DOCSLIB.ORG

Little Fork River Water Trail

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Little Fork River Water Trail A STATE WATER TRAIL GUIDE TO THE LITTLE FORK RIVER RainyRainy Route Description of the LakeLake Little Fork River River NOTE: (R) and (L) represent right and left banks of the river when facing downstream. CANADA 332 RIVER MILE 142.5 County Road 24 bridge. Town of Cook. Upstream, the river meanders 105 24 FFallsallss IntIntll WestWest RatR t through marsh. AAirportirpop rt RiverRiver PeatlandPeatland 142.4 Duluth, Winnipeg and Pacific Railway trestle. River level gauge. 91 332 S.N.A.S 142.2 River Street bridge. Kuttes LocatorLocator Rainy 141.5 U.S. Highway 53 bridge. LakeLake s LakeL akeNNationalN 139.4 County Road 500 bridge. 2 ationa 71 137.4 County Road 914 bridge. 90 l 11 136.4 Class I rapids. Pelland 53 ark 11 ot 135.8 (L) Confluence with Rice River. Nakoda oot SShoepackhoepack R LLakeake 132.5-.6 Class II rapids. Flanked by outcrops, this 50-yard-long rapids bends 26 sharply left and throws two-foot waves in high water. No developed East RatRat RiverRiver portage. 5 97 PeatlandPeatland S.N.A.S.N.A. 134.4 Twite Rapids, Class II. The river drops about eight feet in 300 yards. Ericsburgc Scattered boulders create two-foot waves in high water. Scout from the right. No developed portage. 71 133.5 Power line crosses river. 132.0 Durant Rapids, a Class II stretch that bends right and then left. In Kabetogama East high water, two-foot waves fill this bouldery 100-yard-long pitch. 10 RatRat Statee Forest 122122 79 No developed portage. Confluence with Flint Creek river right. Branch 123123 131.1 County Road 481 bridge. LITTLE 53 Kabetogamaet g 130.1 (L) Confluence with Alango Creek. 22 R 129.0 County Road 500 bridge. at 15 2929 Irwin Bay 126.8 (L) State Highway 73 bridge carry in access, upstream side of the bridge. 122122 Hanover Lofgren Park 125.5 Class I Rapids. Airport fee charged 217217 Ray 53 124.7 (R) Ax-Handle Hound watercraft campsite. 1 20 river level 124.6 Class I boulder-bed rapids. gauge 217 124.6 State Highway 1 bridge. Littlefork Moose 8 123.8 Hannine Falls, a jagged, sloping 15-foot drop. Class VI. Though Beaver Lake 71 25 FORK RiverRiver conceivably runnable at low water levels by an expert in a decked Elm St. Koochichingg 2929 boat, this falls is filled with big holes in high water. No developed 65 77 Brook AshA RiverRiver portage. The waterfall is followed by 150 yards of Class II rapids. 121.2 Class I boulder-bed rapids. Flat II KabetKabetogamaabbe ogammmaa 120.9 County Road 356 bridge. Rock G C 76 8 N Rapids 30 35 N 118.6 Class II rapids. This boulder-filled 150-yard-long pitch splits around C C an island and throws two foot waves in high water. High clay banks BlacBlackhawk Devereaux on river right. khawkkha OUIS C O 118.5 (R) Confluence with Beaver Creek. L . OOCHICHIN Little Fork T 118.0 County Road 495 bridge. 72 River W.M.A. C KOOCHICHING K C LOUIS ST. S 116.6 Class I rapids. 40 RIVER 115.1 Class II rapids. A big, flat outcrop on the right pinches the river, StateSta forming two-foot waves in high water. The 100-yard-long rapids tails Field off into scattered boulders. No developed portage. 45 PearlPearl Kinmount LakeLake Cr.Cr. 113.6 Confluence with the Sturgeon River. The upper reaches of the Sturgeon Este Cross r 50 53 is punctuated with a few Class II-III rapids. Its lower reaches, though 8 AshA Brook less difficult, are blocked by downed trees. 112.5-.7 Class I rapids at County Road 114 bridge. 105.5 (R) Class II rapids with three-foot waves and side curlers in high water. River In low water, the 150-yard-long rapids is bouldery and ledgy. Portage 440 yards, river right. StatSStatee 103.5 (R) Class II rapids, a four-foot sloping ledge with a well formed backroller. 55 The drop is buried completely in high water. Samuelson Park, a county 65 facility, has a picnic table, carry in access, privy and tent sites. 8 ForestFores 103.3 County Road 75 bridge. 31 101.7 (R) Confluence with Willow River. Dentaybow 60 100.2 State Highway 65 bridge. Nett 96.5 (L) Confluence Valley River. 31 94.9 (R) Here Dey Come campsite. Koochiching 92.4-93.5 Nett Rapids, Class I. State Forest L ake 74.1-74.7(R) Seller’s Rapids, a quarter-mile of Class II boulder bed. Portage right 748 rods. The rapids wash out and become easier in high water. 65 Nett 66-67.6 Deadman's Rapids. Considerably less difficult than its name implies, River this Class II-III stretch washes out in high water. Portage right side a Deadman’s RapidsII ost Deadman’s Portage L quarter mile (550 yards). 550 yds. 58.9 State Highway 65 bridge. 53 57.9 (L) Dentaybow carry in access. 65 45.3 (R) Confluence with Ester Brook. 70 Lakeke SwanSwan Lake LakeLake 44.8 (R) Field carry in access. Access is possible, but difficult. II Seller’s Rapids Nett Lake 793 36.5-39.3 (R) Little Fork W.M.A. Portage 75 748 yds. 37.1 (L) Devereaux carry in access. Forest 33.7 (L) Confluence with Cross River. 2323 29.8 Flat Rock Rapids, easy Class II. No developed portage. 21.5 (R) Elm St. water access. Nett Lakee KoochichingKoochichingi 80 21.2 State Highway 217 bridge. Myrtle Peatlandtlandand S.N.A. S Big Island 20.8 (R) Lofgren Park city campground with water access, privies and picnic Indian shelter. Fee charged for camping. River level gauge. City of Littlefork. 85 19.3 (R) Confluence Beaver Brook. Lake 18.4 Former Burlington Northern railroad trestle location. 15.9 U.S. Highway 71 bridge. LITTLE 0 Confluence with Rainy River. Kuttes water access available one mile rs B Peatlands e ders B east on the Rainy River. Ga Saunders Bay Reservation rdn 90 S.N.A. er Orr Municipalnici Rice B LakeLake er r LandingLanding StripStrip ook RiveRiv Nett RapidsI Here Dey Come Superiorupu Myrtle Campsite 65 StateState Lake 95 74 Hoodoo 100 Silverdale LakeLake Hoodoo FORK Willow Greaney Gheen 24 Samuelson Park River 74 74 Rauch National 53 n Bay II 75 egia Norw 105 s Bay Head of the FForest River 75 Portage Lake II 440 yds. 24 Vermilion RIVER Wakemup Bramble Lake 110 eek r BIGBI FranklinFranklin alley LakeLake V C CraigvilleCraigvillll G 73 KOOCHICHINGOOCHICHING CCO.O Forest . I 114 ITASTASA CA CO.O. II 356 Beaver reek Flint Ax-Handle C r. 115 I Hound C 5 495 Campsite 24 5 I 53 FORKFORFFO 547 II Flint OORK Stu Linden river level r 1 Hannine FallsVI Grove gauge BustiesBu Celina geon 1 ake 120 Meadow 125 Brook 115 R Durant Twite 145 RIVERRIVE I Rapids 140 Rapids II 135 500 Cook II I 150 iveiv Island Owens 155 1 W.M.A. 1 Hwy 73 130 7979 LakeLake Bridge Alang Rice 65 Municipal 533 5 o TTogoogo Airport Riv Cr River 38 er . 53 Leander 87 42 1 ThistledewThistledew rgeonrgeon RiverRRiiver State Forest LakeLake 22 BearBe 5 22 RiverRiver 22 1 RiverRivR Sherman’s 22 Corner Carry-in Access Public Land RiverRiver er 73 C . r . O . C O Water Access Tribal Trust Land reek 65 S re C I GilmoGilmo A C C Watercraft Campsite S.N.A. Scientific and Natural Area OU Idingtongtoon L . StatStationion r AS A T BearBea T ST. LOUIS CO. LOUIS ST. Campground W.M.A. Wildlife Management Area CO. ITASCA I S 5 Outfitter RiverRi River Mile NORTH 051234 Miles PeloquinPeloquinlo Superioror RiverRiv Nationall Forestor er C W.M.A.W.M.A.. A r. Rapids SSideide 051234 Kilometers LLakeake LakeLake ourteenourteen BearBear LeanderLeandan err LakeLake © 2014 State of Minnesota, Department of Natural Resources A STATE WATER TRAIL GUIDE TO THE LITTLE FORK RIVER ITTLE FORK L WATER STATE RIVER A TRAIL Guide The river holds a variety of secrets just waiting for you to explore. Bring your binoculars, a field guide or just your curiosity and enjoy the river’s magic. Minnesota State Parks and Trails mndnr.gov/watertrails The Little Fork River A succession of Woodland Culture Indians • Choose a distance Little Fork is often very placid, the current can be • Camp only in occupied the region during the 2,500 years before its tthat is comfortable for quick and powerful when the river is near or at flood designated International 11 Falls Rainy settlement by whites. The Laurel gave way to the yyou, most people stage. But most dangers can be anticipated and campsites, which Blackduck, who may have been the direct ppaddle two to three avoided. Start your trip with the proper safety are available on a Little predecessors of the Dakota. The Dakota, or Sioux, rriver miles per equipment. Coast Guard approved personal floatation first-come, 71 53 inhabited the region until the Ojibway laid claim to hhour. devices (PFD) should be worn at all times. first-served basis. Vermilion 72 65 Fork what would become northern Minnesota. • Wear a U. S. Coast • Bring drinking Fork GGuard approved Hypothermia, a rapid loss of body heat, has killed wwater. It is only Ely 1 Magnificent stands of white and red pine near the ppersonal flotation many people who have swamped or tipped. available at a 1 1 71 Big 73 Little Fork’s headwaters were logged in the late 19th ddevice that state law Swimming soon becomes impossible in freezing limited number of Lake 53 and early 20th centuries.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Water Quality Assessment of Select Lakes Within the Little Fork River Watershed
    Water Quality Assessment of Select Lakes within the Little Fork River Watershed Rainy River Basin St. Louis, Itasca, and Koochiching Counties, Minnesota Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Water Monitoring Section Lakes and Streams Monitoring Unit August, 2010 Author Jesse Anderson Editing Steve Heiskary Dana Vanderbosch Data Provided By Itasca County Soil and Water Conservation District, Itasca Community College, MN DNR Fisheries (Rian Reed) and Volunteers from the Sturgeon Chain of Lakes Assessment Report of Selected Lakes Within the Little Fork River Watershed Rainy River Basin Intensive Watershed Monitoring 2008 Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Water Monitoring Section Lakes and Streams Monitoring Unit wq-ws3-09030005 Minnesota Pollution Control Agency 520 Lafayette Road North Saint Paul, MN 55155-4194 http://www.pca.state.mn.us 651-296-6300 or 800-657-3864 toll free TTY 651-282-5332 or 800-657-3864 toll free Available in alternative formats The MPCA is reducing printing and mailing costs by using the Internet to distribute reports and information to wider audience. For additional information, see the Web site: www.pca.state.mn.us/water/lakereport.html Table of Contents Executive Summary ......................................................................................................................................... 1 Introduction to Monitoring Strategy and Sources of Monitoring Data ............................................................ 2 Environmental Setting and Distribution of Lakes...........................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Little Fork River, Minnesota 1. the Area
    Little Fork River , Minnesota 1. The area surrounding the river: a. The Little Fork watershed is located in Itasca, St. Louis, and Koochichinz Counties, Minnesota. It rises in a rather flat region in St. Louis County and follows a meandering course to the northwest through Koochiching County to its junction with the Rainy River about 19 miles below Little Fork, Minnesota. The area is a hummocky rolling surface made up of morainic deposits and glacial drift laid over a bedrock composed largely of granitic, volcanic, and metamorphic rocks. The upper basin is covered with dense cedar forests with some trees up to three feet in diameter. Needles form a thick layer over the ground with ferns turning the forest floor into a green carpet. In the lower basin the forest changes to hardwoods with elm predominating. Dense brush covers the forest floor. Farming is the major land use other than timber production in the area of Minnesota, but terrain limits areas where farming is practical. Transportation routes in this area are good due to its proximity to International Falls, Minnesota, a major border crossing into Canada. U. S. 53 runs north-south to International Falls about 25 miles east of the basin. U. S. 71 runs northeast-southwest and crosses the river at. Little Fork, Minnesota, and follows the U. S. /Canadian border to International Falls. Minnesota Route 217 connects these two major north-south routes in an east-west direction from Little Fork, Minnesota. Minnesota Route 65 follows the river southward from Little Fork, Minnesota. b. Population within a 50-mile radius was estimated at 173, 000 in.
    [Show full text]
  • Little Fork River Channel Stability and Geomorphic Assessment Final
    Little Fork River Channel Stability and Geomorphic Assessment Final Report Submitted to the MPCA Impaired Waters and Stormwater Program August 13, 2007 Karen B. Gran, Brad Hansen, John Nieber University of Minnesota 0 Table of Contents Introduction..............................................................................................................1 Objectives ................................................................................................................1 Background..............................................................................................................3 1. Geomorphic classification of the Little Fork River Watershed...........................9 2. Historical air photo analysis of landscape changes............................................30 3. Floodplains.........................................................................................................47 4. Post-settlement alluvium....................................................................................57 5. Mid-channel island at confluence ......................................................................65 6. Basin hydrology and bankfull flow....................................................................71 Summary................................................................................................................79 Works Cited ...........................................................................................................83 Appendix A: Spatial datasets used for analyses ...................................................86
    [Show full text]
  • Little Fork River State Water Trail
    A STATE WA TER TRAIL GUIDE T O THE LIT TLE FORK RIVER Rainy Route Description of the Lake Little Fork River RANIER Jackfish Bay Tilson Bay JAMESON ISLAND 11 109 VIEW NOTE: (R) and (L) represent right and left banks of the river when facing downstream. River INTERNATIONAL 11 FALLS Cranberry Bay RIVER MILE 53 332 142.5 County Road 24 bridge. Town of Cook. Upstream, the river meanders CANADA Gold Portage W.M.A. Cranberry through marsh. 105 24 Falls Intl West Rat Airport 142.4 Duluth, Winnipeg and Pacific Railway trestle. River level gauge. River Cr. Peatland Black Bay 142.2 River Street bridge. 91 332 S.N.A. Voyageurs National Park 141.5 U.S. Highway 53 bridge. Kuttes Locator Rainy Lake Lake 139.4 County Road 500 bridge. 2 137.4 County Road 914 bridge. 71 90 136.4 Class I rapids. 11 PELLAND 135.8 (L) Confluence with Rice River. 11 53 Shoepack NAKODA Root 134.4 Twite Rapids, Class II. The river drops about eight feet in 300 yards. Lake 26 Scattered boulders create two-foot waves in high water. Scout from the right. No developed portage. Rat East Rat River 5 97 Peatland S.N.A. 133.5 Power line crosses river. ERICSBURG 132.0 Durant Rapids, a Class II stretch that bends right and then left. In Kabetogama high water, two-foot waves fill this bouldery 100-yard-long pitch. 71 No developed portage. Confluence with Flint Creek river right. 131.1 County Road 481 bridge. Kabetogama East Lake 10 Rat State Forest 130.1 (L) Confluence with Alango Creek.
    [Show full text]
  • Effects of Historical Logging on Geomorphology, Hydrology And
    Effect of Historical Logging on Geomorphology, Hydrology, and Water Quality in the Little Fork River Watershed By Jesse Anderson, Nolan Baratono, Andrew Streitz, Joe Magner, and E. Sandy Verry Minnesota Pollution Control Agency and Ellen River Partners Effect of Historical Logging on Geomorphology, Hydrology, and Water Quality in the Little Fork River watershed Jesse Anderson, Nolan Baratono, Andrew Streitz, Joe Magner, Ph.D. and E. Sandy Verry, Ph.D. * Environmental Outcomes and Regional Divisions Minnesota Pollution Control Agency * Ellen River Partners; Research Hydrologist, Emeritus, USDA Forest Service November 2006 Acknowledgements: US Geological Survey, Water Science Center, Minnesota: Kevin Guttormson, Greg Melhus, James Fallon, Jeff Stoner, and Greg Mitton for providing access to historical data and local expertise regarding Little Fork hydrology Minnesota Historical Society: permissions to publish photos and a manuscript from their collection University of Minnesota, Duluth: Dr. Howard Mooers, Professor of Geology- technical assistance- peatland hydrology and geology Minnesota Pollution Control Agency: Duane Duncanson (pilot for aerial reconnaissance survey); Lynda Nelson and Bob Murzyn (GIS assistance); John Genet and Mark Gernes, (Wetland Delineation GIS Analysis), Jaramie Logelin (DELTA database); Nathan Schroeder, Carrie Robertson, Louise Hotka, Katie Brosch (field assistance) Bois Forte Band of Chippewa: Chris Holm, Les Connor, Louis Drift- local expertise on the River, and permission to access the River within the Reservation. The authors also thank Scott Erickson for permission to access the river from his property. Study support / funding: Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Manuscript Review: Faith Fitzpatrick, Ph.D., Research Hydrologist / Fluvial Geomorphology, U. S. Geological Survey, Water Science Center, Wisconsin Tom Winterstein, US Geological Survey, Water Science Center, Minnesota Debra Taylor, U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Final Little Fork River Watershed Restoration and Protection Strategy
    Little Fork River Watershed Restoration and Protection Strategy Report wq-ws4-21a November 2017 Project Partners Emmons & Olivier Resources, Inc. Meghan Funke, PhD Jason Ulrich Jason Naber Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Mike Kennedy Nolan Baratono Jesse Anderson Itasca County Soil and Water Conservation District Kim Yankowiak Terry Schaedig Andy Arens Koochiching County Soil and Water Conservation District Jolén Simon Pam Tomevi North St. Louis Soil and Water Conservation District Phil Norvich Sam Soderman (by contract from Koochiching County SWCD) Little Fork River WRAPS Report 2 Table of Contents Project Partners......................................................................................................................................... 2 Key Terms .................................................................................................................................................. 4 Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................... 5 What is the WRAPS Report?...................................................................................................................... 7 User’s Guide .............................................................................................................................................. 9 1. Watershed Background & Description ........................................................................... 11 2. Watershed Conditions .................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Little Fork River Watershed Sediment Reduction Project (Total Maximum Daily Load)
    wq-iw10-05b Little Fork River Watershed Sediment Reduction Project (Total Maximum Daily Load) The amount of sediment reduction from the land and stream beds that is needed to reduce the concentrations of sediment in area streams. November 2017 wq-iw10-05e Authors and contributors: Emmons & Olivier Resources, Inc. Meghan Funke, PhD Paula Kalinosky Jason Naber Jason Ulrich Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Mike Kennedy Nolan Baratono Jesse Anderson Greg Johnson Itasca County Soil and Water Conservation District Kim Slanga Koochiching County Soil and Water Conservation District Eric Olson Jolén Simon North St. Louis County Soil and Water Conservation District Sam Soderberg (under contract from Koochiching County SWCD) Little Fork River Watershed TMDL Minnesota Pollution Control Agency 2 Table of Contents TMDL Summary Table ........................................................................................................................7 Acronyms ..........................................................................................................................................8 Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................9 1. Project Overview ....................................................................................................................... 10 1.1 Purpose ................................................................................................................................................ 10 1.2 Identification
    [Show full text]
  • Comprehensive Water Management Plan 2000 Update
    Koochiching County Comprehensive Water Management Plan 2000 Update ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The Koochiching County Board of Commissioners adopted a resolution to develop the first Comprehensive Water Management Plan (CWMP) in June 1990 and assigned the project to the Koochiching Soil and Water Conservation District (SWCD). SWCD efforts to complete the plan became frustrated due to personnel changes and a progressively more complex workload that included state- mandated programs. The plan was approximately half complete by the end of 1993. In spring 1994 the County Board of Commissioners re-assigned the project to the Planning and Zoning Department. Kate Foster was largely responsible for completing the 1994 – 1999 draft plan that was adopted by the Board. CWMP’s need to be updated at five-year intervals to re-assess old problems, consider new problems, edit or re-organize text and re-arrange or re-state priorities. The plan before you is not intended to be a complete re-write. While there are significant additions, appropriate portions of the ’94 text needed editing, other portions were deleted completely and some stayed intact. An equal, if not greater, effort was directed at re-organizing the plan so the contents flowed more logically toward the Action Plan at the end. Perhaps my format can be used as a template for future five-year updates. I wish to thank the following people for their confidence and help: Koochiching County Commissioners Koochiching County SWCD Supervisors KSWCD staff Pamela Tomevi and Thomas Toratti Environmental Services Director Richard Lehtinen (and staff) NRCS Soil Survey Team Edward A. Lombard, consultant Rat Root River Enterprises 4/17/2018 2 Table of Contents I.
    [Show full text]