The article went on to conclude that we should abandon the idea of local and state funding and should only focus on federal funding. I disagree.
This is a state-owned lake. Also, the community has a clear vested interest in lake preservation. I would agree that we need to look into the possibility of federal funding. Certainly, though, if any further lake preservation activities are to continue, it will be because of action spurred by local involvement and funding from both local and state sources.
It should be noted that this will take time. We need to keep a close eye on the archeological issues currently bogging down the Emmetsburg dredging operation, as this federal regulatory obstacle may well be a problem for certain areas in Storm Lake. Additionally, we need to identify additional dredge spoil sites, as this is an absolute condition of any dredging activities. Finally, we need to build local support, which would include local funding and lobbying efforts of state and federal legislators in order to move this effort forward. All of these things, though, take time.
I would heartily support local efforts to move this effort forward and I would be in it for the long haul.
Editor's note: The state official referred to was DNR senior planner Al Farris. The editorial was not intended to dissuade a local fund drive, and we agree this is a must. While it is true that there is no money for Storm Lake dredging in appropriations plans for the future, the editorial encourages a local fund drive to be put to use in the watershed, which will improve our case as we take it to both the legislature and the feds in search of an expanded dredging project. As Mr. Murray states so well, we must be in for the long haul.