Readers familiar with English literature will recognize the title and realize that it has been used before, originally appearing as the title of a satiric essay written and published by Jonathan Swift in 1729. In Swift’s day that essay was, as is often true of satire, controversial.

Before stating my own Modest Proposal, which will strike many readers as being as controversial as that of Swift in his day, note that the complete title of Swift’s essay was, “A Modest Proposal for Preventing the Children of Poor People From Being a Burthen (burden) to Their Parents or Country, and for Making Them Beneficial to the Publick.” The title does not hint at Swift’s full proposal, which was that destitute Irish families could improve their lot by selling their children as food for the wealthy. Swift was, of course, not serious, but used satire as a form of criticism of an important issue of his day, which is the nature of the genre.

On a totally different subject but in a similar satiric manner, I propose that all efforts to improve the condition of Chautauqua Lake be halted immediately and that no future steps to improve or rehabilitate the lake be taken. Pursuing that action would begin the process of allowing the lake to “return to nature,” ultimately following the ecological pathway along which lakes unaffected by human activities proceed to their natural end, eventually filling with sediment and becoming a wetland of some type, e.g., a marsh, bog or swamp.

That natural transition involves what is known as eutrophication, defined as the process of a body of water becoming better nourished, either naturally by maturation (aging) or artificially by fertilization. Artificial eutrophication is called cultural eutrophication because the normal aging process is accelerated by such human activities as water pollution and increased fertilizer use. That produces the buildup of high concentrations of nutrients and the resultant increase in biological activity, evidenced by excessive growth of cyanobacteria, algae and macrophytes, a.k.a. “weeds.”

Because cultural eutrophication results from human activities, the process in Chautauqua Lake began when humans first occupied the lake’s watershed. Those who attended my recent program at The Lawson Center heard a brief summary of human activity within the lake’s watershed, beginning with Native Americans as long as 7000 years ago and continuing to the present, including such historically recent developments as the construction of Chautauqua Mall, Chautauqua Suites, and the Bemus Point Condominiums.

While my modest proposal may seem absurd, I submit that it represents the vision of some opponents of the efforts the Chautauqua Lake Partnership has undertaken this summer to improve Chautauqua Lake by using herbicides and cleaning shorelines. I base my argument on some of the words and statements included in three recent contributions to The Post-Journal Sunday editions of June 30, July 6 and July 13. The several authors of those three articles presented various rationales to argue against the use of herbicides, commonly making claims using words that are either not definitive (e.g., likely, possible, suspected) or that typify alarmist rhetoric (e.g., suspected endocrine disruptor, possible carcinogen, potential groundwater contaminant).

Among these specious claims, however, one can find a few true statements. For example, to say that Chautauqua Lake is an old lake is true, but that does not make it unique. Chautauqua Lake, Cassadaga Lake, Bear Lake, Findley Lake, Lake Erie, and the Finger Lakes all formed at the end of the last ice age, as the glaciers once covering our area melted and receded northward. That was some 15,000 years ago. So, yes, Chautauqua Lake is old, but so are many others.

Another example of a true statement is saying that one of Chautauqua Lake’s needs is the elimination of unwanted weeds on lakeshore properties and reducing the “foul odors” produced by the decaying of those weeds. Agreed, and that has been a goal of the Chautauqua Lake Partnership since it was formed in 2001.

And, as a third example, in one of the contributions the author correctly stated that the potential health-related problems associated with herbicides depend on chemical concentration, application rates and exposure time. That, too, is true, as is the fact that all those parameters were carefully considered when the herbicides were applied by a certified lake management firm and tightly regulated by the DEC, the state agency which issued the herbicide application permits to the Town of Ellery and Village of Bemus Point.

Returning to my proposal and its satirical intent, it is clear that the authors of the three articles, ideologically opposed to herbicide use, are arguing that the eutrophic conditions existing in Chautauqua Lake, encouraged by 25 years of relying on a single, limited approach to weed management, are preferable to using herbicides to combat those conditions which so greatly diminish the enjoyment of time spent on Chautauqua Lake by visitors and residents alike. In other words, our lake is old and we should help it grow older and reach its ultimate eutrophic state as soon as possible, ignoring science-based, state-regulated proven technology to slow the process.

What, then, would be the benefits of halting all efforts to improve or rehabilitate the lake and simply allow it to return to nature and become ever more eutrophic?

¯ No money, time or effort would have to be spent on harvesting, applying herbicides or on any of the projects with long-term benefits currently in progress or planned.

¯ Our lake would be the first-ever populated lake to be involved in such an experiment as we watch property values, tourism, and tax revenues decline.

¯ This innovative experiment would please those opposed to herbicide use because Chautauqua County and our institutions of higher learning would be eligible for research grants not now available. Chautauqua Lake would become one of the best known and most studied lakes in the world.

¯ As the eutrophic condition of the lake becomes worse, as will happen, the lake might be designated a federal remediation site, qualifying it for cleanup dollars to reverse the eutrophication process.

Satire aside, what are the reader’s visions of Chautauqua Lake’s future?

Thomas A. Erlandson has a PhD in zoology. He is a biology adviser to the Chautauqua Lake Partnership.