The Lake George Park Commission (LGPC) voted this week to award a contract to put ProcellaCOR in two Lake George bays — DESPITE THE FOLLOWING:
- The governments of all four towns in the north basin – site of the treatments – have expressed their official opposition to ProcellaCOR.
- Riparian owners, at risk of having their water supply affected by this chemical, have officially objected.
- More than 5,000 people have signed a petition opposing ProcellaCOR in Lake George.
- The Lake George Association (LGA) has offered to pay for hand-harvesting in the two bays where the treatment is planned. The LGPC ignored the offer. Why?
- The state accepts the opinions of EPA and DEC that ProcellaCOR is safe. The studies they used to form their opinion were supplied by the herbicide industry. Ten years of science specific to Lake George is being ignored by the state. Which science would YOU trust?
- The product label of ProcellaCOR say it is for use in quiescent waters. Lake George is not quiescent.
According to new revelations from the Minnesota Dept of Agriculture, ProcellaCOR likely contains PFAS, the cancer-causing forever chemical. What else will we find out about ProcellaCOR in the future, when it’s too late? Why take a risk in the Queen of American lakes? Why is the LGPC, an agency charged with protecting Lake George, relying on science from the chemical industry rather than from Lake George scientists? So many questions. When will we get answers?
— Ginger Henry Kuenzel, Hague
Listen up Lake George Park Commission- You are making a huge mistake by putting things in the water. Beautiful Lake George will be no more. There’s no way that I will ever go in that water again. I won’t spend any money there, I won’t launch my boat, I won’t rent any waterside houses. You have ruined it for me. Thanks so much.
Paddled Wolf Pond today, which is a 2 mile canoe portage on a wilderness lake, and was shocked to discover how it’s choked with milfoil all over the pond. How milfoil got up there, which has never seen any motor boat and requires a 2 mile canoe carry, is beyond me. The state is either going to have to get serious about getting rid of it everywhere, or accept it as part of the new ecosystem of the Adirondack lakes.
HEY, Lake George Park Commission,
WAKE UP
WHY POISON
THE QUEEN OF AMERICAN LAKES
LAKE GEORGE
NO ProcellaCOR!!
Someone needs to research which chemical industry companies are paying off the LGPC. If the LGA is willing to pay for hand harvesting, why is the LGPC determined to put ProcellaCOR in the lake? If that IS done, those individuals on the LGPC should be required to drink the water that comes from the areas where ProcellaCOR is used.
No chemicals…ever.
It seems that someone is being bribed in the state government to make this happen.
I am wondering if there are other examples of New York State forcing something risky on towns and citizens who do not want it. ProcellaCOR is being used in other New York lakes, but not by the state. In those lakes, it is local lake managers who requested the permit. This seems to me to be a unique situation where the state is the one forcing it on the locals, who do not want it. If anyone knows of another example of the state forcing a risky action on residents, I’d like to hear about it. And it doesn’t just have to be a ProcellaCOR example. I just can’t think of another example when the state made people take an unnecessary risk, and would be curious to hear about any that anyone knows about.
These echo chamber comments are crazy. It is used all over the place, apparently the data show it is safe, it isn’t “risky”. Just saying it doesn’t make it so. The state should not base its decisions on a bunch of people re-parroting false information.
Milfoil got into that remote ‘paddle only’ pond in a canoe. I see canoes with bilge water being carried into the St. Regis chain of ponds from St. Regis Lake all the time.
ProcellaCOR is an important, but sometimes emotional, topic. I encourage everyone to do their own research on publicly available documentation and not rely on talking points provided by others. A few points to research are:
– Understand the process to get new chemicals approved for use – Since the late 1970’s, all toxicological testing required for government approval in the US, Canada and the European Union is paid for by the manufacturer but is designed by, and conducted at, independent laboratories. Everyone is exposed to hundreds, or maybe thousands, of chemicals that have all been approved this way.
– Understand why the manufacturer recommends ProcellaCOR for quiescent waters (it has nothing to do with wind driven or thermal driven lake currents)
– Understand the toxicological data that drove the approvals of ProcellaCOR. It is conclusive and covers a wide range of organisms. A number of states have excellent documents that discuss the toxicological testing in detail and also explains their rationale for approving ProcellaCOR. The Vermont and Connecticut approval documents are particularly useful.
– Understand the difference between how the USEPA and most states define the class of chemicals commonly referred to as PFAS’s and the novel way Minnesota has decided to define this class of chemicals.
The research may or may not change your opinion, but the opinion will be yours and not that of others.
DDT was deemed safe by scientists, as was asbestos, PCB’s, Teflon, Scotchguard, and all the other PFOS and PFAs. Why risk it? Healthy skepticism will keep our lakes and our bodies healthy.
Because there is no risk and a large benefit to the lake in trying to eliminate Eurasian Milfoil that greatly damages the aquatic ecosystem.
It’s always about risk benefit. Here it is easy, the benefit far out weights the tiny not-yet-existent risk you describe.
Some places still use DDT to control insects since the malaria deaths that it prevents is a huge benefit.
Eurasian Milfoil, although a nuisance, is not a poison and it can be controlled by hand harvesting. The only reason anyone supports pesticides over manual control is for economic reasons.
Always thinking in “ cost/benefit” terms is dangerous. Its is cheaper to destroy our environment than it is to preserve it.
My family has been going to Lake George for generations. I have researched this issue for my own pond in MA, and the best explanation for authorities to recommend chemical treatment over hand pulling for milfoil is economic (think of the $$$billions to be made from chemical treatments). Hand pulling is a success at Squam L in NH! There are people sitting on regulatory agencies and in decision-making positions who apparently are outside lobbyists pushing a chemical agenda. I am grieving the loss of Lake George and pray for a reversal of this decision. In the meantime, please tell your chambers of commerce that this family will no longer visit Lake George. Maybe we will check out Squam.