SailNet Community - View Single Post - Zebra Mussels - Lakes
View Single Post
  #36  
Old 04-11-2013
KIVALO's Avatar
KIVALO KIVALO is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Central New York
Posts: 391
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Rep Power: 3
KIVALO is on a distinguished road
Re: Zebra Mussels - Lakes

I read the thread fairly carefully, my confusion was what you meant. Anyhow, I agree, the introduction of Zebra mussels have very few benefits and many drawbacks. I live on a Finger Lake and the near shore swimming areas are mostly covered with various forms of aquatic weeds, hydrilla being the most troublesome locally. I cant remember the last time I found crayfish while swimming and cleaning the beach has taken on a whole new meaning in the last decade. In short, zebra mussels SUCK!

Brad

Quote:
Originally Posted by bobmcgov View Post
Re-read the thread, Kivalo. Travelineasy and Benesailor, specifically, have suggested zebras should be intentionally (or surreptitiously) introduced into the Chesapeake watershed as a means of improving water clarity. As an alternative to costly cleanup and pollution management programs. Ahaahaa. Exactly when has intentional or accidental introduction of invasive species gone as planned? Dingos, rabbits, or cane toads in Australia? Rats and goats in Hawaii? Tree snake in Guam? Lake trout in Yellowstone? I suppose you could make a case for the earthworm and European honeybee in the Americas; tho the Africanized bee is the flip side of that.

Distilled water is very clear, too. Absolutely sterile, nothing lives in it, but lovely to look at. Much of the 'murk' you see in estuaries is called nutrients, and its what the entire food chain rests upon. Near-shore game fish populations in the Finger Lakes have been hurt badly by the zebra mussel; I know lifelong fishermen who quit trying a decade ago, because the fishing has gotten so poor.

Any excess Bay algae or sludge that results from human activity ought to be brought down to healthy levels. The way to do that is by attacking point or distributed sources of pollution. Start with your own behavior: you got a quarter acre of luscious, weed-free bluegrass turf in front of your home? How much nitrogen, phosphorus, pesticide, and herbicide you dumping on that baby every year? How much of that ends up in the storm drains after a hard rain? Multiply by a few million, and there's the cause of much of the Bay's murk. You willing to address that? Or do you subscribe to the "Take a pill, feel better" approach? Rather than changing our diets or exercising regularly, let's just pop a handful of Lipitor and shove a stent in there. Hand me another cheeseburger! Let's not re-think our approach to suburban landscaping -- we'll just gamble with the entire Chesapeake ecosystem instead. *sigh*

It's insane to approach behavioral or environmental problems by throwing invasive species at them. The human record in this department, dating back about 20,000 years, is one dismal, unmitigated FAIL.
__________________
s/v KIVALO
2003 Hunter 260
"Any damn fool can navigate the world sober. It takes a really good sailor to do it drunk." - Sir Francis Chichester while loading his boat with gin.
WORK IS OVER-RATED
Reply With Quote Share with Facebook