Update on Missing Plant Life in Candlewood Lake

Submitted by Workingmomof3boys t3_110in1h in Connecticut

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QyZ_yRQwNvQ

You can see the explanation in the video linked above. It turns out the sterile grass carp that were introduced into the lake in 2008 and again in 2015 appear to be the cause. When the carp were introduced for the second time (and in much greater numbers), no one considered that while the carp would not reproduce, they would grow larger as they feasted on the milfoil and then consume even more! Unfortunately, because the power company that owns the lake needs to make repairs to the dam this year, they're doing a deep drawdown, which is not going to help regenerate plant life. I think that ultimately, the lake will probably recover, but finding the right balance between no plant life (which will destroy the lake's ecosystem and kill its fish) and too much plant life (such that it chokes the lake and prevents enjoyable recreation) is not going to be easy.

8

Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

octo2195 t1_j8931tf wrote

The sterile grass carp were never intended to reproduce, hence being sterile. This is a program modeled on the one (first in the state) at Ball Pond in New Fairfield, CT which has been very successful.

The deep draw down has been done in the past on Candlewood Lake to expose the plant life along the shore to cold air to help control the weeds. The draw down to make repairs will most likely not have any major impact on the plant life along the shore this year as it is no where near as cold as necessary to be effective.

7

General_Awareness510 t1_j8alt29 wrote

Maybe don't let homeowners draw water from the lake and use it to fertilize their lawns. Runoff back into lake of chemicals plus septic systems. Don't worry just do a deep draw everything will be OK 👌

2

Workingmomof3boys OP t1_j8b6wn7 wrote

Replying to octo2195 (#1,788,731)

My point about the drawdown is that leaving more of the lakebed exposed will not help the regeneration of plant life. We don't want more milfoil control right now; we need some regeneration of plant growth. The carp, which have all grown a lot larger, are eating any plants in the lake bed as they grow. That means no habitat for juvenile bass fish and the possibility of more nutrients left unused in the lake, which could lead to toxic algae blooms. Hopefully, it will be manageable, but it would be better if we did not have to have a deep drawdown this year. The introduction of the sterile grass carp was well-intentioned, but we just introduced too many, which left the lake with almost zero plant life right now.

1

Workingmomof3boys OP t1_j8b8avx wrote

Replying to General_Awareness510 (#1,791,453)

Actually, irrigation from the lake is usually better for the environment. Most lakefront on Candlewood uses well water, and using that water from the water table to water plants and lawns would be inadvisable for various reasons. City water is treated with chlorine and other chemicals, which would be contaminants in the lake ecosystem. The septic issue is another one entirely. Responsible homeowners should pump their septic systems regularly and perform regular maintenance. Failed septic systems can contribute significantly to toxic algae blooms. Neither of those things, however, is impacted by a drawdown other than the fact that you may not be able to use your irrigation pump until the lake reaches a level high enough for your pumping system to work,

2

Workingmomof3boys OP t1_j8baled wrote

Replying to Workingmomof3boys (#1,792,452)

Irrespective of homeowners' watering systems, we should all be responsible for how we fertilize our plants. There are restrictions on what is permissible, and responsible landscapers and homeowners abide by the rules. Especially now, with essentially no plant life in the lake, we should avoid contributing to algae blooms with fertilizer runoff -- there are no plants to absorb the nutrients.

2

Workingmomof3boys OP t1_j95xc5m wrote

Replying to BryanCalens2ndFamily (#1,793,953)

No. It's owned by a private power company. However, it is subject to DEP rules, and there is a shoreline management program in conjunction with the five towns bordering the lake and the state. The power company actually has the right to flood shoreline property up to the 440' line.

1