|
Report on Existing County Service B. CLEAN LAKES PROGRAM
1. Background
Mr. LaChance, Mr. Robertson, and Mr. Garcia not only operate the equipment during the weed harvesting season but also perform any necessary maintenance or other repair work on the equipment. Thus, the Weed Harvesting staff must have a background in mechanics and engine repair. Indeed, each season they spend close to the entire month of April servicing and readying the equipment for operation. In the end of August, they take the necessary steps to store the equipment for the winter. The remaining three employees assist in operating the equipment during the summer. The Clean Lakes Program (including its Weed Harvesting Program) are supported indirectly by the County Commissioners’ staff. They provide all of the administrative support, including answering phones, drafting letters, sending and receiving mail, billing, budgeting, acting as liaison between the program and its clients and the public, handling the payroll account, obtaining permits, working with the public, supporting Friends of Pontoosuc Lake, administering grants, and providing all bookkeeping services, such as maintaining daily ledgers. The County Treasurer’s Office also provides indirect in-kind support through management of the accounts, budget, and payroll. Service: The Clean Lakes Program historically and presently provides a number of different services for various lakes throughout Berkshire County. Beginning in about 1985, the program has been responsible either for funding or arranging for funding in relation to various studies of Pontoosuc Lake. In 1985 the County obtained, implemented, and oversaw the Massachusetts Clean Lakes Program Grant of $405,375.00 in addition to Berkshire County matching funds of $135,125.00 (these local matching funds were a condition of the State’s grant). This grant included the following budget allocation line items: (a) $10,000.00 to hire a consultant to direct local nutrient reduction programs within the Pontoosuc Lake Watershed in connection with septic management, use of non-phosphorous detergents, erosion control, and catch basin cleaning, (b) $140,000.00 to construct buildings and purchase equipment necessary to implement the USDA Soil Conservation Commission’s program to control agricultural wastes within Pontoosuc Lake’s watershed, (c) $290,500.00 to purchase weed harvesting equipment to treat mechanically Pontoosuc Lake, (d) $25,000 was budgeted to do the following: (i) document the biological impact of draw-downs on Pontoosuc Lake, (ii) determine the true value of draw-downs, comparing their impacts on flood protection, nuisance weed control and the biological environment, (iii) determine the value of a wetland control structure on Town Brook at Bull Hill Road, and (iv) provide preliminary engineering design services for the wetland control structure, (e) $25,000.00 to construct a wetland control structure on Town Brook, if the results of the preceding line item of research indicates this is advisable, and (f) $50,000.00 to implement draw-down beyond the existing five foot level, if the results of item (d) above indicates this is advisable. As part of item (b) above and as part of a 1993 grant from U.S. EPA/Mass. DEP, the County worked in conjunction with various area farmers to build manure storage facilities on their properties. Such facilities are designed to control the amount of nutrients that flow into Pontoosuc Lake causing abnormal weed growth. For these facilities, the County was granted ten-year easements to enter upon the subject properties to inspect the easement area and manure storage facilities. These easements commenced in approximately 1994 when the facilities were constructed. The current status of the manure storage facilities is unclear because there has been no follow-up and one or more of the farms may no longer be operating. The County is currently administering another aspect of the 1985 grant, which commenced in 1996. This involves an allocation of $100,000.00 ($75,000.00 from MA, DEP, $20,000 from Pittsfield, and $5,000.00 from Lanesborough) to perform a diagnostic and feasibility assessment to study and address lake and watershed management problems. The study and a report are due to be completed in the immediate future. As mentioned briefly above, another significant aspect of the Clean Lakes Program and the 1985 grant is the Weed Harvesting Program. This program was designed and funded to address the degradation of lakes and ponds by nuisance aquatic weed infestation. Berkshire Conservation officials have concluded that pollutants from diffuse sources, such as storm water runoff, septic overflows, and erosion and sedimentation, are exacerbating the eutrophication process of these water resources by promoting the rapid growth of aquatic weeds. Such pollutants, particularly excess nutrients such as phosphorous and nitrogen, feed a variety of nuisance, non-native weeds now commonly found in Massachusetts waters, especially Eurasian Milfoil. Berkshire Conservation officials report that these exotic weeds will displace native plants, markedly change the ecology and recreational utility of a lake, and reduce dissolved oxygen levels, impairing aquatic habitat for native plant species and fish. To address this problem, the Weed Harvesting Program originated on Pontoosuc Lake, as part of the 1985 grant. It has since evolved into a County–wide service that provides weed harvesting to a number of different lakes in Berkshire County. The weed harvesting equipment, which was purchased with funds from the 1985 grant, consists of the following: three harvesters, two dump-trucks, a pickup truck, a high speed transport barge, a hydro-rake, and one shore conveyor. Except for the barge, all equipment is reportedly in good working condition and will be for the foreseeable future if it continues to be properly maintained. The barge is not regularly used because of certain inefficiencies in operation. Through the Weed Harvesting Program the County annually harvests several hundred tons of weeds from Berkshire lakes. The lake harvesting season now lasts from about April through August, with most of the harvesting occurring in June through August. In the off-season the equipment has been stored in an old Naval Reserve facility. The determination of which lakes are harvested is made by the towns or cities. Each Spring the towns and cities receive a memorandum from the County that describes the weed harvesting program. It is then up to the towns to decide whether they desire to participate in the service. To participate the towns must file a notice of intent with the County Commissioners, receive their approval, and then subsequently pay the appropriate fee after the service is provided. With respect at least to Pontoosuc Lake, another aspect of the Clean Lakes Program is to maintain and service the dam and its gates, which are owned by the County. This service is provided by the Surveying Department, as described in section A, above.
Town Lake Years Lee Laurel 1988-present Lenox(Bramble) Laurel 1988-present Pittsfield Pontoosuc 1988-present Lanesboro Pontoosuc 1988-present Stockbridge Stockbridge Bowl 1990-present Pittsfield Onota 1988-98 Lenox(Preserv.) Laurel 1989-96 Gt. Barrington Mansfield 1988-95 Becket Shaw Pond 1991-95 Becket Shawnee Shores 1993-95 Becket Long Pond 1995-95 Pittsfield Richmond Pond 1988, 1993 W. Stockbridge Card. + North 1991-92 In regard to actual usage, three additional points should be noted. First, the vast majority of the harvesting occurs on Pontoosuc Lake. Second, although the towns of Lee and Lenox participate in this program, they use only the hydro-rake equipment. Third, for several years there has been controversy surrounding the effectiveness of weed harvesting. Some people believe that weed harvesting is ineffective. They assert that the weeds simply grow back and harvesting may actually exacerbate the problem by spreading weed segments that re-seed and facilitate weed growth. In fact, with regard to Onota Lake, Pittsfield recently abandoned the harvesting program to use a chemical treatment called Sonar. Other people, however, believe that the weed harvesting program is very effective. They argue that they have witnessed a very real reduction over the years in the growth and density of the weeds. They assert that harvesting is a better alternative to using potentially harmful chemical treatments because harvesting actually reduces the weed biomass, which in-turn reduces the weeds’ nutrients for the next growth season. Reduction of the biomass also increases water clarity. Finally, they assert that weed harvesting is less expensive than chemical treatments. In assessing service usage, it is also helpful to know that in 1997 the Berkshire County Task Force survey showed that fifteen of the thirty-two towns and cities indicated support for the Clean Lakes Program. County records showed in 1997 that only eight of the thirty-two towns and cites had participated in the program. Finally, it is noteworthy that the Town of Stockbridge recently purchased a second weed harvester, but continues to use the County’s hydro-raking services to supplement the local program. Also, the Lake Buel Preservation District in Monterey and New Marlboro owns harvesting equipment and operates its program independently.
3. Service Costs and Funding
The direct costs associated with the various lake studies are discussed above. With regard to the Weed Harvesting Program, the six direct staff members are paid the following hourly rates: Mr. LaChance = $10.50/hr., Mr. Robertson = $11.50/hr., Mr. Garcia = $8.00/hr, Messrs. Arena, Mills, and Gallagher = $7.00/hr. These rates of pay are decided by the commissioners from year-to-year. The total Weed Harvesting direct costs for 1998 were as follows:
These direct costs are paid from year-to-year by the towns based on the fee they are charged for the Weed Harvesting Program. Except for Pittsfield, all fees are calculated based on an hourly rate that varies with the machinery required to harvest each lake. For Pittsfield the Pontoosuc and Onota Lake fees are calculated based on the tonnage of weeds harvested. No profits are made by the County and any deficit or surplus that exists with this program is simply carried into the next year. Mr. LaChance reported that the cost of this Program to the towns is approximately 50% of what they would be charged by private sector entities.
Report on Existing County Service Index
 Return to the Berkshire County Commission Index
|