DOCSLIB.ORG

Upper Mississippi River-Brainerd Watershed Monitoring and Assessment Report

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Upper Mississippi River-Brainerd Watershed Monitoring and Assessment Report Watershed health May 2019 Upper Mississippi River-Brainerd Watershed Monitoring and Assessment Report Authors Chad R. Anderson, Joe Hadash, Cadie Olsen, Sophia Vaughan, Anthony J. Dingmann, Mike Bourdaghs, Bruce Monson Contributors/acknowledgements Citizen Stream Monitoring Program Volunteers Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Minnesota Department of Health Minnesota Department of Agriculture Aitkin County SWCD Crow Wing SWCD Central Lakes College - Natural Resources Program The MPCA is reducing printing and mailing costs by using the Internet to distribute reports and information to wider audience. Visit our website for more information. MPCA reports are printed on 100% post-consumer recycled content paper manufactured without chlorine or chlorine derivatives. Project dollars provided by the Clean Water Fund (from the Clean Water, Land and Legacy Amendment). Minnesota Pollution Control Agency 520 Lafayette Road North | Saint Paul, MN 55155-4194 | 651-296-6300 | 800-657-3864 | Or use your preferred relay service. | [email protected] This report is available in alternative formats upon request, and online at www.pca.state.mn.us. Document number: wq-ws3-07010104b Table of contents List of acronyms .............................................................................................................................. viii Executive summary ............................................................................................................................1 Introduction ......................................................................................................................................2 The watershed monitoring approach ............................................................................................................... 3 Assessment methodology ................................................................................................................................ 6 Watershed overview ...................................................................................................................................... 11 Watershed-wide data collection methodology .............................................................................................. 24 Individual aggregated 12-HUC subwatershed results ......................................................................... 28 Aggregated 12-HUC subwatersheds .............................................................................................................. 28 Lower Rice River Aggregated 12-HUC HUC 0701010401-01 ............................................................... 29 Upper Rice River Aggregated 12-HUC HUC 0701010401-02 ............................................................... 33 Ripple River Aggregated 12-HUC HUC 0701010402-01 .............................................................................. 38 Little Willow River Aggregated 12-HUC HUC 0701010403-01 ..................................... 43 City of Aitkin-Mississippi River Aggregated 12-HUC HUC 0701010404-01 ..................................... 48 Cedar Creek Aggregated 12-HUC HUC 0701010404-02 ..................................... 52 Sisabagamah Creek Aggregated 12-HUC HUC 0701010404-03 ..................................... 56 City of Brainerd-Mississippi River Aggregated 12-HUC HUC 0701010405-01 ..................................... 60 Rabbit River Aggregated 12-HUC HUC 0701010405-02 ..................................... 68 Nokasippi River Aggregated 12-HUC HUC 0701010406-01 ..................................... 71 Daggett Brook Aggregated 12-HUC HUC 0701010406-02 ..................................... 76 Little Elk River Aggregated 12-HUC HUC 0701010407-01 ..................................... 79 Swan River Aggregated 12-HUC HUC 0701010408-01 ..................................... 84 City of Little Falls-Mississippi River Aggregated 12-HUC HUC 0701010409-01 ..................................... 89 Pike Creek Aggregated 12-HUC HUC 0701010409-02 ..................................... 92 Watershed-wide results and discussion ............................................................................................ 94 Stream water quality ...................................................................................................................................... 94 Lake water quality .......................................................................................................................................... 96 Fish contaminant results ................................................................................................................................ 97 Pollutant load monitoring ............................................................................................................................ 106 Stream flow .................................................................................................................................................. 112 Wetland condition ........................................................................................................................................ 113 Transparency trends for the Upper Mississippi River-Brainerd Watershed ................................................ 119 Remote sensing for lakes in the Upper Mississippi River-Brainerd Watershed ........................................... 119 Priority waters for protection and restoration in the Upper Mississippi River-Brainerd Watershed .......... 120 i Summaries and recommendations ................................................................................................. 122 Literature cited .............................................................................................................................. 125 Appendix 1 – Water chemistry definitions ................................................................................................... 128 Appendix 2.1 – Intensive watershed monitoring water chemistry stations in the Upper Mississippi River – Brainerd Watershed ..................................................................................................................................... 129 Appendix 2.2 – Intensive watershed monitoring biological monitoring stations in the Upper Mississippi River– Brainerd Watershed .......................................................................................................................... 130 Appendix 3.1 – Minnesota statewide IBI thresholds and confidence limits ................................................ 132 Appendix 3.2 – Biological monitoring results – fish IBI (assessable reaches) .............................................. 133 Appendix 3.3 – Biological monitoring results – invert IBI (assessable reaches) ........................................... 136 Appendix 4.1 – Fish species found during biological monitoring surveys .................................................... 139 Appendix 4.2 – Macroinvertebrate species found during biological monitoring surveys ........................... 140 Appendix 5 – Minnesota Stream Habitat Assessment Results..................................................................... 149 Appendix 6 – Lake protection and prioritization results .............................................................................. 151 Appendix 7 – Stream protection and prioritization results .......................................................................... 156 ii Figures Figure 1. The Intensive Watershed Monitoring Design. ............................................................................... 4 Figure 2. Intensive watershed monitoring sites for streams in the Upper Mississippi River-Brainerd Watershed..................................................................................................................................................... 4 Figure 3. Monitoring locations of local groups, citizens and the MPCA lake monitoring staff in the Upper Mississippi River-Brainerd Watershed. ......................................................................................................... 6 Figure 4. Flowchart of aquatic life use assessment process. ...................................................................... 10 Figure 5. The Upper Mississippi River-Brainerd Watershed within the Northern Lakes and Forest and North Central Hardwoods ecoregions of central Minnesota. .................................................................... 11 Figure 6. Land use in the Upper Mississippi River-Brainerd Watershed. ................................................... 12 Figure 7. Map of percent altered streams by major watershed (8-HUC). .................................................. 14 Figure 8. Comparison of natural to altered streams in the Upper Mississippi River-Brainerd Watershed (percentages derived from the Statewide Altered Water Course project). ............................................... 15 Figure 9. Statewide precipitation total (left) and precipitation departure (right) during 2016 (Source: DNR State Climatology Office, 2019) .................................................................................................................. 16 Figure 10. Precipitation trends in East Central Minnesota from 1997-2016 (left) and 1917-2016 (right) (Source: WRCC, 2018) ................................................................................................................................. 16 Figure 11. Precipitation trends in Central Minnesota from 1997-2016 (left) and 1917-2016 (right) (Source: WRCC, 2018) ................................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Southwest Missouri Water Quality Improvement Project (Wqip) Elk River Basin Water Quality Gap
    SOUTHWEST MISSOURI WATER QUALITY IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (WQIP) ELK RIVER BASIN WATER QUALITY GAP November 2008 PREPARED FOR: Environmental Resources Coalition 3118 Emerald Lane Jefferson City, Missouri 65109 PREPARED BY: MEC Water Resources, Inc. 1123 Wilkes Boulevard, Suite 400 Columbia, Missouri 65201 Ozarks Environmental Water Resources Institute, Missouri State University Temple Hall 328 901 South National Avenue Springfield, Missouri 65897 (page intentionally left blank) Southwest Missouri Water Quality Improvement Project Missouri State University Elk River Basin Water Quality Gap Analysis MEC Water Resources, Inc. TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY...............................................................................................................................................vii I. INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................................................................................1 II. STUDY AREA ................................................................................................................................................................3 2.1. Basin Characteristics..................................................................................................3 2.2. Population and Land Use............................................................................................3 2.3. Permitted Point Source Discharges ..........................................................................7 2.4. Geology and Soils .....................................................................................................11
    [Show full text]
  • Stream Restoration of Tanyard Creek in the Little Sugar Creek Watershed B
    1. Cover Page: 2012 State Wildlife Grant Pre-Proposal a. Title of Project: Stream Restoration of Tanyard Creek in the Little Sugar Creek Watershed b. Project Summary: A 2,500 foot section of Tanyard Creek will be enhanced and restored. Unstable streambanks and excessive woody debris are compromising the aquatic and terrestrial habitat of this Karst area, and accelerated streambank erosion is contributing approximately 1,600,000 lbs/yr of sediment and 200 lbs/yr of total phosphorus to the Little Sugar Creek basin. Aquatic habit is limited from severe sedimentation which has diminished riffle/pool features and from stream instability resulting in degradation of the riparian area. A natural channel design approach will be used to restore and enhance the channel in a manner that reduces streambank erosion, transports sediment efficiently, and improves the riparian area and aquatic habitat for 13 SGCNs. c. Project Leader: Sandi Formica, Executive Director Watershed Conservation Resource Center 380 West Rock, Fayetteville, AR 72701 [email protected], 501-352-5252 d. Project Partners: Darrell Bowman, Lake Ecology/Fisheries Manager, Bella Vista Village Property Owners Association (Bella Vista POA); [email protected], (479) 855-5068 Drew Holts, Executive Director, Elk River Watershed Improvement Association (Elk River WIA), [email protected], (417) 223-3414 Steve Filipek, Assistant Chief Special Programs, Arkansas Game & Fish Commission (AG&FC), [email protected], 501- 223-6369 David Casaletto, President, Ozark Water Watch and Multi-Basin Regional Water Council, [email protected], (417) 739-4100 e. Project Budget: Amount of SWG Funds Requested: $70,000 (37%) Total Matching Funds Provided: $121,000 (63%) Total Project Cost: $191,000 1 2.
    [Show full text]
  • Species Biological Report Neosho Mucket (Lampsilis Rafinesqueana)
    Species Biological Report Neosho Mucket (Lampsilis rafinesqueana) Cover photo: Dr. Chris Barnhart (Missouri State University) Prepared by: The Neosho Mucket Recovery Team This species biological report informs the Draft Recovery Plan for the Neosho Mucket (Lampsilis rafinesqueana) (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2017). The Species Biological Report is a comprehensive biological status review by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) for the Neosho Mucket and provides an account of species overall viability. A Recovery Implementation Strategy, which provides the expanded narrative for the recovery activities and the implementation schedule, is available at https://www.fws.gov/arkansas-es/. The Recovery Implementation Strategy and Species Biological Report are finalized separately from the Recovery Plan and will be updated on a routine basis. Executive Summary The Neosho Mucket is a freshwater mussel endemic to the Illinois, Neosho, and Verdigris River basins in Arkansas, Kansas, Missouri, and Oklahoma. It is associated with shallow riffles and runs comprising gravel substrate and moderate to swift currents, but prefers near-shore areas or areas out of the main current in Shoal Creek and Illinois River. It does not occur in reservoirs lacking riverine characteristics. The life-history traits and habitat requirements of the Neosho Mucket make it extremely susceptible to environmental change (e.g., droughts, sedimentation, chemical contaminants). Mechanisms leading to the decline of Neosho Mucket range from local (e.g., riparian clearing, chemical contaminants, etc.), to regional influences (e.g., altered flow regimes, channelization, etc.), to global climate change. The synergistic (interaction of two or more components) effects of threats are often complex in aquatic environments, making it difficult to predict changes in mussel and fish host(s) distribution, abundance, and habitat availability that may result from these effects.
    [Show full text]
  • Mcdonald Countycounty Missourimissouri States...And It Territories...For the Protection of Life and Property
    National Weather Service “To provide weather and flood Natural Hazard Risk Assessment warnings, public forecasts and Information For: advisories for all of the United McDonaldMcDonald CountyCounty MissouriMissouri States...and it territories...for the protection of life and property. Information Provided By WFO Springfield, Mo National Weather Service 2009 Update Includes data and information through December 2008 5808 W Hwy EE Springfield, Mo. 65802 Phone: 417-864-8535 Email: [email protected] [email protected] National Weather Service Table of Contents Local Climatology Averages and records for Anderson, Missouri in McDonald County Overview of Weather Hazards in Southwest Missouri 2 Normal Normal Normal Normal Record Record Record Record Historical information for McDonald County Missouri 3 High Low Precip. Snow High Low Precip. Snow Tornado Information 4 Jan 45 22 2.00 4.4 78 -21 5.63 23.0 Severe Hail, Lightning, Wind and Winter Weather 5 Feb 51 27 2.01 3.0 86 -21 6.41 16.6 Flooding 6 Mar 61 36 3.75 2.1 90 -4 10.79 24.0 Heat , Drought and Wildfires 7 Apr 70 44 4.14 0 93 6 9.09 4.0 Dam Failure 8 Historic Weather in Southwest Missouri 9 May 76 53 4.75 0 93 27 16.07 0 Local Climatology 10 Jun 84 62 4.58 0 100 39 10.96 0 Jul 89 66 3.21 0 112 44 11.30 0 Aug 88 64 3.50 0 108 42 8.26 0 Sept 80 57 4.76 0 104 27 12.18 0 Oct 71 45 3.48 0 96 13 9.11 0.5 Nov 58 35 4.41 1.1 86 0 9.09 8.0 Dec 48 26 3.01 2.7 80 -18 6.89 14.3 Links for Climate information www.crh.noaa.gov/sgf/ www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/ www4.ncdc.noaa.gov This document is intended to provide general information on severe weather that has affected McDonald County and the communities with in the county.
    [Show full text]
  • Sample County History Submission
    1 Sample County History Submissions of county history articles should include all of the following elements indicated in bold type. Title: McDonald County Region: Southwest County seat: Pineville Established: March 3, 1849 Population: 23,073 (2010 Census) Area: 539.48 square miles (2010 Census) Author: Kimberly Harper About the Author: Kimberly Harper is the associate editor at the State Historical Society of Missouri. She lives in Columbia. Author’s email address and/or phone number: (please include contact information, which will be kept private) Summary (provides the first paragraph of text for the article and is included in the word count): Located in the southwest corner of Missouri, McDonald County borders Arkansas and Oklahoma. Situated within the Ozark Plateau, it is characterized by a mixture of rugged hills, scenic ridges and river valleys, rolling prairie, towering limestone bluffs, and upland forest. The origins of its nickname, “Snake County,” are obscure, but the name may have been prompted by the large number of snakes found in and around the county’s many streams and caves. Although it remains predominantly rural, McDonald County is included in the Fayetteville-Springdale-Rogers, Arkansas, Metropolitan Statistical Area, and serves as a bedroom community for these larger Arkansas towns.1 Home to Elk River, Big and Little Sugar Creeks, and Indian Creek, it is known for its scenic beauty and tourism industry. Body text (it is preferred that the text be organized chronologically, with or without subheadings): Pre-European Exploration Archaeological excavations have shown that McDonald County has been inhabited by humans for thousands of years.2 At the time of European contact, the Osage occupied the area.
    [Show full text]
  • Water Investigations Program SURVEY of the ELK RIVER
    GEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF ALABAMA Berry H. (Nick) Tew, Jr. State Geologist Water Investigations Program SURVEY OF THE ELK RIVER SYSTEM IN ALABAMA FOR FISH SPECIES OF MODERATE TO HIGHEST CONSERVATION CONCERN: REPORT OF RESULTS FOR 2004 OPEN-FILE REPORT 0506 by Thomas E. Shepard, Patrick E. O'Neil, Stuart W. McGregor, and Maurice F. Mettee Prepared in cooperation with the Alabama Department of Conservation and Natural Resources Tuscaloosa, Alabama 2004 CONTENTS Abstract ............................................................ 1 Acknowledgments .................................................... 1 Introduction.......................................................... 2 Study area .......................................................... 3 Methods ............................................................ 6 Results and discussion................................................. 6 Conclusions ........................................................ 35 Literature cited ...................................................... 36 APPENDICES A. Collection results for fish samples in the Elk River system, 2004 . 39 B. Abundance and catch per unit effort (CPUE) for 12 fish species of conservation concern and two nonnative species in the Elk River system, 2004. 70 ILLUSTRATIONS 1. The Elk River system in Alabama and Tennessee . 4 2. Sampling stations in the Elk River system, 2004 . 11 3. Sampling stations where the boulder darter, Etheostoma wapiti, was collected in the Elk River system, 2004 ..................................... 16 4. Sampling
    [Show full text]
  • Elk River Watershed Elk River
    WV Division of Water Resources An Ecological Assessment the Elk River Watershed West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection Division of Water Resources This report summarizes the data collected in the Elk River Watershed by the Watershed Assessment Program in 1997. It includes: An Ecological Assessment of the ● ● ● ●● ●●● ● ● ● ● ●●● ● ● ● ● Elk River Watershed ● ● ●● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● Water Quality Information ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● from 151 sites; ● ● ●● ● ● ● ●●● ● ● ● ●● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●● ● ●● ● ● ●● ● ● ● ●●● ●● ● ● ●● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●●● ● ● ● ● ●● ● ● ● ●● ●● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● Fecal Coliform Bacteria (colonies / 100ml) ● 0 - 399 ● 400 - 1999 ● > 2000 60 64 80 68 Biological Health Information 74 77 76 82 62 (Macrobenthic invertebrates) 66 42 66 74 from 135 sites; 71 51 76 53 Average WVSCI Scores 70 Bad <42 43 - 53 54 - 64 65 - 71 72 - 77 Good 78 - 82 And physical habitat and landuse pattern information that help us identify and understand the impairments that are affecting the streams of West Virginia. Cropland and Pasture Deciduous Forest Land Evergreen Forest Land Residential, Urban, Industrial Mixed Forest Land Strip Mines; Quarries; and Gravel Pits Nonforested Wetlands Transitional Areas Orchards; Groves; Vineyards; Nurseries Transportation; Communications Reservoirs Watershed Assessment Program Watershed Assessment Program The Elk River Watershed 1 An Ecological Assessment of the Elk River Watershed Report number - 05050007 - 1997 prepared by: Watershed Assessment Program Division
    [Show full text]
  • Status Survey of the Western Fanshell and the Neosho Mucket in Oklahoma
    1990 c.3 OKLAHOMA <) PROJECT TITLE: STATUS SURVEY OF THE WESTERN FANSHELL AND THE NEOSHO MUCKET IN OKLAHOMA To determine the distribution and abundance of the freshwater mussels Cyprogenia aberti (Conrad) and Lampsilis rafinesqueana Frierson in Oklahoma. A survey to determine the status of the freshwater mussels, Cyprogenia aberti (Conrad) and Lampsilis rafinesqueana Frierson, in Oklahoma was completed during August and September, 1989. These species are also known by the common names of Western Fanshell and Neosho Mucket, respectively. The western fanshell is probably extinct in the state. It is known that the species formerly occurred in the Verdigris River in Oklahoma and as a result of this study, was determined that it had also existed in the Caney River. However, no evidence of living or fresh specimens was found in any river system in northeastern Oklahoma. The Neosho mucket has also disappeared from most of its former range within the state and presently only occurs in a segment of the Illinois River system extending from the Lake Frances dam near the Arkansas border to Lake Tenkiller. Protection for this species is recommended. This report describes efforts to determine the status of two species of freshwater mussels (Mollusca: Bivalvia: Unionidae) in Oklahoma. Both species are generally considered to be rare and have rather limited geographical distributions. Both species may meet the criteria of endangered species and thus it was considered important to gain some information as to their current status. Both species have been recorded in Oklahoma but their current abundance and distribution in the state were unknown. The western fanshell, Cyprogenia aberti (Conrad) was described in 1850 from specimens collected on the rapids of the Verdigris River, Chambers' Ford, Oklahoma (Johnson, 1980).
    [Show full text]
  • Rivers: Revised November 2008; Caves: Revised July 2007; Trails: Revised March 2010; High Adventure: Revised September 2007
    Everything you need to know about more than 90 of the best camps in the region Including more than 60 High Adventure opportunities Images courtesy of: http://signal.baldwincity.com/news/2011/oct/20/local-boy-scouts-troop-remained-busy-during-summer/ http://i4.ytimg.com/vi/obn8RVY_szM/mgdefault.jpg http://www/sccovington.com/philmont/trek_info/equipment/tents.htm This is a publication of Tamegonit Lodge, the Order of the Arrow lodge affiliated with the Heart of America Council, BSA. Updated: December 2012 Additional copies of this publication are available through the Program Services Department at the Heart of America Council Scout Service Center 10210 Holmes Road Kansas City, Missouri 64131 Phone: (816) 942-9333 Toll Free: (800) 776-1110 Fax: (816) 942-8086 Online: www.hoac-bsa.org Camps: Revised December 2012; Rivers: Revised November 2008; Caves: Revised July 2007; Trails: Revised March 2010; High Adventure: Revised September 2007 HOAC – Order of the Arrow – ON THE LOOSE RIVERS – Page 1 Welcome to the adventures which the scenic rivers in southern Missouri offer. In the next pages many rivers are described, both in general and by specific sections. You will also find within this section a compilation of many public outfitters, which regularly provide all necessary equipment for a canoe trip. The river sections that are profiled are probably not the exact sections of river that you will float if you rent your canoes and equipment form an outfitter. Each outfitter has “normal” floats that you may choose from, and few, if any, of these floats will match with the sections profiled in On The Loose, or with the sections any other outfitter would float! After spending some time with the River Section of On The Loose, I feel that you will agree there are many more rivers, which can be floated than the ones commonly mentioned (i.e.
    [Show full text]
  • Public Information Print Time: 09:48:19 User Name: Oamos
    Print Date: 03-Aug-20 Public Information Print Time: 09:48:19 User Name: oamos Incidents Created From: Incidents Created From: 01-Jul-20 00:00:00 To: 31-Jul-20 23:59:59; Unit Org: McDonald.LAW.MCDONALD COUNTY SO.MCSO; Unit(s): All Areas:All Event: SUSP VEH Create Date/Time: 01-Jul-20 01:12:51 Incident#: 2020-28645 Disposition: C Unit Org(s): APD, MCSO Event Location: 491 E HIGHWAY 76, ANDERSON Lat/Long: 36.649994 -94.425578 Event: EXTRA PATROL Create Date/Time: 01-Jul-20 03:13:21 Incident#: 2020-28652 Disposition: C Unit Org(s): MCSO Event Location: 100 COMMERCIAL DR, MCDONALD Lat/Long: 36.508231 -94.278518 Event: EXTRA PATROL Create Date/Time: 01-Jul-20 03:51:12 Incident#: 2020-28653 Disposition: BLD SEC Unit Org(s): MCSO Event Location: 107 GORDON HOLLOW RD, MCDONALD COUNTY Lat/Long: 36.508584 -94.282594 Event: SUSP VEH Create Date/Time: 01-Jul-20 04:12:50 Incident#: 2020-28655 Disposition: BLD SEC Unit Org(s): MCSO Event Location: 121 N ROY HILL BLVD, GOODMAN Lat/Long: 36.740994 -94.416211 Event: PAPER SERVICE LAW Create Date/Time: 01-Jul-20 06:41:30 Incident#: 2020-28658 Disposition: PAPER Unit Org(s): MCSO Event Location: 2950 ROUTE F, MCDONALD COUNTY Lat/Long: 36.672229 -94.488043 Event: PAPER SERVICE LAW Create Date/Time: 01-Jul-20 08:05:45 Incident#: 2020-28666 Disposition: NA Unit Org(s): MCSO Event Location: 798 LARK RD, MCDONALD COUNTY Lat/Long: 36.755937 -94.398257 Event: VEHICLE THEFT PAST Create Date/Time: 01-Jul-20 08:15:38 Incident#: 2020-28667 Disposition: RT Unit Org(s): MCSO Event Location: 1798 W STATE HIGHWAY 76,
    [Show full text]
  • Big Sugar, Little Sugar & Indian Creeks & Elk River
    Li lNov 14, 2015 M I S S O U R I River reports on Orvis.com Fly Fishing Fishing Reports under Resources or anglersfishinginfo.com In Southwest Missouri Float 3 miles of the Elk River from Cowskins, MO 2 hrs away. 1hr 44min Cowskin Canoe Rental, (417) 775-2448 36.63260 -94.58582 1hr 52min Wayside Campground, 6 mile $40, (417) 475-3230 36.54876 -94.49532 1hr 55min Two Sons Floats & Camping, 4 & 8 Mile $35, (417) 475-4774 36.56175 -94.47538 1hr 56min Shady Beach Campgrounds, 5 miles $35, (800) 745-6481 36.57950 -94.46470 1hr 59 min Elk River Floats, 6 mile $40, (417) 475-3230 36.58615 -94.45493 2hrs 1min Elk River Floats & Campground, 6 mile $40, (417) 475-3561 36.54784 -94.45938 2hrs 3min Kozy Camp, 8 mile $40, (417) 223-4586 36.58945 -94.38888 2hrs 5min Gracie's Canoe Camp, $20 / person, (417)223-4413 36.58693 -94.39090 2hrs 6 min Lazy Days Campground, 4-8 mile $32, (417) 223-3498 36.57905 -94.40536 Big Sugar Creek & Elk River The Elk River & its tributary, Big Sugar Creek, are favorite float with canoeists. Big Sugar has good camping & fishing in the Pineville & Noel areas. Big Sugar Creek Accesses McDonald county 0.0 In high water, a put-in may be made on Big Sugar at the Roller Bridge 36.57463 -94.14139 . Hwy 90 & KK. A CR parallels much of the creek from here to Powell. 5.5 Powell. Road is close to creek & bridges make this a good put-in area.
    [Show full text]
  • Elk River Watershed and Inventory Assessment
    Elk River Watershed and Inventory Assessment Rick Horton, Fisheries Biologist. Missouri Department of Conservation, Springfield, Missouri 2630 N. Mayfair Springfield, MO 65803 Table of Contents Executive Summary ...................................................................................................................................... 4 Location ........................................................................................................................................................ 6 Geology....................................................................................................................................................... 13 Physiographic Region............................................................................................................................. 13 Geology and Soils................................................................................................................................... 13 Watershed Area ...................................................................................................................................... 14 Stream Order........................................................................................................................................... 14 Channel Gradient.................................................................................................................................... 14 Land Use ....................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]