Five drown in reservoirs over 127-year history

Speculation aside, there have been only five drownings in city-owned reservoirs since Fairfield?s first reservoir was built in 1885, according to Ledger archives.

The first drowning in a city-owned reservoir on record was in 1931. The incident occurred at the No. 3 Reservoir, more commonly known as Walton Lake. At that time, swimming in Walton Lake was permitted.

Early on the evening of July 22, 1931, William Mrogenski, 18, parked his car near a cabin on the lake and was taken by boat to the opposite side of the reservoir where eight to 10 other teenagers were swimming and diving from a floating pier. At approximately 7 p.m., the kids realized it had been some time since they last saw Mrogenski dive off the pier. They called his name several times; when he did not respond, the group believed he must have gone ashore. They searched the shoreline and the Walton Club House for Mrogenski, to no avail.

Realizing he may have drowned, the group took turns diving into the lake at the place where he had last been seen diving; the body was recovered at approximately 7:45 p.m. It was believed Mrogenski had suffered a heart attack while swimming as no water aspirated from his lungs or stomach during resuscitation efforts, the archives said.

It was more than three decades later when Donald Pottorff, 34, lost his life in a boating accident at the No. 2 Reservoir - now known as Pleasant Lake. In 1954, Pottorff was fishing on the pond with his son, Donald Pottorff Jr., when the back of the boat they were in dipped below the surface of the water. The 12-year-old boy had taken free swimming lessons conducted at the municipal swimming pool and was able to swim to shore. According to family members, the elder Pottorff wasn?t able ?to swim a stroke.? He clung to the boat until both he and the boat went under. The boat resurfaced a short time later; Pottorff never came up.

In 1964, tragedy struck again at Walton Lake when 19-year-old Lyle Smutz of Libertyville drowned there. Witnesses said Smutz and Louise Burk, 16, were attempting to swim across the east fork of the lake.

At that time, Jim Keltner, Don Swan and an unidentified person told officials they were seated on the patio of the Walton Club house and heard the voices of the two swimming in the lake. Keltner said they remarked about how it sounded as if the two were having a good time. Suddenly, however, the voices changed from laughing to panic. The male voice changed first. Then the girl started to scream, the men recounted.

The three men ran across the foot-bridge to the other side of the lake. They found Burk, who had just reached shore. She told them Smutz had gone down and was still in the water.

According to the archives, emergency personnel were called at approximately 10:30 p.m. A recovery operation was performed with drag lines and borrowed boats. The body was brought to the surface around 12:30 a.m. July 27, 1964.

More than 42 years passed with no drownings in any of the city?s three reservoirs. Then, in 2006, Larry E. Gaus, 63, drowned in Walton Lake.

According to Ledger archives, the Jefferson County Law Enforcement Center received a call of ?a man under water? at about 12:58 a.m. on Sept. 2, 2006 from the Walton Club. Witnesses said Gaus was attempting to swim from the Walton Club to his home across the lake when he went under.

Upon arrival, the Fairfield police officer?s rescue attempts were unsuccessful, and several emergency service agencies were called in to help in the recovery operation.

Randy Cooksey, acting chief of police at that time, said Air Evac Lifeteam helicopters flew above the lake to shine lights into the water to help in the recovery effort. He also said the Wapello County Sheriff?s Office dive team and the Iowa Volunteer Water Rescue Team from Keokuk were called in to help.

The body was recovered later that day at approximately 12:54 p.m. through a dragging process. Gaus? drowning was the third to occur in Walton Lake and the fourth to occur in a city-owned reservoir. Harl?s drowning July 12 was the fifth; it was the first on record in the No. 1 Reservoir.

While each of the five drownings occurred in different decades at different reservoirs, there are many similarities between each incident. In each of the five drownings, rescue efforts were unsuccessful. Each time, enforcement officials almost immediately placed their focus on recovery rather than rescue, and in each of the five cases, recovery took time.

It took rescuers two hours to recover Smutz?s body, and five hours passed before volunteers recovered Pothorff?s body. The recovery of Gaus? body took the longest, at approximately 12 hours. Harl?s and Mgorenski?s recoveries were the shortest, with each being located in approximately one hour.

Another parallel that can be drawn between the five events is in every case, local law enforcement officials were ill-equipped and untrained to carry out a water rescue or recovery. Each time, officials had to turn to local citizens for boats and equipment. Additionally, support from surrounding cities and counties had to be called in.

Because of this, Fairfield Chief of Police Julie Harvey does not support swimming in Lake Bonnifield and would like the beach to be permanently closed to swimmers.

?Police, fire, and ambulance personnel felt set up for failure,? she said of the Harl?s drowning. ?When the beach was opened this year, concerns were voiced that we didn?t have the necessary equipment or training to do a rescue. We made it clear the department?s policy is that no officer is to enter the water and attempt a rescue. But the expectation of the general public is that we are going to attempt a rescue.?

At the time of Harl?s drowning, Harvey said friends and family were yelling at law enforcement personnel to do something. Police Captain Dave Thomas told the Fairfield City Council some people were ?screaming profanity? at officers.

?We were even getting 911 calls from people who were upset,? Harvey said. ?They were saying the officers weren?t doing anything, that they were just standing around, but they were doing what they had been trained to do, and they were following protocol.

?We were there for a recovery operation,? Harvey said. ? We aren?t trained in water rescue. Everybody thinks we?re supposed to save lives, but I?ve got officers who can?t swim. We?re not going to compound the problem by going in.

?When it?s a recovery, we slow down and safety becomes our issue so we don?t compound our problems,? she said.

Because of the lack of equipment and training and the time it takes for officers to respond, any similar situation at Bonnifield Lake in the future also will inevitably end in recovery, not rescue, she said.

?It?s always going to be a recovery effort,? Harvey said. ?That?s the reality.?

Harvey said since Harl?s drowning, police and fire department officials have jointly discussed possible changes that might help tighten safety at the lake. Ultimately, however, officials agree investing in costly water safety and rescue equipment might help create a false sense of security at the lake. A boat and related rescue equipment would cost the departments an estimated $20,000, an amount difficult to justify when economic times are tough and the equipment might never be used.

Even having the equipment on the water?s edge would not guarantee a successful rescue, Harvey said. According to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, a child can drown in a mere 20 seconds. Typically, rescuers have a two- to three-minute window in which to rescue a drowning victim and start resuscitation efforts. Once a person has been without oxygen longer than three minutes, it is unlikely he or she could be revived without suffering brain damage, Harvey said.

?If we do anything more than what we?re already doing, we create additional liability for the city and we give a false sense of security,? she said.

?We just need to close it,? said Harvey.

Coming Tuesday: With people on both sides of the lake debate feeling frustrated, hurt and weary, how can opponents and proponents of the controversy come together going forward? Can safety be improved? Is compromise possible? What will be the final fate of the Bonnifield Beach?