In addition to the earlier post regarding the meeting

HAB Aquatic when taking our lake bottom samples broke the cores of sediment into sections, analyzing the content to find the correct amount of alum necessary for maximum effectiveness in our specific lake rather than simply using a “rule of thumb” approach.
They will be providing not only references but due to Joe Rush's insistence we will have a list of their projects so he can randomly select those Joe wishes to speak with. Joe also asked if there had been any failures in their applications. The response was the only thing that could be considered a failure was one in an oxbow lake. They were asked to do the lake half in one year and half the second due to budgetary restraints. After doing half the lake those funding the project felt the lake was clean enough and canceled the second half of the process, making the result good, but not up to what HAB considers their standards.
Chuck Hart asked if the application will in any way affect our project of getting rid of curly leaf and replacing it with desirable species. The answer was no, but weeds in general will grow better with the additional sunlight penetration. (I personally groaned inside at that aspect of the answer)
In general these guys knew their stuff and were willing to answer all questions the attendees brought forth, and there were some tough ones. I was impressed with the presentation. I only wish the cost was less, but whoever gets the job if the board votes to proceed we want the best result for our lake.
Ken Dillenburg