04-08-1985 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Lou&E Shammed D,mc, Sera Manspw- Eastern till Lammers Benue M14161V Fort Lee, Now Jersey T mpnons 11011 ae r-M 552a MUD r!p" ANmN"melm mN"mmT LCOMPANY THE CLEAN LAKES PROGRAM Section 314 of the flee. Hater Act I M PAC 'I OF tit) FUND LNG R e a e e e • A a. • e e a a A a GENERAL BACKGROUND Since making its first award 1n January 1976, EPA', Clean Lakes Program tCLP) has evolved into a program that 1s now 1n a position to meet Its stated objectives: • Ensuring that the states are prepared to manage their freshwater lakes, an!. • Restore at least one lake to recreational quality within 25 miles of each standard metropolitan statistical area The success has been due to a number of factors: • The alarming rate at which the nation's lakes are continuing to degrade • The program Is Initiated at the erase roots level and and requires a strong local Commitment (50% match) • It in voluntary --not required by law or regulation, and 1t gets tl,e job done! Emphasising, an overall watershed approach, Clean Lakes projecte prevent soil erosion and thus sedimentss and excess nutrients from filling in and "aging" the lake; toxics and organics are kept out of the waters; water supplies are Improved; recreation is increased. This is EPA's only existing program to Implement nonpolnt source controls. RESULTS To date, 45 States have participated in the program and over $70 million has been awarded. Annroximataly six states now have specific legislatively derived lake res- toration and protection programs. A recent survey by the North American Lake Management Society (HALMS) indicates that most states are willing to pursue the development of such programs. The benefits have been well-docmented.... nearly 150 lakes have been restored with public benefit, greater than eight dollars for each EPA dollar invoiced. Approximately 100 million Americans enjoy cleaner lakes, water 16 frec of sediment, weed, and pollutants. Concerned citizens have proven that the voluntary clean-up of our most valuable resources--freahwatar lakS.---WORKSIII And, it or:ly costs each American a dimer per year at full funding support of $15 million annually. FUTURE NEEDS Over 10,000 lakes are in need of restoration and protection, and others are continu- ally being degraded. Th", lakes cannot be taken for granted; efforts to restore and preserve these must go on. Otherwise, NO SWIMMING, NO DRINKING and NO BOATING signs will continue to appear on the landscape. J9 Wiwi Americans want to clean up their lakes. Thev chink a dime of their Federal tax la not an exorbitant price to pay annually to make sure that this nation .betel.. the integrity and value of its freshwater lake hariuga. What good 1n a strong "tio"1 defense when there Ix nothing left back home to protect? Demand for funds has increased deamstiully--more than double the appropriation In the last few yams.. Without Federal soaLance, the States' Initiatives will be lost, v311 flounder and collapse. Our lakes will be in jeopardy. gut" had hopW that this program would be put back on track. They have no that "Poetry or t echniul whe r.-with-all to pick up this program In the next fw years, much Jose Cho next six moothal $50 million in ongoing restoration projects would be to don- gor of ewer seeing Completion and approximately 100 diagnostic/faaLLbill.ty Studio, can mo longer emp"t restoration money. Wltb"t funds, the dogradation of our lakes will continue, and rho science, and tech- molegy dwolopment to d"1 with this terrible problem will stagnate,