|
|
| Post Number: 41
|
MADDOG 
Group: Moderator
Posts: 7821
Joined: Aug. 2003
|
 |
Posted on: May 28 2011,1:37 pm |
|
   |
Dredging may solve a portion of the trade off problems. I haven't looked at the dredging plan as to what extent the plan is. If the final result is deep enough channels dug so when it "levels" out, the large part of the lake has enough depth, boating would be a lesser detriment to the bottom. Strategically placed islands from the byproduct of the dredging could also result in less wide open areas where these speed demons throttle up. Reduced speeds could be enforced in other parts of the lake. Regardless, there will have to be compromises made or it will all be for naught.
More depth also means the need for less aeration to sustain a fish population. Less open water, less geese. It's the lack of water volume combined with winter weather factors that create the need for the aeration. Deep snow cover reduces plant growth during winter months. Less growth means less oxygen in the water.
Dredging, along with conservation measures, will probably not solve all the problems, but it will be a major step in the right direction.
--------------
Actually my wife is especially happy when my google check arrives each month. Thanks to douchbags like you, I get paid just for getting you worked up. -Liberal
|
 |
|
|
| Post Number: 42
|
|
|
| Post Number: 43
|
Liberal
Group: Moderator
Posts: 11451
Joined: Aug. 2003
|
|
Posted on: May 29 2011,9:55 am |
|
 |
QUOTE
For at least the 50 years I can recall, farmers blamed the city dwellers, and vice versa. Despite all of the studies, it seems that every one of them studiously avoided drawing a conclusion as to the source of the problem. As long as there is a controversy, people will always look for "more studies" (read that as "Money") for the problem.
That's just not true, but I'm sure you know that considering in 2005 the water leaving Albert Lea lake was 5 times cleaner than the water going into the top of the lakes before it gets into the city. So either the water is bringing in silt and nutrients from farmland, or Albert Lea is somehow filtering the water after they muck it up.
(Liberal @ Dec. 09 2005,1:54 pm)
QUOTE
It's funny you didn't remember me gloating about being right, and you being wrong.
--------------
The people are masters of both Congress and courts, not to overthrow the Constitution, but to overthrow the men who pervert it!
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 44
|
RET
Group: Members
Posts: 262
Joined: Apr. 2004
|
|
Posted on: May 29 2011,11:50 am |
|
|
You know the City owned the dredger that used to sit by Edgewater back in the 60's. Why did they sell it? I went online yesterday and found that a dredge with a 40' capability that is 1 year old could be purchased for 1.8 million. That is a hell of alot cheaper than the 15 million the watershed board wants to spend. In Iowa there is a lake that the local coop owns that cost them $.45 per cubic yard to dredge. Seems simple to me, purchase the dredge and operate it 7-8 months each year. They will need to purchase some land to set up holding areas for the sludge also but I am sure it would be a lot cheaper than what they are proposing. In the end they will have a dredge that they own and can continue to use on area lakes.
--------------
[B]
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 45
|
jimhanson
Group: Moderator
Posts: 8491
Joined: Aug. 2003
|
|
Posted on: May 29 2011,3:27 pm |
|
|
Libbie--I don't know what your point is. Are you disputing the findings published in the study, showing the water to be cleaner going in than it was going out? 
Do you not trust government?  
--------------
"If you want to anger a Conservative, tell him a lie. If you want to anger a LIBERAL, tell him the TRUTH!"
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 46
|
Liberal
Group: Moderator
Posts: 11451
Joined: Aug. 2003
|
|
Posted on: May 29 2011,7:25 pm |
|
|
Once again I'm disputing what you're claiming your link says. You claimed the readings were for the OUTLET (caps yours) of Albert Lea lake, but when I follow your link it's a bad link. I could tell by the link that you were trying to pull a fast one by using 2008 report, and on top of that the readings were not taken at the OUTLET of Albert Lea lake like you claimed, they were taken in Glenville like the chart says.
If you look at the 2009 report it says that Albert Lea lake was considerably cleaner than Fountain, and in the 2010 report the lakes are at parity, but that's mostly because Albert Lea lake saw a decrease in clarity of 11 in.
Why is it your links rarely say what you claim they do?
It's funny you want to believe a government report now, but in 2005 when the report showed that Albert Lea Lake was much clearer, you acted like they were lying.
It's nice to see you still have that conservative double standard.
--------------
The people are masters of both Congress and courts, not to overthrow the Constitution, but to overthrow the men who pervert it!
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 47
|
|
|
| Post Number: 48
|
|
|
| Post Number: 49
|
|
|
| Post Number: 50
|
|
|
|
|
|
...ned 
