2007 Report on the Water Quality of Minnesota Streams Citizen Stream-Monitoring Program Environmental Analysis and Outcomes Division October 2008 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 The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency thanks the 2007 Citizen Stream-Monitoring Program volunteers for their efforts in collecting water-quality data. Their commitment and dedication to stream monitoring and protection are greatly appreciated. Special thanks to the following people for their contributions to this report: Author and Manuscript Reviewers Johanna Schussler Laurie Sovell Cover Photo John Feneis (Mustinka River) Data Entry Andrea Ebner Nancy Flandrick Jean Garvin Shane Hanly Miranda Nichols Lynda Nelson Johanna Schussler Sandra Simbeck Laurie Sovell wq-csm2-07 The MPCA is reducing printing and mailing costs by using the Internet to distribute reports and information to a wider audience. For additional information, see the Web site: http://www.pca.state.mn.us/water/csmp.html Table of Contents List of Figures........................................................................................................................2 List of Tables .........................................................................................................................2 Introduction............................................................................................................................3 Ecoregions and Stream Water Quality...................................................................................4 Section 1. How CSMP Volunteers Collect and Use Data .....................................................5 What CSMP Volunteers Measure....................................................................................5 Putting CSMP Data to Work............................................................................................9 Section 2. Summary of 2007 CSMP Data .............................................................................10 Stream Monitoring Results ..............................................................................................10 Rainfall Monitoring Results.............................................................................................13 Bibliography ..........................................................................................................................17 Useful Definitions..................................................................................................................18 Appendix 1. Minnesota Drainage Basins & Major Watersheds Map and Key..........................................19 Appendix 2. Summary of 2007 CSMP Data Collected with 60-cm Transparency Tube...........................23 Appendix 3. Summary of 2007 CSMP Data Collected with 100-cm Transparency Tube.........................66 2007 Report on the Water Quality of Minnesota Streams • October 2008 • Minnesota Pollution Control Agency 1 List of Figures Figure 1. Increase in CSMP Volunteers and Sites, 1998 – 2007...........................................4 Figure 2. Minnesota’s Seven Ecoregions. Mapped by U.S. EPA..........................................4 Figure 3. Range of Stream Transparency and Water Quality................................................6 Figure 4. CSMP Rain Gauge .................................................................................................8 Figure 5. CSMP Stream Stage Estimate ................................................................................8 Figure 6. Number of 2007 CSMP Sites in Each Major Drainage Basin ...............................11 Figure 7. Map of 2007 Average Transparency Readings ......................................................12 Figure 8. Percentage of CSMP Sites across 5 Categories of Average Transparency............13 Figure 9a. 2007 Water Year Precipitation Map.....................................................................15 Figure 9b. 2007 Departure from Normal Precipitation Map .................................................16 List of Tables Table 1. Interquartile Range of Concentrations for Least-Impacted Streams .......................5 2007 Report on the Water Quality of Minnesota Streams • October 2008 • Minnesota Pollution Control Agency 2 Introduction The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency’s possible to track the effects of (MPCA) Citizen Stream-Monitoring rainfall runoff on their stream. At the Program (CSMP) began in 1998. The CSMP end of each monitoring season, was designed to give individuals across volunteers submit their data to the Minnesota an opportunity for involvement MPCA. An annual report in a simple yet meaningful stream- summarizes data collected by monitoring program that provides data volunteers statewide and is posted on management and interpretation. 2007 the MPCA Web site. Volunteers also marked the CSMP’s tenth season with 490 receive individual reports specific to volunteers submitting data collected from their stream monitoring sites. 831 different sites across the state. The This report summarizes data collected by CSMP grew again in 2007, with 4 more CSMP volunteers during 2007. The first volunteers and 38 more sites than the section describes what CSMP volunteers do previous year (Figure 1). Of the 490 and gives examples of how participants use volunteers in the program, 81 turned in data CSMP data. Section 2 presents a summary for the first time in 2007. of volunteer data from the 2007 monitoring The CSMP uses a collaborative season. The Appendices contain data approach to stream monitoring by summaries for each site monitored. partnering with citizen volunteers who live on or near a stream, and who are interested in water quality. Any person or group willing to devote a small amount of time and energy on a regular basis can CSMP Goals: participate in the CSMP. Volunteers receive a transparency tube, rain gauge, data sheets, and instructions 6 Collect valuable water-quality for taking measurements. Once data by expanding statewide enrolled, participants visit an stream-monitoring established spot on a nearby stream once per week from April to 6 Provide a basic program for September to measure Stream anyone interested in stream Transparency, Water Level (Stage), monitoring Appearance and Recreational Suitability. In addition to weekly 6 Complement existing citizen efforts stream measurements, rainfall is recorded daily. Volunteers are also 6 Facilitate awareness of water-quality encouraged to monitor immediately issues & promote shared goals after large rainfall events whenever 2007 Report on the Water Quality of Minnesota Streams • October 2008 • Minnesota Pollution Control Agency 3 Figure 1. Increase in CSMP quality for a region, were sampled by the Volunteers and Sites, 1998 – 2007 MPCA to characterize stream conditions for each ecoregion (McCollor and Heiskary 900 1993). The results provide a baseline with 800 which to compare streams. In other words, 700 the least-impacted streams are the yardsticks 600 500 by which we measure other streams. Table 1 400 lists the typical total phosphorus, total 300 suspended solids, and turbidity values for 200 least-impacted streams in six ecoregions. 100 0 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 Figure 2. Minnesota’s Seven Number of Volunteers Number of Sites Ecoregions. Mapped by U.S. EPA N or th e rn Ecoregions and Stream Water Mi n n es o ta W etlands Quality The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has divided the continental United States into ecoregions based on soils, geomorphology, land use and potential Red River natural vegetation. In Minnesota, this results Valley in seven fairly distinct ecoregions (Figure Northern Lakes 2). The Northern Lakes and Forests and Forests ecoregion (NLF) is predominately forested, N o r t h Central has numerous lakes and is located in the Ha r d wood Forests northeastern part of Minnesota. The Western Corn Belt Plains ecoregion (WCBP), located Northern in the southern third of Minnesota, has Glaciated Plains rolling terrain and is extensively cultivated Driftless for row crop farming. The ecoregion Area framework provides a good basis for evaluating differences and similarities in Minnesota's streams. Western Corn B e lt P la i n s “Least-impacted” streams, which are felt to be representative and reflect, expected water 2007 Report on the Water Quality of Minnesota Streams • October 2008 • Minnesota Pollution Control Agency 4 Table 1. Interquartile Range of Concentrations for Least-Impacted Streams in Minnesota by Ecoregion.1 Distributions of annual data from 1970-1992 (McCollor and Heiskary, 1993; note 1 mg/L = 1 ppm = 1,000 ppb) Total Phosphorus Total Suspended Solids Turbidity (mg/L) (mg/L) (NTU) Region/ 25% 50% 75% 25% 50% 75% 25% 50% 75% Percentile NLF 0.02 0.04 0.05 1.8 3.3 6.0 1.7 2.5 4.3 NMW 0.04 0.06 0.09 4.8 8.6 16.0 4.1 6.0 10.0 NCHF 0.06 0.09 0.15 4.8 8.8 16.0 3.0 5.1 8.5 NGP 0.09 0.16 0.25 11.0 34.0 63.0 5.6 15.0 23.5 RRV 0.11 0.19 0.30 11.0 28.0 59.0 6.0 12.0 23.0 WCBP 0.16 0.24 0.33 10.0 27.0 61.0 5.2 12.0 22.0 Section 1. How CSMP Volunteers Collect and Use Data What CSMP Volunteers Measure Stream Water Transparency Stream transparency is an indirect measure Tracking water transparency is like of the amount of dissolved and suspended monitoring your blood pressure because it materials present in water. For most bodies tells us about the health of a stream. of water, the amount of solids suspended