these criteria, and scored from zero to nine. A higher score indicates a more applicable, safer, or cost-effective method. The results are summarized in . A red highlight of the total score indicates an ineffective, expensive, or otherwise unfavorable option, with yellow indicating imperfect methods, and green indicating favorable options. Table : Ranking of remediation approaches. TMDL Dredging Environmental Algae Aeration Removal of for Benthic Riparian Duckweed Considerations Legislation Removal of Pond Dams Nitrogen Barrier Buffer Removal ☺ ☺ ☺ Low,3     Cost Med,2   High,1 ☺ ☺ ☺ Low,3 Environmental     Impact Med,2   High,1     Low,1 Effectiveness in    Removing Plant Med,2 Matter ☺ ☺ High,3     Low,1   Effectiveness in Med,2 Removing ☺ ☺ ☺ Phosphorus High,3 ☺ ☺ Low,3 Difficulty of      Med,2 implementation   High,1 ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ Low,3 Stakeholders    Affected Med,2 Negatively   High,1 12 18 14 6 8 10 11 12 18 Total Looking at the chart mentioned above, environmental legislation, algae removal, aeration of the pond, installation of a riparian buffer, and duckweed removal are the most effective means to remediate the pond and reduce future loadings. The TMDL for nitrogen and the installation of a benthic barrier are also possible solutions but may contain negative drawbacks because a combination of sources such as cost, effectiveness, and difficulty to implement. Finally, removal of dams and dredging are not recommended to be used. These two options have the greatest number of drawbacks and are not worth the effort for what would be the final outcome. As such,
these criteria, and scored from zero to nine. A higher score indicates a more applicable, safer, or cost-effective method. The results are summarized in . A red highlight of the total score indicates an ineffective, expensive, or otherwise unfavorable option, with yellow indicating imperfect methods, and green indicating favorable options. Table : Ranking of remediation approaches. Considerations Environmental Legislation Algae Removal Aeration of Pond Removal of Dams Dredging TMDL for Nitrogen Benthic Barrier Riparian Buffer Duckweed Removal Cost Low,3 ☺ ☺ ☺ Med,2     High,1   Environmental Impact Low,3 ☺ ☺ ☺ Med,2     High,1   Effectiveness in Removing Plant Matter Low,1     Med,2    High,3 ☺ ☺ Effectiveness in Removing Phosphorus Low,1     Med,2   High,3 ☺ ☺ ☺ Difficulty of implementation Low,3 ☺ ☺ Med,2      High,1   Stakeholders Affected Negatively Low,3 ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ Med,2    High,1   Total 12 18 14 6 8 10 11 12 18 Looking at the chart mentioned above, environmental legislation, algae removal, aeration of the pond, installation of a riparian buffer, and duckweed removal are the most effective means to remediate the pond and reduce future loadings. The TMDL for nitrogen and the installation of a benthic barrier are also possible solutions but may contain negative drawbacks because a combination of sources such as cost, effectiveness, and difficulty to implement. Finally, removal of dams and dredging are not recommended to be used. These two options have the greatest number of drawbacks and are not worth the effort for what would be the final outcome. As such,