Assessment of Non-Chemical Control of Aquatic Plants

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Assessment of Non-Chemical Control of Aquatic Plants Aquatic Pesticide Monitoring Program Review of Alternative Aquatic Pest Control Methods For California Waters Ben K. Greenfield Nicole David Jennifer Hunt Marion Wittmann Geoffrey Siemering San Francisco Estuary Institute 7770 Pardee Lane, 2nd Floor Oakland, CA 94621 April 2004 Aquatic Pesticide Monitoring Program Review of Alternative Aquatic Pest Control Methods For California Waters Table of Contents: Disclaimer and Acknowledgements ..................................................................................iii Introduction......................................................................................................................... 2 Review Design.................................................................................................................... 4 Literature Review............................................................................................................ 5 Practitioner Survey.......................................................................................................... 5 Biological Control Methods................................................................................................ 6 Pros and Cons of Biocontrol........................................................................................... 6 Triploid Grass Carp......................................................................................................... 7 Other Herbivorous Fishes ............................................................................................. 11 Fish Biomanipulation.................................................................................................... 11 Terrestrial Herbivorous Mammals................................................................................ 13 Gastropod Mollusks...................................................................................................... 13 Insects ........................................................................................................................... 14 Predatory Animals For Mosquito Control .................................................................... 16 Commercially Available Biocontrol Agents................................................................. 17 Plant Pathogens Currently In Development.................................................................. 18 Pathogens For Mosquito Control.................................................................................. 20 Cyanobacteria Control Agents Currently in Development........................................... 20 Organic Material Amendment ...................................................................................... 21 Acetic Acid ................................................................................................................... 22 Management Considerations For Organic Material Amendment................................. 23 Plant Competition ......................................................................................................... 24 Physical and Mechanical Control Methods ...................................................................... 25 Mechanical Harvesting ................................................................................................. 25 Environmental Effects of Mechanical Harvesting........................................................ 29 Mechanical Cutting....................................................................................................... 31 Rotovation, Rototilling and Hydroraking ..................................................................... 34 Weed Rollers and Sweepers.......................................................................................... 36 Diver-operated Suction Dredging................................................................................. 37 Sediment Removal........................................................................................................ 37 Shading and Piping ....................................................................................................... 37 Bottom Barriers............................................................................................................. 38 Manual Removal........................................................................................................... 40 Water Level Manipulation ............................................................................................ 42 Channel Clearing or Excavation ................................................................................... 43 Exposure of Plants to Extreme Environmental Conditions (Heat, Steam, Flame, Cold, or Electricity) ................................................................................................................ 45 Aeration, Oxygenation, and Water Circulation ............................................................ 45 Nutrient Removal.......................................................................................................... 48 Non-conventional Chemical Controls............................................................................... 49 Calcium-based Products................................................................................................ 50 Aluminum based products ............................................................................................ 51 Nitrate ........................................................................................................................... 52 i Aquatic Pesticide Monitoring Program Review of Alternative Aquatic Pest Control Methods For California Waters Aquashade..................................................................................................................... 52 Salt (Sodium Chloride) ................................................................................................. 53 NPDES Permitting Status of Non-Conventional Chemicals ........................................ 53 Preventive Measures ......................................................................................................... 54 Early Detection ............................................................................................................. 54 Quarantine and Regulation ........................................................................................... 55 Education and Outreach................................................................................................ 56 Riparian Buffer Strips................................................................................................... 56 Retention Pond or Wetland Construction ..................................................................... 57 Watershed Best Management Practices ........................................................................ 57 Relative Reliance on Conventional Pesticides vs. Alternative Methods .......................... 58 General Permitting Requirements For Non-Chemical Methods....................................... 60 General Discussion ........................................................................................................... 61 References......................................................................................................................... 62 Appendix A: Contractors/ Retailers That Specialize in Non-Chemical Control Methods79 Contractors who conduct Non-Pesticide Control Methods .......................................... 79 Companies that Manufacture and Sell Aquatic Plant Harvesters or Other Non- Chemical Devices ......................................................................................................... 80 Appendix B: Practitioners Interviewed For Review......................................................... 82 California Practitioners ................................................................................................. 82 Out of State Practitioners.............................................................................................. 88 Appendix C: Feasibility Screening For Different Weed Control Methods ...................... 93 Appendix D: Peer Review .............................................................................................. 102 ii Aquatic Pesticide Monitoring Program Review of Alternative Aquatic Pest Control Methods For California Waters DISCLAIMER AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This report is the result of feedback by some members of the Aquatic Pesticide Monitoring Program Steering Committee that there is a need for thorough documentation on alternative aquatic pest control methods for California waters. This work is intended as an educational tool, including detailed discussion of alternative methods. This review does not evaluate conventional chemical pesticides; therefore, it should not be considered a guideline on all available aquatic pest control methods. No policy or regulation is expressed or intended by this report. We thank the APMP Steering Committee and Interested Parties for providing feedback and direction on this literature review. Thanks are also due to all the aquatic plant managers, scientists, regulators, and NGOs who agreed to be interviewed and provide literature and unpublished reports for this review. Any errors or omissions in presenting alternative pest control efforts are the responsibility of the authors, rather than those interviewed. David Spencer, George Forni, Lars Anderson, and Robert Leavitt provided constructive review comments on portions of this review, Joe DiTomaso and John Madsen
Recommended publications
  • Hicks Lake Integrated Aquatic Vegetation Management Plan – 2017
    DRAFT HICKS LAKE INTEGRATED AQUATIC VEGETATION MANAGEMENT PLAN – 2017 Prepared for City of Lacey Prepared by Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc. Note: Some pages in this document have been purposely skipped or blank pages inserted so that this document will copy correctly when duplexed. HICKS LAKE INTEGRATED AQUATIC VEGETATION MANAGEMENT PLAN – 2017 Prepared for City of Lacey 420 College Street Southeast Lacey, Washington 98503 Prepared by Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc. 2200 Sixth Avenue, Suite 1100 Seattle, Washington 98121 Telephone: 206-441-9080 Funded by Washington State Department of Ecology Aquatic Weeds Management Fund Grant Number WQAIP-2017-LacePW-00001 DRAFT November 15, 2016 CONTENTS Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................................................... iii 1. Problem Statement ............................................................................................................................................... 1 2. Plant Management Goals .................................................................................................................................... 3 3. Lake and Watershed Characteristics ............................................................................................................... 5 4. Beneficial Uses of Hicks Lake ........................................................................................................................... 11 5. Aquatic Plant Community ................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Environmental Quality: in Situ Air Sparging
    EM 200-1-19 31 December 2013 Environmental Quality IN-SITU AIR SPARGING ENGINEER MANUAL AVAILABILITY Electronic copies of this and other U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) publications are available on the Internet at http://www.publications.usace.army.mil/ This site is the only repository for all official USACE regulations, circulars, manuals, and other documents originating from HQUSACE. Publications are provided in portable document format (PDF). This document is intended solely as guidance. The statutory provisions and promulgated regulations described in this document contain legally binding requirements. This document is not a legally enforceable regulation itself, nor does it alter or substitute for those legal provisions and regulations it describes. Thus, it does not impose any legally binding requirements. This guidance does not confer legal rights or impose legal obligations upon any member of the public. While every effort has been made to ensure the accuracy of the discussion in this document, the obligations of the regulated community are determined by statutes, regulations, or other legally binding requirements. In the event of a conflict between the discussion in this document and any applicable statute or regulation, this document would not be controlling. This document may not apply to a particular situation based upon site- specific circumstances. USACE retains the discretion to adopt approaches on a case-by-case basis that differ from those described in this guidance where appropriate and legally consistent. This document may be revised periodically without public notice. DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY EM 200-1-19 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers CEMP-CE Washington, D.C.
    [Show full text]
  • Eutrophic Lakes
    INTEGRATED POND & LAKE MANAGEMENT Otterbine Aerators, Water Aeration Systems Industry Leader “We Treat Your Water Right” INTRODUCTION Aging Process of Lakes Causes of Water Quality Problems Water Chemistry Effects of Poor Water Quality Costs of Not Acting Preventive Practices Aeration Summary WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT Water quality is a critical factor in the successful management of any property. WATER QUALITY VARIES Water quality varies at each location Recent studies from the US EPA indicates consistent measures in first world countries. National Lakes (Water Quality) 44% of all 23% Good lakes rank 56% 21% Fair fair or poor Poor in water quality MAN MADE LAKES FARED WORSE Almost 60% of Man Made Lakes (Water Quality) man made lakes 30% are rated poor 41% Good or fair Fair 29% Poor Target man made lakes when developing water quality management plans IDENTIFY THE CAUSES Every lake is a unique ecosystem If you can identify the causes, you can implement a solution Focus on environmental balance OLIGOTROPHIC LAKES Oligotrophic lakes are biologically “new” lakes These lakes have very low levels of nutrients, usually less than .001mg\l of phosphorus These lakes have little or no algae and macrophyte growth. MESOTROPHIC LAKES Mesotrophic lakes tend to have intermediate levels of nutrients, phosphorus in the range of 0.1mg/l range and could be considered middle age lakes. These lakes have higher levels of phosphorus and experience some algae and weed problems. EUTROPHIC LAKES Eutrophic lakes are older lakes characterized by high turbidity, nutrient levels, algae and macrophyte populations. Phosphorus levels can be in the range of 1mg/l.
    [Show full text]
  • Semi-Intensive Aeration System Design for Rural Tilapia Ponds
    Oregon State University Semi-Intensive Aeration System Design for Rural Tilapia Ponds Final Report March 14, 2016 BEE 470 Senior Design II Drs. Ganti and Selker Table of Contents Executive Summary .......................................................................................................................2 1. Introduction ................................................................................................................................3 2. Problem Statement.....................................................................................................................3 3. System Overview ........................................................................................................................3 4. Design Process ............................................................................................................................4 5. Charge Controller Overview ....................................................................................................4 6. Battery Overview .......................................................................................................................5 7. Pump Overview ..........................................................................................................................6 8. Aerator Alternatives ..................................................................................................................9 9. Diffuser Overview ....................................................................................................................10
    [Show full text]
  • Nitrogen Compounds at Mines and Quarries I 226
    VTT TECHNOLOGY NOL CH OG E Y T • • R E E C S N E E A Nitrogen compounds at mines and quarries I 226 R C 226 C Sources, behaviour and removal from mine and quarry S H • S H N waters – Literature study I G O I H S L I I V G • H S T Nitrogen compounds at mines and quarries Nitrogen compounds at mines and quarries ISBN 978-951-38-8320-1 (URL: http://www.vttresearch.com/impact/publications) ISSN-L 2242-1211 ISSN 2242-122X (Online) Sources, behaviour and removal from mine and quarry waters – Literature study VTT TECHNOLOGY 226 Nitrogen compounds at mines and quarries Sources, behaviour and removal from mine and quarry waters – Literature study Johannes Jermakka, Laura Wendling, Elina Sohlberg, Hanna Heinonen, Elina Merta, Jutta Laine-Ylijoki, Tommi Kaartinen & Ulla-Maija Mroueh VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland Ltd ISBN 978-951-38-8320-1 (URL: http://www.vttresearch.com/impact/publications) VTT Technology 226 ISSN-L 2242-1211 ISSN 2242-122X (Online) Copyright © VTT 2015 JULKAISIJA – UTGIVARE – PUBLISHER Teknologian tutkimuskeskus VTT Oy PL 1000 (Tekniikantie 4 A, Espoo) 02044 VTT Puh. 020 722 111, faksi 020 722 7001 Teknologiska forskningscentralen VTT Ab PB 1000 (Teknikvägen 4 A, Esbo) FI-02044 VTT Tfn +358 20 722 111, telefax +358 20 722 7001 VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland Ltd P.O. Box 1000 (Tekniikantie 4 A, Espoo) FI-02044 VTT, Finland Tel. +358 20 722 111, fax +358 20 722 7001 Cover image: Johannes Jermakka, VTT Abstract Nitrogen compounds at mines and quarries Sources, behaviour and removal from mine and quarry waters – Literature study Authors: Johannes Jermakka, Laura Wendling, Elina Sohlberg, Hanna Heinonen, Elina Merta, Jutta Laine-Ylijoki, Tommi Kaartinen and Ulla-Maija Mroueh Keywords: ammonia, nitrate, mine wastewater, treatment technology, nitrogen recovery, nitrogen sources, explosives Mining wastewaters can contain nitrogen from incomplete detonation of nitrogen rich explosives and from nitrogen containing chemicals used in enrichment pro- cesses.
    [Show full text]
  • Aquatic Pesticide Application Plan for the San Francisco Estuary Invasive Spartina Project
    Aquatic Pesticide Application Plan for the San Francisco Estuary Invasive Spartina Project This plan addresses herbicide application activities undertaken by the coalition of ISP partner agencies in the effort to eradicate non-native, invasive Spartina from the San Francisco Estuary. Annual update prepared by Drew Kerr 2612-A 8th Street Berkeley, CA 94710 [email protected] Under contract to Olofson Environmental, Inc. Berkeley, California for the State Coastal Conservancy 1330 Broadway, 13th floor Oakland, Ca 94612-2530 June 2013 Current funding for the San Francisco Estuary Invasive Spartina Project comes from the California State Coastal Conservancy and grants from the California Wildlife Conservation Board. Table of Contents Table of Contents ................................................................................................................................... i List of Figures ....................................................................................................................................... ii List of Tables ......................................................................................................................................... ii Appendices ............................................................................................................................................ ii 1. BACKGROUND......................................................................................................... 1 2. STATEMENT OF PURPOSE AND NEED ...............................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Aeration Blowers for Wastewater Treatment Piping Best Practices
    Aeration Blowers for Wastewater Treatment Piping Best Practices November/December 2007 Illustration: Motivair Corporation and Haas Racing 0611_1049_SPX_Ad_CABP:CABP_HPETad 5/9/2007 9:29 AM Page 1 FLOWS TO 3,000 SCFM • ENERGY SAVING emmTM CONTROLLERS • COLDWAVETM 316SS HEAT EXCHANGERS LOAD MATCHING DIGITAL EVAPORATOR TECHNOLOGY • AIR QUALITY TO ISO 8573-1 CLASS 1:4:1 • WORLDWIDE DISTRIBUTION Hankison HES Series compressed air dryers match energy savings to plant air demands. Integrated filtration improves productivity with pure clean dry air. Digital evaporator technology ensures you only pay for the power you need…no more, no less. HES Series’ global design provides unrivaled performance and reliability to start saving you money today. Bank the savings. ® ® www.hankisonintl.com/coldwave | 11–12/07 Focus Industry | WatER & WASTEwatER MANAGEMENT FOCUS INDUSTRY FEATURES Selecting Aeration Blowers for Wastewater Treatment | 8 By Calvin Wallace Critical Compressed Air Treatment | 20 for a NASCAR Wind Tunnel By Graham Whitmore Real World Best Practices: Compressed Air Piping | 25 By Hank Van Ormer 8 20 4 www.airbestpractices.com AC VSD Ad 12/1/06 1:04 PM Page 1 Conserve Energy and Save Money with Variable Speed Drive Compressors When a major California winemaker expanded its grape squeezing operation, the ability to automatically control the variable demand of compressed air provided energy savings that helped the project pay for itself faster. Atlas Copco Variable Speed Drive (VSD) air compressors precisely match the output of compressed air to your air system's fluctuating demand. Atlas Copco has an established record of success creating solutions for our customers whose demand for compressed air varies.
    [Show full text]
  • MCSTOPPP Marin County Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program
    MCSTOPPP Marin County Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program www.mcstoppp.org 2010—2011 MCSTOPPP Annual Report Belvedere ▪ Corte Madera ▪ County of Marin ▪ Fairfax Larkspur ▪ Mill Valley ▪ Novato ▪ Ross ▪ San Anselmo San Rafael ▪ Sausalito ▪ Tiburon ANNUAL REPORT 2010-2011 Marin County Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program (MCSTOPPP) Marin County Department of Public Works P.O. Box 4186 San Rafael, CA 94913‐4186 Countywide Program Staff Terri Fashing, Program Manager (415‐499‐6583) Gina Purin, Public Outreach Coordinator (415‐499‐3202) Howard Bunce, Engineering Technician III (415‐499‐3748) Liz Lewis, Principal Planner, Marin County Department of Public Works [email protected] with assistance from EOA, Inc. and Marin County Department of Public Works Agency Staff Committee Representatives (Local Stormwater Coordinators): Scott Derdenger, City of Belvedere Kevin Kramer, Town of Corte Madera Mark Lockaby, Town of Fairfax Mike Myers, City of Larkspur Howard Bunce and Terri Fashing, County of Marin Jill Barnes, City of Mill Valley Dave Harlan, City of Novato Robert Maccario, Town of Ross Sean Condry, Town of San Anselmo Diane Decicio, City of San Rafael Todd Teachout, City of Sausalito Matt Swalberg, Town of Tiburon Citizens Advisory Committee: Betsy Bikle Stan Griffin* Jan Gross Kristine Pillsbury Aaron Stessman Sam Wilson** Ann Thomas** Cover photo: Garden designed by Art Gardens Landscape Co., 2010 Marin Eco‐Friendly Garden Tour – Photo by Gina Purin. *This Annual Report is dedicated to the memory of Stan Griffin (1920‐2011), with gratitude for his tireless efforts to protect and restore fish habitat in Marin’s creeks. **Ann Thomas replaced Sam Wilson on the MCSTOPPP CAC in May 2011.
    [Show full text]
  • Protecting Urban Water Quality: New Surface Water Regulations of 2012
    Protecting Urban Water Quality: New Surface Water Regulations of 2012 Michael P Ensminger, Staff Environmental Scientist, California Department of Pesticide Regulation, 1001 I Street, Sacramento, CA 95812, [email protected] The California Department of Pesticide Regulation adopted new surface water regulations on June 19, 2012. The regulations restrict outdoor urban applications of pyrethroid insecticides made by professional applicators. Pyrethroids are highly active insecticides that control crawling, chewing, and flying insects as cockroaches, ants, beetles, caterpillars, termites, mosquitos, and wasps; in addition they are highly active on arachnids as spiders, ticks, and mites. Pyrethroids are highly hydrophobic and sorb to soils and sediment; half-lives of pyrethroids range from weeks to more than a year. Pyrethroids are being regulated in urban (non-agricultural) areas because of the following characteristics: 1) high use in urban areas; 2) prone to runoff in urban areas due to the engineering design of urban areas, especially during rainstorms; 3) more frequently detected in urban areas than in agricultural areas; 4) highly toxic to aquatic invertebrates and fish; 5) cause aquatic invertebrate toxicity when detected in surface waters. The new surface water regulations will reduce the amount of pyrethroids applied by limiting applications to spot applications, crack and crevice applications, pin stream applications, and by limiting applications to impervious surfaces. Because more pyrethroids runoff during rainstorm events, applications are prohibited during rainfall (except under eaves), in standing water, to stormdrains and curbside gutters, and unprotected termiticide applications. More specific information can be found at the CDPR website (http://cdpr.ca.gov/docs/legbills/calcode/040501.htm).
    [Show full text]
  • Salmonid Hatchery Wastewater Treatment
    Salmonid hatchery wastewater treatment By Paul B. Liao* nature of hatchery operating procedures, both The characteristics of wastewater must be un- quantity and quality of wastewater vary from derstood before the methods treating that waste time to time. Accordingly, a treatment method can be discussed. The nature of salmonid for salmonid hatchery wastes must be eco- hatchery wastes and their pollution potential nomical, flexible and efficient in terms of the have recently been discussed by Liao." In degree of treatment required. Therefore, de- general, salmonid hatchery wastes can be velopment of an alternate treatment method classified into three groups dependent on type for hatchery effluent water control appears de- of hatchery and type of water supply system. sirable. They are normal hatchery effluent, raceway The degree of treatment required for a cleaning wastes and reuse filter effluent.** For hatchery effluent depends upon several factors reference, Table 1 summarizes salmonid hatch- including wastewater quality, receiving water ery wastewater characteristics. conditions, receiving water quality standards For normal hatchery effluent and reuse filter and effluent water quality standards. The con- overflow waters, the potential pollution prob- trol of pollution from a hatchery can be ac- lems involve oxygen depletion, nutrient en- complished by both in-hatchery operation richment and taste and odor in cases where improvements and effluent water treatment. the receiving water flow is low. Raceway clean- The former has been recently discussed in ing water and reuse filter backwashing wastes detail by the author.' This paper will discuss are potential sources of pollution comparable the results of the treatment methods studied.
    [Show full text]
  • Weed Management in a Changing Agricultural/Urban Environment
    10:20 Weeds as Hosts for Insect Pests 10:20 New Options for Control of Invasive FRIDAY, JANUARY 20, 2017 10:20 WeedsShimat as Joseph, Hosts forUCCE, Insect Monterey Pests County 10:20 NewAnnual Options Grasses for Control in the ofWest Invasive FRIDAY, JANUARY 20, 2017 7:00am- REGISTRATION & CEU Shimat Joseph, UCCE, Monterey County AnnualHarry GrassesQuicke, Bayer in the ES West Development California Weed 7:00am11:15am- REGISTRATIONSIGN-IN/OUT & CEU California Weed Harry Quicke, Bayer ES Development 10:45 Chemical Weed Control in Berry Crops 10:45 The Next Generation of Vegetation 11:15am SIGNJudy-IN/OUT Letterman & Celeste Elliott, CaliforniaScience WeedSociety 10:45 ChemicalSteve Fennimore, Weed Control UC Davis, in Berry Salinas Crops 10:45 TheManagement Next Generation and Stewardship of Vegetation JudyCWSS Letterman & Celeste Elliott, Science Society Steve Fennimore, UC Davis, Salinas ManagementGabriel Ludwig, and HelenaStewardship Chemical Company CWSS Science Society Gabriel Ludwig, Helena Chemical Company 11:30am-1:00pm CWSS BUSINESS & AWARDS LUNCHEON—DE ANZA BALLROOMS I & II DE ANZA BALLROOM III Annual Conference 11:30amKatherine-1:00pm Walker, CWSS CWSS BUSINESS President, &BASF AWARDS LUNCHEON—DE ANZA BALLROOMS I & II Annual Conference DE ANZA BALLROOM III Katherine Walker, CWSS President, BASF Annual Conference 7:30- SESSION M: LAWS & REGULATIONS AFTERNOON CONCURRENT SESSIONS 7:30- SESSIONChairs: LisaM: LAWS Blecker, & REGULATIONSUC Statewide IPM AFTERNOON CONCURRENT SESSIONS 11:30 DE ANZA BALLROOM III BONSAI BALLROOM 11:30
    [Show full text]
  • Barnes Lake Integrated Aquatic Vegetation Management Plan 2016
    BARNES LAKE INTEGRATED AQUATIC VEGETATION MANAGEMENT PLAN 2016 Prepared for City of Tumwater’s Barnes Lake Management District Prepared by Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc. Note: Some pages in this document have been purposely skipped or blank pages inserted so that this document will copy correctly when duplexed. BARNES LAKE INTEGRATED AQUATIC VEGETATION MANAGEMENT PLAN 2016 Prepared for City of Tumwater’s Barnes Lake Management District Tumwater City Hall 555 Israel Road Southwest Tumwater, Washington 98501 Prepared by Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc. 1220 Fourth Avenue East Olympia, Washington 98506 Telephone: 360-754-7644 April 1, 2016 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The City of Tumwater wishes to acknowledge the significant contribution provided by the members of the Barnes Lake Steering Committee toward the completion of the 2016 Barnes Lake Integrated Aquatic Vegetation Management Plan. Barnes Lake Steering Committee: Gary Bodeutsch (Chair) Linnea Madison (Vice Chair) William Baxter Dana Day Bob Gillette Jody Keys Judith Loft Kathy Peterson Tom Sparks Cathy Weaver Dan Smith, Staff Representative The Barnes Lake Steering Committee expressly thanks the Tumwater City Council for their support of the lake management district formation and management goals. Tumwater City Council Pete Kmet, Mayor Joan Cathey Ed Hildreth Nicole Hill Neil McClanahan Tom Oliva Debbie Sullivan Eileen Swarthout The LMD would also like to thank the City of Tumwater staff including John Doan, City Administrator; Jay Eaton, Public Works Director; and Ursula Euler, Finance Director; for their support of the LMD and assistance in providing for the routine management of this project, helping to build community among all the neighbors of Barnes Lake. CONTENTS Executive Summary ....................................................................................
    [Show full text]