Quote:
Originally Posted by Islander
Dave R
Why don't you do an internet search and read the data for yourself. You apparently don't believe the evidence that I provide.
|
I did. I found just a little more data than you did. I completely believe the data you provided; it's good, solid, data. Your conclusions are simply wrong, AND you made the mistake of stating them as "FACT".
There are a couple of fairly recent studies that show parts the lake are pristine but that they have occasional short-term pollution problems. Here's an excerpt:
"7) Based on the current and historical water quality data, Meredith Bay would be considered an unproductive "pristine" portion of Lake Winnipesaukee that is characterized by clear water and low levels of microscopic plant growth. However, short term water clarity reductions and short-term algal blooms have been documented in Meredith Bay and suggest periodic pollutant inputs (par-ticularly the nutrient phosphorus). "
Another study shows Moultonboro bay to be less than pristine and clearly calls for action on the part of waterfront property owners here:
"Based on the current and historical water quality data, Moultonborough Bay would be a moderately nutrient enriched “transitional” segment of Lake Winnipesaukee while the open waters of Winter Harbor and Wolfeboro Bay are currently characterized as relatively unproductive “pristine” segments of the lake. A first step towards preserving the high water quality in Lake Win-nipesaukee is to take action at the local level and do your part to minimize the number of pollutants (particularly sediment and the nutrient phosphorus) that enter the lake. Whenever possible, maintain riparian buffers (vegetative buffers adjacent to the water body). These buffers will biologically “take up” nutrients before they enter the lake and will also provide physical filters which allow materials to settle out before reaching the lake. Reduce fertilizer applications. Most residents apply far more fertilizers than necessary which can be a costly expense to the homeowner and can also be detrimental to the lake since the same nutrients that make our lawns green will also stimulate plant growth in our lakes."
The same study shows how wetlands (natural I suppose) contribute to water quality problems, and implies waterfront property owners may be a problem as well here:
" The 2002 seasonal average Moultonborough Bay water clarity is low, relative to the other locations around the lake, while the amount of microscopic plant growth in Moultonborough Bay is one of the higher levels documented in Lake Winnipesaukee (Figures 51 and 52). Extensive wetland drainage into Moultonborough Bay, and the accompanying “tea” stained water, is partially responsible for the shallower water transparency readings. Likewise, the wetlands can, at times, contribute nutrients that stimulate the mi-croscopic plant “algal” growth. In addition, patches of “heavy” development, compounded with a lack of flushing, might also contribute, and concentrate, nutrients that stimulate algal growth and, in-turn, result in water quality problems."
I ahve nothing to do with these studies. Both indicate how the lake was during 2002 and show no trends so they conclude nothing about the delta of pollution levels in the lake over time, which is what I am interested in.
You seem to think I take personal pride in the lake or something. I have no ties with the lake at all. I just plop my boat in it and enjoy it when I can. It's merely one of several boating destinations for me. I do my part to follow the boating and environmental laws while I'm there, and I fully admit that I really like spending my time on the lake, but if the lake gets nasty, I'll just go somewhere else.
I still do not know if the lakre is getting better or worse. If it is changing (for better or worse), I tend to believe the waterfront property owners have almost everything to do with it.
You blame big or fast boats for a problem that you have yet to show proof even exists. Oddly, none of the studies I can find even mentioned boat wakes or speed...