soil & water nonpoint technical assistance, county road inventory, and wetland initiatives...

8/14/2019 Soil & Water Nonpoint Technical Assistance, County Road Inventory, and Wetland Initiatives (306-11-10)

1/62


2/62

Introduction:

The Cook County Soil and Water Conservation District has been involved inconservation and sustainable land use practices for over 40 years. With the assistance of a Lake Superior Coastal Program grant, the district was able to pursue three innovativeand important conservation tasks.

First, a key responsibility of a local conservation district is to provide technicalassistance to landowners within the County. This grant allowed SWCD staff to offer abroad range of technical services ranging from providing more extensive review of construction projects affecting public waters and wetlands, to assisting local landownerson proper BMP planning, to establishing a thorough water quality monitoring programfor a portion of the stormwater infrastructure of a local municipality.

The second task that was worked on was an inventory of stream and drainage crossingson County Roads within the coastal zone. County Roads have been identified in the localwater management plan as significant sources of sediment to the many streams in thecounty that drain into Lake Superior. Stream crossings also can become barriers to fishand other aquatic organism passage. Finally, stream crossings tend to be weak points inrural infrastructure systems, as they are often deteriorated and eroded. The inventory thatwas completed represents an important planning tool and will allow the SWCD and theCounty to identify priority projects for future restoration.

The district was also able to pursue a wetland initiative that sought to do two things: One,it aimed to provide additional wetland education and outreach to the community,

especially to individuals in the construction community. Second, the grant allowed theSWCD to participate in a Northeast Wetland Mitigation Strategy, a region-wide effort toidentify wetland mitigation in NE Minnesota.

Work Completed:

Nonpoint Technical Assistance

Cook SWCD staff provided technical assistance and review of projects and plans rangingfrom proposals to impact wetlands and public waters permit applications to developmentplans for local municipalities and non-profit orgranizations. Staff also developed andimplemented a water monitoring project for key components of the City of Grand Maraisstormwater infrastructure. Included in this monitoring effort was measurement of water


3/62

Wetland Initiative

This task contained three wetland-related initiatives. The first was to identify potentialwetland mitigation sites in Cook County. To that end, Cook SWCD staff coordinatedwith the Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources to identify sites that possessedcharacteristics that gave them a potential for wetland mitigation. After field reviewingthe sites and corresponding with landowners, it was clear that mitigation opportunitieswere not abundant. However, there were some sites that we would like to look into inmore detail. SWCD staff will continue to meet with the County Planning & Zoning tocreate a County Wetland Bank using the results of the inventory.

The second initiative in this task involved the mapping of historical wetland impacts inthe county to assess which watersheds had been most impacted by wetland alteration andloss. In lieu of the mapping project, staff attended the week-long wetland delineatortraining in Little Falls. This was a valuable training that gave staff an enhancedknowledge of wetland hydrology, soils, and vegetation. Better wetland delineations andboundary determinations are a result of staff attending this important training.

The final initiative was to pursue outreach activities on the subject of wetlands that wouldprovide greater understanding of the Wetland Conservation Act and wetland science.The target audience for this training was the construction community. Constructioncontractors are most often the primary contact for land altering activities, and theirunderstanding of rules and regulations can often be the difference between a project thathas minimal impacts on the environment and one that becomes and enforcement case andhas expansive, long-term impacts on the environment. A day-long training was held in

conjunction with the Cook County Planning and Zoning office in May 2009 that coveredthese important topics. There were 25 participants at the workshop. The presentationgiven by Cook SWCD is included with this report.

Road Inventory

Work on this task progressed through four separate phases as outlined in the proposal.

The first of these was a literature review and project planning phase. Staff reviewedrelevant scientific reports and presentations from similar projects that have been carriedout in other parts of the country. Staff from the Cook County Hwy Department, Cook SWCD, Technical Service Area #3, and Cook County MIS Department met three timesduring the winter and spring of 2009 to discuss project goals and methods. During thesemeetings, we recognized that the inventory needed to be more focused on the most


4/62

database for easier interpretation. Phase three progressed simultaneously with phase two.The final phase of the task was to summarize the findings of the road inventory project

into a final report. That report is included as an appendix to this report, along with thefinal GIS data that was collected.

Results:

Nonpoint Technical Assistance

Staff performed 16 technical reviews of non-wetland related projects. Cook SWCD alsoprovided education materials on shoreland restoration, native plantings, and watershedawareness at the Gunflint Green-Up fair in May 2009 and the County Fair in August2009.

Cook SWCD technical staff observed implementation of six erosion reduction BMPs inthe lower Poplar River watershed. Staff also attended three landowner associationmeetings to discuss and plan for construction projects.

Cook SWCD Conservation Projects Assistant summarized rainfall, water level, streamflow, and turbidity data for the 2009 monitoring season on Nature Boy Creek. The finalreport for this portion of the project can be found in Appendix F.

SWCD staff served on the Cook County Wetland Technical Evaluation Panel. SWCDtechnical staff reviewed 38 applications to impact wetlands, including 14 wetland

delineations. Staff wrote three wetland Restoration Orders and awarded two Certificatesof Satisfactory Restoration. Staff attended 7 days of wetland continuing education,including a 5-day wetland delineation course, the US Army Corps of Engineersdelineation manual updates, and the Minnesota Wetlands conference. The Cook SWCDoffice received, referred and reported citizen wetland concerns. All of the above activitieswere also reported to the SWCD Board at their monthly meetings.

County Road Inventory

Three-hundred water crossings on County Roads were inventoried. Of these, 24 wereidentified as likely barriers to aquatic organism passage. An additional thirteen crossingswere identified as potential barriers to aquatic organism passage and more study wasrecommended to make this determination. These sites are potential candidates for future


5/62

feasibility of creating a local wetland bank. These sites are potential candidates for futurecoastal habitat protection projects.

Cook SWCD staff partnered with the Cook County Planning and Zoning Department toprovide a contractors workshop in May 2009. The full-day workshop includedpresentations on topics ranging from wetland avoidance to erosion control BMPimplementation.

Partnerships:

Minnesota Board of Water and Soil ResourcesTechnical Service Area 3City of Grand MaraisCounty of Cook Highway and Information Systems (MIS) DepartmentsGunflint Green Up CommitteeCounty Fair BoardUSDA Forest Service

Leveraged Dollars:Cook SWCD reported $ 3,844.76 in leveraged dollars beyond the 50% match requiredfor this project.

Conservation Engineer Technical Service Area #3 $ 1,244.76 Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources $ 2,600.00

Conclusions:

Providing technical assistance to local landowners and local government units continuesto be an important component of implementing conservation practices. Cook SWCD isable to fill the role of information provider and reviewer of projects that impact thenatural resources of the coastal zone such as wetlands and public waters. The

implementation of a water monitoring project on a portion of the Grand Maraisstormwater system has provided valuable information that will guide efforts to reduceflooding and sediment loading to Lake Superior. Our initial labors to create a databaserecord of technical assistance were scaled back due to software complications. We willmove this work into a simpler spreadsheet approach to track work accomplished andlandowners assisted.
http:///reader/full/3,844.76http:///reader/full/1,244.76http:///reader/full/2,600.00http:///reader/full/3,844.76http:///reader/full/1,244.76http:///reader/full/2,600.00


6/62

success of this particular task by pursuing additional funding options for expansion of theinventory to the remainder of the county road system. We are also exploring options for

restoration projects based on the prioritization of projects as determined by the inventory.The granting of Lake Superior Coastal Program funding and the success of this projecthave allowed us to pursue these avenues.

The creation of a Cook County wetland bank is complicated by the lack of readilyavailable mitigation sites. However, with the help of this grant we have finally identifiedsome sites that could eventually be put into a conservation easement, which wouldprovide valuable coastal habitat protection.

Appendices

A. Project photosB. Performance Indicators ChecklistC. BudgetD. Road Inventory ReportE. Potential Wetland Mitigation Sites MapF. Nature Boy Creek Monitoring ReportG. Contractor Workshop PresentationH. Technical Assistance and Wetland Review Reports


7/62

Appendix A: Project photos

Photo 1.) Gunflint Greenup Fair, SWCD information booth. Phototaken 5-01-2009 by Cindy Gentz, Cook SWCD Water Plan Coordinator.

Photo 2.) Nature Boy Creek Water Sampler, installed and collectingdata on a stream in Grand Marais. SWCD information booth. Phototaken 06-29-2009 by Brandon Stephens, Cook SWCD ConservationProjects Assistant.


8/62


9/62

Appendix B: Performance Indicators Checklist


10/62

Appendix C: Project Budget


11/62

Appendix D: Road Inventory Report

*Note: GIS files for this portion of the project can be found on CD #2.


12/62

Appendix E: Potential Wetland Mitigation Sites Map


13/62

Appendix F. Nature Boy Creek Monitoring Report


14/62

Nature Boy Creek Monitoring Summer 2009 -Summary

Soil & Water

Conservation District

Prepared by:Brandon Stephens

Conservation Projects AssistantCook County Soil and Water Conservation District


15/62


16/62

interface between computers and the instrument was purchased for $2200. Theautosampler was then installed on the Nature Boy Creek just south of County Road 7

on June 29th

, 2009.The ISCO was setup to collect water level, rainfall rate and collect samplesonce triggered by rainfall. The primary advantage of an autosampler is that it cancollect samples based on predefined parameters (ie flow rate, time interval, rainfallrate) and does not require the individual to enter into the field to collect samples byhand. The goal for the ISCO this summer was to try different combinations ofparameters to get a more complete data set the following summer. It is also hopedthat data collected in the next season would be entered into the MPCAs STORETdatabase.

After trying different combinations of rainfall rate, flow rate and time intervalsthe best program was determined to have the following parameters:

The instrument triggers initially based on a 0.1 per hour rainfall event(termed part A) and collect one sample after being triggered.

Begin part B where sample is collected every 10-12 minutes for bottlesnumbered 2-13, then collect every 30 minutes for bottles 14-24.

Samples collected by the ISCO could remain in the field for up to 24-hours;however, it was recommended to get them in a cold environment in as soon aspossible. If the samples were to remain at room temperature for longer than a day,the samples would become significantly altered by bacterial degradation of theorganic material in the water. It was also recommended that the samples be analyzedwithin one week so that they are not altered by cold-tolerant bacterial species.

Samples that were collected this summer were analyzed for Total Suspended Solids(TSS) by ERA labs in Duluth.

Data collected by the ISCO in 2009 demonstrate that most often the rainfallevents were intense and short, giving rise to flashy discharge events. This may not betrue for every year on the Grand Marais stormwater ditch; however, based on thisdata it is best to collect samples after a rainfall event exceeds 0.1 per hour and thencollect samples every 10-12 minutes for 2 hours then every 30 minutes for the next 5-6

hours. This sampling program should capture the rise and fall of discharge from mostrainfall events on the Nature Boy Creek. Certainly, events that exceed the 50-year rainfall event could continue to discharge through the stormwater system for morethan 8-12 hours; however, it is more important to set a program based on averageconditions (and the same is true for a program setup based on flow).

In speaking with Bruce Wilson, the stormwater program manager for the


17/62

stormwater system. This should be the ultimate goal for updating the ICECOR modeldefined in the 2001 Grand Marais Stormwater Management Plan.

ConclusionsNature Boy Creek monitoring for the summer of 2009 demonstrated that the

ponds and creek respond immediately to any rainfall event exceeding 0.05 per hour.This reiterates the fact that this is a flashy system wherein steep slopes and shallowbedrock predominate the landscape attributes. The data collected is on such a finescale that one may even notice diurnal trends where the water level increases over night and decreases during the daytime. TSS data also demonstrate that significantamounts of sediment are transported into the ditch with rainfall events exceeding0.1 per hour (without any rainfall within the past 24 hours). One goal of monitoringfor the following season should be to better quantify the amount of sediment that isbeing discharged by the Nature Boy Creek.


18/62

Nature Boy Creek Monitoring Summer 2009


Soil & Water

Conservation District

Prepared by:Brandon StephensConservation Projects AssistantCook County Soil and Water Conservation District

This document includes:

1)-Summary of the Grand Marais Storm Water Management Plan, CookCounty Water Plan Initiatives, and the recent (2009) SWCDrecommendations of remedial action on the Nature Boy Creek.

2) Monitoring plan for Nature Boy Creek with photos of site selectionand ISCO installation.

3) Description of instrumental uses on the Creek, including the initiationand deployment of the ISCO autosampler and a description of theWL15 water level logger failure and trade-in.

4) -Data collected by the ISCO water level loggers and rain gauge (which


19/62


20/62


projects should be placed along this bank and vegetated in order todeepen the channel and lessen the frequency of overflowing the creek.

7) - Detention ponds should be installed in order to dampen out peak runoff flows and provide some water quality treatment of the stormwater runoff. Existing ponds should also be excavated so that theycontinue to remove sediment (by settling) from storm water run off.

In the ICECOR report the Village Ditch (i.e. Nature Boy Creek) was identified asan existing problem site (in addition to BDA, Creechville, downtown Grand Marais,Old Ski Hill, Gunflint Trail, and outlets into Lake Superior). Some recommendationsspecific to the Village Ditch include:

1)- Relieving some of the pressure on the Village Ditch by either divertingsome of the flow from the ditch to ditches down Co. Rd 12 or extendthe culvert northeast in a Y shaped casting. Riprap aprons wouldneed to be placed on each end of the extension to focus the run offinto the culvert.

2) - The north bank of the Village Ditch should be excavated and widenedbetween the wooden bridges near the athletic building. The excavatedspoils should be placed on the southern ditch bank to increase itsheight, and it should then be well vegetated.

3) - Higher velocity flow events should be diverted from residentialproperty located on the southern bank of the creek approximately 400feet east of 7 th Avenue East. The exposed bedrock should be blasted

out to level the creek bottom and perhaps deepen the centerline. Thebank should also be armored; however, this is not likely to entirelyprevent the bank becoming eroded behind the armoring.

4) - A 6x11 box culvert at County Road 7 should be able to contain andconvey storm water run off under the 100 year storm event.

5) - Heavy-duty riprap and geofabric should be put in place on the VillageDitch immediately down gradient of the Highway 61 crossing. Deeper center channels should also be created to focus flows away from thecreek banks.


21/62


Current Accomplishments of the Grand Marais Storm WaterManagement Plan and Water Plan Initiatives (in Relation to theNature Boy Creek) Summer 2009

Much of what was originally recommended in the 2001 storm water management plan has been accomplished to date.

The ditch has been widened in several locations by either excavation or blasting this took place downstream of 7 th Ave. E. New culverts were put inplace crossing 7 th Ave. E. and Co. Rd. 7.

Geofabric and other armoring have been put in place in order to reduce bankerosion. Armoring was placed on the banks immediately up and downstreamof Co. Rd. 7.

Storm water retention ponds (2) were put in just below the Gunflint Trail and

cement blocks (concrete block assembly) line the hillside leading into theponds. Native seed mix was spread twice (the first time failed due toextenuating circumstances. The water level of the ponds is currently beingmonitored with water loggers.

A berm was put in place immediately behind the football field to reduce theflooding potential of the creek during spring melt and heavy rainfall events.

An automatic sampler was put on the Nature Boy Cr in 2005 and then again in2009 to collect samples during rain events. Samples were analyzed for totalsuspended solids (TSS) to get an understanding of the sediment load duringrain events.

Several forms of outreach with Cook County residents took place so thatcitizens could understand the importance of proper storm water management. These took place in the form of news articles, student projects,public meetings and website design.


22/62


Recommendations to monitoring the Grand Marais StormWater Management Plan 2003-2004

In December of 2003 Jeff Lee and Chris Bonick of Barr Engineeringrecommended the following in a memo in order to properly monitor the storm water system of Grand Marais.

Staff gauges should be relocated to areas where the stream channel iswell defined and stable. Areas of low flows should be avoided so that

the area of the channel is readily identifiable and does not shift over asampling season. Examples of ideal gauge locations include at a rockledge or at a weir. The best locations would be either at the culverts inthe municipal campground or at the culvert immediately downstreamof Hwy 61. The gauges once installed should be surveyed each year todetermine if they have moved.

Water level loggers should be, like the staff gauges, relocated to

better-defined locations in the stream. The best locations for these areon the upstream side of nearby culverts. Automated sampling equipment should be purchased to collect

samples when a specified water flow condition has been met. Apressure transducer is best suited for the Village Ditch (Nature BoyCreek) to measure water level changes. An area-velocity flow meter isnot recommended because there is not a well-defined, uniform

channel. A 24-bottle configuration is recommended so that it can collect the

greatest number of separate samples to be analyzed. Also, a protectivestructure should be built to protect the autosampler unit from weather events. Either ISCO or Sigma autosamplers are recommended.

Barr recommends placing the autosampler just upstream of the Co. Rd.7 crossing on the Village Ditch (Nature Boy Creek). There are shrubs

that could conceal the autosampler and this section of the ditch isstable.

Four baseflow samples should be collected along the ditch: one at theupstream end of the ditch, one at the highway facility and two atlocations in between. Samples should be tested to determine the


23/62


24/62


Cook County Water Plan Initiatives (in Relation to Nature BoyCreek) December 2007

Dave Stark, a previous Water Plan Coordinator with the Cook County SWCD,summarized the status of the Village Ditch (Nature Boy Creek) monitoring program.Dave reported that data about the ditch was scant and unreliable at best. Water levelloggers and an ISCO autosampler had been deployed previously, but the exactlocations of the water level loggers was not listed and the ISCO was not successful inrecording a full data set. The ISCO had been put in place in July of 2004 and recordedflow, water level and collected samples after a rain event from July to December 2004. However, the ISCO was not deployed again in 2005, which would have allowedfor a complete season of data collection.

Some of the ISCO sampling parameters included:1) Trigger to start collecting grab samples for turbidity analysis

after a 0.1 per hour rainfall event.

2) After collecting an initial (500 ml) sample the program becameflow based to collect a sample every 3 pulses.

3) The ISCO would continue to collect samples until all 24 bottleshad been filled.

Also in this initiatives document were a few recommendations by KeithAnderson, Joint Powers Engineer. He recommended that the storm water retention

ponds be accurately evaluated for retention capacity and hydrology. We should alsoevaluate previous modeling efforts so that this may be effectively updated, whichcould be supplemented by consultation with a contract-for-hire engineer. The BDAponds should be investigated in terms of design, location and function. Finally, theStorm Water Management Plan requires serious consideration for review andupdate.


25/62


Village Creek Remediation Recommendations Summer 2009

On May 28th , 2009 a group of staff from EDA, KGM Construction, SEH, the Cityof Grand Marais, Cook County Highway Department, Soil and Water ConservationDistrict, Planning and Zoning and concerned citizens got together in order to makerecommendations for the remediation of the Village Creek (Nature Boy Creek).Recommendations were either verbally expressed or written and later delivered to aJamie Mehle of SEH Engineering. The following is a site description of the Nature BoyCreek and a summary of the recommendations that the SWCD office offered to Jamie

(this document can be found at S:\TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE\2009\Nature Boy CreekRemediation\ FINAL Village Cr Remediation SWCD Recommenda).

Site Description:The Creechville ponds were constructed in 2004-2005, designed to meet a 50-

year (4) rainfall event capacity. The June 5 th storm event in 2008 exceeded the 100-year rainfall levels (5.1) and created unforeseen problems. Recent widening of the

Gunflint Trail contributed to increased runoff. The medium-sized rhyolite rock used asbank erosion control flushed into and blocked the culvert draining into the ponds.Water bypassed the ponds and washed out huge areas west of the ponds and below.With the loss of retention at the ponds water peaked in the Village Creek rapidly.Water in the ponds did not overflow during the flood. (Pond water levels will bemonitored in relation to rainfall this summer with data loggers.)

The Creechville ponds outlet into the 2 nd Ave W ditch. Flows go southeast tothe intersection of 2 nd Ave W and Gunflint Trail. This section of the creek is a steep,straight channel, with downward erosion through clay. There are several sections (2-7 long) that have significant erosion of the riparian zone streambanks where treesand sections of streambank have fallen into the creek. Additionally, a significantamount of sediment has been deposited around both the entry and exit of theculvert (intersection of 2 nd Ave W and Gunflint Trail).

Water then travels through an intermittently flooded wetland/floodplain for about 800 meters, which retains significant quantities of water and traps sediment.

Water flows from the wetland into the Village Ditch then east (downstream) andagain under the Gunflint Trail. The culvert inlet here is both exposed bedrock andcement.

The culvert one block east of the Gunflint Trail at 7 th Avenue is in good shape.However, in severe storms water and debris flows exceed the capacity of the culvert


26/62


damaged in the flood. Towards the last 50-100m of this stretch geotextile fabric wassecured over the banks in 2005 in order to promote riparian growth and stabilization;

however, most of the netting was washed out in last years storm. Water then flowsthrough a new, 6x11 concrete box culvert. (An ISCO water sampler was previouslyplaced at this culvert to monitor flow and water levels.) South of this culvert erosionis less of an issue until below Hwy 61 where there is a large scour pool.

Recommendations for Repairs to Nature Boy Creek:

1.)-As a general principle, focusing resources further up in the watershed wouldhave less risk associated with whatever projects are built. The ditch below thepond outlet, for example, could use protection to reduce the risk of erosionon and near the roadway.

2.) Removal of the rhyolite material along the north bank of the Gunflint Trailabove the culvert draining to the storm water ponds may be a good measureto prevent blocking the culvert, flooding of the roadway, erosion, and allow

the ponds to function more appropriately in their capacity to reduce peakflows in the system. One suggestion is that the rock be replaced with erosioncontrol blanket overlying a native grass seed mix. Bedrock could be leftexposed. Our recommendation is for SEH to design this change in bankstabilization for the Highway Department.

3.) Remediation of road crossings should be seriously considered for the multiple

benefits it would provide. These are commonly areas where stream systemsare most negatively impacted and erosion and sedimentation occur. Inaddition, undersized culverts tend to be blocked with debris and can causeflooding of public and private property. Our office encourages the installationof a natural bottom, open arch or similar design. These designs offer anincrease in channel bottom roughness, which reduces the velocity and erosivepower of the stream. This also has a small biological benefit, as it encouragesthe passage of aquatic organisms. One culvert in need of replacement is atthe Village Ditch crossing on 7th Ave E. The Grand Marais City Administrator should be consulted for this project.

4.) The first storm water pond (furthest upstream) has accumulated a largevolume of sediment at the base of the inlet flume. This sediment should be

k


27/62


Monitoring plan for Nature Boy Creek Summer 2009

Based on an evaluation of SWMM by engineers Keith Anderson of JointPowers Board and Jeff Lee and Chris Bonick of Barr Engineering the model should becalibrated and possibly revised. This will be achieved by collecting stream flow andturbidity data in the Nature Boy Creek in addition to water level and rain gaugeinformation from the Creechville storm water retention ponds. A preliminary dataset from the ISCO will be obtained in the summer of 2009 in order to determine thebest placement and programming scheme for a more complete and accurate analysis

the following year.The Water Advisory Committee has repeatedly encouraged storm water monitoring on both the Creechville retention ponds and Nature Boy Creek. TheCommittee questions whether storm water issues in the BDA have been adequatelyevaluated, and the placement of the ISCO sampler on Nature Boy Creek will begin toanswer this question.

The Grand Marais storm water management plan was written in 2001 and is inneed of an update. Based on a complete data set collected in 2010 and thereformulation of SWMM, we will be able to more accurately describe the needs ofthis plan for a developing Grand Marais. For instance, the Grand Marais storm water ordinance was a result of this plan (although the ordinance was revised in 2005). Aneventual goal of this project is to assess the effectiveness of the ordinance and inturn the appropriate level of regulation to be prescribed.


28/62



29/62


available for purchase on this software. Fortunately, funding was secured from 2009Coastal grant with help from Pat Collins and the current software (Flowlink 5.1, for

$2,200) was purchased from Teledyne ISCO.In June 2009, the ISCO was again placed on the bank of Nature Boy Creek justsouth of Co. Rd. 7 on a county easement (property formerly belonging to VirginiaPalmer). Brandon Stephens held email correspondence with some of his previousprofessors at the University of Minnesota-Duluth and University of Minnesota-T.C.sas well as with Keith Anderson (Joint Powers Board) for advice on the ISCO setup(see Appendix C).

Based on a data analysis of north shore streams (S:\TECHNICALASSISTANCE\2009\Nature Boy Creek Monitoring Plan 2009\North Shore StreamData and Appendix D) for 2008 and through the advice of peers the ISCO wasprogrammed to trigger when 0.1 of rain per hour was recorded and to then collectsamples based on flow (i.e. every 3 pulses). One of the most difficult tasks in ISCOinstallation will be to accurately determine flow for the stream. The ISCO may beprogrammed to calculate stream flow automatically based on data entered by theuser and placed into Mannings equation. Data required for Mannings equation

include: stream shape, slope, stream width, and a roughness coefficient. Wedetermined the stream to be rectangular in shape, the slope to be 0.025 (2.5%), thewidth to be 8 feet during baseflow, and having a roughness of 0.045 (based on tablesshown in Brooks et al., 2003; see S:\TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE\2009\Nature Boy CreekMonitoring Plan - 2009\Mannings Roughness Coefficient). See Appendixes E-H for complete programming details.

This initial set of stream flow data should not be used to make policy decisions

nor should it be used to make predictions (i.e. in SWMM). The data obtained in thesummer of 2009 is strictly preliminary and should only be used to help programand/or best utilize the ISCO in Nature Boy Creek or elsewhere in Cook County in the2010 sampling season. See Appendix I for a graph illustrating rainfall rate (in/hr, pink)and water level (ft, blue) for the dates June 29 th to August 24 th .

On June 29 th , 2009 Cindy and Brandon installed the ISCO south of Co. Rd. 7 ona county easement (property formerly belonging to Virginia Palmer). The flow andsample inlet tubes should be placed either immediately above a culvert inlet or far downstream of any confluences or culvert outlets. However, the limited sitesavailable to place the rather large protective case (i.e. compost bin) did not allow for sufficient placement of the tubes in the stream: the tubes were placed about 2 feetdownstream of a confluence after braiding in the stream. This should not significantlyimpact the quality of data but is noteworthy. Additionally, the rain gauge should be



30/62


On July 9th , 2009 Cindy went to download water level data and change thebattery for the ISCO only to find that the creek had dried up. Brandon went out on

the 13th

and found that the condition hadnt changed. Both Brandon and Cindywalked the length of the creek from the Creechville ponds downward anddetermined that it would be difficult to get a constant flow measurement anywhere.The options were either to leave the ISCO in place and wait until a rain event camealong or to move the ISCO to a stream/river that has at least a measurable baseflow.Some of the other potential sites include further downstream on the Nature BoyCreek on the Eckel property, on the Devil Track River or on one of the tributaries tothe Devil Track, Woods Creek (see photos of other potential sites at S:\TECHNICALASSISTANCE\2009\Nature Boy Creek Monitoring Plan - 2009\Photos\Photos 07.14.09).A rain event on July 15th , 2009 demonstrated that, although the creek does run dry,flow increases to a significant level shortly after the onset of precipitation. So, indiscussing the options between Rebecca W., Cindy and Brandon it was decided toleave the ISCO where it was on the creek.

During the July 14th rain event the ISCO was triggered by a 0.1 per hour ofrain, however it did not collect any sample thereafter. The ISCO was programmed to

collect sample based on the flow velocity [>1.75 cubic feet per second (cfs)]. Cindyand Brandon measured the channel dimensions and estimated the flow and thosevalues compared to those indicated by the ISCO and it was estimated that the flowshould increase to well over 1.75 cfs. Still, the flow of the creek during this stormevent did not get close to the threshold selected. So, upon this realization a grabsample was collected and the program terminated. Two samples were sent to ERAlabs to be analyzed for Total Suspended Solids (TSS). The first sample was collected

after the rain gauge was triggered (0.1 of rain per 1 hour; at 21:30 on 07/14/09) andthe second collected at 17:05 (07/15/09).The sample program was changed to trigger after 0.1 of rain per hour (like

the previous program), but instead to collect samples every 3 pulses thereafter (likefor Karen Evens program in 2005). However, after a rain event began on July 21 st itwas found that samples werent being collected; even 5 hours after the rain began.So, the program was halted again, the data from July 16 th to July 21st accidentally lost,and the program changed to collect 12 samples every hour starting at 14:30. Tensamples (2 collected at 09:34 and 8 collected hourly starting at 14:30) were then handdelivered to ERA labs on 7/24 (ERA said that the previous two samples did not arriveon the same day that they were sent and that the samples were warm upon arrival.)Brandon spoke with a Susanna at ERA, and she has recommended that we either useat least three ice packs plus crumbled newspaper (as added insulation) took pack the

http:///reader/full/07.14.09http:///reader/full/07.14.09


31/62

y g

and so the ISCO wasnt checked again until Wednesday evening (it actually had 0.26in about 20 minutes). Since the samples sat in the ISCO for two days they were not

sent down to ERA labs to be analyzed. But to be fair, the water level did not changesignificantly and the water did not noticeably change color. This instancedemonstrates that the ISCO should either be checked on daily to ensure bottles donot get missed or an external modem should be purchased that sends real-time datato the office.

A rainfall event that began on July 30 th at 12:50 PM triggered the nextprogram and bottles were collected the morning of the 31 st. It was good thatMondays event was not collected because there would not have been any bottles touse for this event. These were then hand delivered by Brandon to ERA labs later inthe afternoon. Data for this event demonstrate a near linear correlation between TSS(mg/L) and water level (as the water level rises and falls so too does theconcentration of TSS; see Appendix J). This was a typical flashy storm event, raining0.56 in one hour and 15 minutes. From 12:50-13:08 it rained 0.49, reaching a rate of3.0 per hour at its peak.

As the TSS data demonstrate it is useful to sample more frequently for a short

time after the storm begins. Therefore, a suitable sampling program may besomething where 12 samples are collected every 12 minutes and then the remainingsamples are collected every 30 minutes (giving a total sample window of 8 hours.)This data shows that the TSS decreases back to baseline values (2 mg/L) 14 hoursafter the storm begins. 8 hours after the storm begins the TSS value is at 6 mg/L,which is low enough to baseline for our purposes. We would like to catch the rise andfall of the TSS peak so we can ultimately model the discharge of sediment (often

referred to as sediment load) for a range of storm events.In speaking with Bruce Wilson, a stormwater program manager with theMPCA, it is absolutely necessary to determine the flow of the stream to obtainsediment load values. This should be a primary goal for the monitoring plan on theNature Boy Creek. Mr. Wilson warns that flows are one of the most difficultmeasurements to take on a stream given the large amount of uncertainty that mustbe taken into account. The uncertainties stem from channel disconformities, streamflow patterns/paths and channel roughness coefficient estimates. It may beworthwhile to connect with individuals at the DNRs Hydro group in St. Paul or MPCAstreams monitors at the Duluth office.

One final bit of data to note is the difference between the rainfall ratesmeasured by the ISCOs rain gauge (Appendix I) and by the Onset Rain gauge at thestorm water ponds (Appendix B). There is a reduction by nearly half in the ISCOs rain



32/62

Climate Data for Summer of 2009

Here is summarized some of the climate data for Minnesota found at theHydroClim Minnesota Website ( http://climate.umn.edu /).

June 2009 was a seasonally dry month across nearly all of Minnesota. There isa rainfall shortfall that began in early April and continued throughout most ofthe summer.

Ice-out for some lakes in northeastern Minnesota occurred at the followingtimes: Brule (5/11), Devil Track (5/13), E. Bearskin (5/6), Greenwood (5/16),Northern Light (5/7), Saganaga (5/7), Sawbill (5/7), Seagull (5/7), Trout (5/14).

Minnesotas heaviest rainfall event fell on June 16 th , while Grand Maraissheaviest rainfall event fell on June 19 th .

Much of early June was colder than average and in fact set records for coldestmax and min temperatures on the 5 th , 6th and 7th .

Large portions of Minnesota were considered abnormally dry as a result oftwo spells of dry weather, one short-term and one longer-term. The shorter-term dryness began in April and the longer-term commenced in mid-June2008. The 13-month long-term dry spell produced a deficit of 8 inches or more.

USGS reports that stream discharge values are low for south central, eastcentral and northeastern Minnesota. Northeastern rivers are falling below the10th percentile for stream discharge. Consequently, Lake Superior water level

is 1 down from last year at this time and remains below the long-termaverage. The potential for wildfires was moderate in northeastern Minnesota counties. In July the water level for Lake Superior is down 3 inches relative to last July

and remains below the long-term average. Stream discharge remained low for July, occasionally ranking below the

historical 25th percentile. For most of Minnesota July was drier than average, while the northshore was

fairly close to average. July of 2009 was the third coldest July for Minnesota on record.

http:///reader/full/http://climate.umn.eduhttp:///reader/full/http://climate.umn.edu


33/62

APPENDIX A - Creechville Retention Pond Survey

Creechville Retention Ponds Survey Date: 06/26/09 Time: 8:30Staff: Cindy Gentz and Brandon Stephens

Storm Water Pond 1 (SP1)

Rod LevelHolder's Holder's Final Difference

Location Height Height Height Backspot from BS

Top of rocks (bottom of cement blocks, centerline) 16.96 10.72 11.42Bottom of rocks (centerline) 24.25 5.62 23.57 99.31Bottom of Culvert outlet (centerline) 25.7 0.09 25.79 97.09Top of the edge of the Culvert outlet (centerline) 25.7 7.76 22.88 122.88Rain Gauge (next to post) 25.7 6.45 24.19 98.69

Tripod Level Location: On slope above top of rocks, near treeline

Backspot is top edge of culvert outlet?

Storm Water Pond 2 (SP2)

Rod LevelHolder's Holder's Final Difference

Location Height Height Height Backspot from BSTop of Culvert inlet (centerline)

Bottom edge of the Culvert intlet (centerline)Water Level Logger Probe (mid pond)Top of Culvert outlet (centerline)Bottom edge of the Culvert outlet (centerline)Manhole/drain (at "Made in USA" label)

15

1523232310

7.64

5.599.5214.0912.56

7.06

12.54

14.718.4213.8515.38

8.36 108.36

95.82

93.6689.9494.5192.98

Tripod Level Location:Backspot is manhole/drain?

Nearmanhole/drain

*** Add this amount to the difference between the rod holder's height and the height observedin the level.



34/62

APPENDIX B - Stormwater Ponds Water Level and Rainfall RateStormw ater Rete ntion Pond1 - Summ er 2009

0.7 0Rainf all Rat e ("/ hr)

Feet

0.6 1

0.5 2

0.4 3

0.3 4

0.2 5

0.1 6

0 726 Jul 31Jul 5 Aug 10 A ug 15 Aug 20 Aug 25 Aug 30 Aug

This figure illustrates rainfall rate (in/hr) and water level (ft) for Creechville StormWater Pond #1.

Stormwater Retention Pond2 - Summer 2009

2.5 0.0

2.4 1.0

2.3 2.0

W a t e r

L e v e l

( f t )

2.2 3.0

2.1 4.0

2 5.0

1.8

1.9

5/30 6/6 6/13 6/20 6/27 7/4 7/11 7/18 7/25 8/1 8/8 8/15 8/22

Feet

Rainfall Rate ("/hr)

8/29

6.0

7.0

R a i n

F a l

l R a t e

( i n

/ h r )


35/62



36/62

APPENDIX D - Graphs of North Shore Rainfall vs. TurbidityPoplar River 2008

1.2 3500

Rainfall Rate

Turbidity3000

1

2500

0.8

R a i n

f a l l R a t e

( i n

/ h r )

R a i n

f a l l R a t e

( i n

/ h r )

2000

0.6

1500

0.4

1000

0.2500

0 02 Apr 22 Apr 12 May 1 Jun 21 Jun 11 Jul 31 Jul 20 Aug

T u r b i

d i t y

( N T U )

Tischer Creek 2008

4.5 1600Rainfall RateTurb

4 1400

3.5

1200

31000

2.5

800

2

600

1.5

4001

0.5 200

T u r b

i d i t y

( N T U )



37/62

APPENDIX E - ISCO Program June 27th , 2009

SAMPLER ID# 1081348301 17:23 9-JUL 09Hardware: A1 Software: 2.33

*********** PROGRAM SETTINGS***********

PROGRAM NAME:"EXTENDED 1"

SITE DESCRIPTION:"NATUREBOY2"

UNITS SELECTED:LENGTH: ft

UNITS SELECTED:FLOW RATE: cfs

FLOW VOLUME: cf

SUBMERGED PROBE:MANNING

RECTANGULAR CHANNEL

1 MINUTEDATA INTERVAL

24, 500 ml BTLS27 ft SUCTION LINEAUTO SUCTION HEAD

0 RINSES, 1 RETRIES

TWO PART PROGRAMBOTTLE ASSIGNMENTS:

1 1 TO 'A'2 24 TO 'B'

'A' PACING:EVENT PACED

1 EVENT CONDITIONS

'A' COMPOSITE:

1 SAMPLES

'A' VOLUME:

500 ml SAMPLES

'A' ENABLE:

RAIN >0.10"/ 1:00

'A' ENABLE:

'B' PACING:FLOW, EVERY

3 PULSESSAMPLE AT START

'B' DISTRIBUTION:SEQUENTIAL

'B' VOLUME:

500 ml SAMPLES

'B' ENABLE:

FLOW >1.750 cfs

'B' ENABLE:ONCE ENABLED,STAY ENABLED

SAMPLE AT ENABLE

'B' ENABLE:0 PAUSE & RESUMES

NO DELAY TO START

LIQUID DETECT ON

QUICK VIEW/CHANGE

TAKE MEASUREMENTSEVERY 1 MINUTES

DUAL SAMPLER OFFBTL FULL DETECT OFF

TIMED BACKLIGHT

EVENT MARK SENTDURING PUMP CYCLE

PUMP COUNTS FOREACH PURGE CYCLE:

INTERROGATORCONNECTOR

POWER ALWAYS ON

0.01 inch TIPRAIN GAUGE

NO SDI 12 SONDE

AUTO SDI 12 SCAN OFF

I/O1= NONEI/O2= NONEI/O3= NONE

0 ANALOG OUTPUTS

NO EXTERNAL MODEM

NO ALARMCONDITIONS SET

PART 'A':EVENT CONDITIONS:EVENT01: RAIN >0.10"/ 1:00

SAMPLER ID# 1081348301 17:23 9-JUL 09

Hardware: A1 Software: 2.33*********** SAMPLING RESULTS***********

SITE: NATUREBOY2PROGRAM: EXTENDED 1Program Started at 15:24 WE 1 JUL-09PART 'A' Nominal Sample Volume =500 mlPART 'B' Nominal Sample Volume =


38/62


39/62



40/62

----------

----------

----------

----------

----------

----------

----------

----------

----------

----------

----------

----------

----------

APPENDIX H - ISCO Program August 24th , 2009SAMPLER ID# 1081348301 09:01 24-AUG-09

Hardware: A1 Software: 2.33*********** PROGRAM SETTINGS***********

PROGRAM NAME:"EXTENDED 1"

SITE DESCRIPTION:"NATUREBOY2"

UNITS SELECTED:LENGTH: ft

UNITS SELECTED:

FLOW RATE: cfsFLOW VOLUME: cf

SUBMERGED PROBE:MANNING

RECTANGULAR CHANNEL

2 MINUTEDATA INTERVAL

24, 500 ml BTLS27 ft SUCTION LINEAUTO SUCTION HEAD0 RINSES, 1 RETRIES

TWO-PART PROGRAMBOTTLE ASSIGNMENTS:

1- 1 TO 'A'2-24 TO 'B'

'A' PACING:EVENT PACED

1 EVENT CONDITIONS

'A' COMPOSITE:1 SAMPLES

'A' VOLUME:

500 ml SAMPLES

'A' ENABLE:

NONE PROGRAMMED

'A' ENABLE:ONCE ENABLED,STAY ENABLED

SAMPLE AT ENABLE

'A' ENABLE:0 PAUSE & RESUMES

SEQUENTIAL NO SDI-12 SONDE

AUTO SDI-12 SCAN OFF

----------'B' VOLUME: ----------

I/O1= NONE500 ml SAMPLES I/O2= NONE

I/O3= NONE----------'B' ENABLE: ----------

WHEN 'A' IS DONE 0 ANALOG OUTPUTS

----------'B' ENABLE: ----------ONCE ENABLED,STAY ENABLED NO EXTERNAL MODEM

NO SAMPLE AT ENABLE----------'B' ENABLE: ----------

0 MINUTE DELAY TOSTART OF SAMPLING NO ALARM

CONDITIONS SET----------'B' ENABLE: ----------

0 PAUSE & RESUMES --------------------

---------- PART 'A':EVENT CONDITIONS:

NO DELAY TO START EVENT01: RAIN >1.00"/ 1:00

------------------------------ PART 'B':---------- NONUNIFORM TIME: (quantity@interval)

LIQUID DETECT ON START 12@0012 11@0030

QUICK VIEW/CHANGE ----------------------------------- -----

----------

TAKE MEASUREMENTS SAMPLER ID# 1081348301 09:01 24-AUG-09EVERY 1 MINUTES Hardware: A1 Software: 2.33

*********** SAMPLING RESULTS---------- ***********

DUAL SAMPLER OFF SITE: NATUREBOY2

BTL FULL DETECT OFF PROGRAM: EXTENDED 1TIMED BACKLIGHT Program Started at 10:17 TU 11-AUG-09

PART 'A' Nominal Sample Volume = 500 ml---------- PART 'B' Nominal Sample Volume = 500 ml

COUNTEVENT MARK SENT TODURING PUMP CYCLE SAMPLE BOTTLE TIME SOURCE ERROR

LIQUID---------- ------- ------ ---- -- -- ------

PUMP COUNTS FOR 10:17 'A' ENABLEDEACH PURGE CYCLE: 10:17 'B' DISABLED200 PRE-SAMPLE ------------- MO 17-AUG-09 -------------AUTO POST-SAMPLE 09:57 POWER FAILED!

---------- 09:57 POWER RESTORED------------- TH 20-AUG-09 -------------

NO PERIODIC 09:05 MANUAL PAUSESERIAL OUTPUT 09:05 MANUAL RESUME

09:05 MANUAL PAUSE---------- 09:05 MANUAL RESUMEINTERROGATOR 09:05 MANUAL PAUSECONNECTOR 09:05 MANUAL RESUME

POWER ALWAYS ON 09:05 MANUAL PAUSE09:05 MANUAL RESUME

---------- 09:05 MANUAL PAUSE



41/62

APPENDIX I - Nature Boy Creek Rainfall and Water Level

Nature Boy Creek - ISCO Water Level

0.7 0.00

0.6 0.50

0.5 1.00

W a t e r

L e v e l

( f t )

0.4 1.50

0.3 2.00

0.2 2.50

= No Data

0.1 3.00

Water LevelRainfall

0 3.5026 Jun 6 Jul 16 Jul 26 Jul 5 Aug 15Aug 25 Aug 4 Sep

R a i n

f a l l R a t e

( i n

/ h r )

This figure illustrates rainfall rate (in/hr) and water level (ft) for the Nature Boy Creekon data obtained by the ISCO. There is no data for 7/8-7/9 because of a power failure(the rechargeable battery doesnt hold a charge for longer than 7 days). There is nodata for 7/16-7/21 because the program was altered just after a rain event (7/21)began. The program was altered because the ISCO was set to collect every 3 pulses,but unfortunately even 5 hours after the ISCO was initially triggered it still hadntcollected the next sample in line. After the program was changed to collect samplesthe data history from the internal memory was erased and the data lost.



42/62

APPENDIX J - Nature Boy Creek TSS, Rainfall and Water Level



43/62

APPENDIX K -Photos of the ISCO site location and Nature Boy Creek(photos can be found at S:\TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE\2009\Nature Boy Creek Monitoring Plan 2009)

ISCO potential sites, located just above Co. Rd. 7, Humphreys property shown to theleft (taken 06.22.09).

ISCO potential sites, located just below Co. Rd. 7, the marked x1 site is the locationchosen for the ISCO in on June 29 th , 2009 (taken 06.22.09).

http:///reader/full/06.22.09http:///reader/full/06.22.09http:///reader/full/06.22.09http:///reader/full/06.22.09


44/62

ISCO autosampler located on Nature Boy Creek, located just south of Co. Rd. 7 (taken06.30.09 ).

ISCO autosampler located on Nature Boy Creek, located just south of Co. Rd. 7 (taken06.30.09 ).



45/62

Midway between Gunflint Tr. (locations shown below) and Creechville retentionponds (taken 07.13.09).
http:///reader/full/07.13.09http:///reader/full/07.13.09


46/62



47/62

Nature Boy Creek just above Co. Rd. 7, Humphreys property just to the left of thephoto (taken 07.13.09).

Nature Boy Creek just below Co. Rd. 7, box culvert outlet shown at bottom of photo(taken 07.13.09).


48/62


49/62

Soil and Water MissionStatementSoil and Water Mission Statement

"The mission of Cook County Soil & Water (SWCD) is to improve water quality in Cook County by fostering responsible land use and by controlling soil erosion and non-point source pollution. The Board will encourage local conservation efforts by providing educational, technical, and financial assistance for local land users." (adopted June 2000)

In shortIn short Were here to ensure that the county stormwater ordinance and state WCA are administered. We provide technical assistance to help you the constructors comply with regulations Our role is not enforcementP&Z is better staffed to receive and process complaints.

The County Stormwater Ordinance requires a signed copy of the erosion and sediment control plan checklist for small site projects, and for use of BMPs for all grade and fill permits.

The checklist is available at www.co.cook.mn.us under the Planning and Zoning and Soil and Water department pages.

What items on the checklist apply to your project? The practices you use need to result in no negative

water quality impacts for the 2 year storm event (x inches)

Some questions we can help withSome questions we can help with

How big should the rock be for this check dam or rock chute? Can I use coconut blanket instead of rock? What diameter pipe should I use? If I cant answer you immediately, I can call our engineer and get his opinion. Remember, were here to help!

It may just be dirt and rocks, but it can get

Some examplesSome examples


50/62

Maintenanc e is keyaintenance is key

Whats wrong with this picture?This method works better.

Has anyone tried this as an alternative to silt fence?


51/62

Dumping rock everywhere is notalways the most cost-effectiveerosion control method.


52/62

Remember the best construction erosion and sediment control practice is to limit disturbance of native vegetation! Likewise, the best long-term erosion control is to establish healthy, native vegetation.


53/62


54/62

Date of Review Date of Review Supervisor District Type of Review Primary Reviewer Site Visit


55/62

Date of Review Date of Review Supervisor District Type of Review Primary Reviewer Site Visitby Month

Comments/Outcome9/3/2008 4 General Technical Assistance Beaster

Visited June 2008 flood damage site on Old Shore Rd. 2 Culverts had washed out but were already replaced with 60", 28" and 24" culverts. Culvert diameters areprobably sufficient. Recommend additional rock armor at inlet.

9/4/2008 4 General Technical Assistance Anderson

Visited Croftville homeowner's site that was flooded in June 2008. Joined by Keith A. and Tim Byrns. Keith recommended talking to MnDOT about upgradingculvert to prevent highway overtopping. Possible cost-share potential of building a diversion.

49/10/2008 General Technical Assistance Beaster

Visited property on Linnell Rd east of Grand Marais. Reviewed landowner's plans to improve drainage and reduce flooding risk from Durfee Creek on property.

October 2008


Provided recommendations to Caribou Lake association on management of the public water access.

May 2009


Visited property onE Hwy 61. Gave suggestions to landowner on ways to reduce flooding and erosion of drainage ditches. Offered potential for cost share dollarsif money was available.

5/7/2009 1 General Technical Assistance

Provided recommendations for wetland avoidance and boundary determinations for a grade and fill permit proposal.

5/7/2009 2 General Technical Assistance Beaster

Provided recommendations for wetland avoidance and minimization. Referred landowner to DNR for public waters work permit requirements.


Reviewed ditch erosion at stormwater pond outlet in Grand Marais. Provided preliminary recommendations and referred landowner to street department.

Thursday, February 25, 2010 Page 2 of 4



56/62


Comments/Outcome5/22/2009 5 General Technical Assistance Beaster

Responded to landowner complaint of flooding of property in Hovland. Discovered beaver dam failure where flooding began.

June 2009

6/17/2009 1 General Technical Assistance Gentz

Referred landowner observation on gully erosion and solid waste to planning and zoning staff.

6/24/2009 3 DNR Waters Permit (Non-Wetland) Beaster

Reviewed DNR waters permit application for Angry Trout Caf in Grand Marais. Proposal to construct riprap and concrete breakwall to protect restaurantstructure. Recommended permit approval with basic erosion and sediment control requirements.

July 2009


Reviewed expansion proposal for township cemetery. Provided recommendation to avoid wetlands and steep slopes.


Visited site on Lake Superior shoreline in response to concern of erosion. Erosion minimal. Recommended re-directing gutter downspouts, provided informationon rock riprap and native vegetation.

August 2009


Reviewed landowner proposal to create pond on property. Recommended contact with NRCS and formal wetland boundary determination.

November 200911/12/2009 3 General Technical Assistance Beaster

Reviewed erosion on Gunflint trail and associated repaving of shoulder. Submitted comments to SWCD board.




57/62


Comments/Outcome11/16/2009 4 General Technical Assistance

Provided NWI map to landowner for trail improvement requirements.

11/25/2009 5 General Technical Assistance

Reviewed erosion on a private shared road near Hovland. Provided recommendation for further study and inventory of drainage crossings.

December 2009


Provided information on trout stream designation to Cook County Commissioner.


Reviewed NRCS streambank erosion control project on Flute Reed River in Hovland. Provided observations of structural deficiencies to engineering staff.


31T t l R iC k SWCD W l d R i R


58/62

31Total ReviewsCook SWCD Wetland Review ReportDate of Review Date of Review Supervisor District Primary Reviewer WCA Violatio Action Takenby Month Comments

August 2008

8/13/2008

Site review to determine extent of wetland impacts.

1 Beaster Restoration Order

8/28/2008 2 Beaster Replacement Order

October 2008

10/9/2008 2 Beaster Restoration Order

Reviewed restoration activities on a wetland violation on Devil Track Lake. Restoration activities were only partially completed by the 10-01-2008 deadline.

10/9/2008 2 Beaster Delineation Review

Wetland TEP performed review of delineation for Popham property on Devil Track Lake. TEP approved delineation report as prepared by Wayne Hensche.Provided recommendations for site stabilization and revegetation.


Performed wetland delineation review for Norvell property in Schroeder. Delineation report was found to contain inaccuracies, so it was not approved.

May 2009


Date of Review Date of Review Supervisor District Primary Reviewer WCA Violatio Action Taken


59/62

by Month Comments


Reviewed restoration activities for 3 wetland impacts on South Devil Track Lake. Restoration was satisfactory at 2 of 3 sites. Recommended removing additionalmaterial from coniferous bog, seeding and mulching.


Reviewed restoration order requirements with landowner at site on Devil Track Lake. 3,234 sq. ft. of Alder thicket wetlands were impacted in 2008. Restorationactivities not complete, deadline July 1, 2009.

June 20096/2/2009 1 Beaster Boundary Determination

Reviewed plans for trail improvement through wetlands at Birch Grove Community School in Tofte. Made wetland boundary determination, recommended thatlandowner build boardwalk trails to avoid impacts to wetlands. Preliminary approval of no-loss decision

6/8/2009 1 Beaster Boundary Determination

Provided wetland boundary assistance to Lutsen Cemetery Association. Recommended avoiding northern and western sides of property. Preferred alternative:expand to previously disturbed upland on south side of property.

6/9/2009 5 Demmer Comment on Application for Impacts

Landowner submitted application for impacts to a coniferous swamp on McFarland Lake. Driveway impacts of 2,600 sq. ft. were approved. Building pad impactsof 1,375 sq. ft. were not approved because a reasonable a lternative of developing uplands exists.


Reviewed delineation prepared by Tim Lederle for 60 acre parcel on Cty. Rd. 14 East as part of administrative subdivision process. Site dominated by AlderThicket and Hardwood Swamp type wetlands. Approved delineation report as written.


Reviewed Replacement Plan for 7,928 sq. ft. of impacts toa coniferous bogfor a driveway near Devil Track Lake. Plan was found to contain errors and was sentback to landowner for revisions.


Date of Review Date of Review Supervisor District Primary Reviewer WCA Violatio Action Taken


60/62

by Month Comments

6/22/2009 2 Beaster Comment on Application for ImpactsReviewed application for impacts resulting from the clearing of ski trails south of Poplar Lake. Agreed with No-Loss decision by LGU, provided that wetlandswould be avoided and clearing would be done by hand.

July 2009


Reviewed unpermitted impacts to Type 6 Alder thicket wetland near Little Devil Track River. Issued Restoration Order to remove fill from wetlands.

7/17/2009 5 Demmer Boundary Determination

Recommended approval of previous delineation completed in 2006. 2009 delineation contained inaccuracies and could not be approved by the TEP.

7/20/2009 4 Beaster Comment on Application for Impacts

Recommended approval of de minimus exemption for repair of ski trails. Recommended erosion control BMPs for stream crossings and ditch improvement.

7/20/2009 4 Beaster Comment on Application for Impacts

Provided recommendations for BMPs to avoid wetland impacts.


Approved de minimus exemption decision for ski trail maintenance work on Sugarbush trail system in Tofte.

August 2009



61/62

Date of Reviewb M th

Date of Review Supervisor District Primary Reviewer WCA Violatio Action Taken


62/62

by Month Comments

9/28/2009 3 Demmer Delineation ReviewWetland delineation report as prepared by Tim Lederle was approved for 10 acre parcel west of Grand Marais on Cty Rd 7.

October 2009

10/15/2009 4 Beaster

Recommended approval of application for impacts for driveway construction across a stream.

Comment on Application for Impacts

10/19/2009 3 Beaster

Recommended approval of wetland delineation which identified 32.45 acres of wetlands a t Cook County Airport.

Boundary Determination

10/23/2009 2

Amended delineation submitted by Wayne Hensche was approved.

Demmer Delineation Review

November 2009


Recommended not to approve application for impacts for a driveway on Greenwood Lake. Project purpose not well defined.

December 2009

12/18/2009 2 Beaster Boundary Determination

Reviewed wetland boundary and proposed impacts for property on Cascade Beach Rd. Approved of boundary, but recommended project alternative to avoidimpacts to wetlands.


soil & water nonpoint technical assistance, county road inventory, and wetland initiatives...

Documents