DOCSLIB.ORG

The Condition of Rivers and Streams in Minnesota, Based on Probabilistic Surveys, 1995-2011 Report

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Condition of Rivers and Streams in Minnesota, Based on Probabilistic Surveys, 1995-2011 Report This document is made available electronically by the Minnesota Legislative Reference Library as part of an ongoing digital archiving project. http://www.leg.state.mn.us/lrl/lrl.asp The Condition of Rivers and Streams in Minnesota Based on Probabilistic Surveys, 1995-2011 April 2014 Authors April Lueck Scott Niemela Contributors/acknowledgements Daniel Helwig Glenn Skuta Tony Olson Tom Kincaid The MPCA is reducing printing and mailing costs John Genet by using the Internet to distribute reports and Joel Chirhart information to wider audience. Visit our Kristofor Parson website for more information. John Sandburg MPCA reports are printed on 100% post- Andrew Petersen consumer recycled content paper North Biological Monitoring Unit manufactured without chlorine or chlorine South Biological Monitoring Unit derivatives. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency 520 Lafayette Road North | Saint Paul, MN 55155-4194 | www.pca.state.mn.us | 651-296-6300 Toll free 800-657-3864 | TTY 651-282-5332 This report is available in alternative formats upon request, and online at www.pca.state.mn.us . Document number: wq-bsm1-08 Contents Executive summary .................................................................................................................................... 1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................... 3 Methods ..................................................................................................................................................... 6 Site selection ........................................................................................................................................... 6 Sampling protocol ................................................................................................................................... 6 Threshold establishment ........................................................................................................................ 7 Index of biological integrity ................................................................................................................. 7 Water chemistry .................................................................................................................................. 8 Habitat ................................................................................................................................................. 9 Statistical methods ................................................................................................................................. 9 Results ........................................................................................................................................................ 11 Condition estimations ............................................................................................................................. 11 Site conditions ..................................................................................................................................... 11 Water chemistry .................................................................................................................................. 17 Biological ............................................................................................................................................. 21 Cumulative distribution functions .......................................................................................................... 25 Minnesota habitat assessment ........................................................................................................... 25 Human disturbance score ................................................................................................................... 25 Watershed land use ............................................................................................................................. 27 Water chemistry .................................................................................................................................. 29 Biological ............................................................................................................................................. 32 Cumulative distribution functions test ................................................................................................... 34 Factors influencing biological condition ................................................................................................. 36 Biological cumulative distribution functions test ................................................................................ 36 Condition probability analysis ................................................................................................................ 38 Watershed land use ............................................................................................................................. 40 Habitat ................................................................................................................................................. 47 Water chemistry .................................................................................................................................. 54 Discussion................................................................................................................................................... 61 Bibliography ............................................................................................................................................... 63 Appendix .................................................................................................................................................... 66 Appendix 1. Variable abbreviations and explanations .............................................................................. 66 Appendix 2. CDF test p-values ................................................................................................................... 69 Appendix 3. Change estimate values ......................................................................................................... 72 Appendix 4. Condition estimates comparison of significant differences among the basin and ecoregion surveys ...................................................................................................................................... 76 Appendix 5. Fish community CDF test p-values ......................................................................................... 77 Appendix 6. Invertebrate CDF test p-values .............................................................................................. 78 Appendix 7. Site location information and weighting ............................................................................... 79 Appendix 8. Water chemistry concentrations .......................................................................................... 112 Figures Figure 1. Site locations for the basin (left) and ecoregion (right) surveys .................................................... 4 Figure 2. Box plot of MSHA scores - Good= > 66 - Fair - < 45 = Poor ............................................................ 9 Figure 3. Site status, estimated percent of stream miles for the basin and ecoregion .............................. 12 Figure 4. Stream order, estimated percent of stream miles ...................................................................... 13 Figure 5. MSHA, estimated percentage of stream miles ............................................................................ 15 Figure 6. Channel condition estimated percentage of stream miles .......................................................... 16 Figure 7. Total suspended solids estimated percentage of stream miles .................................................. 18 Figure 8. Nitrogen estimated percentage of stream miles ......................................................................... 19 Figure 9. Phosphorus estimated percentage of stream miles .................................................................... 20 Figure 10. Estimated percentage of stream miles that meet fish IBI thresholds ....................................... 22 Figure 11. Estimated percentage of stream miles that meet macroinvertebrate IBI thresholds ............... 23 Figure 12. Estimated percentage of stream miles that meet both fish and macroinvertebrate IBI thresholds at a single site ........................................................................................................................... 24 Figure 13. MSHA score, estimated percent of stream miles with MSHA values that are equal to, or greater than a given value .......................................................................................................................... 26 Figure 14. Percent disturbance within site reach watershed, estimated percent of stream miles with disturbance percentage equal to, or greater than a given value ............................................................... 26 Figure 15. Human disturbance score, estimated percent of stream miles with human disturbance values equal to, or greater than a given value ........................................................................................... 27 Figure 16. Percent agriculture land use in watershed, estimated percent of stream miles with percent agriculture land use values equal to, or greater than a given value ............................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Surface Water Quality……………………………………………
    BECKER Local Water Management Plan COUNTY January 1, 2017 - December 31, 2026 DRAFT Prepared By: Becker Soil and Water Conservation District This page intentionally left blank TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY............................................................................................... i. ACRONYMS AND TERMS........................................................................................... a. INTRODUCTION.............................................................................................................. Plan Purpose………………………………………………………………………….1 Priority Concerns…………………………………………………………………….2 Roles & Responsibilities……………………………………………………………4 About Becker SWCD………………………………………………………………...5 Programs and Projects……………………………………………………………...6 BACKGROUND AND NATURAL RESOURCES INVENTORY....................................... General Characteristics…………………………………………………………….7 County Population Trends…………………………………………………………7 Physiography and Relief…………………………………………………………..14 Drainage……………………………………………………………………………....15 Landuse & Landcover………………………………………………….…………..15 Major Watersheds…………………………………………………………………..17 Public & Protected Waters………………………………………………………...21 Impaired Waters………………………………………………………………….….23 Wetland Resources………………………………………………………………....25 Soils of Becker County……………………………………………………….…….28 Mineral Resources…………………………………………………………………..31 Forest Resources……………………………………………………………………31 IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE………….………………………....................................... Priority Concern: Surface Water Quality……………………………………………
    [Show full text]
  • Crow Wing River Watershed TMDL (Wq-Iw8-45E)
    Crow Wing River Watershed TMDL Quantification of the pollutant reductions needed to improve lake and stream water quality impairments due to excess phosphorus, excess bacteria, or high water temperature. August 2014 wq-iw8-45e Authors and contributors: Emmons & Olivier Resources, Inc: Meghan Jacobson, PhD Pat Conrad Camilla Correll Luke Nolby Sean Marczewski Etoile Jensen Annie Weeks Bonnie Finnerty, MPCA Kevin Stroom, MPCA Mark Evenson, MPCA John Erdmann, PhD, PE, MPCA Doug Kingsley and Mike Kelly, Park Rapids MN DNR-Fisheries Darrin Hoverson, Park Rapids MN DNR-Ecological and Water Resources (Area Hydrologist) Anne Oldakowski, Wadena SWCD Melissa Barrick, Crow Wing SWCD Julie Kingsley and Melissa Koebernick, Hubbard SWCD Sibley Lake Assocation Mayo Lake Association Blueberry Lake Association Twin Lakes Association Crow Wing River Watershed TMDL • August 2014 Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Table of Contents List of Figures .................................................................................................................................. i List of Tables ................................................................................................................................. iv List of Acronyms .......................................................................................................................... vii TMDL SUMMARY TABLE ......................................................................................................... ix EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Wadena County Local Water Resource Management Plan
    DRAFT 2016-2026 Wadena County Local Water Resource Management Plan Wadena County 2016-2026 Local Water Management Plan Leaf River July 2015 Prepared by: Wadena County Soil and Water Conservation District and the Wadena County Water Plan Task Force 1 DRAFT 2016-2026 Wadena County Local Water Resource Management Plan CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY………………………………………………………………...…………6 Plan Purpose ..................................................................................................................................15 Description of Priority Concerns ................................................................................................16 Summary of Goals and Objectives .............................................................................................17 Consistency with Other Plans .....................................................................................................20 ASSESSMENT OF PRIORITY CONCERNS…………………………………………………...21 Priority Concerns Identification .................................................................................................21 Priority Concern – Surface Water ...............................................................................................21 Objective A: Remove the Wadena County impaired waters from the 303(d) list ............................. 21 Objective B: Implement land use practices and best management practices (BMPs) ....................... 26 Objective C: Minimize soil erosion and runoff ...................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Redeye River Watershed Monitoring and Assessment Report
    Summary Monitoring and Assessment Redeye River Watershed Why is it The Redeye River watershed covers nearly 900 square miles in the northern part of the Upper Mississippi River Basin in central Minnesota. The watershed includes all important? or parts of Becker, Otter Tail, Todd, and Wadena counties. The Redeye River begins at Wolf Lake and joins the Leaf River, before draining into the Crow Wing River near Staples. The Redeye River provides drinking water for households and industries, habaitat for aquatic life, riparian corridors for wildlife, and recreation opportunities like fishing, swimming, and canoeing. Nearly half the watershed’s land use is agricultural, 30% is forested, 15% is wetlands, and about 4% is developed communities and industries. Key issues Based on intensive watershed monitoring, which began in 2011, results indicate that a handful of streams do not meet water quality standards for beneficial uses such as: • Aquatic life • Drinking water • Fish consumption The main concerns are excess sediment and high bacteria levels. Highlights of report • In 2011, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency began an intensive watershed monitoring effort at about 40 sites throughout the Redeye River watershed. As part of this effort, MPCA staff joined with the Wadena County Soil and Water Conservation District and the Otter Tail County Coalition of Lake Associations. • In 2013, a holistic approach was taken to assess all of the watershed’s surface waters for support, or non support of aquatic life, recreation, and fish consumption. • Of the waters that do not fully support aquatic life or aquatic recreation, the main source of impairments are due to high bacteria levels and increased sediment.
    [Show full text]
  • Portage Lake Template Lake Management Plan
    (Draft) Lake Management Plan for Portage Lake Hubbard County, Minnesota Revised: September 26, 2006 Healthy Lakes & Rivers Partnership Committee Portage Lake Association 1 Draft- Table of Contents Management Plan for Portage Lake I. Introduction: Summary of Healthy Lakes & Rivers Partnership Program Physical Description of your lake or drainage Watershed size Watershed Hydrology Precipitation Soils Land Use History of development/impacts on your lake Organizational history a) mission b) structure c) accomplishments II. Review of historical and existing conditions for each of eight focus areas: Water Quality Fisheries Management Plans Aquatic vegetation Wildlife Invasive Species Land Use and zoning Managing water surface use conflicts Public water access III. Summary/Conclusion Outcome of Visioning Session IV. Priorities and Action Plans Appendices Department of Natural Resource Fisheries Management Plan Glossary Guide to Common Acronyms and abbreviations 2 Introduction In June 2005 the Portage Lake Association was invited to participate in the Northwest Minnesota Foundation’s Healthy Lakes and Rivers Partnership program along with seven other lake and river Associations in Hubbard County. Under the coordination of William Alden and Alicia Laturnus (Hubbard Soil and Water Conservation District) and Ken Grob (Hubbard County Lakes and Rivers Association), representatives of each group attended two days of training on strategic planning, communication, and nonprofit group leadership. Representatives of many state and local agencies, as well
    [Show full text]
  • Park Rapids Bathhouse: an Assessment of National Register Eligibility City of Park Rapids Hubbard County, Minnesota
    North facade of Park Rapids Bathhouse. View to southeast. PARK RAPIDS BATHHOUSE: AN ASSESSMENT OF NATIONAL REGISTER ELIGIBILITY CITY OF PARK RAPIDS HUBBARD COUNTY, MINNESOTA PREPARED BY STEPHANIE K. ATWOOD AND CHARLENE K. ROISE HESS, ROISE AND COMPANY THE FOSTER HOUSE 100 NORTH FIRST STREET MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55401 JANUARY 2013 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................... 2 DESCRIPTION............................................................................................................................... 4 Exterior ....................................................................................................................................... 4 Interior......................................................................................................................................... 5 PROPERTY HISTORY .................................................................................................................. 8 The Beginning of Park Rapids .................................................................................................... 8 The Growth of Automobile Tourism in Minnesota .................................................................... 8 The Depression and Federal Relief Programs .......................................................................... 12 Attention to the Parks...............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Aquatic Vegetation of Portage Lake Hubbard County, Minnesota (DOW 29-0250-00)
    Aquatic Vegetation of Portage Lake Hubbard County, Minnesota (DOW 29-0250-00) August 10-11, 2004 May 20, 2005 May 17-18, 2006 Report by: Donna Perleberg Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Division of Ecological Services 1601 Minnesota Dr., Brainerd, MN 56401 Phone: 218.833.8727 Email: [email protected] COPYRIGHT Minnesota Department of Natural Resources 2006 Portage Lake (29-0250-00) Hubbard Co. 2004-2006 Vegetation Surveys _______________________________________________________ Acknowledgments Lake sampling: 2006: Josh Knopik, Stephanie Loso, Lucas Wandrie, MnDNR Division of Ecological Services 2005: Donna Perleberg, Joe Backowski, MnDNR Division of Ecological Services 2004: Donna Perleberg, Josh Knopik, MnDNR Division of Ecological Services Report Review: Wendy Crowell, MnDNR Division of Ecological Services, St. Paul Doug Kingsley, MnDNR Fisheries, Park Rapids Funding: Collection of these data was made possible by support from the Heritage Enhancement Fund. This report should be cited as: Perleberg, D. 2006. Aquatic vegetation of Portage Lake, Hubbard County, Minnesota (DOW 29- 0250-00), August 10-11, 2004, May 20, 2005 and May 17-18, 2006. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, Ecological Services Division, 1601 Minnesota Dr., Brainerd, MN 56401. 19 pp. COPYRIGHT Minnesota Department of Natural Resources 2006 Page 2 of 19 Portage Lake (29-0250-00) Hubbard Co. 2004-2006 Vegetation Surveys _______________________________________________________ Summary Portage Lake is a shallow, nutrient rich lake located near Park Rapids, Minnesota. Vegetation surveys were conducted in August 2004 to assess the native aquatic plant community and in May 2005 and May 2006 to assess the non-native, curly-leaf pondweed population. These surveys provide quantitative estimates of the frequency at which the common submerged plant species occur.
    [Show full text]
  • Otter Tail County Local Water Management Plan
    Otter Tail County Local Water Management Plan August 31, 2009 – August 31, 2019 (Amended 2014) Bayerl Water Prepared by Bayerl Water Resources, with mapping by Otter Tail County GIS Department and BWSR and technical Resources assistance from the LWMP task force TABLE OF CONTENTS I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ..................................................................................................... I-1 A. Background .........................................................................................................................I ‐1 B. Plan Purpose ...................................................................................................................... I ‐1 C. Description of Priority Concerns .........................................................................................I‐2 D. Consistency with Other Plans ............................................................................................. I ‐2 E. Recommendations to Other Plans and Official Controls .................................................... I ‐3 II. PRIORITY CONCERNS ...................................................................................................... II-1 A. Priority Concerns Identification ................................................................................ II ‐1 1. Surface Water Issues ..................................................................................................................II‐6 a) Water Quality...................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Land and Water Resource Narrative
    Redeye River Watershed Land and Water Resource Narrative From a bird’s eye view, the Redeye River Watershed is a mosaic of streams, wetlands, pastures, farms and drumlins. This relatively flat land in the middle of Minnesota has a variety of landscape features and land uses. The Redeye River Watershed covers 575,360 acres (899 square miles) and lies mainly within Otter Tail and Wadena counties, with a small portion in Becker and Todd counties. The main towns include Wadena, Sebeka, Parkers Prairie, and New York Mills. The Watershed contains three primary rivers that join near the pour point of the watershed: the Redeye River, the Leaf River, and the Wing River (Figure 1). Figure 1. The Redeye River Watershed. Land & Water Resource Narrative 1 Redeye River Watershed Past Geomorphology About 30,000 years ago, glaciers covered much of Minnesota. For 20,000 years they advanced and receded, reshaping the landscape below. The Redeye River Watershed was partly covered by glacial activity, which contributed to the watershed’s unique geology. When the Wadena Lobe of the glaciated period melted and receded around 30,000 years ago, it shaped an expansive field of drumlins around Wadena and Hewitt. A drumlin is a streamlined deposit of glacial till shaped like a teardrop with the tapered, narrow end pointing in the direction of glacier movement (Minnesota River Basin Glaciation). The drumlins in the Redeye Watershed point from northeast to southwest and spread out in a fan shape with a margin 70 miles long (Figure 2). Because a large portion of the Redeye River Figure 2.
    [Show full text]
  • Redeye River Watershed Monitoring and Assessment Report
    Redeye River Watershed Monitoring and Assessment Report May 2014 Authors The MPCA is reducing printing and mailing costs MPCA Redeye River Watershed Report Team: by using the Internet to distribute reports and Anthony Dingmann, Dave Christopherson, David information to wider audience. Visit our Duffey, Lee Engel, Bonnie Finnerty, Mark website for more information. Gernes, Chuck Johnson, Benjamin Lundeen, Jim MPCA reports are printed on 100 percent post- McArthur, Bruce Monson, Scott Niemela, consumer recycled content paper Shawn Nelson, Kris Parson manufactured without chlorine or chlorine derivatives. Contributors / acknowledgements Wadena County Soil and Water Conservation Otter Tail County coalition of Lake Associations Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Minnesota Department of Health Minnesota Department of Agriculture 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 | www.pca.state.mn.us | 651-296-6300 Toll free 800-657-3864 | TTY 651-282-5332 This report is available in alternative formats upon request, and online at www.pca.state.mn.us Document number: wq-ws3-07010107b List of acronyms AUID Assessment Unit Identification MINLEAP Minnesota Lake Eutrophication Determination Analysis Procedure CCSI Channel Condition and Stability Index MPCA Minnesota Pollution Control Agency CD County Ditch MSHA Minnesota Stream Habitat Assessment CI Confidence Interval MTS Meets the Standard? CLMP Citizen
    [Show full text]
  • Surface Water Quality……………………………………………
    BECKER Local Water Management Plan COUNTY 2017 - 2027 DRAFT Prepared By: Becker Soil and Water Conservation District TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY............................................................................................... i. ACRONYMS AND TERMS........................................................................................... a. INTRODUCTION.............................................................................................................. Plan Purpose………………………………………………………………………….1 Priority Concerns…………………………………………………………………….2 Roles & Responsibilities……………………………………………………………4 About Becker SWCD………………………………………………………………...5 Programs and Projects……………………………………………………………...6 BACKGROUND AND NATURAL RESOURCES INVENTORY....................................... General Characteristics…………………………………………………………….7 County Population Trends…………………………………………………………7 Physiography and Relief…………………………………………………………..14 Drainage……………………………………………………………………………....15 Landuse & Landcover………………………………………………….…………..15 Major Watersheds…………………………………………………………………..17 Public & Protected Waters………………………………………………………...21 Impaired Waters………………………………………………………………….….23 Wetland Resources………………………………………………………………....25 Soils of Becker County……………………………………………………….…….28 Mineral Resources…………………………………………………………………..31 Forest Resources……………………………………………………………………31 IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE………….………………………....................................... Priority Concern: Surface Water Quality…………………………………………… Stormwater Management………………………………………………….33 Erosion
    [Show full text]
  • Ordinance No. 293 Amended Ordinance No. 263 an Ordinance Annexing Land North of the City of Park Rapids Section 14 Todd Township
    l!lC'D, &Y JAN 2 5 1999 NiMB ORDINANCE NO. 293 AMENDED ORDINANCE NO. 263 AN ORDINANCE ANNEXING LAND NORTH OF THE CITY OF PARK RAPIDS SECTION 14 TODD TOWNSHIP, HUBBARD COUNTY, MINNESOTA TO THE CITY OF PARK RAPIDS, MINNESOTA, PURSUANT TO MINNESOTA STATUTES 414.033, SUBD. 2(3), PERMITTING ANNEXATION BY ORDINANCE THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PARK RAPIDS HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION 1. That the unincorporated land located North of the City of Park Rapids along East River Drive and located in Section 14, of Todd Township, Hubbard County, Minnesota, described more fully herein, abuts upon the limits of the City of Park Rapids, is not now included within the limits of any city, is 60 acres or less in size, is or is about to become urban or suburban in character, and 100 percent of all owners of property within the described area have signed a petition requesting the property be annexed to the City of Park Rapids. SECTION 2. That the corporate limits of the City of Park Rapids are hereby extended to include the unplatted land described as follows and the same is hereby annexed to be included within the City of Park Rapids, Minnesota. Parcel 1 - Ferd & Dorotha Ohlsen (Attached) Parcel 2 -Myron & Bessie Amundson (Attached) Parcel 3 - E. Lowell Moore (Attached) Parcel 4 - Carol Anderson (Attached) Parcel 5 - Harriet Benda (Attached) Parcel 6 - Edward Dessert (Attached) Parcel 7 - Charles & Betty Schranz (Attached) SECTION 3: The City Administrator is hereby directed to file certified copies of this ordinance with the Minnesota Municipal Board; the Secretary of State, the Todd Town Clerk, and the Hubbard County Auditor.
    [Show full text]