Introduction of either the quagga or zebra mussel into Clear Lake would have a devastating economic and environmental impact and should be considered as a top-level economic threat to the basic welfare and well-being of the county citizens. As such it should be funded by general tax dollars and given equal status to other programs funded that way.
Once introduced ? and it only takes one boat ? these mussels quickly multiply, ultimately eliminating aquatic life forms that are an essential part of the lake”s natural ecosystem, including fish and other wildlife. The terrestrial life forms that depend on aquatic species for their survival also disappear, moving on to other areas where they can sustain themselves. The mussels also clog up water pipes and systems, increasing maintenance and repair costs to water companies and agencies ? costs that will be passed on to consumers. There is no known eradication method once introduced.
The magnitude of potential impacts, which are well known in the Great Lakes area, have been discussed at Board of Supervisor meetings and written about in the local media. A panel of Lake County staff and citizens under the guidance of Dr. Greg Giusti has developed a fee-based boat inspection program that was approved by the Board of Supervisors. While Dr. Giusti and his panel deserve credit for developing the program, in order to be successful it must be a 100-percent interdiction program. One mistake and this effort was a useless exercise. This is not the time for a low-funded, low-priority program.
Unfortunately, because it is a fee-based program it has a fundamental flaw that creates a higher element of risk that is unnecessary and damps the lake”s visitor-based economy. Charging an inspection fee to a fee-weary public creates the potential for emotional backlash from a pool of fee objectors as I”ve found out while inspecting boats.
Although many lake users are invested in keeping our lakes quagga-free, there are also a troubling small number that will lash back if they can. Among this group the fee fuels negative feelings against a county government “just looking for cash,” doubt as to whether the lake is already infested, and rants about whether the scientists really know what they are doing.
In short, the program is not enjoying the good reputation in the user community that it should or needs. I even found one bait shop that dispensed residence stickers to “good customers” from out-of-county. Under this scenario non-resident boats can enter other, possibly infested lakes, then return to use our lake without an inspection. This is a sure formula for disaster. Resident boats with local stickers are already being trusted to protect the lake and some of them store their boats elsewhere.
A fee also dampens the enthusiasm of out of county lake users upon which our economy depends. All of this is in an existing backdrop of spotty and inconsistent inspections, lack of oversight and a paucity of information for visitors. Even one visitor with the wrong information or attitude that doesn”t comply is too many. Yes, the problem is that serious.
As a county resident who has invested heavily in property and taxes to enjoy the lake in retirement, I believe the funding priorities for county government should include primary protections for our lake”s ecosystems as well as the county”s health, welfare and economy.
In fact, protecting the lake”s ecosystem protects the very economy that many businesses depend on. This includes the hotel and restaurant industry, boating supply and bait shops, the wine industry and other businesses that reap economic benefits from tourism. For example, I wonder what the value of losing 40-plus bass tournaments scheduled this year would be to those venues.
We are accustomed to supporting safety, health and welfare programs with general taxpayer dollars so why is the invasive species program second-class and struggling for funding while potentially fueling negative feelings that put the health and welfare of our county lakes at risk? This is a no-margin-for-error problem that should have adequate, immediate funding. There is time later to adjust cost distribution.
Read the conclusion tomorrow. Jim Steele is a Clearlake Oaks resident. He is a retired state DFG biologist and former adjunct professor of fresh water ecology.
