Table #1 Lake Access

Table #1 – Lake AccessHaves/Insights More community docks would be effective and making public land available for public/back-lot access Municipal lift/dock tags have worked in other places Promote more setback along lake for future development and access Intermunicipal planning could address access through planning and subdivisionNeeds/Issues Boat access: Some want more/some want less o Safety: Need a way to get boats off lake in storms within 2 hours Foot access: o Some areas are overwhelmed with users o Need planning approaches to address access issues Still ATV use on shores Who pays for infrastructure when used by others: should one pay for access to a public resource? This is a complex issue with no easy solution! Municipal planning needs to consider access, boat launching, etc. with longer time horizon Parking issue: e.g. everyone wants to go to Sylvan from other places Need to determine capacity at lakes: what is the consequences of understanding capacity… will it limit development? How can boat capacity be determined? Storm response: o Use strip ties on dock o Need to get boats on lifts o Who cleans up mess when everything is shaken loose from storms? How can CARL help? Recommendations/Next Steps Table #2 – Agricultural BMPsHaves/Insights Cows and Fish has lots of expertise, experience and success promoting riparian stewardship with ag sector Knowledge and science is increasing and is available People want to do the right thing! Grants are available: Growing Forward 2, DUC, Agricultural Watershed Enhancement Program Counties have sustainability staffNeeds/Issues More education and outreach is needed More incentives and resources for farmers Are people applying nutrients according to requirements?How can CARL help? Recommendations/Next Steps Better collaboration between counties, GoA (department of Agriculture, Environment and Parks and Municipal Affairs) Better and more outreach and education More enforcement Better guidelines for reclamation Table #3 – Water Quality MonitoringHaves/Insights Limnologists Grants ALMS training and analysisNeeds/Issues More data, and more continuity in data, and more consolidated data More funding Information access and sharing Training and resources Concerns about industrial organic residues WPACs and WSGs need input and collaboration into AEMERA’s monitoring and Lake stewardship groups need to understand where and when does loading come from into lakes? Potential for retention activities (management) Need to apply more 21st century instrumentation: measuring flow, real time data Monitoring must be tied to clear objectives More citizen science support Need to monitor tributaries and surface loading How can CARL help? Recommendations/Next Steps CARL can play an “information management” role: have a place to store and share information Facilitates combined efforts for advocacy and lobbying: facilitates “strength in numbers” Provide a place to clearly articulate wants and needs as a group with common interests  Education and Outreach: Develop online short courses targeting public, municipal decision- makers Table #4 – Riparian StewardshipHaves/Insights Have had some success with riparian setback promotion (e.g. Lacombe County) Model land use bylaw (PLWA) Education about hard surface vs soft Lake watershed management NAWMPNeeds/Issues Challenge that there is not a consistent, proper definition of “riparian”: not just the area of change… needs to be a much wider area, ~ 800m Need more monitoring and enforcementHow can CARL help? Recommendations/Next Steps Come up with universally accepted definition of riparian: remove controversy and confusion Education for Municipalities CARL can play an “information management” role: have a place to store and share information Facilitates combined efforts for advocacy and lobbying: facilitates “strength in numbers” Table #5 – Land Use Planning for LakesHaves/Insights Encourage the development of IDPs Educate people living on lakes Review and update development plans in light of carrying capacity: take a risk-based approach To address cumulative effects: Educational about municipal requirements and clearly understood ground rules for development that are consistently appliedNeeds/Issues All types of development within the lake watershed All kinds of non-statutory plans Really need to understand what is the carrying capacity of these lakes for development? Including, what is the capacity for boat traffic Look at whether or not development on ecologically significant areas is acceptable Need to refresh our approaches to decision making e.g. approvals tools Need to reconcile planning mechanisms for lake watersheds with other planning processesHow can CARL help? Recommendations/Next Steps Forum for sharing and collaboration Lobbying  Education (Municipalities, developers, stakeholders + public) Discussions with local municipalities Communicate/educate AAMDC, AUMA, ASVA about lake watershed land use policies (lake- friendly, low-impact) Table #6 – First Nations EngagementHaves/Insights Aboriginal Consultation Office: www.aboriginal.alberta.caNeeds/Issues Challenge of Engagement: Experience o 4 Nations have different expectations, e.g. Pigeon Lake different than Maskwacis o Insight: Cultural differences, e.g. communication and language differences Need to know who to talk to: continually changing contactsHow can CARL help? Recommendations/Next Steps Table #7 – Blue Green AlgaeHaves/Insights AEMERA/AEP science expertise on water quality/ecology County being proactive protecting lake (sewer lines installed) Municipal bylaws: fertilizer bylawNeeds/Issues Mitigation technologies Research needed (i.e. climate change and long-term trends) Education on issue and risks: understanding individual impact on water quality Lake specific monitoring and researchHow can CARL help? Recommendations/Next Steps Share information Lobby GoA Table #8 – Aquatic Invasive SpeciesHaves/Insights Voluntary inspection and cleanups Attitude: positive attitude for prevention Lots of education happening: pamphlets, websites, newsletter, anecdotal evidence of effectiveness Need to do education up to the “tipping point”, when the desired behaviour/action just becomes a cultural normNeeds/Issues People need info on where to send samples of Eurasian watermilfoil Lacking info/attention to invasive plants: prioritize issues based on risk assessment Need to target people who live at a lake and people whose livelihoods would be affected Make the message resonate to the specific target audience Look to Europe vs the US for ideas on how to manage Situational scan: case study of strategies… what existsHow can CARL help? Recommendations/Next Steps

Table #1 Lake Access

Details

Download

Copyright

We respect the copyrights and intellectual property rights of all users. All uploaded documents are either original works of the uploader or authorized works of the rightful owners.

Support