IN F O R M A T IO N TO USERS This material was produced from a m icrofilm copy o f the original docum ent. W hile the most advanced technological means to photograph and reproduce this docum ent have been used, the quality is heavily dependent upon the qu ality of the original subm itted. The follow ing explanation o f techniques is provided to help you markings or patterns which m ay appear on this reproduction. understand 1. The sign or "targ et" fo r pages apparently lacking from the docum ent photographed is "Missing Page(s)". If it was possible to obtain the missing page(s) or section, they are spliced in to the film along w ith adjacent pages. This m ay have necessitated cutting thru an image and duplicating adjacent pages to insure you com plete continuity. 2. When an image on the film is obliterated w ith a large round black m ark, it is an indication th at the photographer suspected th a t the copy may have moved during exposure and thus cause a blurred image. Y o u w ill find a good image o f the pege in the adjacent fram e. 3. When a m ap, drawing or chart, etc., was part o f the m aterial being photographed the photographer follow ed a defin ite m ethod in "sectioning" the m aterial. It is customary to begin photoing at the upper left hand corner o f a large sheet and to continue photoing from left to right in equal sections w ith a small overlap. If necessary, sectioning is continued again — beginning below the first row and continuing on until complete. 4. The m ajo rity of users indicate th at the textual content is of greetest value, however, a somewhat higher quality reproduction could be made from "photographs" if essential to the understanding of the dissertation. Silver prints o f "photographs" m ay be ordered at additional charge by w riting the O rder D epartm ent, giving the catalog num ber, title , author and specific pages you wish reproduced. 5. P LE A SE received. NOTE: Some pages m ay have indistinct p rin t. Film ed as University M icrofilm s International 3 0 0 North Z e e b R oad Ann Arbor. M ic h ig a n 4 0 1 0 6 U SA St John's Road. T y le r’s G reen H ig h W yco m b e. Bucks. E n g la n d H P 10 8H R 77-25,240 GIBSON, George Roland, Jr., 1942AN INVESTIGATION OF THE SELF-HELP WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT POTENTIAL OF MICHIGAN LAKE ASSOCIATIONS. Michigan State University, Ph.D., 1977 Limnology Xerox University Microfilms , © Ann A rb o r, M ic h ig a n 4 8 1 0 6 C o p y r i g h t by GEORGE ROLAND GIBSON, JR. 1977 AN INVESTIGATION OF THE SELF-HELP WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT POTENTIAL OF MICHIGAN LAKE ASSOCIATIONS By George Roland G ib s o n , J r . A DISSERTATION S u b m it t e d t o M ic h ig a n S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y in p a r t ia l f u l f i l l m e n t o f the re q uirem ents f o r t h e degree o f DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Departm ent o f Resource Development 1977 ABSTRACT AN INVESTIGATION OF THE SELF-HELP WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT POTENTIAL OF MICHIGAN LAKE ASSOCIATIONS By George R ola nd G i b s o n , J r . M ic h ig a n 's in la n d re c r e a tio n a l l a k e s have become i n c r e a s i n g l y developed in r e c e n t ye a rs t o the e x t e n t t h a t c u l t u r a l is a grow ing problem . e u tro p h ic a tio n A t p r e s e n t t h e r e a r e no s u f f i c i e n t i n s t i t u t i o n a l r e m e d ie s f o r t h e management o f t h e s e l a k e s . I f ab ate m e n t o f t h i s d e g r a d a t i o n i s t o be a c h i e v e d w i t h i n a r e a s o n a b l e amount o f t i m e , t h e management e f f o r t w i l l l a k e c o m m u n ity . tio n , have t o o r i g i n a t e w i t h r e s i d e n t s o f t h e These r e s i d e n t s , u s u a l l y r e p r e s e n t e d by a l a k e a s s o c i a ­ have d e m o n s t r a t e d c o n c e r n f o r t h e i r la ke re s o u rc e s , b u t are unaware o f t h e o p t i o n s a v a i l a b l e t o them f o r s e l f - i n i t i a t e d lake w a te r q u a l i t y management. T h i s r e s e a r c h pa p e r i n c l u d e s a r e v i e w o f t h e t e c h n i c a l lite ra tu re f r o m w h ic h a d o c u m e n t a t i o n o f l a k e management o p t i o n s s u i t a b l e f o r com munity i m p l e m e n t a t i o n has been p r e p a r e d . a c tio n are; q u a lity 1) e f f l u e n t and n u t r i e n t d i s c h a r g e a b a t e m e n t ; 2) w a t e r in v e s tig a tio n ; 3) s y m p t o m a t ic ( a l g a e and weed c o n t r o l ) m en t; and 4 ) s o c i o p o l i t i c a l in s titu tio n a l The f o u r a r e a s o f f e a s i b l e i n v o l v e m e n t by l a k e r e s i d e n t s manage­ t o in d u c e change and agency c o o p e r a t i o n f o r l a k e management. A random sample o f 21 M ic h i g a n Lower P e n i n s u l a l a k e a s s o c i a t i o n s was i n t e r v i e w e d t o d e t e r m i n e t h e " s t a t e o f t h e a r t " o f M i c h i g a n l a k e George Roland G ib s o n , J r . a s s o c i a t i o n s e l f - h e l p management. Management success was based on a com p arison o f r e p o r t e d management p e rfo rm a n c e by a s s o c i a t i o n r e p r e s e n t a ­ t i v e s w i t h t h e o p t i o n c r i t e r i a d e ve lo p e d above. The a s s o c i a t i o n s were found t o be f a i r l y a c t i v e i n t h e a re as o f s o c io p o litic a l lo c a l i n v o l v e m e n t i n d i c a t i n g th e p o t e n t i a l government t o a s s i s t i n la k e management. There was l i t t l e ac co m plis hm e nt i n the o t h e r t h r e e are as more d i r e c t l y ph ysica l to in flu e n c e re la te d to l a k e improvement p e r f o r m a n c e . An a t t e m p t t o equa te s o c i a l and p h y s i c a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f t h e a s s o c ia tio n s w ith r e l a t i v e in c o n c lu s iv e . l a k e management success was e s s e n t i a l l y T h i s was because th e l a k e a s s o c i a t i o n s sampled a r e a l l r e l a t i v e l y homogeneous i n c h a r a c t e r and because l i t t l e s ig n ific a n t s e l f - h e l p management has been ac c o m p lis h e d t o d a t e . It i s b e l i e v e d t h a t the cause o f th e l a k e a s s o c i a t i o n ' s manage­ ment i m p a i r m e n t i s a l a c k o f s u f f i c i e n t combined w i t h member a p a t h y . management p r o j e c t s , knowledge o f management o p t i o n s T his r e s u l t s i n poor p a r t i c i p a t i o n t h e f a i l u r e o f which r e i n f o r c e s t h e i n i t i a l o f a p a t h y and p e r p e t u a t e s a c y c l e o f r e l a t i v e To remedy t h i s p r o b l e m , a r e s i d e n t i a l in sense in e ffic ie n c y . l a k e management c o m m i t t e e , c o o r d i n a t e d by the c o u n t y C o o p e r a t i v e E x t e n s i o n S e r v i c e a g e n t , i s proposed as a p i l o t p r o j e c t . P a rt o f the la k e c o m n u n it ie s ' f r u s t r a t i o n w i t h r e s p e c t t o management i s r e l a t e d to t h e i r s k e p tic is m w i t h regard t o c e n t r a l i z e d p u b l i c agency management o f l a k e r e s o u r c e s . posal, t h e r e f o r e , emphasizes l o c a l d e c i s i o n making pro c e s s as w e l l p ro je c ts imple mente d. and o t h e r p u b l i c as f i n a n c i a l Under t h i s in s titu tio n in itia tiv e T his p ro ­ and c o n t r o l o v e r t h e r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r th e pro po sal, re g io n a l r e s o u r c e a g e n c ie s s p e c i a l i s t s would assume a p r i m a r i l y George R o la nd G i b s o n , J r . a d v is o ry r o le t o t h e l a k e c o r m u n i t y w h ic h w o u l d draw upon t h e i r s e r v i c e s f o r e n f o r c e m e n t , p l a n n i n g , and a s s i s t a n c e mined by t h e l a k e r e s i d e n t s . It is im ple m e ntin g p r o j e c t s d e t e r ­ t h e s e r e s i d e n t s who u l t i m a t e l y a r e a m a j o r s o u r c e o f b o t h t h e p ro b le m s and s o l u t i o n s i n l a n d l a k e w a t e r q u a l i t y management. t o M ich ig an To my w i f e and p a r e n t s ; w i t h i i respect, g r a t i t u d e , and l o v e . ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would l i k e t o e x p r e s s my g r a t i t u d e t o some o f t h e many p e o p le who c o n t r i b u t e d t o th e c o m p l e t i o n o f t h i s study. My c o l l e a g u e s , Mr. Jay G a l i n and Dr. Ted A l t e r , a s s i s t e d and em p ath iz ed w i t h me t h r o u g h o u t o u r mutual g r a d u a t e e d u c a t i o n e x p e r i ­ ence. I am g r a t e f u l t o my academic a d v i s o r , D r . C l i f f o r d Humphrys, Department o f Resource Develop ment, f o r h i s en cou rag em e nt, s u p p o r t , and guid an ce s i n c e my e n r o l l m e n t a t M ic h ig a n S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y . would a l s o l i k e I t o tha nk my o t h e r g u id a n c e c o m m itt e e members, Dr. E c k h a r t D e r s c h , Departm ent o f Resource Developm ent, and D r. C l a r e n c e McNabb, Department o f F i s h e r i e s and W i l d l i f e , c r i t i c i s m s and encouragem ent. f o r t h e ir p ro fe s s io n a l Mr. Wayne N ierm an , D i r e c t o r o f t h e Oakland County C o o p e r a t i v e E x t e n s io n S e r v i c e , p r o v i d e d s u p p o r t and en th u s ia s m t o the r e s e a r c h when c r i t i c a l l y needed. o f t h e M ic h i g a n Lake and Stream A s s o c i a t i o n s , a s s o c ia tio n re p re s e n ta tiv e s edged. in te rv ie w e d Inc. The c o o p e r a t i o n and t h e many l a k e i s a l s o g r a t e f u l l y a c k n o w l­ Miss P a t r i c i a S a lo n e n , s e c r e t a r y , De partm ent o f Resource Development, p a t i e n t l y t y p e d t h i s m a n u s c r i p t . Her work i n e v e r y i n ­ s ta n c e has been e x c e l l e n t i n s p i t e o f many r e v i s i o n s . S c h n e id e r , g r a p h i c s a r t i s t , Mr. Paul Depa rtm ent o f Resource De velo pment, g r a c i o u s l y p r o v i d e d h i s c o n s i d e r a b l e t a l e n t t o th e i l l u s t r a t i o n s contained in t h i s pa pe r. P a r t i c u l a r r e c o g n i t i o n i s due my w i f e , and moral support throughout t h is E lle n , phase o f o u r l i f e . f o r her m a te ria l TABLE OF CONTENTS Page vi i LIST OF T A B L E S LIST OF FIGURES.................................................................................................................. x CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES ................................................................. 1 O b j e c t i v e s ..................................................................................................... 3 RESEARCH APPROACH ....................................................................................... 4 F e a s i b l e Lake Management O p t i o n s ................................................... Assessment o f Lake A s s o c i a t i o n s i n M ic h ig a n ..................... The I n t e r v i e w Procedure ................................................................ The I n t e r v i e w F o r m a t ......................................................................... A n a l y t i c a l M eth od s.............................................................................. S t r e n g t h s and Weaknesses o f the Survey Research Approach .............................................................................. V a r i a b i l i t y i n Response ................................................................ V a r i a b i l i t y A s s o c i a t e d w i t h the I n t e r v i e w T echniq ue . B ia s o f the A u s p i c e s ......................................................................... B ia s A r i s i n g from N o n - r e s p o n s e .................................................. The Time Element as a F a c t o r o f Sampling E f f i c i e n c y . R e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f t h e Study Sample......................................... The Measurement Process ................................................................ 4 5 10 11 13 17 17 18 20 20 21 23 23 RESULTS OF THE LITERATURE SURVEY...................................................... 26 F e a s i b l e Lake Management O p t i o n s .................................................. E f f l u e n t A b a t e m e n t .................................................................................. Ph osphorus, Sewage E f f l u e n t , R u n o f f , and Lake D e g r a d a t i o n .............................................................................. Lawn F e r t i l i z a t i o n and S e p t i c Tank System Management. A l t e r n a t i v e s t o S e p t i c Tank D is p o s a l S y ste m s .................. Lake Water Q u a l i t y I n v e s t i g a t i o n .................................................. S o l u b l e o r O r th o p h o s p h a te Phosphorus and Ni t r a t e - N i t r o g e n .............................................................................. C h l o r i d e s ................................................................................................ B a c t e r i a .................................................................................................... C o n d u c t i v i t y ........................................................................................... Symptomatic Lake Management . .................................................. A lg a e C o n t r o l ....................................................................................... Chemical Methods o f C o n t r o l .................................................. 26 26 II. III. iv 27 31 37 39 40 42 43 44 45 46 47 Page CHAPTER B i o l o g i c a l C o n t r o l s ..................................................................... M echanic al C o n t r o l s ..................................................................... A q u a t i c Weed C o n t r o l ......................................................................... Chemical Methods o f C o n t r o l ................................................... M ec h an ic a l Methods o f C o n t r o l .............................................. E n v ir o n m e n ta l M a n i p u l a t i o n ....................................................... S o c i o p o l i t i c a l I n v o l v e m e n t o f the Lake A s s o c i a t i o n . . . I n f o r m a t i o n F u n c t i o n ......................................................................... E d u c a t i o n and P e r s u a s i o n ................................................................ Legal P o w e r ............................................................................................ P u b l i c Exposure ................................................................................... Economic F u n c t i o n .............................................................................. P o l i t i c a l Power .................................................................................. IV. 50 51 52 54 55 55 60 61 61 62 62 63 64 RESULTS OF THE LAKE ASSOCIATION INTERVIEWS................................ 68 Open Q u e s t i o n s ............................................................................................ O b j e c t i v e s o f Lake A s s o c i a t i o n s .............................................. Problems o f Lake A s s o c i a t i o n s .................................................. R e c o g n i t i o n o f Decreased Lake Water Q u a l i t y as a P r o b le m .................................................................................. Member A p a th y and D i s c o r d as Problems ............................ Accom p li shm en ts o f Lake A s s o c i a t i o n s ..................................... P e r c e iv e d Value o f th e Lake A s s o c i a t i o n s ............................ F a c t o r s Which Would Help Improve the Lake A s s o c i a t i o n s ....................................................................................... R e c r e a t i o n a l Uses o f t h e L a k e s .................................................. C h a r a c t e r i s t i e s ....................................................................................... P o p u l a t i o n C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s ........................................................... Average Lake Community S i z e .................................................. Average Lake A s s o c i a t i o n S i z e .............................................. A c t i v e and Seasonal Lake Members......................................... O r g a n i z a t i o n ........................................................................................... Age o f Lake A s s o c i a t i o n s ............................................................ E n a b l i n g A u t h o r i t y o f th e Lake A s s o c i a t i o n s . . . . Frequency o f A s s o c i a t i o n M e e tin g s Per Y e a r .................. O th e r A s s o c i a t i o n s on the L a k e .............................................. A s s o c i a t i o n R e l a t i o n s h i p s w i t h Local Community and Governmen t....................................................... S o c i a l O r i e n t a t i o n o f the A s s o c i a t i o n s ............................ Lake A s s o c i a t i o n F inances ............................................................ E s t im a t e d Average Household Income L e v e l s ................... R e t i r e e s i n th e Lake A s s o c i a t i o n s ..................................... Annual Dues o f th e Lake A s s o c i a t i o n s ................................ Lake A s s o c i a t i o n Annual Income.............................................. Lake C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s ......................................................................... Lake S i z e ............................................................................................ Lake Depths and Bottom C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s ............................ E x t e n t o f Lake D e v e lo p m e n t............................................................ P o l i t i c a l B o un daries A s s o c i a t e d w i t h Lake C o m m u n i t i e s ...................................................................................... 68 68 71 v 73 7 77 79 80 82 84 84 84 84 87 87 87 92 94 97 98 100 101 101 105 106 106 110 110 110 115 118 Page CHAPTER V. VI. Lake Management Pe rformance by t h e Lake A s s o c i a t i o n s ..................................................................... 121 DISCUSSIONS AND CONCLUSIONS ................................................................. 128 Composite Lake A s s o c i a t i o n C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s ........................... A s s o c i a t i o n C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s Compared t o Performance Score .............................................................................. Summary o f Lake A s s o c i a t i o n Water Q u a l i t y Management P e r f o r m a n c e ..................................................................... N u t r i e n t and E f f l u e n t Abatement .............................................. Water Q u a l i t y I n v e s t i g a t i o n ....................................................... Symptomatic Lake Management ....................................................... S o c i o p o l i t i c a l I n v o l v e m e n t ........................................................... O b j e c t i v e s , Proble m s, and Acco mp lishm en ts o f t h e A s s o c i a t i o n s ..................................................................... C o n c l u s i o n s ................................................................................................ 128 132 132 135 136 138 141 142 RECOMMENDATIONS........................................................................................... 146 F u r t h e r R e s e a r c h ....................................................................................... A Proposed General A s s i s t a n c e P la n f o r Lake A s s o c i a t i o n S e l f - H e l p Management ................................ 146 APPENDIX A THE STANDARDIZED QUESTIONNAIRE USED IN THE PERSONAL INTERVIEWS WITH LAKE ASSOCIATIONS ............................................ B 131 148 159 ASSESSMENT FORM USED TO EVALUATE LAKE ASSOCIATION MANAGEMENT PERFORMANCE........................................................................ 175 HERBICIDES REGISTERED WITH THE MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, AND THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY FOR USE IN THE AQUATIC ENVIRONMENT.......................... 177 D RECOGNIZED PROBLEMS OF MICHIGAN LAKE ASSOCIATIONS . . . . 182 E THE USE OF VEGETATIVE BUFFER STRIPS TO MITIGATE THE IMPACT OF SEPTIC TANK EFFLUENTS ON LAKE WATER QUALITY C . 188 LITERATURE CITED ............................................................................................................. 200 GENERAL REFERENCES ......................................................................................................... 205 vi LIST OF TABLES T a b le 1. Page D i s p o s i t i o n o f t h e 50 Lake A s s o c i a t i o n s C o m p r is in g the Sample P o o l .................................................................................................... 7 Frequency D i s t r i b u t i o n o f S t a t e d Lake A s s o c i a t i o n O b j e c t i v e s ......................................................................................................... 70 Frequency D i s t r i b u t i o n o f S t a t e d Lake A s s o c i a t i o n P r o b le m s ............................................................................................................. 72 Frequency o f Lake A s s o c i a t i o n s R e p o r t i n g Lake Water Q u a l i t y P r o b le m s ........................................................................................... 73 Frequency D i s t r i b u t i o n o f Lake A s s o c i a t i o n s R e p o r t i n g Problems w i t h Member Ap athy .............................................. 75 Frequency D i s t r i b u t i o n o f Lake A s s o c i a t i o n Responses t o the Q u e s t i o n : Are t h e Members o f Your A s s o c i a t i o n Com­ p a tib le ? 75 Responses o f Region al Resource Managers t o Q u e s tio n s R e gardin g T h e i r P e r c e p t i o n o f t h e E x t e n t o f Lake A s s o c i a t i o n C o n f l i c t s ............................................................................. 76 Frequency D i s t r i b u t i o n o f Reported Acco mplishm en ts V o l u n t e e r e d by Lake A s s o c i a t i o n Respondents ........................... 78 Frequency o f Lake A s s o c i a t i o n I n t e r v i e w e e Responses t o the Q uestion: Do You C o n s id e r Your Lake A s s o c i a t i o n t o Be Necessary and M e a n i n g f u l ? ....................................................... 80 Frequency D i s t r i b u t i o n o f I n t e r v i e w e e Responses t o th e Q uestion: What Would Help Improve Your Lake A s s o c i a ­ t i o n ' s Performance? 81 Most F r e q u e n t l y V o lu n t e e r e d Lake R e c r e a t i o n a l Uses i n t h e O p in io n s o f the I n t e r v i e w e e s ....................................................... 83 12. Most P o p u la r R e c r e a t i o n a l Lake U s e s .................................................. 83 13. S i z e o f Lake Communities Sampled........................................................... 85 14. Lake A s s o c i a t i o n Mem bers hips.................................................................... 86 15. A c t i v e Membership by Number o f Households 88 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. vi i ................................... T a b le 16. Page P e r c e n t o f Lake A s s o c i a t i o n Members Who A re Seasonal R e s i d e n t s ......................................................................................................... 89 P e r c e n t o f A c t i v e Lake A s s o c i a t i o n Members Who Are Seasonal R e s i d e n t s ....................................................................................... 90 18. Ages o f Sampled Lake A s s o c i a t i o n s ...................................................... 91 19. Type o f E n a b l i n g L e g i s l a t i o n Under Which the A s s o c i a t i o n s I n c o r p o r a t e ......................................................................... 92 20. Frequency o f General Membership M e e tin g s Per Year ................... 95 21. Average A t te n d a n c e a t General Membership M e e tin g s 96 22. The I n c i d e n c e o f More Than One A s s o c i a t i o n on a Lake. . . . 97 23. Lake A s s o c i a t i o n R e l a t i o n s h i p s w i t h the Lo cal Community and Governm ent................................................................................................ 99 17. ................... 24. S ocial F u n c t i o n o f Lake A s s o c i a t i o n s .................................................. 101 25. Respondents E s t im a t e d Average Annual Income f o r Members o f His Lake A s s o c i a t i o n ......................................................................... 102 Respondents E s t i m a t e o f P e r c e n t o f LA Membership Who Are R e t i r e d I n d i v i d u a l s ......................................................................... 105 27. Annual Dues o f t h e Lake A s s o c i a t i o n s .................................................. 107 28. F re q u e n c ie s o f Respondents An s w ering t h e Q u e s t i o n : Does Your LA Have Any O th e r Source o f Income Beyond Dues?. . . 108 29. Annual Budget o f t h e Lake A s s o c i a t i o n s ............................................. 109 30. Lake S iz e i n A c r e s ........................................................................................... 112 31. Maximum Lake Depth i n F e e t ......................................................................... 113 32. Most F r e q u e n t l y O c c u r r i n g Lake D e p t h .................................................. 114 33. P redom in ant Lake Bottom Types A c c o r d i n g t o Respondent A s s e s s m e n t s ..................................................................................................... 115 E x t e n t o f Lake Community Development T h a t I n c l u d e s N o n - R i p a r i a n L o t D e v e lo p m e n t................................................................ 116 E x t e n t o f Development; i . e . , P e r c e n t o f A v a i l a b l e Lake Shore L o t s S u i t a b l e f o r C o n s t r u c t i o n T h a t Have Been B u i l t Upon......................................................................................................... 117 P o litic a l 118 26. 34. 35. 36. B o u n d a r ie s A s s o c i a t e d w i t h t h e L a k e s .......................... vi i i T a b le Page 37. Summary o f Q u a n t i t a t i v e Lake Community C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s . . 120 38. Summary o f Lake Management P e rfo rm a nce by t h e I n t e r ­ viewed Lake A s s o c i a t i o n s ......................................................................... 122 Sources o f T e c h n i c a l A s s i s t a n c e U t i l i z e d by t h e Sampled Lake A s s o c i a t i o n s ....................................................................................... 125 39. ix . LIST OF FIGURES F ig u re 1. 2. Page A p p r o x im a te L o c a t i o n s o f th e I n t e r v i e w e d Lake A s s o c i a t i o n s ..................................................................................................... 8 I l l u s t r a t i o n o f t h e Dosing Chamber ( o r t a n k ) w i t h Dosing Siphon P r e s e n te d i n Schem atic Form ................................. 35 x CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES M ic h ig a n i n l a n d la k e r e s i d e n t s have exp res s e d g r o w in g c o n c e rn f o r the q u a l i t y o f t h e i r la ke resources in re c e n t y e a rs . They p e r c e i v e changes i n the l a k e such as reduced c l a r i t y o r i n c r e a s e d weed o r a l g a e growth. These changes o f t e n fo llo w in c r e a s e d r e s i d e n t i a l d e v e lo p m e n t. In i n c r e a s i n g numbers t h e y a r e s e e k i n g a s s i s t a n c e from u n i v e r s i t y o r s t a t e a g e n c ie s . It i s c l e a r t h a t c o n c e rn o v e r l a k e d e g r a d a t i o n e x i s t s r ip a r ia n sector. But t h e r i p a r i a n s , a lake a s s o c ia t i o n , th e ir in the many o f whom a r e r e p r e s e n t e d by are f r e q u e n t l y unaware o f t h e p a r t i c u l a r causes o f lake q u a l i t y problems, the s e v e r i t y o f t h e p r o b l e m s , o r o f t h e r e m e d ia l o p t i o n s a v a i l a b l e t o them. The M ic h ig a n De partm ent o f N a t u r a l respond t o t h i s Resources has a t t e m p t e d t o g r o w in g c o n c e rn t h r o u g h the c r e a t i o n o f an i n l a n d la k e s management d i v i s i o n manpower and no f i e l d i n 1974. s ta ff; T h is o f f i c e , and i n j u s t two y e a r s o f o p e r a t i o n , a l r e a d y has more r e q u e s t s f o r a s s i s t a n c e tha n i t S im ila rly , ho w e ver, has l i m i t e d requests to lo c a l can h a n d l e . P u b l i c H e a l t h De partm ent o f f i c i a l s may n o t pro du ce t h e r e s u l t s d e s i r e d by l a k e r e s i d e n t s . partment o f N atu ral it L i k e th e De­ Res ou rces , S t a t e and County H e a l t h De partm ents have l i m i t e d manpower and many o t h e r are as o f r e s p o n s i b i l i t y beyond t h e l a k e corm unity. F urthe r, the p u b l i c h e a l t h o b l i g a t i o n o f l o c a l 1 or state 2 s a n i t a r i a n s does n o t n e c e s s a r i l y e x t e n d t o c o n c e rn f o r a t t e n d a n t l a k e e u t r o p h i c a t i o n p r o b le m s . E x i s t i n g p u b l i c h e a l t h codes may r e q u i r e p a r t i c u l a r d e s ig n and s e tb a c k c r i t e r i a f o r ho use ho ld s e p t i c tan k systems w hic h a r e in t e n d e d t o p r o t e c t t h e l a k e and g r o u n d w a t e r fr o m d i s e a s e pa tho ge ns , b u t do l i t t l e n u trie n ts It evo lve s, t o p r e v e n t accompanying phosphorus and n i t r o g e n from e n t e r i n g e i t h e r system and c o n t r i b u t i n g is e vide nt th a t u n t i l ad eq ua te p u b l i c la k e a s s o c i a t i o n s must i n i t i a t e q u a l i t y management on t h e i r own. If to la k e enrichm ent. in s titu tio n a l response and c a r r y o u t much l a k e w a t e r rip a ria n rig h ts to lake resources a r e t o remain w i t h i n the p u r v i e w o f l a k e sho re p r o p e r t y ow ners, th e b u l k o f t h i s management i n i t i a t i v e them. may alwa ys have t o be assumed by As a p u b l i c ag ency, t h e Depa rtm ent o f N a t u r a l to place i t s Resources (DNR) tends g r e a t e s t emphasis on t h o s e management programs where t h e r e s o u r c e i s most a c c e s s i b l e t o th e g e n e r a l p u b lic . I f a l a k e community o r a s s o c i a t i o n ^ w is h e s t o p r e s e r v e some degree o f e x c l u s i v e n e s s o v e r la k e a c c e s s , it la k e by the DNR. must a t p r e s e n t concede t o a r a t h e r lo w i n t e r e s t S h o r t o f c h a ng in g t h i s p o lic y , in i t s the la k e a s s o c ia t i o n 's p r i m a r y o p t i o n i s management by t h e i r own i n i t i a t i v e . C le a r ly then, t h e r e i s a need f o r a s e l f - h e l p management program w hic h can be i n i t i a t e d lake w ater q u a l i t y and c o n t r o l l e d by t h e l a k e V o r t h e purposes o f t h i s s t u d y , " l a k e com m unity" and " l a k e a s s o c i a ­ t i o n " a r e d e f i n e d as f o l l o w s : Lake community - Those p e o p le l i v i n o p e r ­ m a n e n tly o r s e a s o n a l l y w i t h i n a q u a r t e r m i l e o f th e l a k e and d i r e c t l y i n ­ f l u e n c e d by i t , i . e . , tho s e h a v in g an a e s t h e t i c c o n c e r n , r e c r e a t i o n a l u s e r s , o r tho se dependent upon some a s p e c t o f th e l a k e o r i t s uses f o r a t le a s t a p o rtio n o f t h e ir liv e lih o o d . Lake a s s o c i a t i o n - Those members o f the l a k e community who are f o r m a l l y o r g a n i z e d to a c t i v e l y pu rsue group o b j e c t i v e s r e l a t e d t o the la k e and community. As t h e l a k e a s s o c i a t i o n expands i t s a c t i v i t i e s and membership, i t i s e n v i s i o n e d , i n th e c o n t e x t o f t h i s p a p e r , as becoming p r o g r e s s i v e l y more r e p r e s e n t a t i v e o f the l a k e community which g e n e r a t e d i t . 3 community. I n t e r e s t i n such a program i s e v i d e n t f r o m th e g r o w in g number o f r e q u e s t s f o r a s s i s t a n c e r e c e i v e d by w a t e r r e s o u r c e s p e c i a l i s t s a t M ich ig an S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y . The c o n s i s t e n t n a t u r e o f these r e q u e s t s t o the Depa rtm ent o f Resource Development i s i n terms o f "show us what i s wrong and t e l l im p o rta n t to note t h a t these us what we can d o . " It peop le a r e r a r e l y demanding a s e r v i c e ; is r a t h e r t h e y want i n f o r m a t i o n so t h e y can make d e c i s i o n s and implement programs on t h e i r own. A te n de ncy toward s e l f - h e l p l a k e management a l r e a d y e x i s t s by b o t h i n c l i n a t i o n and d e fa u lt. However, the l a k e r e s i d e n t s , w h i l e r e c o g n i z i n g t h e symptoms o f l a k e q u a l i t y d e c l i n e , a r e n o t always s u f f i c i e n t l y t i a t e o r c a r r y t h r o u g h the n e c e s s a r y r e m e d i a l inform ed to i n i ­ programs. O b j e c t i ves It i s e v i d e n t t h a t because o f develop m en t p r e s s u r e s t h e r e i s a need f o r i n l a n d la k e management, p a r t i c u l a r l y w i t h ment o f r e s i d e n t i a l e fflu e n ts . r e s p e c t t o th e a b a t e ­ T h is need i s n o t b e i n g s u f f i c i e n t l y met by p u b l i c a g e n c ie s and m u s t , a t l e a s t on an i n t e r i m b a s i s , be d e a l t w i t h a t the l o c a l community ( i . e . , la ke a s s o c ia tio n ) t h i s p r o b l e m , the o b j e c t i v e s o f t h i s s t u d y a r e as f o l l o w s : what management o p t i o n s a r e f e a s i b l e f o r l o c a l i z e d rip a ria n s ; 2) assess p r e s e n t c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s la k e a s s o c i a t i o n s le v e l. Given 1) D ete rm in e i m p l e m e n t a t i o n by and p e r form an ce o f th e i n M ic h ig a n w i t h r e s p e c t t o t h e s e management o p t i o n s by i n t e r v i e w i n g s e l e c t e d l a k e a s s o c i a t i o n r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s ; and 3) Design an a s s i s t a n c e program based on t h e c o n c e p t o f l a k e a s s o c i a t i o n s e l f h e l p management w h ic h i n c o r p o r a t e s lo ca l r e s o u r c e s and accormiodates t h e p r i o r i t i e s and i n t e r e s t s o f t h e l a k e community members as i n d i c a t e d by th e i n t e r v i e w s . CHAPTER I I RESEARCH APPROACH F e a s i b l e Lake Management O p t io n s In p u r s u i t o f the f i r s t o b j e c t i v e , the i d e n t i f i c a t i o n o f f e a s i b l e la k e management o p t i o n s which can be implemented by t h e r e s i d e n t s , a s urvey o f t e c h n i c a l e n g in e e rin g , s o il lite ra tu re in the f i e l d s o f l i m n o l o g y , s a n ita ry s c i e n c e , and r e s o u r c e management was made. O bvio usly, such a broad r e v i e w c a n n o t be a l l i n c l u s i v e o f any one f i e l d . The l i t e r a t u r e s u r v e y was, t h e r e f o r e , p r i m a r i l y d i r e c t e d a t th e i d e n t i f i ­ c a t i o n o f th o s e methods wh ic h ap pear t o le nd t h e m s e lv e s t o a r e a l i s t i c "g r a s s r o o t s " l o c a l i z e d approach t o l a k e management. t h i s g ra s s r o o t s emphasis l i e s state in s t it u t io n s i n the r e c o g n i t i o n f o r r e s o u r c e management w i l l The r a t i o n a l e th a t federal resource in c re a s e s , emphasis o f t h i s lite ra tu re p u b lic o f f i c i a l s s earch i s dents can do the m selv e s t o deal w i t h tu tio n s respon d t o t h e need. in c lu s io n in th is and l i k e l y assume a g r e a t e r r o l e i n i n l a n d l a k e q u a l i t y management i n t h e f u t u r e . cern f o r t h i s fo r As c i t i z e n w ill con­ resp on d. Thus, the t o c o n c e n t r a t e on what la k e r e s i ­ t h e i r p r o blem u n t i l Consequently, p u b lic i n s t i ­ t h e methods s e l e c t e d f o r s t u d y were chosen because o f t h e i r r e l a t i v e l y low c o s t , s i m p l i c i t y o f a p p l i c a t i o n , and s i g n i f i c a n c e o f e f f e c t upon l a k e q u a l i t y . These f a c t o r s are e s s e n t i a l to successful s e l f - h e l p management i m p l e ­ m e n t a t i o n by l a k e r e s i d e n t s . It i s e v i d e n t t h a t a s e l f - h e l p approach t o l a k e q u a l i t y management, i n w h ic h c o s t i s a m a j o r c o n s i d e r a t i o n , must c o n c e n t r a t e on abatem ent 4 5 and p r e v e n t i v e p r o c e s s e s . b a s in d r e d g i n g , c e n t r a l Major r e s t o r a t i o n t e c h n i q u e s , such as l a k e sewage t r e a t m e n t , o r w a t e r c o u r s e d i v e r s i o n s tend t o be p r o h i b i t i v e l y e x p e n s iv e and beyond the a u t h o r i t y o f la k e com m u niti es o r a s s o c i a t i o n s . An a l t e r n a t i v e approach i s a program d i r e c t e d a t t h e c u r t a i l m e n t and p r e v e n t i o n o f d e g r a d i n g i n f l u e n t s To t h i s end, emphasis has been p la c e d on methods f o r th e abatement o f s e p tic t a n k - t i l e to t h i s , t o the l a k e a t t h e i r l o c a l o r i g i n s . fie ld e fflu e n ts sym pto m a tic c o n t r o l and s u r f a c e r u n o f f t o l a k e s . In c id e n ta l o f a lg a e and a q u a t i c weeds was i n v e s t i g a t e d . T h is was because t h e s e n u is a n c e g ro w ths a r e o f t e n paramount c o n c ern s o f la k e r e s i d e n t s and c o n s t i t u t e a f a c t o r i n l a k e n u t r i e n t r e c y c l i n g and oxygen d e f i c i e n c i e s . Assessment o f Lake A s s o c i a t i o n s i n M ic h ig a n To meet t h e second o b j e c t i v e , to b e t t e r understand the n a tu re o f M ic h ig a n l a k e a s s o c i a t i o n s and assess t h e i r w a t e r q u a l i t y management s t a t u s , a random sample o f Lower P e n in s u l a a s s o c i a t i o n s was t a k e n , and o f f i c e r s o f the s e l e c t e d a s s o c i a t i o n s were p e r s o n a l l y i n t e r v i e w e d . The p o p u l a t i o n sampled c o n s i s t e d o f a l i s t i n g o f lake a s s o c ia tio n s p r o v i d e d by t h e M ic h ig a n Lake and Stream A s s o c i a t i o n s , n o n -p ro fit, Inc. (MLSA), a s t a t e w i d e o r g a n i z a t i o n o f l a k e and s tr e a m a s s o c i a t i o n s . T his l i s t c o n s i s t e d o f 128 i d e n t i f i e d o f f i c e r s o f member o r g a n i z a t i o n s and t h e i r m a i l i n g a d d r e s s e s . An a d d i t i o n a l da ta l i s t o f 210 l a k e o r stream o r g a n i z a t i o n s n o t b e l o n g i n g t o MLSA was a l s o o b t a i n e d from t h a t o rg a n iz a tio n . The i n i t i a l study p o p u la tio n , 338 l a k e a s s o c i a t i o n s o r i n d i v i d u a l s th e re fo re , in M ichigan. co n siste d o f T h is l i s t i n g i s ap­ p a r e n t l y t h e most c o m p le te d o c u m e n t a t io n o f l a k e a s s o c i a t i o n s a v a i l a b l e i n the s t a t e a t t h i s tim e. O n ly f i v e a s s o c i a t i o n s were r e p o r t e d i n 6 the Upper P e n i n s u l a . Because o f t h i s sm all r e p r e s e n t a t i o n and t h e t r a v e l expenses i n v o l v e d , t h e s e a s s o c i a t i o n s were d e l e t e d fr o m th e sample. Any i n f o r m a t i o n d e r i v e d i s , th e re fo r e , a p p lic a b le o n ly to t h e above 333 documented la k e a s s o c i a t i o n s o f M i c h i g a n ' s Lower P e n in ­ sula. A s tra tifie d random sample o f 50 l a k e a s s o c i a t i o n s was s e l e c t e d by use o f a t a b l e o f random numbers. T h i s sample c o n s i s t e d o f 25 MLSA member a s s o c i a t i o n s and 25 non-member a s s o c i a t i o n s drawn fro m each re sp e ctive l i s t . T h i s s e g r e g a t i o n was done i n o r d e r t o measure, among other v a ria b le s , t h e p o s s i b l e s i g n i f i c a n c e o f membership by th e a s s o c i a ­ tio n s i n t h e MLSA as a f a c t o r o f l a k e management p e r fo r m a n c e . The a c t u a l i n t e r v i e w sam ple , because o f economic and tim e c o n ­ s t r a i n t s , was s e t a t 30. because i t s ta tis tic a l T h is goal o f 30 i n t e r v i e w s was a l s o chosen t r a d i t i o n a l l y r e p r e s e n t s th e c u t o f f p o i n t f o r p a r a m e t r i c te chniq ue s, study p o p u la tio n . and because i t a p p r o x im a t e s t e n p e r c e n t o f t h e There were 15 i n t e r v i e w s i n each c a t e g o r y . The e x t r a 10 a s s o c i a t i o n s drawn fr o m each group were h e l d i n r e s e r v e f o r r e p l a c e ­ ment s h o u ld any a s s o c i a t i o n s r e f u s e i n t e r v i e w s , sim ply n o t e x i s t . n o t be a v a i l a b l e , o r The t e le p h o n e number o f th e i n i t i a l c o n t a c t f o r each a s s o c i a t i o n i n the sample was o b t a i n e d by c o n s u l t i n g t h e a p p r o p r i a t e l o c a l d i r e c t o r y f o r t h a t ad dre ss i n th e L a n s i n g C i t y L i b r a r y c o l l e c t i o n o f c u r r e n t t e le p h o n e books. The combined 30 a s s o c i a t i o n s were the n p l o t t e d on a map o f t h e s t a t e and c o n t a c t e d by t e l e p h o n e t o a r r a n g e i n t e r v i e w s i n o r d e r o f g e o g r a p h i c a l c o n v e n ie n c e o f t r a v e l . Whenever a c o n t a c t was n o t p o s s i b l e o r was r e f u s e d , a r e p la c e m e n t a s s o c i a t i o n was drawn from the a p p r o p r i a t e MLSA o r non-MLSA p o o l . 7 I n t e r v i e w s were c o n d u c te d f r o m l a t e June t h r o u g h e a r l y O c t o b e r 1976 a t t h e c o n v e n ie n c e o f t h e i n t e r v i e w e e s , who g e n e r a l l y p r e f e r r e d weekend a p p o i n t m e n t s . The sun nier's work was u n a v o i d a b l y i n t e r r u p t e d t w i c e by o t h e r r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s fo r a to ta l By t h e end o f t h e summer s eason, a t o t a l d e l a y o f a b o u t f o u r weeks. o f 21 i n t e r v i e w s had been com ple te d (11 MLSA i n t e r v i e w s and 10 non-MLSA i n t e r v i e w s ) and t h e pool o f 50 a s s o c i a t i o n s had been e x h a u s t e d . T a b le 1 p r e s e n t s t h e d i s p o s i ­ t i o n o f t h e 50 a s s o c i a t i o n s o r i g i n a l l y graph ica l F i g u r e 1. drawn. The a p p r o x i m a t e geo­ d i s t r i b u t i o n o f th e com p le te d i n t e r v i e w s No l i s t i n g is presented in o f in te rv ie w e e s o r t h e i r la ke a s s o c ia tio n s is p r o v i d e d because a pro m is e o f c o n f i d e n t i a l i t y was made t o encourage c a n d id resp on ses t o t h e q u e s t i o n s asked. T ab le 1 . - - D i s p o s i t i o n o f t h e 50 Lake A s s o c i a t i o n s C o m p r is i n g t h e Sample Pool (25 MLSA and 25 non-MLSA) Disposi t i o n Number A f f i 1i a t i o n In te r v ie w refused 2 non-MLSA No l a k e a s s o c i a t i o n e x i s t s 3 non-MLSA No phone l i s t i n g 8 3 MLSA, 5 non-MLSA 10 5 MLSA, 5 non-MLSA a v a ila b le Unable t o c o n t a c t A lte rn a tiv e s n o t a t te m p te d ^ I n t e r v i e w s com p le te d 6 21 MLSA 11 MLSA, 10 non-MLSA 50 I n t e r v i e w i n g t e r m i n a t e d because o f t im e and f i n a n c i a l c o n s t r a i n t s and t o p r e s e r v e a c o m p a r a t i v e b a l a n c e between MLSA and non-MLSA a s s o c i a ­ t i o n s sampled. 8 A D ftr * *CMOO+A*L HlASAi ,r .Q R AS^ A ****' rri * S54 •*/( iicico** - ov«# . tosco *A <1 OA o #U*C* Q C fA N A *lW *rC Q M £ C O S TA rS 4 8 £ t.± J W DLAHO MONACAL* ~ Vc-ifAT}0^ J_. \6 S N l* £ £ TTAWS * il£ tiA * VA* mu*£MMAI (Oh / A . BANG* c i t v r o * - £ 4 T Q *t HOUN m ll 5 Sfl . m C H A t* ^ fY A iC T O t, J*C*ia* WffWW . WATNt I A I—CASS. J.• —j o s t_t r jr ------1— SOA a » A *c* st s *t m i t a I A*tIA --------'sr clA/m l I l _ l._ .^ ._ l._ f*4w££ I *0**0* F i g u r e 1 . - - A p p r o x i m a t e L o c a t i o n s o f t h e I n t e r v i e w e d Lake A s s o c i a ­ tio n s . T r i a n g l e s i n d i c a t e l a k e a s s o c i a t i o n s i n th e h i g h e r p e rfo rm a n c e category. C i r c l e s d e s i g n a t e t h e a s s o c i a t i o n s c l a s s i f i e d as l o w e r p e r ­ form ing. A l l symbols a r e p o s i t i o n e d in the c e n t e r o f each c o u n t y and do n o t r e f l e c t t h e a c t u a l l o c a t i o n o f each l a k e . 9 The i n t e r v i e w t e c h n i q u e c o n s i s t e d o f a c o m b i n a t i o n o f t h e " e l i t e and s p e c i a l i z e d " i n t e r v i e w method d e s c r i b e d by D e x t e r (1970 ) and s t a n ­ dard i n t e r v i e w and q u e s t i o n n a i r e methods d e s c r i b e d by Moser and K a l t o n (1972) and P h i l l i p s (1966). T h i s h y b r i d approach was chosen t o accom­ modate the p a r t i c u l a r o b j e c t i v e s o f th e s t u d y . F irs t, t h e D e x te r method was p e r c e i v e d t o be h i g h l y a p p l i c a b l e t o t h e o b j e c t i v e o f d e t e r m i n i n g th e c h a r a c t e r , p e r c e p t i o n , and needs o f l a k e a s s o c i a t i o n s as ex pressed by t h e i r r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s . The i n t e r v i e w e e s were always o f f i c e r s o r members o f l o n g s t a n d i n g i n t h e i r l a k e a s s o c i a t i o n s . As such, t h e y may be presumed t o have e x t e n s i v e knowledge o f th e l a k e and community. In t h i s c o n t e x t , they q u a l i f y acc o rd in g to D e x te r 's d e f i n i ­ tio n o f "e x p e rts ," (D exter, 1970, p. 5 ) . They w e re , t h e r e f o r e , given the l a t i t u d e he a d v i s e s t o e x p r e s s t h e i r p e r c e p t i o n s f r e e o f r i g i d d i r e c t i o n o r g u id a n c e . q u estio ns" The f i r s t i n c o r p o r a t e s t h i s approach ( A p p e n d ix A ) . i n t e r v i e w w i t h broad q u e s t i o n s problems? s e c t i o n o f t h e i n t e r v i e w o r "open What a r e i t s By o p e n in g th e (such as "What a r e y o u r a s s o c i a t i o n ' s accom plis hm ents? the re s p o n d e n ts were a l l o w e d t o i n i t i a l l y What a r e i t s o b je c tiv e s ? "), develop s u b je c t areas o f t h e i r c h o o s in g wh ic h p r o v i d e d a c e r t a i n amount o f i n s i g h t w i t h r e s p e c t t o t h e i r knowledge o f l a k e management. The second o b j e c t i v e ( s i n c e l i t t l e p u b l i s h e d m a t e r i a l c o u l d be found on M ic h ig a n l a k e a s s o c i a t i o n s ) was t o g e t some form o f i n i t i a l u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f t h e a s s o c i a t i o n s as a management i n s t i t u t i o n . t h i s , a c o m p a r a t i v e t e c h n i q u e was r e q u i r e d . To do I t was, t h e r e f o r e , ne c es ­ s a r y t o s t a n d a r d i z e much o f t h e i n t e r v i e w f o r m a t u s i n g t e c h n iq u e s u s u a lly associated w ith p. 2 9 6 ) . fo r m a l i n t e r v i e w i n g (Moser and K a l t o n , By f o l l o w i n g up t h e r e l a t i v e l y open and lo o s e i n i t i a l 1972, 10 c o n v e r s a t i o n w i t h c o n s i s t e n t , s t a n d a r d i z e d q u e s t i o n s a b o u t s e p c i f i c com­ m u n it y c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o r a s s o c i a t i o n a c t i v i t i e s , i t was a l s o p o s s i b l e t o g e t some f e e l i n g f o r how much o f what t h e i n t e r v i e w e e s ex p re s s e d i n i t i a l l y was s u b s t a n t i v e i n f o r m a t i o n as opposed t o w i s h f u l th in k in g . The I n t e r v i e w Proce du re The i n i t i a l phone c a l l c o n ta c t w ith p ro s p e c tiv e in te rvie w ee s co n s iste d o f a t o th e l i s t e d lake a s s o c ia tio n re p r e s e n ta tiv e . s c r i p t i o n o f t h e purpose o f t h e r e s e a r c h was p r o v i d e d . A b r i e f de­ The c o o p e r a t i o n o f t h e M ic h ig a n S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y C o o p e r a t i v e E x t e n s i o n S e r v i c e was s t r e s s e d t o d e m o n s tra te t h e n o n p a r t i s a n m o t iv e s o f t h e s t u d y . agency e n jo y s a g e n e r a l l y n e u t r a l T h is r e p u t a t i o n w i t h t h e p u b l i c and i s viewed as u s u a l l y un biase d and s e r v i c e o r i e n t e d . The p r o s p e c t i v e b e n e f i t t o i n l a n d l a k e a s s o c i a t i o n s o f t h e r e s e a r c h was a l s o i n d i c a t e d t o f u r ­ t h e r in du ce t h e i r c o o p e r a t i o n . O b j e c t i v e s o f t h e r e s e a r c h were d e f i n e d as an a t t e m p t t o b e t t e r u n d e r s t a n d t h e needs, a c c o m p l is h m e n t s , and n a t u r e o f M ic h ig a n l a k e a s s o c i a t i o n s so t h a t i n f o r m a t i o n and a s s i s t a n c e p e r t i n e n t t o t h e i r i n t e r e s t s and needs can be p r o v i d e d . D iscussion c o n c e r n in g t h e a r e a o f w a t e r q u a l i t y management was a v o id e d u n t i l actual in itia l i n t e r v i e w t o reduce th e p o s s i b i l i t y o f r e s p o n d e n t b i a s . the The c o n t a c t was i n f o r m e d o f t h e need t o i n t e r v i e w an o f f i c e r o r r e c e n t p a s t o f f i c e r o f t h e a s s o c i a t i o n who was f a m i l i a r w i t h t h e com­ m u n i t y , o p e r a t i o n s o f t h e a s s o c i a t i o n , and t h e l a k e . In some i n s t a n c e s , t h i s c o n v e r s a t i o n r e s u l t e d i n r e f e r r a l s t o o t h e r i n d i v i d u a l s j u d g e d by the i n i t i a l c o n t a c t t o be b e t t e r i n f o r m e d . These r e f e r r a l s , on f o u r o c c a s i o n s , r e s u l t e d i n j o i n t i n t e r v i e w s w i t h two o r more c o o p e r a t i n g a s s o c ia tio n o f f i c e r s . W h ile t h i s o f t e n p r o lo n g e d an a l r e a d y l e n g t h y I n t e r v i e w because o f t h e need f o r consensus on t h e i s s u e s , t h e i n f o r ­ matio n p r o v i d e d may be more r e l i a b l e t h a n th e o p i n i o n s o f a s i n g l e respondent. The average i n t e r v i e w t o o k a b o u t two h o u r s . P re te stin g w ith c o l­ leag ue s and r e s i d e n t s o f t h e Lake L a ns ing conrnunity i n d i c a t e d t h a t t h e i n t e r v i e w was t o o l e n g t h y and tended t o t a x t h e a t t e n t i o n o f r e s p o n d e n t s . The q u e s t i o n s were th e n c o n s i d e r a b l y r e d u c e d . The r e s u l t was a one and a h a l f t o t w o - h o u r i n t e r v i e w wh ic h r e p r e s e n t e d a d i f f i c u l t compromise between c o l l e c t i n g t h e d e s i r e d i n f o r m a t i o n and im p o s in g on t h e t im e o f respondents. In itia lly , an a t t e m p t was made t o tap e r e c o r d t h e i n t e r v i e w s to in c r e a s e d a t a g a t h e r i n g e f f i c i e n c y and reduce i n t e r p r e t i v e e r r o r s . two a t t e m p t s , t h e ap proach was abandoned because o f c o n cern f o r a p o s s i ­ b l e i n h i b i t o r y e f f e c t on t h e i n t e r v i e w e e s Warner, A fte r 1976, p. 2 8 6 ) . R e c o r d in g o f d a t a , (Moser and K a l t o n , 1972, p. 281 t h e r e a f t e r , was based e n t i r e l y on e n c o d in g o f t h e s t a n d a r d i z e d i n t e r v i e w forms and n o t e t a k i n g . Ad­ d i t i o n a l comments and im p r e s s i o n s were alwa ys made i r r m e d i a t e l y a f t e r each i n t e r v i e w . A t th e end o f each w eek's w o r k , t h e i n t e r v i e w n o t e s were a g a i n re v ie w e d and f u r t h e r conments o r r e c o l l e c t i o n s added. The I n t e r v i e w Format The f o l l o w i n g o u t l i n e d e s c r i b e s t h e m a j o r q u e s t i o n s posed i n t h e in te rv ie w s . A copy o f t h e a c t u a l i n t e r v i e w f o r m used i s p r o v i d e d i n Appe ndix A. A. Open Q u e s tio n s 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Lake a s s o c i a t i o n o b j e c t i v e s Problems Water q u a l i t y problems Accom pli shm ents o f t h e l a k e a s s o c i a t i o n F a c t o r s wh ic h wo uld h e l p improve e f f e c t i v e n e s s o f t h e la ke a s s o c ia tio n R e c r e a t i o n a l uses o f t h e la k e 12 B. C. C h a ra c te ris tic s 1. P o p u la tio n (by ho use holds) a. La ke co m m unity s i z e ( r e s i d e n t s w i t h i n 1 / 4 m i l e o f l a k e ) b. Membership o f l a k e a s s o c i a t i o n c. A c t i v e membership o f l a k e a s s o c i a t i o n d. Seasonal membership e. Seasonal a c t i v e membership 2. O rg a n iz a tio n a. Age o f l a k e a s s o c i a t i o n b. E n a b lin g a u t h o r i t y o f la ke a s s o c ia t i o n c. F requ en c y o f g e n e r a l m e e t in g s d. O t h e r l a k e a s s o c i a t i o n s on t h e l a k e e. R e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h l o c a l com m unity and g o v e rn m e n t f. Issue r e l a t e d o r s o c i a l o r i e n t a t i o n o f a s s o c i a t i o n g. A p a t h y , c o m p a t i b i l i t y o f members 3. F in a nc e s a. E s t i m a t e d a v e r a g e annu al h o u s e h o l d income o f l a k e a s s o c i a t i o n members b. R e ti r e e s in the a s s o c i a t i o n c. Lake a s s o c i a t i o n annu al dues d. O t h e r s o u r c e s o f income e. Annual income o f l a k e a s s o c i a t i o n 4. Lake C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s a. S i z e ( a c r e s ) , maximum d e pth ( f e e t ) , m ost f r e q u e n t depth ( f e e t ) b. Bottom t y p e c. E x te n t o f development d. A v e ra ge f r o n t f o o t a g e o f r e s i d e n t i a l l o t s e. P o l i t i c a l j u r i s d i c t i o n s a s s o c ia te d w i t h la k e com m unities P e rfo rm a n c e 1. N u t r i e n t and E f f l u e n t Abatem ent a. S e p t i c t a n k m a i n t e n a n c e and use r e s t r i c t i o n s b. A l t e r n a t i v e s to s e p t ic tanks c. Lawn f e r t i l i z a t i o n a b a te m e n t d. N a tu ra l v e g e t a ti o n b u f f e r s t r i p around la k e e. E r o s i o n c o n t r o l , marsh p r o t e c t i o n f. D r a in a g e d i v e r s i o n s 2. Water Q u a l i t y I n v e s t i g a t i o n a. Lake w a t e r s a m p l i n g pro gram b. S e p t i c t a n k dye t e s t i n g o r i n s p e c t i o n s 3. Sym ptom atic Management a. F i s h management b. A lg a e c o n t r o l c. A q u a t i c weed c o n t r o l d. W i n t e r drawdown o f l a k e l e v e l 4. f o r weed c o n t r o l S o c i o p o l i t i c a l Involvem ent a. I n f o r m a t i o n , e d u c a t i o n , and p e r s u a s i o n b. P u b l i c e x p o s u r e (m edia u t i l i z a t i o n ) c. Economic f u n c t i o n d. Legal f u n c t i o n e. P o lit ic a l fu n c tio n 13 S e c t i o n s A and B a r e i n t e n d e d t o p r o v i d e some i n s i g h t I n t o t h e n a t u r e * s t a t e o f awareness* p r i o r i t i e s , and c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f t h e a s s o c i a t i o n s sampled. Many o f t h e p a r a m e te r s i n c l u d e d i n t h i s p o r t i o n o f th e i n t e r v i e w a r e d e r i v e d f r o m t h e approach t a k e n by K l e s s i g and Yanggen (1972) when t h e y i n v e s t i g a t e d t h e n a t u r e o f W is c o n s in l a k e a s s o c i a t i o n s by m a i l e d q u e s t i o n n a i r e s t o o f f i c e r s o f 200 a s s o c i a t i o n s . S e c t i o n C, t h e l a k e management p e r fo r m a n c e f u n c t i o n , i s de ve lo p e d fr o m t h e l i t e r a t u r e s u r v e y m en tio n ed e a r l i e r . p r i m a r y component o f t h e i n t e r v i e w r e s e a r c h . T h i s s e c t i o n i s the The r e l a t i v e e x t e n t o f p o s i t i v e resp onses h e r e p r o v i d e s an i n d i c a t i o n o f t h e " s t a t e o f t h e a r t " o f l a k e management p e r fo r m a n c e by t h e a s s o c i a t i o n s . A n a l y t i c a l Methods In a d d i t i o n to the general r e c o g n it io n o f the le v e l o f water q u a l i t y management p e r fo r m a n c e and i n n a t e c h a r a c t e r o f t h e l a k e a s s o c i a ­ tio n s , t h i s r e s e a r c h was a l s o i n t e n d e d t o i n v e s t i g a t e t h e p o s s i b i l i t y t h a t some o f t h o s e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s measured may be r e l a t e d t o t h a t r e l a t i v e de gree o f management p e r fo r m a n c e o b s e r v e d . There m i g h t be elem ents such as w e a l t h , s i z e o f membership, o r g e o g r a p h i c a l lo c a tio n which c o r r e l a t e w i t h t h e r e l a t i v e success o r f a i l u r e o f t h e a s s o c i a t i o n s a t t e m p t i n g s e l f - h e l p l a k e management. I f such paramount c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s e x i s t , any e f f o r t t o d e v e l o p programs t o a s s i s t l a k e a s s o c i a t i o n s i n s e l f - h e l p management would have t o t a k e them i n t o a c c o u n t . e x i s t e n c e c o u l d mean t h a t much more t h a n t e c h n i c a l s a r y t o h e l p some a s s o c i a t i o n s T h e ir a s s i s t a n c e i s nece s­ imp lement l a k e management. In o r d e r t o t e s t f o r such c o r r e l a t i o n s , a q u a n t i t a t i v e in d e x o f r e l a t i v e p e r fo r m a n c e success by t h e i n t e r v i e w e d a s s o c i a t i o n s i s n e c e s s a r y . 14 To a c c o m p l is h t h i s * s e c tio n "C" o f t h e i n t e r v i e w was t r e a t e d as a t e s t o f l a k e a s s o c i a t i o n management a c c o m p l is h m e n t s . t e r v i e w s were c o n d u c t e d , n u m e r i c a l o f t h is p a r t o f the in te r v ie w . B e f o r e any i n ­ v a l u e s were a s s i g n e d t o each q u e s t i o n T h i s c r e a t e d a segmental in d e x s i m i l a r t o t h e system used t o grade s t u d e n t s on s t a n d a r d i z e d c o l l e g e examina­ t i o n s (see A p p e n d ix B ) . W h il e b e in g somewhat a r b i t r a r y in g o f d i f f e r e n t s e c t i o n s o f t h e q u e s t i o n n a i r e , s i s t e n t and i m p a r t i a l fo r a ll in te rv ie w s . It in i t s w e ig h t­ the te c h n iq u e i s con­ is , t h e r e f o r e , con sidere d adequate f o r s o r t i n g t h e sampled l a k e a s s o c i a t i o n s i n t o r e l a t i v e l y h i g h e r and l o w e r p e r f o r m a n c e c a t e g o r i e s . two gro up s o f The p o s s i b l e p o i n t s a s s ig n e d a g i v e n l a k e a s s o c i a t i o n can range f r o m z ero t o 163 on t h i s index. Assig nm ent o f an a s s o c i a t i o n t o e i t h e r p e r fo r m a n c e c a t e g o r y was d e t e r m in e d by w h e t h e r i t s s c o r e was lo w e r th a n o r e q u a le d o r e x ­ ceeded t h e sample median o f s e v e n t y p o i n t s . By a s s i g n i n g each l a k e a s s o c i a t i o n a n u m e r i c a l p e r fo r m a n c e s c o r e , one can n o t o n l y compare t h e a t t r i b u t e s o f t h e h i g h e r and lo w e r p e r ­ formance g r o u p s , b u t can a l s o t e s t f o r l i n e a r r e l a t i o n s h i p s between q u a n t i f i a b l e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s and t h e grade d p e r f o r m a n c e . 2 S p e c ific a lly , c o e f f i c i e n t s o f c o r r e l a t i o n were computed t o e s t i m a t e such p o s s i b l e r e l a t i o n s h i p s where: n r = e x,y, i =1 n 2 _ _ x y a n d, sx sy T h i s t e c h n i q u e i s s i m i l a r t o methods commonly used i n e d u c a t i o n r e s e a r c h where s t u d e n t t e s t s c o r e s a r e compared t o v a r i o u s f a m i l y o r c o n m u n ity f a c t o r s such as number i n f a m i l y , age o r w e i g h t , o r income l e v e l (G la s s and S t a n l e y , 1 9 7 0 ) . The re g re s s io n e q u a tio n used i s o f the form y = mx + b , where m = r • sy sx T h e re fo re , y r = ■ s X. x + b sx A ll a n a ly tic a l assessments were made u sing th e 0 .1 le v e l o f s ig n i­ fic a n c e as a d e c is io n r u l e . To t e s t f o r a s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e between th e mean c h a r a c t e r i s ­ t i c s o f th e two performance c a te g o r ie s a t - t e s t comparison was made using the e q u a tio n : t = (n , - 1 1 )s , 1 + (n ? £ nl + n2 ” 2 Sample v a ria n c e s in t h i s 1 ) s ?2 * 1+1 nl n2 in s ta n c e were computed using th e e q u a tio n : 16 The p o s s i b i l i t y t h a t t h e r e m ight be a combined e f f e c t o f the v a r i ­ ous c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s on la k e a s s o c ia t io n perform ance was a ls o i n v e s t i ­ g ated . A m u l t i p l e l i n e a r re g r e s s io n a n a ly s is was conducted on two s e ts o f to ta l sample d a ta s e le c te d as most prom ising o f such a combined e f f o r t . Lake a s s o c ia t io n membership, average e s tim a te d annual household income, la k e a s s o c ia t io n annual income, and e s tim a te d most fr e q u e n t la k e depth were compared to performance s c o re . These p a r t i c u l a r c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s were s e le c te d because th ey were judged to r e p r e s e n t major p o t e n t ia l f a c t o r s o f p erform ance, i.e ., community in v o lv e m e n t, s o c ia l accomplishment and s ta tu s o f th e members, a s s o c ia t io n w e a lt h , and e x t e n t o f p o s s ib le la k e e u t r o p h ic a t io n response based on an a p p r o x i­ mation o f th e e x t e n t o f i t s litto ra l zone. The second m u l t i p l e re g r e s s io n a n a ly s is i n v e s t ig a t e d member p a r­ t i c i p a t i o n as a f a c t o r o f la k e management success. S p e c ific a lly , the element o f a v a i l a b l e tim e f o r involvem ent in la k e a s s o c ia t io n a c t i v i t i e s (p e rc e n t seasonal r e s id e n t s in th e a s s o c ia t io n and p e rc e n t r e t i r e e s ) was combined w it h th e e s tim a te o f s o c ia l accomplishment (av e ra g e house­ hold income) and compared to a s s o c ia t io n perform ance s c o re s . K le s s ig and Yanggen (1 9 7 2 , p. 12) and K les sig ( 1 9 7 3 , p. A85) a ls o suspected the in f lu e n c e o f s e a s o n a lit y on la k e a s s o c ia t io n perform ance. For both a n a ly s e s , a H e w le tt-P a c k a rd 9815 A c a l c u l a t o r w it h a preprogrammed a n a ly s is o f v a ria n c e and r e g r e s s io n a n a ly s is c a p a c ity (Volume 09815 - 15014, May 1976, R e v is io n B. H e w le tt-P a c k a r d C a l c u l a t o r Products D i v i s i o n , L o v elan d , C o lo rad o ) was used. In n e i t h e r in s ta n c e 2 were s i g n i f i c a n t re g re s s io n s t a t i s t i c s (R ) d e te c te d a t th e 0 .1 l e v e l . I t was t h e r e f o r e concluded, a f t e r c o n s id e r a t io n o f K l e s s i g 's 1973 study and c o n s u lta tio n w it h a d ep artm en tal re s e a rc h s p e c i a l i s t , t h a t f u r t h e r in v e s t ig a t io n s o f t h i s n a tu re were n o t i n d i c a t e d . 17 Strengths and Weaknesses o f the Survey Research Approach W. Edwards Deming, in h is paper "On E rro rs in Surveys" ( 1 9 4 4 ) , documented se ve ra l areas o f survey research s u b je c t to e r r o r . His typology was co nsulted in th e design and conduct o f t h i s research in an e f f o r t to e l i m i n a t e , reduce, o r accommodate p o t e n t i a l erro rs . The f o llo w in g d is cu ss io n o f va rio u s p o s s ib le sources o f e r r o r is presented in compliance w ith Deming's p a r t i c u l a r admonition t h a t . . 1n the p re s e n ta tio n o f d ata the omission o f an adequate d is cu ss io n o f a l l the e r r o r s p resen t and the d i f f i c u l t i e s encountered c o n s t it u t e s a serious d e fe c t in the data and is sure to lead to m i s in t e r p r e t a t i o n and misuse. . ." V a r i a b i l i t y in Response Two kinds o f v a r i a b i l i t y in response cause d i f f e r e n t d e s c r ip tio n s o f the same s i t u a t i o n : 1) given by the same person a t d i f f e r e n t tim e s , and 2) given by d i f f e r e n t persons. are p o s sib le in t h i s stu d y. Both forms o f response v a r i a b i l i t y The f i r s t form o f v a r i a b i l i t y is d i f f i c u l t , i f not im p o s s ib le , to c o r r e c t . A given respondent may always change his o p inio n o r a c q u ire a d d it io n a l in fo rm a tio n between the o r i g i n a l i n t e r v ie w and any subsequent f o llo w - u p . o f the p erp e tu a l This problem is a component "lag phase" imposed by the passage o f tim e which a l l In v e s tig a t o r s must l i v e w ith when a tte m p tin g to measure parameters o f a dynamic system. The second form o f v a r i a b i l i t y , d i f f e r e n t responses by d i f f e r e n t p eo ple, was c o n t r o lle d f o r as f a r as p r a c t i c a l by in t e r v ie w in g long term la k e re s id e n ts who were o f f i c e r s in t h e i r a s s o c ia t io n s . doing, these people were accorded D e x t e r 's s ta tu s o f lo c a l T h e ir o pinio ns may s t i l l By so " e x p e r t s ." d i f f e r from o th e rs in the community o r 18 a s s o c ia t io n , b u t i t i s presumed t h a t th e y a r e more l i k e l y to p re s e n t o p in io n s c o r r e l a t i v e w it h th e f a c t s due to t h e i r c o n s id e ra b le lo c a l e x p e rie n c e and r e s p o n s i b i l i t y . The f a c t remains t h a t in fo r m a tio n about each la k e a s s o c i a t i o n , in most in s ta n c e s , was based on th e p e r­ c e p tio n s and o p in io n s o f i n d i v i d u a l s . V a r i a b i l i t y A s so cia te d w it h th e I n t e r v ie w Technique The personal i n t e r v i e w te c h n iq u e g e n e ra te s more in fo r m a t io n p e r u n i t o f e f f o r t than m a ile d q u e s tio n n a ir e s o r o t h e r impersonal mation g a th e rin g te c h n iq u e s . in fo r­ T h is i s because th e personal e n c o u n te r provides g r e a t e r m o t iv a tio n and p res su re f o r response than a c i r c u l a t e d q u e s t io n n a ir e , e s p e c i a l l y i f m a ile d . fle x ib le The i n t e r v i e w is a ls o a more in s tru m e n t, a llo w in g th e i n t e r v i e w e r to probe f o r a d d it i o n a l in fo rm a tio n and to assess m o tiv a tio n s behind th e responses to q u e s tio n s . (Hyman, 1975, p. 14 passim; S e l l t i z e t a l , 19 59 , p. 214; P h i l l i p s , 1966, p. 1 2 1 ) . Because o f th ese ad v an tag es , th e i n t e r v i e w approach was chosen as th e d a ta g a th e r in g method f o r t h i s s tu d y . t h i s d e c is io n th e i n s i g h t f u l a g a in s t I t s In making gains from i n t e r v ie w i n g had to be weighed p rim a ry drawbacks o f expense, l i m i t e d coverage o f respon­ dents in th e a v a i l a b l e tim e fra m e , and p o s s ib le e r r o r and b ia s asso­ c ia t e d w ith i n t e r v i e w e r i n f l u e n c e on responses and t h e i r i n t e r p r e t a t i o n . The c o n s t r a in t s o f l i m i t e d sample s i z e and g r e a t e r o p e r a tin q e x ­ pense were accepted in r e t u r n f o r in c re as ed i n s i g h t p e r la k e a s s o c ia ­ t i o n in t e r v ie w e d . T h is t r a d e - o f f i s c o n sid e re d p o s i t i v e in l i g h t o f th e absence o f any o t h e r in fo r m a t io n about M ich ig an la k e a s s o c ia t io n s . I n t e r v ie w e r e r r o r was reduced by having a l l the same person. In t e r v ie w s conducted by Bias was reduced by using a s ta n d a rd iz e d i n t e r v i e w 19 fo rm a t, and by th e conscious awareness by the in t e r v ie w e r o f h is p o t e n t ia l impact on responses. The a d v is e o f Hyman ( In t e r v ie w in g in Social Research, 1954) and Moser and Kalton (Survey Methods in So cial I n v e s t ig a t i o n , 1972) was c a r e f u l l y fo llo w e d to e l i c i t in fo rm a tio n as e f f e c t i v e l y as p o s s ib le w ith o u t im p ly in g d i r e c t i o n to the responses pro vided. Encoding o f the data gathered and l a t e r analyses o f i t were a ls o performed by the In t e r v ie w e r which reduced p o t e n t i a l e r r o r s of in te rp re ta tio n . A cross check f o r misinformed o r d e c e p tiv e responses was incom­ p le t e because the a p p ro p r ia te re fe re n c e s o f te n were e i t h e r not a v a i l ­ ab le o r were in a c c u r a te . Q u a n t i t a t i v e data from the in te r v ie w s such as p o p u la tio n es tim a te s and estim ated average annual d en ts, could not be checked because lo c a l income o f r e s i ­ ta x and census f iq u r e s are d e f i c i e n t w ith regard to seasonal r e s id e n t s . Local p ro p e rty assess­ ment records were dismissed as a com parative re fe re n c e f o r household w ealth because the assessment process i s g e n e r a lly recognized as i n ­ c o n s is te n t both w it h i n and between ta x d i s t r i c t s (B a rlo w e , 1972, p. 5 9 6 ) . 3 Respondent es tim a te s o f average la k e l o t f r o n t fo o ta g e d id agree w ith th e development p la t s consulted f o r th re e o f the la k e s . This knowledge is not s u r p r is in g sin ce most o f the la k e communities sampled were p la t t e d in a c o n s is t e n t , system atic manner. Respondent es tim a te s o f la k e acreage and depths a ls o compared f a v o r a b ly w ith Department o f N atural Resources maps and the ta b u la r re fe r e n c e "Michigan Lakes and K le s s ig (1 9 7 3 , p. A75) re p o rts fre q u e n t com plaints by Wisconsin lak e re s id e n ts about t h e i r p ro p e rty assessments. S i m i l a r o pinio ns o f assessment in e q u it y were expressed to the a u th o r in t h i s stu d y. 20 Ponds" {Humphrys, e t a l , 1 9 6 5 ). The maps a r e a v a i l a b l e to the p u b lic and a re p robably th e re sp o n d en t's source o f in fo rm a tio n to o . W hile c o n fin n a tio n o f th e i n t e r v ie w d ata i s not com plete, the o v e r a ll impression drawn from the personal in t e r v ie w e x p e rie n c e i s t h a t th e g r e a t m a jo r it y o f i n d i v i d u a l s who consented to be in te rv ie w e d were c o o p e ra tiv e and honest 1n t h e i r responses. Bias o f the Auspices Deming p o in ts out t h a t i d e n t i f i c a t i o n o f th e sponsor o f a s o c ia l research p r o je c t may in f lu e n c e th e m o tiv a tio n and n atu re o f answers provided by respondents. In a n t i c i p a t i o n o f va rio u s a t t i t u d e s in the lake communities toward p a r t i c u l a r p e r s o n a l i t i e s o r agencies a f f i l i a t e d w ith la k e management, every e f f o r t was made to r e s t r i c t i d e n t i f i c a t i o n o f the research a f f i l i a t i o n to "Michigan S ta te U n i v e r s i t y " and the "Cooperative Extension S e r v ic e ." Both o f these terms were b e lie v e d to denote an e s s e n t i a l l y n e u t r a l , n o n - p o l i t i c a l , s e r v ic e o r ie n te d e n t i t y . Subsequent in te r v ie w in fo rm a tio n re v e a le d t h a t t h is i d e n t i t y was appro­ p r i a t e as most respondents in d ic a te d l i m i t e d f a m i l i a r i t y w ith e i t h e r in s titu tio n . Bias A r is in g from Non-response The b ia s o f non-response is a f a c t o r commonly a s s o c ia te d w ith m ailed q u e s tio n n a ir e s . The motives o f non-respondents a re in v e s t ig a t e d by fo llo w -u p In te r v ie w s in an atte m p t to help e x p la in o r q u a l i f y the data which was c o l l e c t e d . In a study such as t h i s , where the i n i t i a l data g a th e rin g e f f o r t is an i n t e r v ie w , e f f o r t s to i n v e s t ig a t e non-response b ia s a re d i f f i c u l t . 21 I f th e c o n ta c t r e fu s e s th e I n i t i a l i n t e r v i e w , he i s u n l i k e l y to consent to a second one as kin g him why. O f th e t w e n t y - t h r e e r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s o f la k e a s s o c ia t io n s a c t u a l l y c o n ta c te d , o n ly two re fu s e d to be i n t e r v ie w e d . tio n s p ro vided some e x p la n a t io n o f why. ward in e x p la in in g h is r e f u s a l . The r e f u s a l co n ve rs a­ One c o n ta c t was s t r a i g h t f o r ­ He s t a t e d t h a t h is a s s o c ia t io n had re c e iv e d no h elp from th e S t a t e o f M ich ig an o r any o t h e r p u b lic agency in th e p a s t, and he saw no reason to co o p e ra te now as he a n t i c i p a t e d no b e n e f i t to h is a s s o c ia t io n from doing so. a r e t i r e d a d m i n i s t r a t o r who u t i l i z e d The o th e r c o n ta c t was e v a s iv e t a c t i c s r a t h e r than d i r e c t l y re fu s e th e i n t e r v i e w o r p ro v id e an e x p la n a t io n . A fte r th ree teleph on e c o n v e r s a tio n s , the i n t e r v i e w a tte m p t was abandoned because o f h is obvious n e g a tiv e a t t i t u d e . The two r e f u s a l s were s i m i l a r in t h a t both c o n ta c ts in d ic a te d a s u s p ic io n o f th e re s e a rc h m o tiv e s , and a presumption t h a t th ey would g a in l i t t l e from th e p r o j e c t . The sample o f non-respondents i s very small and thus r e s t r i c t s any a p p lie d i n f e r e n c e . But i t does suggest t h a t th e c r e d i b i l i t y o f the s t a t e w ith a t l e a s t a p o r t io n o f th e r i p a r i a n community is r a t h e r s tra in e d . T his presumption i s f u r t h e r in d ic a t e d in C h ap ter IV when in te rv ie w e e s were asked t h e i r o p in io n s o f s e r v ic e s p ro vid e d by v a rio u s a g e n c ie s . The Time Element as a F a c to r o f Sampling E f f i c i e n c y The i n t e r v i e w schedule was planned f o r th e summer months on th e premise t h a t seasonal r e s id e n t s would be more r e c e p t i v e when q u e stio n ed a t the la k e s i t e . W h ile th e p ercen tag e o f seasonal r e s id e n t s was n o t known a t the t im e , o b s e r v a tio n In d i c a t e d t h a t t h i s would be a f a c t o r 22 re gard ing c o n ta c t success, and t h a t th e p r o b a b i l i t y o f reachin g them would be g r e a t e r In th e simmer. Subsequent e x p e rie n c e w ith the i n t e r - view technique has demonstrated t h a t the number o f successful co n tac ts does drop o f f c o n s id e ra b ly a f t e r Labor Day. Not o n ly do th e number o f "no answers" to phone c a l l s in c r e a s e , b u t those c o n ta c ts reached appear less In t e r e s t e d in b eing in te rv ie w e d . A p p a re n tly w ith the end o f sum­ mer, la k e r e s i d e n t s ' a t t e n t i o n s h i f t s away from the la k e and perhaps re tu rn s to r o u t in e m a tte rs n eg le cte d d u rin g the v a c a tio n season. W ith in the sumner sampling p e r io d , weekends d e f i n i t e l y appear to be the more opportune time o f week f o r i n t e r v ie w s . Even when i t involves a c o n f l i c t w ith a c t i v i t i e s o r g uests, most respondents s t i l l p r e f e r to schedule the in t e r v ie w f o r some tim e during a weekend and to have i t a t t h e i r la k e re s id e n c e . fu ll For those in te rv ie w e e s employed tim e , the weekend is o b v io u s ly more co n ve n ien t. also seems b e n e f i c i a l This arrangement in t h a t respondents in te rv ie w e d on th e weekends appear more re la x e d and les s d is t r a c t e d by o th e r m a tters than those in te rv ie w e d on week days. In almost a l l instan ces the In te rv ie w e e s were p le a s a n t, h o s p it a b le , and c o o p e ra tiv e even though the i n t e r v ie w was le n g th y . In f a c t , th e re were occasions where, because o f in te rv ie w e e response, th e u s u a lly two hour process extended to as long as f o u r and a h a l f hours. When t h is d id not c o n f l i c t w ith o th e r scheduled in t e r v ie w s , the p ro tra c te d c o n versation was p le a s a n t and very in fo r m a tiv e . While ex ten d in g the time o f th e i n t e r v ie w , such i n c id e n t a l co n ve rs atio n o f te n c o n tr ib u te s co n sid e ra b le i n s ig h t to p a r t i c u l a r responses and is sim ply good man­ ners. Such c o o p e ra tio n by th e i n t e r v ie w e r , to g e th e r w ith thank-you 23 notes l a t e r m ailed to a l l respondents, a ls o improves th e p o t e n t i a l fo r la k e a s s o c ia tio n a s s is ta n c e in subsequent p r o je c t s . However, such prolonged in te r v ie w s do tend to reduce i n t e r v ie w e r a le r tn e s s and o c c a s io n a lly g en erate a n x ie t y about com pleting h is sched­ u le f o r the day. Both fa c t o r s tend to reduce o b s e rv a tio n a l e f f i c i e n c y . I f th e i n t e r v ie w tim e must be somewhat le n g th y , as was the case h e re , the in te r v ie w s should be l i m i t e d to th re e per day. W hile th re e o s t e n s ib ly two hour in te r v ie w s may not appear t a x i n g , in c lu s io n o f the tim e f o r post in t e r v ie w n o t a t io n s , m eals, and t r a n s i t between lo c a tio n s can e a s i l y lea d to a tw elve o r fo u rte e n hour day. R e p res en tatio n o f the Study Sample The p o p u la tio n sampled co n siste d o f 333 Lower Peninsula Michigan la k e a s s o c ia t io n s . W hile s e le c t io n o f the sample was randomized. Upper Peninsula a s s o c ia tio n s were exclu ded, and no D e t r o i t m e tro p o lita n area a s s o c ia tio n s were in te r v ie w e d . The Measurement Process Sample e r r o r i s in d ic a te d by p ro v is io n o f th e standard e r r o r n o ta ­ tio n s accompanying th e q u a n t i t a t i v e data presented in Chapter IV . Mea­ surement e r r o r must als o be considered 1n th e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f t h is study. A search o f th e s o c ia l science l i t e r a t u r e f o r a s o p h is tic a te d s c a lin g technique f o r a s s o c ia tio n management performance was f r u i t l e s s . Almost a l l methods in v e s t ig a t e d were designed to i n t e r p r e t "why" r e ­ spondents pro vide p a r t i c u l a r answers. The p rim ary o b je c t iv e s o f such scales are to assess respondent m o tiv a tio n s and i n t e n s i t y o f such, i . e . , Guttman and L i k e r t scale s and t h e i r m o d if ic a t io n s . was devoted in the s o c io lo g ic a l L i t t l e a tte n tio n l i t e r a t u r e to methods f o r o b ta in in g the 24 f a c ts from th e In te r v ie w e e s beyond D e x t e r 's s t r a i g h t f o r w a r d prem ise t h a t th ey know t h e i r s u b je c t a r e a . C o n seq u en tly , th e d i r e c t approach o f ind exing responses on a perform ance continuum d e s c rib e d e a r l i e r was s e le c t e d . Both Young (1 9 6 6 , p . 249) and R i l e y , e t a l d e s c rib e t h i s approach as e le m e n t a l. i t does g e t the jo b done. (1 9 5 4 , p. 46 passim) W h ile s h o r t on s o p h i s t i c a t i o n , The method 1s a r b i t r a r y in t h a t the r a t i o n a l e used f o r w e ig h tin g th e s c o rin g process was q u a l i t a t i v e l y d e r iv e d and was not g en erated from w i t h i n by th e i n t e r v i e w d a t a . l i t e r a t u r e c o n s t i t u t e d th e index c r i t e r i a in te rv ie w ). (i.e ., The p ro fe s s io n a l S e c tio n C o f the The combined i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f t h i s m a t e r ia l and c o n s u lt a ­ t io n w it h w a te r re so u rce s p e c i a l i s t s o f th e Departm ent o f Resource Development g en erated th e w eig h ts a p p lie d to each p o s i t i v e response in th e i n t e r v i e w . t i o n was: The s p e c i f i c c r i t e r i a 1) How easy 1s i t used in w e ig h tin g each ques­ f o r the la k e a s s o c ia t io n to do t h i s 1n terms o f monetary co sts and te c h n ic a l lo g is tic s ? to la k e q u a l i t y improvement would such a c t io n be? the body o f th e te c h n ic a l 2) How s i g n i f i c a n t In keeping w it h l i t e r a t u r e , e f f l u e n t abatement atte m p ts re ce ived th e h ig h e s t p o t e n t i a l p o in ts . Lawn f e r t i l i z a t i o n p ro h ib itio n received the h ig h e s t d i s c r e t e p o in t assignment because o f th e presump­ t i o n o f f i n a n c i a l and te c h n ic a l ease o f im p le m e n ta tio n , and because s i g n i f i c a n t phosphorus abatement i s ac h ieved in developed com m unities. Where on s i t e o b s e r v a tio n in d ic a t e d t h a t lawn f e r t i l i z e r s were not as s i g n i f i c a n t , th e p o in ts assigned were redu ced . The absence o f need f o r a g iven o p tio n a t a p a r t i c u l a r l a k e , o r i m p o s s i b i l i t y o f p erfo rm an ce , I . e . , w i n t e r drawdown on a la k e w it h o u t an o u t f l o w , r e s u l t e d 1n th e assignment o f f u l l c r e d it f o r th a t o p tio n . 25 Because o f the n a tu re o f the ra n k in g system used, th e re a d e r 1s cautioned t h a t the q u a n t i t a t i v e In t e r v ie w r e s u l t s o f t h i s study were analyzed on the b as is o f t h i s e n t i r e l y v a l i d but s u b je c tiv e in d e x . CHAPTER I I I RESULTS OF THE LITERATURE SURVEY F e a s ib le Lake Management Options In the course o f the s e l e c t i v e l i t e r a t u r e r e v ie w , a framework o f lake a s s o c ia tio n s e l f - h e l p management o p tio n s e v o lv e d . work d iv id e s in t o th e f o llo w in g fo u r major elem ents: This frame­ E f f l u e n t A bate­ ment - the c u r t a ilm e n t p r i m a r i l y o f s e p tic tank discharges and lawn f e r t i l i z e r r u n o f f to the la k e ; Lake Water Q u a li t y In v e s t ig a t i o n - the i n i t i a t i o n o f a w a te r sampling program to assess problems and progress o f the a s s o c ia tio n ; Symptomatic Lake Management - o p tio n s f o r the co n tro l o f alg ae and a q u a tic weeds; and S o c i o - P o l i t i c a l the ex ten sio n o f a s s o c ia tio n e f f o r t s Involvem ent - to the i n s t i t u t i o n a l aspects o f la k e management. E f f l u e n t Abatement A major Impression gained from the l i t e r a t u r e survey Is t h a t most o f the la k e r e s t o r a t io n techniques now a v a i l a b l e a re p r o h i b i t i v e l y ex­ pensive f o r most la k e convnunlties unless funded by o u ts id e sources such as s t a t e o r f e d e r a l ag e n c ie s. For example, d redging costs a t 1974 price s ran 60 to 80 cents per cubic m eter o f m a te r ia l e t al 1 9 7 4 ). removed (D u n s t, Estim ates f o r t h i s type o f r e s t o r a t i o n tre a tm e n t f o r Lake L ansing, Ingham County, Michigan (453 a c re s ) exceed 1 .6 m i l l i o n d o l l a r s In c lu d in g s p o il d is p o s a l. This p r o je c t could not have reached i t s p resen t s t a t e o f advanced plann ing were n o t co u nty, s t a t e , and f e d e r a l funding o f most costs a n t i c i p a t e d . 27 S i m i l a r l y , o t h e r m ajor e n g in e e rin g atte m p ts such as w astew ater treatm en t p la n ts and m ajor d ra in a g e d iv e r s io n s a r e beyond the f i n a n c i a l scope o f most o f M ic h ig a n 's la k e communities. Even w ith fe d e r a l support o f such p r o j e c t s , a s t a t e l i k e M ichigan w ith o ve r 35 ,00 0 in la n d la k e s , is l i k e l y to be funded f o r o n ly a few o f the basins in need o f h e lp . R e s to ra tio n then should be attem pted o n ly on th e most s e r io u s ly degraded and e c o l o g i c a l l y o r eco n o m ica lly s i g n i f i c a n t la k e s . For the m a jo r it y o f the M ichigan la k e s , which vary from o li g o t r o p h l c to en ric h e d and d e c l i n i n g , but not y e t s e v e re ly degraded, p o l l u t i o n p re v e n tio n and abatement p r a c t ic e s a re in o r d e r . These p r a c tic e s o f la k e management are most f e a s i b l e f o r lo c a l community im p le m e n ta tio n . They e s s e n t i a l l y in v o lv e th e p re v e n tio n o r c o r r e c t io n o f c u l t u r a l e u t r o p h ic a t io n ( i . e . , the p re v e n tio n o r c o r r e c t io n o f human a c t i v i t i e s on o r near a given lake which c o n t r ib u t e to i t s en ric h m en t, f i l l i n g - i n , o r c o n ta m in a tio n ). Phosphorus, Sewage E f f l u e n t , R u n o ff, and Lake Degradation I t is g e n e r a lly recognized by lim n o lo g is ts and la k e management s p e c i a l i s t s t h a t sewage d ischarges from th e la k e community are a m ajor c o n t r ib u t o r o f th e n u t r i e n t s , e s p e c i a l l y phosphorus, causing la k e en­ richment and respondent nuisance growths o f a lg a e o r a q u a tic weeds. S c h in d le r 's (19 74 ) f e r t i l i z a t i o n s tu d ie s c o n v in c in g ly demonstrated the s i g n if ic a n c e o f phosphorus, in comparison to n itr o g e n and carbon, as the l i m i t i n g f a c t o r o f a lg a l blooms on many hard w a te r lakes o f the G reat Lakes r e g io n . The f o llo w in g quote from Wetzel (1 9 7 5 , p. 642) f u r t h e r emphasizes the importance o f phosphorus c o n t r o l , and r e l a t e s t h is to sewage d is ch arg e abatement: . . 1 t is im p o rtan t to emphasize once more t h a t phosphorus abatement w i l l not r e tu r n a l l lak e s to p re -e n ric h m e n t c o n d itio n s . 28 But th e Importance o f the r e l a t i o n o f phosphorus demand to supply f o r p la n t growth Is such t h a t I t s re d u c tio n in in p u ts to fre s h w aters i s th e f i r s t p la ce t o begin and most l i k e l y to succeed in a m a j o r i t y o f cases. F u r t h e r , i f phosphorus in p u ts to s u r­ fac e w a te r a r e to be reduced most e f f e c t i v e l y , p o in t sources should be e lim in a t e d as r a p i d l y as p o s s ib le . . . The s c i e n t i f i c basis f o r the importance o f phosphate and n itr o g e n 1n e u tr o p h ic a t lo n is so overwhelming t h a t an i n t e r n a t i o n a l r e s o lu t io n was r a t i f i e d a t the 19th I n t e r n a t i o n a l Congress o f T h e o r e tic a l and A pp lied Limnology in 1974. This r e s o lu t io n emphasizes the c r i t i c a l r o l e o f phosphorus in th e r a p id e u tr o p h ic a tio n o f in la n d w aters and th e need to c o n tro l th e a d d it io n o f t h i s element to any in la n d w a te r by any means a v a i l a b l e . In a d d it io n to sec­ ondary tre a tm e n t o f sewage, methods o f c o n tro l in c lu d e : (a ) re ­ s t r i c t i o n s on th e use o f c le a n in g products t h a t c o n ta in phos­ phates o r o t h e r e c o l o g i c a l l y harmful substances, (b ) removal o f phosphate a t sewage tre a tm e n t f a c i l i t i e s d is c h a rg in g e f f l u ­ ents i n t o such w a t e r , and ( c ) c o n tro l o f d rain ag e from f e e d l o t s , a g r i c u l t u r a l a r e a s , s e p tic ta n k s , and o t h e r d i f f u s e sources o f phosphorus. Control measures f o r n itr o g e n a ls o should be con­ sid ered 1n basins in which th e re i s evidence t h a t such c o n tr o ls are a p p r o p r ia te . Im plem entation o f such c o n tr o ls is s o c i a l l y complex, but a t t a i n a b l e w ith e x i s t i n g te c h n o lo g y ." A s p e c i f i c example o f the c o n tro l im plem entation r e f e r r e d to by Wetzel above is documented by Edmondson's (1 9 7 2 ) Lake Washington stu d y. He re p o rte d a re d u c tio n o f phosphate and phytoplankton in t h a t la k e o f about 28 p erc en t in th e s i x years f o llo w in g d iv e r s io n o f m unicipal sewage d is c h a rg e s . The s i g n if ic a n c e o f t h is study to la k e management by p o l l u t i o n abatement was i t s emphasis on th e importance o f sewage as a c a u s a tiv e agent in la k e d e g ra d a tio n by phosphate lo a d in g . Edmondson demonstrated a re g re s s io n o f e u tro p h ic symptoms (decreased phosphorus and phytoplankton and Increased c l a r i t y ) when m unicipal e f f l u e n t s were d iv e r te d from the l a k e . W hile th e abatement emphasis here was t r e a te d secondary e f f l u e n t , r a t h e r than s e p tic tank d is c h a rg e s , d iv e r s io n o f sewage from the la k e was shown to be a h ig h ly b e n e f i c i a l w a te r q u a l i t y management te c h n iq u e . Human waste d isp o sal f o r most Michigan la k e communities 1s by on s i t e s e p tic tank - d r a in f i e l d tre a tm e n t. W hile secondary m unicipal 29 sewage tre a tm e n t systems e x is t e d f o r p o r tio n s o f some la k e communities In terview ed 1n t h i s s tu d y , on s i t e s e p tic tank dispo sal systems were the p r e v a i l in g method in use. This In d ic a te s t h a t th e p r e v a le n t source o f human sewage enrichm ent o f Michigan in la n d lakes may be expected to be on s i t e s e p tic tank d isposal systems. The premise t h a t comnunity s e p tic tank discharges a re a m ajor con­ t r i b u t i o n to la k e enrichment i s supported by E l l i s (19 71 ) who conducted studies a t Gull Lake, Kalamazoo County, M ich ig an . His research i n d i ­ cated t h a t 63 p e rc e n t o f t h a t h ig h ly developed l a k e 's annual phosphorus loading came from s e p tic tank - d r a in f i e l d d is c h a rg e s . percent was c o n tr ib u te d by lawn f e r t i l i z e r r u n o f f . percent came from s o i l p e r c o la t io n . Another 24 The rem aining 13 These d ata suggest t h a t more than 85 p ercen t o f the phosphorus enrichm ent o f G ull Lake came from c u l t u r a l sources s u b je c t to c o n tro l to some e x te n t by lo c a l r e s id e n ts . The p a r t i c u l a r impact o f s e p tic tank d isch arge on la k e ecosystems was g r a p h ic a l l y re ve aled by 1973 s tu d ie s o f Houghton Lake, Roscommon County, Michigan conducted by E l l i s and C h ild s . N ineteen s e p tic tank s it e s around th e la k e were e v a lu a te d by t e s t borings and m on ito r w e l l s . The r e s u l t s suggested g r e a t e r below ground movement o f s e p tic tank e f f l u e n t , p a r t i c u l a r l y phosphorus, than had been t r a d i t i o n a l l y presumed. The t r a d i t i o n a l th e o ry a s s o c ia te d w ith o n - s i t e s o il p e r c o la t io n o f waste w ate r presupposes t h a t under id e a l c o n d itio n s an e s s e n t i a l l y complete im m o b iliz a tio n o f phosphorus is achieved by a d s o rp tio n to s o il p a r t i c l e s . E l l i s and C h ild s discovered t h a t phosphorus was moving through th e in te r v e n in g s o i l and i n t o the groundwater system d r a in in g to the la k e a t s ix o f t h e i r n in e te e n study s i t e s . They a ls o found t h a t w h ile o n ly ten p ercen t o f the lawns surrounding Houghton Lake 30 were f e r t i l i z e d by t h e i r owners, " . . .o f t h i s 10% a p p ro x im a te ly one- h a l f o f the lawns showed phosphorus movement through the s o i l the groundw ater." In t o ( E l l i s and C h ild s , 1973, p. i ) . A p p a re n tly , t h i s phosphorus m o b i l i t y is a r e f l e c t i o n o f v a ry in g s o il ty p e s , s lo p e , and r e l a t i v e depth to th e w a te r t a b l e (C a in and B e a tty , 1965; Wall and Webber, 1 9 7 0 ). Bouma (1 9 7 1 ) has a ls o re p o rte d th a t age and e x t e n t o f use o f o n - s i t e d r a in f i e l d s reduces a d s o r p tiv e e f f i c i e n c y o f th e s o i l . i t has the p o t e n t i a l Once phosphorus e n te rs the groundwater system, to move c o n s id e ra b le d is ta n c e to th e l a k e . and C h ild s observed l a t e r a l E llis phosphorus and n i t r a t e movements down g ra d ie n t in the groundwater o f 140 and 330 f e e t r e s p e c t i v e l y . At one study s i t e where th e d r a in f i e l d was a p p ro x im a te ly 120 f e e t from the shore, orthophosphate phosphorus c o n c e n tra tio n s ranged from 8 to 14 mg/1 in a wide zone exten d in g from the a d s o rp tio n s i t e to the la k e . A dense weed bed was observed a t the lak e shore d i r e c t l y in f r o n t o f t h is study s i t e , and samples o f th e la k e w ate r here re v e a le d an o r th o ­ phosphate c o n c e n tra tio n o f 1.0 9 m g /1. The conspicuous weed growth was not e v id e n t on e i t h e r s id e o f t h i s s i t e , and background orthophos­ phate c o n c e n tra tio n s c o l le c t e d elsew here in th e la k e ranged between 0.03 and 0 .0 8 m g /1. It 1s e v id e n t t h a t in Michigan s i g n i f i c a n t f a c to r s causing in la n d r e s i d e n t ia l la k e d eg en eratio n ( I n s o f a r as one may g e n e r a l iz e ) are l i k e l y to be phosphorus inp uts a s s o c ia te d w ith i n e f f i c i e n c i e s o f on­ s i t e waste d isp o sal systems and the p r a c t i c e o f lawn f e r t i l i z a t i o n . In some instances road d ra in s o r a g r i c u l t u r a l r u n o f f have a ls o been im p lic a te d , as w e ll as commercial discharges to lak es a s s o c ia te d w ith ca r washes o r laundrom ats. But the s i g n i f i c a n c e o f lawn f e r t i l i z e r s 31 and s e p tic tanks I s t h e i r u b iq u ito u s n a tu re 1n Michigan In la n d la k e communities. These f a c t o r s o f c u l t u r a l e u tr o p h lc a tlo n and d eg ra d a tio n re sid e e n t i r e l y w i t h i n th e sphere o f r e s p o n s i b i l i t y o f In d iv id u a l lake p ro p e rty owners. T h e r e fo r e , th e c o n tro l o f these two sources o f lake d e g ra d a tio n is a r e s p o n s i b i l i t y o f the la k e community o r as­ s o c ia tio n , which i s a c o l l e c t i v e o f in d i v i d u a l p ro p e rty owners. The r i g h t and r e s p o n s i b i l i t y o f th e community o r a s s o c ia tio n to atte m p t to abate these d e g ra d a tio n sources lo c a te d on p r i v a t e h oldings is implied by the common p ro p e rty resource n atu re o f th e la k e and the d o c trin e s o f r i p a r i a n r i g h t s and p u b lic w e lf a r e in h e r e n t in Michigan law. With an a s p ec t o f la k e d eg ra d a tio n p e r t i n e n t to the problem d e fin e d , and I t s s u i t a b i l i t y to l o c a l i z e d i n i t i a t i v e re c o g n iz e d , i t remains next to i d e n t i f y o p tio n s f o r rem edial a c t io n . Lawn F e r t i l i z a t i o n and S e p tic Tank System Management The le s s e r o f these two p rim ary f a c t o r s o f la k e e u t r o p h lc a t lo n , lawn f e r t i l i z a t i o n , 1s th e most e a s i l y remedied from a p h ysical s ta n d ­ p o in t . The r e s id e n ts need o n ly to stop a p p ly in g f e r t i l i z e r to t h e i r lawns. Or they may c o n s u lt the S o il Conservation S e rv ic e o r Coopera­ t i v e Extension S e rv ic e personnel o f the Michigan S ta te U n i v e r s i t y De­ partment o f Crop and S o il Sciences f o r an assessment o f a c tu a l lawn f e r t i l i z e r needs. They may then ap p ly o n ly t h a t type and amount o f f e r t i l i z e r a c t u a l l y needed and a t r a te s conducive to personal economies and minimal r u n o f f . The second m ajor f a c t o r , s e p tic tank - d r a in f i e l d d is c h a rg e s , re q u ire s more involvem ent and expense. But as in d ic a te d by the G ull 32 Lake and Houghton Lake s t u d ie s , the p o t e n t i a l abatement a re a ls o g r e a t e r . r e tu r n s 1n n u t r i e n t In p u t T his sewage d is ch arg e problem may a ls o c o n s t it u t e a p u b lic h e a lt h t h r e a t in the form o f b a c t e r i a l o r v i r a l contaminations o f groundwater o r the l a k e . Mack and D ' l t r i (1 9 7 3 ) reported c o lif o r m b a c t e r i a i n Lake Michigan a t Naubinway Harbor. The source o f these organisms was r e l a t e d to both over th e s id e d i s ­ charges from w a t e r c r a f t and seepage from a marina s e p tic tank d r a in fie ld . (The d e te c te d l e v e l s in t h i s in s ta n c e were w i t h i n th e l i m i t s e s ta b lis h e d by the S ta te o f M ichigan f o r s a fe body c o n t a c t . ) Mack, e t al (1972) a ls o re p o rte d t h a t th e source o f p o lio v ir u s d e te c te d in a southeastern M ichigan w e ll was a s s o c ia te d w ith c o n tam in atio n o f t h a t w ater supply by e f f l u e n t from a d e f e c t i v e s e p tic - tank system. The problem o f b a c t e r i a l co n tam in atio n o f lak es o r streams may be com­ pounded by the n atu re o f th e r e c e iv in g environm ent. s ta te s , G e ld ric h (1 9 7 0 ) . . the w a te r-s e d im e n t i n t e r f a c e o f a stream o r la k e bottom can be a t r a n s i e n t r e s e r v o i r f o r fe c a l p o l l u t i o n 'fa llo u t' contam ination being tra n s p o rte d in the o v e r ly in g w a t e r . " from such He f u r t h e r points o u t t h a t t h i s sediment f a c t o r is p a r t i c u l a r l y im p o rta n t to re c r e a tio n a l (i.e ., swimming) w a te r s , ". . . sin ce se d im en tatio n does entrap a la r g e p ro p o rtio n o f th e b a c t e r i a l p o p u la tio n , does p la ce these organisms 1n a more p r o t e c t i v e menstruum f o r extended s u r v i v a l , and does slow t h e i r movement downstream and away from a d es ig n a ted r e c r e a ­ t io n a l a r e a . " Cain and B e a tty (19 65 ) s t a t e t h a t th e b u lk o f s e p tic tank pro­ blems can be grouped i n t o t h r e e general c a t e g o r ie s : s e p tic tanks on small 1) The use o f l o t s in crowded s u b d iv is io n s ; 2 ) F a i l u r e o f the 33 systems due to f a u l t y design and c o n s t r u c tio n ; and 3 ) the systems in s o i l s not s u i t a b l e f o r waste d is p o s a l. In s ta lla tio n o f A p o s s ib le f o u r th category might be th e n o n e x is te n t o r Inadequate maintenance o f the system. Kusler and Owen (Lake P ro p e rty S a n ita r y Surveys, undated, p. 7) re p o rt t h a t improper maintenance 1s the most se rio u s problem encountered In t h e i r survey o f common v i o l a t i o n s o f Wisconsin s e p tic tank - s o il absorption system r e g u l a t i o n s . ( I n t h i s w r i t e r ' s personal e x p e rie n c e , Inte rv ie w e es o fte n re p o rte d never having inspected t h e i r systems o r pumped t h e i r s e p tic t a n k s .) W hile the la k e a s s o c ia tio n may be g r e a t l y r e s t r i c t e d in i t s in d e ­ pendent e f f o r t s to c o r r e c t past e r r o r s o f i n s t a l l e d systems on s m a ll, crowded l o t s o r use o f the wrong s o i l s ( e s p e c i a l l y sandy s o i l s which "perc t e s t " v e ry w e l l , but tend to d r a in e f f l u e n t s alm ost unimpeded in to the groundwater system o r l a k e ) , i t can e x e r t c o n s id e ra b le e f f o r t to c o r r e c t design o r i n s t a l l a t i o n e r r o r s and o p e r a tio n a l abuses. The f i r s t a c t io n which should be taken in any s e p tic tank manage­ ment program is in s p e c tio n f o r system e f f i c i e n c y . Obvious symptoms o f f a i l u r e , such as o b s t r u c t io n , o d o rs , and wet spots in th e d r a in f i e l d in d ic a te system f a i l u r e . However, la k e o r groundwater co n tam in ation is p ossible even w ith o u t such b l a t a n t i n d i c a t o r s . C onsequently, any s e p tic tank system should be r e g u l a r l y inspected by a lic e n s e d s e p tic tank service o r p u b lic h e a lth s a n i t a r i a n . The i n v e s t i g a t i o n process is f u r t h e r f a c i l i t a t e d by f l o u r e s c e l n dye t e s t in g to t r a c e the path o f th e w a te r from the system and i t s r a t e o f d is p e r s a l . This procedure i s p a r t i c u ­ l a r l y im p ortan t because i t may be th e o n ly i n d i c a t o r o f la k e contamina­ t io n by an in d iv id u a l s e p tic system. 34 Where d e f i c i e n c i e s a re r e v e a le d , s e v e ra l c o r r e c t i v e o p tio n s a re p o s s ib le . These In c lu d e r e p a i r , r e l o c a t i o n o r expansion o f th e d r a in f i e l d , and replacem ent o r augmentation o f th e s e p tic tank w ith an o th e r one to enhance r e t e n t io n tim e . A p a r t i c u l a r l y h e lp fu l m o d if ic a t io n ( i f not a lr e a d y p re s e n t) f o r in creasin g th e e f f i c i e n c y o f any system i s the i n s t a l l a t i o n o f a dosage chamber. This c o n s is ts o f a tank c o n s tru c te d as a second chamber be­ tween the s e p tic tank and the d r a i n f i e l d . It is equipped w ith e i t h e r an autom atic syphon o r pump, so t h a t when th e w a te r w it h i n the chamber reaches a predeterm ined l e v e l it is emptied i n t o th e d ra in a g e system. The dosage chamber is intended to r e t a i n e f f l u e n t from th e s e p tic tank u n t il an amount a p p r o p r ia te to th e d i s t r i b u t i o n c a p a c it y o f the d ra in a g e fie ld is reached. I t then re le a s e s t h i s measured amount in t o the d i s ­ t r i b u t i o n system. In t h i s manner the r e c e iv in g s o i l s have a g r e a t e r o p p o rtu n ity to dry out between w e ttin g c y c le s , then when the e f f l u e n t flows u n in te rr u p te d from the s e p tic tank to the d r a in f i e l d . dosage chamber is p a r t i c u l a r l y h e lp fu l The 1n reducing massive "slugs" o f e f f l u e n t to the s o i l d u rin g periods o f peak use, such as weekend v i s i t o r s o r e x te n s iv e use o f washers o r o th e r la r g e volume w a te r uses. The in c o rp o ra tio n o f a dosage chamber 1n th e system, in e f f e c t , time" f o r the s o il extends the l i f e to adsorb and f i l t e r th e household e f f l u e n t . "buys This o f th e system as w e ll as i t s e f f i c i e n c y . With re s p e c t to th e maintenance and o p e ra tio n o f s e p tic systems, the l i t e r a t u r e re v e a ls t h a t adherence to a few common sense r u le s w i l l g r e a t ly enhance performance e f f i c i e n c y o f th e s e p tic tank system and w i l l reduce o p e ra tio n a l c o s ts . f o r the householder: O tis (1 9 7 4 ) d e s c rib e s th re e b as ic r u le s 1) be c o n s e rv a tiv e in th e use o f w a t e r ; 2 ) do W a s te F lo a t in g S c u m D o s in g T a n k D is tr ib u tio n 8ox/ D o s in g S ip h o n To D r a in F ie ld Figure 2.- IIlu s tr a tio n of the Dosing Chamber (or tank) with Dosing Siphon Presented in Schematic Form. Adapted from “Manual of Septic-Tank Practice," 1963 by U.S. Dept, of Health, Education and Welfare (Publication number 526) p. 51. 36 not use th e o n - s i t e sewage system as a " d 1 s p o s e -a l1 and 3) pump the se p tic tank r e g u l a r l y . The c o n s e rv a tiv e use o f w a te r sim ply and l o g i c a l l y r e f e r s to reducing the volume o f w ate r passing through th e system so t h a t r e t e n t io n and s o i l exposure times a r e maximized. C o u lt e r , e t al (1 9 6 0 ) in a Tennessee study found t h a t as household w a te r use in c re a s e d , the p e r ­ centage o f s e p tic tank system f a i l u r e s a ls o in c re a s e d . cations o f t h i s w a te r c o n s e rv a tio n proposal P r a c t ic a l a p p l i ­ In c lu d e spacing o u t la u n d ry loads through th e week, r a t h e r than doing a l l th e wash on one day and p la cin g a c o n s id e ra b le s t r a i n on th e system; o n ly using th e washing machine f o r f u l l wash lo a d s ; a p p ly in g the same r a t i o n a l , only to dishw ashing; and i f p o s s ib le , a v o id in g a l l i.e ., fu ll loads to g e th e r th e i n s t a l ­ l a t i o n and use o f dishwashers o r garbage g r in d e r s which a r e w a te r w ast­ ing lu x u ry item s . O tis a ls o ad vises the ju d ic io u s use o f w ate r f o r b a th in g , showering, and flu s h in g o f t o i l e t s . The sim ple expediency o f bending the f l o a t arm down o r p u t tin g a couple o f b ric k s in the tank to d is p la c e some o f i t s volume w i l l reduce the amount o f w a te r used by the t o i l e t . With re s p e c t to substances disposed o f through th e system, a l l referen ces reviewed a d v is e a g a in s t f lu s h in g g re a s e , s o lv e n ts , o r paper products such as d is p o s a b le d ia p e rs o r s a n it a r y napkins i n t o the system. The use o f garbage g rin d e r s is advised a g a in s t by O tis as mentioned above. Cain and B e a tty ( 1 9 6 5 ) , however, suggest the more t o l e r a n t ap­ proach o f In c re a s in g the s i z e o f th e s e p tic tank and d r a in f i e l d accomnodate t h i s a d d it i o n a l o rg a n ic load and w a te r volume. here is upon p re s e rv in g the b a c t e r i a l to The emphasis f l o r a o f the s e p tic ta n k , reducing i t s sludge lo a d , and reducing the p o s s i b i l i t y o f a clogged p ip e o r d r a in 37 fie ld . Given the preceding emphasis on th e importance o f phosphorus co n ten t 1n the l e a c h a t e , i t 1s obvious th e la k e p ro p e rty owner should r be p a r t i c u l a r l y c a r e fu l to use o n ly phosphate f r e e c le a n in g products and bath item s. O tis ' recommendation t h a t the r e s i d e n t i a l s e p tic tank be pumped r e g u l a r ly every two o r th re e years i s c o n s is t e n t w ith o th e r re fe re n c e s encountered (C ain and B e a t ty , 1965; Vogt and Boyd, 1 9 7 3 ). lake r e s id e n t may be a b le to extend t h i s s e r v ic e i n t e r v a l The seasonal but should do so o n ly upon the a d v is e o f a s a n i t a r i a n o r s e p tic tank s e rv ic e special 1 s t . A l t e r n a t iv e s to S e p tic Tank Disposal Systems C u r r e n t ly , t h e r e are th re e t e c h n o lo g ic a l l y f e a s i b l e a l t e r n a t i v e s to the use o f s e p tic tank - d r a in f i e l d systems. These a r e a e r a t io n chambers, holding ta n k s , and m unicipal sewage systems. The a e r a t io n chamber c o n s is ts o f an e l a b o r a t io n o f the b asic s e p tic ta n k . A i r is pumped in t o th e stand ing e f f l u e n t 1n the tank to In tro d u c e more oxygen. D ig e s tio n i s more c o m p le te ly accomplished by ae ro b ic b a c t e r ia as opposed to the an aero b ic system o f the t r a d i ­ tio n a l s e p tic ta n k . The r e s u l t a n t e f f l u e n t re le a s e d to th e t i l e imposes c o n s id e ra b ly le s s s t r a i n on the s o il suspended s o lid s and BOD. fie ld b io t a and 1s low er in However, th e n u t r i e n t component remains a f a c t o r o f th e d ispersed e f f l u e n t , and i t s p o te n tia l la k e enrichm ent a r e s t i l l r a m i f i c a t i o n s in terms o f v ia b le . Conversion to holding tanks e n t a i l s the l i k e l y expansion o f the holding c a p a c ity o f the e x i s t i n g s e p tic ta n k . from the tank by a c o n t r a c t dispo sal A l l e f f l u e n t is pumped s e rv ic e and the l i q u i d waste and 38 sludge 1s taken e i t h e r to a m u n icip al land su rfa ce d is p o s a l sewage tr e a tm e n t p l a n t o r approved s i t e . T h is o p tio n would In v o lv e an expense re s id e n ts o f s u b s c rib in g to a d is p o s a l s e r v ic e to and th e c o n s t r a i n t ju d ic io u s use o f w a te r to reduce th e fre q u e n c y o f pumpage. of Wisconsin and Maine s tu d ie s i n d i c a t e th e c o s t to be about $ 1 ,0 0 0 per y e a r f o r a fa m ily o f f o u r { 0 t 1 s , 1974; Maine Departm ent o f Environm ental P r o te c ­ t i o n , 1 9 7 4 ). Another o p tio n to s e p t ic tank - d r a i n f i e l d systems s t i l l e a r l y m a rk etin g stages is the use o f s e l f - c o n t a i n e d d is p o s a l These In c lu d e propane i n c i n e r a t o r t o i l e t s in th e systems. and a v a r i e t y o f more r e c e n t l y developed systems, such as th e " C liv u s M u l t r u m " dry t o i l e t based on the concept o f o rg a n ic m a t e r ia l composting. flu s h systems a r e a ls o a v a i l a b l e . w h ile h e a v ie r wastes c a r r i e d M in e ra l o i l Here th e o i l r e c y c lin g is clean ed and reused by 1 t s e t t l e o u t in a h o ld in g ta n k . The advantage o f these systems o ve r r e g u l a r f l u s h t o i l e t plumbing 1s the reduced l i q u i d volume o f th e wastes and a subsequent re d u c tio n in the frequ en cy r e q u ir e d f o r pumping th e h o ld in g ta n k . U n fo rtu n a te ly , i n s t a l l a t i o n o f th ese systems ranges from about $800 to $ 4 ,0 0 0 (1976 M an u fa c tu re rs ' b ro c h u re s ) and o fte n In v o lv e s m aintenance and o p e r a tio n costs f o r r e c y c lin g pumps and f i l t e r s , pumpage f e e s . 1n a d d it i o n to propane a n d /o r Pumping o f these ta n k s , however, is r e q u ir e d f a r le s s f r e q u e n tly than w it h a standard h o ld in g tan k system. For th e i n d i v i d u a l r i p a r i a n who can a f f o r d th e I n i t i a l expense, t h is o p t io n — i f proven to be h y g e n ic a lly and a e s t h e t i c a l l y a c c e p ta b le — may prove s u p e r io r in long run costs and en viron m ental r i s k s to the I n t e r i m s e p t i c - h o ld i n g tank approach. I t must be noted t h a t these s e lf - c o n t a in e d u n i t s , w h ile showing g r e a t p o t e n t i a l , remain to be proven t e c h n i c a l l y e f f e c t i v e o r p u b l i c l y a c c e p ta b le . 39 At p res en t th e h o ld in g tan k o p tio n to s e p tic tank systems seems an a p p r o p r ia te s h o r t-te r m i n t e r i m measure f o r p ro v id in g r e l i e f from lake e u tr o p h ic a tio n and co n ta m in a tio n u n t i l a more permanent measure in the form o f m unicipal e s ta b lis h e d . sewage tre a tm e n t f a c i l i t i e s can be E v e n t u a lly , th e s e l f - c o n t a in e d d isp o sal systems may provide a s u p e r io r and economical answer to r e s i d e n t i a l p o l l u t i o n o f su rface w a te rs , but t h i s o p tio n is y e t to be s u f f i c i e n t l y developed and t e s te d . Lake Water Q u a lit y I n v e s t ig a t i o n Regular w ate r sampling o f th e la k e is e s s e n t ia l to any e f f l u e n t abatement program. Such i n v e s t ig a t i o n helps suggest lo c a tio n s o f p o in t and n o n -p o in t e f f l u e n t sources around th e la k e r e q u i r i n g p a r­ tic u la r a tte n tio n . The records o f r e g u la r w a te r q u a l i t y sampling also pro vide b a s e lin e data e s s e n t ia l to the assessment o f r e l a t i v e progress o r setbacks in c le a n in g up th e la k e . Lake w a te r sampling designs are o f b a s i c a l l y two typ es: the o b j e c t iv e , random sampling o f th e b a s in , u s u a lly s t r a t i f i e d by a g rid o r t r a n s i t design approach; and th e more s u b j e c t i v e , d ia g n o s tic approach o f c o l l e c t i n g samples near sources o f l i k e l y e f f l u e n t In p u t s . The former technique is e s s e n tia l 1 f general conclusions are to be made about the e n t i r e l a k e , o r i f th e data is to be used to g en erate in fo rm atio n comparing se ve ra l lak e s to one a n o th e r. The l a t t e r te c h ­ nique 1s more d i r e c t l y a p p li c a b le to th e i d e n t i f i c a t i o n o f d isch arge lo c a tio n s and is h ig h ly a p p r o p r ia t e to s u r v e i l la n c e o r m o n ito rin g ob­ je c tiv e s . But conclusions and comparisons w ith t h i s technique a r e a p p ro p ria te o n ly to s p e c i f i c sample lo c a t io n s w i t h i n t h a t l a k e . This 40 data does not r e a d i l y lend i t s e l f to s t a t i s t i c a l a n a ly s is o r to con­ clusions about th e general c o n d itio n o f th e la k e . The choice o f sampling design and frequ en cy depends to a c o n s id e r­ able e x te n t on the n atu re o f the l a k e , th e o b je c t iv e s f o r which th e in fo rm a tio n i s b eing c o l l e c t e d , and th e amount th e a s s o c ia t io n is w i l l i n g to spend on th e stu d y. Lake a s s o c ia tio n s should o b t a in p ro ­ fes sio n a l a s s is ta n c e in t h i s re s p e c t by c o n ta c tin g t h e i r county e x te n ­ sion ag e n t. He, th e lo c a l p u b lic h e a lth s a n i t a r i a n , o r o f f i c e r s o f o th e r la k e a s s o c ia tio n s should be a b le to reconmend s t a t e , u n i v e r s i t y , or p r i v a t e firm s a c t i v e in lim n o lo g ic a l and w a te r resource i n v e s t i g a t i o n . The parameters s e le c te d f o r a n a ly s is o f la k e w a te r q u a l i t y may c o n s t it u t e any number o f measurements and a r e dependent upon th e ob­ j e c t iv e s o f the re s e a rc h . They may in c lu d e the f u l l gammet o f s e d i­ ment, p h y to p la n kto n , b e n th ic organisms, f i s h , and a host o f b a c t e r i a l and chemical measurements, as w e ll as d e p th , a r e a , and f lu s h in g c h a r­ a c te r is tic s o f a la k e . to be a l l in c lu s iv e . The proposals presented here a re not intended R a th e r th ey a r e d e l i b e r a t e l y l i m i t e d to those w ater q u a l i t y t e s t s s u f f i c i e n t l y g eneral in n a tu re to be r e a d i l y ap­ p l i e d , and which t r a d i t i o n a l l y demonstrate a r e l i a b l e assessment o f p o te n tia l sewage e f f l u e n t c o n ta m in a tio n . With t h i s l i m i t e d o b j e c t i v e 1n mind, th e f o llo w in g w a te r q u a l i t y te s ts a re recommended as the basic data source f o r th e la k e survey. S o lu b le o r Orthophosphate Phosphorus and N i t r a t e - N i t r o q e n A v a r i e t y o f f a c t o r s c o n t r ib u t e to th e growth and s u r v iv a l o f algae and a q u a tic weeds, in c lu d in g l i g h t , carbon, pH, n u t r i e n t s , and various t r a c e m in e r a ls . With re s p e c t to the n u t r i e n t s , phosphorus and 41 n itrogen ( p a r t i c u l a r l y phosphorus) have shown a c o n s is te n t r e l a t i o n s h i p to weed and a lg a l growth, and both a re common to sewage e f f l u e n t s . the two, n itro g e n 1s le s s p e r t i n e n t to a lg a l Of problems because the b lu e - green species a re a b le to f i x atm ospheric n itr o g e n in the absence o f aquatic n itro g e n and can t h r i v e so long as t h e i r o th e r re q u ire d n u t r ie n t s are p re s e n t. A ls o , much o f the n itr o g e n 1n a la k e 1s a s s im ila te d from the atmosphere o r groundwater and i s so u b iq u ito u s t h a t removal e f f o r t s from e f f l u e n t s have l i t t l e promise o f s i g n i f i c a n t re d u c tio n (D . King, I n s t i t u t e o f Water Research, M ichigan S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y , personal communi­ c a tio n ). From th e s ta n d p o in t o f a la k e a s s o c ia t io n , the phosphorus con­ c e n tr a tio n i s o f g r e a t e r s i g n i f i c a n c e . I t s presence in very small amounts, as long as o th e r growth c o n s titu e n ts a r e a ls o a v a i l a b l e , p e r ­ mits the e x te n s iv e growth o f a q u a tic v e g e t a tio n . Most lim n o lo g ic a l te x ts suggest as a general r u l e o f thumb t h a t a th re s h o ld PO^-P c o n c e n tra tio n o f about 0.01 mg/1 i s s u f f i c i e n t to promote expansive growth ( E h r e n f e ld , 1970; Lund, 1 9 6 9 ). thonous ( i . e . , As mentioned above, th e common source o f th e a l l o c h - n o n -la k e produced) phosphorus to r e c r e a t io n a l through sewage e f f l u e n t and f e r t i l i z e r r u n o f f . the la k e , i t has th e p o t e n t ia l d ie and decompose. lakes is Once phosphorus is in to re c y c le through alg ae and weeds as they B a c te r ia l a c t io n in the sediments may then r e le a s e the phosphorus to the w a te r f o r r e a s s i m i l a t i o n by subsequent g en eratio n s o f v e g e ta tio n . The reasons f o r recommending the t e s t i n g o f both n i t r a t e and phos­ phate a re based on t h e i r common occurrence 1n sewage and f e r t i l i z e r e f ­ f l u e n t s , and the f a c t t h a t one o r the o th e r may, a t the tim e o f sam pling, be bound up in growing a q u a tic organisms. 42 W hile much o f t h is d is c u s s io n re g a rd in g n u t r i e n t I n v e s t i g a t i o n p e r­ ta in s s p e c i f i c a l l y to d ia g n o s tic sam pling, 1 t should a ls o be noted t h a t the o b j e c t iv e approach to th e sampling o f these loadin gs i s a ls o p e r t i ­ n en t. The sedim ents, la k e volume, d e p th , and f lu s h in g r a t e in c o n c e rt are i n f l u e n t i a l upon th e p o t e n t ia l n u t r ie n t lo a d in g . Impact on t h a t la k e o f any given A l l la k e s have a c e r t a i n a s s i m i l a t i v e c a p a c ity which determines the e x t e n t to which th ey can r e c e iv e c u l t u r a l e f f l u e n t s w i t h ­ out p r e c ip ito u s d e c li n e . An idea o f t h i s " c a rr y in g c a p a c ity " and con­ sequently the e x t e n t o f development a llo w a b le and "lead tim e " a v a i l a b l e to managers o f la k e w a te r q u a l i t y can be approximated o n ly by o b j e c t iv e sampling o f la k e n u t r i e n t s . T his o b j e c t iv e approach is a ls o p e r t i n e n t 1 f p u b lic funds a r e to be requested f o r la k e management p r o j e c t s . S tate and fe d e r a l agencies a re in c li n e d to p r e f e r the o b j e c t iv e form o f data p re s e n ta tio n a t l e a s t as a component o f formal proposals f o r g ran ts or o th e r a i d . C h lorid es C h lo rid es a r e a common component o f lakes due to th e d is s o lv in g o f m ineral s a l t s by both s u rfa c e and groundwaters. They a r e a ls o h ig h ly concentrated in sewage e f f l u e n t as a component o f u r i n e . f o r t h i s reason t h a t c h lo r id e s should be t e s te d ; i.e ., It is p r i m a r i l y high c o n c e n tra ­ tio n s r e l a t i v e to o th e r areas o f the la k e may in d i c a t e sewage i n f lo w . Another source o f high c h l o r id e c o n c e n tra tio n s in a la k e sample is the leaching and r u n o f f o f s a l t s as a consequence o f w in t e r highway d e ic in g p ra c tic e s . Extrem ely high s a l t c o n c e n tra tio n s can r e s u l t from road drainage near a la k e where exce ss ive s a l t i n g was p r a c tic e d d u rin g w in­ t e r (S c h ra u fn a g e l, 1967; Diment, 1 9 7 3 ). I t has been shown t h a t the leaching o f t h i s s a l t from road shoulders can co n tin u e i n t o the sumner 43 months (K u nkle, 1 9 7 2 ). Hence, high c h lo r id e c o n c e n tra tio n s can I n d i c a t e e i t h e r sewage e f f l u e n t o r road d ra in a g e which may e n t a i l contaminants as w e l l . a tte n d a n t o th e r Or 1n some cases a high c h lo r id e re ad in g may in d ic a te b r in e leakage from w e lls o r u n u su ally s a l t y groundwater. B a c te ria From th e p e rs p e c tiv e o f the t h r e a t to p u b lic h e a lth from s e p tic tank wastes o r storm w a te r r u n o f f , w a te r samples should be examined f o r a t le a s t th re e e c o lo g ic a l types o f b a c t e r i a : Fecal C o l l , and Fecal Strepto co ccu s. T o ta l C o lifo rm organisms, These b a c t e r i a in high numbers in d ic a te th e re c e n t en tran ce o f e x c r e to r y wastes to th e w a te r . In the case o f storm r u n o f f , th e source o f fe c a l m a te r ia l may be ro d e n ts , w i l d ­ l i f e , dogs, c a t s , o r l iv e s t o c k . The S ta te o f M ichigan w ate r q u a l i t y standards o r i g i n a l l y s e t 1 ,0 0 0 colonies to T o ta l C o ll b a c t e r i a in 100 mis o f w ater sample as th e maxi­ mum ac c e p ta b le le v e l f o r body c o n ta c t a c t i v i t i e s , the s t a t e 's su rfa ce w a te rs . i.e . swimming, in I f the geom etric average o f any s e rie s o f 10 consecutive samples exceeded 1 ,0 0 0 o r any 20% o f th e samples ex­ ceed 5 ,0 00 c o lo n ie s , th e w a te r was considered unsafe f o r r e c r e a tio n a l swimming. This c r i t e r i a has s in c e been dropped from the r e g u la t io n s in fa v o r o f a s in g le Fecal C o llfo rm standard r e q u ir in g t h a t w aters con­ sidered s u i t a b le f o r t o t a l body c o n ta c t not exceed 200 c o lo n ie s /1 0 0 m is. S till, t e s t in g f o r T o ta l C o lifo rm remains a h e lp fu l index f o r the e v a lu ­ a tio n o f b a c t e r i a l w ater q u a l i t y by augmenting the Fecal C o llfo rm a n a ly ­ s is . There a r e no present standards f o r Fecal Streptococcus in the Michigan law . However, th e presence o f Fecal Streptococcus b a c t e r ia s p e c i f i c a l l y in d ic a te s re c e n t fe c a l waste co n tam in atio n by warm-blooded 44 animals ( G e ld r e ic h , 1 9 7 0 ). A c o r r e l a t i o n has been observed between th e r a t i o o f Fecal C o li to Fecal S t r e p t o c o c c i i ; and th e source may be i n ­ fe rre d as f o llo w s : FC/FS _> 4 . 0 is stro n g evidence o f human w astes; FC/FS = 0 . 7 im p lie s l i v e s t o c k o r p o u lt r y w astes; FC/FS = a range from 2 to 4 suggests a mix o f human and l i v e s t o c k w astes; FC/FS = 0 . 7 1 .0 suggests a mix o f l i v e s t o c k and p o u lt r y w astes. between 1 and 2 , th e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n I f th e r a t i o to fa lls is u n c e r ta in and th e sample was probably taken too f a r from th e source o f p o l l u t i o n to be i n d i c a t i v e . I f low Fecal Streptococcus c o n c e n tr a tio n s (below 100 c o lo n ie s /1 0 0 m l) are o b ta in e d , o r th e e f f l u e n t exposure i s more than 24 hours o l d , th e r a t i o i n t e r p r e t a t i o n may be ve ry dubious ( G e l d r e i c h , personal communi­ c a t io n , 1 9 7 5 ). In a d d it io n to th e typ e o f p o l l u t i o n in d ic a t e d by an FC/FS r a t i o , i t should be r e a d i l y e v id e n t t h a t high r e s u l t s f o r a l l th r e e b a c t e r i a l c u l t u r e s , plus high n u t r i e n t and c h lo r id e c o n c e n tr a tio n s s t r o n g ly I n d i ­ cates the presence o f sewage e f f l u e n t . T e s t r e s u l t s o f such p ro p o rtio n s should prompt the re s e a rc h e r o r la k e a s s o c ia t io n to f u r t h e r i n v e s t i g a t e t h a t p o r tio n o f th e la k e o r stream f o r a suspected source o f contam ina­ tio n . C o n d u c tiv ity Another e v a l u a t i v e procedure h e lp f u l in th e i n v e s t i g a t i o n o f pos­ s i b le w ate r p o l l u t i o n is th e measurement o f th e e l e c t r i c a l o f th e w a t e r . I f th e i n i t i a l conductance b a c t e r i a l , n u t r i e n t , and c h l o r i d e d ata suggest c o n ta m in a tio n , th e sampling s i t e may be c a r e f u l l y and s lo w ly cru is ed 1n a small b o a t and sampled w it h a f i e l d c o n d u c t i v i t y m eter to d e l in e a t e th e shape and s iz e o f th e e f f l u e n t plume. C o n d u c t iv it y i s the e l e c t r i c a l measurement in mhos o f th e d is s o lv e d ions in w a t e r . 46 to o v e r a ll e u t r o p h lc a tlo n abatem ent, I f re s p o n s ib ly a tte m p te d , t h i s area o f la k e management has a ls o been I n v e s t ig a t e d . Algae Control In th e c o n tin u in g research f o r c o n tro l o f a lg a e blooms c o n s id e ra b le e f f o r t has been d ir e c t e d to th e study o f t h e i r b as ic l i f e o b je c t iv e 1s to f i n d a c r i t i c a l and growth. technique. component e s s e n tia l needs. The to a lg a l s u r v iv a l This research has y e t to gen erate a w orkable management The problem appears to re v o lv e around the o p p o r t u n is t ic nature o f alg ae and the v a g a rie s o f environm ental s e t t i n g s . The a lg a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f ra p id growth, u n iv e rs a l o cc u rren c e, water column m o b i l i t y , and p h o to s y n th e tic metabolism c o m p lic a te the l i m i t i n g f a c t o r approach to i t s management. There does not appear to be a c o n s is t e n t ly s in g u la r f a c t o r c o n t r o l l i n g i t s growth. R a th e r, a combination o f f a c t o r s may be in v o lv e d , in c lu d in g carbon, l i g h t , phos­ phorus, n it r o g e n , i r o n , and pH ( P r o v a s o l i , 1969; Keenan, 1973; Foree and Scroggin, 1973; and Round, 1973, p. 151 passim ). While phosphorus 1s most o fte n the l i m i t i n g f a c t o r c o n t r o l l i n g a lg a e growth, th e p a r t i c ­ u la rs o f each la k e environment can a ls o be i n f l u e n t i a l . The p a r t i c u l a r combination o f circumstances and n u t r ie n t s necessary to g en erate a bloom on one la k e a r e not n e c e s s a r ily the same f o r a n o th e r; nor w i l l the species o f a lg a e causing problems always be the same. In any reasonably enriched l a k e , p e r io d ic a lg a l blooms may be expected. A ll p o s s ib le n u t r i e n t combinations cannot be c o n t r o l l e d , and i t is im possible to remove a l l a lg a e from th e system. The organisms and t h e i r re p ro d u c tiv e spores a re sim ply too numerous and w e ll d i s t r i b u t e d . Consequently, c o n tro l has been t r a d i t i o n a l l y d ir e c t e d a t e f f o r t s to r e s t r i c t the e x t e n t o f blooms when th e y occur o r to reduce t h e i r poten­ tia l to develop. 47 Chemical Methods o f C ontrol A t r a d i t i o n a l , tem porary, and cosmetic approach to a lg a l c o n tro l has been the a p p li c a t i o n o f copper s u l f a t e blue v i t r o l , to th e la k e s u r fa c e . The copper s u l f a t e I n t e r f e r e s w it h p h y s io lo g ic a l processes o f th e c e l l s . w ith in hours o f a p p li c a t i o n and r e s u l t s the c e l l s . (CuSO^), commonly known as This e f f e c t is o f te n e v id e n t In death and decomposition o f The mechanism o f the copper t o x i c i t y is not p r e c is e ly known, but vario us research ers have suggested t h a t i t s y n th e s is , r e s p i r a t i o n , a n d /o r c e l l d iv i s i o n i n t e r f e r e s w it h photo­ (G ibson, 1 9 7 1 ). The copper s u l f a t e may be a p p lie d by l i q u i d spray o r by towing f a b r i c bags o f the d is s o lv in g c r y s t a l s behind a moving b o a t. The r a t e o f a p p l i c a ­ tio n recommended to c o n tro l b lu e -g re e n p la n k to n ic a lg a e 1s u s u a lly about 5 1 /2 pounds per a c r e , o r a one p a r t per m i l l i o n c o n c e n tra tio n in the upper 2 f e e t o f w a te r (Lueschow, 1 9 7 2 ). The copper s u l f a t e is a ls o t o x ic to f i s h and many i n v e r t e b r a t e s , but in h ig h e r c o n c e n tra tio n s than th e approxim ate 1 ppm e f f e c t i v e a g a in s t b lu e -g re e n a lg a e . F u r t h e r , in hard w a te r la k e s , th e copper s u l f a t e q u ic k ly re a c ts w ith carbonate ions to form r e l a t i v e l y b i o l o g i ­ c a l l y I n e r t copper carb o nate which p r e c i p i t a t e s to the bottom sedim ents. Because o f these p o in t s , i t has been g e n e r a lly considered t h a t copper s u l f a t e i s a "s a fe" chemical f o r the tre a tm e n t o f nuisance a lg a l con­ d it io n s as w e ll as swimmers i t c h . I t must be emphasized t h a t such c o n tro l measures are o n ly tempo­ r a r y , and the tre a tm e n t process must o fte n be f r e q u e n t ly repeated throughout the summer season, in some in s ta n c e s , as o fte n as e v e ry few weeks. This may r e s u l t in la r g e c o n c e n tra tio n s o f copper accum ulating 1n the bottom sediments o f problem lak es which have re c e iv e d long term 48 copper s u l f a t e tr e a tm e n t. Some lak es such as Monona and Waubesa In Wisconsin have re c e iv e d hundreds o f tons o f t h i s compound over the years (Lueschow, 1 9 7 2 ). Houghton Lake 1n Michigan has re c e iv e d ap­ p ro xim a tely one m i l l i o n pounds o f copper s in ce copper s u l f a t e t r e a t ­ ments began th e r e 1n 1944 (Novy e t a l , 1 9 7 3 ). One p o s s ib le b e n e f i t a s s o c ia te d w ith th e continued a d d it io n o f copper compounds to lak es is in the re d u c tio n o f n itro g e n f i x a t i o n by blu e-g reen a lg a e . Bioassays conducted by Horne and Goldman (19 74 ) suggest t h a t the a d d it io n o f t r a c e amounts o f copper as copper s u l ­ f a t e (CuSO^-Cu), in 5 to 10 ug/1 c o n c e n tr a tio n s , s i g n i f i c a n t l y r e ­ duces the n itr o g e n f i x a t i o n r a t e o f the b lu e -g re e n a lg a e , Aphanizomenon and Anabaena. They propose t h a t th e a p p l i c a t i o n o f tra c e amounts o f copper to lakes m ight h e lp c o n tro l l a t e s p rin g and f a l l blooms o f blue-green a lg ae by suppression o f t h e i r n itr o g e n f i x a t i o n p o t e n t i a l . They c a u tio n t h a t such management p o t e n t ia l need to c u r t a i l i s supplemental to the sewage e f f l u e n t en tra n c e to la k e s . Concern f o r th e p o s s ib le long term adverse e f f e c t s o f the accumu­ l a t i o n o f copper s a l t s 1n sedim ents, an a p p a r e n tly d eveloping r e s i s ­ tance o f some forms o f b lu e -g re e n a lg a e , p a r t i c u l a r l y Aphanizomenon (Prows and M cllhenny, 1 9 7 3 ); and the r i s k to o th e r l i f e forms i f the treatm en t dosage 1s too g r e a t , makes the use o f copper s u l f a t e a les s than Id e a l a lg a l c o n tro l te c h n iq u e . Its p o t e n t ia l hazard to humans may f u r t h e r in c re a s e i f our growing needs f o r d r in k in g w a te r s u p p lie s extend to th e use o f r e c r e a t io n a l lakes as w a te r supply r e s e r v o i r s . Because o f t h is growing concern o ve r the p o s s ib le r a m i f i c a t i o n s o f in d is c r im in a te chemical tre a tm e n t o f r e c r e a t io n a l la k e s , the Michigan Department o f N a tu ra l Resources r e q u ire s t h a t anyone proposing to ch e m ica lly t r e a t such w aters f i r s t o b ta in a p erm it from t h a t agency. 49 A re c e n t study by Prows and M cllhenny (1 9 7 3 ) suggests t h a t two new compounds might be e n v iro n m e n ta lly s a f e r than e i t h e r copper s u l f a t e or the commercial copper p re p a ra tio n " C u t r i n e ," which is a ls o commonly used. These a r e 2 , 5 - D ic h lo r o - 3 , 4 - d i n i t r o t h i p h e n e (ex p e rim e n ta l compound 2 3 ) , and p -c h lo ro p h e n y l-2 -h ie n y l-io d o n iu m c h l o r id e (e x p e rim e n ta l compound 7 3 ) . Both a re re p o rte d to be 94 to 100% a c t i v e a g a in s t two common forms o f b lu e -g re e n a lg a e ( M ic ro c y s tis aeruginosa and Anabaena flo s -a g u a e ) in c o n c e n tra tio n s o f 0 .2 ppm and 0 . 8 ppm r e s p e c t i v e l y . pound 23 under i n i t i a l Com­ experim ental s tu d ie s demonstrated no known e n v i­ ronmental o r human hazards under o r d in a r y s a fe handling procedures, and compound 73 appears to have ve ry low environmental and human hazards. Prows and Mcllhenny suggest t h a t , e c o n o m ic a lly , both compounds a ls o may prove to be cheaper than copper s u l f a t e o r " C u t r in e ," f o r la k e tre a tm e n t. The problem remains t h a t the use o f chemical substances to c o n tro l algae may r e s u l t In f i s h k i l l s from lowered d is s o lv e d oxygen co n ten t when the tre a te d a lg a e begin to decompose. S i m i l a r l y , th e decomposing algae may r e le a s e in a s h o rt p erio d o f t i n e r e l a t i v e l y high co n ce n tra­ tio n s o f t o x ic substances, re n d e rin g the w a te r poisonous to some forms of life in c lu d in g l iv e s t o c k and humans (Gorham, 1964; Lueschow, 1 9 7 2 ). I t should be noted, however, t h a t n e i t h e r o f these problems are i n e v i t a ­ b le nor fr e q u e n t, and can, in f a c t , occur subsequent to an a lg a l bloom where no a lg a e c id e s have been a p p lie d . The la r g e c o n c e n tra tio n o f algae which c o n s t i t u t e th e blooms, w h ile g e n e ra tin g oxygen by photosyn­ th esis d u rin g the day, w i l l consume oxygen from the w a te r a t n ig h t o r during perio ds o f cloudy w e a th e r. be an oxygen d e f i c i e n c y . The n et r e s u l t in th e long run can The eventual death and decomposition o f the a lg a l bloom, whether n a t u r a l l y o r a r t i f i c i a l l y induced, may a ls o cause oxygen d e p le tio n s and th e g e n e ra tio n o f to x ic substances. 50 B io lo g ic a l C o n tr o ls Due to th e growing concern o v e r th e r e le a s e and ac cu m u latio n o f man-made chem icals 1n th e e n v iro n m e n t, i t 1s im p o r ta n t t h a t n a t u r a l c o n tro l measures f o r th e r e s t r i c t i o n o f nuisance a lg a e be i n v e s t i g a t e d . In many in s ta n c e s though, t h i s approach, l i k e chemical t r e a t m e n t , may g en erate a problem where th e cure 1s worse than th e o r i g i n a l a il m e n t . A good example Is th e d is a g r e e a b le consequences which have developed as a r e s u l t o f in tr o d u c in g th e ca rp ( Cyprinus c a r p i o ) to American s u r ­ face w a te r en viron m ents. I t was a t one tim e th o u g h t to be a good Idea f o r weed c o n t r o l , b u t many p eople view th e ca rp as a g r e a t e r nuisance than the o r i g i n a l problem . More r e c e n t l y , carp ( Ctenopharyngodon i d e l l a ) a q u a tic weed c o n t r o l . th e w h it e amure o r grass has been used as a new approach to But b i o l o g i s t s and th e p u b lic as w e l l , both appear to be wary o f th e p o t e n t i a l a d d i t i o n a l d u ctio n o f new b i o l o g i c a l sp ecies may c r e a t e . problems t h a t th e i n t r o ­ T h is concern based on past ex p e rie n c e s 1s j u s t i f i a b l e , and any re s e a rc h in b i o l o g i c a l co n tro l must c e r t a i n l y proceed w it h c o n s id e r a b le c a u t i o n . Research in t h i s a re a i s a tte m p t in g to d is c o v e r and develop co n tro l organisms to stem th e growth o f a lg a l blooms. Cook, e t a l (1 9 7 4 ) re p o rte d th e presence o f an amoeboid organism in la k e s o f N o rth e a s t Georgia which appears to fe e d v o r a c io u s ly on Anabaena sp ecies o f b lu e green a lg a e . However, as a r e s u l t o f i t s fe e d in g methods th e green scum on th e w a te r s u rfa c e i s re p la c e d by a m ilk y w h ite scum. It appears t h a t t h i s form o f b i o l o g i c a l c o n tr o l a t p re s e n t stages o f r e ­ search may sim p ly r e p la c e one form o f a e s t h e t i c a l l y d is p le a s in g a p p e a r­ ance w ith a n o th e r. 51 Prows and M cllhenn y (1 9 7 3 ) w h i l e w orking on th e development o f a more a c c e p ta b le a l g a e d d e , a ls o d is c o v e re d th e a p p a r e n t ly u b iq u ito u s presence o f a b i f l a g e l l a t e protozoan Ochromonas oval Is which preys upon M ic r o c y s tis spp. o f b lu e -g re e n a lg a e w ith s u f f i c i e n t e f f i c i e n c y to have d is ru p te d t h e i r s tu d ie s o f th e a l g a l c i d a l e f f e c t s o f th e com­ pounds being t e s t e d . They do n o t r e p o r t any a e s t h e t i c a l l y d is p le a s in g s id e e f f e c t s and co n tin ued re se arch w it h th e organism as a form o f b io l o g ic a l c o n tro l would seem p ro m is in g . On th e w h o le , however, w h i l e b io l o g ic a l c o n tro l tech n iq u es may e v e n t u a l l y p ro v id e a s a f e r and more convenient form o f a lg a e c o n t r o l , th ey do n o t a t t h i s tim e c o n s t i t u t e a v ia b le a l t e r n a t i v e to chemical tr e a t m e n t . Mechanical C o n trol The la r g e c o l o n i a l a q u a tic p la n t s , i . e . , forms o f a lg a e which loo k very much l i k e c h a ra , may be c o n t r o l l e d to some e x t e n t by mechanical h a r v e s t in g . These and th e fila m e n to u s a lg a may, w ith some d i f f i c u l t y , be raked from th e la k e as a means o f l i m i t e d c o n t r o l . The p la n k to n ic forms o f a l g a e , s in c e th e y f l o a t w i t h i n the w a te r mass and a r e m ic ro sc o p ic in s i z e , a r e too small mechanical rem oval. fo r e ffic ie n t H a rv e s t would have to c o n s is t o f s e in in g the organisms by p u l l i n g a p la n k to n n e t through th e w a t e r . be e f f i c i e n t would have to be f a i r l y o r two passes w it h such a n e t , l a r g e and d u r a b le . Such nets to A f t e r one i t would have to be removed from the la k e area and e i t h e r disposed o f , o r la b o r o u s ly washed to remove the entrapped a lg a e . E i t h e r a l t e r n a t i v e would be e x p en sive in terms o f m a te r ia l and la b o r c o s ts . F u rth e r, th e a t t e n d a n t b e n e f i t s m ight be s h o rt l i v e d and n e g l i g i b l e s in c e a lg a e n o t removed would be a b le to r e e s t a b lis h the bloom in s h o rt tim e i f en v iro n m e n ta l c o n d it io n s were a p p r o p r ia t e . 52 A t p resen t a lg a l c o n tro l procedure. 1s a t b e s t a d i f f i c u l t and Incom plete The o n ly p r a c t i c a l approach, u n t i l f u r t h e r re se arch 1s accomplished, is th e combined method o f ju d ic io u s chemical tre a tm e n t fo r sh o rt term cosmetic e f f e c t s , to g e th e r w it h a concerted e f f o r t to reduce the amount o f n u t r i e n t s , p a r t i c u l a r l y sewage and f e r t i l i z e r (both lawn and a g r i c u l t u r a l ) , e n te r in g the la k e . P a r t i c u l a r c a u tio n should be e x e rc is e d in the chemical c o n tro l o f a lg a e . Not o n ly because o f th e p o t e n t i a l environm ental r i s k s , but also because a form o f dynamic s t a b i l i t y o fte n e x is t s between species o f alg ae and between the a lg a e and a q u a tic p la n t s . form o f a lg a e , i . e . , The removal o f one the green a lg a e , may r e s u l t in subsequent r e p la c e ­ ment by the more noxious b lu e -g re e n forms. Removal o f th e a lg a e in general may mean t h a t nuisance a q u a tic weeds w i l l t h r i v e in t h e i r p la c e . Aquatic Meed Control L ik e a lg a e , the h ig h e r p la n t forms serve a v a l i d fu n c tio n in the aquatic ecosystem and become nuisances o n ly when they e x i s t in super­ abundance. They, l i k e the a lg a e , c o n s t i t u t e a source o f oxygenation to the w ater and p ro vid e both food and s h e l t e r to a v a r i e t y o f f i s h and o th e r organisms in c lu d in g w i l d l i f e F a s s e tt, 1 9 5 7 ). ( M a r t i n , Zim, and Nelson, 1951; A q u atic v e g e ta tio n o fte n is o f va lu e in s t a b i l i z i n g and in t e r c e p t in g n u t r i e n t en riched and sediment laden w a te r o f i n f l u ­ ent streams and marshes. I t removes a v a i l a b l e n u t r ie n t s and, because the v e g e ta tiv e biomass reduces c u r r e n t v e l o c i t y , enhances c l a r i t y by trapping suspended m a t e r i a l . However, the too lush growth o f emergent ve g etatio n and a q u a tic weed beds i s i n d i c a t i v e o f la k e enrichm ent and c u l t u r a l e u tr o p h ic a t io n . 53 In moderate d e n s it ie s the weed beds are a source o f good f i s h h a b ita t and r e c r e a tio n a l f i s h in g . When weeds a re too p r e v a le n t, how­ ever, they reduce the e f f i c i e n c y o f p red a to ry f i s h consumption o f prey species. The r e s u l t may be co n sid e ra b le d is r u p tio n o f the e c o lo g ic a l balance. This d is ru p tio n may be m anifested in a redu ctio n o f both species composition and c a rry in g c a p a c ity . The fr e q u e n t ly observed dense populations o f stunted pan f is h in r e c r e a tio n a l lakes r e f l e c t s th is c o n d itio n . Over s u f f i c i e n t tim e , the expanded weed beds w i l l als o in flu e n c e the t r a n s i t i o n from a f i r m , sandy lak e bottom to s o f t , organic s e d i­ ments. This r e s u lts each crop o f weeds. from the annual d ie -b a ck and decomposition o f By extending t h is process over many y e a r s , i t becomes e v id e n t t h a t e u tro p h ic a tio n and the expansion o f a q u a tic weed growth can c o n trib u te h e a v ily to the f i l l i n g - i n process o f a la k e . A weed choked la k e is o b v io u sly d e trim e n ta l to the in t e r e s t s o f man and f i s h a l i k e and represents the advanced stages o f lake ev o lu tio n to a marsh and e v e n tu a lly a t e r r e s t r i a l h a b it a t . complete removal o f a l l would c o n s is t o f the aq u a tic weeds from a lak e d es tru c tio n o f a n a tu ra l and b e a u t if u l ecosystem. But the In seeking to con­ tr o l aq u atic weeds, man must be ju d ic io u s in his approach i f the f i s h , w i l d l i f e , and b ird s are to be preserved as a p a r t o f the system. The over zealous e r a d ic a tio n o f aq u atic v e g e ta tio n to promote w a te rs k iin g and swimming can be d is as tero u s f o r f is h in g and a e s th e tic a p p r e c ia tio n . Aquatic weed c o n t r o l, as w ith algae c o n t r o l, should be conducted in a c a re fu l and system atic manner. The f i r s t step in any such pro­ gram should be the mapping o f weed beds, t h e i r e x t e n t , and dominant 54 species. N e x t, in c o n s u lt a t io n w ith an a q u a tic b o t a n is t a n d /o r f i s h e r i e s b i o l o g i s t , those areas to be t r e a t e d and those to be pro­ te c te d should be d e s ig n a te d . Once th e p la n o f c o n tro l the method o f c o n tro l should be s e le c t e d . a l t e r n a t i v e s f o r p la n t c o n tro l a r e : I s fo rm u la te d , C u r r e n t ly 1n Michigan the chemical tre a tm e n t w ith h e r b ic id e s , mechanical h a rv e s tin g w ith weed c u t t e r s , and environm ental m anipula­ t io n such as la k e drawdown and d re d g in g . B io lo g ic a l c o n tro l te c h ­ niques, as w ith a l g a e , remain e s s e n t i a l l y in th e realm o f exp erim en ta­ tio n a t t h is tim e and c e n te r m ostly on c o n tro l by th e use o f h e r b i ­ vorous f i s h species such as the w h ite Amur ( Ctenopharyngdon 1d e l l a ) (B e n n e tt, G. W ., 1971, p. 421; B e n n e tt, F. D . , in M i t c h e l l 1974, p. 1 0 4 ). Chemical Methods o f C ontrol Chemical c o n tro l techniques a re e x tre m e ly v a r i a b l e in c o s t, ranging from $15 to $90 per ac re (N ic h o ls , 1 9 7 4 ). They in v o lv e pos­ s i b le environm ental hazards in c lu d in g poisoning o f f i s h o r w i l d l i f e . The d i s t r i b u t i o n o f th e chemicals i s d i f f i c u l t to c o n tro l both w it h i n the w ate r column and in sediments and may t h e r e f o r e e n t a i l r e s t r i c t e d swimming o r s i m i l a r r e c r e a t io n f o r some tim e a f t e r a p p l i c a t i o n . The decomposing v e g e ta tio n may a ls o c r e a te an oxygen demand as w e ll as r e ­ lease n u t r ie n t s back in t o the la k e (B rooker and Edwards, 1 9 7 5 ). C o n versely, t h i s method o f tre a tm e n t tends to be sim p le and f a s t , many compounds a re species s p e c i f i c , and M ichigan lic e n s in g r e s t r i c t i o n s f o r the h e rb ic a l tre a tm e n t o f lakes and streams makes most approved chemical compounds r e l a t i v e l y s a fe in terms o f p u b lic o r environm ental h e a lth . [See Appendix C: L i s t o f H e rb ic id e s R e g is te re d w it h th e Michigan Department o f A g r i c u l t u r e , and the Environmental P ro te c tio n 55 Agency f o r Use in th e A q u a tic Environm ent. In la n d Lakes Management S e c tio n , M ichigan Departm ent o f N a tu r a l Resources, 1 9 7 6 . ] Mechanical Methods o f C o n tro l The advantages o f mechanical h a r v e s tin g a r e t h a t no chemical re s id u e i s In v o lv e d , a re a c o n tr o l i s com plete (weeds a r e cropped o n ly where th e o p e r a to r takes th e e q u ip m e n t), r e c r e a t i o n a l uses can be re s to re d im m e d ia te ly a f t e r t r e a t m e n t , and th e h a rv e s te d weed biomass to g e th e r w it h i t s n u t r i e n t components can be removed from th e l a k e . The d isad vantages o f mechanical h a r v e s t in g a r e t h a t i t has no s p e c i f i c i t y , a n y th in g in th e path o f th e c u t t i n g b a r is h a rv e s te d ; the process i s slow; o f te n s h a llo w a rea s (2 f e e t o r l e s s ) c a n ' t be t r e a t e d w ith th e same equipment thus r e q u i r i n g a second, s m a lle r machine o r laborous hand c u t t i n g ; and s in c e th e weeds should be removed to f u l l y b e n e f i t from mechanical h a r v e s t i n g , a d d i t i o n a l be in v o lv e d in t r u c k in g th e sodden m a t e r ia l s u i t a b l e d is p o sa l s ite . la b o r and expense may to a l a n d f i l l o r o th e r I f c u t weeds a r e not removed, t h e r e is th e r i s k t h a t f l o a t i n g p a r t i c l e s o f some sp ecies may ta k e r o o t els ew h e re and spread th e weeds to o t h e r p o r tio n s o f th e l a k e . Environm ental M a n ip u la tio n T his method o f weed c o n t r o l r e l i e s on th e changing o f some a s p e c t o f the p l a n t s ' h a b i t a t making i t u n s u it a b le f o r t h e i r co n tin u e d p r o l i f e r ­ a tio n . Some o f th e tec hn iqu es atte m p te d in c lu d e : s t a i n i n g th e w a te r w ith dye to d e p r iv e p la n ts o f s u n l i g h t ; shading by c o v e rin g th e w a te r w ith f l o a t i n g sheets o f p l a s t i c ; c o v e rin g th e v e g e t a tio n w it h a l a y e r o f sand; d re d g in g ; and w inter-draw dow ns o f la k e s . 56 The dye te c h n iq u e has shown promise o f success in sm all ponds and a r e c e n t l y marketed p ro du ct "Aquishade" I s p r e s e n t l y b e in g t e s t e d by the U n i v e r s i t y o f W is co n s in , b u t d e f i n i t i v e r e s u l t s a r e not y e t a v a i l ­ ab le ( N ic h o ls , 1 9 7 4 ). ing shade o f b lu e . The dye 1s r e p o rte d to be an a e s t h e t i c a l l y p le a s ­ The use o f b la c k p l a s t i c s h e e tin g would seem more a p p r o p r ia te to sm all ponds than r e c r e a t i o n a l la k e s as i t s placem ent 1s s u b je c t to wind d is r u p t i o n and o b v io u s ly hampers r e c r e a t i o n i s t s w h ile 1n p la c e . Sand b la n k e t in g c o n s is ts o f sp re a d in g a l a y e r o f sand 6 to 10 inches deep over w i n t e r 1ce in te n d e d to s e t t l e sp rin g thaw. to th e bottom w ith th e O fte n th e c o v e rin g is spread o v e r b la c k p l a s t i c s h e e t in g . When s u c c e s s f u lly acco m p lished , th e method c r e a t e s a good sandy beach area f r e e o f weeds. However, a U n i v e r s i t y o f Wisconsin stu d y using t h is techn iqu e in 1971 showed t h a t by 1973 more weeds were growing on the new s u rfa c e than were o r i g i n a l l y t h e r e . C o n seq u en tly , i t would appear t h a t f u r t h e r long term s tu d ie s a r e needed b e fo re t h i s te c h n iq u e can be c o n f i d e n t l y recommended ( N i c h o ls , 1 9 7 4 ). D red g in g , when conducted on a la r g e s c a le w ith c o n s id e r a b le deepen­ ing o f th e la k e b a s in , can s i g n i f i c a n t l y r e ju v e n a t e a la k e ( N i c h o l s , P ie r c e , 1 9 7 0 ). T h is te c h n iq u e deepens th e la k e and, i f lowered below th e p h o tic zone, makes i t th e bottom i s i n h o s p it a b l e to most a q u a t ic vege­ t a t i o n as th e p la n t s do n o t r e c e iv e adequate s u n l i g h t . [H ow ever, Eura­ sian M i l f o i l , M yrio p h y llu m sp ic a tu m , may r e s i s t d red g in g because i t c o n s id e ra b le depth t o le r a n c e (McNabb, 1 9 7 5 ) . ] u s u a lly h y d r a u lic d re d g in g . may a ls o be used. 1974; has The method employed 1s But on small l a k e s , shore based drag l i n e s The process has th e added advantage o f removing 57 n u t r i e n t laden sediments from th e l a k e . However, as mentioned* e a r l i e r , th e process 1s e x tre m e ly ex p en sive and I s g e n e r a l l y beyond th e means o f most la k e com m unities. To be e f f e c t i v e th e s p o il must be tru c k e d t o an a re a away from th e la k e to p re v e n t th e m a t e r ia l o r I t s from d r a in in g back I n t o th e b a s in . the costs in v o lv e d . This n e c e s s ity n u trie n ts f u r t h e r adds to Sim ply d e p o s it in g th e dredged sediments in a nearby marsh o r low a re a as f i l l may reduce th e expense I n v o l v e d , but 1 t a ls o reduces th e e f f e c t i v e n e s s o f th e o p e r a tio n thus g iv in g th e la k e community le s s r e t u r n on t h e i r in v e s tm e n t. F u r t h e r , s in c e deep dredg­ ing is necessary to e f f e c t i v e l y reduce th e weed grow th, e x te n s iv e tre a tm e n t would r e q u i r e m o d if i c a t io n o f th e s h o r e lin e to c r e a t e a ra p id s te e p d r o p - o f f . T h is co u ld r e s u l t in a hazard to swimmers and p o s s ib le subsequent e ro s io n problem s. The p ro c e s s , i f a d e q u a te ly funded does, however, o f f e r a lon g term c o n t r o l s h a llo w , weed f i l l e d la k e s . O th e r c o n tro l f o r th e c e n te r o f tech n iq u es would s t i l l have to be m a in ta in ed along th e sh o re. W in te r drawdown f o r la k e s having s u i t a b l e dams o r o t h e r la k e le v e l c o n tr o l s t r u c t u r e s o f f e r s an in e x p e n s iv e method o f c o n t r o l l i n g some a q u a tic weeds (B e a rd , 1969, 1973; N ic h o ls , 1974, 1 9 7 5 ). The p la n ts a r e exposed to f r o s t damage and d ry in g when th e w a te r l e v e l low ered. m ilfo il C o o n ta il ( C e ra to p h y llu m demersum) , w a te r l i l i e s ( Myriophyl!urn spp.), is ( Nuphar s p p . ) , and pondweed ( Potamogeton a m p l i f o l i u s , and IP. r o b b l n s i i ) a r e among those forms most re s p o n s iv e to t h i s te c h ­ n iq ue. However, 1975 s tu d ie s by N ic h o ls on th e Mondeaux Flowage in Wisconsin i n d i c a t e some c o n s t r a i n t s on the pro cess. He found t h a t 58 successive annual drawdowns may le a d to r e ln v a s io n by drawdown t o l e r a n t species which r e p la c e th e o r i g i n a l A ris k o f fis h k i l l s v e g e ta t io n and r e s t o r e th e problem . due to low d is s o lv e d oxygen i s a p o s s i b i l i t y d u rin g drawdown, and In c re a s e d c o n c e n tr a tio n s o f n u t r i e n t s sediments and decaying v e g e t a tio n may r e s u l t . from exposed N ic h o ls * s tu d ie s w it h re s p e c t to d is s o lv e d oxygen and n u t r i e n t c o n c e n tr a tio n s a t the Mondeaux Flowage were In c o n c l u s i v e , and he recommended f u r t h e r re s e a r c h . The a q u a tic p la n t r e ln v a s io n response was e v id e n t from N ic h o ls ' o f the flow ag e f o r sp ecies fre q u en c y and stem d e n s i t i e s . sampling He observed s i g n i f i c a n t c o n t r o l w it h th e f i r s t drawdown, a re p e a t drawdown a y e a r l a t e r gained l i t t l e a d d i t i o n a l c o n t r o l , and r a p id r e in v a s io n occurred w it h i n two y e ars a f t e r drawdown ceased. N ic h o ls contends t h a t draw­ down i s a usefu l te c h n iq u e f o r a q u a t ic p la n t management i f conducted no more f r e q u e n t l y than e v e ry o t h e r o r t h i r d y e a r and i f combined w ith o t h e r management te c h n iq u e s . B efore any drawdown a tte m p t i s made (presum ing th e weed species composition and la k e b as in c o n f i g u r a t i o n , and r e f i l l i n g p r i a t e to drawdown management), i t by f u l l y r a t e a r e appro­ is im p e r a t iv e t h a t th e la k e community Inform ed and in accord w ith th e p ro p o s a l. This concensus 1s p a r t i c u l a r l y im p o rta n t w it h re s p e c t to those M ichigan lak es having an e s ta b lis h e d le g a l la k e l e v e l 1n o r d e r to av o id p o s s ib le law s u i t s a s ­ s o c ia te d w it h im p aired r e c r e a t i o n o r d ry w e l l s . 9 If th e p r a c t i c e i s a d o p te d , supplem ental in c o rp o ra te d w it h th e drawdown. p r o je c t s can a ls o be Depending upon i t s e x t e n t , d r a g l in e d re d g in g , weed re m o va l, beach r e n o v a t io n , l i t t e r c o n t r o l , and f i s h management p r o je c t s may be a p p r o p r ia t e . 59 N e it h e r chemical tre a tm e n t nor mechanical h a rv e s tin g methods o f weed c o n tro l o f f e r long term s o lu tio n s to a q u a tic p la n t n uisances, but mechanical h a rv e s tin g does have th e advantage o f removing the weeds and thus some o f th e n u t r ie n t s which a re a t th e base o f th e problem. In any case, complete e r a d i c a t io n 1s n e i t h e r f e a s i b l e nor a p p r o p r ia te as the la k e v e g e t a t io n , in p ro p e r b a la n c e , is an e s s e n tia l component o f the la k e ecosystem and o f r e c r e a t io n a l f i s h i n g and a e s t h e t i c s . Deep w ate r d re d g in g , i f p r o p e r ly conducted, is an e f f e c t i v e con­ tro l technique but is p r o h i b i t i v e l y expensive f o r most la k e communities. A reasonable and cheap a l t e r n a t i v e is the p r a c t i c e o f i n t e r m i t t a n t w in te r drawdown, and some la k e a s s o c ia tio n s may want to co n sid er the p o s s i b i l i t y o f i n s t a l l i n g e n g in e e rin g s t r u c t u r e s (where they do not a lre a d y e x i s t ) to make t h i s p o s s ib le . The combined p r a c t i c e o f suimier c o n tro l by mechanical h a rv e s tin g and removal to g e th e r w it h occasio nal w in t e r drawdown and i t s o p p o r tu n ity f o r in c id e n t a l management p r o je c ts seems a w is e , i f la b o r in t e n s iv e approach having the l e a s t n e g a tiv e environm ental r is k s in v o lv e d . Such a program would in v o lv e the costs o f the r e n t a l o f weed h arv es tin g s e rv ic e s and removal o n ly . (An approach to t h i s s e rv ic e which is growing in p o p u la r it y is th e c o o p e ra tiv e purchase o f the nec­ essary equipment by county o r m u n icip al governments w ith the costs reimbursed by r e n t a l t h a t a r e a .)® fees paid by c o o p e ra tin g la k e a s s o c ia tio n s o f The w in t e r drawdown phase o f th e o p e ra tio n i f p ro p e rly managed by a se rio us la k e conmunity should in v o lv e m a in ly th e v o lu n ta r y time and energy o f i t s members. 5 Oakland County, M ichigan has s u c c e s s fu lly operated a c o o p e ra tiv e weed h a rv e s tin g o p e ra tio n f o r s e v e ra l y e a r s . 60 S o c io p o litic a l In vo lvem en t o f th e Lake A s s o c ia tio n Once th e la k e a s s o c ia t io n has I n i t i a t e d a management program, c o n s id e r a tio n may be shown f o r an expansion o f I t s the in m e d la te la k e community. i n f l u e n c e beyond The paramount concern o f th e a s s o c ia ­ t i o n should always be th e I n t e r e s t s o f i t s membership w it h re s p e c t to th e la k e re s o u rc e , b u t o f t e n th e accomplishment o f t h i s o b j e c t i v e re q u ire s making th e a s s o c i a t i o n 's views known to o th e rs not d i r e c t l y a f f i l i a t e d w it h th e la k e community. Township, c o u n ty , o r s t a t e a g e n c ie s , sometimes c o n s id e ra b ly removed from th e la k e e n v iro n m e n t, a re o fte n th e sources o f p o l i c y d e c is io n s having im p o r ta n t e f f e c t s upon i t . For exam ple, land use p la n n in g , road c o n s t r u c tio n and maintenance o p e r a t io n s , zo ning laws and amendments o r e x c e p tio n s , ta x p ro p o s a ls , and en viron m ental l e g i s l a t i o n can a l l have c o n s id e r a b le impact upon la k e com m unities. To e f f e c t i v e l y respond to th ese e x t e r n a l e f f e c t s , a p p lic a tio n , or i n i t i a t e in te re s ts , such r e g u l a t i o n o r l e g i s l a t i o n In flu e n c e t h e i r in i t s own th e la k e a s s o c ia t io n should have some awareness o f the in s titu tio n a l " to o ls ” a t It s d is p o s a l. Donald H o ltr o p o f th e C o n tin u ­ ing Education S e r v ic e a t M ichigan S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y has w r i t t e n a con­ c is e pamphlet on s o c i o p o l i t i c a l A C i t i z e n ' s Guide ( 1 9 7 3 ) . " in flu e n c e c a lle d In i t "Changing T hing s: he documents s i x such " t o o ls " a v a i l ­ ab le to people who want to p e a c e f u l ly and l e g a l l y a c h ie v e change in t h e i r com m unities. These a r e : i n f o r m a t i o n , e d u c a tio n and p e rs u a s io n , le g a l power, p u b lic exp o s u re, economic power, and p o l i t i c a l power. f o llo w in g d e s c r ip t io n s o f th ese t o o ls c o n s is ts o f an e l a b o r a t i o n and i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f h is concepts as a p p lie d to la k e a s s o c ia t io n s . The 61 In fo rm a tio n Function O b v io u s ly , b e fo re embarking on any concerted program to cause change, the a s s o c ia tio n must be sure o f th e fa c t s o f th e m a tte r and o f the v a l i d i t y and j u s t i f i c a t i o n o f i t s p o s it i o n . The in fo rm a tio n to ol is sim ply th e process o f being secure in these f a c ts and p re s e n t­ ing them to the a p p r o p r ia te p eo ple. or p o litic a l Q u ite o f te n in m atters o f s o c ia l d is p u te , one s id e ( o r b o th ) is c o n c e a lin g th e t r u t h o r fa c ts o f the m a tte r to p r o t e c t t h e i r p o s it i o n . to h id e , the in fo r m a tio n a l I f you have nothing to o l d e riv e d from c a r e f u l and a c c u ra te research is a p o te n t in s tru m e n t. I f you can support yo u r own p o s it io n by in d is p u ta b le f a c t and can p res en t f a c t s c o n tra r y to th e a l l e g a t i o n s o f your opponent, honest p u b lic d e c is io n makers may be a b le to take i t from th e r e . U n f o r t u n a t e ly , 1n our w orld o f im p e rfe c t human n a t u r e , "good guys don’ t always win b a l l games," thus the importance o f the o th e r f i v e s o c ia l to o ls . Education and Persuasion Education and persuasion a re an ex te n s io n o f in fo r m a tio n . the simple p re s e n ta tio n o f the fa c t s does not change t h in g s , i t When is nec­ essary to ap p ly some i n t e r p r e t a t i o n and assessment in a w e l1-c o n s tru c te d argument. For example, the in fo rm a tio n t h a t s e p tic tank e f f l u e n t enriches la k e w aters and may c r e a t e a h e a lth hazard may not alo n e con­ vince one^ neighbors o r lo c a l government t h a t such systems should be checked and where necessary m o d ifie d . B u t, th ey may be convinced by a p re s e n ta tio n o f t h i s same in fo rm a tio n by an i n v i t e d speaker who 1s a recognized a u t h o r i t y on w a te r management o r lim n o lo g y , e s p e c i a l l y i f he backs up h is statem en t w it h d a t a , photographs, o r a dem onstration o f a p o s it iv e dye t e s t . 62 Legal Power Legal power, as th e term I m p l i e s , 1s th e process o f b r in g in g th e f o rc e o f th e law to b e a r when a v i o l a t i o n o f r i g h t s has o c c u rre d . a s t r a ig h f o r w a r d In s ta n c e o f c l e a r I l l e g a l i t y , ment should be r e a d i l y u t i l i z e d . However, i f p a r t i c u l a r l y w ith r e s p e c t to c i v i l should be observed. s u its , The f i r s t o f th ese i s In t h i s k in d o f law e n f o r c e ­ c o u r t a c t i o n is i m p li e d , two b a s ic r u le s o f thumb th e presum ption t h a t the c o u rts should be used as an in s tru m e n t o f l a s t r e s o r t . P ro s e c u tio n o f a c o u r t case can be exp en sive and th e outcome may n o t always be f a v o r a b le . F u rth e r, the a d d it i o n a l expense o f entan g lem ent in long drawn o u t appeals processes could m o l l i f y th e im portance o f th e f i n a l outcome. The c o n tin u in g c o u r t h i s t o r y o f th e a n n e x a tio n p ro v is io n s o f th e M ichigan 1929 Summer R e s o rt A c t is an example o f t h i s conse­ quence. firs t, I t 1s w is e , t h e r e f o r e , to a p p ly th e o t h e r " t o o ls " f o r change r e s e r v in g c o u r t s u i t o r th e t h r e a t o f going to c o u r t as an o p t io n . The second r u l e o f thumb is i f an a s s o c ia t io n i s p la n n in g to sue, i t should always be su re to approach th e b a r w it h " c le a n han ds." I t makes no sense w h a te v e r to ta k e a d e v e lo p e r i n t o c o u r t f o r a zoning v i o l a t i o n i f any a s s o c ia t io n members a r e a ls o remiss in t h e i r own con­ s t r u c t io n p r a c t i c e s . P u b lic Exposure P u b lic exposure is perhaps one o f th e most e f f e c t i v e to o ls a v a i l ­ a b le to th e la k e a s s o c ia t io n , p a r t i c u l a r l y when faced w i t h th e t r a d i ­ t i o n a l b u r e a u c r a t ic "ru n -a ro u n d " by p u b lic a g e n c ie s . If th e a s s o c ia t io n has s c ru p u lo u s ly fo llo w e d th e p re s c r ib e d channels in p u r s u i t o f a l e g i t i m a t e o b j e c t i v e and been r e p e a t e d ly f r u s t r a t e d , th e r e l e a s e o f 63 t h e i r s to r y to the press o r media can o f te n ach ieve near m iraculous re s u lts . P o l i t i c i a n s , b u r e a u c ra ts , and businessmen a l i k e a re s e n s i t iv e to d is c lo s u re o f performance d is c re p a n c ie s in t h e i r p u b lic image. News re le a s e s a re als o an e x c e l l e n t way to p u b l i c i z e a s s o c ia ­ tio n p r o je c ts and gen erate i n t e r e s t o r concern f o r th e l a k e . the expression o f view p o in ts in th e e d i t o r i a l S im ila rly , s e c tio n o f the lo c a l paper can s t im u la t e a c t i o n , p a r t i c u l a r l y w ith re s p e c t to v o te r issues in the la k e community. This approach is o f te n used in school mi 11 age c o n tro v e rs ie s to sway the v o te . In a re c e n t Lansing e l e c t i o n , mi 11 age had been d e fe a te d by the e l e c t o r a t e . posal was again o f f e r e d . by d a i l y e d i t o r i a l s A few months l a t e r th e same p ro ­ However, t h i s time b a l l o t i n g was preceded in the Lansing paper w r i t t e n by teachers and fa v o ra b le parents a r g u in g , o fte n e m o t io n a lly , in fa v o r o f p re s e rv in g a q u a l i t y ed ucation f o r the c h i ld r e n . This l e t t e r w r i t i n g campaiqn (perhaps b o ls te re d by o th e r canvasinq and "g e t o u t the v o te " approaches) succeeded in swaying the v o t e r s , and the issu e passed th e second time around. Economic Function The economic to o l is an o th e r approach r e a d i l y a v a i l a b l e to the well organized la k e a s s o c ia t io n . Local townships may o r may not be concerned w ith the i n t e r e s t s o f the " la k e p e o p le ," b u t a re in flu e n c e d by the spending power o f t h a t community f o r g r o c e r ie s , s u n d r ie s , and a n c i l l a r y r e c r e a t io n pro du cts. The s e l e c t i v e p a t r o n iz a t lo n ( o r b o y c o tt) o f a s to re owned by an i n f l u e n t i a l member o f the township government can have c o n s id e ra b le impact on the s e rv ic e s provided the la k e community. 64 Another as p ec t o f the economic power a v a i l a b l e to th e la k e community 1s th e In f lu e n c e w e a l t h i e r members may have by way o f t h e i r c o n t r ib u t io n s to lo c a l s o c ia l o r r e l i g i o u s o r g a n iz a t io n s . The s ig n if ic a n c e o f t h e i r monetary support provides a r i g h t to a forum f o r t h e i r views on p u b lic m a tters in v o lv in g such o rg a n iz a tio n s and the la k e coirmunlty. P o litic a l Power The s i x t h s o c ia l to o l a v a i l a b l e is p o l i t i c a l power. Lake people o fte n complain o f being d is e n fra n c h is e d in th e la k e community govern­ ment because they a re v a c a tio n r e s i d e n t s . This is not an unsolvab le problem because th e i n d iv id u a l does have th e o p tio n o f changing h is vo ting address from "home" to h is la k e re s id e n c e , thus q u a l i f y i n g him to p a r t i c i p a t e in th e lo c a l p o l i t i c a l processes. For members o f the lake community approaching r e t ir e m e n t who e v e n t u a l ly in te n d to l i v e a t the la k e anyway, t h i s o p tio n should not in v o lv e too s e rio u s a t r a d e ­ o f f o f v o tin g i n t e r e s t s . They could then fu n c tio n as p o l i t i c a l men f o r the o th e r n o n -v o tin g r i p a r i a n s . In e i t h e r in s ta n c e , the la k e community should encourage and support the lo c a l p o l i t i c a l o f t h e i r q u a l i f i e d members. candidacy W hile th e lo c a l v o tin g s tr e n g th o f the a s s o c ia tio n may o r may not be s i g n i f i c a n t , so c ia l spokes­ i t can s t i l l employ the to o ls mentioned above to support o r oppose p a r t i c u l a r candidates or p o l i c i e s in the lo c a l p o l i t i c a l aren a. Of p a r t i c u l a r s i g n i f i c a n c e to the a s s o c ia tio n should be the i n v e s t i g a t i o n o f the p o s s i b i l i t y o f forming a n d /o r j o i n i n g a township zoning board. Michigan s t a t e law (P.A. 183, 1943, "Township Rural Zoning A c t ; " M .C .L .A . 125.271 - .3 0 1 ) permits townships to develop t h e i r own land use plans and implement them 65 v ia a township zoning board . By becoming In v o lv e d 1n t h i s key f u n c t i o n , the a s s o c ia t io n can I n f l u e n c e th e d i r e c t i o n and e x t e n t o f la k e shore development. T h is p la n n in g and enforcem ent f u n c t io n 1s p a r t i c u l a r l y Im p o rta n t w it h re s p e c t to In s u r in g adequate space and s o i l c h a ra c te r is ­ t i c s f o r e f f i c i e n t o n - s i t e waste d is p o s a l system s, c o n t r o l o f road d r a in d is ch arg e s to th e l a k e , and c o n t r o l o f runaway m u l t i p l e d w e ll i n g o r commercial development which may accompany th e I n s t a l l a t i o n o f a m unicipal sewage system. In th e b ro a d e r s e c t o r o f s t a t e p o l i t i c s , o f a handicap. The la k e a s s o c ia t io n should v ia i t s n e w s l e t t e r , o f a l l i n t e r e s t s and o f i t s v o t in g address i s le s s keeD pending l e g i s l a t i o n its membership a d v is e d , p e r t i n e n t to t h e i r p o l i c y toward such p ro p o s a ls ( I n f o r m a t i o n , educa­ t i o n , and p ersu asio n i n t e r n a l i z e d ) . The members may then w r i t e o r c a l l t h e i r r e s p e c t iv e s t a t e d e le g a te s and in fo rm them o f t h e i r p o s i t i o n , as c o n s t i t u e n t s , on th e g iv en l e g i s l a t i o n . It is im p e r a tiv e 1n t h i s re s p e c t t h a t members e s t a b l is h a w orking cornnunication w it h t h e i r e le c te d r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s . A p o l i t i c i a n ' s perform ance i s always enhanced by the c e r t a i n knowledge t h a t h is c o n s t it u e n t s a r e i n t e r e s t e d in how he votes and what l e g i s l a t i o n he sponsors. A f u r t h e r augm entation o f a s s o c ia t io n i n f l u e n c e on l e g i s l a t i o n and p o l i c y can be d e r iv e d by th e o r g a n iz a t io n o f the many d i s c r e t e la k e a s s o c ia tio n s i n t o a s ta te w id e body. Lake a s s o c ia t io n s , l i k e in d i v i d u a l r i p a r i a n s , can be most e f f e c t i v e i f o rg a n iz e d . lik e in d iv id u a l r ip a r ia n s , problems. th e y have a comm onality o f i n t e r e s t s and The M ich ig an Lake and Stream A s s o c ia tio n s , I n c . one means o f so o r g a n iz i n g . And a g a in re p r e s e n ts I t has a membership o f o v e r a hundred 66 a s s o c ia tio n s and publishes I t s own magazine The Michigan R ip a ria n which c a r r ie s a r t i c l e s d e a lin g w ith la k e and stream management Is s u e s . p a rtic u la r, In the R ip a ria n serves as an I n t e r - a s s o c i a t i o n communication l i n k w ith re s p e c t to laws and r e g u la t io n s p e r t a i n i n g to t h e i r I n t e r e s t s . Membership in t h i s o r g a n iz a tio n provides the p o t e n t i a l f o r likem inded r ip a r ia n s to be rep resen ted b e fo re th e s t a t e l e g i s l a t u r e and s t a t e agencies such as th e Department o f N a tu ra l Resources, Department o f A g r i c u l t u r e , and th e Highway Department. Because o f i t s growing member­ ship and the in c re a s in g environm ental s t r a i n on r e c r e a t io n a l w a te rs , the MLSA shows promise o f becoming a s i g n i f i c a n t voice in b e h a lf o f the lak e and stream p ro p e rty owners o f M ich ig an . The d i r e c t i o n t h i s o r g a n iz a tio n ta k e s , and how w e ll it re p re s e n ts the in t e r e s t s o f i t s member a s s o c ia tio n s w i l l be determ ined to a g r e a t e x te n t by how a c t i v e l y they p a r t i c i p a t e in i t . I t seems c e r t a i n t h a t i f r i p a r ia n I n t e r e s t s a t th e s t a t e le v e l a re to become p o l i t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t , some form o f o r g a n iz a tio n w ith lobbying p o t e n t i a l as MLSA w i l l such have to be supported. In c o n sid e rin g the s ix o p tion s to implement s o c ia l change d i s ­ cussed above, i t is im p o rtan t to re co g n ize t h a t they may be employed in c o n c e rt; not j u s t i n d i v i d u a l l y o r in sequence. The c o o rd in a tio n o f any o f these approaches 1s dependent upon broad communication w it h in and among the la k e o r stream a s s o c ia t io n s , p a r t i c u l a r l y by keeping mem­ bers informed o f p o lic y and programs through the r e g u la r c i r c u l a t i o n o f n e w s le tte rs o r s i m i l a r m o tiv a tio n a l correspondence. L a s t l y , in any such p o l i t i c a l inv o lv em e n t, honest f o r t h r i g h t r e a ­ soning w ith the o p p o s itio n should not be presumed as out o f th e q u e s tio n . 67 A ll o f th e " to o ls " mentioned a re l e g i t i m a t e s o c ia l means to b rin g pressure to bear on o th e rs to accomplish a p a r t i c u l a r g o a l. goal leads to a n o th e r, the use o f th e s o c ia l and the same people w i l l As one t o o ls becomes r e p e t i t i v e be encountered a g a in . T h e r e fo r e , i t 1s wise to preserve th e o p p o r tu n ity f o r ongoing, reason able d is cu ss io n through out the procedure. This f a c i l i t a t e s i n t e l l i g e n t compromise and t r a d e ­ o f f s which a re th e essence o f long run p o l i t i c a l success. CHAPTER IV RESULTS OF THE LAKE ASSOCIATION INTERVIEWS The data and a n a ly s is r e s u l t s o f the compiled in t e r v ie w s a re presented here in th e same o rd er as o u tlin e d in Chapter I I Approach, In t e r v ie w F o rm at). The p re s e n ta tio n sequence i s : (Research Open Questions; Lake A s s o c ia tio n C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s ; and Lake Management Performance by the A s s o c ia tio n s . In o rd e r to lend c o n t i n u i t y to t h i s le n g th y p r e s e n ta tio n and to in c lu d e th e p e rs p e c tiv e o f in t e r v ie w o b s e rv a tio n s , b r i e f assess­ ments and p e r t i n e n t remarks a re provided in t h i s s e c tio n as w e ll as the s p e c i f ic r e s u l t s . The e x te n s iv e p re s e n ta tio n o f t a b u l a r data is done t o a s s i s t the re ad er in th e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f th e r e s u l t s o f t h is r e l a t i v e l y small sample. because so l i t t l e This approach was a ls o judged a d v is a b le in fo rm a tio n is p re s e n tly a v a i l a b l e w ith re s p e c t to Michigan la k e a s s o c ia tio n s . Open Questions O b jec tives o f Lake A s s o c ia tio n s The d e s c r i p t iv e statem ents in the ta b le s r e l a t i n g to these open questions c o n s is t o f condensed responses from in te r v ie w s w ith each o f the 21 la k e a s s o c ia tio n s sampled. They o f te n had th e o p tio n o f p ro ­ v id in g as many as f i v e o r more responses. A ll responses were l i s t e d and then sunmarlzed under th e general d e s c r i p t i v e headings used in each t a b le w ith the frequency o f such g e n e r a lly s i m i l a r responses shown in each column. 68 69 The sampled la k e a s s o c ia tio n s (LAs) s ta te d as e x i s t i n g a n d /o r o r i g i n a t i n g o b je c t iv e s th e f o llo w in g 1n descending o rd e r o f frequency: 1) w ater q u a l i t y p r o t e c tio n o r p o l l u t i o n abatem ent, 2 ) a e s t h e t i c o r environmental concerns, and 3) f i s h management, u s u a lly sto cking o p e ra tio n s (T a b le 2 ) . While both th e h ig h e r perform ing (HP, i . e . , a s s o c ia tio n s w ith a management performance score g r e a t e r than 70 p o in t s ) and the lower performing (LP, I . e . , a s s o c ia tio n s assigned 70 p o in ts o r le s s ) a s s o c ia ­ tio n s shared concern f o r w a te r q u a l i t y and a e s t h e t i c p r o t e c t i o n , f i s h management was one o f the most f r e q u e n t ly re p o rte d o b je c t iv e s o f the LPs. In the LPs, 1 t ranks f i r s t along w ith a e s t h e t i c concerns but 1s f i f t h among th e HPs which rank w ate r q u a l i t y a n d /o r p o l l u t i o n abatement most o fte n as an o b j e c t i v e . Another n o t ic e a b le d i s t i n c t i o n between the two performance cla ss es o f LAs i s the p r o v is io n o f s o c ia l a m e n itie s such as a c t i v i t i e s and r e c r e a tio n a l fa c ilitie s . This o b j e c t iv e was one o f the f i v e most f r e q u e n t ly re p o rte d o b je c t iv e s o f the HPs. The LPs l i s t e d s o c i a l i z a ­ tio n o n ly once as an o b j e c t i v e . The rank o rd e rin g o f th e frequency o f s ta te d o b je c t iv e s suggests th a t a l l LAs are e n v iro n m e n ta lly concerned, b u t th e HPs may be a l i t t l e more g reg a rio u s and co sm o po litan, le a n in g toward the o r g a n iz a tio n a l ap­ proach f o r la k e management. t h e i r o b j e c t iv e s , i . e . , The LPs seem more d i r e c t and m a t e r ia l improve the f i s h i n g , f i x social a m e n itie s and p o l i t i c a l In the ro ad s, e t c . , w h ile Involvem ent as a means to ac h ie ve manage­ ment goals seem to be re le g a te d to a secondary s ta tu s by them. The a s ­ signment o f these d i f f e r i n g p r i o r i t i e s by the HPs and LPs a ls o r e f l e c t the In flu e n c e o f s o c ia l values as In d ic a te d by income l e v e l . There Table 2 .—Frequency Distribution of Stated Lake Association Objectives FREQUENCY Total Sample of Lake Assn's Higher Perform. Lake Assn's Lower Perform. Lake Assn's Mater Quality or Pollution Abatement 13 9 4 Aesthetic or Lake Environmental Concerns 13 7 6 Fish Management 10 4 6 Protection of Property Rights of Residents 6 1 5 Control of Land Development 6 5 1 Road Maintenance 6 1 5 Socialization or Provision of Recreation F a cilitie s 6 5 1 Facilitate Lake Comnunity - Government Dialogue 5 5 0 Meed Control 3 1 2 Lake Level Control 3 2 1 Nuisance Abatement (pet control, indecency) 2 0 2 Vandalism Problems 2 1 1 Public Access Concerns 2 1 1 Pest Control (mosquitoes, swinmer's itch) 2 0 2 Tax Problems 1 1 0 Road Drainage Diversion 1 1 0 Fire Protection 1 1 0 OBJECTIVES 71 was a s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e 1n average household Income f o r th e two c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s w it h th e LPs having c o n s id e ra b ly le s s annual Income than th e HPs (T a b le 2 5 ) . Problems o f Lake A s s o c ia tio n s C o n tra ry to th e r e l a t i v e l y low frequ en cy o f re p o rte d weed c o n t r o l o b je c t iv e s o f th e LAs, weed o r a lg a e c o n tr o l was l i s t e d as a second most fre q u e n t problem faced by th e combined a s s o c ia t io n s (T a b le 3 ) . I t was re p o rte d most o f t e n , however, by th e LPs su g g e stin g e i t h e r g r e a t e r concern o v e r th e weeds o r more e x t e n s iv e e u t r o p h ic a t io n a t these la k e s . P o l l u t i o n abatem ent (a m ajor source o f e u t r o p h i c a t io n and weeds o r a lg a e and th e most f r e q u e n t l y s t a t e d o b j e c t i v e o f th e LAs) is a m ajor problem f o r both c a t e g o r ie s as is b o a tin g s a f e t y and r e g u l a t i o n . Both problems a re common to h ig h ly developed la k e s , b u t o n ly the HPs re v e a le d any concern f o r c o n t r o l l i n g land development o r a p r i o r i t y concern over p u b lic access. Only one LA, in th e LP c a te g o r y , id e n tifie d lawn f e r t i l i z a t i o n as a con cern . Membership apathy was a problem f o r both c a t e g o r ie s o f LAs, s ta te d th r e e tim es in each subsample and ra n k in g second and t h i r d in frequency f o r th e LPs and HPs r e s p e c t i v e l y . In s p i t e o f p o s s ib le d if f e r e n c e s o f a t t i t u d e s as suggested by the o b j e c t iv e s o f th e two c a te g o r ie s o f LAs, both share common re c o g n ize d problems o f p o l l u t i o n abatem ent; membership ap a th y ( i . e . , le s s p a r t i c i ­ p atio n in th e a c t i v i t i e s and meetings o f th e a s s o c ia tio n s than d e s ir e d by th e i n t e r v i e w e e s ) ; and b o a tin g use c o n f l i c t s . Table 3 .—Frequency Distribution of Stated Lake Association Problems FREQUENCY PROBLEM Pollution Abatement (including bacterial con­ tamination, septic tank problems, tributary pollution, and d iffic u lty implementing sewage projects) Weed and/or Algae Control Membership Apathy Boating Safety (including user conflicts) Public Access Concerns (including "abuses" and conditions of access site) Nuisance and Disturbing Peace Vandalism Development Control Taxation Road Maintenance No Problems Aesthetics Lawn F ertilizers Low Dues Erosion Creeping Sand Dune Lack of Public Agency Cooperation Conflict Potential over P ossibility of Ureding Lake Fish Management Total Sample of Lake Assn's Higher Perform. Lake Assn's Lower Perform. Lake Assn's 10 6 6 6 7 2 3 3 3 4 3 3 5 3 3 3 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 2 1 3 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 2 0 Q 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 73 When th e two c a te g o rie s a re combined, th e In te rv ie w e e s most f r e ­ q u e n tly r e p o r t problems o f la k e w a te r q u a l i t y , weed and a lg a e c o n t r o l , apathy, b oatin g c o n f l i c t s , p u b lic nuisance and van dalism , and r e s i d e n t i a l development c o n t r o l . These re p o rte d problems a r e comparable to th e data o b ta in e d from two m ailed q u e s tio n n a ire s c i r c u l a t e d 1n M ichigan a t the same tim e (Appendix D ). R ecognition o f Decreased Lake Water Q u a lit y as a Problem F o r t y - t h r e e p erc en t o f th e LAs reco g nized w a te r q u a l i t y problems 1n t h e i r la k e to some e x te n t (T a b le 4 ) , both c a te g o rie s responding in the a f f i r m a t i v e w ith s i m i l a r fre qu en cy. I t is i n t e r e s t i n g t h a t both c a te g o rie s p erceived la k e w a te r q u a l i t y as a problem w it h such c lo s e fre q u en c ie s when presented w it h o n ly a yes o r no response o p tio n . In the previous open ended q u e s tio n about problems, th e h ig h e r performance respondents v o lu n te e re d o b s e rv a tio n s about p o l l u t i o n problems on t h e i r la k e tw ic e as f r e q u e n t ly as th e low er performance group. I t would appear t h a t w a te r q u a l i t y concerns a re le s s predominant in the minds o f lower performance respondents. Table 4 . — Frequency o f Lake A s s o c ia tio n s R epo rtin g Lake Water Q u a lit y Problems ( i . e . , “p o l l u t i o n , n u t r i e n t enrichm ent o r high b a c t e r ia co u nts") RESPONSE Water Q u a lit y Problem No Lake Water Q u a lit y Problem T o ta l Sample o f Lake Assn's FREQUENCY H ig her Perform . Lake Assn's Lower Perform . Lake Assn's 9 5 4 12 6 6 74 Member Apathy and Discord as Problems About 60 p e rc e n t o f the a s s o c ia tio n s 1n both perform ance c a te g o r ie s repo rted problems o f member apathy (T a b le 5 ) . S i m i l a r l y , 1n th e e a r l i e r question a s kin g respondents to l i s t th e problems o f t h e i r a s s o c ia t io n s , member ap ath y along w it h b o a tin g s a f e t y was th e second most f r e q u e n t problem v o ic e d . When as ke d , "What i f a n y th in g would h e lp improve y o u r a s s o c ia t io n 's perform ance?" th e most f r e q u e n t response expressed was a d e s ir e f o r g r e a t e r p a r t i c i p a t i o n by th e membership. Thus, member apathy would appear to be a m ajor problem f o r la k e a s s o c ia tio n s i r r e s p e c t i v e o f th e r e l a t i v e perform ance s ta t u s o f th e a s s o c ia tio n . T his being th e c a s e , perhaps much o f what i s s a id about lake a s s o c ia tio n performance in g e n e r a l, should more r e a l i s t i c a l l y be a t t r i b u t e d t o a s s o c ia t io n o f f i c e r performance in p a r t i c u l a r . The a c ­ complishments o f an a s s o c ia t io n may n o t r e f l e c t th e e f f o r t s o f i t s members as a whole so much as th e e f f o r t s o f those few who c a r r y the weight o f th e o r g a n i z a t i o n . W hile ap ath y may be a re co g n ized problem o f th e la k e a s s o c ia t io n s , the o p p o s ite extrem e o f s o c ia l p a r e n tly i s n o t . in t e r c o u r s e , b ic k e r i n g and d is c o r d , ap­ One hundred p e rc e n t o f th e sample in d i c a t e d t h a t la k e a s s o c ia tio n members in both perform ance c a t e g o r ie s g e t along w e ll on a personal b a s is and t h a t th e g r e a t m a j o r i t y a r e a b le to deal w ith la k e Issues w ith o u t s e rio u s r i f t s (Table 6 ) . o r schisms d e v e lo p in g in th e a s s o c ia t io n s Many respondents q u a l i f i e d t h e i r remarks w it h corrments to the e f f e c t t h a t no human community can e v e r be expected t o l i v e in p e r f e c t harmony a t a l l s o c i a l i z a t i o n , th e y a l l c o o p e ra tiv e . t im e s , b u t t h a t In th e g en eral c o n t e x t o f human f e l t t h e i r la k e communities to be rem arkab ly 75 T h is response by th e la k e a s s o c ia t io n s i s c o n t r a d i c t o r y to the Impressions o f a l o c a l p ro s e c u tin g a t t o r n e y . He e a r l i e r s t a t e d t h a t 1n h is co u n ty , th e c o n s ta n t I n t e r n a l b ic k e r i n g o f th e la k e a s s o c ia tio n s was a f a c t o r p re v e n tin g them from acco m p lis h in g c o o rd in a te d land use management by means o f l e g a l a c t i o n . Table 5 . — Frequency D i s t r i b u t i o n o f Lake A s s o c ia tio n s R e p o rtin g Problems w it h Member Apathy FREQUENCY RESPONSE Problem o f Member Apathy No Problem o f Member Apathy T o ta l Sample o f Lake Assn's H ig her P erform . Lake Assn's Lower P erform . Lake Assn's 12 6 6 9 5 4 Table 6 . — Frequency D i s t r i b u t i o n o f Lake A s s o c ia tio n Responses to th e Q ue stio n : Are th e Members o f Your A s s o c ia tio n C o m p a tib le , I . e . , Is th e Community Harmonious w it h No Long S tanding Feuds o r F a c tio n s o f Any S ig n if ic a n c e ? a ) C o m p a t i b i l i t y on an i n f o r m a l , personal b a s is among members; b ) C o m p a t i b i l i t y when a s s o c ia t io n business o r issues a r e in v o lv e d FREQUENCY A) ON A PERSONAL BASIS Yes T o ta l Sample o f Lake Assn's H ig her Perform . Lake Assn's Lower P erform . Lake A ssn's 21 11 10 0 0 0 B) WITH RESPECT TO ISSUES T o ta l Sample o f Lake A ssn's H ig her Perform . Lake A ssn's Lower Perform . Lake Assn's Yes 18 10 8 3 1 2 No No 76 A s e p ara te q u e s tio n n a ire m a ile d to lo c a l r e p r e s e n t a tiv e s o f f i v e regio nal management p ro fe s s io n s 1n 23 c o u n tie s (Appendix 0) Included questions on la k e a s s o c ia tio n " q u ib b lin g ," " f i g h t i n g w ith lo c a l com­ m unities and government in g e n e r a l," and "d is p u tes over lo c a l muni­ cip a l a u t h o r i t y vs. la k e a s s o c ia tio n r u le s and r e g u l a t i o n s . " The fo llo w in g t a b l e presents t h e i r responses to these th re e q u e s tio n s . Table 7 . — Responses o f Regional Resource Managers to Questions Re­ garding T h e ir P e rcep tio n o f the E x te n t o f Lake A s s o c ia tio n C o n flic ts "YES" ANSWERS REGIONAL PROFESSIONALS POLLED Q u ib b l1ng in Lake Ass'n LA f i g h t s w ith lo c a l coirmunl t y J u ris d ic ­ tio n a l Disputes Regional S o il Conservation S e rvic e D ir e c t o r s , n = 5 20% 40% 60% Cooperative Extension S e rv ic e D ir e c t o r s , n = 15 33% 33% 33% Local P u b lic H e alth A u t h o r i t i e s n = 13 46% 15% Q«V O /o Drain Commissioners, n = 8 38% 38% 13% Department o f N a tu ral Resources Regional F is h e ry B i o l o g i s t s , n = 8 50% 25% 25% The response o f these re g io n a l a d m in is tr a to r s appears to support the o r i g i n a l c o n te n tio n o f the p ro s e c u tin g a t t o r n e y . from th e p e rs p e c tiv e o f lo c a l a u t h o r i t i e s , i n t e r n a l This suggests t h a t la k e a s s o c ia tio n disputes a re a f a c t o r o f performance to be considered which perhaps the a s s o c ia tio n r e p r e s e n ta t iv e s do not re co g n ize o r ad m it. However, 1 t must a ls o be noted t h a t th e o f f i c i a l s q u e rrie d r e p r e ­ sent s e r v ic e - o r ie n t e d p ro fess io n s which a r e o f t e n a t odds w ith la k e 77 a s s o c ia tio n s o v e r re s o u rc e management issues and p o l i c i e s . Under such circu m stan ces, 1 t 1s n o t s u r p r i s in g t h a t th e o f f i c i a l s may be p a r t i c u ­ l a r l y s e n s i t i v e to any d is p u te s In v o lv in g o r w i t h i n la k e a s s o c ia t io n s . S i m i l a r l y , when asked about th e q u a l i t y o f t e c h n ic a l a s s is ta n c e th ey received from some o f th ese same a g e n c ie s , th e a s s o c ia t io n r e p r e s e n ta ­ t iv e s f o r t h e i r p a r t were e q u a l l y c r i t i c a l . Accomplishments o f Lake A s s o c ia tio n s Water q u a l i t y p r o t e c t i o n and p o l l u t i o n abatement were th e most f r e q u e n t ly re p o rte d o b j e c t iv e s and problems o f th e sampled LAs. Y e t, c o n tro l o f development is th e most f r e q u e n t l y r e p o rte d accomplishment (Table 8 ) fo llo w e d c l o s e l y by b o a tin g s a f e t y and f i s h management, w ith p o l l u t i o n abatement and w a te r q u a l i t y m o n ito rin g f i f t h o v e r a ll and not r e p o r te d as accomplishments a t a l l and s i x t h by th e LPs. W hile c o n tr o l o f s t r u c t u r a l development in the la k e community c e r t a i n l y h elps a b a te p o l l u t i o n o f th e la k e w a t e r , i t appears t h a t the d i r e c t approach to w a te r q u a l i t y management in v o lv in g w a te r q u a l i t y t e s t in g and rem edial a c t i o n has met w it h c o n s id e r a b ly le s s e f f o r t o r success among th e LAs. T h e ir t h r e e most f r e q u e n t l y s ta te d ac co m p lis h ­ ments seem to i n d i c a t e p r o j e c t p r i o r i t i e s a s s o c ia te d w it h th e more t a n g i b l e , im m ed iate, and v i s i b l e asp ects o f la k e u t i l i z a t i o n . The a t t e n t i o n to irm ie d ia te , p h y s i c a l, u se r p r i o r i t i e s by the lake a s s o c ia t io n s may r e f l e c t a ru d im e n ta ry s t a t e o f o r g a n iz a t io n a l s o p h is t ic a t io n and re so u rce management awareness. The r e l a t i v e l y high incidence o f "accomplishments" r e f e r r i n g to improved la k e r e s id e n t co o p e ra tio n and th e fo rm a tio n and co n tin u e d e x is te n c e o f th e a s s o c ia ­ t i o n s , supports th e c o n te n tio n t h a t o r g a n iz a t io n occupies much o f the Table 8 .—Frequency Distribution of Reported Accomplishments Volunteered by Lake Association Respondents FREQUENCY ACCOMPLISHMENTS Development Control and/or Removal of Objectional Structures Boating Regulation and Safety Enforcement or Enhancement Fish Management Road Maintenance and/or Street Lights Lake Resident Cooperation Improved Formation and Continued Existence of LA Weed Control Lake Level Control Progress in Septic Tank Pollution Abatement Formation of Newsletter or Lake Community Directory Membership Increase Water Quality Monitoring Program by LA Recognition by Local Government County Government Response to Drainage or Erosion Problems Wetlands Protection, W ildlife Sanctuary Social Events Recreation F a cilitie s Provided Restriction of Public Access Abuses Fire Protection Tax Information to Lake Community Property Rights Information to Lake Community Increased Dues Control of Swimmer's Itch Favorable Court Decision Regarding Lake Shore Channelization Total Sample of Lake Assn's Higher Perform. Lake Assn's Lower Perform. Lake Assn's 11 5 6 8 6 6 4 4 4 4 3 3 2 2 2 5 4 0 4 1 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 3 2 6 0 3 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 < 79 LAs a t t e n t i o n . The low In c id e n c e o f w a te r q u a l i t y management o r abatement accomplishments suggests e i t h e r low p r i o r i t i e s , lim ite d in fo r m a tio n , o r a low in c id e n c e o f success in such a tt e m p t s . U n til a more fo rm a liz e d p la n e o f o r g a n iz a t io n ev o lv e s to f a c i l i t a t e in fo r­ mation d is s e m in a tio n and p r o j e c t im p le m e n ta tio n , th e a s s o c ia t io n s may be c o n s tra in e d from more 1 I m n o l o g i c a ll y p e r t i n e n t management. Perceived Value o f th e Lake A s s o c ia tio n s I r r e s p e c t i v e o f accomplishments vs. o b j e c t iv e s o r problem s, n in e ty p erc en t o f both la k e a s s o c ia t io n c a t e g o r ie s co n sidered t h e i r a s s o c ia tio n s b e n e f i c i a l (T a b le 9 ) . O ffic e r s in one in s ta n c e f o r each subsample were n e g a tiv e about t h e i r a s s o c ia t io n . In both cases they seemed f r u s t r a t e d and b i t t e r a t having atte m p te d p r o je c t s b u t having re c ie v e d minimal o r no c o o p e ra tio n from o t h e r members. "apathy” has been s e v e ra l W hile tim es mentioned by LA o f f i c e r s as a problem , these two i n d i v i d u a l s appeared to be unable to r e c o n c i le themselves to the m a t t e r . It is a ls o i n t e r e s t i n g to n o te t h a t , disagreem ent between re g io n a l in s p i t e o f th e ap p a re n t re so u rce managers and th e a s s o c ia t io n s over th e LA's r e l a t i v e ra p p o rt w it h th e lo c a l cornnunity, those managers overw helm ingly expressed th e o p in io n t h a t th e a s s o c ia t io n s were an asset to t h e i r own p r o fe s s io n a l performance and to th e community. 80 Table 9 . — Frequency o f Lake A s s o c ia tio n In t e r v ie w e e Responses to th e Q ue stio n : Do You C o n sider Your Lake A s s o c ia tio n to Be Necessary and M eaningful ( I . e . , w it h o u t 1 t th e people and la k e would be worse o f f ) ? FREQUENCY RESPONSE Yes No T o ta l Sample o f Lake A ssn's H ig her Perform . Lake A ssn's Lower Perform . Lake A ssn's 19 10 9 2 1 1 F ac to rs Which Would Help Improve th e Lake A s s o c ia tio n s By f a r th e most f r e q u e n t l y s t a t e d f a c t o r which would h e lp Improve LA performance c e n te re d on In c re a s e d p a r t i c i p a t i o n 1n th e a s s o c ia t io n by re s id e n ts such as a d e s ir e f o r in c re as ed membership, b e t t e r m eeting a t ­ tendance, o r a g r e a t e r sense o f commitment (T a b le 1 0 ) . T h is p e rc e p tio n i s supported f u r t h e r by th e response o f 57 p e rc e n t o f th e LAs (12 o u t o f 21) t h a t th e y have problems w it h membership a p a th y . However, many respondents (e x c e p tin g th e two r a t h e r b i t t e r i n d i ­ v id u a ls mentioned e a r l i e r ) were n o t g r e a t l y concerned ab o ut t h i s , ra th e r they seem to understand t h e i r neighbors r e lu c t a n c e to g e t e x t e n s i v e l y in v o lv ed in th e LA and were c o n te n t to have them sim p ly pay t h e i r dues and a tt e n d annual m e e tin g s . The im pression i s t h a t most LA r e p r e s e n t a ­ t i v e s a r e f a i r l y c o n f id e n t t h a t i f an is s u e o f s i g n i f i c a n c e should d evelo p , th ey can depend upon th e membership to r i s e to th e o c c a s io n . T h is Im pression 1s perhaps f u r t h e r s u b s t a n t ia t e d ( o t h e r than statem ents d i r e c t l y to t h a t e f f e c t made by In t e r v ie w e e s ) by th e alm ost unanimous response t h a t LA members were c o m p a tib le and harmonious in Table 10.—Frequency Distribution of Interviewee Responses to the Question: What Would Help Improve Your Lake Association's Performance? FREQUENCY RESPONSES Greater Involvement of Lake Residents in LA (increased membership, meeting attendance, sense of commitment) More Cooperation from Local Government Increased Information, i.e ., Technical and Legal No Improvement Needed More Cooperation from DNR Social Program for Young People Tax Equity for Lake Property Owners Unification of LA's on Lake or in Area Increased Dues Don't Know Research and Development Program for Lake Management Employment of a Lake Manager Greater Performance by Board Members Expansion o f Board of Directors Greater Enforcement by Authorities of Existing Rules and Laws Total Sample of Lake Assn's Hi gher Perform. Lake Assn's Lower Perform. Lake Assn's 15 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 5 1 2 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 10 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 82 t h e i r d a y -to -d a y s o c i l i z a t i o n as w e ll as when d e a lin g f o r m a lly w ith LA business and Is s u e s . In o n ly one in s ta n c e was the e x is te n c e o f a serious schism o r f a c t io n re p o rte d and t h a t i n c id e n t ( le a d in g to fo rm atio n o f a s e p a ra te LA) occurred se ve ra l y e ars ago. R e c re a tio n a l Uses o f the Lakes F is h in g , s k i i n g , and b o atin g a re the r e c r e a t io n a l on the lakes sampled (T ab les 11 and 1 2 ) . fo u rth p la c e . use f a v o r i t e s Swimming ran a r a t h e r d i s t a n t T his may be a f a c t o r in o v e r a l l a s s o c ia tio n la c k o f a t t e n t i o n to w ate r q u a l i t y is s u e s . The p u b lic h e a lth and e u tro p h ic r a m if ic a t io n s o f la k e q u a l i t y may n o t be t h a t obvious to a s s o c ia tio n members because they ( o r a t l e a s t the d e c is io n makers) d o n 't spend th a t much time j j i the w a te r . Water s k i i e r s would not be r e a d i l y vocal about w a te r q u a l i t y e i t h e r s in ce t h e i r use o f th e lak e tends to be out near the c e n te r away from s e p tic tank e f f l u e n t s and the symptomatic response o f increased weed growth. On the b asis o f t h is la k e use d ata and i n t e r p r e t a t i o n , se rio u s user concern about la k e w ate r q u a l i t y may not a r i s e u n t i l tio n reaches Im pressive p r o p o rtio n s . the degrada­ F is h in g may have to d e c lin e d r a s t i c a l l y , and b o a tin g become g r e a t l y im paired by e x te n s iv e weed beds b e fo re enough la k e r e s id e n ts w i l l remedial a c t io n . become aroused to i n i t i a t e 83 Table 1 1 . — Most F re q u e n tly V o lu n teered Lake R e c re a tio n a l Uses 1n th e Opinions o f th e In te r v ie w e e s . (These fre q u e n c ie s a re based on th e se ve ra l uses r e p o r te d . No use o p tion s were suggestec to the I n t e r v ie w e e s . ) FREQUENCY USE 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. F is h in g S k iin g Power Boating Swiruning S a il i n g Snowmobiling S k atin g T o ta l Sample o f Lake Assn1s 19 14 13 6 5 3 1 H igher Perform . Lake Assn's Lower Perform . Lake Assn's 11 8 8 1 4 1 0 8 6 5 5 1 2 1 Table 1 2 . — Most Popular R e c re a tio n a l Lake Uses. (Based on the s in g le most p o p u la r la k e use s ta te d by respondents o r i n t e r p r e t e d as such from th e i n t e r v i e w . ) FREQUENCY USE T o ta l Sample o f Lake Assn1*> Higher Perform . Lake Assn's Lower Perform . Lake Assn1s 1. F is h in g 5 3 2 2. Power Boating 4 2 2 3. S k iin g (a s s o c ia te d w ith power b o a tin g 4 2 2 4. Swimming 3 1 2 5. F is h in g and Boating 1 1 0 6. F ishin g and Swimming 1 0 1 7. F is h in g , S k ii n g , Boat­ in g , and Snowmobiling 1 1 0 8. F is h in g and S k iin g 1 0 1 9. S k iin g , S a i l i n g , and F is h in g J_ 21 _1_ _0 11 10 84 C h a ra c te r is tic s P o pu lation C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s Average Lake Cornnunity S iz e The average la k e community s i z e based on th e t o t a l to be about 370 households (T a b le 1 3 ) . sample appears A t - t e s t comparison o f the mean community s i z e o f each c a te g o ry re v e a le d no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r ­ ences in t h i s c h a r a c t e r i s t i c a t th e 0 .1 le v e l. However, th e r e i s a much n arro w e r range f o r community s i z e in the h ig h e r perform ance group. T h is suggests t h a t an upper and lo w er community s i z e th re s h o ld may e x i s t which has some i n f l u e n c e upon th e performance o f la k e a s s o c ia t io n s . A re g r e s s io n a n a ly s i s o f community s iz e f o r th e e n t i r e sample on perform ance s c o re , re v e a le d a p o s i t i v e c o rre la tio n ( r = 0 . 7 3 8 3 ) s i g n i f i c a n t a t th e 0 .1 le v e l. Perhaps a la k e cornnunity o f something le s s than 100 households lacks th e combined reso u rces necessary to implement management and may not be p re s s in g th e c a r r y i n g c a p a c it y o f th e la k e to th e p o in t where problems d e v e lo p . may e n t a i l On th e o t h e r hand, to o l a r g e a community p r o h i b i t i v e t r a n s a c t io n and communication c o s ts which r e s t r i c t su ccessfu l management e f f o r t s . Average Lake A s s o c ia tio n S iz e The average la k e a s s o c ia t io n s i z e in th e study c o n s is ts o f about 135 households o r s l i g h t l y more than a t h i r d s iz e (T a b le 1 4 ) . th e averag e la k e community As w it h l a k e community s i z e , th e averag e and t o t a l number o f households in th e two c a te g o r ie s a r e s i m i l a r . There is no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e between t h e i r means, b u t th e h ig h e r perform ance group ag ain has a much n arro w e r range and v a r ia n c e . 85 Table 1 3 .— Size o f Lake Communities Sampled (Number o f Households) H ig h e r Performance Lake A s s o c ia tio n s Lower Performance Lake A s s o c ia tio n s 900 1 ,7 5 0 500 1 ,2 5 0 450 450 300 147 227 80 200 45 180 42 160 30 155 18 100 ? ? 3 ,1 7 3 mean = 3 ,8 1 2 3 1 7 .2 v a ria n c e = 58 877.29 standard d e v ia t io n = 2 4 2 .6 5 mean 4 2 3 .5 6 v a ria n c e = 4 0 5 7 4 1 .0 3 stand ard d e v ia t io n 6 3 6 .9 8 86 Table 1 4 .--Lake Association Memberships (Number o f Households) H ig her Performance Lake A s s o c ia tio n s Lower Performance Lake A s s o c ia tio n s 240 700 225 275 200 100 160 50 149 50 133 48 132 40 95 40 90 20 77 16 52 1 ,5 5 3 1,3 3 9 mean = 141.1 8 mean = va ria n c e = 3764.16 v a ria n c e = 45 276.99 6 1 .3 5 standard d e v ia t io n = 2 1 2 .7 8 standard d e v ia t io n * 13 3.9 87 A c t iv e and Seasonal Lake Members Lake a s s o c ia t io n o f f i c e r s e s t im a t e t h a t a p p r o x im a te ly 45 p e rc e n t o f t h e i r membership i s a c t i v e l y engaged in th e f u n c t io n s o f th e a s s o c ia ­ tio n (T a b le 1 5 ) . ''A c tiv e " i s d e fin e d as those households r e g u l a r l y r e p ­ resented a t a s s o c ia t io n meetings and which can be r e l i e d upon to h e lp in a s s o c ia t io n p r o j e c t s . As was th e case w it h community s i z e and a s ­ s o c ia t io n membership, t h e r e i s no s i g n i f i c a n t d i s t i n c t i o n between th e two groups w ith re s p e c t t o a c t i v e p a r t i c i p a t i o n . The seasonal component o f a s s o c ia t io n membership 1s about 55 p e r ­ cent o f both th e t o t a l and a c t i v e members (T a b le s 16 and 1 7 ) . e s tim a te a p p lie d e q u a lly to both c a t e g o r i e s . noted t h a t s e v e ra l However, i t T h is should be respondents in th e low er perform ance c a te g o ry were unable to e s t im a te th e seasonal f r a c t i o n o f t h e i r membership. O rg a n iz a tio n Age o f Lake A s s o c ia tio n s Of th e a s s o c ia t io n s in te r v ie w e d (T a b le 1 8 ) , th e range o f d ates o f in c o r p o r a tio n o r o r g a n iz a t io n v a r ie d from 1975 to 1920 ( o r perhaps e a r l i e r as t h i s i s th e d a te a t l e a s t when t h a t p a r t i c u l a r LA e x i s t e d ) . Since c e n tu ry , 1 t 80 y e a r s . s in ce 1960. le g is la tio n f o r t h i s purpose p re d a te s may be presumed t h a t form al LA's could go back a t l e a s t However, t w o - t h i r d s o f th e sample o f LA's were o rg a n iz e d T h is suggests t h a t w h ile th e id e a has been around f o r some t im e , th e r e has been a c o n s id e r a b le expansion j u s t in th e th e t u r n o f th e l a s t decade. o f growth in LA's T h is may be a r e f l e c t i o n o f th e economic and w orking age p o p u la tio n expansions o f th e same p e rio d m a n ife s te d in second ( v a c a t io n ) home purchases. P a ren ts o f th e "baby boom" were 88 Table 1 5 . — A c t iv e Membership (Those Mho R e g u la r ly A tte n d M eetin g and P a r t i c i p a t e 1n LA P r o j e c t s ) by Number o f Households H ig h e r Performance Lake A s s o c ia tio n s Lower Performance Lake A s s o c ia tio n s 100 350 90 75 87 65 75 40 59 30 56 28 50 20 40 12 35 10 30 10 12 - 634 mean - 5 7 .6 4 v a r ia n c e = 7 7 3 .8 6 standard d e v ia t io n * 2 7 .8 2 640 mean * 64 v a ria n c e = 10602 standard d e v ia tio n - 1 0 2 .9 7 89 Table 1 6 . — Percent o f Lake A s s o c ia tio n Members Who Are Seasonal Residents (Those Who Do Not L iv e a t Lake A l l Y e ar-ro u n d ) Higher Performance Lake A s s o c ia tio n s Lower Performance Lake A s s o c ia tio n s 88% 90% 80 75 75 75 70 50 66 50 65 50 60 50 50 10 30 ? 10 ? __ 3 - 597 mean = 54.27% varian ce ■ 7 9 5 .8 2 standard d e v ia tio n = 28.21 450 mean = 56.25% v a ria n c e * 591.0 7 standard d e v ia t io n * 24.31 90 T ab le 1 7 . — P e rc e n t o f A c t iv e Lake A s s o c ia tio n Members Who Are Seasonal R e s id e n ts H ig h e r Performance Lake A s s o c ia tio n s Lower Performance Lake A s s o c ia tio n s 30% 90% 75 80 70 75 60 50 60 50 50 50 50 50 50 ? 10 ? 10 4 519 mean = 47.18% v a ria n c e = 7 3 5 .3 6 stand ard d e v ia t io n 2 7 .1 2 445 mean = 63.57% v a ria n c e = 3 0 5 .9 5 s ta n d a rd d e v ia tio n = 1 7 .49 91 g e ttin g out from under c h i l d r e a r in g r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s a t th e same time t h a t t h e i r r i s i n g l e v e l s o f d is p o sa b le Income o c c u rre d , thus making lu x u ry purchases a t t r a c t i v e and f e a s i b l e . Whatever the r e a ­ son f o r t h e i r expansion, th e In la n d la k e a s s o c ia tio n s a r e becoming social i n s t i t u t i o n s s i g n i f i c a n t to la k e environments and t h e i r management. Table 1 8 . — Ages o f Sampled Lake A s s o c ia tio n s (Y ea r When F i r s t Formed, Not N e c e s s a r ily th e Year o f In c o r p o r a tio n ) H igher Performance Lake A s s o c ia tio n s Lower Performance Lake A s s o c ia tio n s 1926 1920 1945 1926 1960 1946 1961 1954 1965 1956 1966 1967 1970 1967 1971 1973 1973 1974 1974 1975 1974 mean * 1962 mean = 1956 v a ria n c e * 216.818 v a ria n c e * 390.622 standard d e v ia tio n * 14.72 5 standard d e v ia t io n = 19.764 92 Enabling A u t h o r i t y o f th e Lake A s s o c ia tio n s S ixte en o f th e tw enty-one LA's In te rv ie w e d a r e e i t h e r not Incorporated o r a re o rg an ized under the Michigan General C o rp o ra tio n Acts (T a b le 1 9 ) . Only t h r e e a s s o c ia tio n s in th e survey a re In c o r ­ porated under Act 137 o f 1929, th e Summer R esort A c t. O f the o r ­ g a n iz a tio n a l a l t e r n a t i v e s u t i l i z e d by these a s s o c ia t io n s , Act 137 conveys the most a u t h o r i t y over member a c t i v i t i e s by g ra n tin g the a s s o c ia tio n q u a s i-m u n ic ip a l powers. In t h e o r y , LA's so organized may be expected to have the most p o t e n t i a l f o r successful la k e management since th ey would be most a b le to r e g u la te th e b eh avio r o f t h e i r members, p a r t i c u l a r l y w ith re s p e c t to land use. Table 1 9 . — Type o f Enabling L e g i s l a t i o n Under Which th e A s s o c ia tio n s In c o rp o ra te FREQUENCY T o ta l Sample o f Lake Assn's Higher Perform. Lake Assn's Lower Perform . Lake Assn's Michigan General C o rp o ra tio n Acts 9 5 4 Not In c orpo rated 7 4 3 Act 137, 1929 Sumner Resort Act 3 2 1 Unknown 1 0 1 Deed R e s t r ic t io n 1 0 1 LEGISLATION 93 However, th e c o n s t i t u t i o n a l i t y o f th e 1929 Summer R e so rt A ct has tw ic e been c h a lle n g e d 1n th e M ich ig an Supreme C o u rt w it h o u t r e s o lu tio n (384 M1ch. 4 2 , 1970; 56 M ich. 162, 1 9 7 4 ). The tenuous status o f t h i s law may, a t l e a s t in p a r t , account f o r th e low I n ­ cidence o f I t s use as e n a b lin g l e g i s l a t i o n by th e a s s o c ia t io n s . In any c a s e , the d ata suggests t h a t most o f th e a s s o c ia t io n s have v e ry l i t t l e r e a l a u t h o r i t y and must r e l y on th e v o lu n ta r y cooperation o f t h e i r members f o r any su c ce ssfu l la k e management p ro ­ grams. Discussion w ith th e in te r v ie w e e s in d ic a t e d t h a t most o f th e seventeen a s s o c ia tio n s n o t o rg a n iz e d by deed r e s t r i c t i o n o r A ct 137 e i t h e r were unaware o f th e p o s s i b i l i t y o f having g r e a t e r a u t h o r i t y over t h e i r members o r , knowing o f th e o p t i o n , d id n o t want th e a u th o rity . One o f f i c e r s t a te d he d id not f e e l A ct 137 was l e g a l l y " s a fe ," b u t i f it i s e v e r c le a r e d i n th e c o u rts he would l i k e to see his la k e o rg a n iz e under i t . On th e c o n t r a r y , a n o th e r o f f i c e r s t a t e d t h a t h is a s s o c i a t i o n ' s lawyer s p e c i f i c a l l y ad v is ed a g a in s t i n c o r p o r a t io n in any form to a v o id p o te n tia l law s u i t s . The g en eral im pression re c e iv e d from th e I n t e r ­ views was t h a t many la k e a s s o c ia tio n s a r e not a t a l l any a u t h o r i t y o ve r t h e i r community. It anxious to assume is suspected t h a t t h i s a t t i t u d e o r ig in a t e s from a stro n g concern by most LA members, in c lu d in g th e o f f i c e r s , f o r th e p r o t e c t io n o f t h e i r i n d i v i d u a l p ro p e r ty r i g h t s . The d e s ire to p re s e rv e t h e i r o p tio n s to do what th e y l i k e on t h e i r own p ro p e rty a p p a r e n tly extends even to c o n tr o l o f t h e i r la k e a s s o c ia t io n . A second m o tiv a tio n may r e s u l t from a r e lu c t a n c e by some a s s o c ia ­ tio n s to be a re co g n ized source o f u n p o p u la r, a l b e i t n e c e s s a ry , d e c is io n s 94 made w ith re s p e c t to th e la k e community. I . e . , th e b u t t o f I n d iv id u a l o r s e c tio n a l w rath when th e LA moves to remedy a common te n a n t v i o l a ­ tio n such as waste disposal o rd inances o r b o a tin g r e s t r i c t i o n s . W hile t h is second concern 1s by no means p r e v a le n t (Some o f f i c e r s , a t l e a s t in these d is c u s s io n s , im p lie d t h a t they would ta k e on a n y b o d y '), i t does seem to b o th e r th e more s e n s i t i v e i n d i v i d u a l s who would p r e f e r to endure abuse o f t h e i r standards than I n v i t e hard f e e l i n g s . Given th e p r e v a i l i n g v o lu n ta r y n a tu re o f th e sampled a s s o c ia tio n s , concern f o r m a in ta in in g harmony and co o p e ra tio n i s c e r t a i n l y a w ise s tr a te g y . However, a t l e a s t m a j o r it y r u l e v ia peer pressure must e v e n tu a lly be imposed. I f n o t , th e community may s u f f e r a d i c t a t o r ­ ship o f the abusive m i n o r it y . Frequency o f A s s o c ia tio n Meetings Per Year Table 20 shows t h a t the g r e a t m a j o r i t y (about 75 p e rc e n t) o f the sampled la k e a s s o c ia tio n s have o n ly one o r two g en eral membership meetings per y e a r . F i f t y p ercent o f the sample have j u s t one annual meeting. The e n a b lin g l e g i s l a t i o n p e r t i n e n t to M ichigan la k e a s s o c ia tio n s (General C o rp o ratio n Acts and the Sumner R esort A c ts) re q u ir e s a t le a s t one g eneral membership meeting per y e a r . The data and comments by in te rv ie w e e s suggests t h a t most a s s o c ia tio n s hold t h e i r meetings p r im a r ily to meet th e minimum requ irem ent o f th e laws. Those a s s o c ia tio n s meeting two o r th r e e tim es a y e a r tend to hold these meetings d u rin g th e sunnier months, i . e . , beginning and end o f the summer season o r b e g in n in g , m id d le , and end o f summer. The two remaining a s s o c ia tio n s hold b i-m o n th ly meetings w ith one h o ld in g an e x tra designated annual m eeting. 95 Table 2 0 .— Frequency o f General Membership Meetings Per Year Higher Performance Lake A s s o c ia tio n s 7 Lower Performance Lake A s s o c ia tio n s 3 6 3 2 3 2 2 2 2 26 17 mean = 2 .3 6 mean = 1 .7 va ria n c e = 4 .4 5 v a ria n c e = 0 . 9 standard d e v ia t io n * 2.11 standard d e v ia t io n = 0 .9 5 96 Table 2 1 . — Average Attendance (Number o f I n d i v i d u a l s ) a t General Membership Meetings H ig her Performance Lake A s s o c ia tio n s Lower Performance Lake A s s o c ia tio n s 160 250 110 150 100 65 100 30 70 23 50 20 40 20 35 20 24 12 18 10 15 - 722 mean = 6 5 .6 4 va ria n c e * 21 66 .05 standard d e v ia t io n = 4 6 .5 4 600 mean = 60 v a ria n c e = 6233.11 standard d e v ia t io n = 78.95 97 The average atte n d an c e a t these meetings (T a b le 21 ) 1s about 60 people f o r both performance c a t e g o r ie s . O ther A s s o c ia tio n s on th e Lake T h r e e -fo u r th s o f th e a s s o c ia tio n s p o lle d c o n s t it u t e d th e o n ly o rg a n iz a tio n on t h e i r r e s p e c t iv e la k e s (T a b le 2 2 ) . Where more than one a s s o c ia tio n e x i s t s on the la k e * th e In c id e n c e is s l i g h t l y more fre q u e n t in the low er performance c a te g o ry . As m ight be ex p ec te d , the m u l t ip l e a s s o c ia tio n s tend to occur ( i n both c a t e g o r ie s ) on the la r g e r la k e s . In two o f th e f i v e in s tan ce s r e p o r te d , the respondents sta te d t h a t d i f f i c u l t y c o o rd in a tin g the a c t i v i t i e s o f th e two o r more a s s o c ia tio n s im p airs t h e i r la k e management p o t e n t i a l . Table 2 2 . — The In c id e n c e o f More Than One A s s o c ia tio n on a Lake FREQUENCY Two o r More A s s o c ia tio n s on the Lake Only One A s s o c ia tio n on the Lake However, several T o ta l Sample o f Lake Assn's H ig her Perform . Lake Assn's Lower Perform . Lake Assn's 5 2 3 16 9 7 la r g e HP la k e a s s o c ia tio n s In d ic a te d th e s a t i s ­ f a c to r y e x is te n c e o f an o v e r a l l LA to g e th e r w ith o t h e r independent neighborhood a s s o c ia tio n s . Residents tend to belong to b o th , th e one dealing w ith neighborhood roads and o th e r l o c a l i z e d problems, w h ile 98 the la r g e LA d e a ls w ith o v e r a l l la k e iss u e s ( a p p a r e n t l y th e neighborhood u n its f u n c t io n in g l i k e s t a t e s In a f e d e r a l government. A s s o c ia tio n R e la tio n s h ip s w it h Local Corrmunlty and Government The r e l a t i o n s h i p between th e LA and I t s h o s t corrmunlty a ls o seems v a r i a b l e , b u t g e n e r a l l y f a v o r a b le (T a b le 2 3 ) . From t h e i r p e r c e p t io n , the LAs appear to g et along f a i r l y w e ll w it h th e lo c a l conmunlty. Both HP and LP a s s o c ia t io n s a r e about e v e n ly s p l i t between "ve ry good" and " g e n e r a lly f r i e n d l y " assessments o f t h e i r r e l a t i o n s h i p s w it h t h e i r f e llo w lo c a l re s id e n ts . There was an in v e r s e r e l a t i o n s h i p between these two degrees o f p o s i t i v e a t t i t u d e when th e a s s o c ia t io n o f f i c e r s described t h e i r r e l a t i o n s h i p s w it h lo c a l governments. The m a j o r i t y o f the HP a s s o c ia t io n s f e l t t h e i r r e l a t i o n s h i p w it h government was "very good," w h i l e th e m a j o r i t y o f LP a s s o c ia t io n s viewed t h i s r e l a ­ tio n s h ip as " g e n e r a l ly f r i e n d l y " o r " d i s t a n t . " T h is p e rc e p tio n appears to support th e e a r l i e r im pression t h a t LP a s s o c ia tio n s p la c e le s s emphasis on p o l i t i c a l In vo lvem en t than do th e HP a s s o c ia t io n s . The p o s s i b i l i t y o f improving la k e management perform ance by i n ­ ducing th e a s s o c ia tio n s to ta k e a more a c t i v e r o l e in lo c a l governm ent, 1s enhanced by th e f a c t t h a t none o f them r e p o r te d fr e q u e n t c o n f l i c t s or bad f e e l i n g s w it h e i t h e r l o c a l r e s id e n ts o r government o f f i c i a l s . However, t h e i r f a v o r a b le response toward lo c a l governments is somewhat s u r p r i s in g 1n l i g h t o f f r e q u e n t l y expressed co m p lain ts by the a s s o c ia tio n s about s e rv ic e s p ro vided and high ta x r a t e s . A p p a re n tly the la k e a s s o c ia tio n s d i s t i n g u i s h between what th e y wish would be provided them, and what th e y r e a l i s t i c a l l y e x p e c t township and county governments to p r o v id e . In f a c t , conments were t w ic e made by LA 99 Table 2 3 . — Lake A s s o c ia tio n R e la tio n s h ip s w it h th e Local Community and Government FREQUENCY A) INTERPERSONAL RELATIONSHIPS OF "LAKE PEOPLE" AND LOCAL "TOWN PEOPLE" T o ta l Sample o f Lake Assn's H ig h e r Perform . Lake Assn's Lower P e rfo rm . Lake A ssn 's 9 5 4 11 5 6 D is t a n t O th e r Than Occasional C o n flic ts 1 1 0 Frequent C o n f l i c t s and Bad F e e lin g s 0 0 0 H ig h e r P erform . Lake Assn's Lower P erform . Lake A ssn's 12 9 3 G e n e r a lly F r i e n d l y , But L i t t l e Mutual Involvem ent 7 2 5 D is t a n t O th e r Than O ccasional C o n flic ts 2 0 2 Frequent C o n f l i c t s and Bad F e e lin g s 0 0 0 Very Good G e n e ra lly F r i e n d l y , But L i t t l e Mutual Involvem ent B) THE RELATIONSHIP OF THE LAKE ASSOCIATION AS A POLITICAL BODY T o ta l WITH EITHER THE TOWNSHIP OR Sample o f COUNTY GOVERNMENTS Lake Assn's Very Good 100 o f f i c e r s to the e f f e c t t h a t lo c a l a u t h o r i t i e s were sym pathetic to t h e i r ta x p l i g h t ( I . e . , o f te n being th e h ig h e s t taxed p ro p e rty owners in r u r a l , a g r i c u l t u r a l c o u n t i e s ) , but could do l i t t l e o f s t a t e tax e q u a l i z a t i o n p o l i c i e s . about i t because These o f f i c i a l s o fte n p o in t o u t th a t w h ile la k e p ro p e rty taxes may be high compared to a d ja c e n t la n d , they a re s t i l l a b arg a in compared to what th ey could be under s t a t e ta x a tio n law s. I n c i d e n t a l l y , a p r e v a i l in g co m p lain t remains t h a t ta x assessors d o n 't c a r e f u l l y examine la k e p ro p e rty and thus tend to ta x p lu s h , year-round homes a t the same r a t e as " r u s t i c , " p r i m i t i v e summer c o t ­ tages to the d e trim e n t o f the owners o f th e le s s improved h o ld in g s . S o cial O r i e n t a t i o n o f the A s s o c ia tio n s T h ir te e n o f the 21 a s s o c ia tio n s In te rv ie w e d (62 th a t they d id not sponsor s o c ia l a c t i v i t i e s p e rc e n t) re p o rte d f o r t h e i r members, and o n ly one o f th e t h i r t e e n expressed a d e s ir e to in c lu d e such a fu n c tio n 1n fu tu re o p e ra tio n s . S i m i l a r l y , o v e r 80 p erc en t o f the sample re p o rte d th a t issues and p r o j e c t s , r a t h e r than s o c ia l e v e n ts , are most e f f e c t i v e In keeping a s s o c ia tio n membership a c t i v e (T a b le 2 4 ) . I t 1s e v id e n t t h a t the g re a t m a j o r it y o f sampled a s s o c ia tio n s view themselves as being p r i m a r i l y issue o r s e r v i c e - o r i e n t e d . This a t t i t u d e i s f u r t h e r supported by t h e i r responses above when asked to l i s t th e o b je c tiv e s o f t h e i r a s s o c ia t io n s . (The o b j e c t iv e o f p ro v id in g s o c ia l and r e c r e a t io n a l am e n itie s by the HPs presented in T ab le 2 i s q u a l i f i e d by t h is d a t a , in Table 2 4 , as an o r g a n iz a t io n a l the Issue o r ie n te d fu n c tio n secondary to purpose o f the a s s o c ia t io n s . ) The d a ta , t h e r e f o r e , suggest t h a t LAs would be responsive to Cooperative Extension S e rv ic e proposals o r ie n te d to problem s o lv in g on a l o c a l i z e d , s e l f - i n i t i a t i v e b a s is . 101 Table 2 4 .— Social Function o f Lake Associations FREQUENCY Higher Perform . Lake Assn's Lower Perform . Lake Assn's 8 4 4 13 7 6 T o tal Sample o f Lake Assn's Higher Perform . Lake Assn's Lower Perform . Lake Assn's 1/ 9 8 S ocial Events 2 1 1 Both 2 1 1 T otal Sample o f Lake Assn's A) SPONSORSHIP OF SOCIAL ACTIVITIES Association Sponsorship o f a t Least One Annual S o cial Function No Sponsorship o f Any So cial Functions B) APPROACH MOST EFFECTIVE IN KEEPING ASSOCIATION MEMBERSHIP ACTIVE Issues and P ro je c ts Lake A s s o c ia tio n Finances Estimated Average Household Income Levels Not s u r p r i s i n g l y , the lower performance a s s o c ia tio n s tend to represent low er income le v e l r e s id e n ts as compared to th e h ig h e r p e r­ formance a s s o c ia tio n s (T ab le 2 5 ) . The average household income f o r the lower performance c a teg o ry i s $ 1 7,5 00 per y e a r , w it h 66 p ercen t of these e s tim a te s 1n th e $1 0,0 00 to $ 1 5,0 00 c a te g o ry . The h ig h e r performance la k e a s s o c ia tio n s sampled average $ 2 7 ,4 0 0 per y e a r income per household, w ith 70 p ercen t o f t h e i r es tim ate d annual incomes being g r e a t e r than $ 1 5 ,0 0 0 . A t - t e s t a n a ly s is o f t h i s data re v e a le d a d i s t i n c t i o n between th e two c a te g o rie s s i g n i f i c a n t a t th e 0.1 l e v e l . 102 Table 2 5 . — Respondents'Estim ated Average Annual Income f o r Members o f His Lake A s s o c ia tio n (Two Respondents Refused to E s tim ate an Average Income F ig u re f o r T h e ir Membership.) FREQUENCY T o ta l Sample o f Lake Assn's H ig her Perform . Lake Assn's Lower Perform. Lake Assn's $ 5 ,0 0 0 to $ 1 0,0 00 2 1 1 > $10,000 to $ 1 5 ,0 0 0 8 2 6 > $1 5,0 00 to $2 0,0 00 3 3 0 > $2 0,0 00 to $3 0,0 00 3 2 1 > $ 3 0 ,0 0 0 to $4 0,0 00 2 2 0 > $4 0,0 00 1 0 1 $27,400 $ 1 7 ,5 0 0 A) ESTIMATED AVERAGE ANNUAL INCOME (WAGES OR EQUIVALENT) Average Estim ated Household Income: Note: Computations o f the average income f ig u r e s a re based upon s p e c i f i c annual income e s tim a te s by LA o f f i c e r s o r , i f they were r e l u c t a n t to e s tim a te t h a t c l o s e l y , the m id -p o in t o f th e es tim a te d income range was used, i . e . , > $ 1 5 ,0 0 0 to $ 2 0,0 00 e s tim a te co n verts to $ 1 7 ,5 0 0 . B) RELATIONSHIP OF LA MEMBERS ANNUAL INCOME TO REST OF LAKE COMMUNITY AS ESTIMATED BY RESPONDENT T o ta l Sample o f Lake Assn's Higher Perform . Lake Assn's Lower Perform . Lake Assn's Higher 11 7 4 S im ila r 10 4 6 0 0 0 Lower 103 The upper range o f these I n d iv id u a l Incomes, extended to a few I n ­ d iv id u a ls making 1n excess o f $100,000 p e r y e a r . On one occasion a respondent ( i n the low er performance c a te g o ry ) r e f e r r e d to a " m i l l i o n ­ a ir e " on th e la k e . The es tim a te s o f average Income l e v e l s a r e o b v io u s ly cru d e , being dependent upon the o p in io n o f one member o f each a s s o c ia t io n . However, even t h i s e s tim a te may be c o n s e r v a tiv e . at le a s t, In one in s ta n c e i t was s t r o n g ly suspected t h a t the la k e a s s o c ia t io n p re s id e n t In te rv ie w e d was g ro s s ly u n d e re s tim a tin g the income l e v e l s o f h im s e lf and h is peers. H is home was o b v io u s ly p lu sh , and a l l in the area were la r g e and expensive lo o k in g . o f th e houses The gentlem an's e v a s iv e responses when asked about income l e v e l s and h is re fe re n c e to not knowing what assets some o f h is r e t i r e d neighbors have, even though they . . . " t e c h n i c a l l y no lo n g e r have any income," suggested con­ s id e ra b le w ea lth in the conniunity and a shrewd concern not to p ro vid e any e s tim a te o f r e a l w o rth . In a l l instan ces the la k e a s s o c ia tio n s es tim a te d themselves to equal o r exceed th e annual income s ta tu s o f the r e s t o f t h e i r la k e community. However, th e re i s an almost d i r e c t in v e rs e r e l a t i o n s h i p in t h e i r estim ates o f r e l a t i v e economic s t a t u s . Most o f th e h ig h e r performance a s s o c ia tio n in te rv ie w e e s perceived t h e i r membership as having a h ig h e r income l e v e l than non-member r e s id e n ts o f the la k e community (64 p e r­ cent * h ig h e r , 36 p ercen t * e q u iv a le n t income l e v e l s ) . In th e low er performance c a te g o ry , th e e s tim a te s were re v e rs e d , w ith 60 p erc en t o f the respondents p e rc e iv in g member income l e v e l s to be s i m i l a r to the r e s t o f the la k e conmunlty, and 40 p e rc e n t b e l i e v i n g themselves to be w e a l t h i e r . 104 These p e rc e p tio n s o f r e l a t i v e w e a lth o f th e two c a t e g o r ie s o f lake a s s o c ia tio n s tend t o su p po rt th e d i f f e r e n c e s 1n averag e income le v e ls f o r members o f each typ e la k e a s s o c ia t io n as noted e a r l i e r . The absence o f any e s tim a te s by th e In te r v ie w e e s o f Income s t a t u s lower than th e r e s t o f th e la k e community may r e s u l t from one o r both o f two f a c t o r s . F i r s t , personal p r id e and s e l f r e s p e c t o f th e respondents may be such t h a t th e y w o u ld n 't c o n s id e r vie w in g themselves as an yth ing le s s than th e economic eq u als o f t h e i r n e ig h b o rs . Second, a s s o c ia tio n members may r e p r e s e n t a g e n e r a l ly h ig h e r personal a c h ie v e ­ ment le v e l w i t h i n t h e i r la k e community. N e it h e r o f th e s e s u p p o s itio n s can be proven by th e in fo r m a t io n c o l l e c t e d in t h i s s tu d y , b u t none o f the in t e r v ie w s e v e r took p la c e a t a re s id e n c e t h a t was o b v io u s ly i n f e r i o r to th e c o n d it io n o f i t s was u s u a lly t r u e . It neighbors and in f a c t th e re v e rs e i s e v i d e n t t h a t th e average income l e v e l s e s t i ­ mated f o r e i t h e r la k e a s s o c ia t io n c a te g o ry exceeds th e s ta te w id e average f a m i l y income o f $ 1 2 ,2 9 6 per y e a r as r e p o r te d in th e 1970 U.S. Census (U .S . Bureau o f th e Census, Census o f P o p u la tio n : 1970 General S o c ia l and Economic C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s , F in a l R eport P C (1)-C 24 M ichigan, U .S .G .P .O . 1 9 7 2 ). A Department o f Resource Development survey re se arch p r o j e c t conducted l a s t y e a r in d ic a te d th e average sta tew id e income l e v e l to be $ 1 3 ,5 0 0 (K im b a ll and T h u ll e n , Department o f Resource Development, M ichigan S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y , M ichigan P u b lic Opinion S u rvey, Sumnary o f R e s u lts , 1 9 7 6 ). No m a tte r which o f these estim ates o f average M ichigan Income 1s c l o s e s t to r e a l i t y , 1 t remains c le a r t h a t th e respondents e s tim a te t h e i r communities to be w e a l t h i e r than av e ra g e . 105 R etirees 1n the Lake Associations The p r i n c i p l e wage e a rn e r 1n 23 p e rc e n t o f th e h ig h e r p e r f o r ­ mance a s s o c ia tio n households 1s r e t i r e d . S i m i l a r l y , 17 p e rc e n t o f the householders In the low er performance ca te g o ry a r e r e t i r e e s (Table 2 6 ) . Table 2 6 . — Respondents1 Estim ate o f P ercent o f LA Membership Who Are R e t ir e d I n d iv id u a ls H igher Performance Lake A s s o c ia tio n s Lower Performance Lake A s so cia tio n s 65% 55% 50 25 50 19 25 15 15 13 15 12 10 8 10 5 9 .5 0 5 ? 1 152 2 5 5 .5 mean s 23.23% v a ria n c e * 4 6 8 .1 7 standard d e v ia tio n = 2 1 .6 4 mean = 16.89% v a ria n c e * 258.8 6 standard d e v ia t io n = 1 6.09 106 Annual Dues o f the Lake A s s o c ia tio n s The range o f annual dues charged by th e sampled a s s o c ia tio n s is c o n s id e ra b le , v a ry in g from $ 1 .0 0 to $ 7 5.0 0 per household. The average Is about $ 1 5 .0 0 , w ith no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e between the two performance groups. However, the g r e a t m a j o r it y o f the associations charge o nly $ 5 .0 0 o r $ 1 0 .0 0 per household per y e a r . (Table 2 7 ) . Table 28 shows t h a t s l i g h t l y le s s than h a l f o f th e a s s o c ia tio n s augment t h e i r Income w ith funds o t h e r than from dues, u s u a lly spe­ c ia l assessments o r donations as a p a r t i c u l a r need a r i s e s . Lake A s s o c ia tio n Annual Income The average income f o r the h ig h e r performance a s s o c ia tio n s Is about $ 2 ,4 0 0 . The average income o f th e low er performance as­ sociations 1s about $800. A t - t e s t a n a ly s is o f th e data in d ic a te d no s i g n i f i c a n t d if f e r e n c e between these income f ig u r e s because o f the g re a t v a ria n c e o f the small sample In v o lv e d (T a b le 2 9 ) . However, I t I s e v id e n t t h a t the h ig h e r performance a s s o c ia tio n s have more funds a v a i l a b l e to work w it h . 107 Table 2 7 . — Annual Dues o f th e Lake A s s o c ia tio n s ( I n Most In s ta n c e s Dues Are Per Household o r P ro p e r ty Owner) H ig h e r Performance Lake A s s o c ia tio n s Lower Performance Lake A s s o c ia tio n s $ 7 5 /y e a r $ 4 0 /y e a r 67 35 10 10 10 10 10 5 5 5 5 5 5 41 5 1 .5 0 1 5 I 4 - 201 mean = 1 1 6 .5 1 8 .2 7 mean * va ria n c e = 6 8 8 .2 2 standard d e v ia tio n = 2 6 .2 3 1 1 .6 5 v a ria n c e = 1 9 5 .7 8 sta n d a rd d e v ia tio n * ^ In d ic a t e s dues per a d u l t . 1 3 .9 9 108 Table 2 8 . — Frequencies o f Respondents Answering th e Q ue stio n : Does Your LA Have Any O th e r Source o f Income Beyond Dues? FREQUENCY INCOME T o ta l Sample o f Lake Assn's H ig h e r P erform . Lake A ssn's Lower P erform . Lake A ssn 's Lake A s s o c ia tio n s Having Income 1n A d d itio n to Annual Dues 9 6 3 1£ 5 7 Lake A s s o c ia tio n s Whose Only Source o f Income Is Annual Dues 21 ALTERNATIVE INCOME SOURCES S pecial Donations 5 4 1 S pecial Assessments 3 2 1 S o cial Events 1 0 1 9 109 Table 2 9 . - - Annual Budget o f the Lake A s s o c ia tio n s , I . e . , Estimated Amount o f Funds Taken in Each Year, Before Expenses Higher Performance Lake Associations Lower Performance Lake A ssociations $16,000 $3,525 2,300 1,400 2,000 700 1,200 600 1,200 450 1,200 300 750 200 700 150 600 28 450 ? 240 $26,640 mean * 2 ,4 2 1 .8 2 variance = 2 0 ,6 7 6 ,5 3 6 .3 6 standard d e v ia tio n = 4 ,5 4 7 .1 5 $7,353 mean = 817.00 variance = 1,198,001 standard d e v ia tio n = 1 ,0 9 4 .5 3 110 Lake C h a r a c t e r is t ic s Lake S iz e A t - t e s t a n a ly s is o f t h i s data re v e a le d no s i g n i f i c a n t d if f e r e n c e in average la k e s iz e between the two groups. T h is would In d i c a t e t h a t the average s iz e la k e 1n th e sample I s about 1 ,2 0 0 acres (T a b le 3 0 ) . However, the e x tre m e ly high v a ria n c e suggests an In o r d in a t e In f lu e n c e on the sample o f th e few very la r g e la k e s . This small sample s iz e r e s u lts in a c o n s id e ra b ly skewed e s tim a te o f the mean. E ig h ty -tw o percent o f the sampled lakes a re le s s than 500 hundred acres in s iz e and f i f t y - f o u r p erc en t a re les s than 250 a c re s . I f the mean value is recomputed w ith o u t in c lu d in g th e 1 6 ,70 0 a c re l a k e , a value o f about 730 acres 1s e s tim a te d . T his 730 ac re e s tim a te is about t h i r t y times the average com­ puted on th e b asis o f Humphrys' index o f n e a r ly 35,000 Michigan lakes and ponds ( 1 9 6 5 ) . However, the Humphrys1 data in c lu d e s a l l recorded lakes and ponds 1n M ic h ig a n , many o f which a re no doubt too small to support a la k e a s s o c ia t io n . In 1975, s i x t y - f o u r LAs p a r t i c i p a t e d 1n the Department o f Natural Resources S e lf - H e l p la k e program sponsored by the In la n d Lake U n it. The mean s i z e o f these lak es was 619 a c r e s , w ith 56 p erc en t o f them in the 100 to 500 a c re s i z e group. T h is data compares f a v o r ­ ably w ith th e above re p o rte d la k e s iz e s and suggests t h a t one may es tim ate most low er peninsula In la n d lakes to be le s s than 500 acres 1n s i z e . Lake Depths and Bottom C h a r a c t e r is t ic s While these d ata a re not as v a r i a b l e as la k e s i z e , elements o f the same problem remain e v i d e n t , and no s i g n i f i c a n t d i s t i n c t i o n s emerged. Ill I t was hoped t h a t th e acreage and depth e s tim a te s (T ab les 30 and 31) might provide some c lu e to th e tr o p h ic s ta tu s o f th e la k e s sampled which might then be compared to performance o f t h e i r a s s o c ia tio n s . However, i t 1s e v id e n t t h a t w ith o u t knowing more about the la k e bottom c o n f ig u r a t io n s , maximum depth has l i t t l e gestin g t h a t a l l meaning beyond sug- o f th e lak es sampled have a t l e a s t a p o r tio n o f t h e i r w a te r column below the p h o to tro p h ic zone and a r e probably sub­ j e c t to seasonal s t r a t i f i c a t i o n and tu rn o v e r. The i n t e r v ie w question re g a rd in g most fr e q u e n t ly o c c u rrin g lake depth (T a b le 32) was asked in an e f f o r t to gain some In s ig h t In to a q u a tic weed growth p o t e n t i a l shallow ( l i t t o r a l ) in th e la k e s . The e x t e n t o f areas where the la k e bottom 1s w it h i n th e photo- tro p h ic zone is some I n d i c a t i o n o f the impact o f n u t r i e n t i n f l u e n t s . There was some d i f f i c u l t y conveying th e essence o f t h i s q u estio n w ith o u t i n d i c a t i n g i t s purpose, and perhaps the m a tte r should have been approached d i f f e r e n t l y . N o n eth eles s, except f o r one l a k e , in the LP c a te g o ry , which drops o f f to a g r e a t d e p th , i t appears t h a t the lakes sampled a l l have r a t h e r e x te n s iv e p h o tic zones a v a i l a b l e to rooted v e g e ta tio n . The fre q u e n t I d e n t i f i c a t i o n o f marl bottoms in th e lakes is c o n s is te n t w ith M ic h ig a n 's "hard" groundwater re so u rce s. The s im i­ l a r l y fre q u e n t re fe re n c e to s o f t bottom c o n d it io n s , commonly r e f e r r e d to as muck by the respondents (and q u a l i f i e d when questioned as meaning " s i l t " o r o rg an ic "mud") suggests p o t e n t i a l n u t r i e n t r e s e r ­ v o irs 1n th e accumulated bottom sediments o f these lak es (T a b le 3 3 ) . The in fo rm a tio n about a r e a , d e p th , and bottom c o n d itio n s so f a r c o l le c t e d In no way e s ta b lis h e s th e tr o p h ic s ta tu s o f the la k e s . 112 Table 3 0 .— Lake S iz e , in Acres H ig h e r Performance Lake A s s o c ia tio n s Lower Performance Lake A s s o c ia tio n s 1 6 ,7 0 0 4 ,8 6 5 4 ,0 0 0 3 ,0 0 0 2 .4 0 0 1 49 83 1 .0 6 8 1 342 660 310 400 200 375 1873 287 1793 210 80 183 73 115 68 CsJ CO 00 40 5 4 . 52 - 512 - 452 - 262 2 6 , 6 6 2 . 5 acres mean - 1 ,6 6 6 .4 0 6 a c re s v a ria n c e = 1 7 ,2 1 9 ,0 3 2 .7 7 standard d e v ia tio n = 2 f3J 9 ,8 4 2 acres 4 ,1 4 9 .5 8 2 mean = 8 2 0 .1 6 7 acres v a r ia n c e * 2 ,2 8 9 ,2 8 8 .6 9 7 standard d e v ia tio n 1 ,5 1 3 .0 3 9 5 In d ic a t e s m u l t i p l e la k e s s e rv e d , in each In s t a n c e , by one LA. 113 Table 3 1 . — Maximum Lake Depth 1n F e e t , H ig h e r Performance Lake A s s o c ia tio n s i.e .. Deepest P o in t 1n Lake Lower Performance Lake A s s o c ia tio n s 90 120 86 110 80 1003 702 90 701 80 651 80 55 603 50 55 472 50 422 50 40 50 35 48 30 353 222 - _L 52 - 797 mean * 5 3 .1 3 3 v a ria n c e * 5 3 6 .1 2 5 standard d e v ia t io n * 2 I 3 J 2 3 .1 5 4 878 mean = 7 3 .1 6 7 v a ria n c e = 7 5 5.7 87 stan d ard d e v ia tio n = In d ic a te s m u l t i p l e la k e s s e rv e d , 2 7 .4 9 2 In each In s t a n c e , by one LA. 114 Table 3 2 . — Most F re q u e n tly O ccurring Lake Depth, i . e . . Respondent's Estim ate T h a t, 1n H is E x p e rie n c e , Most o f th e Lake Is th e Below Reported Depth o r Shallow er Higher Performance Lake A s s o c ia tio n s Lower Performance Lake A s s o c ia tio n s 30 f e e t 100 f e e t 30 30 20 25 20 20 20 20 16 15 15 12 12 12 10 10 10 6 10 193 mean * 250 1 7 .5 5 f e e t variance = 5 3 .8 7 standard d e v ia tio n = 7 .3 4 mean = 2 5 .0 0 f e e t v a ria n c e = 6 7 2 .4 0 standard d e v ia t io n = 2 5 .9 3 115 However* 1 t does suggest t h a t th e com bination o f sh a llo w s i l t e d bottom , seasonal o v e r t u r n , and allo c h th o n o u s n u t r i e n t s from lawn f e r t i l i z a t i o n and s e p tic tanks are a l l p resen t and could r e s u l t In r a p id c u l t u r a l e u tr o p h lc a tlo n . Table 3 3 . — Predominant Lake Bottom Types According to Respondent Assessments T o ta l Sample o f Lake Assn's Higher Perform . Lake Assn’ s Lower Perform . Lake Assn's Marl 7 4 3 Muck ( s o f t , o rg a n ic mud) 6 2 4 Sand and Marl 1 0 1 Mixed, b u t M o stly S o ft 2 2 0 Muck and Marl 1 0 1 S i l t and Mud 1 1 0 Sand 1 0 1 Unknown 1 1 0 Sand and C lay 1 1 0 LAKE BOTTOM TYPES Extent o f Lake Development The sampled lakes vary in th e e x te n t to which r e s i d e n t i a l de­ velopment o f th e r i p a r i a n land has o c c u rre d . The l e a s t developed lak e was es tim a te d by the respondent to have about o n e -fo u rth the w a te r f r o n t l o t s s u i t a b l e f o r c o n s tr u c tio n develop ed . The most de­ veloped lakes a re 1n the low er performance c a te g o ry and In v o lv e more than two t i e r s o f co m p lete ly developed l o t s around th e la k e (T a b le 3 4 ) . 116 The average la k e development f o r t h i s study i s about 70 p erc en t o f the lak e fro n ta g e Cwith l o t s a v erag in g about 65 f e e t w id e) and 1n most cases t h e r e 1s o n ly s l i g h t l y more than one t i e r o f development (Table 3 5 ) . Table 3 4 . — E x te n t o f Lake Comnunlty Development T h a t In c lu d es NonR ip a ria n Lot Development, i . e . , More Than One Lake F ro n t T i e r o f Housing; A d d itio n a l Rows o f Houses Back from the Lake H igher Performance Lake A s s o c ia tio n s Lower Performance Lake A s s o c ia tio n s % o f Lake Housing in More Than One T i e r No. o f T ie r s o f Housing on the Lake % o f Lake Housing in More Than One T i e r 1 - 1 - 2 50 3 5-10% in t h i r d t i e 2 5 2 50 2 4 3 "most o f la k e " 2 10 2 75 1 - 1 - 2 10 2 10 2 15 1 - 1 - 1 - 2 15 2 15 ? ? No. o f T ie r s o f Housing on the Lake ** - Note: T h is data does not c o r r e l a t e w it h p e rc e n t development and d e n s ity o f housing because la k e development does not proceed in a system atic manner. Second o r t h i r d t i e r development may proceed 1n some areas b e fo re a l l la k e shore l o t s a re b u i l t upon. Table 35.—Extent of Development; i.e . . Percent of Available Lake Shore Lots Suitable for Construction That Have Been B uilt Upon Higher Performance Lake Associations V /to Developed Lower Performance Lake Associations Average Front Footage of Lots % Developed 1501 50' 2501 50' 97 60 2001 50 85 88 1501 50 80 55 100 50 80 100 90 60 75 100 85 100 75 50 80 100 60 75 50 70 60 75 30 60 50 60 30 45 J5 _45 ___ 837 750 1065 mean * variance ■ 982.091 variance = 401.091 variance * standard deviation = 31.338 standard deviation = 20.027 standard deviation « 76.09 - - mean = 68.909 mean * Average Front Footage of Lots 635 106.5 5289.166 72.7266 mean = 63.5 variance * 422.5 standard deviation s 20.554 ^Represents rough estimate of extent of development of off-lake as well as riparian lo ts , where back lo t development appeared extensive. 118 P o l i t i c a l Boundaries Associated w ith th e Lake Communities N in ety p e rc e n t o f both c a te g o rie s o f la k e a s s o c ia tio n s a re located e n t i r e l y w i t h i n one county (T a b le 3 6 ) . This suggests t h a t the county as a p o l i t i c a l and a d m i n is t r a t iv e e n t i t y i s a f e a s i b l e regional d e l i n i a t l o n f o r c o n s id e ra tio n 1n proposing lo c a l la k e manage­ ment programs. Township boundaries d o n 't appear to be s u f f i c i e n t l y in c lu s iv e to fu n c tio n as a lo c a l p o l i t i c a l denominator o f la k e management e f f o r t s since about 60 p ercen t o f the lakes sampled l i e w it h i n th e j u r i s d i c ­ tio n o f two o r more townships. This data a ls o suggests t h a t lak es under the a u t h o r i t y o f more than one township a re not p a r t i c u l a r l y hindered in t h e i r r e l a t i v e management perform ance. Almost h a l f o f the h ig h e r performance a s s o c ia tio n s a re 1n t h i s s i t u a t i o n in c lu d in g the highest s c o rin g la k e a s s o c ia tio n in the sample; w h ile 70 p erc en t o f the lower scoring lakes were lo c a te d w it h i n a s in g le township. Table 3 6 . — P o l i t i c a l Boundaries A sso ciated w ith the Lakes FREQUENCY A) LAKE ENTIRELY WITHIN ONE COUNTY Yes No ( I n Two o r More C o u nties) B) LAKE ENTIRELY WITHIN ONE TOWNSHIP Yes No ( I n Two o r More Townships) T o ta l Sample o f Lake Assn's H ig her Perform . Lake Assn's Lower Perform . Lake Assn's 19 10 9 _2 21 T o ta l Sample o f Lake Assn's 1 1 Higher Perform . Lake Assn's Lower Perform. Lake Assn's 12 5 7 9 21 6 3 119 P o litic a l "horse sense" suggests t h a t m u l t i p l e township In v o lv e ­ ment would compromise la k e management e f f i c i e n c y because the In vo lved local bureaucracy would be l a r g e r . t h is assumption. However, th e d ata does not support A p p a re n tly , i f a la k e a s s o c ia tio n i s adamant about i t s management o b j e c t i v e s , township government c o n s t it u t e s e i t h e r an I n s i g n i f i c a n t o b s ta c le o r is co m p atib le (even in th e In s ta n c e o f overlapping a u t h o r i t y ) w ith th e a s s o c ia t io n 's i n t e n t . The p rim ary I n d i c a t i o n o f t h is p o r tio n o f the study d e a lin g w ith lake a s s o c ia tio n c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s i s one o f rem arkable homogeneity between the h ig h e r performance and low er performance groups. With only a few e x c e p tio n s , th e d if f e r e n c e s in q u a n t i t a t i v e l y measurable c h a r a c t e r is t ic s between the two c a te g o rie s o f a s s o c ia tio n s a re s t a t i s ­ t i c a l l y i n s i g n i f i c a n t (T a b le 3 7 , t - t e s t r e s u l t s column t h r e e ) . This suggests t h a t ( w it h re s p e c t to those c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s measured I n d i ­ v i d u a l l y ) th e re Is l i t t l e actual perform ance, i t s to d is t in g u is h in advance o f an a s s o c ia t io n 's l i k e l i h o o d f o r s e l f - h e l p management success. To f u r t h e r i n v e s t ig a t e t h i s , th e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f the combined sample o f 21 la k e a s s o c ia tio n s were te s te d f o r c o r r e l a t i o n w ith t h e i r performance scores. It i s p r e f e r a b l e to use the e n t i r e sample to t e s t f o r c o r r e l a t i o n because th e dependent v a r i a b l e (performance score) was used to e s t a b lis h th e two c a t e g o r ie s , and because t h e r e was no demonstrated d i s t i n c t i o n between them o th e rw is e . T ab le 3 7 , l a s t column, presents the r e s u l t s o f t h i s a n a ly s i s . There remained th e p o s s i b i l i t y t h a t s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n s w ith performance could r e s u l t from the i n t e r a c t i o n o f two o r more c h a r a c t e r is t ic s o f a la k e a s s o c ia t io n , i . e . , when measured d i s c r e t e l y , the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s may f a i l to suggest a r e l a t i o n s h i p w ith management Table 37.—Summary of Quantitative Lake Community Characteristics POPULATION CHARACTERISTICS Size of Lake Cowunlty (Households) Hater o f Nepers In Lake Association (Households) Number o f Active Households In Lake Association Percent o f Headier Households that are Seasonal Percent of Active H ater Households that are Seasonal ORGANIZATIONAL CHARACTERISTICS Tear Lake Association Mas Organized Frequency of General Meetings Per Year Average Attendance at General Meetings (Individuals) Percent of Associations in Each Group Belonging to MLSA Average Performance Score Hean Characteristic Hean Characteristic of the LP Group of the IIP Group 317.2 i 242.65 141.18 t 61.35 57.64 i 27.82 54.27 t 28.21 47.18 ± 27.12 423.56 133.9 64.0 56.25 63.57 ± 636.98 t 212.78 i 47.8 t 24.31 ♦ 17.49 Significant t-te s t of Difference Between the Two Groups no no no no no 1956 no 1.7 t 0.95 no 60.0 i 78.95 2 00 30 x test signif. at 0.01a 50.30 i 12.93 t-te s t sig n if. at 0.001a 1962 2.36 i 2.11 65.64 t 46.54 82 87.45 i 13.92 Correlation (r) of Total Sample (HP+LP) Characteristics with Performance Score r > 0.7383, signif. at 0.01a 0.3415, no 0.1704, no no - 0.1407, - 0.4256, signif. at 0.1a - 0.0215, 0.2154) " » * » no no no - - FINANCIAL CHARACTERISTICS Average Annual Household Income Percent of Association Heaters Retired (Households) Annual Dues Per Household Annual Incane o f the Lake Associations 27,400 t 9,297.70 23.23 t 21.64 18.27 i 26.23 2,421.82 ± 4,547.15 17,500 i 13,028.82 t-te s t signif. at 0.1a no 16.89 t 16.09 11.65 t 13.99 no 894.13 i 1,143.66 no 0.2047, - 0.0032, 0.0435, 0.0245, no no no no 1,666.4 53.13 17.55 76.09 68.91 820.2 73.17 25.00 106.5 63.5 0.1116, - 0.3467, - 0.2652, 0.2367, 0.2742, no no no no no LAKE SETTING CHARACTERISTICS Size of Lake (Acres) Ihxlmum Depth of Lake (Feet) Host Prevalent Lake Depth (Feet) or Shallower Percent of Residential Development of Suitable Shoreline Average Front Footage of Materfront Lots t 4,149.6 23.15 t 7.34 i 31.34 i 20.03 t ^Seventy percent of the lakes In this group are less than 500 acres In size. ^Ninety percent of the lakes in this group are less than 500 acres in size. t t * ± ♦ 1,513.04 no 27.49 t-te s t signif. at 0.1a 25.93 no 72.73 no 20.55 no 121 performance, b u t to g e th e r th ey could have a com plim entary e f f e c t . To screen f o r t h i s p o s s i b i l i t y , a s e r ie s o f m u l t i p l e l i n e a r re g re s s io n analyses were conducted. T h is procedure was d es crib ed above in Chapter I under A n a l y t i c a l Methods and w i l l not be re p e ate d here save to r e p o r t t h a t no c o r r e l a t i o n s s i g n i f i c a n t a t th e 0.1 le v e l were d etected . Lake Management Performance by the Lake A s s o c ia tio n s Table 38 presents a summary o f th e va rio u s s e l f - h e l p management options a v a i l a b l e to the la k e a s s o c ia tio n s ac co rd in g to th e l i t e r a t u r e , and o f th e frequ en cy w ith which they a v a i l themselves o f the manage­ ment o p p o r t u n it ie s . The o n ly management o p tio n a c t i v e l y pursued by 100 p e rc e n t o f the sample was the seeking o f te c h n ic a l a s s is ta n c e by th e la k e a s s o c ia ­ tio n s . T able 39 p resents a breakdown o f th e va rio u s sources o f a s s is ­ tance sought by th e a s s o c ia tio n s and th e in t e r v ie w e e s ' assessment o f the q u a l i t y o f s e rv ic e d e riv e d from each source. 122 T a b le 3 8 .— S um w ry o f Lake management P o rfo n M n c o by th e In te rv ie w e d Lake A s s o c ia tio n s NUMBER OF ASSOCIATIONS OF TOTAL SAMPLE ENGAGED IN EACH PERFORMANCE, n-21 FEASIBLE MANAGEMENT OPTIONS N u tr ie n t and E f f lu e n t Abatem ent S e p tic ta n k system m aintenance and use r e s t r i c t i o n s S e p tic ta nk system Im provem ents C o n s id e ra tio n o f a lt e r n a t i v e to s e p tic ta n k systems Program to p re v e n t o r reduce lawn f e r t i l i z a t i o n P rom otion o f n a tu ra l v e g e ta tio n b u f f e r s t r i p s a lo n g la k e shore E ro sio n o r s e d im e n ta tio n c o n tr o l Marsh p r o te c tio n D rainage ( a g r i c u lt u r a l a n d /o r ro a d ) d iv e rs io n s from la k e 2 (10X) 2 (10X) 4 (19X) 5 (24X) 0 ( OX) 1 ( 5X) 4 ( 19X) 3 (14X) Water Q u a lity I n v e s t ig a t io n Lake w a te r q u a li t y sa m pling program S e p tic ta n k system dye t e s t in g o r In s p e c tio n s 7 (33X) 2 (10X) Symptomatic Management F1sh management A lgae c o n tr o l A q u a tic weed c o n tr o l W in te r la k e le v e l drawdown f o r weed c o n tr o l 13 (62X) 1 ( 5X) 4 ( 19X) 0 ( OX) S o c io p o lit ic a l In vo lve m e n t In fo rm a tio n and E d u ca tio n F u n c tio n In fo rm a tio n program (s p e a k e rs ) T e c h n ic a l a s s is ta n c e so ug ht 5 5 l(7 6 X ) 39Z(100X) P e rsua sio n F u n c tio n N e w s le tte r Media u t i l i z a t i o n (new spapers. r a d io , t . v . - e d i t o r i a l s and fe a tu re s ) 13 (62X) 7 (33X) Legal F u n c tio n A c tiv e p ro m o tio n o f . and c o m p li­ ance w it h , laws and r e g u la tio n s Legal counsel a v a ila b le to th e la k e a s s o c ia tio n 14 (66X) 16 (76X) Economic F u n c tio n Awareness and u t i l i z a t i o n o f th e L A 's economic s ta tu s 1n th e community A s s o c ia tio n members I n f l u e n t i a l In lo c a l com m unity and governm ent 12 (57X) 16 (76X) P o l i t i c a l F u n c tio n G re a te r th a n SOX r e s id e n t v o te rs In th e la k e a s s o c ia tio n R e g ula r a s s o c ia tio n r e p re s e n ta tio n a t to w n sh ip o r c o u n ty m eetings L e t t e r o r te le p h o n e campaigns on la k e Issu e s ( In c lu d in g p e t i t i o n s ) Com m unication w ith s t a t e le g i s la t o r s on la k e Issu es 10 (48X) 13 (62X) 5 (24X) 1 ( 5X) 123 T a b le 3 8 .— C ontinued FEASIBLE MANAGEMENT OPTIONS BREAKDOWN OF PERFORMANCE BY ASSOCIATIONS IN THE "HIGHER PERFORMANCE" CATEGORY, n-11 Some No t L A 's Not N ot a By O th e r A tte m p t A tte m p t A c t iv e ly P o s s ib le Problem LA Sponsor By LA By LA In v o lv e d N u trie n t and E f flu e n t Abatement S e p tic tank system m aintenance and use r e s t r ic t io n s S e p tic tank system Improvements C o n s id e ra tio n o f a lt e r n a t iv e to s e p tic ta nk systems Program to p re v e n t o r reduce lawn f e r t i l i z a t i o n Prom otion o f n a tu ra l v e g e ta tio n b u ff e r s t r ip s a lo ng la k e shore E rosion o r se d im e n ta tio n c o n tr o l Marsh p ro te c tio n Drainage ( a g r ic u lt u r a l a n d /o r roa d) d iv e rs io n s from lake 2 1 2 2 7 8 18 9 3 3 5 27 5 1 5 45 3 2 8 1 2 0 0 27 1 4 27 8 6 3 3 3 Water Q u a lity In v e s tig a tio n Lake w a te r q u a lit y sam pling program S e p tic tank system dye te s tin g o r In s p e c tio n s Symptomatic Management F1sh management Algae c o n tr o l A q ua tic weed c o n tro l W in te r la k e le v e l drawdown f o r weed c o n tro l S o c io p o litic a l Involvem ent In fo rm a tio n and E ducation F u n ctio n In fo rm a tio n program (spe ake rs) Tech nica l a s s is ta n c e sought 7 5 5 2 2 2 40 2 1 4 4 18 1 3 2 3 72 9 27 2 3 0 1 91 100 1 82 6 5 55 10 1 91 8 1 3 6 3?1 63 Persuasion F un ction N e w s le tte r Media u t i l i z a t i o n (newspapers. r a d io , t . v . - e d i t o r i a ls and fe a tu r e s ) Legal F un ction A c tiv e prom otion o f , and c o m p li­ ance w it h , laws and r e g u la tio n s Legal counsel a v a ila b le to the la k e a s s o c ia tio n Economic F un ction Awareness and u t i l i z a t i o n o f the LA' s economic s ta tu s In th e community A s s o c ia tio n members I n f lu e n t ia l In lo c a l comaajnlty and government P o l it ic a l F u n c tio n G re a te r than' 30* r e s id e n t v o te rs in the la k e a s s o c ia tio n R egular a s s o c ia tio n re p re s e n ta tio n a t to w nship o r co u n ty m eetings L e tt e r o r te lep ho ne campaigns on la k e Issues ( In c lu d in g p e t it io n s ) Communication w ith s ta te le g is la t o r s on la k e Issues 1 9 11 100 9 2 82 10 1 91 7 4 64 3 82 2 9 1 1 6 27 1 2 8 0 124 Table 38.-*•Continued FEASIBLE MANAGEMENT OPTIONS BREAKDOWN OF PERFORMANCE BT ASSOCIATIONS IN THE "LOWER PERFORMANCE" CATEGORY, n*10 No S LA's Some Not a By Other Attempt Atteaqit A c tiv e ly Not Bv LA Involved Possible Problem LA Sponsor By LA N u trie n t and E fflu e n t Abatement Septic tank system maintenance and use re s tric tio n s Septic tank system Improvements Consideration o f a lte r n a tiv e to septic tank systems Program to prevent or reduce lawn f e r t il is a t i o n Promotion o f natural vegetation b u ffe r s trip s along lake shore Erosion or sedimentation control Harsh protection Drainage (a g ric u ltu ra l and/or road) diversions from lake 1 1 6 2 9 7 0 10 2 4 10 2 8 0 1 8 1 4 0 10 10 1 4 0 3 5 20 2 8 0 1 4 3 & 50 0 10 4 0 1B] 26 4 60 100 4 6 40 1 1 1 2 2 3 S Water Qua 11 tv In v e s tig a tio n Lake water q u a lity sampling program Septic tank system dye te s tin g o r Inspections Symptomatic Management Fish management Algae control Aquatic weed control Winter lake le v e l drawdown fo r weed control 1 2 1 2 5 7 3 1 1 6 S o c io p o litic a l Involvement Information and Ld.cation Function Inform ation p re gran (speakers) Technical assistance sought Persuasion Function Newsletter Media u t iliz a t io n (newspapers. ra d io , t . v . - e d ito r ia ls and fe a tu re s ) Legal Function A ctive promotion o f , and compli­ ance w ith , laws and regulations Legal counsel a v a ila b le to the lake association Economic Function Awareness and u t il iz a t io n o f the LA's economic status In the community Association maafcers In flu e n tia l In local coaaaunlty and goveriaaent P o lit ic a l Function G reater than 30X resident voters In the lake association Regular association representation a t township o r county meetings L e tte r or telephone campaigns on lake Issues (In c lu d in g p e titio n s ) Comaunication w ith s ta te le g is la to rs on lake issues (unknown) 2 (unknown) 1 1 2 6 10 4 2 4 40 3 50 5 3 3 3 X 6 2 1 60 7 30 3 (unknown) 2 (unknown) 1 (unknown) 2 4 2 2 40 2 1 7 20 7 10 1 dumber o f speakers in v ite d to lake association meetings w ith in the preceding 3 years 2Huskier of times technical assistance was sought by lake associations w ith in the preceding 5 years Table 39.—Sources o f Technical Assistance U tiliz e d by the Sampled Lake Associations Total Sample o f Associations, n = 21 AGENCY OR OTHER SOURCE OF TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE1 FREQUENCY OF CONTACT QUALITY OF ASSISTANCE PROVIDED Unknown/ Opinion Often Occasionally Once None Good Fair Dissatisfied Pending USDA Soil Conservation Service 1 1 3 16 4 0 0 1 MSU Cooperative Extension Service 2 2 1 16 5 0 0 0 College or University Personnel 2 3 4 12 9 0 0 0 Drain Commissioner 1 4 1 15 3 1 1 1 Michigan Department of Natural Resources 7 10 0 4 4 5 6 3 County Public Health Department 6 7 0 8 5 1 4 3 Association Menbers 6 5 1 9 11 0 0 2 Commercial Firms 2 1 6 12 6 1 2 1 County Planning and Zoning Board 1 1 Local High School 1 1 Police, State or Local 1 1 County Tax Assessor 1 County Road Commission 2 Township Government 1 Other Lake Associations Private Attorney 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 2 1 Table 39.--Continued Higher Performance Category of Sampled Associations, n = 11 AGENCY OR OTHER SOURCE OF TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE1 QUALITY OF ASSISTANCE PROVIDED FREQUENCY OF CONTACT Opinion Unknown/ Ofteni Occasionally Once None Good Fair Dissatisfied Pending USDA Soil Conservation Service 1 1 MSU Cooperative Extension Service 2 2 College or University Personnel 2 3 Drain Coimrissioner 1 3 Michigan Department of Natural Resources 6 5 County Public Health Department 3 5 Association Menfcers 4 2 Conmercial Firms 1 1 County Planning and Zoning Board 2 1 Local High School 1 1 Police, State or Local 1 3 7 4 3 3 8 1 6 2 1 1 1 2 3 4 2 3 2 1 4 1 1 3 7 1 4 5 5 1 1 County Road Commission 2 Township Government 1 Private Attorney 7 1 1 County Tax Assessor Other Lake Associations 2 2 1 1 1 2 1 Table 39.—Continued Lower Performance Category of Sampled Associations, n = 10 AGENCY OR OTHER SOURCE OF TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE1 QUALITY OF ASSISTANCE PROVIDED FREQUENCY OF CONTACT Opinion Unknown/ Often Occasionally Once None Good Fair Dissatisfied Pending USDA Soil Conservation Service 1 9 1 MSU Cooperative Extension Service 1 9 1 College or University Personnel 1 9 1 1 9 1 Drain Commissioner Michigan Department of Natural Resources 1 5 4 2 County Public Health Department 3 2 5 3 1 Association Menbers 2 3 5 4 1 Commercial Firms 1 7 1 2 2 1 1 1 County Planning and Zoning Board Local High School Police, State or Local 1 County Tax Assessor County Road Commission Township Government Other Lake Associations Private Attorney 1 1 1 1 ^Sources of assistance below the dashed line are those additions to the questionnaire format volun teered by interviewees when asked i f they had sought other help not specifically mentioned. CHAPTER V DISCUSSIONS AND CONCLUSIONS Composite Lake A s s o c ia tio n C h a r a c t e r is t ic s The average In la n d la k e community s i z e appears to be about 370 households, p o s s ib ly a co n ve n ien t s i z e f o r s e l f - h e l p management Im p le ­ m entation. The tendency toward low er r e l a t i v e perform ance, w i t h i n the sample, accompanied a s s o c ia tio n s in communities o f le s s than 100 o r more than 1 ,0 0 0 households. I t may be t h a t s m a lle r la k e communities lack municipal and economic i n f l u e n c e , w h ile l a r g e r ones s u f f e r from high communication costs (Schmid, 1 9 7 6 ;. About 40 p erc en t o f th e la k e coirmunlty o r 135 households belong to the la k e a s s o c ia t io n . F o r t y - f i v e p erc en t o f the member households are " a c t iv e " members, in t h a t they r e g u l a r l y a tte n d meetings and p a r t i c i p a t e in a s s o c ia tio n p r o je c t s . About 55 p erc en t o f a s s o c ia tio n members are seasonal r e s i d e n t s , and 20 p erc en t a re households 1n which the p r in c ip a l wage e a rn e r is r e t i r e d . The average annual income f o r a s s o c ia tio n member households is h ig h e r than e i t h e r th e s t a t e median Income le v e l o r t h a t o f non-member neigh b ors. H ig h e r performance c a t e ­ gory a s s o c ia tio n menber households averaged $ 2 7 ,4 0 0 p er y e a r ; low er performance a s s o c ia tio n households averaged $ 1 7 ,5 0 0 p er y e a r . The average la k e a s s o c ia tio n was formed 1n t h a t l a t e 19 50 's o r e a r ly 1 9 6 0 's , although some a s s o c ia tio n s have e x is te d s in c e a t l e a s t 1920. The tendency f o r th e a s s o c ia tio n s to be f a i r l y young 1s p ro b ab ly 128 129 due In p a r t to th e r e l a t i v e l y high d is p o s a b le income l e v e l s o f t h a t p e rio d . This made la k e p ro p e rty purchases a t t r a c t i v e to many m iddle Income f a m i l i e s . Most o f these la k e a s s o c ia tio n s a re e i t h e r not i n ­ corporated o r a re n o n - p r o f i t c o rp o ra tio n s o rg an ize d under th e M ichigan General C o rp o ratio n A c ts . In e i t h e r in s ta n c e , they a r e e s s e n t i a l l y v o lu n ta ry o rg a n iz a tio n s w ith l i t t l e the land use a c t i v i t i e s a c tu a l o r im p lie d a u t h o r i t y over (such as waste dispo sal o r o t h e r a c tio n s which could a f f e c t the la k e ) o f t h e i r members. In p a r t i c u l a r , the Summer Resort A c t o f 1929, which pro vides q u a s i-m u n ic ip a l a u t h o r i t y to the lake a s s o c ia t io n , appears to have been avo id ed . fea rs t h a t i t w i l l T h is may be due to e v e n t u a l ly be ru le d u n c o n s titu tio n a l In th e M ichigan Supreme C o u rt. Most a s s o c ia tio n s hold general membership meetings once o r tw ic e a y e a r , b u t the o f f i c e r s meet monthly o r b im o n th ly . the general meetings runs about 60 peo ple. Attendance a t The a s s o c ia t io n is u s u a lly the o n ly one on th e la k e (75 p erc en t o f sampled a s s o c ia t io n s ) . Of the 21 a s s o c ia tio n s in t e r v ie w e d , 12 a r e formal members o f MLSA. (Membership i s a v a i l a b l e both to in d iv id u a l as a u n i t . ) r i p a r i a n s o r to LAs Nine o f the 11 HP a s s o c ia tio n s (82 p e rc e n t) belong to MLSA, w h ile o n ly 3 o f th e 10 LP a s s o c ia tio n s (30 p e rc e n t) b elong. A l l o f the a s s o c ia tio n s a r e s tr o n g ly 1 s s u e -o r1 e n te d . tio n s assume a d i s t i n c t l y minor r o l e . S o cial fu nc­ T h e ir emphasis on Issues appar­ e n t ly does not p r e ju d ic e the r e l a t i o n s h i p between the a s s o c ia tio n s and lo c al re s id e n ts o r government, because in a l l la tio n s h ip s were re p o r te d . instan ces fa v o r a b le r e ­ However, t h e r e was a s l i g h t tendency f o r the h ig h e r perform ing a s s o c ia tio n s to In d i c a t e a g r e a t e r r a p p o r t. This may In d i c a t e more Involvem ent and g r e a t e r n e g o t ia t in g fin e s s e on t h e i r p art. 130 Annual dues a r e u s u a l l y charged on a household b a s is . The r a t e s are low and average $ 1 5 .0 0 p e r y e a r , w it h th e m a j o r i t y c h a rg in g o n ly $ 5 .0 0 o r $ 1 0 .0 0 p er household p er y e a r . C o l l e c t i o n o f dues 1s n o t a problem, g iven th e g e n e r a l l y low r a t e s and high income l e v e l o f members. When th e a s s o c ia t io n s need e x t r a money f o r p a r t i c u l a r p r o j e c t s , they comnonly re q u e s t s p e c ia l c o n t r i b u t io n s from t h e i r membership. A l l a s s o c ia tio n s which have done t h i s , h ig h ly s u c c e s s fu l. re p o rte d t h a t t h e i r ap p ea ls were A few a s s o c ia tio n s m a in ta in s p e c ia l co n tin g e n cy funds f o r such p r o j e c t s , p a r t i c u l a r l y law s u i t s . G iven th e low re p o rte d dues r a t e s , most a s s o c ia t io n s have s u r ­ p r i s i n g l y l a r g e b u d g e ts. The average i s about $ 1 , 6 0 0 , b u t th e range o f annual a s s o c ia t io n incomes extends from $ 2 8 .0 0 to $ 1 6 , 0 0 0 .0 0 . N i n e t y - f i v e p e rc e n t o f th e sampled la k e a s s o c ia t io n s a r e w i t h i n one c o u n ty , and 57 p e rc e n t a r e w i t h i n one to w n sh ip. Most o f th e sampled lakes a r e le s s th an 500 a c re s in s i z e , and th e average maximum la k e depth (d e e p e s t p o in t in th e la k e ) f o r th e sample i s 63 f e e t . average f o r th e lo w er performance c a te g o ry i s 73 f e e t . performance group averaged 53 f e e t a t th e d ee p e st p o i n t . The The h ig h e r W h ile these depths a r e s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t f o r the two c a t e g o r i e s , th e more im p o rtan t c h a r a c t e r i s t i c o f most fr e q u e n t d ep th o f w a te r in th e la k e (re g a rd in g e x t e n t o f l i t t o r a l zone) was e s s e n t i a l l y th e same. The i n ­ d ic a t i o n is t h a t th e sampled la k e s a r e r e l a t i v e l y s h a llo w and may have r a t h e r e x t e n s iv e l i t t o r a l zones. Bottom ty p e was most o f t e n marl a n d /o r s o f t o rg a n ic d e p o s it s . The la k e s v a r i e d 1n th e extend o f r e s i d e n t i a l d evelopm ent, from o n ly about a f o u r t h o f th e a v a i l a b l e r i p a r i a n l o t s b u i l t upon, to com­ p le t e s h o r e lin e development plus two o r more a d d i t i o n a l t i e r s o f "back 131 lo ts " b u i l t upon (250 p e rc e n t d e v e lo p e d ). The average e x t e n t o f development 1s about 90 p erc en t o f th e w a te r f r o n t l o t s s u i t a b l e and a v a i l a b l e f o r housing. There 1s very l i t t l e back l o t development. I t was unusual to encounter a la k e convnunlty In th e study where back l o t development approached o r exceeded h a l f th e number o f la k e f r o n t houses. The average la k e f r o n t l o t 1s 65 f e e t w id e. A s s o c ia tio n C h a r a c t e r ! s t i c s Compared to Performance Score The o n ly ap p aren t c o r r e l a t i o n between o v e r a l l performance and LA c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s 1s w ith re s p e c t to community s i z e , the e x te n t o f seasonal re s id e n ts who a r e a c t i v e in th e a s s o c ia t io n , and a s s o c ia tio n membership 1n the MLSA. I t may be t h a t an optimum comnunity s i z e e x i s t s which 1s appro* p r l a t e to s e l f - h e l p la k e management. Too small a community may n o t have a g r e a t enough degrading Impact on la k e q u a l i t y to arouse a t t e n t i o n and/or may la c k th e resources s u f f i c i e n t to accomplish management. The l a r g e r conmunitles may have the g r e a t e r need f o r management, but t h e i r s i z e and d i v e r s i t y o f concerns and p r i o r i t i e s can impede o rg a n iz a ­ t io n a l e f f o r t s . The n e g a tiv e c o r r e l a t i o n o f se a s o n a l, a c t i v e r e s id e n ts w ith p e r­ formance score in d ic a te s th e e f f e c t th e absence o f key members can have upon an a s s o c ia t io n . These re s id e n ts comprise about h a l f the a c t iv e membership and may be expected to be p res en t in th e community only 3 to 6 months o f th e y e a r . Most seasonal r e s id e n ts a r r i v e and depart th e la k e w it h i n weeks o f each o th e r and a re u s u a lly a t th e la k e only 1n simmer. (E x te n d e d *la k e use due to the growing p o p u l a r i t y o f w in te r snowmobiling and p ro g re s s iv e r e t ir e m e n t " to the la k e " o f seasonal 132 re s id e n ts may change t h i s p a t t e r n . ) The r e s u l t a n t im pact o f t h i s r e s i ­ d e n tia l m ig r a to r y p a t t e r n i s o b v io u s ly an I n t e r r u p t i o n o f program c o n tin u ity . T h e i r absence a ls o d im in is h e s the e f f e c t o f LA in f lu e n c e on and p a r t i c i p a t i o n 1n lo c a l government o r agency programs. The s tro n g p o s i t i v e c o r r e l a t i o n between management perform ance and MLSA membership is im p re ss iv e b u t does n o t n e c e s s a r i ly im p ly an in flu e n c e by MLSA on a s s o c ia t io n p erform ance. W hile t h i s may be th e case, i t may a ls o be t h a t th e more dynamic LAs, p a r t i c u l a r l y those w ith w a te r q u a l i t y co ncerns, a r e s im p ly more i n c l i n e d to g a t h e r under the r u b r i c o f th e MLSA. Summary o f Lake A s s o c ia tio n Water Q u a l i t y Management Performance N u t r i e n t and E f f l u e n t Abatement Only 5 o f th e 21 sampled LAs, a l l any a tte m p t a t lawn f e r t i l i z a t i o n in th e HP c a t e g o r y , have made ab atem ent, even though t h i s most e a s i l y implemented o f the management o p t io n s . is the Most o f th e a s s o c ia ­ tio n s a re aware o f th e concept o f lawn f e r t i l i z e r impact through e i t h e r Department o f N a tu r a l Resources l i t e r a t u r e o r MLSA sponsored m a t e r i a l . But they tend to d ism iss th e e f f e c t o f such a p p l i c a t i o n s as I n c i d e n t a l . This i s i n d ic a t e d by the o b s e r v a tio n in T ab le 3 o f o n ly one LA I d e n t i f y ­ ing lawn f e r t i l i z a t i o n as a m a tt e r o f co n ce rn , and t h i s a s s o c ia t io n had as y e t taken no a c t i o n I t s e l f . t h e i r own w a t e r f r o n t lawns. Twice LA p r e s id e n ts a d m itte d f e r t i l i z i n g A p p a re n tly th e "suburban syndrome" o f manicured lawns 1s s tr o n g e r than e x p ec te d . T h is i n c l i n a t i o n , t o g e th e r w ith a p r e v a i l i n g r e lu c ta n c e on th e p a r t o f most LAs to " I n t e r f e r e " t h e i r members p r o p e r ty uses, p ro b a b ly accounts f o r th e n e g lig e n c e 1n t h is a r e a . In 133 Marsh p r o t e c t i o n and c o n s id e r a tio n o f a l t e r n a t i v e s to s e p tic ta n k systems has been atte m p te d 1n each case by 4 LAs, m o stly 1n th e HP ca teg o ry. The a c t i v i t y is m a n ife s te d in a s s o c ia t io n co m p lain ts to Public H e a lt h , Z oning, and Department o f N a t u r a l Resources a u t h o r i t i e s when th ey hear o f s a le s o r proposed f i l l marsh s i t e s . T h is a c t i v i t y and c o n s t r u c tio n plans on 1s e x p e d itio u s s in c e th e LA can assume an e n v iro n m e n ta lly re s p o n s ib le p o s i t i o n , w h ile a ls o f u r t h e r i n g i t s i n t e r e s t s by r e s t r i c t i n g a d d i t i o n a l d ilig e n c e o f LAs in t h i s la k e developm ent. s e lf- The l i m i t e d re s p e c t may r e f l e c t th e success o f th e In la n d Lakes and Streams A c t o f 1973 (A c t 346, 1 9 7 2 ) , which r e q u ir e s a p e rm it fo r any dredging o r f i l l i n g a c tiv itie s . However, enough r e p o r t s o f evasion o f t h i s law were re p o rte d by in te r v ie w e e s to suggest t h a t comnunlty m o n ito rin g by more LAs 1s I n d i c a t e d . The e x i s t i n g waste d is p o s a l method f o r a l l studied i s o n - s i t e s e p tic tan k systems w ith t i l e o f th e communities fie ld s . households, th e d i s t r i b u t i o n system was a d ry w e l l . In a few Reported c o n s id e r­ a tio n o f a l t e r n a t i v e s to t h i s system by th e a s s o c ia t io n s , e i t h e r a c t i v e l y o r i n c i d e n t a l l y ("some a tte m p t by L A ," T a b le 3 8 ) , i s prob­ a b ly somewhat i n f l a t e d . It 1s easy f o r a respondent to r e p o r t t h a t his a s s o c ia t io n has "co n s id e re d " a l t e r n a t i v e s view q u e s tio n . in response to the i n t e r ­ S ince th e predom inant a l t e r n a t i v e under c o n s id e r a tio n by the sampled LAs 1s a m u n ic ip a l sewer system, and s in c e no c o n s tru c ­ tio n had y e t begun, th e absence o f any e v id e n c e o f performance i s j u s t i ­ fia b le . The p o s i t i v e l y responding a s s o c ia tio n r e p r e s e n t a t iv e s a l l im nplled a c t i v e Involvem ent 1n lo c a l p la n n in g and re q u e s tin g o f fe d e ra l fu n d s. But i t I s suspected t h a t the p r o j e c t o f t e n o r i g i n a t e d w ith re g io n a l o r lo c a l p la n n in g a g e n c ie s , and t h a t th e LAs a r e 1n many cases sim ply responding (b oth pro and con) to t h i s In itia tiv e . Only one respondent re p o rte d c o n s id e rin g th e s e l f - c o n t a i n e d o p tio n s f o r waste d is p o s a l. in d ic a te d u n t i l O thers f e l t such a l t e r n a t i v e c o n s id e r a t io n s were c o n tra th e Issue o f a m u n ic ip a l sewer was r e s o lv e d . A ll LAs, where a sewer system was under c o n s i d e r a t io n , were a p p re h e n s iv e about the p ro p e rty assessments r e q u ir e d to pay f o r i t . most accep t I t as worth th e c o s t . B u t, s u r p r i s i n g l y , O f g r e a t e r concern seems to be th e fe a r o f a b u i l d i n g boom f o l l o w i n g th e i n s t a l l a t i o n o f th e sewer. In th is r e s p e c t , one in v o lv e d a s s o c ia t io n has s u c c e s s f u lly i n i t i a t e d lo c a l township land use p la n n in g and o rd in an ce s to c o n t r o l th e a n t i c i p a t e d development. D iv e rs io n o f road d r a in s from th e la k e fo llo w e d w aste d is p o s a l a l t e r n a t i v e s in fre q u en c y o f perform ance. T hree HPs were a c t i v e l y involved in t h i s a r e a , b u t two o f them were p r i m a r i l y m o tiv a te d by the c o n d itio n o f eroded and flo o d e d access roads caused by d e f i c i e n t d ra in s , r a t h e r than by a paramount concern f o r la k e s e d im e n ta tio n . No a g r i c u l t u r a l d r a in s were known to e n t e r th e la k e s i n v e s t i g a t e d . Only two LAs had an a c t i v e program o f any s o r t t o in fo rm r e s i ­ dents and r e s t r i c t t h e i r use o f s e p t i c tan k systems. In both in s t a n c e s , the process c o n s is te d o n ly o f th e o cc a s io n a l c i r c u l a t i n g o f i n f o r m a t i v e l i t e r a t u r e and "word o f mouth" a t annual m e e tin g s . In te r v ie w e e s o f t e n appeared i l l im pact o f s e p t ic inform ed w it h re s p e c t to th e p o t e n t i a l tank systems on la k e w a te r q u a l i t y . S i m i l a r l y , o n ly two LAs ( n o t c o i n c i d e n t w it h th e two LAs r e f e r r e d to in rn e d ia te ly above) had made any a tte m p t to upgrade th e e f f i c i e n c y o f o n -s 1 te d is p o s a l systems. In both cases th e procedure sim ply in v o lv e d watching f o r and r e p o r t i n g suspected system m a lfu n c tio n s to th e P u b lic 135 Health Department. The b u lk o f th e LAs I n d i c a t e d , however, t h a t th ey f e l t the fu n c tio n o f an I n d i v i d u a l ' s s e p tic tank system was a p r i v a t e property m a tte r and not t h e i r l e g i t i m a t e concern. Water Q u a lit y I n v e s t ig a t io n T h ir te e n o f the 21 LAs re p o rte d t h a t some form o f la k e w ater q u a lity t e s t i n g , a t one tim e o r an o th e r and to v a ry in g e x t e n t , had been conducted on t h e i r la k e s . supported th e i n v e s t i g a t i o n . But o n ly 7 o f these LAs i n i t i a t e d and The o th e r 6 b e n e f it e d from independent studies conducted by c o lle g e s , the Department o f N a tu ra l Resources, the lo c al p u b lic h e a lth d epartm ent, o r by lo c a l r e s id e n ts on t h e i r own i n i t i a t i v e . The n a tu re o f th e va rio us sampling approaches in c lu d e s : unsuper­ vised grab samples taken by householders and subm itted to va rio u s la b o r a to rie s f o r t e s t i n g ; p a r t i c i p a t i o n in th e Department o f N a tu ra l Resources s e l f - h e l p t e s t in g program; c o n tra c te d la k e t e s t i n g by con­ s u lta n t f ir m s ; and la k e sampling by u n i v e r s i t y o r c o lle g e personnel as part o f ongoing tea ch in g o r research a c t i v i t i e s . The l a t t e r approach 1s the o n ly one, so f a r , g e n e ra tin g an e x te n s iv e , m u lti-s e a s o n a l body of in fo rm a tio n about any o f the la k e s . Four o f the 21 LAs in te rv ie w e d have access to data which inclu d es sampling o f m u l t i p l e areas o f t h e i r lake over more than two occasions. Two o f these a s s o c ia tio n s c o n tra c te d the research them selves; th e o th e r two enjoyed th e w i n d f a l l o f being on lakes ta r g e te d f o r u n i v e r s i t y research p r o j e c t s . Dye t e s t in g o f household s e p tic tank systems was attem pted by two LAs. In each case th e a s s o c ia tio n o b ta in ed th e dye from the h e a lth 136 department and made i t a v a i l a b l e to la k e re s id e n ts on a v o lu n ta r y basis. No atte m p t was made t o c o o rd in a te e i t h e r program f o r optimum p a r t ic ip a t io n o r e f f l u e n t d e t e c t i o n . In both in s tan ce s few re s id e n ts elected to t e s t t h e i r system, and the sponsoring LA considered the attempt to be u n s u c c e s s fu l. Symptomatic Lake Management By f a r the g r e a t e s t LA p a r t i c i p a t i o n in any o f th e physical management o p tio n s discussed (as opposed to s o c i o p o l i t i c a l ment) 1s f i s h management. in v o lv e ­ In most in s tan ce s t h i s i s m anifested in stocking o f th e la k e w ith game f i s h o r sampling o f the f i s h popula­ tion to d eterm in e stocking needs. The LA r o l e is most o fte n t h a t o f the p e t i t i o n e r f o r Department o f N a tu ra l Resources a s s is ta n c e . However, in two instan ces th e a s s o c ia tio n has assumed th e predominant r o l e in stocking and managing th e l a k e 's f i s h e r y re s o u rc e . In one case the as so c ia tio n p re s id e n t is a department employee, and in the o t h e r , a member 1s a stu d en t o f f i s h e r y b io lo g y . The personal c o n t r ib u t io n of each o f these members no doubt enhances th e a s s o c ia t io n 's p e r f o r ­ mance. I t should be noted t h a t 13 la k e a s s o c ia tio n s re p o rte d d i r e c t Involvement in f i s h management a t one tim e o r a n o th e r, b u t o n ly 6 regarded t h i s fu n c tio n as an "accomplishment" in th e I n i t i a l open question p o r tio n o f the i n t e r v i e w . This suggests t h a t th e respondents may view t h i s as a " s e rv ic e " to t h e i r fisherm en members ( f i s h i n g is the most f r e q u e n t ly re p o rte d la k e u s e ), r a t h e r than as a p rim ary ob­ j e c t i v e o f the a s s o c ia t io n . 137 Weed and a lg a e c o n t r o l a r e a c t i v e l y pursued by few e r a s s o c ia t io n s than ex p ec te d . However, s e v e ra l respondents In d i c a t e d t h a t th e y e x p e c t to have to deal w it h v e g e t a tio n problems 1n th e near f u t u r e as th e weed beds have expanded n o t i c e a b l y In r e c e n t y e a r s . The same o b s e rv a ­ tion was re p o rte d w ith re s p e c t to a lg a e blooms on th e la k e s . No a s so c ia tio n re p o rte d prolonged d u r a t i o n , b u t th e r e g u l a r i t y o f n o t i c e ­ able a lg a e growth f o r a few weeks each summer in r e c e n t y e a rs was a c o n s is te n t comment. L im ite d Department o f N a tu ra l Resources d a ta f o r n in e l a k e s , represented by 5 o f th e LAs, I n d i c a t e s t h a t a l l a r e m esotrophic ( M i k u l a , e t a l , 1976, Annual R epo rt o f th e In la n d Lake S e l f - H e l p Program; un­ published data p ro vided by th e In la n d Lake Management U n i t , M ichigan Department o f N a tu r a l R e so u rce s). M esotrophy, in t h i s in s t a n c e , i s defined as la k e s from which w a te r samples i n d i c a t e a C h lo r o p h y ll- a c o n c e n tra tio n o f 4 to 10 ug/1 and Secchl d is c depth re a d in g o f 6 . 5 to 15 f e e t . The o b s e r v a tio n s o f th e respondents t o g e t h e r w ith q u a li t y d a ta suggest t h a t th e la k e s sampled may be j u s t a le v e l o f enrichm en t s u f f i c i e n t to g e n e ra te p h y s ic a l enough to s t im u la t e r i p a r i a n c o n ce rn . a v a i l a b l e w a te r now approaching symptoms g ra p h ic Where weed c o n t r o ls have been attem pted, th e method used 1s e v e n ly d iv id e d between chemical ment tre a t­ (2 LAs) and mechanical c u t t i n g ( 2 LA s). Lake l e v e l w i n t e r drawdown as a weed c o n t r o l te c h n iq u e has n o t been attem p ted by any o f th e LAs i n t e r v ie w e d . In a l l in s ta n c e s the respondents were unaware o f t h i s r e c e n t l y developed approach to weed c o n t r o l. Most o f th e LAs a ls o lac ke d th e a p p r o p r ia t e la k e l e v e l t r o l s t r u c t u r e s to accom plish such management. con­ 138 S o c io p o lit ic a l Involvem ent C l e a r l y th e a re a o f g r e a t e s t a c t i v i t y by th e a s s o c ia t io n s , both HP and LP, i s 1n th e a re a o f s o c i o p o l i t i c a l a s so c ia tio n i n t e r e s t s i n f l u e n c e on b e h a l f o f (T a b le 3 8 ) . This s o c i o p o l i t i c a l in v o lv em e n t i s c o n c e n tra te d in th e in fo r m a tio n and e d u c a tio n , economic, and le g a l f u n c t io n s . These a re a s o f emphasis by both c a te g o r ie s o f a s s o c ia t io n s , a l b e i t to d i f f e r e n t d e g re e s , i n ­ d ic a te a d e s ir e by th e LAs to o b t a in more in fo r m a t io n p e r t i n e n t to t h e i r re so u rce and r e l a t e d issues and an a tte m p t to u t i l i z e those services and I n s t i t u t i o n s a v a i l a b l e to them. A l l o f the a s s o c ia t io n s have sought t e c h n ic a l a s s is ta n c e in th e areas o f re s o u rc e management a n d /o r law enforcem ent a p p r o p r ia t e to the la k e en v iro n m e n t. Most o f th e a s s o c ia t io n s r e g u l a r l y i n v i t e speakers to t h e i r meetings to address issues o f concern to th e mem­ bers. However, th e LAs have n o t f u l l y s e rv ic e s . Of 8 lo g ic a l u tiliz e d some o f th e a v a i l a b l e re so u rce agencies l o c a l l y a v a i l a b l e to the r ip a r ia n p u b l i c , o n ly f e l l o w members, th e Departm ent o f N a tu r a l Resources, and P u b lic H e a lth Department have been c a l l e d upon by as many as h a l f the sampled a s s o c ia t io n s . P a r t i c u l a r l y u n d e r u t i l i z e d a r e th e s e rv ic e s o f the S o il C o n s e rv a tio n S e r v ic e and th e M ich ig an S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y Cooperative E x te n sio n S e r v ic e . resource personnel s k i l l e d tio n s . Both agencies have lo c a l o f f i c e s and In a rea s r e l a t e d to problems o f la k e a s s o c ia ­ B u t, when asked why th ey had n o t c o n ta c te d e i t h e r , most a s s o c ia ­ tio n r e p r e s e n t a t iv e s expressed e i t h e r Ig n o ran ce o f th e e x is t e n c e o f the agencies o r th e presumption t h a t th e y d id not s e rv e th e needs o f 139 lake comm unities. There I s a s tro n g im pression among respondents who knew o f e i t h e r agency, t h a t t h e i r c l i e n t e l e a r e s t r i c t l y menbers o f th e a g r i c u l t u r a l l i m i t e d to community. Low re co u rse t o county d r a i n com m issioners, on th e o t h e r hand, would appear to be based on p o l i t i c a l e x p e rie n c e . was not u n i v e r s a l , many LAs were c r i t i c a l W h ile th e o p in io n o f th e p r i o r i t i e s and accom­ plishments o f th e county d r a i n c o m n is s io n e r's o f f i c e ( o r e q u iv a l e n t in the road coim ilssion) and in d ic a t e d a d i s i n c l i n a t i o n to pursue t h i s option f o r r e s o l u t i o n o f d ra in a g e problems. The two h ig h l y in v o lv e d re so u rce a g e n c ie s , th e Departm ent o f Natural Resources and th e lo c a l P u b lic H e a lth D epartm en t, re c e iv e d mixed assessments by th e a s s o c ia t io n s . In both cases comments extended from high p r a is e to p o in te d c r i t i c i s m . C ritic a l exonerate lo c a l p e r s o n a l i t i e s and in s te a d l a i d p o lic y as th e y p e rc e iv e d i t . LAs were q u ick to t h e i r blame on agency A conrnon r e f r a i n was in essen ce, " I d o n 't blame s o -a n d -s o , h e 's j u s t t r y i n g to do h is j o b , b u t . . . " The expressed p o l i c y p e rc e p tio n s were g e n e r a l ly t h a t th e D e p a r t­ ment o f N a tu ra l Resources tak es an a l o o f approach to l o c a l management e n t i r e l y independent o f community concerns. reso u rce In s te a d o f p ro vidin g a s e r v ic e to th e lo c a l community in th e management o f n a t u r a l resources, the re g io n a l o f f i c e is seen by many in te r v ie w e e s as an en fo rc e r o f remote and in c o n s id e r a t e s t a t e "mandates" i n a p p r o p r ia t e to t h e i r i n t e r e s t s o r needs. In th e case o f p u b lic h e a lt h departm ent c r i t i c i s m , in t e r v ie w e e perceptions a r e s l i g h t l y re v e rs e d . W h ile th ey would l i k e th e lo c a l n atu ral resources a g e n t to be more independent o f " s t a t e " p re s s u re s , 140 they want th e lo c a l s a n i t a r i a n to be more Independent o f " l o c a l " ones. Most c r i t i c a l LAs f e e l th e h e a lt h d epartm ent does not a d e q u a te ly en­ force the s a n i t a t i o n codes re g a rd in g o n - s i t e waste d is p o s a l . They blame t h i s la c k o f enforcem ent on l i m i t e d manpower and long s ta n d in g local In f lu e n c e by land development and c o n s t r u c tio n I n t e r e s t s . C lo s e ly r e l a t e d to t h e i r p u r s u it o f a d d i t i o n a l management a s s is t a n c e , in f o r m a t io n and is the a tte m p t by LAs to I n f l u e n c e lo c a l tu tio n s on t h e i r b e h a l f . in s ti­ Most o f the a s s o c ia tio n s a r e v e ry c o g n iz a n t of the power s t r u c t u r e in t h e i r community (as In d ic a t e d by t h e i r comments re g a rd in g agency perform ance im m e d ia te ly above) and o f t h e i r place in t h a t s t r u c t u r e . Where th e y have economic s i g n i f i c a n c e v ia property taxes paid o r lo c a l purchasing power, th ey do not h e s i t a t e to Impress th e p o i n t on lo c a l government in t h e i r p u r s u it o f s e r v ic e s . They o f te n c o n t r i b u t e space, l a b o r , o r funds to c i v i c causes and r e ­ cognize th e s i g n i f i c a n c e o f such a c t i v i t i e s t h e i r i n t e r e s t s in th e lo c a l cornnunity. to th e advancement o f Most LAs re p o rte d having a t l e a s t one menber on the township board o r s i m i l a r g o verning body, and most make i t a p o in t to have r e p r e s e n t a t iv e s p re s e n t a t a l l such governmental m e e tin g s . The m ajor o b j e c t iv e s o f t h i s c i v i c of t h e i r la k e I n t e r e s t s . in v o lv em e n t is th e p r o t e c t i o n To t h i s end th e LAs a c t i v e l y promote lo c a l ordinances and enforcem ent o f e x i s t i n g la w s , e s p e c i a l l y those r e l a t i n g to la k e use, b o a tin g s a f e t y , and land use zoning r e g u l a t i o n s . The p e rs u a s io n , p u b lic ex p o s u re, and p o l i t i c a l fu n c tio n s (beyond the lo c a l s e t t i n g ) a r e o n ly o c c a s io n a lly employed by th e la k e a s s o c ia ­ tio n s . This suggests t h a t th ey a r e s t i l l in th e process o f e s t a b l i s h ­ ing t h e i r in f lu e n c e w i t h i n th e immediate la k e s e t t i n g and have y e t t o expand t h e i r area o f s o c i o p o l i t i c a l Im p act. 141 Objectives, Problems, and Accomplishments o f the Associations Water q u a l i t y p r o t e c t i o n 1s th e most f r e q u e n t l y s t a t e d o b j e c t i v e o f the sampled la k e a s s o c ia t io n s . T h a t th e y a r e havin g d i f f i c u l t y meeting t h a t o b j e c t i v e i s in d ic a t e d by t h e i r two most p r e v a i l i n g problems o f p o l l u t i o n abatement and weed o r a lg a e c o n t r o l . Although they appear to re c o g n iz e la k e p o l l u t i o n and enrichm en t problem s, there is a low in c id e n c e o f any re p o rte d accomplishments in these areas o f la k e w a te r q u a l i t y management. One f a c t o r r e l a t e d to t h i s low l e v e l o f r e p o r te d accomplishment may be t h a t th e a s s o c ia tio n s a r e not y e t s u f f i c i e n t l y o rg a n iz e d to be an e f f e c t i v e f o r c e f o r lo c a l management. T h a t th e la k e a s s o c ia tio n s are g e n e r a lly 1n th e f o r m a t iv e stages o f o r g a n iz a t io n i s in d ic a te d by the frequ en cy o f re p o rte d "accomplishments" in o r g a n iz in g and main­ ta in in g an a s s o c i a t i o n , observed ap ath y problems re p o rte d by th e r e ­ spondents, and th e o f t e n expressed d e s ir e f o r in c re a s e d member and re s id e n t involvem ent t o improve a s s o c ia t io n p erform ance. A second im p lie d f a c t o r o f low w a te r q u a l i t y management e f f e c t i v e ­ ness is la c k o f m o t i v a t i o n . Most o f th e respondents appear to be a t le a s t vaguely aware o f p o l l u t i o n p o t e n t i a l s and lan d use impacts on t h e i r lak es b u t seem somewhat com placent about doing a n y th in g so long as the lak e s s t i l l loo k good. Appearances, in most in s t a n c e s , a r e s t i l l q u i t e p le a s in g , and th e Departm ent o f N a tu r a l Resources d ata mentioned above p a r a l l e l s t h i s o b s e r v a tio n . I t may r e q u i r e massive and fre q u e n t a lg a e blooms and e x te n s iv e weed growth s u f f i c i e n t to im­ p a ir b o a t in g , f i s h i n g , and swimming b e f o r e th e a s s o c ia t io n s a r e m o ti­ vated to implement w a te r q u a l i t y management on a s e rio u s b a s is . 142 Concluslons 1. Much o f la k e management In v o lv e s th e abatement o f c u l t u r a l e u tro p h lc a tio n , and th e re 1s much t h a t la k e a s s o c ia tio n s , on t h e i r own I n i t i a t i v e , can do to Improve la k e w a te r q u a l i t y . the te c h n ic a l A re vie w o f l i t e r a t u r e documents many o f these o p tio n s which i n ­ cludes e f f l u e n t abatem ent, w a te r q u a l i t y i n v e s t i g a t i o n , symptomatic management, and s o c i o p o l i t i c a l involvem ent by the LAs to accomplish i n s t i t u t i o n a l change. 2. The a s s o c ia tio n s re co g n ize the s i g n i f i c a n c e o f la k e w a te r q u a lity d eg rad atio n as a p res en t o r p o t e n t ia l problem and a re b a s i c a l l y In c lin ed and o rg a n iz e d , as is s u e -o r ie n t e d b o d ie s , toward s e l f - i n i t i a t e d lake management. 3. tia l However, as a group, th e LAs have not approached t h e i r poten­ f o r s e l f - h e l p la k e q u a l i t y management. T his is c e r t a i n l y t r u e o f the LPs, and th e r e l a t i v e l y h ig h e r perform ing a s s o c ia tio n s a re a ls o functioning a t a le v e l s h o rt o f t h a t which is ec o n o m ica lly and p h y s i­ c a lly f e a s i b l e . This s h o rt f a l l i s p a r t i c u l a r l y t r u e w ith re s p e c t to the i n v e s t ig a t i o n o f la k e w a te r q u a l i t y and th e abatement o f e n r ic h in g and p o l l u t i n g i n f l u e n t s . 4. O f the la k e a s s o c ia tio n c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s measured, th e r e was l i t t l e d i s t i n c t i o n between th e HP and the LP a s s o c ia t io n s . In terms of geographic l o c a t i o n , s o c ia l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s , fin a n c e s , p o p u la tio n , o rg a n iz a tio n , and p h ysical s e t t i n g , the HP and LP a s s o c ia tio n s a re remarkably homogeneous. This suggests t h a t key elements p e r t i n e n t to s e lf - h e lp management success e i t h e r were not measured o r a r e convnon to both a s s o c ia tio n c a te g o rie s and have not y e t been s u f f i c i e n t l y e x p lo i t e d . 143 In p a r t i c u l a r 1 t 1s I n t e r e s t i n g to note t h a t th e re Is no s ig n if ic a n t d i f f e r e n c e between HP and LP a s s o c ia tio n budgets o r dues ra tes , even though th e average Income le v e l o f HP members is c o n s id e r­ ably h ig her than t h a t o f LP menfcers. The f a i l u r e o f these In d ic a t o r s o f wealth to c o r r e l a t e w ith performance score may be because none o f the a s s o c ia tio n s have reached a le v e l o f management p r o f ic ie n c y s u f ­ f i c i e n t l y complex o r expensive to make the r e l a t i v e d if f e r e n c e in In d ivid u al w ealth a s i g n i f i c a n t f a c t o r . 5. The a s s o c ia tio n c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s t h a t do c o r r e l a t e w ith p e r­ formance a re : s iz e o f la k e community; percentage o f a c t i v e members who are seasonal r e s id e n t s ; and whether o r not the a s s o c ia tio n belongs to MLSA. The element o f " p a r t i c i p a t i o n " i s common to a l l th re e c h a r­ a c t e r i s t i c s and suggests t h a t t h is may be the key f a c t o r to emphasize in any program designed to a s s i s t la k e a s s o c ia tio n s . 6. There a r e two major elements r e l a t e d to the o v e r a l l management performance by the sampled la k e a s s o c ia tio n s . low The f i r s t is a lack o f s u f f i c i e n t in fo rm a tio n and te c h n ic a l a s s is ta n c e w ith respect to la k e iss u e s . The second is member ap ath y. The a s s o c ia tio n s a re unaware o f many management o p tio n s a v a i l ­ able to them. T h is d e f ic ie n c y in c lu d e s : the c a u s a tiv e elements o f e u tro p h lc a tlo n ; la k e management techniques f e a s i b l e f o r lo c a l im ple­ mentation; and awareness o f resource s e rv ic e s a v a i l a b l e to them to expedite t h e i r programs. The member apathy problem may be, in p a r t , a common symptom o f the e a r ly developmental stages o f the la k e a s s o c ia tio n s ; r e f l e c t i n g community I n e r t i a to t h i s r e l a t i v e l y new i n s t i t u t i o n . As such 1 t may be overcome by subsequent accomplishments, a c t i v i t i e s , and r e c r u i t ­ ment campaigns. However, t h i s sense o f apathy may a ls o r e s u l t from a c o n f l i c t between the personal o b je c t iv e s o f th e la k e r e s id e n ts as p ro p e rty owners and t h e i r environm ental concern f o r the la k e re so u rce . A p a r t ic u la r r e s id e n t may g e n e r a l ly concede t h a t h is s e p t ic tank d i s ­ charge and lawn f e r t i l i z e r r u n o f f a r e bad f o r th e la k e . But he may also know t h a t s e p tic tank r e p a ir s o r sewer s e r v ic e assessments a re expensive and t h a t h is b e a u t i f u l lawn is th e envy o f h is neigh b ors. Personal costs and v a n it y come up a g a in s t w ise resource management. The a l t e r n a t i v e s a re to make an unpleasant d e c is io n o r to do n o th in g . The d ec is io n to do n o th in g , a p a th y , can be r a t i o n a l i z e d by convincing one's s e l f t h a t th e i n d i v i d u a l ' s c o n t r ib u t io n to the problem i s minuscule, e s p e c i a l l y i f re sid en ce i s o n ly f o r a few months o f th e year; t h a t o th e rs a re not co o p e ra tin g e i t h e r ; o r t h a t l i t t l e accomplished anyway. can be These presumptions a r e r e in f o r c e d by th e observed lack o f performance on th e p a r t o f th e la k e a s s o c ia t io n and the p u b lic agencies in v o lv e d . Another elem ent c o n t r ib u t in g to the appearance o f apathy may be the tem p ta tio n to be what Schmid (19 76 ) r e f e r s to as a " f r e e r i d e r . " Some re s id e n ts may see la k e management by th e a s s o c ia tio n as a s i t u a ­ tion whereby they can b e n e f i t from a l l the advantages o f improved water q u a l i t y r e s u l t i n g from the s a c r i f i c e s o f o th e r s , w ith o u t being inconvenienced a t a l l . The p r e v a i l i n g v o lu n ta r y membership n a tu re of most a s s o c ia tio n s is conducive to t h i s p lo y , and 1 f enough re s id e n ts adapt the " f r e e r i d e r " a t t i t u d e , member re c r u itm e n t and p a r t i c i p a t i o n by the a s s o c ia tio n w i l l be s e r io u s ly im p a ire d . 145 7. The problem o f low management perform ance by th e a s s o c ia ­ tions 1s p r i m a r i l y th e r e s u l t o f th e I n t e r a c t i o n o f l i m i t e d te c h n ic a l inform ation and a s s is ta n c e w it h low r e s i d e n t p a r t i c i p a t i o n a s s o c ia tio n . in the The in te rc h a n g e o f th ese two f a c t o r s c r e a t e s a s e l f - perp etu atin g c y c le o f i n e f f i c i e n t p erform ance. The presumption by r i p a r i a n s t h a t l i t t l e to manage th e la k e can be done by them (caused by i n s u f f i c i e n t knowledge and a la c k o f technical a s s is ta n c e on one hand, and a p ro p e n s ity to p la c e s e l f in t e r e s t above en viron m ental concern on th e o t h e r ) g en erates a g en eral sense o f apathy in th e la k e community o r a s s o c ia t io n . T h is a t t i t u d e in turn handicaps any p r o je c t s a s s o c ia t io n le a d e rs a tte m p t to im p le ­ ment because th ey cannot gain m a j o r i t y c o o p e r a tio n . the management a tte m p t f a i l s . the i n i t i a l Consequently This poor perform ance s u b s t a n tia t e s a p a t h e t i c a t t i t u d e which becomes a s e l f - f u l f i l l i n g With th e p r e s e n t a t io n o f th ese c o n c lu s io n s , i t prophecy. 1s a p p r o p r ia t e to review th e o b j e c t iv e s discussed in C hapter I a t the opening o f th is paper. The f i r s t o b j e c t i v e , to d e te rm in e f e a s i b l e management options f o r l o c a l i z e d im p le m e n ta tio n , has been accomplished by the p re s e n ta tio n in C h ap ter I I I one above. and 1s summarized in co n c lu s io n number The second o b j e c t i v e , an assessment o f th e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s and performance o f LAs, 1s s a t i s f i e d by th e r e s u l t s presented in Chapter IV and th e assessment o f those r e s u l t s Chapter V I w i l l in t h i s c h a p t e r . In c lu d e a recorrmendation f o r an approach based on th e conclusions p res en ted above and i s a p p r o p r ia t e to th e f i n a l o b j e c t i v e o f d es ig n in g an a s s is ta n c e program f o r LA s e l f - h e l p management. CHAPTER VI RECOMMENDATIONS The i n i t i a l premise o f t h i s stu d y i s t h a t ( a t l e a s t f o r th e short term) la k e w a te r q u a l i t y management i s , by d e f a u l t , a community and/or la k e a s s o c ia t io n r e s p o n s i b i l i t y . It i s n o t th e purpose o f t h i s study to seek p u b lic p o l i c y changes to remedy th e problem , i f indeed there i s one, b u t r a t h e r to propose c o r r e c t i v e approaches g iven con­ d itio n s as th e y a r e . Thus, th e f o ll o w i n g recommendations a r e c o n fin e d s t r i c t l y to elem ents o f th e l o c a l i z e d , s e l f - h e l p approach to la k e management. F u r th e r Research This study c o n s t i t u t e s th e i n i t i a l a s so c ia tio n re s e a r c h . spade work in M ichigan la k e The 21 in t e r v ie w s conducted have g en erated some i n t e r e s t i n g o b s e rv a tio n s b u t have h a r d ly exhausted th e f i e l d . A r e p e t i t i o n o f t h i s study using a l a r g e r sample would h e lp r e f in e th e presumptions o f f e r e d h e re . A d d it io n a l areas o f i n q u i r y might a ls o be pursued. In c lu d in g th e elem ent o f MLSA i n f l u e n c e on LA performance; th e e d u c a tio n a l background o f a s s o c ia t io n members and o f f i c e r s ; community s i z e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s ; and th e degree and n a tu re o f a d m i n is t r a t iv e o r g a n iz a t io n adopted by th e LAs, p a r t i c u l a r l y w it h regard to the a u t h o r i t y they assume. The Upper P e n in s u la o f M ich ig an and the D e t r o i t m e t r o p o lit a n a re a were excluded from t h i s study and deserve i n v e s t i g a t i o n as g eographic e n t i t l e s 146 them selves. 147 By using t h i s study as a base f o r f u r t h e r r e s e a r c h , comparisons can be made between th e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f M ich ig an and W isconsin LAs. Knowledge o f th e s i m i l a r i t i e s and d i s t i n c t i o n s o f la k e communities in the two s t a t e s could have a b e a rin g on th e e x t e n t to which re se arch conducted in e i t h e r s t a t e i s a p p lie d l o c a l l y . c o lle c te d in t h i s The in fo r m a tio n so f a r i n v e s t i g a t i o n i s a ls o p e r t i n e n t as a benchmark ag ain st which f u t u r e s tu d ie s may be compared to assess changing a t t i ­ tudes o r performance o f M ich ig an a s s o c ia t io n s . F u rth e r I n v e s t i g a t i o n o f th e l i t e r a t u r e w it h re g a rd to f e a s i b l e management o p tio n s a v a i l a b l e to th e LAs i s o b v io u s ly i n d i c a t e d . The framework presented In t h i s study d em onstrates t h a t s e l f - h e l p o p tio n s are a v a i l a b l e . There 1s l i t t l e q u e s tio n t h a t these o p t i o n s , as re s e a rc h progresses, a re a ls o s u b je c t to change and a r e exp an d ab le. In p a r t i c u l a r , th e concept o f using p h r e a to p h y t ic v e g e ta t io n as a lak e shore b u f f e r zone i s an i n t r i g u i n g management co n c e p t. Idea o f p re s e rv in g th e n a t u r a l The shore l i n e v e g e t a t io n has long been espoused in Department o f N a tu r a l Resources e x te n s io n pam p h lets, b u t a review o f th e l i t e r a t u r e in d ic a te d no c l e a r c u t p ro p o sa ls a d a p tin g the concept, as a form o f la k e management, to enhance th e q u a l i t y o f drainage w ate rs e n t e r i n g developed la k e s . I n q u i r y o f th e sampled LAs revealed no u t i l i z a t i o n o f th e concept a t a l l on a la k e wide b a s is . Because the idea 1s b e lie v e d to have m e r i t and, i f f e a s i b l e , would be h ig h ly a p p r o p r ia t e to s e l f - h e l p la k e management, a d e s c r i p t io n o f th e process and l i s t o f suggested p la n t in g s i s in c lu d e d in Appendix E. 148 A Proposed General A s sista n c e Plan f o r "Lake A s s o c ia tio n S e lf - H e l p Management Some suggestions f o r a d d i t i o n a l research I n t o s e l f - h e l p LA management have been in d ic a te d above, but th e In fo rm a tio n thus f a r obtained is s u f f i c i e n t to j u s t i f y a p i l o t p r o j e c t intended to remedy the impediment to b e t t e r management c re a te d by the in fo rm a tlo n -a p a th y problem. The conclusions o f t h i s re se arch suggest t h a t s e l f - h e l p o p tio n s do e x is t p e r m itt in g la k e re s id e n ts to accomplish management o f t h e i r own i n i t i a t i v e . It is a ls o e v id e n t t h a t they reco g nize w a te r q u a l i t y degradation as a s i g n i f i c a n t problem and have not y e t approached t h e i r p o te n tial f o r s e l f - h e l p management in t h i s r e g a rd . The means f o r lo c a lize d management e x i s t and a need f o r a s s is ta n c e is e v id e n t. The c o rre la tio n s between r e l a t i v e performance and a s s o c ia tio n c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s suggests th a t a key f a c t o r o f s e l f - h e l p management performance Is r e s i ­ dent p a r t i c i p a t i o n . Another elem ent o f LA management i n e f f i c i e n c y 1s apparently the problem o f th e i n t e r r e l a t e d e f f e c t o f i n s u f f i c i e n t Inform ation on one hand and member apathy on th e o t h e r . The key to solving t h i s problem 1s, t h e r e f o r e , Increased p a r t i c i p a t i o n in a s i g n i ­ fic a n t way by la k e re s id e n ts and the p ro v is io n o f more te c h n ic a l in fo r­ mation dem onstrating t h a t th ey can accomplish l o c a l i z e d management. S u f f ic ie n t in fo rm a tio n and te c h n ic a l a s s is ta n c e from re g io n a l agencies should enhance the p o t e n t i a l f o r l o c a l i z e d management success. This p ro je c t success to g e th e r w ith demonstrated meaningful r e s id e n t p a r t i c i ­ pation 1n the d ec isio n -m aking process should do much to break the I n f o r ­ mation- a pa th y c y c le . I f la k e q u a l i t y i s to be e f f i c i e n t l y managed, th e lo c a l re s id e n ts must be a c t i v e l y in v o lv ed in t h a t management. They must f u l l y cooperate 149 1n the f i n a n c i a l support o f management programs ( t h e la c k o f funds 1s one reason why p u b l i c l y a d m in is te re d la k e management has not progressed f u r t h e r ) and 1n th e changing o f In d i v i d u a l land use p r a c t ic e s c o n t r i ­ buting to c u l t u r a l e u t r o p h lc a t lo n and p o l l u t i o n . p r e r e q u is ite o f lo c a l R eco g n itio n o f t h i s Involvem ent I s in h e r e n t 1n W isco nsin's manage­ ment program a d m in is te re d on a re g io n a l " la k e d i s t r i c t " b a s is ( K l e s s i g , 1976), and in M ic h ig a n 's In la n d Lake Improvement A ct (A c t 345, 1966 as amended, 1975) which a u th o r iz e s I n d iv id u a l la k e management boards. While th e Idea o f lo c a l c i t i z e n Involvem ent should be recognized as e s s e n tia l to Michigan in la n d la k e management, th e in s tru m e n t s e le c te d by the s t a t e to ac h ie ve t h i s has not accomplished adequate r e s u l t s . Since 1966, o n ly 22 la k e boards have formed in M ic h ig a n , o f these a t le a s t nine are no lo n g e r a c t i v e (Department o f N a tu ra l Resources mlmeo by L. A. Cook), and a member o f the Department o f N a tu ra l Resources I n ­ land Lake U n it re p o rte d t h a t he b e lie v e d o n ly 5 la k e boards were s t i l l a c tiv e as o f December 1976. considering Consequently, th e Department i s now l e g i s l a t i o n intended to re p la c e A ct 345. The prim ary d e f i c i e n c y o f Act 3 4 5 , in t h is w r i t e r ' s o p in io n , that i t does not a llo w s u f f i c i e n t lo c a l r e s id e n t in volvem ent. is It creates an a d m i n is t r a t iv e body to manage a given la k e re s o u rc e , i n ­ cluding the a u t h o r i t y to le v y p ro p e rty assessments to pay f o r t h a t management, but th e o n ly a u th o r iz e d r i p a r i a n Involvem ent i s to p e t i ­ tio n f o r the i n i t i a l c r e a t io n o f the Lake Board. Board membership, the decision-m aking body, excludes lo c a l la k e r e s id e n ts unless they happen to be a f f i l i a t e d w ith lo c a l government. tion i s : I t s a u th o riz e d composi­ a r e p r e s e n t a t iv e o f th e county board o f commissioners, a re p re s e n ta tiv e o f each u n i t o f lo c a l government, th e d r a in commissioner 150 or his e q u iv a l e n t , and a r e p r e s e n t a t i v e o f th e Departm ent o f N a tu ra l Resources. Given th e expressed re sentm en t o f c e n t r a l i z e d a u t h o r i t y observed 1n the course o f t h i s r e s e a r c h , i t munity r e s id e n t s have f a i l e d i s n o t s u r p r i s in g t h a t la k e com­ to su p p o rt a management program in which t h e ir p a r t i c i p a t i o n 1s e s s e n t i a l l y r e s t r i c t e d to paying th e b i l l s . A program more conducive to success is one in which much o f th e decision-m aking a u t h o r i t y s t a r t s w i t h , and remains w i t h , th e la k e community. Under such a program, th e r o l e o f governmental and reso u rce agencies would be more a d v is o r y than a d m i n i s t r a t i v e . The charge o f r i p a r i a n r e s p o n s i b i l i t y to p a r t i c i p a t e in la k e management can be j u s t i f i e d on th e b a s is o f Aldo L e o p o ld 's ste w a rd s h ip philosophy a lo n e . There I s , however, a ve ry p rag m atic reason f o r pursuing t h i s p rem ise . As mentioned e a r l i e r , most la k e d e g ra d a tio n and e u t r o p h lc a t lo n is th e d i r e c t r e s u l t o f man's i n f l u e n c e on t h a t environment. Lake problems develop and management becomes necessary because o f th e s t r a i n and abuse Imposed upon th e la k e s e t t i n g by man's use o f i t . Most management, t h e r e f o r e , i s e s s e n t i a l l y th e changing o f human b e h a v io r and th e tre a tm e n t o f th e n a t u r a l environm ent to c o rre c t damages caused by t h a t b e h a v io r . Thus, th e people w ith the g re a te s t r e s p o n s i b i l i t y to change t h e i r b e h a v io r and do something about I t s Impact a r e those who use and b e n e f i t from th e la k e th e most. Lake coinnunity r e s id e n t s a r e c e r t a i n l y among those p e o p le . W hile the paramount concern o f t h i s paper is w a te r q u a l i t y management, t h i s proposed a s s is t a n c e p la n 1s designed to accommodate the necessary response to any problem a re a i d e n t i f i e d by th e p a r t i c i ­ pating r e s i d e n t s . T his g e n e r a liz e d paradigm i s thus a p p l i c a b l e to 151 the v a r i e t y o f o b j e c t iv e s and problems i d e n t i f i e d by la k e a s s o c ia t io n s (Tables 2 and 3 ) . However, I t 1s s t i l l p e r t i n e n t to la k e w a te r q u a lity management, s in c e sooner o r l a t e r and to one degree o r a n o th e r , a l l lake conrnunlties w i l l have to deal w it h t h i s problem. The essence o f t h i s s e l f - h e l p management concept then is f o r the la k e community, v ia th e la k e a s s o c i a t i o n , to assume th e i n i t i a t i v e in the r e c o g n i t io n , e v a l u a t i o n , and s o lu t io n o f t h e i r problems. To th is end they have a r i g h t and r e s p o n s i b i l i t y to e n l i s t th e a s s is ta n c e of lo c al p u b lic a g e n c ie s . level and keeping i t By I n i t i a t i n g t h i s process a t th e lo c a l t h e r e , th e la k e community enhances i t s to r e t a i n c o n tro l o v e r i t s own a f f a i r s . c i t i z e n in v o lv e m e n t, e s s e n t i a l p o te n tia l T h is is im p o rta n t i f lo c a l to any s e l f - h e l p program 's success, 1s to remain v i a b l e . The v e h ic le proposed f o r im plem enting t h i s s e l f - h e l p process 1s a r e g u l a r ly m eeting committee o r consortium c o n s is t in g o f : 1) lo c a l lake a s s o c ia tio n r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s r e s p o n s ib le f o r p re s e n tin g th e p ro ­ blems o f t h e i r community; 2 ) r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s o f lo c a l government and public agencies re co g nized as p e r t i n e n t t o th e g iv e n problem and i n ­ v ite d to co o p e ra te 1n i t s s o l u t i o n ; 3) th e County C o o p e ra tiv e E xten­ sion S e rv ic e D i r e c t o r o r Agent as c o o r d in a t o r ; and 4 ) a p p r o p r ia t e u n iv e r s it y s p e c i a l i s t s a v a i l a b l e to th e group through th e M ichigan State U n i v e r s i t y C o o p e ra tiv e E x te n sio n S e r v ic e (CES). The e x te n s io n s e r v ic e d i r e c t o r o r ag ent i s a l o g i c a l c h o ic e f o r the fu n c tio n o f c o o r d in a t o r s in c e th e CES 1s an agency charged w ith the r e s p o n s i b i l i t y o f In fo rm in g and a s s i s t i n g th e lo c a l a p o l i t i c a l n a tu re o f th e CES and I t s r e la tio n s f u r t h e r recommends I t p u b lic . The re c o g n ize d e x p e rie n c e in community to t h i s f u n c t i o n . Through In t r o d u c t io n by th e county ag ent o r d i r e c t o r , th e con­ cept o f assuming lo c a l la k e management r e s p o n s i b i l i t y can be presented to a g iv e n , concerned la k e a s s o c ia t io n . The procedure f o r such mana­ g e ria l s e l f - h e l p fo llo w s the t r a d i t i o n a l c y c l i c fo rm a t o f : 1) re s e a rc h 2) plan; 3 ) program im p le m e n ta tio n ; and 4 ) assessm ent, w it h a r e t u r n f u l l c y c le to re s e a r c h . The proposed steps f o r im p le m e n ta tio n a re as fo llo w s : 1. C o n s u lta tio n between th e CES ag ent o r d i r e c t o r and a t r a i n e d lake management s p e c i a l i s t to a s c e r t a i n w hether th e procedure 1s fe a s ib le f o r th e g iven la k e community. In d iv id u a ls I f e i t h e r o f these two key ( t h e one knowledgeable about th e community, th e o t h e r about the la k e re s o u rc e ) is r e l u c t a n t to i n i t i a t e a s e l f - h e l p program, the m a tte r should be re s o lv e d b e fo r e b ro aching th e idea w it h th e la k e a s s o c ia tio n . T his i s necessary to a v o id r a i s i n g f a l s e e x p e c ta tio n s or i n v i t i n g d e f e a t i f th e p r o b a b i l i t y o f accomplishment i s low. The m ajor elements th ese two f u n c t i o n a r i e s should c o n s id e r in t h e i r d e l i b e r a t i o n s a re th e s u b je c t la k e a s s o c ia t io n s ' sense o f com­ mitment and i t s d e te r m in a tio n to see a ta s k th ro u g h . Does i t appear capable o f in d u c in g i t s members to a c t i v e p a r t i c i p a t i o n in p r o je c ts ? Does i t dem onstrate th e d e te r m in a tio n to c o n f r o n t and persuade r e ­ c a l c i t r a n t lo c a l government o r agency heads to p ro v id e th e necessary services and r e g u l a t o r y enforcement? In the course o f t h e i r c o n s u lt a t io n both men may conclude t h a t s u f f i c i e n t in fo r m a tio n d o e s n 't e x i s t to make t h i s d e c is io n about fe a s ib ility . In t h i s case s t r a t i f i e d random in t e r v ie w s in th e com­ munity and la k e a s s o c ia t io n may be i n d i c a t e d . An i n t e r v ie w framework in c o rp o ra tin g elem ents o f Appendix A would p ro v id e adequate in fo r m a tio n 153 to assess e x i s t i n g and p o t e n t i a l promise o f community p a r t i c i p a t i o n . Included In th e course o f such co n ve rs atio n s should be th e d i r e c t questioning o f I n d i v i d u a l s as to t h e i r f e e l in g s about such a p r o j e c t . Subjects In te rv ie w e d should In c lu d e not o n ly lo c a l householders b u t o ffic e r s o f the la k e a s s o c ia tio n and heads o f lo c a l government. In keeping w ith the e a r l i e r ad m o n itio n , some degree o f evasiveness may be required in o rd e r to gain the i n i t i a l In fo r m a tio n w it h o u t im p ly in g the promise o f s t a r t i n g a s e l f - h e l p program. 2. C o n s u lta tio n between the CES a g e n t, la k e s p e c i a l i s t s , and o ffic e r s o f th e la k e a s s o c ia t io n . If the d e c is io n in step one is p o s itiv e , a meeting w it h the o f f i c e r s o f the la k e a s s o c ia tio n should be held a t which time th e technique o f th e program and I t s Is discussed w ith them. fe a s ib ility A g ain , the two key f a c t o r s o f convnltment and determ ination should be d iscussed. The two s p e c i a l i s t s may o r may not reveal t h e i r p r i o r d e te r m in a tio n s , but these p o in ts should be addressed by th e a s s o c ia tio n o f f i c e r s , t h e i r o b lig a t io n s f u l l y recog­ nized, and a f ir m d e c is io n made by them. 3. I f the a s s o c ia tio n o f f i c e r s conclude t h a t th e s e l f - h e l p management approach is v i a b l e f o r t h e i r l a k e , th e m a tte r should be presented to th e g eneral membership f o r a referendum . This emphasis a t t h r e e d i f f e r e n t p o in ts on a commitment by those Involved 1s im p e ra tiv e because th e key to success o r f a i l u r e o f the s e l f - h e l p approach l i e s 1n the w illin g n e s s o f th e m a j o r it y to become in v o lv e d . I t should be c l e a r l y e x p la in e d b e fo re th e referendum t h a t the members a r e d e s ig n a tin g t h e i r r e p r e s e n ta t iv e s to work o u t a s e rie s o f management plans w hich, i f adopted by the a s s o c ia t io n , w i l l commit 154 them a l l to p a r t i c i p a t i o n , which could In v o lv e personal f i n a n c i a l expenditure and r e s t r i c t i o n s on p r i v a t e p ro p e rty uses. F u r t h e r , the as so c ia tio n 's engagement o f lo c a l government and agencies 1n the management program is a two-edged sword. W hile s e rv ic e s and a s s is ta n c e may be obtained from these i n s t i t u t i o n s , p re v io u s ly la x enforcement of r e g u la tio n s , law s, o r assessments (advantageous to la k e r e s id e n t s ) might also change. 4. I f the referendum supports the s e l f - h e l p p ro p o s a l, the n e x t step is in fo rm a tio n g a t h e r in g . Since the whole idea o f the s e l f - h e l p management concept 1s problem s o lv in g , the f i r s t o rd e r o f business 1s to determine what problems are paramount in th e minds o f la k e r e s id e n t s . To t h i s end a q u e s tio n n a ire should be prepared and c i r c u l a t e d by the la k e a s s o c ia tio n to as many re s id e n ts as p o s s ib le . (A h ig h ly successful a p p li c a t i o n o f t h i s technique has been conducted a t Long Lake, Grand T rav erse County by Or. C. R. Humphrys o f th e Michigan State U n iv e r s it y Department o f Resource Development, East L a n s in g .) The q u e s tio n n a ire used could be as sim ple as: 1) What do you th in k are the major problems on t h i s lake? and 2) What do you t h in k could be done to solve these problems? 5. Problem i d e n t i f i c a t i o n and assignment o f p r i o r i t i e s a re then p o s sib le based on the in fo rm a tio n c o lle c t e d 1n step f o u r . The lake a s s o c ia tio n should c o n sid e r th re e questions in d e te rm in in g pro­ je c t p r io r it ie s . F i r s t , what problem is most f r e q u e n t l y recognized by the re sid en ts? Presumably those problems commanding m a j o r it y re c o g n itio n , a l l o th e r th in g s considered e q u a l, w i l l a ls o re c e iv e m a jo rity support f o r s o l u t i o n . e a s ily solved? Second, what p roblem (s) can be most There is something to be said f o r s t a r t i n g o f f w ith 155 the e a s ie r tas ks f i r s t and b u i l d i n g up e x p e rie n c e b e fo r e t a k in g on the hard ones. A ls o , i n i t i a l c en tive to th e program. successes p ro v id e c o n fid e n c e and i n ­ T h i r d , what p r o b le m ( s ) , i f s o lv e d , w i l l have the g r e a t e s t b e n e f i c i a l e f f e c t upon th e la k e re s o u rc e and communl ty? 6. Based on the problems chosen, th e la k e a s s o c ia t io n should se lec t members f o r th e management c o m m itte e . These i n d i v i d u a l s ignated to a t l e a s t an annual term f o r perform ance c o n t i n u i t y ) , (d e s ­ in c o n s u lta tio n w it h th e CES ag e n t and a p p r o p r ia t e u n i v e r s i t y s p e c i a l i s t s fo r t h a t s e t o f problem s, w i l l then d e te rm in e what o t h e r lo c a l govern­ ment o r agency members to I n v i t e to j o i n th e co m m ittee. L i k e l y c a n d id a te s under most circu m stan ces would be township and c i t y o r v i l l a g e o f f i c i a l s , a t l e a s t one r e p r e s e n t a t i v e from th e county government, and, i f p o s s i b l e , a member o f th e county o r re g io n a l planning s t a f f . O ther agencies which a r e l i k e l y or an o ther a r e : to become In v o lv e d a t one tim e th e County D ra in Corrmlssion, Road Commission, and Public H e a lth Departm ent; Regional o r f i e l d o f f i c e s o f th e M ich ig an Department o f N a tu ra l Resources, and Departm ent o f P u b lic H e a lth ; and the D i s t r i c t C o n s e r v a t io n is t o f th e USDA S o il C o n s e rv a tio n S e r v ic e . I t may a ls o be a d v is a b le to e s t a b l i s h a permanent la k e q u a l i t y component o f th e committee d e a lin g w ith w a te r q u a l i t y management s in c e th is problem by n a tu re r e q u ir e s co n tinuous a t t e n t i o n 1n th e form o f water q u a l i t y m o n it o r in g , e f f l u e n t i n v e s t i g a t i o n , and d is c h a rg e a b a te ­ ment programs. The process o f d e te rm in in g comm ittee co m p o sitio n may become a re c u rre n t c h a lle n g e to th e la k e a s s o c ia t io n . Some r e g io n a l agency 156 heads* f o r p o l i t i c a l c ip a te . o r personal reason s, may be r e l u c t a n t to p a r t i ­ I f t h e i r o f f i c e 1s s i g n i f i c a n t to th e p a r t i c u l a r management program* they may have to be coerced I n t o th e o p e r a tio n . accomplished* th ese r e l u c t a n t p a r t i c i p a n t s may s t i l l This being r e s i s t proposals offered o r p ro v id e minimal c o o p e ra tio n i f th ey p e rc e iv e the p r o j e c t in a neg ative l i g h t w it h re s p e c t to t h e i r p e rs o n a l, p o l i t i c a l * o r p ro ­ fessional o b j e c t iv e s . Under these circu m stan ces* th e a s s o c ia t io n 's o rig in a l sense o f cornnitment and d e te r m in a tio n may be s o r e ly t e s t e d . An a p p ro p r ia te response* should such d i f f i c u l t i e s e v o lv e * i s the c a re fu l mandate. in v e s t ig a t i o n o f t h a t agency's professed and documented I f a case can be b u i l t f o r c o o p e ra tio n w ith th e p r o j e c t * the r e c a l c i t r a n t e x e c u tiv e can be ch a llen g ed to perform h is d u ty . resistance may be combated by p u b lic exposure o f the Is s u e . F u r th e r In f a c t , a l l o peratio ns o f th e co n m ittee should, from t h e s t a r t , be open and well p u b lic iz e d 1n the community. 7. D iscussion o f o p tio n s and development o f a management p l a n . Once the committee composition is determ ined w ith re s p e c t to the c u r­ rent o b j e c t iv e s , th e ment>ers can begin d is c u s s io n o f the management options a v a i l a b l e to them; th e m e rits and consequences o f each; and the resources a v a i l a b l e to b rin g to bear on th e p ro b le m (s ). They may then weigh t h e i r a l t e r n a t i v e s , s e l e c t th e most promising approach, and develop a plan o f a c t i o n . 8. The la k e community should then be Informed o f th e p a r t i c u l a r management plan proposed and be g iven th e o p p o r tu n ity to respond a t a p ub lic h e a r in g . T h is step Is th e e s s e n tia l "feedback loop" i n the decision-making process and may r e s u l t in r e v i s io n o r m o d if ic a t io n o f the plan depending upon th e community response. 157 An a p p r o p r ia te mechanism f o r th e p u b lic h e a rin g m ig ht be a general meeting o f th e la k e a s s o c ia t io n . A t t h i s m e etin g , the commit­ tee o r i t s d esignated r e p r e s e n t a tiv e s should be p re s e n t to e x p la in the plan and respond to q u e s tio n s . By combining th e h e a rin g and la k e association m e etin g , th e o p p o r tu n ity is a ls o pro vided to expand the a s s o c ia tio n 's membership. The more r e s id e n ts th e a s s o c ia t io n can g a in , the stro n g er th e community sense o f commitment may become and the g reater the in d iv id u a l r a te s o f p a r t i c i p a t i o n in the management pro­ je c ts may be. 9. Im plem entation o f the program may now proceed according to the proposed o r p o s s ib ly re v is e d management p la n . 10. The f i n a l ste p 1s a subsequent assessment o f the management program and i t s m o d if ic a t io n as l o g i s t i c s d i c t a t e , o r te r m in a t io n when the o r i g i n a l problem has been remedied. (N o te; Reference throughout has been to "problem s," o b v io u s ly t h i s same approach can be used to implement "improvements," " o b j e c t i v e s , " o r " in n o v a tio n s " not neces­ s a r i l y in v o lv in g a rem edial ap p ro ac h .) The management c y c le has now been completed. A t t e n t i o n may now be d ire c te d to o th e r issues and th e process repeated by s t a r t i n g again a t e i t h e r step one o r step f i v e depending on th e n a tu re o f the is s u e . I t nay be noted by th e re ad er t h a t t h i s proposed approach im p lie s a c o n f l i c t between some Michigan p u b lic agencies and la k e r e s id e n t s . " C o n flic t" is perhaps too strong a term , but a d i s p a r i t y in o b je c t iv e s and p r i o r i t i e s does appear to e x i s t as In d ic a te d by th e i n t e r v ie w d a ta and o b s e rv a tio n s . It i s t h is r e l a t i v e gap between p u b lic agencies and lake re s id e n ts which d is tin g u is h e s th e I n s t i t u t i o n a l environment o f Wisconsin and Michigan In la n d la k e management programs. 158 Personal e x p e rie n c e and K le s s lg 's 1976 paper both suggest a con­ d it io n o f r e l a t i v e mutual c o o p e ra tio n a r r i v e d a t by th e Wisconsin De­ partment o f N a tu ra l Resources, C o o p e ra tiv e Extension S e r v ic e , and la k e comnunlty. In p a r t i c u l a r , th e two agencies seem to have made c o n s id e r­ able progress toward j o i n t c o o p e ra tio n , as In d ic a te d by t h e i r many co-sponsored p r o je c t s e s p e c i a l l y th e In la n d Lakes Dem onstration P r o j e c t o f 1974. This c o o p e ra tio n between the p r i m a r i l y te c h n ic a l p rim a rily s o c ia l (DNR) and (CES) r a m i f i c a t i o n s o f la k e management has p e rm itte d the broad I n s t i t u t i o n a l i z a t i o n o f la k e management adopted by W isconsin's "Lake D i s t r i c t " framework. Confidence 1n t h i s b u r e a u c r a tic co o p e ra tio n may be an element which p erm its Wisconsin to r e a d i l y adm it la k e r e s i ­ dents as a t h i r d p a r t y to the dec1s1on-mak1ng process. M ichigan, 1n t h i s w r i t e r ' s o p in io n , has y e t to approximate Wisconsin's le v e l o f co o p e ra tio n o r accomplishment w it h re s p e c t to lake management. The development o f the In la n d Lake U n i t in d ic a te s progress, but a broad d i s p a r i t y s t i l l e x i s t s between CES and DNR inform ation p r o je c t s . Given t h is d i s t i n c t i o n in evolved c o o p e ra tio n f o r la k e manage­ ment between th e two s t a t e s , th e above proposal has been o f f e r e d as a stimulus toward more complete la k e management in M ic h ig a n . Wisconsin appears to have approached f u l l Where Involvem ent i n In la n d la k e management v ia b u r e a u c r a tic inducement o f la k e community In v o lv em e n t, 1 t may be t h a t M ichigan w i l l have to approach i t by la k e community Inducement o f the b u reaucracy. APPENDICES APPENDIX A THE STANDARDIZED QUESTIONNAIRE USED IN THE PERSONAL INTERVIEWS WITH LAKE ASSOCIATIONS 159 TELEPHONE INTERVIEW REQUEST Name o f Lake A s s o c ia tio n : ____________________________ Lake: ____ County: Name o f A s s o c ia tio n P re s id e n t: _____________________ Address (hom e): _________________________________ Phone: Address ( l a k e ) : Phone: C orrections: _______ In te rv ie w d ate & tim e : In te rv ie w address: M a te ria ls Requested: A r t ic le s o f In c o rp o ra tio n Bylaws & R e g u la tio n s ____ Annual R eports ___________ Notes o r Comments: 160 INTERVIEW FORM, LAKE ASSOCIATION WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT Date: _____________________ Timebegin Location o f In te rv ie w : Name o f Lake: ___________________________ Name o f A s s o c ia tio n : ____________________ Interview ee: _____________________________ M a te ria ls : A r t ic le s o f In c o rp o ra tio n Bylaws A R e g u latio n s ____ Annual Reports ___________ In te rv ie w e d s ) : Timeend 161 INTERVIEW FRAMEWORK I. OPEN QUESTIONS 1. a ) P lease 1 1 s t f i v e ( o r le s s ) o b je c tiv e s o f yo u r la k e a s s o c ia tio n , b ) Please rank th ese o b je c tiv e s 1n o rd e r o f Im p ortan ce. 2. a) Please l i s t f i v e a s s o c ia tio n . ( o r le s s ) problems c u r r e n t ly fa c in g yo u r b) Please rank these problems in o rd e r o f Im p ortan ce. 3. a ) Do you have any w a te r q u a lit y problems? b) P lease rank th ese in o rd e r o f Im p ortan ce. re : th e problems you mentioned above? What a re they? Causes? How do they rank 4. a ) P lease 1 1 s t th e accomplishments o f yo u r a s s o c ia tio n . b) Please rank these accomplishments In o rd e r o f im p ortan ce. 162 II. 5. Do you f e e l your a s s o c ia tio n 1s necessary and m eaningful? I . e . , th a t 1 t 1s b e n e f ic ia l to th e la k e and re s id e n ts and th a t w it h ­ o ut the a s s o c ia tio n th in g s would be worse f o r b o th . 6. What, I f a n y th in g , do you th in k would h elp Improve yo u r a s s o c i­ a t io n 's performance? ORGANIZATION AND PARTICIPATION 1. When was yo u r la k e a s s o c ia tio n formed? U n o f f i c i a l l y __________________ In c o rp o ra te d Any in te r r u p tio n s 1n th e e x is te n c e o f th e a s s o c ia tio n s in ce f i r s t formed? _______________________________________________________ 2. Type o f e n a b lin g l e g i s l a t i o n ______________________________________ 3. Membership: a ) S iz e o f th e la k e community, i . e . , households d i r e c t l y a s s o c ia te d w ith the la k e by r ip a r ia n o r access r i g h t , o r w it h in 1 /4 m ile o f th e la k e shore. In d iv id u a ls ___________________ Households _____________ ' b ) T o ta l number o f members in th e a s s o c ia tio n . In d iv id u a ls ___________________ Households __________________ c) Number o f a c t iv e members in th e a s s o c ia tio n . In d iv id u a ls ___________________ Households _________________ d ) What p erc en t o f th e t o t a l a s s o c ia tio n membership a re seasonal la k e re s id e n ts ? __________________ What p e rc e n t o f th e a c tiv e membership a re seasonal re s id e n ts ? _____________ 4. How o fte n a re g en eral membership m eetings held? _________________ Average attendance? ________________ 5. Are th e re any o th e r a s s o c ia tio n s on th e lake? ___________________ I f so: a ) How many? ___________________________________________________ b) Why? ________________________________________________________ 163 c) Can you estim ate t h e ir membership? d ) A re th e y v e ry a c tiv e ? e ) Is th e re a system o f c o o p e ra tio n ( u n i t y ) among th e a s ­ s o c ia tio n s on th e lake? ___ _____ 6. What 1s y o u r a s s o c ia t io n 's r e la t io n s h ip w ith th e lo c a l commun­ i t y ; r e s id e n ts and o f f i c i a l s ? R e sid en ts O ffic ia ls V ery good, much c o o p e ra tio n & common a c tiv itie s ED ED G e n e ra lly f r i e n d l y , b u t s e p a ra te i n t e r e s t s & l i t t l e in v o lv em e n t w ith each o th e r Q Q D is t a n t , o th e r than o c c a s io n a l con­ f l i c t s on issu es ED ED F req u en t c o n f l i c t s & bad f e e lin g s □ 7. Does yo u r a s s o c ia tio n sponsor s o c ia l a c t i v i t i e s a t t r a c t i v e to th e members? ___________________ Examples & freq u en cy____________ 8. What is most e f f e c t i v e in keeping yo u r membership a c tiv e ? Issues & p r o je c ts S o c ia l even ts III. ED ED ED MEMBERS 1. Would you p le as e e s tim a te th e av erag e income o f yo u r a s s o c ia ­ t i o n 's members. Less than $ 2 ,0 0 0 p er y e a r ED $ 2 ,0 0 0 > $ 1 5 ,0 0 0 - $ 2 0 ,0 0 0 □ - $ 5 ,0 0 0 □ > $ 2 0 ,0 0 0 - $ 3 0 ,0 0 0 □ > $ 5 ,0 0 0 - $ 1 0 ,0 0 0 □ > $ 3 0 ,0 0 0 - $ 4 0 ,0 0 0 □ > $ 1 0 ,0 0 0 - $ 1 5 ,0 0 0 ED G re a te r than $ 4 0 ,0 0 0 I I How does t h is it y ? H ig h e r Income compare w ith th e r e s t o f th e la k e commun­ ED S im ila r □ Lower ED 164 2. What p e rc e n t o f y o u r membership would you e s tim a te a re l i v i n g on a r e tir e m e n t Income? __________________________________________ 3. Does yo u r a s s o c ia tio n have problems w ith membership ap ath y Why?___________________________ 4. Do th e members g e t alo n g w e ll w ith each o th e r p e rs o n a lly ? Why?__________________________ 5. IV . Do th ey g e t alo ng w e ll w ith re s p e c t to la k e a s s o c ia tio n issu es and business? Why? _______________________________ LAKE ASSOCIATION FINANCES 1. What a re y o u r a s s o c ia t io n 's annual dues? ___________ Are members prompt in payment? ______________________ 2. Do you have o th e r sources o f income? ________________ F u n d -ra is in g p r o je c t s , s p e c ia l assessments? ( L i s t . ) How o fte n ? S uccessful? 3. Would you mind t e l l i n g me y o u r annual budget? ( I f o b je c t , p e r­ haps a rough fig u r e ? ) _______________________________________________ Has i t r e c e n t ly changed? Up o r down? _________________________ Why? _______________________________________________________________ V. LAKE CHARACTERISTICS 1. S iz e o f la k e ____________ a c re s ; maximum depth ____________ f e e t Most o f th e la k e 1s ____________ f e e t deep (p h o to tro p h lc zone) 2. Bottom ty p e is m o s tly _________________ ( s i l t a t i o n ) 165 3. a ) E x te n t o f developm ent on la k e : To what e x te n t would you e s tim a te y o u r la k e shore to be developed? £ 25% ______ 26 - 50% ______ 51 - 75%___ ______ 76 - 100% > 100% from th e la k e ______ ; number o f t i e r s o f housing back __________ b ) What is th e averag e f r o n t fo o ta g e p er lo t ? _______________ c ) Comments: _____________________________________________________ 4. Is yo u r la k e e n t i r e l y w it h in one county? _ _________________________ One township?______ 5. What is th e most p o p u la r use on y o u r lak e? 6. What typ es o f f i s h a re most o fte n caught from y o u r lak e? Game fis h ? Pan fis h ? S p ecies: _______________________ _______________________ S iz e : __________________________ _______________________ Abundance: Comments: ________________ ____________ 166 V I. HATER QUALITY PERFORMANCE A. Symptomatic Management: 1. Have any f is h management programs been I n i t i a t e d on yo u r lake? A s s o c ia tio n r o le 1n f is h management e f f o r t s . 2. Do you have a lg a e problems on th e lake? _____________________ I f yes: a ) A lgae blooms have been o c c u rrin g s in c e ________ (y e a r ) b) E x te n t (% o f la k e in v o lv e d ) and lo c a tio n in the la k e : ___ c ) Type o f a lg a e , i f 3. known ______________________ Does y o u r a s s o c ia tio n have an a lg a e c o n tro l program? O th e r sponsor? _________________________________________ I f yes: a ) What method o f c o n tro l is used (c h e m ic a ls )? b ) How many ye a rs has th e program been in e ffe c t? c ) Is tre a tm e n t necessary ev ery year? d ) How o fte n per season? e ) Cost p er tre a tm e n t? ______________________ 4. Do you have weed problems on th e lake? __________ I f yes: a ) Has been a problem s in c e _________________ b) E x te n t (% o f la k e in v o lv e d ) and lo c a tio n 5. Does yo u r a s s o c ia tio n have a weed c o n tro l program? O th e r sponsor? ____________ I f yes: a ) What m ethod(s)? 167 b ) How many y e a rs has th e program been In e f f e c t ? c ) Is tre a tm e n t n ecessary e v e ry y e ar? d ) How o fte n p e r season? e ) C ost per tre a tm e n t? _ f) 6. E ffe c tiv e n e s s ? _______ Has w in te r drawdown o f th e la k e le v e l been co n s id e re d o r p ra c tic e d as a means o f weed c o n tr o l? (How much?) ______ I f n o t, why? (can la k e be lo w e re d , r i p a r ia n o b je c tio n s ) I f drawdown, any a n c i l l a r y p r o je c ts w ith i t ? 7. B. Any o th e r management procedures a tte m p ted on th e la k e ? i . e . , d re d g in g , s h a d in g , sand b la n k e ts , e t c . _______________________ In v e s t ig a t io n : 1. Does yo u r la k e have a w a te r q u a l i t y te s t in g program? Sponsored by th e a s s o c ia tio n ? Encouraged by th e a s s o c la tio n ? What t e s t s a re run? Who conducts th e te s ts ? How many samples each tim e? Where are they taken? (Sampling methodology?, G/W?) How o fte n ? Do you have a s e p tic tan k dye t e s tin g program a n d /o r I n ­ spections? Sponsored by th e a s s o c ia tio n ? Encouraged by th e a s s o c ia tio n ? Who conducts th e te s ts o r in s p e c tio n s ? How o fte n ? When? (B e st in summer) R esults? (S uccessful d e te c tio n s and c o r r e c tio n s ) Are th e re any o th e r te s tin g o r in v e s t ig a t iv e procedures con­ _________________________ ducted on th e lake? Who does th e te s tin g o r in v e s tig a tin g ? Comments: A c tio n Programs f o r N u t r ie n t and I n f l u e n t Abatem ent: 1. Is th e w aste d is p o s a l system on y o u r la k e sewers o r s e p tic tanks? ____________________________________________________________ O ther? ____________________________________________________________ I f sewer system , what was th e a s s o c ia tio n 's r o le in i n i t i a ­ tio n ? ________ Why? 2. I f s e p tic ta n k s ; ask q u e s tio n s 2 -4 . Do you a c t i v e l y promote r e g u la r pumping and m aintenance? (Pumped how o fte n ? ) _________________________________________ How do you promote th is ? Do you encourage improvements? _______________ a ) Dosage chambers? _________________________ b) Expansion o r r e lo c a tio n o f d ra in f i e l d s Success? 3. Are r e s id e n ts inform ed o r re g u la te d in any way w ith re s p e c t to s e p tic tan k system o p e ra tio n a l r e s t r a in t s ? _______________ a ) D iv e rs io n o f ro o f and fo o tin g d ra in s to d ry w e lls o r s u rfa c e d is c h a rg e away from s e p tic system ______________ b ) No garbage d is p o s a ls , d is h w a sh ers , o r washing machines o r c u r t a i le d use ___ ___ ___________________________ c ) G eneral w a te r co n se rv in g methods? 4. Have you discu ssed o r Implemented p ro p o sals to sw itch to a l t e r n a t i v e w aste d is p o s a l methods? a ) H o ld in g tan ks __________________________________________ b) In c in e r a t o r t o i l e t s c ) S e lf c o n ta in e d u n its d) Sewage system _______ 170 e) O th e r Why? 5. Is th e re a program to reduce o r p re v e n t a l l - t o g e t h e r th e use o f f e r t i l i z e r s on la k e r e s id e n t s ' lawns and gardens? Awareness? a ) Any encouragement o f r e s id e n t w a te rfo w l on lake? 6. Do you encourage th e p re s e r v a tio n o f n a tu r a l v e g e ta tio n alo ng th e shore as opposed to lawns r i g h t down to th e w a te r 's edge? _______________________________________________ Why? ______________________________________________ How? ______________________________________________ 7. Do you have any e ro s io n o r sedim ent problems? I f so , who is w orking on i t ? 8. Are th e r e any marshes on o r d r a in in g in t o th e lake? ____ I f so , who is w o rkin g to p r o te c t and p re s e rv e them o r is a t t i t u d e f o r d r a i n / f i l l because o f m o sq u ito es, o r o th e r reasons? ______ 9. Are th e re any a g r i c u l t u r a l o r road d ra in s e n te r in g th e la k e o r i t s t r i b u t a r i e s ? _________________ Any a tte m p t to c o r r e c t o r im prove them? By whom? 171 V II. ENFORCEMENT AND TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE 1. W ith re s p e c t to y o u r a s s o c ia tio n b y la w s , r e g u la t io n s , o r pro gram s, 1s th e r e any problem w ith com pliance? _________________ I f y e s , p le a s e s p e c ify which r e g u la tio n s o r programs ________ Why? 2. Are th e re any s t a t e o r m u n ic ip a l laws o r codes a p p ly in g to yo u r la k e t h a t a re n o t g e n e r a lly com plied w ith ? ___________ I f y e s , p le a s e s p e c ify ________________________________________ Why? 3. Has yo u r a s s o c ia tio n sought te c h n ic a l a s s is ta n c e from any o f th e fo llo w in g sources? Agency Frequency o f C o n ta ct O fte n Occas. Once None Comments (R easons, S a t i s f a c t i o n ) S .C .S . E x t. S e r. U n iv . P e rs . D ra in Comm. D .N .R . P u b lic H e a lth L .A . Members Comm. F irm s . 4. Does y o u r a s s o c ia tio n have le g a l counsel? 172 V III. SOCIOPOLITICAL MOBILIZATION (E x te n s io n o f th e a s s o c ia tio n 's im pact o u ts id e o f I t s Im m ediate sphere o f In f lu e n c e , i . e . , p re s s in g f o r l e g i s l a t i o n In i t s I n t e r e s t s , p e rs u a s io n , e t c . ) 1. In fo r m a tio n , E d u c a tio n , and P ersu asio n a ) Does y o u r a s s o c ia tio n sponsor p u b lic speakers on Issu es o f I n t e r e s t o r Im portance to y o u r members? _____________ What to p ic s ? How o fte n 1n th e l a s t 5 y e a rs ? b) Do you have y o u r own n e w s le tte r? — I f s o . how o fte n does i t come out? When s t a r t e d ___________________ Continuous? What to p ic s does I t cover? C ir c u la t io n ? 2. (J u s t members? O thers in community, e t c . ) P u b lic Exposure F u n ctio n a ) Does y o u r a s s o c ia tio n express i t s p o s itio n on lo c a l issu es in v o lv in g th e la k e 1n th e e d i t o r i a l s e c tio n o f lo c a l papers? _____________________________________________ I f y e s , how o fte n in how many y e a rs ? b ) Have you promoted lo c a l newspaper f e a t u r e a r t i c l e s on y o u r la k e o r a s s o c ia tio n ? _______________________________ c ) "Spots" o r fe a tu r e s on lo c a l TV o r ra d io ? 3. Economic F u n ctio n a ) Do you f e e l y o u r a s s o c ia tio n c o n tr ib u te s s i g n i f i c a n t l y to th e lo c a l economy? _____________________________________ What p e rc e n t o f r e t a i l s a le s and s e rv ic e ? ______________ What p e rc e n t o f th e lo c a l ta x revenue do you p ro vide? Have you co n sid ered th e s ig n ific a n c e o f t h is to yo u r d e a lin g s w ith the lo c a l government? __________________ b) Are any o f yo u r members o r a s s o c ia te s I n f l u e n t i a l 1n th e lo c a l community. I . e . , businessmen, church members, e tc .? I f so . 1s t h is o f any a s s is ta n c e to you as an o rg a n iz a ­ tio n ? Legal Function a ) Does yo u r a s s o c ia tio n a c t i v e ly push f o r enforcem ent o f m unicipal laws and re g u la tio n s 1n y o u r I n t e r e s t s , I . e . , housing and development o rd in a n c e s , p u b lic h e a lth la w s , In la n d Lakes and Streams A ct (A c t 346, 1972) o r th e S ed im entatio n C o n tro l Law (A c t 347, 1972)? Please g iv e exam ples. ___________________________________________________ b) Has yo u r a s s o c ia tio n been engaged In any c o u rt s u its o r th re a te n e d le g a l a c tio n ? P lease e x p la in . P o litic a l Function a ) To what e x te n t do yo u r members c la im a v o tin g re sid en ce a t th e la k e in o rd e r to p a r t ic ip a t e in lo c a l d e c is io n making and e le c tio n s ? _____________________________________ b) Do any members belong to th e lo c a l government as e le c te d o r ap p oin ted o f f i c i a l s ? ____________________________________ 174 c ) Do a s s o c ia tio n r e p r e s e n ta tiv e s r e g u la r ly a tte n d lo c a l meetings and h ea rin g s on b e h a lf o f th e a s s o c ia tio n ? d ) Does y o u r a s s o c ia tio n , as an o f f i c i a l body o r I t s mem­ bers as c o n s titu e n ts , m a in ta in r e g u la r communications w ith s t a t e le g is la t o r s ? __________________________________ e ) Has your a s s o c ia tio n e v e r engaged In l e t t e r w r it in g campaigns to p o l i t i c ia n s o r o th e r d e c is io n makers o ve r Issues p e r t in e n t to yo u r In te r e s ts ? Comments: ________ f) What 1s yo u r o p in io n o f th e M ichigan Lake and Stream A s s o c ia tio n s , In c .? (Recognized as a r e a l o r p o te n tia l lo b bying instrum ent? Source o f in fo rm a tio n ? ) __________ Does yo u r a s s o c ia tio n belong to MLSA? IX . REASSESSMENT BY INTERVIEWEE 1. In r e f le c t i n g on o u r d is c u s s io n , a re th e re any a d d itio n s o r changes you would make 1n yo u r a s s o c ia tio n 's o b je c t iv e s , problem s, o r accomplishments l i s t e d a t th e s t a r t ? __________ APPENDIX B ASSESSMENT FORM USED TO EVALUATE LAKE ASSOCIATION MANAGEMENT PERFORMANCE. The Perform ance Score 1s Based on Accum ulated P o in ts . Possible P o in ts f o r Each A spect o f Perform ance A re In d ic a te d 1n P a re n th e s e s . PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT Region _ Lake Association I. Investigation and Symptomatic Management 1. Fish Management (51 Z. Alaae (51 3. Weeds { 5 } 4. Winter Drawdown ( j) 5. Water Quality Testing * Nutrients ( j) - Bacteria ( 5 ) - Groundwater { 5 ) 6 . Dye Test (101 7. Other Investigations Influent Abatement 1. Z. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. III. IV. Sewage Treatment Plant ( 10) Septic Tank Servicing [jg] Septic Tank Information and Regulation ( y Alternative Disposal Methods [£) Lawn F ertilization Prohibition (20) Vegetative Buffer Zone [ 5 } Harsh Protection (5) Agricultural Drain Abatement (2 ) Road Drain Abatement (7) Technical Assistance Resources Consulted 2. Leoal Council (2) (|4 gy 2 each) Socio-Political Mobilization Information Tunction 1. Speakers (21 2. Newsletter ( 2 ) No Problem Other County Lake Association Involved Lake Association Program ed Attempted In Effect None Points PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT (Continued) Like Association IV. No (Continued) Problem Exposure Function 1. Editorials 2. Feature Articles ( 2 1 _______ 3. Radio-Television (21____________ Economic Function 1. Knowledge cf sales contribution 121 2. Knowledge of tax contribution (2)_______ 3. Application regarding township government^? Legal Function 1. Enforcement of regulations or laws (5) 2. Court action or threat of (2)________ P olitical function 1. Voting residence 2. Elected or app o in tffio fficials (2) 3. Attendance at township meetings (10) 4. Communication with s;ate legislators (21 5. Letter or phone campaigns (2)__________ Region County Other Program Lake Association Involved Lake Association Program Completed Attempted In Effect Mute APPENDIX C HERBICIDES REGISTERED WITH THE MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, AND THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY FOR USE IN THE AQUATIC ENVIRONMENT Herbicides registered with the Michigan Department of Agriculture, and the Environmental Protec tion Agency for use in the aquatic environment. Brand Name Manufacturer Percent Active Ingredient Liquid or Granular COPPER SULFATE PRODUCTS Cito Copper Sulfate E-Z F10 MO Copper Sulfate Haviland Copper Sulfate Rootex Envirocap - C Diamond Copper Sulfate Cities Service Co. E-Z Flo Chemical Co. Haviland Agricultural Chemical Co. Relance Chemicals Corp. 3 - M Co. United Co-operatives Inc. 99. OH 99. OH 99. OH 86.2H 5.3H 99. OH G G G G G G A and V Inc. A and V Inc. Applied Biochemists Inc. Applied Biochemists Inc. Applied Biochemists Inc. Applied Biochemists Inc. Aqualar Geigy Agricultural Chemicals Mogul Corporation Ralston Purina Co. 3 - M Co. 3 - M Co. Transvaal Inc. 1.8H 7.OH 1.1H 7.1H 9.OH 3.7H 7.OH 13.OH 7.1H 5.OH 55.8H 7.OH 7.OH G L G CHELATED COPPER PRODUCTS A & V - 70 A & V - 70 Cutrine Cutrine Cutrine - Plus Cutrine - Plus KS - 9 Sequestrine Copper Mogul 7431 Purina Algae Check Herbicide System M Moriner System A Algae - Rhap Cu-7 Brand Name Manufacturer Percent Active Ingredient Liquid or Granular ENDOTHALL PRODUCTS 66.7% 40.3% 10.1% 17.5% 10.1% 40.3% 40.3% 17.5% 66.7% 22.1% L L G G G L L G L G Mogul AG-436 Mogul Corp. L Mogul A-437 Mogul Corp. 22.1% Endothall 25.3% Si 1vex 5.1 Endothall 5.6% Si 1vex Aquathol Plus Pennwalt Corp. L Aquathol Plus Granular Pennsalt Chemicals Corp. (Pennwalt Corp.) 22.1% Endothall 25.3% i 1vex 5.1% Endothall 5.6% Silvex Dow Chemical Co. 69.2% L Pennwalt Corp. 60.0% L ENDOTHALL & SILVER PRODUCTS* G G SILVEX PRODUCTS* Kuron Low Volatile Brush and Weed Herbicide Aquavex 178 Mogul Corp. Mogul Corp. Mogul Corp. Mogul Corp. Pennwalt Corp. Pennwalt Corp. Pennwalt Corp. Pennwalt Corp. Pennwalt Corp. 3 - M Co. Mogul AG - 434 Mogul AG - 432 Mogul A - 433 Mogul A - 435 Aquathol Granular Aquathol K Potassium Endothall Hydrothol 47 Granular Hydrothol 47 3-M Brand System E Brand Name Aquavex Granular Vlsko-Rhap Low Volatile Ester 2TP Ded - Weed Silvex LV Manufacturer Percent Active Ingredient Liquid or Granular Pennwalt Corp. Rhodia Inc. 22.8* 34,7% G L Thompson-Hayward Chemical Co. 64.0% L Abbott Supply Co. Agro-Chem Inc. A llied Chemical Co. American Research Corp. Chevron Chemical Co. 1.85% 1.85% 35.3% 1.85% 35.3% DIQUAT PRODUCTS Super Aquatic Weed Control Statebrand Formula 268 Aqua-Guat Certified Laboratories Inc. DEA Chemical Corp. Globe Chemicals Inc. Lad Chemicals Le Bro Chemical Co. 1.85% 4.35% 1.85% 1.85% 1.85% Lion Industrial Chemical Corp Modern Research Corporation Muni Chem Corp. National Chemsearch Corp. Precision Laboratories Inc. S cientific International Research Inc. Shore Corp. State Chemical Mfg. Co. 1.85% 1.85% 4.35% 1.85% 1.85% 1.85% 1.85% 2.36% 179 Aqua • Kleen Agro - Chem Aqua - K ill #101 Diquat A.R.C. DR-AC Ortho - Diquat Water Weed K ille r Aquatate Del Aquatic Weed K ille r Globe Eradicate Liquid Vegetation Control Le Bro Liquid Vegetation Control ConKi 11 Aqua - K ill M Aqua - K ill Watrol Herbicide Di - K ill Veg - Go Brand Name Thoroughbred Liquid Vegetation Control Envirocop - D Manufacturer Thoroughbred Chemical Corp. Percent Active Ingredient 1.85% Liquid or Granular L 3 - M Co. 17.4% Amchem Products Inc. American Oil Co. American Oil Co. Aquacide Co. Diamond Shamrock Chemical Co. Hercules Inc. 20.0% 31.1% 69.7% 20.0% 30.2% 49.5% G G L G G L Hercules Inc. 69.9% L Hercules Inc. 69.1% L Hercules Inc. 30.2% G Hercules Inc. 94.2% L Hercules Inc. 36.6% L Parsons Chemical Works Rhodia Inc. Rhodia Inc. Transvaal Inc. Transvaal Inc. Transvaal Inc. Transvaal Inc. 30.1% 30.2% 37.1% 49.5% 69.9% 69.1% 30.2% G G L L L L G G 2,4 - D PRODUCTS Aqua - Kleen 20 Amoco 2,4 - D Granules Amoco 2,4 - D LV Ester Aquaeide Crop Rider 20% Aqua Granular Hercules Weed - Rhap Amine A-4D Hercules Weed - Rhap LV Ester 4D Hercules Weed - Rhap Amine A-60 Hercules Weed - Rhap LV Granular D Hercules Weed - Rhap LV Ester 6D Hercules Visko Rhap LV Ester 2D Parsons 2,4 - D Granules Chipman 2,4 - D Gran. 20 Rhodia Visko - Rhap LV Ester 2D Weed - Rhap 2,4 - D Amine A-4D Weed - Rhap LV - 4D Weed Rhap A - 6 D Weed Rhap Low Volatile Granular D Brand Name Manufacturer Percent Active Ingredient Liquid or Granular SIMAZINE PRODUCTS** Aquazine * Ciba - Geigy Corp. 80.0* G Even though these products are registered fo r use in the aquatic environment, the Inland Lakes Management Section, DNR w ill not issue permits for th e ir use. ** For use only in small private ponds without an outlet. This lis tin g has been prepared by the Inland Lakes Management Unit as a public service based on information currently available. Listing or omission should not be construed as an endorsement or disapproval of services offered. APPENDIX D RECOGNIZED PROBLEMS OF MICHIGAN LAKE ASSOCIATIONS 182 S ep arate re s e a rc h which c o r r e la te s w ith t h is stu d y was a ls o con­ ducted 1n th e summer o f 1976. The M ich ig an Lake and Stream A s s o c ia tio n s * In c . c ir c u la t e d a q u e s tio n n a ire among I t s member la k e a s s o c ia tio n s ask­ ing them to 1 1 s t th e problems th e y each fa c e . F o rty q u e s tio n n a ire s were re tu rn e d o f 150 m a ile d . A t th e same tim e , th e Departm ent o f Resource Developm ent* M ich ig an S ta te U n iv e r s ity c ir c u la t e d a m ail q u e s tio n n a ire to re g io n a l re s o u rc e managers 1n 23 in la n d la k e c o u n tie s th ro u g h o u t th e s t a t e . q u e s tio n n a ire s were re tu rn e d o f th e 83 m a ile d . F o r ty -n in e In n e it h e r th e MLSA or reso u rce manager surveys was a fo llo w -u p conducted. R e s u lts o f th e two s tu d ie s a re p resen ted on th e fo llo w in g pages fo r comparison to th e d ata c o lle c t e d by t h is p r o je c t . The f i n a l page o f t h is appendix p re s e n ts a comparison o f th e fre q u e n c ie s o f observed lake problems from th e th re e In fo rm a tio n so u rces. LAKE PROBLEMS RECOGNIZED BY REPRESENTATIVES OF 21 LAKE ASSOCIATIONS INTERVIEWED, SUMMER 1976 PROBLEMS Total Sample of Lake Assn's FREQUENCY Higher Perform. Lake Assn's Lower Perform. Lake Assn's Pollution Abatement (including bacteria contamination, septic tank problems, tributary pollution, and d iffic u lty imple­ menting sewage projects) 10 7 3 Weed and/or Algae Control 6 2 4 Membership Apathy 6 3 3 Boating Safety (including user conflicts) 6 3 3 Public Access Concerns (including "abuses" and condition of access site ) 5 4 1 Nuisance and Disturbing Peace 3 2 1 Vandalism 3 1 2 Development Control 3 3 0 Taxation 2 2 0 Road Maintenance 2 0 2 No Problems 2 1 1 Aesthetics 1 0 1 Lawn F e rtilize rs 1 0 1 Low Dues 1 0 1 Erosion 1 0 1 Creeping Sand Dune 1 0 1 Lack of Public Agency Cooperation 1 1 0 C onflict Potential over P ossibility of Dredging Lake 1 1 0 Fish Management 1 1 0 184 LAKE PROBLEMS RECOGNIZED BY 65% OR MORE OF MLSA ASSOCIATIONS RESPONDING TO A MAILED QUESTIONNAIRE, SUMMER 1976 1. W ater q u a l i t y p roblem , excess n u t r ie n t s cau sin g p la n t growth (80%) 2. A lgae problems (7 7 .5 % ) 3. A q u a tic p la n t problems (7 7 .5 % ) 4. F e r t ll1 z a t 1 o n o f lawns (75%) 5. F is h management - Need f o r d e s ir a b le sp e cies (72%) - E xcessive sm all f i s h - Few la r g e game f i s h - Need f o r a s to c k in g program (65%) (70%) (70%) 6. Need f o r improved law en fo rcem ent p e r ta in in g to th e la k e community (70% ). N o te: Trespass problems (62 .5% ) 7. S h o re lin e e ro s io n (6 7 .5 % ) 8. Legal la k e le v e l d e te rm in a tio n 9. Power boats (65%) 10. NOTE: (65%) Fisherm en - s k ie r la k e use c o n f l i c t s (65%) 40 respondents o u t o f 150 m a ilin g s , no fo llo w -u p was conducted. 185 LAKE PROBLEMS RECOGNIZED BY 75% OR MORE OF RESPONDING REGIONAL RESOURCE MANAGERS MAILED QUESTIONNAIRE, SUMMER 1976 1 . Overdevelopment - SCS, PHD, CES, DNR, DC's 2. S e p tic tan k e f f l u e n t t o la k e a n d /o r problems g e t t i n g sewage tre a tm e n t p la n t s o r o t h e r a l t e r n a t i v e s to s e p t ic tanks Implemented - SCS, CES, DNR, D C 's , PHD 3. Lake l e v e l c o n t r o l - PHD, CES, DNR, DC's 4. A q u a tic weed c o n tr o l 5. F e r t i l i z e r r u n o f f - PHD, DNR, DC's 6. V and alism , tr e s p a s s , t h e f t , e t c . 7. A g r i c u l t u r a l and road d ra in a g e to lak es - DNR, DC's 8. S h o r e lin e e ro s io n - SCS 9. A lgae c o n tr o l 10 . L i t t e r - CES 11. F1sh management - DNR 12 . 13. - SCS, CES, DNR - SCS, D C s - CES P r o t e c t io n o f marshland - DNR Overuse and user c o n f l i c t s - DNR QUESTIONNAIRE KEY Code PHD DC's DNR CES SCS Agency Number M a ile d Number Returned County P u b lic H e a lth Departm ent 19 13 County D r a in Commission ( o r Road Commission 22 8 Departm ent o f N a tu r a l Resources, Regional F is h e r y B i o l o g i s t 9 8 C o o p e ra tiv e E xten sion S e r v i c e , County E x te n sio n D i r e c t o r 23 15 S o il C o n serva tio n S e r v i c e , Regional O f f i c e ( D i s t r i c t C o n s e r v a t io n is t ) VO J> 83 49 186 COUNTIES POLLED BY MAIL QUESTIONNAIRE TO REGIONAL RESOURCE MANAGERS I. Upper Peninsula Gogebic M arquette S c h o o lc ra ft Luce II. Northern Lower Peninsula Liimet C h arle vo ix Cheboygan A n trim Grand Traverse Alcona Wexford Roscommon III. Southern Lower Peninsula Montcalm Kent Ba r r y L iv in g s to n Oakland Kalamazoo Jackson Washtenaw Cass S t . Joseph Branch 187 Table 0 1 .--Sunvnary Comparison o f th e Frequencies o f Reported Lake Problems f o r th e Three Surveys Personal In t e r v ie w s o f 21 Lake A s s o c ia tio n s MLSA M a ile d Q u e s tio n n a ire M a ile d Q u e s tio n n a ire to Resource Managers 1. P o l l u t i o n Abatement 1, W ater Q u a li t y 1. Overdevelopment 2. Weed a n d /o r A lg ae C o n trol 2. Weed a n d /o r A lg ae C o n tro l 2. P o l l u t i o n A b a te ­ ment 3. B oating S a fe ty 3. Lawn F e r t i l i z a t i o n 3. Lake Level 4. Member Apathy 4. Fish Management 4. Weed a n d /o r A lg ae C o n trol 5. Nuisance, D i s t u r b in g th e Peace, Vandal ism 5< Law Enforcement 5. Lawn F e r t i l i z a t i o n 6. P u b lic Access Concerns 6, S h o r e lin e Erosion 6. Vand alism , e t c . 7. Development C o n tro l 7. Lake Level 7. A g r i c u l t u r e and Road D rainage 8. Boating C o n f l i c t s APPENDIX E THE USE OF VEGETATIVE BUFFER STRIPS TO MITIGATE THE IMPACT OF SEPTIC TANK EFFLUENTS ON LAKE WATER QUALITY 188 THE USE OF VEGETATIVE BUFFER STRIPS TO MITIGATE THE IMPACT OF SEPTIC TANK EFFLUENTS ON LAKE WATER QUALITY I r r e s p e c t i v e o f o n -s 1 te sewage d isp o sal method, an a d d it io n a l way to l i m i t n u t r i e n t in p u t to th e la k e i s to p reserve a n a tu r a l s t r i p o f p h re a to p h itlc (" m o is tu re lo v in g p la n t s " ) woody v e g e ta tio n along the w a te r's edge. T his b u f f e r zone o f Indigenous p la n ts w i l l the lake shore as a p re c a u tio n a g a in s t e ro s io n . h elp s t a b i l i z e I t a ls o in t e r c e p t s some o f the n u t r i e n t s which would o th e rw is e e n t e r th e la k e by e i t h e r surface r u n o f f o r subsurface d ra in a g e such as from household d ra in fie ld s . This i n t e r c e p t io n 1s accomplished by n u t r i e n t uptake v ia the root systems, w ith subsequent conversion o f a t l e a s t p a r t o f these n u tr ie n ts to the r e l a t i v e l y permanent biomass o f th e t r e e s o r shrubs' woody t is s u e s . T his i n t e r r u p t i o n and p a r t i a l r e t e n t io n o f e f f l u e n t n u trie n ts 1n sh o reside t r e e s and shrubs is a p r e f e r a b l e a l t e r n a t i v e to the d i r e c t e n tra n c e o f these n u t r ie n t s to th e la k e where th ey may c o n trib u te to a q u a tic weed and a lg a l growth. W hile much o f th e n u t r i e n t uptake by the v e g e ta t iv e b u f f e r s t r i p may be expected to r e t u r n In le a f f a l l a t th e onset o f w i n t e r , any I n t e r r u p t i o n o f the flo w o f e f ­ flu e n t n u t r ie n t s to a lg a e and weeds d u rin g th e s p rin g and sunnier growing seasons h e lp s . Raking o f th e f a l l e n leaves f o r decomposition in a compost p i l e s e t w e ll back from the shore ( p r e f e r a b l y on th e re v e rs e slope) w i l l f u r t h e r help reduce the n u t r i e n t lo a d in g o f th e la k e . I f th e la k e l o t 1s j u s t being d eveloped, th e owner should le a v e as wide a s t r i p o f u n d istu rb ed v e g e ta tio n as p o s s ib le , p a r t i c u l a r l y I f a r e l a t i v e l y steep slope 1s In v o lv e d . In a d d it io n to heightened w a te r q u a li t y p r o t e c t i o n , t h i s p r a c t i c e a ls o in c re as es the a e s th e t ic s o f the The concept of the vegetative buffer zone, showing uptake of septic tank effluent from the ground water system. The nutrients are theoretically intercepted by the root system of the shrubs, trees and other plants, and retained in their structure and leaves. Leaves should be raked and composted away from the lake shore to prevent release of phosphates to the lake upon their decomposition. 190 lake by p re s e rv in g I t s n a tu ra l appearance, and p rovides th e r e s id e n t with more l e i s u r e tim e sin ce le s s y a rd maintenance 1s r e q u ir e d . In f a c t , the les s th e n a tu ra l v e g e ta tio n o f th e home s i t e 1s d is t u r b e d , the b e t t e r , so long as th e I n i t i a l cover i s n a t u r a l and t h r i v i n g . Where th e p ro p e rty has a lr e a d y been e x t e n s iv e ly d evelop ed , th e sculp tured , manicured lawns r i g h t down to w a t e r 's edge should be modi­ fie d by th e r e i n t r o d u c t io n o f l o c a l l y common p h re a to p h y tlc v e g e t a t io n . This can be accomplished by th e s e l e c t i v e p la n t in g o f t e r r e s t r i a l species observed growing in t h i s zone a t o t h e r s i t e s around th e la k e where development has n o t y e t o cc u rre d . In in v e n to r y in g th e surrounding h a b ita ts f o r s e l e c t io n o f th e species to be in c o r p o ra te d , a t t e n t i o n should be paid to th e comparison and c o n t r a s t o f the two areas w ith respect to s o il ty p e , m o istu re c o n te n t, depth to w a t e r t a b l e , and slope. In s e l e c t in g species f o r r e i n t r o d u c t i o n , the a s s is ta n c e o f the Department o f N a tu ra l Resources re g io n a l f o r e s t e r can be I n v a l u a b le . The accompanying guide to t y p i c a l phreatophi t i c tr e e s and shrubs found In Michigan may a ls o be h e l p f u l . In s e l e c t in g species f o r in c o r p o r a tio n in th e b u f f e r zone, a com­ b in a tio n o f deep ro o ted and sh a llo w rooted p la n ts should be considered f o r optim al d ra in a g e i n t e r c e p t io n as w e ll as In c lu s io n o f a s u i t a b le m ixture o f ground cover s p e c ie s . s to rie d complex o f t a l l This w i l l I d e a l l y , r e s u l t 1n a th re e t r e e s , s h o r t e r t r e e s and shrubs, and ground le v e l v e g e t a t io n , such as f e r n s , c r e e p e r , o r g rasses. When s e le c t in g the species to be used t h e i r r e l a t i v e c o m p a t i b i l i t y to one an o th e r must be considered. ( I n th e f o llo w in g t a b l e , an e f f o r t has been made t o p r e ­ sent co m p atib le t r e e and shrub species w ith each r e fe r e n c e t r e e , so th e a p p ro p ria te combination o f canopy and u n d e rs to ry species can be p la n t e d .) This may e n t a i l p la n t in g some species a t d i f f e r e n t seasons o r tim e 191 In te r v a ls to a llo w f o r d i f f e r i n g growth r a t e s . S i m i l a r l y , th e u l t i m a t e s ize o f th e p la n tin g s should be considered w it h re s p e c t to t h e i r p o t e n t i a l f o r screening u n s ig h tly s t r u c tu r e s on the p ro p e rty o r th e p o s s i b i l i t y th a t they would o b s t r u c t a p r e f e r r e d v ie w . Cooperating personnel o f the Michigan S ta te U n i v e r s i t y Extension S e rv ic e 1n th e Department o f H o r t i c u l t u r e , and School o f Urban P lanning and Landscape A r c h it e c t u r e may be approached f o r a s s is ta n c e 1n plann ing the b es t p o s it io n in g o f the species s e le c te d . Once the choice o f species i s made, a p p r o p r ia t e se e d lin g s o r l a r g e r In d iv id u a ls must be a c q u ire d . Some o f the species included in the accompanying l i s t o f suggestions may be o b ta in e d from th e Michigan D e p a rt­ ment o f N a tu ral Resources, F o re s try Department under t h e i r W i l d l i f e p la n tin g s program, and once ag ain th e re g io n a l as sis tan ce in t h i s r e s p e c t. f o r e s t e r should be o f (An a d d it i o n a l b e n e f i t a s s o c ia te d w ith th e b u ffe r zone p la n tin g s i s t h a t most o f the species l i s t e d a r e o f d i r e c t b e n e fit to w i l d l i f e s e ttin g .) and may enhance the n a tu ra l a e s t h e t ic s o f the Stock o b tain ed from the Department o f N a tu ra l Resources w i l l be o f s e e d lin g s i z e ; i f l a r g e r specimens a re d e s ire d they may in many cases be purchased from lo c a l n u r s e r ie s . Care should be taken to avo id the In t r o d u c t io n o f e x o t ic species which may d is r u p t th e lo c a l e c o lo g y . S i m i l a r l y , i n d i v i d u a l s should be ca u tio n e d n o t to a tte m p t to remove any w ild species from p u b lic la n d , as t h i s is a v i o l a t i o n o f s t a t e law . The American homeowner would appear to ta k e c o n s id e ra b le p rid e 1n his law n, as In d ic a te d by the la r g e m arket 1n home gardening s u p p lie s . This same p r id e and In d u s trio u s n e s s can be a p p lie d to th e la k e p ro p e rty s e t t i n g , w ith th e r e s id e n t d e r iv in g s i m i l a r s a t i s f a c t i o n . However, the e f f o r t expended must be r e d ir e c t e d toward th e more e n v ir o n m e n ta lly b e n e f ic ia l r a m i f i c a t i o n s o f v e g e t a t iv e b u f f e r s t r i p lan d s ca p in g . 192 SUGGESTED WOODY PLANT SPECIES WHICH MAY BE APPROPRIATE TO LAKE FRONT BUFFER ZONE PLANTING Reference: F o w e l l , H. A . , 1965. Si 1 v i e o f f o r e s t t r e e s o f th e U n ited S t a t e s , A g r i c u l t u r e Handbook *2 7 1 . USFS, Dept. A g r i . , USGPO, W ash., D . C . , 762 pp. Tamarack - A l l o f M ich ig an . S o il: V a r i e t y o f s o i l s , high m o is tu re t o l e r a n c e , common on la k e sh o res. Found throughout M ic h ig a n . Associated Trees and Shrubs: Trees - N. w h ite c e d a r , red m aple, b a lc k ash , aspen, b la c k and w h ite spruce. Shrubs- A ld e r , r e d - o s i e r dogwood, c r a n b e r r y , b iru rn u m . Growth C o n d itio n s : S e ed lin g s need abundant l i g h t and c o n s ta n t w a te r l e v e l — should not be shaded in e a r l y growth s ta g e s . R e la t i v e slow growth 3 f e e t in 5 y e a r s ; 16 f e e t in 15 y e a r s ; 60+ f e e t in 45 y e a r s . Roots: S h a llo w , compact system , u s u a l l y 1 -2 f e e t deep. w ater t a b l e is 18 inches deep. Grows w e ll If Cedar, W h i t e - C e n tra l and N o rth ern M ic h ig a n . S o il: Best in n e u t r a l o r a l k a l i n e s o i l s e s p e c i a l l y o f lim e s to n e o r i g i n , w ell d r a in e d , b u t a ls o grows in swamps. Associated Trees and Shrubs: Trees - W hite and b la c k s p ru c e , red s p ru c e , y e llo w b i r c h , balsam f i r , w h it e p in e , Tamarack, red m aple, American elm , aspen, sugar maple, basswood. Shrubs- R e d -o z ie r dogwood, w il l o w s , c h o k e c h e rry , c r a n b e r r y , a l d e r . Growth C o n d itio n s : S e e d lin g s r e q u i r e c o n s ta n t summer m o is tu re . Medium s iz e t r e e commonly 4 0 - 5 0 f e e t t a l l , 2 -3 f e e t d ia m e t e r , 28 f e e t t a l l in 40 years on good s i t e . Roots: S h a llo w , s u b je c t to w ln d th ro w . Cedar, Red-So uth ern M ichigan (E a s te rn red c e d a r ) . S o il : N e u tra l to s l i g h t l y a c id s o i l s ; pH 4 . 7 - 7 . 8 , b u t n o t v e ry t o l e r ­ ant o f upper pH. Associated T ree s: P in e s , oaks. Growth C o n d itio n s : 4 0 -5 0 f e e t t a l l , a s s o c ia te d w ith w a te r su p p ly. Roots: S eed lin gs have deep ta p slow grow th; r a t e o f growth c l o s e l y r o o t , a p p a r e n t ly m a in ta in e d w it h m a t u r i t y . 193 Aspen. Quaking-A ll o f M ich ig an . S o il: Wide v a r i e t y , but l e a s t successful 1n coarse sands. poor In sands because o f low m o is tu re and n u t r i e n t l e v e l very w e ll a t la k e sides w ith e f f l u e n t ) . U s u a lly (may do Associated Trees and Shrubs: Trees - B ir c h , w h ite and b la c k spruce, ja c k p in e . Shrubs- H a z e l, a l d e r , ra s p b e rry . Roots: 39-60 inches deep. WHlow, B la c k -Southern and C e n tra l M ichigan. S o il: F lo u ris h e s 1n very wet a re a s . Needs abundant and continuous supply o f m o is tu re d u rin g growing season. Grows in alm ost any s o i l . Associated Trees and Shrubs: Trees - Black sp ru ce, r i v e r b i r c h , sycamore, red m aple, l o c u s t , red m u lb e rry . Shrubs- Buttonbush, swamp p r i v i t . Growth C o n d itio n s: 1ive d . Roots: Very r a p i d , reach 30-60 f e e t t a l l in north but s h o rt Tend to have r e l a t i v e s h a llo w , e x te n s iv e ro o t systems. Paper B i r c h - North and C e n tral M ich ig an . S o il: G la c ia l s o i l s e s p e c i a l l y t i l l s and outwash g e n e r a lly re q u ire s w ell d rain ed s o i l . Grows b es t in stands. Associated Trees: Jack p in e , balsam f i r , b lack spruce, y e llo w b i r c h , aspen, sugar m aple, w h ite o r red sp ru c e, w h ite ash. Growth C o n d itio n s: S e n s it iv e s e e d lin g s . Mature tre e s 70 f e e t t a l l , s h o rt l iv e d 70-75 y e a r s . Heavy m o r t a l i t y . Yellow B i r c h - A l l o f M ichigan. S o il: Grows w e ll on loams from good to p o o rly d ra in e d . Associated Trees and Shrubs: Trees - Hemlock, sugar m aple, beech, red sp ru c e , w h ite c e d a r, bass­ wood, b la ck ash, w h ite ash, aspen, w h ite b ir c h . Shrubs- Mountain m aple, dogwood ( a l t e r n a t e l e a f e d ) , ground hemlock. Growth C o n d itio n s: Rapid w it h moderate overhead s u n lig h t . 6 y e a rs . About 50 f e e t high when mature. 8 -1 0 f e e t in American Sycamore-C e n t r a l and Southern M ichigan. S o il: E x c e lle n t along la k e s . T o le r a n t o f groundwater f l u c t u a t i o n s . Associated Trees: Black elm , red m aple, s i l v e r maple, b la ck w illo w (m od erately i n t o l e r a n t ) . Growth C o n d itio n s : Fast growing throughout I t s is f a s t e r . 70 f e e t in 17 y e a r s . Roots: Wide sp read , s tr o n g ly branched r o o t s . l i f e , o n ly b lack w illo w 194 Red Maple-A-1 of Michigan. S o il: Wide v a r i e t y o f s o i l s . Common along small slu g g ish stream s. Associated Trees: B lack ash , American elm , aspen, paper b i r c h , y e llo w b ir c h , b lack spruce, sugar m aple, beech, basswood. Growth C o n ditio n s: Rapid up 1n e a r l y l i f e Mature tre e s are 6 0 -90 f e e t h ig h . Roots: 3 - 3 . 5 inches dbh Shallow o r deep tap ro o t depending on w e ig h t. in 10 y e a r s . Shade t o l e r a n t . S i l v e r M ap le-C e n tral and Southern M ichigan. S o il: V a r ie t y o f s o i l s , common on low , w e ll d rain ed r i v e r bottom Sometimes along low la k e shores. la n d . Associated Trees: American elm , red maple, basswood, sycamore, r i v e r b ir c h , cottonwood, b lack ash. Growth C o n ditio n s: Rapid e s p e c ia ll y in f i r s t 50 y e a r s , 70-120 f e e t high. M oderately i n t o l e r a n t . Sugar M ap le-A ll o f M ichigan. S o il: A l l ty p e s , t h r i v e s on f e r t i l e , w e ll d rain ed s i t e s , e s p e c ia ll y loams. pH range 3 . 7 - 7 . 3 , b es t is 5 . 5 - 7 . 3 . Associated Trees and Shrubs: Trees - Beech, y e llo w , basswood, red spruce, red maple, hemlock, w h ite spruce. Shrubs- Beaked h a z e l, a t l a n t i c leatherw oo d , s c a r l e t e l d e r , American e l d e r , pagoda dogwood, dwarf honeysuckle, ra s p b e rr y , b la c k b e rr y . Growth C o n d itio n s: About 1 f o o t / y e a r . Very t o l e r a n t o f shade. Roots: At age 30 may reach 35-40 f e e t . Deep and branching. Basswood-A l l o f M ichigan. S o il: Loams, sandy loam, s i l t loam w ith c la y s u b s o il. Should have minimum s i l t plus c la y co n ten t o f 35% ^nd 3% o rg a n ic m a tte r in upper 7 inches o f s o i l p r o f il e - p H 5 . 5 - 7 . 3 . F a i r l y s e n s i t i v e to m ic ro c lim a te . [A p p a re n tly not "wet s o i l " t o l e r a n t , but leaves have high phosphorus and n itro g e n co n ten t suggesting t h a t 1 t would tak e up e f f l u e n t . ] Associated Trees: Paper b i r c h , w h ite p in e , n o rth e rn red o ak , w h ite ash, w h ite p in e , hemlock, y e llo w b i r c h , sugar maple, beech, b la c k c h e r r y , w h ite oak. Growth C o n ditio n s: About 5 to 12 o r 18 inches per y e a r . in f i r s t 20 y e a r s . Reach 140+ f e e t t a l l . Roots: Deep, wide spread system o f stron g l a t e r a l r o o ts . F a s te s t growth 195 Black L o c u s t-Not n a tu r a l to M ic h ig a n , b u t has been In tr o d u c e d . S o il: Does w e ll on poor s o i l s . But 1s a legume and w it h U t t e r 1 t produces s i g n i f i c a n t n it r o g e n to th e s o i l and environm ent ( s o l u b l e n i t r a t e occurs w ith ra p id decom position o f lo c u s t l i t t e r ) . Associated T rees: Growth C o n d itio n s : 40-100 f e e t . Roots: Hardwoods and y e llo w p o p la r , maples. Very r a p id 75 f e e t in 50 y e a r s . Maximum h e ig h t is E x te n s iv e s h a llo w r o o t system. American Beech- A l l o f M ich ig an . S o il: P re fe re n c e i s loamy s o i l w it h a high humus c o n te n t. Requires co n sid e ra b le w a t e r - 10 in c h e s /y e a r f o r growth and t r a n s p i r a t i o n . W i l l grow where w a te r t a b l e w i t h i n 6 -1 0 inches o f s u r f a c e , but is less t o l e r a n t than red maple o r sweetgum. Has s h a llo w e r r o o t system on p o o rly d r a i n ­ ed s o i l s . Associated T ree s: Sugar m aple, y e llo w b i r c h , basswood, b la c k c h e r r y , red s p ru c e, h ic k o r y , oaks. Growth C o n d itio n s : About 1 f o o t / y e a r f o r f i r s t 40 y e a r s , m ature h e ig h t 60-80 f e e t , maximum 120 f e e t . Very t o l e r a n t , s i m i l a r to sugar maple. Roots: Large expanse o f s u rfa c e r o o t s . fungal i n f e c t i o n . Thin bark makes i t s u b je c t to Black Ash-A l l o f M ich ig an . S o il: Most common in p e a t, b u t a ls o c la y s and sands o r c l a y t i l l . fe rs high w a te r t a b l e o r s ta n d in g w a t e r . P re­ Associated Trees and Shrubs: Trees - American elm , red m aple, w h it e cedar a ls o b ir c h e s , sp ru c es , hemlock and tam arack. Shrubs- A l d e r , dogwood, sumac, b l u e b e r r y , h o l l y . Growth C o n d itio n s : T a l l e s t o f re co rd is 79 f e e t in W isconsin. White Ash-A l l o f M ichigan except w estern Upper P e n in s u la . S o il: Most common on f e r t i l e s o i l s w ith high n itr o g e n c o n te n t and moder­ a te to high ca lciu m c o n te n t. Grows b e s t on m o d e ra te ly w e ll d ra in e d s o ils . R a re ly found in swamps, b u t t o l e r a n t o f tem porary f l o o d i n g . — R arely found in bottom lands where poor a i r d ra in a g e . Associated Trees and Shrubs: Trees - W hite p in e , n o rth e rn red o a k , basswood, red and sugar m aples, hemlock, beech, b i r c h , b la c k c h e r r y , elm. Shrubs- Downy s e r v i c e b e r r y , paw paw, American hornbeam, f lo w e r in g dogwood, w i t c h - h a z e l , E. hophornbeam, dockmackie. Growth C o n d itio n s : 3 -5 years to reach b r e a s t h e i g h t . About 3 5 -4 0 f e e t t a l l in 20 y e a r s . Shade t o l e r a n t when young b u t w ith m a t u r it y becomes in to le ra n t. - - P i o n e e r sp ecies but can s u r v iv e in c lim a x canopy. 196 Green Ash-A ll o f M ichigan. S o il: Common on b o tto m -la n d s , loams w ith n e u t r a l pH to s l i g h t l y a lk a lin e . Successful p la n tin g s on s p o il banks o f s t r i p mines. Common in a l l u v i a l s o i l s o f r i v e r and stream banks. Associated Trees: S u g a rb e rry , American elm , aspen, sugarmaple, basswood, b lack w i l l o w , sycamore, b o x e ld e r, red maple. Growth C o n d itio n s: 1 -3 f e e t p e r y e a r in f i r s t 6 o r 7 y e a rs . Roots: "Fourth most e x te n s iv e ro o t system o f a l l species stu d ie d " (A g ri. Handbook #271 p. 1 8 3 ). Trees 38 f e e t t a l l had ro o ts 48 f e e t l a t e r a l l y and 3 . 6 f e e t downward. About e q u a lly d i s t r i b u t e d w it h in top 3 f e e t o f s o i l . H ig h ly r e s i s t a n t to wind damage. - - I n t o l e r a n t to m oderately t o l e r a n t . Dogwood, Flow ering -C e n tr a l and Southern M ichigan. S o il: Upland to deep m oist s o i l s , common along streambanks. Do b e t t e r on l i g h t s o i ls than heavy ones. F o lia g e high in m ineral n u t r i e n t s , hence s i g n i f i c a n t in s o i l improvement. L i t t e r decomposes r a p i d ly e s p e c ia lly good source o f calcium . — Leaves c o n c e n tra te f l o u r i n e range 40 to 100 ppm w ith s i t e and season. Associated Trees: O ak-Hickory f o r e s t s , a ls o red m aple, y e l lo w - p o p l a r , w hite ash, beech, blackgum. Growth C o n ditio n s: Maximum s iz e 40 f e e t t a l l , many branched shrub. Very shade t o l e r a n t . in n o rth e rn range is a Yellow P o p la r - Lower C e n tra l and Southern M ichigan. S o il: Well d r a in e d , loose t e x tu r e d s o i l s . Requires high n itr o g e n content and consequently o fte n found w ith b la ck lo c u s t. Associated Trees: Beech, sugar m aple, blackgum, dogwood, h ic k o r ie s . Growth: 120 f e e t t a l l in 50 -60 years w ith dbh 1 8 -2 4 " . growth, but i n t o l e r a n t . Very f a s t Roots: R a p id ly growing, deeply p e n e tr a tin g top ro o t plus many s tr o n g ly developed wide spreading l a t e r a l ro o ts . White P ine- A l l o f M ichigan. S o il: Grows on v a r i e t y o f s o i l s but most commonly a s s o c ia te d w ith w e ll-d r a in e d sandy s o i l s . Associated Trees and Shrubs: Trees - Northern red oak, w h ite as h , hemlock, paper b i r c h , red maple, p in c h e r r y , sugar m aple, beech, y e llo w b i r c h , balsam f i r , w h ite s p ru c e , w h ite ced ar. Shrubs- Q x a l i s , M i t c h e l l a , A r a l i a , A risaem a, D e n n s ta e d tia , Cornus, Haianthemum, P t e r i diurn. Growth C o n d itio n s: Rapid, 20 inches a n n u a lly . Long l i v e d , up to 200 years and o ld t r e e s may be 200 f e e t t a l l . T o le ra n c e : May be shaded out by aspens, oaks, maples and e v e n t u a lly d ie . But can dominate b irch es ( t h i n l e a f c o v e r ) . 197 Roots: Form and d i s t r i b u t i o n v a r ie s w it h s o i l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s . N o rm ally only v e s t ig e o f a tap r o o t w it h 3 -5 la r g e ro o ts spread l a t e r a l l y o u t ­ ward and downward. Gives t r e e f i r m anchor in s o i l . Mass o f s m a lle r l a t e r a l ro o ts spread from th e m ajor l a t e r a l s . High c o n c e n tr a tio n s o f n itr o g e n , o rg a n ic m a t t e r and exchangeable bases s t im u la t e s fo rm a tio n o f a c o n c e n tr a tio n o f f i n e r o o t s . Red P in e -C e n tra l and N o rth ern M ichigan in c lu d in g Upper P eninsu la S o il: Grows w e ll in p oo re r s o i l s . S tu d ies o f l i t t e r show i t to be high in Phosporus and N itro g e n . in la k e s t a t e s Associated Trees and Shrubs: Trees - Jack p in e , e a s te rn w h ite p in e , quaking aspen, b ig to o t h aspen, scrub o aks, m aples, b la c k c h e r r y , balsam f i r , b la c k spruce. Shrubs- Canada b lu e b e r r y ( Vaccinium canadense) , lowbush b lu e b e r r y ( A r c t o s ta p h -y lo s u v a - u r s i ) , p r a i r i e w il l o w ( S a l i x h u m i l i s ) , Amer. hazel ( CoTylus a m e ric a n a ) beaked hazel ( £ . c o r n u ta ) , s t r i p e d m aple^TAcer pensylanicum ) , d w arf bush honeysuckle ( D i e r v i l l a l o n i c e r a ) , J e rs e y te a ceanothus ( Ceanothus am eric an u s) , American f l y honeysuckle ( L o n ic era c o n a d e n s is ) . Growth C o r d it io n s : y e a rs . About 1 f o o t p e r y e a r f o r f i r s t 60 y e a r s . L iv e 100+ Roots: L ik e w h it e p in e , v e ry e x te n s iv e r o o t system , in some cases ta p ro o t may go down 9 f e e t o r more. Balsam P o p l a r - A l l o f M ic h ig a n . S o il: Common along la k e b o rd e rs . s o ils . Needs much m o is tu r e . E x c e ll e n t growth on sandy, g r a v e l l y Associated Trees and Shrubs: Trees - Balsam f i r , aspen, w h ite s p ru c e , balsam f i r , b la ck ash , red m a p le , o c c as io n a l tam arack. paper b i r c h , Shrubs- Speckled a l d e r ( Alnus ru g osa) , American green a l d e r (A. c r i s p a ) , r e d - o s i e r dogwood ( Cornus s t o l i n f e r a ) , bunchberry dogwood ( t . ca n a d e n s is ) , mountain maple ( Acer s p ic a tu m ) , b e a rb e rr y honeysuckle ( L o n ic e ra ~ ~ in v o lu c ra te ) , beaked hazel ( C ory1us c o r n u t a ) , American c ra n b e rry bush ( Viburnum t r i l o b u m ) . . . Growth C o r d it io n s : Rapid d u rin g f i r s t 4 0 -5 0 y e a r s -u p to 70 f e e t t a l l . Short l i v e d . Less shade t o l e r a n t than common a s s o c ia te s : w h ite sp ru c e , balsam f i r , n o rth e rn w h ite c e d a r , b la c k ash , red m aple, b u t e q u a l l y i n t o l e r a n t as quaking aspen and paper b ir c h . W i l l not grow w e ll in c o m p e titio n w it h o t h e r sp e ic es unless i s dominant. B igtoothed Aspen-A l l o f Michigan S o il: Well d ra in e d sandy s o i l s . Needs w a te r t a b l e lo w er than 18 inches from s u rfa c e f o r adequate a e r a t i o n . Found alo ng streams and la k e s . Associated Trees and Shrubs: Trees - Quaking aspen, balsam p o p la r , paper b i r c h , red maple (th e s e most common). Shrubs- Choke b e r r y ( Prunus y i r g i n i a n a ) , downey s e r v ic e b e r r y ( A m elanchier a r b o r e a ) , s w e e tfe rn ( Comptonia p e r e q r i n a ) , p r a i r i e w il l o w ( S a l i x h u m ilu s ) . 198 Groundcover- B lu e b e r rie s ( Vaccinium s p p ) , ch eckerb erry w ln te rg re e n ( E a u lt h e r ia procumbens), dwarf bushhoneysuckle ( p i e r v i l l a lo n ic e r a ) e a s te rn bracken (P te r id iu m la tiu s c u lu m ) and b la c k ­ b e rry ( R'ubus spp). Growth C o n ditio n s: Medium s i z e t r e e u s u a lly not more than 30 -40 f e e t ta ll. Rapid growth u n t i l 40 years o ld . Short l i v e d o n ly about 6 0 -70 years. H ig h ly i n t o l e r a n t . Roots: Very s h a llo w , good e f f l u e n t in t e r c e p t io n p ro b a b ly , but s u b je c t to windthrow and to pp in g . Popular w i l d l i f e fo o d -w h ite t a i l d e e r, beaver, grouse, procupine. Black C h e rry -Michigan Lower Peninsula S o il: Loamy to g r a v e l l y s o i ls w ith s i l t y to c la y e y s u b s o ils , w e ll drain ed . Associated Trees: Sugar maple, w h ite p in e , n orthern red ash, hemlock, beech, y e llo w b ir c h . Growth C o n ditio n s: Very ra p id f i r s t 4 5 -5 0 y e a rs . reach 100 f e e t but u s u a lly 80 f e e t o r le s s . oak, w h ite Maximum h e ig h t may Roots: Predom inantly spreading and s h a llo w , u s u a lly r e s t r i c t e d to upper 2 fe e t o f s o il. E a s ily windthrown. I n t o l e r a n t , common in canopy openings. Northern Red Oak- A l 1 o f Michigan S o il: S o ils range from c la y to loamy sands, and from deep stone f r e e to ro cky, shallow s o i l s . Needs moist substratum w it h in 4 to 1 fo o t o f s u rfa c e . Best s i t e s are f i n e te x tu r e d s o i l s w ith high w a te r t a b l e . Associated Trees and Shrubs: Trees - Hany a s so c ia tes in c lu d in g ashes, aspens, b ir c h e s , c h e r r i e s , elm , f i r s , h ic k o r y , maples, o th e r oaks, p in e s , spru ces, bass­ wood, sycamore, n o rth ern w h ite c e d a r, b lack lo c u s ts , e t c . Small T re e s - Flow ering dogwood, h o l l y , hornbeam, hophornbeam, redbud, pawpaw, s a s s a fr a s , s e r v i c e b e r r y , percimmon. Shrubs- G re e n b rie r ( Smi1ax s p p . ) , H ydran gia, mountain l a u r e l ( Kalmia 1a t i f o l a ) , rhododendran, and w itc h h a ze l ( Hamamelis v i r q i n i a n a ) . Growth C o n d itio n s: Maximum 70-90 f e e t t a l l w ith 2 -3 f e e t dbh. growth r e t e in te r m e d ia te t o le r a n c e . Roots: Slow Deep tap r o o t. Swamp White Oak-Lower Michigan (S o uth ern) S o il: Comnonly found in wet low lands. Associated Trees: A l l tre e s common to wet o r m oist s i t e s ; basswood, black ash, h i c k o r i e s , pin o ak , red m aple, northern red oak, s i l v e r maple, sweetgun, sycamore, y e llo w p o p la r , w h ite ash, w illo w . Growth C o n d itio n s : 6 0 -7 0 f e e t h ig h , f a i r l y ra p id growth, 2 - 3 f e e t dbh. In te rm e d ia te in to le r a n c e w ith se ed lin g s a b le to s t a r t in shade. Roots: Shallow ro o t system. 199 Eastern Hemlock-C e n tr a l to Upper P e n in s u la o f M ichigan S o il : Grows w e ll la k e s t a t e s . 1n p e a t and muck s o i l s * b u t a ls o on sandy loams 1n Associated T ree s: W hite p in e , y e l lo w b i r c h , y e l lo w p o p la r , aspen, w h ite sp ru c e , paper b i r c h , tam a ra c k , sycamore. Growth C o n d itio n s : 16 f e e t 1n 40 y e a rs 1n M ic h ig a n . Maximum 60 f e e t in 140 y e a r s . H ig h ly t o l e r a n t o f sh a d in g , b u t causes s tu n te d grow th. ADDITIONAL LAKE FRONT BUFFER ZONE PLANTING REFERENCES Boom, B. K. and H. K l e i j n . 1966. The g lo r y o f th e t r e e . & Company, I n c . , Garden C i t y , N .Y . 128pp. Doubleday M a r t in , A. C. e t a l . 1951. American w i l d l i f e and p l a n t s , a guide to w i l d l i f e food h a b i t s . Dover P u b l i c a t i o n s , I n c . , N .Y . 500pp. Robinson, F. B. 1960. U sefu l t r e e s and shrubs (a ca rd f i l e o f d ata on approx. 500 hardy woody p la n ts in common use as o rn a m e n ta ls ). G a rrard P u b lis h in g Company, Champaign, 111. S a rg e n t, C. S. 1965. Manual o f th e t r e e s o f N orth America V o l. Dover P u b l i c a t io n s , I n c . , New Y o rk , N .Y . 433pp. 1. LITERATURE CITED LITERATURE CITED Barlowe, R a le ig h . 1972. Land re so u rce economics: th e economics o f r e a l p r o p e r t y , 2nd Ed. P r e n t i c e - H a l l I n c . , Englewood C l i f f s , N .J . 616p. Beard, Thomas D. 1969. Impact o f an o v e r w in t e r drawdown on the a q u a tic v e g e ta t io n in Murphy Flowage, W is co n s in , research r e p o r t no. 4 3 . * Wise. D ept. N a t. R e s ., Madison, Wise. _________ . 1973. O v e rw in te r drawdown: impact on th e a q u a t ic v e g e ta ­ t i o n in Murphy Flowage, W isco nsin, Tech. B u l l . No. 6 1 . Wise. D ept. N a t. R e s ., Madison, Wise. 13p. B e n n e tt, George W. 1971. Management o f la k e s and ponds, 2nd Ed. Van Nostrand R ein h o ld C o ., New Y o rk , N.Y. Bouma, J . 1971. E v a lu a tio n o f th e f i e l d p e r c o la t io n t e s t and an a l t e r n a t i v e procedure to t e s t s o i l p o t e n t i a l f o r d is p o s a l o f s e p t i c tank e f f l u e n t . S o il S c i . Soc. Amer. Proc. 3 5 ( 6 ) :8 7 1 - 8 7 5 . B rooker, M. P . , and R. W. Edwards. 1975. A q u a tic h e r b ic id e s and th e c o n tr o l o f w a te r weeds, re v ie w p ap er. W ater Research 9 : 1 - 1 5 . C ain, John M ., and M. T . B e a tt y . 1965. Disposal o f s e p t i c tank e f ­ f l u e n t in s o i l s . J . S o il and w a te r Cons. 2 0 ( 3 ) : 1 0 1 - 1 0 5 . Cook, W. L. e t a l . 1974. Blooms o f an algophorous amoeba a s s o c ia te d w ith Anabaena in a fre s h w a te r l a k e . W a te r, A i r , and S o il P o l­ lu tio n 3 (1 ):7 1 -8 0 . C o u lt e r , J . B . , T. W. B endixen, A. B. Edwards. 1960. Study o f seepage beds. R obert A. T a f t S a n i t a r y E n g in e e rin g C e n te r, U.S. P u b lic H e a lth S e r v ic e , Colunfcus, O hio. 62p. Deming, W. Edwards. 9 (4 ):3 5 9 -3 6 9 . 1944. On e r r o r s in su rv e y s . Amer. Soc. Review D e x te r, Lewis A. 1970. E l i t e and s p e c i a l i z e d i n t e r v i e w i n g . w estern U n iv . P re s s , Evanston, 111. 205p. N o rth ­ Diment, W. H. e t a l . 1973. Some e f f e c t s o f d e ic in g s a l t s on I r o n d e q u o it Bay. Highway Research Record, No. 4 2 5 : 2 3 - 3 6 . Edmondson, W. T. 1972. N u t r i e n t s and p h y to p la n kto n 1n Lake Washing­ t o n , pp. 1 7 2 -1 9 3 . In N u t r i e n t s and e u t r o p h i c a t i o n , s p e c ia l symposia V o l. I . Amer. Soc. Limno. and O cean., I n c . A l l e n P re s s , Lawrence, Kansas. 328p. 200 201 El 11s, Boyd G. 1971. G u ll Lake I n v e s t i g a t i o n s : n u t r i e n t In p u t s tu d ie s [Research r e p o r t to Kalamazoo N a tu re C e n t e r ] . D ept, o f Crop and S o il S c ie n c e s , M ich ig an S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y , E. L a n s in g , M ich ig an . 17p. E l l i s , Boyd, and Kenneth E. C h ild s . 1973. N u t r i e n t movement from s e p tic tanks and lawn f e r t i l i z a t i o n , Tech. B u l l . No. 7 3 -5 . M ichigan D e p t. N a t. R e s ., L a n s in g , M ic h ig a n . 83p. E h re n fe ld , David W. 1970. B i o lo g i c a l and W inston, I n c . New Y o rk , N .Y. c o n s e r v a tio n . 226p. F a s s e tt, Norman C. 1957. A manual o f a q u a t ic p la n t s . W isconsin P re s s , Madison, W ise. 405p. H o l t , R in e h a r t U n iv e rs ity o f Foree, Edward G . , and C h arles R. S c ro g g ln . 1973. Carbon and n itr o g e n as r e g u la t o r s o f a l g a l grow th. ASCE, J . o f E n v iro n . E n g in e e rin g D iv . 99 ( E E 5 ): 6 3 9 -6 5 2 . G e ld r e lc h , E. E. 1970. A p p ly in g b a c t e r i a l w a te r q u a l i t y . J . AWWA 6 2 ( 2 ) : 1 1 3 - 1 2 0 . param eters to r e c r e a t i o n a l Gibson, C. E. 1971. The a l g a c ld a l e f f e c t o f copper on a green and a b lu e -g r e e n a lg a and some e c o lo g ic a l I m p l i c a t i o n s . J. of A p p lie d Ecology 9 ( 2 ) : 5 1 3 -5 1 8 . Glass, Gene V . , and J u l i a n C. S t a n le y . 1970. e d u c a tio n and psychology. P re n tic e -H a ll, N .J . 596p. S t a t i s t i c a l methods In I n c . , Englewood C l i f f s , Gorham, Paul R. 1964. T o x ic a lg a e as a p u b lic h e a lt h h a z a rd . AWWA 5 6 ( 1 1 ) : 1 4 8 1 - 1 4 8 8 . J. H o ltr o p , Donald. 1973. Changing th in g s : a c i t i z e n ' s guide [ p a m p h le t]. C o n tin u in g Education S e r v ic e s , M ichigan S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y , East L a n s in g , M ich ig an . Horne, A le x a n d e r J . , and C h arles R. Goldman. 1974. Suppression o f n itr o g e n f i x a t i o n by b lu e -g re e n a lg a e in a e u tr o p h ic la k e w ith t r a c e a d d it io n s o f copper. S cience 1 8 3 ( 4 1 2 3 ) : 4 0 9 - 4 1 1 . Humphrys, C l i f f o r d R. e t a l . 1965. M ichigan la k e s and ponds. D ept, o f Resource D e v e lo p ., A g r i c u l t u r a l Experim ent S t a t i o n , M ichigan S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y , East L an sin g , M ich ig an . Hyman, H e r b e r t Hiram e t a l . 1975. I n t e r v ie w i n g in s o c ia l re s e a r c h . U n iv. Chicago P re s s , C hicago, 111. 414p. Keenan, John D. 1973. Response o f Anabaena to pH, ca rb o n , and phos­ phorus. ASCE, J . o f E n v iro n . E n g in e e rin g D iv . 99 ( E E 5 ) : 6 0 7 -6 2 0 . K le s s lg , Lowell L. 1973. Lake p ro p e rty owners 1n n o rth e rn W isconsin. U n iv . W ise. E x te n s io n , Madison, W ise. 146p. 20? . 1976. I n s t i t u t i o n a l arrangements f o r la k e management In Wisconsin. J. o f S o il and Water C o n servatio n * J u ly -A u g u s t: 152-155. K le s s lg , Lowell L . , and Douglas A. Yanggen. 1972. Wisconsin lak es h o re p ro p e rty owners' a s s o c ia tio n s : i d e n t i f i c a t i o n , d e s c r i p t io n , and p e rc e p tio n o f la k e problems. U niv. o f Wise. E x te n s io n , Madison, Wise. 72p. Kunkle, S. H. 1972. E f f e c t s o f road s a l t on a Vermont stream. AWWA 6 4 ( 5 ) : 2 9 0 - 2 9 5 . J. K usler, Jon A . , and Robert Owen. n .d . Lake p ro p e rty s a n it a r y surveys. Wise. In la n d Lake Renewal and Shoreland Demonstration P r o je c t Re­ p o rt. Leopold, A ldo. 1949. A Sand County almanac. New York, N .Y. 226p. Oxford U n iv. Press, In c . Lueschow, Lloyd A. 1972. B io lo g y and c o n tro l o f s e le c te d a q u a tic nuisances in r e c r e a t io n a l w a te rs , Tech. B u l l . No. 57. Dept, o f N a t. Resources, Madison, Wise. 36p. Lund, J . W. G. P h yto p lan k to n , pp. 30 6-3 30 . In E u tr o p h ic a tio n : causes, consequences, c o r r e c t io n s . 1969. N a t. Acad. S c i . , Wash., D.C. Mack, W a lte r N. e t a l . 1972. I s o l a t i o n o f P o li o m y e l it i s V iru s from a contaminated w e l l . H e alth S e rv ic e Reports 8 7 ( 3 ) :2 7 1 -2 7 4 . Mack, W a lte r N . , and Frank M. D ' l t r i . 1973. P o ll u t io n o f a marina area by w a t e r c r a f t use. J . Water P o l l u t . Control Fed. 4 5 ( 1 ) : 9 7 -1 0 4 . Maine Dept, o f E n v iro n . P r o t e c t io n . 1974. C lean in g up th e w a te r: p r i v a t e sewage d isposal in Maine. Augusta, Me. 29p. M a r tin , A lexander C . , H e rb e r t S. Zim, and Arnold L. Nelson. 1951. American w i l d l i f e and p la n ts : a guide to w i l d l i f e food h a b it s . Dover P u b lic a t io n s , I n c . , N .Y. 500p. McNabb, Clarence D . , J r . 1975. A q u atic p la n t problems 1n r e c r e a t io n a l lakes o f southern Michigan [ N a r r a t i v e f o r a s l i d e s e r i e s ] . Mich­ igan Dept, o f N a t. R e s ., Water Q u a lit y Control D i v . , L ansing, Mich. 52p. M ik u la , Richard e t a l . 1976. In la n d la k e s e l f - h e l p program, annual r e p o r t f o r 1975. In la n d Lake Management U n i t , Michigan Dept. N a t. R e s ., Lansing, Mich. Moser, C. A . , and G. K a lto n . 1972. Survey methods 1n s o c ia l I n v e s t i ­ g a t io n , 2nd Ed. Basic Books, In c . New Y o rk , N .Y. 549p. 203 N1cholst S. A. 1974. Mechanical and h a b i t a t m a n ip u la tio n f o r a q u a tic p la n t management. Tech. B u l l . No. 77. Wise. Dept, o f N a t. R e s ., Madison, Wise. 34p. ________ . 1975. management. 1137-1148. The use o f o v e rw in te r drawdown f o r a q u a tic v e g e ta tio n Water Resources B u l l . Amer. Water Res. Assoc. 1 1 ( 6 ) : Novy, James R . , Charles H. Pecor, and J e f f e r y T. C lin e . 1973. Swim­ m er's i t c h c o n t r o l: e f f e c t on w a te r q u a l i t y , Tech. B u l l . No. 7 3 -4 . Michigan Dept. N at. R e s ., L ansing, M ich ig an . 31p . O t is , R. J . 1974. B u ild in g a home in the country? What you should know about y o u r s e p tic system. P u b lic a t io n G1071. U n iv. Wise. C o o perative E x te n s io n , Madison, Wise. P h i l l i p s , Bernard S. 1966. S o c ia l re se arch : The Macmillan C o ., New Y o rk , N .Y. 336p. s t r a t e g y and t a c t i c s . P ie r c e , Ned D. 1970. In la n d la k e dredging e v a l u a t i o n , Tech. B u l l . No. 4 6 . Wise. Dept, o f N a tu ra l Resources, Madison, Wise. 68p. P ro v a s o ll, L u i g i . A lg al n u t r i t i o n and e u t r o p h ic a t io n , pp. 57 4-593. In E u tro p h ic a tio n : causes, consequences, c o r r e c t i v e s . 1969. N at. Acad. S c i . , Wash., D.C. 661p. Prows, B. L . , and W. F. M cllhenny. 1973. Development o f a s e l e c t i v e a lg a e c id e to c o n tro l nuisance a lg a l grow th, EPA r e p o r t 6 6 0 / 3 - 7 3 006. U.S. Government P r i n t i n g O f f i c e , Wash., D.C. 126p. R i l e y , M a tild a W ., John W. R i l e y , and Jackson Toby. 1954. Socio­ l o g i c a l s tu d ie s in s c a le a n a ly s is : a p p l i c a t i o n s , t h e o r y , pro­ cedures. Rutgers U niv. Press, New Brunswick, N .J . 433p. Round, F. E. 1973. The b io lo g y o f th e a lg a e , 2nd Ed. Press, N .Y. 278p. S t . M a rtin s S c h in d le r , D. W. 1974. E u tro p h ic a tio n and reco very in ex p erim en tal la k e s : im p lic a tio n s f o r la k e management. Science 1 8 4 :8 9 7 -8 9 9 . Schmidt, A. A. 1975. P ro p e r ty , power, and p u b lic ch o ic e : impact o f i n s t i t u t i o n a l a l t e r n a t i v e s [u np ub lished m a n u s c rip t]. Michigan S t a te U n i v e r s i t y , Department o f A g r i c u l t u r a l Economics, East L ansing, M ich ig an . S c h rau fn a g e l, F. H. 1967. P o ll u t io n aspects a s s o c ia te d w ith chemical d e ic in g . Highway Research Record No. 1 9 3 :2 2 -3 3 . S e l l t i z , C la ire e t a l . 1966. Research methods in s o c ia l r e l a t i o n s (re v is e d ). H o l t , R in e h a rt and W inston, New York. 622p. T s a i, Chu-Fa. 1973. Water q u a l i t y and f i s h l i f e below sewage o u t­ fa lls . Tran s. Amer. F is h . Soc. 1 0 2 ( 2 ) :2 8 1 -2 9 2 . 204 U.S. D ept, o f H e a l t h , E ducation and W e lf a r e . 1963. Manual o f s e p t l c tan k p r a c t i c e . Pub. No. 526. U .S . Government P r i n t i n g O f f i c e , Wash., D.C. Vogt, John E . , and James S. Boyd. 1973. Questions and answers about home sewage d is p o s a l , E x t. B u l l . 577. M ich ig an S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y , C o o p e ra tiv e E x te n s io n S e r v i c e , E. L a n s in g , M ic h ig a n . W a ll, G. J . , and L. R. Webber. 1970. S o il c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s and sub­ s u rfa c e sewage d is p o s a l. Can. J . Pub. H e a lth 6 1 ( 1 ) : 4 7 - 5 4 . Warner, W il l i a m W. 1976. B e a u t i f u l swimmers, watermen, crabs and th e Chesapeake Bay. L i t t l e , Brown and C o ., Boston, Mass. 304p. W e tz e l, R obert G. 1975. p h i a , Pa. 743p. Young, P a u lin e V. P re n tic e -H a ll Lim nology. W. B. Saunders C o ., P h i l a d e l ­ 1966. S c i e n t i f i c s o c ia l surveys and re s e a rc h . I n c . , Englewood C l i f f s , N .J . 576p. GENERAL REFERENCES GENERAL REFERENCES A ckh o ff, Russell L. 1953. The design o f s o c ia l re s e a rc h . o f Chicago Press. Chicago, 111. 420p. U n iv e rs ity Anonymous. 1967. [and a n n u a ls ]. Michigan compiled laws annotated (MCLA). West P u b lis h in g C o ., S t . P a u l, Minn. Anonymous. 1973. S u b d iv is io n in Michigan (a w orking p a p e r ). o f Land Use, Dept, o f N a t. R e s ., Lansing, Mich. 30p. Babbie, Earl R. 1975. The p r a c t i c e o f s o c ia l re s e a rc h . P u b lis h in g C o ., Belmont, C a l i f . 511p . 1973. Survey research methods. Belmont, C a l i f . 383p. O ffic e Wadsworth Wadsworth P u b lis h in g C o ., Backstrom, Charles H. 1963. Survey re s e a rc h . s i t y Press, Chicago, 111. Northwestern U n iv e r­ B a ll y , James, and H a ro ld Wallman. 1971. A survey o f household waste tre a tm e n t systems. J . Water P o l l u t . Control Fed. 4 3 ( 1 2 ) : 2 3 4 9 2360. B a g n a ll, L a rr y 0 . 1971. Processing a q u a tic weeds. Paper presented a t SE Regional Meeting Amer. Soc. A g r ic . Engrs. Bender, W illia m H. 1971. S o ils and s e p tic ta n k s , A g r ic . I n f o . B u l l . 349. S o il Conservation S e r v ic e , U.S. Dept. A g r i c u l t u r e . U.S. Government P r i n t i n g O f f i c e , Wash., D.C. B ern hard t, Kenneth L. ( e d ) . 1973. V acation housing and r e c r e a t io n land development. I n d u s t r i a l Development D i v i s io n , I n s t i t u t e o f Science and Technology, U niv. o f M ich ig an , Ann A rb o r, Mich. 149p. Black, James A. 1976. Methods and issues 1n s o c ia l re s e a rc h . W iley and Sons I n c . , New York, N.Y. 445p. B la lo c k , Hubert M ., J r . 1968. Methodology in s o c ia l re s e a rc h . H i l l Book C o ., New Y o rk , N.Y. 493p. . 1970. An In t r o d u c tio n to s o c ia l re s e a rc h . Englewood C l i f f s , N .J . 120p. John McGraw- P re n tic e -H a ll, (e d ). 1974. Measurement in the s o c ia l scien ces: th e o r ie s and s t r a t e g i e s . A ld in e Publ. C o ., Chicago, 111. 464p. 205 206 Boesch, Donald M. ( e d ) . 1974. Lake development p r o p e r ty , a consumer's buying g u id e . Extension P u b l. o f the U n iv . o f M is s o u ri-C o lu m b ia , Mo. 31 p. Born, Stephen M. ( D 1 r ) . 1974. In la n d la k e dem onstration p r o j e c t , fin a l re p o rt. U n iv. W1scons1n-Extens1on, and Wise. D ept. N a t. R e s ., Madison, Wise. 31p. Boruch, Robert F. 1972. Measurement e r r o r 1n s o c ia l and e d u c a tio n a l survey re s e a rc h . ACE Research Reports 7 ( 2 ) : 6 2 p . Boyd, C. E. 1973. Summer a lg a l communities and prim ary p r o d u c t i v i t y in f i s h ponds. H y d ro b io lo g ia 4 1 ( 3 ) : 3 5 7 - 3 9 0 . Bruhn, H. D . , D. F. L iv erm o re , and F. 0 . Aboaba. 1971. Physical prop­ e r t i e s and processing c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f macrophytes as r e l a t e d to mechanical h a r v e s t in g . T ran s . Amer. Soc. A g r ic . Engrs. 14: 1004-1008. Buchanan, J . M ., and G. T u llo c k . 1971. The c a lc u lu s o f consent. U n iv e r s it y o f Michigan Press. Ann A rob o r, Mich. 361 p. B u r k h a lte r , A. P. 1972. G u id e lin e s f o r a q u a tic weed c o n t r o l . Dept. Nat. Res. T a lla h a s s e e , F la . 66p. F lo r id a B u r k h a lte r , A. P. e t a l . n .d . A q u atic weed i d e n t i f i c a t i o n andc o n tro l manual. F lo r id a Dept. N a t. R e s., Bur. A q u atic P la n t Research and C o n tr o l. T a lla h a s s e e , F la . lOOp. Chiaudani, G ., and M. V1gh i. 1974. The N:P r a t i o and t e s t s w ith Selenastrum to p r e d ic t e u tr o p h ic a tio n in la k e s . Water Research 8 :1 0 6 3 -1 0 6 9 . Clawson, M ario n , and Jack L . Knetsch. 1971. Economics o f outdoor r e c r e a t io n . Johns Hopkins Press. B a ltim o r e , Md. 328p. C l e s c e r l, N. L. 1973. Organic n u t r i e n t f a c to r s e f f e c t i n g a lg a l growths. EPA Report 6 6 0 / 3 - 7 3 - 0 0 3 . U.S. Government P r i n t in g O f f i c e , Wash., D.C. 302p. Cochrane, Raymond ( e d ) . 1973. Advances 1n s o c ia l re s e a rc h . and C o ., L td . London. 460p. Constable Conner, J . R. e t a l . 1973. The e f f e c t s o f w a te r fro n ta g e on r e c r e a ­ t i o n a l p ro p e rty v a lu e s . J . o f L e is u re Research 5 ( 2 ) : 2 6 - 3 8 . Dunst, Russell C. e t a l . 1974. Survey o f la k e r e h a b i l i t a t i o n te c h ­ niques and e x p e rie n c e s , Tech. B u l l . No. 75. Wisconsin Dept. N a t. R e s ., Madison, W ise. 179p. Ferguson, F. A la n . 1968. A nonmyopic approach to the problem o f excess a lg a l growths. E n viro n . S c i. and Tech. 2 ( 3 J:1 8 8 —193. 207 F e s s le r, 0 . R. The group process approach to community o r g a n iz a t io n , pp. 2 5 1 -2 5 6 . In Readings 1n community o r g a n iz a t io n p r a c t i c e . Kramer, R. M. and H. Specht ( e d s ) . 1969. P re n tic e -H a ll, In c ., Englewood C l i f f s , N .J . Forsberg, C u r t, S v e n -O lo f Rydlng, and Anders Claesson. 1975. Recovery o f p o llu t e d la k e s . A Swedish research program on th e e f f e c t s o f advanced waste w a te r tre a tm e n t and sewage d iv e r s io n . Water Research 9 : 5 1 - 5 9 . F ru c h te r, N . , and R. Kramer. An approach to community o rg a n iz in g p ro ­ j e c t s , pp. 2 3 2 -2 4 1 . In Readings in community o r g a n iz a t io n p ra c ­ tic e . Kramer, R. M. and H. Specht ( e d s ) . P re n tic e -H a ll, In c ., Englewood C l i f f s , N .J . F u lto n , Jerome K. 1971. Development and e v a lu a t io n o f c i t i z e n p a r t i ­ c i p a t i o n techniques f o r in la n d la k e and shoreland management, fin a l re p o rt. Huron R iv e r Watershed C o u n c il, Ann A rb o r, Mich. G e ld re lc h , E. E. e t a l . 1968. The b a c t e r i o lo g ic a l aspects o f storm w a te r p o l l u t i o n . J . Water P o l l u t . Control Fed. 4 0 (1 1 ) P a rt 2: R336-R352. H ealy, Kent A . , and Rein Laak. 1973. Factors a f f e c t i n g th e perco­ la tio n t e s t. J . Water P o l l u t . Control Fed. 4 5 ( 7 ) :1 5 0 8 -1 5 1 6 . H i l t i b r a n , R. C. 1974. Some experiences in a q u a tic p la n t management. Proc. N o rth c e n tra l Weed Control Conf. 2 9 : 6 5 - 6 6 . K le in , Stephen A. 1974. NTA removal in s e p t ic tank and o x id a tio n pond systems. J . W ater P o l l u t . Control Fed. 4 6 (1 ).*7 8 -8 8 . K le s s lg , Lowell L . , and 0 . A. Yanggen. 1973. The r o le o f la k e prop­ e r t y owners and t h e i r o rg a n iz a tio n s in la k e management. E x t. B u l l . No. 10320149. U niv. W isconsin, Madison, Wise. K u sle r, Jon A. 1971. A r t i f i c i a l lakes and land s u b d iv is io n s . Wisconsin Extension S e r v ic e , Madison, Wise. U n iv. Lachenmeyer, Charles W. 1973. The essence o f s o c ia l rese arch : a Copernican r e v o l u t i o n . The Free Press, New York, N .Y. 309p. L ik en s, G. E. ( e d ) . 1972. N u t r ie n ts and e u tr o p h ic a tlo n V o l. 1, proceedings o f a s p e c ia l symposium. Amer. Soc. Limno. and Ocean, A l l e n P re ss , I n c . , Lawrence, Ka. 328p. Lop1n o t , A. C. 1971. A q u atic weeds, t h e i r i d e n t i f i c a t i o n and methods o f c o n tro l. F is h e ry B u l l . No. 4 . I l l i n o i s Dept, o f Cons., D iv . o f F is h e r i e s , S p r i n g f i e l d , 111. 56p. Mackenthun, Kenneth M., W illia m M. Ingram, and Ralph Porges. 1964. Llm no log lcal aspects o f r e c r e a t io n a l la k e s . U.S. P u b lic H e alth S e rv ic e Publ. No. 1167. U.S. Government P r i n t i n g O f f i c e , Wash., D.C. 176p. 208 Mackenthun, Kenneth M ., and W il l ia m M. Ingram . 1967. B i o lo g i c a l a s s o c ia te d problems 1n f r e s h w a t e r en viron m ents* t h e i r I d e n t i f i ­ c a t i o n , I n v e s t i g a t i o n and c o n t r o l . U.S. Government P r i n t i n g O f f i c e , W ash., D.C. 287p. M agdoff, F. R . , J . Bouma, and D. R. Keeney. 1974. Columns r e p r e s e n t ­ in g mound-type d is p o s a l systems f o r s e p t i c tan k e f f l u e n t : I s o l l - w a t e r and gas r e l a t i o n s . J . E n v iro n . Q u a !. 3 ( 3 ) : 2 2 3 - 2 2 8 . . 1974. Columns r e p r e s e n t in g mound-type d is p o s a l systems f o r s e p t i c tan k e f f l u e n t : n u t r i e n t t r a n s fo r m a tio n s and b a c t e r i a l p o p u la tio n s . J . E n v iro n . Q u a l. 3 ( 3 ) : 2 2 8 - 2 3 2 . Marsh, W il l ia m M . , and Thomas E. B o rto n . 1976. In la n d la k e w atershed a n a l y s i s , a p la n n in g and management approach. M ichigan D ept. N a t. R e s ., In la n d Lake M gt. U n i t , L an sing , M ich . 88p. M cIn tosh, A. W ., and N i l e s R. Kevern. 1974. T o x i c i t y o f copper to zo o p la n k to n . J . E n v iro n . Q u a l. 3 ( 2 ) : 1 6 6 - 1 7 0 . Michigan Dept. N a t. Res. 1972. A q u a tic weeds and t h e i r c o n t r o l . Departm ental B u l l . , L a n s in g , Mich. M i t c h e l l , D. S. ( e d ) . 1974. A q u a tic v e g e t a tio n and i t s tro l. UNESCO, P a r i s . 135p. M o ra l, H e r b e r t R. 1972. C o ., C h a r l o t t e , V t . Buying c o u n try p r o p e r t y . 119p. use and con­ Garden Way P u b l. Morse, J . W ., K. J . L i t t l e , and V. A. G a r ris o n . 1976. E u tr o p h ic a t io n in Vermont. P ro c. N o rth e a s te rn Weed S c1. Soc. 3 0 : 9 2 - 9 7 . Moss, B r ia n . 1972. S tu d ies on G u ll L ak e, M ic h ig a n . I , seasonal and depth d i s t r i b u t i o n o f p h y to p la n k to n . F re s h w a te r B i o l . 2 : 2 8 9 - 3 0 7 . _________ . 1972. S tu d ie s on G ull L a k e , M ic h ig a n . I I , e u t r o p h ic a t io n : e v idence and p ro g n o s is. F resh w ater B i o l . 2 : 3 0 9 - 3 2 0 . N a t. Acad. S c i . 1969. E u t r o p h ic a tio n : causes, consequences, c o r r e c ­ tiv e s . P r i n t i n g and P u b lis h in g O f f i c e , N a t . Acad. S c i . , W ash., D.C. 661p. N e e l, J . K. e t a l . 1973. Weed h a r v e s t and la k e n u t r i e n t dynamics, e c o lo g ic a l re s e a rc h r e p o r t , E P A -6 6 0 /3 -7 3 -0 0 1 . U .S . Environm ental P r o t e c t io n Agency, U .S . Government P r i n t i n g O f f i c e , W ashington, D.C. 91p. N elso n, Burton D. 1973. Second home development in M ichigan £Ph.D. d is s e rta tio n ]. Dept, o f Geography, M ichigan S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y , E a st L an sin g , M1ch. N ic h o ls , S . , and G. Cottam. 1972. H a rv e s tin g as a c o n t r o l p la n ts . Water Res. B u l l . 8 ( 6 ) : 1 2 0 5 - 1 2 1 0 . f o r a q u a tic 209 N ich o ls o n , J . A . , and A. C. Mace, J r . 1975. W ater q u a l i t y p e rc e p tio n by users: can 1 t supplement o b j e c t i v e w a te r q u a l i t y measures? W ater Resources B u l l . 1 1 ( 6 ) : 1 1 9 7 - 1 2 0 7 . Olson, M. 1971. The l o g i c o f c o l l e c t i v e a c t i o n . P re ss , Cambridge, Mass. 186p. H arvard U n i v e r s i t y O t i s , R. J . , N. J . H u t z l e r , and W. C. B o y le . 19 74 . 0 n - s 1 t e household w astew ate r tr e a tm e n t a l t e r n a t i v e s : l a b o r a t o r y and f i e l d s t u d ie s . Water Research 8 :1 0 9 9 - 1 1 1 3 . P a t r i c k , Ruth e t a l . 1975. The r o l e o f t r a c e elem ents i n management o f nuisance grow ths. E n v iro n . P r o t e c t io n Tech. R e p t. E P A -6 60 /27 5 -0 0 8 . U .S . Environm ental P r o t e c t io n Agency, U .S. Government P r i n t i n g O f f i c e , W ash., D.C. 250p. Pennak, R. W. 1953. F res h w a ter I n v e r t e b r a t e s o f th e U n ite d S t a t e s . Ronald Press C o ., N .Y . 769p. P eterson , James 0 . , Stephen M. B orn, and Russel C. Dunst, 1974. Lake r e h a b i l i t a t i o n tec hn iqu es and e x p e r ie n c e . W ater Resources B u ll. 1 0 (6 ):1 2 2 8 -1 2 4 5 . Raman V . , and N. C h a k la d a r. 1972. Upflow f i l t e r s f o r s e p t i c tank e fflu e n ts . J . W ater P o l l . Cont. Fed. 4 4 ( 8 ) : 1 5 5 2 - 1 5 6 0 . Rogatz, R ichard L . 1969. V a c a tio n homes. D e p t, o f Housing and D e sig n , C o rn e ll U n i v e r s i t y , I t h a c a , N .Y . 387p. R o se n th al, R o b e rt, and Ralph L. Rosnow. 1975. P rim e r o f methods f o r th e b e h a v io r i a l s c ie n c e s . John W ile y and Sons, New Y o rk , N .Y . 117p. S c h e r f lg , J . e t a l . 1973. E f f e c t o f phosphorus removal processes on a l g a l growth. EPA r e p o r t 6 6 0 / 3 - 7 3 - 0 1 5 . U .S . Government P r i n t i n g O f f i c e , Wash., D .C. 81p. S c u lth o rp e , C. D. 1967. M a rtin s P re s s , N .Y . The b io lo g y o f a q u a tic v a s c u la r p l a n t s . 610p. S t. Shabman, Leonard A . , and P e t e r M. Ashton. 1976. C itiz e n a ttitu d e s toward management o f th e Chesapeake Bay. B u ll. No. 9 6 . V irg in ia W ater Resources Research C e n t e r , Va. P o ly te c h . I n s t , and S t a t e U n i v . , B la c k s b u rg , Va. 69p. Slmmonds, M. A. 1973. E x p e rien ce w it h a l g a l blooms and th e removal o f phosphorus from sewage. W ater Research 7 :2 5 5 - 2 6 4 . Sm ith, J . H . , and C. L. D ouglas. 1973. M ic r o b io l o g i c a l q u a l i t y o f s u rfa c e d ra in a g e w a te r from t h r e e small I r r i g a t e d w atersheds 1n southern Id a h o . J . E n v iro n . Q u a l i t y 2 ( 1 ) : 1 1 0 -1 1 2 . Survey Research C e n te r. 1960. Manual f o r i n t e r v i e w e r s , o f M ic h ig a n , Ann A r b o r, M ich. 159p. 3rd Ed. U n iv . 210 S u tton , David L. 1975. E f f e c t o f w h ite amur on p la n t c o m p e titio n between H y d r l l l a and V a l H s n e r l a . Proc. Southern Weed Sc1. Soc. 28:274 Tague, D. F . , and G. H. La t i f f . 1973. G ull Lake - p a s t, p re s e n t, f u t u r e [p a m p h le t]. W. K. K ello gg B io lo g ic a l S t a t i o n o f Michigan S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y , E. L ansing, Mich. Tombaugh, L a rry W. 1970. Factors In f lu e n c in g v a c a tio n home lo c a t io n s . Journal o f L e is u re Research 2 ( 1 ) : 5 4 - 6 3 . VanDusen, P e te r , W illia m M. Marsh, and Thomas E. Borton. n .d . P lanning and management g u id e lin e s f o r in la n d la k e p ro p e rty owners [pam­ p h le t]. M1ch. Dept. N a t. Res. Water Res. Comm., L an sin g , Mich. Vepraskas, M. J . , F. G. B aker, and J . Bouma. 1974. S o il m o t t lin g and d rain ag e in a M o lU c H a p lu d a lf as r e l a t e d to s u i t a b i l i t y f o r s e p tic tank c o n s tr u c tio n . S o i l , S c i . Soc. Amer. Proc. 3 8 ( 3 ) : 4 9 7 501. W alker, W. G ., J . Bouma, D. A. Kenney, and F. R. M agdoff. 1973. N itro g e n tra n s fo rm a tio n s d u rin g subsurface d isposal o f s e p tic tank e f f l u e n t in sands: I s o i l t r a n s fo r m a tio n . J . E n viro n . Qual. 2 ( 4 ) : 4 7 5 -4 8 0 . _______. 1973. N itro g e n tra n s fo rm a tio n s d u rin g subsurface dispo sal o ^ s e p tic tank e f f l u e n t in sands: I I groundwater q u a l i t y . J. E n viro n . Q ual. 2 ( 4 ) : 5 2 1 - 5 2 5 . Warren, R. L. 1963. The community in Am erica. Company, Chicago, 111. 347p. Rand M cN ally and Water Resources Comm., Michigan D ept. N a t. Res. 1973. General r u l e s , p a r t 4: w a te r q u a l i t y s ta n d a rd s , as amended, Lan sing , Mich.