FAIRMONT– The Lakes Management Committee met for the fifth time on Wednesday in Fairmont. The group again discussed both chemical and mechanical treatment for Curly Leaf Pondweed (CLP) and also the negative impact that wakeboats have on the lakebed and what can be done about it.

At the meeting in September, the group had briefly discussed a study from the University of Minnesota on Recreational Powerboat Hydrodynamics and their Impacts on the Water Column and Lakebed, published July 2025.

On Wednesday Water Resources Coordinator, Hannah Neusch, said she had reached out to the authors of the study to see if they could talk to the local group but that they’ve had many, many requests to speak to groups, and instead sent some links to a webinar about the lakebed study.

Dr. Ryan Wersal, an aquatic invasive species specialist who has been studying the Fairmont chain of lakes, was in virtual attendance at the meeting on Wednesday and asked Neusch what the boat demographic was in Fairmont.

“Based on that report and their study, essentially every lake in southern Minnesota would be impacted by those wakeboats,” Wersal said.

Neusch said that looking at the Fairmont chain of lakes, there’s a sliver here and there that meet the criteria, I.e. depth, for wakeboats, per the study.

“In the end it would be council’s decision on whether or not there would be or needs to be an ordinance enforcing these types of things,” Neusch said. “Opening it up for discussion is a first step.”

She added that the study alludes to an impact on not just the lakebed, but the shoreline as well.

Wersal said there are a few lakes in the state, like Madison Lake and Washington Lake, that have some “holes” that are 30 to 40 feet deep, but that some lakes have whole bays that have a max depth of 5 feet.

“The more they go around, the more they stir it up. I hope, and this is just me talking, but I hope that the state helps lake associations and municipalities with legislation to address this. Otherwise, lake associations are going to be left, and cities, sheriffs, can we put in no wake zones. What does that look like on a lake by lake basis?” Wersal asked.

Community Development Director Pat Oman noted that some other communities in the state have ordinances about wakeboats, but acknowledged that there would be some unhappy people locally if something was enforced here.

“It’s going to be a complex conversation, but this is just the very beginning of it,” Neusch said.

Fairmont Lakes Foundation Member Jon Omvig pointed out that the county is the entity that enforces regulations in the lakes but it does not currently have enough staff to man a boat right now to enforce anything.

“Is there a more simplistic approach to minimizing the impact? Could you do ‘no wake’ buoys coming out of the channels? Could you do ‘no wake’ buoys near the filtration plant?” Omvig asked.

He said that Hall Lake is the only lake that’s close to having adequate setbacks from shorelines and depth for wakeboats.

Omvig added that another issue is that even people who aren’t wakeboarding have the full thrust down while cruising along the borders of the lake.

“I think five years from now you’re still going to be looking at how you’re going to enforce it and who’s going to be writing the tickets and staffing the county boat,” Omvig said.

Neusch said that if the city council wants to move forward with something, a serious conversation will need to be had about enforcement. She pointed out that the city does not currently have a boat, which poses concerns already about planning and zoning enforcement.

Oman said, “I think the concept of boats or drones might be something to look into…I think technology might be the solution but there still needs to be an early conversation about expectations and citizen input. It’s a serious issue and has to be addressed.”

A member of the public who was present pointed out that boat owners do not own the lakes.

“We’re not telling someone they can’t mow their lawn. Just because I can afford to buy a Lamborghini doesn’t mean that I can go 90 miles per hour down Blue Earth Avenue. I think that’s another consideration,” they said.

Neusch agreed that the lakes are a public water and that that was a good reminder.

During the meeting she also touched on some Requests for Proposals (RFP) that are currently in progress. This includes one for aquatic invasive species (mainly CLP) removal and treatment in the Fairmont chain of lakes.

She said as it’s the first time the city has done something like this, a phased approach is thought to be best. Neusch then spoke about a proposed phased plan to treat CLP, starting in certain plots of the lakes.

Oman pointed out that Wersal has previously suggested that the city be strategic in certain areas with chemical treatment working in concert with harvesting.

“I’m not advocating one method over another. I think put all of the tools in the toolbox and start picking ones that work best for your lakes and in different areas… I think harvesting can be a solution in areas that are high profile,” Wersal said.

He said that whether it’s chemical treatment or harvesting, the biggest thing is to get at CLP before it produces turions, so the first application should be in early or middle May, before June.

Wersal added that long-term success would be wearing out the propagule bank that’s in the sediment.

“This is not going to be a one and done thing. It’s going to be a sustained effort,” Wersal said.

Oman said the RFP that the city is developing will work in time with the timeline mentioned. Neusch also pointed out that the RFP is written for mechanical management of CLP, but that as all tools should be used, she looked into if chemical treatment has been used in a different lake that’s being used as the majority of the drinking water source, such as in Fairmont.

“We’re really the only southern Minnesota community that’s using lake water…we are really the only one that’s using the type of lake that we’re using, a shallow, muddy bottom type of lake for drinking water,” Neusch said.

She spoke about another Minnesota community that applied for both chemical and mechanical treatment of CLP with the Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) and was rejected because the lake was a drinking water source.

Council Member Britney Kawecki said that MDH has previously said that Fairmont’s water treatment plant was more than qualified to handle a chemical, and that what Neusch said contradicts that.

Neusch and Brady Powers, water/wastewater superintendent, spoke about the potential testing process with chemical treatment. However, Powers said he was unsure of what specific chemical treatment would be used.

“We’re not ignoring the permitting process for chemicals… harvesting for CLP is not the solution, it’s harvesting plus other things including chemical treatment,” Oman said.

He suggested that Wersal come and talk to the entire city council at a future meeting.

In other business at the meeting, Neusch shared what the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) said in a letter about manipulating the water levels in the chain of lakes via the George Lake dam. The city council had previously asked staff to look into the possibility of doing this by unwelding the dam.

“Essentially this letter is a summary of all the reasons why manipulating water levels in the dam isn’t going to work and that the DNR is lending their support for rock arch rapids,” Neusch said.

She went on to say that DNR area hydrologist, Erynn Jenzen, referenced a permit for seasonal draw down that was granted to the city in 1983, but that public waters work permits have an expiration date of five years from when granted.

“They do lend support for the rock arch rapids that could potentially save us money in the long term. Of course, that’s a proposal that we’ll be talking about a little later that will be going to council that will be council’s decision on whether we want to move forward with that,” Neusch said.

Later in the meeting, Neusch said that the George Lake dam has recently undergone an inspection. Tyler Cowing, an engineer with the city, said that they don’t have the final report yet but that from his understanding the dam passed the underwater inspection and there are just some minor maintenance issues.

Neusch said the next step would be using the data previously provided by the DNR to get an estimate from an engineering company for a cost estimate to install the rock arch rapids.

“They can give us an idea of what to expect, whether it’s going to be $700,000 or $2 million. That way we have an idea of what to ask for from Lessard Sams,” Neusch said of a grant opportunity previously discussed.

However, Kawecki said that if the dam is in good condition, she thinks the potential grant funds could be used to help fund a different project.

“I would hate to waste money if the dam inspection comes back that it doesn’t need anything expect some minor repairs,” Kawecki said.

During the meeting Neusch also spoke about a few different upcoming grant opportunities including a MDH Source Water Protection Implementation grant and a Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources (BWSR) Keep it Clean Program grant.

The first, the city has applied for and received before and is up to $15,000. The application deadline just opened and will close in mid November.

“It’s a first come, first serve grant as well so we’re going to want to make sure to get an application in as soon as possible,” Neusch said.

The second grant would be new for the city and the application period closes later this month.