Fish Like a GIRL

Last week I met with the advisory committee looking to assist in creating a classification system for all of Oneida County’s lakes. I am truly enjoying working on this committee and being a part of a project that seems daunting to say the least. The more we talked in the meeting, the more sides of the conversation came out, and the bigger the project seemed, in many ways.

The staff at Oneida County land and water have put in a ton of work on the project, lead by JoAnne Lund. This was the second meeting we’d had regarding building this classification system. We had a really great group of people for this meeting, with 20 in attendance. What made that great was there were people from so many different backgrounds, meaning we could all learn something from one another as we all pooled our ideas of how to best to classify our lakes and determine what management actions would be appropriate for each class of lakes.

The purpose of the group is to provide feedback to the department. Several lake associations are represented on the committee as well as Wisconsin Lakes, several factions of the Department of Natural Resources (DNR), a couple county board supervisors who are appointees of various lake associations, Carolyn Scholl from the Vilas County land and water department, the Oneida County zoning department, the Town of Newbold and UW-Extension.

Lund kicked off the meeting with a discussion about the lakes in the county. There are 651 unnamed lakes, she said, and 451 named lakes. After the first meeting of our advisory group, Lund separated the data for the unnamed lakes from the named lakes. The data for the former group, she said, was a bit sketchy and somewhat incomplete. It makes sense, when you take into account that 250 of those lakes are less than one acre in size.

In the last meeting, we chose eight features by which to create a vulnerability assessment for the lakes within the county. Two of the more easy metrics on which we settled were maximum depth or size/surface area. Public access and boat landings was also a bit of a “no brainer.” It makes sense that they more people who have access to a lake, the more vulnerable it may be to the influences of people. Shoreline density, which is the measure of the shape of the lake, whether the lake was on the DNR Outstanding Resources Waters list, the eco-rank of the watershed in which the lake was located, whether the lake was on the top 300 AIS Protection list and the natural community rank of the lake. 

Scores for the named lakes ranged from three to 15. The lower the number, the more vulnerable the lake would be to outside stressors. Our first task was to decide how to group these scores. Lund showed us bar graphs that represented three, four, and five classes that we might use to classify the lakes. There was a lot of discussion about whether or not there would be different actions taken for each group and if that was feasible if we grouped the lakes into a larger number, or whether it made more sense to have fewer classes.

One of the concerns here was whether or not it made sense to have five classes if there were only a few actions that would be recommended regardless of whether there were more classes. County conservationist Michele Sadauskas said her original thought was because of the number of lakes in the county, there should be more. But then, when she looked at the actions that might be taken and wondered if they would be enough differences in management techniques to warrant a more divided class system. 

Carolyn Scholl, department head of Vilas land and water said she felt the same. While the list could go on and on about the types of activities that might be undertaken, the capacity of the county to undertake different management tracts may be limited.

We talked briefly about the percentage of shoreline that could be developed and how that could and should effect the ranking. Lund said that had been talked about within the department and it was something all felt would be important to discuss at a further meeting.

There was some interest in having more lake classifications, though. It would not necessarily mean that activities in each class would need to be distinctly different. But having those five categories may paint a better picture. Both made sense to me, honestly, although my first thought was for three. If lake classifications were meant to be a living system, understanding when a lake might be slipping from one class to the next might be important as time goes on.

Lund spoke about Aquatic Invasive Species (AIS) next. In this category, she said, there were containment activities for lakes where AIS is already present. The assumption would be these lakes would have a higher score and be considered less vulnerable. In other lakes, shielding activities are in place on lowered scored lakes aimed at keeping AIS out of these lakes that are not yet infected. Clean Boats Clean Waters grants are integral in the containment and shielding framework about which Lund spoke, according to Stephanie Boismenue, who many know is the county’s AIS coordinator.

We discussed the CBCW program, too, and that most lakes are having staffing issues. Perhaps the fight against AIS would have to go beyond that somehow. Maybe the use of iLids or some other automated way to help to control AIS. 

Then we came to the question of  what AIS puts a lake in what category. Simply because a lake as a certain invasive species does not mean it is not completely vulnerable where another invasive species is concerned. This is just one of the difficulties in creating this system. The idea is to have a system that is not so unwieldy as to be manageable, but to also take into account as many categories as possible to prioritize management activities. 

Our conversation turned to watercraft recommendations next — one of the hottest topics in the state, for sure. We were talking about providing some guidance regarding on which lakes higher impact boats with high energy waves might be the least disruptive. That is probably one of the more contentious topics we broached during the meeting, but I do not think a lake classification can be done without also looking at the vulnerability of a lake based on the types of recreational activities that are popular on those lakes. 

This is an interesting conversation for me as a tournament angler. Some people who watch our 30 plus boats take off, one after another in a line shortly after sunrise have commented to me they thought it was “so cool!” But at the same time, at a recent tournament on the Willow Flowage, I heard anecdotal stories later that people were “freaking out” over the amount of fast, fancy boats on the lake. I get that, too, to be honest. A kayaker out for an early morning paddle on the Willow Flowage may feel they are truly in the “wilderness.” I have heard the Willow described as “as close to Canada as you can get.” That said, paddling around and seeing 10 or 15 bass boats scream by was probably a bit disconcerting. That is a bit of a different conversation, but when we talk about wave energy, I have seen how tournament anglers operate even their boats in a way that is not conducive to shoreline health.

In the meeting, we moved on from there to also talk about shoreline buffers, lake monitoring, outreach and so much more. There was a lot to discuss, for sure. On the surface, it might seem like an easy task, but when we really delved into it — while I am happy to be on this advisory group and to ask questions and learn things and sometimes even look at things differently, I am also happy that I am not the one tasked with creating the final classification system. The meeting was far too in depth for me to cover here in this column. But I feel like we shared so much information within the group that it could very easily be overwhelming, but in a way that it made sense to everyone involved. Looking at things through the eyes of a larger group is never a bad thing, no matter the topic. All of that information was captured and is now in the capable hands of the ladies of the county land and water department.

I am excited to see the next step of this classification system that will come out of this meeting. I am sure it will take a few days to decompress from all of these great minds contributing to the whole picture. I look forward to seeing what action items might come out of each category within the classification system and how lake groups might utilize the information that comes out of this huge, all encompassing project.

Beckie Gaskill may be reached at [email protected] or [email protected].