DOCSLIB.ORG

Le Sueur River Watershed Monitoring and Assessment Report

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Le Sueur River Watershed Monitoring and Assessment Report z c LeSueur River Watershed Monitoring and Assessment Report March 2012 Acknowledgements MPCA Watershed Report Development Team: Bryan Spindler, Pat Baskfield, Kelly O’Hara, Dan Helwig, Louise Hotka, Stephen Thompson, Tony Dingmann, Kim Laing, Bruce Monson and Kris Parson Contributors: Citizen Lake Monitoring Program volunteers Citizen Stream Monitoring Program Volunteers Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Minnesota Department of Health Minnesota Department of Agriculture Minnesota State University, Mankato Water Resource Center Project dollars provided by the Clean Water Fund (from the Clean Water, Land and Legacy Amendment). March 2012 Minnesota Pollution Control Agency 520 Lafayette Road North | Saint Paul, MN 55155-4194 | www.pca.State.mn.us | 651-296-6300 Toll free 800-657-3864 | TTY 651-282-5332 This report is available in alternative formats upon request, and online at www.pca.State.mn.us Document number: wq-ws3-07020011b Table of Contents Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................................................. 1 I. Introduction .................................................................................................................................................................. 2 II. The Watershed Monitoring Approach ........................................................................................................................... 3 Load monitoring network ....................................................................................................................................................... 3 Intensive watershed monitoring ............................................................................................................................................ 4 Lake monitoring ..................................................................................................................................................................... 7 Citizen and local monitoring ................................................................................................................................................... 7 III. Assessment Methodology ............................................................................................................................................10 Water quality standards ....................................................................................................................................................... 10 Assessment units .................................................................................................................................................................. 10 Determining use attainment status...................................................................................................................................... 11 Data management ................................................................................................................................................................ 12 Period of record ................................................................................................................................................................... 12 IV. The LeSueur River Watershed Overview .......................................................................................................................14 Land use summary ............................................................................................................................................................... 14 Surface water hydrology ...................................................................................................................................................... 16 Precipitation and climate in the LeSueur River Watershed .................................................................................................. 17 Surficial and groundwater withdrawals ............................................................................................................................... 18 V. Watershed-Wide Data Collection Methodology............................................................................................................19 Load monitoring ................................................................................................................................................................... 19 Stream water sampling ........................................................................................................................................................ 19 Stream biological sampling .................................................................................................................................................. 19 Lake water sampling ............................................................................................................................................................. 20 Fish contaminants ................................................................................................................................................................ 20 VI. Individual Watershed Results .......................................................................................................................................21 HUC-11 watershed units ...................................................................................................................................................... 21 Stream assessment .............................................................................................................................................................. 22 Stream habitat results .......................................................................................................................................................... 22 Outlet water chemistry results ............................................................................................................................................. 22 Lake water chemistry ........................................................................................................................................................... 23 LeSueur River Watershed Unit - HUC ............................................................................................................................23 Watershed description ......................................................................................................................................................... 23 Watershed summary ............................................................................................................................................................ 30 Boot Creek Watershed Unit - HUC 07020011020 ..........................................................................................................34 Watershed description ......................................................................................................................................................... 34 Lake Water Aquatic Recreation Assessment for the Boot Creek 11 HUC .......................................................................38 Boot Creek Watershed Unit Summary ..........................................................................................................................38 Little LeSueur River Watershed Unit – HUC 07020011030 .............................................................................................40 Watershed description ......................................................................................................................................................... 40 Water chemistry assessments on assessed AUIDs in the Little LeSueur 11 HUC ................................................................. 40 Non-assessed biological stations on channelized AUIDs in the Little LeSueur River 11 HUC ............................................... 40 Outlet stream water chemistry for the Little LeSueur River 11 HUC .................................................................................... 41 Lake water aquatic recreation assessment for the Little LeSueur 11 HUC ........................................................................... 41 Little LeSueur watershed unit summary .............................................................................................................................. 41 Janesville Village Watershed Unit – HUC 07020011040 .................................................................................................43 Watershed description ......................................................................................................................................................... 43 Watershed summary ............................................................................................................................................................ 48 Madison Lake Watershed Unit HUC 07020011050 .......................................................................................................52 Watershed description ......................................................................................................................................................... 52 Water chemistry assessments on assessed AUIDs in the Madison Lake 11 HUC ................................................................. 52 Non-assessed biological stations on channelized AUIDs in the Madison Lake 11 HUC .......................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Assessment Report of Selected Lakes Within the Le Sueur River Watershed Minnesota River Basin
    Assessment Report of Selected Lakes Within the Le Sueur River Watershed Minnesota River Basin Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Water Monitoring Section Lakes and Streams Monitoring Unit June 2010 Authors The MPCA is reducing printing and mailing costs Kelly O’Hara by using the Internet to distribute reports and information to wider audience. Visit our Web site Geographical Information System Mapping at: www.pca.state.mn.us/water/lakereport.html. Kris Parson MPCA reports are printed on 100% post-consumer recycled content paper manufactured without Editing chlorine or chlorine derivatives. Steve Heiskary Dana Vanderbosch Assessment Report of Selected Lakes Within the Le Sueur River Watershed Minnesota River Basin Intensive Watershed Monitoring 2009 Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Water Monitoring Section Lakes and Streams Monitoring Unit Minnesota Pollution Control Agency 520 Lafayette Road North | Saint Paul, MN 55155-4194 | www.pca.state.mn.us | 651-296-6300 Toll free 800-657-3864 | TTY 651-282-5332 This report is available in alternative formats upon request, and online at www.pca.state.mn.us Document number: wq-ws3-07020011 Contents Executive Summary ................................................................................................................. 1 Intensive Watershed Monitoring Approach Introduction ........................................................ 1 Lake Monitoring Methods ....................................................................................................................... 2 Lake Mixing
    [Show full text]
  • Lower Mississippi River Basin Planning Scoping Document
    2001 Basin Plan Scoping Document Balmm Basin Alliance for the Lower Mississippi In Minnesota Lower Mississippi River Basin Planning Scoping Document June 2001 balmm Basin Alliance for the Lower Mississippi in Minnesota About BALMM A locally led alliance of land and water resource agencies has formed in order to coordinate efforts to protect and improve water quality in the Lower Mississippi River Basin. The Basin Alliance for the Lower Mississippi in Minnesota (BALMM) covers both the Lower Mississippi and Cedar River Basins, and includes a wide range of local, state and federal resource agencies. Members of the Alliance include Soil and Water Conservation District managers, county water planners, and regional staff of the Board of Soil and Water Resources, Pollution Control Agency, Natural Resources Conservation Service, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, University of Minnesota Extension, Department of Natural Resources, Mississippi River Citizen Commission, the Southeastern Minnesota Water Resources Board, the Cannon River Watershed Partnership, and others. BALMM meetings are open to all interested individuals and organizations. Existing staff from county and state agencies provide administrative, logistical and planning support. These include: Kevin Scheidecker, Fillmore SWCD, Chair; Norman Senjem, MPCA-Rochester, Basin Coordinator; Clarence Anderson, Rice SWCD, Area 7 MASWCD Liaison; Bea Hoffmann, SE Minnesota Water Resources Board Liaison. This Basin Plan Scoping Document is the fruit of a year-long effort by participants in BALMM. Environmental Goals, Geographic Management Strategies and Land-Use Strategies were developed by either individual BALMM members or strategy teams. An effort was made to involve those who will implement the strategies in developing them.
    [Show full text]
  • 2. Location the County Limits of Faribault County, Minnesota Street & Number Not for Publication
    FHR-8-300 (11-78) United States Department of the Interior Heritage Conservation and Recreation Service National Register of Historic Places Inventory Nomination Form See instructions in How to Complete National Register Forms Type all entries complete applicable sections /'*) 1. Name (S-^A^ JJLX... sf. Historic Resources of FarFaribault County historic (Partial Inventory - Historic Properties) and/or common 2. Location The County Limits of Faribault County, Minnesota street & number not for publication city, town vicinity of congressional district Second state Minnesota code 22 county Faribault code 043 3. Classification Multiple Resources Category Ownership Status Present Use district public occupied agriculture museum building(s) private unoccupied commercial park structure both work in progress educational private residence site Public Acquisition Accessible entertainment religious object in process yes: restricted government scientific being considered yes: unrestricted industrial transportation no military other: 4. Owner of Property name Multiple Ownership - see inventory forms street & number city, town vicinity of state 5. Location of Legal Description courthouse, registry of deeds, etc. Recorders Office - Faribault County Courthouse street & number city, town Blue Earth state Minnesota 6. Representation in Existing Surveys title Statewide Survey of Historic has this property been determined elegible? yes no Resources date 1979 federal state county local depository for survey records Minnesota Historical Society - 240 Summit Ave.- Hill House Minnesota city, town St. Paul state APR 8198Q FARIBAULT COUNTY The basis of the survey is an inventory of structures which are indicative of various aspects of the county's history. Selection of structures for the inventory included both field reconnaissance or pre-identified sites and isolation of sites on a purely visual basis.
    [Show full text]
  • Tracing Sediment Sources with Meteoric 10Be: Linking Erosion And
    Tracing sediment sources with meteoric 10Be: Linking erosion and the hydrograph Final Report: submitted June 20, 2012 PI: Patrick Belmont Utah State University, Department of Watershed Sciences University of Minnesota, National Center for Earth-surface Dynamics Background and Motivation for the Study Sediment is a natural constituent of river ecosystems. Yet, in excess quantities sediment can severely degrade water quality and aquatic ecosystem health. This problem is especially common in rivers that drain agricultural landscapes (Trimble and Crosson, 2000; Montgomery, 2007). Currently, sediment is one of the leading causes of impairment in rivers of the US and globally (USEPA, 2011; Palmer et al., 2000). Despite extraordinary efforts, sediment remains one of the most difficult nonpoint-source pollutants to quantify at the watershed scale (Walling, 1983; Langland et al., 2007; Smith et al., 2011). Developing a predictive understanding of watershed sediment yield has proven especially difficult in low-relief landscapes. Challenges arise due to several common features of these landscapes, including a) source and sink areas are defined by very subtle topographic features that often cannot be detected even with relatively high resolution topography data (15 cm vertical uncertainty), b) humans have dramatically altered water and sediment routing processes, the effects of which are exceedingly difficult to capture in a conventional watershed hydrology/erosion model (Wilkinson and McElroy, 2007; Montgomery, 2007); and c) as sediment is routed through a river network it is actively exchanged between the channel and floodplain, a dynamic that is difficult to model at the channel network scale (Lauer and Parker, 2008). Thus, while models can be useful to understand sediment dynamics at the landscape scale and predict changes in sediment flux and water quality in response to management actions in a watershed, several key processes are difficult to constrain to a satisfactory degree.
    [Show full text]
  • By David L. Lorenz and Gregory A. Payne
    SELECTED DATA FOR STREAM SUBBASINS IN THE LE SUEUR RIVER BASIN, SOUTH-CENTRAL MINNESOTA By David L. Lorenz and Gregory A. Payne ABSTRACT This report presents selected data that describe the characteristics of stream basins upstream from selected points on streams in the Le Sueur River basin. The points on the streams include outlets of subbasins of about five square miles, sewage treatment plant outlets, and U.S. Geological Survey streamflow-gaging stations in the basin. INTRODUCTION The Le Sueur River upstream from its confluence with the Blue Earth River drains an area of 1,110 mi (square miles). It is located in the counties of Blue Earth, Faribault, Freeborn, Le Sueur, Steele, and Waseca in south-central Minnesota. This report is one of several gazateers providing basin characteristics of streams in Minnesota. It provides selected data for subbasins larger thai about 5 mi , sewage-treatment-plant outlets, and U.S. Geological Survey (USG! streamflow-gaging stations located in the Le Sueur River basin. Methods USGS 7-1/2 minute series topographic maps were used as base maps to obtain the data presented in this report. Data were compiled with a geograph­ ic information system (CIS) and were stored in an Albers equal-area projec­ tion. Data-base functions and other capabilities of the CIS were used to aggregate the data, determine drainage area of the subbasins, and determine stream channel lengths. Elevation data for the streams were recorded at the point were topographic-contour lines interescted the stream traces. Points on the stream channel 10 percent and 85 percent of the stream-channel length from the basin outlet to the drainage divide were located by the CIS, and the elevations of these points were interpolated from the data recorded in the CIS.
    [Show full text]
  • Waseca County Water Plan Cover.Pub
    WASECA COUNTY LOCALWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT 2015 - 2018 (Photo credit: Kelly Hunt) Clear Lake, Waseca, Minnesota Prepared by Waseca County Planning and Zoning This page was intentionally left blank to allow for two-sided printing. WASECA COUNTY WATER PLAN TABLE OF CONTENTS Abbreviations List………………………………………......................... Pg. iii Executive Summary..........................................................................................iv Water Plan Contents……………………………………………………………………………..…..iv Section One: Purpose of the Plan……………………………………………………………....v Section Two: Waseca County Priority Concerns....……………………………….....vi Waseca County Water Plan Task Force……………………………........................vii Section Three: Summary of Goals & Objectives………………………………………..x Section Four: Consistency with Other Plans & Recommended Changes………………………………………………………………………………….……xi Section Five: Nonpoint Priority Funding Plan……………………………………..……xv Chapter One: County Profile & Priority Concerns Assessment………………………………………………………….1 Section One: County Profile……………………………………………………………………..1 Section Two: Reducing Priority Pollutants Assessment………………………………………………………………………….6 Section Three: Drainage & Wetlands Assessment…………………………………………………………………………24 Section Four: Shorelands & Natural Corridors Assessment…………………………………………………………….36 Section Five: Public Education Assessment……………………………………………..39 Waseca County Water Plan Amendment (2015 – 2018) i Chapter Two: Goals, Objectives, and Implementation Steps .................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • R & R Hogs LLC Environmental Assessment Worksheet
    Notice of Availability of an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) R & R Hogs LLC Doc Type: Public Notice Public Comment Information EAW Public comment period begins: July 4, 2016 EAW Public comment period ends: August 3, 2016 Notice published in the EQB Monitor: July 4, 2016 Facility Specific Information Facility name and location: Facility contact: R & R Hogs Alan D. Larsen Faribault County Anez Consulting, Inc. Dunbar Township 1700 Technology Drive NE NW ¼ Section 4 Willmar, MN 56201 Township 104N Range 24 West Phone: 320-235-1970 Fax: 320-235-1986 Email;[email protected] MPCA Contact Information MPCA EAW contact person: MPCA Permit contact person: Laura Hysjulien Desiree Hohenstein Resource Management and Assistance Division Watershed Division Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Minnesota Pollution Control Agency 520 Lafayette Road North 520 Lafayette Road North St. Paul, MN 55-55 St. Paul, MN 55155-4194 Phone: 651-757-2455 Phone: 651-757-2334 Fax: 651-297-2343 Fax: 651-297-2343 Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected] Admin staff phone: 651-757-2100 General Information The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) is distributing this Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) for a 30-day review and comment period pursuant to the Environmental Quality Board (EQB) rules. The MPCA uses the EAW and any comments received to evaluate the potential for significant environmental effects from the project and decide on the need for an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). An electronic version of the EAW is available on the MPCA Environmental Review webpage at http://www.pca.state.mn.us/oxpg691.
    [Show full text]
  • River Bank Erosion in the Minnesota River Valley A
    RIVER BANK EROSION IN THE MINNESOTA RIVER VALLEY A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA BY ANDREW C KESSLER IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIERMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY DR. SATISH C GUPTA DECEMBER 2015 © ANDREW C. KESSLER, 2015 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I gratefully acknowledge the assistance that was provided over the years in completing this research by Blue Earth County Environmental Services Staff especially Scott Salisbury and Professor Susan Galatowitsch of Fish, Wildlife and Conservation Biology for their insights about early survey data; Ryan Mattke and the staff at the University of Minnesota, John R. Borchert Map Library for their help with the historical aerial photographs; and Greg Spoden and Pete Boulay of the State Climatologist Office of the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources for sharing the long-term climatic data. In addition, I’d like to acknowledge help from Ashley Grundtner, Melinda Brown, David Thoma, and Kari Wolf with field work and manuscript reviews. The original 2009 Lidar scan was jointly funded by the Minnesota Corn and Soybean Research and Promotion Councils. Remaining research projects were partially supported with funds from the Minnesota Corn Research and Promotion Council. I’d also like to acknowledge the tireless work of my major adviser Dr. Satish Gupta whose guidance made this research possible. Finally, I would like to acknowledge my wife Andrea and our three daughters for supporting me through this endeavor. i ABSTRACT Sediments remain one of the major causes of water quality impairments in the United States. Although soil erosion from agricultural lands has been viewed as the major source of sediment to rivers and lakes, in many watersheds, river banks are also contributing a significant amount of sediments to surface waters.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction
    Introduction Description of the Study Area The Le Sueur River Major Watershed is one of the twelve major watersheds of the Minnesota River Basin. It is located in south central Minnesota within Blue Earth, Faribault, Freeborn, Le Sueur, Steele, and Waseca counties (Figure 1). Predominate land use within the watershed is agriculture including cultivation and feedlot operations. Urban land use areas include the cities of Eagle Lake, Janesville, Mankato, Mapleton, New Richland, Waseca, Wells, Winnebago, and other smaller communities. The Le Sueur River Major Watershed area is a region of gently rolling ground moraine, with a total area of approximately 1,112 square miles or 711,838 acres. The watershed is subdivided using topography and drainage features into 86 minor watersheds ranging in size from 1,381 acres to 19,978 acres with a mean size of approximately 8,277 acres. The Le Sueur River Major Watershed drainage network is defined by the Le Sueur River and its major tributaries: the Maple River, and the Big Cobb River. Other smaller streams, public and private drainage systems, lakes, and wetlands complete the drainage network. The drainage pattern of the Le Sueur River Watershed is defined by the Le Sueur River which drains from the southeast along the edge of the moranic belt located in the east and north, the Maple River and the Big Cobb River which drain from the south to reach the river’s confluence with the Le Sueur River near the western edge of the watershed. The lakes and other wetlands within the Le Sueur comprise about 5% of the watershed.
    [Show full text]
  • Floods of March-May 1965 in the Upper Mississippi River Basin
    Floods of March-May 1965 in the Upper Mississippi River Basin GEOLOGICAL SURVEY WATER-SUPPLY PAPER 1850-A Prepared in cooperation with the States of Minnesota, Wisconsin, Iowa, Illinois, and Missouri and with agencies of the Federal Government Floods of March-May 1965 in the Upper Mississippi River Basin By D. B. ANDERSON and I. L. BURMEISTER FLOODS OF 1965 IN THE UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY WATER-SUPPLY PAPER 1850-A Prepared in cooperation with the States of Minnesota, Wisconsin, Iowa, Illinois, and Missouri and with agencies of the Federal Government UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON : 1970 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERICR WALTER J. HICKEL, Secretary GEOLOGICAL SURVEY William T. Pecora, Director For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Washington, D.C. 20402 - Price $2.25 (paper cover) CONTENTS Page Abstract. _________________________________________________________ Al Introduction._____________________________________________________ 1 Purpose and scope.________________________________________________ 3 Acknowledgments.________________________________________________ 6 Flood forecasts.___________________________________________________ 6 Meteorological conditions causing floods._____________________________ 7 Conditions previous to March..______ ___________________________ 7 March climatological events.-___--______-_---_-_-_-_____-_-____ 9 April climatological events___________________-_-________________ 13 Thefloods________._______.____.____________________ 15 Mississippi
    [Show full text]
  • Le Sueur River Watershed Priority Management Zone Identification Project
    Le Sueur River Watershed Priority Management Zone Identification Project July 2014 Minnesota Pollution Control Agency 520 Lafayette Road North | Saint Paul, MN 55155-4194 | www.pca.state.mn.us | 651-296-6300 Toll free 800-657-3864 | TTY 651-282-5332 This report is available in alternative formats upon request, and online at www.pca.state.mn.us . Document number: wq-iw7-29q Final Report Format Section 319 and Clean Water Partnership Projects or Final Progress Report for TMDL Development and TMDL Implementation Projects Grant Project Summary Project title: Le Sueur River Watershed - Priority Management Zone Identification Project Organization (Grantee): Greater Blue Earth River Basin Alliance Project start Project end Report submittal date: May 23,2011 date: June 30, 2013 date: 8-1-2013 Grantee contact name: Kay Clark Title: Administrative Coordinator Address: 339 9th Street City: Windom State: MN Zip: 56101 Phone 507-831-1153 number: Ext 3 Fax: 507-831-2928 E-mail: [email protected] Blue Earth, Faribault, Basin (Red, Minnesota, St. Croix, Freeborn and etc.): Minnesota County: Waseca Project type (check one): Clean Water Partnership (CWP) Diagnostic CWP Implementation Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) Development 319 Implementation 319 Demonstration, Education, Research TMDL Implementation Grant Funding Final grant Final total project amount: $84,403.37 costs: $84,403.37 Matching funds: Final Final in- Final cash: $0.00 kind: $0.00 Loan: $0.00 Contract MPCA project number: CFMS No. B56179 manager: Paul Davis For TMDL Development or TMDL
    [Show full text]
  • Le Sueur River Watershed WRAPS Report (Wq-Ws4-10A)
    ` Watershed conditions and restoration and protection strategies Le Sueur River WRAPS Report Circa 1913 Circa 2013 August 2015 wq-ws4-10a Credits Author: Joanne Boettcher, Project Manager: Paul Davis Editing and comment: MPCA Staff- Eileen Campbell, Pat Baskfield, Scott MacLean, Lee Ganske BWSR Staff- Matt Drewitz, Chris Hughes MDNR Staff- Brooke Hacker, Jon Lore, Brady Swanson MDA Staff – Bill VanRyswyk, Scott Matteson, Heidi Peterson GIS maps and analysis: Ashley Ignatius, Joanne Boettcher, Breeanna Bateman HSPF model assistance and data management: Chuck Regan, Ben Rousch Strategies Development Workshop Planning/Facilitation: John Knisley (Brown County), Mark Schaetzke (Freeborne County SWCD), Joanne Boettcher Strategies Development Team (and report comment): · Mark Schaetzke, Freeborn County SWCD · Michelle Stindtman, Faribault County/SWCD · Dick Hoffman, Freeborn County · Merissa Lore, Faribault County/SWCD · Mark Lieferman, Waseca County · Joe Mutschler, Faribault County/SWCD · Julie Conrad, Blue Earth County · Ryan Braulick, NRCS - Mankato · Paul Zimmer, City of Mankato · Eileen Campbell, MPCA - Mankato · Brooke Hacker, DNR - Mankato · Bryan Spindler, MPCA - Mankato · Chris Hughes, BWSR - Mankato · Paul Davis, MPCA - Mankato · Bill VanRyswyk, MDA - Mankato Additional strategies and report comment: Jerad Bach and Christina Stueber, Blue Earth County SWCD Final strategies synthesis, calculations, and editing: Joanne Boettcher Spatial Targeting Workshop Planning/Facilitation: Rick Moore, Ashley Ignatius, Joanne Boettcher Spatial Targeting
    [Show full text]