This is a follow-up to a comment on a topic introduced within a previously hijacked thread... In early March 2025, Helena and SePro initiated work with Texas Parks & Wildlife biologists on a “case study” to technically and empirically document the effects of various EutroSORB formulations on a 5 surface-acre city park pond in Katy, TX (Mary Jo Peckham Park). The park’s pond is occupied (“infested” 😉) by a relative high population of waterfowl, which do what waterfowl do best when fed ample amounts of foodstuffs by the visiting public. In 2023 & 2024, the park’s pond experienced several bouts of excessive planktonic algae blooms, often accompanied by Cyanobacteria blooms that posed a threat to both “wildlife” and park-visiting pets. The objective of the case study is to document effects & benefits associated with a properly executed phosphorus mitigation program. Lanthanum (a rare earth element) is the key component found in the various EutroSORB formulations. Use-rates for one or more formulation are more accurately based upon phosphorus sample results rather than a predesignated rate per acre or acre-foot. Accordingly, the formulation(s) and dosage(s) for this case study will be based upon collected water and benthic soil samples, which are currently undergoing analysis within SePro’s water-quality testing lab. The final results of this case study will become available this fall after the treatment(s) have concluded and several post-treatment water/soil samples are analyzed. Personally, I believe this case study will provide an excellent comparison to innumerable private ponds that suffer from the effects of excessive & long term eutrophication. I’m happy to share the case study results (later this year) with anyone who expresses an interest. UPDATE: The application was executed on Thurs/May 15th. Video linked below. Post-treatment sampling will occur at two intervals between July & October. MARY JO PECKHAM PARK / KATY TX (Phosphorus Mitigation Project)
Thanks for starting a new thread and posting about this study.
I think a way to manage phosphorus in our old eutrophic (nutrient rich) ponds could become a very valuable tool for improving these bodies of water!
P.S. I know that cost will probably not be a factor in a publicly-funded case study, since we have to understand the basic science first. However, when we start getting concrete results back on these studies, could you apply your experience and add some very rough ball-park cost estimates where possible?
Thanks Kelly. I have about 5 neighbor's cow tanks that I'm struggling with, and something like this would be a game changer. My neighbors do tons for me, so the cost of single treatments is well worth it to me. Any wild idea what the cost for 2 to 3 army worm treatments a year is on my hay meadows? You bet I'll spend $$$ for my neighbor's ponds.
Thanks Kelly. I have about 5 neighbor's cow tanks that I'm struggling with, and something like this would be a game changer. My neighbors do tons for me, so the cost of single treatments is well worth it to me. Any wild idea what the cost for 2 to 3 army worm treatments a year is on my hay meadows? You bet I'll spend $$$ for my neighbor's ponds.
For phosphorus management treatments; as with selecting site-suitable herbicide treatments, ponds' circumstances vary - often in a significant manner. Ponds used exclusively for livestock watering holes probably won't justify the expenses involved for "fish-safe" phosphorus-binding treatments. Personally, I'd explore the use of repetitive, sequential, low-dose rates of aluminum sulfate for such utility-ponds. Lanthanum-based products would also prove effective, and are also fish-safe, but involve a notably higher cost.
Kelly, P.S. I know that cost will probably not be a factor in a publicly-funded case study, since we have to understand the basic science first. However, when we start getting concrete results back on these studies, could you apply your experience and add some very rough ball-park cost estimates where possible?
Honestly, the Katy park-pond in this case study is one of the most heavily "nutrified" ponds I've encountered. Secchi disk reading was approximately 5-6" on the day of application. Ultimately, the costs involved for a typical pond managed for optimal fish production SHOULD be far less than what's required in this city park pond case study. The required dosing rates (and associated costs) directly correlate to how much EXCESS phosphorus is present, and how much needs to be inactivated as a nutrient source, which requires a water sample for assessment. With that info in hand (for a specific pond) it is much more feasible to calculate the rational dosage (and associated expense) for lowering the free phosphorus to a more acceptable level.
...Personally, I'd explore the use of repetitive, sequential, low-dose rates of aluminum sulfate for such utility-ponds. Lanthanum-based products would also prove effective, and are also fish-safe, but involve a notably higher cost.
Kelly, thanks for the information. Esshup and I agreed about the aluminum sulfate, but honestly, I kinda sorta turned away from it because of the cost if done on my big pond. So 2 quick questions. What's considered a low-dose, and does a low dose still require the halved type 2 lime? Most of the ponds i deal with are no bigger than 100X100, and no lower than 5-6 feet.
.gif)
