Guests - If You want access to member only forums on HSO. You will gain access only when you sign-in or Sign-Up on HotSpotOutdoors.

It's easy - LOOK UPPER right menu.

Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
stick

Lake Weed/Algae Control

15 posts in this topic

Does anyone know what is recommended to control Chara (pronounced "Care-a") which is a rootless algae. I tried a product from a company in Rogers that claims they are in the business of "restoration" of a "lake". This product we were told was effective in largely eliminating chara, and it was spendy. I thought I'd roll the dice on it to give it a shot. Well, I tried 2 applications of the stuff, and it had NO impact, whatsoever. So, I thought I'd call them and get their take. The guy essentially said that chara is essentially impossible to control, but if anything would do anything, it would be this product. He also stated that chara would be back soon, and that it would involve repetitive applications and wiht that, it may never make an impact. I told him that the sales pitch that they gave (keep in mind I supplied a picture of the growth, and it was ID'd as the chara algae) said that this was the product to control chara. I NEVER would have purchased this expensive stuff had they said what they told me today. So...this post is for 2 reasons.

1. Does anyone know of a real method to control this algae (by the way it looks like a weed that lays on the bottom)?

2. Get the word out about this company (not specifically mentioning names) doing a bait and switch with a hefty fee.

Any feedback is appreciated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Might try the DNR course they will permit a application,Is your water private?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nope. It's public.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Try the aquacide company out of White Bear Lake

Recommended Products

CUTRINE-PLUS Granular

Excellent

CUTRINE-PLUS Liquid

Excellent

WEEDITRINE-D combined with CUTRINE-PLUS LIQUID

Excellent

HYDROTHOL 191 Granular

Good

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Problem with Aquacide they sell it and you dont get a permit from the DNR you could face a large fine,some chemicals are also restrictive of human ,animal contact without posting area treated, a suit could follow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Chara is a branched algae. If you grind it with your fingers it should give you a musky odor. Make sure you have identified it correctly. There are some good sites on the web with descriptive photos. I am assuming you purchased Hydrothol 191? Depending on how big of an area you treated and the water depth you may have been under the dosage rate needed to control the chara. What are the dimensions of the treatment area? how deep is the water 1/2 way out and how deep is it all the way out? How much chemical did you put in that area? You can figure out the acre feet of your treatment area and get to the right dosage rate. 100' X 100'/ 43,560(feet in a acre)gives you surface area of .229 acre. If your average water depth is 5 feet you would have 5 X .229 = 1.14 acre feet. The label will tell you how much product to apply to control your target plant.

Apply in the morning on a sunny day with little wind. If you made the application under the cover of darkness it will not be as effective.

If the 191 isn't doing the trick try using a crystal form of copper sulfate (CuSo4). Much more economical. And can control the chara effectively.

ALWAYS READ THE LABEL CAREFULLY!!!

and stay within the label dosage rate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This was a real small area (15' x 30') and about 4' deep. This was the CuSo4 product (crystal).

You are also correct in your description of the musky odor (skunklike).

I will be shifting gears to the old bed-spring.

Just frustrated with the lack of truth given to us when dropping a good chunk of change.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have had similar situations with them - they tend to know their stuff but their solution is always herbicides and algacides - not good for fish! Regardless of that...as you now know, Chara is not an easy thing to deal with. For anyone else that hasnt seen it, its kind of crusty and abrasive and when you crush it in your hands, it stinks. As you research it, its sometimes called Skunkweed or Muskgrass. Sometimes people actually like this algae because it can help keep the water more clear and it acts as a ground cover meaning that it might not let other invasives come in. But since you are wondering how to get rid of it the best way is WORK. Yup, good ol labor! There are several mechanical tools available. ( Note from admin, please read forum policy before posting again,thank-you.) They are in plymouth or new hope. I have a 18' long reach rake from them but they have other options like a beach buddy . They also have aeration and fountains - not sure but that may help too. Sorry for the long post - I feel your pain!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stick, let me play devil's advocate for a second and ask a question: Why do you want to get rid of the chara?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not conducive to the kid's swimming. I'm talking a small area around the dock. It gets to be about 4-6" of wirey-smelly mess on the bottom.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I'm going to give you some tough love, so take it with a grain of salt:

Why not use the stuff to teach the kids about biology or lake ecology? Chara isn't a broadleaf that is going to harbor a bunch of fish by any means, but it is an algae so you can talk about eukaryotic cells. Chara is great for attracting crayfish; it is one of their favorite foods. At night you can use a flashlight to see all the crayfish scuttling around on the bottom. Young of the year perch and panfish like to hang out near chara flats, see if you can see a few from the dock and talk about their importance.

I offer these alternatives because I don't think chara really impedes swimming. If you are taught that it is part of the lake, the mental block of "weeds are icky and need to be eliminated" isn't harbored in your children. They learn that they don't need an immaculate sand beach for swimming. I see it as a tragedy of the commons thing...everyone does habitat elimination or manipulation incrementally and thinks they have no effect. Then you look around the lake and see sprawling docks, lawns mowed to the water's edge, and automatic weed rollers gearing up at 7 a.m. each morning.

It's within your riparian rights to do as you wish within the letter of the law, so I can't criticize you for doing what you want to do, I'm just saying you might consider thinking about it twice. Chara is tough to get rid of, grows quickly, and is one of the first plants to recolonize a barren area.

Good luck.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

GOOD POST da chise.

Also if it is done a permit is required! Only means of no permit is the $35.00 dock permit and removal by hand NO CHEMICALS!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I remember swimming at the lake when I was a kid you either had weeds on your legs or rocks and blood suckers I preferred the weeds LOL I really don't like the idea of dumping poison into a lake then swimming in it or eating fish out of it especially kids I doubt if that smelly algae has anything caustic in it like the weed killer does after treatment, I just don't trust chemical company's in general.

Definitely call the DNR and make sure your not destroying critical fish habitat or spawning area.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you want to drag something in the lake try a roll of chain link fence or use a high powered gas power washer to cut it up. Hope this can help.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0



  • Posts

    •     I believe you said it was "libertarian" drivel, actually, so you dismissed it out of hand...          
    •   You posted about neither.     But if you would read the article, my commentary and TJ's commentary you would know that's not really what the article is about.     You have to be kidding, right? Just about everyone who has an opinion on politics at all is this sort of person. Do you look at social media at all?
    •     Ok, now getting back to whether Trump will win the War on Drugs, do you think he will take any steps at all to decriminalize drugs, such as reclassifying marijuana, and recognizing state laws and programs designed to move towards the decriminalization of drugs?   Or do you think he will take steps to protect vested interests, such as prisons and the pharmaceutical. industry?   Just going off his rhetoric and his choice for a drug czar, I'm guessing he much prefers the latter, and will end up spending a bunch of taxpayer's money, and actually lose ground by continuing on with the brute force/criminalization approach.        
    • Because at the time, I don't have anything better to do.   I posted about the article, and you wanted to talk about the topic.  I posted about the topic and you want to discuss the article.    Which is it?     I support a particular candidate because their positions, taken as a whole, are preferable to me as compared to the other candidate(s).   In a few years I get to do it over.     I don't think there are really that many ardent "rah rah for my party" type folks out there, in spite of what we see on TV, or the occasional people we meet.     So the article is basically drivel, as I said before, based on a false premise.   
    • Borch I just signed up Ryan, Morgan, and me but I only see my name listed in the summary. Do my kids not show up because they don't have hso usernames?  Or did I not enter it right?     Please let me know how to fix it and I'll do so.  Thanks!
    •   Because I think self reflection is good for all of us from time to time.   If you don't wan't to discuss this article, why do you persist in posting here?           No one is disputing that at all. The premise of the author's article is in regards to the hypocrisy of then justifying everything your chosen candidate or party does blindly while vilifying the other candidates or party. It's the "all in" sports like mentality that is being discussed here.  
    • There is a really excellent book called "The Righteous Mind" that approaches this tribalist mindset from an evolutionary psychology standpoint. The author, Jonathan Haidt, does a remarkable job of unpacking why people persist in truly irrational defense of the indefensible - when it's their team doing the stupid stuff. I highly highly highly recommend it to anyone who is interested in lessening the hyperpartisan idiocy we have today.

      The trouble is that the closed-off mindset that lends itself to reflexive support for Obama/Hillary/Trump/whomever also tends to preclude any serious engagement in self-examination that the book is designed to provoke. Really good read, though.
    •   I get what your saying here but I think what Dave is talking about is the willingness of some to blindly follow, without question, their party or candidate. I saw this first hand during the primary with some of my own relatives, for example. I had a SIL who was a huge Bernie backer. The things she said about Hillary were worse than anything said here. As far as she was concerned, Hillary should be tarred and feathered and ran out on a rail. Then Bernie loses the nomination. She then became Hillary's biggest defender. Everything she said about her during the primary was instantly washed away. Even her own husband called her out. She wasn't simply voting for her because she found Trump worse. That's understandable. She defended or at least tried to deflect the issues with Hillary when just a few months prior, she said things that would make even Cooter or Bill say, "man you're harsh on her."   I don't think this is a new phenomenon. I also don't think it's widespread. Like everything else, access to more and diverse information just makes it possible to hear more about it than before. I think human nature causes people to internalize candidates and/.or elected officials. It's a "if you're critical of my candidate, you're critical of me," kind of thinking.   I don't fault anyone for voting for a candidate that one feels best represents their line of thinking. Or even defending their candidate from detractors. I don't think that is what Dave is talking about here. It's also the flipping of political opinions just because the candidate you voted for or support is supporting certain positions. For example, many conservatives opposed BHO's stimulus, including myself. It didn't work  as promised and we just added more on to the debt. So on the campaign trail, Trump also spoke of a stimulus plan that was even more expensive than BHO's and  those same people not only supported it but are justifying it. In summary, one can vote for a candidate without defending everything that person does        
    •  Come on.   The world, life is a bit more complicated then that.          Quit passing the blame. Your whole thesis is on choice and owning it.   Let me guess, you hate big banking also since they made it easy to refinance and purchase.   It just proves that general society is incapable of making the right decisions as a whole.   Sorry, you go down with the ship.    
  • Our Sponsors