Oneida Lake Association, Inc.

Conservationists and Environmental Advocates since 1945
It's your lake! Help us preserve it!

Home | About Oneida Lake | Hot Issues Take Action Now | Photo Gallery | Contact Us | Join Us
President's Message | Oneida Lake Area Accommodations
Oneida Lake in Central NY

 CURRENT HOT ISSUES

The Cormorant Problem

Invasion of the Water Chestnut

New proposal for the Canal
System

VHS What is it? What can we do?



Archived Articles
Oneida Lake's Vital Wetlands
Oneida Lake Lore
Birds of Oneida Lake -- Martin
Birds of Oneida Lake -- Loon
Birds of Oneida Lake -- Heron
The Lake Sturgeon
Cormorants, Clarity, Conundrum
Oneida Lake -- 1896
Oneida Lake -- 1897
Fish Stories? You bet!
Oneida Lake Quiz #1
Oneida Lake Quiz #2
Oneida Lake Pamplets
Oneida Lake's Precious Resource
New Fishing Access
Invasion of the Water Chestnut
Editorial on Boat Noise
The Cormorant Problem

Oneida Lake Association Position on Native and Invasive Aquatic Vegetation

Adopted May 2008

The OLA recognizes the value of aquatic plants to the health and wellbeing of Oneida Lake and its ecosystem. The lake as we know it could not exist without aquatic vegetation. However, the OLA also recognizes that aquatic plants can cause problems to lake users, residents, and the
lake itself. These problems can generally be categorized into two groups: those caused by exotic, invasive, and introduced plants; or those caused by over abundant native plants.

Examples of exotic, introduced, and invasive plants causing problems in Oneida Lake are water chestnut and frogbit. The OLA endorses the elimination and/or control of these plants as it may be possible by any legal means. The goal is the control or elimination of these plants and the problems associated with them.

With regard to native vegetation, the OLA goal for management is more moderate, as there is great value in our native plants. The OLA supports the control of native vegetation that has become a problem in the lake, as when it causes impenetrable windrows or mats of vegetation that impede recreation and navigation, whether offshore or near-shore. The OLA specifically endorses the ability of individuals or groups to harvest native vegetation by legal means in the public waters adjacent to their property. The OLA goal for native plants in Oneida Lake is to
encourage mitigation of the problems they cause through a program of legal harvest, removal and composting. Legal harvest, which includes obtaining necessary permits, can be accomplished by hand pulling, raking, shading, and the use of mechanical weed harvesters. Concerned individuals and groups are encouraged to work with their municipalities to explore composting and other sensible options for disposing of weed matter.


Oneida Lake Association Position on Phosphorous Levels in Oneida Lake

Adopted December 2005

The Oneida Lake Association (OLA) is a 3,000+ member lake-user organization that advocates for a healthy Oneida Lake ecosystem - including a vigorous sport fishery supported by adequate nutrients, beneficial habitat and wholesome environmental conditions.

Proper levels of phosphorous are vital to the fishery and the lake as a whole. Oneida Lake's recent total phosphorous levels (mean annual levels of 20-30 ppb during the 1990s) have proven beneficial to the health of the fishery and the lake. The weight of scientific evidence and past
experience regarding Oneida Lake and other watersheds demonstrates that lowering Oneida Lake's total phosphorus level could have serious negative consequences. Too little phosphorous equals too few fish.

OLA supports a minimum mean annual level no lower than 20 ppb of total phosphorus. The OLA also supports the establishment of a phosphorus budget for Oneida Lake; this action should be completed prior to any significant nutrient abatement to ensure that healthy nutrient levels
are maintained in Oneida Lake.

For more information on the importance of phosphorous, see page 19 of the Oneida Lake Watershed Advisory Council's 2003 "State of the Lake Report;" Edward Mills' and John Forney's article "P=Life: Phosphorous and the Oneida Lake Ecosystem," in the Spring/Summer 2002 Oneida Lake Bulletin; and Yurk, J. and J. Ney's study, "Phosphorous-Fish Community Biomass Relationships in Southern Appalachian Reservoirs: Can Lakes Be Too Clean for Fish?" in Lake and Reservoir Management, 1989.


The Coast Guard Authorization Act of 2007 (H.R. 2830) was passed today by the U.S. House of Representatives by a vote of 395 to 7 (26 NY Representatives voted "Aye", 3 cast no vote). The ball is now in the Senate's court to pass S.1892); the two bills would have to be reconciled in conference before being sent to President Bush.

Title V - Ballast Water Treatment Act of 2007

Section 503 -

1. Amends the Nonindigenous Aquatic Nuisance Prevention and Control Act of 1990 to replace provisions relating to preventing the introduction and spread of aquatic nuisance species in the Great Lakes through the exchange of ballast water with provisions relating to the introduction and spread of such species from ballast water and other ship-borne vectors. (The new provisions are not focused only on the Great Lakes.)

2. Prohibits the uptake or discharge of ballast water or sediment in waters subject to the jurisdiction of the United States except as specified in these provisions, subject to exceptions.
3. Requires vessel operators to conduct all ballast water management operations in accordance with an approved ballast water management plan that meets requirements prescribed by regulation. Requires maintenance of a ballast water record book.
4. Prohibits the discharge of ballast water in waters subject to U.S. jurisdiction except after conducting ballast water exchange, using a treatment technology meeting certain requirements, or using environmentally-sound alternative ballast water treatment technology. Allows exceptions, including for safety or stability. Allows waiver for a substantial business hardship. Sets forth exchange and treatment requirements.
5. Requires notice to vessel owners and operators of any area in waters subject to the U.S. jurisdiction in which vessels may not uptake ballast water due to known conditions.
6. Prohibits the removal or disposition of sediment from spaces designed to carry ballast water except in accordance with specified requirements, including that the removal or disposition be more than 200 nautical miles from land or into a reception facility meeting certain requirements.
7. Authorizes the Secretary to inspect vessels and allows states to administer their own inspection and enforcement programs.
8. Authorizes the Secretary to detain vessels and provides for civil penalties (including in rem liability), criminal penalties, and revocation of clearance.
9. Declares that provisions in this title relating to ballast water exchange requirements and treatment requirements supersede any inconsistent state or local law.
10. Requires a report to specified congressional committees on vessel-borne vectors of aquatic nuisance species and pathogens other than ballast water and sediment, including vessel hulls and equipment and from vessels equipped with ballast tanks that carry no ballast water.

Full text of the Bill can be found at:
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h110-2830

Charles R. O'Neill, Jr.
Sr. Extension Specialist
Cornell University/New York Sea Grant
Director, National Aquatic Nuisance Species Clearinghouse
Morgan II, SUNY College
Brockport, NY 14420
Voice: 585/395-2638
Fax: 585/395-2466
E-mail: cro4@cornell.edu
Web site: www.aquaticinvaders.org


ONEIDA LAKE'S CORMORANT PROBLEM:

OLA Directors Speak at Fish and Wildlife Hearings
by Jack Henke

The economic and ecological devastation caused by Oneida Lake's thriving cormorant colony was vividly discussed in testimony given by several of your OLA Directors at "scoping sessions" (public hearings) sponsored by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service. The sessions were held last May in Watertown and Syracuse.

OLA President William Schriever and Directors Tom Pierce, Kurt Snyder, Tony Buffa, and Jack Henke entered their comments and data into the Fish and Wildlife Service's official record. The Directors cited the following facts:

1. Cormorant predation is the major factor behind the drastic decline in Oneida's walleyed pike population. The birds' feeding has destroyed hundreds of thousands of walleyes in the 1990's.

2. Cormorants are also responsible for severe reductions in our lake's yellow perch population. The number of adult perch hovers around 700,000--a fraction of its former self. In some years, the birds have consumed more than 200,000 perch that had reached age 2--a size at which they have an excellent chance of surviving to adulthood. The perch death toll from cormorant predation throughout the 1990's extends well into the millions.

3. Poor fishing has resulted from reduced walleye and perch populations. Poor fishing translates into economic losses. Marinas, motels, restaurants, and bait/tackle stores in the lake region have experienced economic hardships. The OLA submitted a detailed economic analysis of 15 marinas on Oneida Lake. This report documented nearly $1,000,000 lost every year to the area's economy because anglers had left these marinas. The report stressed that this loss is but a fraction of the total amount lost by the region because of the bad fishing brought on by cormorants' predation. The OLA gave the Fish and Wildlife Service several copies of this report.

4. The cormorant colonies on Wantry and Long Islands have destroyed much of those isles' vegetation. Wantry, in particular, bears the appearance of a "cormorant guano wasteland", and anyone approaching the islands from their downwind side had best be prepared for some memorable odors.

5. The Oneida Lake Association is committed to the cause of eliminating cormorant predation on the lake. The Association strongly believes in working through the legal channels of the Fish and Wildlife Service and condemns any vigilante efforts at harassing or harvesting cormorants.

The United States Fish and Wildlife Service is in the process of developing a policy for managing the nation's expanding, destructive cormorant populations. The scoping sessions that the Oneida Lake Association participated in were two of many that have been held across the country. Other hearings have occurred in Hauppauge, Long Island, Burlington, Vermont, Portland, Oregon, and in places as far flung as Wisconsin, Texas, and Arkansas. The Fish and Wildlife Service used these sessions to gather data about cormorants. Participants could mail in their comments or testify at the hearings.

The "comment period", during which evidence could be submitted to the Fish and Wildlife Service, ended in June. The agency is now in the process of collecting and synthesizing all the data and will prepare a "summary document" of all the material by September 1.

The agency has hired two biologists from the University of Wisconsin to prepare a report containing relevant biological data about cormorant predation. These biologists have contacted the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation and its counterparts in other states. The biologists' findings will be combined with an analysis of the data received in the scoping sessions.

The Fish and Wildlife Service will then issue a preliminary Environmental Impact Statement (EIS, for short) by late fall. The EIS will recommend a method, or methods, to manage cormorant populations. There will be a 90 day "comment period", during which individuals and organizations can submit their thoughts about the EIS. Additional data, missed during the scoping sessions, can be added to the process here. The Oneida Lake Association will contribute input at this time, should it be displeased with the preliminary EIS.

After 90 days, the Fish and Wildlife Service will prepare a "final EIS". This report will constitute official agency policy concerning double crested cormorants. A management plan for the nation will be detailed here. The final EIS should be completed by the spring of 2001.

The Oneida Lake Association has voiced your concerns to the appropriate authorities in the cormorant issue. It will continue to do so--loudly and clearly.

This graph, produced by Cornell Field Station biologists, clearly shows their prediction for Oneida Lake's perch population if cormorants were eliminated (the "no cormorants line"). Perch numbers would soar from under 1,000,000 to 3,000,000 by 2010.

The other lines on the graph show the following:

"Status quo" means that nothing is done to change today's situation.

"No harvest" means that anglers stop catching yellow perch, but cormorants continue to feed.

"No top predators" translates to stopping both angler and cormorant predation.


Reprinted (with minor modifications) from The Oneida Lake Bulletin:  Summer, 2000.