Food for thought on the Aquatic Management Plan

[darealdeal]

As things seem deem and the responses from the council little we have one group that is trying to hold those responsible accountable. We all talk about the good old or at least us younger guys listen to the older fellas y’all about the good ole days and yet a lot of the time all we do is talk. It is about high tide we as a group stand up and let them know we will not stand idly by and let them destroy what we hold dear. As I was scrolling through and the management plan and reading about some of the chemicals used it is insane what they are putting in the water. As I was doing this I happen to check Facebook and see someone was doing jus the exact same. This was posted to Facebook and figured I would include it here for those that are not on Facebook. Just want to say thanks Strick9 for doing what you do and I hope that we can come together and make a change. Please take the time to read this and do just a little research on your own. This information is easy to find and we should not let this continue.

Sorry for typos and grammar typing on a phone.

"South Carolina Aquatic Management plan"

The Math behind the Madness

From the Aquatic Management Report:

Today, while waiting on a meeting to begin, I did some math with figures taken directly from the SC Aquatic Management Plan.

It didn't take long to put together but it certainly opened my eyes even further.

Let me first ask a question, did you know that at present almost every single lake and river in SC has a fish consumption advisory?

These advisories state that due to the toxicity of the fish that you shouldn't eat more than one meal of various fish species per week. How terribly sad is that? Did you also know that within the Aquatic Management Plan that the leading reasoning for spraying herbicides is to promote fishing? Do you find this ironic?

In 2020 SC as a whole, either through taxation or consumption via electrical power fees, will spend $1.26 million on chemical applications used upon our states public rivers, lakes and ponds.

Lets look at the chemicals that being used and the rates applied :

Triclopyr - 0.500 - 0.750 gallons per acre.

Diquat - 0.500 gallons per acre.

Imazamox - 0.250 - 0.750 gallons per acre.

Glyphosate - up to 0.937 gallons per acre.

Copper* - up to 1 ppm (about 10- 16 gallons per acre).

Copper*/Diquat - 4 gallons/2 gallons per acre

Imazapyr – 0.250 - 0.750 gallons per acre.

Penoxsulam - Submersed 0.174 fl oz/acre foot to achieve minimum effective concentration of 25 to 75 ppb, Floating species – 2 to 6 fl oz/acre as foliar application.

ProcellaCOR-SC - 1-5 PDUs per acre foot for submersed application, 1-2 PDUs per acre for foliar application.

Now lets put this into perspective as to how much of these chemicals will be used on our public lakes, rivers and ponds.

For general purpose and ease of understanding, lets just look at the most common chemicals used as listed in the plan for everyone of our public lakes : Diquat, Tricopyr, Imazomox and Glyphosphate.

If we take the acreages given in the plan "to be treated" and multiply those acreages by the application rates we can easily figure out the amount of chemical to be used upon our public waters. Obviously far more are used as we left so many out of the list.

Now, at this point, I would suggest that each and everyone of you take a look at the toxicity rating per the EPA on each of these chemicals while remembering those fish consumption advisories. Then, if I were you I would take the time to look at your own local lake's fish consumption advisories. I would also ask that you look at where your drinking water comes from as well.

To be clear, I am not saying that each of these advisories is due to these particular chemicals. I am however saying that adding chemicals upon sedimentary stored chemicals can certainly alter the mix via reaction. We must never dismiss the known fact of chemical uptake into the environment nor the reaction of chemical synergism as related to uptake.

Total of only the most commonly used Chemicals to be used in 2020 upon SC public waters:

Diquat= 8,652 gallons

Triclopyr = 12,978 gallons

Imazomox= 12,978 gallons

Glyphosphate 16,213 gallons

Often in each area to be treated we also see this notation where Hydrilla is concerned =

* May be toxic to fish at recommended treatment rates; however, precautions will be implemented to minimize the risk of fish kills.

Now if you wanted to see the bigger picture, you could look at the last ten years of treatment by simply multiplying those numbers by a factor of 10 :

Diquat= 80,652 gallons

Triclopyr = 120,978 gallons

Imazomox= 120,978 gallons

Glyphosphate 160,213 gallons

And in economical terms , over the last 10 years SC has spent well over $10 million dollars on chemically treating aquatic vegetation.

I would say its high time that we ask why ventilator masks and protective suits are highly recommended while using these chemicals and most certainly push for more mechanical harvesting period.
-Strick9