| Doc. # 2007-31
Issue/Agenda Committee
Cayuga Lake Watershed Network
May 29, 2007 Minutes
Shaw Law Office, Ithaca NY
Present:Brian Boerman, Roxy Johnston John Mawdsley,
Ruth Richardson, Sharon Anderson
Apologies: Ted Hullar, Keith Tidball
1. Oswego River Basin Commission proposal - what is our
view?
Cayuga Lake, along with the central and eastern Finger Lakes, is
part of the Oswego basin. Lakes operated by different organizations
including several hydroelectric companies. Canal Corp operates Cayuga
Lake and tries to coordinate the other organizations to follow guidelines
for lake levels and to minimize flooding.
The proposal was made by a Canal Corp task force in 2005 and Sen.
John DeFrancisco’s staff are aiming to write a bill to create
it. The proposal is for a Commission that would be a “traffic
cop” to get the operators to coordinate. They are considering
whether economic development, including agriculture and tourism
should be part of the remit of the Commission.
Also under consideration is which Agencies should be involved and
who should appoint the members.
In our discussion it was pointed out that previous Commissions of
this type extended over much larger areas and covered several States,
e.g. for the Susquehanna basin with much wider remit. It may be
that simpler solutions are available. If the proposal proceeds there
will be an opportunity for public comment and at this point the
Network should form a view and send it comments.
2. Progress on 2007 Projects
a) Modeling and monitoring: Doug Haith presented the modeling plans
and some early results to the Tompkins County WQ Committee recently.
It was similar to the presentation to the Board. Doug was not able
to make our meeting and the following was reported by Roxy who attended
the TCWQ meeting. The presentation prompted a lengthy discussion.
In this discussion it was clarified that the model:
· Does not take into account historical sources that are
more an issue where nitrogen is of concern.
· Does not capture sediment runoff from stream banks. In
a Sixmile Creek study it was shown that most of the sediment is
coming from this source. The omission of streambank erosion is likely
to make the estimates too low for sediment.
· If data are available on sediment and phosphorous loads
to test the model it can be corrected but Doug has not done this
in the past perhaps because good data have not been available .
Roxy’s monitoring results should provide good data later this
year.
· Does not explicitly model groundwater although the river
flow includes that from groundwater. What is the affect of not considering
groundwater, does it matter?
· Assumes that agricultural fields are not tiled. What is
the affect of this as many in the watershed are tiled. Will the
results from the model underestimate the nutrients contributed by
Ag?
All models are simplifications of the reality and have to omit
some aspects. The results are a better estimate of loadings onto
the lake than currently available. It is hoped that comparisons
between model results and the data from Roxy will be able to be
made to assess the accuracy of the results.
The full results will be presented to the Issues Committee later
this year.
b) Bioindicators – Susan Cushman of Hobart and William Smith
Colleges will be invited to speak with us concerning the use of
such indicators to the rivers of the watershed. John to arrange
a date.
c) Stormwater: rain garden training and installation scheduled
this summer in Village of Lansing. Training only at the Finger Lakes
Institute and Cayuga County Cooperative Exension.
d) Weeds and invasives: educational program schedule in July in
Union Springs. Have begun gathering materials for the weed booklet
that will also serve as a membership recruitment tool as the intention
is to target lake shore owners.
3. Any other business:
Lake Friendly Farm Awards: The deadline for nominations has been
extended because of work pressures at the county Soil Conservation
organizations. The Network would like to encourage non-dairy farms
to apply and particularly wineries and to further this aim Brian
will talk with Frontenac Winery, a Watershed Network member, if
Sharon makes the contact and explains the LFF program.
The AEM criteria for the award may not be well understood by the
wineries. Brian indicated that wineries can apply AEM as a management
tool, even if manure is not an issue. Information related to tree
fruits has been added. Re-writing the letter may be enough to encourage
other agricultural producers (non-dairy) to apply.
Peter Shuster, a former Board member, is a conscientious farmer
and should be able to receive the award – Sharon to check
if he knows about it and would like to apply.
Another area of farming is turf production that could be considered
agriculture. However, golf courses would be a better fit for a business
focused award.
Salmon Creek Forum: Sharon organized jointly with
the Cayuga County Water Quality Management Agency (WQMA) a forum
to discuss pollution concerns within the watershed. Some residents
consider the larger farms to be a source of pollution. There is
a lack of hard evidence. EPA did an environmental audit of Willet
Dairy within the last month.
Ruth pointed out that this sounded like a perfect situation to do
DNA-based microbial source tracking.
Sharon will work with the WQMA to discern how to follow up so that
the situation does not become more contentious. Employee assistance
and Community Dispute Resolution Centers may be able to help with
conflict resolution. Roxy pointed out that at a Lake Source Cooling
meeting they were successful breaking out into small, self-selected
discussion groups after the panel discussion and before open Q and
A.
4. Date of Next Meeting
Wednesday the 27th June 3.30pm at Shaw’s Offices.
Submitted by,
John Mawdsley
|
