Lake District OKs small dredge project

By NEIL JOHNSON ( Contact )   Sunday, July 31, 2011
ADVERTISEMENT
 

— Lake Koshkonong resident Bill Lauderdale gave a thumbs-up Saturday to plans by the Rock-Koshkonong Lake District for an experimental dredge on the north end of Lake Koshkonong.

He was among a majority of lake district residents who voted to approve the district’s 2012 budget at the annual district meeting Saturday at Fort Atkinson High School. About 150 of the district’s 4,000 residents turned out for the meeting.

Lauderdale lives on the lake’s south shore at 339 Oxbow Bend, near a canal that provides residents with boat access to Bingham’s Bay. The canal and bay are filling with silt carried downstream along the Rock River.

Lauderdale, an electrical contractor in Illinois, supports the plans for an experimental dredge. “We have to do something. We have to move forward,” he said.

Someday, Lauderdale could see his neighborhood canal cleared as part of a multi-million dollar dredging project at the lake. The project, which could include numerous shoreline dredges and the construction of islands to control erosion and silting at the lake, would first need approval by the lake district and state and federal regulatory agencies.

But the pilot dredge that district voters approved Saturday could determine whether a larger-scale dredge could be viable at the lake.

The lake district, along with the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, could start dredging a small swath of residential shoreline in Stinker’s Bay, on Lake Koshkonong’s north end, as early as October.

The groups plan to study the dredge over three years to learn how larger dredges could hold up against erosion and silting. Under the plan, the groups would use dredged material along with rock riprap to build a shoreline breakwater that would protect Mud Lake, a wetland connected by a channel to Lake Koshkonong’s north end.

Mud Lake is a major fish hatchery, but officials say it’s threatened because wave erosion is eating into a spit of land that separates it from the lake.

“We made the ecological decision that we want to protect that fish habitat,” lake district Chairman Brian Christianson said in an interview Saturday. “We want to continue to make Koshkonong a world-class fish hatchery. This is a way to do that that’s affordable.”

The project, which is pending environmental review, could cost about $200,000, according to lake district officials. The district would pay for it with money earmarked for lake improvements and a special $50 per parcel fee approved Saturday by district residents.

Lake district resident Jeff Huberd was among a handful of district residents who on Saturday voted against approving the district’s budget. He said he did so because the lake dredging plans he’s seen seem as though they’d mostly benefit lakefront property owners. Huberd lives about five blocks away from Lake Koshkonong.

Huberd said he believes that if the district dredges in front of lakefront properties, then those owners should have to pay more for the work than people who don’t live along the lake—possibly through special user fees.

Lake district voters on Saturday also approved:

n An amendment that would allow the lake district to use money from a maintenance fund to convert Indianford dam to generate electricity.

The district owns and operates the dam, which controls water flow on the south end of Lake Koshkonong. The dam was once used to produce electricity. A plan to restore its electric turbines and add solar collection panels at the dam’s powerhouse could cost as much as $300,000, district officials estimated.

Christianson said the district likely would run the dam itself, using profits to fund lake projects. Rob Montgomery, a consultant for the lake district, said the district would have to study whether it would be feasible to convert the dam. No work has been approved.

He said the district cannot make upgrades that would modify stream flow at the dam, and it would still have to comply with an operating agreement under the DNR.

reader COMMENTS
Click here to view reader comments
(7)
Sandman
Aug 4, 2011 at 4:43 p.m.
Suggest removal

Sadly, this "lake" is a SWAMP - it has been for eons - and that's really what the surrounding lands do best! No economically reasonable amount of dredging will ever make it into a real lake nor keep it from silting back up on a regular basis, not to mention that no one really wants the resultant sludge islands to spoil the view in front of their property or favorite spot.

Probably the best thing that could be done is to dredge and mark the main river channel and dig out and mark some of the major access points - regularly. Aside from that, they'll be wasting an inordinate amount of time, money and effort on a fruitless task (you know, like we have in attempting to eradicate chronic wasting and in trying to balance the budget!).

partarican1
Aug 4, 2011 at 9:07 a.m.
Suggest removal

working with does not mean approval....details...

njohnson
Aug 2, 2011 at 11:04 a.m.
Suggest removal

fearandrhetoric4dummies:

Here's a link to a PDF that highlights the proposed experimental dredge and shore fortification at Mud Lake. Check out the aerial map on page 4.

http://www.rkld.org/Portals/0/documents/...

fearandrhetoric4dummies
Aug 2, 2011 at 9:40 a.m.
Suggest removal

could someone please post the GPS coordinates for the place where the dredging will be? I would like to know where the walleyes will be hanging out after its done:)

Long_Time_Gone
Aug 2, 2011 at 12:32 a.m.
Suggest removal

I just looked at their website - RKLD has not been raising the special charge, besides, according to state statutes, electors vote on their tax.
*
The permitting agencies are partners in the experimental dredging that was proposed, according to RKLD.org
*
You both need to read a bit more - facts can be pesky little details.

partarican1
Aug 1, 2011 at 9:38 p.m.
Suggest removal

the lake district may have approved it, but the permitting agencies have not as of yet...

riverrat006
Aug 1, 2011 at 7:51 a.m.
Suggest removal

They keep raising the fee, but I see no movement to increase the fee for all the businesses that make money off the lake. Ramp fees, pier fees, fuel. Ever wonder who these 150-200 are that show up?

Before you post a comment, consider this:

Note: GazetteXtra.com does not condone or review every comment. Read more in our User Policy Agreement
  • Keep it clean. Comments that are obscene, vulgar or sexually oriented will be removed. Creative spelling of such terms or implied use of such language is banned, also.
  • Don't threaten to hurt or kill anyone.
  • Be nice. No racism, sexism or any other sort of -ism that degrades another person.
  • Harassing comments. If you are the subject of a harassing comment or personal attack by another user, do not respond in-kind.  Hit the "Suggest Removal" button on offensive comments.
  • Share what you know. Give us your eyewitness accounts, background, observations and history.
  • Do not libel anyone. Libel is writing something false about someone that damages that person's reputation.
  • Ask questions. What more do you want to know about the story?
  • Stay focused. Keep on the story's topic.
  • Help us get it right. If you spot a factual error or misspelling, email newsroom@gazettextra.com or call 1-800-362-6712.
  • Remember, this is our site. We set the rules, and we reserve the right to remove any comments that we deem inappropriate.

Post Comment

Commenting requires registration.

Username:
Password: (Forgotten your password?)

Comment:

ADVERTISEMENT