By Ray Oglesby, Professor Emeritus of Natural Resources
Cornell University's Lake Source Cooling project has received comprehensive coverage in the local press and has been the subject of many expressions of opinion. The news coverage has been largely fair and accurate and some writers have expressed legitimate, well thought-out viewpoints. Others appear to have based their opinions on fundamental misunderstandings, misinterpretations of fact, and/or a strong case of the not-in-my-backyard syndrome.
As a professional with 37 years of experience in water resources management, I support Cornell's proposed Lake Source Cooling project and offer the following points in support of this view:
- Cornell has been completely open with the public, providing information concerning the project on a timely basis and in a number of venues. This information has been extensively reviewed at all stages by a large number and variety of experts, including scientists at area colleges and universities and those employed by the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation. None of these has advanced any substantive reason why the project should not proceed. It appears that many of those criticizing lake source cooling have not reviewed the material provided by Cornell and its consultants.
- The database pertaining to Cayuga Lake's southern end is probably as extensive as that for any lake (or portion thereof) in the world. All of the experts who have reviewed this data in depth concur that any effects lake source cooling may have on water quality and on the lake ecosystem as a whole will be so minimal as to be undetectable.
- The waters of Cayuga Lake are undergoing dramatic changes. Zebra mussel activity has greatly improved water clarity, one consequence being that rooted aquatic vegetation is increasing in shallower (depths up to about 25 feet) waters. This is a result of more sunlight now reaching bottom over a wider area and the ability of these plants to take up from bottom sediments nutrients they need. The zebra mussel incursion is also certain to result in decreased gamefish production. In comparison with the foregoing changes, together with those brought about by improved sewage treatment and by New York State's continuing ban on phosphates in household laundry detergents, any adverse effects that might be associated with lake source cooling pale into insignificance.
Two recent organized efforts to found lakewide organizations for addressing issues important to Cayuga Lake, its users, and its stewards have been successfully launched. For many years, the Cayuga Nature Center, the Finger Lakes Land Trust, and other organizations in the basin have been active on lake issues through their informational and educational programs. These organizations provide worthwhile avenues for all citizens, public officials, and professionals concerned about Cayuga Lake and its management. It is to be hoped that some of the energy poured into opposing lake source cooling could be rechanneled into some of these more fruitful avenues.
Having lived in the Ithaca area since 1968, I am used to stormy debates over proposed changes, changes of almost any nature. This vibrant skepticism, this tendency to debate any and all issues, is one of Ithaca's most endearing characteristics, but let's not overdo it and disregard the evidence. I believe public discussion about lake source cooling reached a point in the last few months where the latter outweighed the former. Let's get the project started and all work together on managing the Cayuga Lake watershed.
