Hello Denise,
Thank you for this report. I think I should point out that the figures you have are for the Louisiana side of the lake only.
On the Texas side, Cypress Valley Navigation District sprayed 2,880 acres and Texas Parks & Wildlife sprayed 50 in 2008.
LDWF used 1,142 gals of herbicide at a cost of $41,748. CVND used approximately 2,900 gals herbicide at a cost of $140,825.
So total acres sprayed at Caddo Lake in 2008 was 4,280, consuming $183,473 worth of herbicide.
Those are the official figures from LDWF and TPW/CVND for that year. I don't have a current estimate of number of acres on Texas side infested with giant salvinia, but it is acknowledged by TPW that it is greater than the 700 - 1,000 acres LDWF estimates on the LA side.
I have just returned from a trip to California where I visited a mechanical removal job site and spent several days talking with aquatic vegetation control contractors in both the Monterey Bay and Oakland areas.
The Caddo Lake Institute, with funding from the City of Marshall and private contributors, has arranged to bring a mechanical harvesting crew & equipment in for a Trial Project, tentatively set to begin May 4, 2009.
The object of this first Trial Project will not be to see how much IAV can be removed per man hour. It will be to see how effectively an integrated program involving mechanical removal, temporary boom containment, and follow-up herbicide applications can be in several specific areas.
There has been, as we all know, skepticism about the potential benefits of mechanical removal at Caddo Lake. It is my view, and a view shared by others, that there is no data to support a valid position one way or the other regarding mechanical removal. For that matter, I've not seen any evaluation of herbicide use on giant salvinia at Caddo Lake.
Although we are told that herbicides are retarding the expansion of giant salvinia I am unaware of any testing that has been done with controlled areas to support that belief. Given the large funds that will be needed in the future, it is imperative that we can support our treatment plans and strategies with better data than has been relied on thus far.
Our project is intended to produce useful data of that sort for combining mechanical removal & herbicide applications, using temporary containment booms and other techniques to maximize the effectiveness of both.
There are indeed obstacles at Caddo, and not just the submersed stump problem. The greatest obstacle is the long distances and other difficulties associated with the fact that there are a very limited number of shoreline locations where removed IAV can be offloaded.
That is to say that even if IAV can be efficiently lifted from the water and conveyed to transport barges, distances transport barges would have to travel to acceptable shoreline removal sites will drive up the cost significantly.
There are, however, a number of strategies for dealing with that problem. Techniques ranging from mechanically reducing water content of removed plants before transporting them to incineration at removal sites are currently in development.
We should all bear in mind that our first experience with giant salvinia originated in May, 06. We are only now entering our 4th growing season since then, and if increases continue exponentially as they have been we are in for a very rough time.
On the Texas side, in our prolific shallow and Cypress studded swamp areas, the situation is getting grim. There are several areas previously inundated with water hyacinth that are expected to see giant salvinia as the dominant species this year -- Turtle Shell and Hog Wallow, to name two.
Worse, we are already experiencing heavy matting. Spray team operators have told me they are seeing giant salvinia matting up to 12 inches thick in some areas.
As USGS IAV specialist Dr. Randy Westbrook told me in a telephone call a few days ago, once giant salvinia mats you have no hope whatsoever of controlling it with herbicide. Randy, and others I have spoken with, think our part of the country will inevitably require mechanical removal, integrated with containment and other strategies.
I think so, too. We simply have to start somewhere, get hands-on experience, monitor, measure & evaluate carefully, and improve & innovate as we move forward.
Our Trial Project will begin operations in Buzzard Bay near the state line. We will submit a treatment proposal to LDWF as well as TPW and seek permission to work a day or two on the LA side of the line. James Seale has indicated to TPW's Tim Bister that he is interested in our project and will cooperate as he can. We are pleased about that, because James has had probably more experience fighting giant salvinia than anyone in our two states -- at Lake Bistineau alone -- and his observations and advice will be greatly valued. I will request a meeting with James soon to discuss all in detail.
Also we will hold a Community Meeting outlining our Trial Program at the Karnack Commnity Center Monday, April 13, at 6 PM.
I have also asked Dan Fulghum if I could take 15 minutes or so to make a similar presentation to the LA GCLA meeting April 14 in Oil City.
We certainly don't want to get anyone's hopes up or represent that we think we have the solution. We simply believe we need to get some first-hand data at Caddo. It is entirely possible we will be unable to justify moving toward an integrated program following the Trial Project.
Although we will be employing a contractor with an experienced crew for the harvesting activities, we will be seeking volunteers to assist with monitoring and measuring and other tasks associated with evaluation.
More information will be made available before and after these meetings.
Thanks for this opportunity to add this information to yours.
Best regards,
Jack Canson
Caddo Lake Institute