Pompton Lake Lake Management Plan

Outline

Submitted by the Lake Restoration Committee for initial review by Mayor and Council

July 2014

1

Tonight’s Objectives

• Review the current status of the Plan• Discuss the key points of the Plan– Identify any areas where more research is needed

before adoption– Note controversial areas

• Determine how the plan will be finalized and adopted

2

Current status of the Plan• It has been clear for several years that some kind of

management plan is needed for Pompton Lake• We attempted to get 319h grant money to have the plan

created professionally, but DEP had different priorities– We elected to begin the plan on our own– There is no specific format required by any agency for a Lake

Management Plan• The plan outline was assembled using information from

existing documentation and from experience.– Phosphorous TMDL document from the DEP– ANJEC guidance document– Other Lake Management Plans– Experience with our lake

3

Current Status of the Plan (con’t)

• Several knowledgeable people provided feedback and guidance to this plan– Dr. Bill Pendexter, Hydro-Geologist, LSRP– Dr. Amy Rowe, Environmental Resource Agent– Ed Merrill, Environmental Officer– Lloyd Kent, Council Liaison– Jeff Lipman, Lake Restoration Committee– Maria Kent, lake Restoration Committee

• The plan elaborates on the specific problems the lake is experiencing, the stakeholders involved in the health of the lake, what has been done to improve matters so far, and makes recommendations for long term improvement

4

Current Status of the Plan (con’t)

• It is assumed that the Acid Brook Delta contamination issue will be well on its way to being resolved before this plan is set in place, and that there will be no special restrictions on our actions because of prior contamination

• The Plan calls for periodic review and amendment (roughly every 3 years), and a re-write after 9-10 year

5

Key Points of the Plan• Storm water management is the most important overall

priority– This is widely accepted as having the most benefit where non-

point source causes are prominent (like here)– The plan calls for identifying the most practical approaches for

us, and actively promoting them– Natural buffers (riparian buffers) are an important part of this

• Water fowl population control– The Plan recommends consideration of stronger (lawful)

measures than are being used today• Dredging to historic depths

– State and/or Federal funding would be required

6

Key Points of the Plan (Con’t)• Control of invasive plant species• Clear navigational obstructions• Monitor bacteria levels and take action if needed• Actively compel upstream communities to comply with

laws intended to promote better water quality– Most importantly, the Plan calls for our Borough to set the

example on how to act responsibly– The Borough needs to be prepared request or take legal action

if necessary• Promote legislation to make water companies better

community citizens– NJDWSC must feel responsible for helping with general flood

mitigation

7

How to finalize the Plan

• Resolve any questions about Plan objectives and approaches

• Present the revised Plan outline to Mayor and Council

• Engage a consultant to articulate the Plan in the most appropriate format

• Adopt the Plan and notify the public, as well as the appropriate State agencies

• Estimated adoption, mid-2015

8