2012 River Report Card

Milwaukee River Report Card 2012 www.milwaukeeriverkeeper.org Milwaukee River Basin Grade: C- East and West Branches Milwaukee River The Milwaukee River Basin, consisting of the Milwaukee, Menomonee, Subwatershed and Kinnickinnic River Watersheds, scored a disappointing (but North Branch improved) overall grade of C-. The year 2012 was a tumultuous B+ Milwaukee River Subwatershed year in weather, contributing to continued poor grades for several parameters across all watersheds. An early thaw coupled with wet B spring, made monitoring swollen streams difficult in May. A prolonged drought ensued, bringing streamflows in several streams to a near Milwaukee River halt, if not completely drying up in spots. Low water conditions led Watershed to high turbidity, phosphorus, chloride/conductivity and bacteria concentrations in both watersheds, with these parameters earning a combined five F’s, 2 D’s and only one C. C

The Milwaukee River Watershed, consisting of the North Branch, East Cedar Creek Subwatershed & West Branch, and South Branch Subwatersheds of the Milwaukee River, as well as the Cedar Creek Subwatershed, maintained a C B average. All subwatersheds received A’s for pH, water temperature and dissolved oxygen. Turbidity remained a problem in the South Branch phosphorus, conductivity, and bacteria received across the Menomonee C- River board D’s and F’s in all subwatersheds. Watershed Milwaukee River South Subwatershed What Do the Grades Mean? Fig. 1 D All water quality indicators meet desired targets 90- 100% of the time. Streams or river segments have A “good” water quality, which are capable of supporting fish and other aquatic life.

Most water quality indicators meet desired targets Kinnickinnic C- roughly 80-89% of the time. Quality of these streams River B and river segments tends to be good; most areas are Watershed capable of supporting fish and other aquatic life.

There is a mix of healthy and unhealthy water quality indicators, or indicators are only meeting water quality targets 70-79% of the time. Water quality of these Report card grades for the Milwaukee, Menomonee and Kinnickinnic Rivers and their tributary streams in 2012. C waters tends to be fair, as well as conditions for fish and aquatic life. Grades are largely based on water quality data collected by Milwaukee Riverkeeper volunteer stream monitors at 80 Few water quality indicators meet desired targets, or sites throughout the Milwaukee River Basin. The Milwaukee only meet water quality targets 60-69% of the time. Metropolitan Sewerage District (MMSD) also collected data at 22 sites in the Menomonee River Watershed, 18 sites in Water quality and wildlife habitat of these waters D the Milwaukee River South Subwatershed, and 8 locations in tends to be poor. the Kinnickinnic River Watershed. The Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) monitored 16 sites in the Very few or no water quality indicators meet desired Milwaukee and Kinnickinnic River Watersheds. targets. Quality of these streams and river segments is More information on water quality grades and targets for F very poor, most often leading to poor conditions for fish watershed health can be found on pages 3-5 and on our and aquatic life. website at www.milwaukeeriverkeeper.org

1 Introduction Dear Friend of the River,

Welcome to our third annual Milwaukee River Report Card. This year’s report card summarizes the 2012 water quality of the Milwaukee River Basin, which includes the Kinnickinnic and Menomonee River Table of Contents Watersheds, in addition to the Milwaukee River Watershed (consisting of the Cedar Creek, East & West Branch, North Branch and South Branch Subwatersheds). Water quality grades are based on data from our dedicated cadre of Milwaukee Riverkeeper citizen stream monitoring volunteers, as well as data from the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District (MMSD) and the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (WDNR).

This annual report card keeps you informed of our progress towards meeting the fishable, swimmable goals for our local watersheds as envisioned under the Clean Water Act. It provides a snapshot of the health of the river at subwatershed, watershed, and basin levels, as measured by basic water quality parameters such as dissolved oxygen, temperature, turbidity, pH, and macroinvertebrates (aquatic organisms). as well as data for contaminants such as bacteria, phosphorus, chloride, and conductivity which are major impediments to our rivers meeting their fishable and swimmable goals.

Lastly, the report card provides ideas for what you can do to help improve the water quality of our watersheds. If we are serious about achieving clean water and healthy communities, we must change the way we live on the land. By all working together, we can be the solution to the pollution affecting our waterways!

Sincerely,

Cheryl Nenn, Riverkeeper Joe Rath, Water Quality Specialist

P.S. If you are interested in becoming a citizen stream monitor, please contact us! 1845 N. Farwell Ave., Suite 100 Milwaukee, WI 53202 414-287-0207 www.milwaukeeriverkeeper.org

2 How Did We Grade Water Quality Parameters?

To determine water quality grades for the life. Our citizen water quality monitors also collected conductivity data, as well Milwaukee River Basin, a combination of use standard, calibrated monitoring as collected water samples that were Riverkeeper volunteer stream monitoring equipment to measure DO, water sent to the State Lab of Hygiene for data and water quality data from two temperature, and pH on a monthly basis chloride and total phosphorus analysis. government agencies, WDNR and between May and October. Volunteers WDNR water quality data for 16 sites and MMSD, were analyzed. use transparency tubes to test for MMSD data from 48 sites was analyzed turbidity. Most volunteers also deploy to supplement volunteer data. Data collected by Riverkeeper volunteers continuous water temperature loggers was assessed for several water quality called thermistors, which record hourly Below is a description of water quality parameters to determine grades for water temperature readings throughout parameters assessed for the report card, this report, including dissolved oxygen the monitoring season. Macroinvertebrate and the targets or goals that water quality (DO), water temperature, pH, turbidity data was used to assess aquatic data was assessed against to determine (or water clarity), and macroinvertebrate ecosystem health. A subset of volunteers health and condition of waterways.

DISSOLVED OXYGEN (DO) (measured hourly by thermistors) were life. Phosphorus is typically low to analyzed against this standard. absent in natural freshwater systems. Dissolved oxygen is crucial for aquatic Human activities have led to large life. Some streams and steam pH LEVEL inputs of phosphorus into our rivers segments in the Milwaukee River Basin and lakes. These activities include pH is a measure of acidity, or the have regulatory variances (per State fertilization of lawns and fields; sewage amount of hydrogen (H+) ions in the of Wisconsin Administrative Code) treatment discharge; and the addition water. pH ranges from 0 to 14 (0 being allowing DO concentrations as low as of phosphorus into our water supply most acidic, 14 being most basic) with 2 mg/L, which is suitable only for the as an anti-corrosion inhibitor for old, a value of 7 representing a “neutral” most pollution tolerant fish species. lead pipes. Phosphorus entering our solution. Milwaukee River Basin However, we believe all streams and waterways causes growth of nuisance streams generally run on the basic side stream segments in the Milwaukee algae as well as a cascade of water of neutral, with values typically between River Basin can reach at least the quality problems (see phosphorus 7 or 8 on the pH scale. It is generally Warm Water Sport Fishery (WWSF) article on pg. 12). Riverkeeper accepted that a pH range of 6-9 can concentration of 5 mg/L (most streams advanced volunteers (or Level II) support a healthy aquatic ecosystem. in the watershed are designated take monthly water samples that are WWSF), and this was the target we shipped to the State Lab of Hygiene used to determine if waterways could TURBIDITY for total phosphorus analysis. These support a diverse ecosystem of fish and sample results are assessed against aquatic life. There are many streams in Turbidity, or water clarity, affects both Wisconsin phosphorus standards, the basin already meeting or capable the light and energy inputs available which are generally 0.075 mg/L for of meeting cool or cold water standards to aquatic ecosystems. Our volunteers smaller streams and 0.1 mg/L for larger for fish and aquatic life. measure turbidity using transparency rivers and the Milwaukee Estuary. tubes; clear, plastic tubes, which are Riverkeeper beginner volunteers (Level TEMPERATURE filled and/or emptied of stream water I) use chemical titration kits (CHEMets Water temperature also greatly affects until they barely reveal the black and kits) to test for orthophosphate, fish and aquatic life. As the majority of white pattern on the bottom of the tube which is a common molecular form streams and stream segments in the (similar to a lake secchi disc). A height of phosphorus. The kits use acids Milwaukee River Basin are classified as of at least 54.7 cm of stream water in that react with orthophosphate to existing or attainable WWSF streams, a 120 cm transparency tube indicates turn water samples blue. Volunteers we believe the water temperature a healthy water turbidity acceptable for determine the level of orthophosphate target should at least remain below the aquatic life, and this was used as the by comparing the intensity of blue WWSF continuous water temperature target for stream health. color to known standards, which get maximum standard of 31.7°C. Both progressively darker in proportion PHOSPHORUS instantaneous water temperatures to the orthophosphate present. (measured monthly using meters) Phosphorus is an essential nutrient Orthophosphate levels are assessed and continuous water temperatures for plants, animals, and aquatic against EPA guidance of 0.1 mg/L, the

3 Water Quality Parameters continued

recommended maximum for rivers and determine an overall grade milliliter sample). The percentage of streams. samples meeting these targets was CONDUCTIVITY used to determine water quality grades MACROINVERTEBRATES for bacteria. Conductivity is a measure of the ability To assess macroinvertebrates, of water to pass an electrical current. HUMAN BACTEROIDES Milwaukee Riverkeeper volunteers Conductivity in water is affected by use a simple biotic index developed charged particles (ions) which can be Historically high levels of bacteria by a group of Wisconsin scientists and both positive (cation) and negative along stretches of the Menomonee specifically designed for streams in (anion). Anions (negative ions) and Kinnickinnic Rivers in Milwaukee Wisconsin. Index score classifications include chloride, nitrate, sulfate and and Wauwatosa led Milwaukee range from Excellent-Good-Fair-Poor. phosphate, and positive ions (cations) Riverkeeper (along with the Great Our target for sites in the Milwaukee include sodium, magnesium, calcium, Lakes Water Institute of the University River Basin is a “good” classification. iron, and aluminum. Conductivity of Wisconsin - Milwaukee or GLWI) Because macroinvertebrates can’t in streams is naturally affected by to investigate the possibility that readily migrate like fish, they provide a geology; for instance bedrock streams failing sewer infrastructure was the good overall indicator of the health of a tend to have lower conductivity culprit. Sandra McLellan’s Lab at certain reach of stream, and tend to be whereas streams passing through clay GLWI has developed techniques to classified per their tolerance to a range soils tend to have higher conductivity. identify and quantify the presence of oxygen conditions Anthropogenic discharges to streams- and concentration of human bacteria -such as discharge of industrial waste in stormwater using a genetic test CHLORIDE (e.g. heavy metals), sewage, or other called qPCR, which can count DNA “charged” contaminants such as sequences in a sample that are High chloride concentrations in chloride, phosphate, and nitrate--can associated with human sewage. After rivers and streams are toxic to raise conductivity. A conductivity four years of testing and analysis, we aquatic organisms. Road salt runoff reading of 150 - 500 umhos/ have found large concentrations of constitutes a large source of chloride. cm provides for a healthy aquatic human waste entering the Menomonee Elevated levels of chloride can disrupt ecosystem with mixed fisheries, and and Kinnickinnic Rivers as well as an organism’s ability to maintain a this threshold was used as the target Honey Creek and Underwood Creek, natural internal water balance, which for determining water quality grades major tributaries to the Menomonee. leads to impaired survival, growth, and/ for this parameter. We graded the streams based on the or reproduction. The Environmental presence of human waste (percentage Protection Agency (EPA) has set an BACTERIA of samples testing negative for human acute chloride standard at 860 mg/L strains of Bacteroides) entering the and a chronic chloride standard of 230 High bacteria concentrations impact stream from stormwater outfalls. mg/L as targets for healthy streams. not only stream health, but also human These levels recognize that high levels health. Regulatory agencies such as of chloride can be acutely or instantly MMSD and WDNR regularly test for toxic to fish, but that lower levels of fecal coliform and E. coli bacteria. chloride over a longer period of time According to State of Wisconsin or chronic exposure can be just as Recreational Use Standards, fecal toxic (see chloride article on pg. 14 coliform levels should never exceed for more information). Chloride data 200 CFU/100 mL (colony forming was assessed against these targets units/100 milliliter sample) and the EPA to determine grades. Grades for acute established an E. coli standard of 235 and chronic criteria were averaged to CFU/100 mL (colony forming units/100 NOTE: Grades for each water quality parameter are based on the percentage of time that the data points for the monitoring stations in each subwatershed meet our targets relating to overall aquatic ecosystem health. Grades were assigned on a typical percentage basis (90-100%=A, 80-89%=B, 70-79%=C, 60-69%=D and below 60%=F). Overall grades for each subwatershed were determined based on averaging grades for each individual parameter, and the overall watershed grade was determined by averaging the overall grades for each subwatershed. The overall Milwaukee River Basin grade was determined by averaging overall grades for the three watersheds.

4 What We Didn’t Grade in 2012

5 How Healthy is the Milwaukee River & its Tributaries?

Our 2012 water quality data analysis Creek and the Milwaukee River road salt season. With phosphorus and results from the Milwaukee River South, we find one major trend: the chloride/conductivyt routinely receiving Watershed are in! As much as we’d like parameters which have scored well in failing grades, we hope to investigate to say, “we win!,” unfortunately the best the past (dissolved oxygen, pH and these parameters more in depth in we can say is, “we’re holding steady.” water temperature) continue to fare the future. Currently, the Milwaukee The Milwaukee River Watershed well, and those parameters which have Metropolitan Sewerage District earned an overall grade of “B-” in 2010. done poorly (turbidity in some areas, monitors for conductivity and bacteria, In 2011, we added additional data conductivity / chlorides, phosphorus, but only in their service area which parameters (conductivity/chlorides, bacteria and macroinvertebrates) falls in the Milwaukee River South phosphorus and bacteria) which continue to do poorly. (see Chart Subwatershed. brought the overall grade down to a below). “C.” In 2012, the waterhsed showed no With regulatory agencies not overall improvement, retaining our run Volunteer monitor data, which serves monitoring these pollutants, Milwaukee of the mill “C” grade. as the backbone of this report card, Riverkeeper continues to strive for currently focuses on the favorable available funds which will enable us After 3 years of analyzing water quality parameters, with the exception of to continue to monitor these emerging for the Milwaukee River Watershed turbidity. A large subset of volunteers and troubling parameters; bacteria and it’s subwatersheds, the North also measure phosphorus, and a few (especially human bacteroides), Branch Milwaukee River, East & West have participated in conductivity / phosphorus and conductivity / chloride Branches Milwaukee River, Cedar chloride monitoring during the winter linked to road salt.

Water Cummulative Cummulative Year Subwatershed DO pH Turbidity Thermistors Phosphorus Conductivity T e mp Chloride Bacteria 2012 Milwaukee River South 93.0% 99.5% 59.4% 100.0% 99.8% 30.0% 5.3% 55.6% 68.5% A- A F A A F F F D+ 2011 Milwaukee River South 97.4% 100.0% 67.0% 100.0% 99.0% 40.0% 7.5% 89.7% 53.1% A A D+ A A F F B+ F 2010 Milwaukee River South 96.0% 99.0% 67.0% 99.0% 99.9% 10.0% 48.0% A A D+ A A F F

2012 North Branch Milwaukee100.0% 100.0% 87.9% 100.0% 100.0% 50.0% 0.0% A A B+ A A F F 2011 North Branch Milwaukee70.0% 100.0% 85.0% 100.0% 99.0% 38.9% 0.0% C- A B A A F F 2010 North Branch Milwaukee 64.7% 100.0% 76.5% 100.0% 100.0% D A C A A

2012 Cedar Creek 90.0% 100.0% 83.3% 100.0% 100.0% 62.1% 0.0% A- A B A A D- F 2011 Cedar Creek 94.9% 100.0% 93.9% 94.9% 99.8% 62.5% 4.8% 100.0% A A A A A D- F A 2010 Cedar Creek 95.0% 100.0% 92.5% 100.0% 99.8% A A A- A A

2012 East & West Branches 98.1% 98.0% 92.2% 100.0% 99.7% 58.5% 0.0% A A A- A A F F 2011 East & West Branches 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 46.2% 0.0% A A A A A F F 2010 East & West Branches 100.0% 100.0% 91.7% 100.0% A A A- A Fig. 2 3 year comparison of water quality grades; parameters measured by volunteer stream monitors (supplemental bacteria and conductivity data provided by MMSD)

6 2012 Milwaukee River Subwatershed Water Quality Grades by Parameter Fig. 3

Fond du Lac # Sheboygan North Branch Milwaukee County # County # Overall Grade = B * Dissolved Oxygen Grade =A # (N = 33 values, 100% Values Meet Target) # # # pH Dodge B+ Grade =A County (N = 29 values, 100% Values Meet Target) Turbidity ## Grade =B+ East and West Branches # B (N = 33 values, 87.9% Values Meet Target) Overall Grade = B+ # Instantaneous Water Temp Grade =A # # (N = 33 values, 100% Values Meet Target) Dissolved Oxygen ##*# Ozaukee Grade =A County (N = 54 values, 98.1% Values Meet Target) Continuous Water Temp ### Grade =A pH *# (N = 17098 values, 100% Values Meet Target) Grade =A # Conductivity (N = 53 values, 94.3% Values Meet Target) * # Grade =F # (N = 1 values, 0% Values Meet Target) Turbidity # # Grade =A- # # Phosphorus (N = 51 values, 92.2% Values Meet Target) # # # # Grade =F Instantaneous Water Temp # # # (N = 38 values, 50% Values Meet Target) Grade =A # # (N =53 values, 100% Values Meet Target) # Continuous Water Temp Washington B # Lake Grade =A County Michigan (N =28463 values, 99.8% Values Meet Target) ## ## Conductivity # Grade =F Milwaukee River South (N = 3 values, 0% Values Meet Target) # *# ## Phosphorus Overall ##C-## Overall Grade = C- - Grade =F ###*## # Dissolved Oxygen (N = 41 values, 58.5% Values Meet Target) Watershed # # * Grade =A- Grade # ### (N = 440 values, 93% Values Meet Target) Cedar Creek Waukesha ### ## pH County # *#* Grade =A Overall Grade = B # (N = 439 values, 99.5% Values Meet Target) C #* Dissolved Oxygen ## Turbidity Grade =A- # Grade =F (N = 30 values, 90% Values Meet Target) Macroinvertebrates for the ## (N = 438 values, 59.4% Values Meet Target) pH Milwaukee River Watershed Instantaneous Water Temp Grade =A (Citizen Monitoring Biotic Index) Grade =A (N = 30 values, 100% Values Meet Target) (N = 471 values, 100% Values Meet Target) Grade = F Turbidity Continuous Water Temp (14 of 24 values fail to meet Grade =B Grade =A (N = 30 values, 83.3% Values Meet Target) "good" classification) (N = 65686 values, 99.8% Values Meet Target)

Instantaneous Water Temp Chloride Grade =A # MRK Monitoring Location Grade =F (N =18 values, 55.6% Values Meet Target) (N = 34 values, 100% Values Meet Target) * MRK Macroinvertebrate Sampling Location Continuous Water Temp # WDNR Monitoring Location Milwaukee Conductivity Grade =A # MMSD Monitoring Location County Grade =F (N = 11409 values, 100% Values Meet Target) (N = 339 values, 5.3% Values Meet Target) Stream Conductivity Subwatershed Phosphorus Grade =F County Boundary Grade =F (N = 6 values, 0% Values Meet Target) (N = 80 values, 30% Values Meet Target) Lake Michigan Phosphorus Bacteria Grade =D- 0 2.5 5 10 Grade =D+ (N = 29 values, 62.1% Values Meet Target) Miles ± (N = 292 values, 68.5% Values Meet Target)

7 Health of Kinnickinnic & Menomonee Rivers

The Kinnickinnic River and Turbidity, phosphorus and chloride / proactively working with municipalities Menomonee River Watersheds are conductivity also remain a problem. and regulatory agencies to establish once again plagued by poor water As in the Milwaukee River South Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) quality. 2012 was the second year that subwatershed, we suspect stormwater for the Menomonee River Watershed. we analyzed water quality in these two runoff to be the main culprit in A TMDL is an allocation for acceptable heavily urbanized and suburbanized increased turbidity, with land surface pollutant levels released from watersheds. Even allowing for excellent sediments and debris being swept municipalities and other institutions. marks in pH and water temperature, through the storm sewers and directly The intention is that using a watershed- and slightly above average marks into the streams. In addition, massive wide approach to regulating TMDLs will in dissolved oxygen, there were a flashy flows occur during rain events, prove more effective in limitting and/or resounding 9 failing grades leading to with water levels rising quickly and eliminating certain pollutants from our overall grades of C- for the Kinnickinnic eroding massive amounts of sediment streams. River Watershed and a D for the from stream banks. One only needs to Menomonee. visit the Kinnickinnic River along the Another Riverkeeper project started KK River Parkway between 47th and in 2012 should also help to improve Bacteria continues to be a major 60th streets to observe for themselves. water quality and aquatic connectivity issue. MMSD monitors e. coli and in the Menomonee River Watershed, fecal colifrom bacteria, which could High loads of phosphorus and road the Fish Passage Impediment Project. be sourced to either human or other salt are also found in large quantities MRK staff and volunteers walked miles animal waste. Milwaukee Riverkeeper in stormwater runoff and have been an of streams including the Menomonee has taken it a step further by working issue in our more urban watersheds. River, Little Menomonee River, Little with Dr Sandra McClellan at the UW Milwaukee Riverkeeper has tested for Menomonee Creek, Nor-X-Way Milwaukee School of Freshwater both chloride and conductivity, which Channel, Dretzka Park Creek, Butler Sciences, who has developed a can be used as a suitable subsittute Creek, and Lily Creek, searching for technique to identify bacteria specific in correlation to chloride. MMSD potential barriers to fish passage. The to the human gut, hence indicating the measures conductivity as well and they next stage will be to secure funding to presence of viruses more specifically too find levels beyond recommended remove and remediate the most severe dangerous to human health, but also guidelines for a freshwater stream. barriers in order to not only improve indicating that we have issues with our fish passage, but also to hopefully sanitary sewage contaminating our Milwaukee Riverkeeper, along with improve overall water quality. stromwater. Please see our section on our partners at Southeast Wisconsin bacteria in this year’s report card. Watershed Trust (SWWT) are

Water Cummulative Fecal Cummulative Year Subwatershed DO pH Turbidity Thermistors Phosphorus Conductivity Temp Chloride Coliform Bacteria 2012 Kinnickinnic River 82.6% 98.5% 64.2% 100.0% 98.6% 42.1% 27.0% 0.0% 48.7% 49.6% B- A D A A F F F F F 2011 Kinnickinnic River 76.7% 100.0% 51.4% 100.0% 100.0% 77.8% 12.6% 35.7% 33.3% 34.9% C+ A F A A C+ F F F F 2010 Kinnickinnic River

2012 Menomonee River 84.5% 99.7% 70.1% 100.0% 99.8% 36.9% 2.8% 75.0% 44.8% 44.3% B A C- A A F F C F F 2011 Menomonee River 93.8% 100.0% 53.2% 100.0% 100.0% 42.0% 5.2% 65.8% 51.2% 39.6% A A F A A F F F F F 2010 Menomonee River

Fig. 4 2 year comparison of water quality grades; parameters measured by volunteer stream monitors (supplemental bacteria and conductivity data provided by MMSD, and human bacteria data by Milwaukee Riverkeeper staff)

8 Fig. 5 2012 Menomonee and KK River Watersheds Water Quality Grades

Washington Menomonee River Kinnickinnic River County Overall Grade = D Overall Grade = D - OzaukOeezaukee County Dissolved Oxygen Dissolved Oxygen Grade =B Grade =B-

Washington (N = 394 values, 84.5% Values Meet Target) (N = 201 values, 82.6% Values Meet Target) k

k e ree e endale C r pH pH d C l

o #

G Grade =A Grade =A n

o (N = 394 values, 99.7% Values Meet Target) (N = 195 values, 98.5% Values Meet Target)

o n

Menomonee e Turbidity Turbidity

k M

e (! l

* t

e River

r t

i Grade =C- Grade =D C L w #(! Watershed (N = 381 values, 70.1% Values Meet Target) (N = 193 values, 64.2% Values Meet Target) o l l i

W Men om k o e Instantaneous Water Temp Instantaneous Water Temp n e # # e (! r e C

R k Grade =A Grade =A

i (! r

v a (N = 419 values, 100% Values Meet Target) (N = 207 values, 100% Values Meet Target)

er P

t Continuous Water Temp Continuous Water Temp

e r D(! # Grade =A Grade =A #(! (N = 41651 values, 99.8% Values Meet Target) (N = 10946 values, 98.6% Values Meet Target) #(! # # Chloride Chloride (! Grade =C Grade =F #(! (N = 12 values, 75% Values Meet Target) (N = 2 values, 0% Values Meet Target)

Conductivity Conductivity Waukesha # County Grade =F Grade =F (!# (N = 359 values, 2.8% Values Meet Target) (N = 159 values, 27% Values Meet Target) # Phosphorus Phosphorus * Grade =F Grade =F #(! M (N = 65 values, 36.9% Values Meet Target) (N = 38 values, 42.1% Values Meet Target) en o #(! m o n e Bacteria Bacteria D # e

i Grade =F Grade =F # v U e (N = 537 values, 44.3% Values Meet Target) (N = 127 values, 49.6% Values Meet Target) # n r d *#(! # e r w k # * # e o e o r (! d C #* # #(!*##*(! #(! ## # Waukesha # #

# # #(!# # #

k e

e # Lake r

# C

r y Michigan e

e v #

i n

o c R

H nni #(! icki # *#(! K inn #*(! #* # ## #*(! KK MilwauWkee i River ls o * n #*(! *#(! P Watershed # #(! ark *# Cre *# ek Milwaukee * County C-

# MRK Monitoring Location * MRK Macroinvertebrate Sampling Location # WDNR Monitoring Location # MMSD Monitoring Location Menomonee River Watershed KK River Watershed Stream Milwaukee Subwatershed Macroinvertebrates Macroinvertebrates (Citizen Monitoring Biotic Index) (Citizen Monitoring Biotic Index) County Boundary Lake Michigan Grade = F No Data 0 1 2 4 (4 of 8 values fail to meet Miles ± "good" classification)

9 Spotlight: Bacteria and Human Bacteroides Do You Like to Swim, Paddle, or Drink Water? If Yes, Bacteria Levels Matter!

Menomonee River Watershed Milwaukee Riverkeeper completed Human Bacteroides Sample Results it’s initial stormwater monitoring goals 50 for the Menomonee River Watershed 45 focus area in 2012, collecting up to 4

40 samples for each stormwater outfall on the Menomonee River, Honey Creek

35 and Underwood Creek. We collected 3 30 samples during rain events and if flowing

25 during dry weather, we collected a fourh. Why do stormwater outfalls flow when 20 there is no rain? Unfortunately, a large # of samples in each range each in samples of # 15 portion of our stormwater sewers are

10 aging and in disrepair, hence leaks occur. When stormwater outfalls flow during dry 5 weather, it could be due to groundwater Bacteria Counts 0 (Copy Number / 100 mL) Honey Creek Menomonee River Underwood Creek Watershed infiltration or permitted cooling water Low (CN < 1,000) 16 4 20 40 discharge from industry. However, a more Medium (CN 1,000 - 10,000) 9 6 13 28 High (CN > 10,000) 1 25 9 35 serious explanation may be at play; cross- Total Samples 26 35 42 103 contamination from sanitary sewers. Fig. 6 We remain greatly concerned about the Chart shows # of samples testing positive for human bacteroides in each range for the Menomonee River and it’s tributaries Honey Creek & Underwood Creek, and the wtaershed as amount of human waste entering our a whole. streams through stormwater conveyance. More than 1/3 of our outfall samples (where the stormsewer dumps directly 2012 Kinnickinnic River Watershed into the stream) contain medium to high Human Bacteroides Sample Results 10 amounts of human bacteria. It should be noted that the results for the Menomonee 9 River samples are a bit skewed, as they 8 include detailed investigations of strongly suspected sanitary sewage contamination;

7 needless to say, the results proved the 6 suspicions! 5 Milwaukee Riverkeeper staff also surveyed 4 large portions of the Kinnickinnic River # of samples in each range each in samples of # 3 Watershed, looking for dry flowing outfalls.

2 Wilson Park Creek had several, with roughly half of them containing medium to 1 high amounts of human bacteria. When Bacteria Counts 0 (Copy Number / 100 mL) Kinnickinnic River Wilson Park Creek Watershed considering three “wet weather” samples Low (CN < 1,000) 2 5 7 from the Kinnickinnic River mainstem, half Medium (CN 1,000 - 10,000) 0 4 4 High (CN > 10,000) 1 2 3 of all samples for the watershed ranked Total Samples 3 11 14 in the medium and high range for human Fig. 7 bacteria. Chart shows # of samples testing positive for human bacteroides in each range for streams in the Kinnickinnic River Watershed and for the wtaershed as a whole. Milwaukee Riverkeeper will expand their

10 data collection in the Kinnickinnic River Watershed for 2013 (weather and rain permitting) so as to have a more full picture of the sanitary sewage contamination in this watershed. We will employ the same regime of 3 rain event samples and one dry weather sample for each stormwater outfall.

Fig. 8 Stormwater Outfalls & Historic Urban Growth: Human Bacteroides Lab Results 2012 Map showing stormwater Milwaukee outfalls compared to historic Human Bacteroides Historic Urban High Count (2012) Growth (! (CN / 100 mL) urban growth. The growth layer Other 0 - 1,000 1850 - 1899 helps us to determine if and how M!ilwa1,u00k0e -e 10,000 er iv 1900-1919 R River 1S0,o00u0t h- 100,000 e much aging infrastructure plays e 1920-1939 k Wate1r0s0h,0e0d0 - 1,000,0u00 Elm Grove (! a 1940-1949 in sewer systems with high over 1 million lw U i M 1950-1959 n (! d Wauwatosa

levels of human bacteria. While e Municipal Boundary 1960-1969

r w (! Menomonee Watershed Boundary 1970-1979 we do see a strong correlation, o k Stream o River e 1980-1989 d e r Street it is not the only indicator. C Watershed (! 1990-1999 re C (! Lake Michigan e y k 2000- e

n (!(! Menomonee River o (! Results depict samples H 0 0.225 0.45 0.9 ± Miles k e collected from outfalls during (! re C Brookfield d 2012. The larger and darker the o o symbol, the greater the amount W of human bacteroides found.

Unfortunately, for 2012 data r New Berlin iv e 43rd cR St i West Allis r n

alone, we have found samples ee

t i

D k

i i

t with over 100,000 counts of n c

h n human bacteroides on four i K

L different stream reaches, two y H Kinnickinnic o o n n each for the Menomonee and e s River y C P Watershed re a Kinnickinnic River Watersheds. e r k k C re (! e k (!

W ilso n Park C St. Francis Greenfield re ek

Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee Stormwater Outfalls & Historic Urban Growth: Highest Recorded Human Bacteroides / Outfall Fig. 9

M(!ilwaukee Map showing stormwater outfalls as (! Human Bacteroides Historic Urban High Count (2012) Growth they relate to historic urban growth. (CN / 100 mL) (! Other Results include samples collected (! 0 - 1,000 1850 - 1899 ! 1,000 - 10,000 Milwaukee 1900-1919 between 2008 and 2012, with the 10,000 - 100,000 r (! ive 1920-1939 (!(! River South R 100,000 - 1,000,000 e highest recorded bacteria levels for (! e 1940-1949 (!! Watershed k ( over 1 million u (!(! a 1950-1959 each outfall shown in graduated Elm Grove lw i 1960-1969 U (!(! ! Municipal Boundary M n (!(! ( symbols. d Wauwatosa (! (! Watershed Boundary 1970-1979

e (!(! k r (! Stream w e 1980-1989 (! e (! Street r o (! 1990-1999 o Menomonee C (! (! (! (! Lake Michigan d (! y 2000- Cr River e (! e e n (! k Watershed o (! (! H (! 0 0.225 0.45 0.9 (! Menomonee Riv±er Miles (! (!

k e (! re(! C d Brookfield o o W

r New Berlin Riv e 43rd c St i West Allis r n

t i

D k

c i i

t c n

h n

i (!(! K

H o (! n e y Kinnickinnic Cr ee River k Watershed (!(! (! W i (! ls

n P arkC r eek Greenfield

(! (! 11 Turbidity / Transparency / Water Clarity: No Matter What You Call It, It’s a Problem for Our Basin!

Turbidity, transparency and water dissolved oxygen essential for aquatic species, lose their advantage when clarity are all terms which describe life. Turbid water also hinders the visibility is impaired. the amount of suspended material sunlight’s ability to penetrate the water in a body of water such as a stream. column, lessening the ability of aquatic Milwaukee Riverkeeper volunteer Increased turbidity not only indicates vegetation to undergo photosynthesis, monitors use a transparency tube poor and worsening land use, it also a process which contributes dissolved to measure water quality. The tubes leads to various degraded conditions oxygen to the stream ecosystem. are clear plastic with a metric (cm) for both aquatic organisms and the Eventually, the suspended sediment measuring tape running along the stream itself. causing the turbidity will settle out side and a black and white disc at on the stream bottom, covering the bottom, alternating colors in 4 Poor tilling practices on farmland, small rocks and other debris whcih quadrants. Monitors fill the tube poor buffer management in ripairan house macroinvertebrates, the small completely with stream water, then environments, dirty streets and high organisms which compose an intergral slowly release the water through a levels of erosion all contribute to lower link of the aquatic food chain. valve and hose connected near the increased turbidity in our streams bottom of the tube. As the water drains through erosion and stormwater runoff. Turbidity also affects indidvidual from the tube, the monitor peers organisms directly. Sediments will straight down into the tube and stops Generally, as turbididty increases, irritate fish gills leading to respiratory the release of water when they can water temperature rises, which in turn distress and other difficulties. Sight see a distinction between black and leaves the stream less capable to store predators, including certain fish white on the disk. MMSD uses more

Fig. 10 Turbidity by Major Watershed 2010 - 2012 100

30 % Standard % Samples Achieve

0 2010 2011 2012 Kinnickinnic River 100 51 67 Menomonee River 80 68 70 Milwaukee River (all) 80 70 65

14 Subwatershed Comparison of Turbidity 2010 - 2012 100

% Achieve Samples Standard 30

0 E&W Branches N Branch Cedar Creek Milwaukee River South 2010 92 76.5 92.5 67 2011 100 85 94 67 2012 92.2 87.9 83.3 59.4

Fig. 11 sophisticated (and much more expensive) equipment to measure transparency in units 2012 Turbidity Results by Watershed / Subwatershed of Nephelometric Turbidity (NTU). Volunteer % Samples Meeting Standard monitors can do a simple conversion from their 100 readings in cm to those of NTU’s for a useful 90 comparison. 80

The Milwaukee River Basin as a whole 70 struggles with turbid waters. The northern 60 subwatersheds fare a bit better, with the North Branch improving from a C to a B to a 50 B+ in 2012, and theEast & West Branches 40

maintaining an A/A- grade the past 3 years. standard meeting % Samples 30 Cedar Creek dropped from an A to a B from 2011 to 2012, the North Branch improved a 20 bit from a C to a B+, but the Milwaukee River 10

South had the worst readings dropping from a 0 D+ in 2011 to an F in 2012 making the standard E&W Br Milw Riv NB Milw Riv Cedar Creek Milw Riv S KK Riv Wtshd Men Riv Wtshd only 59.4% of the time. The Menomonee and F D C B A Pct Meet Standard Kinnickinnic Watersheds fared no better, though Fig. 12 each improved from F’s in 2011 to a C- and D respectively in 2012. See the “What You Can Do” section for tips on helping with this major issue in our watershed!

15 Spotlight: Phosphorus and Chloride Nutrients: Aren’t They Supposed to Be Good For Us? Fig. 13 While the ingestion of certain amounts of nutrients are critical Watershed Phosphorus Compliance Comparison to the survival of the human race, overloading our local streams with 2011 - 2012 excess nutrients is another matter. 90.0%

As you may have noticed from 80.0%

our watershed and subwatershed 70.0%

grade maps, phosphorus once again did very poorly in our water 60.0% quality analysis, with 5 F’s and 50.0% a D-. 2012 Phosphorus results managed to even beat out 2011 40.0% results, which actually saw 4 F’s a 30.0%

D and a C. Standard Meeting % Samples

Once again, the culprit is 20.0%

stomrwater and human modified 10.0% environments. Urban stormwater 0.0% loads local sewer systems with Milw River Menomonee Cedar Creek E&W Branch North Branch KK River leaves and other phosphorus- South River containing plant debris, residual % Meet Stndrd 2011 57.0% 60.0% 39.0% 47.0% 78.0% 42.0% % Meet Stndrd 2012 63.0% 57.5% 47.4% 29.3% 43.2% 36.4% fertilizers and animal waste. Rural areas supporting agriculture also fertilizers, manure and the soil itself. Other As mentioned in previous report contribute phosphorus runoff from sources of phosphorus in our local waterways cards, excessive phosphoru leads poor plowing techniques and include detergents and additives to our drinking to several problems for aquatic riparian buffer widths contributing water which prevent pipe corrosion. organisms, especially streams with warmer waters, concrete bottoms 2012 Monthly Phosphorus Compliance and lesser stream flows. Such by Watershed / Subwatershed stream conditions, with the addition 120% of excess phosphorus, often accelerate and foster the growth of 100% algae blooms on water surfaces,

which are not only unsightly but can 80% also contribute to fish kills and if at all toxic, beach closings. 60% What can you do to help? Farmers 40% can take more care in applying % Samples in Compliance fertilizers and manure and create/ 20% manage buffers on their field edges; homeowners can properly 0% E & W Branch North Branch South Branch Menomonee Cedar Creek Kinnickinnic River dispose of phosphorus-containing Milwaukee Milwaukee Milwaukee River May 100% 71% 33% 38% 50% 53% fertilizers, remove leaves and other June 60% 29% 33% 8% 33% 8% debris from street gutters and storm July 20% 29% 33% 0% 43% 0% grates. August 75% 43% 50% 23% 29% 38% September 50% 100% 40% 55% 57% 46% October 50% 86% 100% 50% 75% 70% Fig. 14

12 Spotlight: Phosphorus and Chloride Fig. 15 Chlorides, aka salts, are another essential compound for human life, 2012 Milwaukee River Basin Chloride Results 3000 aiding in metabolism. Too much salt in 2730

one’d diet can lead to issues with blood 2450 2500 pressure, kidney function and worse.

Too much salt in our local streams can 2000 turn them into marine-like bodies of 1480 water in a very short time. The culprit? 1500 ... road salt. 1140 Chloride levels can impact aquatic 1000 Chloride Concentrations (mg/L) Concentrations Chloride

life in two major ways, chronically and 448 484 500 410 374 275 acutely. Acute levels of chloride have 221 193 128 123 131 the potential to kill fish and aquatic 109 97.3 0 organisms instantly, whereas chronic levels over a longer period of time can have the same effect.

For the third winter in a row, Milwaukee Riverkeeper monitored the effects of Chloride Result EPA Acute Std (860 mg/L) EPA Chronic Std (230 mg/L) road salt at various locations in the metro Milwaukee area. We continued to application seasons, January - March Willow and Ulao Creeks), while less in monitor conductivity, which we’ve found and October - November. We can concentration, are vulnerable to chronic is a strong corollary for measuring see that the more urban and smaller levels of salt. the impact of road salt, at most of our volume streams, the Kinnickinnic original sites from 2010, but scaled River and Lincoln Creek, have serious Figure 16 depicts the urban, concrete- back our monitoring for chloride to just issues with chloride whereas the urban lined, flashy Kinnickinnic River, with those sites where we needed additional Milwaukee River location does not have samples taken throughout the year, data. the chloride issues, as concentrations from 2011 - 2013. are diluted due to a greater volumne When observing the date and related Figure 15 includes samples taken in of water. The suburban streams (Lily, 2012, which includes two road salt chloride concentration, one notices the trend very easily; late spring, Kinnickinnic River @ 11th St Chloride Results summer and early fall have fairly 2011 - 2013 consistent concentrations (which also 5000 4890 happen to be chronically salty), but as

4500 soon as road salt season arrives, the concentrations leap into acute levels of 4000 toxicity. 3500 3170 As we noted earlier in the report card, 3000 even though we may have average to 2450 2500 excellent grades for dissolved oxygen, 2080 2000 1710 pH, turbidity and water temperature, having acute chloride toxicity could Chloride Concentration (mg/L) Concentration Chloride 1500 negate these positive factors and be a 1000 EPA Acute large factor prohibiting vibrant aquatic 525 546 500 316 309 307 life in our local streams.

EPA Chronic 0 So please, season lightly this winter!

Chloride Lab Results EPA Acute Std (860 mg/L) EPA Chronic Std (230 mg/L) Fig. 16

16 Spotlight: Conductivity, It’s Electric!

Conductivity measures the ability metro area streams. One major high side of average, with absolutely of water to conduct electricity. outcome, besides the realization none of them falling in the optimal Many elements have this capability, that chlorides and conductivity 150 - 500 uhmos/cm range. and in our local streams it tends are having a seriously deleterious to be metals and salts, both impact on our local waterways, Figure 16 compares monitoring naturally occuring as well as those changing them from freshwater locations for upstream and contributed by humans. to marine environments for large downstream locations on the portions of the winter, was that Milwaukee River as well as for Unfortunately, our local streams there is a strong correlation smaller tributary streams of the have a legacy of heavy metal and between chloride and conducitivity. Milwaukee. As we saw in our nutrient pollution; heavy metal Hence, conductivity may be used chloride results, a few major trends pollution (no, not AC/DC or Led as a dependable surrogate when exist. Tributary streams see a Zepplin) can be traced back to measuring the impact of road salt more dynamic variation throughout the industrial juggernaut that once on our local streams. the year and have overall higher was Milwaukee, whereas nutrient readings of conductivity, most likely pollution (in the form of phosphorus Studies show that the optimal range due to their lower baseflow volume. and chloride) appear to be in their for a healthy aquatic ecosystme In addition, all three categories heyday. is 150 - 500 uhmos/cm; none of show three basic trends; spikes our locations achieved that range, during the road salt season, a Beginning in the winter of 2010- with values ranging much higher. A major dip during the spring when 2011 Milwaukee Riverkeeper, in normal range for rivers in the US is streams are swollen from rainfall, conjunction with UW-Extension, 50 - 1500 uhmos/cm. and increasing conductivity in the the USGS and the Wisconsin summer and early fall due to lower DNR, began monitoring chlorides Milwaukee area streams tend to stream flows, leading to the next and conductivity in Milwaukee have conductivity readings on the winter spike.

Upstream / Downstream Conductivity Comparisons Milwaukee River Monitoring Locations - 2012 2000 * Jan = 4055 Feb = 2470 1800 Apr = 2028

1600

1400

)

1200

1000 1000 800 Conductivity (uhmos/cm Conductivity 600 500

400 Fig. 16

200 Comparing monthly 200 conductivity readings for 150 0 three categories of monitoring Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec locations: upstream and Aquatic Life Optimum (150 - 500 uhmos/cm) USA Stream Norm (200 - 1000 uhmos/cm) downstream locations on Upstream Milw Co Sites Downstream Milw Co Sites the Milwaukee River and * Tributaries Milw Co Milwaukee River tributary streams.

17 Spotlight: Conductivity, It’s Electric!

Fig. 17 Milwaukee River downstream 2012 Monthly Conductivity - Milwaukee River Downstream Sites, Milwaukee Co. conductivity monitoring locations for conductivity. 1400 Downstream sites tend to have a higher flow 1200 and volume which at times can dilute pollutant

1000 concentrations. In this case, conductivity readings followed a somewhat 800 seasonal progression, with higher readings in the later 600 winter - early spring, no 500 uhmos/cm Conductivity (uhmos/cm)Conductivity doubt linked to road salting 400 and melting runoff saturated Optimal Aquatic Life Conductivity Range (150 - 500 uhmos/cm) with road salt. Late summer

200 and early fall saw levels 150 uhmos/cm spike moderately, most likely due to lower water volumes 0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec increasing the concentration of No recorded values for this Milw Riv @ North Ave Milw Riv @ Walnut St Milw Riv @ Wells St site met the optimal range for Milw Riv @ Water St Milw Riv @ Estabrook Milw Riv DS CTH H conductivity, with all values falling above the upper limit.

Fig. 18 2012 Monthly Conductivity - Milwaukee River Upstream Sites, Milwaukee Co. Milwaukee River upstream conductivity monitoring 1400 sites show an even stronger relationship relating to 1200 seasonality and stream flow.

We see the late winter/early 1000 spring spikes at the beginning of the year, followed by a dip mid-spring related to higher 800 stream flows. A more gradual increase ensues as summer 600 500 uhmos/cm gives way to fall and water (uhmos/cm) Conductivity levels gradually recede. 400 Optimal Aquatic Life Conductivity Range Interestingly, water volume may (150 - 500 uhmos/cm) be the main factor affecting 200 these sites with swollen spring 150 uhmos/cm streams diluting the conductivity temporarily before they return 0 to their characteristic annual Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec levels. Milw Riv @ Pioneer Rd Milw Riv @ Brwn Deer Rd Milw Riv @ Silv Spr Rd Milw Riv @ N Pt Wash Rd

13 Volunteer Monitor Spotlight

Milwaukee Riverkeeper is grateful to the more than 250 citizens who have actively participated in our volunteer stream monitoring programs since 2006. Two groups of monitors are highlighted below. Matt & Angela

Matt & Angela began Level 1 stream become involved and help out our local In addition to volunteer stream monitoring monitoring in the spring of 2012. I set them waterways” initially became aware of Matt & Angela have participated in several up to monitor on a pretty little creek that I the program through her husband Matt, river cleanups, staffed our educational had noticed early in thespring ... a week “ Matt was interested in pursuing stream table at local events, participated in a local or so later I got a message that they could monitoring and I thought it would be an morning tv shoot about water quality and only find a muddy swamp area ... my bad! activity we could share together without took some beautiful pictures at our annual While this didn’t help Matt & Angela’s effort knowing what I was getting myself into.” bash this fall. They make a great team! to monitor, it did teach us something new about that particular intermittent stream. Matt’s passion for angling and his “itch to Thanks Matt & Angela! Undeterred, Matt & Angela agreed to stray get outside on a monthly basis” (Matt’s a bit further from home to take over a quite often in “the lab” conducting public different monitoring location. health research at UW Milwaukee School of Freshwater Sciences) led to his interest In 2013, they immediately jumped at the in volunteer stream monitoring. “Not only chance to move up to Level 2 monitoring, is the volunteer work educational, but I and even took on an additional monitoring get a sense of satisfaction when I see site. Angela, a self-described novice that I made a positive difference on the regarding water quality, “I prove that you community. don’t have to be in a scientific field to Team KK

Bill & Sheila, Christine, & Brian Brian hopes his efforts to improve it is now time for us to DO something!” They were 5 disparate strangers at our water quality in his neighborhood will Their interactions with the river stretch 2010 spring training (ok, there is one inform others about respecting “the back to their kids youth, “Our children couple in the bunch and they all hail unique environment we have here in used to catch crayfish in Wilson Creek. from Bayview, but they didn’t know it at the Great Lakes region and [will] work We know that the streams that flow into the time) who took it upon themselves to improve and protect it.” the KK River are now very polluted... to team up and monitor the difficult-to- Christine likewise hopes to improve Our monitoring can provide data to access Kinnickinnic River Watershed.... her surroundings, “I love the message help” solve this problem. We obviously four years later they are still together that [Milwaukee] Riverkeeper is concur. and have become good friends; they about making rivers swimmable and Thanks Team KK! are, Team KK! fishable. It makes me nuts to be on Brian learned about stream monitor water that I can’t jump into.” She goes training after attending a river cleanup. on to note, “I like that it {Milwaukee Christine found herself cheering on Riverkeeper] looks at the water up- Riverkeeper from a newspaper story close and scientifically, is a source of and then noticed the mention of stream direct evidence, and is willing to both monitor training. Bill & Sheila just cooperate (and sue if necessary) to showed up to cause trouble ... kidding, achieve results. Go Riverkeeper!” of course, Bill & Sheila both have Sheila and Bill, both trained strong backgrounds in the sciences biologists, began monitoring upon and bring experience and enthusiasm retirement, realizing “we have done to the table. a lot of talking about water issues,

If you are interested in joining Team KK & the Wolters as volunteer water quality monitors, please contact Milwaukee Riverkeeper. We hold trainings for Level 1 and Level 2 monitors each spring in late April or early May. For more information, see our website at www. milwaukeeriverkeeper.org, or contact Joe Rath at [email protected].

18 What YOU Can Do

Below are some easy things you can do to help restore the health of the Milwaukee River Basin. Thank you for your help and support!

Reduce erosion and sediment entering the rivers 1) Adopt a River -- keep an eye on a section of river near you. Contact us to learn how.

2) Educate and participate in land stewardship activities such as tree planting and invasive species removal.

3) Report potential sources of pollution from construction sites or stormwater outfalls, eroding areas, and other problems to Milwaukee Riverkeeper at 414-287-0207 or to the WDNR at 1-800-TIP-WDNR.

Reduce nutrients and polluted runoff 1) Prevent stormwater runoff by catching and encouraging slow infiltration of rain into soils with rain gardens, rain barrels, cisterns, and planting of native vegetation.

2) Pick up after pets -- pet waste is a major source of bacteria to our rivers.

3) Use water wisely both inside and outside the home. Minimize use of water during heavy rain storms to reduce stress on local sewers and protect rivers from sewage overflows.

4) Minimize or eliminate use of fertilizers and pesticides on your property.

5) Reduce or eliminate your use of salt on paved surfaces.

Stay engaged and help inform and educate others

1) Stay up-to-date on current issues affecting water quality and wildlife habitat. Sign up for Riverkeeper News.

2) Vote GREEN and advocate for fishable, swimmable, drinkable rivers and lakes. Contact elected officials and let them know that the health of the rivers and Lake Michigan is important to you.

3) Become involved in river cleanups, volunteer water quality monitoring, and other community events to protect our rivers and the land that drains to them.

19 Milwaukee River Report Card 2011 Our Mission Milwaukee Riverkeeper’s mission is to protect water quality and wildlife habitat in the river corridors and to advocate for sound land use in the Milwaukee, Menomonee, and Kinnickinnic River Watersheds.

Milwaukee Riverkeeper serves as an advocate and voice for the Milwaukee, Menomonee, and Kinnickinnic Rivers. Our core programming involves patrolling, monitoring, and advocating on behalf of the rivers. We also coordinate hands-on river restoration projects and organize thousands of volunteers each year in river cleanups. Milwaukee Riverkeeper is a licensed member of the Waterkeeper Alliance, an international coalition dedicated to clean water and healthy communities. Milwaukee Riverkeeper 1845 N. Farwell Ave., Suite 100 Milwaukee, WI 53202 (414) 287-0207 www.milwaukeeriverkeeper.org [email protected]