# Toxic alge found at buckeye



## browns_jr88 (Aug 5, 2008)

hey all i was reading the dispatch this morning..and it stated that they had found toxic algae at buckeye.. but they claimed its not as bad as grand lake St.Marys... not sure what effects this has on the fish.. but it said that it can cause skin rash...make u sick and possibley kill small pets... so just a heads up to all of u who might be heading out there....


good luck today


----------



## toad (Apr 6, 2004)

Doesn't surprise me and I wouldn't think that this would be new for buckeye as heavy as the alge growth is every year. 
Not to start a debate but IMO buckeye lake fish have a strange taste to them that I believe is caused from living in that thick green pea soup water for 7 to 9 months a year. I had a couple of eyes from there and a couple of eyes from hoover this spring and even though they looked the same on the plate after being fried I could tell what ones was buckeye lake fish.


----------



## JamesT (Jul 22, 2005)

"Toxic algae found in lake
Level in Buckeye Lake isn't as high as that in Grand Lake St. Marys 
Thursday, July 16, 2009 3:15 AM 
By Tim Magaw

THE COLUMBUS DISPATCH 
Ohio environmental officials have discovered toxic algae in Buckeye Lake.

The algae are called planktothrix, and they produce a neurotoxin called microcystin. In high levels, it can cause rashes, make you sick and kill small pets, including dogs.

The same blue-green algae was discovered in high concentrations in Grand Lake St. Marys in western Ohio in May.

Ohio Environmental Protection Agency officials say the levels in Buckeye Lake are lower and should not pose a threat to humans or animals.

But levels can fluctuate, as they have in Grand Lake. That troubles clean-water advocates.

"This is not a trivial organism to be discovering," said Joe Logan, agricultural director for the Ohio Environmental Council. "It's extremely harmful, extremely toxic and extremely worrisome."

Lake Erie has had toxic algae blooms for several years.

Grand Lake St. Marys was the first inland lake in Ohio where algae pose a health threat. The 13,000-acre lake has long been considered one of the state's most-polluted; fertilizers and manure from farms in Mercer and Auglaize counties have turned it green with algae.

The EPA also said it found low levels of microcystin in LaDue Reservoir in Geauga County.

"At this point, it's not necessary to post (warnings in LaDue and Buckeye Lake) as we did at Grand Lake St. Marys," said Linda Oros, a spokeswoman for the Ohio EPA.

The microcystin found at Grand Lake was four times higher than a limit the World Health Organization considers safe for swimming, and 82 times higher than the safe level for drinking.

Area drinking water is not threatened, Oros said.

Levels of the toxic algae in Grand Lake St. Marys have decreased, said Sean Logan, director of the Ohio Department of Natural Resources.

But he also said the levels fluctuate and that the state will continue working with landowners about how they treat the land.

"We must do that," Logan said. "We cannot treat the watershed as it has been treated in the past."

*Phosphorous runoff from pesticides, fertilizers and animal waste can cause the algae that produces the microcystin, said David Culver, who supervises Ohio State University's Limnology Lab.

"These organisms do very well in warm water, so they often show up in a lake this time of year," Culver said. The only way to eliminate these toxins is by eliminating runoff into the lake, he added.

George O'Donnel, a trustee for Buckeye Lake for Tomorrow, said there are other pollution concerns, including old septic systems.*

"The correction process is not going to take place quickly," he said.

The testing is part of an on-again, off-again state inland lake program created to monitor the health of Ohio waterways.

Pressed by funding cuts and its own emphasis on stream pollution, the Ohio EPA abandoned routine inland-lake testing in 1995.

Though the state's monitoring program was resurrected last year, there are more questions than answers concerning the 400 public lakes in Ohio. Additional budget cuts could doom the program again.

Scientists sampled two other inland lakes at the same time as Buckeye Lake. Oros said no traces of the toxic algae were found in Lake Loramie and Indian Lake.

[email protected] "


----------



## JamesT (Jul 22, 2005)

and from yesterday's news(there are 20-30 million septic systems in the U.S., more than 30% don't work properly).

"NEWS BRIEFS
Wednesday, July 15, 2009 3:05 AM 


COLUMBUS 
Septic system rules lost in budget shuffle
Lawmakers now have less than six months to work out the differences between competing ideas over how the state should regulate home septic systems.

Lost in the tussle over the state budget, work on a compromise between competing Senate bills on the subject stalled before the end of the legislative season. 

Both bills would have toughened the state's regulation of home septic systems, but Sen. Timothy Grendell, a Republican from Chesterland in northeastern Ohio, said a bill introduced by fellow Republican Sen. Tom Niehaus, of New Richmond in southwestern Ohio, would be too costly for many Ohio homeowners.

Niehaus said his bill was the result of more than a year of study by a task force made up of state health officials, environmental agencies and sewage experts. 

The group determined the provisions were necessary to protect the public health.

When no compromise was reached, an existing moratorium on new sewage legislation that was set to expire July 1 was extended for two years as part of Senate's version of the state budget. 

That moratorium was reduced to just more than five months, until Jan. 1, 2010, as a provision in the compromise budget bill approved Monday.

Both senators had said the two-year moratorium was too long, and could have kept the bills from getting needed attention when the legislative season resumes in the fall.

-- Josh Jarman [email protected]"


----------



## misfit (Apr 5, 2004)

some people wonder how legitimate threads can turn on a dime,and take on a whole new personality............................................well,here's a prime example........


> And here's Andyman on his soapbox:
> I think sportsmen have been mislead. The threat of "taking away our guns" is used as a scare tactic to politically mislead us.


no matter what the subject,some people just cannot resist the opportunity to climb up on their soapbox to promote their personal agenda.i'm having a hard time seeing the correlation is between the nra and toxic algea on buckeye lake
as further proof of how one post like that can distract from the original topic,i present exhibit b...............


> add pawn shop guys, and pay day loan places.


now we've gone from toxic algea to gun control to pawn shops and loan companies to banking practices

that said,all hijacks have been removed,in an effort to get things back on track.so please keep it there.


----------



## seethe303 (Dec 12, 2006)

question to those who keep and eat fish from buckeye:

will this information affect the amount of fish you keep and eat from buckeye?


----------



## misfit (Apr 5, 2004)

i doubt it will have any impact on what i keep.but then lately,that's been very little anyway


----------



## puterdude (Jan 27, 2006)

Won't have any effect what so ever on my eating saugeye from buckeye lake.
Buckeye ,being the first & oldest state park in Ohio has always went through this year in and year out.Nothing new here with this ,same ole,same ole.It's the lake's general makeup that contributes to this so called problem.it's an old feeder lake to it's old canal system.It was never meant to be a resevoir supplying water to a large municipality,as a result it's shallow so algae is gonna grow in it.I just stop fishing there during late July,August,Sept each year.When fall arrives,the algae dies till next year and the whole process is repeated again next year.I just accept the bad along with the good.Also BUckeye is alot cleaner today than say 20 years ago when septic tanks lined it's shores ,all of which are illegal today within a certain distance from the lake,so it's a far safer and cleaner lake than years gone by.But still Buckeye gets a bad rap from a lot of people as being a nasty,dirty,cesspool lake.If you feel that way ,good for you ,go else where and leave the eyes for we that do fish Buckeye & eat her offerings,more for us.


----------



## andyman (Jul 12, 2005)

Apologies to the board....I guess.

I honestly didn't see my response as a highjacking, but adding information to the topic. (And that quote is grossly out of context.)
His topic was "Toxic Algae found in Buckeye Lake", so I began to ellaborate on HOW it got there, and WHAT we could do about it. 

Sincere apologies for the detour to the author.


----------



## cpr_mike1 (Feb 25, 2009)

I may have missed this somewhere as I did not go through every post but my question is, is the algae going to affect fishing or is it just scientifically not known yet?


----------



## misfit (Apr 5, 2004)

i didn't see anything that would effect fishing at this point.


----------



## andyman (Jul 12, 2005)

I'm going to make another attempt at my point, as it very much pertains to the ORIGINAL point of a toxic algae bloom.
(Please bear with me Rick and seperate my opinion from the forum rules)

The original post suggests that this algae may effect the fishing, cause skin rashes, makes pets sick, etc...

I am suggesting this: That we, as sportsmen, should try to seprate ourselves from the immediate/how's this effect ME type of questions like "Will the fshing suffer?"....but instead concentrate on the bigger picture questions of WHY.

Like why is toxic algae growing in our lakes and water supplies?
How did it happen?
How do we fix it?

If we never get around to addressing the issues of why, I'm fairly certain that indeed the fishing and such will suffer in the long run; not to mention the public health issues involved in a water supply.

puterdude suggested that the design and shallowness of the lake is teh cause, which is partlly true. The shallow environment certainly allows for this to happen, but it is not the CAUSE. The cause is from what's being dumped INTO the lake. Evidenced by the improvement in the lake once the septic systems and chemical applications were improved.
The linked article explains as much.

So how does it get improved? Either by volunteer clean up or through legislation, plain and simple is people have to stop dumping bad stuff in the lake.
And most likely corporations are not going to voluntarily improve their discharge into lakes/rivers, it almost always has to be legislated.

So, in my opinion, in order to remedy such situations, we need to vote for representatives who not only cater to sportsmen in the campaign speeches, but also vote for improving our envrionment once in office. 
I also beleive we need to volunteer in organizations who support our local environments as many success stories began in grass roots groups of less than 10 people.

My quote you chose above, was simply referring to the point that our issues as sportsmen are far deeper than just gun laws, like why is toxic algae growing in our lakes at 82 times the maximum levels for drinking?


----------



## misfit (Apr 5, 2004)

now that's much better and actually gives food for thought.though i agree with your thoughts on the effects of corperate policies and the need for legislation pertaining to pollution in the big picture,we can't blame everything on the corperate goons.
and i wonder if the same tests that exposed the problem at buckeye were done in past years.if so,why is it just now being discovered?since many of the problems you mentioned have been addressed going back several years(as you noted)there must be some other cause(s)for the the problem,unless it took decades to become evident,which i don't think is the case.so it leads me to believe there must be some other underlying factors.

as for this


> Please bear with me Rick and seperate my opinion from the forum rules


as i've mentioned many times,i never have a problem with opinions unless the manner in which they are given is unacceptable and detract from the true purpose of this site.


----------



## andyman (Jul 12, 2005)

misfit said:


> and i wonder if the same tests that exposed the problem at buckeye were done in past years.if so,why is it just now being discovered?since many of the problems you mentioned have been addressed going back several years(as you noted)there must be some other cause(s)for the the problem,unless it took decades to become evident,which i don't think is the case.so it leads me to believe there must be some other underlying factors.
> 
> 
> > This is another one of many "temperature" related environmental problems. Some might suggest our average mean temperture/latitude is increasing.
> ...


----------



## toad (Apr 6, 2004)

Went down to buckeye tonight and it's not even green yet.... looked better than most years.


> we can't blame everything on the corperate goons


I'll be good,


----------



## andyman (Jul 12, 2005)

puterdude said:


> Won't have any effect what so ever on my eating saugeye from buckeye lake.
> Buckeye ,being the first & oldest state park in Ohio has always went through this year in and year out.Nothing new here with this ,same ole,same ole......But still Buckeye gets a bad rap from a lot of people as being a nasty,dirty,cesspool lake.If you feel that way ,good for you ,go else where and leave the eyes for we that do fish Buckeye & eat her offerings,more for us.


With all due respect, this is not same ole, same ole. Neither is this some kind of passive aggressive attack on your favorite fishing lake.
This isn't the Alum guys saying Buckeye sucks.

"This is not a trivial organism to be discovering," said Joe Logan, agricultural director for the Ohio Environmental Council. "It's extremely harmful, extremely toxic and extremely worrisome."

Do some research on the Shenendoah river valley and see what's hapening there....or just go and drink a glass of water from the tap in Celina, OH.
Ask those people if they wish they had given more of a crap when they first heard or wish they had reacted sooner.
Ask them if they would swim with a small cut... or let their dog grab a drink from the lake on a hot day.

Your reaction is ironic. If Buckeye was my favorite fishing destination, this would be my top priority.
The good news is there are people out there that will make this a priority.


----------



## puterdude (Jan 27, 2006)

My opinion for what it's worth is much more attention or testing is being done now than in the past.I think if test would have been done 20 to 30 years ago in the month of July people would have ran from Buckeye Lake.I think it's all a natural reaction to higher temps and normal algae growth annually this time of year.Farm land around the lake has and will continue to shrink as the populations continue to grow from Columbus eastward.I do think more chemical are available to farmers to squeze every bushel out of an acre and that could cause a slight increase in toxcity levels but I still think with the reductions of available farm land it all probably evens out in the end.So in the end I feel we are a lot more aware or concerned today than years ago.So whats the fix?Can't dig the lake deeper as cost prevents that,control the chemicals that farmers put down?I think we all are more conscience of our waterways today than years ago and try to help keep them clean,maybe ride the butts of those whom don't.I don't think theres a quick fix if a fix exists at all as I still think it's a natural annual occurance on Buckeye but just more talked about today.


----------



## andyman (Jul 12, 2005)

Do you simply disregard the science, the testing, and the data from people who make a living studying such things?
Do you not see similar temperature related anomalies going on in our world?
Do you disregard your fellow fisherman who says he can determine a fish from Buckeye by taste?

I have a very good friend who is an aquatic biologist for the state of Pennsylvania. A couple years ago he was in town and we did some fishing for a few days. We showed him alot of different water.
One afternoon we took him to the Licking river and within 10 minutes he says "This river is jacked up. No bugs."
I of course pointed out all the nice fish we were catching. 
And then I received a long lesson in what makes water healthy.

I suggest that when the fishing starts to suffer to the point where it's noticable to the average fisherman, it may be too late.


----------



## Fisherman 3234 (Sep 8, 2008)

I found the correlation with St. Mary's algae levels and the phosphorous levels paired with the amount of fertilizer levels very interesting. Is it a coincidence that St. Mary's is literally surrounded by hundreds of square miles of farmland around its many feeder creeks and rivers (not to mention the lake itself) and it right now is having the biggest problem with these algae blooms due to increased phosphorous and fertilizer levels found in the water? These blooms at buckeye should be monitored more closely for the next few years (if they occur) to see if this is just an odd year or there is a possibility of it becoming a problem. As for St. Mary's something has got to be done.


----------



## andyman (Jul 12, 2005)

puterdude said:


> My opinion for what it's worth is much more attention or testing is being done now than in the past.I think if test would have been done 20 to 30 years ago in the month of July people would have ran from Buckeye Lake.I think it's all a natural reaction to higher temps and normal algae growth annually this time of year.


Hmmmm Are you suggesting that attention to water quality and testing are new ideas? Or that we didn't have the science back then?

Just so everyone understands, water issues and testing in Ohio is even older than me. It is well documented and the science was as sound back then as it is today.
There were also newspapers in the 50's and 60's that most adults read everyday.

Know that the water at Buckeye lake has been tested for decades, by professionals with no bias.

"The Ohio Department of Natural Resources (ODNR), Division of Water, maintains a statewide data base of more than 700,000 well logs. The Ground-Water Resources Section of the Division manages this valuable data base, which includes some information collected by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) and the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency (Ohio EPA). Since 1948, well log information has been collected to increase the understanding of the ground-water resources in Ohio. Geologists and hydrogeologists continue to study the state's ground-water resources, and as a result, Ohio is one of only a few states that has been completely mapped for ground-water availability (mapped by river basin, from 1959 to 1962)."

"Standards to control industrial pollution in the Ohio River were first adopted in 1955 (Vicory and Weaver 1984). The discharge of some toxic substances began to be restricted by law in 1958, and acid mine drainage was required to be treated beginning in I960...."

"The first improvement in the water quality of the industrialized Ohio River came with the introduction of sewage treatment in the 1940s and 1950s. In the 1940s, mean monthly dissolved oxygen concentrations were recorded
well below minimum accepted standards in low flow months."

" Early in the 1970's, the Ohio Division of Water realized the need to distribute basic ground water availability information to the general public in an easy to use, semi-technical format."

"The National Center for Water Quality Research (NCWQR) has been collecting and testing surface water in Ohio since 1974. Throughout the history of the Ohio Tributary Monitoring Program, over 100,000 samples collected from rivers and streams that drain over 50% of the land area of Ohio have been analyzed for sediments, nutrients, pesticides, and metals"

"In its early stages the Division of Water was primarily focused on research and information. The Division was given the responsibility to formally inventory water resources in all watersheds throughout the state, a task which was to take 10 years. Data were gathered from automatic stream gauges in operation on roughly 200 streams, and sedimentation of reservoirs was measured. Chemical and silt-load analyses were made on many streams in order to assess suitability of the water for human consumption, agriculture and industrial use. The Division operated automatic gages in wells and logged ground water level fluctuations. Flood and drought frequencies, along with their associated flows, were determined by analyzing stream-flow records. Results of these investigations were made available through Water Bulletins, and beginning in 1959, the Division published a series of Water Resources Inventory Reports by basin. Regional Water Plans for all five planning regions of the state were also developed. Throughout the coming years, the Division of Water retained its role of collecting and analyzing information about Ohio's water resources, but program activities specifically involving water quality (chemical analysis, etc.) were transferred to the Ohio EPA in 1972, shortly after it was created. However, several additional programs were also created within or transferred to the Division of Water."


----------



## andyman (Jul 12, 2005)

Fisherman 3234 said:


> These blooms should be monitored more closely for the next few years (if they occur) to see if this is just an odd year or there is a possibility of it becoming a problem.


Not an odd year, this has been going on for a while.
Article from 1994:
"The total trihalomethanes (TTHM) concentration in the water has been greater than the maximum contaminant level that is allowed by public water system regulations. A quarterly public notice will continue to be issued advising that the TTHM have exceeded the maximum contaminant level (MCL), which is a running quarterly average of 0.080 milligrams per liter (mg/L). Some people who drink water containing trihalomethanes in excess of the recommended maximum level over many years may experience problems with their liver, kidneys or central nervous systems, and may have an increased risk of getting cancer. 

Ohio EPA also found that Celina failed to: maintain the required minimum disinfectant concentration and contact time; added carbon dioxide to the water that did not meet industry standards; failed to monitor for synthetic organic chemicals in accordance with a schedule provided by Ohio EPA; and failed to notify the public of the TTHMs MCL violations as required by Ohio law. Celina also installed continuous ozone monitors that do not function as approved by the director of Ohio EPA which has resulted in a failure to continuously monitor ozone since March 1994. 

The city has 18 months to bring theTTHM levels into compliance. Ohio EPA also has ordered Celina to evaluate the source water for both a ground water and a surface water treatment system. Celina must then upgrade the existing surface water treatment plant or construct a new ground water/surface water plant to permanently address its compliance issues."

As far as the "possibility of it becoming a problem"... the lake has 82 times the maximum safe level of microcystin for drinking water.
That makes it a NOW problem to me.



Jerking with the water supply of an entire community is a pretty big deal to me, if case no one has noticed.


----------



## Fisherman 3234 (Sep 8, 2008)

I was mostly referring to the original post with buckeye lake, sorry for not being so clear, but yeah I would say that St. Mary's has a BIG problem on its hands. Something has to be done.


----------



## andyman (Jul 12, 2005)

Gotcha.

I honestly hope that Buckeye does not go down the path that Grand Lake has. But it sure is heading that same way. The science doesn't lie.

I'm from Celina and I have alot of great memories on Grand Lake fishing, shooting ducks, swimming, water skiing, etc...
I'll be there the next two weekends with my kids. We won't even think about swimming or skiing, and all my relatives have jet skis and such. And we stopped drinking tap water in Celina decades ago....it takes like a glass of stagnant pond water and I'm aware of all the issues with their water treatment plant.
I have a cousin that makes lots of cash selling alternatives to drinking the public water supply.

I'm always surprised at the lack of public out cry at such things. I believe people are so conditioned to think there's nothing that we can do, that they try to convince ourselves it's not that bad and any efforts for change would be futile.
It's very frustrating, as collectively the people could really institute change.
And what could be a bigger issue than your family's drinking water? Water is literally the only thing that the government provides my family that is essential to our existance. Everything else the government can fubar and I can make due.


----------



## JamesT (Jul 22, 2005)

It would be interesting to see what the average monthly water temps were for Buckeye (and all the central Ohio waters) over the last 50 years or when they started collecting data. Then get some lab data on toxic algae growth rates at difn't temps to compare and see what conclusions can be drawn. I know a degree or two or even fraction of a degree change doesn't seem like a lot or that it would affect much but the biologists and scientists say otherwise with regards to many biological/ecosystems.


----------



## puterdude (Jan 27, 2006)

andy,first of all I admire your conviction on this issue as it's very apparent you have spent hours researching this area & topic.I think we agree on a lot of it's content but disagree on several points.One being that science,testing and public awareness has improved greatly during the past 20 to 30 years.Algae bloom has always occurred on our canal lakes annually.Has the algae bloom increased in density related to global warming,possibly since the earth has warmed one degree since 1970.I haven't totally bought into global warming just yet,try convincing New York City where 85 degrees has been their top temps so far this year,or Wyoming where they had snow killing their tomato plants on June 19th,but I have to be honest I am beginning to lean towards global warming as a destinct possiblity.What I guess I am trying to say is alage blooms has always occurred on Buckeye lake and always will,if it gets more pronounced in density I can see where the increase in toxcity could occur but I think public awareness,testing and the science has increased dramatically during the past few decades.Now I admit we do need to be concerned & start action to halt the damage we as humans are causing but again,what is the answer?Chosing our elected officals better won't work as all of them turn on dime after elected.Why do you think Hebron,Heath,Newark and probably more cities & villages have thier sewer plants lining the Licking River? To discharge their sewer byproducts more readily into the river,of course after it's been cleaned enough to pass the minimal EPA guidelines.I don't know the answer short of destroying sewer plants,farmers,or thinning out the human populations.


----------



## andyman (Jul 12, 2005)

What we do is quite simple.

We form citizen's groups like http://savinggrandlake.com/ and begin raising money public awareness. 
We start working on local news reporters who may be sympathetic to the cause.
We look for local businesses that want to help champion the effort.
We start writing letters to representatives.
We start inviting those representatives to our meetings and get them involved.
We use our local lawyers, printing businesses, restaurants, etc... to help with letters and printings and fund raisers.

And then we propose change and laws.

Ever hear of the Big Darby Accord? 
If not, do a quick Google.

What we don't do is pretend the problem will fix itself or that the problem has always been there or that somehow the testing a few years ago was inadequate or irrelavent.
Although the problem will kind of fix itself eventually. Someone will pick up the baton and get something going. Probably a local bar owner or bait shop guy that gets it...maybe a couple of soccer moms who give a hoot about what their kids drink....maybe a guy who has aspirations of local government...and probably a well meaning high schooler or two.

Unfortnately, these rooms are usually pretty lonely for us sportsmen. There we be like 2 of us in there, wearing Bass Pro hats so we can recognize if there's another sportsman involved.

Which brings me back to my original point. As a sportsman, how can these types of issues not be priority number one? Or at least make the top ten list?
Instead many of us look down on environmentalists as tree hugging liberals.
But groups like the Sierra Club will be the first ones to help out and support such a grass roots effort and show people how to get stuff done.
I believe they have an office on High Street in Columbus, by the way.


----------



## bopperattacker (Sep 12, 2008)

andyman said:


> wearing Bass Pro hats so we can recognize if there's another sportsman involved.


you had me at Bass Pro Hats.....


----------



## andyman (Jul 12, 2005)

puterdude said:


> Why do you think Hebron,Heath,Newark and probably more cities & villages have thier sewer plants lining the Licking River? To discharge their sewer byproducts more readily into the river,of course after it's been cleaned enough to pass the minimal EPA guidelines.


Your logic can escape me at times, so I apologize ahead of time.
But where exactly do you think the sewer treatment plants SHOULD discharge their water?
Isn't that what sewage treament plants do by their very nature; clean the water and then reintroduce it into our environment?

I think I'm going to have to bow out here. This is a bit frustrating.
I guess at the end of the day, I shouldn't give any more of a crap than anyone else.
I dont' live there. I don't fish there. And I don't drink the water.
I'm sure everything will be just fine.


----------



## st.slippy (Oct 3, 2008)

I think you have to consider bottom composition, and especially all fo the people who live around buckeye lake. The lake heats up much faster than others in the area, it's rather shallow, and people live very close together all around the lake. People probably spend a lot of money around there to keep up their yards. Plus there are a lot of farms along the creeks and streams. All of these together I'm sure contribute. The waste management is part of reality, and we will have to see what other measures could be taken to reduce other issues.


----------



## jshbuckeye (Feb 27, 2005)

Wow I read alot of this thread not all. Im going to guess that most lakes have algae, my question is what makes it toxic? Not the amount of algae correct? But what is in the algae correct?


----------



## JamesT (Jul 22, 2005)

here is some info on toxic algae

http://www.pca.state.mn.us/publications/wq-s1-03.pdf

http://www.pca.state.mn.us/water/clmp-toxicalgae.html

http://www.tpchd.org/page.php?id=148

Here are pics of a public park pond that is next to a nursery. The shore areas of the pond that abutt the nursery developed gnarly algae blooms (don't know if they were toxic) this April/May. The blooms did not develop anywhere else around the pond. There was clear runoff from the nursery into this pond. One of the pics (2nd to last)shows what it looked like in an area away from the nursery There were also areas where there was zero noticeable algae (my old computer died or I'd post them, these were the only pics that survived). Another shows a super small stream where water trickled from the nursery into the pond. The rest are the algae blooms on the bank closest to the nursery. It got real bad. If you cast a floating rapala out 100 feet and reeled it slowly in, you would pick up algae within the first 5 feet of reeling. You couldn't fish the bank near the nursery and the fish didn't hang out there either. It was nasty and some of the best pictures got deleted when my computer died.


----------



## JamesT (Jul 22, 2005)

and here is some info on general algae blooms. Taken from _Environmental Science: A Study of Interrelationships_ 11th Edition by Eldon Enger and Bradley Smith. pp 348-349.

"Nutrients are also a pollution problem. Additional nutrients in the form of nitrogen and phosphorous compounds from fertilizer, sewage, detergents, and animal waste increase the rate of growth of aquatic plants and algae. However, phosphates and nitrates are generally present in very limited amounts in unpolluted freshwater and, therefore, are a limiting factor on the growth of aquatic plants and algae. (A limiting factor is a necessary material that is in short supply, and bc of the lack of it, an organism cannot reach its full potential growth). Thus, when phosphates or nitrates are added to the surface water, they act as a fertilizer and promote the growth of undesirable algae populations. The excessive growth of algae and aquatic plants due to added nutrients is called eutrophication. Algae and larger aquatic plants may interfere with the use of the water by fouling boat propellers, clogging water intake pipes, changing the taste and odor of water, and causing the buildup of organic matter on the bottom. As this organic matter decays, oxygen levels decrease, and fish and other aquatic species die."


----------



## andyman (Jul 12, 2005)

"There is no single factor that causes an algae bloom. A combination of factors such as excessive nutrients, warm temperatures, and lots of sunlight all encourage the growth of blue-green algae. A primary cause, excess nutrients (e.g. phosphorus), is largely due to nonpoint source runoff from agricultural lands (e.g., row crops), urban areas (e.g. streets, parking lots, lawns, etc.), and point sources, such as wastewater treatment facilities."

Now go and check how many "hot" days we've had this year. How many times have you run the air conditioning? It's late July and we really have not had many 90 degree days...in fact, it's been very, very mild in comparison to an average Ohio summer.

So what might be causing this?.........


----------



## hoffa (Jun 13, 2009)

wow soapbox thread.....toxic anything does not sound good now or every year or so though does it


----------



## Darby Rat (Aug 8, 2005)

Another important growth factor for algae is carbon dioxide (CO2). Blue-green algae are really bacteria that get their energy from photosynthesis. Photosynthesis uses CO2 and light to make sugar. Sugar is the backbone for most algae and all higher plants to form their supportive structures, like cell walls, wood, etc.. Of course animals also use the sugars for their energy. The current CO2 level in the earth's atmosphere is highest ever recorded since the late 1700's. Also, bacteria can reproduce in as little as 20 mins, so populations can explode very quickly. Combined with the other growth factors already mentioned, it's not too surprising blooms can occur more often and to a greater extent. Algae are good for water in normal populations, releasing oxygen to dissolve in the water, but when the bloom dies, they then deplete the O2. Only by limiting these various growth factors can algal growth be controlled.


----------



## Bobinstow90 (Apr 13, 2006)

Just an observation:
This inland lake problem sounds a lot like "the dead zone(s)" that show up in Lake Erie annually. The little I've read about it suggests the same culprits, phospherous and nitrates resulting in excessive algea bloom. (Not sure its the same kind of toxic algea.)

Ohio Seagrant has had some interesting discussions re this issue in Erie.
(http://ohioseagrant.osu.edu/discuss/)


----------

