What really sucks is that the state has no control over it at all. I think the state should control these things or, at least, the lake authority should have to get a permit from the state for any action like this. Then the state could deny the permit if it would negatively affect the lake.

If they gave me some real power in their little outfit, I would make that the healthiest, best studied lake in the state, but they would not get their frivolous and damaging desires like no weeds and deep areas where they shouldn't be (they propose draining the lake in the future and gouging out the vital shallow center portion into yet more deep water).

True that, Jiggy. Too bad Valinn, you would be a great asset if you could get on the board. Don't they have elections every so often? Ashame that you don't even have a "chance", to be voted in. Figure they would have a yearly vote for people who (like yourself) would like to try and get on the board. Sounds like some heavy duty politics involved.

As long as the association is self governing and of a local makeup as an association member you should have a right to make a point at a board meeting. One way to make a point at an association meeting is as follows. Form a petition spelling out the issue and how and why it affects the lake and its residents. Get your neigbors and other like minded residents to sign it. Have your signed petition reviewed by your local town paper so its a publicly known issue. (They may or may not give you bad press over it). Then present it at a board meeting after you preregister to attend the meeting with an outline of your petition. Make the association board aware that you want to be part of or start a commitee(sp) to address your issues going forward. The residents around the Wethersfield Cove did this to stop actions that would of turned over town services to a third party. Thats freedom in action. The reason the locals in Wetheresfield were able to act is that they still had a voice in town ploitics. Had the services been signed over to a third party the decisions made on properties that bordered there neighborhood would of been made by a non resident third party board.

Vallin,

If you can get the fellow association members on board with you like mattman7's post illistrates, then you could be the one in the future making decisions for the overall best interests of the lake. Sell your knowledge and good intentions..

Good Luck

It doesn't matter....if you can show them that certain practices can be harmfuil to the fishery....they simply can't ignore it in good conscience. If it isn't brought to their attention however....they can ignore it forever.

Example - Myself and a few others were riding the RWA about their weed killing practices on Lake Saltonstall years ago after a massive weed kill that changed everthing. At a winter meeting / fish awards presentation, they had with a guest speaker from the DEP, I got up and asked questions like, "Aren't the weeds a good thing?" - "Don't they filter sediment, help reduce nitrogen levels and help prevent erosion?" - "Don't they create Oxygen and habitat for juvenile fish?" and so on. He responded, Yes, Yes and Yes. I know another guy that showed them photos he took of empty bags of (I think copper-sulfate) in their own dumpster, right on the property after they denyed using anything to kill the weeds.

They didn't come right out and confess - but they were now aware that people were watching....and sometimes, that's enough

Obviously Rogers has a weed issue......if you are not a fishermen and not into weeds. Especially out in front of the boat launch creek where the weedly flat interfers with pleasure boat traffic between the north and south ends. I'd like to see them carve out a boat channel for me to fish but they could just as easily resort to poisoning the lake with weed killer repeatedly too I'd keep an eye on them if I were you....before they do something stupid because they didn't know any better. We can help them "know better" Keep me posted.