With our last water test, I reported 2.25 inches of water in the rain gauge. Since then we have had 5.2 inches in the last 3 days:
1.4 inches on the morning of July 5
3 inches on July 6
0.8 inches on July 7

When we recently restored the lake, the theory was 2 inches of rain on saturated ground in our watershed ( 4 square miles) would fill it up. In May we got approval to close the dam and refill the lake. We immediately moved into a drought….. In July, we got 2 inches of rain on parched ground and not much changed. Then in September, we got 4 inches of rain and the lake finally filled up.

Based on our 2003 experience, enough rain has fallen in the last three days, and under the proper conditions, to completely refill our lake. In reality, most of the new rainwater will probably go over the spillway, but we should get a good dilution of new oxygen-rich rainwater. The first part of that rain probably brought a lot of nasty runoff, but that should be thoroughly diluted now. The strategy for having two forebays on our tributaries is to slow-down the torrent of silt laden “erosion” water after heavy rain. Water that is not moving as fast cannot “hold onto” as much suspended matter, so the silt “falls out” of the stream and fills up the forebays. Forebays are easier and less disruptive to scoop out than the main lake.

We expect rain every day now for for the next 6, and we expect some rain on 7 of the next 10 days. If you live near the lake and you fertilize or treat twice a year, this is NOT the time to do that. If you get light regular treatments, that is probably OK. Since it is supposed to rain in the afternoon, it would be better to apply in the morning and water it fully in. We don’t want any chemicals of any sort: fertilizer, herbicide, or pesticide getting washed into the lake.

Seems like our goose population is very high this year. I counted (& shooed) 37 adult & almost adult sized geese at the beach this morning.

Second 2008 water samples were taken Friday, June 27 at about 9am.

Results are as follows:

#1 Dock 28 cfu
#2 Cedar Fork Creek 34 cfu
#3 Booker Creek 13 cfu

Caution level is individual reading above 400 cfu, or average above 200 cfu. TriTest (lab) will notify us if readings are above 100..

Lake water temp: 28.5-29 C, 83-84 F

SECCI Clarity: 28 inches

There was 2.25 inches in the Rain Gauge at 9am on Monday, June 30 At 5pm on June 30, water was running over the full width of our dam. Rain is good, it keeps the water moving in our system. However, the water testing protocol says we must not test immediately after a hard rain. Rain washes contamination off impervious surfaces in our watershed, into our tributaries.

We had our lowest fecal colifiorm reading within feet of a large gaggle of Geese. These readings are all very low, contaminated water has readings between several thousands and several ten-thousands.

Our test is required by the health department for “recreational use waters”, and it measures only one contaminator. This organism, E.coli is an “indicator” that is associated with other nasty stuff in human and animal waste. Some of the other substances and organisms are more hazardous to health, and also a lot harder to find and measure.

In the past, for about 8 years after Hurricane Fran, we had access to OWASA’s labs, and we tested more frequently and year round. They were improving a sewage pump on Kenmore and needed to test for spills that were pretty frequent. So we took the samples for them and in return got a lot of useful information about how long it takes for water to work its way through our watershed and through our lake.

When taking the tests, I noticed a fair amount of broken glass and loose unsecured canoes near the boatracks. I also saw glass bottles in the recycling bin. Loose canoes and glass containers are vandal bait, or at least it gives trespassers something bad to do. The rule is “no glass containers”. We had three cut foot incidents last week.

A former neigborhood resident stopped at the park today and talked to our gate guard about the plans that had been drawn before the 1983 restoration. There was to have been a glass-walled field house and tennis courts at a new park located that the intersection of N & S Lakeshore. This was next to the new building lots that were to be developed and sold to pay for the restoration. That all fell through because of floodplain building prohibition. Before that restoration there were larger Bass and Bluegill in the lake than we have seen since the introduction of the Grass Carp.

After that restoration, there was a beaver problem. The beavers created what is now a federally protected wetland at that end of our lake. This gives rise to an interesting “catch 22″ type problem:
The wetland is dependent on the lake, and the lake is man-made. If our dam is not properly maintained, the federal government will breach it. If they breach the dam, they will be guilty of endangering a “delineated” wetland. I’m pretty sure there is no way we can use that to our advantage, but it is curious….

Chuck Henage

Anne and I took the first 2008 water samples on Wednesday May 14 between 10 and 11. Evan helped us launch the canoe.

Preliminary results are as follows:

#1 Dock 50 cfu
#2 Cedar Fork Creek 46 cfu
#3 Booker Creek 30 cfu

Caution level is individual reading above 400 cfu, or average above 200 cfu. TriTest (lab) will notify us if readings are above 100..

Lake water temp: 20.5 C, 69 F

SECCI Clarity: 33 inches

This test was taken after several recent rains. Our bacteria count was higher than last year, but well below the threshod of concern, and expected after rainfall. Higher readings at the dock than at the tributaries indicates that we are getting good water flow, and/or we have a lot of geese. (True) The clarity was better than at any of 2007 tests, also an indication of good flow. The temperature is a little cooler than it was last year at this time, and that seems to have no direct bearing on bacteria.

Our water tests look at an indicator organism that does not grow or reproduce in the water, so the lake flow is either flushing, diluting, or concentrating it, while it is dying. This has been a health department standard for drinking and recreational water sources at least since WW2. In general, our lake tracks University Lake, although it has a much larger and mostly agricultural watershed, and we have a 4 square mile mostly residential watershed (mostly outside of Lake Forest Estates.)

Since it is spring and we have just gone through a bad drought, and may be facing another dry summer and fall, I will make my yearly reminder about lake-margin fertilizer: Anyone living on the shore of the lake, or next to the two upstream tributataries should only be using “lake margin” fertilizer for lawns and gardens. Appliy it sparingly and fully “water it in”. Do not fertilize right before a rain. That last instruction is counter-intuitive, but rain tends to “flush” everything downstream. You want to keep all your fertilizer where you apply it. Lake margin fertilizer has no phosphorous, and the application protocol is designed to keep any surplus from being flushed into the lake, where it would fertilize the annual cyclic algae bloom. That bloom happens on its own, but fertilizer makes it worse and keeps it going longer. Phosphorous (in the form of phosphates) is only lost when soil is removed (erosion) and only needed when new plants (seedlings, sod) are set. Lake margin fertilizer is available at Southern States and from most landscapers.

The lake water level is up, and our forebays are full. The Booker Creek forebay has an expanding isthmus of silt from the North Lakeshore Drive bridge. When we restored the lake in 2003 we took some steps to make it maintainable without having to undertake the disruptive “drain and dredge” process that has gone on at roughly 20 year intervals since the lake was first built by the C.C.C. in the 1930s. Creating the two forebays and putting in standpipes that allow us to lower the lake level for preventive maintenance were part of that plan. My understanding was this process had an expected 3-5 year cycle, and we are now at 5 years. In 2005, the town came and scooped out under the bridge as part of their road & bridge maintenance, so that may have bought us some time. The process of paying for the 2003 restoration was to have spawned an ongoing maintenance fund. If anyone reading this knows where we are in that cycle, please post a reply…

Chuck Henage