By Greg Guisti
In a recent guest commentary the author offered his personal opinion on the state of the current effort to prevent the introduction of quagga and zebra mussels into the waters of Lake County.
The author stated a number of factual inaccuracies that I feel must be addressed in order to help your readers. First of all the list of native fishes was woefully mis-leading. The fish fauna of Clear Lake at the time of European settlement was narrowly limited to 12 species, including Pacific lamprey, three-spined stickleback, rainbow trout, thicktail chub, splittail, pikeminnow (squawfish), Sacramento sucker, Sacramento perch, Sacramento blackfish, hitch, tule perch and prickly sculpin. All of the game and non-game fish currently found in Clear Lake were physically introduced starting at the turn of the 20th century. These include all of the bass, crappie, carp/goldfish, catfish, sunfish, shad, shiners and mosquitofish. The total count of established fish fauna, including both endemic and introduced species, currently stands at 20 species. Most of the introduced species come from other parts of North America and Europe. The notion that several of these species “migrated” from surrounding creeks and springs is completely unfounded in the scientific literature. There is strong evidence that the introduction of many of these species have resulted in negative impacts to the population of native fishes.
Secondly, to simply discount the current program as “failed” simply because the county is the lead agency is cynical and unproductive. The reality of the program is based on the input of an advisory group formed by the Board of Supervisors named the Invasive Species Council (ISC) which has representation from city, county, state and Federal jurisdictions; plus representation from businesses, recreational interests, tribes, water managers, homeowner associations, and academia. This effort represents a true community-based approach to problem solving where honest debate is encouraged and diversity of views is included and honored.
The accusation that the “county” is paying biologists “to figure out if waterfowl can transfer the mussel” is unfounded and misleading. No such program is currently underway.
The article was accurate in that the surrounding lakes, most under Federal jurisdiction, have not implemented serious mussel prevention programs. There are current discussions with the staff”s of Congressman Mike Thompson and Senator Barbara Boxer to address this concern. The lack of an organized, reciprocal state-wide program of mussel containment and prevention is a serious matter that challenges Lake County”s local program”s long-term success. Efforts are under way to address this obvious challenge to our local program.
Thirdly, the current presence of hydrilla (an invasive species) in the lake is having a direct, negative impact to dock owners who want to try and mechanically manage weeds and other vegetation interfering with their access. Hydrilla affects where and when dock owners can mechanically remove unwanted aquatic vegetation and limits there choice to chemical control greatly affecting the cost of management options available to them. The addition of another unwanted, aquatic pest that potentially can clog water lines, pumps, screens, and/or cover boat motors, swimming ladders, and beaches can potentially add much higher maintenance costs to everyone who uses water or the lake in a number of ways. The costs to other water bodies in the Midwest and Southern California to minimize the impacts from mussels have been well documented and are nothing less than exorbitant.
Lastly, the ISC has spent countless hours of debate over how to minimize business and recreational impacts while maximizing mussel prevention while others have opined on the need to be less accommodating to economic considerations and more concerned with ecological protections. The results of any advisory suggestions are vetted through this process are eventually aired to the public through the Board of Supervisors before any final action is taken.
The breath of mussel prevention approaches in other areas is varied and costly. Some lakes in the state forbid the entrance of non-resident vessels, while others require inspections on both entry and exit of vessels from the water with little consideration of costs or ancillary impacts to business or recreation all to prevent the unwanted introduction of these mussels. The ISC has debated these and other strategies for prevention while fully aware of how these decisions can affect people”s lives and businesses.
The prevention of zebra and quagga mussel introductions into the waters of Lake County is a big deal. As a community, we are treating it has such.
Greg Giusti, University of California Cooperative Extension, Chair Lake County Invasive Species Council.
