SLPOA Survey Results, 2006
About You
13 Property Owner for 0-5 years
21 5-10 years
71 10 years or more
NA Resort/Campground resident or other non-property owner
Use of your Property
28 Year around Residence
72 Seasonal Cabin/Second Home
1 Commercial/Resort
1 Agricultural/ Timber
1 Other- “Investment for children”
3 Other – Undeveloped with intent to develop
Since 2002 a high priority of the SLPOA has been to protect and preserve the water quality and habitat areas of Star Lake
1. Do you believe this should continue to be a high priority of SLPOA?
91 Yes 7 No
2. Why?
Protect spawning areas on the South Lake.
Laws and Enforcement entities are in place, why then does the board think it is their job to protect and preserve habitat and water quality.
This is a high priority on every lake.
They need to protect the back bays and the Southwest Bay because that is where the spawning beds are located.
Current rules and regulations from the county and DNR are enough.
Leave the Lake alone. Don’t waste more paper on more tireless regulations.
Water quality ad habitat areas are very important in the ecosystem. Plant life takes harmful chemicals out of the water to preserve our resources. I think other restriction have to be enforced first and forget about trying to change our lake classification. Keep Star Lake at a General Development Classification.
We have seen great improvement in water quality on Star and want it to stay clean.
Because every lake needs this! But not through reclassification. Pressure the county and the DNR to enforce the current rules and regulations in force now and you will see much less of a problem.
Water quality and habitat is very important.
I believe the DNR is doing a good job in this area. We, as property owners should not have to undergo more restrictions to keep the quality as it is now.
To support wildlife fishing and lake activities.
Like to fish.
Lakes are fragile organisms, that if damaged take years of hard work to undue. We live close to Clear Lake, IA and it has cost millions of dollars to try to slow the eutrophication.
The “Character: of the lake and its water quality are both important to me. The latter because I like to swim and the former because the lake still retains the undeveloped character it has had for the 50 years I have been there and I don’t want that lost.
The swampiness and our bedding areas.
To Maintain a Good Fishery.
Water quality is very important. However, weed control should be allowed by owners along shore line and Rip Rap control
Clear Water.
The clean water and habitat continues to provide a great fishery and quality experience. As in land based wild life the fish need a place to successfully breed and rear young. Development in the sensitive areas will lead to less spawning habitat and less fish in the future – it already has! In addition to the “sensitive” areas of the lake, I feel the main lake should also be protected. For that reason, among others, I feel that the “ENTIRE” lake should be reclassified if the process is continued.
Once the habitat areas are gone there is no way of getting them back. It displaces wildlife which also can’t be replaced. If the water quality is compromised it will take great effort to reverse the problem.
This should continue to be a high priority for property owners who enjoy and respect our lakes privileges, as well as those of future generations.
We believe water quality and habitat are intimately related.
To keep the lake in its present condition.
Protect spawning areas on the South Lake.
Seems only natural to want the best we can have.
Who would not want water quality – being against reclassification of the lake is not being against water quality and habitat
Fish habitat protection.
Without water quality we have nothing.
We want a clean lake.
Of course we want water quality and habitat preserved, but this doesn’t require reclassification. Priorities: Fishery, safety, education and communication.
Without good water quality the lake is not very useable.
We are firm believers in the process of preserving Star Lake and the land around the lake. We really wish Star Lake would be an environmental Lake, as all our lakes are a natural resource. At the last meeting, I couldn’t believe how many did not want to change the lake to an environmental. I think we should as them, then why did they buy on Star Lake. It is a Great Lake.
Star Lake is a beautiful lake and should continue to be that way.
The water quality and habitat directly affects/determines the health and desirability of my property.
Someone/something has to do the job. We need a “local” presence on the lake to organize, care, lead and take action. We must build working relationships with the DNR, OTC and PCA, etc. In order to be effective. As the water quality committee chair once said “ A Lake Dies From a Thousand Cuts” Stop the cutting!!
This should be achieved through a shared sacrifice of all stake holders and not at the expense of new or future property owners for the benefit of the established property owner.
We need to be less regulated not more.
We need a group to protect the shorelines in the South and West arms, wild rice bed and cattail bogs are getting destroyed faster than hell. We don’t want to lose what we have left. This area needs to some what be protected so it doesn’t turn out to be like the Brainerd area. We need to protect waterfowl habitat before that’s gone! Spawning beds are being destroyed by lake property in the back arms.
The lake will more quickly move toward eutrophication and increased algae blooms, unless we take an active and aggressive role. We would lose our quality fishery if we destroy too much aquatic vegetation.
We are fortunate to have wildlife; loons & herons, eagles & osprey that are fast disappearing from suburban lakes for lack of habitat. I believe in the future, this will ad to our value bath as a desirable
Lake to be on and a destination for wildlife lovers.
It is important to continue the work towards a natural environment status. The future of the lake depends on this.
So Our Lake Does Not Fall Prey to the negative impacts other lakes have experienced.
It’s the reason the lake is a great one.
We have more important things to worry about; it’s not fair to the others on the lake.
To keep water quality up and clear.
Recreation and shore values depend on water quality.
The answer should be obvious. Clean, pure, water is necessary for safe and enjoyable water sports and fishing. Star Lake has traditionally enjoyed excellent water. Let’s try to keep it that way.
Keep the water clean and clear and preserve the good fishing on Star.
For hunting and fishing quality .To prevent large developments coming in. To protect against milfoil and zebra mussels.
To save the water quality, fishing, preservation of the land and lake.
Laws and enforcement entities are in place. Why then does the board, SLPOA, think it is their job to protect and preserve habitat and water quality?
We don’t want a weedy mud hole!
Keep out of property owner issues.
To keep our lake clear and clean.
For our fish and children.
We want the lake and habitat areas to be the highest quality possible.
Keep the lake clean and natural for future generations to enjoy.
I want our grandchildren to be able to experience the same quality of lake life that we have.
We need to keep Star Lake clean, stocked, and a place to relax and fish.
It is the main reason we purchased property on Star Lake.
Protect the lake.
That is the reason, in no better words.
I want to keep Star Lake the pristine lake it is for future generations.
I want to see my grandchildren catch fish like we do.
Quality of life.
This objective has been the precise attraction for most on Star Lake in the past. No one would spend time and resources on a “pea soup” swamp.
The value on land on a pristine lake is paramount.
This must be done without infringing on the rights of present and future property owners.
Question is a sweeping generalization- that can only be answered in the affirmative.
Because we have been coming to the lake for 50 years and seen how the new development have pull down the quality of the lake by water quality and fishing by loss of habitat.
To protect all of our futures on the lake.
So the lake can be used for generations to come.
To preserve the lake quality.
We would like the clean lake for swimming and for the continuation of great fishing. We want to keep control over multiple family dwellings like condos/townhouses to ensure lower taxes than neighboring lakes.
So that the water will be clean enough to see out toes when we are at a shoulder height depth; so the loans and their babies will be able to nest and grow safely and all the other wildlife that live and thrive there now.
These birds and animals need the marshes and reeds to make their homes.
3. What should we protect the lake from?
Restrict Cluster Developments.
Developers, Eurasian milfoil, gated community type living. We are up North to get away from that.
Jet Skis
Over restrictions of the DNR and EPA.
Bureaucrats that need more regulations.
Septic Systems that are not in compliance. Runoff from chemicals that are applied on lawns and fields.
Milfoil
At the present tine I would say the SLPOA Board
Sewage, erosion, removal of natural vegetation.
Existing lots and plats that are not following the current rules and regulations regarding vegetation removal and the requirement for common docks and access.
Special Interests.
Leaking septics, farm run off and people pulling out all weeds.
Over development, yard chemical runoff and septic leaks.
Over development, inappropriate use and pollution.
Septic Systems not up to code.
Pollution.
Too Much Fishing Pressure (if the public access is updated or improved with additional parking it would increase the public – nonresident - fishing pressure).
The spread of wild rice and pollution.
Large scale condo type development, protection of sensitive and not already developed projects by lakeshore owners that don’t meet already existing restrictions, i.e. – weed removal. Also to make sure all septic systems are up to codes, including making sure resort systems are adequate to cover existing usage.
Limit development of habitat areas.
Aquatic predators, predators, pollution, over development, misuse of water craft.
Cluster developments
Harmful vegetation.
People who want to rezone and reclassify it.
Tougher property restrictions.
Submerged ad emerged vegetation destruction, substandard septic systems, shoreline vegetation destruction.
Larger public access.
Over development, sewage disposal, garbage on the ice, runoff containment.
Septic tanks, fertilized lawns, oversized and over powered boats, light and noise pollution, year round homes.
Developers building over population.
Weeds from the shoreline.
High, high population and use. (Concentrations of people)
Ideally, from all kinds of abuse including; septic pollution, pollution, aquatic vegetation removal, invasive plants and critters and over development. We need to encourage buffer strips and storm water management plans. We need to educate people on what they can/should do and what they should not do.
Milfoil, Zebra mussels and other non-native species. Runoff from farms and lawns. Broken septics. Removal/destruction of spawning areas.
Lawn fertilizer run-off, over fishing/hunting, cleaning significant percentage of lots adjacent to water of aquatic vegetation, m in. lot sizes (current and future lots).
Lake Shore management
Town home development. Saving the back arms on this lake from development, high water, ruining cattails, opens the back ends for development.
Increased phosphorus input. Destruction of aquatic vegetation. Agitation of phosphorus – containing bottom silt and sediment from high speed boat traffic in shallow areas. Removal of near-shore trees and vegetation which means loss of wildlife habitat, travel corridors and decrease in the attractiveness of the shore land.
Large scale development and overuse by motorized vehicles.
Developers and inappropriate zoning/building.
Irresponsible development and use. Also from run off contaminants; invasive aquatic vegetation.
Weed infestation
Less rules and regulations, more accommodating for people on the lake.
Contamination.
Over building.
Septic systems that are poorly designed, built or maintained.
Dirty Rip-Rap.
Milfoil and zebra muscles and other polluting weeds.
From proliferation of unwanted urban type sprawl. Multiple dwellings, poor water quality and overcrowding.
At the present time, I would say the SLPOA board.
Water pollution, fishing.
Cormorants, Canadian Geese, poor septic systems, phosphorous fertilizers.
SLPOA Board of Directors.
Milfoil and etc.
Milfoil, no fishing in spawning beds, protect loon nesting areas.
The vegetation which is washing up on my beach. Overpopulation- protect the lake against projects like the one (Heron?) over on Dead Lake. I live next to the North Star Resort which was a sleepy resort with 8 cabins in the early 70’s to what is now a medium sized village with over 50 boat/lifts. Everyone needs a place to go, but your attitude changes when you have explosive growth right next to you.
Sewage from septic systems - Clearing of vegetation from shorelines.
Population density.
Pollution.
Any more development and enforce the laws regarding jet skiing and over fishing.
Weeds.
Over-development which creates stress, run-off, erosion, over fishing, chemicals, sewage etc.
Extensive development.
People who only care about dollars and not Star and its beauty.
Future development keeping water quality and habitat areas from destruction.
Over development.
Unrestricted development.
Factors that influence the overuse or misuse of this environment.
Any outside influences that would negatively affect the quality of the lake, water and land.
Violation of existing laws, especially inadequate septic systems.
Pollution and invasive plants.
Over development and removal of shore line habitat.
We should work with DNR on current regulations.
Erosion to have clean water and great fishing.
Destruction of natural habitats on the shoreline.
Poachers, abusers of fishing limits, shoreline erosion, * Multiple family dwellings*
Contamination of water, destruction of breeding areas for wildlife.
4. What are the most important things the SLPOA should concentrate on regarding preservation?
Protect Spawning Areas.
Property Owners Rights.
Keeping it a pleasant getaway and protecting the loons.
Accurately representing the wishes of all property owners on Star Lake whether members of SLPOA or not.
Over population of undeveloped areas.
No mass developments above family dwellings on maximum sized lots.
Leave the Lake alone.
Non-Compliant septic systems. Enforce rules (that are on the books now) more effectively.
Education – taking care of shore line, keeping natural vegetation, etc.
Restrict any new plats, lots, subdivisions, etc. to the “Natural Environment” regulations and start enforcing the rules and regulations already in place.
Preserving property owner’s rights.
Wild Life and fishing.
Enforce the laws of being able to clear 50’ of your shoreline. Have 5 year septic checks on all properties.
Water quality and milfoil prevention.
Try to prevent over development.
That property owners are following current Land management and Shore land Regulations.
Pollution.
Keep Jet Skis’ out of reproduction – spawning areas.
Over Regulation.
Vegetation, septic system checks, cluster development regulations, posting spawning beds, not necessarily to stop fishing pressure, but to protect the habitat and boats motoring through those areas.
Protecting water quality.
Aquatic vegetation, fishing, development (in sensitive areas) and water clarity.
Reducing the density of future development.
Clean water and Weed control.
Protect spawning areas.
Preserving the classification of lake as is.
Keep monitoring water quality and habitat.
Sensitive habitat areas and water quality.
Water quality and Fishery
Water quality and large year round homes.
Changing the lake to environmental.
Water Quality and Lake Shore use.
Water Quality, Habitat preservation, Water safety, fishery quality, monitoring shore land development rules. Continue to build and maintain communications and relationships with the DNR and OTC departments.
Lake is Ok as it is …Leave it alone.
I think if the public landing is expanded it would be a higher risk of non-native species entering the lake.
Saving the back arms from development, keeping water level low to save the cattails and rice that saves spawning beds and water fowl habitat and water quality.
Habitat – those areas of the lake tat are wild, where the loons nest, in particular.
Continued water and fishing quality, concentration and habitat, etc.
Protect sensitive areas from development – reclassify to a natural environment.
Stop new development
Update septic systems, more fish stocking.
Sensitive habitat not remaining aquatic, because aging produces weeds, as low areas fill with sediment.
Preserve the existing spawning beds and wildlife habitat.
Can’t really say any special thing.
Allow owners to buy build able land and develop within set guidelines, but keep large developers at bay.
Consider a manageable use of resorts with the restrictions on trailer parks, tiny lots and careless transients.
Property owners’ rights.
Clean water, lower lake level, good running septic systems, clean up dead weeds and the public accesses,
Eradicate suckers, carp, and mudpuppies from the lake.
Let the Dept of Natural Resources do their job, not SLPOA.
Keeping lake clean, keep DNR from experimenting with fish limits, e.g. 10 sunfish rule on this lake only.
Maintaining fish population.
Fish- water quality, shore lines.
Keep lake as is. Do not sell off lots on Boy’s Camp or the South side of the bay.
Keeping the rules and regulations to a minimum.
Development patterns.
Restrict the remaining areas of the lake from development beyond single homes.
I feel we need to give the people that own pristine areas, the help to accomplish this. If they choose to keep them this way.
All of the following—
Change lake classification.
Water quality, habitat preservation and commercial exploitation.
Controlled growth and cleanliness of the lake water.
Sensitive areas and septic systems.
Water quality.
Water quality – shoreline habitat – fish limits- cluster development
Working with DNR.
We all should work on the lake to keep it clean.
1. Safety of fish, aquatic animals and wildlife. 2. Making sure the lake isn’t over populated like Ottertail, Lida, and Dead Lakes.
Lake safety, lake accessibility, fish reproduction, control of watercraft noise and hours of use.
5 . Strategies to protect aquatic vegetation
52 High priority 29 Medium priority 13 Low priority
6. Strategies to protect sensitive habitat areas
62 High priority 23 Medium priority 9 Low priority
7. Strategies to reduce the density of the future development and redevelopment.
54 High priority 20 Medium priority 20 Low priority
8. Strategies to protect water quality.
83 High priority 9 Medium priority 3 Low priority
9. Continue to proactively work with county and state officials to help protect and preserve Star Lake
70 High priority 13 Medium priority 9 Low priority
10. Do you want the SLPOA Board to pursue reclassification of Star Lake?
39 Yes 47 No 15 Uncertain
11. Do you want the SLPOA Board to pursue the reclassification of the most sensitive areas of Star Lake?
41 Yes 38 No 21 Uncertain
12. Would you like more information regarding lake classification and reclassification?
64 Yes 31 No
Please share any other comments, suggestions or ideas with the SLPOA Board of Directors.
Your group has good working relationships with the county and DNR. Don’t screw it up.
Please don’t turn going up to the cabin into a gated community, as it is there are so many people that call on others for the dumbest things. We should be able to conserve the lake and enjoy it and ourselves without worrying about everything that is done to improve our property.
Star Lake has existed and thrived since the last ice age without the meddling and private agendas of the SLPOA Board and will continue to exist and thrive. The Lake is fine! The classification is Fine! It is tine to leave “fine” alone.
Be accurate in how these actions will affect current land owners that want to develop there own lots without extra bureaucracy.
Those of us in shallow frontages must continue to be able to remove some of the weeds or it is uninhabitable.
We do not need more regulations. More regulations would not be any benefit to property owners on this lake. We all take very good care of our property and enjoy this beautiful lake.
Information that affects property owners on Star Lake needs to be dispersed to the property owners and not just to members or members that attend meetings.
I don’t want the board to pursue anything that changes my property owner rights. Who benefits from the reclassification property? All the years of paying dues I don’t expect the board to be pursuing something that benefits certain board members and certain past presidents of the past couple of years.
The Board should be an instrument of education for home owners first. The political aspects are happening before owners are informed and resentment is forming. The county and state have lots of control already ad seem to be actively enforcing lake management regulations. The board needs to work with home owners before pushing for classification.
It looks to us that there are hidden agendas amongst the board members and less than full disclosure about the real issues before votes are taken. It appears that the reclassification was to be ramroded down our throats with no voice in the matter.
Star Lake is a public lake with public access so limiting development around the lake doesn’t necessarily guarantee a better quality lake. We already have adequate regulation for lakeshore development to protect our lake. My lot is by wetland which is already protected and I have special requirements to meet when developing my lot.
Seems to be handled well currently, want to preserve the fishing and limit jet skis.
Send out the Rules of a Natural environment lake to all.
We appreciate the great organization and hard work of the board. Prevention is better than correction. Thank you.
Poorly written survey – clearly intended to steer in one direction. Please represent only the agenda(s) of the majority of the SLPOA membership when at county commission meetings – follow thru with your statement that the SLPOA board would NOT pursue this further unless there was a 2/3 majority
The Board should follow the consensus of the members – not just a few out spoken ones.
Seems as though you have the attitude “I got my place on the lake now, that’s it. No more development, Leave the classification alone
More of an effort to get all property owners signed up as members of the SLPOA. I know that this issue will have caused the remaining members of our beach to join to ensure they get a vote in the future. Make sure every land owner has all the information, both good and bad, so they can make an informed vote on the issue. Protect the island environments. Protect the sandy areas on the East side – currently being used by many people on hot days.
It would be a great loss to have the water quality deteriorates from its present state. One of the main reasons we purchased a cabin on Star Lake was the habitat areas and wild life it is home to.
We appreciate and support all that the SLPOA has done to preserve and protect our beautiful Star Lake. We need to continue education ad awareness for all property owners.
We are glad to see that you have had the courage and the foresight to submit these proposals to the people for reconsideration. I feel the first vote at the 2006 annual meeting was made in haste.
We believe the Lake classification should remain as is. Why make it more difficult to improve and enjoy what we have.
I think that this survey is slanted toward your apparent wish to re-classify the lake. If yes or high priority is checked, I believe you will see that as a wish to do things your way. I do not believer the board is following the wishes of the property owners as they were elected to do. It is inappropriate to use your elected position to bull doze your agenda through the association.
We admire and appreciate the ongoing water quality and habitat work done by the SLPOA board. However, we do not believe putting additional restrictions on ourselves is in our best interest. Lakeshore mgmt appears to doing a great job on restrictive measures.
Keep the lake a general development classification.
I suspect this survey is very misleading, with respect to the ramifications of reclassifications. Just whose interests are being represented?
We live on the South arm, it is really pretty here, and I’d like to preserve it for the wildlife and fishery. I duck hunt, fish, ice fish and snowmobile this week. Every lake in MN is part of the natural environment, we must preserve it.
I don’t want the SLPOA board of directors to pursue changes in classification of Star Lake.
If we/you are not creating some controversy then we’re not doing much. There are many, many ways the SLPOA and members can contribute to water quality habitat and fishery. If we choose not to go for the entire lake reclassification then let’s focus on other strategies and priorities (habitat, water quality and fishery).
In general I would oppose rules that add restrictions to me. I think people who live on the lake are already generally trying to preserve and protect the lake, so it is not clear to me that reclassifying the lake would help. Updates on what we can do voluntarily to help would be useful, as well as posting information for guests on our lake at resorts and public boat launches would be helpful.
I truly believe that the SLPOA has good intentions and the goals are important. Changing the classification is a drastic step that will not assure the desired outcome. If current property owners continue killing aquatic vegetation to make room for multiple water craft, continue fertilizing lawns and mowing to the lakes edge, operating substandard septic systems, over fishing/hunting the lake or otherwise behave in an “I got mine – to heck with everyone else” attitude.
We need to save spawning beds for sunfish. We need to save cattails, wild rice, and waterfowl habitat. The lake doesn’t fair well with high water. The back ends of the arms need to be protected. What ever can be done needs to be done or else its over. The bogs at the beginning of the South arm every year are less and less – losing fish habitat like crazy.
I believe becoming a Lake Improvement District (LID) will greatly facilitate accomplishing the lake preservation goals. I also believe the education role SLPOA has will require more communication with property owners regarding their role in water quality preservation, such as through our website, and news letters with detailed informative articles. We also need to spell out for property owners why the DNR and Shore land management aren’t able to preserve the quality of Star Lake.
As a new owner, I was drawn to this lake in particular, because of its water quality and wildlife. I would support the resolution efforts to preserve the lake. Many of my neighbors are hunters and fisherman so I feel that we attract or can continue to attract people who value what we have. The pressures for lakeshore development are huge in MN. We should protect what we have proactively, before we are confronted with a problem. I feel strongly that the SLPOA is headed in the right direction and approve your efforts.
I was very impressed with the work that the board has done to date and you should be commended for your tireless work. Congratulations. I felt that there was a misunderstanding of some property owners regarding the affects of these resolutions upon their individual ownerships.
You do not have the right to tell people what they can and can’t do to their own property. Everyone has a right to build when they want to.
Sorry I was not at the meeting to cast my vote. I really appreciate the boards efforts and in particular the fine past efforts of Stu Peterson.
Need definition of options regarding reclassification.
Pursue protection of undeveloped land especially. Concern: Allow people who already own to do what they want (within guidelines) with their land. New 100 ft. lots-the same. Keep new large developers at bay.
Over my 63 year life span I have witnessed the Mpls metro area lakes suffer from years of neglect (poor water quality, Asian milfoil, sewage, overcrowding. LET’S SAVE THE LAKE!!Star Lake has existed and thrived since the last ice age without the meddling and private agendas of the
SLPOA board and will continue to exist and thrive. The lake is fine! The classification is” fine”. It is time to leave “fine” alone.
Keep out of PROPERTY OWNER ISSUES.
Keep up your good work. Pressure to develop will get stronger in the coming years.
Keep Star Lake as it is. Do not impose rules on others.
Insure septic systems are up to code.
It is time to be proactive. If we sit on our hands, we will not like the outcome. We can’t listen to the people that don’t share these beliefs.
I commend you on all the work you have done and will be doing to protect “our” lake. Thank you.
How about telling them RV’s in driveways don’t affect lake quality.
On the assumption that most concerned property owners are already members of SLPOA; spend the money on a paper ballot/voting procedure to approve re-classification.
This looks to me like a few people are trying to protect their property at the expense of other people’s rights. I have yet to talk to anyone who is in favor of this change, and would welcome the opportunity.
Tough job and we appreciate your time and efforts. We wish you the best as you continue to seek what is best for Star Lake owners.
We do not support reclassification! We feel this is a disadvantage to cabin owners like ourselves, who have been enjoying the benefits of a seasonal cabin for the last several decades.
Yes, we need to do something or we’ll end up like the Alexandria area – and what has happened in the Iowa great lake area.
Rice seems to be overtaking lake. Development is a way of life. We do not have any interest in reclassification. We have a small lot and it would become worthless to us with the new classification, it was an investment for us.
You have good ideas but I don’t want to put more restrictions on myself so I can’t put a basement under my house.
Let’s work together to make our lake accessible and affordable for “families”. The people and families we have met and worked with are invaluable and we don’t want to see any of them leave because it has become too expensive to stay here.