And there you have it! Thanks Buck.......is there a downside? Everything you posted sounds pretty positive.

The downsides are:

--Stocking rates: Too many by overstocking and you eat too many weeds. The goal is to just crop down the tops of the weed beds so they are no longer unsightly, impede boating and become a danger to swimmers. No one wants to eliminate weeds like you do with chemicals. Weeds are mandatory to optimize fisheries biomass. A study in NY by their DEC at Walton Lake showed the impact of overstocking. By using an attrition rate of 22% the yearly restocking resulted in overstocking since the grass carp were not dying off at a 22% rate and with no weeds in the lake the fisheries biomass of all species in all year classes after three years had dropped about 30% as verified by yearly electro shocking.
Understocking creates bitching by the instant gratification groups since it takes longer to get the desired results. Our DEEP will tend to understock and then re-assess. It took Ball Pond five years to get DEEP approval to restock after the initial 1997 stocking. Things do work much better today but it is always a negotiation. My calculation of vegetated acres in Candlewood is larger than the calculation by the consulting company that used satellite imaging so if I am right then we will understock but I used contour maps and their work was more sophisticated so we are going with the consultants.

--Invasive species status: Though the grass carp are sterile and can't reproduce this issue is always brought up. I believe Ct. is the only New England state that allows the use of grass carp anywhere including small private ponds.

--Time lines: As I already mentioned, it takes three years of constant monitoring and stocking adjustments to get things where you want them to be.

--Size of the lake: There will be some distribution issues. The stocking sites will be similar to those used for trout stocking so all areas will get fish except possibly down at the end of the New Milford arm. The grass carp are kept in the lake at the penstocks at the end of the power canal by the trash racks that surround the intakes. The trashracks use 2" square hole heavy wire caging and our grating guidelines call for a size smaller than 2"s. The fish will be 12 to 14 inches long and will not get through the trash rack but the DEEP wants to let them grow before they work their way to the canal so that end of the New Milford arm won't get fish directly but probably somewhere around Gerard's Marina.

--DEEP involvement: Chemical applications and the use of third party environmental companies are much easier on DEEP personnel than a grass carp project which requires a DEEP biologist to visit the water, create the data and sign off on the plan. This is why lake associations across the state use chemicals though they are much more expensive and require being used every year. The third party company handles the issues. This is really not a negative but a reason grass carp projects don't get a lot of advertising and support. This project on Candlewood will change a lot of that.

--Grass carp guidelines: Much more detailed than most DEEP applications. One requirement includes getting project approval from every lake front owner even though they do not own any land under the lake nor do they own the water. This makes no sense and I have argued against it since 1997. The DEEP regulation is being changed but as with all DEEP rules and regulations it has to be done by the state legislature. For Candlewood's project there are still about 100 parcels of flooded land under the surface of Candlewood Lake still owned by private individuals, their estates or heirs, who never sold out in 1929. With the regulation change it will not be necessary to get anyone's approval other than direct stakeholders such as First Light, the five towns, the CLA and most importantly, the DEEP.

--One last thought is the fact that at some point First Light through FERC, the government regulatory agency, may decommission Candlewood Lake as an active pumped storage hydro impoundment. If that happens and the penstocks and pumps are decommissioned and moth-balled there is no way to refill the lake in the spring so the fall draw-downs will be discontinued. When that happens the winter cold will no longer kill all of the weed beds out to the 8 foot depth line and we will now have weeds growing all the way to shore with no inside weed line. This puts an added burden on the resident grass carp requiring an additional stocking amount. Carp also are a spooky fish and don't like really shallow water less than two feet so there will be some shore line issues. In any case, decommissioning the lake puts a burden on all of us no matter what weed control we use but getting a grass carp project going now puts us out front of the issue and if the time comes to have to manage the inshore areas without a drawdown it won't require a whole new solution but simply adding more grass carp based upon the new vegetated acreage.

If they're a spooky fish, I wonder how the insane summer boat traffic on the lake will effect them. I truly hope this works!