To the editor: After 40 plus years of observation during my life, I’ve found that one of the biggest flaws in human nature is the inability to admit doing wrong. We’re so afraid of hearing the old “I told you so!” But the township officials and watershed commission were told. All the facts were documented and distributed in computer printouts, but the powers that be decided to ignore common sense. If the grant money received had been used to contract the weed harvesting company, as in years past, the weeds would have been properly cleaned out in a short amount of time, with all expenses (salaries, insurance, workmans’ comp, fuel, maintenance, weed disposal) covered in the price. And they’d take care of winter storage of the machines. Each subsequent season would have required less weed removal, because the job would’ve been done the right way the previous year. What we have now is several years of accumulation that is expanding rapidly. At this pace, when our new granddaughter is my age, she will not inherit our lakefront property. It will be swampfront property. If the weed harvester isn’t the solution to this monumental task, perhaps other methods should be considered. I wonder if the outspoken environmental groups that oppose the use of chemicals actually use the lake. They make outrageous claims such as the theory that if people swim in the lake after chemicals have been used, their children and/or grandchildren will be mutants. I am descended from a long line of lake enthusiasts and swimmers. Chemicals have been used to control lake weed growth for decades. I may not be physically perfect (who is?), but I’m certainly not mutated. The chemicals used today have the added bonus of years of research to ensure safety to humans and wildlife. West Milford residents get their water from underground wells, but all the citizens in towns that have “city water” are getting water that it treated with chemicals. Anyone with a backyard swimming pool is immersing themselves in water treated with chemicals. Folks, there are more toxic chemicals in the food we eat and the air we breathe than what would be needed to remove the weeds from our lakes. Where would the money come from to chemically treat the lake or to dredge the southern end? When Congressman Garrett was running for election he had lake dredging as part of his campaign platform. Where is he now? Perhaps, he doesn’t want to see any more tax dollars wasted... throwing good money after bad. Sure, the weed harvester was acquired through grant money (who paid for all the added expenses?), but where do you all think the grant money comes from? It isn’t money donated by some mega corporation. It’s ultimately from your tax dollars. On Memorial Day weekend we had several family members stay with us to enjoy the beautiful weather and the weed infested lake. The weed beds at the north end of Fox Island were so huge they looked like an actual extension of the island! Floating weed beds now move about the lake, many winding up piled on lakefront shorelines. The overtaxed lakefront property owners now have to trudge through these mini swamps to access the lake. If time is money, maybe the time they now need to spend cleaning these weeds from their shorelines should be deducted from their tax bills. Why should someone be so severely taxed for lakefront when they can only look at the lake rather than enjoying its use? Why should we continue to be taxed to the point of not being able to afford to live here when we see those tax dollars tied to a dock at a marina or sitting motionless on a beach? Clem Hoppe Hewitt