Still Cold, and More on the EWM Issue, Feb. 6, 2026

We're headed for another frigid weekend. The snow is great for skiing and winter sports, but the cold is bone chilling, and will remain so, even deepening Saturday and Sunday. Next week doesn't show much improvement, but that could change.

We aren't the only ones experiencing cold and snow. Liz Randall (W. Shore Rd), sent pictures taken at their home on Long Island. Liz said part of the bay is frozen and that hasn't happened in years, and they have at least a foot of snow on the ground - and it's cold, so the snow isn't going anywhere right away. She sent these photos. She said John is keeping their house toasty with their wood stove. The sunshine looks lovely and bright there - not unlike what we had yesterday. But even with the sunshine, it was bitterly cold where the wind hit.

Liz is a big fan of the Foster Bridge over by the cemetery on Cabot Plain. She found this photo on Facebook - looks like a time-lape photo with northern lights and the Milky Way by our "famous for photos" bridge honoring the Foster Family who lived nearby and were part of the Walbridge clan. The bridge was built by Richard Spaulding in the 1970s; Dick's mother was a Walbridge, and A. M. Foster invented a popular sap spout in the 1800s. All intertwined - and now all gone from the area, but the bridge remains. The photo of Foster Bridge is by Alice Wack, photographer and graphic design artist.

Many of you knew that our head of Eurasian Milfoil Control, Barry Cahoon, appeared yesterday to testify before a committee within the Department of Fish and Wildlife (DF&W) Board, hoping to impress upon them the importance of putting washing stations ahead of parking spaces on the priority list for Vermont State Fishing Access sites. If you have been following this issue, Joe's Pond Association has proposed installing a boat wash at the fishing access (at no cost to the state), but the DF&W has rejected the request on the basis that it would be at the expense of losing two parking spaces.The access area is already in a wetlands area - installed by the state before wetland laws became more stringent. This makes it nearly impossible to use surrounding land owned by the state as they are now firm about infringing on wetlands. 

Here is Barry's testimony:

Testimony Submitted to the VT Senate Natural Resources & Energy Committee on February 5th, 2026, For the Joe’s Pond Association and for the Ecological Well-Being of all VT Waterbodies
By Barry Cahoon, Water Quality Director/Eurasian Watermilfoil Management Coordinator

    Good morning, my name is Barry Cahoon. I am here today representing the Joe’s Pond
Association (JPA) as its Water Quality Director and Eurasian Watermilfoil (EWM)
Management Coordinator.
    Joe’s Pond is a 400 acre lake straddling the town line between Danville in Caledonia
County and Cabot in Washington County. It is named after an Abenaki man, Joe, who
aligned and guided VT militias in the Revolutionary War.
    Thank you for providing me the opportunity to present to the Committee the experience
of the JPA related to its efforts to collaborate with the VT Agency of Natural Resources
(ANR) to establish a boat inspection station at the state-owned fishing access area.
    Our purpose and goal is to prevent introduction of aquatic invasive species (AIS) into
Joe’s Pond and to avoid export of invasives to non-infested Vermont waterbodies.
In addition, my testimony will include suggested amendments to S.224 as introduced
that will, if enacted, establish AIS spread prevention as an authorized use of state-
owned fishing access areas at a priority level reflective of its vital importance to
preserving the ecological health of Vermont lakes.
    I sent an email this past Monday to each committee member with attachments providing
the text of my testimony today as well as supplementary supporting information.
    Please do not consider that my testimony here today is only about Joe’s Pond. The
JPA’s experience is representative of many other Vermont lake associations’
interactions with the VT Department of Fish & Wildlife (DF&W) relating to this issue of
AIS spread prevention facilities at fishing access areas. The recommendations I offer
here today are intended to address and resolve conflicting priorities in support of the
long-term ecological well being of all Vermont lakes; something that, seemingly, would
be a shared goal of both Vermont lake associations and ANR.
    The JPA has operated a Greeter Program at the DF&W fishing access area for over a
quarter century (absent a boat wash facility). Unfortunately, despite robust staffing
levels and training, the invasive aquatic vegetation known as Eurasian watermilfoil
(EWM) was discovered in August, 2024. The JPA immediately mobilized to contain the
proliferation of this insidious, aggressive and persistent invasive, which has now
infested over 100 Vermont waterbodies. Yet, despite tremendous financial expenditures
and efforts by the JPA membership, contracted harvesting, education, establishment of
a SNUBA supported dive team that expended hundreds of person-hours hand
harvesting, and much more, EWM, at the end of 2025, was more widespread around
the lake than it was at the end of 2024.
    The invasive milfoil infestation dramatically elevated the awareness of the JPA as to the
critical need to prevent the introduction of additional aquatic invasives into the lake. As
well, the association believes it is our responsibility to prevent the export of invasives,
particularly EWM from Joe’s Pond to other waterbodies. A fully equipped boat
inspection station is absolutely essential to achieve these purposes.
    The JPA believed, naively as it turns out, that the DF&W would share and embrace the
critical need to avoid introduction of invasives into, and export from, Vermont lakes by
collaborating with the association to facilitate the establishment of a boat inspection
facility at the fishing access.
    Without getting into all the details of the JPA proposal, I have provided to the committee
members via email, attachments documenting the communication exchange between
the DF&W and the association, including a comprehensive rationale for why it makes
little if any sense to prioritize parking spaces over an AIS spread prevention facility. A
site plan and preliminary project design is included.
    In coordination with Federation of Vermont Lakes and Ponds (FOVLAP), the JPA offers
these specific revisions to the provisions of S.224: Page 11, following line 12, the following provision should be added:  (4) The Fish & Wildlife Department shall work collaboratively and to resolve any conflict with any entity, as defined under Section 1453(2) of this Title, proposing establishment and operation of a boat inspection station for the purpose of aquatic nuisance spread prevention, so that the lake protection facility and other authorized uses can reasonably be accommodated.

    This provision, if enacted, would complement and support existing statutory provisions
in Section 1451 “It is the policy of the State of Vermont to prevent the infestation and
proliferation of invasive species”, and Section1453 requiring that ANR work with, among
other entities, “local interest organizations” such as lake associations, to develop aquatic
invasive species controls.
    Secondly, because the essential priority of preventing introduction of AIS into Vermont
lakes is of paramount importance in long-term protection of fish and wildlife aquatic
resources and associated wetlands habitat, an aquatic nuisance inspection facility listed
in Rules as the lowest priority authorized use of state-controlled fishing access areas,
does nothing to resolve the refusal of the DF&W to recognize this absolute necessity. 
By not collaboratively achieving AIS spread prevention, the day will come when very
few, if any, parking spaces will be required at a fishing access area because of
profoundly diminished and degraded aquatic habitats, native species populations and
natural resources.  When this occurs, the short-sighted nature of disallowing a boat
inspection station in order to preserve a few parking spaces may finally become crystal
clear.
    Therefore, S.224 as introduced, should be amended to delete lines 1-3 on Page 14 and
be replaced on Page 13 at line 8 as follows: 4.1 Approved aquatic nuisance
inspection stations for inspection of vessels entering or exiting lakes pursuant to
10 V.S.A. Section 1454.  With this change, boat inspection stations will become the
highest priority authorized use and will substantively contribute to the lake protection
operations which are most vital to preserving the social, economic and ecological values
of Vermont lakes.
    We live in a far from perfect world. Navigating through life and achieving our purpose
frequently results in conflicts and requires resolution through compromise. That the
inability to accommodate 100% of desired parking 100% of the time is deemed and
drawn as a red line represents a rejection of the opportunity for compromise and
collaboration through which achievement of a higher purpose and a mutually beneficial
outcome becomes possible.
    The most profoundly distressing aspect of the current situation is that DF&W #39;s
resistance to working affirmatively with lake associations to facilitate and enhance AIS
spread prevention, is that it not only represents an abdication of their responsibilities
under 10 V.S.A. Section 1453, but then leaves all the staggering costs, efforts, sweat
and tears associated with AIS containment and management to the lake associations in
perpetuity! Sacrificing a few parking spaces (in the case of Joe’s Pond, just 2) seems
to be not a lot to ask nor a lot to give.
     And finally, the JPA developed a preliminary design for the boat inspection station that
included an approximately 3000 square foot encroachment into a wetland buffer area in
order to minimize loss of parking space. However, the DF&W contended that the VT
DEC “wetlands program would not permit” the prospective encroachment.
    The JPA has performed a brief and partial search of the DEC database of recent
wetland encroachment permit decisions and has found a half dozen regulatory actions,
wherein permanent wetland and wetland buffer encroachments ranging from 6,000 to
over 20,000 square feet have been approved. These projects are all of substantially
greater magnitude than the prospective encroachment associated with the JPA
proposal.
    In addition, these projects provide little or no identifiable associated ecological benefit
particularly in comparison with that which would be achieved by the JPA proposal. If the
JPA proposal for 3000 square feet of wetland buffer encroachment were to be denied,
such action would be entirely and egregiously inconsistent with prior DEC wetland
regulatory decisions.
    The JPA offered to amend our preliminary project design to increase the wetland buffer
encroachment (subject to regulatory review) in order to further minimize loss of parking
space. But this mitigating approach was also rejected by DF&W.
    The same reasoning about short-sighted decision making applies here to minor wetland
encroachments which represent little or no measurable diminishment of wetlands
functions and values, yet can provide immense benefit through long-term protection of
wetlands habitats all around the lake from degradation by introduced aquatic invasives.
    The ANR wetlands permitting data, upon which my preceding testimony is based, has
been provided via email to all committee members as supplemental information.
    Vermont lake associations are the primary stewards of our invaluable lakes and ponds.
Lake associations and their members suffer disproportionately and must shoulder the
burdens associated with the social, financial and ecological costs of AIS proliferation
and management. As the JPA works to discharge its responsibilities to our
membership, to Joe’s Pond, and other vulnerable water bodies, to implement a complete
AIS spread prevention and containment program, we can much more effectively
accomplish our purpose when the ANR is acting as a collaborative and supportive
partner.
    The JPA appreciates the value of public access to Joe’s Pond and all public waters and
recognizes the constraints of limited space. But the current situation begs an honest
assessment of our collective shared purposes and priorities. We hope, through
enactment of these recommended amendments to S.224, that a functional and mutually
beneficial relationship between the DF&W and lake associations can be formed to
minimize the likelihood of AIS proliferation and its associated ecological loss.
    Thank you again. The Joe’s Pond Association urges you to pass S.224 with the above
suggested amendments. 

*****

 I have to believe that after this thoughtful, frank, and well documented presentation, this committee would certainly understand and wholeheartedly agree, therefore will urge DF&W to allow the change to S.224 and then work with JPA to get a wash station installed. It may be too late to protect Joe's Pond from EWM, but would certainly keep other invasives out of our lake (of which there are many), and prevent the spread to other lakes by boats that have been at Joe's Pond.

I did a little research and found that there is a member from each county on that board and Brad Ferland in Hardwick represents Caledonia County; Jon Valsangiacomo, in Barre, represents Washington County. Do you know these men? If so - let them know how important this is, and that is is only common sense. 

Once again, I thank Barry Cahoon for his unrelenting efforts on behalf of Joe's Pond. I have to believe we will be able to save it. It may take a few years, but it will happen - Joe's Ponders are not going to give up. But we all have to make our voices heard. We can't wait for someone else to do the heavy lifting. Talk to your representatives, your neighbors, find out from Barry what you can do to help. It's going to be a long haul.

As you know, I try to remain neutral, at least hear on Joe's Pond Reflections. However, I feel very strongly about this issue. If we don't get better cooperation from the State, every body of water in Vermont will be clogged with EWM or some other invasive. That will mean that nobody will want to spend summer vacations here - who wants to swim, water-ski, or go kayaking in a sea of green weeds? I don't have to elaborate further, you can imagine what it will be like - it won't be a pleasant future. I firmly believe that boat-wash stations should be mandatory at all state-owned boating accesses.