MISSISSIPPI MAKEOVER A Plan for Restoration, Just Around the Bend

Transcription

1 MISSISSIPPI MAKEOVER A Plan for Restoration, Just Around the Bend Interim Report Card 2013 Project coordinated by the Dakota County Soil and Water Conservation District and sponsored by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency with funding from the Clean Water Land and Legacy Amendment with matching funds and support from the Vermillion River Watershed Joint Powers Organization and the National Park Service.

2 The Makeover Project focused on planning for ecological restoration in Spring Lake and lower Pool 2, Pool 3, and the Lower Vermillion River. The Project engaged citizens in developing a vision and indicators of successful restoration and utilized technical experts to help set quantifiable targets. This report card summarizes the most recent data on the indicators and shows how close, or how far we are from reaching the targets. As you can see in the tables below, some indicator metrics have recently improved. However, these may be temporary results of low water during the drought years. It will take additional years of data collection and more analyses to track the trends of the indicators. INDICATOR: aquatic vegetation AQUATIC VEGETATION is one of the most important components of a healthy aquatic ecosystem. It includes floating leaved plants that are rooted to the bottom, submersed plants that grow entirely under water, and emergent plants that grow above water along shorelines and in marshes. Vegetation is influenced by substrate, flow, and water clarity and is measured by percent frequency of occurrence, species richness, and biomass. ( ) ( ) Frequency of NA 11 a 26 b occurrence (%) of submerged aquatic vegetation Number of species NA a Updated from original indicators target table due to further data analysis b Exceeds targets due to lower summer water levels in 2006, 2007, and 2009, leading to reduced water level fluctuations. Water level fluctuation is an important physical variable in the distribution of submersed aquatic vegetation. Total suspended solids and turbidity were also lower in these years, allowing more sunlight to reach the river bottom and resulting in increased vegetation. There is a lag time before submerged vegetation responds to both positive and negative variables, however. Thus, the conditions for vegetation were improving in , but the plants needed 1-2 years to respond to the positive change. Unfortunately, analysis of the latest vegetation data indicates that levels are returning to lower frequencies once again. This is likely a delayed response to the water levels and turbidity levels that are on the rise with the end of the drought.

3 INDICATOR: Water Clarity WATER CLARITY is simply how far you can see into the water. It is influenced by the amount of suspended and dissolved material in the water - often referred to as total suspended solids (TSS). It includes both organics like algae, and inorganics like sediment. Measurements of clarity include total suspended solids (TSS), turbidity and Secchi disk transparency. Makeover Indicator TSS (mg/l) summer average at Lock & Dams 2 and 3 Secchi depth (cm) summer average at Lock & Dam 3 Secchi depth (cm) summer lake wide average in Lake Pepin < ( ) (2012) NA NA 68 ( ) INDICATOR: sedimentation SEDIMENTATION is the deposition of soil (sand, silt and clay) and organic matter (decomposing plant material) in rivers and their floodplains. Sediment comes from tributary watersheds, and from within the river s channel and floodplain. Lake Pepin is a natural sink for sediment. The slow current allows most of the sediment coming into Lake Pepin to settle on the bottom. Common measurements for sedimentation are load, rate, and composition. Life span of Lake Pepin (years) Accumulation amount (metric tons/year) ( ) ( ) 4, , , , , ,000

4 INDICATOR: invertebrates INVERTEBRATES are the bugs and clams (mussels) found in the river. There are many types of invertebrates, and their presence and numbers depend upon substrate, vegetation, flow, nutrients, dissolved oxygen, and other factors. Invertebrates are good indicators of ecosystem health. Some populations (like mayflies) react quickly to changes in water quality and physical conditions, while others (like mussels) are affected by longer term changes. Much attention has been placed on mussel populations in recent years, and good data are available to monitor the status of their populations. Much less information is available regarding other invertebrates in the reach of river upstream of Lake Pepin. Common measurements to track invertebrates include catch per unit effort and species richness. Makeover Indicator Catch/unit effort (% sites with 10/min) Catch/unit effort (% sites with 1/min) (2008) (2012) NA 0 a NA Species richness (# species) Mucket mussel (% of population) a Updated from original indicators target table due to error in original table

5 INDICATOR: Fish There are many different FISH in the Upper River, including game fish, panfish, non-game, and forage fish. Game fish are the most well-known and include popular species sought by anglers like walleye, largemouth bass, and channel catfish. Panfish are generally more common than game fish and include bluegill, crappie, white bass and other smaller species that are also popular with anglers. There are many species of non-game fish, including redhorse, freshwater drum, bowfin, paddlefish and sturgeon. Forage fish include many species of minnows and smaller fish that serve as a food source for larger predators. Gizzard shad and emerald shiner are two of the most common. There are also many rare native species found in specific habitats, like the crystal darter which lives in deep channels with high current, the weed shiner found in backwaters with abundant vegetation, and the skipjack herring which is a long distance migrant found here only during or following flood events. In addition, invasive species are present; the common carp and the recently discovered bighead and silver carp are causing great concern. Fish are sampled by several agencies throughout all River pools. Common measurements to track fish include catch per unit effort, size structure, and species assemblage. Fish Assemblage or Communities in Channel and Backwaters Assemblages dominated by rough fish like carp, gizzard shad and bullhead minnows as measured in Upper Pool 4. Fish assemblages have not changed drastically since 2008, but there appears to be shifts in species abundance. Since 2008, monitoring shows that species requiring clearer water and submerged aquatic vegetation have increased in Pool 3 and upper Pool 4 while some species that do better in more turbid water have decreased. Bluegill, largemouth bass and yellow perch numbers were found well above the long-term ( ) mean in each of the past 5 years, while carp and gizzard shad numbers have decreased. Other species including walleye, catfish and important commercial species (buffalo and quillback) are also doing well. There has also been an increase in the numbers of two large river species, lake sturgeon and paddlefish. Assemblages more closely resembling those found in Pool 13 with more bluegill and largemouth bass in backwaters and channel catfish and smallmouth buffalo in channel. Assemblages more closely resembling those found in Upper Pool 8 with even more bluegills and largemouth bass in backwaters and bluegills, large and smallmouth bass in channel without dominance of rough fish.

6 INDICATOR: waterfowl During the course of developing indicators for the Makeover Project, it was discovered that only anecdotal information on waterfowl populations existed for Pools 2, 3, upper 4 and Lake Pepin. While waterfowl surveys were completed annually on lower River pools downstream of Lake Pepin, surveys were not being conducted upstream of Lake Pepin. As a result of advocacy from the Citizen Advisory Group and interest among technical experts, waterfowl surveys began in Pools 2, 3 and 4 through collaboration among several agencies including the National Park Service, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Minnesota Department of Resources, Wisconsin Department of Resources, Prairie Island Indian Community, Audubon, and the River Fund. Improvements in Waterfowl Populations Anecdotal evidence indicates backwaters of Pool 2 (Spring Lake) were historically a renowned waterfowl hunting ground. Unknown; data lacking No target set due to lack of data Annual fall waterfowl counts in Pools 2, 3, 4 and Lake Pepin began in Data indicate that while there are a variety of geese, ducks and swans present in these pools, their population numbers are lower than pools below Lake Pepin. There could be many reasons for this including a lack of good habitat and food sources. An additional factor that may be affecting waterfowl numbers in this area is the amount of disturbance from boaters or hunters and a lack of Waterfowl Hunting Closed Areas and/or No Hunting Zones. Experts and researchers in the Upper River National Wildlife Refuge near Winona report that if the birds are not given the chance to feed and rest in the area due to some sort of disturbance (hunting or otherwise), they will move down river to find a place with refuge. Waterfowl counts will continue in Pools 2 4 if funding and resources are available. It will be interesting to track trends in waterfowl numbers as habitat restoration projects are implemented here.

7 Related reports The Minnesota Department of Resources now maintains an interactive website with the Watershed Health Assessment Framework. The assessment provides an overview of the ecological health of Minnesota's 81 major watersheds. By providing a snapshot of the condition of our natural systems today, this assessment also provides a baseline to discuss how to improve and maintain healthy systems for tomorrow. This site will be updated regularly to report current data and track trends over time. The website includes a report card for each of the major watersheds in the state, reporting scores on biology, hydrology, geomorphology, water quality and connectivity. MDNR s Watershed Health Assessment: Friends of the River (FMR) and the National Park Service (NPS) teamed up to develop the State of the River Report in The Report highlights 13 key indicators of river health, and details the results in way that non-scientists can understand. The report provides a current snapshot, as well as history and trends, of factors affecting the health of the river and solutions to help protect and improve the metro portion of the River. By presenting clear and concise information on important factors of water quality and river health, the State of the River Report offers readers the opportunity to learn more about this resource and contribute to its protection and restoration. FMR s and NPS s State of the River Report: The Lake Pepin Legacy Alliance (LPLA) recently developed its Local Resource Management Scorecard for counties in the Minnesota River Basin. Goals of the scorecard include recognizing successes in remediation of sedimentation and compliance with regulations and best practices; recognizing accountability in monitoring and enforcement of regulations; identifying obstacles, opportunities, and solutions to reducing soil erosion and keeping water on the land; encouraging cooperation among local units of government; and providing a means for counties to more easily share information on their processes, funding sources, success rates, and areas in need of attention. LPLA s Local Resource Management Scorecard: