DOCSLIB.ORG

Enhancing an Urban Resource: Watershed Assessment and Management Plan for Monona Bay, Madison, Wisconsin

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Enhancing an Urban Resource: Watershed Assessment and Management Plan for Monona Bay, Madison, Wisconsin 07 2007 20 2006 Management Practicum Resources Water Studies Environmental for Nelson Institute Wisconsin–Madison of University Enhancing an Urban Resource: Enhancing an Urban Resource: Assessment and Management Plan Watershed Wisconsin Madison, Monona Bay, for Enhancing an Urban Resource, Monona Bay, Wisconsin WATER RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PRACTICUM | 2007 Cover photo by Water Resources Management Practicum 2006. Management Practicum Resources Water by photo Cover Enhancing an Urban Resource: Watershed Assessment and Management Plan for Monona Bay, Madison, Wisconsin Water Resources Management Practicum Nelson Institute for Environmental Studies University of Wisconsin–Madison A note about Web sites All URLs in this document were current at the time of publication. An Equal Educational Opportunity Institution (Title VI, Title IX) In conformance with applicable federal and state law and with university policy, the University of Wisconsin–Madison does not discriminate on the basis of age, race, color, religion, sex, national origin or ancestry, sexual orientation, arrest or conviction record, marital status, handicap, political affi liation, or veteran’s status with regard to treatment of employees and students in its educational programs or activities. Inquiries concerning this policy may be directed to appropriate campus admitting or employing units or to the Equity and Diversity Resource Center, 179A Bascom Hall, 608/263-2378. Disabled persons should contact the McBurney Disability Resource Center, 905 University Avenue, 608/263-2741 (voice/TDD), for information and referral. If you need this information in an alternative format, contact the Nelson Institute for Environmental Studies, ✆ 608/262-7996. Th e Water Resources Management Practicum is a regular part of the curriculum of the Water Resources Management (WRM) Graduate Program at the University of Wiscon- sin–Madison. Th e workshop involves an interdisciplinary team of faculty members and graduate students in the analysis of a contemporary water resources problem. Th e conclusions and recommendations are those of the graduate student authors and do not necessarily refl ect the offi cial views or policies of any of the cooperating agencies or organizations, nor does the mention of any trade names, commercial products, or com- panies constitute endorsement or recommendation for use. For more information, contact: Nelson Institute for Environmental Studies Public Information Offi ce 70 Science Hall 550 North Park Street Madison, Wisconsin 53706 ✆ 608/262-7996 www.nelson.wisc.edu Th is publication is available online at: www.nelson.wisc.edu/wrm/workshops/2006. ii Contents PREFACE xiii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS xiii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1 CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION 5 1.1 Monona Bay Setting and History 5 CHAPTER 2. WATERSHED FACTORS 7 2.1 Physical Setting 7 2.2 Hydrology 7 2.3 Land Use 9 2.4 Stormwater Quality 10 2.4.1 Overview of Urban Stormwater Problems 10 2.4.2 Stormwater Problems in the Monona Bay Watershed 12 2.4.2.1 Sources of Contamination 12 2.4.2.2 Common Pollutants 13 2.4.2.3 Nutrient Loading 14 2.4.2.4 Sedimentation 14 2.4.2.5 Flooding 15 2.4.2.6 Floatable Litter 17 2.4.3 Source Loading and Management Model Results 18 CHAPTER 3. MONONA BAY ECOLOGY 21 3.1 Shallow Lake Ecology 21 3.1.1 Eutrophication 21 3.1.2 Lake Morphometry 21 3.1.3 Roles of Algae and Aquatic Plants 21 3.1.4 Nutrient Cycling 22 3.1.4.1 Phosphorus 22 3.1.4.2 Nitrogen 23 3.1.5 Stable-State Equilibrium Theory 23 3.1.5.1 Feedback Mechanisms 24 3.2 Shoreline Composition 24 3.3 Water-Quality Data 25 3.3.1 Previous Data Collection Eff orts 25 3.3.2 Essential Nutrients and Physical Parameters 26 3.3.2.1 Phosphorus 26 3.3.2.2 Nitrogen 26 3.3.2.3 Chlorophyll-a 28 3.3.2.4 Silica 28 iii 3.3.2.5 pH 28 3.3.2.6 Temperature and Dissolved Oxygen 28 3.3.2.7 Secchi Depth 28 3.3.3 Measures of Eutrophication: Trophic State Index 29 3.4 Sediment Quality 30 3.4.1 Coring Methods 30 3.4.2 Sedimentation Sources and Rates 31 3.4.3 Bulk Composition of Sediments 31 3.4.4 Sediment Nutrients 32 3.4.5 Sediment Contamination 32 3.4.5.1 Mercury 33 3.4.5.2 Trace Metals 33 3.4.5.3 Organic Contamination 36 3.5 Aquatic Plants 37 3.5.1 Historic Aquatic Plant Growth and Management 37 3.5.1.1 Historic Diversity and Abundance 37 3.5.1.2 Arrival and Spread of Exotic Species 38 3.5.1.3 A native that can be a nuisance: Coontail 40 3.5.1.4 Historic Management 40 3.5.2 Aquatic Plant Surveys, 1990–1993 40 3.5.3 Aquatic Plant Surveys, 2005 and 2006 40 3.5.3.1 Sampling Protocol 40 3.5.3.2 Biomass Weights 42 3.5.3.3 Diversity Indices 42 3.5.4 Aquatic Plant Key Findings 42 3.5.4.1 Limitations of the Surveys 42 3.5.4.2 Most Common Species 43 3.5.4.3 Seasonal and Overall Diversity 44 3.5.4.4 Maximum Plant Depth 44 3.6 Algae and Fecal Bacteria 44 3.6.1 Fecal Bacteria 45 3.6.2 Nontoxic Filamentous and Planktonic Algae 45 3.6.2.1 Filamentous Algae in Monona Bay 45 3.6.2.2 Associated Problems 46 3.6.3 Blue-Green Algae 46 3.6.3.1 Toxins 46 3.6.3.2 Concentrations in Monona Bay 47 3.7 Fishery 47 3.7.1 Fish Species and Health 47 3.7.1.1 Panfi sh and Game Fish 47 iv 3.7.1.2 Carp 48 3.7.2 Eff ects of Aquatic Plants and Harvesting on Fish Habitat 48 3.7.3 Fish Consumption and Human Toxicity 49 3.7.3.1 Mercury and PCB Levels 49 CHAPTER 4. STAKEHOLDERS 51 4.1 Principal Land Holders and Recreational Users 51 4.2 Stakeholder Survey 52 4.2.1 Purpose and Methodology 52 4.2.2 Survey Results 52 4.2.2.1 User Groups 52 4.2.2.2 Water-Quality Perceptions 53 4.2.2.3 Support of Management Activities 53 4.2.3 Key Findings 53 CHAPTER 5. CURRENT MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES 55 5.1 Regulatory Context 55 5.1.1 Federal Regulations 55 5.1.1.1 Stormwater 55 5.1.2 State Regulations 56 5.1.2.1 Stormwater 56 5.1.2.2 Other 57 5.1.3 County Regulations 58 5.1.3.1 Stormwater 58 5.1.3.2 Other 58 5.1.4 City Regulations 59 5.1.4.1 Stormwater 59 5.1.4.2 Other 59 5.1.5 University Regulations 60 5.1.5.1 Stormwater 60 5.2 Stormwater Controls 60 5.2.1 Current Estimates of Stormwater Treatment 60 5.2.2 Street Sweeping 62 5.2.2.1 Street-Sweeping Effi ciencies 63 5.2.2.2 Street-Sweeping Study 63 5.2.3 Trash and Leaf Management 64 5.2.4 Erosion Control and Stormwater Management at Construction Sites 65 5.2.5 Stormwater-Outfall Maintenance 66 5.2.6 University of Wisconsin–Madison Water-Quality Practices 66 5.3 Shoreline Maintenance 67 5.3.1 Public and Private Owners 67 v 5.3.2 Riprap 68 5.4 Water Quality 68 5.4.1 Fecal Bacteria 68 5.4.2 Blue-Green Algae 68 5.4.2.1 SolarBees 68 5.5 Aquatic Plants 70 5.6 Outreach and Education 72 CHAPTER 6. MANAGEMENT ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS 75 6.1 Current and Future Scenarios 75 6.1.1 Potential Management Impacts 75 6.2 Stormwater Management Alternatives 75 6.2.1 Water-Quality Activities 76 6.2.1.1 Create an Erosion-Control Hotline 76 6.2.1.2 Expand Promotion of Pollution Prevention 77 6.2.1.3 Expand and Enhance Litter Prevention and Cleanup Programs 78 6.2.1.4 Expand and Enhance Street Sweeping 78 6.2.1.5 Expand Stormwater Outfall Maintenance 79 6.2.2 Stormwater-Treatment Devices 80 6.2.2.1 Catchbasin and Storm Inlet Inserts 81 6.2.2.2 Continuous Defl ective Separation Devices 82 6.2.2.3 Trash-Removal Devices 83 6.2.2.4 Media Filtration Devices 84 6.2.3 Low Impact Development 85 6.2.3.1 Porous Pavement 86 6.2.3.2 Green Roofs 87 6.2.3.3 Rain Gardens 89 6.2.3.4 Rain Barrels 90 6.2.3.5 Comprehensive LID Case Studies 91 6.2.4 Policy Tools 92 6.2.4.1 Develop a City of Madison Stormwater Master Plan 92 6.2.4.2 Expand Stormwater Components of Madison’s GRE2EN Commitment 94 6.2.4.3 Incentives for Innovative Stormwater Management 94 6.2.4.4 Expand We Conserve Program into a Comprehensive Environmental Sustainability Program 96 6.2.4.5 Develop a Stormwater Treatment Device Testing Protocol for Wisconsin 97 6.3 Shoreland Management Alternatives 98 6.3.1 Passive Restoration 99 6.3.2 Active Restoration 100 6.3.2.1 Restoring the Shoreland of Brittingham Park 100 6.4 Aquatic Plant Management Alternatives 102 vi 6.4.1 Large-Scale Dredging 103 6.4.1.1 Dredging Techniques 103 6.4.1.2 Sediment Dewatering and Disposal 104 6.4.1.3 Environmental Concerns 104 6.4.1.4 Regulations and Permitting 104 6.4.2 Biological Controls 107 6.4.3 Chemical Controls 108 6.4.3.1 Broad-Scale Chemical Control 109 6.4.3.2 Small-Scale Chemical Control 110 6.4.3.3 Small-Scale Chemical Control with Plant Restoration 111 6.4.4 Aquatic Plant Harvesting 113 6.5 Water-Quality Monitoring Alternatives 115 6.5.1 Continued Water-Quality Monitoring 115 6.6 Outreach and Education Alternatives 115 6.6.1 Educational Opportunities 116 6.6.1.1 Brochures and Fact Sheet 116 6.6.1.2 Mass Media Campaigns 116 6.6.1.3 Workshops and Demonstration Sites 116 6.6.1.4 Environmental Monitoring 116 6.6.1.5 Signage 117 6.6.1.6 Public Awareness and Education of Fish Consumption Advisories 117 6.6.1.7 Internet-Based Outreach 117 6.6.1.8 Community-Based Social Marketing 118 6.6.2 Recreational Use Confl ict Resolution 118 6.6.2.1 Trash Receptacle Modifi cation 118 6.6.2.2 Cleanup Days 118 6.6.2.3 Waterway Markers 119 6.6.2.4 Tools for Addressing Recreational Use Confl icts 119 6.6.3 Expanding Participation and Membership for the Friends of Monona Bay 119 6.6.3.1 Door-to-Door Distribution 119 6.6.3.2 Subcommittees 120 6.6.3.3 Collaboration 120 CHAPTER 7.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Lake Mendota
    wendot2gounty2rk pox qovF2xelson hr2reights gherokee tte2rk gonservtion ry fluff r S yx vke i2 rk vx f 5 xs e xq2yyh2 e 2 i 5 5 r g x e w wendot w y T 5 riivi2hF g qovernor9s sslnd gonttD2pility2nd2eess 5 uiX ht2evised2PHHQ F h 2 E2smproved2fot2vunhD2rking2vot v y y r g E2fot2vunhD2xo2rking2vot rner2rk 5 E2grryEsn2gnoeGmll2fot2ite 5 E2lkEsn2pishing2eess Q E2pishing2ier 5 hunn9s2fr E2eessile2pishing2ier R 5 U E2eessile2fot2vunh wple2fluff E2esonl2estroom 5 5 feh 5 E2tte2rk2ermit2equired V E2vunh2pee2equired furrows2rk E2uli2hone E2gmping wrshll2rk 5 B2por22detiled2desription2of2eh E2feh 229hore2pishing2votion9Y2refer2to 224hore2pishing2on2the2wdison 5 x 22ere2vkesF42evilleD2free2of E2wrin 22hrge2from2the2hr2pishing 5 22glu282hne2gounty2rksF 5 P R E2hore2pishing2votionB 5 i i rieex gevi fexgr 2 vke2wendot I42a2QDSHH9 peies i 5 u wendot e of2pish v WVRP2eres wxF2hepth2VP9 H9 IDPSH9 QDSHH9 eundnt gommon resent wuskie xF2ike 5 lleye 5 IH enney2rk wonon 5 vFwF2fss I 5 5 ingr FwF2fss W 5 nfish igle rout 5 5 reights syv 5 ues e 5 g vke2wps2re2not2intended 5 for2nvigtion2purposesF 5 5 frerly 5 ht2is22pish2gric tF2frs uegons ood2llets 5 gement2floks 5 5 5 @ll2nded2togetherA toney qiddings2rk oint por2pish2gri2votions2plese2ontt gommodore 5 the2isonsin2heprtment2of2xturl fr vke2fottom2ymolsX esoures2pish2wngerX ini 2222222222222222@THVA2PUQESWRT tmes2wdison F et frF fedrok pring prutshi oint FF2wemoril2 nion wkF wuk fF foulders pring2rror rror wuenn eond rk gF gly tumps282ngs feh oint oint erreGroofers2entls idgewter wF wrl hngerous2xvigtion
    [Show full text]
  • Seasonal Shifts in the Relative Importance of Local Versus Upstream Sources of Phosphorus to Individual Lakes in a Chain
    Aquat Sci DOI 10.1007/s00027-016-0504-1 Aquatic Sciences RESEARCH ARTICLE Seasonal shifts in the relative importance of local versus upstream sources of phosphorus to individual lakes in a chain 1 2 Cory P. McDonald • Richard C. Lathrop Received: 29 September 2015 / Accepted: 27 August 2016 Ó Springer International Publishing 2016 Abstract Water quality in the Yahara chain of lakes in flushing lakes. Understanding the interaction of landscape southern Wisconsin has been degraded significantly since position, water residence time, and mixing regime can help European settlement of the region, primarily as a result of guide watershed management for water quality improve- anthropogenic nutrient inputs. While all four main lakes ments in lake chains. (Mendota, Monona, Waubesa, and Kegonsa) have under- gone eutrophication, elevated phosphorus and chlorophyll Keywords Lake chain Á Landscape limnology Á concentrations are particularly pronounced in the smaller Phosphorus Á Eutrophication lakes at the bottom of the chain (Waubesa and Kegonsa). Due to their short water residence times (2–3 months), these lakes are more responsive to seasonal variability in Introduction magnitude and source of phosphorus loading compared with the larger upstream lakes. In 2014, more than 80 % of Many regions of the world contain lake chains—lakes and the phosphorus load to Lake Waubesa passed through the rivers connected in a series of alternating lentic and lotic outlet of Lake Monona (situated immediately upstream). reaches (Jones 2010). The position of a lake within the However, between mid-May and late October when phos- regional flow system determines the relative importance of phorus concentrations in Lake Monona were reduced as a various hydrologic inputs to the lake (Kratz et al.
    [Show full text]
  • Phytoplankton and Primary Production
    Phytoplankton and Primary Production Phagotrophic dinoflagellates Cryptomonads & photosynthetic Chain Forming diatoms Diatoms Green algae Blue Green algae (Cyanobacteria) Anabaena Productivity: rate at which organic matter is produced Microcystis Production: Total organic matter produced Relationship Between Primary Productivity Lakes are Categorized According to their Level of and Phytoplankton Biomass (Production) Productivity or “Trophic State” More Productive For conditions in which nutrients are limited Less Productive Biomass Productivity g Carbon . m-3. day-1 (Production) Oligotrophic Mesotrophic Eutrophic g Carbon . m-3 Greater Water Clarity : 10 m Less Water Clarity: 2.5 m Less Algae : 1.7 µg/L Chl a More Algae : > 14 µg/L Chl a Lower Phosphorus : < 8 µg/L More Phosphorus: 16 µg/L time PHOSPHORUS AND CHLOROPHYLL CONCENTRATIONS AND SECCHI DISK DEPTHS CHARACTERISTIC OF THE TROPHIC CLASSIFICATION OF LAKES Phosphorus Concentrations Vary Across the Western Finger Lakes MEASURED PARAMETER Oligotrophic Mesotrophic Eutrophic Total Phosphorus (µg/L) AVG 8 26.7 84.4 Range 3.0- 17.7 10.7- 95.6 16-386 Chlorophyll a (µg/L) AVG 1.7 4.7 14.3 Range 0.3 - 4.5 3 – 11 3 – 78 Secchi Disk Depth (m) AVG 9.9 4.2 2.45 Range 5.4 - 28.3 1.5 – 8.1 0.8 – 7.0 Table I – Data from Wetzel, 1983 Source: CSLAP data Chlorophyll Concentrations Are Relatively Low In Conesus Lake Cycle of Phytoplankton Production and Biomass in Temperate Lakes Source: CSLAP data Start of Spring bloom Autumn bloom fall Summer turnover Dry Period & fallout Surface temperature in a
    [Show full text]
  • TIEE Teaching Issues and Experiments in Ecology - Volume 3, April 2005
    TIEE Teaching Issues and Experiments in Ecology - Volume 3, April 2005 ISSUES : DATA SET Changes in Lake Ice: Ecosystem Response to Global Change Robert E. Bohanan, Center for Biology Education, University of Wisconsin – Madison, Madison, WI 53706, [email protected] Marianne Krasny, Department of Natural Resources, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, 14853, [email protected] Adam Welman, Center for the Environment, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, 14853 THE ECOLOGICAL QUESTION: Is there evidence for global warming in long term data on changes in dates of ice cover in three Wisconsin Lakes? ECOLOGICAL CONTENT: Effects of climate change on ecological systems. WHAT STUDENTS DO: Students plot more than 100 years of data on dates of "ice on" and "ice off" and duration of ice cover for three Wisconsin Lakes. They examine patterns of variation at different time scales to see the importance of long-term data. SKILLS: Interpreting data, making inferences from trends or patterns in data, making spatial and temporal comparisons of ecological systems. ASSESSABLE OUTCOMES: Interpretation of data, analyzing trends and patterns in spatial and temporal data, and constructing explanations about the links between abiotic and biotic factors on ecological systems from large-scale data. SOURCE: North Temperate Lakes LTER archive (http://lterquery.limnology.wisc.edu/abstract_new.jsp?id=PHYS) TIEE, Volume 3 © 2005 - Robert E. Bohanan and the Ecological Society of America. Teaching Issues and Experiments in Ecology (TIEE) is a project of the Education and Human Resources Committee of the Ecological Society of America (http://tiee.ecoed.net). page 2 Robert E. Bohanan, Marianne Krasny, Adam Welman TIEE Volume 3, April 2005 OVERVIEW Note: the overview is written for faculty but can be used as the basis for an introduction to the data set for students.
    [Show full text]
  • Simulation of the Effects of Operating Lakes Mendota, Monona, And
    Simulation of the Effects of Operating Lakes Mendota, Monona, and Waubesa, South-Central Wisconsin, as Multipurpose Reservoirs to Maintain Dry-Weather Flow By William R. Krug U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Open-File Report 99-67 Prepared in cooperation with the DANE COUNTY REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION WISCONSIN GEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY SURVEY Middleton, Wisconsin 1999 USGS science for a changing world U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR BRUCE BABBITT, Secretary U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Charles G. Groat, Director The use of firm, trade, and brand names in this report is for identification purposes only and does not constitute endorsement by the U.S. Geological Survey. For additional information write to: Copies of this report can be purchased from: District Chief U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Geological Survey Branch of Information Services 8505 Research Way Box 25286 Middleton, Wl 53562-3586 Denver, CO 80225-0286 CONTENTS Abstract................................................................................................................................................................................. 1 Introduction.............................................................................................._^ 1 Purpose and scope....................................................................................................................................................... 2 Physical setting ..........................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Lakes in Winter
    NORTH AMERICAN LAKE NONPROFIT ORG. MANAGEMENT SOCIETY US POSTAGE 1315 E. Tenth Street PAID Bloomington, IN 47405-1701 Bloomington, IN Permit No. 171 Lakes in Winter in Lakes L L INE Volume 34, No. 4 • Winter 2014 Winter • 4 No. 34, Volume AKE A publication of the North American Lake Management Society Society Management Lake American North the of publication A AKE INE Contents L L Published quarterly by the North American Lake Management Society (NALMS) as a medium for exchange and communication among all those Volume 34, No. 4 / Winter 2014 interested in lake management. Points of view expressed and products advertised herein do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of NALMS or its Affiliates. Mention of trade names and commercial products shall not constitute 4 From the Editor an endorsement of their use. All rights reserved. Standard postage is paid at Bloomington, IN and From the President additional mailing offices. 5 NALMS Officers 6 NALMS 2014 Symposium Highlights President 11 2014 NALMS Awards Reed Green Immediate Past-President 15 2014 NALMS Photo Contest Winners Terry McNabb President-Elect 16 2014 NALMS Election Results Julie Chambers Secretary Sara Peel Lakes in Winter Treasurer Michael Perry 18 Lake Ice: Winter, Beauty, Value, Changes, and a Threatened NALMS Regional Directors Future Region 1 Wendy Gendron 28 Fish in Winter – Changes in Latitudes, Changes in Attitudes Region 2 Chris Mikolajczyk Region 3 Imad Hannoun Region 4 Jason Yarbrough 32 A Winter’s Tale: Aquatic Plants Under Ice Region 5 Melissa Clark Region 6 Julie Chambers 38 A Winter Wonderland . of Algae Region 7 George Antoniou Region 8 Craig Wolf 44 Water Monitoring Region 9 Todd Tietjen Region 10 Frank Wilhelm 48 Winter Time Fishery at Lake Pyhäjärvi Region 11 Anna DeSellas Region 12 Ron Zurawell At-Large Nicki Bellezza Student At-Large Ted Harris 51 Literature Search LakeLine Staff Editor: William W.
    [Show full text]
  • AMENDMENT Aquatic Plant Management Plan, Lake Mendota, Lower Rock River Basin, Dane County Wisconsin
    AMENDMENT Aquatic Plant Management Plan, Lake Mendota, Lower Rock River Basin, Dane County Wisconsin Approved by the Dane County Lakes and Watershed Commission on April 10, 2014 and by the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources on March 27, 2014 Prepared by Sue Jones, Dane County Office of Lakes and Watersheds, with assistance from Jim Leverance, Darren Marsh, and Pat Sheahan. Mapping by Michelle Richardson, Dane County Land and Water Resources Department, Administration Division. Plant surveys conducted by James Scharl of Stantec Consulting Services Inc. (2011) for the Dane County Office of Lakes and Watersheds. The Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources provided funding to the Office of Lakes and Watersheds to support this plan amendment. Introduction This is an update to the Aquatic Plant Management Plan, Lake Mendota, Lower Rock River Basin, Dane County Wisconsin, published in January 2007 by the Dane County Office of Lakes and Watersheds. The Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources approved the 2007 plan on March 17, 2007 and the Dane County Lakes and Watershed Commission approved the plan on April 12, 2007. Aquatic Plant Management Plans are required under NR 109.04(d), Wisconsin Administrative Code, to guide mechanical harvesting activities and the effective management of aquatic plants in water bodies. This plan is prepared in support of Dane County’s permit for its mechanical aquatic plant harvesting program, operated in accordance with NR 109 Wisconsin Administrative Code. Individuals and groups that propose herbicide treatments of aquatic plants in Dane County waters would need to go through a separate planning and permitting process with the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources.
    [Show full text]
  • Evaluation of Cyanotoxins in the Farmington Bay, Great Salt Lake, Utah
    Evaluation of Cyanotoxins in the Farmington Bay, Great Salt Lake, Utah. Nodularin Dr. Ramesh Goel Assistant Professor Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering University of Utah & Leland Myers District Manager Central Davis Sewer District 2627 W Shepard Lane Kaysville, UT 84039 (801) 451-2190 Project Report March, 2009 ABSTRACT The presence of toxic cyanobacteria in several marine environments world wide is well documented. However, the presence of cyanobacteria in the Farmington Bay of the Great Salt Lake, Utah, is largely unexplored. Recently, a great concern is being raised over severe eutrophication in the Farmington Bay due to the presence and the inflow of nutrients in the bay from various sources. Excess growth of algae, especially during summer months, has been observed in the Farmington Bay. In brackish waters, such as in the Great Salt Lake, the cyanobaceria belonging to the genus Nodularia generally occurs and produces the toxin nodularin. This study quantified nodularin in representative and homogeneous water samples collected from six different locations in the Farmington Bay of the Great Salt Lake at four different occasions during the summer of 2008. A significant portion of the research was also devoted to analytical method development and quality control tests in our laboratory. An ultra performance liquid chromatography-based analytical method was developed for nodularin found in brackish waters. When deionized water was spiked with nodularin to give a final concentration of 1 μg/L, more than 99 % toxins could be recovered from deionized water, thus demonstrating the ability of the newly developed method to detect and quantify low concentrations of nodularin.
    [Show full text]
  • State of the Lakes Report Shows the Impact and Accelerate the Adoption of Effective Solutions
    WHAT CLOSED OUR BEACHES? LAKE BY LAKE REPORT A look at beach closure data and A breakdown of the state of each the cause of closures of the Yahara lakes PG. 43 (CENTER)SOTL PG. 45 - 49 Volunteer water quality monitor Greater Madison Lake Guide training| Summer on 2020Lake Mendota39 STATE OF THE LAKES WHAT HAPPENS ON THE LAND, IMPACTS THE LAKES View of Wisconsin State Capitol over Lake Mendota The Yahara River Watershed encompasses lakes Mendota, large number of beach closures. These conditions can be Monona, Wingra, Waubesa, and Kegonsa, and is home to a tied in part to wetter than normal weather. Large runoff fast-growing population and some of the most productive events, especially in the late winter when the ground was farmland in the United States. The intersection of frozen, contributed to the highest annual phosphorus productive farms and growing urban areas presents unique loading since the 1990s. Overall, phosphorus loading was challenges as we work to improve water quality. 2019 also saw 146 days of beach closures, or 39 more closure days than the long-term median (2010-2019). landscape. Many of the decisions we make on the land Cyanobacteria blooms were the primary cause of the 2019 impact the health of our lakes, from how we manage beach closures, and were likely made worse by invasive manure, to how much winter salt we use. zebra mussels. Zebra mussels (see page 26) consume At Clean Lakes Alliance, we focus on curbing the biggest cyanobacteria—which compete for the same nutrients and culprit of our water quality problems—phosphorus sunlight—largely untouched.
    [Show full text]
  • MONITORING BEACH HEALTH Public Health Madison & Dane County Monitors Dane County Area Beaches for E
    MONITORING BEACH HEALTH Public Health Madison & Dane County monitors Dane County area beaches for E. coli bacteria and blue-green algae. Our goal is to prevent harmful bacteria and toxins from making people ill while they enjoy our area lakes and beaches. We test for… E. coli bacteria Waterborne pathogens are most commonly bacteria, viruses or Beaches monitored by Public parasites originating from human or animal feces and are associated with illnesses among swimmers. Health Madison & Dane County Because testing for multiple pathogens is time-consuming and Lake Mendota: expensive, scientists and beach managers use indicator James Madison organisms for monitoring. For freshwaters, Escherichia coli Lake Mendota County Park Marshall (E. coli) is the best indicator for the presence of pathogens that Memorial Union can make people sick. Spring Harbor Tenney Cyanobacteria (blue-green algae) Warner Photosynthetic bacteria, called cyanobacteria can form harmful Lake Monona: algal blooms in freshwater that can be toxic to people and BB Clarke animals, causing a variety of symptoms. Bernies Brittingham Favorable conditions, including high nutrient levels, sunshine Esther and other factors can promote development of dense Frost Woods populations of cyanobacteria. Hudson Olbrich Olin How beach monitoring information is Schluter communicated Lake Waubesa: We close beaches when the presence of E. coli and Goodland cyanobacteria pose a risk to health and well-being. Lake Wingra: www.publichealthmdc.com/beaches Vilas Email notifications Stewart Lake: Sign-up on the beaches website page Stewart Lake /publichealthmdc /publichealthmdc Signs at the beach www.publichealthmdc.com/beaches June 2018 Monitoring Beach Health When do we collect samples? E.
    [Show full text]
  • Predicting the Occurrence of Stunted Bluegill Populations
    PREDICTING THE OCCURRENCE OF STUNTED BLUEGILL POPULATIONS FROM WISCONSIN LAKE FEATURES By Jennifer Marie Hurt A Thesis Submitted in partial fulfillment of the Requirements of the degree MASTERS OF SCIENCE IN NATURAL RESOURCES (FISHERIES) College of Natural Resources UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN Stevens Point, Wisconsin December 2007 Al'l'ROVED BY'l'HECRADU:\TE COM\fiTTF.F. OF: D:. :\.fic,1ac. J. J-fo.u~n, Cormma::e Ch~1n:,~n l)rofcssor ofFish~i~ Collr,gr. ofN°a!'l.uat Resomcei !'j,') !ti,t, IL/ "I>" . -1,_~- Ji?.:v,,:>.- D,. R.ob"1t .'.:Holsm,:o A~,;i~la;1l Pn,feoesor ofCOilServatio."l Lat\• .:.nd '\','jltl!if~ n::lci(C of)1J~t1m1l ltr.SCl'l!J'Qa~ ---~v.1. .O..:."' ...r~/""/,;e.=_- ---­ ~nc:y A. N~t('\ Fishec jes D;llahH.:;c Coor,!:ruitc1J: ·~V!3co!lSjn De1>arlmc:11l orN;:.(urai Rc:;ou·.-r,r:5 ABSTRACT Bluegill stunting (poor growth and small size) is a fishery management problem in Wisconsin. Wisconsin has over 15,000 lakes and surveying each lake is not feasible due to lack of resources (personnel, money and time). Classifying lakes based on ecological and limnological similarities may provide a way to account for differences among lakes without having to survey all lakes. My objective was to classify stunted and non-stunted bluegill populations using features of Wisconsin lakes. Before I addressed my main objective, two subordinate objectives were addressed to establish data needs and define a stunted bluegill population for Wisconsin lakes. First, I determined if size selectivity of bluegills differed between electrofishing and Fyke netting in Wisconsin lakes.
    [Show full text]
  • 2018 Yahara Chain of Lakes Flooding Technical Work Group Report
    2018 Yahara Chain of Lakes Flooding Technical Work Group Report Photo of flooding in Tenney Park with Lake Mendota in the background. Courtesy of Rick Lange (Dane County Sheriff Office) performing drone footage of flooding in August 2018. February 1, 2019 Table of Contents 1.0 Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................ 1 2.0 Introduction ........................................................................................................................................... 2 2.1 The Yahara Lakes and Flooding .......................................................................................................... 4 2.2 2018 Water Levels and Management ................................................................................................ 7 3.0 Technical Approach ................................................................................................................................ 9 3.1 INFOS Framework .............................................................................................................................. 9 3.2 INFOS Model Performance .............................................................................................................. 10 3.2.1 Comparison between Modeled and Observed Lake Levels ...................................................... 10 3.2.2 Comparison between Modeled and Observed River Water Surface Profiles ........................... 11 3.2.3 Comparison between Modeled
    [Show full text]