DOCSLIB.ORG

Restoration Plan and Environmental Assessment Saint Louis River Interlake/Duluth Tar Site DRAFT | April 2017

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Restoration Plan and Environmental Assessment Saint Louis River Interlake/Duluth Tar Site DRAFT | April 2017 Restoration Plan and Environmental Assessment Saint Louis River Interlake/Duluth Tar Site DRAFT | April 2017 Photo credit: 1854 Treaty Authority. PREPARED BY: 1854 Treaty Authority (governed by the Bois Forte and Grand Portage Bands of Lake Superior Chippewa) Fond du Lac Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Minnesota Pollution Control Agency United States Department of Commerce (represented by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration) United States Department of the Interior (represented by the Fish and Wildlife Service and Bureau of Indian Affairs) WITH ASSISTANCE FROM: Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources Industrial Economics, Incorporated c-s3-17b This page intentionally left blank. TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF EXHIBITS LIST OF ACRONYMS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY CHAPTER 1 | INTRODUCTION 1.1 Background 1 1.2 The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act and the Designation of Natural Resource Trustees for the Saint Louis River Interlake/Duluth Tar Site 3 1.3 Purpose and Need 4 1.4 The National Environmental Policy Act 4 1.5 Compliance with Other Authorities 5 1.6 Public Participation 6 1.7 Administrative Record 7 CHAPTER 2 | SAINT LOUIS RIVER INTERLAKE/DULUTH TAR SITE REMEDY AND NATURAL RESOURCE DAMAGE ASSESSMENT AND RESTORATION 2.1 Summary of Site History and Remediation 9 2.2 Saint Louis River Area of Concern 11 2.3 Natural Resource Damage Assessment and Restoration 13 2.3.1 Natural Resource Damage Assessment and Restoration Activities at this Site 13 2.3.2 Relationship to Remedial Activities 14 2.3.3 Natural Resources Damages Settlement 16 CHAPTER 3 | AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT 3.1 Physical Environment 17 3.2 Natural Resources and Biological Environment 17 3.2.1 Habitat Types 18 3.2.2 Sediment Invertebrates 19 3.2.3 Aquatic Plants 19 3.2.4 Fish 20 3.2.5 Birds and Other Wildlife 20 3.3 Socio-Economic Resources 21 3.4 Cultural and Historic Resources 22 i 3.5 Landscape-Scale Ecological Stressors 23 3.5.1 Great Lakes Water Levels 23 3.5.2 Water Quality 24 3.5.3 Air Quality 24 3.5.4 Invasive Species 25 3.6 Summary 26 CHAPTER 4 | NATURAL RESOURCE INJURIES AND SERVICE LOSSES 4.1 Assessment Area 27 4.2 Pathway 27 4.3 Baseline 29 4.4 Ecological Injuries and Losses 30 4.4.1 Injury to Aquatic Resources 31 4.5 Human Use of Natural Resources and Services 38 4.5.1 Recreation 38 4.5.2 Tribal Uses 40 CHAPTER 5 | TRUSTEE VISION FOR RESTORATION AND PROPOSED RESTORATION ALTERNATIVES 5.1 Restoration Objectives 41 5.2 Screening of Restoration Approach Alternatives 42 5.3 Alternative A: No Action 47 5.4 Alternative B: Kingsbury Bay Restoration 47 5.4.1 Overview of Kingsbury Bay 47 5.4.2 Kingsbury Bay Project Design and Construction 50 5.5 Alternative C: Grassy Point Restoration 53 5.5.1 Overview of Grassy Point 53 5.5.2 Grassy Point Project Design and Construction 54 5.6 Alternative D: Kingsbury Creek Watershed Protection 58 5.7 Alternative E: Wild Rice Restoration with Cultural Education Opportunities 59 CHAPTER 6 | ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PREFERRED NATURAL RESOURCE DAMAGE ASSESSMENT AND RESTORATION ALTERNATIVE 6.1 Assessment of Environmental Consequences 61 6.1.1 Scope of the National Environmental Policy Act Analysis 62 6.2 Evaluation of Alternative A: No Action 64 6.3 Evaluation of Alternative B: Kingsbury Bay Restoration 64 6.4 Evaluation of Alternative C: Grassy Point Restoration 70 6.5 Evaluation of Alternative D: Kingsbury Creek Watershed Protection 71 6.6 Evaluation of Alternative E: Wild Rice Restoration with Cultural Education Opportunities 73 ii 6.7 Preferred Alternative 75 CHAPTER 7 | MONITORING 7.1 Saint Louis River Interlake/Duluth Tar Natural Resource Damage Assessment Restoration Monitoring Framework 77 7.2 Adaptive Management 79 REFERENCES APPENDIX A | FISH STUDY DATA APPENDIX B | BIRD STUDY DATA APPENDIX C | KINGSBURY BAY CONCEPT DESIGN APPENDIX D | GRASSY POINT CONCEPT DESIGN APPENDIX E | WILD RICE RESTORATION IN THE ST. LOUIS RIVER ESTUARY iii LIST OF EXHIBITS Exhibit ES-1 Restoration Included Under the Preferred Alternative viii Exhibit 1-1 Map of Assessment Area and Response Actions 2 Exhibit 2-1 Phases of the Natural Resource Damage Assessment and Restoration Process 14 Exhibit 4-1 Acreage of Assessment Area 27 Exhibit 4-2 Overview of Aquatic Ecosystem Inhabitants and Possible Contaminant Transport Pathways 29 Exhibit 4-3 Summary of Representative Resources 30 Exhibit 4-4 TPAH Sediment Concentrations in Historical Surface Sediment Samples Collected at the Site 33 Exhibit 4-5 Benthic Invertebrate Site-Specific Toxicity Test Results 35 Exhibit 4-6 Summary of Literature-Derived Adverse Effects Thresholds for Fish 37 Exhibit 4-7 Warning Sign Posted for Site 39 Exhibit 5-1 Current Conditions at Kingsbury Bay 49 Exhibit 5-2 Pre- and Post-Project Comparisons 49 Exhibit 5-3 Removal Summary 51 Exhibit 5-4 Preliminary Kingsbury Bay Cost Estimate 53 Exhibit 5-5 Conceptual Design Grassy Point Restoration Site Units 55 Exhibit 5-6 Preliminary Cost Estimate by RSU 57 Exhibit 5-7 Preliminary Kingsbury Creek Costs 58 Exhibit 7-1 General Monitoring Framework 79 iv LIST OF ACRONYMS AOC Area of Concern BUIs Beneficial Use Impairments CERCLA Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act CEQ Council on Environmental Quality CFR Code of Federal Regulations CM Centimeters COCs Contaminants of Concern DNA Deoxyribonucleic Acid DOI United States Department of the Interior EA Environmental Assessment EIS Environmental Impact Statement FAC Fluorescent Aromatic Compound FDL Fond du Lac Band of Lake Superior Chippewa FONSI Finding of No Significant Impact FWS United States Fish and Wildlife Service GLRI Great Lakes Restoration Initiative IJC International Joint Commission LOEC Lowest Observed Effects Concentration MNDNR Minnesota Department of Natural Resources MPCA Minnesota Pollution Control Agency NEPA National Environmental Policy Act NRDAR Natural Resource Damage Assessment and Restoration PAHs Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons PEC Probable Effects Concentration PCBs Polychlorinated Biphenyls PCDD/F TEQ Polychlorinated Dibenzodioxin/Dibenzofuran Toxic Equivalent v PPM Parts per Million PRPs Potentially Responsible Parties RAP Remedial Action Plan ROD Record of Decision RP/EA Restoration Plan and Environmental Assessment RSU Restoration Site Unit SLRIDT St. Louis River/Interlake/Duluth Tar SQT Sediment Quality Target TPAH Total Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons USC United States Code VOCs Volatile Organic Compounds WDNR Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources vi EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this draft Restoration Plan/Environmental Assessment (RP/EA) is to describe how the Trustees for the St. Louis River Interlake/Duluth Tar (SLRIDT) Natural Resource Damage Assessment and Restoration (NRDAR) – the United States Fish and Wildlife Service, the Bureau of Indian Affairs, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the Fond du Lac Band of Lake Superior Chippewa, the 1854 Treaty Authority, the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, and the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources – will utilize funds obtained through resolution of claims for natural resource damages for the restoration of natural resources and services injured by the release of hazardous substances at the SLRIDT Site. Injuries to natural resources in the 93.6-acre Response Action Area (which is the Assessment Area for the purposes of this NRDAR), including surface water, sediment, aquatic invertebrates, aquatic vegetation, fish, birds, and other wildlife, were caused by exposure of those resources primarily to polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs). These injuries resulted in a loss of the ecological and recreational services that Assessment Area resources would otherwise have provided. The Trustees have lodged with the United States District Court for the District of Minnesota a proposed Consent Decree memorializing a proposed settlement of the Trustees’ natural resource damage claims relating to hazardous substances historically released by the potentially responsible parties (PRPs) to the St. Louis River. Under the proposed settlement, the Trustees would have a total of $6.5 million available for the restoration, replacement, or acquisition of the equivalent of the natural resources injured, destroyed, or lost. Consistent with the United States Department of the Interior NRDAR regulations and the National Environmental Policy Act, the Trustees evaluated a suite of alternatives for conducting the type and scale of restoration sufficient to compensate the public for natural resource injuries and service losses. This restoration would be implemented with the funds from the proposed settlement. Based on selection factors including location, technical feasibility, cost effectiveness, provision of natural resource services similar to those lost due to contamination, and net environmental consequences, the Trustees have identified Alternatives B, D, and E as the preferred alternative (Exhibit ES-1). Under the preferred alternative, the Trustees would conduct shallow sheltered embayment enhancement/restoration at Kingsbury Bay, which includes recreational access and cultural education opportunities; implement watershed protection at Kingsbury Creek; and restore wild rice in the St. Louis River estuary. Kingsbury Bay is a 70-acre shallow sheltered embayment adjacent to, but separate from, the SLRIDT Site. It is a focus area for ecological, cultural, and recreational restoration vii under the Trustees’ preferred alternative. This area
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Hog Island/Newton Creek Habitat Restoration Project St. Louis River Area of Concern, Superior, Wisconsin NOAA Great Lakes Habitat Restoration Program June 2011
    Hog Island/Newton Creek Habitat Restoration Project St. Louis River Area of Concern, Superior, Wisconsin NOAA Great Lakes Habitat Restoration Program June 2011 Background Hog Island is a place of scenic beauty and high ecological value. Located at the “headwaters of Lake Superior,” at the far western end of the lake within the city of Superior, Wisconsin, the area is regionally important both as an ecological resource and a recreational and scenic amenity. For many years the area has served as a disposal site for dredge spoils, a railway yard, and a repository for industrial byproducts. In 1987, the St. Louis River, including Hog Island, was designated as an Area of Concern (AOC) due to numerous beneficial use impairments (BUIs), including loss of fish and wildlife habitat, degradation of fish and wildlife populations, degradation of benthos, beach closings, and others. Despite these conditions, Hog Island, Hog Island Inlet, Newton Creek, Allouez Bay, and Pokegama Bay are extremely important for local and migratory fish and wildlife populations. Ecological restoration within these areas through NOAA’s Great Lakes Habitat Restoration Program will provide essential habitat for rare, threatened and endangered species; control invasive vegetation and other threats to ecological viability; improve water and sediment quality; and provide recreation and an aesthetic amenity for local residents and visitors. Moving from Remediation to Restoration Remediation of contaminated materials at Hog Island/Newton Creek was completed in 2005 after a 10‐year, multi‐phase cleanup process. During the final phase 60,000 tons of contaminated sediments were removed from the lower portions of Newton Creek and Hog Island Inlet.
    [Show full text]
  • Fishing Regulations, 2020-2021, Available Online, from Your License Distributor, Or Any DNR Service Center
    Wisconsin Fishing.. it's fun and easy! To use this pamphlet, follow these 5 easy steps: Restrictions: Be familiar with What's New on page 4 and the License Requirements 1 and Statewide Fishing Restrictions on pages 8-11. Trout fishing: If you plan to fish for trout, please see the separate inland trout 2 regulations booklet, Guide to Wisconsin Trout Fishing Regulations, 2020-2021, available online, from your license distributor, or any DNR Service Center. Special regulations: Check for special regulations on the water you will be fishing 3 in the section entitled Special Regulations-Listed by County beginning on page 28. Great Lakes, Winnebago System Waters, and Boundary Waters: If you are 4 planning to fish on the Great Lakes, their tributaries, Winnebago System waters or waters bordering other states, check the appropriate tables on pages 64–76. Statewide rules: If the water you will be fishing is not found in theSpecial Regulations- 5 Listed by County and is not a Great Lake, Winnebago system, or boundary water, statewide rules apply. See the regulation table for General Inland Waters on pages 62–63 for seasons, length and bag limits, listed by species. ** This pamphlet is an interpretive summary of Wisconsin’s fishing laws and regulations. For complete fishing laws and regulations, including those that are implemented after the publica- tion of this pamphlet, consult the Wisconsin State Statutes Chapter 29 or the Administrative Code of the Department of Natural Resources. Consult the legislative website - http://docs. legis.wi.gov - for more information. For the most up-to-date version of this pamphlet, go to dnr.wi.gov search words, “fishing regulations.
    [Show full text]
  • Shoreland Lighting
    1 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Produced by the Northwest Regional Planning Commission, September 2007. Funded in part by the Wisconsin Coastal Management Program. Financial assistance for this project was provided by the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, as amended, administered by the Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration pursuant to grant #96003-006.13 and the Wisconsin Coastal Management Program. The Wisconsin Coastal Management Program, part of the Wisconsin Department Of Administration, and overseen by the Wisconsin Coastal Management Council, was established in 1978 to preserve, protect and manage the resources of the Lake Michigan and Lake Superior coastline for this and future generations. Funded by the Wisconsin Department of administration Wisconsin Coastal Management Program. Author: Jason K. Laumann Special thanks go to Dr. Lowell Klessig (Ret.), Mike Kroenke, Gene Clark, UW-Sea Grant, Duane Lahti, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources and Doug Miskowiak at the UWSP Center for Land Use Education for their review and comments. Thanks also to Steve Rannenberg (Douglas County Zoning) and Karl Kastrosky (Bayfield County Zoning) for their assistance in identifying subdivision visualization sites, and to ABDI for their assistance in identifying native plant species. Credit also goes to the UWSP Center for Land Use Education for development of the subdivision visualization models. i Table of Contents Introduction .........................................................................................................................................................................1
    [Show full text]
  • Water Quality Report to Congress - 2018
    Water Quality Report to Congress - 2018 Wisconsin Water Quality Report to Congress 2018 Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources Water Quality Bureau Division of Environmental Management Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources 101 South Webster Street • PO Box 7921 • Madison, Wisconsin 53707-7921 dnr.wi.gov i Water Quality Report to Congress - 2018 Governor Scott Walker Natural Resources Board Terry Hilgenberg, Chair Dr. Frederick Rehn, Vice-Chair Julie Anderson, Secretary William Bruins Preston D. Cole Gregory Kazmierski Gary Zimmer Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources Daniel Meyer, Secretary Ed Eberle, Deputy Secretary Pat Stevens, Assistant Deputy Jim Zellmer, Environmental Division Deputy Administrator Sharon Gayan, Director, Water Quality Bureau Steve Galarneau, Director, Office of Great Waters Pam Biersach, Director, Watershed Management Justine Hasz, Director, Fisheries Management Steve Elmore, Director, Drinking Water & Groundwater Cover Photo: View of Seidel Lake in Florence County. Photo by Luke Ernster. ii Water Quality Report to Congress - 2018 Wisconsin’s Water Quality Report The Federal Clean Water Act (CWA) requires all states to prepare a Water Quality Report to Congress every two years. This “Integrated Report” combines the CWA sections 305(b) and 303(d). The report contains an overall summary of water quality conditions in the State and an updated Impaired Waters List. Wisconsin data are also provided electronically to the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) as part of the Integrated Reporting Process. Wisconsin’s 2018 Wisconsin Water Quality Report to Congress summarizes assessment progress and activities related to water quality protection during the past two years. This document is an online publication only that can be accessed at the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) website: http://dnr.wi.gov/topic/surfacewater/assessments.html.
    [Show full text]
  • GLIC Semi-Annual Report
    EPAGLNPO GL-00E01567-6 Semi-annual report October 2019 Page 1 of 135 Great Lakes Coastal Wetland Monitoring Program Semiannual Progress Report April 1, 2019 – September 30, 2019 Prepared for: U.S. EPA GLNPO (G-17J) 77 W. Jackson Blvd. Chicago, IL 60604-3590 Contract/WA/Grant No./Project Identifier: GL-00E01567-6 Prepared by: Dr. Donald G. Uzarski, Principal Investigator CMU Institute for Great Lakes Research CMU Biological Station Department of Biology Central Michigan University Brooks 127 Mount Pleasant, MI 48859 Dr. Valerie J. Brady, QA Manager Center for Water and the Environment Natural Resources Research Institute University of Minnesota Duluth 5013 Miller Trunk Highway Duluth, MN 55811-1442 Dr. Matthew J. Cooper, QA Manager Burke Center for Freshwater Innovation Northland College 1411 Ellis Avenue Ashland, WI 54891 Project Period: Oct. 1, 2015 – Sept. 30, 2020 EPAGLNPO GL-00E01567-6 Semi-annual report October 2019 Page 2 of 135 INTRODUCTION Monitoring the biota of Great Lakes coastal wetlands began as a project funded under the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative on 10 September 2010. The project had the primary objective of implementing a standardized basin‐wide coastal wetland monitoring program. Our first five years of sampling (2011-2015) set the baseline for future sampling years and showed the power of the datasets that can be used to inform decision‐makers on coastal wetland conservation and restoration priorities throughout the Great Lakes basin. During round one, we 1) developed a database management system; 2) developed a standardized sample design with rotating panels of wetland sites to be sampled across years, accompanied by sampling protocols, QAPPs, and other methods documents; and 3) developed background documents on the indicators.
    [Show full text]
  • Lake Superior National Estuarine Research Reserve
    Location: Northwestern corner of Wisconsin along the St. Louis Lake Superior River, bordering Minnesota and Lake Superior National Estuarine Research Reserve Date Designated: 2010 Area Protected: 16,697 acres Web Address: lakesuperiorreserve.org Management: Daily oversight is provided by the University of Wisconsin–Madison Division of Extension. NOAA’s Office for Coastal Management provides funding, national guidance, and technical assistance. Access and Infrastructure • The reserve is a combination of four components located within 10 minutes of each other: Red River Breaks, Pokegama Bay, South of Pokegama Bay, and Wisconsin Point. Each site possesses its own combination of habitats. • Two waterfront structures on Barkers Island are part of the University of Wisconsin–Superior campus. The buildings house administrative offices, a 1,300-square-foot dockside laboratory, a public science and interpretive center, and classrooms. A boat and dock are available to visiting researchers. • The reserve features areas of national significance, including the world’s largest freshwater bay mouth sand bar (Wisconsin Point), estuarine wetlands, and steep, highly erodible red clay bluffs. The Lake Superior National Estuarine Research Reserve is located along a river-to-lake gradient at the confluence of the St. Louis River and Lake Superior, the largest and most pristine of the Great Lakes. The reserve is a combination of varying land areas that include uplands, riparian and riverine habitats, freshwater marshes, interdunal wetlands, forests, and open sand beach and dunes. The reserve is adjacent to the “Twin Ports” of Superior, Wisconsin, and Duluth, Minnesota, which together represent the largest freshwater port in the world. The lower portion of the St.
    [Show full text]
  • St. Louis and Lower Nemadji River Watershed
    Wisconsin St. Louis and Lower Nemadji Watersheds River Watershed 2010 Water Quality Management Plan Update Lake Superior Basin, Wisconsin August, 2010 The t.S Louis River, the largest U.S. tributary to Lake Superior, drains 3,634 square miles, entering the southwestern corner of the lake between Duluth, Minnesota and Superior, Wisconsin. The river flows 179 miles through three distinct areas: coarse soils, glacial till and outwash deposits at its headwaters; a deep, narrow gorge at Jay Cooke State Park in Minnesota; and red clay deposits in its lower reaches. As the St. Louis River approaches Duluth and Superior, the river takes on the characteristics of a 12,000 Contents acre freshwater estuary. The upper estuary has some Watershed Details 1 wilderness-like areas, while the lower estuary is character- Population and Land Use . 1 ized by urban development, an industrial harbor, and Ecological Landscapes . 3 a major port. The lower estuary includes St. Louis Bay, Other Details . 3 Map 1: St Louis River and Lower Nemadji Superior Bay, Allouez Bay, Kimball’s Bay, Pokegama Bay, River Watershed Invasive Species . 3 Howard’s Bay, and the lower Nemadji River. Historical Note . 4 Watershed Details Watershed Condition 4 Priority Issues . 4 Water Quality Goals . 4 Population and Land Use Overall Condition . 4 The watershed is dominated by Point and Nonpoint Sources . 5 forests (65%), agriculture (9%), Fish Consumption Advice . 5 followed closely by open water River and Stream Condition . 5 and open space (8%) (Figure 1). Lakes and Embayments . 16 Wetlands . 17 In 1987, the International Joint Waters of Note: . .22 Commission, an advisory com- mission on U.S-Canadian border Watershed Actions 23 Figure 1: Land Use in the St Louis and Lower Nemadji River Partnership Activities .
    [Show full text]
  • ATLAS of the SPAWNING and NURSERY AREAS of GREAT LAKES FISHES Volume II - Lake Superior
    Biological Services Program FWS/OBS-82/52 SEPTEMBER 1982 ATLAS OF THE SPAWNING AND NURSERY AREAS OF GREAT LAKES FISHES Volume II - Lake Superior Great Lake - St. Lawrence Seaway Navigation Season Extension Program Fish and Wildlife Service Corps of Engineers U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Department of the Army The Biological Services Program was established within the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to supply scientific information and methodologies on key environmental issues that Impact fish and wildlife resources and their supporting ecosystems. The mission of the program is as follows: o To strengthen the Fish and Wildlife Service in its role as a primary source of information on national fish and wild- life resources, particularly in respect to environmental impact assessment. o To gather, analyze, and present information that will aid decisionmakers in the identification and resolution of problems associated with major changes in land and water use. o To provide better ecological information and evaluation for Department of the Interior development programs, such as those relatfng to energy development. Information developed by the Biological Services Program is intended for use in the planning and decisionmaking process to prevent or minimize the impact of development on fish and wildlife. Research activities and technlcal assistance services are based on an analysis of the issues, a determination of the decisionmakers involved and their informatlon needs, and an evaluation of the state of the art to identify information gaps and to determine priorities. This is a strategy that will ensure that the products produced and disseminated are timely and useful.
    [Show full text]
  • Lake Superior National Estuarine Research Reserve LAKE SUPERIOR NATIONAL ESTUARINE RESEARCH RESERVE MANAGEMENT PLAN
    ManageMent Plan 2010 - 2015 Lake Superior National estuarine research reserve LAKE SUPERIOR NATIONAL ESTUARINE RESEARCH RESERVE MANAGEMENT PLAN 2010-2015 Prepared by: University of Wisconsin-Extension September 2010 Prepared for: U.S. Department of Commerce National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management Estuarine Reserves Division 1305 East West Highway Silver Spring, MD 20910 University of Wisconsin - Extension 432 North Lake Street Madison, WI 53706 This Management Plan has been developed in accordance with National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) regulations, including all provisions for public involvement. It is consistent with the congressional intent of Section 315 of the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, as amended, and the provisions of the Wisconsin Coastal Management Program. This publication is funded, in part, through a grant agreement with the Wisconsin Coastal Management Program and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management under the Coastal Zone Management Act, Grant # NA08NOS4200405. Cover photography by: Michael K. Anderson Interior photography by: Amy Elliot, Becky Sapper, Michael K. Anderson, Patrick Robinson, Lynelle Hanson and Frank Koshere - WDNR Graphic Design by: Amy B. Torrey - UW Extension Lake Superior NatioNaL EstuariNe RESEARCH RESERVe 2010-2015 i | Table of Contents Table of Contents LIST OF APPENDICES iii LIST OF FIGURES iv LIST OF MAPS iv LIST OF TABLES iv LIST OF ACRONYMS v ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 3 INTRODUCTION 6 Purpose and Scope of the Lake Superior NERR Management Plan. 6 Description of the Lake Superior NERR. 7 Great Lakes Freshwater Estuaries. 7 Lake Superior NERR Key Attributes and Setting.
    [Show full text]
  • Paleolimnological Investigation of the St. Louis River Estuary to Inform Area of Concern Delisting Efforts
    PALEOLIMNOLOGICAL INVESTIGATION OF THE ST. LOUIS RIVER ESTUARY TO INFORM AREA OF CONCERN DELISTING EFFORTS A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA BY Elizabeth E. Alexson IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF SCIENCE Dr. Euan D. Reavie August 2016 © Elizabeth Alexson 2016 Acknowledgements This work was made possible by two grants. (1) This work is the result of research sponsored by the Minnesota Sea Grant College Program supported by the NOAA office of Sea Grant, United States Department of Commerce, under grant No. R/CE-05-14. The U.S. Government is authorized to reproduce and distribute reprints for government purposes, notwithstanding any copyright notation that may appear hereon. (2) Project funding was made available by a contract with the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency through USEPA grant #00E05302 and support from the Minnesota Clean Water Legacy Amendment. Thanks go to: Dr. Euan Reavie, Dr. Rich Axler, and Dr. Mark Edlund for their guidance in the development of my thesis; Dr. Pavel Krasutsky and Dr. Sergiy Yements of the Natural Resources Research Institute for completing pigment analysis; Lisa Estepp, Kitty Kennedy, Meagan Aliff, and the Fond du Lac Band of Lake Superior Chippewa for their help with field and lab work; Dr. Daniel Engstrom of the Science Museum of Minnesota for completing 210Pb analysis and interpretation; Dr. Robert Pillsbury for completing diatom identification and enumeration for the core from western Lake Superior. Diane Desotelle and Molly Wick (MPCA) provided helpful reviews of earlier drafts of this manuscript. i Abstract The St.
    [Show full text]
  • Wisconsin Fishing.. It's Fun and Easy!
    Wisconsin Fishing.. it's fun and easy! To use this pamphlet, follow these 5 easy steps: Restrictions: Be familiar with What's New on page 4 and the License Requirements 1 and Statewide Fishing Restrictions on pages 8-11. Trout fishing: If you plan to fish for trout, please see the separate inland trout 2 regulations booklet, Guide to Wisconsin Trout Fishing Regulations, 2019-2020, available online, from your license distributor, or any DNR Service Center. Special regulations: Check for special regulations on the water you will be fishing 3 in the section entitled Special Regulations-Listed by County beginning on page 28. Great Lakes, Winnebago System Waters, and Boundary Waters: If you are 4 planning to fish on the Great Lakes, their tributaries, Winnebago System waters or waters bordering other states, check the appropriate tables on pages 64–76. Statewide rules: If the water you will be fishing is not found in theSpecial Regulations- 5 Listed by County and is not a Great Lake, Winnebago system, or boundary water, statewide rules apply. See the regulation table for General Inland Waters on pages 62–63 for seasons, length and bag limits, listed by species. ** This pamphlet is an interpretive summary of Wisconsin’s fishing laws and regulations. For complete fishing laws and regulations, including those that are implemented after the publica- tion of this pamphlet, consult the Wisconsin State Statutes Chapter 29 or the Administrative Code of the Department of Natural Resources. Consult the legislative website - http://docs. legis.wi.gov - for more information. For the most up-to-date version of this pamphlet, go to dnr.wi.gov search words, “fishing regulations.
    [Show full text]
  • Lower St. Louis River Habitat Plan [PDF]
    Lower St. Louis River Habitat Plan May 2002 Prepared by St. Louis River Citizens Action Committee Duluth, Minnesota Funded by U.S. Environmental Protection Agency under Grant Contract Number X995385010 with additional support from the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Conservation Partners Program, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and The Nature Conservancy. Lower St. Louis River Habitat Plan Spirit of the Earth’s Rivers Cover art by Jan Hartley, copyright 1993 Used by permission of the artist. “The Spirit Cape of the Earth’s Rivers portrays the Egret flying over her estuary home. Guardian of the river, she carries the wading waterbirds on one wing and their prey on the other. Water birds were symbols of the ancient Great Mother whose rivers hold the energy of birth, death, rebirth and of time itself, flowing ever onward without reversal. Egret calls us to stewardship of the Earth’s river systems and a commitment to the ancient sacredness of water.” Citation: St. Louis River Citizens Action Committee. 2002. Lower St. Louis River Habitat Plan. St. Louis River Citizens Action Committee, Duluth, MN. Lower St. Louis River Habitat Plan TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS . i GLOSSARY OF TERMS AND ABBREVIATIONS . iv EXECUTIVE SUMMARY. xi INTRODUCTION . 1 Overview . 1 Remedial Action Plan . 1 Habitat Plan . 2 How To Use This Plan. 3 HISTORY OF THE LOWER ST. LOUIS RIVER . 5 Geologic History of the Lower St. Louis River . 5 Pre-Industrial History of the Lower St. Louis River . 6 Post-Industrial History of the Lower St. Louis River . 9 Summary . 11 OVERVIEW OF THE PLANNING PROCESS.
    [Show full text]