# Bad lake news confirmed



## rod bender bob (May 19, 2004)

TOLEDO, Ohio (AP)  New research shows that a record amount of dissolved phosphorus has been washing into two of Lake Eries biggest tributaries in northern Ohio.

Heidelberg University researchers say the amounts measured in the Maumee (maw-MEE) River from April through June are the highest theyve been since they started monitoring the pollutants 33 years ago. Levels in the Sandusky River near Fremont are at their second highest rate in 35 years

The researchers say this all means that algae blooms in Lake Erie could become a bigger problem.

Farm fertilizers that contain phosphorous are the main source of the pollutant in the rivers.

Its likely that heavy rains in the spring and early summer contributed to the high amounts.


----------



## ErieAngler (Apr 15, 2006)

Just another thing to keep me up at night

Its like every other environmental issue man has created, the result is a afterthought of the process that caused it. The algea blooms have really been bad the last few years, I thought it had more to do with the increased clarity in the lake.


----------



## rod bender bob (May 19, 2004)

Nope it's phosphorus, same thing as in the 60s. different algae, same damn problems!


----------



## crittergitter (Jun 9, 2005)

Yep, gotta have more tile in those fields, no riparian corridor on the irrigation ditches, creeks, or rivers. It's a big mess.


----------



## eyecatchum2 (Mar 30, 2010)

If the algae blooms keep up, should give the Silver & Bighead Carp something to eat when they get here, since they will not do anything about them until its too late. Not a problem until it already exists, then try to fix it, never can be proactive, always the hard way.


----------



## Scum_Frog (Apr 3, 2009)

God this stuff damn near brings tears to my eyes....I cannot believe how bad things are going to be soon....bad enough already but the worse is yet to come...


----------



## FISHIN216 (Mar 18, 2009)

eyecatchum2 said:


> If the algae blooms keep up, should give the Silver & Bighead Carp something to eat when they get here, since they will not do anything about them until its too late. Not a problem until it already exists, then try to fix it, never can be proactive, always the hard way.


they have to research it first for at least 6 years....if not what would all these college yuppies with pointless chemistry degrees do?..what a friggin joke! should we still be having the same problems we had in the 60's???come on its ALL about the mighty dollar and it disgusts me


----------



## Papascott (Apr 22, 2004)

You have to remember that drama sells papers. Remember the dead zone and how many papers it sold. Sure there are problems but not everything needs the sky is falling mentality. 

Sure its the almighty dollar. LOL no thought it might be Almighty food in those fields. But who would car I'd beef prices go up or milk or bread etc etc. Then it would just be big business sticking it to the little man.


----------



## Buckeye Ron (Feb 3, 2005)

i hope they do something so she doesn't become like Grand Lake St. Mary, its a real mess.


----------



## sylvan 17 (May 22, 2010)

Ok,explain it all to us that do not know anything.


----------



## eyewannago (Dec 28, 2009)

Go to Northwest Reports and there is a 9 page thread on Grand Lake St Marys being shut down for toxins from algae Grand lake is in western central Ohio. Joe


----------



## boatnut (Nov 22, 2006)

Papascott said:


> You have to remember that drama sells papers. Remember the dead zone and how many papers it sold. Sure there are problems but not everything needs the sky is falling mentality.
> 
> Sure its the almighty dollar. LOL no thought it might be Almighty food in those fields. But who would car I'd beef prices go up or milk or bread etc etc. Then it would just be big business sticking it to the little man.


Is it food in the fields? or corn for ethanol? The US produces probably the cheapest food in the world....but at what price to the enviroment? I think there has to be some middle ground somewhere. just food for thought


----------



## Papascott (Apr 22, 2004)

What if it was barley and hops Mike?


----------



## Hook N Book (Apr 7, 2004)

Papascott said:


> What if it was barley and hops Mike?


That could get real ugly...I can visualize Mike with a 55 gallon drum going at it...and yes, I'd help him!


----------



## boatnut (Nov 22, 2006)

Papascott said:


> What if it was barley and hops Mike?


well i don't care what they grow.. maybe barley would be better then corn? half of it used for animal feed and a lot in making of alcohol, but not sure how much phosphorus /fertilizer it needs. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barley

hops on the other hand doesn't appear to need a lot of fertilizer... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hops

I don't think we're really comparing apples to apples though. 

Scott, I'm not a whacko , left wing enviromentalist nut, as you should know, but it just seems to me that the agricultural community is, at times, all about producing as much product as they can (yield) , using whatever means (fertilizer?) they can then trying to figure out ways to market it. Throw in government subsidies and a good marketing campaign and what have we got?

Cheap and plentiful food yet polluted streams/rivers/lakes. Again, I think there has to be some type of solution, with agronomists sitting down with others from wildlife, consumer orgs, end users etc and work out something that will benefit everyone in the long run.


----------



## CarpetBagger (Sep 21, 2009)

Just remember you can survive months without food....Only days without water...


----------



## Captain Kevin (Jun 24, 2006)

If remember correctly, the article said that the phosphorus levels were at the highest level in 33 years. By coincidence, that was when Lake Erie was having it's greatest survival of walleye fry. Remember the early 80's and walleye fishing??? If I remember my science class correctly, little fishy's eat that stuff until they are big enough to eat other fishy's, and other life forms. Maybe the biologists who specialize in what a fry needs to survive can chip in here with some valid points and facts to this issue, and set us arm chair quarterbacks at ease.


----------



## Lewzer (Apr 5, 2004)

> they have to research it first for at least 6 years....if not what would all these college yuppies with pointless chemistry degrees do?..


Make cosmetics so the wives don't look so ugly in the morning!


Just goes to show the farm runoff and other non-point source pollution problem was never solved.


----------



## Lundy (Apr 5, 2004)

Captain Kevin hit it right.

Higher nutrient load levels,maybe equal better recruitment of this years walleye hatch.

The sky is not falling


----------



## ErieGoldSportfishing (Feb 5, 2009)

crittergitter said:


> Yep, gotta have more tile in those fields, no riparian corridor on the irrigation ditches, creeks, or rivers. It's a big mess.



Agriculture continues to receive most of the blame for the increase in phosphorus runoff but what most people outside that industry don't realize is NW Ohio soils are so heavy in phosphorus, you can almost mine it. With that said, the majority of farming operations in this part of the world use no-till systems which greatly reduce wind and water erosion. There are more grassed buffer strips (thanks to the Lake Erie CREP...Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program) on stream and drainage (not irrigation) ditches than ever before. These are 30' to 120' wide buffers designed to filter soil particles that move in wind or water erosion events. Also, field tile allows rain to move through the soil column slowly so nutrients can attach to soil and organic particles and remain available until crops use them. Lack of drainage tile in NW Ohio means ponding and runoff. That sends high charges of nutrient and pesticides directly into the stream. Tile is good. One potential source of increased P into the watershed is glyphosate, which is the chemical name for Roundup. There has been a tremendous increase in the amount of glyphosate use with the introduction of the "Roundup Ready" genetics in beans and corn. They are used in both no-till and conventional till systems.

Somebody mentioned "its all about the almighty dollar" and they are partially right. In agriculture, nearly every field planted is soil tested and fertilizer is applied at a rate that will maximize a profitable crop. GPS, VERIS, variable rate applicators, yield mapping, etc. technology is in full use (this tech equipment makes chart plotters look like toys!) on better than half the farms in NW Ohio and could be available to all of them. Fertilizer applications change on the go and can now vary from one end of the field to the other to avoid putting it on spots where fertility is already sufficient. Fertilizer is expensive....farmers put on as little as they can to get a decent crop so they can see a profit at the end of the year. With the technology that's widely available today, some operations put half the fertilizers down they used to in the past. The almighty dollar actually PREVENTS excess fertility in farmed areas. 

So how is more P making it to Lake Erie? There is another potentially HUGE source of N-P-K (Nitrogen, phosphorus, Potassium) along with pesticides that has nothing to do with agriculture and we heard very little talk of or studies being done on and you only need to look out your window to see it. How many of you hire lawn services to spray and fertilize your lawn? How many more run up to Anderson's or Walmart and buy bags of weed and feed to apply it yourself? Its done on a huge scale and it has nothing to do with the almighty dollar. It has to do with who's lawn is greener. Think about it. If you live in a housing development in Lucas or Wood County, you probably have storm drains on the curb in front of your house with concrete or asphalt gutters leading to it. If the yards in your neighborhood receive their "early season" shot of weed and feed on a Monday in April, then it rains 4" over the next 2 days, by Thursday morning most of the chemicals that were applied to those lawns are in the Maumee Bay. Ever wonder how golf courses stay so green? Most golf courses have a creek or river running right through the middle of them. In contrast to crop production, the frequency and rates of fertilizer applications on lawns, parks, golf courses, etc. will blow your mind. The novice turf manager trying to have the greenest lawn on his street puts enough N-P-K on to burn up a corn crop.....and does so virtually unregulated. I'm not a big fan of more government in out daily lives but why do we regulate so many industries so tight and at the same time let untrained homeowners have unregulated access to unlimited amounts of what is widely known as the cause of Lake Erie's algae problems? 

I'd like to see a study done on the total tons of chemical fertilizers and pesticides that are applied in residential areas of the Western Lake Erie watershed. It might shock some people.


----------



## BFG (Mar 29, 2006)

My buddy told me a week ago that when he ran in from Sputnik to Sterling State Park he went around a bunch of huge mats of what appeared to be...

"little green marshmallows about 2" thick"...

Lovely!

As long as the wind keeps blowing it won't be a big problem. It'll continue to get distributed over the entire lake and diluted. BUT..if we get stretches of hot and calm...yep...she's gonna bloom.


----------



## rod bender bob (May 19, 2004)

Papascott said:


> You have to remember that drama sells papers. Remember the dead zone and how many papers it sold. Sure there are problems but not everything needs the sky is falling mentality.
> 
> Sure its the almighty dollar. LOL no thought it might be Almighty food in those fields. But who would car I'd beef prices go up or milk or bread etc etc. Then it would just be big business sticking it to the little man.


It's this kind of thinking that almost killed our lake in the 60. The dead zone is there and getting worse, did you think it went AWAY! now we have low oxygen areas near sandusky. What will i take to convince you -- not allowing anyone to report anything? 
The farm lobby will keep anything from happening for years, but hopefully things will happen soon enough !!!!
I agree boatnut.


----------



## ErieGoldSportfishing (Feb 5, 2009)

Do we know if the "dead zone" was ever absent? People didn't know what the top of Niagara Reef looked like 35 years ago unless they had a paper graph fish finder. Now there are few, if any boats on the lake that don't have a sonar. If there wasn't ongoing studies and/or the technology to measure O2 levels near the lake bed back in the 60s, 70s, 80s, and 90s, how can we declair the "dead zone" as something new?

We can't deny there's a problem with a huge phosphorus load in the WB, but blaming the "farm lobby" in the year 2010 is just plain crazy. Anyone associated with production agriculture over the past 30-50 plus years will tell you many practices that were considered "normal" decades ago were so environmentally irresponsible that they would be considered taboo or downright illegal by today's standards. The environmental movement in the 80s and 90s and technology changed the way food is produced in the U.S. As I mentioned before, nobody knows the concept of diminishing returns more than the American farmer. The cost of production is way too high to burn dollars applying unneeded fertilizers. 

There's obviously has to be a reason for the increase in P in the Maumee and Sandusky rivers, but I would be a shock to me if it was from increased soil and wind erosion on excessively fertile soils. It will be very interesting to follow this intruiging story.


----------



## Captain Kevin (Jun 24, 2006)

Let me reword this in a way some of you may understand more clearly. Just because it looks bad to us (the algae) does not mean it's bad for the food chain of the lake. Actually it enhances young of the year survival rates, i.e. IT"S A GOOD THING!!!! We may not like the smell, or the looks of it, but I'm willing to bet that a couple years from now we are going to reap the benefits of this abnormally wet spring/summer, and the run-off it created. In fact I remember a post here by one of the O.S.U. researchers that said the reason a good numbers of hatches fail is due to the lack of quality food available to fry because of a lack of run off, or something to that effect.


----------



## bocajemma (Dec 29, 2008)

Here is a decent read from the EPA regarding the dead zones and oxygen depletion. Of note, like captain Kevin thought, you will notice that 2003 was also one of the worst years in the past 30 years for oxygen depletion (dead zone). Makes you think how important the algae is to walleye fry. States that the amount of dead zone each summer (and it's only a summer thing so far) has been steadily decreasing for the past 30 years or so, but for about the past 10 or so have been steady to slightly increasing. Also remember that green algae is very important to the food chain. It's the Blue-green algae, also known as Cyanobacteria which are not part of the food chain and produces toxins. 



http://www.epa.gov/glindicators/water/oxygenb.html


----------



## rod bender bob (May 19, 2004)

Captain Kevin said:


> Let me reword this in a way some of you may understand more clearly. Just because it looks bad to us (the algae) does not mean it's bad for the food chain of the lake. Actually it enhances young of the year survival rates, i.e. IT"S A GOOD THING!!!! We may not like the smell, or the looks of it, but I'm willing to bet that a couple years from now we are going to reap the benefits of this abnormally wet spring/summer, and the run-off it created. In fact I remember a post here by one of the O.S.U. researchers that said the reason a good numbers of hatches fail is due to the lack of quality food available to fry because of a lack of run off, or something to that effect.


Capt you really need to get some information -- talk to some scientists -- the algae we are talking about produces TOXINS, it closes beaches, it is not good for the fish. What diff does it make if the dead zone was there 1,000 years ago -- it is growing and concerns a lot of scientists (these are people who actually study things). Go Buckeye I agree farming has made great strides, but to think they are not polluting Erie is to believe the farm lobby propaganda. And to believe the farm lobby doesn't swing a big stick, well, i give up.


----------



## bocajemma (Dec 29, 2008)

rod bender bob said:


> Capt you really need to get some information -- talk to some scientists -- the algae we are talking about produces TOXINS, it closes beaches, it is not good for the fish. What diff does it make if the dead zone was there 1,000 years ago -- it is growing and concerns a lot of scientists (these are people who actually study things). Go Buckeye I agree farming has made great strides, but to think they are not polluting Erie is to believe the farm lobby propaganda. And to believe the farm lobby doesn't swing a big stick, well, i give up.


Wow, fishing must be slow and nerves on edge. The dead zone does not grow. It happens every year and it goes away every year. Mostly due to the shallow nature of the central basin which has a very shallow bottom layer. Some years is bigger than others. And of course the amount of phosphorus plays a part in how much algae is produced as well as the weather, which accounts for how much algae dies and decomposes to cause the "dead zone". The type of algae is a completely different subject than the "dead zone". I run out of PC and I have never personally seen the blue-green algae, also known as Cyanobacteria on Lake Erie. A lot of green algae which is good and is a big part of the food chain. Only the blue-green algae produces toxins. The toxins have nothing to do with the "dead zone". Don't take my word for it though, please visit the link below from the EPA.

http://www.epa.gov/glindicators/water/oxygenb.html


----------



## boatnut (Nov 22, 2006)

GoBuckeyes,
I apologize if I seemed to be coming down hard on agribusiness. You are probably right in that lawn/golf course fertilizer contributes a great deal as well. What percentage each contributes would be nice to know.
I sometimes forget to blow in my breathalyzer before posting


----------



## rod bender bob (May 19, 2004)

bocajemma said:


> Here is a decent read from the EPA regarding the dead zones and oxygen depletion. Of note, like captain Kevin thought, you will notice that 2003 was also one of the worst years in the past 30 years for oxygen depletion (dead zone). Makes you think how important the algae is to walleye fry. States that the amount of dead zone each summer (and it's only a summer thing so far) has been steadily decreasing for the past 30 years or so, but for about the past 10 or so have been steady to slightly increasing. Also remember that green algae is very important to the food chain. It's the Blue-green algae, also known as Cyanobacteria which are not part of the food chain and produces toxins. http://www.epa.gov/glindicators/water/oxygenb.html



"The algae on Erie has the same cause as on Lake St. Marys (excessive phosphorus), but is mostly different types - Microcystis on Erie and a combo mostly of Planktothrix and Anabaena with some Microcystis thrown in at St. Marys. All release toxins when the cells die, so the problems are basically the same."

This from a scientist with Erie ties. It is blue-green algae and it DOES produce toxins and it is a problem! The dead zone is studied and studied and they recently reported oxygen-depleted areas in the Sandusky area. I'm sorry, but if you fish out of PC and have not seen the algae this year you haven't been out much this month or you aren't looking. If you don't think it's a problem, fine. I do, i remember fishing with the blue-green algae (different strain) in the 60s and I don't want to wait until it is a disaster. i know, the sky isn't falling, but i believe there are cracks in it! Check out the SeaGrant board and see if the people there are concerned.


----------



## bocajemma (Dec 29, 2008)

rod bender bob said:


> "The algae on Erie has the same cause as on Lake St. Marys (excessive phosphorus), but is mostly different types - Microcystis on Erie and a combo mostly of Planktothrix and Anabaena with some Microcystis thrown in at St. Marys. All release toxins when the cells die, so the problems are basically the same."
> 
> This from a scientist with Erie ties. It is blue-green algae and it DOES produce toxins and it is a problem! The dead zone is studied and studied and they recently reported oxygen-depleted areas in the Sandusky area. I'm sorry, but if you fish out of PC and have not seen the algae this year you haven't been out much this month or you aren't looking. If you don't think it's a problem, fine. I do, i remember fishing with the blue-green algae (different strain) in the 60s and I don't want to wait until it is a disaster. i know, the sky isn't falling, but i believe there are cracks in it! Check out the SeaGrant board and see if the people there are concerned.


Never said I didn't think it was a problem, I agree that it is a problem. But not all Mycrocystis is toxic. And I have seen the algae, but I just didn't assume that it was blue-green algae. I don't know how much I have seen is mycrocystis and how much is just algae. If it's all mycrocystis I stand corrected. I was just stating the fact that not all algae is bad, but typically too much of anything is bad. But the "dead zone" is not a result of toxins, it's a result of all the oxygen in a area of the lower water column of the central basin being used up to decompose dead algae. That's a result of just too much algae in general. Doesn't matter what type. Yes it's possible to have oxygen depletion in the western basin, but uncommon and typically short lived due to the western basin being so shallow and not having the bottom water column. The western basin readily churns up with the storms.


----------



## Trippin Dipsys (Jul 13, 2010)

To sum it up quickly for people who do not understand;
Phosphorus is a necessary thing in the aquatic community. Phosphorus=plankton=fry and bait fish food=a healthy lake. In the 60's Lake Erie's water quality was horrible due to too much P. The lake was considered dead and annoxic meaning little or no dissolved O2. All this algae will die and eventually use up oxygen in the decomposition process. This is what causes the dead zone at the bottom of the lake (my speculation). Tons of P in Western Basin produces tons of algae which current takes to the central basin and it will die and use up O2 on the bottom.. The dead zone is the canary and we all need to pay close attention to it. The late 70's and early 80's saw the best Walleye breeding in the lake and thats when it got the title of Walleye Capital. The P ammounts in the lake must have been perfect. We had bumper walleye crops every 3 years. Then came the mussels. All of a sudden water clarity was at records. I remember thinking that if walleye were light sensitive that this was not a good thing. I thought to myself that they should increase P loading as the mussels were filtering large amounts of plankton. P loading did increase however I dont think on purpose. Yes I believe home fert applications and roundup do play a part in this. Also the clean water act may have been something that looked good on paper but really didnt change too many variables. Still to this day the sewers in many communities overflow after an inch of rain. In my opinion, something has happened in Western Ohio and Ontario. Something has changed in farming practices that is causing a problem. If you dont think its a problem, go look at the photos of thousands of dead fish at GLSM. I honestly fear that a return to the 60's is coming if no immediate action is taken.


----------



## Hetfieldinn (May 17, 2004)

Fishing in Lake Erie brought 700 million dollars alone to Ohio's economy. Lake Erie produces more poundage of fish each year than the other Great Lakes combined. 

If these toxins or algae are a threat in the least bit, rest assured that people with far greater knowledge on the subject than any of us are working feverishly to figure out how to rectify the situation.


----------



## reo (May 22, 2004)

Imho, I think that lawn/golf course fertilizer is _*A*_ contibuting factor as well as aging septic systems. I have a question though....Isn't the Sandusky and Maumee drainages mostly farm lands? Another question.....Is the same spike in P happening in streams with mostly urban run off? Any EPA type data on this?


----------



## Trippin Dipsys (Jul 13, 2010)

Yes the maumee and sandusky drainage is mainly farmland. Also the Thames River in Ontario (Drains into St. Clair) is also farming. These 3 sources are contributing so much non-point source of P. Most streams and rivers have regular epa testing.


----------



## rod bender bob (May 19, 2004)

Hetfieldinn said:


> Fishing in Lake Erie brought 700 million dollars alone to Ohio's economy. Lake Erie produces more poundage of fish each year than the other Great Lakes combined.
> 
> If these toxins or algae are a threat in the least bit, rest assured that people with far greater knowledge on the subject than any of us are working feverishly to figure out how to rectify the situation.


I agree about the economic impact. However, the people who are working feverishly on a solution don't make the decisions to implement those solutions -- the same people who allowed the lake to get into a desperate situation in the 60s (our politicians) are still making the decisions -- that doesn't make me feel warm and fuzzy. They have been a threat for a long time Het, it's just getting worse.
Sorry, I was going to quit posting on this - now I will.


----------



## Toolman (Jun 8, 2004)

boatnut said:


> GoBuckeyes,
> I apologize if I seemed to be coming down hard on agribusiness. You are probably right in that lawn/golf course fertilizer contributes a great deal as well. What percentage each contributes would be nice to know.
> I sometimes forget to blow in my breathalyzer before posting


Mike-Thats one of the funniest things I've seen on here for awhile! 

I'm not a scientist but I think GoBuckeye makes some valid points about the ag industry and the more environmentally friendly practices as compared to years ago. I'm not sure about the no-till usage in NW Ohio, though. Seems like mostly traditional or at best minimum tillage. 

Is there a way to reduce phosphorous pollution...probably, but are people willing to give up green lawns and cheaper fuel and food to get it?

Tim


----------



## justin (Oct 26, 2005)

I am doing my PhD research on algae blooms in Lake Erie, so I hope my response will be helpful. I have talked to the Heidelberg researchers and have seen their data presentation numerous of times. Also, Heidelbergs National Center for Water Quality Research is a very prestigious laboratory, respected by scientists nationally. 

High dissolved phosphorus (P) entering a lake is a problem because dissolved P is 100% bioavailable for algae to use. P is the limiting nutrient for algae growth, add more P- get more algae. Add even more P get cyanobacteria blooms (aka Blue-green algae). Dissolved P loads into Lake Erie have been increasing since 1995. One hypothesis is simply that many of the fields are saturated with P. Some fields can be fertilized with non-P fertilizer for 30 years and crops would be just fine. Another is no till farming and fertilizers (has P) sprayed on the surface of the ground. Fertilized then tilling the land will mix the P down to deeper soils. Fertilized and no-till land leaves the P right at the surface. Soil tests have shown that the top 2 inches of no-till land have a very high P concentration compared to deeper soils. So, when rains come, a lot of that surface P gets dissolved and enters the rivers then lakes. I acknowledge Heidelberg for this data. Their Maumee River water sampler is in Waterville Ohio, upstream of any urban inputs from Toledo. The best-case scenario is to inject P into the soils of fields that need to be fertilized with P.

The run off of P is a very wasteful economically for farmers. During 2007, $66.5 million dollars of excess nutrients went down the Maumee River and into Lake Erie (again, I acknowledge Heidelberg for this data).

I presented my research to about 300 farmers in February at the Tri-State farming expo. Most of the farmers I talked to after my presentation felt like they wanted to help and cared about the impacts they have on the lake. It is important to say that farmers are not the only reason for the recent trend of increasing dissolved P and algae blooms. 

Lake Erie scientists have noticed that the lake has been worse for several years now. Its nice to see that so many people care about the algae woes of lakes.

I do not like to leave long-winded replies, but I can go through some of these posts and answer questions regarding Microcystis, the toxins, the dead zone, zebra mussels, water clarity in additional replies. 

Justin


----------



## Fish-Crazy (Dec 1, 2006)

justin said:


> I am doing my PhD research on algae blooms in Lake Erie, so I hope my response will be helpful. I have talked to the Heidelberg researchers and have seen their data presentation numerous of times. Also, Heidelbergs National Center for Water Quality Research is a very prestigious laboratory, respected by scientists nationally.
> 
> High dissolved phosphorus (P) entering a lake is a problem because dissolved P is 100% bioavailable for algae to use. P is the limiting nutrient for algae growth, add more P- get more algae. Add even more P get cyanobacteria blooms (aka Blue-green algae). Dissolved P loads into Lake Erie have been increasing since 1995. One hypothesis is simply that many of the fields are saturated with P. Some fields can be fertilized with non-P fertilizer for 30 years and crops would be just fine. Another is no till farming and fertilizers (has P) sprayed on the surface of the ground. Fertilized then tilling the land will mix the P down to deeper soils. Fertilized and no-till land leaves the P right at the surface. Soil tests have shown that the top 2 inches of no-till land have a very high P concentration compared to deeper soils. So, when rains come, a lot of that surface P gets dissolved and enters the rivers then lakes. I acknowledge Heidelberg for this data. Their Maumee River water sampler is in Waterville Ohio, upstream of any urban inputs from Toledo. The best-case scenario is to inject P into the soils of fields that need to be fertilized with P.
> 
> ...


Nice. Very, very nice!

TY


----------



## Captain Kevin (Jun 24, 2006)

justin said:


> I am doing my PhD research on algae blooms in Lake Erie, so I hope my response will be helpful. I have talked to the Heidelberg researchers and have seen their data presentation numerous of times. Also, Heidelbergs National Center for Water Quality Research is a very prestigious laboratory, respected by scientists nationally.
> 
> High dissolved phosphorus (P) entering a lake is a problem because dissolved P is 100% bioavailable for algae to use. P is the limiting nutrient for algae growth, add more P- get more algae. Add even more P get cyanobacteria blooms (aka Blue-green algae). Dissolved P loads into Lake Erie have been increasing since 1995. One hypothesis is simply that many of the fields are saturated with P. Some fields can be fertilized with non-P fertilizer for 30 years and crops would be just fine. Another is no till farming and fertilizers (has P) sprayed on the surface of the ground. Fertilized then tilling the land will mix the P down to deeper soils. Fertilized and no-till land leaves the P right at the surface. Soil tests have shown that the top 2 inches of no-till land have a very high P concentration compared to deeper soils. So, when rains come, a lot of that surface P gets dissolved and enters the rivers then lakes. I acknowledge Heidelberg for this data. Their Maumee River water sampler is in Waterville Ohio, upstream of any urban inputs from Toledo. The best-case scenario is to inject P into the soils of fields that need to be fertilized with P.
> 
> ...


Ok, that being said, what is the impact to the young of year fry, and is the sky really falling??


----------



## Hetfieldinn (May 17, 2004)

rod bender bob said:


> - the same people who allowed the lake to get into a desperate situation in the 60s (our politicians) are still making the decisions -- that doesn't make me feel warm and fuzzy. They have been a threat for a long time Het, it's just getting worse.
> Sorry, I was going to quit posting on this - now I will.



I would not compare the attitude and the decisions made about the lake fifty years ago to the decisions and attitude towards it today.

I don't want to give the impression that I know diddley about the topic of this thread, but I'm confident that there is a team of people that know a lot more about it than the 'team' we have put together in this thread. I'm confident that they have the lake's 'best interest' in mind, and are working hard on a solution if in fact this topic is a threat.


----------



## Papascott (Apr 22, 2004)

Hetfieldinn said:


> I would not compare the attitude and the decisions made about the lake fifty years ago to the decisions and attitude towards it today.
> 
> I don't want to give the impression that I know diddley about the topic of this thread, but I'm confident that there is a team of people that know a lot more about it than the 'team' we have put together in this thread. I'm confident that they have the lake's 'best interest' in mind, and are working hard on a solution if in fact this topic is a threat.


Brain washed by the lobby young Jedi. Follow the AP you must!


----------



## boatnut (Nov 22, 2006)

Justin,
thanks for your very educated response. My question to you, would be, How can "we" (as a group of organized/unorganized fisherman) help address the problem? Do we form a political action committee? Protest to the EPA? or ???? 

Another question, in your experience, of the total P going into the lake, what percentage is from non-farm sources? 

Also here is a link to an interesting article in Columbus Dispatch-

http://www.dispatch.com/live/conten...ctly-for-cutting-their-pollution.html?sid=101


----------



## yonderfishin (Apr 9, 2006)

Seems to me that the streams and rivers are utilized too heavily for drainage and runoff. Its an old fashioned system that needs to be updated even if it costs a lot to do it. There are too many people now days and too many farms not to be coming up with ways to be using more retention ponds , etc to capture runoff and localize pollution. Im no expert but Im sure more could be done to keep the stuff from entering the river systems in such large amounts , I know some of it will always find its way there but not all of it has to. The problem is that it costs money and ultimately its gotta be the source of the pollutants that will have to pay for it. I am also surprised at how many signs along the rivers and at lake Erie there are stating that raw sewage flows into it during heavy rains. Should we be doing that by the year 2010 ? Thats a nasty bunch of filth that dont need to be there. The old fashioned thinking that says just dump your trash in the river and let someone else worry about it. There is no excuse for it when we have had all this time to come up with a better way.


----------



## Gottagofishn (Nov 18, 2009)

In regards to trusting those in power to put out best interests first. My father said if you don't have anything nice to say don't say anything........."crickets".........


----------



## Rippin (Jan 21, 2007)

Here's a link to the Ohio Sea Grant, with Fred Snyder and Dave Kelch, of Ohio Sea Grant explaining things a little.

http://ohioseagrant.osu.edu/discuss/index.php?topic=1315.0


----------



## rod bender bob (May 19, 2004)

Het those experts are concerned. Read SeaGrant, check some of the blogs. Those in power have known that freighters have brought invasive species into the Great Lakes for years and they have caused big problems, but they haven't done much if anything to stop tis problem. They have known for years that the Asian carp were on their way, are you pleased with the efforts they've made to stop them? 
Here's a view from a different expert, an economists involved in agriculture. 
http://www.dispatch.com/live/conten...ctly-for-cutting-their-pollution.html?sid=101
i'm not beating on you Het just pointing out some things to consider.
Papascott: I have no response for you since you have no grasp of anything - the AP didn't do the study or make it up they just reported it -- you wouldn't know the difference.


----------



## BFG (Mar 29, 2006)

Hey Scott: Slapped on the wrists you have been.... 

Why anyone is surprised the algae is bad this year is beyond me. How quickly we forget the nearly two week period when the ENTIRE west end of the lake was chocolate milk. 

Every creek from Fort Wayne to Toledo is being gouged deeper and deeper in the name of "progress" and as a result the run-off has increased. There are places around where I grew up that are being farmed that I never would have thought could be farmed b/c they sit so low and are near creeks. Guess what...they dug out the creeks to 15' and tiled the fields...wa-la....dry fields to farm!

Even this summer the Maumee has yet to really clear up like it normally does. For whatever reason, the run-off IS worse this year. 

The way I see it, while the Fisheries guys may say the zebra and quagga mussels are a bad thing...I kinda feel like they are sort of our only line of defense against the Phosphorus right now...


----------



## ErieGoldSportfishing (Feb 5, 2009)

justin said:


> I am doing my PhD research on algae blooms in Lake Erie, so I hope my response will be helpful. I have talked to the Heidelberg researchers and have seen their data presentation numerous of times. Also, Heidelbergs National Center for Water Quality Research is a very prestigious laboratory, respected by scientists nationally.
> 
> High dissolved phosphorus (P) entering a lake is a problem because dissolved P is 100% bioavailable for algae to use. P is the limiting nutrient for algae growth, add more P- get more algae. Add even more P get cyanobacteria blooms (aka Blue-green algae). Dissolved P loads into Lake Erie have been increasing since 1995. One hypothesis is simply that many of the fields are saturated with P. Some fields can be fertilized with non-P fertilizer for 30 years and crops would be just fine. Another is no till farming and fertilizers (has P) sprayed on the surface of the ground. Fertilized then tilling the land will mix the P down to deeper soils. Fertilized and no-till land leaves the P right at the surface. Soil tests have shown that the top 2 inches of no-till land have a very high P concentration compared to deeper soils. So, when rains come, a lot of that surface P gets dissolved and enters the rivers then lakes. I acknowledge Heidelberg for this data. Their Maumee River water sampler is in Waterville Ohio, upstream of any urban inputs from Toledo. The best-case scenario is to inject P into the soils of fields that need to be fertilized with P.
> 
> ...


Justin thanks for the great information and good luck on your PhD. I happen to be one of those people in the ag industry that cares and I agree that the vast majority have the same attitude.

One thing I'd like to point out regarding foliar feeds which are sprayed on during the growth cycle. Virtually every wheat crop in our region has a foliar applied in March or April. However, what is applied is commonly referred to as "28" or, 28% liquid nitrogen, which is a urea based nitrate. There is no P in that formulation. There is a tiny handful of producers who are playing with foliar applications on other crops, but the economics of that hasn't been posititve so that practice is almost a non-issue. It's my opinion that the biggest contributor to the high P levels has yet to be identified. 

You made a comment that got me thinking about about the Maumee River watershed as a whole. When you said the Heidelberg monitoring site was at Waterville. In my first post, I referred to ag practices in NW Ohio but the watershed actually covers parts of 3 states. There are 11 counties in Ohio, 6 in Indiana and 2 in Michigan that contribute to the Maumee river. The Sandusky river has 8 Ohio counties in it's watershed.

I know locally, farming practices tend to change from county to county (although not as much as they used to) based on information and technical support from county FSA and SWCD offices. You used to be able to cross county lines in the fall and the majority of fields would change from residue left behind (stubble) to mostly chiseled or mold board plowed. Today you can look in Wood County and see a fair amount of buffer strips along ditches and streams but cross into Ottawa County and see very few. The reason is some counties promote CREP or other USDA programs that effect water quality while others largely ignore them or in extreme cases, deter enrollment. Same goes for SWCDs that promote and initiate pilots programs to trial conservation tillage and/or equipment. It all goes to the philosophy of elected boards or professionals in those offices. My point is the practices used in your area may not be common throughout the watershed.

One more fact I overlooked in my first post might be the most significant of the discussion. Rainfall totals in the Maumee watershed during April, May, and June were the highest in 30 plus years. More rain= more runoff.

This is a very interesting thread that is obviously near and dear to all of us.


----------



## AvianHunter (Jan 23, 2009)

Captain Kevin said:


> Let me reword this in a way some of you may understand more clearly. Just because it looks bad to us (the algae) does not mean it's bad for the food chain of the lake. Actually it enhances young of the year survival rates, i.e. IT"S A GOOD THING!!!! We may not like the smell, or the looks of it, but I'm willing to bet that a couple years from now we are going to reap the benefits of this abnormally wet spring/summer, and the run-off it created. In fact I remember a post here by one of the O.S.U. researchers that said the reason a good numbers of hatches fail is due to the lack of quality food available to fry because of a lack of run off, or something to that effect.


This article makes it sound like it might not be such a good thing?
http://www.cleveland.com/outdoors/index.ssf/2010/07/early_large_algae_blooms_on_la.html


----------



## bocajemma (Dec 29, 2008)

AvianHunter said:


> This article makes it sound like it might not be such a good thing?
> http://www.cleveland.com/outdoors/index.ssf/2010/07/early_large_algae_blooms_on_la.html



The blue-green algae is bad. Not a good part of the food chain. On the other hand the run off does contribute considerably to the food chain. Other food sources grow well with the increased P as well. If you look at the records 2003 was also one of the "worst algae blooms in 30 years". I think thats what Captain Kevin was saying. Even though the algae bloom is very bad and needs to be dealt with, we had the same scenario in 2003 and we had the mega hatch of walleye. Let's hope that we have another semi-mega hatch of walleye this year. There is no quick solution for the "P". It will take a lot of effort and years to reduce. The quick solution for walleye population is one good hatch.


----------



## reo (May 22, 2004)

BFG said:


> Hey Scott: Slapped on the wrists you have been....
> 
> Why anyone is surprised the algae is bad this year is beyond me. How quickly we forget the nearly two week period when the ENTIRE west end of the lake was chocolate milk.
> 
> ...


I was under the impression that they ADDED to the problem

Edit: After a little bumping around the OSG site and some others my thoughts were confirmed, the 'waste' from zebra and quagga mussels does contribute to the increase of Phosphorus.


----------



## justin (Oct 26, 2005)

Captain Kevin asked about YOY fish: 

I would say that the sky is not falling yet. Nutrient loading is highly correlated with discharge. The annual recruitment of Yellow Perch is linked to spring Maumee River discharge (the total volume of water). Springtime discharge (run-off and P) explains 90% of the variation - more rain  more YOY perch survive. No pattern is known about walleye. High discharge during the spring loads P into the lake when the water temperature is too cool for Microcystis (the harmful cyanobacteria in Lake Erie) to grow, therefore we get blooms of edible algae. High summer discharge leads to more Microcystis in the Maumee Bay area. However, Microcystis was earlier this year than normal because the warm temperature, then Microcystis may be more abundant earlier in the year if global climate change is accurate (thats another can of worms). The zooplankton that eat algae do not like Microcystis, and when YOY fish are looking for zooplankton during a Microcystis bloom, they are SOL.

BFG mentioned zebra mussels:

Zebra and Quagga mussels are making the problem worse for two reasons. 1) They filter lake water to feed on plankton, but they spit out Microcystis. So this removes competition for Microcystis. 2) From the filtered water (contains sediments and algae) they release dissolved P back into the lake. This is a problem because the P is recycled in lakes rather than being buried in the lake sediments. 

Boatnut asked about protesting to the EPA and among others:

The Ohio EPA formed the Phosphorus Task Force back in 2006 or 2007. A report was released earlier this year. The Task Force was composed of soil scientists, lake scientists, Ohio and US Dept of Agriculture, Ohio Farm Bureau Both of our state senators visited my lab recently and are aware of the problem, but with the job and economy and other $$$ problems, environmental issues take a back seat... until there is a disaster, like an oil spill

Also, you asked what percentage of the total P is from non-farming. Again, Im going to reference Heidelberg, 10-20% of the P is from point sources (waste-water treatment plants, ect) and the rest is from non-point. I do not know how much is from non-farming, non-point sources, such as golf courses and lawns. 

GoBuckeyes85: Heidelberg places their sample station in Waterville to catch only upstream water. Sometimes lake water is pushed into the Maumee by strong east winds and the system backed up. 
Land use practices are a major player, and the Maumee River is the largest watershed in the Great Lakes basin. Thats a lot of states, counties, and townships that can do things their way. It will take a major political movement to get all farmers using the best practice possible that fits their fields. 

Bocajemma mentioned that not all Microcystis is toxic: 
This is very true. It takes 10 genes to make the toxin called microcystin, and all 10 must be present. These genes are named mcyA-J. A study published in 2008 by researchers at the NOAA lab in Ann Arbor looked at the mcyB gene in Microcystis from Lake Erie. Only 25% of the Lake Erie Microcystis had the mcyB gene, therefore only 25% had the ability to produce toxin. However, this does not mean that only 25% of the blooms are toxic. A strain that lacks mcy genes can be replaced by a strain that has all genes. Or a toxic strain can be only a small fraction of the total Microcystis, but the toxin can be in very high concentration. Researchers around the world are trying to figure out what and when makes Microcystis produce and release toxins.

Justin


----------



## LEfriend (Jun 14, 2009)

Nice posts Justin. I agree with what you have said. Especially how the mussels have complicated the natural functioning of the system. I don't have the link now but folks can do a google for Ohio EPA Phosphorous Task Force to get that report you referenced. I sat on that task force and their work represented a lot of hard frank discussions, investigations, and time evaluating the science and available data. 

One comment on this year versus 2003. This year the record rains and storms came in April May and early June..the third quarter of the 2010 Water Year which runs Oct 1 to Sept 30th. Much came duriing the spawning season and during May. Not as much in late June.

In 2003 the major rains/storms were late June into July. I remember because I was up in a plane over the Lake, taking pictures of the bloom to use in presentations we gave to farmers to try to get practices changed and more conservation in the watershed. That year the runoff hit in a different time window.

It is very possible this year, the storms may have hit earlier, at a different stage of the spawn and/or fry development than 2003. I think it is way too early to say because 2003 year was good, this year will be the same. If the fry were more advanced in 2003 it is posible the sediment hid them from preditors and provided nourishment, beneficial.... whereas this year if it was earlier the sediment could possibly have damaged/covered eggs....which could have hurt hatching. So again, till the fall data is in, it is too early to know either way.

I would also add that there are scientists from 14 different universities who have banded together and are studying what is going on and trying to find answers and solutions. If was easy it would have already been solved. Ohio Lake Erie Commission and USEPA have provided them major funding the last two years to accelerate the finding of answers to what it going on...what has changed in the last 10 years.

I know a scientist who 15 years ago when the mussles started cleaning up the lake predicted that there would be a delayed reaction due to the eventual rerelease of concentrated phosphorous in the pseduofeces pellets the mussels develop and excrete. It looks like we may have seen his prophacy come true...that is one theory they are testing.

I would also point out on the recent news article everyone is talking about...that data was for 3 months only. True, it was a record for that time period and definitely not good, and at a critical time. It quantifies what we knew happened this spring. But the entire year's loading, which is also an important figure will be based on the entire 12 month period. Whether this is a record or bad year, or even above average year depends on what happens in those other nine months. So much of what happens to the lake depends on long term windows, and there is much variation in storms, runoff, and loadings in any single year. That news in the article is not good and points out what we know...we need to do more. But take that data in context for what it is...3 months out of one year.


----------



## justin (Oct 26, 2005)

If anybody watches Toledo news Ch24, I was interviewed about the algae in Lake Erie. I missed it, but found it on their website: 
http://www.toledoonthemove.com/news/video.aspx?id=490115


----------

