Latest News
Auto Repair
Blinds
Building/Remodeling
Floor Refinishing
Insulation
Landscaping
Landscaping
Lightning Rods
Moving
Overhead Doors
LAKEVILLE — The first returns are in on the sampling and monitoring of Lake Wononscopomuc water quality and the results are somewhat surprising, according to Don Mayland, the new Wononscopomuc Lake Keeper.
“The phosphorus readings and other survey samples indicate the lake is in an early mesotrophic state,� Mayland told the association’s spring meeting Saturday, May 30. That is somewhat better than what many people expected, given the development around the lake over the past 50 years.
There are three basic classifications of lake water quality: ranging from oligotrophic (pristine), mesotrophic (healthy with some problems) and eutrophic (almost dead).
“These are early samples and we have to keep looking,� Mayland said.“We are taking these readings throughout the year to set a baseline so we will be able to judge in future years whether the lake environment is improving or deteriorating.�
Mayland plans to take readings of dissolved oxygen, chlorophyll visibility, water temperature at various levels and look for evidence of zebra mussels, hydrilla and other invasive species.
One finding was a lower-than-expected oxygen level in the deep part of the lake. That could lead to a decrease in the size of some fish, he warned, noting that really big trout can’t survive in oxygen-deficient deep water.
“The oxygen depletion is nothing new,� Mayland said. “Years ago, about 20, there was an attempt to deal with it with a hypolimnetic withdrawal system. It didn’t prove successful, however. Fishermen have long known of the low oxygen levels in the deep water.�
Mayland has done scuba diving in both Wononscopomuc and Twin Lakes this spring.
“Visibility is much better in Twin Lakes, but that could be because there are zebra mussels,� he said. “The zebra mussels eat the plankton, but that is food the fish population needs.�
Mayland did not find any evidence of zebra mussels in Wononscopomuc. However, he said there are large balls of algae growing in the water. As the balls fill with gas they break apart and float toward shore. It is an annual phenomenon and he said the algae should dissipate quickly.
Another invasive weed has been found in nearby Massachusetts. It is called hydrilla.
Mayland warned lake users to watch out for this weed and report it to the association if they suspect they have seen it. Hydrilla can literally choke a lake.
“Hydrilla is so bad it would make Eurasian milfoil look like a pleasant neighbor,� he said.
As part of the program a new detailed watershed map is being prepared so the community can evaluate what problems may develop in the future. It will show how many lots can be subdivided, how much construction could be undertaken and how much property is under conservation or other legal restrictions.
The Wononscopomuc Lake Keeper program is an educational and community project for the town of Salisbury and The Hotchkiss School. Mayland (who is a retired Hotchkiss teacher) will work with students from Salisbury Central School and Hotchkiss on pond and stream studies.
He has developed a program for more advanced students in the Hotchkiss summer school’s environmental science program — and he hopes to involve students from Housatonic Valley Regional High School.
A major goal of the program is to develop a basic lake management plan in time for the Lake Association’s annual meeting in late October.
Related Stories
Get Local News Delivered To Your Inbox
Subscribe to receive stories reported for, by, and about our neighbors, on the issues affecting you.
By signing up you agree to our
privacy policy
.
Telecom Reg’s Best Kept On the Books
When Connecticut land-use commissions update their regulations, it seems like a no-brainer to jettison old telecommunications regulations adopted decades ago during a short-lived period when municipalities had authority to regulate second generation (2G) transmissions prior to the Connecticut Siting Council (CSC) being ordered by a state court in 2000 to regulate all cell tower infrastructure as “functionally equivalent” services.
It is far better to update those regs instead, especially for macro-towers given new technologies like small cells. Even though only ‘advisory’ to the CSC, the preferences of towns by law must be taken into consideration in CSC decision making. Detailed telecom regs – not just a general wish list -- are evidence that a town has put considerable thought into where they prefer such infrastructure be sited without prohibiting service that many – though not all – citizens want and that first responders rely on for public safety.
Such regs come in handy when egregious tower sites are proposed in sensitive areas, typically on private land. The regs are a town’s first line of defense, especially when cross referenced to plans of conservation and development, P&Z regulations, and wetlands setbacks. They identify how/where the town plans to intersect with the CSC process. They are also a roadmap for service providers regarding preferred sites and sometimes less neighborhood contention. In fact, to have no telecom regs can weaken a town’s rights to protect environmental, scenic, and historic assets, and serve up whole neighborhoods to unnecessary overlapping coverage and corporate overreach. Such regs are unique to every town and should not follow anyone else’s boiler plate, especially industry’s.
Connecticut is the only state that has a centralized siting entity for cell towers. The good news is that applicants must prove need for new tower sites in an evidentiary proceeding and any decisions have the weight of the state behind them. The bad news is that the CSC used to be far less industry-friendly and rote in their reviews, which now resemble a check list. There is an operative assumption at CSC that if an applicant wants a tower, they must need it, otherwise why spend significant money to run the approval gauntlet? This reflects a subtle shift over the years at CSC from sincere willingness to protect the environment toward minimal tweaking of bad applications with minor changes. The bottom line is that towns really cannot rely on the CSC to do all the work for them.
What CSC issues telecom providers is a “certificate of environmental compatibility” after an evidentiary proceeding (not unlike a court case) with intervenors, parties, expert witnesses, and the service provider’s technical pro’s sworn in and subject to cross examination. Service providers get to do the same with any opposition from intervenor/party participants – like towns and citizens -- and their experts. It’s an impressive process whose ultimate goal is the fine balancing between allowing adequate/reliable public services and protecting state ecology with minimal damage to scenic, historic, and recreational values. They unfortunately often fall short of their mandate – like approving cell towers with diesel generators over town aquifers -- evidenced by CSC only rejecting about five cell towers in the past 15-20 years.
The CSC was founded in 1972 and clarified its mission in the 1980’s to prevent the state from being carved up willy-nilly by gas pipelines, high tension corridors, and broadcast towers. With the sudden proliferation of cell towers beginning in late 1990’s, it became the most sued agency in Connecticut by both an arrogant upstart industry if applications were denied and by towns/citizens when bad sites were forced on them. CSC gradually formed a defensive posture that drives their decisions toward industry with deeper pockets and attorneys on retainer.
For citizens, nothing can wreck one’s day like the CSC. It behooves towns to protect what little toolkit they have, and understand the legal parameters of the CSC’s playing field. The CSC is not a “normal” government agency where municipal/citizen redress is based on logic and local support. Their process is largely immune to everything but specific kinds of evidence – like town regs with setbacks/fall zones, radio frequency transmission signal strengths, sensitive areas identified, and detailed wildlife inventory, among others.
There is a current cell tower fight involving two intervening towns -- Washington and Warren; both with good cell tower regs – over a tower site within 1200’ of a Montessori School, near Steep Rock’s nature preserves with comprehensive geology/wildlife databases that include endangered, threatened and special concern flora and fauna, on established federal/state migratory bird flyways, within throwing distance to a historic site capable of being listed on the Underground Railroad, and with an access road on a blind curve entering a state highway that will permanently damage wetlands, vernal pools, and core forests. There are well credentialed environmental experts, including Dr. Michael Klemens, former chair of Salisbury’s P&Z, as well as the former director of migratory bird management at the US Fish and Wildlife Service, and an RF engineer testifying to alternative approaches, plus three attorneys representing intervenors. It is the most professional challenge I have seen at CSC since Falls Village successfully mounted one that protected Robbins Swamps several years ago.
The hearing is ongoing, with uncertain results. To see what it takes today to stop an inappropriate tower siting, see Docket #543 under “Pending Matters” at https://portal.ct.gov/csc before removing local cell tower regs – the lowest hanging fruit that any town can possess in case it’s needed.
B, Blake Levitt is the Communications Director at The Berkshire-Litchfield Environmental Council. She writes about how technology affects biology.