Home

Cedar Lake Improvement District meeting

September 8, 2025

New Prague Public Library

Attending:

Board Members:  Paul Hoyt, Dave Skogland, John Tuschner Ted Schnaare, Larry Vollmar, Jim Paulson and Scott Sousek

Non-Board Member:  Melissa Bokman Ermer (Scott County Sr Water Resources Planner), April Londo (MN DNR), Patrick Selter (PLM Corp), Keegan Lund (SePRO)

Meeting notes

Generated by AI. Be sure to check for accuracy.

• Lake Management Strategies and Herbicide Selection: Keegan, Patrick, April, and Melissa discussed with the board the ongoing challenges with curly leaf pondweed in Cedar Lake, reviewed past herbicide treatments, and evaluated a potential shift from Sonar to Galleon for future management, considering ecological impact, cost, and grant opportunities.
  • Curly Leaf Pondweed Management: The team reviewed the persistent issue of curly leaf pondweed in Cedar Lake, noting that previous Sonar treatments have been effective but have not led to the desired increase in native plant populations. They discussed the need for longer-lasting clear water and the importance of balancing plant management with recreational use.
  • Herbicide Comparison and Galleon Proposal: Keegan introduced Galleon as a more selective and gentler herbicide compared to Sonar, explaining its higher cost but potential benefits for native plants. The group considered shifting to Galleon, with Patrick and April providing data from other lakes and discussing application timing, dosage, and expected outcomes.
  • Treatment Timing and Dosage: Patrick explained the importance of timing and dosage for effective curly leaf control, noting that early spring applications and adaptive dosing strategies are critical. The team discussed the possibility of fall or under-ice treatments and the need for iterative, stepwise approaches to optimize results.
  • Grant Funding for Herbicide Treatments: The group explored new grant opportunities, including the LCCMR small grant and the DNR invasive aquatic plant control grant, which could offset the higher costs of Galleon and support multi-year treatment plans. They discussed strategies for successful grant applications and the importance of aligning project language with funding priorities.
• Phosphorus Mitigation and Water Quality Improvement: Keegan and Patrick proposed incorporating lanthanum-based phosphorus binders, such as Eutrosorb, to reduce internal phosphorus loading in Cedar Lake, aiming for incremental improvements in water clarity and native plant recovery, with data collection and grant support discussed as part of the plan.
  • Phosphorus Loading and Reduction Goals: The team reviewed Cedar Lake's internal phosphorus load, estimated between 600 and 1500 lbs per year, and discussed the potential impact of reducing this load by 200 lbs annually using lanthanum-based products. They emphasized the importance of incremental reductions and adaptive management.
  • Lanthanum vs. Alum Treatments: Keegan explained the advantages of lanthanum-based binders over alum, particularly for shallow lakes like Cedar, citing permanent binding and resilience to physical disturbance. The group discussed the limitations of alum, including pH sensitivity and potential for phosphorus release under certain conditions.
  • Data Collection and Monitoring: The team proposed collecting sediment phosphorus data before and after treatment to track efficacy, suggesting cost-effective sampling methods and partnerships with consultants or local experts. They discussed using water quality metrics such as chlorophyll-a and clarity to monitor progress.
  • Grant Support for Phosphorus Mitigation: Participants identified grant opportunities to fund phosphorus mitigation efforts, including the LCCMR and Clean Water Fund, and discussed the need for strong data and demonstration projects to qualify for larger funding pools in the future.
• Zebra Mussel Infestation and Management Options: April and Melissa addressed the recent detection of zebra mussels in Cedar Lake, evaluated the ecological implications, and reviewed available treatment options, ultimately recommending ongoing monitoring over costly eradication efforts due to substrate limitations and lack of proven solutions.
  • Ecological Impact of Zebra Mussels: The group discussed how zebra mussels may affect water clarity and plant growth, noting that Cedar Lake's silty bottom and high cyanobacteria levels limit mussel survival and proliferation. April and Patrick shared observations from other lakes and predicted limited long-term impact.
  • Treatment Options and Limitations: Keegan inquired about products like Zequanox and copper-based treatments, with April and Patrick explaining their high cost, limited effectiveness, and potential harm to non-target species. They advised against large-scale treatments and emphasized the lack of viable eradication methods for established populations.
  • Monitoring Recommendations: The team recommended regular monitoring of zebra mussel populations using sediment sampler plates and shoreline surveys, suggesting collaboration with the University of Minnesota for data analysis. They advised focusing on tracking population trends rather than pursuing expensive interventions.
  • Prevention and Boat Launch Protocols: Participants discussed the potential for steam cleaning stations at boat launches to prevent further spread, acknowledging practical challenges with ballast tanks and the limited effectiveness of such measures once mussels are established.
• Grant Application Strategies and Financial Planning: The board reviewed past grant application experiences, discussed strategies for improving future submissions, and considered financial models for sustaining lake management efforts, including levy adjustments and multi-year planning.
  • Grant Writing and Application Process: The group reflected on previous unsuccessful grant applications, identifying the need to align project language with funder priorities and to include partnership arrangements and experimental approaches. They discussed leveraging support from Minnesota Lakes and Rivers and other organizations for future submissions.
  • Multi-Year and Block Grant Opportunities: Participants explored the potential for multi-year grants, such as the LCCMR small grant and DNR block grants, to support ongoing herbicide and phosphorus mitigation efforts. They discussed timelines for application and the importance of demonstrating project impact.
  • Levy and Budget Considerations: The team reviewed the current levy structure and discussed the possibility of raising the levy to support lake management activities. They considered presenting different financial models at the next annual meeting to build consensus among residents.
  • Sustainable Financial Planning: Keegan and others emphasized the need for a long-term financial model to support a 10-year lake improvement plan, aiming to balance grant funding with reliable local resources to ensure continuity of management efforts.
• Mechanical Harvesting and Dredging Alternatives: Keegan and Patrick commented on the potential role of mechanical weed harvesters and mini dredges in managing curly leaf pondweed and muck accumulation, weighing costs, operational challenges, and integration with chemical and phosphorus management strategies.
  • Weed Harvester Evaluation: The team discussed the pros and cons of investing in a weed harvester, noting its utility for targeted removal of curly leaf and chara, but also highlighting staffing, maintenance, and disposal challenges. They recommended pausing major investments until after evaluating the impact of chemical and phosphorus treatments.
  • Mini Dredge Proposal: Keegan described research into mini dredge units for spot removal of muck in problem areas, outlining the process and cost relative to harvesters. The group considered integrating mechanical removal with other management approaches for improved results.
• Nano Bubbler Technology Assessment:  Questions raised about the potential use of nano bubbler technology for sediment oxygenation and muck reduction, with Patrick and April providing a technical overview and cautioning about scalability, cost, and mixed results in similar projects.
  • Technical Overview and Limitations: Patrick explained that nano bubblers can maintain iron-phosphate bonds in sediments through hyperoxygenation, but noted that their effectiveness is limited by scale and energy consumption. The group discussed the high cost and uncertain long-term benefits, referencing mixed outcomes from other lakes.
• Native Plant Restoration and Fish Habitat Enhancement: Discussed goals for increasing native plant diversity and improving fish habitat in Cedar Lake, considering reintroduction of desirable species and monitoring progress as part of the broader lake management plan.
  • Species Diversity Goals: The team set targets for increasing native plant species from five to seven or more, aiming for a diverse habitat without excessive coverage. They discussed potential reintroductions and the benefits for fish populations, including crappie, walleye, and largemouth bass.

Follow-up tasks:

• Grant Application for Lake Treatment: Coordinate with Melissa, Patrick, and others to prepare and submit grant applications for the DNR Invasive Species Control Grant and the LCCMR Small Grant, ensuring alignment with the new grant language and incorporating feedback from previous applications.
• Phosphorus Sediment Sampling: Review existing sediment core data and determine whether to collect additional sediment phosphorus samples this fall or winter to support future grant applications and track phosphorus reduction.
• Grant Writing Support: Share past grant application materials and feedback with John to assist in preparing improved applications for upcoming grant cycles.
• Financial Planning for Lake Management: Develop and present different financial models for sustainable lake management, including potential levy increases and grant funding scenarios, at the next annual meeting.
• Zebra Mussel Monitoring: Organize a shoreline walk and dock inspection among residents to monitor for zebra mussels, and consider deploying sediment sampler plates for annual population tracking. (the team)
• Herbicide Pricing Analysis: Review and confirm the cost estimates for switching from Sonar to Galleon for lake-wide treatment, including potential discounts and funding options. (Patrick, Keegan)
• Native Plant Reintroduction Planning: Evaluate the feasibility of reintroducing desirable native plant species after phosphorus and curly leaf management efforts show results.