Curlew Lake Weed Kill (MUST READ)

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Craig Bukowski on December 5, 2014 at 1:57pm

Great post and thanks for the info!  This could potentially be bad for all fishing.  How are they conducting the weed kill?  Is it by hand (pulling) or with chemicals?  Also, are they only targeting invasive species or all weeds?  Lots of questions and it seems rather selfish to allow the residents to potentially damage the fishery just because they don't want weeds in front of their cabins. Finally, is there a WDFW impact statement posted anywhere???

Thanks!

Permalink Reply by Ryan Higgins on December 5, 2014 at 2:26pm

I've sent an email off to the local bio and am asking the same questions.  If it is for noxious weeds they need a HPA at minimum.  If they remove via herbicide they need a HPA and permits from the DOE and DOA.  Being that land owners do not own the lake bed, I'm not sure how they can do this at all unless it is specifically for noxious weeds.

Permalink Reply by Mark Byrne on December 5, 2014 at 4:29pm

Ryan call Bruce Baker WDFW

Permalink Reply by Ryan Higgins on December 5, 2014 at 5:07pm

I emailed Bill Baker for region 1. Hes out till monday so I will be gathering more info then

Permalink Reply by Mark Wells on February 12, 2015 at 7:03pm

Have you heard back from Bill Baker yet? Seems like enough time has passed since your first post.

Permalink Reply by Ryan Higgins on February 13, 2015 at 8:03am

Yes I heard back from Bill Baker and Sandra Dotts with the WDFW.  After much discussion Sandra sent me this letter as their response to the CLA.

"

January 15, 2105

Curlew Lake Association

PO Box 54

Republic WA 99166

Re: Proposed aquatic weed control proposal of Curlew Lake and Curlew Creek

Dear CLA members,

Thank you for notifying the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) of

your proposal to treat the littoral zone of Curlew Lake for aquatic weeds.

We have received comments from a concerned citizen that this work my impact the

fishery, in particular tiger muskie, trout, and bass. Based on our understanding of the

proposed shoreline treatment (e.g., improved recreational access and aesthetics) and

permit conditions required by the Washington Department of Ecology under the Aquatic

Plant and Algae Management General Permit (General Permit), we do not believe that

treatment will have any significant influence on fish populations in Curlew Lake.

Concern has also been raised about impacts to red-necked grebes nesting near the

lake shoreline within the littoral zone. Red-necked grebe is a state monitor species.

Monitor species are managed by WDFW to prevent them from becoming endangered,

threatened, or sensitive. If the treatment window of July 15-October 31 is followed per

General Permit requirements, the treatment should not affect grebe reproduction.

We are concerned that the proposed treatment of the outlet (i.e., Curlew Creek) from

the lake to the rail trail crossing may pose significant impacts to several other

Washington priority habitats and species (PHS). The proposed treatment area is very

biologically diverse and native aquatic and emergent plants play an essential role in

supporting the ecology of the wetland area associated with the outlet, providing food

and habitat for fish and wildlife, stabilizing the shoreline, and contributing to nutrient

cycling. The outlet of Curlew Lake is a high priority waterfowl concentration area,

providing nesting and foraging habitat for a variety of species. The area also provides

important breeding and foraging habitat for marsh birds, songbirds, small mammals,

reptiles, and amphibians, such as the Columbia spotted frog, a state species of

concern. Removal of native aquatic and emergent vegetation in this area may result in

unintended reduction of ecological function.

From past conversations with CLA members, I understand that removal of vegetation

from the outlet is considered a solution to reducing the lake level. This is possible in

theory, but no comprehensive studies have been undertaken to assess the cause(s) of

lake level fluctuations. Removal of native vegetation at the outlet would be a

temporary solution at best that may have lasting impacts to nesting and foraging habitat

for wildlife.

We recommend that a more thorough investigation of lake level fluctuations be

conducted prior to undertaking herbicide treatment of the outlet. If it is determined that

vegetation is contributing to a high lake level, then a Vegetation Management Plan

(VMP) should be developed that considers the ecology of target species and

environmental characteristics of the site to determine appropriate control strategies.

Generally, WDFW recommends that herbicide application be restricted to those

circumstances where other weed removal or control techniques are not sufficient (as

evaluated in the VMP).

Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions or need assistance developing

a VMP.

Sincerely,

Sandy Dotts

Habitat Biologist

Cc: Irene Whipple, Ferry County Planning Department

Jon Jennings, Washington Dept. of Ecology

Lloyd O’Dell, Ferry Conservation District

Rochelle Osborne, Ferry County Weed Board

Mark Wachtel, WDFW Habitat Program Manager

Bill Baker, WDFW District Fish Biologist

Dana Base, WDFW District Wildlife Biologist"

I also got a public notice from the DOE that the CLA is starting their permit process for the work.  If you would like my whole email string with Bill send me a message with your email and I will forward it.  I got to talking to him about not only the weed removal, but the invasive Perch as well.