Goose Lake Watershed District Commissioners Special Meeting 5 PM Sunday, July 19, 2020 MINUTES via phone & video conference Meeting ID: 867 5314 0993 Password: 052492 +1 312 626 6799 US MINUTEShttps://us02web.zoom.us/j/86753140993?pwd=ZUxZeXBlWnFXTU5hYXd3TjlZdHFNQT09

1. CALL TO ORDER – Call to order Jeff Spitzer-Resnick 5:34 P.M.
2. OPEN MEETING COMPLIANCE – Posted by Onie Karch at three locations
3. ROLL CALL – Present Jeff Spitzer-Resnick, Bill Fitzgerald, Don Homan, Onie Karch. Absent- Chuck Guests present– John and Janet Malamed, Chris and Clair Billing, Matt Dregne, Tom Timm, Andy Hessenbach, Tom Crowley, Scott Nelson
4. AGENDA APPROVAL – Motion to approve Don Homan, 2nd Onie Karch, approved unanimous
5. MINUTES APPROVAL – Bill Fitzgerald requests addition to item d. Motion to approve Onie Karch, 2nd BillFitzgerald, approved unanimous
6. TREASURER’S REPORT – Presented by Bill Fitzgerald Motion to approve Don Homan, 2nd Onie Karch, approvedunanimous
7. OPEN ISSUES
   1. a)  Approve expenditures over $500.00, discuss possible future expenditure(s) and notify treasurer of upcoming expenditures of any amount. – None
   2. b)  Donation of 1,000 Bluegills – Former commissioner Joe Stuklac has arranged for3-5” bluegills approx. $700 value.
   3. c)  Discussion on high water/flooding mitigation – Jeff has been in contact with Katie from DNR and was informed that she was not available for weekend meetings. See attached letter from Chris Billing to Katie. Tom Timm suggested that perhaps a contingency fund could be created. The short answer from board was NO the district cannot operate using that premise.
   4. d)  Discussion and possible decision on possible purchase of land from Town of Jackson for weed harvester and storage and maintenance building; or remodeling leased building in Oxford; or hiring an outside harvester – Jeff pointed out three options faced by this board and put then to a vote: 1) Explore using outside source for weed control. 2) continue with plan to remodel current storage space and enter into a long term lease arrangement, 3) Reinstate plan to purchase land and erect our own facility which has an approved budget. Subsequently these three were put to the board for a motion. The resulting motion by Don Homan Purchase the Town of Jackson property (description attached) and use the building plan originally approved by the populace. 2nd by Onie Karch, approved by Three Yea (Jeff,Onie,Don) and 1 abstain (Bill)
   5. e)  Report on weed harvesting = Weeds are down due to increased water level.
   6. f)  Report on pier installation – Nick and Don Homan installed on south side of boat launch Thursday 7-7-2020
   7. g)  Discuss Goose Lake summer condition – Possibly consider parking restrictions at launch/public beach.
   8. h)  Any other new business – None

VIII.OLD BUSINESS: DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION

1. a)  Review Annual Duty Schedule for action items and additions – None
2. b)  Review GOAL/ACTION item(s) from management plan, prioritize and set schedule as needed – None
3. c)  Any other old business – None

9. Set next meeting date-if no meeting in August, then set Annual mtg. agenda and location Sunday August 9 @ 5 P.M
10. OPEN FORUM FOR PUBLIC INPUT followed by adjournment –Motion to adjourn by Don Homan, 2nd Onie Karch 7:07 P.M. approved unanimous

From: “christopher billing” To: “Katie M Mallum – DNR” , “Jeffrey Spitzer- Resnick”, “Claire”
Sent: Thursday, July 2, 2020 12:12:37 PM
Subject: Fwd: DNR letter

Hello Katie,

Thanks for the initial information and general guidance you provided earlier. We have a few follow up questions so that we might refine our approach and proposals to lower the level of Goose Lake. We will count on you to forward this request for information to appropriate staff at DNR that might more specifically address particular items. We will also count on Jeff Spitzer-Resnick to forward this to the Goose Lake Watershed District Board members who also have an interest in this issue on behalf of the residents within the district, and the public that use Goose Lake.

1. As any impacts to Neenah Creek must be given consideration, what are the specific parameters that define a Class I trout stream as it relates to water quality/biology? Also, what are the allowable or desirable ranges of those parameters? Are there other factors besides temperature variation flow regimes and aquatic biology?

2. Does DNR monitor conditions along Neenah Creek? How do conditions of the creek fit in with those parameters?

3. How successful is Neenah Creek as a trout stream? Are there fish counts? Do you track the number of anglers per year? Is trout harvested by DNR for any stocking program?

4. What are the typical flow profiles of the creek in the area of the southernmost crossing with County Highway A (roughly 1.2 miles north of County Highway EE), base flow throughout the year; storm flows; how does the creek flow va ry? There was surely peak storm flow studies 20 years ago for the basis of design for the new CMP box culvert. We have asked the County Highway engineer these questions, but to this date they have not located that work. DNR must have some form of flow information for Neenah Creek in this area that can be provided.

5. Do you know of any particular parameters of Goose Lake that would be problematic if water is released to Neenah Creek? Goose Lake does not appear to contain anything unique that is not evident in other area lakes.ill

6. Does DNR have some sort of monitoring well for Goose Lake? The DNR Surface Water Data Viewer Map indicates a monitoring station on the peninsula on the
east side of the lake; station ID 10040941. The earliest field work date is in April 2013 and the latest entry for this active station is March 2020. What is being monitored? Of particular interest, is there a mean sea level elevation for the monitoring well? We have been trying to track down a benchmark in the immediate area so we can relate the current lake level conditions to the available county topographic data. A known elevation of any item would be helpful.

7. Does the DNR have alternative procedures or protocols to deal with emergency dewatering of impoundments? If the lake level continues to rise, several houses may be inundated. FEMA has already paid out for water damages from flooding. Several garages, sheds, and out buildings are already flooded. This can release potentially toxic materials to the lake. Trees around the perimeter of the lake are dying and the lake has consumed vegetation and moved the riparian zone of the lake bank. None of this can be good for the water quality of the lake. The water appears to have a much darker tint this year than we’ve ever seen in our ten year familiarity with the lake. The increasing lake level is not innocuous.

8. We ask about emergency dewatering protocols because we are wondering if a temporary solution to provide a moderate lowering of the lake level would be more palatable than the permanent solution we previously offered. We’ve been researching the use of a smaller siphon for a more limited duration to lower the lake level to a lesser amount, say only two feet. A siphon appears feasible and could be implemented more expediently with likely less impact. A siphon of four inch diameter PVC pipe may have a flow rate in the range of 0.2 cfs. A six inch diameter PVC pipe siphon may have a flow rate in the range of 0.5 cfs. A temporary siphon might require the involvement of only one immediate downstream landowner. An existing small channel might serve as an intermediate outlet providing some buffering before the small flow combines with Neenah Creek. If this alternative approach might seem more acceptable and permitable, we can develop this concept more, and provide additional detail.

We appreciate your assistance in our search for more specific and detailed information as we search for a resolution to the increasing level of Goose Lake. Many lakes throughout Wisconsin are experiencing high water levels and many, sadly, have little opportunity to address the problem. In this case, there is a feasible and reasonably cost effective opportunity to outlet the excess lake water. Land owners and the public at large would appreciate help from the state agencies to alleviate this problem before more damage occurs.

There will be a watershed district board meeting within the next several weeks and we would like to report the latest progress at that time. Thank you for your prompt attention to our inquiries.

Fwd: DNR letter Sincerely,Chris and Claire Billing