DOCSLIB.ORG

Sauk River Watershed Stressor Identification Report

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Sauk River Watershed Stressor Identification Report Sauk River Watershed Stressor Identification Report Conditions causing deterioration of aquatic biological communities in the SRW August 2012 Legislative Charge Minn. Statutes § 116.011 Annual Pollution Report A goal of the Pollution Control Agency is to reduce the amount of pollution that is emitted in the state. By April 1 of each year, the MPCA shall report the best estimate of the agency of the total volume of water and air pollution that was emitted in the state the previous calendar year for which data are available. The agency shall report its findings for both water and air pollution, etc, etc. HIST: 1995 c 247 art 1 s 36; 2001 c 187 s 3 Authors Estimated cost of preparing this report (as Principal Author Chuck Johnson required by Minn. Stat. § 3.197) Other author Jeff Jasperson Total staff time: 500 hrs. $15,000 Other author Production/duplication $x,xxx Contributors / acknowledgements (if any) Total $xx,xxx Kevin Stroom The MPCA is reducing printing and mailing costs Nolan Baratona by using the Internet to distribute reports and Greg Van Eeckhout information to wider audience. Visit our web site Laurel Mezner for more information. Editing and Graphic Design (if any) MPCA reports are printed on 100% post-consumer PIO staff recycled content paper manufactured without Graphic design staff chlorine or chlorine derivatives. Administrative staff Cover photo: 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-iw8-38n Contents Legislative Charge ................................................................................................................................................................... 2 Authors ................................................................................................................................................................................... 2 Contributors / acknowledgements (if any) ............................................................................................................................ 2 Editing and Graphic Design (if any) ........................................................................................................................................ 2 Estimated cost of preparing this report (as required by Minn. Stat. § 3.197) ........................................................................ 2 Executive Summary for the Sauk River Watershed Stressor Identification Report ................... 1 Stressors in the Sauk River Watershed (8 Digit HUC) .............................................................................. 2 Low dissolved oxygen concentrations ................................................................................................... 3 Loss of habitat due to excess bedded sediment ..................................................................................... 3 Increased nutrients .............................................................................................................................. 3 Altered hydrology/channelization ........................................................................................................ 3 Loss of woody habitat .......................................................................................................................... 3 Loss of connectivity (impoundments/improper placement of culverts) ................................................... 4 Elevated concentration of total suspended solids .................................................................................. 4 Sauk River Watershed Monitoring Sites and known impairments .......................................................... 4 Recommendations for implementation strategies ................................................................................. 4 Introduction .......................................................................................................................... 7 Overview of watershed impairments .................................................................................................... 7 Organization Framework of Stressor Identification ................................................................ 8 Sauk River ............................................................................................................................. 9 Definition of Sauk River Watershed Management Units (Minors) .......................................................... 9 Division of Minors .................................................................................................................................................................. 9 Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Watershed assessment tool ........................................... 11 Candidate causes for biological impairment ........................................................................................ 12 Candidate cause #1: ditching/channelization ...................................................................................... 13 Background .......................................................................................................................................................................... 13 Conceptual mModel ............................................................................................................................................................. 15 Casual analysis ...................................................................................................................................................................... 16 Biological effects -- fish ........................................................................................................................................................ 16 Tolerance metrics ................................................................................................................................................................. 17 Trophic response .................................................................................................................................................................. 18 Biological effects -- macroinvertebrates .............................................................................................................................. 19 Strength of evidence summary – channelization/ditching ................................................................................................... 20 Candidate Causes #2-4: Total Suspended Solids /Turbidity/Bedded Sediment ....................................... 22 Biological effects of TSS, turbidity, and bedded sediment ................................................................................................... 22 Turbidity/TSS standard ......................................................................................................................................................... 22 Sources and pathways of deposited and bedded sediment riparian grazing/bank erosion ................................................. 23 Overland runoff .................................................................................................................................................................... 24 Total suspended volatile solids ............................................................................................................................................ 25 Specific effects of TSS on fish and macroinvertebrates ........................................................................................................ 25 Conceptual model ................................................................................................................................................................ 26 Strength of evidence summary for TSS ................................................................................................................................ 26 Bedded (deposited) sediment ............................................................................................................. 28 Biological effects of TSS, turbidity, and bedded sediment ................................................................................................... 28 Assessment of bedded sediment ......................................................................................................................................... 28 Causal analysis – bedded sediment ..................................................................................................... 30 Strength of evidence summary for deposited and bedded sediment ..................................................... 32 Nitrate toxicity ................................................................................................................................... 32 NO2 – NO3 water quality standards/ecoregion expectations ............................................................................................... 32 Effects of nitrate-N toxicity on aquatic organisms ............................................................................... 33 Sources and causal pathways of NO3 - NO2 toxicity .............................................................................. 34 Toxicity from insecticides and herbicides ............................................................................................. 37 Pesticide monitoring in Minnesota and
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Hearing Exhibit H (Wq-Rule4-21M9)
    Exhibit H Minnesota Pollution Control Agency CERTIFICATE OF GIVING ADDITIONAL NOTICE UNDER THE ADDITIONAL NOTICE PLAN Proposed Amendments to Rules of the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Governing Water Quality Standards – Class 2 and Class 7 Use Designations, Minnesota Rules, Chapter 7050 Waters of the State, Revisor’s ID Number 4561 I certify that on September 23, 2019 (except as noted below), at least 33 days before the end of the comment period, at the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) in St. Paul, Minnesota, I gave notice according to the Additional Notice Plan approved by the Office of Administrative Hearings on August 27, 2019. Specifically, I: · Sent notification to the three organizations identified in the Amended Order and Recommendations on Review of Additional Notice Plan and Dual Notice from Administrative Law Judge Ann C. O’Reilly dated August 27, 2019. I accomplished this by sending via U.S. mail on September 20, 2019, a copy of the Dual Notice of Intent to Adopt Rules to the contact person for each of the organizations. A copy of the list of organizations is attached to this Certificate. · Published the Dual Notice of Intent to Adopt Rules on the MPCA’s public notice webpage https://www.pca.state.mn.us/public-notices. · Provided a 45-day extended comment period on the proposed rule amendments. · Held a public meeting on October 29, 2019, to provide information on the proposed rule amendments. · Sent notification to the MPCA list of Air and Water Tribal Contacts for the 11 federally recognized tribes in Minnesota. I accomplished this by sending electronic notification via email containing a hyperlink to the Dual Notice of Intent to Adopt Rules to the contact person for each of the tribes.
    [Show full text]
  • Delineation Percentage
    Lake Superior - North Rainy River - Headwaters Lake Superior - South Vermilion River Nemadji River Cloquet River Pine River Rainy River - Rainy Lake Little Fork River Mississippi River - Headwaters Leech Lake River Upper St. Croix River Root River Big Fork River Mississippi River - Winona Upper/Lower Red Lake Kettle River Mississippi River - Lake Pepin Mississippi River - Grand Rapids Mississippi River - La Crescent Crow Wing River Otter Tail River Mississippi River - Reno Mississippi River - Brainerd Zumbro River Redeye River Upper Big Sioux River Mississippi River - Twin Cities Snake River Des Moines River - Headwaters St. Louis River Rum River Lower Big Sioux River Lower St. Croix River Cottonwood River Minnesota River - Headwaters Cannon River Mississippi River - St. Cloud Long Prairie River Lake of the Woods Lower Rainy North Fork Crow River Mississippi River - Sartell Lac Qui Parle River Buffalo River Wild Rice River Minnesota River - Mankato Sauk River Rock River Redwood River Snake River Chippewa River Watonwan River Clearwater River East Fork Des Moines River Red River of the North - Sandhill River Upper Red River of the North Blue Earth River Red River of the North - Marsh River Roseau River Minnesota River - Yellow Medicine River Le Sueur River Little Sioux River Bois de Sioux River Cedar River Lower Minnesota River Pomme de Terre River Red Lake River Lower Des Moines River Upper Iowa River Red River of the North - Tamarac River Shell Rock River Two Rivers Rapid River Red River of the North - Grand Marais Creek Mustinka River South Fork Crow River Thief River Winnebago River Upper Wapsipinicon River 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% %Altered %Natural %Impounded %No Definable Channel wq-bsm1-06.
    [Show full text]
  • Sauk River State Water Trail
    STATE WATER TRAIL MAP Sauk River A STATE WATER TRAIL GUIDE TO THE SAUK RIVER “...Nicollet (Joseph) also reported the waters of the river were clear and tasted sweeter than the Mississippi.” (Excerpt from “Sauk River Log,” by Dave Simpkins) The Sauk River The chain of lakes area is almost entirely surrounded by around the two state managed wildlife areas south of Water levels can speed or slow you down. You can get hardwood forests dominated by red oak, bur oak, aspen, Sauk Center. It is not uncommon to view birds of prey information about water levels from the regional DNR Originating at Lake Osakis in Todd County, the Sauk and basswood. An interesting patch of tamarack swamp including the bald eagle, owls and various hawks. office, or check the DNR website, or the DNR River River meanders southeast for 125 miles until it joins up occurs on part of a broad groundwater seepage plain on Information Center. Remember that much of the the north bank near Rockville. The golden fall color of shorelands are privately owned. Respect and protect the 10 with the Mississippi River on the northern side of St. Fishing Prairie Cloud. Although the entire river is a state-designated the tamaracks stand out among the typically more subtle water and shorelands. Long Little reds and yellows of the hardwoods. 71 Falls canoe and boating route, the northern portion of the river Alexandria from Lake Osakis to Guernsey Lake is generally Boating Information considered impassable most of the year because of low Through the lower reaches of the river, exposures of water levels.
    [Show full text]
  • Evaluation of the Aquatic Macroinvertebrate Fauna of the Middle Portion of the Sauk River, Stearns County, Minnesota, 2010
    Evaluation of the Aquatic Macroinvertebrate Fauna of the Middle Portion of the Sauk River, Stearns County, Minnesota, 2010 . Submitted to: Sauk River Watershed District 524 Fourth Street South Sauk Centre, Minnesota 56378 Submitted by: Lake Superior Research Institute University of Wisconsin-Superior 801 North 28 th Street Superior, Wisconsin 54880 Principal Investigator: Kurt L. Schmude, Ph.D. Senior Scientist April 28, 2011 INTRODUCTION The Sauk River Watershed District (District) entered into a Joint Powers Agreement under which the District would provide physical assessments, chemical monitoring, and aquatic macroinvertebrate assessment of aquatic habitats for the State of Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA). The project is known as the Upper Sauk River Water Quality Assessment Project. The District worked in cooperation with the Lake Superior Research Institute (LSRI) at the University of Wisconsin-Superior in 2008 and 2009 to provide professional training to its staff in the collection of samples of aquatic macroinvertebrates, and to use these organisms to evaluate the water quality of the upper portion of the Sauk River (Schmude 2010). In the fall of 2010, the Sauk River Watershed District conducted a similar assessment for the middle reach of the Sauk River. The current report provides an evaluation of the water quality of the middle portion of the Sauk River for 2010 based on the aquatic macroinvertebrates. METHODS District personnel sampled six sites along the middle portion of the Sauk River in Stearns County on October 13, 2010. More sites would have been sampled, but high water in this section of the river prevented access to additional sites. The sites listed below are arranged in order from the most upstream site to the most downstream site.
    [Show full text]
  • Old Rail Fence Corners; the A
    Library of Congress Old rail fence corners; the A. B. C.'s of Minnesota history LUCY LEAVENWORTH WILDER MORRIS Originator of “Old Rail Fence Corners.” Daughters of the American Revolution. Minnesota Old Trails and historic Spots Committees Old Rail Fence Corners THE A. B. C's. OF Minnesota History SECOND EDITION AUTHENTIC INCIDENTS GLEANED FROM The Old Settlers By the Book Committee 1914 F607 D232 COPYRIGHTED 1914 BY THE BOOK COMMITTEE LUCY LEAVENWORTH WILDER MORRIS, EDITOR PUBLISHED BY THE F. H. McCULLOCH PRINTING © AUSTIN, MINN. $1.75 SEP 2 1915 ©CI.A411625 OLD TRAILS AND ROADS COMPILED BY MR. GEORGE RALPH AND MRS. JAMES T. MORRIS OLD TRAILS AND ROADS COMPILED BY MR. GEORGE RALPH AND MRS. JAMES T. MORRIS Explanatory How little we know about what we don't know! Old rail fence corners; the A. B. C.'s of Minnesota history http://www.loc.gov/resource/lhbum.19293 Library of Congress During my search for a map of the Old Trails and Roads of Minnesota, public libraries were thoroughly investigated, but no book or map could be found showing these old highways. A few old maps in the Historical Library bore snatches of them, but in their entirety they had disappeared from books and maps, as well as from our state. They might be the foundations for modern roads, but only the names of those modern roads survived, so they were lost. Months of this research work failed to resurrect them, although a map was made from the fragmentary pieces on old maps, filled out by what the pioneers who had traveled those roads could furnish.
    [Show full text]
  • Water-Quality Assessment of Part of the Upper Mississippi River Basin, Minnesota and Wisconsin
    Water-Quality Assessment of Part of the Upper Mississippi River Basin, Minnesota and Wisconsin- Nitrogen and Phosphorus in Streams, Streambed Sediment, and Ground Water, 1971-94 By Sharon E. Kroening and William J. Andrews U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 97-4107 Contribution from the National Water-Quality Assessment Program Mounds View, Minnesota 1997 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR BRUCE BABBITT, Secretary U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Gordon P. Eaton, Director 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 2280 Woodale Drive Box 25286 Mounds View, MN 55112 Denver, Colorado 80225-0286 Information regarding the National Water-Quality Assessment (NAWQA) Program is available on the Internet via the World Wide Web. You may connect to the Upper Missis­ sippi River Basin NAWQA Home Page at: http: / / wwwmn.cr.usgs.gov / umis / index.html FOREWORD The mission of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) is to assess the quantity and quality of the earth resources of the Nation and to provide information that will assist resource managers and policy makers at Federal, state, and local levels in making sound decisions. Assessment of water-quality conditions and trends is an important part of this overall mission. One of the greatest challenges faced by water-resources scientists is acquiring reliable information that will guide the use and protection of the Nation's water resources. That challenge is being addressed by Federal, state, interstate, and local water-resource agencies and by many academic institutions.
    [Show full text]
  • Where to Go Activities Guide
    Order of the Arrow Where To Go Activities Guide Sponsored by Ni-Sanak-Tani Lodge #381 Gateway Area Council (Spring 2009 Edition) Ni-Sanak-Tani Lodge #381 – Gateway Area Council, BSA, - 2009a, Updated 4/5/2009 1 (this page intentionally left blank) Ni-Sanak-Tani Lodge #381 – Gateway Area Council, BSA, - 2009a, Updated 4/5/2009 2 Introduction Order of the Arrow – “Where To Go” Guide This resource has been developed to help leaders provide a greater outdoor adventure. We hope to expand this booklet regularly with more ideas and places to go. A large part of the Scouting program calls for new experiences in new places! A committee of the Order of the Arrow youth were selected, and under the guidance of the Lodge Executive Committee, developed this resource as a service to you. One of the major purposes of the Order is to promote Scout camping and to help strengthen the district and council camping year-round. This includes our Camp Decorah summer and winter programs, Camporees, Klondikes, Expos, High Adventure Bases and unit camping. Although not listed in this resource, another great place to take your unit includes county owned property. This is often available for little or no cost and can be arranged by contacting your local Park Department or County Forester. More information about nearby private and public facilities can be found at your local Chamber of Commerce. We want to thank you for keeping the “Outing” in Scouting. Disclaimer Note that the Internet links included in this document are for your convenience. There is no connection to them, other than their being to BSA-recognized units (councils, or Scouting.org), government agencies, tourism groups, or organizations that share a similar interest in that particular topic.
    [Show full text]
  • Assessment Report of Selected Lakes Within the Sauk River Watershed
    Assessment Report of Selected Lakes within the Sauk River Watershed Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Water Monitoring Section Lakes and Streams Monitoring Unit July 2010 Minnesota Pollution Control Agency 520 Lafayette Road North Saint Paul, MN 55155-4194 http://www.pca.state.mn.us651-296-6300 or 800-657-3864 toll free TTY 651-282-5332 or 800-657-3864 toll free Available in alternative formats Author Matt Lindon Geographical Information System Mapping Kris Parson Editing Steve Heiskary Dana Vanderbosch Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Water Monitoring Section Lakes and Streams Monitoring Unit wq-ws3-07010202 The MPCA is reducing printing and mailing costs by using the Internet to distribute reports and information to wider audience. For additional information, see the Web site: www.pca.state.mn.us/water/lakereport.html 2010 Assessment of Selected Lakes Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Within the Sauk River Watershed May 2010 i This report was printed on recycled paper manufactured without the use of elemental chlorine (cover: 100% post-consumer; body: 100% post-consumer) 2010 Assessment of Selected Lakes Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Within the Sauk River Watershed May 2010 ii Table of Contents Table of Contents ......................................................................................................................................iii List if Figures ............................................................................................................................................ vi List of Tables ...........................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • The Failed Watab Treaty of 1853
    The Failed Watab Treaty of 1853 EDWARD J. PLUTH O n August 6, 1853 , after five years of complaints, “repeated solicitations,” and delays, 32 Winnebago chiefs and headmen in Minnesota Territory signed a treaty with the United States govern - ment in which they exchanged their unsatisfactory Long Prairie reservation for land to the south on the Crow River. When this controversial Watab Treaty was drastically amended in Washington, the Winnebago reject - ed it, thus making it one of the nation’s many unratified Indian treaties. The Winnebago were then moved, instead, to southern Minnnesota, only to be unfairly forced out of the state in the hysteria that fol - lowed the 1862 Dakota conflict. Historians to date have given un- ratified treaties only cursory attention. Yet, these documents invariably entailed The 1853 Watab Treaty, a four-page document bearing the signatures of Minnesota Territory’s governor Willis A. Gorman, Indian agent Jona- than E. Fletcher, and the marks of 32 Winnebago chiefs and headmen; oval portrait of treaty signer Baptiste Lasallier (center) posed with new agent Charles H. Mix (right) and a nattily dressed Indian supply merchant from New York, 1857. 3 Yet, these documents invariably entailed serious, sus - The immediate origins of the abortive Watab Treaty tained negotiations between Indian and U.S. officials may be found in Winnebago dissatisfaction with the attempting to address issues important to both parties. Long Prairie reservation to which they had reluctantly Furthermore, as historian Francis Paul Prucha has removed in 1848 . The larger context involves even ear - observed, failure to ratify a treaty caused “considerable lier displacements.
    [Show full text]
  • Newsletter March 2010
    Board of Managers Jim Kral, President Issue 2 March 2010 Bob Mostad Jim Rothstein Sauk River Watershed District Updates Greetings! A complete, printed copy of the For comprehensive information administrative rules is available for This is the second newspaper on 2009 projects or updates, Richard Raeker Virgil Rettig edition of the Sauk River inspection by any person during please contact our office or Watershed District Newsletter. regular office hours at the district request a copy of the 2009 The newsletter began to directly Annual Report. inform the citizens of the office. The rules may also be watershed. Currently, this viewed online at www.srwdmn.org. 2009 Program newsletter is circulated to over Jason Scherping Vernon Vangsness 19,000 residents within the These rules will guide the permitting Review watershed. You can expect three process within the District. newsletter editions each year as Education If you are planning a project within the well as an annual report publica- Youth watershed it is recommended to visit our - 80 Class Presentation: tion. website or to call. Your project may 3,568 Students Dan Coughlin Larry Kuseske Our goal is to get the information require a permit from the watershed. - Waterfests: 2,750 Students Adult Staff out so that you may be informed SRWD Receives State Award - Workshops: 478 Attendees on the work that the Sauk River - 18 Presentations Watershed District is carrying The SRWD received the state program of Other Outreach out. the year award from the Minnesota - Open House: 40 People Association of Watershed District’s for - MAWD Conference: 400 We hope you enjoy your edition their S.H.O.R.E.
    [Show full text]
  • Effect of Ground-Water Withdrawals on Floe in the Sauk River Valley Aquifer and on Streamflow in the Cold Spring Area, Minnesota
    Prepared in cooperation with the City of Cold Spring, Minnesota Effect of Ground-Water Withdrawals on Floe in the Sauk River Valley Aquifer and on Streamflow in the Cold Spring Area, Minnesota Water-Resources Investigations Report 01–4111 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Effects of Ground-Water Withdrawals on Flow in the Sauk River Valley Aquifer and on Streamflow in the Cold Spring Area, Minnesota By R. J. Lindgren Water-Resources Investigations Report 01-4111 Prepared in cooperation with the City of Cold Spring, Minnesota U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Gale A. Norton, Secretary U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Charles G. Groat, Director Use of brand names in this report is for identification purposes only and does not constitute endorsement by the U.S. Geological Survey. Mound View, Minnesota, 2001 For additional information write to: U.S. Geological Survey District Chief 2280 Woodale Drive Mounds View, MN 55112 Copies of this report can be purchased from: U.S. Geological Survey Branch of Information Services Box 25286, MS 517 Federal Center Denver, CO 80225 Information regarding the USGS is available on the Internet via the World Wide Web. You may connect to the USGS Home Page using the Universal Resource Locator (URL) at http://wwwrvares.er.usgs.gov. You may also connect to the Minnesota District Home Page at http://mn.water.usgs.gov/. For more information on all USGS reports and products (including maps, images, and computerized data), call 1-888-ASK-USGS Water-Resources Investigations Report 01-4111 CONTENTS Abstract.................................................................................................................................................................................1
    [Show full text]
  • Sauk River Watershed Groundwater Restoration and Protection Strategies Report
    Sauk River Watershed (SRW) Groundwater Restoration and Protection Strategies Report October 2018 GRAPS Report #7 Sauk River Watershed GRAPS Report 1 Sauk River Watershed Groundwater Restoration and Protection Strategies Report Minnesota Department of Health Source Water Protection Unit PO Box 64975, St. Paul, MN 55164-0975 (651) 201-4695 [email protected] www.health.state.mn.us Upon request, this material will be made available in an alternative format such as large print, Braille, or audio recording. Printed on recycled paper. The development of the GRAPS report was funded by money received from the Clean Water Fund through the Clean Water, Land, and Legacy Amendment. The goal of the Clean Water Fund is to protect, enhance, and restore Minnesota’s lakes, rivers, streams, and groundwater. Contributors The following agencies dedicated staff time and resources toward the development of the Sauk River Watershed GRAPS report: ▪ Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources (BWSR) ▪ Minnesota Department of Agriculture (MDA) ▪ Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) ▪ Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) ▪ Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) Photo Credit: The photo on the front page is in Stearns County in the Sauk River Watershed and is courtesy of the Stearns County Soil and Water Conservation District. Sauk River Watershed GRAPS Report 2 Summary Groundwater is an important resource in the Sauk River Watershed (SRW). Groundwater accounts for 89 percent of reported water use in most years. More than 28 percent of groundwater withdrawn is for public water supply use, with nearly 57 percent used for agricultural irrigation. In addition, groundwater accounts for 100 percent of the region’s drinking water, except for the City of St.
    [Show full text]