Phosphorus is a naturally occurring element that is found in rocks and sediment. Through natural processes, this phosphorus is released into streams. Phosphorus is also an important element for plant growth and an ingredient in fertilizing products. When a lot of phosphorus is added to a water body, excessive weed growth can occur, as well as odor and bad taste in drinking water.
Although Groton does contribute through its wastewater treatment plant, there are several other sources of phosphorus loading to Owasco Lake. Both residential and agricultural runoff are a major concern and threat to Owasco Lake.
Over 50 percent of the 208 square mile Owasco Lake Watershed is in agricultural production. This makes runoff from agriculture particularly influential on the entire watershed. With the rising cost of fuel and commercial fertilizer (over $500 per ton), runoff can be costly. Agricultural runoff can best be addressed through good management of farm resources. Programs like the Agricultural Environmental Program and Certified Nutrient Management Plans can help reduce a farm's runoff potential.
Residential areas are also a concern to the watershed for a variety of reasons. Many residential areas around Owasco Lake have septic systems, which can leach nutrients into the water. Having structures along the lakeshore increases the amount of impervious surfaces (roofs, driveways, etc), increasing water velocities from these surfaces, causing erosion. The application of lawn fertilizers for “golf course” lawns is a serious residential concern. Populated areas also increase phosphorus loading because of sources like leaf and lawn clipping litter and domestic pet waste. Homeowners can make simple adjustments on their property that will cumulatively have a dramatic effect on the amount of phosphorus in Owasco Lake.
Although Groton is a serious concern in the Owasco Lake Watershed, it is certainly not the only source of pollution. Education is crucial in both the agricultural and residential arenas to help inform both parties of better techniques and practices. Every property owner in the watershed can have some impact and together we can decrease the phosphorus entering Owasco Lake.
Over 50 percent of the 208 square mile Owasco Lake Watershed is in agricultural production. This makes runoff from agriculture particularly influential on the entire watershed. With the rising cost of fuel and commercial fertilizer (over $500 per ton), runoff can be costly. Agricultural runoff can best be addressed through good management of farm resources. Programs like the Agricultural Environmental Program and Certified Nutrient Management Plans can help reduce a farm's runoff potential.
Residential areas are also a concern to the watershed for a variety of reasons. Many residential areas around Owasco Lake have septic systems, which can leach nutrients into the water. Having structures along the lakeshore increases the amount of impervious surfaces (roofs, driveways, etc), increasing water velocities from these surfaces, causing erosion. The application of lawn fertilizers for “golf course” lawns is a serious residential concern. Populated areas also increase phosphorus loading because of sources like leaf and lawn clipping litter and domestic pet waste. Homeowners can make simple adjustments on their property that will cumulatively have a dramatic effect on the amount of phosphorus in Owasco Lake.
Although Groton is a serious concern in the Owasco Lake Watershed, it is certainly not the only source of pollution. Education is crucial in both the agricultural and residential arenas to help inform both parties of better techniques and practices. Every property owner in the watershed can have some impact and together we can decrease the phosphorus entering Owasco Lake.
Citizen
Hot Jobs
New! Off the Menu
The Citizens' Say
Post your comment - click hereThere are 6 comment(s)
Farmer's Gal wrote on Aug 27, 2008 8:25 AM:
The four-letter word you need is CAFO, not cows. "
demsarecrazy wrote on Aug 26, 2008 3:42 PM:
Farmer's Gal wrote on Aug 25, 2008 7:46 AM:
Farmer's Gal wrote on Aug 25, 2008 7:44 AM:
However, the regulatory system is broken. My view is that once you regulate something, you've already lost -- you've said, "It's OK to pollute, we're just going to slightly slow down the rate at which you are allowed to pollute (on paper, but since they don't do their job, agribusiness (and any other industry, to be fair) can go ahead and pollute as fast as they want.
The answer is to fight it at an entirely different level. You need to educate yourself (and your local government) on how corporations (including agribusiness) came to have more Constitutional rights than natural human persons, and have that OBSCENE misinterpretation of our Constitution reversed. That's a big battle -- it's what allows corporations to do whatever they want in pursuit of profit, including destroying our environment, our quality of life, our communities.
It starts by local governments demanding the right to say what goes in their own local communities. It starts with this local governments passing local ordinances saying We will not allow the spreading of liquid manure or human waste on farm fields here, for example. Then you have to be prepared for the corporations to fight it -- and if they do, chances are good they will win, because they have this sick and wrongful interpretation of the Constitution (from a late 1800s case Santa Clara vs. Southern Pacific Railroad -- when the Supreme Court acted under extreme influence of the then all-powerful railroad industry) to back them up -- and that is exactly the battle that needs fighting.
Dozens of communities have already taken exactly this stand, mostly in Pennsylvania, but also in Vermont and some other states. When enough stand up, whether it's against liquid manure, or sewage sludge, or industrial wind farms or nuclear dumps or strip mining or whatever -- it will force the case back to the Supreme Court, where corporations will have to show their ugliness to try to convince us why they should be considered "persons" with privileges greater than those of natural persons.
And hopefully, this time, the Supreme Court will decide in favor of the natural persons for whom the Founding Fathers intended our rights and freedoms, and put more restraints on companies, which was also the intention of the Founding Fathers, an intention that corporations have skillfully circumvented over the past couple centuries.
Check out www.celdf.org for more info. "
bizzaro-world wrote on Aug 23, 2008 7:28 PM:
Farmer's Gal wrote on Aug 22, 2008 10:57 AM:
Until the DEC starts acting like the regulatory body they are supposedly supposed to be instead of the Agribusinessman's Buddy, we'll keep right on seeing those high levels of gunk in the lakes. "