Fabius River Drainage District

Des Moines River Basin Master Reservoir Regulation Manual Feasibility Report with Integrated Environmental Assessment

Des Moines River, Saylorville Lake, & Lake Red Rock

APPENDIX A

CORRESPONDENCE AND PUBLIC COMMENTS, DISTRICT RESPONSE TO PUBLIC COMMENTS, AND PUBLIC MEETINGS INFORMATION This page was intentionally left blank. CORRESPONDENCE This page was intentionally left blank. CHESTER J. CULVER OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR PATTY JUDGE GOVERNOR LT. GOVERNOR

July 20, 2010

Lieutenant General Robert Van Antwerp Commanding General, USAGE Headquarters, US Army Corps of Engineers 441 G. Street, NW Washington, DC 20314-1000

Dear Lt. General Van Antwerp,

The floods of 2008 and 2010 in Iowa provide vivid reminders of the complex factors impacting the ability of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USAGE) to conduct day-to-day operations of the water storage capacities of each of our state's reservoirs. Much of the analyses underlying the Water Control Activities of the USAGE are premised on decades-old technologies and assumptions about Iowa's hydrology. Based on our recent cooperative efforts with USAGE, and in light of uncontrolled releases at Saylorville Reservoir, and new reports of technical problems as to the pneumatic crest gate at that dam, we believe that a review of these complex practices would be beneficial to all parties involved.

We have USAGE-controlled dams in Iowa that have reached beyond their half lives without a comprehensive review of their operations. What may have been defined as "normal" 30 years ago might be quite unusual today. In light of the changing Midwestern weather patterns, I believe it is imperative to the safety and well-being of Iowans that plans put in place for the facilities and operations be carefully reviewed. I understand there have been changes to pieces of the plans over the years, but I believe that all stakeholders, at all levels, will benefit from a comprehensive review of existing operations.

As such, on behalf of the State of Iowa, I request a meeting with division and regional USAGE members from the Rock Island, Omaha and Kansas City districts, and from USAGE headquarters. Representatives of affected state and local governments as well as representatives of our Congressional delegation should also participate in this meeting. The intent of this meeting would be for all parties to come to a better understanding of, at least, the following matters: the restrictions and limitations under which the USAGE must operate; the conditions necessary to deviate from those restrictions and limitations; and, any existing variances concerning which all parties may not now be aware.

STATE CAPITOL DES MOINES, !OWA 50319 515.281 .5211 FAX 515.281.6611 WWW.GOVERNOR.STATE.IA.US I pledge to work together with the USAGE on funding strategies for this effort.

In addition to the requested deviation plans and policies that I seek from your agency, you should know that I am sending a letter to President Obama requesting that he include in his FY12 Budget Request funding for USAGE to conduct comprehensive plan reviews for each of the USAGE-managed reservoirs within Iowa.

Thank you in advance for your anticipated cooperation, and best wishes.

ester J. Culver~ Governor, State of Iowa

CJC/drb

Cc: The Honorable Barack Obama Senator Tom Harkin Senator Charles Grassley Congressman Tom Latham Congressman Bruce Braley Congressman Dave Loebsack Congressman Leonard Boswell Congressman Steve King Jo Ellen Darcy DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS WASHINGTON, D.C. 20314-1000 JUL 2 8 2010

Honorable Chester J. Culver Governor State of Iowa State Capital Des Moines, Iowa 50319

Dear Governor Culver:

Thank you for your letter of July 20, 2010, concerning operations of U.S. Army Corps of Engineers reservoirs in Iowa. I would also like to thank you for your call yesterday.

Corps reservoirs have reduced peak floods in Iowa and have greatly minimized flooding in the communities located below the reservoirs and in downstream areas. We operate these reservoirs in accordance with water control plans that were developed to meet their congressionally authorized purposes. During development of these water control plans, local, state and Federal agencies with water resources responsibilities and the public reviewed and provided comments to help ensure the projects would meet their objectives. The primary purpose of these reservoirs is flood risk management for areas below the lakes. Other purposes include low flow augmentation, fish and wildlife management, and recreation. Saylorville Lake is also operated to provide water supply for areas below the reservoir. As you point out, many variables have changed since the last in-depth review of these plans including stakeholders, land-use, and possibly quantity/frequency of precipitation. We welcome a meeting with state and Corps representatives to discuss current operations and potential future studies. As we discussed yesterday, we will work to set this meeting up in Iowa, during the month of August 2010.

As you may know, this year we have authorized deviations from the water control plans on Rock Island District Reservoirs on three separate occasions in order to minimize flood risks associated with uncontrolled reservoir releases. Deviations were also approved for the Water Control Plan for the Rathbun Dam in Kansas City District. If an in-depth review of the reservoir regulation manuals is pursued, the process would include economic evaluation of alternative water control strategies, public reviews, evaluation of real estate requirements, assessment of environmental impacts and compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and other applicable laws. The process would likely take approximately two years to complete and would cost between $1 million and $2 million per dam/reservoir. The Corps has gained new information during the recent flood events which would aid in updating these plans. 2

Funding to undertake these investigations will be considered with the multiple needs throughout the Country when developing the Administration's Budget.

Additionally, the Corps executes a comprehensive dam safety program consisting of instrumentation reviews, field inspections, and engineering evaluations to ensure that all of its dams are designed, constructed, operated, and maintained as safely and effectively as reasonably possible. Interim Risk Reduction measures have been approved for Rathbun Dam to aid the Corps in managing risks until permanent actions are approved and implemented.

We understand the importance of the flood control provided by Corps reservoirs to Iowans and appreciate your commitment to raise these issues on their behalf. I look forward to working with you as we address these issues.

Sincerely,

R. L. Van Antwerp Lieutenant General, US Chief of Engineers .~~,.,wsr4 ,~. UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY REGION 7 11201 Renner Boulevard \s.w;z l Lenexa, Kansas 66219 'i,.4tPRo7 MAR 2 9 2017

James D. Homann, Program Manager U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Rock Island District ATIN:PM-M P.O. Box 2004 Rock Island, Illinois 61204-2004

Dear Mr. Homann:

Thank you for the opportunity to provide scoping comments regarding the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' plan to update the Des Moines River Regulation Manual, including the Water Control Manual for both Saylorville Lake and Lake Red Rock in central Iowa. The Rock Island District will be developing an Environmental Assessment to comply with the National Environmental Policy Act once scoping is complete. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency requests the opportunity to review and comment on the draft EA once the District makes it available. Our scoping comments are an enclosure with this letter.

We hope tht:'..se comments are useful to you as you proceed with EA development. Please feel free to contact me at 913-551-7606 an~ I - - or Larry Shepard, National Environmental Policy Act staff, at 913-551-7441 and JIll g I·if you have any questions regarding our comments.

Sincerely, ~~~ Josh Tapp, Deputy Director Environmental Sciences and Technology Division

Enclosure cc: Jeannette Schafer, WWPD/WPIB/WWSP

Printed on Recycled Paper Detailed Comments

Reservoirs Planning and Management Integration

The Corps uses several planning and management tools for reservoir projects and project resources. The Environmental Assessment should provide a clear explanation ofhow the water control manuals for each reservoir, under the Des Moines River Regulation Manual, are integrated with each project's Shoreline Management Plans and Master Plans.

Sedimentation

The EA should fully characterize historical trends and the current status ofboth reservoirs with regard to sedimentation rate. This characterization should include the effects ofsedimentation on reservoir storage capacity, including delta formation at the headwaters ofboth reservoirs, sediment deposition trends and raises in conservation pool due to sediment-related loss offlood storage. Sedimentation affects reservoir storage and, therefore, reservoir operations. In addition, a recent chemical characterization of sediment quality should be part of the assessment, including nutrients, mercury and pesticides. Sediment quality also affects reservoir condition and management. Geographical sources of excessive sediment load to the reservoir within the upstream watershed should also be identified to the extent that information is available, i.e., relative tributary watershed contributions to reservoir sedimentation.

Water Quality

The EA should include documentation of algal blooms within both reservoirs and an analysis of the impact ofreservoir operations on the appearance of algal blooms. The potential for an increased frequency and severity of algal blooms in response to operational actions and increasing reservoir water temperatures should also be discussed. Alternatives with operational actions intended to improve reservoir conditions potentially causing algal blooms should be included among the range of alternatives.

The river reaches above and below each reservoir should be characterized as well as the impacts of operations on river morphology and aquatic life in each reach. Identified release minimums to reaches below each reservoir should be identified and the rationale supporting these minimums provided. The EA should also describe the association between minimum releases and the condition of the aquatic community in these receiving waters, including documented fish kills.

Impacts related to the timing and quantity ofreleases on receiving stream temperature, dissolved oxygen, dissolved gases, conductivity, pH and nutrients should be characterized and operational changes identified among alternatives which could eliminate or mitigate any impacts associated with releases on receiving stream water quality.

Sensitive Aquatic Species

Information assembled as a result of the 2016 Environmental Flows Workshop and contained in the 2017 document "Identifying Environmental Flow Requirements for the Des Moines River: Background Literature Review and Summary'' should provide support for the EA's characterization of the affected environment and the environmental consequences ofcurrent operations. To the extent supported by available information and the perspective ofriver resource specialists, the EA should pursue the

2 characterization of all reasonable connections between project operations and aquatic community condition below each reservoir.

Monitoring and Assessment

It is critical that the selected alternative identified within the EA include provisions for Corps-funded monitoring of both reservoir and receiving stream condition. The EA should identify the components comprising a project-specific monitoring strategy, funding levels necessary to the implementation of this strategy and how the Corps will adaptively manage project operations in response to resource condition. Corps expectations that state resource agencies should or will financially support project-related monitoring are not reasonable, given that these are federal projects. Monitoring program needs should be incorporated into the Corps' operational budget and be identified in the water control plan.

Hydrologic Record and Operational Adaptation

The EA should characterize the historical hydrologic record, the potential for future changes in that record and any constraints on operational options available to the Corps which could support adaptation to potential changes in those regional precipitation patterns, affecting the magnitude, duration and timing of both high and low flow extremes.

Purpose of Water Control Plan Revision

The purpose of the Plan revision should be broad enough to include consideration of all the impacts of operational changes for both reservoirs on resources within the reservoirs and the river above and below the reservoirs.

Alternatives

The EA must include a robust and meaningful range of control alternatives, as required by Council on Environmental Quality regulations, including release strategies which could improve conditions in river reaches below each reservoir. Alternatives should include operational and management actions beyond those currently undertaken to improve reservoir aquatic life and wildlife species condition, such as the fall reservoir rise for waterfowl and the spring reservoir rise to support fish spawning. In addition to releases providing minimum flows downstream, the EA alternatives should include strategies intended to mimic a natural stream hydrograph, in general, and water release schemes linked to stream aquatic life cycle needs, specifically. CEQ regulations addressing alternatives do not direct the selection of a preferred alternative, but, instead, focus on the range of alternatives necessary to "sharply defining the issues and providing a clear basis for choice among options by the decision maker and the public [emphasis added]." This robust range of alternatives must include alternatives "not within the jurisdiction of the lead agency" ( 40 CFR 1502.14). The Corps has recently participated in a partnership, with The Nature Conservancy and other organizations, to identify and evaluate environmental flow requirements for the riverine environments surrounding the reservoirs. The results ofthese efforts should inform the development of alternatives which should include management actions intended to improve and sustain the aquatic environment affected by reservoir retention and releases.

3 - . . .

Des Moines Flood Risk Reduction

The cumulative impact analysis should include a comprehensive assessment of the association between reservoir operation at Saylorville Lake and on-going efforts to modify flood control structures within the City of Des Moines.

Impacts of Hydropower Operations

The Red Rock Hydroelectric Project has been licensed by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission and is being retrofitted into the existing Corps facility. The project will be operated in a "run-of-release" mode. This means that the Corps will determine how much water will be released through the hydropower facility and when those releases will be made. This is a significant change in the operation of the project and the EA should address the cumulative effects associated with this change in project operation, downstream from the project, within the reservoir and upstream ofthe reservoir. The EA should also characterize whether changes in operation to accommodate hydropower at Red Rock could affect operations at Saylorville reservoir as well.

4 DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS, ROCK ISLAND DISTRICT PO BOX 2004 CLOCK TOWER BUILDING ROCK ISLAND, ILLINOIS 61204-2004

REPLY TO ATTENTION OF July 10, 2017

Regional Planning and Environmental Division North (RPEDN)

SEE DISTRIBUTION LIST

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps), Rock Island District (District), is initiating an update to the Des Moines River Regulation Manual, specifically updating the Water Control Plans for Saylorville Lake and Lake Red Rock. With this letter, the District would like to give you a progress update on our planning efforts and ask for your agencies' input to help with the District's environmental analysis. Your participation in this process can greatly enhance the District's planning efforts.

Earlier this year, the District conducted four public scoping open houses to informally discuss the potential updates to the Plans. The comments collected at the scoping meetings as well as agency comments will help the District formulate alternatives and help address any enviro11_mental impacts associated with any Plan updates. The District anticipates preparing an environmental assessment to document our decision making process dealing with the Plan updates.

The Saylorville Lake and Lake Red Rock Water Control Plans are a critical section ofthe Des Moines River Master Regulation Manual, as they outline the operational plans to meet all the reservoir's congressionally mandated purposes. These plans define downstream control points and triggers, release amounts, allowable adjustments, and other measurable factors within certain conditions while allowing for emergency response flexibility. Water control plans also ensure the operations of reservoirs conform to laws and applicable Corps rules. The last updates for the Saylorville Lake and Lake Red Rock Water Control Plans respectively occurred in 2003 and 2001. The District is evaluating the Plans based on the authorized purposes offlood risk management, low-flow augmentation, water supply, recreation and environmental stewardship.

Water control plans evolve over time due to changes in hydrology, sedimentation, and land use. Changes in physical and economic conditions related to changes in flood frequencies, ongoing river sedimentation, and changes in downstream land use necessitate the need for alterations in the Des Moines River Reservoirs' Water Control Plan. Water Control Plan alterations may offer opportunities to reduce peak annual reservoir and downstream river levels, especially during large floods; improve the reliability of drought operations; and reacquire lost conservation storage due to sedimentation.

This project is in the planning stage, exploring possible modifications to normal flood risk management operations. Possible modifications at one or both reservoirs could include: -2

• altering downstream stage constraints to reflect current conditions, • altering the allowable growing season maximum release, measured in cubic feet per second, • switching to higher outflows sooner, to reduce the probability of uncontrolled, large magnitude spillway flows, • altering the conservation pool elevation, • modifying or eliminating the balancing of storage between the two reservoirs, • altering the trigger stage elevation as it relates to Mississippi River gage levels, and/or • other, presently unidentified alterations.

The District and The Nature Conservancy (TNC) also are partnering in a Sustainable Rivers Program (SRP) project on the Des Moines River. The Des Moines River SRP is designed to identify environmental flow requirements for the Des Moines River, and develop hypotheses for alternative flow releases from the Red Rock and Saylorville dams that might establish more natural flow regimes and/or enhance multiple benefits within the project area. The goal ofthe project is to explore whether it is possible to modify the District's dam operations to manage for a more "naturalized" flow regime benefiting fish and wildlife populations, ecosystem function, river and floodplain habitat, and water quality.

Restoring at least some aspects ofthe natural flow regime would be expected to benefit numerous species, including several ancient river fishes, such as paddlefish, shovelnose and lake sturgeon, as well as floodplain plant communities and terrestrial wildlife. The Des Moines SRP flow restoration project may also be linked to a larger Des Moines River watershed project. The project involves development ofa literature review and initial hypothesized recommendations for environmental flow adjustments. The project would also identify whether proposed modifications are within current guidelines allowed by the Des Moines River Water Regulation Manual, or might require adjustments to the operations regulations in the course ofupdates to the water regulation manuals scheduled over the next several years.

The District is integrating the SRP recommendations in the Water Control Plans' alternative analysis.

In 2016, and again this year, the District is conducting a temporary deviation from its standard operating protocols to study an alternative that may reduce the overall downstream impacts from major flood events. The District is gaining valuable information from this short term study. The District is integrating this study into the current full evaluation ofpermanent updates to the two reservoirs' Water Control Plans. The District provided information on the two deviation studies in earlier correspondence to the area stakeholders including resource agencies. -3

Please provide comments on this project with respect to concerns, or anticipated effects on, any resources within your agency's jurisdictional oversight within 30 days ofthis letter.

Ifyou have any questions concerning this study or would like to request additional information, please call Mr. Joe Jordan of our Economic and Environmental Analysis Branch, telephone: (309) 794-5791; e-mail: -or write to the address above, ATTN: Planning, Programs, and Project Management Division (Joe Jordan).

Sincerely,

Chief, Environmental Planning Branch RPEDN This page was intentionally left blank. DISTRIBUTION LIST

Mr. Kraig McPeek, Field Supervisor Mr. Josh Gansen U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Iowa Department of Natural Resources 1511 47th Avenue 1436 255th Street Moline IL 61265 Boone, Iowa 50036

Mr. Josh Tapp Mr. Seth Moore Environmental Services & Technology Div Iowa Department of Natural Resources U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Wallace State Office Building Region VII 502 E 9th Street 11201 Renner Blvd. Des Moines IA 50319-0034 Lenexa KS 66219 Ben Dodd Mr. Joe Summerlin Iowa Department of Natural Resources Environmental Services & Technology Div 1436 255th Street U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Boone IA 50036 Region VII 11201 Renner Blvd. Paul Sleeper Lenexa KS 66219 Iowa Department of Natural Resources 3525 HWY 382 NE Mr. Richard Leopold, Director Solon IA 52333 Polk County Conservation 11407 NW Jester Park Drive Mr. Nate Hoogeveen Granger IA 50109 Iowa Department of Natural Resources Wallace State Office Building Mr. Steve Edwards, Director 502 E 9th Street Marion County Conservation Des Moines IA 50319-0034 214 East Main Street Knoxville IA 50138 Martin Konrad Iowa Department of Natural Resources Mr. Chuck Gipp, Director Wallace State Office Building Iowa Department of Natural Resources 502 E 9th Street Wallace State Office Building Des Moines IA 50319-0034 502 East 9th Street, 4th floor Des Moines IA 50319-0034 Mark Flammang Iowa Department of Natural Resources Mr. Bruce Trautman, Deputy Director 15053 Hatchery Place Iowa Department of Natural Resources Moravia IA 52571 Wallace State Office Building 502 E 9th Street Jeff Telleen Des Moines IA 50319-0034 Iowa Department of Natural Resources 28248 415th Street Mr. Scott Peterson Russell IA 50238-9209 Iowa Department of Natural Resources 1436 255th Street Todd Ashby, Executive Director Boone IA 50036 Des Moines Area MPO 420 Watson Powell, Jr. Way, Suite 200 Todd Gosselink Des Moines IA 50309 Iowa Department of Natural Resources Knoxville IA 50138 Teva Dawson Des Moines Area MPO 420 Watson Powell, Jr. Way, Suite 200 Des Moines IA 50309 This page was intentionally left blank. DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES G OVERNOR K IM REYNOLDS LT. GOVERNOR A DAM GREGG

D IRECTOR CHUCK G IPP

5 August 31 \ 2017

Joe Jordan CEMVP-PD-C US Army Corps of Engineers, 17 Clock Tower Building P.O. Box 2004 Rock Island, IL 61204-2004

Mr. Jordan,

We are writing in regards to the request for input from agency stakeholders regarding the revision and update of the Des Moines River Regulation Manual and the Water Control Plans for Lake Red Rock and Saylorville Lake. We appreciate the opportunity provide input, and value our partnership with the USACE tremendously. Adjusting the lake pool levels in the fall and spring can greatly benefit both wildlife and fisheries in the reservoirs, and has the potential for significant positive impact on numerous species. The recreational value of hunting, fishing, and wildlife viewing in these reservoirs is currently tremendous, but increases as fisheries and wildlife populations excel (e.g., an estimated 200 birders recently came from around the Midwest for an opportunity to observe a Bar-tailed Godwit, which has never been observed in Iowa before). Due to the extremely variable conditions of water levels, flow regimes, aquatic habitat conditions, siltation, and weather patterns, we are requesting a "Conservation Band" in the updated regulations manual that would allow for annual variations of lake levels within this band during fall and spring. Local discussions at the reservoirs with the USACE and DNR managers would occur near the fall and spring lake level modification period based on the current conditions, with those recommendations provided to District USACE for final decision making. These are the bandwidths that Saylorville and Red Rock are requesting:

Saylorville:

Summer (July 15- Sept 30) Conservation Band: 836.0-837.0. Fall/winter {Oct 1- Mar 1) Conservation Band: 836.0 - 842.0. Spring (May 1-June 15) Conservation Band: 836.0 - 840.0.

Red Rock:

Summer (July 15 - Sept 30) Conservation Band: 741.5 - 743.0. Fall/winter {Oct 1-Mar 1) Conservation Band: 742.0 - 748.0. Spring {May 1-June 15) Conservation Band: 742.0 - 746.0.

In addition to the implementation of a conservation band at particular times of the year, we also support these management strategies to further benefit fisheries and wildlife:

WALLACE BUILDING, 502 E gTH ST, DES MOINES IA 5b319 Phone: 515-725-8200 www.lowaDNR.gov Fax: 515-725-8201 • When possible, limit the daily rate of change (when dropping in elevation) in the reservoirs to three inches. Freshwater mussel experts have recommended this rate of change to better allow mussels to move within the water column as the reservoir decreases.

• Avoid rapid changes in outflow to minimize gas bubble trauma in fish. It is believed GBT conditions arise from decreasing outflows and is flow dependent (i.e. larger cuts at lower flows). Further analysis of flows preceding a known event need identified and metrics associated with the condition to better define flow change tolerances.

• Evaluate the potential of reducing a daily maximum rate of change from Red Rock. Re-evaluate the current maximum daily rate of change at Saylorville, currently set at 3,000 CFS.

• Allow the fall rise to be held to protect he rps and mussels. Water levels should return to conservation pool level in Feb/March to allow for vegetation growth prior to fish spawning season.

• We encourage coordination between the Saylorville Corps office and the City of DSM on discharge shutdowns for cleaning Saylorville dam trash racks and installing/removing flash boards on Center St Dam. Alternatives to flashboards at Center St Dam (i.e. pneumatic gates) should be encouraged and explored to avoid spring and fall discharge shutdowns/reductions.

• Hold spring water levels above normal conservation pool to stabilize and improve fish spawning conditions in May and June. If spring water levels are elevated and precipitation forecasts allow, we recommend holding water levels four feet above conservation pool to provide vegetated spawning habitat for black and white crappie.

• Increase minimum discharge rates for Red Rock Lake to minimize stress on fish downstream in the Des Moines River. We recommend a conservation band that ranges from 300 - 600 cfs.

Thank you for the opportunity to provide input for the regulations plans. The flexibility to adjust the lake pool levels and outflows at specific times of the year and will be extremely beneficial to Iowa's wildlife and fisheries resources.

Sincerely,

Division Administrator Conservation and Recreation Division Iowa Department of Natural Resources p 515-725-8494 I F 515-725-8201 502 E. 9th St., Des Moines, IA 50319 United States Department of the Interior FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE Illinois-Iowa Ecological Services Field Office Illinois & Iowa Ecological Services Field Office 1511 47th Ave Moline, IL 61265-7022 Phone: (309) 757-5800 Fax: (309) 757-5807

In Reply Refer To: May 03, 2018 Consultation Code: 03E18000-2018-SLI-1055 Event Code: 03E18000-2018-E-02356 Project Name: Des Moines River Water Control Study

Subject: List of threatened and endangered species that may occur in your proposed project location, and/or may be affected by your proposed project

To Whom It May Concern:

The attached species list identifies any federally threatened, endangered, proposed and candidate species that may occur within the boundary of your proposed project or may be affected by your proposed project. The list also includes designated critical habitat if present within your proposed project area or affected by your project. This list is provided to you as the initial step of the consultation process required under section 7(c) of the Endangered Species Act, also referred to as Section 7 Consultation.

Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 requires that actions authorized, funded, or carried out by Federal agencies not jeopardize federally threatened or endangered species or adversely modify designated critical habitat. To fulfill this mandate, Federal agencies (or their designated non-federal representative) must consult with the Service if they determine their project “may affect” listed species or critical habitat.

Under 50 CFR 402.12(e) (the regulations that implement Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act) the accuracy of this species list should be verified after 90 days. This verification can be completed formally or informally. You may verify the list by visiting the ECOS-IPaC website http://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/ at regular intervals during project planning and implementation and completing the same process you used to receive the attached list. As an alternative, you may contact this Ecological Services Field Office for updates.

Please use the species list provided and visit the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's Region 3 Section 7 Technical Assistance website at - http://www.fws.gov/midwest/endangered/section7/ s7process/index.html. This website contains step-by-step instructions which will help you determine if your project will have an adverse effect on listed species and will help lead you through the Section 7 process.

For all wind energy projects and projects that include installing towers that use guy wires or are over 200 feet in height, please contact this field office directly for assistance, even if no federally listed plants, animals or critical habitat are present within your proposed project or may be affected by your proposed project.

Although no longer protected under the Endangered Species Act, be aware that bald eagles are protected under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (16 U.S.C. 668 et seq.) and Migratory Bird Treaty Act (16 U.S.C. 703 et seq), as are golden eagles. Projects affecting these species may require measures to avoid harming eagles or may require a permit. If your project is near an eagle nest or winter roost area, see our Eagle Permits website at http://www.fws.gov/midwest/ midwestbird/EaglePermits/index.html to help you determine if you can avoid impacting eagles or if a permit may be necessary.

We appreciate your concern for threatened and endangered species. Please include the Consultation Tracking Number in the header of this letter with any request for consultation or correspondence about your project that you submit to our office.

Attachment(s):

▪ Official Species List ▪ USFWS National Wildlife Refuges and Fish Hatcheries ▪ Migratory Birds ▪ Wetlands Official Species List This list is provided pursuant to Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act, and fulfills the requirement for Federal agencies to "request of the Secretary of the Interior information whether any species which is listed or proposed to be listed may be present in the area of a proposed action".

This species list is provided by:

Illinois-Iowa Ecological Services Field Office Illinois & Iowa Ecological Services Field Office 1511 47th Ave Moline, IL 61265-7022 (309) 757-5800

This project's location is within the jurisdiction of multiple offices. Expect additional species list documents from the following office, and expect that the species and critical habitats in each document reflect only those that fall in the office's jurisdiction:

Missouri Ecological Services Field Office 101 Park Deville Drive Suite A Columbia, MO 65203-0057 (573) 234-2132 Project Summary Consultation Code: 03E18000-2018-SLI-1055

Event Code: 03E18000-2018-E-02356

Project Name: Des Moines River Water Control Study

Project Type: STREAM / WATERBODY / CANALS / LEVEES / DIKES

Project Description: The assessment will support the evaluation of reservoir regulation opportunities on the Des Moines River, including the Saylorville Lake and Lake Red Rock projects. The assessment was initiated in response to observed changes in physical and economical conditions related to changes in hydrologic loading, ongoing reservoir sedimentation, and changes in downstream land use.

Project Location: Approximate location of the project can be viewed in Google Maps: https:// www.google.com/maps/place/41.441580305219894N93.19360013245021W

Species on this list should be considered in an effects analysis for your project and could include species that exist in another geographic area. For example, certain fish may appear on the species list because a project could affect downstream species.

IPaC does not display listed species or critical habitats under the sole jurisdiction of NOAA Fisheries1 , as USFWS does not have the authority to speak on behalf of NOAA and the Department of Commerce.

See the "Critical habitats" section below for those critical habitats that lie wholly or partially within your project area under this office's jurisdiction. Please contact the designated FWS office if you have questions.

1. NOAA Fisheries, also known as the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), is an office of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration within the Department of Commerce.

Mammals NAME STATUS Indiana Bat Myotis sodalis Endangered There is final critical habitat for this species. Your location is outside the critical habitat. Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/5949

Northern Long-eared Bat Myotis septentrionalis Threatened No critical habitat has been designated for this species. Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9045

Birds NAME STATUS Least Tern Sterna antillarum Endangered Population: interior pop. No critical habitat has been designated for this species. Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/8505 Fishes NAME STATUS Topeka Shiner Notropis topeka (=tristis) Endangered Population: Wherever found, except where listed as an experimental population There is final critical habitat for this species. Your location overlaps the critical habitat. Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/4122

Clams NAME STATUS Higgins Eye (pearlymussel) Lampsilis higginsii Endangered No critical habitat has been designated for this species. Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/5428

Sheepnose Mussel Plethobasus cyphyus Endangered No critical habitat has been designated for this species. Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/6903

Spectaclecase (mussel) Cumberlandia monodonta Endangered No critical habitat has been designated for this species. Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/7867

Flowering Plants NAME STATUS Eastern Prairie Fringed Orchid Platanthera leucophaea Threatened No critical habitat has been designated for this species. Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/601

Mead's Milkweed Asclepias meadii Threatened No critical habitat has been designated for this species. Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/8204

Prairie Bush-clover Lespedeza leptostachya Threatened No critical habitat has been designated for this species. Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/4458

Western Prairie Fringed Orchid Platanthera praeclara Threatened No critical habitat has been designated for this species. Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/1669

Critical habitats There is 1 critical habitat wholly or partially within your project area under this office's jurisdiction. NAME STATUS Topeka Shiner Notropis topeka (=tristis) Final https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/4122#crithab USFWS National W ildlife Refuge Lands And Fish Hatcheries Any activity proposed on lands managed by the National Wildlife Refuge system must undergo a 'Compatibility Determination' conducted by the Refuge. Please contact the individual Refuges to discuss any questions or concerns.

REFUGE INFORMATION WAS NOT AVAILABLE WHEN THIS SPECIES LIST WAS GENERATED. PLEASE CONTACT THE FIELD OFFICE FOR FURTHER INFORMATION. Migratory Birds Certain birds are protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act1 and the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act2 .

Any person or organization who plans or conducts activities that may result in impacts to migratory birds, eagles, and their habitats should follow appropriate regulations and consider implementing appropriate conservation measures, as described below.

1. The Migratory Birds Treaty Act of 1918. 2. The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act of 1940. 3. 50 C.F.R. Sec. 10.12 and 16 U.S.C. Sec. 668(a)

The birds listed below are birds of particular concern either because they occur on the USFWS Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC) list or warrant special attention in your project location. To learn more about the levels of concern for birds on your list and how this list is generated, see the FAQ below. This is not a list of every bird you may find in this location, nor a guarantee that every bird on this list will be found in your project area. To see exact locations of where birders and the general public have sighted birds in and around your project area, visit the E-bird data mapping tool (Tip: enter your location, desired date range and a species on your list). For projects that occur off the Atlantic Coast, additional maps and models detailing the relative occurrence and abundance of bird species on your list are available. Links to additional information about Atlantic Coast birds, and other important information about your migratory bird list, including how to properly interpret and use your migratory bird report, can be found below.

For guidance on when to schedule activities or implement avoidance and minimization measures to reduce impacts to migratory birds on your list, click on the PROBABILITY OF PRESENCE SUMMARY at the top of your list to see when these birds are most likely to be present and breeding in your project area.

BREEDING NAME SEASON American Bittern Botaurus lentiginosus Breeds Apr 1 to This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird Conservation Regions Aug 31 (BCRs) in the continental USA https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/6582

American Golden-plover Pluvialis dominica Breeds This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA elsewhere and Alaska. BREEDING NAME SEASON Bald Eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus Breeds Oct 15 This is not a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) in this area, but warrants attention to Aug 31 because of the Eagle Act or for potential susceptibilities in offshore areas from certain types of development or activities.

Black Tern Chlidonias niger Breeds May 15 This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird Conservation Regions to Aug 20 (BCRs) in the continental USA https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/3093

Black-billed Cuckoo Coccyzus erythropthalmus Breeds May 15 This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA to Oct 10 and Alaska. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9399

Bobolink Dolichonyx oryzivorus Breeds May 20 This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA to Jul 31 and Alaska.

Buff-breasted Sandpiper Calidris subruficollis Breeds This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA elsewhere and Alaska. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9488

Cerulean Warbler Dendroica cerulea Breeds Apr 21 This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA to Jul 20 and Alaska. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/2974

Dunlin Calidris alpina ar cticola Breeds This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird Conservation Regions elsewhere (BCRs) in the continental USA

Franklin's Gull Leucophaeus pipixcan Breeds May 1 to This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA Jul 31 and Alaska.

Golden Eagle Aquila chrysaetos Breeds Jan 1 to This is not a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) in this area, but warrants attention Aug 31 because of the Eagle Act or for potential susceptibilities in offshore areas from certain types of development or activities. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/1680

Henslow's Sparrow Ammodramus henslowii Breeds May 1 to This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA Aug 31 and Alaska. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/3941 BREEDING NAME SEASON Hudsonian Godwit Limosa haemastica Breeds This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA elsewhere and Alaska.

Kentucky Warbler Oporornis formosus Breeds Apr 20 This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA to Aug 20 and Alaska.

Least Bittern Ixobrychus exilis Breeds Aug 16 This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird Conservation Regions to Oct 31 (BCRs) in the continental USA https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/6175

Lesser Yellowlegs Tringa flavipes Breeds This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA elsewhere and Alaska. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9679

Marbled Godwit Limosa fedoa Breeds May 1 to This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA Jul 31 and Alaska. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9481

Nelson's Sparrow Ammodramus nelsoni Breeds May 15 This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA to Sep 5 and Alaska.

Prothonotary Warbler Protonotaria citr ea Breeds Apr 1 to This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA Jul 31 and Alaska.

Red-headed Woodpecker Melanerpes erythrocephalus Breeds May 10 This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA to Sep 10 and Alaska.

Ruddy Turnstone Arenaria interpr es morinella Breeds This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird Conservation Regions elsewhere (BCRs) in the continental USA

Rusty Blackbird Euphagus carolinus Breeds This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA elsewhere and Alaska.

Semipalmated Sandpiper Calidris pusilla Breeds This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA elsewhere and Alaska. BREEDING NAME SEASON Short-billed Dowitcher Limnodromus griseus Breeds This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA elsewhere and Alaska. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9480

Willet Tringa semipalmata Breeds Apr 20 This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA to Aug 5 and Alaska.

Wood Thrush Hylocichla mustelina Breeds May 10 This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA to Aug 31 and Alaska.

Probability Of Presence Summary The graphs below provide our best understanding of when birds of concern are most likely to be present in your project area. This information can be used to tailor and schedule your project activities to avoid or minimize impacts to birds. Please make sure you read and understand the FAQ “Proper Interpretation and Use of Your Migratory Bird Report” before using or attempting to interpret this report.

Pr obability of Pr esence ( )

Each green bar represents the bird's relative probability of presence in the 10km grid cell(s) your project overlaps during a particular week of the year. (A year is represented as 12 4-week months.) A taller bar indicates a higher probability of species presence. The survey effort (see below) can be used to establish a level of confidence in the presence score. One can have higher confidence in the presence score if the corresponding survey effort is also high.

How is the probability of presence score calculated? The calculation is done in three steps:

1. The probability of presence for each week is calculated as the number of survey events in the week where the species was detected divided by the total number of survey events for that week. For example, if in week 12 there were 20 survey events and the Spotted Towhee was found in 5 of them, the probability of presence of the Spotted Towhee in week 12 is 0.25. 2. To properly present the pattern of presence across the year, the relative probability of presence is calculated. This is the probability of presence divided by the maximum probability of presence across all weeks. For example, imagine the probability of presence in week 20 for the Spotted Towhee is 0.05, and that the probability of presence at week 12 (0.25) is the maximum of any week of the year. The relative probability of presence on week 12 is 0.25/0.25 = 1; at week 20 it is 0.05/0.25 = 0.2. 3. The relative probability of presence calculated in the previous step undergoes a statistical conversion so that all possible values fall between 0 and 10, inclusive. This is the probability of presence score. Breeding Season ( ) Yellow bars denote a very liberal estimate of the time-frame inside which the bird breeds across its entire range. If there are no yellow bars shown for a bird, it does not breed in your project area.

Survey Effort ( ) Vertical black lines superimposed on probability of presence bars indicate the number of surveys performed for that species in the 10km grid cell(s) your project area overlaps. The number of surveys is expressed as a range, for example, 33 to 64 surveys.

No Data ( ) A week is marked as having no data if there were no survey events for that week.

Survey Timeframe Surveys from only the last 10 years are used in order to ensure delivery of currently relevant information. The exception to this is areas off the Atlantic coast, where bird returns are based on all years of available data, since data in these areas is currently much more sparse.

probability of presence breeding season survey effort no data

SPECIES JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC American Bittern BCC - BCR American Golden- plover BCC Rangewide (CON) Bald Eagle Non-BCC Vulnerable

Black Tern BCC - BCR Black-billed Cuckoo BCC Rangewide (CON) Bobolink BCC Rangewide (CON) Buff-breasted Sandpiper BCC Rangewide (CON) Cerulean Warbler BCC Rangewide (CON)

Dunlin BCC - BCR SPECIES JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC Franklin's Gull BCC Rangewide (CON)

Golden Eagle Non-BCC Vulnerable

Henslow's Sparrow BCC Rangewide (CON)

Hudsonian Godwit BCC Rangewide (CON)

Kentucky Warbler BCC Rangewide (CON)

Least Bittern BCC - BCR

Lesser Yellowlegs BCC Rangewide (CON)

Marbled Godwit BCC Rangewide (CON)

Nelson's Sparrow BCC Rangewide (CON) Prothonotary Warbler BCC Rangewide (CON) Red-headed Woodpecker BCC Rangewide (CON) Ruddy Turnstone BCC - BCR

Rusty Blackbird BCC Rangewide (CON) Semipalmated Sandpiper BCC Rangewide (CON) Short-billed Dowitcher BCC Rangewide (CON) Willet BCC Rangewide (CON)

Wood Thrush BCC Rangewide (CON)

Additional information can be found using the following links:

▪ Birds of Conservation Concern http://www.fws.gov/birds/management/managed-species/ birds-of-conservation-concern.php ▪ Measures for avoiding and minimizing impacts to birds http://www.fws.gov/birds/ management/project-assessment-tools-and-guidance/ conservation-measures.php ▪ Nationwide conservation measures for birds http://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/pdf/ management/nationwidestandardconservationmeasures.pdf Migratory Birds F AQ Tell me mor e about conservation measur es I can implement to avoid or minimize impacts to migratory birds. Nationwide Conservation Measures describes measures that can help avoid and minimize impacts to all birds at any location year round. Implementation of these measures is particularly important when birds are most likely to occur in the project area. When birds may be breeding in the area, identifying the locations of any active nests and avoiding their destruction is a very helpful impact minimization measure. To see when birds are most likely to occur and be breeding in your project area, view the Probability of Presence Summary. Additional measures and/or permits may be advisable depending on the type of activity you are conducting and the type of infrastructure or bird species present on your project site.

What does IPaC use to generate the migratory birds potentially occurring in my specified location? The Migratory Bird Resource List is comprised of USFWS Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC) and other species that may warrant special attention in your project location.

The migratory bird list generated for your project is derived from data provided by the Avian Knowledge Network (AKN). The AKN data is based on a growing collection of survey, banding, and citizen science datasets and is queried and filtered to return a list of those birds reported as occurring in the 10km grid cell(s) which your project intersects, and that have been identified as warranting special attention because they are a BCC species in that area, an eagle (Eagle Act requirements may apply), or a species that has a particular vulnerability to offshore activities or development.

Again, the Migratory Bird Resource list includes only a subset of birds that may occur in your project area. It is not representative of all birds that may occur in your project area. To get a list of all birds potentially present in your project area, please visit the E-bird Explore Data Tool.

What does IPaC use to generate the pr obability of pr esence graphs for the migratory birds potentially occurring in my specified location? The probability of presence graphs associated with your migratory bird list are based on data provided by the Avian Knowledge Network (AKN). This data is derived from a growing collection of survey, banding, and citizen science datasets .

Probability of presence data is continuously being updated as new and better information becomes available. To learn more about how the probability of presence graphs are produced and how to interpret them, go the Probability of Presence Summary and then click on the "Tell me about these graphs" link.

How do I know if a bird is br eeding, wintering, migrating or pr esent year -round in my pr oject ar ea? To see what part of a particular bird's range your project area falls within (i.e. breeding, wintering, migrating or year-round), you may refer to the following resources: The Cornell Lab of Ornithology All About Birds Bird Guide, or (if you are unsuccessful in locating the bird of interest there), the Cornell Lab of Ornithology Neotropical Birds guide. If a bird on your migratory bird species list has a breeding season associated with it, if that bird does occur in your project area, there may be nests present at some point within the timeframe specified. If "Breeds elsewhere" is indicated, then the bird likely does not breed in your project area.

What ar e the levels of concern for migratory birds? Migratory birds delivered through IPaC fall into the following distinct categories of concern:

1. "BCC Rangewide" birds are Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC) that are of concern throughout their range anywhere within the USA (including Hawaii, the Pacific Islands, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands); 2. "BCC - BCR" birds are BCCs that are of concern only in particular Bird Conservation Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA; and 3. "Non-BCC - Vulnerable" birds are not BCC species in your project area, but appear on your list either because of the Eagle Act requirements (for eagles) or (for non-eagles) potential susceptibilities in offshore areas from certain types of development or activities (e.g. offshore energy development or longline fishing). Although it is important to try to avoid and minimize impacts to all birds, efforts should be made, in particular, to avoid and minimize impacts to the birds on this list, especially eagles and BCC species of rangewide concern. For more information on conservation measures you can implement to help avoid and minimize migratory bird impacts and requirements for eagles, please see the FAQs for these topics.

Details about birds that ar e potentially affected by offshor e pr ojects For additional details about the relative occurrence and abundance of both individual bird species and groups of bird species within your project area off the Atlantic Coast, please visit the Northeast Ocean Data Portal. The Portal also offers data and information about other taxa besides birds that may be helpful to you in your project review. Alternately, you may download the bird model results files underlying the portal maps through the NOAA NCCOS Integrative Statistical Modeling and Predictive Mapping of Marine Bird Distributions and Abundance on the Atlantic Outer Continental Shelf project webpage.

Bird tracking data can also provide additional details about occurrence and habitat use throughout the year, including migration. Models relying on survey data may not include this information. For additional information on marine bird tracking data, see the Diving Bird Study and the nanotag studies or contact Caleb Spiegel or Pam Loring.

What if I have eagles on my list? If your project has the potential to disturb or kill eagles, you may need to obtain a permit to avoid violating the Eagle Act should such impacts occur.

Pr oper Interpr etation and Use of Your Migratory Bird Report The migratory bird list generated is not a list of all birds in your project area, only a subset of birds of priority concern. To learn more about how your list is generated, and see options for identifying what other birds may be in your project area, please see the FAQ “What does IPaC use to generate the migratory birds potentially occurring in my specified location”. Please be aware this report provides the “probability of presence” of birds within the 10 km grid cell(s) that overlap your project; not your exact project footprint. On the graphs provided, please also look carefully at the survey effort (indicated by the black vertical bar) and for the existence of the “no data” indicator (a red horizontal bar). A high survey effort is the key component. If the survey effort is high, then the probability of presence score can be viewed as more dependable. In contrast, a low survey effort bar or no data bar means a lack of data and, therefore, a lack of certainty about presence of the species. This list is not perfect; it is simply a starting point for identifying what birds of concern have the potential to be in your project area, when they might be there, and if they might be breeding (which means nests might be present). The list helps you know what to look for to confirm presence, and helps guide you in knowing when to implement conservation measures to avoid or minimize potential impacts from your project activities, should presence be confirmed. To learn more about conservation measures, visit the FAQ “Tell me about conservation measures I can implement to avoid or minimize impacts to migratory birds” at the bottom of your migratory bird trust resources page. Wetlands Impacts to NWI wetlands and other aquatic habitats may be subject to regulation under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, or other State/Federal statutes.

For more information please contact the Regulatory Program of the local U.S. Army Corps of Engineers District.

Please note that the NWI data being shown may be out of date. We are currently working to update our NWI data set. We recommend you verify these results with a site visit to determine the actual extent of wetlands on site.

WETLAND INFORMATION WAS NOT AVAILABLE WHEN THIS SPECIES LIST WAS GENERATED. PLEASE VISIT HTTPS://WWW.FWS.GOV/WETLANDS/DATA/MAPPER.HTML OR CONTACT THE FIELD OFFICE FOR FURTHER INFORMATION. United States Department of the Interior FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE Missouri Ecological Services Field Office 101 Park Deville Drive Suite A Columbia, MO 65203-0057 Phone: (573) 234-2132 Fax: (573) 234-2181

In Reply Refer To: May 03, 2018 Consultation Code: 03E14000-2018-SLI-1537 Event Code: 03E14000-2018-E-03354 Project Name: Des Moines River Water Control Study

Subject: List of threatened and endangered species that may occur in your proposed project location, and/or may be affected by your proposed project

To Whom It May Concern:

This response has been generated by the Information, Planning, and Conservation (IPaC) system to provide information on natural resources that could be affected by your project. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) provides this response under the authority of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531-1543), the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (16 U.S.C. 668-668d), the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (16 U.S.C. 703-712), and the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (16 U.S.C. 661 et seq.).

Thr eatened and Endanger ed Species

The enclosed species list identifies threatened, endangered, proposed and candidate species, as well as proposed and final designated critical habitat, that may occur within the boundary of your proposed project and may be affected by your proposed project. The species list fulfills the requirement for obtaining a Technical Assistance Letter from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) under section 7(c) of the Endangered Species Act (Act) of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).

New information based on updated surveys, changes in the abundance and distribution of species, changed habitat conditions, or other factors could change this list. Note that under 50 CFR 402.12(e) of the r egulations implementing section 7 of the Act, the accuracy of this species list should be verified after 90 days. The Service recommends that verification be completed by visiting the ECOS-IPaC website at regular intervals during project planning and implementation for updates to species lists and information. An updated list may be requested through the ECOS-IPaC system by completing the same process used to receive the enclosed list. Consultation Technical Assistance

Refer to the Midwest Region S7 Technical Assistance website for step-by-step instructions for making species determinations and for specific guidance on the following types of projects: projects in developed areas, HUD, pipelines, buried utilities, telecommunications, and requests for a Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR) from FEMA.

Federally Listed Bat Species

Indiana bats, gray bats, and northern long-eared bats occur throughout Missouri and the information below may help in determining if your project may affect these species.

Gray bats - Gray bats roost in caves or mines year-round and use water features and forested riparian corridors for foraging and travel. If your project will impact caves, mines, associated riparian areas, or will involve tree removal around these features particularly within stream corridors, riparian areas, or associated upland woodlots gray bats could be affected.

Indiana and northern long-ear ed bats - These species hibernate in caves or mines only during the winter. In Missouri the hibernation season is considered to be November 1 to March 31. During the active season in Missouri (April 1 to October 31) they roost in forest and woodland habitats. Suitable summer habitat for Indiana bats and northern long-eared bats consists of a wide variety of forested/wooded habitats where they roost, forage, and travel and may also include some adjacent and interspersed non-forested habitats such as emergent wetlands and adjacent edges of agricultural fields, old fields and pastures. This includes forests and woodlots containing potential roosts (i.e., live trees and/or snags 5 inches diameter at breast height (dbh) for Indiana bat, and 3 inches dbh for northern long-eared bat, that have exfoliating bark, cracks, crevices, and/or hollows), as well as linear features such as fencerows, riparian forests, and other wooded corridors. These wooded areas may be dense or loose aggregates of trees with variable amounts of canopy closure. Tree species often include, but are not limited to, shellbark or shagbark hickory, white oak, cottonwood, and maple. Individual trees may be considered suitable habitat when they exhibit the characteristics of a potential roost tree and are located within 1,000 feet (305 meters) of other forested/wooded habitat. Northern long-eared bats have also been observed roosting in human-made structures, such as buildings, barns, bridges, and bat houses; therefore, these structures should also be considered potential summer habitat and evaluated for use by bats. If your project will impact caves or mines or will involve clearing forest or woodland habitat containing suitable roosting habitat, Indiana bats or northern long-eared bats could be affected.

Examples of unsuitable habitat include:

▪ Individual trees that are greater than 1,000 feet from forested or wooded areas; ▪ Trees found in highly-developed urban areas (e.g., street trees, downtown areas); ▪ A pure stand of less than 3-inch dbh trees that are not mixed with larger trees; and ▪ A stand of eastern red cedar shrubby vegetation with no potential roost trees. Using the IPaC Official Species List to Make No Effect and May Affect Determinations for Listed Species

1. If IPaC returns a result of “There are no listed species found within the vicinity of the project,” then project proponents can conclude the proposed activities will have no effect on any federally listed species under Service jurisdiction. Concurrence from the Service is not required for No Effect determinations. No further consultation or coordination is required. Attach this letter to the dated IPaC species list report for your records. An example "No Effect" document also can be found on the S7 Technical Assistance website.

2. If IPaC returns one or more federally listed, proposed, or candidate species as potentially present in the action area of the proposed project other than bats (see #3 below) then project proponents can conclude the proposed activities may affect those species. For assistance in determining if suitable habitat for listed, candidate, or proposed species occurs within your project area or if species may be affected by project activities, you can obtain Life History Information for Listed and Candidate Species through the S7 Technical Assistance website.

3. If IPac returns a result that one or more federally listed bat species (Indiana bat, northern long- eared bat, or gray bat) are potentially present in the action area of the proposed project, project proponents can conclude the proposed activities may affect these bat species IF one or more of the following activities are proposed:

a. Clearing or disturbing suitable roosting habitat, as defined above, at any time of year; b. Any activity in or near the entrance to a cave or mine; c. Mining, deep excavation, or underground work within 0.25 miles of a cave or mine; d. Construction of one or more wind turbines; or e. Demolition or reconstruction of human-made structures that are known to be used by bats based on observations of roosting bats, bats emerging at dusk, or guano deposits or stains. If none of the above activities are proposed, project proponents can conclude the proposed activities will have no effect on listed bat species. Concurrence from the Service is not required for No Effect determinations. No further consultation or coordination is required. Attach this letter to the dated IPaC species list report for your records. An example "No Effect" document also can be found on the S7 Technical Assistance website.

If any of the above activities are proposed in areas where one or more bat species may be present, project proponents can conclude the proposed activities may affect one or more bat species. We recommend coordinating with the Service as early as possible during project planning. If your project will involve removal of over 5 acres of suitable forest or woodland habitat, we recommend you complete a Summer Habitat Assessment prior to contacting our office to expedite the consultation process. The Summer Habitat Assessment Form is available in Appendix A of the most recent version of the Range-wide Indiana Bat Summer Survey Guidelines.

Other Trust Resour ces and Activities Bald and Golden Eagles - Although the bald eagle has been removed from the endangered species list, this species and the golden eagle are protected by the Bald and Golden Eagle Act and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. Should bald or golden eagles occur within or near the project area please contact our office for further coordination. For communication and wind energy projects, please refer to additional guidelines below.

Migratory Birds - The Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) prohibits the taking, killing, possession, transportation, and importation of migratory birds, their eggs, parts, and nests, except when specifically authorized by the Service. The Service has the responsibility under the MBTA to proactively prevent the mortality of migratory birds whenever possible and we encourage implementation of recommendations that minimize potential impacts to migratory birds. Such measures include clearing forested habitat outside the nesting season (generally March 1 to August 31) or conducting nest surveys prior to clearing to avoid injury to eggs or nestlings.

Communication Towers - Construction of new communications towers (including radio, television, cellular, and microwave) creates a potentially significant impact on migratory birds, especially some 350 species of night-migrating birds. However, the Service has developed voluntary guidelines for minimizing impacts.

Transmission Lines - Migratory birds, especially large species with long wingspans, heavy bodies, and poor maneuverability can also collide with power lines. In addition, mortality can occur when birds, particularly hawks, eagles, kites, falcons, and owls, attempt to perch on uninsulated or unguarded power poles. To minimize these risks, please refer to guidelines developed by the Avian Power Line Interaction Committee and the Service. Implementation of these measures is especially important along sections of lines adjacent to wetlands or other areas that support large numbers of raptors and migratory birds.

Wind Energy - To minimize impacts to migratory birds and bats, wind energy projects should follow the Service's Wind Energy Guidelines. In addition, please refer to the Service's Eagle Conservation Plan Guidance, which provides guidance for conserving bald and golden eagles in the course of siting, constructing, and operating wind energy facilities.

Next Steps

Should you determine that project activities may affect any federally listed species or trust resources described herein, please contact our office for further coordination. Letters with requests for consultation or correspondence about your project should include the Consultation Tracking Number in the header. Electronic submission is preferred.

If you have not already done so, please contact the Missouri Department of Conservation (Policy Coordination, P. O. Box 180, Jefferson City, MO 65102) for information concerning Missouri Natural Communities and Species of Conservation Concern.

We appreciate your concern for threatened and endangered species. Please feel free to contact our office with questions or for additional information. Karen Herrington

Attachment(s):

▪ Official Species List ▪ USFWS National Wildlife Refuges and Fish Hatcheries ▪ Wetlands Official Species List This list is provided pursuant to Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act, and fulfills the requirement for Federal agencies to "request of the Secretary of the Interior information whether any species which is listed or proposed to be listed may be present in the area of a proposed action".

This species list is provided by:

Missouri Ecological Services Field Office 101 Park Deville Drive Suite A Columbia, MO 65203-0057 (573) 234-2132

Illinois-Iowa Ecological Services Field Office Illinois & Iowa Ecological Services Field Office 1511 47th Ave Moline, IL 61265-7022 (309) 757-5800 Project Summary Consultation Code: 03E14000-2018-SLI-1537

Event Code: 03E14000-2018-E-03354

Project Name: Des Moines River Water Control Study

Project Type: STREAM / WATERBODY / CANALS / LEVEES / DIKES

Project Location: Approximate location of the project can be viewed in Google Maps: https:// www.google.com/maps/place/41.441580305219894N93.19360013245021W

1. NOAA Fisheries, also known as the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), is an office of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration within the Department of Commerce.

Mammals NAME STATUS Gray Bat Myotis grisescens Endangered No critical habitat has been designated for this species. Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/6329

Indiana Bat Myotis sodalis Endangered There is final critical habitat for this species. Your location is outside the critical habitat. Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/5949

Northern Long-eared Bat Myotis septentrionalis Threatened No critical habitat has been designated for this species. Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9045

Fishes NAME STATUS Pallid Sturgeon Scaphirhynchus albus Endangered No critical habitat has been designated for this species. Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/7162 Clams NAME STATUS Higgins Eye (pearlymussel) Lampsilis higginsii Endangered No critical habitat has been designated for this species. Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/5428

Sheepnose Mussel Plethobasus cyphyus Endangered No critical habitat has been designated for this species. Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/6903

Critical habitats THERE ARE NO CRITICAL HABITATS WITHIN YOUR PROJECT AREA UNDER THIS OFFICE'S JURISDICTION. USFWS National W ildlife Refuge Lands And Fish Hatcheries Any activity proposed on lands managed by the National Wildlife Refuge system must undergo a 'Compatibility Determination' conducted by the Refuge. Please contact the individual Refuges to discuss any questions or concerns.

REFUGE INFORMATION WAS NOT AVAILABLE WHEN THIS SPECIES LIST WAS GENERATED. PLEASE CONTACT THE FIELD OFFICE FOR FURTHER INFORMATION. Wetlands Impacts to NWI wetlands and other aquatic habitats may be subject to regulation under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, or other State/Federal statutes.

For more information please contact the Regulatory Program of the local U.S. Army Corps of Engineers District.

FRESHWATER EMERGENT WETLAND ▪ PEMC ▪ PEMA

FRESHWATER FORESTED/SHRUB WETLAND ▪ PFO1A ▪ PSS1A ▪ PFO1C ▪ PSS1C

FRESHWATER POND ▪ PUBF ▪ PUSA

RIVERINE ▪ R2UBH ▪ R2USA ▪ R2USC ▪ R2UBG This page was intentionally left blank. From: McPeek, Kraig To: Jordan, Joseph W CIV (US) Subject: [Non-DoD Source] Re: [EXTERNAL] Des Moines River Water Regulation Plan update Feasibility and Integrated EA. Date: Friday, May 11, 2018 10:38:42 AM

Hey Joe - Thanks for sending this over. It doesn't look like there would be a reason for a CAR to be completed for this. We will be available if you would like informal input. Thanks

Kraig McPeek Field Supervisor

US Fish and Wildlife Service

Illinois and Iowa ES Field Office

Moline, IL 61265 - - x202 - - (cell) - - (fax)

<º/,}}}}}}}=<{

On Mon, May 7, 2018 at 12:50 PM, Jordan, Joseph W CIV (US) wrote:

Hi Kraig,

I am currently crafting the feasibility report to update the Saylorville Lake and Lake Red Rock Water Control Plans. I sent out a scoping letter last year (attached). I didn't request a formal CAR at that time, and still not sure I need a formal letter back from you on it. The reason I say that, is because we are modifying the releases from the dams so we can knock the tops off of the major flood events. We are not constructing anything; just modifying the flows so the reservoirs do not build as fast. In fact, with the TNC's Sustainable Rivers Program we are integrating conservation bands we hope to operate during non-flood periods, which are more often than flood events. The conservation bands will allow us (in cooperation with the agencies) to manage the outflows for fish and wildlife purposes. The TNC, IADNR, and FWS were all part of building the SRP goals and objectives for the Des Moines River.

I will be making a No Effect determination for ESA listed species. My documentation for that will be in the EA.

Let me know If I need to make a formal request for a CAR, or let me know if a CAR is not forthcoming (email is fine).

If you like, I can speak to you or folks on your staff in greater detail.

Thanks Kraig,

Joe

This page was intentionally left blank. DEPARTMENT OF Tl-IE ARMY ROCK ISLAND DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS CLOCK TOWER BUILDING - PO BOX 2004 ROCK ISLAND, IL 61204-2004

REPLY TO ATIENTIONOF June 20, 2017

Regional Planning and Environmental Division North (RPEDN)

SEE DISTRIBUTION LIST (Enclosure 1)

The U.S. Army Corps ofEngineers (Corps), Rock Island District, is revising its Des Moines River Reservoirs (Saylorville Lake and Lake Red Rock, Iowa) Water Control Plan (Project; Enclosures 2-3) and would like to initiate consultation to address cultural and historic resource issues, pursuant to Section 106 ofthe National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA), 36 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 800.2( c ).

The purpose ofthis letter is to (1) identify interested parties and (2) determine any concerns early in the environmental review process. Your participation in this process can greatly enhance this Project's outcome.

These two lakes were authorized as part of a plan to provide comprehensive flood reduction benefits along the Des Moines and Mississippi rivers, as well as other Project purposes such as water conservation/supply, fish and wildlife habitat, and recreation. The lakes are operated individually or in tandem to meet these objectives. Other components ofthe Des Moines River Reservoirs Water Control Plan include the Avon Station Remedial Works, Carlisle Remedial Works and the Des Moines Local Protection Works.

A Water Control Manual is the guiding document that specifies how Corps projects are operated to meet their authorized objectives. The last update for the Red Rock Lake and Saylorville Lake Water Control Manuals respectively occurred in 1993 and 2001. A manual's most critical section is the Water Control Plan, which outlines the operational plan to meet all the reservoir's congressionally mandated purposes. These plans constrain water release locations, triggers, release amounts, allowable adjustments, and other measurable factors within certain conditions while allowing for emergency response flexibility.

Water control plans typically evolve over time due to changes in hydrology, sedimentation, and land use. The need for alterations in the Des Moines River Reservoirs Water Control Plan is suggested due to observed changes in physical and economic conditions related to changes in flood frequencies, ongoing river sedimentation, and changes in downstream land use. Water Control Plan alterations offer opportunities to reduce peak annual reservoir and downstream river levels, especially during large floods; improve the reliability of drought operations; and reacquire lost conservation storage due to sedimentation. -2

This project is in the planning stage, exploring possible modifications to normal flood control operations. Possible modifications at one or both reservoirs could include:

• altering certain stage constraints, • altering the allowable growing season maximum release, measured in cubic feet per second, • switching to higher outflows sooner, to reduce the probability of uncontrolled, large magnitude spillway flows, • altering the conservation pool elevation, • adding conduit(s) to alter outflow capacity, • modifying or eliminating the balance ofstorage between the two reservoirs, • altering the trigger stage elevation as it relates to Mississippi River gage levels, and/or • other, presently unexplored alterations.

Federal Undertaking

Pursuant to the NHP A of 1966, as amended, and its implementing regulations, 36 CFR Part 800, the District has determined that this Unde1iaking has potential to cause effects to archeological historic properties [36 CFR 800.3(a)] and as a consequence will require a determination ofeffect within the Area ofPotential Effect (APE). Because this Project is in the early planning stages, the undertaking's APE is not yet defined.

Consulting Parties Invitation and Request for Comment

The District finds the organizations identified on the Distribution List are entitled to be consulting parties, as set out in 36 CFR 800.2, and invites them by copy ofthis letter to participate in the Section 106 process. Inclusion on the Distribution List allows agencies, tribes, individuals, organizations, and other interested parties an opportunity to provide views on any effects ofthis undertaking on historic properties resulting from the Project and to participate in the review ofthe Water Control Plan. The District complies with any requests to be removed from, or provide additions to, the Distribution List.

The District invites consulting parties to: • identify any other consulting parties as per 36 CFR 800.3(f); • comment as per 36 CFR 800.2(d)(3) on the District's plan to involve the public by utilizing the District's normal procedures for public involvement under the National Environmental Policy Act; and, -3

• comment on or contribute to identification efforts including definition of the APE, all as per 36 CFR 800.4(a-b). • provide information regarding concerns with issues relating to the potential effects ofthis undertaking on historic properties and, particularly, the tribes' concerns with identifying properties that may be of religious and cultural significance to them and may be eligible for the NRHP [36 CFR 800.4(a)(3-4)].

Concerns about confidentiality [36 CFR 800.1 l(c)] regarding locations of properties can be addressed under Section 304 ofthe NHPA which provides withholding from public disclosure the location of properties under several circumstances, including in cases where it would cause a significant invasion of privacy, impede the use of a traditional religious site by practitioners, endanger the site, etc.

The District requests you indicate ifyou would like to be a consulting party to this Project, in order to facilitate future communications Other written comments on this project, pursuant to 36 CFR 800.3(c)(4), are also welcomed. The point of contact for this project is Ms. Cindy Peterson of our Environmental Compliance Branch at (309) 794-5396, by e-mail: ·e ;] · 1.pctcrnd qr , or in writing to our address, ATTN: Environmental Compliance Branch (Cynthia Peterson).

Sincerely, ~~f!~~ Chief, Environmental Planning Branch (RPEDN)

Enclosures (3) This page was intentionally left blank. DISTRIBUTION LIST

Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe Mr. Michael LaRonge, THPO Chairperson Harold Frazier Forest County Potawatomi Community Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe 5320 Wensaut Ln. PO Box 590 P.O. Box 340 Eagle Butte, SD 57625 Crandon, WI 54520

Mr. Steve Vance, THPO Fort Peck Assiniboine & Sioux Tribes Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe Chairperson Rusty Stafne PO Box 590 Fort Peck Assiniboine & Sioux Tribes Eagle Butte, SD 57625 501 Medicine Bear Road PO Box 1027 Citizen Potawatomi Nation Poplar, MT 58255 Chairperson John Barrett Citizen Potawatomi Nation Mr. Darrell Youpee, THPO 1601 S. Gordon Cooper Dr. Fort Peck Assiniboine & Sioux Tribes Shawnee, OK 74801 501 Medicine Bear Road PO Box 1027 Dr. Kelli Mosteller, THPO Poplar, MT 58255 Citizen Potawatomi Nation 1601 S Gordon Cooper Drive Ho-Chunk Nation Shawnee OK 74801 President Wilfrid Cleveland Ho-Chunk Nation Crow Creek Sioux Tribe PO Box 667 Chairperson Roxanne Suzue Black River Falls, WI 54615 Crow Creek Sioux Tribe PO Box 50 Mr. Bill Quackenbush Ft. Thompson, SD 57339 Ho-Chunk Nation PO Box 667 Mr. Darrell Zephier, THPO Black River Falls, WI 54615 Crow Creek Sioux Tribe PO Box 50 Iowa Tribe of Kansas and Nebraska Ft. Thompson, SD 57339 Chairperson Tim Rhodd Iowa Tribe of Kansas and Nebraska Flandreau Santee Sioux Tribe 3345 B Thrasher Rd President Anthony Reider White Cloud, KS 66094 Flandreau Santee Sioux Tribe PO Box 283 Mr. Lance Foster, THPO Flandreau, SD 57028 Iowa Tribe of Kansas and Nebraska 3345 B Thrasher Rd. Mr. Garrie Killsahundred, THPO White Cloud, KS 66094 Flandreau Santee Sioux Tribe PO Box 283 Iowa Tribe of Oklahoma Flandreau, SD 57028 Chairperson Bobby Walkup Iowa Tribe of Oklahoma Forest County Potawatomi Community 335588 E. 750 Rd. Chairperson Harold Frank Perkins, OK 74059 Forest County Potawatomi Community P.O. Box 340 Crandon, WI 54520 Mr. Eagle McClellan, Cultural Preservation Ms. Cheyanne St. John, THPO Director Lower Sioux Indian Community Iowa Tribe of Oklahoma 339527 Res. Highway 1 335588 E. 750 Rd. Morton, MN 56270 Perkins, OK 74059 Mendota Mdewakanton Dakota Community Kickapoo Traditional Tribe of Texas Chairperson Sharon Lennartson Chairperson Estavio Elizondo Mendota Mdewakanton Dakota Community Kickapoo Traditional Tribe of Texas 340 River Rd. 359 Bishop Gracida Rd. Mendota, MN 55150 Eagle Pass, TX 78852 Oglala Sioux Tribe Kickapoo Tribe in Kansas President John Yellow Bird Steele Chairperson Lester Randall Oglala Sioux Tribe Kickapoo Tribe in Kansas PO Box 2070 1107 Goldfinch Rd Pine Ridge, SD 57770 Horton, KS 66439 Mr. Dennis Yellow Thunder, THPO Mr. Cirtis Simon, NAGPRA Director Oglala Sioux Tribe Kickapoo Tribe in Kansas PO Box 129 1107 Goldfinch Rd Kyle, SD 57752 Horton, KS 66439 Omaha Tribe of Nebraska Kickapoo Tribe of Oklahoma Chairperson Mike Wolfe Chairperson David Pacheco, Jr. Omaha Tribe of Nebraska Kickapoo Tribe of Oklahoma PO Box 368 PO Box 70 Macy, NE 68039 Mcloud, OK 74851 Mr. Thomas Parker, THPO Mr. Kent Collier, NAGPRA Coordinator Omaha Tribe of Nebraska Kickapoo Tribe of Oklahoma PO Box 368 PO Box 70 Macy, NE 68039 Mcloud, OK 74851 Osage Nation Lower Brule Sioux Tribe Principal Chief Geoffrey Standing Bear Chairperson Boyd Gourneau Osage Nation Lower Brule Sioux Tribe PO Box 779 PO Box 187 Pawhuska, OK 74056 Lower Brule, SD 57548 Andrea A. Hunter, Ph.D. Mr. Brian Molineaux, Archeologist Director, Tribal Historic Preservation Officer Lower Brule Sioux Tribe Osage Nation PO Box 187 627 Grandview Lower Brule, SD 57548 Pawhuska, OK 74056

Lower Sioux Indian Community Otoe-Missouria Tribe Chairperson Robert Larsen Chairperson John R. Shotton Lower Sioux Indian Community Otoe-Missouria Tribe 339527 Res. Highway 1 8151 Hwy 177 Morton, MN 56270 Red Rock OK 74651 Ms. Elsie Whitehorn, THPO Rosebud Sioux Tribe Otoe-Missouria Tribe President William Kindle 8151 Hwy 177 Rosebud Sioux Tribe Red Rock OK 74651 PO Box 430 Rosebud, SD 75770 Ponca Tribe of Nebraska Chairperson Larry Wright, Jr. Mr. Russell Eagle Bear, THPO Ponca Tribe of Nebraska Rosebud Sioux Tribe PO Box 288 PO Box 809 Niabrara, NE 68760 Rosebud, SD 75770

Mr. Shannon Wright, Jr., THPO Sac and Fox Nation of Missouri in Kansas Ponca Tribe of Nebraska and Nebraska PO Box 288 Chairperson Edmore Green Niabrara, NE 68760 Sac & Fox Nation of Missouri 305 North Main Street Ponca Tribe of Oklahoma Reserve, KS 66434 Chairperson Earl Howe III Ponca Tribe of Oklahoma Sac and Fox Nation of Oklahoma 20 White Eagle Dr. Principal Chief Elizabeth Kay Rhoads Ponca City, OK 74601 Sac and Fox Nation of Oklahoma 920883 S Hwy 99, Admin Bldg A Ms. Halona Cabe, THPO Stroud, OK 74079 Ponca Tribe of Oklahoma 20 White Eagle Dr. Ms. Sandra Massey Ponca City, OK 74601 NAGPRA Representative Sac and Fox Nation of Oklahoma Prairie Band Potawatomi Nation P.O. Box 230 Chairperson Liana Onnen Drumright, OK 74030 Prairie Band Potawatomi Nation 16281 Q Road Sac and Fox Tribe of the Mississippi in Iowa Mayetta, KS 66509 Mr. Johnathan Buffalo Director, Historic Preservation Department Ms. Hattie Mitchell, NAGPRA Representative Sac & Fox Tribe of the Mississippi in Iowa Prairie Band Potawatomi Nation 303 Meskwaki Road 16281 Q Road Tama, IA 52339 Mayetta, KS 66509 Chief Gailey Wanatee Prairie Island Indian Community Sac & Fox Tribe of the Mississippi in Iowa Tribal Council President Shelley Buck 349 Meskwaki Road Prairie Island Indian Community Tama, IA 52339 5636 Sturgeon Lake Road Welch, MN 55089 Chairperson Milo Buffalo, Jr. Sac & Fox Tribe of the Mississippi in Iowa Mr. Noah White, THPO 349 Meskwaki Road Prairie Island Indian Community Tama, IA 52339-9629 5636 Sturgeon Lake Road Welch, MN 55089 Santee Sioux Tribe of Nebraska Standing Rock Sioux Tribe Chairperson Roger Trudell Chairperson Dave Archambault II Santee Sioux Tribe of Nebraska Standing Rock Sioux Tribe 108 Spirit Lake Avenue West PO Box D Niobara, NE 68760 Ft. Yates, ND 58538

Mr. Duane Whipple THPO Mr. Jon Eagle, THPO Tribal Historic Preservation Office Standing Rock Sioux Tribe Santee Sioux Tribe of Nebraska Administrative Service Center 108 Spirit Lake Avenue West North Standing Rock Ave. Niobara, NE 68760 Ft. Yates, ND 58538

Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community of Winnebago Tribe of Nebraska Minnesota Chairperson Darla LaPointe Chairperson Charles R. Vig Winnebago Tribe of Nebraska Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community of PO Box 687 Minnesota Winnebago, NE 68071 2330 Sioux Trail NW Prior Lake, MN 55372 Mr. Randy Teboe, THPO Winnebago Tribe of Nebraska Mr. Leonard Wabasha, Director, Cultural PO Box 687 Resources Dept. Winnebago, NE 68071 Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community of Minnesota Yankton Sioux Tribe 2330 Sioux Trail NW Chairperson Robert Flying Hawk Prior Lake, MN 55372 Yankton Sioux Tribe P.O. Box 1153 Sisseton-Wahpeton Oyate Wagner, SD 57380 Chairperson Dave Flute Sisseton-Wahpeton Oyate Ms. Roseanne Wade, THPO P.O. Box 907 Yankton Sioux Tribe Sisseton, SD 57262 P.O. Box 1153 Wagner, SD 57380 Ms. Dianne Desrosiers, THPO Sisseton-Wahpeton Oyate Boone County Conservation Board P.O. Box 907 Executive Director Sisseton, SD 57262 610 H Ave. Ogden, IA 50212 Spirit Lake Tribe Chairperson Myra Pearson Office of the State Archaeologist Spirit Lake Tribe Dr. John Doershuk PO Box 359 700 CLSB Fort Totten, ND 58335 University of Iowa Iowa City, IA 52242 Dr. Erich Longie, THPO Spirit Lake Tribe Iowa State Historic Preservation Offfice PO Box 359 Ms. Libby Wielenga, R&C Coordinator Fort Totten, ND 58335 600 E. Locust Des Moines, IA 50319-0290 Marion County Conservation Board Polk County Conservation Commission Mr. Steve Edwards, Director Mr. Rich Leopold, Director 214 E Main St. 11407 NW Jester Park Dr. Knoxville, IA 50138 Granger, IA 50109

Warren County Conservation Board Mr. Jim Priebe, Director 15565 118th Ave. Indianola, IA 50125 This page was intentionally left blank. f - ~-- - · ·· -..... £.... \ \ \ J 'l \ . ------_),

Saylorville Lake Reservoir Legend - Saylorville Lake Reservoir {Fee-Title) -- Interstates DISCLAIMER: Wiile the United Sta les Arrrrj Corps of Engineers (here!nafter referred to as USAGE) has made a reasonableeffort toinsurethC!accuracyofthe mapsandassociateddata it should be exphc:ltly - Flowage Easemenl -- US Highways noted that USACE makes no warrarty, representabon or guaranty, either express or imphed as to the State Highways COf'llenl sequen::c accuracy, timelines.s or completeness of any of the data provided herein The USACE, County Boundary its offic:en;, agents emplayees orservants shaUassumenollabilltyofanynature for anyerrors, omssions. -- Highways or inaccuraciesintheinformationpravidedregardlessof howcaused Cites I I -- Railroads ..•.. The USACE, its offrcers agents employees or servants shall assume no liability for any deosions made or - USACEDams actionstakenornol lakenbytheuserof themapsandassociateddatalnreliancc uponany 1rlormationor data furnished here. By using lhese maps and associated data the user does so entirely al their own risk US Army Corps and explicitty acknowledges that he/she is aware of and agrees lo be bound by this disclaimer and agfees of Engineers<> not lo present any claim Of" demand of arrt nature against !he USAGE. its o!ficers, age,..s erfl>loYees or seN ants in any rOfum whatsoever t0< l!."f damages of any nature whatsoever that may resutt !rom or may Rock Island District be causedm af?( waybythc useof themapsandassociated data Miles Lake Red Rock Reservoir Legend - Lake Red Rock Reservoir (Fee-Title) -- Floodwall Line DISCLAIMER: Wlile the United Slates Armt Corps of Engineers, (hereinafter referred to as USACE} has made a reasonable effort to insae the accuracy of the maps and associated dala, ii sholAd be exphcitly - Flowage Easement -- Interstates noted that USAGE makes no wartanty, representation or guaranty. either express or implied, as to the content sequence, accuracy, timeliness or completeness or any of the data provided herein The USACE. County Boundary -- US Highways itsofficers, agents, employees, or servants shall assumeoo!iabilltyofanynaturefor arT{errors, omissions, or inacc11aciesin lheinformationprovidedregardlessof howcaused State Highways I Cites ..• The USAGE, its officers, agents, employees or servants shall asst.me no liability fcx any decisions made or - - · Highways - USACEDams actions ta ken or not taken by the user of the maps and associated data in re liance uponarry irtormationor data furnished here. By using these maps and associated data the user doessoentirelyattheir ownrisk -- Levee Centerline -- Railroads US Army Corps and explicitly acknowledges that helshe is aware of and agrees to be bound by this disclaimer a nd agees of Engineers"' not to presenl any claim°' demand of any nature aga inst the USAGE, its officers, agents. employees or servants in arry forum whatsoever for any damages of af?( nature whatsoever that may result from or may Rock Island Dlstnct be caused in art{waybijtheuseofthemapsandassociateddata Miles From: Duane Whipple To: Peterson, Cynthia L CIV (US) Subject: [Non-DoD Source] Santee Sioux Nation Date: Tuesday, June 27, 2017 11:27:59 AM

We feel there is no need to provide consultation in the Des Moines River Reservoirs Water Control Plan Project. This page was intentionally left blank. From: Garrie Kills-A-Hundred To: Peterson, Cynthia L CIV (US) Subject: [Non-DoD Source] RE: Des Moines River Reservoirs Water Control Plan Date: Tuesday, July 18, 2017 11:18:34 AM

Hello,

Thank you.

We look forward to working with you.

Garrie Kills A Hundred 3 57028 ( ) - Ext.

-----Original Message---- From: Peterson, Cynthia L CIV (US) [mailto: . . @ . l] Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2017 7:30 AM To: JoLisa Bahr Cc: Garrie Kills-A-Hundred Subject: RE: Des Moines River Reservoirs Water Control Plan

Dear Ms. Bahr,

Thank you for the response. The draft PEA completion date is set for late summer or early fall. Upon completion, a copy will be remitted to you for your review and comment. The APE has not yet been defined, but also will be supplied to you upon determination.

Sincerely,

Cindy Peterson

Archeologist, MVP@MVR Environmental Compliance Branch USACE-RPEDN-Rock Island 309/794-5396 (office) [email protected]

-----Original Message---- From: JoLisa Bahr [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Monday, July 17, 2017 4:16 PM To: Peterson, Cynthia L CIV (US) Cc: Garrie Kills-A-Hundred Subject: [Non-DoD Source] Des Moines River Reservoirs Water Control Plan

Jodi, This email is in response to the letter dated June 20, 2017. Regarding the Des Moines River Reservoirs Water Control Plan.

The FSST-THPO is requesting more information so that we can make a determination.

Please provide our office with the following material:

1. The define A.P.E.

2. A copy of the NEPA

If you have any questions regarding this request, please contact me at your convenience.

Thank you,

JoLisa Bahr, B.S. Environmental Engineering

FSST-THPO- Environmental Consultant

PO BOX 283

( - ext 1240

( From: Doershuk, John F To: Peterson, Cynthia L CIV USARMY CEMVR (US) Subject: [Non-DoD Source] Des Moines River Reservoirs Water Control Project Date: Wednesday, August 16, 2017 1:13:00 PM

Hi Cindy,

Tardy response to the Corps letter of June 20, 2017 – please include OSA as a consulting party to this Project.

Thank you,

John

John F. Doershuk, Ph.D.

State Archaeologist and Director

Office of the State Archaeologist

Adjunct Associate Professor, Anthropology

University of Iowa

OSA: a UI research center since 1959 This page was intentionally left blank. DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY ROCK ISLAND DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS CLOCK TOWER BUILDING - PO BOX 2004 ROCK ISLAND, IL 61204-2004

REPLY TO ATTENTION OF July 2, 2018

Regional Planning and Environmental Division North (RPEDN)

SEE DISTRIBUTION LIST (Enclosure 1)

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Rock Island District (District), is revising its Des Moines River Reservoirs (Saylorville Lake and Lake Red Rock, Iowa) Water Control Plan (Project; Enclosure 2). On June 20, 2017, the District mailed an invitation to participate in consultation to assist in identifying cultural and historic preservation issues early in the plan formulation process. The present letter identifies a preferred Project alternative, outlines the rationale behind this choice, and requests your comment on the District’s historic property effects determination, pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA).

Central Iowa’s Saylorville and Red Rock lakes were authorized as part of a plan to provide comprehensive flood reduction benefits, as well as other purposes such as water conservation/supply, fish and wildlife habitat, and recreation. The lakes are operated individually or in tandem to meet these objectives.

The Project seeks to update the Water Control Plan, which was last modified in 1992 for Red Rock and 2001 for Saylorville. Water control plans outline the operational plan to meet all the reservoirs’ congressionally mandated purposes by constraining water release locations, triggers, release amounts, allowable adjustments, and other measurable factors within certain conditions while allowing for emergency response flexibility.

Water control plans evolve over time due to changes in hydrology, sedimentation, and land use. The need for modification of the Des Moines River Reservoirs Water Control Plan is suggested due to observed alterations in physical and economic conditions related to changes in flood frequencies, ongoing reservoir sedimentation, and changes in downstream land use.

Federal Undertaking

In the June 20, 2017, letter, the District determined that this Project is an Undertaking with potential to cause effects to historic properties and as a consequence requires a determination of effect within the Area of Potential Effect (APE).

APE

This Project’s APE is defined as the flood pools of Saylorville Lake and Lake Red Rock and the lakes’ associated downstream corridors. -2-

Proposed Water Control Plan Alterations

The No Action Alternative is the existing Water Control Plan. Six major alternatives were considered, but Alternative 6 is considered most hydraulically sound, cost effective and environmentally beneficial, and least environmentally damaging. An engineering comparison of various hydraulic-modeling measures assisted in selection of the proposed alternative, with the goal being to find operational parameters which would lessen the severity of flooding (Enclosure 3). Alternative 6 improves upon the present Water Control Plan in terms of flood event frequency and duration by nearly every hydraulic modeling measure.

Perhaps the most relatable hydraulic-modeling measure is the predicted “number of spillway events at Saylorville Lake,” since water only flows over the spillway during the highest flood events. Modeling the current plan predicts that five such events would have occurred over the historical period of record (1917-2016); should Alternative 6 be implemented, an anticipated two spillway events would have occurred over that same period.

The proposed changes at Saylorville Lake seek to preserve available flood storage by altering the stage constraint at SE 6th Street and eliminating the balancing of flood storage between Saylorville Lake and Lake Red Rock (Enclosure 4). The change in control stage at SE 6th Street reflects changed conditions of when flood impacts begin (due to improvements to the levees and pump stations within the City of Des Moines that have occurred over time); this change does not result in higher maximum releases, but rather lessens the reduction in releases when the Raccoon River (which joins the Des Moines River just upstream of the SE 6th Street Gage) is high. The proposed changes at Lake Red Rock result in higher within bank discharges during the early stages of a flood event to reduce the likelihood of Large Magnitude Flood Operations and uncontrolled releases which result in damaging flows downstream of the lake.

Alternative 6’s operating parameters are within the range of outflows of the existing Water Control Plan. The upper (full flood pool) and lower (conservation pool) range of operating elevations remain the same as within the existing plan. The primary difference between the two plans are the triggers and timing of the flow releases (Enclosures 5-8).

Consultation on Prior Water Control Plans

The most recent Saylorville Lake Water Control Plan modification is documented in the Environmental Assessment entitled, Saylorville Regulation Plan Modification, Saylorville Reservoir, Polk County, Iowa, dated April 2001, where plan alterations involved:

-3-

 increasing maximum releases from 12,000 to 16,000 year round (previously, this release rate was only allowed from 15 December to 21 April),  a fall pool raise of one to four feet (previously, the allowable rate was one to two feet), and  an allowance for uncontrolled releases during certain emergency flood conditions.

A portion of Saylorville’s downstream (Des Moines River) corridor required Phase I archeological survey in association with the 2001 plan alterations, documented in the report entitled, Phase II Archeological Testing at 13PK407 and Phase I Cultural Resources Resurvey of the Des Moines River Corridor Downstream from Saylorville Lake, Crocker, Webster, Saylor, and Des Moines Townships, Polk County, Iowa, by Blikre et al (2001) of Bear Creek Archeology, Inc., Cresco, Iowa.

The District determined, and the Iowa State Historic Preservation Office’s (SHPO) concurred in a February 7, 2001 letter, that there were three sites in the downstream corridor that had not been assessed for their NRHP eligibility but which would not be adversely affected by water control plan alterations. Both parties agreed the sites would require Phase II eligibility testing, should future undertakings affect them. Site 13PK404 is either a prehistoric camp or a non-cultural, ancient prairie burn locale. Site 13PK416 is a prehistoric camp and 13PK415 is a Woodland camp site.

The 2001 plan alterations were anticipated to have an adverse effect to one historic property at Saylorville Lake or its downstream corridor: increased erosion to the Christensen Oneota Site (13PK407). The SHPO concurred with the District’s Adverse Effect finding in their February 7, 2001, letter. The District authored an MOA which resulted in data recovery at the site. Twenty- seven tribes were included in consultation mailings, with the Iowa Tribe of Oklahoma, the Meskwaki Nation, and the Pawnee Nation of Oklahoma being respondents. The data recovery documentation is found in the report entitled, Data Recovery Excavations at the Christenson Oneota Site (13PK407), Polk County, Iowa, by Benn et al. (2003) of Bear Creek Archeology, Inc., Cresco, Iowa. In a letter dated Dec 24, 2002, the SHPO concurred that the report satisfied the mitigation requirements, although additional data recovery may be warranted in the future if further erosion should threaten intact portions of the site. No other historic properties or unassessed sites were identified within the flood pool or the downstream corridor during the 2001 Saylorville Lake water control plan modification consultation.

Lake Red Rock’s most recent water control plan modification is documented in the report entitled, Water Control Plan with Supplemental Master Plan and Final Environmental Impact Statement Supplement II. Alterations in 1992 involved:

 a direct pool raise to 742 feet NGVD (implemented as flow permits), with an annual fall pool raise of an additional 2 feet.

-4-

Archeological survey and testing occurred in association with proposed Lake Red Rock alterations, with 11 National Register of Historic Places (NRHP)-eligible properties identified and subjected to data recovery excavations (Oneota sites 13MA207, 13MA208, 13MA209; Oneota and Woodland site 13MA387; Late Woodland site 13MA385; Woodland and Archaic site 13MA324; farmsteads 13MA262, 13MA266, 13MA400; historic towns 13MA347, 13MA449). As a result, the Iowa SHPO concurred in letters dated May 16, and October 25, 1989, with the District’s determination that the proposed 1992 alterations would have No Adverse Effect, conditional upon completion of the data recovery mitigation measures.

The data recovery documentation is found in the following reports, with the first three produced by American Resources Group of Carbondale, Illinois, and the fourth report by Bear Creek Archeology, Inc.:

 Archeological Data Recovery at Five Prehistoric Sites, Lake Red Rock, Marion County, Iowa by Moffat et al. (1990),  The Ratcliff (13MA400) and Stortes/Crookham (13MA262) Sites: Data Recovery at Two Historic Farmsteads, Lake Red Rock, Iowa by Rogers et al. (1988),  Archaeological Data Recovery at the Cormorant Site (13MA387): A Multicomponent Woodland and Oneota Site at Lake Red Rock Iowa by Moffatt and Koldehoff (1988), and  The Sutton (13MA266) Site and the Townsites of Percy (13MA347) and Dunreath (13MA449): Data Recovery at Three Historic Sites, Lake Red Rock, Iowa by Rogers et al. (1989).

The SHPO concurred that these reports satisfied the mitigative measures and conditions as stipulated in the No Adverse Effect finding for the Lake Red Rock pool raise. No other historic properties or unassessed sites were identified within the flood pool during the 1992 Lake Red Rock Water Control Plan modification consultation.

Existing Cultural Resources and Surveys

Archeological surveys, testing, and excavations overlapping the APE include archeological work anticipatory to both lakes’ original construction and prior to subsequent developments thereto, archeological work conducted in concert with the previous water control plan modifications, and archeological work associated with non-District-led improvements, such as roadway modifications. Surveys and sites information are summarized in Red Rock (1999) and Saylorville’s (1993) Historic Property Management Plans (HPMP), and in the 1995 document, Environmental Assessment – Flexible Pool Plan for Drought Contingency, Saylorville Lake, Polk, Boone, and Dallas Counties, Iowa.

-5-

There are no architectural historic properties within the APE. Red Rock and Saylorville dam construction concluded, respectively, in 1969 and 1975. As of this writing, neither dam complex has met the 50-year-old mark, although both soon will need an NRHP-eligibility assessment.

As mentioned in the prior section, “Consultation on Prior Water Control Plans,” the APE’s historic properties are limited to one site (13PK407) in the Saylorville Lake downstream corridor and 11 sites in the Lake Red Rock pool. The 11 sites at Lake Red Rock experience continual or very frequent inundation, and additionally, have been subjected to data recovery excavations which the SHPO agreed satisfied the mitigative measures and conditions associated with the 1992 flood pool raise-related MOAs. In addition, there are three sites in the Saylorville Lake downstream corridor which have not been assessed for NRHP eligibility (13PK404, 13PK415, 13PK416), but which SHPO agreed would not be affected by the 2001 water control plan alterations.

Examination of GIS landownership tract maps reveals prehistoric camp site 13PK416 is actually not District-owned and lies at an elevation above the Saylorville flood pool. When the site was first recorded (Benn and Bettis in 1981:25), the researchers noted that the site is on private land and not being affected by District management practices. Examination of aerial and LiDAR imagery from 2002 to present reveals that there has been no discernible loss of land at site 13PK404 or 13PK415 since the 2001 coordination of the Saylorville Lake Water Control Plan (Enclosure 9). The presently proposed plan is not expected to affect either site 13PK404 or 13PK415.

In association with a proposed water system improvement project near site 13PK407, archeological field verification and literature review refined the site boundaries, as documented in the report entitled, Archaeological Boundary Definition of the Christenson Oneota Site (13PK407), City of Des Moines, Polk County, Iowa, by Peterson (2005) of the Office of the State Archeologist, Iowa City. Peterson recommended that, should high water level discharges or other impacts to the remaining 0.17 ha of the site be planned, data recovery of the remainder of the site should occur. Review of aerial and LiDAR imagery between 2002 and the present reveal no discernible loss of land at site 13PK407 between those dates (Enclosure 10). Because maximum water outflow rates and pool elevations associated with Alternative 6 are the same as those presently utilized—with only timing and release triggers being modified— proposed Alternative 6 is anticipated to cause no additional erosion to site 13PK407.

-6-

Historic Properties Determination

The 2001 Saylorville and 1992 Red Rock Water Control Plans have been coordinated through the SHPO, with SHPO concurrence on the District’s effects determination findings received for both, including agreement that data recovery excavations satisfied the mitigative measures conditions. The flood pool elevations and maximum discharge rates for Alternative 6 remain the same as those already coordinated at Saylorville Lake and its downstream corridor in 2001 and at Lake Red Rock in 1992.

The proposed Alternative 6 maintains the same flood pool elevations as were coordinated in the past, and all proposed maximum flow rates are within rates already utilized. Implementation of Alternative 6 is expected to have no measureable impacts on historic properties as compared to the existing Water Control Plan. No discernible erosion into or approaching the intact portions of the Christenson Oneota Site (13PK407) has occurred since the 2001 data recovery excavations. Implementation of Alternative 6 is not expected to affect sites 13PK404 or 13PK415, which have not been assessed for their NRHP eligibility. For these reasons, the District proposes a No Adverse Effects determination for this Project.

Consulting Parties Invitation and Request for Comment

The District invites consulting parties to:  comment on or contribute to identification efforts including definition of the APE and the District’s determination of effect, all as per 36 CFR 800.5(a-b).  provide information regarding concerns with issues relating to the potential effects of this undertaking on historic properties and, particularly, the tribes’ concerns with identifying properties that may be of religious and cultural significance to them and may be eligible for the NRHP [36 CFR 800.4(a)(3-4)].

Concerns about confidentiality [36 CFR 800.11(c)] regarding locations of properties can be addressed under Section 304 of the NHPA which provides withholding from public disclosure the location of properties under several circumstances, including in cases where it would cause a significant invasion of privacy, impede the use of a traditional religious site by practitioners, endanger the site, etc. -7

Please respond within 30 days ofreceipt of this letter. The point ofcontact for this project is Ms. Cind Peterson ofour Environmental Compliance Branch at (309) 794-5396, by e-mail: or in writing to our address, ATTN: Environmental Compliance Branch (Cynthia Peterson).

Sincerely, J~K:e~~~ Chief, Environmental Planning Branch (RPEDN)

Enclosures (10) This page was intentionally left blank. DISTRIBUTION LIST

Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe Kickapoo Tribe in Kansas Mr. Steve Vance, THPO Mr. Cirtis Simon, NAGPRA Director PO Box 590 1107 Goldfinch Rd Eagle Butte, SD 57625 Horton, KS 66439

Citizen Potawatomi Nation Kickapoo Tribe of Oklahoma Dr. Kelli Mosteller, THPO Mr. Kent Collier, NAGPRA Coordinator 1601 S Gordon Cooper Drive PO Box 70 Shawnee OK 74801 Mcloud, OK 74851

Crow Creek Sioux Tribe Lower Brule Sioux Tribe Mr. Darrell Zephier, THPO Mr. Brian Molineaux, Archeologist PO Box 50 PO Box 187 Ft. Thompson, SD 57339 Lower Brule, SD 57548

Flandreau Santee Sioux Tribe Lower Sioux Indian Community Mr. Garrie Killsahundred, THPO Ms. Cheyanne St. John, THPO PO Box 283 339527 Res. Highway 1 Flandreau, SD 57028 Morton, MN 56270

Forest County Potawatomi Community Meskwaki Nation Mr. Michael LaRonge, THPO Mr. Johnathan Buffalo 5320 Wensaut Ln. Director, Historic Preservation Department P.O. Box 340 303 Meskwaki Road Crandon, WI 54520 Tama, IA 52339

Fort Peck Assiniboine & Sioux Tribes Oglala Sioux Tribe Mr. Darrell Youpee, THPO Ms. Trina Lone Hill, THPO 501 Medicine Bear Road PO Box 129 PO Box 1027 Kyle, SD 57752 Poplar, MT 58255 Omaha Tribe of Nebraska Ho-Chunk Nation Mr. Thomas Parker, THPO Mr. Bill Quackenbush, THPO PO Box 368 PO Box 667 Macy, NE 68039 Black River Falls, WI 54615 Osage Nation Iowa Tribe of Kansas and Nebraska Dr. Andrea A. Hunter, THPO Mr. Lance Foster, THPO 627 Grandview 3345 B Thrasher Rd. Pawhuska, OK 74056 White Cloud, KS 66094 Otoe-Missouria Tribe Iowa Tribe of Oklahoma Ms. Elsie Whitehorn, THPO Mr. Eagle McClellan, Cultural Preservation 8151 Hwy 177 Director Red Rock OK 74651 335588 E. 750 Rd. Perkins, OK 74059

ENCLOSURE 1

Ponca Tribe of Nebraska Mr. Shannon Wright, Jr., THPO Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community of PO Box 288 Minnesota Niabrara, NE 68760 Mr. Leonard Wabasha, Director, Cultural Resources Dept. Ponca Tribe of Oklahoma 2330 Sioux Trail NW Ms. Halona Cabe, THPO Prior Lake, MN 55372 20 White Eagle Dr. Ponca City, OK 74601 Spirit Lake Tribe Dr. Erich Longie, THPO Prairie Band Potawatomi Nation PO Box 359 Ms. Hattie Mitchell, NAGPRA Representative Fort Totten, ND 58335 16281 Q Road Mayetta, KS 66509 Standing Rock Sioux Tribe Mr. Jon Eagle, THPO Prairie Island Indian Community Administrative Service Center Mr. Noah White, THPO North Standing Rock Ave. 5636 Sturgeon Lake Road Ft. Yates, ND 58538 Welch, MN 55089 Winnebago Tribe of Nebraska Rosebud Sioux Tribe Mr. Randy Teboe, THPO Mr. Russell Eagle Bear, THPO PO Box 687 PO Box 809 Winnebago, NE 68071 Rosebud, SD 75770 Yankton Sioux Tribe Sac and Fox Nation of Missouri in Kansas Mr. Kip Spotted Eagle, THPO and Nebraska P.O. Box 1153 The Honorable Tiauna Carnes Wagner, SD 57380 305 North Main Street Reserve, KS 66434 Des Moines Historic Preservation Commission Sac and Fox Nation of Oklahoma Mr. York Taenzer, Chairperson Historic Preservation Department 602 Robert D. Ray Dr. P.O. Box 230 Des Moines, IA 50315 Drumright, OK 74030 Iowa State Historic Preservation Office Santee Sioux Tribe of Nebraska Ms. Libby Wielenga, R&C Coordinator Mr. Duane Whipple THPO 600 E. Locust 108 Spirit Lake Avenue West Des Moines, IA 50319-0290 Niobara, NE 68760 Office of the State Archaeologist Sisseton-Wahpeton Oyate Dr. John Doershuk Ms. Dianne Desrosiers, THPO 700 CLSB P.O. Box 907 University of Iowa Sisseton, SD 57262 Iowa City, IA 52242

ENCLOSURE 1

Saylorville and Red Rock lake vicinities in relation to the Des Moines River basin watershed.

ENCLOSURE 2 This page was intentionally left blank. Hydraulic comparison of existing plan (Alt 1) with various alternatives, typically depicted as probabilities, with Alt 6 being the preferred plan. Green represents hydraulic improvements in flood risk management compared to the existing plan and non- green is the same or essentially the same measurement as the existing plan. For example, in the first measure, the probability of the current plan exceeding the 26.5 foot stage in downtown Des Moines is 0.19, while Alt 6 is less, at 0.14.

ENCLOSURE 3 This page was intentionally left blank.

Summary of the existing Water Control Plan’s operating parameters.

ENCLOSURE 4 This page was intentionally left blank. Current Plan compared to Alternative 6, Saylorville Lake Growing Season. Red are changes from current plan.

ENCLOSURE 5 Current Plan compared to Alternative 6, Saylorville Lake Non-Growing Season. Red are changes from current plan.

ENCLOSURE 6 Current Plan compared to Alternative 6, Lake Red Rock Growing Season. Red are changes from current plan.

ENCLOSURE 7 Current Plan compared to Alternative 6, Lake Red Rock Non-Growing Season. Red are changes from current plan.

ENCLOSURE 8 Your request for comment by the State Historic Preservation Officer has been received. Date Received: 7/5/2018 Projected end of Review Period based on date received: 8/4/2018 Agency: COE SHPO Review & Compliance Number (R&C#): 170600103 ROCK ISLAND DISTRICT - DES MOINES RIVER RESERVOIR - WATER CONTROL PLAN - SAYLORVILLE LAKE AND LAKE REDROCK - PROJECT INFORMATION AND DOCUMENTATION - NAE DTRM In accordance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 and its implementing regulations, 36 CFR Part 800 (revised, effective August 5, 2004), the 30-day comment period under a formal review begins when the SHPO has received a submittal containing full documentation in support of an agency’s finding and determination of effect. The SHPO is under no time restraints but will provide a technical assistance response when: A. The SHPO concludes that the documentation provided does not support the agency’s definition of the Area of Potential Effects (APE) for the undertaking OR B. The SHPO concludes that the project documentation provided does not support the agency’s determination of a property’s eligibility for listing in the National Register of Historic Places OR C. The SHPO concludes that the documentation provided does not support the agency’s finding of an undertaking’s effects on a historic property OR D. The agency has determined that the undertaking will have “Adverse Effects” on historic properties and is actively consulting with SHPO on resolution of those effects.

If the documentation submitted to the SHPO for review meets the basic standards set forth at 36 CFR Part 800.11 and the SHPO fails to respond within 30 days, then the SHPO has waived its opportunity to comment and the agency may either (1) proceed to the next step in the process based upon the agency’s finding and determination, or (2) consult directly with the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation. In order to determine the next step in the process, we advise the agency to review the applicable sections of 36 CFR Part 800 or the programmatic agreement under which your undertaking is being reviewed.

Be advised that the successful conclusion of consultation with the SHPO does not fulfill the agency’s responsibility to consult with other parties who may have an interest in properties that may be affected by an undertaking. Nor does it override the sovereign status of federally recognized American Indian Tribes in the Section 106 consultation process.

We have made these comments and recommendations according to our responsibilities defined by Federal law pertaining to the Section 106 process. The responsible federal agency does not have to follow our comments and recommendations to comply with the Section 106 process. It also remains the responsible federal agency’s decision on how to proceed from this point for this undertaking.

Should you have any questions please contact me at the email below, referencing the R&C# above.

SHPO Review & Compliance Coordinator [email protected]

STATE HISTORICAL BUILDING • 600 E. LOCUST ST. • DES MOINES, IA 50319 • P: 515.281.5111 • WWW.IOWACULTURE.GOV This page was intentionally left blank. From: Doershuk, John F < u> Sent: Thursday, July 12, 2018 11:41 AM To: ]

Subject: [Non-DoD Source] Des Moines River Reservoirs Water Control Plan

Cindy,

Thanks for the information packet explaining Preferred Alternative 6 for the Des Moines River Reservoirs Water Control Plan. OSA concurs this is a reasonable solution and that adverse effects are unlikely at the previously recorded sites as identified in the packet.

I note the elevation of 760 ft for Lake Red Rock is utilized in the graphics included as enclosures; interestingly this is the approximate point at which wave action adversely impacts the location at which the mammoth remains were recently recovered. This makes me wonder about other possible archaeological (or paleontological) sites that may now be exposed around the lake margins compared to when shoreline surveys were last completed and how such resources are to be managed within either the Water Control Plan or other measures?

Sincerely,

John

John F. Doershuk, Ph.D. State Archaeologist and Director Office of the State Archaeologist Adjunct Associate Professor, Anthropology University of Iowa 700 Clinton Street Iowa City, Iowa 52242-1030

OSA concurrence email 12Jul2018.txt[8/3/2018 7:41:20 AM] This page was intentionally left blank. t 70~{!(J/o3 DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY ROCK ISLAND DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS CLOCK TOWER BUILDING - PO BOX 2004 RECEIVED ROCK ISLAND, IL 61204-2004 JUl 05 2n13 REPLY TO ATIENTIONOF July 2, 2018 by SHPo Regional Planning and Environmental Division North (RPEDN)

SEE DISTRIBUTION LIST (Enclosure 1)

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Rock Island District (District), is revising its Des Moines River Reservoirs (Saylorville Lake and Lake Red Rock, Iowa) Water Control Plan (Project; Enclosure 2). On June 20, 2017, the District mailed an invitation to participate in consultation to assist in identifying cultural and historic preservation issues early in the plan formulation process. The present letter identifies a preferred Project alternative, outlines the rationale behind this choice, and requests your comment on the District's historic property effects determination, pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA).

Central Iowa's Saylorville and Red Rock lakes were authorized as part of a plan to provide comprehensive flood reduction benefits, as well as other purposes such as water . conservation/supply, fish and wildlife habitat, and recreation. The lakes are operated individually or in tandem to meet these objectives.

The Project seeks to update the Water Control Plan, which was last modified in 1992 for Red Rock and 2001 for Saylorville. Water control plans outline the operational plan to meet all the reservoirs' congressionally mandated purposes by constraining water release locations, triggers, release amounts, allowable adjustments, and other measurable factors within certain conditions while allowing for emergency response flexibility.

Federal Undertaking

APE

This Project's APE is defined as the flood pools of Saylorville Lake and Lake Red Rock and the lakes' associated downstream corridors. -2

Proposed Water Control Plan Alterations

The No Action Alternative is the existing Water Control Plan. Six major alternatives were considered, but Alternative 6 is considered most hydraulically sound, cost effective and environmentally beneficial, and least environmentally damaging. An engineering comparison of various hydraulic-modeling measures assisted in selection ofthe proposed alternative, with the goal being to find operational parameters which would lessen the severity of flooding (Enclosure 3). Alternative 6 improves upon the present Water Control Plan in terms of flood event frequency and duration by nearly every hydraulic modeling measure.

Perhaps the most relatable hydraulic-modeling measure is the predicted "number of spillway events at Saylorville Lake,'' since water only flows over the spillway during the highest flood events. Modeling the current plan predicts that five such events would have occurred over the historical period ofrecord (1917-2016); should Alternative 6 be implemented, an anticipated two spillway events would have occurred over that same period.

The proposed changes at Saylorville Lake seek to preserve available flood storage by altering the stage constraint at SE 6th Street and eliminating the balancing of flood storage between Saylorville Lake and Lake Red Rock (Enclosure 4). The change in control stage at SE 6th Street reflects changed conditions of when flood impacts begin (due to improvements to the levees and pump stations within the City of Des Moines that have occurred over time); this change does not result in higher maximum releases, but rather lessens the reduction in releases when the Raccoon River (which joins the Des Moines River just upstream ofthe SE 6th Street Gage) is high. The proposed changes at Lake Red Rock result in higher within bank discharges during the early stages of a flood event to reduce the likelihood of Large Magnitude Flood Operations and uncontrolled releases which result in damaging flows downstream ofthe lake.

Alternative 6's operating parameters are within the range of outflows ofthe existing Water Control Plan. The upper (full flood pool) and lower (conservation pool) range ofoperating elevations remain the same as within the existing plan. The primary difference between the two plans are the triggers and timing ofthe flow releases (Enclosures 5-8).

Consultation on Prior Water Control Plans

L' -3

• increasing maximum releases from 12,000 to 16,000 year round (previously, this release rate was only allowed from 15 December to 21 April), • a fall pool raise of one to four feet (previously, the allowable rate was one to two feet), and • an allowance for uncontrolled releases during certain emergency flood conditions.

A portion of Saylorville's downstream (Des Moines River) corridor required Phase I archeological survey in association with the 2001 plan alterations, documented in the report entitled, Phase IIArcheological Testing at J3PK407 and Phase I Cultural Resources Resurvey of the Des Moines River Corridor Downstream from Saylorville Lake, Crocker, Webster, Saylor, and Des Moines Townships, Polk County, Iowa, by Blikre et al (2001) ofBear Creek Archeology, Inc., Cresco, Iowa.

The District determined, and the Iowa State Historic Preservation Office's (SHPO) concurred in a February 7, 2001 letter, that there were three sites in the downstream corridor that had not been assessed for their NRHP eligibility but which would not be adversely affected by water control plan alterations. Both parties agreed the sites would require Phase II eligibility testing, should future undertakings affect them. Site 13PK404 is either a prehistoric camp or a non-cultural, ancient prairie bum locale. Site 13PK416 is a prehistoric camp and 13PK415 is a Woodland camp site.

The 2001 plan alterations were anticipated to have an adverse effect to one historic property at Saylorville Lake or its downstream corridor: increased erosion to the Christensen Oneota Site (13PK407). The SHPO concurred with the District's Adverse Effect finding in their February 7, 2001, letter. The District authored an MOA which resulted in data recovery at the site. Twenty seven tribes were included in consultation mailings, with the Iowa Tribe of Oklahoma, the Meskwaki Nation, and the Pawnee Nation of Oklahoma being respondents. The data recovery documentation is found in the report entitled, Data Recovery Excavations at the Christenson Oneota Site (13PK407), Polk County, Iowa, by Benn et al. (2003) of Bear Creek Archeology, Inc., Cresco, Iowa. In a letter dated Dec 24, 2002, the SHPO concurred that the report satisfied the mitigation requirements, although additional data recovery may be warranted in the future if further erosion should threaten intact portions ofthe site. No other historic properties or unassessed sites were identified within the flood pool or the downstream corridor during the 2001 Saylorville Lake water control plan modification consultation.

Lake Red Rock's most recent water control plan modification is documented in the report entitled, Water Control Plan with Supplemental Master Plan and Final Environmental Impact Statement Supplement II. Alterations in 1992 involved:

• a direct pool raise to 742 feet NGVD (implemented as flow permits), with an annual fall pool raise of an additional 2 feet. -4

Archeological survey and testing occurred in association with proposed Lake Red Rock alterations, with 11 National Register of Historic Places (NRHP)-eligible properties identified and subjected to data recovery excavations (Oneota sites 13MA207, 13MA208, 13MA209; Oneota and Woodland site 13MA387; Late Woodland site 13MA385; Woodland and Archaic site 13MA324; farmsteads 13MA262, 13MA266, 13MA400; historic towns 13MA347, 13MA449). As a result, the Iowa SHPO concurred in letters dated May 16, and October 25, 1989, with the District's determination that the proposed 1992 alterations would have No Adverse Effect, conditional upon completion ofthe data recovery mitigation measures.

• Archeological Data Recovery at Five Prehistoric Sites, Lake Red Rock, Marion County, Iowa by Moffat et al. (1990), • The Ratcliff(l3MA400) and Stortes/Crookham (l 3MA262) Sites: Data Recovery at Two Historic Farmsteads, Lake Red Rock, Iowa by Rogers et al. (1988), • Archaeological Data Recovery at the Cormorant Site (13MA387): A Multicomponent Woodland and Oneota Site at Lake Red Rock Iowa by Moffatt and Koldehoff (1988), and • The Sutton (l3MA266) Site and the Townsites ofPercy (l3MA347) and Dunreath (l3MA449): Data Recovery at Three Historic Sites, Lake Red Rock, Iowa by Rogers et al. (1989).

Existing Cultural Resources and Surveys

Archeological surveys, testing, and excavations overlapping the APE include archeological work anticipatory to both lakes' original construction and prior to subsequent developments thereto, archeological work conducted in concert with the previous water control plan modifications, and archeological work associated with non-District-led improvements, such as roadway modifications. Surveys and sites information are summarized in Red Rock (1999) and Saylorville's (1993) Historic Property Management Plans (HPMP), and in the 1995 document, Environmental Assessment - Flexible Pool Plan for Drought Contingency, Saylorville Lake, Polk, Boone, and Dallas Counties, Iowa. -5

There are no architectural historic properties within the APE. Red Rock and Saylorville dam construction concluded, respectively, in 1969 and 1975. As ofthis writing, neither dam complex has met the 50-year-old mark, although both soon will need an NRHP-eligibility assessment.

As mentioned in the prior section, "Consultation on Prior Water Control Plans," the APE's historic properties are limited to one site (13PK407) in the Saylorville Lake downstream corridor and 11 sites in the Lake Red Rock pool. The 11 sites at Lake Red Rock experience continual or very frequent inundation, and additionally, have been subjected to data recovery excavations which the SHPO agreed satisfied the mitigative measures and conditions associated with the 1992 flood pool raise-related MOAs. In addition, there are three sites in the Saylorville Lake downstream corridor which have not been assessed for NRHP eligibility (13PK404, 13PK415, 13PK416), but which SHPO agreed would not be affected by the 2001 water control plan alterations.

Examination of GIS landownership tract maps reveals prehistoric camp site 13PK416 is actually not District-owned and lies at an elevation above the Saylorville flood pool. When the site was first recorded (Benn and Bettis in 1981 :25), the researchers noted that the site is on private land and not being affected by District management practices. Examination of aerial and LiDAR imagery from 2002 to present reveals that there has been no discernible loss of land at site 13PK404 or 13PK415 since the 2001 coordination ofthe Saylorville Lake Water Control Plan (Enclosure 9). The presently proposed plan is not expected to affect either site 13PK404 or 13PK415.

In association with a proposed water system improvement project near site 13PK407, archeological field verification and literature review refined the site boundaries, as documented in the report entitled, Archaeological Boundary Definition ofthe Christenson Oneota Site (13PK407), City ofDes Moines, Polk County, Iowa, by Peterson (2005) of the Office ofthe State Archeologist, Iowa City. Peterson recommended that, should high water level discharges or other impacts to the remaining 0.17 ha ofthe site be planned, data recovery ofthe remainder of the site should occur. Review of aerial and LiDAR imagery between 2002 and the present reveal no discernible loss of land at site 13PK407 between those dates (Enclosure 10). Because maximum water outflow rates and pool elevations associated with Alternative 6 are the same as those presently utilized-with only timing and release triggers being modified proposed Alternative 6 is anticipated to cause no additional erosion to site 13PK407. -6

Historic Properties Determination

The 2001 Saylorville and 1992 Red Rock Water Control Plans have been coordinated through the SHPO, with SHPO concurrence on the District's effects determination findings received for both, including agreement that data recovery excavations satisfied the mitigative measures conditions. The flood pool elevations and maximum discharge rates for Alternative 6 remain the same as those already coordinated at Saylorville Lake and its downstream corridor in 2001 and at Lake Red Rock in 1992.

Consulting Parties Invitation and Request for Comment

The District invites consulting parties to: • comment on or contribute to identification efforts including definition ofthe APE and the District's determination of effect, all as per 36 CFR 800.5(a-b). • provide information regarding concerns with issues relating to the potential effects of this undertaking on historic properties and, particularly, the tribes' concerns with identifying properties that may be of religious and cultural significance to them and may be eligible for the NRHP [36 CFR 800.4(a)(3-4)].

Concerns about confidentiality [36 CFR 800.1 l(c)] regarding locations ofproperties can be addressed under Section 304 of the NHPA which provides withholding from public disclosure , the location ofproperties under several circumstances, including in cases where it would cause a significant invasion ofprivacy, impede the use of a traditional religious site by practitioners, endanger the site, etc. -7

Please respond within 30 days ofreceipt ofthis letter. The point ofcontact for this project is Ms. Cindy Peterson of our Environmental Compliance Branch at (309) 794-5396, by e-mail: •lll!!!!!!!!!!!!!i!!!l!!!l!l!l!!!!l!ll!l!!!l!l!l!!!l!lll , or in writing to our address, ATTN: Environmental hia Peterson).

'"'·- r.;.,·.·· Sincerely, J~K:e~~ Chief, Environmental Planning Branch (RPEDN)

Enclosures (10) This page was intentionally left blank. August 12, 2018

Joe Jordan CEMVP-PD-C US Army Corps of Engineers, Clock Tower Building P.O. Box 2004 Rock Island, IL 61204-2004

Maj. Gen. Richard G. Kaiser MVD Commander USACE Mississippi Valley Division P 0 Box 80 Vicksburg , MS 39181-0080

Re: Des Moines River Water Control Plan Update Gentlemen : Thank you for allowing the extra time to respond to this proposed plan The proposed interval of only a few days after the last public meeting would have been difficult for many to meet. For reference, I am attaching a copy of the submission after the initial meetings that were held. This was submitted in February of 2017. This is submitted so much of this will not have to be repeated We are happy to see that some adjustment is being made adding the "large magnitude flood operation" when the Red Rock Reservoir hits 770 feet, or 60% of flood control storage This is a step in the right direction. The main mission of the Iowa Reservoirs is Flood Control, that was their intended purpose and why the ta xpayers authorized their build and expenditure. Bearing that in mind that stipulation should apply not only to the Des Moines River, but to the Mississippi River which it feeds. The Des Moines River is a major contributor to flow in the Mississippi River. There is a large amount of agricultural ground in Pool 20 and below which is outside levied districts as well as that ground protected by levees. There is also commercial navigation in the Mississippi River which is affected by flooding . It would seem imperative that these issues be included in consideration of the operation of the reservoirs. After the initial meetings there was a response to that effect. It seems that there was little consideration given to the issues on the Upper Mississippi. Local feelings are that the issues on the Upper Mississippi River should receive more weight than have been given It would appear that the "reservoirs" primary consideration is the effects on Des Moines, IA and other areas on the Des Moines River Your statements of the Des Moines releases only changing the levels on the Mississippi a little over one foot are taken as valid , however, remember that one foot is significant a peak times in the survival of crops; the stability of levee systems and the continuation of commercial traffic on the main stem Upper Mississippi River. Commercial traffic affects many things, St. Paul, Minneapolis, Quade Cities, all get fuel , salt, fertilizer from the river and agricultural and petroleum products flow downriver. Your "trigger points" remaining with the Quincy gage (3 4. 5 miles below the mouth of the Des Moines) are still an issue that hasn 't changed in the proposed new operation manual Again , I encourage your consideration of a change in this trigger point to Lock and Dam upper pool gage (18 .3 miles below the mouth of the Des Moines. This will give an earlier response and more sensitivity to Mississippi River Stages. See the previous submission for additional information. When the middle Upper Mississippi raises to major flooding Lock and Dam 17 is typically the first dam to go out due to flooding, Lock and Dam 20 is typically the second. When 20 goes out, Commercial Navigation stops. That "one foot" affect from the Des Moines can be very important. Using Lock and Dam 20's upper gage as a trigger point could be important. Also, keeping in mind that Lock 20 is an "early out" lock, there is a concern with the proposed plan's waiting until certain stages are reached before major emptying of the reservoirs occurs. It would seem that common sense would dictate in wet conditions that the reservoirs be held as close to the Conservation Pool Stage, or even below (742 feet). As agricultural ground below Red Rock and on the main stem reservoir are affected and as Mississippi stages raise to near shut down then and only then should there be a concentrated effort to hold water in the reservoirs. Fall and early winter should find the Des Moines reservoirs at their lowest levels. The TVA operates many reservoirs and operates the main stem Tennessee and Cumberland Rivers for flood control and for navigation and they do a very effective job of this. Starting in early winter and through the winter these pools are held low. I would encourage Rock Island District to review the operations and successes of the TVA/Nashville pools. Lock 20 shuts down at around an 18-foot stage depending on conditions (rising river, stationary river, speed of raise, etc.) Their upper wall goes under about 19-foot stage. They are good about operating as long as possible to assist Commercial Navigation. At about these same stages on down the river other things are happening: • Agricultural ground in pool 20 and 21 begins to go under about 14-foot stage, but the it's flooding gets really bad at about 16-foot stage. Depending on crop type and stage of maturity these stages can be anywhere from minor effects to devastating. • Riverfront camp grounds in Canton, MO area go under. • Hannibal is close to closing its flood gates which is costly and a disruption in the tourist trade in Hannibal. Hannibal greatly depends on this trade. • In Quincy these stages are only a minor inconvenience at the river front barge docks and parks. Serious implications don't happen in Quincy until another 3 to 4 feet raise in the river. Hence, again, Quincy gage is a poor choice as a trigger point. In Summary • Please reconsider these trigger points and consider relocating from Quincy to Lock 20 Pool gage or to the Gregory, MO gage. • Des Moines River reservoirs need to be drained and maintained at lowest levels possible during normal flood times and or exceptional wet times at other times in the year. They are "Flood Control Reservoirs" first and foremost Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, ~~~ Michael G. Herschler Des Moines River Water Control Plan Update The water control plan revisions need to include changes to downstream triggers. At a point in time when the reservoir was conceived and or built Quincy, being the first major city downstream was a significant control point. The thinking here was probably that there was a great deal ofindustry scattered along the low ground along the river on Quincy's west side. Today much ofthis industry has either moved or closed its doors. There is some left, but no where near the amount that was there at the time the reservoir was built. Therefore Quincy, or the Quincy gage is ofless significance. Of major significance now in that general portion of the river most affected by the Des Moines River, i.e. pool 20-22 is agriculture and commercial river navigation. Agricultural ground is imperiled by elevated river stages during wet periods by two things; direct flooding of unprotected farm ground and seep water into levee districts. In extreme conditions, ofcourse levee overtopping and failure come into the picture. As an example, in the fall of 2016 crops were inundated resulting in complete crop failure in the pool 20 and pool 21 low ground areas. Also, lock 20 reached its highest operative level resulting in near or complete shutdown oflock operations and a stoppage of commercial navigation. The result ofthis is huge in dollars to the consumer, companies who depend on shipments, and the companies who move material on the Upper Mississippi. This affects our ability to compete in the world market. Ifyou review the levels ofthe reservoir and the discharge history it is clear that water could have been held resulting in lowering ofthe peak levels which resulted in the lock being or nearly being closed and crops being destroyed.

It is suggested also that the conservation level is too high to effect significant water holding in the normal wet part ofthe year. When dry conditions in the normally dry part of the year are predicted, the reservoir levels should be held to higher levels, thus allowing release of water to supplement flows in extreme low-level times. This would further assist commercial navigation. It is suggested that the conservation level be allowed to vary depending on the time of the year and the prediction of wet or dry conditions. To affix one locked in conservation level is probably not very realistic when trying to achieve what the operation ofthe reservoir is attempting to do. The reservoirs were authorized for flood control and this should remain a primary factor in their operation. Commercial navigation and low land flooding should be added as part of the operational control. Recreation is a good thing, and recreation will take place successfully on the reservoir regardless of the reservoir stage. Control for recreational purposes is not necessary. Recreation needs to have little or no influence on operation of the reservoir, it is a byproduct of the reservoir's being there. The gage at Lock 20 needs to be a downstream control point.

Michael G. Herschler Master of Steam or Motor Vessels ofnot more than 200 Gross Registered Tons (Domestic Tonnage), 500 Gross Tons (ITC Tonnage) Upon Western Rivers Master of Towing Vessels upon Western Rivers, Radar Observer-Rivers. License 2000507/000268479; issue number 10 (Expires 16 November 2019) This page was intentionally left blank. From: Tyler Christian To: CEMVR_Planning Cc:

Subject: [Non-DoD Source] Public Comment: Des Moines River Basin Master Reservoir Regulation Manual Date: Friday, August 10, 2018 10:01:19 AM Attachments: image001.jpg Impacts of 2018 Temporary Deviation for Saylorville and Red Rock Reservoirs.msg

Marion County has many Class A gravel roads that are inundated by Lake Red Rock level flooding almost on a yearly basis. It is our opinion that the ‘lake level’ flooding impacts to our roads overall would be reduced by Alternative 6 being implemented as the new Regulation Plan. This proposed Alternative would reduce the duration of which our roads are under water and also would prevent some from going under during certain floods when compared to the current regulation plan. This is evident in the e-mail sent from Maren Stoflet – Impacts of 2018 Temporary Deviation for Saylorville and Red Rock Reservoirs, as attached.

However, we do have a road that will be impacted during the fall pool raise, if the peak of the raise is at 747. Kennedy St. between 150th Ave. and Co. Rd. S71 goes underwater at elevation slightly below 747. There is a bridge on Kennedy that is likely to be replaced in the next 3-5 years, however, the replacement date and scope of work is uncertain at this time. I would request that the Army Corps of Engineer’s not approve a fall pool raise above 744 (current 2’ fall pool raise) until agreements between the Army COE, Iowa DNR, and Marion County can be reached in order to replace the bridge and raise the road to a safe elevation above the 747 elevation.

Lastly, we do not predict any impact to roads down stream of Lake Red Rock Dam along the Des Moines River as a result of the proposed Alternative 6. However, we have had comments from the public that with the river running at a higher flow of 22,000 in the wet spring rainy season, water may not be able to get away downstream quickly enough. The thought is that tributaries of the Des Moines River, i.e. Cedar Creek, English Creek, and many others, that are downstream of Red Rock are acting as a backwater from the Des Moines River. Theorizing that water from heavy rain falling in the tributary drainage basins can’t get out of/off of fields, tiles, ditches, and other drainage ways because there isn’t enough relief downstream. I have no proof or information to back this up, I am just passing along the comments from area farmers.

Let me know if you have any questions.

Thank you,

Tyler Christian, P.E.

Marion County Engineer

Marion County Road Department

. This page was intentionally left blank. From:

Subject: Impacts of 2018 Temporary Deviation for Saylorville and Red Rock Reservoirs Date: Wednesday, July 25, 2018 4:29:23 PM Attachments: 2018_Reservoir Plan and Deviation Comparisons.pdf

Hello all,

The various heavy rain events over the middle and upper Des Moines River basin the past couple of months have provided opportunities to apply the approved temporary deviation of the Water Control Plan to Saylorville Lake and Lake Red Rock reservoir operations. We wanted to share the comparison between what was observed under this year’s 2018 deviation and what it would have looked like without the deviation, had we operated under the existing Water Control Plan.

Attached are graphical comparisons of the pool elevations and outflow/releases from what was observed under the temporary 2018 deviation vs. what was simulated if we had operated with the existing Water Control Plan this past May through mid-July.

The tables below include the highlights:

Saylorville Lake

Maximum Observed

(Under Deviation)

Maximum Simulated (Existing Water Control Plan)

Difference (Deviation minus Existing Water Control Plan)

Pool Elevation

886.19 feet (9 July 2018)

890.10 feet (5 July 2018)

-3.91 feet (4 days later)

Outflow/Releases

21,000 cfs (remained below spillway with pneumatic crest gates raised)

42,000 cfs (would have exceeded spillway from

5 July to 12 July)

-21,000 cfs

Inflow to Reservoir

43,200 cfs (1 July 2018) same same

Key elements of the deviation that were used at Saylorville Lake:

1. Increased the stage constraint at the SE 6th Street gage in Des Moines from 24 feet to 26.5 feet.

2. Eliminated flood storage balancing between Saylorville Lake and Lake Red Rock.

Using the deviation at Saylorville Lake, the pool crested at 886.19 feet (using about 89.5% of the flood storage and 6th highest on record) with an outflow of 21,000 cfs. Without the deviation, the simulated pool crest would have exceeded 890 feet (100% of the flood storage utilized) and would have resulted in an uncontrolled spillway release with a peak outflow near 40,000 cfs.

Lake Red Rock

Maximum Observed

(Under Deviation)

Maximum Simulated (Existing Water Control Plan)

Difference (Deviation minus Existing Water Control Plan)

Pool Elevation

766.2 feet (20 July 2018)

772.6 feet (20 July 2018)

-6.40 feet (same day)

Outflow/Releases

22,000 cfs

22,000 cfs same

Inflow to Reservoir

65,900 cfs (1 July 2018) same same (at maximum inflow)

Key elements of the deviation that were used at Lake Red Rock:

1. Increased the seasonal maximum discharge during the growing season (from 18,000 cfs) to 22,000 cfs. Correspondingly increased the stage constraints at the Ottumwa gage (from 7.5 feet) to 8.7 feet, and at the Keosauqua gage (from 17.6 feet) to 18.4 feet.

Using the deviation at Lake Red Rock, the pool crested at 766.2 feet (using about 48% of the flood storage) with an outflow of 22,000 cfs. Without the deviation, the simulated pool crest would have been 772.6 feet (using about 69.5% of the flood storage), with a simulated outflow also at 22,000 cfs.

If you have any input or questions with regard to the temporary deviation so far this year, or about the information provided above, please let me know. Also, you may recall an email for the upcoming public open houses and presentations scheduled for Jul 31st, Aug 1st, 2nd, and 7th which you are welcome to attend.

Thank you,

Maren Maren Stoflet

Hydrologist - Water Management Section

Rock Island District (CEMVR-EC-HW)

US Army Corps of Engineers Saylorville Lake - 2018 Max Pool Observed (Deviation): 886.19 feet (9 July) Max Pool Simulated (Existing Plan): 890.10 feet (5 July) Max Release Observed (Deviation): 21,000 cfs Max Release Simulated (Existing Plan): 42,000 cfs Max Inflow Observed: 43,200 cfs (1 July)

Observed Pool with Deviation Simulated Pool with Existing Plan (Max 886.19 feet – 9 July) (Max 890.10 feet – 5 July)

Observed Inflow (Max 43,200 cfs) Simulated Release with Existing Plan (Max 42,000 cfs)

Observed Release with Deviation (Max 21,000 cfs) Lake Red Rock - 2018 Simulated Pool with Existing Plan Max Pool Observed (Deviation): 766.2 feet (20 July) (Max 772.6 feet – 20 July) Max Pool Simulated (Existing Plan): 772.6 feet (20 July) Max Release Observed (Deviation and Existing Plan): 22,000 cfs Max Inflow Observed: 65,900 cfs (1 July) Observed Pool with Deviation (Max 766.2 feet – 20 July)

Observed Inflow (Solid Black) Simulated Inflow (Dashed Black) with Existing Plan (Max 65,900 cfs)

Simulated Release Observed Release (Solid Blue) with Deviation with Existing Plan (Max 22,000 cfs) (Max 22,000 cfs) From: Nick Fanning To: Jordan, Joseph W CIV (US) Subject: [Non-DoD Source] RE: Des Moines River Basin Master Reservoir Regulation Manual Feasibility Report Public Comment Period Extension to August 31, 2018 Date: Wednesday, August 15, 2018 1:13:29 PM Attachments: D-MRES-USACE-1295 2018-0815 Comments to DMRB Master Reservoir Regulation Manual.pdf

Joe,

Attached are comments from Missouri River Energy Services on behalf of Western Minnesota Municipal Power Agency. A hardcopy of the attached is also being sent in the mail to your attention.

Regards,

Nick Fanning Resource Engineer Missouri River Energy Services

-----Original Message---- From: Jordan, Joseph W CIV (US) l] Sent: Thursday, August 09, 2018 5:41 PM Subject: Des Moines River Basin Master Reservoir Regulation Manual Feasibility Report Public Comment Period Extension to August 31, 2018

MRES External Email Security: This email is from an outside source. Use caution before clicking on any link or downloading any content.

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Rock Island District is extending the Draft Des Moines River Basin Master Reservoir Regulation Manual Feasibility Report's public comment period from August 17 to August 31 based on public request. We encourage everyone to provide input on the report so the Corps can make informed decisions about our Des Moines River management.

To review and comment on the draft report, visit:

Blockedhttp://go.usa.gov/xQSF9

(The draft report is located on the lower right hand side of the webpage.)

You may email me or mail your comments to the address below.

***Public comment period now ends on August 31, 2018.***

Thank you and we look forward to your comments on the draft report.

Joe

Joe Jordan CEMVP-PD-C US Army Corps of Engineers, This page was intentionally left blank. 3724 West Avera Drive MISSOURI PO Box 88920 Sioux Falls, SD 57109-8920 Telephone: 605.338.4042 RIVER Fax: 605.978-9360 ENERGY SERVICES® www.mrenergy.com

August 15, 2018 Letter No. D-M RES-USACE-1295

VIA US MAIL and EMAIL to [email protected]

US Army Corps of Engineers Rock Island District P.O. Box 2004 Rock Island, IL 61204-2004 Attention: Joe Jordan

RE: Comments to the Des Moines River Basin Master Reservoir Regulation Manual and Feasibility Report with Integrated Environmental Assessment

Dear Mr. Jordan:

Missouri Basin Municipal Power Agency doing business as Missouri River Energy Services (MRES) respectfully submits these comments on behalf ofitself and Western Minnesota Municipal Power Agency (Western Minnesota) to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) for consideration in response to the Des Moines River Basin Master Reservoir Regulation Manual and Feasibility Report with Integrated Environmental Assessment dated June 2018.

MR.ES is a not-for-profit, member-based, municipal joint-action agency that provides power supply, transmission, and related services to its 61 member municipalities in Iowa, Minnesota, North Dakota, and South Dakota. Each ofthese members owns and operates its own municipal electric utility. MR.ES is headquartered in Sioux Falls, SD, and is governed by a 13-member Board of Directors elected by and from the ranks of the membership. In order to meet its power supply obligations to its members, MR.ES has contracted for power supply resources with Western Minnesota.

Western Minnesota is a not-for-profit, municipal power agency, established under Minnesota Statutes Ch. 453. It owns and finances power supply and transmission facilities, all ofwhich are dedicated to serve MRES members under the terms ofa power supply contract between Western Minnesota and MRES. Western Minnesota holds the License for construction and operation of the Red Rock Hydroelectric Project (RRHP or the Project), which is currently under construction on the Red Rock Dam on the Des Moines River. This License was issued by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) pursuant to its Order dated April 18, 2011 . Western Minnesota has contracted with MR.ES to manage the construction ofRRHP and, when construction is completed, to operate RRHP on behalf of Western Minnesota.

The construction of the RRHP was authorized by the FERC as an important source of baseload, renewable electricity for the region for the future. The Project is the result of thorough review by the FERC, the USACE, and others, and represents a significant element of the long-term energy policy ofthe nation. The Project is an integral part ofthe Des Moines River Basin and the Red Rock Reservoir, and it was authorized based on the historic Public Comments ofMRES and Western Minnesota regarding the Des Moines River Basin Master Reservoir Regulation Manual and Feasibility Report with Integrated Environmental Assessment August 15, 2018 Page 2of3 management and operation ofthe waterway by the USACE. ln addition, the Rock Island District has completed a Review Plan for the RRHP, subsequent to the issuance ofthe federal License for its construction. See "Review Plan, Red Rock Hydroelectric Project, Federal Energy Regulat01y Commission (FERC) # 12576, Hydropower Construction," Red Rock Dam, Des Moines River, Marion County, Iowa, P2 Number 332224, July 11 , 2012 (most recently revised 07/02/ 13). The purpose ofcompleting this Review Plan was for the USACE to establish that the RRHP will not adversely affect the operational or structural integrity of the Red Rock Dam, both in terms ofthe construction project and in terms ofthe operational plans for the RRHP.

MRES and Western Minnesota recognize that the USACE manages Lake Red Rock as a multi-purpose reservoir. We understand that the purpose for which Congress authorized construction ofthe Red Rock Dam and reservoir was primarily for flood risk management for areas below the lake. We also acknowledge that the secondary purposes include augmenting the flow ofthe Des Moines River below the Red Rock Dam during drought conditions, managing fish and wildlife, and providing recreation opportunities. The USACE manages the level ofLake Red Rock on a seasonal basis to achieve these objectives. This responsibility requires the USACE to balance interests of the public and stakeholders - which at times are competing - while it directs, operates, and manages water storage for the Red Rock Reservoir and Red Rock Dam, as well as other water control structures on the Des Moines River.

With this understanding, MRES and Western Minnesota respectfully submit the following comments for USACE consideration as it prepares to finalize revisions to the Des Moines River Basin Master Reservoir Regulation Manual and Feasibility Report with Integrated Environmental Assessment:

1. Impacts To Clean Renewable Hydroelectric Generation. The USACE has selected Alternative 6 as the preferred alternative and has recommended Alternative 6 for replacing the current Des Moines River Basin Master Reservoir Regulation Manual. As presented to MRES by the USACE via webinar on July 17, 2018, Alternative 6 would reduce annual renewable energy production by 1.9% from the no-action alternative (Alternative 1). However, after reviewing the data supplied by the USACE, it is evident that a reduction of 1.9% does not reflect the full impact that Alternative 6 will have to the production ofrenewable energy. As presented, most ofthe reduction in production will occur during the months ofJune, July and August, when electric loads are typically the highest and energy is needed most. The reduction of 1.9% in annual energy production is further skewed when taking into account that under Alternative 6, energy production increases in February and March when electrical loads are typically much lower and the need for energy is less.

For example, using 24 years ofdata from 1993 to 2016, Alternative 6 will result in providing renewable energy to over 220 fewer households during the months ofJuly and August, when the demand for power is typically at its highest. Using the same data set, nearly I I ,400 fewer households will be powered with renewable energy over the 24 year period. This reduction not only reduces the benefits derived from clean renewable hydroelectric power, but comes at a cost ofover $3 .9M over the 24 year period. Public Comments of MRES and Western Minnesota regarding the Des Moines River Basin Master Reservoir Regulation Manual and Feasibility Report with Integrated Environmental Assessment August 15, 2018 Page 3of3

The USACE should recognize the value that clean, renewable hydroelectric energy has to the nation and place a higher priority on this value than what was provided in the study. As such the USACE should maintain a maximum release of 18,000 cfs during the growing season as is followed in the current Des Moines River Water Control Plan (Alternative 1).

MRES and Western Minnesota appreciate the opportunity to provide input as the USACE works to finalize the Des Moines River Basin Master Reservoir Regulation Manual and Feasibility Report with Integrated Environmental Assessment. We look forward to working with the USACE as it seeks to implement the revisions to ensure that the value of hydropower is recognized. Please contact me if you have any questions regarding these comments, or would like further input on the importance of hydropower as a renewable energy source. I can be reached by email at [email protected] and by telephone at 605-330-6963.

Sincerely,

Raymond J. WaWe, P.E. Director, Power Supply and Operations Missouri River Energy Services Agent for Western Minnesota Municipal Power Agency This page was intentionally left blank. From: Stoflet, Maren A To: ( Cc:

Subject: RE: Public Comment: Des Moines River Basin Master Reservoir Regulation Manual Date: Friday, August 17, 2018 10:52:00 AM

Hello all,

The following are comments I received from Tim at Ottumwa Hydropower...

------From: Tim Albert : ] Sent: Monday, August 13, 2018 5:03 PM To: Stoflet, Maren A CIV USARMY CEMVR (US) Subject: [Non-DoD Source] Re: Public Comment Period Extended to August 31, 2018 for Des Moines River Basin Master Reservoir Regulation Manual Feasibility Report

My only comment would be that we would like to see the outflow begin to be reduced from the full 22,000 CFS back to 18,000 once the lake has dropped back to like 752 or so. Also when the long term out look shows dry weather like we have now. The river will go from being bank full all spring and summer to a trickle. I am concerned about bank erosion so if we could slowly lower the flow to run of the river rather than doing it in just 5-7 days I think it would give the banks some time to dry out as the water recedes. The natural flow would be for the stream to flash full and over the banks and then rapidly come back in the banks. When the banks stay full for months, the soil is saturated, I think slowly lowering the water level slowly would be better for them. ------

I did reply to Tim and let him know that we are currently and plan to strive for the slower reduction in outflows from Red Rock.

Maren This page was intentionally left blank. SNYISLAND LEVEE DRAINAGE DISTRICT 110,000 Acres in Adams, Pike and Calhoun Counties Phone: (217) 426-2521 490 North Main Fax: (217) 426-4281 P.O. Box 169 New Canton, IL 62356-0169

COM1lfISSIONERS STA~FF RUSSELL E. KOELLER MIKE REED DAN LUNDBERG Superintendent BRADY BORROWMAN TRUDI BRUMMELL Administrative Assistant August 20, 2018

Major General Richard Kaiser President, Mississippi River Commission Commander, Mississippi Valley Division U.S. Army Corps ofEngineers P.O. Box 80 Vicksburg, Mississippi 39181-0080

RE: Low Water Inspection - Upper Mississippi River Basin Des Moines River Basin Master Reservoir Regulation Manual

Dear General Kaiser:

I write to share growing concern with the proposed update ofthe Des Moines River Master Water Control Manual (Master Manual) and to make you aware ofits fatal flaws. More importantly, the Sny Island Drainage District (Sny) respectfully requests assistance from the Mississippi River Commission (Commission) in ensuring this Master Manual update is not implemented, nor further advanced toward completion, until its process, policy and technical shortcomings are fully and appropriately resolved.

At the August 7th Master Manual U.S. Army Corps ofEngineers- Rock Island District's (Corps) public meeting held in Quincy, Illinois, there were multiple questions and concerns voiced by participants prior to and during the presentation on impacts to downstream flooding--to which the Corps' response was misleading and unsatisfactory. Refusing to acknowledge an increase on Mississippi River flooding, the Corps reiterated that would be avoided by maintaining the downstream constraints at Burlington, Iowa, and Quincy, Illinois. It was not acknowledged that in the "tentatively selected plan" those constraints do not serve as controls during "large magnitude flood operations" and that such operations are to be triggered sooner. Coupled with that there will be significantly larger volume releases during those operational periods. How can this not effect Mississippi River flooding!

A related concern is that during the time from when the study was requested in 2010 until its completion earlier this year the downstream States of Illinois and Missouri were not brought into the study process by the Corps. Had this early error in judgment not occurred-the initial fatal flaw-it is quite likely the downstream states and stakeholders would have caught the above described technical deficiency-another fatal flaw-in the update to the Master Manual. Policy, and law, mandates that the congressionally authorized primary purpose of Mississippi River flood control be fully considered; not sacrificed to enhance flood protection elsewhere-perhaps the most egregious ofthe fatal flaws. Page Two Sny Island Levee Drainage District -August 20, 2018 Low Water Inspection - Upper Mississippi River Basin Des Moines River Basin Master Reservoir Regulation Manual

Comments of a more technical nature are being prepared for submission into the record ofthe Des Moines River Master Water Control Manual update, and we will forward those for the Commission. The bottom line is the Corps' "tentatively selected plan (Alternative 6)" reduces flooding for Iowa, while increasing flooding along the Mississippi River downstream of Quincy, Illinois. That together with the Corps' stance on levee heights in that same reach means we'll have more floodwater to pass, and with lower levees. In other words, there will be more frequent and greater flood damage for the people, property and productivity protected by Mississippi River levee systems like the Sny's.

Again, we ask the Commission to intervene and thank you for your consideration ofthis urgent request.

Sincerely, Sny Island Levee Drainage District fl)iJu~ Mike Reed Superintendent/Treasurer

CC: Sny Commissioners SNY ISLAND LEVEE DRAINAGE DISTRICT 110,000 Acres in Adams, Pike and Calhoun Counties Phone: (217) 426-2521 490NorthMain Fax: (217) 426-4281 P.O. Box 169 New Canton, IL 62356-0169 COMMISSIONERS STAFF RUSSELL£. KOELLER MJKEREED DAN LUNDBERG Superintendent BRADY BORROWMAN TRUDI BRUMMELL Administrative Assistant August31, 2018

Mr. James D. Homann, PMP Project Manager U S Army Corps of Engineers PO Box2004 Rock Island, Illinois 61204-2004

RE: Des Moines River Basin Master Reservoir Regulation Manual

Dear Mr. Homann: We welcome this opportunity to provide comment on an update to the Des Moines River Basin Master Reservoir Regulation Manual (Master Manual), particularly after having attended the Corps of Engineers - Rock Island District's (Corps) public meeting in Quincy, Illinois. There were multiple inquiries made by participants prior to and during the presentation concerning potential impacts on downstream flooding; the Corps' response was misleading and unsatisfactory. A related concern is that during the eight year period from when the study was requested in 2010 (by then Iowa Governor Culver) until its completion earlier this year the downstream States, including Illinois, have not been meaningfully engaged in the Master Manual revision process. The first paragraph ofthe study report released for comment states, "The authorized purposes included flood risk management for the Des Moines <111d J\Jississi11pi Ril"<.!1:,~ ..• " (11mphasis added). which were later identified the report as the congressionally authorized primwT purpuse. As such, it was incumbent upon the Corps to include the downstream States along the Mississippi River in the Master Manual revision process. We do not even see in the study report the appropriate Illinois' departments included on the distribution list for pub! ic meeting notices. At the referenced public meeting the Corps, in response to numerous questions about increased flooding downstream, repeatedly stated that the primary purpose of the project was flood risk management. Most importantly, the Corps claims that flooding along the Mississippi will not be increased because they are maintaining the downstream constraints at Burlington (18.5 feet) and Quincy (20.0 feet). BUT, the new plan calls for abandoning the downstream constraints (i.e., start large magnitude flood operations) when the Lake Red Rock reservoir height reaches 770 feet(@ 60% flood control storage utilized) as opposed to current plan at 775 feet (79% flood control storage utilized); and also increasing the large magnitude flood release from Lake Red Rock at elev. 775 from 30,000 to 50,000 cfs (the current plan hits 50,000 cfs release rate at elev. 779). This means there will be more (not less) floodwater flowing into the Mississippi when it is likely to already be in flood stage-hence, downstream flooding will increase.

The Corps' "tentatively selected plan (Alternative 6)" reduces flooding for Iowa, while increasing flooding along the Mississippi River downstream of Quincy, Illinois. The Corps acknowledges that new Mississippi River flood profiles. when issued. will be higher than the current regulatory profiles. These Corps generated profiles are typically used by FEMA as the I 00-year regulatory base flood elevation for purposes offloodplain management as well as levee certification; both ofwhich are strongly linked to land use and value. Revising Des Moines River reservoir operations in a manner that will lead to higher flood profiles along the Mississippi. especially from Quincy to St. Louis, at a time when the Corps is calling for at least some ofthe levee owner/operators in that reach to lower their levees, is unconscionable, at best. Page Two: SNY ISLAND LEVEE DRAINAGE DISTRICT RE: De.r; Moi11ej' River B"sin iJ./{l.f/er Resen•oir Reg11/t1tim1 Ma1111al August 31. 2018

We are also disturbed by the Corps having ind icatcd that operating outside of the constraints of the Master Manual. even after it is revised, falls entirely within their purview. While we acknowledge there are instances during emergency operations when that may be appropriately necessarily. such behavior is not wa!1'antcd in other situations. The Master Manual is the document relied upon by businesses, land owners. communities, etc., in making their decisions. Yet, it has essentially no meaning ifthe Corps, at their sole discretion, and without notice, can choose at any time and for any reason to alter the operations prescribed therein. We urge the Corps to address rhe aforementioned issue by taking two specific actioni:. First, identify the likely outside parameters of emergency operations and their impacts on downstream flooding. Second. for any deviation from the Master Manual that is not for the express purpose ofemergency operations issue an advance notice of at least thi1ty days identifying the purpose of the deviation and its anticipated impacts (higher, lower or none) on water surface elevations. This additional information and notice will allO\v impacted parties to make risk-info1med decisions for their businesses and communities, taking into account not just flood risk but othera that may arise. That the Corps did not involve downstream States in the study effort, nor inform them of the increase in flooding that is certain to occur as a direct result ofthe Master Manual revisions, is a fatal flaw.

Sincerely, n1~ tRsd2 Mike Reed Superintendent/Treasurer

CC: Sny Commissioners Wayne Rosenthal, Director of the Illinois Department ofNatural Resources From: Van Buren County Register To: CEMVR_Planning Subject: [Non-DoD Source] Public Comment: Des Moines River Basin Master Reservoir Regulation Manual Date: Friday, August 17, 2018 1:45:48 PM

Thank you for this opportunity for accepting public comment.

I am currently the editor of the Van Buren County Register, Keosauqua, a position I've held since 1986. I also was a seasonal employee for the Rock Island District survey crew when I was in college, having worked at Red Rock, Saylorville, Coralville and at Rock Island. My job was surveying easements and assisting dam inspections. Working for the Army Corps of Engineers and working at a newspaper along the flood plain that has been flooded four times over its life span has made me appreciate the immensity of your job and that the flood control efforts not only affects cities downstream from Saylorville and Red Rock, but also interconnects with the Mississippi River system of locks and dams. During my time here at the newspaper in Keosauqua columnists have researched and reported on many of the great floods, dating back to 1857. I also keep a weekly column of river and weather data, including Red Rock outflows. Here are my comments and suggestions. *From the downriver prospective, I feel the Army Corps has done a great job in managing the outflows at Saylorville and Red Rock since the 2008 floods. I've noticed a more proactive approach in releases. * Any changes I would make to your outflow would be if the lake elevation is above 765 I would release 25,000 CFS, instead of 22,000. I also recommend starting the 30,000 release at 770, instead of 775. * I recommend varying the outflow at Red Rock a little during the summer. I've noticed a lot of erosion when the release is constantly 22,000 for a good period of time. * I recommend developing a state-federal partnership to build two to three small to medium structures along the Raccoon River watershed. This would help with sediment and water quality issues and would prevent a spike in the inflow to the Des Moines River. * I would also like the USGS to put a rain gauge at the Keosauqua gage. Our county has had some issue, according to our state representative, in getting drought declarations. This might assist in that.

Rusty Ebert Editor

Van Buren County Register 106 Van Buren P.O. Box 477 Keosauqua, Iowa 52565

< >

• Award winning newspaper • Member, Iowa Newspaper Association This page was intentionally left blank.

Iowa Field Office Tel (515) 244-5044 nature.org/iowa 505 – 5th Avenue, STE 930 Fax (515) 244-8890 facebook.com/TNCIowa Des Moines, IA 50309

August 24, 2018

Rock Island District Attn PM-M P.O. Box 2004 Rock Island, IL 61204-2004

Dear Mr. Homann:

I am writing to express our support for current drafts of the Red Rock and Saylorville regulation manual updates. We also appreciated the Rock Island District’s recent participation in the Sustainable Rivers Program (SRP), a longtime partnership between the US Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) and The Nature Conservancy (TNC), and were happy to see some of the SRP recommendations incorporated into the regulation manual updates.

In particular, we support the Corps plan to incorporate a small conservation band that will provide flexibility needed to manage water levels and mudflats for nutrient removal, migratory shorebirds and environmental flow augmentation. By properly timing seasonal inundation and drawdowns on the reservoir’s extensive mudflats we believe the Corps can substantially reduce nitrate levels in the river and create thousands of acres of new habitat for migratory shorebirds. Research is needed to substantiate this proposed management practice and we hope that federal funding can be secured so that someday this practice could provide environmental benefits across the Mississippi Valley Division.

We also supported the Corps decision to increase growing season flows from 18,000 cfs to 22,000 cfs as this will begin to enable the Corps to respond to long-term increases in river flow volume. Reconnecting the river to its floodplain is vital to the health of riverine aquatic systems and we also hope that the Corps will someday consider allowing run of river flows of 30,000 cfs or higher during the growing season regardless of pool level. Perhaps this naturalization of the river hydrograph could someday be facilitated by the Corps or other public partners offering voluntary flowage easement or fee title buyouts of low areas downstream that might be affected by higher growing season flows.

In addition to flow considerations we hope the Corps will continue to refrain from conducting drawdowns of the river or reservoir during freezing temperatures to protect freshwater mussels, slow the rate of change in outflow to reduce gas bubble disease in fish below the dam and consider augmenting summer low flows to prevent major fish kills downstream. These and many more suggestions are contained in the SRP reports.

Satisfying a diverse set of constituencies through river and reservoir management is a difficult job. We appreciate the Corps willingness to consider all viewpoints and especially your thoughtful consideration of environmental needs in this regulation manual update.

Sincerely,

David W. De Geus Working Lands Director This page was intentionally left blank. From: Randy and Melanie Conrad To: CEMVR_Planning Subject: [Non-DoD Source] Public Comment: Des Moines River Basin Master Reservoir Regulation Manual Date: Saturday, August 25, 2018 11:53:09 AM

To: US Army Corps of Engineers

Re: Des Moines River Basin Master Regulation Update

I am writing to comment on the Army Corp of Engineering proposal to change the outflow of Lake Red Rock. We farm approximately 170 acres of Des Moines River bottom ground and our son has an additional 30 acres about 4 – 5 miles upriver from the Ottumwa Hydroelectric Dam. We have lived on the present farm since 1995. In that time the river fluctuation has caused substantial loss of farmable land. Every spring we move 10 to 12 feet away from the river bank when we plant crops and every fall the last rows are right on the river’s edge. At one point we had a large grove of trees along the bank and now they are gone. In addition, we tried several times to protect our investment by building a dike across a low area, however, it washed out three times and cost a large sum of money.

This year (2018) with the Red Rock outflow at 22,000 cfs and severe drought conditions in our area, the river ran at capacity and was out of its banks and into our crops at least once. We surveyed the river bank recently by boat and there is evidence that the bank has caved in another 10 to 15 feet in places. If the standard outflow is raised to 25,000 cfs for 3 months it is likely there would be perpetual flooding on our river bottom farmland and substantial erosion that would prevent us from growing a crop.

As you can tell, I am strongly against this proposal. We hope you will listen to those whose livelihood depends on raising a crop along the Des Moines River. Although we understand the risk of flooding in years when extreme conditions cause it, we feel making a decision to raise levels to cause consistent flooding is not a good choice. There has to be a better option for your purpose than to flood landowners below Red Rock Dam. Thank you for listening!

Randy and Melanie Conrad

Sent from my iPad This page was intentionally left blank. From: Craig Ver Steegh To: CEMVR_Planning Subject: [Non-DoD Source] Public Comment: Des Moines River Basin Master Reservoir Regulation Manual Date: Tuesday, August 28, 2018 4:03:04 PM

To whom it may concern,

My name is Craig Ver Steegh. I farm, with my family, around 6000 ac in Mahaska, Monroe, and Wapello counties. We are a multi generational farm which now supports 11 families and we have been at this location since 1951. Approximately 1800 acres of this is located in the Des Moines river basin. My livelihood depends greatly on how the out flow at Red Rock lake is managed. I understand the management of this water is very complex and difficult. I also understand rain events, in recent years, are trending much larger and things need to be done to prevent a 1993 or 2008 event at the lakes.

The past few years you have deviated from your current plan by increasing growing season outflows to 22,000 CFS. This, I my opinion, has worked well because the river in our area is much larger than it was say 25 years ago. If you look at old aerial photos you can see how much wider the Des Moines river is today. That is why 22,000 works and I can live with changing the max growing season outflow to 22,000 CFS. from 18000. It is a 122% increase in outflow from 18000 and most years this will offset our larger rain events.

My concern with your proposed plan is how quick(750 lake elevation or 11% flood capacity) you go to a release rate of 25,000. I would under stand this release rate if the lake elevation was at 760 or higher. While 3,000 CFS. do not sound like much, it will have a great impact on my fields. By your own rating table this 3000 CFS will raise the river level at Eddyville 1 foot. In a river bottom this 1 foot is enough to flood a large portion of a field or make everything wet enough that it never dries out enough to get it planted.

I think you are on the right path with your proposed plan with the exception of the 25000 release rate at 750 elevation. I would really like to see this changed to releasing at 25000 only if the lake is higher than 760. Currently the plan is 18000 up to 760 and then 22000 above 760. By changing this to 760 hopefully our crops will have less very high river periods and yet, if necessary, you can release at 25000 to avoid a 1993 or 2008.

I would really like someone with authority from the Army corps. to call my cell to clarify the need to release 25,000 at 750 elevation and not 760 like it is currently.

Craig Ver Steegh Ver Steegh Bros. Farms This page was intentionally left blank. From: David DeGeus To: CEMVR_Planning Cc: Howe, Hugh D (US); Thostenson, Perry (US); Homann, James D CIV USARMY CEMVR (US) Subject: [Non-DoD Source] Public Comment: Des Moines River Basin Master Reservoir Regulation Manual Date: Tuesday, August 28, 2018 4:37:28 PM Attachments: image001.png Reg manual letter of support TNC final.pdf

Dear Mr. Homann:

Attached is our letter of support for the current regulation manual update at Red Rock and Saylorville. Thanks for giving us the opportunity comment on the recommendations.

Dave DeGeus

Working Lands Director

: >

(

. / / /

The Nature Conservancy in Iowa

505 5th Avenue, Suite 930

Des Moines, IA 50309

This page was intentionally left blank.

Iowa Field Office Tel (515) 244-5044 nature.org/iowa 505 – 5th Avenue, STE 930 Fax (515) 244-8890 facebook.com/TNCIowa Des Moines, IA 50309

August 24, 2018

Rock Island District Attn PM-M P.O. Box 2004 Rock Island, IL 61204-2004

Dear Mr. Homann:

Sincerely,

David W. De Geus Working Lands Director This page was intentionally left blank. From: To: CEMVR_Planning Cc: Heinold, Thomas D Jr (US) Subject: [Non-DoD Source] Des Moines River Water Control Plan Update - Comments from River Industry Action Committee (RIAC) Date: Wednesday, August 29, 2018 2:10:12 PM

Good Afternoon,

The Rock Island U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has proposed revisions to the Des Moines River Water Control Plan which is presently open to public comment. In the proposed revision to the Des Moines River Water Control Plan (Alternative #6), the Corps proposes to alter the levels and releases from the Lake Red Rock Reservoir from the current plan. The operation of the reservoir system on the Des Moines River has a large impact on the Mississippi River, Interstate Commerce and down river flood control abilities.

Lake Red Rock Reservoir “Growing Season” Operations – May 1 to December 15 summary of the major changes is as follows:

Conservation Pool Operations:

Presently, the minimum Lake Red Rock Conservation Pool is Elev. 742 feet which utilizes 0% of the potential Flood Control Storage. At this stage or lower, releases from the Dam are at 300cfs. No changes are proposed at this stage.

Small Magnitude Flood Operations:

Presently, at Elev. 742 feet to Elev. 760 feet, the Lake Red Rock Reservoir utilizes a maximum of 31% of the potential Flood Control Storage. Between these stages, releases are maintained at 18,000 cfs provided that the Burlington Gage does not exceed 18.5 feet, or the Quincy gage does not exceed 20 feet. Once the river stages reach the afore mentioned numbers, Red Rock Dam releases are reduced to 5,000 cfs. (It should be noted that once the Quincy gage reaches around 20 feet, typically Lock & Dam 20 goes out of operation, large amounts of farm land between the mouth of the Des Moines River and Quincy are flooded and most of the barge docks in the area go out of operation.)

The Corps of Engineers proposes to lower this retention level to a maximum Elevation of 750 feet or now a maximum of 11% of the potential Flood Control Storage, all the while the Corps proposes to increase Dam release flows from 18,000 cfs to 22,000 cfs provided that the Burlington Gage does not exceed 18.5 feet, or the Quincy gage does not exceed 20 feet. Once the river stages reach the afore mentioned numbers, Red Rock Dam releases are reduced to 5,000 cfs.

With this new proposal, there is an increased chance of increased river closures at Lock 20, flooded farm ground and barge loadings would slow or stop. Moderate Magnitude Flood Operations:

Presently, from Elev. 760 feet to Elev. 775 feet, the Lake Red Rock Reservoir utilizes a maximum of 79% of the potential Flood Control Storage. Between these stages, releases are maintained at 22,000 cfs provided that the Burlington Gage does not exceed 18.5 feet, or the Quincy gage does not exceed 20 feet. The flow release varies depending on Rivergages.

The Corps of Engineers proposes to lower this retention level to a maximum of 770 feet or now a maximum of 60% of the potential Flood Control Storage while raising i.e. increasing the Dam release to 25,000 cfs provided that the Burlington Gage does not exceed 18.5 feet, or the Quincy gage does not exceed 20 feet. The flow release varies depending on Rivergages.

With this new proposal, there is an increased chance of river closures at Lock 20, flooded farm ground and barge loadings would slow or stop.

Large Magnitude Flood Operations:

The changes to the large magnitude flood operations do not impact the Mississippi River greatly as at this point, the River is most likely already shut down.

Review & Opinion

If the tentatively selected plan, Alternative 6, is implemented by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, there is now a greater downstream risk of higher river levels, a higher risk of stopping interstate commerce (barge traffic) and a higher risk of flooding. Instead of reducing the Red Rock Reservoir releases when the reservoir is below 31% capacity, the Corps is proposing to INCREASE the flows. This will speed up the rise in the river and potentially lengthen the duration of the high water.

The proposed alternative gives the impression that the Des Moines River Water Control Plan is being crafted to accommodate stake holders upstream of Lake Red Rock in an area that is and was intended to be used for Flood Control purposes, I.E. Flood Water Storage while not considering the larger impact to downstream farms and interstate commerce. The interstate commerce referenced is not limited to just that of Mississippi River Pools 20, 21 & 22, but rather much larger part of the Mid West ranging from Minneapolis to St. Louis. This area has a much larger economic impact that a few acres surrounding the Saylorville Lake and Lake Red Rock.

The River Industry Action Committee has the following comments regarding the revisions to the Des Moines River Water Control Plan:

1. Restore the primary purpose of the Des Moines River reservoirs to reducing flooding on the Mississippi River and fostering interstate commerce. This will also have a great impact on preserving our already aging infrastructure. 2. Move the downstream Mississippi River control point from Quincy, IL to Lock 20 at Canton, MO. The target should be to keep the river at or below technical Flood Stage of 14 feet. 3. During the late growing season, July 1 through December 15, the goal should be to retain as much water as possible. A good target for this would be to retain water and reduce flows to 5,000 cfs until the river stage reaches 14 feet on the Lock 20 gage. The reason for this is at this point, critical crops and interstate commerce are already “seeded” for the year and all efforts should be made to keep them moving and viable. Increasing releases after the Canton gage reaches 14 feet give the Corps more than ample time to dump the reservoir if conditions warrant. 4. During the late growing season (harvest), we object to raising the reservoir levels to accommodate fish and wild life habitat growth. The primary purpose of the reservoirs is to provide Flood Control by retaining water. The idea of prematurely holding back water seem counterintuitive. Please refer to the last few years where the Des Moines River basin has experience high water in the fall. Prematurely raising the levels of the reservoirs seems to be the opposite of what we need to do. At the late time of the crop season, we should be doing everything we can to not “flood” downstream farm ground and/or put barge loading facilities out of business and stopping interstate commerce. 5. We feel that the revisions to the water control plan appear to influenced more by upstream constituents while neglecting the downstream interests.

We highly recommend that the Corps does not implement Des Moines River Water Control Plan “Alternative 6”.

Additional copies of our comments and a more detailed analysis have been provided to:

General Richard Kaiser, MVD Commander USACE, Mississippi Valley Division

The Honorable R.D. James, Assistant Secretary of the Army-Civil Works

Mr. Pat Chambers, Deputy Chief of Operations, Mississippi Valley Division

Please do not hesitate to contact me with any questions.

Thank you,

Casey

CASEY M. HERSCHLER

Canton Marine Towing Co. This page was intentionally left blank. From: Gano, Jonathan A. To: Subject: [Non-DoD Source] Public Comment: Des Moines River Basin Master Reservoir Regulation Manual Date: Thursday, August 30, 2018 3:39:02 PM

The City of Des Moines supports the Corps of Engineers plan to make the current deviation plan the standard water control plan for the Des Moines River.

While it imposes additional operational costs due to higher water levels than the standard plan, we vastly prefer the reduced risk of an uncontrolled release.

This summer’s extreme rainfall would have caused the Saylorville Reservoir to overtop the spillway had the deviation plan not been in place.

Thanks,

Jonathan Gano, P.E.

Public Works Director

City of Des Moines This page was intentionally left blank. From: Gano, Jonathan A. To: _ Subject: [Non-DoD Source] RE: Public Comment: Des Moines River Basin Master Reservoir Regulation Manual Date: Thursday, August 30, 2018 9:02:53 PM

Please allow me to amplify the earlier-submitted comments with some more details:

The City of Des Moines supports the Corps of Engineers plan to make the current deviation plan the standard water control plan for the Des Moines River. Each of the elements is acceptable, with a high degree of support for both removing the balancing of storage between Lake Red Rock and the Saylorville Reservoir and raising the allowable discharge rate from 12,000 cfs to 16,000 cfs.

While it imposes additional operational costs due to higher water levels at times than the standard plan, we vastly prefer the reduced risk of an uncontrolled release and will happily bear those modest costs to lessen the potential enormous cost of an overflow at Saylorville on our downtown levee system.

This summer’s extreme rainfall event at the end of June would have caused the Saylorville Reservoir to overtop the spillway had the deviation plan not been in place. Had there been a seasonally expected amount of rain in the month of July this year (instead of zero), there would have been substantially greater flood risk, if not catastrophic flooding, if the deviation plan had not been in place.

From: Gano, Jonathan A. Sent: Thursday, August 30, 2018 3:39 PM To: '[email protected]' Subject: Public Comment: Des Moines River Basin Master Reservoir Regulation Manual

The City of Des Moines supports the Corps of Engineers plan to make the current deviation plan the standard water control plan for the Des Moines River.

While it imposes additional operational costs due to higher water levels than the standard plan, we vastly prefer the reduced risk of an uncontrolled release.

This summer’s extreme rainfall would have caused the Saylorville Reservoir to overtop the spillway had the deviation plan not been in place.

Thanks, Jonathan Gano, P.E.

Public Works Director

City of Des Moines From: Jerry Parker To: l Subject: [Non-DoD Source] Public Comment: Des Moines River Basin Master Reservoir Regulation Manual Date: Friday, August 31, 2018 3:16:49 PM

I am Jerry Parker a County Supervisor in Wapello County, Iowa. I am raising questions and concerns about the proposed increase in outflow from Red Rock. I am sure you are aware that annually we lose several feet of river bank with the present flow. Low land farmers have to move row crops further in land annually because of the loss of farm ground. What other options have been considered? Has there been adequate study to determine that raising the out flow to 25,000cfs will result in less loss of soil because of less 30,000cfs times. Wapello County has great concern for our land owners who farm low land areas but we must concern ourselves with flooding. I have not been convinced yet that the proposed change is the best option.

Jerry L. Parker

This page was intentionally left blank. From: Jacoby, Karin To: CEMVR_Planning Cc: Roger Sutter; Scott Wegman . ); Homann, James D CIV (US) Subject: [Non-DoD Source] FW: Public Comment: Des Moines River Basin Master Reservoir Regulation Manual Date: Friday, August 31, 2018 5:04:14 PM Attachments: Fabius Des Moines River Master Manual Comments.pdf

Jim –

Please find attached comments submitted on behalf of the Fabius River Drainage District.

Thank you,

Karin

Karin M. Jacoby, PE Attorney

HUSCH BLACKWELL LLP

Named a first-tier national real estate law firm by U.S. News-Best Lawyers in 2018 This page was intentionally left blank. Fabius River Drainage District

August 31, 2018

Mr. James D. Homann, PMP Project Manager U S Army Corps of Engineers PO Box 2004 Rock Island, Illinois 61204-2004

Submitted via [email protected]

RE: Des Moines River Basin Master Reservoir Regulation Manual

Dear Mr. Homann: We were surprised to only recently be made aware of the Corps of Engineers – Rock Island District’s (Corps) process to revise the Des Moines River Basin Master Reservoir Regulation Manual (Master Manual), especially since one of the primary purposes is flood control for the Mississippi River. The Fabius River Drainage District (Fabius) is located in a reach of the Mississippi River that has received significant attention over the past few years for increases in flood heights, which some have sought to attribute to levees in the reach from Quincy to St. Louis. Any possible change to flood heights in our reach of the river is of concern to us, and not just because of the potential flooding impacts to our community. We also seek to stay informed of those changes in flood profiles that may, yet again, be incorrectly deemed as resulting from levee raises that were done in accordance with federal, state and local law. We understand that the Corps’ “tentatively selected plan (Alternative 6)” (Plan) reduces flooding for Iowa, while increasing flooding along the Mississippi River downstream of Quincy, Illinois, during large magnitude flood operations. And further, that the Plan calls for moving into large magnitude flood operations at a lower reservoir elevation. This essentially means we’ll be getting more floodwaters at a time when the Mississippi River is likely already in, or approaching, flood stage. The Corps has acknowledged that new Mississippi River flood profiles, when issued, will be higher than the current flood profiles. These Corps generated profiles are typically used by FEMA as the 100-year regulatory base flood elevation for purposes of floodplain management and levee certification; both of which are strongly linked to land use and value. Coupled with these proposed Master Manual revisions, the Corps has been seeking to enforce more rigid requirements for altering levees through its Section 408 process. This has led to it being nearly impossible for levee owner/operators to maintain their current levee heights and levels of protection. Revising Des Moines River reservoir operations in a manner that will lead to higher flood profiles along the Mississippi, especially from Quincy to St. Louis, at a time when the Corps is calling for at least some of the levee owner/operators in that reach to lower their levees, is unconscionable, at best. Also of concern is that during the eight year period from when the study was requested in 2010 (by then Iowa Governor Culver) until its completion earlier this year the downstream States, including Missouri, have not been meaningfully engaged in the Master Manual revision process. The first paragraph of the study report released for comment states, “The authorized purposes included flood risk management for the Des Moines and Mississippi Rivers…” (emphasis added), which were later identified the report as the congressionally authorized primary purpose. As such, it was incumbent upon the Corps to include the downstream States along the Mississippi River in

8203 County Road 346 ◊ Taylor, MO 63471 Page 2 Fabius River Drainage District August 31, 2018 the Master Manual revision process. We understand that appropriate departments from the State of Missouri were not informed nor involved in the study process. The Corps acknowledges the primary purpose of the project is flood risk management, and claims flooding along the Mississippi will not be increased because downstream constraints are being maintained at Burlington (18.5 feet) and Quincy (20.0 feet). However, the new plan calls for abandoning the downstream constraints (i.e., start large magnitude flood operations) when the Lake Red Rock reservoir height reaches 770 feet (@ 60% flood control storage utilized) as opposed to current plan at 775 feet (79% flood control storage utilized), and also increasing the large magnitude flood release from Lake Red Rock at elev. 775 from 30,000 to 50,000 cfs (the current plan hits 50,000 cfs release rate at elev. 779). This means there will be more (not less) floodwater flowing into the Mississippi when it is likely to already be in flood stage—hence, downstream flooding will increase.

We urge the Corps to address the aforementioned issue by taking two specific actions. First, identify the likely outside parameters of emergency operations and their impacts on downstream flooding. Second, for any deviation from the Master Manual that is not for the express purpose of emergency operations issue an advance notice of at least thirty days identifying the purpose of the deviation and its anticipated impacts (higher, lower or none) on water surface elevations. This additional information and notice will allow impacted parties to make risk-informed decisions for their businesses and communities, taking into account not just flood risk but others that may arise.

That the Corps did not involve downstream States in the study effort, nor inform them of the increase in flooding that is certain to occur as a direct result of the Master Manual revisions, is a fatal flaw.

We hereby request the Corps to refrain from completing the study, or implementing any changes included therein, until such time that the downstream States, including Missouri, can review, evaluate and advise as to the extent of adverse impacts, and those are documented and taken into full consideration in this process to revise the Master Manual.

Sincerely,

Roger Sutter KMJ for: Roger Sutter President

CC: Karen Rouse, Surface Water Chief, Missouri Department of Natural Resources Chris Klenklen, Division Director, Missouri Department of Agriculture

From: v on behalf of Sov Land and Env Review, DNR To: Jordan, Joseph W CIV (US) Subject: [Non-DoD Source] (SL 16083) Re: Des Moines River Basin Master Reservoir Regulation Manual Feasibility Report Public Comment Period Extension to August 31, 2018 Date: Friday, August 31, 2018 3:10:25 PM

Sovereign Lands: 16083

Your application was logged under the tracking number listed above. Please use the assigned tracking number on all future correspondence for this project.

Contact: Seth Moore, ,

Environmental Reviews can be submitted electronically to:

This correspondence does not constitute approval. When review has been completed a letter or email concerning the Sovereign Lands determination will be issued.

Thank you,

Iowa Department of Natural Resources 502 E 9th St, Des Moines, IA 50319 Blockedwww.iowadnr.gov

On Thu, Aug 23, 2018 at 3:05 PM Colleen Conroy > wrote:

Colleen Conroy | Administrative Assistant Iowa Department of Natural Resources P 515-725-8268 | F 515-725-8202 502 E 9th St, Des Moines IA 50319 Blockedwww.iowadnr.gov

------Forwarded message ------ From: Seth Moore > Date: Thu, Aug 23, 2018 at 2:54 PM Subject: Fwd: Des Moines River Basin Master Reservoir Regulation Manual Feasibility Report Public Comment Period Extension to August 31, 2018 To: Colleen Conroy <

Please log as ER, thank you.

Seth Moore | Environmental Specialist Iowa Department of Natural Resources P 515-725-8464 | F 515-725-8201 | 502 E. 9th St., Des Moines, IA 50319 Blockedwww.iowadnr.gov

------Forwarded message ------ From: Jordan, Joseph W CIV (US) < Date: Thu, Aug 9, 2018 at 5:40 PM Subject: Des Moines River Basin Master Reservoir Regulation Manual Feasibility Report Public Comment Period Extension to August 31, 2018 To:

To review and comment on the draft report, visit:

Blockedhttp://go.usa.gov/xQSF9

(The draft report is located on the lower right hand side of the webpage.)

You may email me or mail your comments to the address below.

***Public comment period now ends on August 31, 2018.***

Thank you and we look forward to your comments on the draft report.

Joe

From: Dodd, Ben To: Jordan, Joseph W CIV (US); Chris j Larson; Randy Schultz Subject: [Non-DoD Source] Re: Des Moines River Basin Master Reservoir Regulation Manual Feasibility Report Public Comment Period Extension to August 31, 2018 Date: Friday, August 31, 2018 9:56:22 AM Attachments: Iowa DNR Fisheries Regulation Plan Comments.docx

Hey Joe,

I didn't have a lot of time to spend on this, but here are fisheries comments.

Ben

Ben Dodd | Fisheries Management Biologist

Iowa Department of Natural Resources

P 641-891-3795 | F 515-432-2835 | 1436 255th St., Boone, IA 50036

Blockedwww.iowadnr.gov

On Thu, Aug 9, 2018 at 5:40 PM, Jordan, Joseph W CIV (US) > wrote:

To review and comment on the draft report, visit:

Blockedhttp://go.usa.gov/xQSF9

(The draft report is located on the lower right hand side of the webpage.)

You may email me or mail your comments to the address below.

***Public comment period now ends on August 31, 2018.***

Thank you and we look forward to your comments on the draft report.

Joe

Joe Jordan

This page was intentionally left blank. Iowa DNR Fisheries Des Moines River Regulation Plan Comments

In general, the goal of this regulation plan change is to better manage flood risk in the Des Moines River system, particularly in the spring. Flows have increased due to changes in watershed land use and climate change. Fish and wildlife benefits were discussed within the plan, but the discussion was heavily focused on riverine and fall reservoir benefits. There was very little discussion about reservoir based angling and boating in the spring and early summer. There are several changes that have the potential to negatively impact reservoir fisheries and angling opportunities. Below are comments from the Iowa DNR Fisheries Bureau regarding the proposed Des Moines River Regulation Plan.

Aquatic Life Resources

We didn’t notice any acknowledgement of how increased reservoir levels in the spring increases vegetated fish spawning habitat. This is extremely important for black bass and crappie spp. spawning success.

Water Residence Time – This metric for each lake was compared for Alternatives 1 and 6 at both reservoirs for growing season (1May-15Oct) when the pool is at conservation elevation. For the period of record analysis at Saylorville (1977-2016), the change in residence time during the growing season, when the pool is at conservation elevation, was -4.24 days (15.33 to 11.09 days). For the period of record analysis at Red Rock (1968-2016), the change in residence time during the growing season, when the pool is at conservation elevation, was -1.60 days (17.55 to 15.95 days).

The proposed change is water residence time does not seem significant when presented as a loss in days. However, the proposed change results in a 27.7% and 11% loss of water residence time for Saylorville and Red Rock, respectively.

It’s well documented that water residence time is an extremely important factor when it comes to managing and maintaining reservoir fisheries. The Iowa DNR has observed that flow rates and Walleye loss are positively correlated at Rathbun Lake. This same relationship has been shown to be true for crappie spp. In addition, turbidity will likely increase in the reservoir as increased velocities carry sediment further into the basin. A reduction in water residence time is not beneficial for reservoir fisheries management or angling.

Conservation Bands & Adaptive Water Level Management - For the natural resource management aspect of operating within the conservation bands, the District would continue its existing practice of meeting with its resource partners on an annual basis. During this meeting the District and agencies discuss the current year’s desired outcomes based on the ability to manage with a drier or wetter than normal conditions. They also discuss the next year’s management goals. If conditions are right, the District would operate the dams to the best of their ability to meet these goals. Appendix C contains the final report from the Des Moines Sustainable Rivers Program. This report offers management scenarios fitting with the proposed conservation operating bands. The District would also implement other operating scenarios within the conservation bands not in the plan if there is a potential for natural resource benefit.

We would first like to note that what was formerly referred to as the “Annual Water Level Management Meeting”, is now called the “Fall Pool Raise Meeting”. When will spring water levels be discussed in the future?

The proposed plan categorized conservation bands into “summer” and “winter”. The upper limit of the summer pool conservation bands were reduced by 2ft at Saylorville and 3ft at Red Rock from the elevations that the Iowa DNR requested. This will have a negative impact on the amount of vegetated spawning habitat that is available for crappie spp. in both reservoirs.

This is an unfortunate change and we would encourage the Corps to take a more adaptive management strategy when it comes to spring water levels in the future.

Public Input - The District solicited input from the public, local emergency management, state, county and Federal agencies, and tribal nations for the Des Moines River Basin Master Reservoir Regulation Manual Study. Eight public meetings and multiple agency meetings were held to gather input.

While a number of points were made during these meetings, there is obviously a large recreational boating community and angling community that were not heard from during these meetings and comment periods. It’s hard to believe that the proposed changes wouldn’t negatively impact boat-based recreation in the reservoirs in the spring/early summer. If more water is released earlier in the year, boat recreation could be limited in the upstream end of both reservoirs in the spring/early summer due to sediment. The upper end of Saylorville is already closed for boat recreation and angling during the majority of the open water season.

Red Rock Minimum Discharge

Is there a possibility of increasing minimum discharge rates to minimize stress on fish downstream in the Des Moines River? A conservation band of 300 -600 cfs was recommended at an earlier date to potentially evaluate strategies that could reduce thermal stress and gas bubble trauma.

Other Comments

o Sedimentation is a major contributor to the lack of in-lake fish habitat in both reservoirs.

o We remain concerned about turbine-related fish mortality associated with new hydroelectric facility at Red Rock. This should be evaluated.

o We look forward to continuing our efforts to rear game fish species adjacent to both reservoirs. There was no mention of water level being modified to pump the Wallashuck rearing ponds full.

o Continue to search for ways to minimize Gas Bubble Trauma in the Red Rock tailrace. This page was intentionally left blank. From: Jacoby, Karin To: CEMVR_Planning Cc: Mike Reed; Trudi Brummell < >; Homann, James D ) Subject: [Non-DoD Source] Public Comment: Des Moines River Basin Master Reservoir Regulation Manual Date: Friday, August 31, 2018 5:00:41 PM Attachments: SLLD Comments - Des Moines River Master Manual.pdf

Jim –

Please find attached comments submitted on behalf of the Sny Island Drainage District.

Thank you,

Karin

Karin M. Jacoby, PE Attorney

HUSCH BLACKWELL LLP

Named a first-tier national real estate law firm by U.S. News-Best Lawyers in 2018 This page was intentionally left blank. SNY ISLAND LEVEE DRAINAGE DISTRICT 110,000 Acres in Adams, Pike and Calhoun Counties Phone: (217) 426-2521 490 North Main Fax: (217) 426-4281 P.O. Box 169 New Canton, IL 62356-0169 COMMISSIONERS STAFF RUSSELL E. KOELLER MIKE REED DAN LUNDBERG Superintendent BRADY BORROWMAN TRUDI BRUMMELL Administrative Assistant August 31, 2018

Mr. James D. Homann, PMP Project Manager U S Army Corps of Engineers PO Box 2004 Rock Island, Illinois 61204-2004

Submitted via [email protected]

RE: Des Moines River Basin Master Reservoir Regulation Manual

Dear Mr. Homann: We welcome this opportunity to provide comment on an update to the Des Moines River Basin Master Reservoir Regulation Manual (Master Manual), particularly after having attended the Corps of Engineers – Rock Island District’s (Corps) public meeting in Quincy, Illinois. There were multiple inquiries made by participants prior to and during the presentation concerning potential impacts on downstream flooding; the Corps’ response was misleading and unsatisfactory. A related concern is that during the eight year period from when the study was requested in 2010 (by then Iowa Governor Culver) until its completion earlier this year the downstream States, including Illinois, have not been meaningfully engaged in the Master Manual revision process. The first paragraph of the study report released for comment states, “The authorized purposes included flood risk management for the Des Moines and Mississippi Rivers…” (emphasis added), which were later identified the report as the congressionally authorized primary purpose. As such, it was incumbent upon the Corps to include the downstream States along the Mississippi River in the Master Manual revision process. We do not even see in the study report the appropriate Illinois’ departments included on the distribution list for public meeting notices. At the referenced public meeting the Corps, in response to numerous questions about increased flooding downstream, repeatedly stated that the primary purpose of the project was flood risk management. Most importantly, the Corps claims that flooding along the Mississippi will not be increased because they are maintaining the downstream constraints at Burlington (18.5 feet) and Quincy (20.0 feet). BUT, the new plan calls for abandoning the downstream constraints (i.e., start large magnitude flood operations) when the Lake Red Rock reservoir height reaches 770 feet (@ 60% flood control storage utilized) as opposed to current plan at 775 feet (79% flood control storage utilized); and also increasing the large magnitude flood release from Lake Red Rock at elev. 775 from 30,000 to 50,000 cfs (the current plan hits 50,000 cfs release rate at elev. 779). This means there will be more (not less) floodwater flowing into the Mississippi when it is likely to already be in flood stage—hence, downstream flooding will increase.

The Corps’ “tentatively selected plan (Alternative 6)” reduces flooding for Iowa, while increasing flooding along the Mississippi River downstream of Quincy, Illinois. The Corps acknowledges that new Mississippi River flood profiles, when issued, will be higher than the current regulatory profiles. These Corps generated profiles are typically used by FEMA as the 100-year regulatory base flood elevation for purposes of floodplain management as well as levee certification; both of which are strongly linked to land use and value. Revising Des Moines River reservoir operations in a manner that will lead to higher flood profiles along the Mississippi, especially from Quincy to St. Louis, at a time when the Corps is calling for at least some of the levee owner/operators in that reach to lower their levees, is unconscionable, at best.

Page Two: SNY ISLAND LEVEE DRAINAGE DISTRICT RE: Des Moines River Basin Master Reservoir Regulation Manual August 31, 2018

We are also disturbed by the Corps having indicated that operating outside of the constraints of the Master Manual, even after it is revised, falls entirely within their purview. While we acknowledge there are instances during emergency operations when that may be appropriately necessarily, such behavior is not warranted in other situations. The Master Manual is the document relied upon by businesses, land owners, communities, etc., in making their decisions. Yet, it has essentially no meaning if the Corps, at their sole discretion, and without notice, can choose at any time and for any reason to alter the operations prescribed therein. We urge the Corps to address the aforementioned issue by taking two specific actions. First, identify the likely outside parameters of emergency operations and their impacts on downstream flooding. Second, for any deviation from the Master Manual that is not for the express purpose of emergency operations issue an advance notice of at least thirty days identifying the purpose of the deviation and its anticipated impacts (higher, lower or none) on water surface elevations. This additional information and notice will allow impacted parties to make risk-informed decisions for their businesses and communities, taking into account not just flood risk but others that may arise. That the Corps did not involve downstream States in the study effort, nor inform them of the increase in flooding that is certain to occur as a direct result of the Master Manual revisions, is a fatal flaw.

Sincerely, Mike Reed KMJ for Mike Reed Superintendent/Treasurer

CC: Sny Commissioners Wayne Rosenthal, Director of the Illinois Department of Natural Resources From: Ethan Conrad To: CEMVR_Planning Subject: [Non-DoD Source] Public Comment: Des Moines River Basin Master Reservoir Regulation Manual Date: Saturday, September 1, 2018 7:12:31 AM

I currently rent a piece of ground along the Des Moines River north of Ottumwa. I began renting it in 2015. The river has been out multiple times since then. I lost the majority of my crop in 2015 and have lost parts of it other years as well. There are two lower spots that run the length of the field parallel to the river. When the river comes out these spots take a exceedingly long time to dry out. This makes it difficult to get to the sections of the field closer to the river. The river has been running bank full the majority of the year with little to no rain in this area. Increasing the output to 25k cfs alone will put the field at significant risk to be flooded. Couple that with actually getting rain in this area and all the water that drains to the river and the field will almost certainly be affected. Because of this I am highly opposed to increasing the output from 22k cfs to 25k cfs . Thanks

Sent from my iPhone This page was intentionally left blank.

September 13, 2018

Joe Jordan CEMVP-PD-C US Army Corps of Engineers, Clock Tower Building P.O. Box 2004 Rock Island, IL 61204-2004

Mr. Jordan,

We are writing in regards to the request for comments from agency stakeholders regarding the revision and update of the Des Moines River Basin Master Reservoir Regulation Manual Update. We appreciate the opportunity to comment on the proposed regulation changes, and value our partnership with the USACE tremendously. Adjusting the lake pool levels in the fall wildlife and in the reservoirs, and has the potential for significant positive impact on numerous species. The recreational value of hunting and wildlife viewing in these reservoirs is currently tremendous, and increases as wildlife populations excel (e.g., an estimated 200 birders came in 2017 from around the Midwest for an opportunity to observe a Bar-tailed Godwit, which has never been observed in Iowa before). Comments on the proposed changes are as follows for Lake Red Rock.

Increased releases from reservoir: 22,000 cfs maximum release when pool level is below elevation 750 (currently 18,000 cfs) 25,000 cfs maximum release when pool level is between elevation 750 and 770 Earlier 30,000 cfs release for the growing season when the pool level reaches elevation 770.

Conservation bands

Lake Red Rock fall pool elevation bands: Elevations 741.5 – 747 feet (currently a 742-744 band)

• The current regulation plan allows a 2 foot raise in the fall to help create habitat for migratory waterfowl at Red Rock and recreation of wildlife observers and hunters. Lake Red Rock continues to

www.IowaDNR.gov experience heavy siltation, which reduces the potential for habitat creation for waterfowl and access by the public. Migrating shorebirds also heavily use the mudflats (delta) of Red Rock, and with this conservation band, we would be able to create an incremental lowering of the water to create ideal shorebird habitat throughout August, while still having enough elevation change in the conservation band to allow excellent migratory waterfowl habitat later in the fall. This regulation change has an enormous potential to increase both shorebird and waterfowl use at Lake Red Rock, likely attracting new species (as was seen last year with the Bar-tailed Godwit) and definitely larger numbers these birds. We are extremely excited about the conservation band potential, and strongly encourage the approval of this regulation. The regulation change could allow the siltation at Red Rock to be used as a positive factor in attracting migratory shorebirds, and Lake Red Rock could be an even more destination spot for birders in the Midwest. Allowing the fall pool raise up to potential of 747 elevation is an equally exciting potential change that will substantially increase the use of migratory waterfowl at Red Rock. The current regulation of a 2 foot raise make it difficult to back water into quality habitat for waterfowl due to the fluctuating water levels throughout the year. A lake pool raise in the fall up to 5 feet is a game changer for migratory waterfowl use at Red Rock. It is often a challenge every year in providing habitat for migratory waterfowl at Red Rock. This increased lake pool raise will create an additional 1000+ acres of habitat in the fall for waterfowl. Red Rock could easily become an even more destination spot for waterfowl enthusiasts in the Midwest. We also encourage the USACE to hold these fall pool raises until the following spring until ice out or March 15. This change will help protect herps and mussels during their hibernation over the winter months.

Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments for the Regulation Manual Update. The flexibility to adjust the lake pool levels and outflows at specific times of the year and will be extremely beneficial to Iowa’s wildlife resources. We applaud your efforts in examining regulation changes that will benefit wildlife conservation at Lake red Rock, and look forward to an exciting future with the USACE in promoting use of wildlife conservation and the public recreation at the Lake Red Rock.

Sincerely,

Todd Gosselink, Ph.D. Wildlife Biologist, Red Rock Wildlife Unit Wildlife Bureau, Iowa department of Natural Resources 1105 N Hwy T15, Knoxville, IA 50138 [email protected] P 515-238-6936

DISTRICT RESPONSE TO PUBLIC COMMENTS This page was intentionally left blank. Name/Org Category Comment Response Marcia O., It would be good if the website would update more often for out flow of Red Reservoir forecasts are typically updated once daily and Ottumwa Public Rock during times when there is a lot of rain and it may change more often than include 24 to 48 hours of forecasted rainfall. However, if the Meeting Coordination reported. reservoir release changes significantly during the day, the website is updated to show the revised forecast. Aug 2, 2018 Brody B., Please extend the comment period at least another two weeks. Corps has four Public comment period was extended as requested. Quincy Public months to review. Meeting Coordination

Aug 7, 2018 I note the elevation of 760 ft for Lake Red Rock is utilized in the graphics Unless a find is reported to the District or Project office or John F. Doershuk, included as enclosures; interestingly this is the approximate point at which wave there is a site of known concern, the District does not Ph.D., Office of the action adversely impacts the location at which the mammoth remains were normally perform shoreline reconnaissance surveys on State Archaeologist, recently recovered. This makes me wonder about other possible archaeological previously surveyed areas. Cultural University of Iowa (or paleontological) sites that may now be exposed around the lake margins compared to when shoreline surveys were last completed and how such Jul 12, 2018 resources are to be managed within either the Water Control Plan or other measures? It is our opinion that the ‘lake level’ flooding impacts to our roads overall would Given the impacts, a fall pool raise above lake elevation 746 be reduced by Alternative 6 being implemented as the new Regulation Plan. This would not be implemented prior to bridge replacement. proposed Alternative would reduce the duration of which our roads are under water and also would prevent some from going under during certain floods when compared to the current regulation plan. This is evident in the e-mail sent from Maren Stoflet – Impacts of 2018 Temporary Deviation for Saylorville and Red Rock Reservoirs, as attached. Flooding/Water

Management However, we do have a road that will be impacted during the fall pool raise, if Tyler Christian, P.E., the peak of the raise is at 747. Kennedy St. between 150th Ave. and Co. Rd. S71 Marion County, IA, (Roadways) goes underwater at elevation slightly below 747. There is a bridge on Kennedy Road Department that is likely to be replaced in the next 3-5 years, however, the replacement date

and scope of work is uncertain at this time. I would request that the Army Corps Aug 10, 2018 of Engineer’s not approve a fall pool raise above 744 (current 2’ fall pool raise) until agreements between the Army COE, Iowa DNR, and Marion County can be reached in order to replace the bridge and raise the road to a safe elevation above the 747 elevation. Flooding/Water Lastly, we do not predict any impact to roads down stream of Lake Red Rock With regard to concerns of outflows greater than 22,000 cfs Management Dam along the Des Moines River as a result of the proposed Alternative 6. creating a backwater effect on tributary streams as a result of However, we have had comments from the public that with the river running at heavy rain, reductions in outflows in observance of (Des Moines) a higher flow of 22,000 in the wet spring rainy season, water may not be able to downstream stage constraints will still be initiated limiting the (Farmland) get away downstream quickly enough. The thought is that tributaries of the Des likelihood of backwater effects.

1 Moines River, i.e. Cedar Creek, English Creek, and many others, that are downstream of Red Rock are acting as a backwater from the Des Moines River. Theorizing that water from heavy rain falling in the tributary drainage basins can’t get out of/off of fields, tiles, ditches, and other drainage ways because there isn’t enough relief downstream. I have no proof or information to back this up, I am just passing along the comments from area farmers. The main mission of the Iowa Reservoirs is Flood Control, that was their The major authorized purpose of the Saylorville and Red Rock intended purpose and why the taxpayers authorized their build and expenditure. reservoirs is flood risk management. While additional Bearing that in mind that stipulation should apply not only to the Des Moines authorized purposes include low flow augmentation, fish and River, but to the Mississippi River which it feeds. The Des Moines River is a major wildlife and recreation, flood risk management takes contributor to flow in the Mississippi River. There is a large amount of precedence over these other purposes. Please note that agricultural ground in Pool 20 and below which is outside levied districts as well navigation is not an authorized operating purpose for the Des as that ground protected by levees. There is also commercial navigation in the Moines River reservoirs. Mississippi River which is affected by flooding. It would seem imperative that these issues be included in consideration of the operation of the reservoirs. Overall, the tentatively selected plan reduces the magnitude and frequency of the larger, more damaging floods that can After the initial meetings there was a response to that effect It seems that there result in flooding in unprotected communities and was little consideration given to the issues on the Upper Mississippi. Local overtopping of levees along both the Des Moines and feelings are that the issues on the Upper Mississippi River should receive more Mississippi Rivers. However, flood risk reduction benefits weight than have been given. It would appear that the "reservoirs" primary along the Mississippi River are limited as the Des Moines River consideration is the effects on Des Moines, IA and other areas on the Des reservoirs influence only about 9 percent of the drainage area Moines River. Your statements of the Des Moines releases only changing the above Quincy, IL on the Mississippi River. The current levels on the Mississippi a little over one foot are taken as valid , however, constraints of 18.5 feet at Burlington and 20 feet at Quincy Michael G. remember that one foot is significant a peak times in the survival of crops; the are exceeded prior to the river reaching the stage that results Hershler, stability of levee systems and the continuation of commercial traffic on the main in closure of Lock & Dam 20. Therefore, the full benefits of Quincy, IL Mississippi stem Upper Mississippi River. Commercial traffic affects many things, St Paul, reductions in outflow from Lake Red Rock for this downstream

Minneapolis, Quad Cities, all get fuel, salt, fertilizer from the river and constraint will be realized at river levels that result in potential Aug 12, 2018 agricultural and petroleum products flow downriver. Your "trigger points" closure of navigation. remaining with the Quincy gage (34 5 miles below the mouth of the Des Moines) are still an issue that hasn't changed in the proposed new operation manual. The Burlington, IA, and Quincy, IL gages were chosen as a Again, I encourage your consideration of a change in this trigger point to Lock control points to represent the entire reach of the Mississippi and Dam upper pool gage (18.3 miles below the mouth of the Des Moines. This River downstream of the confluence with the Des Moines will give an earlier response and more sensitivity to Mississippi River Stages. See River and are not specific to a particular location. The gages the previous submission for additional information. have a long history as NWS forecast points. Operation of Lake Red Rock to reduce flooding along the Mississippi River is When the middle Upper Mississippi raises to major flooding Lock and Dam 17 is based on river forecasts at these locations as reductions in typically the first dam to go out due to flooding, Lock and Dam 20 is typically the outflow are initiated 3 to 4 days in advance of forecasted second. When 20 goes out, Commercial Navigation stops. That ""one foot"" flooding along the Mississippi. affect from the Des Moines can be very important. Using Lock and Dam 20's There is insufficient storage within Lake Red Rock to “keep the upper gage as a trigger point could be important. Also, keeping in mind that Lock river at or below” a stage of 14 feet at Lock and Dam 20. 20 is an ""early out"" lock, there is a concern with the proposed plan's waiting Continuously reducing outflows once the Mississippi River at until certain stages are reached before major emptying of the reservoirs occurs. Lock and Dam 20 exceeds a stage of 14 feet would result in It would seem that common sense would dictate in wet conditions that the rapid filling of Lake Red Rock. This would result in the reservoirs be held as close to the Conservation Pool Stage, or even below (742 increased likelihood of large magnitude flood releases from

2 feet). As agricultural ground below Red Rock and on the main stem reservoir are the reservoir which would result in an increase in flood risk affected and as Mississippi stages raise to near shut down then and only then within and below the reservoir on the Des Moines River, an should there be a concentrated effort to hold water in the reservoirs. Fall and increase the likelihood of navigation closure on the Upper early winter should find the Des Moines reservoirs at their lowest levels. The Mississippi River due to high water, and an increase in the TVA operates many reservoirs and operates the main stem Tennessee and flood risk to drainage and levee districts and urban Cumberland Rivers for flood control and for navigation and they do a very communities along the Upper Mississippi River. The current, effective job of this. Starting in early winter and through the winter these pools and tentatively selected plan, focusses on timing reductions are held low. I would encourage Rock Island District to review the operations from Lake Red Rock to correspond to peak Mississippi River and successes of the TV A/Nashville pools. Lock 20 shuts down at around an 18- flooding. foot stage depending on conditions (rising river, stationary river, speed of raise, etc.) Their upper wall goes under about 19-foot stage. They are good about operating as long as possible to assist Commercial Navigation. At about these same stages on down the river other things are happening: Agricultural ground in pool 20 and 21 begins to go under about 14-foot stage, but it's the flooding gets really bad at about 16-foot stage. Depending on crop type and stage of maturity these stages can be anywhere from minor effects to devastating. Riverfront camp grounds in Canton, MO area go under. Hannibal is close to closing its flood gates which is costly and a disruption in the tourist trade in Hannibal. Hannibal greatly depends on this trade. In Quincy these stages are only a minor inconvenience at the river front barge docks and parks. Serious implications don't happen in Quincy until another 3 to 4 feet raise in the river. Hence, again, Quincy gage is a poor choice as a trigger point.

In Summary, Please reconsider these trigger points and consider relocating from Quincy to Lock 20 Pool gage or to the Gregory, MO gage.

Des Moines River reservoirs need to be drained and maintained at lowest levels possible during normal flood times and or exceptional wet times at other times in the year. They are ""Flood Control Reservoirs"" first and foremost" Impacts To Clean Renewable Hydroelectric Generation The Corps policies and procedures for working with non- As presented to MRES by the USACE via webinar on July 17, 2018, Alternative 6 Federal hydropower developers are stated in ER 1110-2-1462 would reduce annual renewable energy production by 1.9% from the no-action Water Quality and Water Control Considerations for Non- alternative (Alternative 1). Federal Hydropower Development at Corps of Engineers Projects (20 February 1991). That ER indicates that the Corps Raymond J. Wahle, However, after reviewing the data supplied by the USACE, it is evident that a project may change during the development or after Flow Management P.E., Missouri River reduction of 1.9% does not reflect the full impact that Alternative 6 will have to completion of the non-Federal hydropower plant. And, if it

Energy Services the production of renewable energy. As presented, most of the reduction in does, the non-Federal hydropower developer is obligated to (effecting production will occur during the months of June, July and August, when electric modify its operation or development to accommodate the hydropower) Aug 15, 2018 loads are typically the highest and energy is needed most. The reduction of 1.9% Federal requirements. "The Operating Agreement shall clearly in annual energy production is further skewed when taking into account that state Corps authority to change project operating criteria at under Alternative 6, energy production increases in February and March when any time and to order the developer to cease operation of the electrical loads are typically much lower and the need for energy is less. hydropower facility if it is deemed to be detrimental to water control or water quality objectives of the project, personnel or project safety or other project objectives." ER 1110-2-1462,

3 For example, using 24 years of data from 1993 to 2016, Alternative 6 will result paragraph 7e(1). "The Operating Agreement can also be in providing renewable energy to over 220 fewer households during the months modified if warranted to incorporate new requirements or of July and August, when the demand for power is typically at its highest. Using modify existing ones as needed to protect Corps interests." the same data set, nearly 11,400 fewer households will be powered with ER 1110-2-1462, paragraph 7e(2). renewable energy over the 24 year period. This reduction not only reduces the benefits derived from clean renewable Hydroelectric power, but comes at a cost In this study, the primary authorized purpose of managing of over $3.9M over the 24 year period. flood risk on the Des Moines and Mississippi Rivers was the driver for formulation, evaluation, and screening of The USACE should recognize the value that clean, renewable hydroelectric alternative water management strategies. In addition to flood energy has to the nation and place a higher priority on this value than what was risk management, opportunities related to the other provided in the study. authorized federal operating purposes, fish and wildlife management and low-flow augmentation, were evaluated and As such the USACE should maintain a maximum release of 18,000 cfs during the incorporated into the tentatively selected plan. The water growing season as is followed in the current Des Moines River Water Control needs of the authorized Federal projects (Saylorville Lake and Plan Lake Red Rock) to meet their congressionally authorized (Alternative 1). project purposes take precedence over the needs of a non- Federal hydropower plant built at an authorized Federal project. From the downriver prospective, I feel the Army Corps has done a great job in Concur. Thank you. Flow Management managing the outflows at Saylorville and Red Rock since the 2008 floods. I've noticed a more proactive approach in releases period of time. Any changes I would make to your outflow would be if the lake elevation is In the tentatively selected plan, lake elevation 750 is the Rusty Ebert, Editor, above 765 I would release 25,000 CFS, instead of 22,000. I also recommend trigger for releasing 25,000 cfs. The trigger for releasing

The Van Buren starting the 30,000 release at 770, instead of 775. 30,000 cfs and abandoning downstream constraints is lake County (IA) Register elevation 770. I recommend varying the outflow at Red Rock a little during the summer. I've When reservoir inflows are high, releases are sometimes held Flow Management Aug 17, 2018 noticed a lot of erosion when the release is constantly 22,000 for a good period for extended periods in order to evacuate flood storage. (Erosion) of time. I recommend developing a state-federal partnership to build two to three small The authority for this study pertains only to the Saylorville and Flooding/Water to medium structures along the Raccoon River watershed. This would help with Red Rock Reservoir projects. Design and construction of new Management sediment and water quality issues and would prevent a spike in the inflow to the facilities is beyond the scope of this study. Des Moines River. In particular, we support the Corps plan to incorporate a small conservation Through adaptive management the District and stakeholders band that will provide flexibility needed to manage water levels and mudflats for can capitalize on hydraulic conditions to reduce nitrate levels David W. DeGeus, nutrient removal, migratory shorebirds and environmental flow augmentation. in the river as well as achieve quality fish and wildlife habitat Working Lands By properly timing seasonal inundation and drawdowns on the reservoir’s in certain years when conditions support these resources. Flooding/ Water Director, The extensive mudflats we believe the Corps can substantially reduce nitrate levels in Management Nature Conservancy the river and create thousands of acres of new habitat for migratory shorebirds. Research is needed to substantiate this proposed management practice and we Des Moines, IA hope that federal funding can be secured so that someday this practice could provide environmental benefits across the Mississippi Valley Division. Aug 24, 2018 We also supported the Corp’ decision to increase growing season flows from The District recognizes the ecological benefits of reconnecting Flow Management 18,000 cfs to 22,000 cfs as this will begin to enable the Corps to respond to long- the river to its floodplain, however, the primary mission for term increases in river flow volume. Reconnecting the river to its floodplain is Saylorville and Red Rock is FRM. We need to balance this

4 vital to the health of riverine aquatic systems and we also hope that the Corps mission with our other missions, however, FRM is the primary will someday consider allowing run of river flows of 30,000 cfs or higher during mission for these projects. The authority to construct and the growing season regardless of pool level. Perhaps this naturalization of the manage the two reservoirs does not allow for voluntary river hydrograph could someday be facilitated by the Corps or other public flowage easements to compensate for ecological outflows. partners offering voluntary flowage easement or fee title buyouts of low areas Conservation easement agreements may be a viable option downstream that might be affected by higher growing season flows. with other state and federal agencies such as the NRCS.

We appreciate the Corps willingness to consider all viewpoints and especially your thoughtful consideration of environmental needs in this regulation manual update. In addition to flow considerations we hope the Corps will continue to refrain The District will avoid environmental impacts to its fullest from conducting drawdowns of the river or reservoir during freezing ability. It will also try to improve environmental quality when temperatures to protect freshwater mussels, slow the rate of change in outflow it can. The District actively took part in developing the SRP to reduce gas bubble disease in fish below the dam and consider augmenting report and endorses its conclusions and will implement them Fish and Wildlife summer low flows to prevent major fish kills downstream. These and many more wherever it can. The District appreciates the time and effort suggestions are contained in the SRP reports. the TNC, IA DNR, and other partners invested in the SRP report and in their endeavors enriching environmental quality Satisfying a diverse set of constituencies through river and reservoir for the resources and public who enjoy them. management is a difficult job. We appreciate the Corps willingness to consider all viewpoints and especially Thank you for your comment. Coordination your thoughtful consideration of environmental needs in this regulation manual update. Every spring we move 10 to 12 feet away from the river bank when we plant The intent of higher release rates is to reduce reservoir pool crops and every fall the last rows are right on the river’s edge. At one point we levels thereby conserving flood storage and moving water had a large grove of trees along the bank and now they are gone. In addition, we through the system more rapidly. The risk of higher more tried several times to protect our investment by building a dike across a low damaging releases and the duration of those releases is area, however, it washed out three times and cost a large sum of money. reduced benefiting both upstream and downstream stakeholders. The 3-month period of releasing 22,000 cfs in This year (2018) with the Red Rock outflow at 22,000 cfs and severe drought 2018 was due to an extended period of high inflows to the Randy and Melanie conditions in our area, the river ran at capacity and was out of its banks and into reservoir. An allowable release of 25,000 cfs would have Flooding/ Water Conrad, Local our crops at least once. We surveyed the river bank recently by boat and there is evacuated flood storage faster resulting in an earlier return to Management Farmers, evidence that the bank has caved in another 10 to 15 feet in places. If the lower releases.

Ottumwa, IA standard outflow is raised to 25,000 cfs for 3 months it is likely there would be (Des Moines) perpetual flooding on our river bottom farmland and substantial erosion that (Farmland) Aug 25, 2018 would prevent us from growing a crop.

I am strongly against this proposal. We hope you will listen to those whose livelihood depends on raising a crop along the Des Moines River. Although we understand the risk of flooding in years when extreme conditions cause it, we feel making a decision to raise levels to cause consistent flooding is not a good choice. There has to be a better option for your purpose than to flood landowners below Red Rock Dam. Thank you for listening!"

5 My concern with your proposed plan is how quick (750 lake elevation or 11% Analysis of the alternatives showed that the tentatively flood capacity) you go to a release rate of 25,000. I would understand this selected plan which indicates releasing 25,000 cfs from Lake release rate if the lake elevation was at 760 or higher. While 3,000 CFS does not Red Rock at elevation 750, reduces the frequency of sound like much, it will have a great impact on my fields. By your own rating occurrence of flooding of secondary roads and significant table this 3000 CFS will raise the river level at Eddyville 1 foot. In a river bottom agricultural area below Lake Red. It also reduced the Craig Ver Steegh, this 1 foot is enough to flood a large portion of a field or make everything wet frequency large magnitude flood releases which impact urban Ver Steegh Bros. Flow Management enough that it never dries out enough to get it planted. communities downstream of Lake Red Rock. The major Farm purpose for updating the Des Moines River Reservoir Water (Farmland) I would really like to see this changed to releasing at 25000 only if the lake is Control Plans is to reduce the magnitude and frequency of the Aug 28, 2018 higher than 760. Currently the plan is 18000 up to 760 and then 22000 above larger, more damaging floods that can result in flooding in 760. By changing this to 760 hopefully our crops will have less very high river unprotected communities and overtopping of levees along periods and yet, if necessary, you can release at 25000 to avoid a 1993 or 2008. both the Des Moines and Mississippi Rivers. In order to accomplish that goal, higher reservoir releases are proposed I would really like….to clarify the need to release 25,000 at 750 elevation and not in order to preserve flood storage for these larger magnitude 760 like it is currently. flood events. Review & Opinion General. The comment is incorrect with regards to the effects If the tentatively selected plan, Alternative 6, is implemented by the U.S. Army on navigation and flooding impacts on downstream areas. In Corps of Engineers, there is now a greater downstream risk of higher river levels, regards to navigation, the report does not propose to alter the a higher risk of stopping interstate commerce (barge traffic) and a higher risk of downstream constraints on the Mississippi River. The current flooding. Instead of reducing the Red Rock Reservoir releases when the reservoir constraints of 18.5 feet at Burlington and 20 feet at Quincy is below 31% capacity, the Corps is proposing to INCREASE the flows. This will are exceeded prior to the river reaching the stage that results speed up the rise in the river and potentially lengthen the duration of the high in closure of Lock & Dam 20. Therefore, the full benefits of water. reductions in outflow from Lake Red Rock for this downstream

The River Industry Action Committee has the following comments regarding the constraint will be realized at river levels that result in potential revisions to the Des Moines River Water Control Plan: closure of navigation. In addition, the relatively small increase in seasonal releases from Lake Red Rock (22,000 cfs vs 25,000 Casey M. Hershler, cfs) reduces the frequency of releases greater than 30,000 cfs Canton (MO) Flooding/Water which result in significantly greater impacts downstream of Marine Towing Co. Management the reservoir. (Mississippi) Aug 29, 2018 1. Restore the primary purpose of the Des Moines River reservoirs to reducing 1. The major authorized purpose of the Saylorville and Red flooding on the Mississippi River and fostering interstate commerce. This will Rock reservoirs is flood risk management. While additional also have a great impact on preserving our already aging infrastructure. authorized purposes include low flow augmentation, fish and wildlife and recreation, flood risk management takes precedence over these other purposes. 2. Move the downstream Mississippi River control point from Quincy, IL to Lock 20 at Canton, MO. The target should be to keep the river at or below technical 2. The Burlington, IA, and Quincy, IL gages were chosen as a Flood Stage of 14 feet. control points to represent the entire reach of the Mississippi River downstream of the confluence with the Des Moines River and are not specific to a particular location. The gages have a long history as NWS forecast points. Operation of Lake Red Rock to reduce flooding along the Mississippi River is

6 based on river forecasts at these locations as reductions in outflow are initiated 3 to 4 days in advance of forecasted flooding along the Mississippi. There is insufficient storage within Lake Red Rock to “keep the river at or below” a stage of 14 feet at Lock and Dam 20. Continuously reducing outflows once the Mississippi River at Lock and Dam 20 exceeds a stage of 14 feet would result in rapid filling of Lake Red Rock. This would result in the increased likelihood of large magnitude flood releases from the reservoir which would result in an increase in flood risk within and below the reservoir on the Des Moines River, an increase the likelihood of navigation closure on the Upper Mississippi River due to high water, and an increase in the flood risk to drainage and levee districts and urban communities along the Upper Mississippi River. The current, and tentatively selected plan, focusses on timing reductions from Lake Red Rock to correspond to peak Mississippi River flooding. 3. During the late growing season, July 1 through December 15, the goal should 3. The major purpose for updating the Des Moines River be to retain as much water as possible. A good target for this would be to retain Reservoir Water Control Plans is to reduce the magnitude and water and reduce flows to 5,000 cfs until the river stage reaches 14 feet on the frequency of the larger, more damaging floods that can result Lock 20 gage. The reason for this is at this point, critical crops and interstate in flooding in unprotected communities and overtopping of Flow Management commerce are already “seeded” for the year and all efforts should be made to levees along both the Des Moines and Mississippi Rivers. In (Farmland) keep them moving and viable. Increasing releases after the Canton gage reaches order to accomplish that goal, higher reservoir releases are 14 feet give the Corps more than ample time to dump the reservoir if conditions proposed in order to preserve flood storage for these larger warrant. magnitude flood events. Please see discussion related to item 2 from Mr. Hershler, above. 4. During the late growing season (harvest), we object to raising the reservoir 4. While fish and wildlife management is an authorized levels to accommodate fish and wild life habitat growth. The primary purpose of purpose of the Saylorville and Red Rock Reservoirs, flood risk the reservoirs is to provide Flood Control by retaining water. The idea of management takes precedence over all other authorized Flooding/Water prematurely holding back water seem counterintuitive. Please refer to the last purposes. Raising the pool levels 2 to 4 feet has little impact Management few years where the Des Moines River basin has experience high water in the on flood risk management during the fall when rainfall is

fall. Prematurely raising the levels of the reservoirs seems to be the opposite of typically much lower than spring or summer and utilizes less (Des Moines) what we need to do. At the late time of the crop season, we should be doing than 5% of the available flood storage. Modeling analysis of (Farmland) everything we can to not “flood” downstream farm ground and/or put barge the tentatively selected plan showed that raising the pool in loading facilities out of business and stopping interstate commerce. the fall has no effect on flood risk as compared to the base condition (existing water control plan). Casey M. Hershler, 5. The proposed alternative gives the impression that the Des Moines River 5. Releasing more water reduces reservoir pool levels, Canton Marine Water Control Plan is being crafted to accommodate stake holders upstream of conserving flood storage and moving water through the Towing Co Lake Red Rock in an area that is and was intended to be used for Flood Control system earlier. The risk of higher more damaging releases and Engagement purposes, I.E. Flood Water Storage while not considering the larger impact to the duration of those releases is reduced benefiting both downstream farms and interstate commerce. The interstate commerce upstream and downstream stakeholders. However, flood risk Aug 29, 2018 referenced is not limited to just that of Mississippi River Pools 20, 21 & 22, but reduction benefits along the Mississippi River are limited as rather much larger part of the Mid West ranging from Minneapolis to St. Louis. the Des Moines River reservoirs influence only about 9

7 This area has a much larger economic impact that a few acres surrounding the percent of the drainage area above Quincy, IL on the Saylorville Lake and Lake Red Rock. Mississippi River.

We feel that the revisions to the water control plan appear to be influenced more by upstream constituents while neglecting the downstream interests. The City of Des Moines supports the Corps of Engineers plan to make the current Noted. Thank you. deviation plan the standard water control plan for the Des Moines River. Each of the elements is acceptable, with a high degree of support for both removing the balancing of storage between Lake Red Rock and the Saylorville Reservoir and raising the allowable discharge rate from 12,000 cfs to 16,000 cfs. Johnathan Gano, P.E., Public Works Flow While it imposes additional operational costs due to higher water levels at times Director, Des Management, than the standard plan, we vastly prefer the reduced risk of an uncontrolled Moines Flooding/ Water release and will happily bear those modest costs to lessen the potential Management enormous cost of an overflow at Saylorville on our downtown levee system. Aug 30, 2018 This summer’s extreme rainfall event at the end of June would have caused the Saylorville Reservoir to overtop the spillway had the deviation plan not been in place. Had there been a seasonally expected amount of rain in the month of July this year (instead of zero), there would have been substantially greater flood risk, if not catastrophic flooding, if the deviation plan had not been in place. Aquatic Life Resources The Main Report, Chapter V, Section I, Rivers and Streams, We didn’t notice any acknowledgement of how increased reservoir levels in the Water Quality, Wetlands, has been revised to include a spring increases vegetated fish spawning habitat. This is extremely important for discussion on Spring water level management and the Ben Dodd, black bass and crappie spp. spawning success. opportunity to promote the reservoirs’ fisheries spawning and Iowa DNR Fisheries, rearing conditions. While this opportunity has always been a Boone, IA Fish and Wildlife part of reservoir management, the Conservation band with a wider management flexibility would perhaps increase fishery Aug 31, 2018 management in the Spring and Summer months. This has and would continue to be predicated on rainfall and FRM responsibilities. Water Residence Time – This metric for each lake was compared for Alternatives The District updated Chapter V, Section I, Rivers and Streams, 1 and 6 at both reservoirs for growing season (1May-15Oct) when the pool is at Water Quality, Wetlands, with additional discussions conservation elevation. For the period of record analysis at Saylorville (1977- concerning retention time and the benefits to fish. Ben Dodd, 2016), the change in residence time during the growing season, when the pool is Iowa DNR Fisheries, at conservation elevation, was -4.24 days (15.33 to 11.09 days). For the period of Boone, IA record analysis at Red Rock (1968-2016), the change in residence time during the Flow Management growing season, when the pool is at conservation elevation, was -1.60 days Aug 31, 2018 (17.55 to 15.95 days). The proposed change is water residence time does not seem significant when presented as a loss in days. However, the proposed change results in a 27.7% and 11% loss of water residence time for Saylorville and Red Rock, respectively.

8 It’s well documented that water residence time is an extremely important factor when it comes to managing and maintaining reservoir fisheries. The Iowa DNR has observed that flow rates and Walleye loss are positively correlated at Rathbun Lake. This same relationship has been shown to be true for crappie spp. In addition, turbidity will likely increase in the reservoir as increased velocities carry sediment further into the basin. A reduction in water residence time is not beneficial for reservoir fisheries management or angling. Red Rock Minimum Discharge The District and IA DNR discussed the possibility of changing Is there a possibility of increasing minimum discharge rates to minimize stress on Red Rock’s minimum discharge. At that time, the IA DNR fish downstream in the Des Moines River? A conservation band of 300 -600 cfs stated the minimum discharge of 300 cfs is adequate and does was recommended at an earlier date to potentially evaluate strategies that could not have to be changed. If the conservation pool can be reduce thermal stress and gas bubble trauma. maintained, the District could release more than the 300 cfs to reduce fish impacts downstream. Sedimentation is a major contributor to the lack of in-lake fish habitat in both Chapter V,, Rivers and Streams, Water Quality, Wetlands, reservoirs. addresses how the TSP may reduce sedimentation. However, given the erodible nature of Iowa soils and the reservoirs’ FRM mission, sedimentation will remain a menace to quality aquatic habitat now and in the future. Through adaptive management the District and stakeholders may achieve quality spawning, rearing and overwintering habitat in certain years when conditions support fisheries management. We remain concerned about turbine-related fish mortality associated with new The project discussed in this report focuses on evaluating the hydroelectric facility at Red Rock. This should be evaluated. possible change to the regulation manual and does not Fish and Wildlife address hydropower operation, or its environmental impacts. Fish entrainment impacts at the hydropower facility were addressed in the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission licensing reports and NEPA documentation. We look forward to continuing our efforts to rear game fish species adjacent to For the purposes of this project, there are no specific fish and both reservoirs. There was no mention of water level being modified to pump wildlife features addressed. Specific fish and wildlife projects the Wallashuck rearing ponds full. are addressed on a case by case basis through the reservoirs Operation and Maintenance Programs on an annual basis. Continue to search for ways to minimize Gas Bubble Trauma in the Red Rock The District agrees with the need for finding the cause and tailrace. solutions for Gas Bubble Trauma and would support an IA DNR or other entity based fishery study using the District’s 30- year water quality data from below Red Rock.

In a letter dated September 13, 2018, the IA DNR provided comments concerning wildlife impacts associated with the proposed project (Appendix A). The following paragraphs outline each comment followed by a District response. Conservation Bands & Adaptive Water Level Management The District will be cognizant of their annual meeting to Flow We would first like to note that what was formerly referred to as the “Annual discuss water level management in all seasons in the future. Management/Fish Water Level Management Meeting”, is now called the “Fall Pool Raise Meeting”. Spring reservoir water levels will remain an important aspect and Wildlife When will spring water levels be discussed in the future? of fisheries management at each reservoir.

9 The proposed plan categorized conservation bands into “summer” and “winter”. The District considered many water levels and release rates The upper limit of the summer pool conservation bands were reduced by 2ft at along with their respective FRM options and natural resource Saylorville and 3ft at Red Rock from the elevations that the Iowa DNR requested. benefits. The TSP’s reservoir levels were primarily selected for This will have a negative impact on the amount of vegetated spawning habitat FRM but were raised above conservation pool levels for the that is available for crappie spp. in both reservoirs. purposes of natural resources management. While fisheries benefits were not optimized in accordance with the DNR’s This is an unfortunate change and we would encourage the Corps to take a more wishes, they were taken into account resulting in a Spring adaptive management strategy when it comes to spring water levels in the conservation band which will allow for future flexibility for future. improved fishery management. Public Input The discussion in Chapter V, Q, Recreation, states that water- While a number of points were made during these meetings, there is obviously a based recreation facilities and opportunities will remain Ben Dodd, large recreational boating community and angling community that were not available as a result of fewer high water events Iowa DNR Fisheries, heard from during these meetings and comment periods. It’s hard to believe Boone that the proposed changes wouldn’t negatively impact boat-based recreation in Recreation the reservoirs in the spring/early summer. If more water is released earlier in the Aug 31, 2018 year, boat recreation could be limited in the upstream end of both reservoirs in the spring/early summer due to sediment. The upper end of Saylorville is already closed for boat recreation and angling during the majority of the open water season. Concerns about the proposed increase in outflow from Red Rock. While bank erosion was not specifically addressed in this I am sure you are aware that annually we lose several feet of river bank with the study, bank erosion was investigated in multiple previous present flow. Low land farmers have to move row crops further in land annually studies. Operationally, under the current Water Control Plan because of the loss of farm ground. and the proposed plan, measures have been adopted to limit the rate of flow reductions in releases to 2,500 cfs per gate What other options have been considered? Has there been adequate study to change with the intent of limiting downstream bank erosion. determine that raising the out flow to 25,000cfs will result in less loss of soil Bank stabilization studies have shown that rapid reductions in Jerry Parker, because of less 30,000cfs times. Wapello County has great concern for our land water levels have a greater impact on bank stability than Flow Management Wapello County owners who farm low land areas but we must concern ourselves with flooding. increasing flows. The proposed increase in release from

Supervisor 22,000 to 25,000 cfs when the lake level reaches elevation (Erosion) 750 was related to flood reduction benefits. The study (Farmland) Aug 31, 2018 evaluated 12 alternative water control plans that were screened based up on their ability to reduce overall flood risk. For the Lower Des Moines River within the Ottumwa Reach (extending from the Cedar Creek confluence to Selma, IA), the tentatively selected plan reduces the long-term average annual flood damages by approximately 38% as compared to the existing water control plan (please see Table E-9 of Appendix E). Mike Reed, Sny There were multiple inquiries made by participants prior to and during the The District initially held eight open house style public Flooding/Water Island Levee presentation concerning potential impacts on downstream flooding; the Corps’ meetings in January 2017 and February 2017. The meetings Management Drainage District, response was misleading and unsatisfactory. A related concern is that during the were in Des Moines, Pella, and Ottumwa, Iowa and Quincy,

New Canton, IL eight year period from when the study was requested in 2010 (by then Iowa Illinois. The District conducted these meetings to attain public (Mississippi – Governor Culver) until its completion earlier this year the downstream States, input at the beginning phase of the feasibility plan to ensure Downstream) Aug 31, 2018 agency perspectives aligned to the extent allowable under law

10 including Illinois, have not been meaningfully engaged in the Master Manual and policy with public needs. District representatives were revision process. available to answer any questions from the public or other agency representatives. The meetings consisted of an The first paragraph of the study report released for comment states, “The approximately 30 minute presentation followed by a lengthy authorized purposes included flood risk management for the Des Moines and question and answer session. Mississippi Rivers…” (Emphasis added), which were later identified the report as the congressionally authorized primary purpose. As such, it was incumbent upon In compliance with regulations requiring a public review the Corps to include the downstream States along the Mississippi River in the period, in July of 2018 the District circulated the draft Master Manual revision process. We do not even see in the study report the feasibility report to a wide distribution list (Appendix G) to appropriate Illinois’ departments included on the distribution list for public solicit public input as part of the decision-making process. meeting notices. The District also posted the report on the District’s Public Website. During the 60-day public review period, the District At the referenced public meeting the Corps, in response to numerous questions held public meetings/open houses similar to the earlier about increased flooding downstream, repeatedly stated that the primary scoping meetings at the same locations. The purpose of these purpose of the project was flood risk management. Most importantly, the Corps meetings was to solicit input on the report and the claims that flooding along the Mississippi will not be increased because they are recommended plan. At the conclusion of the 60-day period, maintaining the downstream constraints at Burlington (18.5 feet) and Quincy the District integrated all comments into their decision making (20.0 feet). BUT, the new plan calls for abandoning the downstream constraints process. (i.e., start large magnitude flood operations) when the Lake Red Rock reservoir

height reaches 770 feet (@ 60% flood control storage utilized) as opposed to The major purpose for updating the Des Moines River current plan at 775 feet (79% flood control storage utilized); and also increasing Reservoir Water Control Plans is to reduce the magnitude and the large magnitude flood release from Lake Red Rock at elev. 775 from 30,000 frequency of the larger, more damaging floods that can result to 50,000 cfs (the current plan hits 50,000 cfs release rate at elev. 779). This in flooding in unprotected communities and overtopping of means there will be more (not less) floodwater flowing into the Mississippi when levees along both the Des Moines and Mississippi Rivers. In it is likely to already be in flood stage—hence, downstream flooding will order to accomplish that goal, higher reservoir releases are increase. proposed in order to preserve flood storage for these larger

magnitude flood events. As you note, the tentatively selected The Corps’ “tentatively selected plan (Alternative 6)” reduces flooding for Iowa, plan does recommend lowering the reservoir elevation that while increasing flooding along the Mississippi River downstream of Quincy, IL. triggers major flood operations at Lake Red Rock; however,

due to the higher allowable releases during normal flood The Corps acknowledges that new Mississippi River flood profiles, when issued, operations contained in the plan, the likelihood of reaching will be higher than the current regulatory profiles. These Corps generated major flood operations (during which downstream constraints profiles are typically used by FEMA as the 100-year regulatory base flood are no longer considered in making release decisions) is elevation for purposes of floodplain management as well as levee certification; approximately the same as under the current water control both of which are strongly linked to land use and value. Revising Des Moines plan (please see Figure D-52 in Appendix D). However, as the River reservoir operations in a manner that will lead to higher flood profiles reservoir levels under the tentatively selected plan would be along the Mississippi, especially from Quincy to St. Louis, at a time when the lower, the resulting large magnitude flood releases would be Corps is calling for at least some of the levee owner/operators in that reach to reduced as compared to the current water control plan and lower their levees, is unconscionable, at best. would have resulted in lower peak releases from Lake Red Rock during the 1993 and 2008 flood events. We are also disturbed by the Corps having indicated that operating outside of Provisions for deviating from the approved water control Engagement the constraints of the Master Manual, even after it is revised, falls entirely within plans, for all Corps of Engineers projects, are contained with their purview. While we acknowledge there are instances during emergency ER 1110-2-240 (Section 3-4.) “All water control manuals shall

11 operations when that may be appropriately necessarily, such behavior is not contain provisions authorizing the operating agency to deviate warranted in other situations. The Master Manual is the document relied upon temporarily from operations prescribed by the project’s by businesses, land owners, communities, etc., in making their decisions. Yet, it approved water control plan when necessary to alleviate has essentially no meaning if the Corps, at their sole discretion, and without critical situations or possibly to realize increased benefits notice, can choose at any time and for any reason to alter the operations during an operation season without significantly affecting the prescribed therein. fulfillment of the project’s authorized purposes.”). While the Corps of Engineers reserves the right to deviate from We urge the Corps to address the aforementioned issue by taking two specific approved Water Control Plans to alleviate critical conditions actions. First, identify the likely outside parameters of emergency operations or realize increased benefits, there is a specific process that and their impacts on downstream flooding. must be adhered to prior to approval of a deviation. Final approval of any deviation rests with the Division Commander. Second, for any deviation from the Master Manual that is not for the express Potential benefits and negative impacts associated with a purpose of emergency operations issue an advance notice of at least thirty days deviation are required to be documented and analyzed prior identifying the purpose of the deviation and its anticipated impacts (higher, to the deviation being approved. lower or none) on water surface elevations. This additional information and notice will allow impacted parties to make risk-informed decisions for their businesses and communities, taking into account not just flood risk but others that may arise. That the Corps did not involve downstream States in the study effort, nor inform them of the increase in flooding that is certain to occur as a direct result of the Master Manual revisions, is a fatal flaw.

We hereby request the Corps to refrain from completing the study, or implementing any changes included therein, until such time that the downstream States, including Illinois, can review, evaluate and advise as to the extent of adverse impacts, and those are documented and taken into full consideration in this process to revise the Master Manual." " We understand that the Corps’ “tentatively selected plan (Alternative 6)” (Plan) The major purpose for updating the Des Moines River reduces flooding for Iowa, while increasing flooding along the Mississippi River Reservoir Water Control Plans is to reduce the magnitude and downstream of Quincy, IL, during large magnitude flood operations. And further, frequency of larger, more damaging floods that can result in that the Plan calls for moving into large magnitude flood operations at a lower flooding in unprotected communities and overtopping of Roger Sutter, reservoir elevation. This essentially means we’ll be getting more floodwaters at a levees along both the Des Moines and Mississippi Rivers. In President, Fabius time when the Mississippi River is likely already in, or approaching, flood stage. order to accomplish that goal, higher reservoir releases are River Drainage The Corps has acknowledged that new Mississippi River flood profiles, when proposed in order to preserve flood storage for these larger Flooding/Water District, Palmyra, issued, will be higher than the current flood profiles. These Corps generated magnitude flood events. Higher release rates triggered at Management MO profiles are typically used by FEMA as the 100-year regulatory base flood lower reservoir elevations move water through the system

elevation for purposes of floodplain management and levee certification; both of earlier limiting the risk of higher more damaging releases and (Mississippi) Aug 31, 2018 which are strongly linked to land use and value. Coupled with these proposed the duration of those releases, benefiting both upstream and Master Manual revisions, the Corps has been seeking to enforce more rigid downstream stakeholders. While downstream constraints will requirements for altering levees through its Section 408 process. This has led to be abandoned earlier, the frequency of damaging it being nearly impossible for levee owner/operators to maintain their current downstream discharges along both the Des Moines and levee heights and levels of protection. Revising Des Moines River reservoir Mississippi Rivers will be reduced. operations in a manner that will lead to higher flood profiles along the Mississippi, especially from Quincy to St. Louis, at a time when the Corps is

12 calling for at least some of the levee owner/operators in that reach to lower As you note, the tentatively selected plan does recommend their levees, is unconscionable, at best. lowering the reservoir elevation that triggers major flood operations at Lake Red Rock; however, due to the higher The Corps acknowledges the primary purpose of the project is flood risk allowable releases during normal flood operations contained management, and claims flooding along the Mississippi will not be increased in the plan, the likelihood of reaching major flood operations because downstream constraints are being maintained at Burlington (18.5 feet) (during which downstream constraints are no longer and Quincy (20.0 feet). However, the new plan calls for abandoning the considered in making release decisions) is approximately the downstream constraints (i.e., start large magnitude flood operations) when the same as under the current water control plan (please see Lake Red Rock reservoir height reaches 770 feet (@ 60% flood control storage Figure D-52 in Appendix D). However, as the reservoir levels utilized) as opposed to current plan at 775 feet (79% flood control storage under the tentatively selected plan would be lower, the utilized), and also increasing the large magnitude flood release from Lake Red resulting large magnitude flood releases would be reduced as Rock at elev. 775 from 30,000 to 50,000 cfs (the current plan hits 50,000 cfs compared to the current water control plan and would have release rate at elev. 779). This means there will be more (not less) floodwater resulted in lower peak releases from Lake Red Rock during the flowing into the Mississippi when it is likely to already be in flood stage—hence, 1993 and 2008 flood events. downstream flooding will increase.

We urge the Corps to address the aforementioned issue by taking two specific actions. First, identify the likely outside parameters of emergency operations and their impacts on downstream flooding. Also of concern is that during the eight year period from when the study was The District initially held eight open house style public requested in 2010 (by then Iowa Governor Culver) until its completion earlier meetings in January 2017 and February 2017. The meetings this year the downstream States, including Missouri, have not been meaningfully were in Des Moines, Pella, and Ottumwa, Iowa and Quincy, engaged in the Master Manual revision process. The first paragraph of the study Illinois. The District conducted these meetings to attain public report released for comment states, “The authorized purposes included flood input at the beginning phase of the feasibility plan to ensure risk management for the Des Moines and Mississippi Rivers…” (Emphasis added), agency perspectives aligned to the extent allowable under law which were later identified the report as the congressionally authorized primary and policy with public needs. District representatives were purpose. As such, it was incumbent upon the Corps to include the downstream available to answer any questions from the public or other States along the Mississippi River in the Master Manual revision process. We agency representatives. The meetings consisted of an Roger Sutter, understand that appropriate departments from the State of Missouri were not approximately 30 minute presentation followed by a lengthy President, Fabius informed nor involved in the study process. question and answer session. River Drainage District Engagement We are also disturbed by the Corps having indicated that operating outside of In compliance with regulations requiring a public review the constraints of the Master Manual, even after it is revised, falls entirely within period, in July of 2018 the District circulated the draft Aug 31, 2018 their purview. While we acknowledge there are instances during emergency feasibility report to a wide distribution list (Appendix G) to operations when that may be appropriately necessarily, such behavior is not solicit public input as part of the decision-making process. warranted in other situations. The Master Manual is the document relied upon The District also posted the report on the District’s Public by businesses, land owners, communities, etc., in making their decisions. Yet, it Website. During the 60-day public review period, the District has essentially no meaning if the Corps, at their sole discretion, and without held public meetings/open houses similar to the earlier notice, can choose at any time and for any reason to alter the operations scoping meetings at the same locations. The purpose of these prescribed therein. meetings was to solicit input on the report and the recommended plan. At the conclusion of the 60-day period, We urge the Corps to address the aforementioned issue by taking two specific the District integrated all comments into their decision making actions. …Second, for any deviation from the Master Manual that is not for the process. Provisions for deviating from the approved water express purpose of emergency operations issue an advance notice of at least

13 thirty days identifying the purpose of the deviation and its anticipated impacts control plans, for all Corps of Engineers projects, are (higher, lower or none) on water surface elevations. This additional information contained with ER 1110-2-240 (Section 3-4). “All water and notice will allow impacted parties to make risk-informed decisions for their control manuals shall contain provisions authorizing the businesses and communities, taking into account not just flood risk but others operating agency to deviate temporarily from operations that may arise. prescribed by the project’s approved water control plan when necessary to alleviate critical situations or possibly to realize That the Corps did not involve downstream States in the study effort, nor inform increased benefits during an operation season without them of the increase in flooding that is certain to occur as a direct result of the significantly affecting the fulfillment of the project’s Master Manual revisions, is a fatal flaw. authorized purposes.” While the Corps of Engineers reserves the right to deviate from approved Water Control Plans at its We hereby request the Corps to refrain from completing the study, or projects for to alleviate critical situations or realize increased implementing any changes included therein, until such time that the benefits, there is a specific process and that must be adhered downstream States, including Missouri, can review, evaluate and advise as to the to prior to approval of the deviation. Final approval of any extent of adverse impacts, and those are documented and taken into full deviation rests with the Division Commander. Potential consideration in this process to revise the Master Manual." benefits and negative impacts associated with a deviation are required to be documented and analyzed prior to the deviation being approved. My only comment would be that we would like to see the outflow begin to be Operationally, under the current Water Control Plan and the reduced from the full 22,000 CFS back to 18,000 once the lake has dropped back tentatively selected plan, measures have been adopted to to like 752 or so. Also when the long term outlook shows dry weather like we limit the reductions in releases to 2,500 cfs per gate change have now. The river will go from being bank full all spring and summer to a with the intent limiting downstream bank erosion. Bank Tim Albert, trickle. stabilization studies have shown that rapid reductions in Ottumwa (IA) water levels has a greater impact on bank stability than Hydropower Flow Management I am concerned about bank erosion so if we could slowly lower the flow to run of increasing flows.

the river rather than doing it in just 5-7 days I think it would give the banks some Aug 31, 2018 time to dry out as the water recedes. The natural flow would be for the stream to flash full and over the banks and then rapidly come back in the banks. When the banks stay full for months, the soil is saturated, I think slowly lowering the water level slowly would be better for them. I currently rent a piece of ground along the Des Moines River north of Ottumwa. Analysis of the alternatives showed that the tentatively I lost the majority of my crop in 2015. When the river comes out (it takes) selected plan which indicates releasing 25,000 cfs from Lake exceedingly long time to dry out. Red Rock at elevation 750, reduces the frequency of occurrence of flooding of secondary roads and significant Increasing the output to 25k cfs alone will put the field at significant risk to be agricultural area below Lake Red Rock. It also reduced the Flooding/Water flooded. Couple that with actually getting rain in this area and all the water that frequency of occurrence of large magnitude flood releases Ethan Conrad, Management drains to the river and the field will almost certainly be affected. which impact urban communities downstream of Lake Red Des Moines Rock. The major purpose for updating the Des Moines River

(Des Moines) Because of this I am highly opposed to increasing the output from 22k cfs to 25k Reservoir Water Control Plans is to reduce the magnitude and Sep 1, 2018 (Farmland) cfs. frequency of the larger, more damaging floods that can result in flooding in unprotected communities and overtopping of levees along both the Des Moines and Mississippi Rivers. In order to accomplish that goal, higher reservoir releases are proposed in order to preserve flood storage for these larger magnitude flood events.

14 22,000 cfs maximum release when pool level is below elevation 750 (currently The District also recognizes the collateral benefit to FRM and 18,000 cfs) wildlife management when the conditions are right. With the 25,000 cfs maximum release when pool level is between elevation 750 and 770 stakeholder support, the District also hopes to capitalize on Earlier 30,000 cfs release for the growing season when the pool level reaches hydraulic conditions above and below each dam to optimize elevation 770. fish and wildlife habitat.

These increased flows were demonstrated at the public meetings to reduce flood pool period at Red Rock during flooding events. This is extremely beneficial for habitat management in reservoir. The longer flood waters are retained, the more devastating effects are on terrestrial plant growth, and thus habitat availability for wildlife and recreation of wildlife enthusiasts in viewing and hunting. The longer water retention, the decrease in habitat planting potential. Several areas in the floodpool are planted to wildlife food plots that provide food and cover for wildlife, and support conservation throughout the Lake Red Rock Project. Therefore, we are in strong support of increased outflows to help reduce flood water storage on potential wildlife habitat. The current regulation plan allows a 2 foot raise in the fall to help create habitat The District concurs the conservation bands would help for migratory waterfowl at Red Rock and recreation of wildlife observers and improve wildlife habitat as well as provide more outdoor hunters. Lake Red Rock continues to experience heavy siltation, which reduces opportunities for the public. Todd Gosselink, the potential for habitat creation for waterfowl and access by the public. Ph.D. Migrating shorebirds also heavily use the mudflats (delta) of Red Rock, and with Wildlife Bureau, this conservation band, we would be able to create an incremental lowering of Fish and Wildlife Iowa DNR the water to create ideal shorebird habitat throughout August, while still having enough elevation change in the conservation band to allow excellent migratory Sep 13, 2018 waterfowl habitat later in the fall. This regulation change has an enormous potential to increase both shorebird and waterfowl use at Lake Red Rock, likely attracting new species (as was seen last year with the Bar-tailed Godwit) and definitely larger numbers these birds. We are extremely excited about the conservation band potential, and strongly encourage the approval of this regulation. The regulation change could allow the siltation at Red Rock to be used as a positive factor in attracting migratory shorebirds, and Lake Red Rock could be an even more destination spot for birders in the Midwest. Allowing the fall pool raise up to potential of 747 elevation is an equally exciting potential change that will substantially increase the use of migratory waterfowl at Red Rock. The current regulation of a 2 foot raise make it difficult to back water into quality habitat for waterfowl due to the fluctuating water levels throughout the year. A lake pool raise in the fall up to 5 feet is a game changer for migratory waterfowl use at Red Rock. It is often a challenge every year in providing habitat for migratory waterfowl at Red Rock. This increased lake pool raise will create an additional 1000+ acres of habitat in the fall for waterfowl. Red Rock could easily become an even more destination spot for waterfowl enthusiasts in the Midwest. We also encourage the USACE to hold these fall pool raises until the following spring until ice out or March 15. This change will help protect herps and mussels during their hibernation over the winter months.

This page intentionally left blank. PUBLIC MEETINGS INFORMATION This page was intentionally left blank. PUBLIC NOTICE

U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS BUILDING STRONG ®

Release No: Date: December 22, 2016 Contact: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Rock Island District Jim Homann, 309-794-5704, [email protected]

Public Input Sought on Des Moines River Water Control Plan Update

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), Rock Island District (District) is initiating an update of the Des Moines River Regulation Manual which includes the Water Control Manuals for Saylorville Lake and Red Rock Lake.

Water control manuals provide guidance for the operation and management of water storage for each individual reservoir or system of reservoirs. USACE periodically updates the manuals in order to keep abreast of changing conditions, legislation and other relevant factors. Water Control Plans are contained within water control manuals for all projects under the supervision of USACE. The plans’ primary goal is to define normal operation of a water control structure. Water control plans ensure the operations of reservoirs conform to laws and applicable USACE rules.

The Des Moines River Regulation Manual evaluation team is seeking initial public input. During the end of January and beginning of February, the team will host four public scoping open houses. The purpose of the open house are to informally meet with individuals and groups to openly discuss potential updates to the Des Moines River Regulation Manual, which includes the Saylorville Lake and Red Rock Lake Water Control Plans. A short presentation will provide the public an opportunity to learn about how the system is currently operated. Items to be evaluated during the study relate the authorized purposes of flood risk management, low-flow augmentation, water supply, recreation and environmental stewardship.

At each open house, the same overview presentation on the Water Control Plans will be presented. Information areas will be set up within the room displaying informational posters. District staff will be available throughout the event to answer questions and discuss comments, questions and/or concerns regarding the Water Control Plan update/revision. Attendees’ comments will be valuable to the planning team, particularly by providing observations, issues, or other related information.

These public scoping open houses will be held:

Tuesday, January 31, 2017 Wednesday, February 1, 2017 2:00pm to 4:00pm and 5:00pm to 7:00pm 2:00pm to 4:00pm and 6:00pm to 8:00pm Presentations at 2:30pm and 5:30pm Presentations at 2:30pm and 6:30pm Johnston Public Library Central College - Graham Annex Building 6700 Merle Hay Rd 812 University St. Johnston, IA 50131 Pella, IA 50219 Thursday, February 2, 2017 Friday, February 3, 2017 2:00pm to 4:00pm and 6:00pm to 8:00pm 2:00pm to 4:00pm and 6:00pm to 8:00pm Presentations at 2:30pm and 6:30pm Presentations at 2:30pm and 6:30pm Bridge View Center Town & Country Inn and Suites 102 Church St. 110 N 54th St. Ottumwa, IA 52501 Quincy, IL 62305

The Des Moines River Regulation Manual revision process will begin after public scoping. A draft report of recommended revisions is anticipated to be available in late 2017 or early 2018. Its content will then be available for public review and comment through public notice, web posting, and/or by letter/e-mail to those who attended and signed up to receive direct updates. The final Plan is anticipated to be completed in September 2018.

For the latest information on the study progress, to view current Des Moines River Reservoir Regulation Plan, to submit comments, or to be added to an email list to receive updates and notifications, please visit http://www.mvr.usace.army.mil/About/Offices/Programs-and-Project-Management/Des-Moines-River-Water Control-Plan-Update/. The website will have a page dedicated to comment submission beginning on January 31, 2017. The public can also contact the District team lead by mail at: Rock Island District, Attn: PM-M, P.O. Box 2004, Rock Island, IL 61204-2004; by email: [email protected]; or telephone: (309) 794-5704.

- end 1_!1~~ ... REGISTER MEDIA A GANNETT COMPANY AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION

State of Iowa

County of Polk, ss.:

The undersigned, being first duly sworn on oath, states that The Des Moines Register and Tribune Company, a corporation duly organized and existing under the laws of the State of Iowa, with its principal place of business in Des Moines, Iowa, the publisher of THE DES MOINES REGISTER

newspaper of general circulation printed and published in the City of Des Moines, Polk County, Iowa, and that an advertisement, a printed copy of which is attached as Exhibit "A" and made part of this affidavit, was printed and published in The Des Moines Register on the following dates:

Ad No. Start Date: Run Dates: Cost:

0001824957 12/31/16 12/31/16, 01/02/17, 01/03/17, 01/04/17, 01/05/17, $1,500.70

Copy of Advertisement 01/12/17, 01/13/17, 01/14/17, 01/16/17, 01/17/17, Exhibit "A" 01/18/17, 01/19/17, 01/20/17, 01/21/17, 01/23/17, 01/24/17, 01/25/17, 01/26/17, 01/27/17, 01/28/17, 01/30/17, 01/31/17, 02/01/17. 02/02/17 02/03/17 Staff member, Register Media

Subscribed and sworn to before me by said affiant this

17th day of March 2017

·c for the state....afJ.ow.a ANDREA HOUGHTON ~ . ~ ~ COMMISSION NO. 753956 4l-~~lfltt • COMMISSION EXPIRES fOWP. u.,l , _ , PUBLIC 'N_OT!1C:JE Ptlblic · 1n1>of -Sought-_.,.-_J>n --=Des Moines River ·woter-:-Co'nfr:O:I -p1an u~i~te U.S; Army· ---~-on:is: -->_--of Engineers ~USACE);" Rocl<:->lsland ~Jttcr;~t_-0~0J~~i.:Red.---Rock Water-- co·ntrol-- manuais·-;provide guidance .-for the operation ,and _monagem·ent 'of .-water. stora:ge --for i~it~m ing~vidi'e~e~v~&1:rv_ot'.fsAC~ rneri~~~~!y ti!Xi~~~- _t_~br~~~\Jab1 changing conditions,_ legislation and .other relevant factors; -Water control Plans -are contained -within water_·- cimtrol - manuO!s-_:-= for - al! ~?A~~~' ¥iie_~1b~;.:-s~~~~~5J0.-i-ogf ~at~r~e~g~tr'6~r~~~o't!f~~g~io_'Wgfe~ control plans : ensure __ the 'operations -of reservoirs=··confarm ~i-i~~ws ,and __applicable_ , _USACE The Des Moines __ .Riv'er Resulation Mat\ual evaluation rngITT. tfuri~~~~i eJ8 1 ~~ 1 Ja~~~1~~ 0 fJ1adm ~W1n~~~l f~r ::~~~~t:: ~~0PJ~g open houses. The, purpose- of .,the open to -informally meet with groups to -~~i?/res L=~~~gfgfii~ Manual, -- : the Say_1orvn_r,e_ ---~ake ~ock Lake wotet: cant '§tlOrt -~Gb1[gta~~-rt-Op~~tuhi 1ei~~ about how the system is' cu_rrently oJ:ierated: -: Items ·-_to be -evoluated g~rm~izJhepur~~~ - ofeH~}tfd ri~~ manogement,__ ------!OVi1-flow ·augmentation, water: supply, recreation and environmental stewordsh1P. At- eoch. open house, _the- s_ome overview presentation on the -:ri~~nteo~11-f~rm~~{b~s ar~b~ -W~11 be set _-up-_,within_, __ the -_room diSP!oying- informational· posters. D_isfrlct· -stoff -will be: available b~ei\iro~sut~-~R~di~~Z~i--ig_m~~~~~ questions and/or concerns regarding the_ water-_-_Contro! Pion update/revision.------_,_ -Attendees' comments -will-_be_.voluable ---to-the Plannirig - team,_ -port1cu1ar1y- _'_by gfg~~'Vg1~+2~-~~~Z~Mi~f6h-:1 ss_ues,: or These._ PtlbHc scoping open houses-_wlll be held: Tuesday_,-JonutJ:rY- 31;. '2017: 2:00pm to -4:oopm--ond-S:OOphl_ to ~:~gfe'Rtilfions· Ot 2:3opi'fi and 0 Jhi ifS1on-PuOtic UbrarY 6700 Merle Hay-·Rd Johnston, IA 50131 2:o~:~nt~:~?60~~~~0D'bbP~ 1lo PresentotionS ·a+ 2:"3'oz~og~ 6:30pm Central College - Graham Annex Building 812 University St. Pella; IA 50219 0 rn~~~ tb-~4~~Gg~rr-o2nJ-O,l~oopm to ~:~gfe~tat!o11S "cit- 2:-JOi:n-ri ond -%:~i~~View'Center --~t1:ic~tlfJ,hr~h2so1 2:ooptTi'-/toFJ:iCJbl'tn ~-g~~~~~&i~~Vo 8:00pm ___ : -:- -.- -· .. -' PresentotiOns at 2:30pm and 3 4~ .2~"J.-:c6Unffy Inrl' Cind Suites llO:N 54th:St. Quiney, -IL 62305 TJ1e ______Des __ Moines ~iyer Resulation MOhua! rev1s1on process - will .begin _after- _-public scoPing.- --A --draft -----report of , recommended .:- reyislons - :-- is ant1cit>ated ·to be ·available in late fg!~- ~---~~~Wat~!8f6~t~·JgarePJv1%W _and- --:comment:- _-through -__ public notice,- -web-· ):>Osting; -- and/or - bY letter/e~tnaiJ--_to --those -:who offended and- signed-- UP to· -rec·eive -direct updates: -The- ·final_ -- Plan_- is anticipdted--"to -be -completed in 5~~~~~~i~Jt0~~t _-irito-rril~tion On fhe g~~y --tKo1~~~SS,'.R~~e~iE!WRe~~-~i?: ~oeri!i~~~?s~- o/•tgnbe_---Jgdeds~~"bi~ ~~P/i~ci!fJnt~ recei;rreti~~d_ot~s ;v~r~ http :/lwww. mvr._usoce .army.mi!/A ?~1tit~~b~~rrit!8~I-~o1h°e"s~lr~i~:~ ater-contro!-P!an:Updote/. - . The website will'l:ii::lve_ o page-_dedicated to commenf submission _beginning on,-January--_31;-,.20.11~: -The' public con also contact the District team lead: by_ ·m-ai!. --at:. Rock. ·Js!and foWl;_i~Oc~-tt1~ion'd~-('t·__ 6~i~.i-2b~~~ ~iib1iclhvo1v~ment@uso1::e-:·aF~~-i:,; ii; or telephone:_.(309)_794:5704. Lake Red Rock Des Moines River

Reservoir Operations – Lake Red Rock, built and maintained by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Rock Island District, is operated as a multi-purpose reservoir. The primary purpose authorized by Congress (Public Law 75- 761) is flood risk management for areas below the lake. Other purposes include low flow augmentation, fish and wildlife management, and recreation (PL 78-534, PL 94-587). Lake Red Rock maintains a permenant conservation pool to augment low flows during drought and implements a fall pool raise to accommodate migrating bird species. Recreation is an important and highly visible activity at Saylorville Lake. While access and facilities are provided for recreation, water is not controlled for this purpose.

Lake Red Rock is regulated to conform to a strict water control plan that is coordinated by the Corps of Engineers with local, state and federal agencies with water resources responsibilities. The water control plan includes regulation of releases during flood and drought periods. A summary of the water control plan for Lake Red Rock is shown on the back of this page.

Maximum season release rates were determined in coordination with downstream stakeholders. For the reach of the Des Moines River downstream of Lake Red Rock, the channel capacity varies from approximately 18,000 cfs, just downstream of the project, to more than 24,000 cfs with 3 feet of freeboard near Ottumwa and Keosauqua. During the non-growing season larger discharges can be tolerated without causing excessive damage.

Storage Allocation – Storage within the reservoir is allocated as follows:

Conservation Storage – 185,450 acre-ft (11.2% of total storage) Flood Risk Management Storage – 1,463,250 acre-ft (88.8% of total storage)

The storage below the permenant conservation pool elevation of 742 feet (NGVD) includes storage for low-flow augmentation (during periods of drought) as well as capacity to accommodate 100 years of anticipated sedimentation. As sedimentation continues, the Corps will periodically assess remaining storage capacity and the need for operational changes necessary to ensure the reservoir continues to meet its authorized purposes.

In the past, such operational changes have included raises in the conservation pool elevation. The most recent raise (to 742 feet) occurred in 1992 and represents the ultimate, 100-year conservation pool level. The decision to enact an immediate raise to 742 (in lieu of a series of step raises) was made in response to public comments and input from the State of Iowa.

Periodically, requests have been received to vacate conservation storage prior to spring snowmelt in order to increase the amount of flood risk management storage available in the reservoir. Implementation of such a drawdown would have the following impacts to other authorized project purposes, natural resources, and the public:  loss of conservation storage for low-flow augmentation should we experience drought conditions  need to maintain water supply storage would prevent a complete drawdown at Saylorville  mortality of exposed mussels  interruption of spring fish spawning  potential for fish kills in areas that become isolated by the drawdown  reduction in habitat for migratory birds  potential bank instability  current infrastructure not constructed for reduced lake levels leading to interruption in other uses of the reservoir (boating, fishing, other recreation). Reduction in regional economic activity related to these uses.  impact to future hydropower operations at Red Rock

Water Control Plan – The full Water Control Plan for Lake Red Rock can be viewed at: http://www.mvr.usace.army.mil/About/Offices/Programs-and-Project-Management/Des-Moines-River-Water-Control-Plan- Update/

A Leader in Integrated Water Resources Management SERVING FIVE RIVER BASINS IN FIVE STATES At the Heart of the Upper Mississippi River System Lake Red Rock Flood Control Regulation Schedule Conservation Pool Schedule

Date Elevation (feet) December ‐ Fall Hold 742 Fall ‐ December 742 ‐ 744 (Fall Pool Raise)

Normal Flood Control Operation: Pool elevation at or forecast between 742 and 775 feet

15 December ‐ 30 April 1 May ‐ 15 December Stage at, above, or forecast to exceed: If lake elevation is below 760 feet: Ottumwa: 10.8 feet (or 30,000 cfs release) Stage at, above, or forecast to exceed: Keosauqua: 19.6 feet Ottumwa: 7.5 feet (or 18,000 cfs release) Mississippi River at Burlington: 18.5 feet Keosauqua: 17.6 feet Mississippi River at Quincy: 20.0 feet If lake elevation is above 760 feet: Maximum Release: 30,000 cfs Stage at, above, or forecast to exceed: Minimum Release: 5,000 cfs Ottumwa: 8.7 feet (or 22,000 cfs release) Keosauqua: 18.4 feet

Large Magnitude Flood Operation: Mississippi River at Burlington: 18.5 feet Pool elevation at, above, or forecast to Mississippi River at Quincy: 20.0 feet exceed 775 feet: Max Release if lake above 760 feet: 22,000 cfs Any Date Max Release if lake below 760 feet: 18,000 cfs Elevation (feet) Release (cfs) Minimum Release: 5,000 cfs 775 30,000 776 35,000 777 40,000 778 45,000 779 50,000 780 60,000 780.5 80,000 781 100,000 781.5 115,000 782 130,000 783 130,000 784 130,000 785 Open spillway gates as necessary to maintain lake elevation 785 until uncontrolled spillway and outlet conduit release prevails. Summary Number of Comment Category Related Comments Silt impeding hunting activity 4 Increase flow for waterfowl hunting 3 Rowing club requirements 1 Increase outflows for power/municipal water supply purposes 2 High water affecting commercial navigation and agriculture 1 Current conditions adversely affecting agriculture 4 High water affecting recreation-related business 1 High water affecting private property (non-farm) 1

Public Scoping Meeting Comments and Responses

Name Comment Meeting Location Jason Rice Comment City of Johnston, Thanks again for holding a public meeting on Future Plans for Red Iowa Library Rock/Saylorville. Me and my hunting group have been hunting Red Rock for last 15 year, and it has gone down hill due to silt! Areas that where [sic] huntable - you can no longer launch a boat – or even walk in and hunt. 744 (Fall Lake lavel) is almost not boatable at the Boxcars/Swan hunting areas, only in the River or creek channels. We have had our Mad Motor boats stuck several times – on a strong NW wind the water will blow out towards the mile long Bridge/Damn [sic] area and then your [sic] stuck! 6 years ago those areas where [sic] huntable by boat or walk in. Recent flooding has brought lots of silt and MUD! We realize fall waterfowl hunting is not your main priority over the public’s safety – (flooding), but raising lake a foot or two (745-746) would open up a lot of new areas for hunting. Thanks again for asking for our input. How did you hear about today’s public meeting? IA Waterfowlers Do you feel listened to…? Yes so far – we will see if they take action and raise lake level. Next 10 yrs may not be a Boxcar/Swan area at the rate of silting. Suggestions No, great presentation! Aaron Comment City of Johnston, Ackelson First off thanks for having a meeting where the public can voice Iowa Library there [sic] concerns/observations. I have been hunting Red Rock area for over 20 yrs and have seen it all fist hand. By biggest concern is the silt. Areas we use to be able to get in by boat are no longer huntable. Swan boat ramp – With Breast west side of Hwy 14, and walk in area on west side of Boxcar Refugee [sic] are no longer huntable. You ask DNR – Army Corps officers if they see people hunting these areas – only when lake level is (746) or higher – my thoughts are normal pool 744 Fall Level (745 – 746) - so many areas West of mile long Bridge are only 6” to a foot deep during waterfowl season. On a 20-30 mph NW windy day the water will blow out towards the Damn [sic] and leave you stuck in a the mud. This has happened to me twice. Looking forward to the Army Corp raising Red Rock lake normal pool to (744) in next couple years. Thanks again – 515-975-6512 – call if any questions. How did you hear about today’s meeting? FaceBook – IA Water Fowler Do you feel listened to…? Yes – willing to listen – and talk with people Suggestions No suggestions – great presentation

Gary Comment City of Johnston, Mahannah Big Creek hunting area (area behind the Big River Dam) raises and Iowa Library (City of falls more quickly than in the time period of 10 years prior. This Polk City) area empties it’s water to E_____ Des. By quantity flow or pumps With high water levels in Saylorville, the ______of water from Barrier Ponding area to Saylorville is greatly elevated. - Ask the USACE to make plans for the construction of this new ponding history and make preventative steps to better manage the ponding area

How did you hear about the meeting? Emails to Polk City

*The handwriting on this comment was difficult to decipher. Blank spaces and italic words indicate uncertainty of the written word Kenneth Comment City of Johnston, Danley none Iowa Library How did you hear about the meeting? Public notice – DM Register Des Moines Metro Water Trails Planning Committee

Brenda Comments City of Johnston, Copley The Des Moines Rowing Club has 220+ members rowing out of Iowa Library (Des Birdland Marina. Ideal and safe rowing conditions are when the Moines water level is between 15’ -20’ per the 2nd avenue bridge guage. Rowing The third weekend of September, we hold a regatta which draws Club) hundreds of rowers from the Midwest. This event is a major source of revenue to fund our 501c3 club. Maintaining a safe river level between I-80 bridge and University Ave bridge of 15’-20’ is critical to supporting our clubs effort and partnership with the city. We also have a Junior’s high school program as well as an adaptive rowing program targeting athletes that have lost the use of their legs.

How did you hear about the meeting? Email from Water Trails group

Other comments More email communication to drive people to the website for more info

Michael Comments Central College Schreiner Support increase fall pool for duck hunting. Need better outflow forecast. Possible txt warning of river changes for those down stream.

How did you hear about the meeting? Internet Brandon I understand how fluid of an operation you have and the priorities Central College Knopf of the lake. I’m speaking on behalf of waterfowl hunters. The Red Rock Refuge System is the only refuge for immediate area. Increasing the fall lake for increased habitat and refuge locations would be a huge benefit. We had a max refuge count of 5,000 ducks. It’s not worth hunting on the number. 3 hours south of here holds 300,000 ducks. Iowa will lose waterfowl hunters if this keeps up.

How did you hear about the meeting? Red Rock conservation

Do you feel listened to? I think so, we will see in follow up meeting Tim Albert Comment Bridge View (Ottumwa • Study the effects dropping inflated gate @ Saylorville Center Water) • Do not modify the plan for a Hydro pool Ottumwa • Increase non growing outflows • Increase non growing season set Date June 1st • Flows above 18,000 cfs stop power production • Increase non growing season outflows • After Large Magnitude Flood cut out flow once lake is below 755. I need to make power • Cut flows form Nitrate reduction when Requested

M.G. Comments Quincy Herschler The water control plan revisions need to include changes to downstream triggers. At a point in time when the reservoir was conceived and or built Quincy, being the first major city downstream was a significant control point. The thinking here was probably that there was a great deal of industry scattered alon the low greound along the river on Quincy’s west side. Today much of this industry has either moved or closed its doors. There is some left, but no where near the amount that was there at the time the reservoir was built. Therefore Quincy, or the Quincy gage is of less significance.

Of major significance now in that general portion of the river most affected by the Des Moines River, i.e. pool 20-22 is agriculture and commercial river navigation. Agricultural ground is imperiled by elevated river stages during wet periods by tow things; direct flooding of unprotected farm ground and seep water into levee districts. In extreme conditions, of course levee overtopping and failure come into the picture.

As an example, in the fall 2016 crops were inundated resulting in complete crop failure in the pool 20 and 21 low ground areas. Also, lock 20 reached its highest operative level resulting in near or complete shutdown of lock operations and a stoppage of commercial navigation. The result of this is huge in dollars to the consumer, companies who depend on shipments, and the companies who move material on the Upper Mississippi. This affects our ability to compete in the world market. If you review the levels of the reservoir and the discharge history it is clear that water cold have been held resulting in lowering of the peak levels which resulted in the lock being or nearly being closed and crops being destroyed. It is suggested also that the conservation level is too high to effect significant water holding in the normal wet part of the year. When dry conditions in the normally dry part of the year are predicted, the reservoir levels should be held to higher levels, thus allowing release of water to supplement flows in extreme low level times. This would further assist commercial navigation. It is suggested that the conservation level be allowed to vary depending on the time of the year and the prediction of wet or dry conditions. To affix one locked in conservation level is probably not very realistic when trying to achieve what the operation of the reservoir is attempting to do.

The reservoirs were authorized for flood control and this should remain a primary factor in their operation. Commercial navigation and low land flooding should be added as part of the operational control. Recreation is a good thing, and recreation will take place successfully on the reservoir regardless of the reservoir stage. Control for recreational purposes is not necessary. Recreation needs to have little or no influence on operation of the reservoir, it is a byproduct of the reservoir’s being there. The gage at Lock 20 and 21 needs to be a downstream control point.

Signed: Micheal G. Herschler

Master of Steam or Motor Vessels of not more than 200 Gross Registered Tons (Domestic Tonnage), 500 Gross Tons (ITC Tonnage) Upon Western Rivers Master of Towing Vessels upon Western Rivers, Radar Observer- Rivers. License 2000507/000268479; issue number 10 (Expires 16 November 2019) Designated Examiner 16720/4 (Expires February 28, 2014)

How did you hear about the meeting? Newspaper/word of mouth

Did you feel listened to? We will see – depends on the outcome

Other comments More direct contact with knowledgeable people. The retire director was a wealth of information Kevin G. Comment Central College Marshall First in 1 of 7 yrs got crops off of Bottoms Keep Lake levels lower (Farmer) weeds are a big problem because of flooding not just because of flood ground but because of anybody that has ground next to it. Wildlife walks across flood ground on to my ground and spreads the seed out off farther and fun on to me. Therefore costs more for wood heel and fuel to work them as opposed to chemicals. Also all the nutrients taken out of soil every duh that runs off of my ground on to the Bottoms has got full of sediment. Therefore that causes water to back up on my ground causing it to overflow and make new ditches. Also pushes all the wildlife up on tome which therefore damages all of my crops

How did you hear about today’s public meeting Word of mouth

Did you feel listened to? More than normal. Yes.

Other comments Get it out more to make it aware there is a meeting. Maybe put it in the local papers.

John Comment Email McWilliams I have been hunting Red Rock for 13 years and have lived "as close to on" the lake for another 3. In my exerpeince raising the water level would greatly and increase the opportunities for Iowa waterfowlers. When I first started hunting the spreading of millet across the mud flats from Knoxville to Runnels was a great benefit to waterfowl and hunters because ducks actually stayed around. This practice has ceased across the majority of those muds flats and raising the water level would provide more feed for ducks. Raising the water levels also provides more areas for ducks and hunters to spread out. It also allows more access to areas by boat and walk ins. Currently there are areas that can not be hunted any more due to silt in that were previously hunted by boat and while walking in is an option man is it a man killer trudging 1/4 mile through knee deep silt(done it too often). I have also noticed with the high water levels the number of ducks appears to me to be higher I am assuming because of hunting pressure being spread out so resting areas are possible as well as the increase in available food. All of that being said to what water level does it need to be raised? I am sure you have an idea of how much to raise it but since I cannot be at the meeting I am unaware at this point in time what the core is thinking. Personally I love it when the lake is backed up just south of highway 92 west of Knoxville but that is pretty high. 750' allows for some great habitat and access in my opinion.

Thank you and if you have any questions please feel free to contact me.

Jon McWilliams 3195417908

Randy Comment Quincy (emailed Klues I am a boater on the Mississippi River near Quincy, Il. It has come to response) my attention that this water control plan update could directly affect our continuous fluctuations in water level between locks 20 and 21 on the Mississippi River. We as a community constantly are dealing with rising water, which erodes our beaches and decreases boater activity in the area. Our marina alone last year only had close to ½ occupancy. There used to be a waiting list but since there are no beaches, the marina has suffered, as has many local marina shops, gas docks, etc. I believe that a water controlled environment would help our boating community as well as our local economy by increasing sales at local boat shops, gas stations, food stores, etc. Thank you for giving us the opportunity to voice our opinions.

Ryan Comment Central College Jensen (submitted via We are below Red Rock Dam. We are impacted when river goes to email) 60,000 it will flood the road to our permanent house. Also if the river flows at 30,000 it will erode the bank and wash the trees away. Major environmental impacts happen anything above 25,000. If the river flows are increased and decreased faster it will make the river wider and flat. This causes navigational issues and erosion. AS for management of the lake, I use the waterfowl management areas during the waterfowl season and it is very hard to navigate since the lake has so much silt. Keeping the lake higher for longer has increased the silt. But we continue to keep the 2 foot rise even on wet years when it’s a MUD HOLE! We need the option to keep it higher if needed to feed the waterfowl and maintain cover for them to sleep at night. I know they try to lower the lake back to normal pool before full freeze up but this shortens some of the best parts of the season. Keep it up till end of season. Maybe in general let the water flow more natural unless absolutely necessary. We would like accurate information of the lake level and outflows. The river gages are never forcasted correctly. We need a tex message or e-mail system if river is going to change more than 1000cfps. Example is sleeping on sand bar and you raise it 5000 I would drown. Or you forcast it to up the flow and drop it. I’m hunting in my boat against the bank now I’m beached. Same example on the lake when you drop it. DO WHAT YOU SAY YOUR GOING TO DO!

How did you hear about the meeting? Facebook, Thank goodness I seen it as this is VERY important to me

Do you feel listened to… Yes they always listen, but I feel like it is lost or disregarded

Any suggestions for improving public meetings? Definitely!! I understand there was a press release. That is not going to get to the people you are trying to get information from. You need to pay for tv time and do a face to face with the news media. (ie example is lake ice is unsafe) everyone of the tv stations will play that over and over, but did not hear anything on this meeting! Tim Myers Comments Central College I am a farmer that Lake Red Rock backs upon. Almost every year I (mailed via post) plant my creek bottoms and more times than not the Lake backs up killing what I have planted, this costs me thousands of dollars almost every year. The Lake also splits my cow pasture making it very difficult to utilize the pasture correctly. Anything you could do to let more water through the gates, lower the lake level in early spring would be much appreciated in these hard financial for farming times. Mike & Comments Central College Lynn We own farmland which has easement for Lake Red Rock. We also (mailed in via Slykhuis lease farm land from the Iowa DNR which is impacted by Red Rock. post) The lakes, especially Red Rock, were built as flood control projects and should be managed as such. The management in 2016 seemed to be better than previous years. The lake levels seemed to drop faster rather than to be held artificially high. I did have a concern: why was Red Rock held when Saylorville was released? The flooding we did experience in 2016 was during that time frame. Another major problem we face is the destruction of private property including fences and the erosion of stream banks *this is not everything, but out of room!

How did you hear about the meeting? A phone call from a cousin, since the notice was not in the local paper. I did not receive an email even though I have given it to the Corps before

Do you feel listened to…? More so than I have since the colonel left Rock Island

Suggestions Better notification including more lead time so plans can be made Randy Comments Bridgeview Conrad Our farm partnership farms river bottom ground for a distance of Center – about a mile. When we moved to this farm in 1995 the river bank Ottumwa has a line of large trees on it. Over the years river current has eaten (via post) away the bank right up to our field edge. At least an eighth of a mile of trees are gone along with 50 to 100 feet of ground. Could there be communication between Red Rock (Army Corps) and Ottumwa Water Works, so water outflows could be coordinated.

How do you hear about the meeting? Neighbor

Do you feel listened to? Yes David Comments Central College Kingery My brother and I farm together. His place is flooded at about n58 (via post) n60 ft. Original contract with Corps said would flood at This level once every 10 years, more or less. Some years it is flooded every year. Corps paid my grandfather a little over $3,000 for this flooding. As of now, from flooding has caused around $200,000 damage and lost income from this land. Does this sound fair to you. My place is also flooded and cut into through places when water is up. Starts flooding at about 770?

If you want to use it for flood control than use it for flood control. Flood control was all you talked about at the meeting. Keep lake level low, let water out at a faster rate when big inputs are coming in. Even start letting water out before the flood water hit Red Rock. You have 24 hours to ______for the time the water _____ Des Moines til it gets to Red Rock.

Environmentally this is no good environmental inpact ______Red Rock Dam. Cockel burrs every where, drift wood, every bodys junk. The DNR has planted this small tree with small red berrys that has be come a real problem to kill and control. The Corps is the worst neighbor a person could have.

What you did las year to keep water level low it worked good. This letting out more cf/s needs to be ____ and _____ to find a max. That can be lived with for above and below dam. Below Red Rock Dam is going to have to start standing part of damages too. We have taken damages for them since 1969 and have not been fairly compensated. The river was their long before the ______into flood area. Flood control is like _____ farm one they get protected from flooding it’s hard to take it away from them. Another thought put a tax on people in flood area to pay us back for damages to protect them. We provided a service for them but was not compensated fairly. Another though, Red Rock Lake will not last for _____. Cornal CLink? In 1969 said it would only last 50 years (2019) so we need to start prepairing peole below Red Rock Dam for the end of Red Rock by starting to make them stand part of flooding to prepair them for end of Red Rock.

How did you hear about the meeting? Hear about meeting from a friend (neighbor) that knew some one with in the Corps of Engineers. Their was only 4 of us that I knew from above the Dam (evening meeting.) We asked why this meeting was not inlocal papers. The Corps assumed it was in 3 or 4 papers. It seems that it was only in the Des Moines Register a small ad in the Legal section. At this time we as a group of 4 let the Corps know that we have trusted them. And how does this look. Don’t look good.

Did you feel listened to…? They have never listed to us in the past. Can’t tell if they listened to us or not. I sure hope so it is about time. I t was always said in the past that the only way to be able to talk to the Corps was to get them in a room with no windows so they can’t sit and stair out windows.

Suggestions for future meetings First you are going to have to make an effort to get these meeting published papers, email, mail phone ect. If the Corps want to have good successful meetings with us they are going to have to prove to us that they can be trusted. I was 19 years old when lake was filled. I have followed it till now. The corps in past never even made any effort to listen to us. It has been a very sad ______. The Corp is the worst neighbor that a person could ever have Rich Paris I attended a public meeting addressing possible updates to the Des Central College Moines River Water Control Plan in Pella, IA the first week of (via email) February. I would like to convey a couple of comments.

I agree with the concept of higher discharges from Red Rock Lake and Saylorville Lake during the growing season to maintain both reservoirs as best as possible at normal conservation pool levels. Stable water conditions are beneficial to fish and wildlife species utilizing the areas in and around both reservoirs since stable conditions will help improve water quality and allow for better natural vegetation growth in adjacent ephemeral systems. The procedure I would like to see updated is the fall migration raise. Currently that raise is defined as two feet above conservation pool at Red Rock Lake, I would suggest that the Red Rock Lake fall migration raise be changed to a variable raise from 2 to 6 feet. The update would allow managers to adapt fall water levels to habitat needs due to summer water fluctuations that stymie vegetative growth and silting issues that create higher dry soil areas that are less likely to be inundated by the fall migration raise on the upper reaches of the reservoir. This update would then be similar to the current water plans at Saylorville and Coralville lakes which I believe incorporate the variable fall migration raise in their plans. During the public meeting I attended, the presenter stressed that some of the growing season release rate updates would give Army Corp staff more flexibility to meet water conditions at the reservoirs. A variable 2 to 6 foot fall migration raise would give wildlife managers the same flexibility to adjust fall water levels for optimum benefit to migrating waterfowl and other migrating bird species that rely on those habitat conditions to maintain good health during long rigorous journeys.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on possible water control plan updates.

Douglas A. Comment: Johnson County Currie I have hunted (waterfowl) at Lake Red Rock every fall since 1981 Library using a duck boat to get to the most huntable areas. It ismy opinion (via email and that in the past couple years siltation has made it nearly impossible fax) to motor boat from one of the most used boat ramps on the upper end of the Lake (the boxcars ramp) to any of the most huntable areas. While I understand that the primary purpose of Lake Red Rock is as a flood control facility, it is also a “fish and wildlife management and recreation” facility, as noted in your Lake Red Rock fact sheet. I attended the public meeting held on January 31, 2017, at the Johnston Public Library. I would like to ask that the Corps consider changing the fall conservation pool raise at lake Red Rock from 2’ (an elevation 744.00’) to 4’ (an elevation of 746.00’). (a 4’ raise would match the fall raise at the Saylorville reservoir.) The difference between the current normal conservation storage at 742.00’ (185,450 acre-ft) and the current fall conservation storage at 744.00’ (225,550 acre-ft) is 39,100 acre-ft, or 2.7% of the flood control storage capacity (1,463,250 acre-ft). If the fall conservation elevation raise is 4’ (to 746.00’) instead of 2’ (to 744.00’) the increase to the fall conservation pool (38,230 acre-ft) would only be another 2.61% of the flood control storage capacity of 1,463,000 acre-ft. A minimal raise of the fall elevation to 746.00’ would pose practically no threat to the flood control ability of the reservoir. In addition, since 1981 there has been only one fall rain that appreciably raised the pool. Since 1981, the only time that fall rains have raised the elevation more than 20’ above the normal fall pool (757.20’) was in late October /early November of 1986 – over 30 years ago. Even then, the pool was at only 554,000 acre-ft, which was only 38% of the flood control storage capacity of the reservoir. Also, since the baseline conservation pool was adjusted in 2011, the highest October or November pool happened on November 20, 2015 at 747.30’. The pool on that date was 282,610 acre-ft, which is only 58,060 acre-ft. above the normal fall pool – a difference of less than 4% of the flood control pool. Fall rains simply pose no threat to the flood control ability of the reservoir. I urge the Corps to consider changing the fall conservation pool raise at Lake Red Rock from 2’ (an elevation of 744.00’” to 4’ (an elevation of 746.00).

How did you hear about the meeting? Through the IowaWaterfowlers.com forum/message board

Did you feel listened to…? I trust that that will be the case

Any suggestions? Thank you for giving us the opportunity to comment