fall. 

You would think the DNR would advertise them somehow, maybe the website.
Title: Re: Manitou.
Post by: Retired-UAW on Mar 04, 2008, 08:53 PM
Good Question!  The district biologists would know. 
[email protected] try this guy.I`ve had Good luck requesting info for a small lake the DNR manages. He gave me  19 pages of infomation with more info than a normal fisherman would need to fish this small lake. Maybe he can help resovle this conflict or lack of infomation? Each part of the state has different people for certain areas. Maybe this guy? Maybe someone else. Info at DNR site for each area. :-\
Title: Re: Lake Manitou.Near Rochester.Fulton County.
Post by: musky8it on Mar 04, 2008, 09:23 PM
Fact is the weeds in Max are not the same as they were 30-40 years ago.  I think you will find this in about any lake you look at.  It is not a fact that chemical treatment and the lake owners killed the native weeds. ......


So you are wanting me to believe that native cabbage weed beds just simply disappeared on their own since the 80's. I am sorry but I can not believe that. I truly believe that legal or illegal chemical treatments have killed off most or all of the native weeds. That is my opinion, and I feel its the opinion of many others.

Its to late to bring them back now. I very well doubt you will get the DNR to transplant the cabbage weeds back into Max.. Even if the DNR wanted to transplant Cabbage back into Max.. They would need to OK from the lake association to do that and they are not going to give the ok. Why do I say they would need the Lake Association approval. Because the Lake Association owns/controls/ or influences the politicians/Dnr who oversee that lake. No matter if you want to agree with that or not, I and many others feel the same way. Say for example you got together 1,000 fisherman to go up against Max's lake association. Do you really think they would win out? I don't think so. Nowdays to win in politics you need money and influence. And no doubt the Max. Lake Association has way more than the fisherman will ever have.

Quote
The real question is the fish population declining in Maxi?  If not, what is the issue?

Yes, that is the story. Fish needs weeds for protection of their young. And since there is very little weeds, the population decreases thru time.


It is sad that the native weeds, on Max. has been depleted. In my opinion, a few Snobs who only want to run their High Dollar boats in a lake free of weeds are to blame. As I stated, I do have solid verbal facts on how the Lake Association and town of Culver have stopped the addition of a Parking lot so more out-of-town fisherman could be on the lake. And they also have pushed out bait shop owners, I talked to a shop owner yrs back who stated that. Those are facts I personally can vouch for.

As for me, I don't have any solid evidence or proof. But I personally feel thru the killing of weed with permits, or illegal treating weeds by lake owner. That is how the native weeds have been destroyed. You have to ask yourself, can you proof that is incorrect?



Title: Re: Manitou.
Post by: high_flags on Mar 04, 2008, 10:13 PM
Great discussion,  I think we all agree that the Lakes have changed . I hope the weed beds return someday. My option is that the fishing was much better with the weeds. How do we get the plants back???  re plant them???
Title: Re: Manitou.
Post by: musky8it on Mar 05, 2008, 01:32 AM
Great discussion,  I think we all agree that the Lakes have changed . I hope the weed beds return someday. My option is that the fishing was much better with the weeds. How do we get the plants back???  re plant them???

Thats is a good question. But in my opinion, in my lifetime, my grandkids lifetime, and their kid's lifetime. You will never see the vegataion we had 20 or 30 yrs ago. Why? We all know the answer to that.
Title: Re: Manitou.
Post by: musky8it on Mar 05, 2008, 01:37 AM
Back to Manitou. I like how they have a large section blocked off against motor travel(gas & electric). And I am hopeful that lake is returned to its natural state. It would be nice if Max. had the same thing in a few key areas. But again, we all know that will never happen and we all know why. Just 2 words explains why, Lake Association.
Title: Re: Manitou.
Post by: abishop on Mar 05, 2008, 03:06 AM
mon ey
Title: Re: Lake Manitou.Near Rochester.Fulton County.
Post by: wax_worm on Mar 05, 2008, 11:45 AM

So you are wanting me to believe that native cabbage weed beds just simply disappeared on their own since the 80's. I am sorry but I can not believe that. I truly believe that legal or illegal chemical treatments have killed off most or all of the native weeds. That is my opinion, and I feel its the opinion of many others.

You may be right here about the illegal treatments.  Someone may have illegally killed the weeds.  What did they use?  According to Muskyman who works with weed killers, there are no weed killers that target cabbage.  If it did happen, it is sad, but to blame the DNR, politicians and lake association for the illegal act of one or two people is ridiculous.  Unless someone catches them, nothing can and will be done.  What you are saying is like holding you accountable for someone in your neighborhood running a meth lab in his basement!!!

Quote
Its to late to bring them back now. I very well doubt you will get the DNR to transplant the cabbage weeds back into Max.. Even if the DNR wanted to transplant Cabbage back into Max.. They would need to OK from the lake association to do that and they are not going to give the OK. Why do I say they would need the Lake Association approval. Because the Lake Association owns/controls/ or influences the politicians/Dnr who oversee that lake. No matter if you want to agree with that or not, I and many others feel the same way.
 

I don't know how they would get the weeds back in there, but if the DNR deems it necessary to put weeds in, the lake association is not going to stop it.  The state owns that lake, not the lake association.  You sure have one h*ll of a conspiracy theory that the lake property owners, the DNR, and all politicians are corrupt and do whatever someone with money wants to keep weeds out of lake Maxi!!

Quote
Say for example you got together 1,000 fisherman to go up against Max's lake association. Do you really think they would win out? I don't think so. Nowdays to win in politics you need money and influence. And no doubt the Max. Lake Association has way more than the fisherman will ever have.

If you can get 1000 fishermen, back them with some FACTUAL information, attend a meeting and not be antagonistic toward the lake association, you would have a great chance of getting your points presented and listened too.  Once again, you are making this a battle between the fishermen vs. the lake association and that is why you are getting no where.  The lake association and the fishermen should be working together to make Maxi a better lake.  There is a compromise in there somewhere, but you will never get there because you are alienating the lake association instead of working with them.  Weeds in 8 fow and greater should not impact boating, skiing or any other recreational boat activity.  Weeds choking the shallows, especially invasive, need some control.

I suggest you locate the Indiana BASS federation nation chapters and the FLW TBF chapters that fish Maxi and contact the president of each chapter to enlist their help.  They can leverage the State BASS and FLW chapters if they need to and go all the way to the national headquarters if need be.  BASS has has an instrumental part in a lot of legislation dealing with our waterways around the country.  You will have to support your theory with some proof before they will get on board with you, but if you can enlist their support you will be better off than without it.  Here are the websites for the IN BASS and FLW TBF chapters.

Indiana TBF contact - Doug Bradley - http://tbf.flwoutdoors.com/email.cfm?id=57 (http://tbf.flwoutdoors.com/email.cfm?id=57) 
Indiana TBF website - http://www.indianabass.com/index.html (http://www.indianabass.com/index.html)

BASS federation nation website - http://www.ibfn.us/index.html (http://www.ibfn.us/index.html)


Quote
Yes, that is the story. Fish needs weeds for protection of their young. And since there is very little weeds, the population decreases thru time.

True, fish fry need cover.  That does not have to be cabbage weeds.  They can take cover in milfoil, docks, under boats, near rocks, etc.  Part of the FACTS you need to provide to the DNR is that the fish population is suffering due to lack of cover.  If the fish surveys do not support your theory, then they must be doing OK.  Check the surveys (if any) from the 80's (when you say there were weeds) through the present and see if there are negative trends in several species.  These surveys are available from the biologist in charge of lake maxi.

Quote
It is sad that the native weeds, on Max. has been depleted. In my opinion, a few Snobs who only want to run their High Dollar boats in a lake free of weeds are to blame. As I stated, I do have solid verbal facts on how the Lake Association and town of Culver have stopped the addition of a Parking lot so more out-of-town fisherman could be on the lake. And they also have pushed out bait shop owners, I talked to a shop owner yrs back who stated that. Those are facts I personally can vouch for.

What you describe is hearsay, not facts.  Facts are backed by visual evidence and documentation.  Unless you have that, you have an opinion and the opinion of others and not facts.  Not denying they ran the bait store out of town, but hearsay is not enough to convince me.  The DNR messed up the parking at Maxi.  They should have purchased parking land long before maxi became the high dollar property it is today.  Now it is too late and someone will always be wiling to pay more than the DNR will for any land that becomes available.  But that is how real estate works.  Highest bidder gets the land.  Only a donation to the DNR will allow better parking at Maxi.  It is funny you say the town and lake assoc. hate fishermen.  When I fished BASS years ago we had our Top 8 tournament for the northern region there.  The town of Culver, the marina at Maxi and everyone I encountered were happy we were there.  They even created bags of coupons for use in Culver and goodies for every fishermen and there were over 100 boats there with 2 people in each boat.  The marina opened its doors late Friday and early in the mornings for our meeting place, allowed us to park on the hill behind it and had coffee and doughnuts for everyone.  Lots of residents even showed up for the weigh in and were very nice.  I have been there several other times fishing and never had an issue even when pitching and casting around their docks and boats.  I even spent 15 minutes showing a resident what I was using, how to rig it and where to cast it after he saw me catch 3 nice bass right in front of his place.  Obviously our experiences on Maxi are drastically different.  Wonder why that is?

Quote
As for me, I don't have any solid evidence or proof. But I personally feel thru the killing of weed with permits, or illegal treating weeds by lake owner. That is how the native weeds have been destroyed. You have to ask yourself, can you proof that is incorrect?

I don't have evidence that someone did not kill the cabbage weeds, just as you don't have evidence that they did.  Lakes are very complicated Eco systems and there are likely 100's of reasons the lake has changed since the 70's.  I defer to those educated in lake management and biologists for the reasons.  My point is, if you want to stop the weed killing or weed control, you have to get organized and have evidence that is damaging the lake by reducing the fish populations etc.  Without that, you will get no where, cause those you are opposing have the permits and evidence they are improving and not harming the lake from their standpoint. 

Good luck if you take this challenge on.
Title: Re: Manitou.
Post by: abishop on Mar 05, 2008, 06:45 PM
I will be at the next lake associations meeting if someone posts when and where it will be.
Title: Re: Manitou.
Post by: AlgaeKilla on Mar 05, 2008, 07:21 PM
FYI good event to learn some facts;
Indiana Lakes Management Society, Inc.
March 28th & 29th, 2008:  Annual ILMS Conference. Ramada Inn, Warsaw, IN.
Title: Re: Manitou.
Post by: musky8it on Mar 07, 2008, 03:35 AM
I don't have evidence that someone did not kill the cabbage weeds, just as you don't have evidence that they did.  Lakes are very complicated Eco systems and there are likely 100's of reasons the lake has changed since the 70's

Not to many yrs back, I think it might have been 2002. I was fishing on Max in the summer. I ran ac cross a weed patch approx 20ft dia. just straight out from the landing about 150- yds in shallow water. I marked it on my GPS, the weeds looked like wilted lettuce then. A month later I went back and they had all died out. I contacted the DNR and ask them if any permits where giving out for this area and they said no. The weeds where gone, so I had no proof they had even been there. So I knew better than to file a complaint.

So I know for a fact someone is killing weeds at Max. illegally. I imagine at night so no one can see them. I suppose they find them in the day, mark them on a GPS. Then at night dump chemicals on the area or what ever to kill the weeds.

I still have the GPS coordinates on my GPS, I have no idea if the weeds came back up. I know they was not there this winter when I went to that GPS spot.

I see no way to stop this at all!!!! I am sorry if all my post on this thread are upsetting. But the things I have seen done to our Ind. lakes illegally is upsetting to me. Sorry if I vented on the subject. If you don't believe it, talk to the bait shop owner on HWY10 west of Bass lake. He'll tell you about Bass lake weed kills. They go fishing in the summer and the weeds are there on the flats, then they wilt and die.

I have been so discussed with Max, I have not fished it for a few yrs. This winter has been the first I have fished it in 3-4 yrs. And from what I have seen with my underwater camera, the weeds are not there. Oh ya, you have the scraggly grass on the floor, that's about it.
Title: Re: Manitou.
Post by: musky8it on Mar 07, 2008, 03:46 AM
My brother talked to the land owner(face to face), and the owner told my brother that the Lake association/town block his efforts to make his field a parking lot. I am sorry, but you can defend the Lake Association all you want, maybe you are one of them I have no idea. If you are, then you are lucky to be on one of Indiana's great lakes.

It is not fiction, its a fact that the lake association do their best to restrict the flow of non residents on Max. and weed growth. I am going to do my best to stop discussing or arguing this subject anymore, since you always take the lake Associations side on this fisherman's site. I have no hard feellings and I am sorry if I upset you. But you can ask any fisherman who fishes Max., and I bet 90% will feel like I do that someone has killed off the native weeds. And it sure hasn't been the fishermen.
Title: Re: Manitou.
Post by: musky8it on Mar 07, 2008, 03:55 AM
mon ey

That is what its all about bishop. Whether people want to admit it or not. Money talks to the HIGH end DNR officials and politicians( I am not talking about the local DNR officers either, I think they are with us). And if any lake association has enough money, they will get what they want period! And anyone who believes differant is living in a fairytale land. I know I said I was done, but I didn't see this post and had to reply to it.
Title: Re: Manitou.
Post by: wax_worm on Mar 07, 2008, 12:05 PM
My brother talked to the land owner(face to face), and the owner told my brother that the Lake association/town block his efforts to make his field a parking lot. I am sorry, but you can defend the Lake Association all you want, maybe you are one of them I have no idea. If you are, then you are lucky to be on one of Indiana's great lakes.

It is not fiction, its a fact that the lake association do their best to restrict the flow of non residents on Max. and weed growth. I am going to do my best to stop discussing or arguing this subject anymore, since you always take the lake Associations side on this fisherman's site. I have no hard feellings and I am sorry if I upset you. But you can ask any fisherman who fishes Max., and I bet 90% will feel like I do that someone has killed off the native weeds. And it sure hasn't been the fishermen.

I live 60 miles from Max, so I am not a lake propery owner on Max.  I am on your side on this, believe it or not.  Someone or something has killed the native weeds.  I don't know what killed them, and you are adament that people did it illegally.  All I am trying to say is without proof, you have no chance of getting anywhere.  And if you do get proof, try to enlist the help of BASS and other fishing organizations to help you make and back your point.

As for the land owner wanting to use his land for parking and being stopped by the town from doing so, what are their legal reasons for stopping it? It is his property, so they must have some legal reason to prevent him from doing it.  Likely his property is not zoned to be used as parking and that is why they are able to stop it.  If he wants to use his land for parking he should sell it the DNR and allow them to fight the town the culver to get it rezoned for parking.  The DNR dropped the ball years ago, by not buying land for parking when it was cheap and before Max became a high dollar area.  As with alot of things, it is hard to fix the mess years after it was created.

By the way, you did not upset me.  I am just providing a different perspective and trying to help you be successful if you decide to take them on again.  Good luck.
Title: Re: Manitou.
Post by: AlgaeKilla on Mar 07, 2008, 06:25 PM
Okay, here are some facts for you. Some species of aquatic vegetation die during the summer months. That's there life cycle. They begin growing in  late fall or early spring and when the water temps reach 80 degrees they die. Curlyleaf pond weed is one of them. It can form expansive bed in up to 18" of water if clarity is adequate.
(http://i158.photobucket.com/albums/t88/AlgaeKilla/curly.jpg)
Some guys refer to this "weed" as cabbage. It is however not cabbage nor is it native. It is an invasive species that can out compete true cabbage. See my earlier post for the name of true cabbage. This plant and others are common in Indiana and do in fact die on their own during summer months.
This coupled with the fact that herbicides do not work at night lead me to believe you are indeed wrong about illegal "weed kills". In order for a herbicide to be taken up by the plant the plant must be photosynthesising. This only occurs when sunlight is present. Contact killers as they are called in the industry either don't stay in the water column long enough or are diluted down so much be morning that the are not effective at even wounding the target plant.
My third point to disprove your accusations is as follows. Do you really think those rich a$$ people that live on Maxi who probably don't even mow their own yard would go to dirty farm store and purchase hundreds of dollars of herbicide, put said herbicide in there fancy a$$ boat and apply it to a weed bed. He!! no if they want the weeds in front of their fancy house gone they pick up a phone book and call a professional. There are at least a few guys in the area that I personally know that make a living spraying shorelines on our public lakes. These weed treatments are exempt from the permit mandates because they are done from shore to 25' out. These licensed professionals are indeed fisherman and would not do anything to negatively impact the fishery. Plus they all know if they did they would lose their license and therefore their livelihood.
You throw the word "fact" around quite loosely, but the fact of the matter is if you want to make a difference you need to educate yourself about what you are talking about. Did you look into any of the information Dr. White or I have shared with you. I'm not taking the side of the rich I'm only trying to help you understand (like Waxworm) that your "personal facts" and  bad attitude are a poor representation of your fellow fisherman. Me included.
Title: Re: Manitou.
Post by: coondog59 on Mar 07, 2008, 07:33 PM
This happens to be a very infomative, and stimulating discussion,  Muskyman you sound very knowledgable, as you should be, being this is your chosen livelyhood. I not an expert ,or even remotely qaulified to refute any statements that have been presented here, one way or another. But it struck me as a little fishy,(pardon the pun), that you would post a very alarming picture of a weed infested lake in Florida, when in fact we have a much different, growing cycle, climate, and nutrient base, here in northern Indiana. Not knowing the excact conditions in which these invasive weeds need to grow and proliferate, leaves me at a  disadvantage.Surely you might understand where some skepticism may creep into my mind. I know Maxi. should have plenty of enough depth, to allow healthy weedgrowth without interfering with recreational activities, but Bass on the other hand, does not enjoy this kind of water depth in such large volume.I myself have witnessed huge declines in plant growth over just the last 5 years, and with that declining fish catches. Maybe I need to relearn how to catch these fish through the ice, but it was much simpler fishing the weedbeds. How do you reach a workable compromise on a shallow lake, used heavily for recreation?
Thankyou, Coondog
Title: Re: Manitou.
Post by: AlgaeKilla on Mar 07, 2008, 08:47 PM
The picture I posted was of hydrilla in a lake. Be it Florida, Pennsylvania, or here it can grow vertically and horizontally up to 5 feet a day in 80 degree water. It is said to be the "ultimate water weed" because it can propagate through fragmentation, seeds, roots, tubers, and turions. It can and will form a monoculture. Meaning... it out competes every other aquatic plant. This is what was discovered in Lake Manitou in September of '06. The growing season is indeed different here than in Florida, but the tubers and turions can "winter over". Also the nutrient loading here is similar to that of Florida. As a matter of fact we often have more nitrogen and phosphorus than they do in the south.
As far as a compromise, you need to realize that although some funding for weed treatments does come from lake property owners this does not dictate what the state will grant a permit for. Much (some in the know say too much) research is conducted on lake seeking a permit and the majority of large scale lake treatment permits are granted in order to eradicate invasives and reclaim native weed populations to the best of the ability of those involved.
Yes, catch rates do decline when invasive weeds decline because fisherman are creatures of habit. If they were here last year they should be here this year. The fact of the matter is we need to drill more hole and find the fish. If you think about it, in the last five years the ice season has been anything but consistant. The number one variable in catchin' fish in weather. I'm not talking about global warming because that's a whole other can of warms. I'm simply saying that in the last 5 years the winter weather has been different than I remember it in the 80's and 90's.
Nutrient loading has also changed in the last decade. Most of the lake houses in northern Indiana used dump sewage directly in to the lake. Thankfully that has changed. They are still spending a ton of money trying to clean up the watersheds and sewage systems on public and private lakes. This is not man trying to stop the progress of nature, but rather trying to limit the damage they have already done.