Wednesday, June 19, 2024

Temperatures rise, and so does Lake George’s debate around ProcellaCOR

quote from dave wick

The air isn’t the only thing heating up in the Adirondacks this week. The Adirondack Park Agency will be voting tomorrow on whether to issue a new permit to the Lake George Park Commission for the use of an herbicide that targets invasive watermilfoil. (There are other water bodies up for permits as well.) In Lake George, the debate around ProcellaCOR has intensified in recent weeks.

We published a pair of stories yesterday on the Explorer’s website. Both are from Zachary Matson, our water reporter, who has been closely following this issue. (Check out this overview on what ProcellaCOR is and how it works on milfoil to get up to speed.)

In one article, Zach speaks with property owners in the two bays slated for a “test” of ProcellaCOR, and they are against the idea of using a chemical in the lake.

The other article is a Q&A with Lake George Park Commission’s Executive Director Dave Wick, who addresses the concerns and defends his agency’s plan.

What’s your take on this issue? Leave your comments below. And to stay connected to this issue and all of Zach’s reporting on water quality issues in the Adirondacks, sign up for his weekly “Water Line” newsletter.

quote about procellacor

Related Stories


Melissa is a journalist with experience as a reporter and editor with the Burlington Free Press, Ithaca Journal and Fairbanks Daily News-Miner. She worked as a communications specialist for the Adirondack North Country Association and is currently digital editor for Adirondack Explorer, overseeing both the Explorer's website and its community forum the Adirondack Almanack. She enjoys hiking, camping and other outdoors activities, and spending time with her husband, their twin daughters, and rescue animals -- two dogs and two cats.




8 Responses

  1. Stuart Cartwright says:

    Read my letter on Not1Drop.org
    Town Boards in all towns at northern LG have voted against use of herbicide. No one here except the LGPC is a proponent of its use.

    LGPC’s “science” was conducted in small eutrophic lakes unlike any oligotrophic lakes like LG. Tests conducted by the product manufacturers, rubber-stamped by the EPA. Read Dr. Carol Collins, professional limnologist’s response regarding said “tests.”

    Really maddening to local residents who have no voice in this matter. Wrong on so many fronts.

    How can the state act against the wishes of the oldest lake association in America, the Lake George Association? Bizarre.

    Stay on this story, Mr. Matson. You are doing the work of a strong democracy with a free press! (I see the Albany Times Union ran an editorial today urging the APA to put the brakes on the ProcellaCor train.)

    Thomas Jefferson wrote paeans to the Queen of American Lakes. He’d be quite perturbed about the politics determining the chemical makeup of the lake these days.

  2. David Gibson says:

    Thanks as always, Zach, for visiting with concerned residents and Lake George Waterkeeper this week before the APA meeting. Given the levels of public concerns, the LGPC should want an APA adjudicatory hearing. 20 years ago, APA would vote for such adjudication. They won’t vote for that today. But just because it is likely that LGPC will receive an APA permit does not mean that LGPC should act like a private developer and simply move forward with what it wants to do. LGPC serves the public interest, not a private interest. It should hold off on application of the herbicide, hold its own public hearings, and then deliberate again.

    • Paul says:

      Why would someone from Protect be opposed to doing whatever we can to protect the lake from invasives. The science is clear here. The opposition is just based on “bad feelings” that some people have about using any chemical no matter how safe it’s profile is. The LGPC is just trying to do its job and protect the lake. You can do a hearing but it just seems like a waste of time and money given all the use and the studies that there already are done on this. The stuff is in there’ it’s warming up. My preference would be to do what we can now, rather than delay and let it spread.

      • sa says:

        Let me guess. You are not a human toxicologiest, biologist, biochemist epidemiologist, or biostatistician, are you ? How could anyone have guessed that based on your desire to force an artificial hormone that can kill plants in 2 weeks into the drinking water for thousands of people ? I will further guess that you and your family do not personally drink LG water. What could possibly go wrong with forcing people to drink this pesticide ?

  3. Paul says:

    You can’t measure opposition vs. support of something by looking mostly at the people opposed to it like all of these repetitive articles are doing. The vast majority of people that are okay with the fact that they have delegated decisions to people who are experts and know what they are doing are not getting “measured” here in these forums.

  4. sa says:

    This artificial hormone kills a plant in 2 weeks. No long term research exists on it’s impact on human health. What could possibly go wrong with forcing thousands of people to drink it in their water supply ?

  5. S. Hudson says:

    We all have a common goal of getting rid of the invasive species, but this isn’t an emergency, and experimenting in our lake with an aquatic herbicide that has no significant long term test data published is foolish.

Leave a Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *