Updated: Tuesday, June 17, 2003 8:19 PM

Branch Pond Association    Newsletters   Home
Spring 2003 Newsletter

Topics:
Maine Lakes Face New Threat
President’s Message
Treasurers Report
A Report from History Committee
An Update From The Invasives Species Committee
Lake Resource Goals Set By Dep Commissioner

Phosphorus A Lake Nemesis
Cola Conference Scheduled
About Our Web Site
Classified Ads on Our Website
Water Quality Role Explained
Sailboat Races - 2003
We Get Letters
Land Trends In Hancock County
Membership
Survey Question

Maine Lakes Face New Threat

There’s a new threat to Maine lakes and ponds and appropriately enough it rhymes with Godzilla. This monster invasive aquatic plant is called hydrilla and it has already been identified in 46-acre Pickerel Pond in Limerick.

While most lake associations have concentrated on identifying variable milfoil, another devastating invasive plant, the appearance of hydrilla in Maine poses an additional threat because it can be spread to all lakes and ponds in the same manner that variable milfoil has moved into some 14 lakes and ponds, according to the Department of Environmental Protection Web site. And hydrilla is more aggressive than variable milfoil.

Hydrilla, which has plagued the southern United States for decades, is native to Africa, Australia and Asia and came to this country by way of household aquariums. Once it escapes into the wild it is nearly impossible to destroy. It can grow in water depths up to 30 feet. Discovery of the plant in Maine came as a surprise to DEP officials as it previously had been confirmed only in Massachusetts and Connecticut among the Northeastern states.

The State of Maine has passed legislation that outlaws the introduction, transportation, sale and cultivation of 11 invasive aquatic plants. Of the 11 species, hydrilla may be the most aggressive and problematic. According to the DEP, once hydrilla becomes established in a lake or pond, chances of eradication are poor and unless strong preventive measures are taken, it is likely that the plant will spread to other water bodies. Hydrilla has excellent survival characteristics, including one known as "clonal expansion". This simply means that fragments of the plant are capable of producing new plants. Therefore the rate at which hydrilla spreads is actually increased when boats, swimmers and even natural wave action disturbs the plant, causing fragments to break off and float away. Last October Maine Volunteer Lake Monitoring Program(VLMP) and DEP staff found fragments of hydrilla attached to a boat trailer that was parked at the public access area at Pickerel Pond. Thus, informing boaters about the importance of equipment inspections before launching can substantially reduce the risk of spreading any invasive aquatic plant.

Discovery of hydrilla in Pickerel Pond came about because of the curiosity of a lake waterfront owner who sent a sample to the VLMP which has established a Maine Center for Invasive Aquatic Plants. The Center will provide a long-term mechanism to assure that there will be continuing support available to address the threat of invasive aquatic plants to Maine’s water resources.

Hydrilla roots burrow under the bottom of lakes and ponds so it is able to withstand the cold winters and its roots spread with multiple stems, allowing it to spread quickly. Once it takes root it can foul up boat propellers and make it difficult to swim.

For now, the DEP’s Aquatic Invasive Species Program is investigating a range of methods for controlling the plants from instructing people how to pull plants by hand to teaching residents how to install underwater barriers. Herbicides will be considered only as a last resort and after discussions with residents, according to DEP officials.

But the best safeguard continues to be inspection and prevention.

Back to top

President’s Message
By Van L. Terrell

Hello everyone! Here’s to another great summer on Branch Lake! For those of you who live south of Ellsworth, it was a blustery and cold winter for folks around the lake. In fact, the ice was not completely gone until the end of April. The weather recently has been so fantastic that one has difficulty picturing ice on the lake as recently as three weeks ago. The bad news is that those little pesky things with wings are all around us, thus gardening and yard work are a challenging task to say the least.

This year’s message will primarily focus on LD 824 and the importance of MEMBERSHIP (Bob Totman, our treasurer, covers this in his article on the status of the treasury). My request is that if you have not paid your dues, please do so. If you are not sure, feel free to call Bob in Hampden (see his phone number in his article).

For those of you who followed the journey of LD 824 through the legislative process, I am sure that most are breathing a sigh of relief, knowing that the Bill was defeated. I know that the property owners on Branchview Drive South were especially relieved, as their road was to be the temporary access road to the proposed unsupervised, uncontrolled State public launch. The BPA worked very closely with the Branchview Drive South Road Association President, Carl Winslow, and in fact, we both spoke at the City Council meeting on April 14th when the City Council voted unanimously to oppose the bill.

For those of you who don’t know, LD 824 was a bill introduced in the House that mandated the construction of an unsupervised, uncontrolled public boat launch and road on the State of Maine property at the Narrows. Although the Bill was resoundingly defeated, the issue of improved public access to Branch is not going to go away. I have been advised by our Senator, Dennis Damon, and our Representative, Bob Crosthwaite, that the City and the BPA need to work together to design an appealing solution to the problem of improved public access. The City has finally come to the realization that the City Landing needs to be upgraded (with gate, supervision, washing station, curfews, etc.) and the rocks at the bridge will need to be dealt with as well. Thus, we are working with the City and the State on developing a responsible plan to upgrade the City landing, using State dollars, in a manner satisfactory to all the parties, including the BPA. Later in this article, I will be asking for opinions from those of you who did not have the opportunity to participate in the e-mail survey conducted in April. I am again begging for e-mail addresses from those of you who have not sent yours to me. We make this plea in order to quickly advise you of any happenings that are a threat to Branch Lake’s water quality and recreational use. Please simply send me your updated e-mail address at President@branchpond.org. Some that I have are no longer valid, so please send me an updated e-mail address. Thank you.

The following are excerpts from some of the e-mail communications I sent out in April. These will give you a flavor of the efforts put forth to defeat this Bill.

On APRIL 10, 2003, I sent an e-mail message to the BPA Board, Past Presidents of the BPA, as well as other property owners who have advised me of their e-mail addresses. That message was essentially as follows:

"As of Monday April 7, Tim King, City Manager (who has recently heard from Councilman/State Representative-Legislator Bob Crosthwaite) advised me that a new Bill has been introduced in the House. If passed this Bill would transfer responsibility/authority for the State owned land on Branch Lake from the Department of Conservation (DOC) to the Department of Inland Fisheries & Wildlife (I, F & W). The Bill further states that the Inland Fisheries people will construct an unsupervised/uncontrolled public boat launch on Branch Lake without any input from anyone. LD 824 is still in Committee.

I’m further advised that there is talk in the Committee about possibly setting the Bill aside and voting instead to pass a resolution that would mandate that the DOC and the City of Ellsworth reach agreement as to how to best allow improved access to Branch Lake. If the resolution were passed, agreement would need to be reached by the fall of 2004. Bear in mind that I have no factual info on this. I have seen nothing in writing, but I have no reason to believe this is not the case.

I have been involved in a conference with the City, Bob C and Herb Hartman of the DOC. It seems inevitable to me that public access to Branch will be improved in some form. The BPA will have input as I have been working closely with Tim K, Bob C, and the City Council as needed. Anne Hayes has been involved in this as well in her work with the Comprehensive Planning Committee, as member of the COLA board and as a concerned citizen." (End of first e-mail)

On April 14, 2003, I sent the following e-mail message:

"This matter was on the City Council meeting agenda on Monday April 14th. Several people were there from the lake and made comments on the Bill, including Anne Hayes, Carl Winslow, Jack Holmes John Phillips and Bill Fenn. I presented a document to the Council expressing the concerns of the many people I had heard from. A copy of this document is posted on the BPA Website (Click Here). The Council voted 7 to 0 to expressly oppose LD 824, which was a great first step." (End of second e-mail)

On May 12, 2003 I sent the following update:

"The bill was defeated in the House on May 5, 2003. However, the Bill was passed in the Senate on May 9 and was sent back to the House for another vote. Our legislator, Bob Crosthwaite, led the debate on the City’s behalf, as well as for Lake Property owners, and the House. Again, the Bill was defeated. THIS SECOND VOTE KILLED THE BILL, AT LEAST FOR THE TIME BEING.

The City, The State and the BPA now have an opportunity to package the City Landing in such a manner as to make it the single most appealing place to allow improved public access to Branch Lake. The City Landing, unlike any State landing, would be gated, supervised, have curfews, a washing station, etc. Such improvements to the City Landing would hopefully be funded by the State, using some of the $400,000.00 they will not now be spending on a State Landing. The City would operate the landing and the BPA will have input all along the way. A proper road to the City Landing already exists. Also, I understand that the rocks at the bridge can be dealt with, such that obstacles preventing reasonable sized boats from accessing the big lake can be managed by the state and the city in partnership. This proposal is in contrast to constructing an unsupervised/uncontrolled public landing on the other side of the point from sand beach." (End of third e-mail)

In an earlier e-mail message sent on April 10, 2003, I conducted a quick and informal survey and asked the question stated below. I received 85 responses out of 140 e-mails sent. All who responded stated their opposition to the construction of an unsupervised/ uncontrolled public landing on the State land. All but four people supported improved access to Branch Lake via the City landing as outlined above. This partial survey allowed me to participate in the discussion in a constructive discussion with the City. For those of you who do not have e-mail, would you please take a moment to send me a response to the question presented at the end of this article AS SOON AS POSSIBLE? If you have any questions, feel free to call me at 207-667-8098. Thank you for your anticipated response.

DUES: Also, if you have not already done so, please pay your 2002 ($15.00) and 2003 ($20.00) dues. The BPA is now an official non-profit organization and as such your dues and contributions to the BPA are tax deductible. We have enclosed an information sheet for your dues. We need the support of the full membership on these issues as it is difficult for me to go before the City Council on your behalf when only 50% of the Lake property owners are paid members of our Association. Thank you!

Back to top

Treasurer's Report
By Bob Totman

The cash position of the BPA remains at about the same level as it has been over the past few years with a total of $8,750 in the savings and checking accounts. However (and sadly), we did experience a decrease in membership from a high of 180 in 2001 to 140 in 2002 and a decrease in income from $3,345 to $2,660. As we start the new year 2003, we have income of $1,493 and expenses of $374 through the end of April with 75 paid memberships. As you can see, we need an additional 105 memberships to bring us up to the level of membership and income of 2001. Van Terrell and I have spent hours preparing and mailing dues notices to the property owners on Branch. It's disappointing, to say the least, to have only a 50% response rate. You'll see a dues notice form in the Newsletter. Please take a moment to send in your check.

To better manage our financial affairs and as mandated at the 2002 Annual Meeting of the BPA, Glen Curtis (Chair of the BPA Audit Committee and Website Master) has designed a budget format for our Association. As promised at the Annual Meeting, we are pleased to be able to share the budget and planning process with you. A copy of the actual budget is shown below. The data we are using as budget objectives were entered in the spreadsheet by Glen, with the help of your President, Van Terrell, and me. The income and expense estimates were based on historical data. A new approach has been incorporated with the inclusion of a "reserve fund" section. These funds are set aside for education, legal, invasive species, water quality, and general operating expenses. Each fund has a cap.

This budget format was presented to and accepted by the BPA Board at its last meeting in 2002. If you have any questions about your membership status, you can reach me at 207 862-3257 or during the summer at 667-7482. You may also contact me by email at rtotman@gwi.net.

Beginning Balance 9/16/02 Balance 9/30/02   2003     2003    
  $7,199   1st Qtr 3/31/2003   Year    
    Budget Actual Diff Budget Actual Diff  
Income              
1 Membership 300 1,195 895 4,000 1,195 (2,805) 1
2 Interest 25 17 (8) 100 17 (83) 2
3 Gifts, Grants, Donations   65 65 200 65 (135) 3
4 Other   6 6 0 6 6 4
5   Total 325 1,283 958 4,300 1,283 (3,017) 5
                 
Expense              
6 Printing 400 26 (374) 500 26 (474) 6
7 Postage 75 37 (38) 300 37 (263) 7
8 COLA     0 400 0 (400) 8
9 Invasive Species 50   (50) 500 0 (500) 9
10 Annual Mtg     0 100 0 (100) 10
11 Web Site 300 227 (73) 300 227 (73) 11
12 Special Events     0 100 0 (100) 12
13 Water Quality     0 100 0 (100) 13
14 Gifts, Grants, Donations     0 300 0 (300) 14
15 Other 60 68 8 240 68 (172) 15
16   Total 885 358 (527) 2,840 358 (2,482) 16
                 
Net Income/Loss (560) 925 1,486 1,460 926 (534)  
                 
Reserve Funds              
17 Education 1,025 1,095 70 1,344 1,095 (249)