Drawdowns of Lake Hopatcong—both the annual 26-inch and the five-year 60-inch—weighed heavily on the minds of attendees of the Lake Hopatcong Commission meeting on Monday night. There were mixed opinions among the attendees, and an assurance from the commission that no final decision has been made as of yet.
The annual drawdown begins each year in mid-November and continues until mid-December, with about an inch a day removed until the lake reaches a depth of about six feet, according to the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP).
Every five years, five feet of water is removed from the lake. The next five-foot drawdown is scheduled for 2013.
Tim Clancy, a Hopatcong resident and Knee Deep Club member, said he didn’t understand how the commission could even consider not doing both drawdowns.
“Last year we had one of the driest winters on record, and the lake was still spilling over the dam by June 4,” Clancy said. “In 2010, after the drawdown, the lake rose 24 inches within 48 hours, and in 2008, it went up 16.5 inches in five days after a drawdown.”
“If there’s no annual drawdown, the lake will freeze at the higher level and could cause great damage to property on the lake,” said Lake Hopatcong resident Sam Hoagland.
Landing resident Richard Pedati noted that the footings of his home are built under the water table.
“I need this drawdown,” he said. “If the water level goes too high, my home could move.”
“As for the five-foot drawdown, people count on that to be able to fix their docks,” he continued. “If you don’t have that drawdown, people won’t be able to fix their property. Most residents can’t afford to call in professional help to maintain their property, and count on that drawdown to fix things themselves.”
Byram Cove resident Jeanette Vreeland asked if residents would be surveyed as to their thoughts on the drawdown.
“Yes, we do have a survey that we plan to send out to lakefront owners,” said commissioner Kerry Kirk-Pflugh.
The DEP is considering not doing the drawdown because of concerns about the lake not recovering from the loss of water.
“We know that the lake fills because of rain, not because of anything we do,” Kirk-Pflugh said. “If it doesn’t rain, the lake doesn’t refill after a drawdown.
“However, we also understand that ice and flooding are very important issues for people who live on the lake. That’s why we want to do research, so we can make an informed decision on what to do.”
Business owners who make their living from the lake are more concerned with the affect on their businesses if the lake doesn’t recover from a drawdown.
“The lake is here to benefit many people, not just the lakefront property owners,” said Ray Fernandez, owner of Bridge Marina in Lake Hopatcong. “We’ve always recovered from a 26-inch drawdown, but we haven’t always come back from a five-foot drawdown.”
Commission Chairman Russell Felter said that the DEP, not the commission, makes the final decision regarding all drawdowns, and that a final decision hasn’t been made yet.
“Everyone just needs to stay calm,” he said. “The (60-inch) drawdown is by no means a done deal.”
Felter expected a decision would be made on that drawdown by the end of 2012.
Dorothy Sabarese
2:36 pm on Tuesday, September 18, 2012
I don't even understand why this has been brought up. The drawdown schedule works. People AND businesses need to take care of their property!!!! Now the DEP has to spend money on research when the state is so stingy with their $ to this lake to take care of its health all around....like weeds and other important health issues to the lake!!!!
Lake Lover
9:31 pm on Tuesday, September 18, 2012
I do not have any concerns about the 26 inch drawdown which is needed for weed control and dock preservation. I do, however, have concerns about the 60 inch drawdown. Can the drawdown be less then 60 inches and a compromise met? Can it be pushed back to 7 years for example due to increased marine material longevity? I really don’t know the answers. How many lakefront owners will perform repairs and maintenance during the 60 inch drawdown that can’t be performed during the 26 inch drawdown? Perhaps the survey will help answer these questions so the best decision can be made.
lklubber
5:26 am on Monday, October 1, 2012
Why would they draw water down every year and risk the water not coming back? Is this just to protect a few home owners from the responsibilty of maintaining their front yards? I am a boater who uses the lake a lot, and i have about 30 boater friends who do as well. Why are we (and the thousands of others like me) supposed to risk losing the lake so a few homeowners can save a few bucks on property management? Seems pretty simple case, that they should decrease all of our risk and just keep drawdows to the bare minumum, so everyone can get to use the lake. The lake is no use without water in it, right?
John Kurzman
4:11 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
The drawdowns are also for weed and algae control and is a technique used in other lakes as as well. Scientists indicate that if the weeds are exposed to freezing before snow protects them, they are killed and that helps the next season.
I also believe that releasing water that has phosphorus and is replaced by rainwater without phosphorus, lowers the overall Phosphorus level, that helps prevent algae blooms as well. (i call it the flushing effect).
As someone who has observed the lake for more than 25 years, including years on the LHRPB focused on harvesting, and as I believe others concur, the years after the 5 year drawdown (assuming the lake level recovers) has the lightest weed load, and progressively gets worse each year thereafter, until the next 5 year drawdown. There is something to that.
But although I like the drawdowns for the quality of the lake, unless they fix the refill procedure to be more like it was pre-2006, we've got a problem. And that's before considering changing weather patterns that cause severe droughts and severe flooding conditions that also could either be very helpful or very harmful to recovery from the drawdowns.
And as a homeowner, I find the 26 inch drawdown to be the worst height - too high that it causes dock damage, but too low that there's not enough water for a bubbler to have warm water to rise and stop ice from forming.
We'll never make everyone happy, but have to do what's best for the lake overall.
John Kurzman
2:44 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
This did not come out of thin air. The old IMPLEMENTATION as shown by USGS statistics, typically worked.
USGS gauges show that in 2006, the state changed their implementation, and started letting out 7.5 million gallons per day, no matter if it was a wet springtime or a dry august. Pre-2006, the dam might be closed entirely or <7.5mgd during the wet springtime, to help the refill process work, and since downstream was vernal pools for frogs, toad, salamanders to be born safely, versus transforming that area into a trout habitat as has been the project since about 2006. That has significantly changed the chances of refill and sustaining levels.
There are 65 million gallons in an inch of Lake Hopatcong level, so releasing 7.5mgd means the lake either doesn't rise by 3.6 inches that month that it would have, or can actually fall even during what is supposed to be refill time. (ie. the lake fell this last spring for instance, and would have been 3.6 inches higher each month had the release not been happening).
I think a compromise would be to compare pre-2006 USGS statistics to 7.5mgd release, and figure out how much lower the lake will now be than the old typical management method by a certain date. I think the drawdowns are important, but if the lake used to get to keep 'x' more inches of water by a certain date, perhaps adjust the drawdown by that much? The annual drawdown already went from 30” to 26”, perhaps the 5 year amount is too deep or too often.