HomeMy WebLinkAboutBoard of Commissioners – Supporting Documents Compiled – 11/05/2019OTTER TAIL COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS AGENDA PACKET Government Services Center, Commissioners’ Room 515 W. Fir Avenue, Fergus Falls, MN Tuesday, November 5, 2019 8:30 a.m.
Table of Contents
2.1 Draft Otter Tail County Board Minutes for 10.22.19
2.2 Otter Tail County Bills-Warrants for 11.05.19
2.3 Human Services Bills-Warrants for 11.05.19
3.0 Public Health Items
4.0 Greater MN Regional Parks & Trails Resolution
5.0 Disability Services Report
7.0 2020-2022 Government Services Technical Labor Agreement
8.0 Resolution Approving the Issuance of Revenue Obligations
9.0 Highway Items
10.0 Pomme De Terre River Comprehensive Management Plan
Page 1 of 17
MINUTES OF THE
OTTER TAIL COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
Government Services Center, Commissioners’ Room
515 W. Fir Avenue, Fergus Falls, MN
October 22, 2019
8:30 a.m.
Call to Order
The Otter Tail County Board of Commissioners convened at 8:32 a.m. Tuesday, October 22, 2019, at the
Government Services Center in Fergus Falls, MN, with Commissioners Doug Huebsch, Chair; Lee Rogness,
Vice-Chair; Wayne Johnson, John Lindquist and Betty Murphy present.
Approval of Agenda
Chair Huebsch called for approval of the Board Agenda. Motion by Rogness, second by Lindquist and
unanimously carried to approve the Board of Commissioners Agenda of October 22, 2019 with the following
changes:
Parks & Trails Ordinance removed from Public Works Committee
Addition of issuance of credit card
Confirmation of HRA Board members
Revision to upcoming-Long Range Strategic Planning location change for November 18th & 20th
Consent Agenda
Motion by Murphy, second by Johnson and unanimously carried to approve Consent Agenda items as
follows:
1. October 15, 2019 Board of Commissioners’ Meeting Minutes
2. Warrants/Bills for October 22, 2019 (Exhibit A)
3. Human Services Warrants/Bills for October 22, 2019 (Exhibit A)
4. Approval of Tobacco License for Lakes Area Cooperative dba Perham
Oasis, Dent Oasis, Ottertail Oasis and Battle Lake Cenex
5. Approval of LG220 Application for Exempt Permit as submitted by the
Pelican Rapids Jaycees for an event scheduled for February 15, 2020
Out of State Travel
Motion by Rogness, second by Johnson and unanimously carried to authorize out of state travel for Otter Tail
County Collections Officer, Crystal Herman, November 11th – 13th, 2019 to attend a Minnesota Fraud
Investigator’s Association (MFIA) meeting in Washington, DC. The travel and lodging expenses will be fully
funded by the MFIA.
Administrator Position
County Administrator John Dinsmore provided a handout to the Board summarizing their succession planning
retreat held October 15, 2019. The county’s vision, mission and values, current development of a 20-year
Long Range Strategic Plan and the county’s priorities to grow collaborative relations while influencing and
supporting economic development were discussed extensively. He presented the following three (3) options
to consider in determining how to implement this succession plan: (1) Internal promotion of previous County
Administrator finalists; (2) Internal recruitment and selection; or (3) Internal/External recruitment and
selection.
Motion by Rogness, second by Johnson and unanimously carried to approve option 1 (noted above), develop
a County Administrator and Deputy Administrator structure and proceed with internal promotion of previous
County Administrator finalists. The upcoming retirement of the current County Administrator will enable the
county to re-evaluate the current Administrator’s essential functions and delegating the primary duties and
responsibilities to the County Administrator and Deputy Administrator positions. This decision of the
Commissioners reflects the discussion from the 2017 appointment process.
Board of Commissioners Meeting Minutes
October 22, 2019
Page 2 of 17
Recess & Reconvene
At 8:49 a.m., Chair Huebsch declared the meeting of the Otter Tail County Board of Commissioners recessed
for a short break. The Board of Commissioners meeting was reconvened at 9:04 a.m.
Twin Spruce Farm North Feedlot
At 9:04 a.m., Chairman Huebsch convened a public meeting held for Twin Spruce Farm North Feedlot on
behalf of the MN Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) under M.S. 116.07, Subd. 7(I). Kris and Arnie Gruenes
are proposing to re-establish an existing feedlot on county highway 51 in Perham, MN. The MPCA is
responsible for issuing a permit for the feedlot. The County provides a local forum for the public to express
their opinions regarding the project. Mr. and Ms. Gruenes stated that the neighbors within 5,000’ of the
project had been notified by mail and was also posted in two separate newspapers.
Commissioner Huebsch opened the meeting to public comment summarized as follows:
Property Owner Ed Kyle:
• Mr. Kyle lives about one (1) mile from the feedlot. He believes this will be a great benefit to his soil
and farm and would like to see the facility re-established.
Commissioner Huebsch commented animal agriculture is very important to local economy and value added
is important to our cities. These minutes will be forwarded to the MN Pollution Control Agency in Detroit
Lakes. After review, the MPCA will put this request on public notice for 30 days and the MPCA must respond
to those comments.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Wetland & Habitat Easements
USFWS District Manager Neil Powers and Realty Specialist Blake Knisley appeared before the Board and
requested certification of 2 wetland easements and 5 habitat easements. Documentation was previously
submitted regarding the request. Motion by Lindquist, second by Murphy and unanimously carried to approve
certification for the USFWS to secure the following wetland and habitat easements:
Olson, David & Julie – Wetland Easement
T. 131 N., R. 39 W., 5th P. M.:
Section 6 as described in Exhibit B
T. 131 N., R. 40 W., 5th P.M.:
Section 1 as described in Exhibit B
Vukonich, Mark et. Al. – Wetland Easement
T. 132 N., R. 41 W., Sec 18, 5th P.M.:
Section 18 as described in Exhibit C
Nordwall, Randy & Linda – Habitat Easement
T. 132 N., R. 42 W., 5th P.M.:
Section 28, part of the SW ¼ SE ¼, to be determined by a survey.
Newman, Evan & Michelle – Habitat Easement – Hay
T. 132 N., R. 43 W., 5th P.M.:
Part of the E ½ NE ¼ of section 28, to be determined by a survey.
Board of Commissioners Meeting Minutes
October 22, 2019
Page 3 of 17
Tysdal, Jesse & Molly – Habitat Easement – Hay & Graze
T. 133 N., R. 42 W., 5th P.M.:
Section 14, part of Government Lots 4 & 5, to be determined by a survey
Section 16, part of the SE ¼ SW ¼ and the N ½ SW ¼, to be determined by a survey
Section 23, part of the W ½ NW ¼, to be determined by a survey
Tsydal, Keith – Habitat Easement – Hay & Graze
T. 133 N., R. 42 W., 5th P.M.:
Section 8, part of the SE ¼, to be determined by a survey
Section 9, SW ¼ NW ¼ and part of the N ½ SW ¼, to be determined by a survey
Section 14, Government Lot 1
Section 15, part of Government Lot 1, to be determined by a survey
Section 17, NE ¼ NE ¼
Tuel, Dennis & Kristin – Habitat Easement - Hay
T. 132 N., R. 42 W., 5th P.M.:
Section 31, part of Government Lot 2, part of the SE ¼, all to be determined by a survey
Section 32, part of Government Lot 2, part of the W ½ SW ¼, all to be determined by a survey
Recess & Reconvene
At 9:21 a.m., Chair Huebsch declared the meeting of the Otter Tail County Board of Commissioners recessed
for a short break. The Board of Commissioners meeting was reconvened at 9:47 a.m.
New York Mills Employee Safety Training
Motion by Rogness, second by Murphy and unanimously carried to authorize the Safety and Emergency
Services Director to close the New York Mills building to the public on November 13, 2019 to allow staff to
engage in an emergency procedures training. The building will close at 2:30 p.m. and will resume normal
business hours on November 14, 2019.
Recess & Reconvene
At 9:52 a.m., Chair Huebsch declared the meeting of the Otter Tail County Board of Commissioners recessed
for a short break. The Board of Commissioners meeting was reconvened at 9:57 a.m.
Continued Public Hearing for Ditch 52
Chair Huebsch opened the continued Public Hearing for the Redetermination of Benefits for Ditch 52. Ditch
Inspector Kevin Fellbaum provided an overview of discussion from previous public hearings and responses
to concerned landowners that had requested additional reviews. He presented a second amendment to the
ditch viewers report showing a benefit of $747,672.02 down from the initial benefit of $1,219,627.71 in March
2019.
Mr. Fellbaum shared additional correspondence that was received regarding ditch 52 and at 10:13 a.m.,
Chair Huebsch opened the public hearing for comments from the public.
A property owner requested to be removed from the Redetermination of Benefits due to no sign of water flow
through the culvert on their property. The ditch viewers investigated with GIS and determined there is an 8-
foot natural fall from the property to Jolly Ann Lake. The three (3) ditch viewers are in agreement with the
decision to keep this property in the Redetermination Benefitted Area. Property owners expressed concerns
that Eagle, Torgerson, and Middle Lakes are not being assessed as part of the Redetermination. Ditch
Inspector Kevin Fellbaum reviewed the decision not to include Eagle, Middle and Torgerson Lakes in the
Redetermination Area and provided detail of that decision.
Board of Commissioners Meeting Minutes
October 22, 2019
Page 4 of 17
County Attorney Michelle Eldien stated if Commissioners choose to disagree with the ditch viewers, it is
required to provide specific findings as to why they find the outcome inappropriate and a basis as to why
ditch viewers did not follow statute, specifically Minn. Stats. 103E.311 and 103E.315.
At 10:34 a.m. the public hearing is closed.
Commissioner Johnson commented that they do not have reasons to disagree with the ditch viewers findings
and have not determined that ditch viewers are not following statutes. He confirmed the water above (Eagle,
Torgerson, and Middle Lakes) was draining into Jolly Ann Lake before Ditch 52 was created to help maintain
the water level on Jolly Ann.
A motion was offered by Johnson and seconded by Rogness to accept the amended viewers report as
presented.
Motion by Lindquist, second by Murphy and unanimously carried to table the motion made by Commissioners
Johnson and Rogness to allow further research and confirm statutes are being followed before making a
final decision.
Ditch 42
Motion by Johnson, second by Rogness and unanimously carried to authorize cost effective minor repairs
on ditch 42 to allow the water to flow properly. The motion included the water levels downstream not be
affected and requested ditch 42 be added to the list of re-determination to build a maintenance fund and
repair the system to a functional state.
Closed to the Public
At 10:47 a.m., Chair Huebsch declared the Board of Commissioners meeting closed to the public to discuss
Attorney-Client Privileged matters involving potential litigation regarding CSAH 35. The closed session is
authorized under M.S.13D.05, Subd.3(b). Present were all five seated Commissioners, Attorney Michelle
Eldien, Administrator John Dinsmore, Internal Services and Internal Services/HR Director Nicole Hansen,
County Engineer Charles Grotte, Public Works Director Rick West, Assistant County Engineer Matthew
Yavarow, Board Secretary Tara Bakken and Kendra Olson with Pemberton Law Firm.
The closed session was concluded at 11:04 a.m.
Pemberton Law Firm
Motion by Johnson, second by Lindquist and unanimously carried to contract with Pemberton Law Firm for
potential litigation regarding CSAH 35 as recommended by the County Attorney .
Conditional Use Permit (CUP)
Motion by Rogness, second by Murphy and unanimously carried to approve a conditional use permit
application, with conditions as recommended by the Planning Commission, proposing to cut 1840 cubic
yards of soil off of 2 Parcels and place on 35 Acre Parcel. Parcel No. 22000130099010 – Cut A - Will be
approx. 80’ x 100’ x 2.5’ = 740 cubic yards. FILL in RROW – Will be Approx. 250 cubic yards (100’ x 25’ x
2.5’) which is approved by Elizabeth Twp; Parcel No. 22000130099013 – Cut B – Will be Approx. 60’ x 100’
x 5’ = 1111 cubic yards; Parcel No. 22000130099000 – Spoils from the cuts will be used to fill in 2 hollow
areas. Fill Area #1 – 130’ x 65’ x 3’ = 938 cubic yards; Fill Area #2 – 160’ x 35’ x 3’ = 622 cubic yards; Extend
Approach Area 25’ x 12’ x 3.5’ = 39 cubic yards. Old Road-Bed – Place approx. 5” of black dirt on old rod
bed on Parcel No.’s 22000130099013 & 22000130099010 – 200’ x 30’ x 5” = 111 Cubic Yards. The proposal
is located in Section 13 of Elizabeth Township; Jewett (56-877), GD.
Board of Commissioners Meeting Minutes
October 22, 2019
Page 5 of 17
Request for Filing Extension of Final Plats
Motion by Lindquist, second by Rogness and unanimously carried to approve extending the filing of a final
plat titled “Tamarac Lake View Second Addition” to November 30, 2020 as requested by Anderson Land
Surveying, Inc.
Motion by Johnson, second by Lindquist and unanimously carried to approve extending the filing of a final
plat titled “Arvig Acres” to November 27, 2020 as requested by Compass Consultants.
Natural Resources Block Grant Agreement
Motion by Rogness, second by Murphy and unanimously carried to authorized appropriate County Officials’
signatures to execute the Natural Resources Block Grant agreement between the County of Otter Tail and
the State of Minnesota, acting through its Board of Water and Soil Resources. The grant is designated for
low income homeowners for use of septic system upgrades and a draft policy will be presented to the Public
Works Committee.
RESOLUTION AWARDING SALE OF $6,365,000 TAXABLE GENERAL
OBLIGATION WASTE DISPOSAL REVENUE REFUNDING BONDS, SERIES 2019B,
FIXING THE FORM AND SPECIFICATIONS THEREOF, PROVIDING
FOR THEIR EXECUTION AND DELIVERY, AND PROVIDING FOR THEIR PAYMENT
Otter Tail County Resolution No. 2019 – 76
The Chair announced that the meeting was open for the purpose of considering proposals for the purchase
of $6,365,000 Taxable General Obligation Waste Disposal Revenue Refunding Bonds, Series 2019B.
Proposals were submitted as shown in Exhibit D attached hereto.
A. WHEREAS, the Board of Commissioners hereby determines and declares that it is necessary and
expedient to issue on behalf of Prairie Lakes Municipal Solid Waste Authority Joint Powers Board (the
"Board") $6,365,000 aggregate principal amount of Taxable General Obligation Waste Disposal Revenue
Refunding Bonds, Series 2019B (the "Bonds"), pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 475 and Sections
400.101 and 471.59, to refund the County’s outstanding General Obligation Waste Disposal Revenue Bonds,
Series 2011 maturing on or after May 1, 2022 (the “Refunded Bonds”) which were issued to finance the cost
of acquiring and improving the solid waste disposal facilities known as the Perham Resource Recovery
Facility (the "Facilities"); and
B. WHEREAS, the County, together with Becker, Clay, Todd and Wadena Counties (the "Other Members"
and, with the County, the "Member Counties") organized the Board as a joint powers entity under Minnesota
Statutes, Section 471.59 for the purpose of acquiring and operating the Facilities; and
C. WHEREAS, the Member Counties have entered into a Joint Powers Financing Agreement, as amended
(the "County Agreement") under which the County has agreed to issue general obligation bonds on behalf
of the Board and, to the extent necessary to pay their respective pro rata shares of the principal and interest
on the Bonds when due, the Member Counties have pledged their full faith and credit and taxing powers;
and
D. WHEREAS, the Board and the County will enter into a Solid Waste Financing Agreement (the "Board
Agreement") under which the Board agrees to pay to the County the net revenues of the Facilities to the
extent necessary to pay principal of and interest on the Bonds when due.
E. WHEREAS, the County has retained Ehlers & Associates, Inc., in Roseville, Minnesota, as its independent
financial advisor for the sale of the Bonds and is therefore authorized to sell the Bonds by private negotiation
in accordance with Minnesota Statues, Section 475.60, Subdivision 2(9) and proposals to purchase the
Bonds have been solicited by Ehlers; and
F. WHEREAS, the proposals set forth on Exhibit A attached hereto were received at the offices of Ehlers at
12:00 P.M. on October 21, 2019 pursuant to the Terms of Proposal established for each series of the Bonds;
and
Board of Commissioners Meeting Minutes
October 22, 2019
Page 6 of 17
G. WHEREAS, it is in the best interests of the County that the Bonds be issued in book-entry form as
hereinafter provided.
H. WHEREAS, a form of Escrow Agreement establishing an escrow for the payment of the principal of the
Refunded Bonds and a portion of interest on the Bonds with the proceeds of the Bonds has been presented
to this Board. 4835-6719-3000.2
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Commissioners of Otter Tail County, Minnesota,
as follows:
1. Award of Sale. The proposal of Piper Jaffray to purchase the $6,365,000 Taxable General Obligation
Waste Disposal Revenue Refunding Bonds, Series 2019B of the County is hereby found and determined to
be a favorable proposal, and shall be and is hereby accepted, said proposal being to purchase Bonds
maturing and bearing interest as set forth in paragraph 2 at a price of $6,337,997.96 plus accrued interest.
2. Bond Terms. The Bonds shall be in the aggregate principal amount of $6,365,000, be dated November
14, 2019, bear interest at the rates per annum according to years of maturity set forth below, computed on
the basis of a 360-day year of twelve 30-day months, payable May 1, 2020, and semiannually thereafter on
May 1 and November 1 in each year, and mature serially on May 1 in the years and amounts as follows:
Year
Amount
Interest
Rate
Year
Amount
Interest
Rate
2022 $650,000 1.85% 2027 $720,000 2.25%
2023 670,000 1.90 2028 735,000 2.35
2024 680,000 1.95 2029 805,000 2.40
2025 695,000 2.05 2030 705,000 2.45
2026 705,000 2.15
All Bonds maturing on or after May 1, 2027, are subject to redemption and prior payment in whole or in
part in such order as the County may determine and by lot within a maturity at the option of the County on
May 1, 2026, and any date thereafter at par and accrued interest. In the event of redemption by lot of
Bonds of like maturity, the Bond Registrar shall assign to each Bond of such maturity then outstanding a
distinctive number for each $5,000 of the principal amount of such Bonds and shall select by lot in the
manner it determines the order of numbers, at $5,000 for each number, for all outstanding Bonds of like
maturity. The order of selection of Bonds to be redeemed shall be the Bonds to which were assigned
numbers so selected, but only so much of the principal amount of each Bond of a denomination of more
than $5,000 shall be redeemed as shall equal $5,000 for each number assigned to it and so selected. The
Bonds shall be numbered R-1 upwards in order of issuance or in such other order as the Registrar may
determine and shall be in the denomination of $5,000 each or any integral multiple thereof not exceeding
the amount maturing in any year.
3. Registrar and Paying Agent. The Bonds shall be payable as to principal upon presentation at the main
office of Bond Trust Services Corporation, as Registrar and Paying Agent, or at the offices of such other
successor agents as the County may hereafter designate upon 60 days' mailed notice to the registered
owners at their registered addresses. Interest shall be paid by check or draft of the Registrar mailed to the
registered owners at their addresses shown on the registration books of the County on the 15th day of the
month preceding each interest payment date.
4. Bond Form. The Bonds, the Registrar's Certificate of Authentication and Registration and the form of
assignment shall be in substantially the following form:
Board of Commissioners Meeting Minutes
October 22, 2019
Page 7 of 17
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
STATE OF MINNESOTA
COUNTY OF OTTER TAIL
No. R ____
TAXABLE GENERAL OBLIGATION
WASTE DISPOSAL REVENUE REFUNDING BOND, SERIES 2019
Interest Rate Maturity Date Date of Original Issue CUSIP
Registered Owner: Cede & Co.
Principal Amount:
The County of Otter Tail, Minnesota, for value received, hereby promises to pay to the Registered Owner
specified above, or registered assigns, the Principal Amount specified above on the Maturity Date specified
above, upon the presentation and surrender hereof, and to pay to the Registered Owner hereof interest on
such Principal Amount at the Interest Rate specified above from November 14, 2019, or the most recent
interest payment date to which interest has been paid or duly provided for as specified below, on May 1 and
November 1 of each year, commencing May 1, 2020, until said principal amount is paid. Principal is payable
in lawful money of the United States of America at the office of Bond Trust Services Corporation, in Roseville,
Minnesota, as Registrar or of a successor Registrar designated by the County, which designation shall be
made upon notice of 60 days to the Registered Owners at their registered addresses. Interest is payable to
the person in whose name this Bond is registered at the close of business on the 15th day of the month
preceding each interest payment date (whether or not a business day) at the registered owner's address set
forth on the registration books maintained by the Registrar. Any such interest not punctually paid or provided
for will cease to be payable to the owner of record as of such regular record dates and such defaulted interest
may be paid to the person in whose name this Bond shall be registered at the close of business on a special
record date for the payment of such defaulted interest established by the Registrar. For the prompt and full
payment of such principal and interest as the same become due, the full faith, credit and taxing powers of
the County have been and are hereby irrevocably pledged.
The Bonds of this series maturing on or after May 1, 2027, are subject to redemption at the option of the
County, in whole or in part in such order as the County may determine and by lot within a maturity, on May
1, 2026, and any date thereafter at par and accrued interest. Thirty days' notice of prior redemption will be
given by mail to the bank where the Bonds are payable and to the registered owners in the manner provided
by Chapter 475, Minnesota Statutes. Any defect in mailing notice of redemption shall not affect the validity
of the proceedings for redemption. Any Bond called for redemption, and for the payment of which moneys
are set aside by the County on the redemption date, shall not bear interest after the redemption date,
regardless of any delay in its presentation.
This Bond is one of an issue of Bonds in the aggregate principal amount of $6,365,000, all of like date and
tenor except as to maturity, interest rate, and redemption privilege, issued pursuant to and in full conformity
with the Constitution and Laws of the State of Minnesota, including Sections 400.101 and 471.59, Minnesota
Statutes, for the purpose of refunding certain obligations issued to finance the acquisition and improvement
of the solid waste disposal facilities (the "Facilities") owned and operated by Prairie Lakes Municipal Solid
Waste Authority Joint Powers Board (the "Board"), a joint powers entity whose members are Becker, Clay,
Otter Tail, Todd and Wadena Counties (the "Member Counties"). The Bonds of this issue (and any additional
obligations payable therefrom) are payable primarily from the net revenues of the Facilities and certain
obligations of the Member Counties as described in the Resolution referred to below, but this Bond
constitutes a general obligation of the County and to provide moneys for the prompt and full payment of said
principal and interest as the same become due the full faith and credit of the County is hereby irrevocably
pledged, and the County will levy ad valorem taxes on all taxable property in the County, if required for such
purpose, without limitation as to rate or amount.
Board of Commissioners Meeting Minutes
October 22, 2019
Page 8 of 17
This Bond is transferable, as provided by the Resolution of the Board of County Commissioners authorizing
the issuance of the Bonds of this series adopted October 22, 2019 (the "Resolution") only upon books of the
County kept at the office of the Registrar by the Registered Owner hereof in person or by the Registered
Owner's duly authorized attorney, upon surrender of this Bond for transfer at the office of the Registrar, duly
endorsed by, or accompanied by a written instrument of transfer in form satisfactory to the Registrar duly
executed by, the Registered Owner hereof or the Registered Owner's duly authorized attorney, and, upon
payment of any tax, fee or other governmental charge required to be paid with respect to such transfer, one
or more fully registered Bonds of the series of the same principal amount, maturity and interest rate will be
issued to the designated transferee or transferees. The Registered Owner of this Bond may be treated as
the absolute owner hereof for all purposes.
The Bonds of this series are issuable only as fully registered bonds without coupons in denominations of
$5,000 or any integral multiple thereof not exceeding the principal amount maturing in any one year. As
provided in the Resolution and subject to certain limitations therein set forth, the Bonds of this series are
exchangeable for a like aggregate principal amount of Bonds of this series of a different authorized
denomination, as requested by the Registered Owner or the Registered Owner's duly authorized attorney
upon surrender thereof to the Registrar.
IT IS HEREBY CERTIFIED AND RECITED that this Bond is issued by authority of and in strict accordance
with Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 475 and Sections 400.101 and 471.59, that all acts, conditions and things
required by the Constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota to be done, to happen and to be performed
precedent to and in the issuance of this Bond have been done, have happened and have been performed
in regular and due form, time and manner as required by law and that this Bond, together with all other
indebtedness of the County outstanding on the date of its issuance, does not exceed any constitutional or
statutory limitation of indebtedness.
This Bond shall not be valid or become obligatory for any purpose until the Certificate of Authentication and
Registration hereon shall have been signed by the Registrar.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Otter Tail County, Minnesota, by its Board of Commissioners, has caused this
Bond to be executed in its behalf by the facsimile signature of the Chair and by the facsimile signature of the
County Administrator, all as of the Date of Original Issue specified above.
OTTER TAIL COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Date:__________________________
By: _______________________________________ Attest: _________________________
Doug Huebsch, Board of Commissioners Chair John Dinsmore, Clerk
BOND REGISTRAR'S CERTIFICATE OF
AUTHENTICATION AND REGISTRATION
This is one of the Bonds described in the within mentioned Resolution and this Bond has been registered as
to principal and interest in the name of the Registered Owner identified above on the registration books of
Otter Tail County, Minnesota.
BOND TRUST SERVICES
CORPORATION, as Bond Registrar
By
_______________________________
Authorized Signature
Board of Commissioners Meeting Minutes
October 22, 2019
Page 9 of 17
ASSIGNMENT
FOR VALUE RECEIVED, the undersigned hereby sells, assigns and transfers unto (Please Print or
Typewrite Name and Address of Transferee) the within Bond and all rights thereunder, and hereby
irrevocably constitutes and appoints _______________ attorney to transfer the within Bond on the books
kept for registration thereof, with full power of substitution in the premises.
Dated: _________________________________
___________________________________________ ________________________________________
Please Insert Social Security Number or Other Identifying Notice: The signature to this assignment must correspond
Number of Assignee with the name as it appears on the face of this Bond in
every particular, without alteration or any change whatever.
Signature Guaranteed:
______________________________________________
Signatures must be guaranteed by a national bank or trust company
or by a brokerage firm having membership in one of the major stock
exchanges.
5. Execution and Delivery. The Bonds shall be prepared in printed form under the direction of the County
Administrator and when so prepared shall be executed on behalf of the County by the manual or facsimile
signature of the Chair and by the manual or facsimile signature of the County Administrator. The Bonds shall
not be valid for any purpose until authenticated by the Registrar. The Bonds initially issued hereunder shall
be registered as of the date of issuance, and all Bonds issued in exchange therefor shall be registered as of
such date, or, if issued after the first payment date, as of the most recent interest payment date on which
interest was paid or duly provided for. When the Bonds shall have been so prepared and executed, they
shall be delivered to the purchaser by the County Administrator or the Administrator's designee(s) upon
receipt of the purchase price and accrued interest and the signed legal opinion of Kutak Rock LLP, as Bond
Counsel, and the purchaser shall not be required to see to the proper application of the proceeds.
6. Registration and Transfer. As long as any of the Bonds issued hereunder shall remain outstanding, the
County shall maintain and keep at the office of the Registrar an office or agency for the payment of the
principal of and interest on the Bonds, as in this Resolution provided, and for the registration and transfer of
the Bonds, and shall also keep at the office of the Registrar books for such registration and transfer. Upon
surrender for transfer of any Bond at the office of the Registrar with a written instrument of transfer
satisfactory to the Registrar, duly executed by the registered owner or the owner's duly authorized attorney,
and upon payment of any tax, fee or other governmental charge required to be paid with respect to
such transfer, the County shall execute and the Registrar shall authenticate and deliver, in the name of the
designated transferee or transferees, one or more fully registered Bonds of the same series and maturity
date, of any authorized denominations of a like aggregate principal amount, maturity and interest rate. The
Bonds, upon surrender thereof at the office of the Registrar, may at the option of the registered owner thereof
be exchanged for an equal aggregate principal amount of Bonds of the same maturity date and interest rate
of any authorized denominations. In all cases in which the privilege of exchanging Bonds or transferring fully
registered Bonds is exercised, the County shall execute and the Registrar shall deliver Bonds in accordance
with the provisions of this Resolution. For every such exchange or transfer of Bonds, whether temporary or
definitive, the County or the Registrar may make a charge sufficient to reimburse it for any tax, fee or other
governmental charge required to be paid with respect to such exchange or transfer, which sum or sums shall
be paid by the person requesting such exchange or transfer as a condition precedent to the exercise of the
privilege of making such exchange or transfer. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Resolution, the
cost of preparing each new Bond upon each exchange or transfer, and any other expenses of the County or
the Registrar incurred in connection therewith (except any applicable tax, fee or other governmental charge)
shall be paid by the County. The County and the Registrar shall not be required to make any transfer or
exchange of any Bonds during the fifteen (15) days next preceding any May 1 or November 1 interest
payment date.
Board of Commissioners Meeting Minutes
October 22, 2019
Page 10 of 17
7. Payment. Interest on any Bond which is payable, and is punctually paid or duly provided for, on any
interest payment date shall be paid to the person in whose name that Bond (or one or more Bonds for which
such Bond was exchanged) is registered at the close of business on the 15th day of the month preceding
such interest payment date. Any interest on any Bond which is payable, but is not punctually paid or duly
provided for, on any interest payment date shall forthwith cease to be payable to the registered holder on
the relevant regular record date solely by virtue of such holder having been such holder; and such defaulted
interest may be paid by the County in any lawful manner, if, after notice given by the County to the Registrar
of the proposed payment pursuant to this paragraph, such payment shall be deemed practicable by the
Registrar. Subject to the foregoing provisions of this paragraph, each Bond delivered under this Resolution
upon transfer of or in exchange for or in lieu of any other Bond shall carry all the rights to interest accrued
and unpaid, and to accrue, which were carried by such other Bond and each such Bond shall bear interest
from such date that neither gain nor loss in interest shall result from such transfer, exchange or substitution.
8. Ownership of Bonds. As to any Bond, the County and the Registrar and their respective successors, each
in its discretion, may deem and treat the person in whose name the same for the time being shall be
registered as the absolute owner thereof for all purposes and neither the County nor the Registrar nor their
respective successors shall be affected by any notice to the contrary. Payment of or on account of the
principal of any such Bond shall be made only to or upon the order of the registered owner thereof, but such
registration may be changed as above provided. All such payments shall be valid and effectual to satisfy and
discharge the liability upon such Bond to the extent of the sum or sums so paid.
9. Book-Entry.
(a) For purposes of this paragraph 9, the following terms shall have the following meanings:
"Beneficial Owner" shall mean, whenever used with respect to a Bond, the person recorded as the
beneficial owner of such Bond by a Participant on the records of such Participant, or such person's
subrogee.
"Cede & Co." shall mean Cede & Co., the nominee of DTC, and any successor nominee of DTC with
respect to the Bonds.
"DTC" shall mean The Depository Trust Company of New York, New York.
"Participants" shall mean those broker-dealers, banks and other financial institutions for which DTC
holds Bonds as securities depository.
"Representation Letter" shall mean the Blanket Letter of Representation from the County to DTC,
which shall be executed in substantially the form on file.
(b) The Bonds shall be initially issued as separate authenticated fully registered bonds, and one
Bond shall be issued in the principal amount of each stated maturity of the Bonds. Upon initial
issuance, the ownership of such Bonds shall be registered in the bond register of the County kept
by the Registrar in the name of Cede & Co., as nominee of DTC. The Registrar and the County may
treat DTC (or its nominee) as the sole and exclusive owner of the Bonds registered in its name for
the purposes of payment of the principal of or interest on the Bonds, selecting the Bonds or portions
thereof to be redeemed, giving any notice permitted or required to be given to registered owners of
Bonds under this Resolution, registering the transfer of Bonds, and for all other purposes
whatsoever; and neither the Registrar nor the County shall be affected by any notice to the contrary.
Neither the Registrar nor the County shall have any responsibility or obligation to any Participant,
any person claiming a beneficial ownership interest in the Bonds under or through DTC or any
Participant, or any other person which is not shown on the registration books of the Registrar as
being a registered owner of any Bonds, with respect to the accuracy of any records maintained by
DTC or any Participant, with respect to the payment by DTC or any Participant of any amount with
respect to the principal of or interest on the Bonds, with respect to any notice which is permitted or
Board of Commissioners Meeting Minutes
October 22, 2019
Page 11 of 17
required to be given to owners of Bonds under this Resolution, with respect to the selection by DTC
or any Participant of any person to receive payment in the event of a partial redemption of the Bonds,
or with respect to any consent given or other action taken by DTC as registered owner of the Bonds.
The Registrar shall pay all principal of and interest on the Bonds only to Cede & Co. in accordance
with the Representation Letter, and all such payments shall be valid and effective to fully satisfy and
discharge the County's obligations with respect to the principal of and interest on the Bonds to the
extent of the sum or sums so paid. No person other than DTC shall receive an authenticated Bond
for each separate stated maturity evidencing the obligation of the County to make payments of
principal and interest. Upon delivery by DTC to the Registrar of written notice to the effect that DTC
has determined to substitute a new nominee in place of Cede & Co., the Bonds will be transferable
to such new nominee in accordance with subparagraph (e) hereof.
(c) In the event the County determines that it is in the best interest of the Beneficial Owners that they
be able to obtain Bond certificates, the County may notify DTC and the Registrar, whereupon DTC
shall notify the Participants, of the availability through DTC of Bond certificates. In such event, the
Bonds will be transferable in accordance with subparagraph (f) hereof. DTC may determine to
discontinue providing its services with respect to the Bonds at any time by giving notice to the County
and the Registrar and discharging its responsibilities with respect thereto under applicable law. In
such event the Bonds will be transferable in accordance with subparagraph (e) hereof.
(d) Notwithstanding any other provision of this Resolution apparently to the contrary, so long as any
Bond is registered in the name of Cede & Co., as nominee of DTC, all payments with respect to the
principal of and interest on such Bond and all notices with respect to such Bond shall be made and
given, respectively, to DTC as provided in the Representation Letter.
(e) The application of the terms of the Representation Letter to the Bonds is hereby confirmed. The
Representation Letter incorporate by reference certain matters with respect to, among other things,
notices, consents and approvals by registered owners of the Bonds and Beneficial Owners and
payments on the Bonds. The Registrar shall have the same rights with respect to its actions
thereunder as it has with respect to its actions under this Resolution.
(f) In the event that any transfer or exchange of Bonds is permitted under subparagraph (b) or (c)
hereof, such transfer or exchange shall be accomplished upon receipt by the Registrar from the
registered owners thereof of the Bonds to be transferred or exchanged and appropriate instruments
of transfer to the permitted transferee in accordance with the provisions of paragraph 6 hereof.
10. Fund and Accounts. There is hereby created a special fund to be designated the "General Obligation
Disposal System Revenue Bonds, Series 2019 Fund" (the "Fund") to be administered and maintained by the
County Treasurer as a bookkeeping account separate and apart from all other funds maintained in the official
financial records of the County. The Fund shall be maintained in the manner herein specified until the Bonds
have been fully paid and the County has been fully reimbursed from funds pledged under the Board
Agreement and the County Agreement (the "Pledged Receipts") for payment of the principal and interest on
the Bonds paid by the County from taxes levied on property in the County. There shall be maintained in the
Fund a Debt Service Account there hereby pledged and irrevocably appropriated and to which there shall
be credited: (i) amounts available under the Escrow Agreement described below for the payment of interest
on the Bonds to and including May 1, 2021, (ii) Net Revenues of the Facilities pursuant to the Board
Agreement in an amount sufficient, together with other sums herein pledged, to pay the annual principal and
interest payments on the Bonds; (iii) payments from Member Counties under the County Agreement; (iv) any
accrued interest received upon delivery of the Bonds; and (v) any collections of all taxes herein or hereafter
levied for the payment of the Bonds and interest hereon. The Debt Service Account shall be used solely to
pay the principal and interest and any premiums for redemption of the Bonds and any other general obligation
bonds of the County hereafter issued by the County and made payable from said account as provided by
law.
Board of Commissioners Meeting Minutes
October 22, 2019
Page 12 of 17
11. Coverage. The Net Revenues are estimated to be such that if collected in full they will produce at least
five percent in excess of the amount needed to meet when due the principal and interest payments on the
Bonds. Consequently, no taxes are levied at the present time. The pledge of Net Revenues shall not limit
the ability of the Board or County to pledge such Net Revenues to additional obligations of the County or
Board.
12. General Obligation Pledge. For the prompt and full payment of the principal of and interest on the Bonds
as the same respectively become due, the full faith, credit and taxing powers of the County shall be and are
hereby irrevocably pledged and the County shall levy a tax on all taxable property in the County if necessary
to pay the principal of and interest on the Bonds when due. If the balance in the Debt Service Account is
ever insufficient to pay all principal and interest then due on the Bonds payable therefrom, the deficiency
shall be promptly paid out of any other accounts of the County which are available for such purpose, and
such other funds may be reimbursed without interest from the Debt Service Account when a sufficient
balance is available therein.
13. Continuing Disclosure. The County is an obligated person with respect to the Bonds. The County hereby
agrees, in accordance with the provisions of Rule 15c2-12 (the "Rule"), promulgated by the Securities and
Exchange Commission (the "Commission") pursuant to the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended,
to perform its obligations under the Continuing Disclosure Certificate (the "Certificate") attached to the official
statement.
The Chair and County Administrator of the County, or any other officer of the County authorized to act in
their place (the "Officers") are hereby authorized and directed to execute on behalf of the County the
Certificate in substantially the form presented to the Board of Commissioners subject to such modifications
thereof or additions thereto as are (i) consistent with the requirements under the Rule, (ii) required by the
Purchaser of the Bonds, and (iii) acceptable to the Officers.
14. Authorization of Solid Waste Financing Agreement, Escrow Agreement and Incidental Documents. The
form of the proposed Solid Waste Financing Agreement between the County and the Board and the form of
Escrow Agreement between the County and UMB Bank, N.A. are hereby approved and the Board Chair and
Administrator of the County are authorized to execute the same and such other documents as Bond Counsel
considers appropriate for in connection with the issuance of the Bonds and redemption of the Refunded
Bonds, in the name of and on behalf of the County. The approval hereby given to the various documents
referred to herein includes approval of such additional details therein as may be necessary and appropriate
and such modifications thereof, deletions therefrom and additions thereto as may be necessary and
appropriate and approved by the County Administrator, the County's legal counsel and the County officials
authorized herein to execute said documents prior to their execution; and said County officials are hereby
authorized to approve said changes on behalf of the County. The execution of any instrument by the
appropriate officer or officers of the County herein authorized shall be conclusive evidence of the approval
of such documents in accordance with the terms hereof.
15. Payment of Issuance Expenses. The County authorizes the Purchaser to forward the amount of Bond
proceeds allocable to the payment of issuance expenses to Bond Trust Services Incorporated, Roseville,
Minnesota, on the closing date for further distribution as directed by Ehlers.
16. Certificates. The County Administrator and County Auditor are authorized and directed to prepare and
furnish to the purchaser and to the attorneys approving the Bonds, certified copies of all proceedings and
records relating to the issuance of the Bonds, and to the right, power and authority of the County and its
officers to issue the same, and said certified copies and certificates shall be deemed the representations of
the County.
Board of Commissioners Meeting Minutes
October 22, 2019
Page 13 of 17
18. Redemption of Refunded Bonds. The Refunded Bonds are hereby called for prior redemption on May 1,
2021. The County Auditor shall give notice of such redemption as provided by law and the terms of the
Refunded Bonds.
19. Registration. The County Auditor shall register the Bonds in his office as required by law.
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was make by Commissioner Johnson and duly
seconded by Commissioner Lindquist and upon vote being taken thereon the following voted in favor thereof:
Johnson, Murphy, Lindquist, Rogness, Huebsch
and the following voted against the same: None
whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
OTTER TAIL COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Date:__________________________
By: _______________________________________ Attest: _________________________
Doug Huebsch, Board of Commissioners Chair John Dinsmore, Clerk
RESOLUTION RELATING TO THE
GENERAL OBLIGATION CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT REFUNDING BONDS, SERIES 2016A OF THE
COUNTY AND AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF ESCROW AGREEMENT
Resolution No. 2019 - 75
BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Commissioners of Otter Tail County, Minnesota, as follows:
1. Prior Bonds. In 2007 the Otter Tail County Housing and Redevelopment Authority issued its Public
Project Revenue Bonds (Chemical Dependency Building), Series 2007E (the “Series 2007E Bonds”) to
finance a chemical dependency facility (the “Project”) to be leased to the State of Minnesota. The Series
2007E Bonds, together with certain other outstanding County bonds, were refunded by the County’s
General Obligation Capital Improvement Refunding Bonds, Series 2016A (the “Series 2016A Bonds”). The
State has discontinued its lease of the Project and the County intends to lease the Project to a for profit
entity beginning in 2020. The County reasonably expected on the date of issuance of the Series 2016A
Bonds that the Series 2016A Bonds would not become taxable private activity bonds within the meaning of
Section 141 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (the “Code”). However, if the County enters into the
proposed lease, such action may be treated as “deliberate action” which causes the Project to have a
private business use and result in taxation of interest on the Series 2016A Bonds unless the County takes
“remedial action” under Treas. Reg. Section 1.141-12 (the “Remedial Action Rule”).
2. Remedial Action. The County proposes to satisfy the requirements of the Remedial Action Rule by
establishing a “defeasance escrow” whereby the County deposits in an irrevocable escrow account an
amount sufficient to pay the principal and interest on that portion of the outstanding Series 2016A Bonds
which is allocable to the Series 2007E Bonds. The appropriate allocation and operation of the escrow
account are described in the report of Ehlers and Associates Inc. submitted to this Board.
3. Escrow Agreement. There has been presented to this Board a form of Escrow Agreement with
UMB Bank whereby funds are irrevocably set aside and invested for the purpose of paying principal and
interest on the allocable portion of the Series 2016A Bonds when due. The Chair and County Administrator
are authorized to execute the Escrow Agreement in substantially the form on file. An amount sufficient to
fund the Escrow Fund is hereby appropriated from grant funds provided by the State of Minnesota and
funds available in the County’s Human Services Fund.
Board of Commissioners Meeting Minutes
October 22, 2019
Page 14 of 17
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was made by Commissioner Rogness and duly
seconded by Commissioner Johnson and upon vote being taken thereon the following voted in favor
thereof: Johnson, Lindquist, Murphy, Rogness, Huebsch
and the following voted against the same: None
whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
OTTER TAIL COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Date:__________________________
By: _______________________________________ Attest: _________________________
Doug Huebsch, Board of Commissioners Chair John Dinsmore, Clerk
Payment Agreement
Motion by Johnson, second by Lindquist and unanimously carried to authorize appropriate County Officials
signatures to execute the agreement relating to Paying Agency, Registrar, and Transfer Agency with Bond
Trust Services for the $6,365,000 Taxable General Obligation Waste Disposal Revenue Refunding Bonds,
Series 2019B. The agreement will be effective November 14, 2019.
Issuance of County Credit Card
Motion by Johnson, second by Murphy and unanimously carried to approve the issuance of a county credit
card to Highway Group Lead Terry Bennett.
Otter Tail County HRA Appointed Board Members
Motion by Johnson, second by Murphy and unanimously carried to confirm the following as Otter Tail
County’s current appointed members to the Otter Tail County Housing and Redevelopment Board: John
Lindquist, Carl Linderkamp, Wayne Johnson, Robert Maki, Scott Rocholl and Leland Rogness.
Revision to Otter Tail County Federal Award Procurement Policy
Motion by Johnson, second by Rogness and unanimously carried to approve the Otter Tail County Federal
Award Procurement Policy as revised adding verbiage to describe certain activities and increase the
simplified acquisition threshold to $150,000.00 due to a change in state statute.
Adoption of the Otter Tail County 2040 Transportation Plan Update (2019)
Otter Tail County Resolution No. 2019-77
Upon motion by Rogness, seconded by Johnson and unanimously carried, the following resolution was
adopted:
WHEREAS, the Otter Tail County Board of Commissioners is the duly elected governing body for Otter Tail
County and is responsible for the planning, development, and preservation of a safe and functional
transportation system; and
WHEREAS, Otter Tail County has undertaken the task of updating their long-range comprehensive County
Transportation Plan to ensure the continued performance of the County’s transportation network; and
WHEREAS. the transportation planning process was guided by an Advisory Committee, composed of a
cross-section of multi-jurisdictional technical experts and citizens; and
WHEREAS, the public was invited, encouraged and involved in the Plan’s preparation; and
WHEREAS, the Otter Tail County 2040 Transportation Plan Update (2019) includes the following key
elements: existing conditions, future multi-model analysis, system preservation strategies and a financial an
performance analysis with an implementation plan; and
Board of Commissioners Meeting Minutes
October 22, 2019
Page 15 of 17
WHEREAS, this County Transportation Plan will assist County and local officials to cooperatively preserve
and improve the County’s transportation system.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, THAT the Otter Tail County Board of Commissioners does hereby
adopt the Otter Tail County 2040 Transportation Plan Update (2019), and agrees to use it as a guide for
future transportation system decisions.
Adopted at Fergus Falls, Minnesota, this 22nd day of October 2019.
OTTER TAIL COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Date:__________________________
By: _______________________________________ Attest: _________________________
Doug Huebsch, Board of Commissioners Chair John Dinsmore, Clerk
Speed Zone Study Request
Segments of CSAH 1 and CSAH 88 (both on Fir Avenue) within the City of Fergus Falls, MN
Otter Tail County Resolution No. 2019 - 78
Motion by Johnson, seconded by Rogness and unanimously carried to adopt the following resolution:
WHEREAS, Otter Tail County and the City of Fergus Falls have recently exchanged various routes within
the City of Fergus Falls, including CSAH 1 and CSAH 88 (both on Fir Avenue), and
WHEREAS, Otter Tail County believes that a speed zone study on segments of CSAH 1 and CSAH 88 (both
on Fir Avenue) in Fergus Falls would be beneficial in this area, and
WHEREAS, the County of Otter Tail is taking such action as may be necessary in order to pursue a speed
zone study on the segment of County State Aid Highway 1 (Fir Avenue) from Broadway to Tower Road and
County State Aid Highway 88 (Fir Avenue) from Tower Road to Deerfield Drive, and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that Otter Tail County does hereby request that this area be studied
by the Minnesota Department of Transportation to determine the need for a revised speed zone or zones, if
any.
BE IT ALSO RESOLVED, that Minnesota Department of Transportation proceed with establishing a legal
speed zone if the findings of the traffic study are supportive.
Adopted at Fergus Falls, Minnesota, this 22nd day of October 2019.
OTTER TAIL COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Date:__________________________
By: _______________________________________ Attest: _________________________
Doug Huebsch, Board of Commissioners Chair John Dinsmore, Clerk
Speed Zone Study Request
Segment of CSAH 1 (Tower Road) within the City of Fergus Falls, MN
Otter Tail County Resolution No. 79
Motion by Johnson, seconded by Rogness and unanimously carried to adopt the following resolution:
WHEREAS, the Otter Tail County has previously requested a Speed Zone Study for segments of CSAH 1,
CSAH 15 and Tower Road within the City of Fergus Falls, MN through Otter Tail County Resolution No.
2015-38, and
Board of Commissioners Meeting Minutes
October 22, 2019
Page 16 of 17
WHEREAS, Otter Tail County and the City of Fergus Falls have recently exchanged various routes within
the City of Fergus Falls, including CSAH 1 (Tower Road), and
WHEREAS, Otter Tail County believes that a speed zone study on a segment of CSAH 1 (Tower Road) in
Fergus Falls would be beneficial in this area, and
WHEREAS, the County of Otter Tail is taking such action as may be necessary in order to pursue a speed
zone study on the segment of County State Aid Highway 1 (Tower Road) from I-94 to County State Aid
Highway 88 (Fir Avenue), and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that Otter Tail County withdraws its Speed Zone Study Request
Otter Tail County Resolution No. 2015-38.
BE IT ALSO RESOLVED, that Otter Tail County does hereby request that this area of CSAH 1 be studied
by the Minnesota Department of Transportation to determine the need for a revised speed zone or zones,
if any.
BE IT ALSO RESOLVED, that Minnesota Department of Transportation proceed with establishing a legal
speed zone if the findings of the traffic study are supportive.
Adopted at Fergus Falls, Minnesota, this 22nd day of October 2019.
OTTER TAIL COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Date:__________________________
By: _______________________________________ Attest: _________________________
Doug Huebsch, Board of Commissioners Chair John Dinsmore, Clerk
Recess & Reconvene
At 11:53 a.m., Chair Huebsch declared the meeting of the Otter Tail County Board of Commissioners
recessed for a short break. The Board of Commissioners meeting was reconvened at 12:57 p.m.
Perham to Pelican Trail
Public Works Director Rick West announced a Public Works Committee meeting will be held October 31,
2019 at 8:30 a.m. at 505 South Court Street to continue their discussion regarding the Perham to Pelican
Trail.
Public Hearing for Revisions to the
Subsurface Sewage Treatment Systems Ordinance
Chair Huebsch opened the continued Public Hearing for the Sanitation Code for proposed revisions to the
Subsurface Sewage Treatment Systems (SSTS) Ordinance. Documentation was received with comments
regarding the proposed revisions and there were thirty-six members of the public that signed the attendance
sheet.
Land & Resource Director Chris LeClair reviewed seven areas that need to be addressed in the current
Otter Tail County Subsurface Sewage Treatment Systems Ordinance. An audit by the MN Pollution Control
Agency (MPCA) on January 25, 2019 alerted that the current ordinance is out of compliance with the MN
Rules chapter 7082. He addressed comments from previous hearings which includes rock fragments, two
compartment tanks, repair permits, vertical separation standard for existing systems and the compliance
timeline for failing systems.
At 1:15 p.m., Chair Huebsch opened the public hearing. County Administrator John Dinsmore facilitated the
public hearing and comments are summarized as follows:
Board of Commissioners Meeting Minutes
October 22, 2019
Page 17 of 17
• Concerns of the complexity of the ordinance, where to find the information and how quickly to find it.
It was suggested to keep the ordinance as simple as possible and adopt what the state has.
• Concerns expressed by multiple attendees regarding the requirement of two compartment tanks and
feel this decision should be between the homeowner and the designer.
• Concerns of conflict of interest with a Board member.
• Concerns of distrust.
• Concerns of zoning.
• One attendee was in support of the two-compartment tank requirement.
• One attendee was in support of the updated ordinance.
At 1:49 p.m., the public hearing is closed. Comments and discussion occurring at the public hearing will be
further considered at a Public Works Committee meeting following the hearing. The Board will consider
action on the Subsurface Sewage Treatment Systems Ordinance at 11:00 a.m. on November 5, 2019.
Adjournment
At 2:32 p.m., Chair Huebsch declared the Otter Tail County Board of Commissioners meeting adjourned.
The next Board meeting is scheduled at 8:30 a.m. on Tuesday, November 5, 2019, at the Government
Services Center in Fergus Falls, MN.
OTTER TAIL COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Date:__________________________
By: _______________________________________ Attest: _________________________
Doug Huebsch, Board of Commissioners Chair John Dinsmore, Clerk
Board of Commissioners Meeting Minutes
October 22, 2019 (Exhibit A)
Page 1 of 3
Board of Commissioners Meeting Minutes
October 22, 2019 (Exhibit A)
Page 2 of 3
Board of Commissioners Meeting Minutes
October 22, 2019 (Exhibit A)
Page 3 of 3
Board of Commissioners Meeting Minutes
October 22, 2019 (Exhibit B)
Page 1 of 1
EXHIBIT “B"
Olson, David
Otter Tail County Waterfowl Production Area Otter Tail County, Minnesota
The SE 1/4 and Lot 1, Section 1, Township 131, Range 40, Otter Tail County, Minnesota, except that
part of Lot 1 described as follows: Commencing at the Southeast corner of said Government Lot l; thence
on an assumed bearing of North on the Easterly line thereof for a distance of 1182. 79 feet to point of
beginning of tract to be described; thence North 79 degrees 35 minutes 39 seconds West 189.68 feet;
thence North 72 degrees 44 minutes 02 seconds West 290. 89 feet; thence North 17 degrees 15 minutes
58 seconds East 61 feet, more or less, to the shoreline of Belmont Lake; thence Easterly and
Northeasterly on said shoreline to the Easterly line of said Section l; thence on an assumed bearing of
South on the Easterly line thereof for a distance of 511 feet. more or less, to the point of beginning;
AND
Government Lot Seven (7), and that part of Government Lots Three (3) and Four (4) in Section 6,
Township 131, Range 39, described as follows: Beginning at the Southwest corner of said Government
Lot Four (4); thence North along the township line 1182.79 feet; thence South 88 degrees 59 minutes 50
seconds East 267.40 feet; thence North 83 degrees 14 minutes 40 seconds
East 758.70 feet; thence North 58 degrees 57 minutes East 391.40 feet; thence North 63 degrees 57
minutes East 494.70 feet; thence North 60 degrees 57 minutes East 687.85 feet to the quarter- section
line; thence South 00 degrees 08 minutes 30 seconds East 2047.50 feet to the southeast corner of said
Government Lot 7; thence North 89 degrees 21 minutes 37 seconds West 2407.34 feet to the point of
beginning, containing 81.48 acres.
EXCEPT
All that part of the Government Lot 7, Section 6, Township 131, Range 39, Otter Tail County, Minnesota
described as follows:
Beginning at the southeast corner of said Government Lot 7; thence on an assumed bearing of North
along the east line of said Government Lot 7, a distance of748.08 feet; thence South 89 degrees 36
minutes 48 seconds West a distance of217.08 feet; thence North 5 degrees 26 minutes 14 seconds West
a distance of280.0l feet; thence North 46 degrees 40 minutes 05 seconds West a distance of 78.55 feet;
thence North 84 degrees 03 minutes 37 seconds West a distance of 536.65 feet; thence South 5 degrees
43 minutes
01 seconds West a distance of 317.39 feet; thence South 16 degrees 58 minutes 32 seconds East a
distance of 578.14 feet; thence South 3 degrees 46 minutes 59 seconds East a distance of255.70 feet
to the south line of Government Lot 7; thence South 89 degrees 04 minutes 56 seconds East along said
south line, a distance of 680.56 feet to the point of beginning, containing 17.68 acres more or less.
Board of Commissioners Meeting Minutes
October 22, 2019 (Exhibit C)
Page 1 of 1
EXHIBIT “C”
Vukonich, Mark et. Al.
Otter Tail County Waterfowl Production Area
Otter Tail County, Minnesota
T.132 N., R41 W., Sec 18, Fifth Principle Meridian:
That part of Government Lot 1 and that part of the NE ¼ of the NW ¼ of Section 18, Township 132 North,
Range 41 West, Otter Tail County, Minnesota described as follows: Commencing at the Southwest
Corner of said Government Lot 1; thence North 00 degrees 04 minutes 02 seconds East (Assumed
Bearing) along the West Line of said Government Lot 2 a distance of 640.21 feet to the point of beginning;
thence South 88 degrees 23 minutes 55 seconds East a distance of 776.82 feet; thence South 04
degrees 24 minutes 28 seconds East a distance of 635.80 feet to the South Line of said Government Lot
1; thence South 88 degrees 55 minutes 52 seconds East along the South Line of said Government Lot
1 and to the South Line of said NE ¼ of the NW ¼ a distance of 1231.19 feet to a point distant 506.42
feet from the Southeast Corner of said NE ¼ of the NW ¼ as measured along the South Line of said NE
¼ of the NW 1/4; thence North 01 degrees 30 minutes 26 seconds West a distance of 391.99 feet; thence
North 88 degrees 21 minutes 24 seconds West a distance of 331.50 feet; thence No9rth 03 degrees 34
minutes 36 seconds West a distance of 58.69 feet; thence North 84 degrees 55 minutes 06 seconds
West a distance of 369.16 feet; thence North 61 degree 05 minutes 06 seconds West a distance of
105.88 feet; thence North 05 degrees 35 minutes 30 seconds West a distance of 796.61 feet to the North
Line of said Government Lot 1; thence North 88 degrees 51 minutes 36 seconds West along said North
Line a distance of 40.74 feet to a point distant 1131.71 feet from the Northwest Corner of said
Government Lot 1 as measured along the Norther Line of said Government Lot 1; thence South 05
degrees 53 minutes 21 seconds East a distance of 216.42 feet; thence South 86 degrees 50 minutes 00
seconds West a distance of 603.15 feet; thence North 86 degrees 47 minutes 34 seconds West a
distance of 552.62 feet to the West Line of said Government Lot 1; thence South 00 degrees 04 minutes
02 seconds West along said West Line a distance of 441.19 feet to the point of beginning. Subject to
County Road Right of Way along the West and North Lines thereof.
Board of Commissioners Meeting Minutes
October 22, 2019 (Exhibit D)
Page 1 of 1
BID TABULATION
$6,435,000* Taxable General Obligation Disposal System Revenue Refunding
Bonds, Series 2019B Otter Tail County, Minnesota
SALE: October 21, 2019
AWARD: PIPER JAFFRAY
Rating: S&P Global Ratings "AA" Taxable - Non-Bank Qualified
Milwaukee, Wisconsin
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
*Subsequent to bid opening the issue size was decreased to $6,365,000.
Adjusted Price - $6,337,997.96 Adjusted Net Interest Cost - $966,427.30 Adjusted TIC - 2.3075%
NAME OF BIDDER
MATURITY (May 1)
RATE
REOFFERING
YIELD
PRICE
NET
INTEREST COST
TRUE
INTEREST RATE
PIPER JAFFRAY
Minneapolis, Minnesota
2022
1.850%
1.850%
$6,407,701.00
$1,004,200.33
2.3191%
2023 1.900% 1.900%
2024 1.950% 1.950%
2025 2.050% 2.050%
2026 2.150% 2.150%
2027 2.250% 2.250%
2028 2.350% 2.350%
2029 2.400% 2.400%
2030 2.450% 2.450%
BAIRD $6,397,826.45 $1,015,034.86 2.3467%
NORTHLAND SECURITIES, INC.
Minneapolis, Minnesota
$6,359,026.40 $1,044,406.95 2.4226%
STIFEL, NICOLAUS
Birmingham, Alabama
$6,523,906.20
$1,057,441.99
2.4253%
FIFTH THIRD SECURITIES, INC. Cincinnati, Ohio
$6,501,092.45
$1,104,883.49
2.5388%
RAYMOND JAMES &
ASSOCIATES, INC. Memphis, Tennessee
$6,377,372.55
$1,118,091.74
2.5897%
BNY MELLON CAPITAL
MANAGEMENT
$6,387,713.00
$1,214,324.70
2.8072%
COMMISSIONER'S VOUCHERS ENTRIES10/31/2019
csteinba
N
Y
D
4
N
Otter Tail County Auditor
Audit List for Board Page 1
Print List in Order By:
Save Report Options?:
Type of Audit List:
on Audit List?:
Paid on Behalf Of Name
Explode Dist. Formulas?:
D - Detailed Audit List
S - Condensed Audit List
1 - Fund (Page Break by Fund)
2 - Department (Totals by Dept)
3 - Vendor Number
4 - Vendor Name
1:59:46PM
COMMISSIONER'S VOUCHERS ENTRIES
Account/Formula
1:59:46PM10/31/2019
csteinba
General Revenue Fund
Copyright 2010-2019 Integrated Financial Systems
01-149-000-0000-6369 7,117.25 12 MONTH DEVICE RENEWAL 90583 Miscellaneous Charges N
01-201-000-0000-6342 600.25 12 MONTH DEVICE RENEWAL 90583 Service Agreements N
10-303-000-0000-6278 4,000.00 SERVICE Engineering & Hydrological Testing N
10-302-000-0000-6505 17,849.25 WINTER SAND 711649229 Aggregates N
10-302-000-0000-6505 4,402.39 WINTER SAND 711658445 Aggregates N
50-000-000-0130-6859 2,605.75 MISC RECYCLING 2685 Electronic Disposal N
01-061-000-0000-6680 5,498.50 A2RJVV5AA0WI1P IP PHONES 1GV6-JH9Y-Q4YM Computer Hardware N
01-061-000-0000-6680 456.71 A2RJVV5AA0WI1P AIRONET ACCESS 1JNC-FD47-6F4Y Computer Hardware N
01-061-000-0000-6406 272.71 A2RJVV5AA0WI1P SUPPLIES 1ML7-HWVX-3X3Q Office Supplies N
01-061-000-0000-6680 128.90 A2RJVV5AA0WI1P LASER PRINTER 1P7R-LPD6-HTL1 Computer Hardware N
01-061-000-0000-6406 86.95 A2RJVV5AA0WI1P HDMI CABLES 1RQX-R1R1-PFX9 Office Supplies N
01-121-000-0000-6239 218.90 A2RJVV5AA0WI1P LASER PRINTER 1PP1-K4XG-C4LW MDVA Grant N
50-000-000-0120-6290 30.00 ACCT 160002806 1601885896 Contracted Services.N
50-000-000-0120-6290 30.00 ACCT 160002806 1601893254 Contracted Services.N
50-000-000-0120-6290 30.00 ACCT 160002806 1601900961 Contracted Services.N
50-000-000-0000-6290 17.03 ACCT 160002035 1601906714 Contracted Services N
50-000-000-0120-6290 30.00 ACCT 160002806 1601908172 Contracted Services.N
50-000-000-0000-6290 17.03 ACCT 160002035 1601914139 Contracted Services N
50-390-000-0000-6290 17.04 ACCT 160002035 1601906714 Contracted Services.N
50-390-000-0000-6290 17.04 ACCT 160002035 1601914139 Contracted Services.N
50-399-000-0000-6290 32.06 ACCT 160002035 1601906714 Contracted Services.N
50-399-000-0000-6290 32.06 ACCT 160002035 1601914139 Contracted Services.N
12995 ACTIVE911 INC
7,717.5012995
15896 AGASSIZ ARCHEOLOGY
4,000.0015896
2413 AGGREGATE INDUSTRIES - MWR INC
22,251.642413
14813 ALBANY RECYCLING CENTER
2,605.7514813
14386 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES INC
6,662.6714386
13620 AMERIPRIDE SERVICES INC
Page 2Audit List for Board
Account/Formula Description Rpt Invoice #Warrant DescriptionVendorName 1099
Paid On Bhf #Accr Amount On Behalf of NameNo.Service Dates
2 Transactions
1 Transactions
2 Transactions
1 Transactions
6 Transactions
ACTIVE911 INC
AGASSIZ ARCHEOLOGY
AGGREGATE INDUSTRIES - MWR INC
ALBANY RECYCLING CENTER
AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES INC
Otter Tail County Auditor
ASPIRE PSYCHOLOGICAL & CONSULTING SVCS
COMMISSIONER'S VOUCHERS ENTRIES
Account/Formula
1:59:46PM10/31/2019
csteinba
Solid Waste Fund
Copyright 2010-2019 Integrated Financial Systems
10-303-000-0000-6278 4,597.25 SERVICE 9840 Engineering & Hydrological Testing N
10-303-000-0000-6278 7,611.50 SERVICE 9841 Engineering & Hydrological Testing N
50-399-000-0000-6306 3,998.60 BALER MAINT & REPAIRS 3086 Repair/Maint. Equip Y
01-201-000-0000-6526 549.79 ACCT 56537OT UNIFORM ITEMS 245269 Uniforms N
01-013-000-0000-6276 2,700.00 EVALUATION - Z BAKER 659 Professional Services N
01-091-000-0000-6369 231.66 PREPARE CASE FILE COPIES 72469 Miscellaneous Charges N
01-112-000-0000-6572 41.06 ACCT 2189988000 BATTERIES P19969521 Repair And Maintenance Supplies N
10-304-000-0000-6572 5,907.64 TIRES 260118440 Repair And Maintenance Supplies N
01-061-000-0000-6342 3,900.00 QEDD YEARLY MAINTENANCE 12445 Service Agreements N
50-000-000-0110-6290 21.00 DRINKING WATER 76093 Contracted Services.N
252.2613620
13484 APEX ENGINEERING GROUP INC
12,208.7513484
13718 APEX EQUIPMENT LLC
3,998.6013718
15551 ASPEN MILLS INC
549.7915551
14527
2,700.0014527
1711 BACHMAN PRINTING
231.661711
14731 BATTERIES PLUS BULBS
41.0614731
15349 BAUER BUILT INC
5,907.6415349
13056 BCS GROUP LLC
3,900.0013056
1755 BEN HOLZER UNLIMITED WATER LLC
Page 3Audit List for Board
Account/Formula Description Rpt Invoice #Warrant DescriptionVendorName 1099
Paid On Bhf #Accr Amount On Behalf of NameNo.Service Dates
10 Transactions
2 Transactions
1 Transactions
1 Transactions
1 Transactions
1 Transactions
1 Transactions
1 Transactions
1 Transactions
ASPIRE PSYCHOLOGICAL & CONSULTING SVCS
AMERIPRIDE SERVICES INC
APEX ENGINEERING GROUP INC
APEX EQUIPMENT LLC
ASPEN MILLS INC
BACHMAN PRINTING
BATTERIES PLUS BULBS
BAUER BUILT INC
BCS GROUP LLC
Otter Tail County Auditor
COMMISSIONER'S VOUCHERS ENTRIES
Account/Formula
1:59:46PM10/31/2019
csteinba
Solid Waste Fund
Copyright 2010-2019 Integrated Financial Systems
50-000-000-0110-6290 10.00 COOLER RENT 76214 Contracted Services.N
50-000-000-0130-6290 10.00 COOLER RENT 76270 Contracted Services.N
22-622-000-0652-6369 1,375.00 PER DIEM DITCH 52 11/5/19 Miscellaneous Charges Y
22-622-000-0652-6369 73.76 MEALS DITCH 52 11/5/19 Miscellaneous Charges Y
22-622-000-0652-6369 613.64 MILEAGE DITCH 52 11/5/19 Miscellaneous Charges Y
10-302-000-0000-6350 400.00 SERVICE 373759 Maintenance Contractor N
10-303-000-0000-6278 1,458.00 SERVICE Engineering & Hydrological Testing N
50-390-000-0000-6290 325.86 PROJECT 41918.0 HHW REMODEL 10/11/19 Contracted Services.N
50-399-000-0000-6290 325.86 PROJECT 41918.0 HHW REMODEL 10/11/19 Contracted Services.N
01-507-000-0000-6300 85.58 MATERIALS FOR PHELPS MILL PARK 10/7/19 Building And Grounds Maintenance N
01-123-000-0000-6140 225.00 PER DIEM 10/10/19 Per Diem Y
01-123-000-0000-6330 160.66 MILEAGE 10/10/19 Mileage Y
01-124-000-0000-6140 150.00 PER DIEM 10/9/19 Per Diem Y
01-124-000-0000-6330 99.76 MILEAGE 10/9/19 Mileage Y
01-201-000-0000-6508 497.27 ACCT O2750 EFJ MOBILE MIC INV25902 Radios N
10-303-000-0000-6278 2,791.50 SERVICE B187829 Engineering & Hydrological Testing N
41.001755
11455 BERGQUIST/RICHARD
2,062.4011455
15727 BERGREN/PAUL
400.0015727
13535 BHH PARTNERS
2,109.7213535
11859 BOEN/DAVID
85.5811859
11652 BOYER/RODNEY
635.4211652
24 BRANDON COMMUNICATIONS INC
497.2724
386 BRAUN INTERTEC CORPORATION
Page 4Audit List for Board
Account/Formula Description Rpt Invoice #Warrant DescriptionVendorName 1099
Paid On Bhf #Accr Amount On Behalf of NameNo.Service Dates
3 Transactions
3 Transactions
1 Transactions
3 Transactions
1 Transactions
4 Transactions
1 Transactions
BEN HOLZER UNLIMITED WATER LLC
BERGQUIST/RICHARD
BERGREN/PAUL
BHH PARTNERS
BOEN/DAVID
BOYER/RODNEY
BRANDON COMMUNICATIONS INC
Otter Tail County Auditor
COMMISSIONER'S VOUCHERS ENTRIES
Account/Formula
1:59:46PM10/31/2019
csteinba
Road And Bridge Fund
Copyright 2010-2019 Integrated Financial Systems
10-303-000-0000-6278 249.50 SERVICE B187830 Engineering & Hydrological Testing N
10-303-000-0000-6278 2,791.50 SERVICE B187832 Engineering & Hydrological Testing N
10-303-000-0000-6278 2,791.50 SERVICE B187834 Engineering & Hydrological Testing N
10-303-000-0000-6278 2,722.75 SERVICE B187835 Engineering & Hydrological Testing N
10-303-000-0000-6278 3,569.00 SERVICE B188220 Engineering & Hydrological Testing N
10-303-000-0000-6278 7,420.25 SERVICE B189390 Engineering & Hydrological Testing N
10-303-000-0000-6278 2,697.25 SERVICE B189397 Engineering & Hydrological Testing N
10-302-000-0000-6350 1,270.00 SERVICE 1921 Maintenance Contractor N
10-304-000-0000-6572 1,130.16 TIRES 23201 Repair And Maintenance Supplies N
10-304-000-0000-6572 243.60 TIRE REPAIR 23260 Repair And Maintenance Supplies N
10-303-000-0000-6501 37.73 SUPPLIES Engineering And Surveying Supplies N
10-305-000-0000-6369 8.59 KEYS Miscellaneous Charges N
10-304-000-0000-6526 124.95 SHOES Uniforms N
50-399-000-0000-6304 2,448.09 ACCT 100331 UNIT 17373 SERVICE 055575 Repair And Maint-Vehicles N
50-399-000-0000-6304 682.75 ACCT 100331 CAPPED CASINGS 055588 Repair And Maint-Vehicles N
10-302-000-0000-6350 535.00 SERVICE 114110 Maintenance Contractor N
25,033.25386
9528 BRIAN M RIPLEY EXCAVATING
1,270.009528
10371 BRIAN'S REPAIR INC
1,373.7610371
3880 BUGBEE/WADE
46.323880
3319 BUSHMAN/JOHN
124.953319
3423 BUY-MOR PARTS & SERVICE LLC
3,130.843423
1227 CARR'S TREE SERVICE
535.001227
2307 CENTRAL DOOR & HARDWARE INC
Page 5Audit List for Board
Account/Formula Description Rpt Invoice #Warrant DescriptionVendorName 1099
Paid On Bhf #Accr Amount On Behalf of NameNo.Service Dates
8 Transactions
1 Transactions
2 Transactions
2 Transactions
1 Transactions
2 Transactions
1 Transactions
BRAUN INTERTEC CORPORATION
BRIAN M RIPLEY EXCAVATING
BRIAN'S REPAIR INC
BUGBEE/WADE
BUSHMAN/JOHN
BUY-MOR PARTS & SERVICE LLC
CARR'S TREE SERVICE
Otter Tail County Auditor
COMMISSIONER'S VOUCHERS ENTRIES
Account/Formula
1:59:46PM10/31/2019
csteinba
General Revenue Fund
Copyright 2010-2019 Integrated Financial Systems
01-112-101-0000-6572 571.00 REPAIR DOOR HING REINFORCEMENT 186992 Repair And Maintenance Supplies N
10-302-000-0000-6505 38,864.88 HAUL RECYCLED ASPHALT SHINGLES 19069-1 Aggregates N
10-302-000-0000-6505 225,000.00 SHOULDER BASE AGGREGATE CLASS 19069-1 Aggregates N
10-304-000-0000-6306 79.06 SERVICE 42808 Repair/Maint. Equip N
10-304-000-0000-6572 1,716.00 SUPPLIES 3692361 Repair And Maintenance Supplies N
01-122-000-0000-6304 5,546.92 INSTALL COMPUTER MOUNTS 5123 Repair And Maintenance N
01-201-000-0000-6315 4,788.90 UNIT 1908 INITIAL UP-FIT 5113 Radio Repair Charges N
01-201-000-0000-6315 374.00 UNIT 1308 REMOVED EQUIPMENT 5115 Radio Repair Charges N
01-201-000-0000-6315 2,640.12 UNIT 1901 INITIAL UP FIT 5126 Radio Repair Charges N
01-122-000-0000-6304 36.08 WIPER BLADES FOR UNIT 17522 053943 Repair And Maintenance N
10-303-000-0000-6278 669.66 TESTING P00010810 Engineering & Hydrological Testing N
01-201-000-0000-6408 72.60 ACCT 4931 BOARDING FOR MOJO 149959 Canine Supplies N
01-031-000-0000-6406 32.89 ACCT 2189988076 SUPPLIES 442905 Office Supplies N
571.002307
143 CENTRAL SPECIALTIES INC
263,864.88143
8930 CERTIFIED AUTO REPAIR
79.068930
1756 CHEMSEARCH
1,716.001756
9087 CODE 4 SERVICES, INC
13,349.949087
32655 COLLEGE WAY AUTO INC
36.0832655
608 COMMISSIONER OF TRANSPORTATION
669.66608
32659 COMPANION ANIMAL HOSPITAL
72.6032659
32603 COOPERS TECHNOLOGY GROUP
Page 6Audit List for Board
Account/Formula Description Rpt Invoice #Warrant DescriptionVendorName 1099
Paid On Bhf #Accr Amount On Behalf of NameNo.Service Dates
1 Transactions
2 Transactions
1 Transactions
1 Transactions
4 Transactions
1 Transactions
1 Transactions
1 Transactions
CENTRAL DOOR & HARDWARE INC
CENTRAL SPECIALTIES INC
CERTIFIED AUTO REPAIR
CHEMSEARCH
CODE 4 SERVICES, INC
COLLEGE WAY AUTO INC
COMMISSIONER OF TRANSPORTATION
COMPANION ANIMAL HOSPITAL
Otter Tail County Auditor
DAKOTA MAILING & SHIPPING EQUIPMENT INC
COMMISSIONER'S VOUCHERS ENTRIES
Account/Formula
1:59:46PM10/31/2019
csteinba
General Revenue Fund
Copyright 2010-2019 Integrated Financial Systems
01-031-000-0000-6677 369.00 ACCT 2189988076 CHAIR 443043 Office Furniture And Equipment N
01-031-000-0000-6406 24.95 ACCT 2189988076 SUPPLIES 443050 Office Supplies N
01-031-000-0000-6406 19.31 ACCT 2189988076 SUPPLIES 443075 Office Supplies N
01-031-000-0000-6406 23.88 ACCT 2189988076 BATTERIES 443122 Office Supplies N
01-031-000-0000-6406 60.00 ACCT 2189988076 SUPPLIES 443153 Office Supplies N
01-101-000-0000-6406 738.00 ACCT 2189988140 CHAIRS 442995 Office Supplies N
01-112-000-0000-6406 96.21 ACCT 2189988050 SUPPLIES/INK 443085 Office Supplies N
01-121-000-0000-6406 59.82 ACCT 2189988605 SUPPLIES 07083 Office Supplies N
01-250-000-0000-6406 60.61 ACCT 2189988556 SUPPLIES 443021 Office Supplies N
01-705-000-0000-6677 909.00 ACCT 2189988076 ADJ BASE 442776 Office Furniture And Equipment-Minor N
01-705-000-0000-6406 15.90 ACCT 2189988076 WALL FILE 443016 Office Supplies N
01-061-000-0000-6202 275.00 ESS PAYROLL SUPPORT 299795 County Website N
50-399-000-0000-6485 0.66 ACCT 227162 SUPPLIES 63679 Custodian Supplies N
50-399-000-0000-6485 62.90 ACCT 227162 SUPPLIES 67029 Custodian Supplies N
01-002-000-0000-6240 100.80 ACCT 3652 SEP 17 MINUTES 906127 Publishing & Advertising N
01-002-000-0000-6240 487.20 ACCT 3652 SEP 24 MINUTES 909898 Publishing & Advertising N
01-149-000-0000-6210 30.71 ACCT O014 SEALING SOLUTION AR34937 Postage & Postage Meter N
01-063-000-0000-6210 1,627.07 ACCT 14431200 MAILING SERVICE A300IC56199I Postage Meter N
01-002-000-0000-6369 55.60 MEALS BOARD RETREAT 10/15 10/15/19 Miscellaneous Charges N
2,409.5732603
9018 D & T VENTURES LLC
275.009018
36 DACOTAH PAPER COMPANY
63.5636
35011 DAILY JOURNAL/THE
588.0035011
15041
30.7115041
9655 DEPT OF HUMAN SERVICES
1,627.079655
11391 DOUBLE A CATERING
Page 7Audit List for Board
Account/Formula Description Rpt Invoice #Warrant DescriptionVendorName 1099
Paid On Bhf #Accr Amount On Behalf of NameNo.Service Dates
12 Transactions
1 Transactions
2 Transactions
2 Transactions
1 Transactions
1 Transactions
DAKOTA MAILING & SHIPPING EQUIPMENT INC
COOPERS TECHNOLOGY GROUP
D & T VENTURES LLC
DACOTAH PAPER COMPANY
DAILY JOURNAL/THE
DEPT OF HUMAN SERVICES
Otter Tail County Auditor
FOTH INFRASTRUCTURES & ENVIROMENTAL LLC
COMMISSIONER'S VOUCHERS ENTRIES
Account/Formula
1:59:46PM10/31/2019
csteinba
General Revenue Fund
Copyright 2010-2019 Integrated Financial Systems
01-002-000-0000-6369 30.00 10/15 MEETING SNACKS 10/15/19 Miscellaneous Charges N
01-091-000-0000-6330 134.68 MILEAGE - CHILD SUPPORT CONF 10/8/19 Mileage N
01-091-000-0000-6331 34.59 MEALS - CHILD SUPPORT CONF 10/8/19 Meals And Lodging N
50-399-000-0000-6306 798.00 RECYCLING CONTAINER REPAIRS 000029 Repair/Maint. Equip N
10-302-000-0000-6350 780.00 SERVICE 42223 Maintenance Contractor N
50-000-000-0130-6863 3,195.00 LEACHATE HAULING 10/11/19 42224 Leachate Disposal N
50-000-000-0170-6863 615.00 LEACHATE HAULING 10/16/19 42239 Leachate Disposal N
02-103-000-0000-6369 2,904.35 LAREDO USAGE SEP 2019 0223703-IN Miscellaneous Charges N
01-124-000-0000-6140 150.00 PER DIEM 10/9/19 Per Diem N
01-124-000-0000-6330 13.34 MILEAGE 10/9/19 Mileage N
01-122-000-0000-6330 225.62 MILEAGE TO AIRPORT 10/17/19 Mileage N
01-122-000-0000-6369 80.60 AIRPORT PARKING 5 DAYS 10/17/19 Miscellaneous Charges N
50-000-000-0120-6276 7,106.23 PROJECT 0019O005.00 64272 Professional Services N
50-000-000-0130-6276 16,470.26 PROJECT 0019O006.00 64273 Professional Services N
85.6011391
15756 ESTEP-LARSON/SARAH
169.2715756
13026 EZWELDING LLC
798.0013026
2153 FERGUS POWER PUMP INC
4,590.002153
13636 FIDLAR TECHNOLOGIES, INC
2,904.3513636
15555 FISCHER/JUDD R
163.3415555
14904 FOSBERG/JESSICA
306.2214904
387
23,576.49387
Page 8Audit List for Board
Account/Formula Description Rpt Invoice #Warrant DescriptionVendorName 1099
Paid On Bhf #Accr Amount On Behalf of NameNo.Service Dates
2 Transactions
2 Transactions
1 Transactions
3 Transactions
1 Transactions
2 Transactions
2 Transactions
2 TransactionsFOTH INFRASTRUCTURES & ENVIROMENTAL LLC
DOUBLE A CATERING
ESTEP-LARSON/SARAH
EZWELDING LLC
FERGUS POWER PUMP INC
FIDLAR TECHNOLOGIES, INC
FISCHER/JUDD R
FOSBERG/JESSICA
Otter Tail County Auditor
COMMISSIONER'S VOUCHERS ENTRIES
Account/Formula
1:59:46PM10/31/2019
csteinba
General Revenue Fund
Copyright 2010-2019 Integrated Financial Systems
01-201-000-0000-6526 73.83 ACCT 5287917 UNIFORM ITEMS 013674546 Uniforms N
01-250-000-0000-6526 454.23 ACCT 5287917 UNIFORM ITEMS 013674546 Uniforms N
01-250-000-0000-6526 144.00 ACCT 5287917 PATROL PANTS 013830055 Uniforms N
01-250-000-0000-6526 29.59 ACCT 5287917 GLOVES 013865155 Uniforms N
01-250-000-0000-6526 74.99 ACCT 5287917 STRYKE PANTS 013874716 Uniforms N
01-250-000-0000-6526 211.92 ACCT 5287917 UNIFORM ITEMS 013911204 Uniforms N
01-250-000-0000-6526 13.05 ACCT 5287917 BELT KEEPERS 013925482 Uniforms N
01-250-000-0000-6526 186.39 ACCT 5287917 BATES SHOES 013964620 Uniforms N
01-250-000-0000-6526 133.32 ACCT 5287917 DUTY BOOTS 014006195 Uniforms N
01-250-000-0000-6526 161.00 ACCT 5287917 GORE-TEX BOOTS 014020716 Uniforms N
01-250-000-0000-6526 72.74 ACCT 5287917 ARMOUR FLEECE 014026882 Uniforms N
01-112-102-0000-6673 3,900.00 INSTALL PLASTIC PARTITIONS 4879 Remodeling Projects N
50-000-000-0170-6290 116.00 ACCT 12465 RAT CONTROL 145332 Contracted Services.N
50-399-000-0000-6290 120.75 ACCT 7152 RAT CONTROL 145268 Contracted Services.N
50-399-000-0000-6290 9.45 ACCT 7152 ODOR UNIT 145532 Contracted Services.N
01-112-000-0000-6572 435.10 ACCT 813640729 TOILET KIT 9322928558 Repair And Maintenance Supplies N
01-112-108-0000-6572 476.89 ACCT 813640729 SEWAGE PUMP 9325509793 Repair And Maintenance Supplies N
01-250-000-0000-6493 428.53 ACCT 886466207 LAUNDRY BAGS 9313845084 Laundry Supplies N
01-250-000-0000-6493 428.52 ACCT 886466207 LAUNDRY BAGS 9314159915 Laundry Supplies N
01-201-000-0000-6315 16.28 LAPEL CLIP FOR RADIO 150006066-1 Radio Repair Charges N
01-112-000-0000-6369 130.03 FORESTRY HOSE 5571 Miscellaneous Charges N
392 GALLS LLC
1,267.06392
12848 GAST CONSTRUCTION CO INC
3,900.0012848
5066 GODFATHERS EXTERMINATING INC
246.205066
52564 GRAINGER INC
1,769.0452564
11754 GRANITE ELECTRONICS
16.2811754
13203 GREAT PLAINS FIRE
Page 9Audit List for Board
Account/Formula Description Rpt Invoice #Warrant DescriptionVendorName 1099
Paid On Bhf #Accr Amount On Behalf of NameNo.Service Dates
-
11 Transactions
1 Transactions
3 Transactions
4 Transactions
1 Transactions
GALLS LLC
GAST CONSTRUCTION CO INC
GODFATHERS EXTERMINATING INC
GRAINGER INC
GRANITE ELECTRONICS
Otter Tail County Auditor
HEALTHCARE ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES INC
COMMISSIONER'S VOUCHERS ENTRIES
Account/Formula
1:59:46PM10/31/2019
csteinba
General Revenue Fund
Copyright 2010-2019 Integrated Financial Systems
01-041-000-0000-6342 354.00 AGREE 025-1114829-000 25772430 Service Agreements N
01-042-000-0000-6342 118.02 AGREE 025-1114829-000 25772430 Service Agreements N
01-250-000-0000-6526 594.91 UNIFORM ITEMS FOR STS 10/21/19 Uniforms N
10-301-000-0000-5923 307.00 REFUND CHANGED CULVERT SIZE Sale Of Road Materials N
10-304-000-0000-6526 72.24 JACKET Uniforms N
01-112-109-0000-6572 90.00 ACCT OT SHERIFF HOLDING TANK 25192 Repair And Maintenance Supplies Y
01-250-000-0000-6432 119.00 ACT 325 WAST DISPOSAL 54287 Medical Incarcerated N
01-091-000-0000-6273 7.59 MEAL - MFWCAA MTG 9/20/19 Collections Officer Expenses N
01-091-000-0000-6273 153.12 MILEAGE - VISIT/MFWCAA MTG 9/20/19 Collections Officer Expenses N
01-201-000-0000-6408 101.94 ACCT 838960 2 BAGS OF DOG FOOD 234197862 Canine Supplies N
130.0313203
13522 GREATAMERICA FINANCIAL SVCS
472.0213522
7195 GRIFFIN/PATRICK
594.917195
15897 HANSON/MARTY
307.0015897
977 HAUGE/MARK
72.24977
9453 HAWES SEPTIC TANK PUMPING LLC
90.009453
37755
119.0037755
6914 HERMAN/CRYSTAL
160.716914
15589 HILL'S PET NUTRITION SALES INC
101.9415589
13767 HOLO/DALE
Page 10Audit List for Board
Account/Formula Description Rpt Invoice #Warrant DescriptionVendorName 1099
Paid On Bhf #Accr Amount On Behalf of NameNo.Service Dates
1 Transactions
2 Transactions
1 Transactions
1 Transactions
1 Transactions
1 Transactions
1 Transactions
2 Transactions
1 Transactions
HEALTHCARE ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES INC
GREAT PLAINS FIRE
GREATAMERICA FINANCIAL SVCS
GRIFFIN/PATRICK
HANSON/MARTY
HAUGE/MARK
HAWES SEPTIC TANK PUMPING LLC
HERMAN/CRYSTAL
HILL'S PET NUTRITION SALES INC
Otter Tail County Auditor
COMMISSIONER'S VOUCHERS ENTRIES
Account/Formula
1:59:46PM10/31/2019
csteinba
Road And Bridge Fund
Copyright 2010-2019 Integrated Financial Systems
10-302-000-0000-6331 10.91 MEALS Meals And Lodging N
02-612-000-0000-6140 150.00 PER DIEM - TASK FORCE 10/14/19 Per Diem Y
02-612-000-0000-6330 69.60 MILEAGE - TASK FORCE 10/14/19 Mileage Y
02-612-000-0000-6242 44.06 REGISTRATION - AIS SHOWCASE 9/18/19 Registration Fees Y
02-612-000-0000-6331 238.41 LODGING - AIS REASEARCH SHOW 9/18/19 Meals And Lodging Y
02-612-000-0000-6140 375.00 PER DIEM - TRAIN TEACHERS 9/30/19 Per Diem Y
02-612-000-0000-6330 371.43 MILEAGE - TRAIN TEACHERS 9/30/19 Mileage Y
10-303-000-0000-6278 27,833.03 SERVICE 0045318 Engineering & Hydrological Testing N
01-122-000-0000-6240 137.20 SANITATION CODE HEARING 1909140 Publishing & Advertising N
01-201-000-0000-6406 14.10 ACCT 9988526 CLIPBOARD 050283 Office Supplies N
50-000-000-0000-6406 454.72 ACCT 565373 SUPPLIES 050269 Office Supplies N
01-201-000-0000-6526 32.00 EMBROIDERD SHIRTS 3199 Uniforms N
01-250-000-0000-6526 266.00 STS CARHARTT SHIRTS 90535 Uniforms N
01-250-000-0000-6526 56.00 EMBROIDERD ITEMS 90536 Uniforms N
01-250-000-0000-6526 60.34 EMBROIDERD ITEMS 159186 Uniforms N
01-205-000-0000-6273 700.86 TECH SERVICES C KELLER A19-015 894 Coroner Expense 6
10.9113767
13642 HORGEN/JERRY
1,248.5013642
5835 HOUSTON ENGINEERING INC
27,833.035835
70 INDEPENDENT/THE
137.2070
38100 INNOVATIVE OFFICE SOLUTIONS
468.8238100
39324 JK SPORTS
354.0039324
7173 LAKE COUNTRY GRAPHICS INC
60.347173
79 LAKE REGION HEALTHCARE
Page 11Audit List for Board
Account/Formula Description Rpt Invoice #Warrant DescriptionVendorName 1099
Paid On Bhf #Accr Amount On Behalf of NameNo.Service Dates
1 Transactions
6 Transactions
1 Transactions
1 Transactions
2 Transactions
3 Transactions
1 Transactions
HOLO/DALE
HORGEN/JERRY
HOUSTON ENGINEERING INC
INDEPENDENT/THE
INNOVATIVE OFFICE SOLUTIONS
JK SPORTS
LAKE COUNTRY GRAPHICS INC
Otter Tail County Auditor
COMMISSIONER'S VOUCHERS ENTRIES
Account/Formula
1:59:46PM10/31/2019
csteinba
General Revenue Fund
Copyright 2010-2019 Integrated Financial Systems
01-205-000-0000-6273 6,750.00 CORONER SERVICES SEP 2019 907 Coroner Expense 6
01-013-000-0000-6276 4,971.00 SERVICES FOR OTTER TAIL COURT 10/7/19 Professional Services N
01-013-000-0000-6276 1,008.00 SERVICES FOR OT COURT ADMIN 10/7/19 Professional Services N
01-507-000-0000-6251 183.50 ACCT 700285 LP GAS COMMERCIAL 69751 Gas And Oil - Utility N
01-507-000-0000-6251 467.46 ACCT 700285 FUEL OIL 9118 Gas And Oil - Utility N
50-399-000-0000-6291 500.00 CARDBOARD 10/17/19 73245 Contract Transportation N
50-399-000-0000-6291 500.00 CARDBOARD 10/22/19 73253 Contract Transportation N
50-399-000-0000-6291 500.00 CARDBOARD 10/24/19 73256 Contract Transportation N
50-399-000-0000-6291 550.00 TIN 10/21/19 73258 Contract Transportation N
50-399-000-0000-6291 500.00 CARDBOARD 10/28/19 73267 Contract Transportation N
50-399-000-0000-6291 550.00 PAPER 10/29/19 73273 Contract Transportation N
01-123-000-0000-6140 225.00 PER DIEM 10/10/19 Per Diem Y
01-123-000-0000-6330 93.38 MILEAGE 10/10/19 Mileage Y
01-061-000-0000-6330 117.16 MILEAGE SEP-OCT 2019 11/5/19 Mileage N
10-304-000-0000-6572 695.53 PARTS 9307095625 Repair And Maintenance Supplies N
01-122-000-0000-6330 760.96 MILEAGE - MOWA/IWIP 11/5/19 Mileage N
7,450.8679
25146 LAKELAND MENTAL HEALTH CENTER
5,979.0025146
10350 LAKES AREA COOPERATIVE
650.9610350
81 LARRY OTT INC TRUCK SERVICE
3,100.0081
15078 LARSON/DOUG
318.3815078
41525 LARUM/PAT
117.1641525
1020 LAWSON PRODUCTS INC
695.531020
15088 LECLAIR/CHRISTOPHER
Page 12Audit List for Board
Account/Formula Description Rpt Invoice #Warrant DescriptionVendorName 1099
Paid On Bhf #Accr Amount On Behalf of NameNo.Service Dates
2 Transactions
2 Transactions
2 Transactions
6 Transactions
2 Transactions
1 Transactions
1 Transactions
LAKE REGION HEALTHCARE
LAKELAND MENTAL HEALTH CENTER
LAKES AREA COOPERATIVE
LARRY OTT INC TRUCK SERVICE
LARSON/DOUG
LARUM/PAT
LAWSON PRODUCTS INC
Otter Tail County Auditor
COMMISSIONER'S VOUCHERS ENTRIES
Account/Formula
1:59:46PM10/31/2019
csteinba
General Revenue Fund
Copyright 2010-2019 Integrated Financial Systems
01-122-000-0000-6330 297.54 MILEAGE - MEETINGS 11/5/19 Mileage N
01-123-000-0000-6140 300.00 PER DIEM 10/10/19 Per Diem Y
01-123-000-0000-6330 133.98 MILEAGE 10/10/19 Mileage Y
01-112-106-0000-6572 38.37 CROSS TEES/WALL ANGLE I-57407 Repair And Maint Supplies N
01-122-000-0000-6342 299.57 ACCT 35700038 CN 500-0450685 397309121 Service Agreements N
01-122-000-0000-6342 164.92 ACCT 35700038 CN 500-0491119 398020537 Service Agreements N
01-201-000-0000-6340 719.66 ACCT 35700038 CN 500-0397774 397309212 Office Equipment Rental & Maint.N
01-091-000-0000-6342 134.77 ACCT OT00-025 CN 123160-04 6819424 Service Agreements N
50-000-000-0130-6300 25.36 ACCT 984898 SUPPLIES 082565/1 Building And Grounds Maintenance N
50-000-000-0130-6306 18.24 ACCT 984898 GREASE 082565/1 Repair/Maint. Equip N
50-000-000-0130-6300 10.66 ACCT 984898 CHIP BRUSHES 082660/1 Building And Grounds Maintenance N
50-000-000-0130-6306 24.05 ACCT 984898 PARTS 082701/1 Repair/Maint. Equip N
50-000-000-0130-6300 12.58 ACCT 984898 DECK SCREWS 082732/1 Building And Grounds Maintenance N
01-091-000-0000-6270 500.00 LAW MN9988400 EXPERT WITNESS 73656 Misc Professional-Expert Witness N
01-061-000-0000-6346 1,400.00 REAL ASSET MANAGMENT TRNG 1910191 Mccc Fees N
1,058.5015088
11658 LEE/THOMAS
433.9811658
14696 LUMBER DEPOT LLC
38.3714696
36132 MARCO INC ST LOUIS
1,184.1536132
2721 MARCO TECHNOLOGIES LLC
134.772721
9930 MARKS FLEET SUPPLY INC
90.899930
11116 MAYO CLINIC
500.0011116
548 MCCC BIN#135033
Page 13Audit List for Board
Account/Formula Description Rpt Invoice #Warrant DescriptionVendorName 1099
Paid On Bhf #Accr Amount On Behalf of NameNo.Service Dates
2 Transactions
2 Transactions
1 Transactions
3 Transactions
1 Transactions
5 Transactions
1 Transactions
LECLAIR/CHRISTOPHER
LEE/THOMAS
LUMBER DEPOT LLC
MARCO INC ST LOUIS
MARCO TECHNOLOGIES LLC
MARKS FLEET SUPPLY INC
MAYO CLINIC
Otter Tail County Auditor
COMMISSIONER'S VOUCHERS ENTRIES
Account/Formula
1:59:46PM10/31/2019
csteinba
General Revenue Fund
Copyright 2010-2019 Integrated Financial Systems
01-149-000-0000-6354 1,000.00 CLAIM 19PC1032 DEDUCTIBLE D7068 Insurance Claims N
01-250-000-0000-6432 628.87 ACCT 5006836 MEDICAL SUPPLIES 67394819 Medical Incarcerated N
01-201-000-0000-6171 227.50 LODGING - TZO CONFERENCE 10/24/19 Tuition And Education Expenses Y
01-250-000-0000-6432 21.69 NITRO TABS 4358 Medical Incarcerated Y
01-250-000-0000-6435 230.00 DRUG SCREENING CARDS 4359 Drug Testing Y
01-127-000-0000-6330 39.44 MILEAGE - AMTRACT RESPONSE TRN 10/24/19 Mileage N
10-304-000-0000-6306 1,697.61 REPAIR 2012480 Repair/Maint. Equip N
10-302-000-0000-6350 3,828.00 SERVICE 2644 Maintenance Contractor N
01-042-000-0000-6406 35.00 ACCT ARC-001734 TITLE PAPER 084956 Office Supplies N
01-031-000-0000-6369 20.00 ACCT 1143 SHREDDING SERVICES 408796 Miscellaneous Charges N
1,400.00548
546 MCIT
1,000.00546
10115 MCKESSON MEDICAL-SURGICAL INC
628.8710115
5433 MEKASH/ALLEN
227.505433
10425 MEND CORRECTIONAL CARE
251.6910425
3737 MEYER/GEORGE
39.443737
948 MIDWEST MACHINERY CO
1,697.61948
9139 MIDWEST TREE & MAINTENANCE
3,828.009139
2929 MINNCOR INDUSTRIES
35.002929
7661 MINNKOTA ENVIRO SERVICES INC
Page 14Audit List for Board
Account/Formula Description Rpt Invoice #Warrant DescriptionVendorName 1099
Paid On Bhf #Accr Amount On Behalf of NameNo.Service Dates
1 Transactions
1 Transactions
1 Transactions
1 Transactions
2 Transactions
1 Transactions
1 Transactions
1 Transactions
1 Transactions
MCCC BIN#135033
MCIT
MCKESSON MEDICAL-SURGICAL INC
MEKASH/ALLEN
MEND CORRECTIONAL CARE
MEYER/GEORGE
MIDWEST MACHINERY CO
MIDWEST TREE & MAINTENANCE
MINNCOR INDUSTRIES
Otter Tail County Auditor
COMMISSIONER'S VOUCHERS ENTRIES
Account/Formula
1:59:46PM10/31/2019
csteinba
General Revenue Fund
Copyright 2010-2019 Integrated Financial Systems
01-091-000-0000-6342 20.00 ACCT 1143 SHREDDING SERVICES 408795 Service Agreements N
01-201-000-0000-6342 25.00 ACCT 1159 SHREDDING SERVICES 408802 Service Agreements N
10-304-000-0000-6306 10.00 SERVICE ABR0216830I Repair/Maint. Equip N
01-045-000-0000-6266 59,766.50 AUDIT SERVICES 4/17-10/1/19 70188 Audit Cost N
01-045-000-0000-6266 1,185.00 NON AUDIT SERVICES 8/21-10/1 70189 Audit Cost N
10-301-000-0000-6266 6,399.00 AUDIT 70191 Audit Cost N
01-043-000-0000-6406 9.98 SEALING BAGS FOR PASSPORTS 10/18/19 Office Supplies N
01-112-101-0000-6572 4,098.41 PLANTING/REPAIR PAVERS 19179 Repair And Maintenance Supplies N
50-000-000-0170-6304 325.51 ACCT 9984898 REPAIRS 6217800 Repair And Maintenance N
01-112-101-0000-6485 192.18 ACCT 655-790197 SUPPLIES 67258 Custodian Supplies N
01-112-106-0000-6485 355.88 ACCT 655-794996 SUPPLIES 69071 Custodian Supplies N
01-112-108-0000-6572 80.00 PAINT HALLWAY POSTS 4355 Repair And Maintenance Supplies N
10-302-000-0000-6515 35,310.00 POSTS TRFINV016142 Signs And Posts N
65.007661
928 MN DEPT OF LABOR AND INDUSTRY
10.00928
565 MN STATE AUDITOR
67,350.50565
3337 MYHRE/JIM
9.983337
589 NATURES GARDEN WORLD
4,098.41589
43227 NELSON AUTO CENTER
325.5143227
595 NETWORK SERVICES COMPANY
548.06595
11384 NEWMAN PAINTING INC
80.0011384
1060 NEWMAN TRAFFIC SIGNS
Page 15Audit List for Board
Account/Formula Description Rpt Invoice #Warrant DescriptionVendorName 1099
Paid On Bhf #Accr Amount On Behalf of NameNo.Service Dates
3 Transactions
1 Transactions
3 Transactions
1 Transactions
1 Transactions
1 Transactions
2 Transactions
1 Transactions
MINNKOTA ENVIRO SERVICES INC
MN DEPT OF LABOR AND INDUSTRY
MN STATE AUDITOR
MYHRE/JIM
NATURES GARDEN WORLD
NELSON AUTO CENTER
NETWORK SERVICES COMPANY
NEWMAN PAINTING INC
Otter Tail County Auditor
COMMISSIONER'S VOUCHERS ENTRIES
Account/Formula
1:59:46PM10/31/2019
csteinba
Road And Bridge Fund
Copyright 2010-2019 Integrated Financial Systems
01-123-000-0000-6140 300.00 PER DIEM 10/10/19 Per Diem Y
01-123-000-0000-6330 179.80 MILEAGE 10/10/19 Mileage Y
01-112-102-0000-6342 318.50 OTTCTYJAIL SERVICE & RECERT 38207 Service Agreements N
01-101-000-0000-6406 520.65 ACCT 379548 MN VITAL RECORDS 48925698 Office Supplies N
10-304-000-0000-6572 216.00 PARTS 645419 Repair And Maintenance Supplies N
50-399-000-0000-6487 7,000.00 ROLL OFF CONTAINER 10928 Tools & Minor Equipment N
01-112-106-0000-6342 534.99 ACCT 284651 SERVICE CLF05630B19 Service Agreements N
50-000-000-0130-6379 68.00 ACCT O2416 HEB B VACCINE 524 Miscellaneous Charges N
BJERKETVEDT/LARRY14825
01-507-000-0000-6300 1,844.12 ACCT 420 PHELPS MILL CHARGES 2633 Building And Grounds Maintenance N
01-507-000-0000-6301 220.05 ACCT 420 FESTIVAL CHARGES 2633 Phelps Mill Festival N
01-507-000-0000-6545 1,003.57 ACCT 420 MULCH/CHIP BRUSH 2633 Contracted Services N
50-000-000-0110-6300 128.45 ACCT 408 MOWING @ BL TSF 2632 Building And Grounds Maintenance N
35,310.001060
14655 NEWVILLE/DARREN
479.8014655
14257 NORTHLAND FIRE PROTECTION
318.5014257
14303 NORTHSTAR COMPUTER FORMS INC
520.6514303
1073 OLSEN COMPANIES
216.001073
4233 OLYMPIC SALES INC
7,000.004233
5686 OTIS ELEVATOR CO
534.995686
115 OTTER TAIL CO PUBLIC HEALTH
68.00115
126 OTTER TAIL CO TREASURER
Page 16Audit List for Board
Account/Formula Description Rpt Invoice #Warrant DescriptionVendorName 1099
Paid On Bhf #Accr Amount On Behalf of NameNo.Service Dates
1 Transactions
2 Transactions
1 Transactions
1 Transactions
1 Transactions
1 Transactions
1 Transactions
1 Transactions
NEWMAN TRAFFIC SIGNS
NEWVILLE/DARREN
NORTHLAND FIRE PROTECTION
NORTHSTAR COMPUTER FORMS INC
OLSEN COMPANIES
OLYMPIC SALES INC
OTIS ELEVATOR CO
OTTER TAIL CO PUBLIC HEALTH
Otter Tail County Auditor
OUTDOOR RENOVATIONS LANDSCAPE & NURSERY
COMMISSIONER'S VOUCHERS ENTRIES
Account/Formula
1:59:46PM10/31/2019
csteinba
Solid Waste Fund
Copyright 2010-2019 Integrated Financial Systems
50-000-000-0120-6300 370.32 ACCT 408 MOWING @ HENNING 2632 Building And Grounds Maintenance N
01-201-000-0000-6304 24.66 UNIT 1101 TIRE REPAIR 117921 Repair And Maintenance N
01-201-000-0000-6304 134.95 UNIT 6605 REPLACE BATTERY 118357 Repair And Maintenance N
50-000-000-0120-6291 3,233.56 HAULING CHARGES 10/7/19 39037 Contract Transportation N
50-000-000-0170-6291 7,804.03 HAULING CHARGES 10/7/19 39037 Contract Transportation N
50-000-000-0120-6291 2,425.17 HAULING CHARGES 10/14/19 39055 Contract Transportation N
50-000-000-0170-6291 9,604.96 HAULING CHARGES 10/14/19 39055 Contract Transportation N
50-399-000-0000-6291 2,912.00 HAULING CHARGES 10/7/19 39037 Contract Transportation N
50-399-000-0000-6291 1,456.00 HAULING CHARGES 10/14/19 39055 Contract Transportation N
10-303-000-0000-6369 9,417.86 SERVICE 8528 Miscellaneous Charges N
50-000-000-0130-6278 66.00 ACCT 10-106029 ANALYSIS 19100274761 Engineering & Hydrological Testing N
50-000-000-0150-6565 12.00 ACCT 1630248 DIESEL 10/3/19 6993 Fuels N
10-302-000-0000-6331 19.90 MEALS Meals And Lodging N
10-304-000-0000-6526 193.49 SHOES Uniforms N
01-031-000-0000-6276 12,562.80 20123713-00M COUNTY MATTERS 51 Professional Services Y
3,566.51126
49008 OTTER TAIL TIRE INC
159.6149008
7392 OTTERTAIL TRUCKING INC
27,435.727392
6351
9,417.866351
6259 PACE ANALYTICAL SERVICES INC
66.006259
45022 PARK REGION CO OP
12.0045022
11974 PEDERSEN/ALVIN
213.3911974
137 PEMBERTON LAW, PLLP
Page 17Audit List for Board
Account/Formula Description Rpt Invoice #Warrant DescriptionVendorName 1099
Paid On Bhf #Accr Amount On Behalf of NameNo.Service Dates
5 Transactions
2 Transactions
6 Transactions
1 Transactions
1 Transactions
1 Transactions
2 Transactions
OUTDOOR RENOVATIONS LANDSCAPE & NURSERY
OTTER TAIL CO TREASURER
OTTER TAIL TIRE INC
OTTERTAIL TRUCKING INC
PACE ANALYTICAL SERVICES INC
PARK REGION CO OP
PEDERSEN/ALVIN
Otter Tail County Auditor
COMMISSIONER'S VOUCHERS ENTRIES
Account/Formula
1:59:46PM10/31/2019
csteinba
General Revenue Fund
Copyright 2010-2019 Integrated Financial Systems
10-304-000-0000-6565 786.47 DIESEL FUEL 17051 Fuels - Diesel N
50-399-000-0000-6306 1,200.00 BLAST & PAINT DUMPSTER 000519 Repair/Maint. Equip N
01-250-000-0000-6491 304.20 PILLOW COVERS 18305 Jail Supplies N
01-250-000-0000-6491 148.91 HYGIENE SUPPLIES 18444 Jail Supplies N
01-250-000-0000-6491 1,290.84 CLEAR SAFE MATTRESSES 18477 Jail Supplies N
01-112-000-0000-6572 228.47 FILTERS/SUPPLIES 87969 Repair And Maintenance Supplies N
01-112-106-0000-6572 164.94 WATER FILTERS 87992 Repair And Maint Supplies N
50-399-000-0000-6290 495.38 MAGAZINES & CHIPBOARD 1131330 Contracted Services.N
01-149-000-0000-6210 964.44 ACCT 0010390164 LEASE PYMT 3103501518 Postage & Postage Meter N
01-149-000-0000-6369 1,200.00 ACCT 679827 5MB DATA PLAN 1023129 Miscellaneous Charges N
01-149-000-0000-6400 1,198.96 TRAINING 10/15 BOARD RETREAT 0150 Leadership Training Expense N
12,562.80137
1087 PENROSE OIL COMPANY
786.471087
7145 PETE'S AUTOBODY
1,200.007145
11290 PHOENIX SUPPLY
1,743.9511290
45072 PINE PLAZA TV & APPLIANCE
393.4145072
10827 PIONEER INDUSTRIES INTERNATIONAL
495.3810827
7900 PITNEY BOWES
964.447900
12526 PRECISE MRM LLC
1,200.0012526
15901 PRINCIPES CONSULTING
1,198.9615901
Page 18Audit List for Board
Account/Formula Description Rpt Invoice #Warrant DescriptionVendorName 1099
Paid On Bhf #Accr Amount On Behalf of NameNo.Service Dates
1 Transactions
1 Transactions
1 Transactions
3 Transactions
2 Transactions
1 Transactions
1 Transactions
1 Transactions
1 Transactions
PEMBERTON LAW, PLLP
PENROSE OIL COMPANY
PETE'S AUTOBODY
PHOENIX SUPPLY
PINE PLAZA TV & APPLIANCE
PIONEER INDUSTRIES INTERNATIONAL
PITNEY BOWES
PRECISE MRM LLC
PRINCIPES CONSULTING
Otter Tail County Auditor
COMMISSIONER'S VOUCHERS ENTRIES
Account/Formula
1:59:46PM10/31/2019
csteinba
Solid Waste Fund
Copyright 2010-2019 Integrated Financial Systems
50-000-000-0120-6565 81.84 ACCT 988529 DIESEL 10/11/19 88050527 Fuels N
50-000-000-0120-6565 37.65 ACCT 988529 DIESEL 10/17/19 88050622 Fuels N
10-304-000-0000-6565 1,390.00 DIESEL FUEL 88050429 Fuels - Diesel N
50-399-000-0000-6290 99.09 OTTERTAILRECY01 JANITORIAL INV00061780 Contracted Services.N
01-201-000-0000-6305 500.00 RADIATION SAFETY TRAINING 12042 Electronic Devices - Maint.N
10-304-000-0000-6526 169.95 SHOES Uniforms N
01-091-000-0000-6369 114.00 CASE 28380-0001 DRAIN MATTERS 303725 Miscellaneous Charges Y
10-303-000-0000-6369 152.00 SERVICE 472740 Miscellaneous Charges N
01-124-000-0000-6140 225.00 PER DIEM 10/9/19 Per Diem Y
01-124-000-0000-6330 125.86 MILEAGE 10/9/19 Mileage Y
01-123-000-0000-6140 225.00 PER DIEM 10/10/19 Per Diem Y
01-123-000-0000-6330 99.76 MILEAGE 10/10/19 Mileage Y
45475 PRO AG FARMERS CO OP
119.4945475
6547 PRO AG FARMERS COOPERATIVE
1,390.006547
25082 PRODUCTIVE ALTERNATIVES INC
99.0925082
15899 QUALITY RADIOLOGIC CONSULTANTS INC
500.0015899
12958 RATZ/JEFFREY
169.9512958
10842 RINKE NOONAN LAW FIRM
114.0010842
12652 RMB ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORIES INC
152.0012652
13859 ROSENTHAL/JACK
350.8613859
11656 SCHIERER/STEVE
Page 19Audit List for Board
Account/Formula Description Rpt Invoice #Warrant DescriptionVendorName 1099
Paid On Bhf #Accr Amount On Behalf of NameNo.Service Dates
2 Transactions
1 Transactions
1 Transactions
1 Transactions
1 Transactions
1 Transactions
1 Transactions
2 Transactions
PRO AG FARMERS CO OP
PRO AG FARMERS COOPERATIVE
PRODUCTIVE ALTERNATIVES INC
QUALITY RADIOLOGIC CONSULTANTS INC
RATZ/JEFFREY
RINKE NOONAN LAW FIRM
RMB ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORIES INC
ROSENTHAL/JACK
Otter Tail County Auditor
COMMISSIONER'S VOUCHERS ENTRIES
Account/Formula
1:59:46PM10/31/2019
csteinba
General Revenue Fund
Copyright 2010-2019 Integrated Financial Systems
22-622-000-0629-6369 200.00 2 BEAVERS TRAPPED IN DITCH 29 10/18/19 Miscellaneous Charges N
01-091-000-0000-6331 15.00 MEAL - PROBATION ADVISORY MTG 10/21/19 Meals And Lodging N
01-091-000-0000-6331 29.96 MEALS - CHIPS CONFERENCE 9/20/19 Meals And Lodging N
01-041-000-0000-6369 120.00 NOTARY COMMISSION APPLICATION 11/5/19 Miscellaneous Charges N
GODEL/DAWN2124
01-042-000-0000-6369 120.00 NOTARY COMMISSION APPLICATION 11/5/19 Misc Charges/Manuals N
TABBUT/DEB2946
01-042-000-0000-6369 120.00 NOTARY COMMISSION APPLICATION 11/5/19 Misc Charges/Manuals N
ABBOTT/CYNDI1799
01-061-000-0000-6680 412.00 ACCT 1079757 USB DOCKS B10752317 Computer Hardware N
01-122-000-0000-6406 382.00 ACCT 1079757 INDESIGN LICENSE B10663223 Office Supplies N
50-399-000-0000-6330 72.50 MILEAGE - RDO/VERIZON FARGO 10/4/19 Mileage N
01-091-000-0000-6330 53.36 MILEAGE - CONFLICT CASE 10/11/19 Mileage N
01-002-000-0000-6818 3,464.16 LRSP PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 11025.00-21 Board Contingency N
10-303-000-0000-6278 3,495.23 SERVICE 10246.00-16 Engineering & Hydrological Testing N
10-303-000-0000-6278 177.26 SERVICE 11568.00-15 Engineering & Hydrological Testing N
324.7611656
15129 SCHMITZ/DUANE
200.0015129
15767 SCHUR/KATHLEEN
44.9615767
8085 SECRETARY OF STATE
360.008085
10001 SHI CORP
794.0010001
11529 SIMON/SETHRENA
72.5011529
15661 SPIELMAN/MATTHEW
53.3615661
6321 SRF CONSULTING GROUP INC
Page 20Audit List for Board
Account/Formula Description Rpt Invoice #Warrant DescriptionVendorName 1099
Paid On Bhf #Accr Amount On Behalf of NameNo.Service Dates
2 Transactions
1 Transactions
2 Transactions
3 Transactions
2 Transactions
1 Transactions
1 Transactions
SCHIERER/STEVE
SCHMITZ/DUANE
SCHUR/KATHLEEN
SECRETARY OF STATE
SHI CORP
SIMON/SETHRENA
SPIELMAN/MATTHEW
Otter Tail County Auditor
COMMISSIONER'S VOUCHERS ENTRIES
Account/Formula
1:59:46PM10/31/2019
csteinba
Road And Bridge Fund
Copyright 2010-2019 Integrated Financial Systems
10-303-000-0000-6278 133.02 SERVICE 13062.00-1 Engineering & Hydrological Testing N
50-000-000-0000-6290 127.26 SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN 12682.00-1 Contracted Services N
01-112-108-0000-6485 150.50 ACCT 00224002 SUPPLIES 842035 Custodian Supplies N
01-112-106-0000-6485 687.37 ACCT 00224001 SUPPLIES 843272 Custodian Supplies N
01-112-101-0000-6485 592.12 ACCT 00224000 SUPPLIES 843445 Custodian Supplies N
01-112-108-0000-6485 213.66 ACCT 00224002 SUPPLIES 843447 Custodian Supplies N
01-201-000-0000-6304 1,256.90 ACCT 00224005 CAR WASH SOAP 834315 Repair And Maintenance N
02-612-000-0000-6140 600.00 PER DIEM 10/14/19 Per Diem Y
02-612-000-0000-6330 287.68 MILEAGE 10/14/19 Mileage Y
50-000-000-0000-6290 3,712.00 WASTE DELIVERY ASSURANCE 4146654 Contracted Services Y
01-123-000-0000-6140 150.00 PER DIEM - BA 10/9/19 Per Diem Y
01-123-000-0000-6330 64.38 MILEAGE - BA 10/9/19 Mileage Y
01-124-000-0000-6140 900.00 PER DIEM - PC 10/9/19 Per Diem Y
01-124-000-0000-6330 538.02 MILEAGE - PC 10/9/19 Mileage Y
01-201-000-0000-6526 58.98 ACCT 974 BATON HOLDER/HANDCUFF I1392318 Uniforms N
WING/MICHAEL15790
01-201-000-0000-6481 15.99 ACCT 974 IRRITANT I1392364 Radar, Weapons Etc.N
01-112-110-0000-6572 660.00 CHECKED DOORS @ 60 BED 4989 Repair And Maintenance Supplies N
7,396.936321
48183 STEINS INC
2,900.5548183
13628 STEUART/MARK
887.6813628
11210 STOEL RIVES LLP
3,712.0011210
15408 STONE/BRUCE
1,652.4015408
168 STREICHERS
74.97168
14550 SUMMERVILLE ELECTRIC, INC.
Page 21Audit List for Board
Account/Formula Description Rpt Invoice #Warrant DescriptionVendorName 1099
Paid On Bhf #Accr Amount On Behalf of NameNo.Service Dates
5 Transactions
5 Transactions
2 Transactions
1 Transactions
4 Transactions
2 Transactions
SRF CONSULTING GROUP INC
STEINS INC
STEUART/MARK
STOEL RIVES LLP
STONE/BRUCE
STREICHERS
Otter Tail County Auditor
COMMISSIONER'S VOUCHERS ENTRIES
Account/Formula
1:59:46PM10/31/2019
csteinba
General Revenue Fund
Copyright 2010-2019 Integrated Financial Systems
01-250-000-0000-6269 79.14 C1252000 ADD CHARGES 1/4/19 INV2000040639 Professional Services-Kitchen N
01-250-000-0000-6269 4,932.69 C1252000 MEALS 9/28-10/4/19 INV2000059017 Professional Services-Kitchen N
01-250-000-0000-6269 4,802.09 C1252000 MEALS 10/5-11/19 INV2000059522 Professional Services-Kitchen N
01-250-000-0000-6269 5,051.25 C1252000 MEALS 10/12-18/19 INV2000060388 Professional Services-Kitchen N
01-250-000-0000-6269 4,955.60 C1252000 MEALS 10/19-25/19 INV2000060975 Professional Services-Kitchen N
01-201-000-0000-6490 3,507.00 ACCT 0565372 AMMO 0003236-IN Ammo, Shooting Supplies N
01-112-000-0000-6240 58.20 ACCT 1968 FACILITIES ASSISTANT 58268 Publishing & Advertising N
01-091-000-0000-6455 1,324.98 ACCT 1000520140 SEP 2019 841054422 Reference Books & Literature N
10-304-000-0000-6572 53.00 TIRE REPAIR 032116 Repair And Maintenance Supplies N
01-149-000-0000-6354 1,010.00 UNIT 1606 HEADLIGHT ASSEMBLY 10/9/19 Insurance Claims Y
01-601-000-0000-6342 882.85 ACCT 3691600057 5007699440 Service Agreements N
01-124-000-0000-6140 300.00 PER DIEM 10/9/19 Per Diem Y
01-124-000-0000-6330 143.26 MILEAGE 10/9/19 Mileage Y
660.0014550
6642 SUMMIT FOOD SERVICE, LLC
19,820.776642
15186 SUNSET LAW ENFORCEMENT
3,507.0015186
42537 THIS WEEKS SHOPPING NEWS
58.2042537
183 THOMSON REUTERS - WEST
1,324.98183
1999 TNT REPAIR INC
53.001999
3152 TOM'S BODY SHOP
1,010.003152
14497 TOSHIBA FINANCIAL SERVICES
882.8514497
11949 TRITES/DAVID
Page 22Audit List for Board
Account/Formula Description Rpt Invoice #Warrant DescriptionVendorName 1099
Paid On Bhf #Accr Amount On Behalf of NameNo.Service Dates
1 Transactions
5 Transactions
1 Transactions
1 Transactions
1 Transactions
1 Transactions
1 Transactions
1 Transactions
SUMMERVILLE ELECTRIC, INC.
SUMMIT FOOD SERVICE, LLC
SUNSET LAW ENFORCEMENT
THIS WEEKS SHOPPING NEWS
THOMSON REUTERS - WEST
TNT REPAIR INC
TOM'S BODY SHOP
TOSHIBA FINANCIAL SERVICES
Otter Tail County Auditor
COMMISSIONER'S VOUCHERS ENTRIES
Account/Formula
1:59:46PM10/31/2019
csteinba
General Revenue Fund
Copyright 2010-2019 Integrated Financial Systems
01-061-000-0000-6342 1,483.26 ACCT 33780558 CN 500-0589834 397753633 Service Agreements N
01-121-000-0000-6239 109.00 ACCT 152701 VETERANS OFFICER INV28-191004 MDVA Grant N
50-390-000-0000-6863 12,666.24 ACCT 444586 PAINT DISPOSAL 924223532 Disposal Costs Y
01-123-000-0000-6140 300.00 PER DIEM 10/10/19 Per Diem Y
01-123-000-0000-6330 205.32 MILEAGE 10/10/19 Mileage Y
01-112-000-0000-6572 114.60 ACCT 351623 LIGHTING 15337042-01 Repair And Maintenance Supplies N
01-112-000-0000-6572 76.40 ACCT 351623 LIGHTING 15337795-00 Repair And Maintenance Supplies N
10-304-000-0000-6572 12.00 PARTS 195855 Repair And Maintenance Supplies N
01-124-000-0000-6140 300.00 PER DIEM 10/9/19 Per Diem Y
01-124-000-0000-6330 107.88 MILEAGE 10/9/19 Mileage Y
50-000-000-0110-6853 484.56 ACCT 3-85099-73002 0002143-0010-5 MSW BY PASSED EXPENSE LANDFILL N
50-000-000-0120-6853 6,887.52 ACCT 3-85099-73002 0002143-0010-5 MSW BY PASSED EXPENSE LANDFILL N
50-000-000-0130-6853 635.86 ACCT 3-85099-73002 0002143-0010-5 MSW BY PASSED EXPENSE LANDFILL N
443.2611949
15431 US BANK EQUIPMENT FINANCE
1,483.2615431
15898 VALLEY NEWS LIVE EMPLOYMENT
109.0015898
7857 VEOLIA ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
12,666.247857
15024 VORDERBRUGGEN/KENNETH
505.3215024
761 VOSS LIGHTING
191.00761
52574 WADENA HIDE & FUR CO
12.0052574
12465 WASS/DAVID F
407.8812465
2278 WASTE MANAGEMENT
Page 23Audit List for Board
Account/Formula Description Rpt Invoice #Warrant DescriptionVendorName 1099
Paid On Bhf #Accr Amount On Behalf of NameNo.Service Dates
2 Transactions
1 Transactions
1 Transactions
1 Transactions
2 Transactions
2 Transactions
1 Transactions
2 Transactions
TRITES/DAVID
US BANK EQUIPMENT FINANCE
VALLEY NEWS LIVE EMPLOYMENT
VEOLIA ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
VORDERBRUGGEN/KENNETH
VOSS LIGHTING
WADENA HIDE & FUR CO
WASS/DAVID F
Otter Tail County Auditor
COMMISSIONER'S VOUCHERS ENTRIES
Account/Formula
1:59:46PM10/31/2019
csteinba
Solid Waste Fund
Copyright 2010-2019 Integrated Financial Systems
50-000-000-0150-6853 322.50 ACCT 3-85099-73002 0002143-0010-5 MSW BY PASSED EXPENSE LANDFILL N
50-000-000-0170-6853 31,076.50 ACCT 3-85099-73002 0002143-0010-5 MSW BY PASSED EXPENSE LANDFILL N
01-124-000-0000-6140 150.00 PER DIEM 10/9/19 Per Diem Y
01-124-000-0000-6330 12.76 MILEAGE 10/9/19 Mileage Y
39,406.942278
11653 WILSON/WARREN R
162.7611653
780,964.98
Page 24Audit List for Board
Account/Formula Description Rpt Invoice #Warrant DescriptionVendorName 1099
Paid On Bhf #Accr Amount On Behalf of NameNo.Service Dates
5 Transactions
2 Transactions
Final Total ............165 Vendors 321 Transactions
WASTE MANAGEMENT
WILSON/WARREN R
Otter Tail County Auditor
COMMISSIONER'S VOUCHERS ENTRIES 1:59:46PM10/31/2019
csteinba
General Revenue Fund
Copyright 2010-2019 Integrated Financial Systems
Page 25Audit List for Board
Otter Tail County Auditor
Amount
203,438.71 General Revenue Fund 1
5,040.53 General Fund Dedicated Accounts 2
434,098.41 Road And Bridge Fund 10
2,262.40 County Ditch Fund 22
136,124.93 Solid Waste Fund 50
780,964.98
NameFundRecap by Fund
All Funds Total Approved by,. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
COMMISSIONER'S VOUCHERS ENTRIES10/31/2019
LHart
Y
N
D
4
N
Otter Tail County Auditor
Audit List for Board Page 1
Print List in Order By:
Save Report Options?:
Type of Audit List:
on Audit List?:
Paid on Behalf Of Name
Explode Dist. Formulas?:
D - Detailed Audit List
S - Condensed Audit List
1 - Fund (Page Break by Fund)
2 - Department (Totals by Dept)
3 - Vendor Number
4 - Vendor Name
12:37:49PM
COMMISSIONER'S VOUCHERS ENTRIES
Account/Formula
12:37:49PM10/31/2019
LHart
Human Services
Copyright 2010-2019 Integrated Financial Systems
11-407-200-0022-6488 180.00 INTERPRETER FOR VISIT 19.22489 Phn Program Supplies - Wic 11 N
10/25/2019 10/25/2019
11-407-600-0090-6677 253.50 ACCT #2189988320/TACKBOARD 442996 Office Furniture And Equipment 15 N
10/18/2019 10/18/2019
11-407-500-0081-6331 9.58 SUPPER/WATER PROGRAM TRAINING OCT2019 EXPENS Meals & Lodging Well Delegation 16 N
10/23/2019 10/23/2019
11-407-100-0018-6331 6.00 BREAKFAST/REGIONAL CTC MTG OCT2019 EXPENS Meals & Lodging Ctc Outreach 19 N
10/29/2019 10/29/2019
11-407-100-0018-6331 9.00 LUNCH/REGIONAL CTC MTG OCT2019 EXPENS Meals & Lodging Ctc Outreach 20 N
10/29/2019 10/29/2019
11-407-600-0090-6091 666.67 DR LOKKEN/SEPT 2019 IVC00000928 Medical Consultant 1 6
09/30/2019 09/30/2019
11-407-600-0090-6331 11.70 LUNCH/PROBATION TOUR OCT2O19 EXPENS Meals & Lodging 17 N
10/30/2019 10/30/2019
11-407-600-0090-6242 600.00 DARE TO LEAD WORKSHOP 10.16.2019 Registration Fees 10 N
10/16/2019 10/16/2019
13951 ASL INTERPRETING SERVICES
180.0013951
32603 COOPERS TECHNOLOGY GROUP
253.5032603
14398 GEORGESON/ANTHONY
9.5814398
37610 HENDRICKX/KATHY
15.0037610
7512 LAKE REGION HEALTHCARE
666.677512
7908 LIEN/JODY
11.707908
15701 NELSON/JILL
600.0015701
Page 2Audit List for Board
Account/Formula Description Rpt Invoice #Warrant DescriptionVendorName 1099
Paid On Bhf #Accr Amount On Behalf of NameNo.Service Dates
1 Transactions
1 Transactions
1 Transactions
2 Transactions
1 Transactions
1 Transactions
1 Transactions
ASL INTERPRETING SERVICES
COOPERS TECHNOLOGY GROUP
GEORGESON/ANTHONY
HENDRICKX/KATHY
LAKE REGION HEALTHCARE
LIEN/JODY
NELSON/JILL
Otter Tail County Auditor
COMMISSIONER'S VOUCHERS ENTRIES
Account/Formula
12:37:49PM10/31/2019
LHart
Human Services
Copyright 2010-2019 Integrated Financial Systems
11-407-300-0071-6488 4,886.16 CUST #70036172/FLUZONE 913417710 Imz Program Supplies 13 N
10/15/2019 10/15/2019
11-407-300-0071-6488 4,596.94 CUST #70036172/FLUBLOK 913424156 Imz Program Supplies 12 N
10/15/2019 10/15/2019
11-407-300-0071-6488 2,298.47 CUST #70036172/FLUZONE 913508260 Imz Program Supplies 14 N
10/15/2019 10/15/2019
11-407-100-0018-6200 52.87 ACCT #680689848-00001/C&TC 9840526644 Ctc Outr Telephone 9 N
10/29/2019 10/29/2019
11-407-200-0024-6200 158.61 ACCT #680689848-00001/NFP 9840526644 NFP Telephone 3 N
10/29/2019 10/29/2019
11-407-200-0027-6200 212.24 ACCT #680689848-00001/HFA 9840526644 HFA Telephone 5 N
10/29/2019 10/29/2019
11-407-300-0070-6200 52.87 ACCT #680689848-00001/DP&C 9840526644 Telephone 6 N
10/29/2019 10/29/2019
11-407-400-0083-6200 52.87 ACCT #680689848-00001/PHEP 9840526644 Telephone 2 N
10/29/2019 10/29/2019
11-407-500-0080-6488 105.74 ACCT #680689848-00001/FPL 9840526644 FPL Prog Supplies 7 N
10/29/2019 10/29/2019
11-407-500-0081-6488 52.87 ACCT #680689848-00001/WELLS 9840526644 Prog Supplies Well Delegation 4 N
10/29/2019 10/29/2019
11-407-600-0090-6200 53.54 ACCT #680689848-00001/ADMIN 9840526644 Telephone 8 N
10/29/2019 10/29/2019
11-407-200-0060-6488 69.29 ACCT #242307887-0001/HEALTH ED 9840714486 Program Supplies Inj Prev 18 N
10/29/2019 10/29/2019
12084 SANOFI PASTEUR
11,781.5712084
9820 VERIZON WIRELESS
810.909820
14,328.92
Page 3Audit List for Board
Account/Formula Description Rpt Invoice #Warrant DescriptionVendorName 1099
Paid On Bhf #Accr Amount On Behalf of NameNo.Service Dates
3 Transactions
9 Transactions
Final Total ............9 Vendors 20 Transactions
SANOFI PASTEUR
VERIZON WIRELESS
Otter Tail County Auditor
COMMISSIONER'S VOUCHERS ENTRIES12:37:49PM10/31/2019
LHart
Human Services
Copyright 2010-2019 Integrated Financial Systems
Page 4Audit List for Board
Otter Tail County Auditor
Amount
14,328.92 Human Services 11
14,328.92
NameFundRecap by Fund
All Funds Total Approved by,. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
COMMISSIONER'S VOUCHERS ENTRIES10/31/2019
LHart
Y
N
D
4
N
Otter Tail County Auditor
Audit List for Board Page 1
Print List in Order By:
Save Report Options?:
Type of Audit List:
on Audit List?:
Paid on Behalf Of Name
Explode Dist. Formulas?:
D - Detailed Audit List
S - Condensed Audit List
1 - Fund (Page Break by Fund)
2 - Department (Totals by Dept)
3 - Vendor Number
4 - Vendor Name
12:39:41PM
CARVER COUNTY COMMUNITY SOCIAL SERVICES
COMMISSIONER'S VOUCHERS ENTRIES
Account/Formula
12:39:41PM10/31/2019
LHart
Human Services
Copyright 2010-2019 Integrated Financial Systems
11-430-700-0000-6242 500.00 ESSEX/SWENSON/HAUGRUG TRAIN Registrations 50 N
10/17/2019 10/18/2019
11-430-700-0000-6331 38.04 MEALS Meals & Lodging - Ss Adm 1 N
07/31/2019 10/21/2019
11-420-601-0000-6406 34.36 2189988150 442178 Office Supplies 3 N
10/15/2019 10/15/2019
11-420-601-0000-6406 183.04 2189988150 442205 Office Supplies 4 N
10/15/2019 10/15/2019
11-420-601-0000-6406 172.05 2189988150 442476 Office Supplies 5 N
10/15/2019 10/15/2019
11-420-601-0000-6677 909.00 2189988150 442533 Office Furniture And Equipment - Im 2 N
10/15/2019 10/15/2019
11-420-601-0000-6677 909.00 2189988150 443040 Office Furniture And Equipment - Im 6 N
10/15/2019 10/15/2019
11-430-700-0000-6406 43.74 2189988150 442178 Office Supplies 3 N
10/15/2019 10/15/2019
11-430-700-0000-6406 232.97 2189988150 442205 Office Supplies 4 N
10/15/2019 10/15/2019
11-430-700-0000-6406 218.98 2189988150 442476 Office Supplies 5 N
10/15/2019 10/15/2019
11-430-700-0000-6331 9.71 MEAL Meals & Lodging - Ss Adm 7 N
10/10/2019 10/10/2019
11-420-640-0000-6298 162.00 10/02/19 8105592019 Child Support Blood Test Charge 8 N
08/20/2019 09/24/2019
9141
500.009141
13727 COLE/MELANIE
38.0413727
32603 COOPERS TECHNOLOGY GROUP
2,703.1432603
33467 DAHLEN/JODY
9.7133467
11695 DNA DIAGNOSTICS CENTER INC
Page 2Audit List for Board
Account/Formula Description Rpt Invoice #Warrant DescriptionVendorName 1099
Paid On Bhf #Accr Amount On Behalf of NameNo.Service Dates
1 Transactions
1 Transactions
8 Transactions
1 Transactions
CARVER COUNTY COMMUNITY SOCIAL SERVICES
COLE/MELANIE
COOPERS TECHNOLOGY GROUP
DAHLEN/JODY
Otter Tail County Auditor
COMMISSIONER'S VOUCHERS ENTRIES
Account/Formula
12:39:41PM10/31/2019
LHart
Human Services
Copyright 2010-2019 Integrated Financial Systems
11-406-000-0000-6379 72.47 ADV. BOARD PER DIEM/MILEAGE Miscellaneous Charges 9 N
10/21/2019 10/21/2019
11-430-740-0000-6277 90.00 ADULT LAC MTG - STIPEND Mental Health Adv Committees 10 N
09/27/2019 10/23/2019
11-430-740-0000-6277 18.56 LAC MTG - MILEAGE Mental Health Adv Committees 11 N
09/27/2019 10/23/2019
11-430-700-0000-6379 40.00 SUBPOENA RESEARCH - I. HESLIEN Miscellaneous Charges - Ss Adm 12 N
10/10/2019 10/10/2019
11-430-740-0000-6277 135.00 ADULT LAC MTG - STIPEND Mental Health Adv Committees 13 Y
09/24/2019 10/23/2019
11-420-640-6331-6171 27.27 TRAINING MEALS Ivd Training Meals & Lodging 14 N
10/06/2019 10/08/2019
11-420-640-0000-6091 33,782.58 2019 QUARTER 2 Fathers Resource Program Regional Plan 15 N
06/30/2019 06/30/2019
11-420-640-0000-6091 37,214.94 2019 QUARTER 3 Fathers Resource Program Regional Plan 16 N
09/30/2019 09/30/2019
162.0011695
15640 DOKKEN/MARK
72.4715640
15449 DUENOW/DIANE
108.5615449
8142 FARMERS & MERCHANTS STATE BANK
40.008142
40636 KNUDSON/FONDA L
135.0040636
10041 LUNDBY/DEB
27.2710041
12560 MAHUBE OTWA-ACTION PARTNERSHIP
70,997.5212560
2721 MARCO TECHNOLOGIES LLC
Page 3Audit List for Board
Account/Formula Description Rpt Invoice #Warrant DescriptionVendorName 1099
Paid On Bhf #Accr Amount On Behalf of NameNo.Service Dates
1 Transactions
1 Transactions
2 Transactions
1 Transactions
1 Transactions
1 Transactions
2 Transactions
DNA DIAGNOSTICS CENTER INC
DOKKEN/MARK
DUENOW/DIANE
FARMERS & MERCHANTS STATE BANK
KNUDSON/FONDA L
LUNDBY/DEB
MAHUBE OTWA-ACTION PARTNERSHIP
Otter Tail County Auditor
COMMISSIONER'S VOUCHERS ENTRIES
Account/Formula
12:39:41PM10/31/2019
LHart
Human Services
Copyright 2010-2019 Integrated Financial Systems
11-406-000-0000-6406 14.84 COPIER INV6890584 Office Supplies 17 N
10/15/2019 10/15/2019
11-420-601-0000-6406 57.20 CUST #1143-SHREDDING SERVICES 408793 Office Supplies 18 N
09/30/2019 09/30/2019
11-420-601-0000-6406 25.00 CUST #1143-SHREDDING SERVICES 408793 Office Supplies 19 N
09/30/2019 09/30/2019
11-430-700-0000-6406 72.80 CUST #1143-SHREDDING SERVICES 408793 Office Supplies 18 N
09/30/2019 09/30/2019
11-420-000-0000-2100 9,879.93 A300MM9Q56I Due Other Governments MA Refunds 20 N
10/16/2019 10/16/2019
11-420-621-0000-6040 14,478.28 A300MM9Q56I Co Share Of Under 65 Nh To State 23 N
10/16/2019 10/16/2019
11-420-640-0000-6379 57.90 FEDERAL OFFSET FEES A300C928538 Miscellaneous Charges 25 N
09/30/2019 09/30/2019
11-430-740-4901-6051 4,830.27 A300MM9Q56I R79 Ch Case Manage State 22 N
10/16/2019 10/16/2019
11-430-740-4911-6051 4,152.50 A300MM9Q56I R 79 Adltcasemngmnt To State 21 N
10/16/2019 10/16/2019
11-430-750-5740-6050 529.30 A300MM9Q56I Icf/Mr County Share 24 N
10/16/2019 10/16/2019
11-420-601-0000-6266 2,013.44 FINANCIAL AUDIT/CLAIM #70190 Audit Cost - Im Adm 51 N
04/17/2019 10/01/2019
11-420-601-0000-6266 3,236.64 SINGLE AUDIT/CLAIM #70190 Audit Cost - Im Adm 52 N
04/17/2019 10/01/2019
11-430-700-0000-6266 2,562.56 FINANCIAL AUDIT/CLAIM #70190 Audit Cost - Ss Adm 51 N
04/17/2019 10/01/2019
11-430-700-0000-6266 4,119.36 SINGLE AUDIT/CLAIM #70190 Audit Cost - Ss Adm 52 N
04/17/2019 10/01/2019
14.842721
7661 MINNKOTA ENVIRO SERVICES INC
155.007661
43022 MN DEPT OF HUMAN SERVICES
33,928.1843022
42076 MN STATE AUDITOR
Page 4Audit List for Board
Account/Formula Description Rpt Invoice #Warrant DescriptionVendorName 1099
Paid On Bhf #Accr Amount On Behalf of NameNo.Service Dates
1 Transactions
3 Transactions
6 Transactions
MARCO TECHNOLOGIES LLC
MINNKOTA ENVIRO SERVICES INC
MN DEPT OF HUMAN SERVICES
Otter Tail County Auditor
COMMISSIONER'S VOUCHERS ENTRIES
Account/Formula
12:39:41PM10/31/2019
LHart
Human Services
Copyright 2010-2019 Integrated Financial Systems
11-430-700-0000-6171 15.00 MEALS & TRAINING COST Ss Adm Training 27 N
09/12/2019 10/21/2019
11-430-700-0000-6331 22.54 MEALS & TRAINING COST Meals & Lodging - Ss Adm 26 N
09/12/2019 10/21/2019
11-420-640-0000-6297 53.56 B. KORSMO 644707 Iv-D Sheriff's Costs 28 N
10/16/2019 10/16/2019
11-420-640-0000-6260 3,967.50 IV-D BILLING FOR SEPT. 2019 Legal Services Iv-D 29 N
10/11/2019 10/11/2019
11-406-000-0000-6379 68.00 HEP B FOR L. JOHNSTON Miscellaneous Charges 53 N
10/18/2019 10/18/2019
11-420-640-0000-6297 40.00 CASE #20190660/PARTY #001 Iv-D Sheriff's Costs 54 N
05/15/2019 05/15/2019
11-420-640-0000-6297 40.00 CASE #20191357/PARTY #001 Iv-D Sheriff's Costs 30 N
10/11/2019 10/11/2019
11-420-640-0000-6297 75.00 CASE #20191359/PARTY #001 Iv-D Sheriff's Costs 31 N
10/02/2019 10/02/2019
11-420-640-0000-6297 92.20 CASE #20191358/PARTY #001 Iv-D Sheriff's Costs 32 N
10/05/2019 10/05/2019
11-420-601-0000-6271 3,257.89 SANDY TIME - SEP 2019 Fraud Investigation Costs 55 N
09/01/2019 09/30/2019
11,932.0042076
12428 NETTESTAD/AMY
37.5412428
15583 NIEMANN/KEVIN
53.5615583
12963 OTTER TAIL CO ATTORNEY'S OFFICE
3,967.5012963
115 OTTER TAIL CO PUBLIC HEALTH
68.00115
44010 OTTER TAIL CO SHERIFF
247.2044010
44003 OTTER TAIL CO TREASURER
Page 5Audit List for Board
Account/Formula Description Rpt Invoice #Warrant DescriptionVendorName 1099
Paid On Bhf #Accr Amount On Behalf of NameNo.Service Dates
4 Transactions
2 Transactions
1 Transactions
1 Transactions
1 Transactions
4 Transactions
MN STATE AUDITOR
NETTESTAD/AMY
NIEMANN/KEVIN
OTTER TAIL CO ATTORNEY'S OFFICE
OTTER TAIL CO PUBLIC HEALTH
OTTER TAIL CO SHERIFF
Otter Tail County Auditor
COMMISSIONER'S VOUCHERS ENTRIES
Account/Formula
12:39:41PM10/31/2019
LHart
Human Services
Copyright 2010-2019 Integrated Financial Systems
11-420-601-0000-6349 14,120.04 RENT Building & Facilities Rental 33 N
11/05/2019 11/05/2019
11-430-700-0000-6349 17,970.96 RENT Building & Facilities Rental 33 N
11/05/2019 11/05/2019
11-430-740-0000-6277 90.00 LAC MTG -STIPEND Mental Health Adv Committees 34 N
09/25/2019 10/23/2019
11-430-740-0000-6277 6.00 LAC MTG - BUS FARE Mental Health Adv Committees 35 N
09/25/2019 10/23/2019
11-430-740-0000-6277 90.00 LAC MTG - STIPEND Mental Health Adv Committees 36 N
09/25/2019 10/23/2019
11-430-740-0000-6277 62.64 LAC MTG - MILEAGE Mental Health Adv Committees 37 N
09/25/2019 10/23/2019
11-430-700-0000-6304 92.29 ACCT 139 6038193 Motor Vehicle Service And Repair 56 N
10/01/2019 10/18/2019
11-430-700-0000-6304 70.64 ACCT 139 6038575 Motor Vehicle Service And Repair 57 N
10/01/2019 10/18/2019
11-430-700-0000-6304 233.73 ACCT 139 6038642 Motor Vehicle Service And Repair 58 N
10/01/2019 10/18/2019
11-430-700-0000-6304 126.52 ACCT 139 6038735 Motor Vehicle Service And Repair 59 N
10/01/2019 10/18/2019
11-430-700-0000-6331 30.11 MEALS Meals & Lodging - Ss Adm 38 N
09/23/2019 10/17/2019
11-430-700-6331-6171 11.64 TRAINING MEAL Ss Adm Training Meals & Lodging 39 N
35,348.8944003
10722 POTTER/TARA
96.0010722
6777 PRESCOTT - ADAMIETZ/CATHIE
152.646777
46006 QUALITY TOYOTA
523.1846006
14457 RESLER/RANDI
30.1114457
15893 SCHMIDT/HEATHER
Page 6Audit List for Board
Account/Formula Description Rpt Invoice #Warrant DescriptionVendorName 1099
Paid On Bhf #Accr Amount On Behalf of NameNo.Service Dates
3 Transactions
2 Transactions
2 Transactions
4 Transactions
1 Transactions
OTTER TAIL CO TREASURER
POTTER/TARA
PRESCOTT - ADAMIETZ/CATHIE
QUALITY TOYOTA
RESLER/RANDI
Otter Tail County Auditor
COMMISSIONER'S VOUCHERS ENTRIES
Account/Formula
12:39:41PM10/31/2019
LHart
Human Services
Copyright 2010-2019 Integrated Financial Systems
09/09/2019 09/09/2019
11-420-601-6331-6171 120.51 TRAINING MEALS Im Training Meals & Lodging 40 N
10/14/2019 10/18/2019
11-420-601-0000-6677 676.00 4 - 24" SCREENS B10621044 Office Furniture And Equipment - Im 41 N
09/24/2019 09/24/2019
11-430-700-0000-6331 12.60 CLIENT MEALS/MEAL Meals & Lodging - Ss Adm 42 N
10/16/2019 10/16/2019
11-430-710-1621-6097 25.20 CLIENT MEALS/MEAL In Home Service - Brief 43 N
10/16/2019 10/16/2019
11-406-000-0000-6379 62.32 ADVIS. BOARD PER DIEM, MILEAGE Miscellaneous Charges 44 N
10/21/2019 10/21/2019
11-430-700-0000-6330 82.36 MILEAGE Mileage - Ss Adm 45 N
10/02/2019 10/02/2019
11-420-601-0000-6210 44.00 ACCT #675931 Postage Im Adm 46 N
10/22/2019 10/22/2019
11-430-700-0000-6210 56.00 ACCT #675931 Postage Ss Adm 46 N
10/22/2019 10/22/2019
11.6415893
15894 SCHNOOR/VERONICA
120.5115894
10001 SHI CORP
676.0010001
48290 STANISLAWSKI/MARI
37.8048290
10313 SYNSTELIEN/RANDY
62.3210313
12985 TORGERSON/CHELSEY
82.3612985
149 U S POSTMASTER
100.00149
Page 7Audit List for Board
Account/Formula Description Rpt Invoice #Warrant DescriptionVendorName 1099
Paid On Bhf #Accr Amount On Behalf of NameNo.Service Dates
1 Transactions
1 Transactions
1 Transactions
2 Transactions
1 Transactions
1 Transactions
2 Transactions
SCHMIDT/HEATHER
SCHNOOR/VERONICA
SHI CORP
STANISLAWSKI/MARI
SYNSTELIEN/RANDY
TORGERSON/CHELSEY
U S POSTMASTER
Otter Tail County Auditor
COMMISSIONER'S VOUCHERS ENTRIES
Account/Formula
12:39:41PM10/31/2019
LHart
Human Services
Copyright 2010-2019 Integrated Financial Systems
11-430-700-0000-6379 46.30 SUBPOENA RESEARCH - E. FEIST INV326722 Miscellaneous Charges - Ss Adm 47 N
10/03/2019 10/03/2019
11-430-700-0000-6379 41.50 SUBPOENA RESEARCH-E. FEIST INV326932 Miscellaneous Charges - Ss Adm 60 N
10/16/2019 10/16/2019
11-406-000-0000-6379 78.85 ADVIS. BOARD PER DIEM/MILEAGE Miscellaneous Charges 48 N
10/21/2019 10/21/2019
11-430-700-6331-6171 55.09 TRAINING MEALS Ss Adm Training Meals & Lodging 49 N
10/09/2019 10/11/2019
13912 WELLS FARGO BANK NA
87.8013912
13066 WINDEY/MICHAEL
78.8513066
14896 ZACHMANN/KRISTA
55.0914896
162,660.72
Page 8Audit List for Board
Account/Formula Description Rpt Invoice #Warrant DescriptionVendorName 1099
Paid On Bhf #Accr Amount On Behalf of NameNo.Service Dates
2 Transactions
1 Transactions
1 Transactions
Final Total ............35 Vendors 68 Transactions
WELLS FARGO BANK NA
WINDEY/MICHAEL
ZACHMANN/KRISTA
Otter Tail County Auditor
COMMISSIONER'S VOUCHERS ENTRIES12:39:41PM10/31/2019
LHart
Human Services
Copyright 2010-2019 Integrated Financial Systems
Page 9Audit List for Board
Otter Tail County Auditor
Amount
162,660.72 Human Services 11
162,660.72
NameFundRecap by Fund
All Funds Total Approved by,. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
November 5, 2019
Community Health Improvement Plan (CHIP)
Partnership4Health Community Health Board has completed our community health assessment
and have started to identify our community health improvement plan.
“A community health improvement plan is a long-term, systematic effort to address public health
problems in a community. It is based on the results of community health assessment activities
and is one step in a process to improve community health. The community health improvement
plan is developed collaboratively, and defines a vision for the community’s health; the
community health improvement plan is the community’s plan, not the community health board’s
plan for the community.” Minnesota Department of Health
Infant Scale Donation
Public Health has seven infant scales that are outdated and no longer in use. The request is to
donate these scales to Healthcare Equipment Recycling Organization (HERO). HERO is a
registered 501(c)3 nonprofit. They provide access to healthcare equipment and supplies
through local and global distribution.
Top Ten Health Priorities 2019
Mental Wellbeing
Research shows adversity experienced in childhood can
affect us into adulthood. 38.6% of children in Becker
County, 33.3% in Clay County, 38.5% in Otter Tail County,
and 43.8% in Wilkin County experience at least one
adverse childhood experience. According to the 2016 MN
Student Survey, 12% of 11th grade males and 30% of 11th
grade females in our four-county area report having a
long-term mental health problem.
Obesity/Physical Activity/Nutrition
Obesity effects all ages. A healthy weight is key to
prevention and management of serious chronic diseases.
All four of our counties have higher than the 28% MN
average for adult obesity rates: Becker 32%, Clay 29%,
Otter Tail 31% and Wilkin 30%. Nutrition is a concern for
our four-county area. In a randomized CHB community
survey, 10.2% of persons reported they worry about food
running out or not lasting.
Child Care Access
Access to quality child-care is difficult to find in our four
counties. In Becker County there are 250 families needing
childcare where it is not available. A Wilkin County child-
care survey showed affordability, backup coverage, and
newborn services as primary concerns for parents.
Substance Abuse
Vaping usage among teens has increased in all four
counties. People seeking treatment for substance abuse
continues to rise. All four counties have higher than the
state average of adults who drink excessively with Wilkin
County highest at 41.8%. At Essentia Hospital in Detroit
Lakes 23% of all obstetrical meconium cord tissue tests
were positive for chemical use in 2018. Opioid abuse is on
the rise in Becker County. Becker, Clay and Otter Tail
Counties have opioid task forces to address this issue.
Transportation
Transportation is a key to daily activities, including access
to food, health care and connections to families. In focus
groups in our four counties it came up as a top 10 health
concern. After hours and weekend transportation was
especially difficult to find in our rural areas.
Aging Population
By 2030 the percentage of persons 65 and older is
expected to increase across our four counties. In Becker
County the over 65-year old are expected to grow from
20 to 28%, Clay County 12.9 to 20%, Otter Tail County
23.2 to 32% and Wilkin County 18.7 to 29%. Programs
and services will need to be continued and developed to
meet the needs of our growing aging populations.
Environmental Factors
Our health is impacted by our connection to and
interactions with the natural environment. Our four-
county area has elevated radon levels. Becker and Otter
Tail Counties have more tested wells with higher levels of
arsenic compared to other Minnesota counties.
Breastfeeding
Breastfeeding provides the ideal nutrition for infants.
Despite progress, gaps in the rate of breastfeeding
persist. 2018 WIC data show our four counties below the
57.5% state-wide average for mothers’ breastfeeding
their infants past 3 months of age: Becker 30.1%, Clay
47.7%, Otter Tail 45.1% and Wilkin 50.0%.
Dental Care Access
Dental access and affordability continue to be of concern.
2017 Child and Teen Checkup Program data showed that
children on Medical Assistance receiving any type of
dental or oral health care ranged from 35% to 45% across
our four-county area. A 2018 survey identified lack of
access to dental insurance as a major barrier in seeking
dental care. Low MA reimbursement rates and long
distances to receive dental care play into reduced access
and care.
Immunization
Of growing concern in our four-county area is the
percentage of students that are not immunized leaving
more children susceptible to disease. Otter Tail County
has lower than state rate of children receiving the full
series of vaccinations by 24-35 months. Otter Tail and
Wilkin Counties are lower than the state rate for series
completion of adolescents ages 13-17.
RESOLUTION SUPPORTING FY 2021 GREATER MINNESOTA REGIONAL PARKS AND
TRAILS COMMISSION (GMRPTC) GRANT APPLICATION WITH 50% MATCH
Otter Tail County Resolution No. 2019 - Click here to enter text.
WHEREAS: The Otter Tail County Board of Commissioners has previously approved the Perham to
Pelican Rapids Regional Trail – Silent Lake Segment Memorandum Agreement, AND
WHEREAS: the original GMRPTC grant request of $2,141,855 had a local match of 43% ($1,615,785),
AND
WHEREAS: Joe Czapiewski, GMRPTC System Plan Coordinator, requested that Otter Tail County
evaluate options for “phasing” or “reducing” the FY 21 GMRPTC grant request for the Perham to
Pelican Rapids Regional Trail – Silent Lake Segment, AND
WHEREAS: the Silent Lake Segment is already one of four segments of the Perham to Pelican Trail
making additional phasing or additional segmentation difficult, AND
WHEREAS: the Perham to Pelican Rapids Regional Trail – Silent Lake Segment was highly rated (i.e.
6th overall) by the GMRPTC ETEAM, AND
WHEREAS: the completion of the Silent Lake Segment will create new and expanded park and trail
opportunities by expanding access to Maplewood State Park and eventually connecting the Heartland
and Central Lakes Trails,
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT: The Otter Tail County Board of Commissioners hereby
approves increasing our local match to 50%, reducing our FY 21 GMRPTC grant request to
$1,878,820.
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was introduced by Commissioner Click here to
enter text., duly seconded by Commissioner Click here to enter text. and, after discussion thereof and
upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor:
Commissioners Click here to enter text.
and the following voted against the same: None
Adopted at Fergus Falls, Minnesota, Click here to enter a date.
Dated: OTTER TAIL COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
By: _________________________________________
Doug Huebsch, Board of Commissioners Chair
Attest: _______________________
John Dinsmore, Clerk
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
)
COUNTY OF OTTER TAIL )
I, John Dinsmore, the County Administrator, do hereby certify that I have compared the foregoing
resolution with the original resolution filed in my office on the 10th Day of September, 2019, and that
the same is a true and correct copy of the whole thereof.
________________________________
John Dinsmore
Disability Services and MnCHOICES
Annual Report to Board for CY 2018
______________________________________________________
Disability Services October 2019
What We Do
The Disability Services Unit provides case management to recipients of Home and Community
Based Services (HCBS) which include CADI, CAC, Brain Injury, and DD waiver recipients. They
also provide case management to individuals receiving a variety of non-waiver programs. To
be eligible for these waiver programs, an individual must be under the age of 65, certified
disabled, on MA, and must meet facility level of care as determined by a MnCHOICES
assessment.
Services provided by the Disability Services Unit include:
• Developmental Disability Waiver Case Management
• Community Access for Disability Inclusion Waiver Case Management
• Brain Injury Waiver Case Management
• Community Alternative Care Waiver
• Semi Independent Living Skills
• Community Support Grant
• Family Support Grant
• Rule 185 Eligibility Determination / Case Management
• VA/DD Targeted Case Management
• Level II OBRA Assessment
• Family Based Respite Care Program
What is Going Well
• Increased implementation of Person-Centered Thinking and Planning has resulted increased
choices and opportunities for community inclusion for Persons with Disabilities in Otter Tail
County.
• Otter Tail County contracts with Lakeland Mental Health Center for Limited CADI case
management and with Thomas Allen Inc, and Meridian for Out of County DD and CADI Case
management. This has helped to limit travel time for Case managers.
Opportunities for Growth
• Continued work with the Mn Support Plan Application for Rate Management and the Development
of Person-Centered Coordinated Services and Supports Plan for individuals with Disabilities.
• Continued Collaboration with Income Maintenance Unit regarding streamlining the SMRT and
Financial Eligibility Processes
• Waiver Reimagine - The Minnesota Legislature authorized DHS to make system-level
improvements to Minnesota’s disability waiver programs. Waiver Reimagine legislative report was
submitted 02/12/2019: https://edocs.dhs.state.mn.us/lfserver/Public/DHS-7841A-ENG
The report recommends consolidating the four existing waiver programs into two waivers, based
on residential setting. DHS also recommends replacing the current lead agency budget allocation
system with an individual support range budget methodology.
Number of People served in 2018
• 518 individuals received waiver services and case management in 2018
• 86 additional individuals received services from non-waiver programs noted above
MnCHOICES
What We Do
• Annual reassessments for Disability Waiver participants
• Otter Tail County has 4 Certified Assessors who complete annual reassessments. Each of them
completed an average of 12 assessments a month in 2018.
What is Going Well
The County of Residence/County of Financial Responsibility Process took effect in 2018
requiring increased communication with other lead agencies and assuring person-
centered planning.
Opportunities for Growth
• MnCHOICES 2.0 has been delayed. This would have allowed for increased efficiency within the
current system.
Number of People served in 2018
• In 2018, Otter Tail County provided 587 reassessments to waiver recipients.
Case Studies – Disability Services
Developmental Disability Waiver
9-year-old with a diagnoses of Down Syndrome. Receiving Consumer Support Grant – this program
is a state-funded alternative to Medicaid home care services of home health aide, personal care assistance
and/or private duty nursing. A MnCHOICES Assessment referral was made, and additional needs were
identified. Referred for Rule 185 Developmental Disabilities Case Management and eligibility
determination. Upon review of records and documentation, the child was fund eligible via a
disability determination by the DD case manager and eligible for DD waiver. In person meeting
held with individual and his parent to determine services. Case management, PCA, Extended PCA
due to overriding supervision needs and Respite care are the planned services determined to meet
his needs. Completion of Coordinated Services and Support Plan. Facilitate at least semi-annual
contacts/visits and annual approval of revised Community Support Plan. Work with family to
ensure continued MA eligibility as well as disability certification.
CADI Waiver
40-year-old who has received radiation and chemotherapies in the past for renal
cancer and recently underwent radiation therapy for metastasis to his liver and has had two stents
surgically placed in his liver. He also has some metastasis to his lungs. He has a poor appetite and
has experienced severe weight loss (he is approximately 120 lbs. now from a high of 165 lbs. He is
6' 2"). Lives with Stickler Syndrome which impacts eyesight and connective tissue. Has an artificial
right eye and his retina is detached in his left eye, so he is legally blind. Lives with intense
abdominal and pelvic pain, is generally weak and fatigues easily. He lives in Fergus Falls in an
apartment at River View Heights.
Case manager meets with individual and services requested include case management, para-
professional case management, Homemaking 3 hour/week, daily Home Delivered Meals, and a
Wheeled Walker (if denied by MA). His doctor has written a prescription and it is pending MA
approval. Facilitate at least semi-annual contacts/visits to ensure services are meeting his needs in
order to remain living as independently as possible. Provides for annual approval of revised
Community Support Plan. Work with him to ensure continued MA eligibility as well as disability
certification. Completion of Coordinated Services and Support Plan.
CAC Waiver
13 month old with a diagnosis of a rare neurodegenerative disorders and a complex, rare, and
severe childhood-onset epilepsy. Child found eligible for CAC waiver. Case manager assigned and
met with family. Discussion of options for administration of the CAC waiver that would best meet
the child and family’s needs and a determination was made to utilize Consumer Directed
Community Supports (CDCS) to meet child’s needs including Personal Support (provided by
parent), specialized equipment, Vehicle Modification, Environmental Modifications, Special diet
needs and respite needs. Work with family to complete the Community Support Plan for CDCS and
approval process. Facilitate at least semi-annual contacts/visits and annual approval of revised
Community Support Plan. Work with the family to ensure continued MA eligibility as well as
disability certification. Completion of Coordinated Services and Support Plan.
LABOR AGREEMENT
between
COUNTY OF OTTER TAIL
Fergus Falls MN
and
MINNESOTA TEAMSTERS PUBLIC
AND LAW ENFORCEMENT
EMPLOYEES' UNION,
LOCAL NO. 320
Representing
GOVERNMENT SERVICES TECHNICAL UNIT
January 1, 2020 through December 31, 2022
TABLE OF CONTENTS Otter Tail County Government Services Technical Unit
LABOR AGREEMENT ............................................................................................................... 1
ARTICLE 1. PURPOSE OF AGREEMENT ............................................................................. 1
ARTICLE 2. RECOGNITION ................................................................................................... 1
ARTICLE 3. DEFINITIONS ...................................................................................................... 1
ARTICLE 4. EMPLOYER SECURITY...................................................................................... 3
ARTICLE 5. EMPLOYER AUTHORITY ................................................................................... 3
ARTICLE 6. UNION SECURITY .............................................................................................. 3
ARTICLE 7. GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE ................................................................................ 4
ARTICLE 8. SAVINGS CLAUSE ............................................................................................. 6
ARTICLE 9. SENIORITY ......................................................................................................... 6
ARTICLE 10. DISCIPLINE ........................................................................................................ 8
ARTICLE 11. CONSTITUTIONAL PROTECTION .................................................................... 9
ARTICLE 12. WORK SCHEDULE ............................................................................................ 9
ARTICLE 13. OVERTIME ....................................................................................................... 10
ARTICLE 14. APPAREL ......................................................................................................... 11
ARTICLE 15. WORKING OUT OF CLASSIFICATION ........................................................... 11
ARTICLE 16. INSURANCE .................................................................................................... 11
ARTICLE 17. HOLIDAYS ....................................................................................................... 13
ARTICLE 18. VACATION SCHEDULE ................................................................................... 14
ARTICLE 19. SICK LEAVE ..................................................................................................... 15
ARTICLE 20. WAGES ............................................................................................................ 16
ARTICLE 21. MEAL ALLOWANCE ........................................................................................ 16
ARTICLE 22. INJURY ON DUTY ........................................................................................... 16
ARTICLE 23. RESIGNATION ................................................................................................. 17
ARTICLE 24. LEAVES OF ABSENCE.................................................................................... 17
ARTICLE 25. SAFETY............................................................................................................ 19
ARTICLE 26. EMPLOYEE ASSISTANCE PROGRAM ........................................................... 19
ARTICLE 27. TUITION ASSISTANCE.................................................................................... 19
ARTICLE 28. POST EMPLOYMENT HEALTH CARE VEBA PLAN ....................................... 19
ARTICLE 29. NATIONAL TEAMSTERS D.R.I.V.E. ................................................................ 20
ARTICLE 30. WAIVER ........................................................................................................... 20
ARTICLE 31. DURATION ....................................................................................................... 20
APPENDIX A – Classification, Position, and Grade ................................................................ 21
APPENDIX B – Salary Schedules for 2020, 2021, and 2022 .................................................. 22
GST Unit – CBA 2020-2022 1
LABOR AGREEMENT
between COUNTY OF OTTER TAIL and MINNESOTA TEAMSTERS PUBLIC AND LAW ENFORCEMENT
EMPLOYEES' UNION, LOCAL NO. 320
Government Services Technical Unit ARTICLE 1. PURPOSE OF AGREEMENT
This Agreement is entered into between the County of Otter Tail, hereinafter called the Employer, and the
Minnesota Teamster Public and Law Enforcement Union, Local No. 320, hereinafter called the Union. It
is the intent and purpose of this Agreement to:
1.1 Establish procedures for the resolution of disputes concerning this Agreement's interpretation
and/or application; and
1.2 Place in written form the parties' agreement upon terms and conditions of employment for the
duration of this Agreement.
ARTICLE 2. RECOGNITION 2.1 The Employer recognizes the Union as the exclusive representative, under Minnesota
Statutes 179A.03, Subd. 14, for all personnel in the following job classifications:
"All employees within the Assessor, Auditor-Treasurer, Recorder, and Land &
Resource Departments employed by Otter Tail County, Fergus Falls, Minnesota, who
are public employees within the meaning of Minnesota Statute §179A.03, Subd. 14,
which excludes supervisory, confidential employees, and all other essential employees."
2.2 In the event the Employer and the Union are unable to agree as to the inclusion or exclusion of a
new or modified job class, the issue shall be submitted to the Bureau of Mediation Services for
determination.
ARTICLE 3. DEFINITIONS 3.1 UNION: The Minnesota Teamsters Public and Law Enforcement Employees' Union, Local
No. 320.
3.2 UNION MEMBER: A member of the Minnesota Teamsters Public and Law Enforcement
Employees' Union, Local No. 320.
3.3 EMPLOYEE: A member of the exclusively recognized bargaining unit.
GST Unit – CBA 2020-2022 2
3.4 DEPARTMENT: Includes the Ottertail County Assessor, Recorder, Auditor-Treasurer, and Land
& Resource Departments.
3.5 EMPLOYER: The County of Otter Tail, Minnesota.
3.6 DEPARTMENT HEAD: The Director of the Otter Tail County Departments of Assessor, Auditor-
Treasurer, Land & Resource, and Recorder.
3.7 PART-TIME REGULAR: An employee who has completed a twelve (12) month probation period
and works fewer than forty (40) hours per week on a regular basis.
3.8 FULL-TIME REGULAR: Employee who has completed probationary period of twelve (12)
months or 2,080 hours, whichever is greater, and works forty (40) hours or more a week for the
Employer.
3.9 IMMEDIATE FAMILY: Employee's spouse, children, adult children, adopted or foster child,
parent(s), step-parents, siblings, sister/brother/mother/father-in-law, grandchildren, grandparents
related by blood or marriage.
3.10 UNION STEWARD: Steward elected or appointed by the Minnesota Teamsters Public and Law
Enforcement Employees' Union, Local No. 320.
3.11 SENIORITY: Seniority is as defined in Article 9.
3.12 STRIKE: Concerted action in failing to report for duty, the willful absence from one's position, the
stoppage of work, slow-down, or abstinence in whole or in part from the full, faithful, and proper
performance of the duties of employment for the purpose of inducing, influencing or coercing a
change in the conditions or compensation or the rights, privileges or obligations of employment.
3.13 PROBATIONARY PERIOD: A period of time not to exceed twelve (12) calendar months from the
date of employment subject to the conditions of Article 5, Section 5.3.
3.14 CLASS: One or more positions sufficiently similar in the duties performed; degree of supervision
exercised or required; minimum qualifications of training, experience, or skill; and such other
characteristics that the same job title, the same tests of fitness, and the same schedule of
compensation may be applied with equality to all of the positions.
3.15 DEMOTION: A change by an employee from a position in one class to a position in another class
with less responsible duties and a lower salary range.
3.16 PROMOTION: A change of an employee from a position in one class to a position in another class
with more responsible duties and a higher salary range.
3.17 TRANSFER: The movement of a probationary or permanent employee from a position in one class
to another position in the same class in the same or different county agency or to a position in a
different class in the same or different county agency that has a comparable work value.
GST Unit – CBA 2020-2022 3
3.18 DIVISION DIRECTORS: Managers responsible for directing the activities of multiple
departments, programs or functions.
3.19 ANNIVERSARY DATE: Date of original hire from which continuous employment is maintained,
less day for day adjustments for unpaid leaves of absence.
3.20 IN GOOD STANDING: The status of an employee who is not the subject of current discipline, and
has given proper notice of resignation.
ARTICLE 4. EMPLOYER SECURITY
The Union agrees that during the life of this Agreement that the Union will not cause, encourage,
participate in or support any strike, slow-down, or other interruption of or interference with the normal
functions of the Employer.
ARTICLE 5. EMPLOYER AUTHORITY
5.1 The Employer retains the full and unrestricted right to operate and manage all manpower, facilities
and equipment; to establish functions and programs; to set and amend budgets; to determine the
utilization of technology; to establish and modify the organizational structure; to select, direct and
determine the number of personnel; to establish work schedules and to perform any inherent
managerial functions not specifically limited by this Agreement.
5.2 Any term or condition of employment not specifically established or modified by this Agreement
shall remain solely within the discretion of the Employer to modify, establish, or eliminate.
5.3 Employees will be subject to probationary period of time not to exceed twelve (12) calendar months
or 2,080 hours, whichever is greater, from the date of employment. During the probationary period,
employees may be terminated from employment at the sole discretion of the Employer. During the
probationary period, probationary employees are employed "at will" and cannot avail themselves
of the grievance procedure in Article 7 contesting any termination process.
ARTICLE 6. UNION SECURITY
6.1 The Employer shall deduct from the wages of employees who authorize such a deduction in writing
an amount sufficient to provide the payment of dues established by the Union, or a negotiated
deduction, as provided in Minnesota Statutes §179A.06, Subd. 3, consistent with the Janus decision.
Such money shall be remitted as directed by the Union.
6.2 It is agreed that the Employer's obligation to provide for dues deduction and/or negotiated fee
assessment shall continue only for the period of time that such deductions are non-negotiable and
required by PELRA.
6.3 The Union may designate employees from the bargaining unit to act as a steward and an alternate
and shall inform the Employer in writing of such choice and changes in the position of steward
GST Unit – CBA 2020-2022 4
and/or alternate. The Union may designate two (2) stewards and one (1) alternate to represent this
unit.
6.4 The Employer shall provide a Union bulletin board at the Courthouse and the Government Services
Center for the posting of Union notice(s) and announcement(s). The Union agrees to limit the
posting of such notices to the bulletin board space designated by the Employer. It is specifically
understood that no notices of a political or inflammatory nature shall be posted on the Employer's
premises.
6.5 The Union agrees to indemnify and hold the Employer harmless against any and all claims, suits,
orders or judgments brought or issued against the Employer as a result of any action taken or not
taken by the Employer under the provisions of this Article.
6.6 Neither the County nor the Union shall interfere with the right of employees covered by this
Agreement to become or not become members of the Union, and there shall be no discrimination
against any such employees because of lawful Union membership or non-membership activity or
status.
6.7 Union representatives shall have access to the premises of the Employer at reasonable times and
subject to reasonable rules in connection with official Union business.
ARTICLE 7. GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE
7.1 Definition of a Grievance. A grievance is defined as a dispute or disagreement as to the
interpretation or application of the specific terms and conditions of this Agreement. A probationary
employee is not entitled to utilize the grievance procedure.
7.2 Union Representatives. The Employer will recognize representatives designated by the Union, as
the grievance representative of the bargaining unit, having the duties and responsibilities
established by this Article. The Union shall notify the Employer, in writing, of the names of their
successors, when so designated.
7.3 Processing of a Grievance. It is recognized and accepted by the Union and the Employer that the
processing of grievances, as hereinafter provided, is limited by the job duties and responsibilities
of the employees and, therefore, shall be accomplished during normal working hours only when
consistent with such employee duties and responsibilities. The aggrieved employee and the Union
representative shall be allowed a reasonable amount of time without loss in pay when a grievance
is investigated and presented to the Employer during normal working hours provided the employee
and the Union representative have notified and received the approval of the designated supervisor
who has determined that such absence is reasonable and would not be detrimental to the work
programs of the Employer.
7.4 Procedure. Grievances, as defined by Section 7.1, shall be resolved in conformance with the
following procedure.
GST Unit – CBA 2020-2022 5
STEP 1. An employee, claiming a violation concerning the interpretation or application of this
Agreement, shall, within fourteen (14) calendar days after such alleged violation has occurred,
present such grievance to the employee's supervisor, as designated by the Employer. The
Employer-designated representative will discuss and give an answer to such Step 1 grievance
within ten (10) calendar days after receipt. A grievance not resolved in Step 1 and appealed to
Step 2 shall be placed in writing, setting forth the nature of the grievance, the facts on which it is
based, the provision or provisions of the Agreement allegedly violated and the remedy requested
and shall be appealed to Step 2 within ten (10) calendar days after the Employer-designated
representative's final answer in Step 1. Any grievance not appealed in writing to Step 2 by the
Union, within ten (10) calendar days, shall be considered waived.
STEP 2. If appealed, the written grievance shall be presented by the Union and discussed with the
Employer-designated Step 2 representative. The Employer-designated representative shall give the
Union the Employer's Step 2 answer, in writing, within ten (10) calendar days after receipt of such
Step 2 grievance. A grievance not resolved in Step 2 may be appealed to Step 3 within ten (10)
calendar days following the Employer-designated representative's final answer in Step 2. Any
grievance not appealed in writing to Step 3 by the Union, within ten (10) calendar days, shall be
considered waived.
STEP 3. If appealed, the written grievance shall be presented by the Union and discussed with the
Employer-designated Step 3 representative. The Employer-designated representative shall give the
Union the Employer's answer, in writing, within ten (10) calendar days after receipt of such Step 3
grievance. A grievance not resolved in Step 3 may be appealed to Step 4 within ten (10) calendar
days following the Employer-designated representative's final answer in Step 3. Any grievance not
appealed in writing to Step 4 by the Union within ten (10) calendar days shall be considered waived.
STEP 4. A grievance unresolved in Step 3 and appealed to Step 4 shall be submitted to arbitration,
subject to the provisions of the Public Employment Relations Act of 1971, as amended. The
selection of an arbitrator shall be made in accordance with the "Rules Governing the Arbitration of
Grievances" as established by the Bureau of Mediation Services (BMS). By mutual agreement,
both parties can request involvement of a BMS mediator to hear and resolve the grievance. If either
side does not agree to the mediation process, either party may request arbitration within ten (10)
days after either party's written notification to the other of their intent not to participate in the
mediation process by serving a written notice on the other party of their intention to proceed with
arbitration.
7.5 Arbitrator's Authority.
A. The arbitrator shall have no right to amend, modify, nullify, ignore, add to or subtract from,
the terms and conditions of this Agreement. The arbitrator shall consider and decide on the
specific issue(s) submitted in writing by the Employer and the Union and shall have no
authority to make a decision on any other issue, not so submitted.
B. The arbitrator shall be without power to make decisions contrary to, or inconsistent with, or
modifying or varying in any way, the application of laws, rules, or regulations having the force
and effect of law. The arbitrator's decision shall be submitted in writing within thirty (30) days
GST Unit – CBA 2020-2022 6
following close of the hearing or the submission of briefs by the parties, whichever be later,
unless the parties agree to an extension. The decision shall be binding on both the Employer
and the Union and shall be based solely on the arbitrator's interpretation or application of the
express terms of this Agreement and to the facts of the grievance presented.
C. The fees and expenses for the arbitrator's services and the proceedings shall be borne equally
by the Employer and the Union, provided that each party shall be responsible for compensating
its own representatives and witnesses. If either party desires a verbatim record of the
proceedings, it may cause such a record to be made, providing it pays for the record. If both
parties desire a verbatim record of the proceedings, the cost shall be shared equally.
7.6 Waiver. If a grievance is not presented within the time limits set forth above, it shall be considered
waived. If a grievance is not appealed to the next Step within the specified time limit or any agreed
extension thereof, it shall be considered settled on the basis of the Employer's last answer. If the
Employer does not answer a grievance, or an appeal thereof, within the specified time limit, the
Union shall elect to treat the grievance as defined at that Step and may immediately appeal the
grievance to the next Step. The time limit in each Step may be extended by mutual agreement of
the Employer and the Union.
7.7 No employee shall be disciplined for filing a grievance or for his/her testimony at a grievance
hearing.
7.8 Choice of Remedy: If, as a result of the written Employer response in Step 3, the grievance remains
unresolved, and if the grievance involves the suspension, demotion, or discharge of an employee
who has completed the required probationary period, the grievance may be appealed to either Step 4
of Article 7 or a procedure such as Civil Service, Veterans Preference, etc. If appealed to any
procedure other than in Step 4 of Article 7, the grievance is not subject to the arbitration procedure
as provided in Step 4 of Article 7. The aggrieved employee shall indicate in writing which
procedure is to be utilized - Step 4 of Article 7 or another appeal procedure - and shall sign a
statement to the effect that the choice of any other hearing precludes the aggrieved employee from
making a subsequent appeal through Step 4 of Article 7.
ARTICLE 8. SAVINGS CLAUSE
This Agreement is subject to the laws of the United States, the State of Minnesota and the County of Otter
Tail. In the event any provision of this Agreement shall be held to be contrary to law by a court of
competent jurisdiction from whose final judgment or decree no appeal has been taken within the time
provided, such provisions shall be voided. All other provisions of this Agreement shall continue in full
force and effect. The voided provisions may be renegotiated at the written request of either party.
ARTICLE 9. SENIORITY
9.1 There are three types of seniority:
A. Service Seniority is the total length of continuous service with the County.
GST Unit – CBA 2020-2022 7
B. Departmental Seniority is the total length of service within a specific department or division
of County service.
C. Classification Seniority is the total length of service within a work classification.
9.2 Seniority Provisions: Seniority is recognized for all employees in cases of layoff, recall, or
promotion. Seniority only applies within the employee's specific department.
A. Employees will not accumulate seniority, vacation, or sick leave during an unpaid leave of
absence except as required by State or Federal law.
B. The Employer is committed to hiring and promoting the most qualified candidate for County
service. When the County determines in its discretion that all other qualifications are equal,
the Employer shall select the applicant with the greater departmental seniority for the job
opening.
C. An employee promoted or transferred will serve a trial period of ninety (90) days. During the
trial period the employee or his or her supervisor may request return to a position of
comparable duties, number of hours, pay, and classification or, if available, the former
position.
D. Employees who voluntarily terminate or who are discharged from employment forfeit all
seniority rights with the County.
E. After completing the probation period, employees will be credited with seniority from the first
date of continuous employment with the County.
9.3 Layoff and Recall: Except in those instances where senior employees are not qualified to perform
remaining work, seniority shall determine the order of:
A. Layoff, which shall be by classification within a department, in inverse order of classification
seniority. However, an employee about to be laid off shall have the right to bump (displace)
any employee in a lower classification, provided that the Employer determines the employee
who is exercising bumping rights to be adequately qualified to perform the duties of the
classification into which the employee is bumping and the employee has greater departmental
seniority than the employee who is to be bumped.
B. Recall from layoff, which shall be by classification within a department, in inverse order of
layoff, provided that, if an employee does not return to work upon recall, as directed by the
Employer, or on an extended date mutually acceptable to the employee and Employer, she/he
shall automatically have terminated her or his employment. Recall notification shall be by
first-class mail to the employee's last known address for an indefinite layoff and shall be
contained in the layoff notice for layoffs for a definite period. An employee's name shall be
retained on the recall list for two (2) years, at which time all rights to recall shall terminate.
GST Unit – CBA 2020-2022 8
C. The Employer shall issue written notice of an indefinite layoff at least ten (10) calendar days
in advance of layoff and will meet and confer to attempt to minimize the impact of the layoff
on employees. The Employer shall issue written notice of recall from an indefinite layoff to
affected employees, providing at least seven (7) calendar days to return to work. An indefinite
layoff shall be defined as a layoff made for an indeterminate period at the time of notice or any
layoff of forty-five (45) calendar or more days. The Employer may layoff an employee for a
definite period of forty-four (44) calendar days or less by giving written notice to the affected
employees.
D. Contract and temporary employees in the same department and classification shall precede
regular employees in layoff. No new employees shall be hired in a work classification within
a department where there are employees on layoff status until all laid off employees have been
recalled in accordance with paragraphs A, B, and C above.
ARTICLE 10. DISCIPLINE
10.1 The Employer will discipline employees for just cause that is proportionate to the behavior and the
employee’s prior record of discipline. Discipline will be in one or more of the following forms:
A. Oral reprimand;
B. Written reprimand;
C. Suspension;
D. Demotion; or
E. Discharge.
10.2 Suspensions, demotions and discharges will be in written form.
10.3 Written reprimands, notices of suspension and notices of discharge which are to become part of an
employee's personnel file shall be read and acknowledged by signature of the employee. Employee
and the Union will receive a copy of such reprimands and/or notices. Documentation of oral
reprimands is not arbitrable.
10.4 Discharges will be preceded by a five (5) day suspension without pay.
10.5 Employees may examine their own individual personnel files at reasonable times under the direct
supervision of the Employer.
10.6 Employees will not be questioned concerning an investigation of disciplinary action unless the
employee has been given an opportunity to have a Union representative present at such questioning.
10.7 Grievances relating to suspension or discharge may be initiated by the Union in Step 3 of the
grievance procedure under Article 7. Probationary employees cannot avail themselves of the
grievance procedure in Article 7 contesting any termination process.
10.8 If a Department Head or Supervisor has a reason to reprimand an employee, it will be done in a
manner that will not embarrass the employee before other employees or the public.
GST Unit – CBA 2020-2022 9
ARTICLE 11. CONSTITUTIONAL PROTECTION
Employees shall have the rights guaranteed to all citizens by the United States and Minnesota
Constitutions.
ARTICLE 12. WORK SCHEDULE
12.1 Hours of Work:
A. County offices are open for business on times and days established by the County Board.
B. To meet the service needs of the public, Department Head(s) may vary an employee's or
department's work hours. Each Department Head shall establish a regular work schedule for
his/her employees.
12.2 Weather Closing Policy for Otter Tail County offices and departments:
A. The Chair of the County Board of Commissioners, or the Chair's designee is authorized to
order closure of the County Offices in Fergus Falls when it is not reasonably possible for
employees to travel within the City of Fergus Falls. The Commissioners representing
Districts 1 and 4 are authorized to determine if weather conditions require closure of the New
York Mills County Offices.
B. All County employees are encouraged to avoid unnecessary risk to their personal safety when
traveling to or from their place of work. Those employees not defined as "essential employees"
under the Minnesota Public Employment Labor Relations Act, and not performing highway
maintenance duties, may choose not to report to work, or to leave early, as weather conditions
require in the interest of their personal safety. Department Heads or Supervisors must approve
this absence from work, prior to or after the fact.
C. Those employees who are unable to safely report to work, as provided above, whether or not
the County offices are closed, may select one or more of the following ways to account for
their normal work hours missed, subject to the approval of their Department Head:
1. By utilizing a corresponding number of hours of accrued vacation time; or
2. By utilizing a corresponding number of hours of accrued sick leave; or
3. By utilizing a corresponding number of hours of accrued compensatory time (accrued
overtime); or,
4. By making up the hours within the work week during which the time was missed, on an
hour for hour basis, performing productive work, subject to the approval of the employee's
supervisor; or
5. By taking a corresponding number of hours without compensation.
D. Employees with questions regarding this policy should contact their immediate supervisor.
GST Unit – CBA 2020-2022 10
12.3 Employees may take a fifteen (15)-minute break per four (4) hours worked. When scheduling
breaks, supervisors may request that employees arrange their time so that all phones and/or
workstations are covered. Employees may also be requested to take their break at the time and
location indicated by their supervisor. Time spent on breaks is compensated and considered work
time. Employees cannot bank break time for extended lunch periods or to modify regular work
hours.
12.4 Lunch breaks normally consist of one-half (1/2) hour (unpaid) unless otherwise scheduled by their
Department Head. The Department Head may request that employees arrange their time so that all
phones and/or workstations are covered. Employees may be requested to take their lunch break at
the time indicated by their supervisor.
12.5 Nothing contained in this or any other article shall be interpreted as a guarantee of a minimum or
maximum number of hours the Employer may assign employees.
12.6 The Employer shall pay for training required by the Employer or authorized by the Employer during
duty periods. Duty and assigned training shall be at regular base rates with no premium. Training
necessary to maintain professional licensure and not mandated by the Employer shall be at the
employee's own expense.
ARTICLE 13. OVERTIME
13.1 All overtime requires prior authorization by the employee's Department Head/Supervisor. With
the employee's agreement, overtime may be taken as compensatory time. Compensatory time or
overtime payments will be paid at one and one-half (1½) times the hourly rate, or in the case of
compensatory time, it is overtime hours times one and one-half (1½) for equivalent time off. This
provision does not apply to those employees who are defined as exempt by Fair Labor Standards
Act.
13.2 There is no pyramiding, duplicating, or compounding of overtime.
13.3 For the purposes of computing overtime, the work week commences at 12:01 a.m. Monday and
consists of forty hours. Holiday, vacation, and sick leave hours count as hours worked for the
purposes of computing overtime as do work related (not commuting) travel hours.
13.4 An employee may elect to receive compensatory time off in lieu of overtime. No employee shall
accumulate more than forty (40) hours of compensatory time. Compensatory time off may be
scheduled only with the approval of the employee's Supervisor or Department Head. The request
will be granted unless it places an unreasonable burden on the Employer.
13.5 All accrued compensatory time shall be paid (as set forth in Article 28) and the bank reduced to
zero (0) in December of each year.
GST Unit – CBA 2020-2022 11
ARTICLE 14. APPAREL
For ease of public identification, certain clothing may be required by the Supervisor. The Employer may
participate in this cost. Where appropriate, the Employer will provide those items of apparel classified as
personal protective equipment which the Department Head has determined is required to be worn by the
employee for the safe performance of his/her duties.
ARTICLE 15. WORKING OUT OF CLASSIFICATION
Employees temporarily transferred to a higher classification for a period of more than 15 working days
will receive the rate for the higher classification for the period of the transfer, provided that, all tasks and
duties of that higher job classification are performed. When employees are temporarily assigned to a
lower paid classification, they will receive their regular rate of pay until the transfer has been made
permanent. A transfer to a lower classification is considered permanent after thirty (30) calendar days.
ARTICLE 16. INSURANCE
16.1 CAFETERIA BENEFITS PLAN. In addition to salary, the Employer offers a Cafeteria Benefits
Plan to employees.
The Employer shall contribute designated amounts as referenced below per month to each regular
full-time employee dependent upon classification for health insurance and/or other benefits through the Cafeteria Benefits Plan. This takes effect thirty (30) days after the beginning of employment, or in the case of an employee beginning County service other than the first day of a month, it shall be thirty (30) days after the first of the month following the month in which he/she
becomes employed. The employee must complete a Cafeteria Benefits Enrollment form at least
fifteen (15) days prior to the effective date of eligibility for the plan. Regular employees working thirty (30) to forty (40) hours per week shall receive pro-rata portion of the benefit per month. Regular employees working less than thirty (30) hours per week are not eligible for participation in the Cafeteria Benefits Plan.
Effective January 1, 2020, all employees who choose a single plan and were employed on or before December 31, 2019, shall receive an Employer contribution of one thousand, three hundred and twenty-five dollars ($1,325.00) per month.
Effective January 1, 2021, all employees who choose a single plan and were employed on or before
December 31, 2019, shall receive an Employer contribution of one thousand, three hundred fifty dollars ($1,350.00) per month. Effective January 1, 2022, all employees who choose a single plan and were employed on or before
December 31, 2019, shall receive an Employer contribution of one thousand, three hundred
seventy-five dollars ($1,375.00) per month. ***
Effective January 1, 2020, all employees who choose a single plan and were employed after
December 31, 2019, shall receive an Employer contribution of seven hundred and sixty-five dollars ($765.00) per month.
GST Unit – CBA 2020-2022 12
Effective January 1, 2021, all employees who choose a single plan and were employed after December 31, 2019, shall receive an Employer contribution of seven hundred and ninety dollars ($790.00) per month.
Effective January 1, 2022, all employees who choose a single plan and were employed after
December 31, 2019, shall receive an Employer contribution of eight hundred and ten dollars ($810.00) per month. ***
Effective January 1, 2020, all employees who choose a single plus children plan or a single plus spouse plan shall receive an Employer contribution of one thousand, three hundred fifty dollars ($1,350.00) per month.
Effective January 1, 2021, all employees who choose a single plus children plan or a single plus
spouse plan shall receive an Employer contribution of one thousand, four hundred dollars ($1,400.00) per month. Effective January 1, 2022, all employees who choose a single plus children plan or a single plus
spouse plan shall receive an Employer contribution of one thousand, four hundred and twenty-five
dollars ($1,425.00) per month. ***
Effective January 1, 2020, all employees who choose a family plan shall receive an Employer
contribution of one thousand, five hundred and twenty-five dollars ($1,525.00) per month. Effective January 1, 2021, all employees who choose a family plan shall receive an Employer contribution of one thousand, six hundred dollars ($1,600.00) per month.
Effective January 1, 2022, all employees who choose a family plan shall receive an Employer contribution of one thousand, six hundred and fifty dollars ($1,650.00) per month.
16.2 The Medical Reimbursement Account Maximum (Flexible Benefits Plan) shall be the maximum
amount allowed for under the plan during the term of this Agreement.
16.3 Part-time employees who do not qualify for health insurance benefits under the plan in effect at the
time of their employment will not receive any of the benefits set forth in this Article.
16.4 Upon resignation in good standing, may use seventy-five percent (75%) of their accumulated sick
leave for payment to continue insurance in effect under this Article, subject to approval by the
insurance carrier and limited to the required periods of continued health insurance coverage
provided by Federal and State laws and regulations. Accumulations in the employee's sick leave
bank (see Section 19.3) are specifically excluded from this provision. At the time of resignation,
employees may elect to use a portion of the accumulated sick leave benefits under this Section and
receive the balance as severance pay as authorized in Section 23.2 and Section 28.1.B.
16.5 One (1) member from the bargaining unit will be elected to sit on the Insurance Committee which
will be a sub-committee of the Labor Management Committee (LMC).
GST Unit – CBA 2020-2022 13
16.6 The failure of an insurance carrier(s) to provide any benefit for which it has contracted shall result
in no liability to the County or to the Union, nor shall such failure to be considered a breach by the
County or to the Union, nor shall such failure be considered a breach by the County or Union of
any obligation undertaken under this or any other agreement. However, nothing in this Agreement
shall be construed to relieve any insurance carrier from any liability it may have to the County,
Union, employee or beneficiary of any employee. The terms of any contract or policy issue by an
insurance carrier shall be controlling in all matters pertaining to benefits thereunder.
16.7 In the event that the health insurance provisions of this Agreement fail to meet the requirements of
the Affordable Care Act or its successor and its related regulations or cause the County to be subject
to a penalty, tax, or fine, either party may request a meet and confer. In such negotiations, the rights
and obligations of the Union shall be subject to the provisions of Minn. Stat. §179A.06, and the
rights and obligations of the County shall be subject to the provisions of Minn. Stat. §179A.07.
ARTICLE 17. HOLIDAYS
17.1 All regular employees shall be entitled to paid holidays as defined below:
New Year's Day Labor Day
Martin Luther King Day Veteran's Day
President's Day Thanksgiving Day
Good Friday Thanksgiving Friday
Memorial Day 1/2 Day, December 24
Independence Day Christmas Day
17.2 In order to qualify for the holiday pay under this Article, an otherwise qualified employee must not
be on unpaid status. Holiday pay consists of eight (8) hours per holiday.
17.3 When any of the above named holidays falls on a Sunday, the following Monday shall be observed
as the holiday. When the holiday falls on a Saturday, it shall be observed on the preceding Friday.
17.4 Should Christmas Day fall on Saturday, the preceding Thursday shall be observed as
December 24th.
17.5 When a paid holiday falls during an employee's vacation period, he/she shall receive an additional
day of paid vacation.
17.6 Employees who are required to work a holiday shall be paid at one and one-half (1 1/2) times their
normal base pay rate for all hours worked.
17.7 Part-time employees will receive paid holidays on a pro-rated basis.
GST Unit – CBA 2020-2022 14
ARTICLE 18. VACATION SCHEDULE
18.1 All regular County employees shall be entitled to earn vacation at the rate designated in the
following schedule:
1st year employment 6.67 hours/month
2nd year employment 7.33 hours/month 3rd year employment 8.00 hours/month 4th year employment 8.67 hours/month 5th year employment 9.33 hours/month 6th year employment 10.00 hours/month
7th year employment 10.33 hours/month 8th year employment 10.67 hours/month 9th year employment 11.00 hours/month 10th year employment 11.33 hours/month 11th year employment 11.67 hours/month
12th year employment 12.00 hours/month 13th year employment 12.33 hours/month 14th year employment 12.67 hours/month 15th year employment 13.00 hours/month 16th year employment 13.33 hours/month
17th year employment 13.67 hours/month 18th year employment 14.00 hours/month 19th year employment 14.33 hours/month 20th year employment 14.67 hours/month
21st year employment 15.00 hours/month
22nd year employment 15.33 hours/month 23rd year employment 15.67 hours/month 24th year employment 16.00 hours/month 25th year employment 16.33 hours/month
26th year employment 16.67 hours/month
27th year employment 17.33 hours/month
18.2 Vacation shall accrue semi-monthly at the rates indicated above commencing with the first month
of employment. Employees may only claim and be entitled to a vacation upon continuation of
employment after completion of six (6) months of continuous employment in good standing.
Provided, however, any employee working less than forty (40) hours per week shall earn vacation
on a pro rata basis (e.g. a part-time employee who works thirty (30) hours per week would qualify
for seventy-five percent (75%) of the vacation allowed in the above schedule). An employee is not
entitled to accrued vacation time/pay if employment terminates during the probationary period.
18.3 Vacation schedules shall respect the employee's wishes to the extent reasonable within the
limitations of the department. The Department Head may require that vacation requests be made
by a specific reasonable date each year or a reasonable time before vacation is to be taken.
18.4 Accumulated vacation leave for regular full-time employees in excess of twenty-four (24) days or
192 hours shall be lost at the employee's anniversary date unless carryover of additional days is
specifically approved by the Division Directors for good cause. Employees are encouraged to use
GST Unit – CBA 2020-2022 15
their vacation each year. Employees in good standing shall be paid for any unused vacation upon
separation from County service as set forth in Article 28.
ARTICLE 19. SICK LEAVE
19.1 Employees are responsible for reasonable, prudent, and bona fide use of sick leave privileges.
Claiming sick leave when fit, except as provided in this section, may be cause for disciplinary
action, including cancellation of sick leave benefits, suspension, demotion or termination.
19.2 Sick leave is earned at the rate of eight (8) hours per month, and accumulates to a total of nine
hundred and sixty (960) hours. It is accumulated on a pro-rated basis for regular part-time
employees working less than forty (40) hours per week.
19.3 An employee who has accumulated 960 hours of sick leave may bank an additional 240 hours to
be used only in the event that sick leave accumulated under this section has been exhausted. Sick
leave in this bank cannot be used to replenish the maximum accumulation of 960 hours as stated in
paragraph 19.2. Sick leave in this bank may not be used for payment of insurance premiums or
severance under Article 16.
19.4 The employee must notify his/her supervisor of his/her inability to be at work due to illness as soon
as possible, preferably before the start of working hours. Failure to provide notification may result
in a loss of sick pay for the time taken.
19.5 Employees claiming sick leave may be required to file written documentation. If employees have
been incapacitated, they may be required to provide documentation of being capable of performing
all job duties. If in excess of three (3) consecutive days, written statement from a physician/public
health service specifying the amount of time needed may be required.
19.6 Other permitted uses of sick leave:
SITUATION NUMBER OF HOURS
Medical necessity in Immediate Family 24** (per event)
Pregnancy/Birth/Adoption 24*** (per event)
Funeral for co-workers within the department 4 (per event)
** Additional time with department head approval and physician's certification.
*** Additional days as required by physician.
19.7 The use of sick leave for dental or medical appointments for the employee or employee's spouse,
child, or parent is not required unless the appointments total more than three (3) hours in any given
month. This provision only applies to full-time employees.
19.8 An employee on vacation who becomes ill or injured may with proper notification change his/her
leave status to sick leave.
GST Unit – CBA 2020-2022 16
ARTICLE 20. WAGES
20.1 All employees shall be paid in accordance with the attached wage schedule.
20.2 For each year of the contract, each employee not yet on Step 12 shall receive one (1) step increase
on the appropriate pay grade on his/her anniversary day conditioned on satisfactory performance.
ARTICLE 21. MEAL ALLOWANCE
21.1 When employees are required to be out of Otter Tail County on training, education, official
business or on approved work-related meetings, they shall receive reimbursement for meals under
the following conditions:
A. Breakfast: When an employee is required to leave home before 6:00 a.m., or was away
overnight, at a rate of ten dollars ($10.00).
B. Lunch: When an employee is out of the County between 11:00 a.m. and 2:00 p.m., at a rate
of fifteen dollars ($15.00).
C. Supper: When an employee is out of the County between 5:00 p.m. and 8:00 p.m., at a rate of
eighteen dollars ($18.00).
21.2 Employees may aggregate the meal reimbursement amounts during any one-day period not to
exceed the daily maximum of forty-three dollars ($43.00). Employees must provide a receipt
showing the actual costs incurred. Reimbursement will not be available for the cost of alcoholic
beverages.
21.3 Reimbursed mileage for personal vehicle use shall be at the current IRS rate.
ARTICLE 22. INJURY ON DUTY
22.1 At the Employer's discretion, an employee (a) acting within the limits of the authority established
by the Employer, (b) who receives a disabling injury, as a result of a single incident, during the
performance of assigned official duties performing acts required by law, and (c) wherein the
Employer had determined that the employee has not contributed to the cause of the injury through
negligence, judgmental decision, out of wrongful or willful or wanton neglect of duty or other
action or inaction, may by granted leave with pay for any period of disability provided that such
leave with pay shall not exceed ninety (90) calendar days. Such disabling injury shall be reported
to the appointing authority immediately. Request for such leave shall be presented to the Employer
together with supporting documentation including appropriate physician(s) reports. Such leave, if
granted, shall not be charged to normal sick leave.
22.2 All benefits received under this plan shall be coordinated with benefits received through Worker's
Compensation and the County long-term disability program. An employee may elect to
supplement Worker's Compensation benefits and/or long-term disability payments with
GST Unit – CBA 2020-2022 17
deductions from accrued sick leave or vacation provided that the total received does not exceed
the employee's normal base pay, subject to the following terms:
A. The use of such earned leave time to make up the difference in hours between the two-thirds
Workers' Compensation payment and a normal work day is limited to pre-injury accumulated
leave time.
B. The leave time accrued while receiving two-thirds Workers' Compensation and one-third (1/3)
accumulated leave time cannot be used until there is a return to work.
C. Work related injuries may qualify for and be subject to the Family and Medical Leave Act.
D. After the exhaustion of earned leave time and FMLA leave, the health benefits are the
responsibility of the employee, and limited to continued coverage eligibility required under
federal and state laws and regulations.
E. Seniority will cease to accrue at the date on which an employee has exhausted pre-injury
accumulated leave and while on any unpaid leave of absence.
F. Employees injured on the job must make a report of such injury as soon as possible to their
immediate supervisor. All injuries, however slight, must be reported within twenty-four (24)
hours of occurrence. Major incidents, such as death, amputation, loss of consciousness or
three (3) or more casualties are to be reported immediately. Department Heads are
responsible for providing the proper notification to the Personnel Office of all injuries
reported by employees of their department. Current forms and procedures are available in at
the Administration Office.
ARTICLE 23. RESIGNATION
23.1 Any employee desiring to resign shall submit such resignation in writing to the Department Head
under which he or she works. This shall be at least two (2) weeks in advance of the proposed
resignation. Existing vacation credits shall be payable into the Post Employment Health Care
VEBA Plan on termination or retirement to employees in good standing. (See Article 28.1.D.)
Failure to comply with this provision may be cause for non-payment of unused vacation leave.
23.2 Employees, in good standing, who leave employment after a minimum of ten (10) years, will
receive seventy-five percent (75%) of the balance of their accumulated sick leave payable into the
Post Employment Health Care VEBA Plan not to exceed 720 hours. (See Article 28.1.B.)
ARTICLE 24. LEAVES OF ABSENCE
24.1 Any request for the leave of absence other than for vacation and sick leave shall be submitted in
writing by the employee and must be approved by the employee's department head or designee.
GST Unit – CBA 2020-2022 18
24.2 Funeral Leave: Employees, in good standing, are allowed a maximum of three (3) days paid leave
for a death in their immediate family. Additional time off requires the use of vacation, sick leave
or comp time and requires Department Head/Supervisor approval.
24.3 Reporting of Absence From Job:
Absence during working hours must have prior approval of the Department Head.
24.4 Emergency Closing: Non-weather related emergency closure of the courthouse, Government
Services Center, or New York Mills Building will be authorized by the Chair of the County Board
or his or her appointed delegate.
24.5 Jury Duty: Employees on Otter Tail County jury duty will be allowed normal pay and are not
eligible for the daily juror fee. Employees normally reporting to work in Fergus Falls will not be
eligible for mileage.
24.6 Military Leave: Military rights are provided by MS 192.26 and federal law.
24.7 Leave of Absence Without Pay:
A. Employees wishing to absent themselves from their duties may, with Department Head
approval, be granted a leave of absence without pay. Such leave will be granted only upon
the written request of the employee, containing reasons for the leave, when it is in the best
interest of the county. Except in the case of illness or disability, such leave will not exceed
one (1) year.
B. A leave of absence may be canceled at any time with written notice to the employee. The
Department Head will specify a reasonable date for termination of the leave.
C. Anniversary dates will be adjusted forward for the duration of unpaid leaves.
D. Employees on an unpaid leave of absence are responsible for their own benefit premiums.
E. An employee on unpaid leave status will not receive compensation for holidays nor accrue
vacation, sick leave or seniority.
24.8 Other Authorized Leaves: Employees shall be granted all leaves of absence, with or without pay,
as required by Federal or State laws or rules. A Department Head shall consult with the County
Personnel Office regarding appropriate procedures for all leaves required by law.
24.9 If the reasons and circumstances upon which an employee's leave of absence was granted change
while he/she is on leave, he/she must immediately report to the Employer to be reinstated if
required by law or if previous position is open and available, or to request continuation of leave,
based on the changed conditions. If the employee fails to so report or falsifies his/her report, he/she
may be subject to disciplinary action in accordance with Article 10.
GST Unit – CBA 2020-2022 19
ARTICLE 25. SAFETY
25.1 The Employer seeks to insure the safest working conditions possible. Regulations and instructions
for employees regarding occupational safety and health are found in the Otter Tail County Policy
and Programs to Promote Worker Safety and Health. Employees will sign that they have read and
understand the Employer’s policy on safety and are expected to follow strictly all requirements.
Suggestions in safety are welcomed from all employees.
25.2 Safety is an integral part of each position and the responsibility of each employee. The violation
of safety rules and practices may be grounds for disciplinary action.
ARTICLE 26. EMPLOYEE ASSISTANCE PROGRAM
The County will provide employees the same Employee Assistance Program that it offers to other County
employees.
ARTICLE 27. TUITION ASSISTANCE
The County will provide the same Tuition Assistance Program that it provides for other County
employees.
ARTICLE 28. POST EMPLOYMENT HEALTH CARE VEBA PLAN
28.1 The Employer will allow employees to participate in the Post Employment Health Care (PEHC)
VEBA Plan administered by Further (formerly Select Account). The Employer will make
contributions on behalf of eligible employees as follows:
A. All accumulated comp time (defined in 13.5) as of a wage rate increase and December 31st of
each year will be applied to the PEHC VEBA Plan. Those employees not receiving a wage
rate increase on their anniversary date shall have all accumulated comp time as of December
31st of each year applied to the PEHC VEBA Plan.
B. Employee's severance pay per Section 23.2 (Sick Leave) of the Labor Agreement will be put
into the PEHC VEBA Plan upon leaving employment with the Employer.
C. An employee who has accumulated a total of 960 hours of sick time will receive four (4)
hours per month, for each month the 960 hours are maintained, to their Health Care Savings
Plan. This amount will be paid to the Plan once a year. This benefit will be pro-rated for
part-time employees.
After the accumulation of 960 hours of sick time, four (4) hours will be applied to the
catastrophic sick bank authorized in Section 19.3, until a total of 1,200 hours of sick leave
have been banked. This benefit will be pro-rated for part-time employees.
GST Unit – CBA 2020-2022 20
D. Any unused vacation, not in excess of authorizing accrual of up to 192 hours (24 days) as of
the employee’s anniversary date, at the time of resignation will be deposited into the PEHC
VEBA Plan.
ARTICLE 29. NATIONAL TEAMSTERS D.R.I.V.E. (Democratic/Republican/Independent Voter Education.)
Upon receipt of a properly executed voluntary authorization card from an employee, the Employer will
deduct from the employee's salary such amounts as the employee authorizes to pay National Teamsters
D.R.I.V.E.
ARTICLE 30. WAIVER
30.1 Any and all prior agreements, resolutions, practices, policies, rules and regulations, regarding
terms and conditions of employment, to the extent inconsistent with the provisions if this
Agreement, are hereby superseded. Provided, however, that the addendum attached hereto and
marked as Wage Schedule is to continue as part of this Agreement.
30.2 The parties mutually acknowledge that during the negotiations which resulted in this Agreement,
each had the unlimited right and opportunity to make demands and proposals with respect to any
terms or conditions of employment not removed by law, from bargaining. All agreements and
understandings arrived at by the parties are set forth in writing in this Agreement for the stipulated
duration of this Agreement. The Employer and the Union, each voluntarily and unqualifiedly
waives the right to meet and negotiate, regarding any and all terms and conditions of employment
referred to or covered in this Agreement or with respect to any term or condition of employment
not specifically referred to or covered by this Agreement, even though such terms or conditions
may not have been within the knowledge or contemplation of either or both the parties at the time
this Agreement was negotiated or executed.
ARTICLE 31. DURATION
This Agreement shall be effective as of January 1, 2020, and shall remain in full force and effect until
December 31, 2022.
FOR THE COUNTY OF OTTER TAIL FOR TEAMSTERS LOCAL NO. 320
________________________________ _____________________________________
County Board Chair Roger Meunier, Business Agent
_________________________________ _____________________________________
County Administrator Steward
_________________________________ _____________________________________
Human Resources Director Steward
Date: ____________________________ Date: ________________________________
MTR:sb/2012-3713/10/4/2019
GST Unit – CBA 2020-2022 21
APPENDIX A – Classification, Position, and Grade
GOVERNMENT SERVICES TECHNICAL UNIT CLASSIFICATION POSITION GRADE
Administrative Assistant Office Technician A12, A13 Accounting Technician Deputy Treasurer A12, A13 Appraiser Provisional Appraiser B22
Administrative Specialist Election/Voter Registration Specialist B21, B22 Administrative Assistant Assessment Technician II A12, A13
Administrative Assistant Property Records Technician A12, A13 Inspection Specialist Aquatic Invasive Species Specialist B21/B22 Inspection Specialist Permit Technician I B21
Inspection Specialist Permit Technician II B22 Administrative Assistant Administrative Deputy -Vital Statistics A12, A13
Accounting Specialist Administrative Deputy Treasurer B21, B22 Accounting Technician Accounts Payable/Billing Specialist A12, A13 Administrative Assistant License Center Specialist A12, A13
Administrative Assistant Administrative Deputy-UCC/CNS A12, A13 Appraiser Appraiser I B22
Inspector Land & Resource Inspector B23 Inspector Wetlands Inspector B24 Administrative Specialist Land Title Specialist B21, B22
Administrative Specialist Administrative Specialist B21, B22 Administrative Specialist Chief Deputy Recorder B23
Appraiser Appraiser II B23 Appraiser Appraiser III B24
GST Unit – CBA 2020-2022 22
APPENDIX B – Salary Schedules for 2020, 2021, and 2022
GST Unit – CBA 2020-2022 23
GST Unit – CBA 2020-2022 24
RESOLUTION NO. ___
RESOLUTION APPROVING THE ISSUANCE OF REVENUE
OBLIGATIONS BY THE CITY OF BERTHA, MINNESOTA, TO
FINANCE A PROJECT BY TRI-COUNTY HOSPITAL
D/B/A TRI-COUNTY HEALTH CARE
BE IT RESOLVED, by the Board of Commissioners of Otter Tail County, Minnesota (the
“County”), as follows:
Section 1. General Recitals. The County makes the following recitals of fact:
1.01 Tri-County Hospital, d/b/a Tri-County Health Care (the “Borrower”), a
Minnesota nonprofit corporation and organization described in Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”), located at 415 Jefferson Street North, Wadena,
Minnesota, has proposed issuance of revenue obligations, in one or more series, in an amount
not to exceed $81,000,000 (the “Obligations”) by the City of Bertha, Minnesota (the “Issuer”),
to undertake the following project, owned and to be owned by the Borrower:
(a) financing (i) the acquisition of land, constructing and equipping an
approximately 120,000 square foot replacement critical access hospital and clinic
facilities to be located at 63835 Highway 10, Wadena, Minnesota; and (ii) renovation of
the existing hospital and clinic facilities of the Borrower located at 415 Jefferson Street
North within the City of Wadena, Minnesota (the “Existing Facilities”; the activities
described in this clause (a) are referred to as the “2019 Project”);
(b) refinancing the following obligations: (i) the Issuer’s $1,743,638 Health
Care Facilities Revenue Note, Series 2017A (Tri-County Health Care Project); (ii) the
Issuer’s $5,456,362 Health Care Facilities Revenue Note, Series 2017B; (iii) the City of
Verndale, Minnesota $1,743,638 Health Care Facilities Revenue Note, Series 2017A; and
(iv) the City of Verndale, Minnesota $5,456,362 Health Care Facilities Revenue Note,
Series 2017B (together the “Series 2017 Notes”), the proceeds of which were used to
finance and refinance capital expenditures at the Existing Facilities (the “2017 Project,”
and together with the 2019 Project, the “Project”);
(c) financing capitalized interest; and
(d) paying costs associated with the financing.
1.02 The Borrower desires to finance and refinance the Project through the issuance of
the Obligations by the Issuer, and the Issuer has agreed to issue the Obligations.
1.03 Portions of the Project are located in the County and the City of Wadena,
Minnesota (together with the Issuer, the “Municipalities”).
1.04 Fryberger, Buchanan, Smith & Frederick, P.A., bond counsel (“Bond Counsel”)
has advised the County as follows:
(a) The legal authority for the issuance of the Obligations is Minnesota
Statutes, Sections 469.152 through 469.1655, as amended (the “Act”).
2
(b) The stated purposes of the Act include the provision of necessary health
care facilities, so that adequate health care services are available to residents of the State
of Minnesota at reasonable cost; that the welfare of the state requires that, whenever
feasible, employment opportunities made available by the Act should be offered to
individuals who are unemployed or who are economically disadvantaged; and the
welfare of the state further requires that, whenever feasible, action should be taken to
reduce the cost of borrowing by local governments for public purposes, such as the
Project.
(c) The Act authorizes the Issuer to issue revenue obligations to refinance
and finance indebtedness incurred by an organization engaged in providing health care
related activities and social services.
(d) In order for interest on the Obligations to be exempt from federal income
taxation, the tax-exempt bond rules of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended,
require that each jurisdiction in which a portion of the Project is located must hold a
public hearing on the Project and approve the issuance of the Obligations.
(e) In order for the Obligations to be legally issued by the Issuer, Minnesota
State law (Minnesota Statues, Section 471.656) requires that the County consent to the
issuance by the Issuer of the portion of the Obligations issued to finance the 2019
Project.
Section 2. Public Hearing Held.
2.01 A Notice of Public Hearing was published in the Fergus Falls Daily Journal, the
County’s official newspaper and a newspaper of general circulation, calling a public hearing on
the proposed issuance of the Obligations and the proposal to undertake and finance and
refinance the Project. Publication of the Notice of Public Hearing is ratified and approved.
2.02 The Board of Commissioners has, on November 5, 2019, held a public hearing on
the proposed issuance of the Obligations and the proposal to undertake and finance and
refinance the Project, at which all those appearing who desired to speak were heard and written
comments were accepted.
Section 3. Recital of Representations Made by the Borrower.
3.01 The County has been advised by representatives of the Borrower that: (i)
conventional financing is available only on a limited basis and at such high costs of borrowing
that the economic feasibility of operating the Project would be significantly reduced; (ii) on the
basis of information submitted to the Board of Commissioners by the Borrower and their
discussions with representatives of area financial institutions and potential buyers of tax-exempt
bonds, the Obligations could be issued and sold upon favorable rates and terms to finance and
refinance the Project; (iii) the Borrower will experience a significant debt service cost savings as
a result of financing and refinancing the Project; and (iv) the 2019 Project would not be
undertaken in its present form but for the availability of financing under the Act.
3.02 The Borrower has agreed to pay any and all costs incurred by the Municipalities
in connection with the issuance of the Obligations, whether or not such issuance is carried to
completion.
3
3.03 The Borrower has represented to the County that no public official of the County
has either a direct or indirect financial interest in the Project nor will any public official either
directly or indirectly benefit financially from the Project.
Section 4. Findings. It is found, determined and declared as follows:
4.01 The welfare of the State and the County requires the provision of necessary health
care facilities so that adequate health care services are available to residents of the State and the
County at reasonable cost.
4.02 The County desires to facilitate the selective development of the community and
help to provide the range of services and employment opportunities required by the population.
The 2019 Project will assist the County in achieving those objectives; help to stabilize market
valuation of the County; help maintain a positive relationship between assessed valuation and
debt; and enhance the image and reputation of the community.
4.03 On the basis of information made available to the Board of Commissioners by the
Borrower it appears that: (1) the 2019 Project constitutes properties, real and personal, used or
useful in connection with a revenue producing enterprise engaged in providing health care
services; (2) the 2019 Project furthers one or more of the purposes stated in the Act; (3) the 2019
Project would not be undertaken but for the availability of financing under the Act and the
willingness of the Issuer to furnish such financing; and (4) the effect of the 2019 Project, if
undertaken, will be to: (i) encourage the development of economically sound industry and
commerce, (ii) assist in the prevention of the emergence of blighted and marginal land, (iii) help
prevent chronic unemployment, (iv) provide the range of service and employment opportunities
required by the population, (v) help prevent the movement of talented and educated persons out
of the State and to areas within the State where their services may not be as effectively used, (vi)
promote more intensive development and appropriate use of land within the Issuer, eventually
to increase the tax base of the community, and (vii) provide adequate health care services
available to residents of the Issuer, the County and the surrounding area at a reasonable cost.
Section 5. Approval.
5.01 The County consents to the financing of that portion of the 2019 Project located
in the County, and approves the issuance of the Obligations by the Issuer subject to the approval
of the Project by the Department of Employment and Economic Development of the State.
5.02 The Authorized Officers are authorized and directed to execute and deliver such
other documents or certificates needed from the County for the sale of the Obligations.
Section 6. Nature of the Obligations. The Obligations, when and if issued for the
Project, shall not constitute a charge, lien or encumbrance, legal or equitable, upon any property
of the Municipalities. (There will, however, be a charge, lien or encumbrance on the Project,
which is not an asset of the Municipalities.) The Obligations, when and if issued, shall recite in
substance that the Obligations and the interest thereon, are payable solely from revenues
received from the Project and property pledged for payment thereof, and shall not constitute a
debt of the Municipalities.
Section 7. Ratification. The actions of the Auditor-Treasurer taken with respect to
causing the Notice of Public Hearing, in the form attached hereto as Exhibit A, to be published
in the official newspaper of the County and a newspaper of general circulation in the County not
less than 14 days prior to the hearing are ratified and confirmed in all respects.
4
Section 8. Payment of County’s Costs. The issuance of the Obligations and the
approvals given in this Resolution, are subject to the following:
(a) approval by the Issuer of issuance of the Obligations; and
(b) the agreement by the Borrower that it will pay, or, upon demand,
reimburse the County for payment of, any and all costs incurred by the County in
connection with the Project and the issuance of the Obligations by the Issuer, whether or
not the Project is carried to completion, or the Obligations are issued.
Adopted this 5th day of November, 2019
OTTER TAIL COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Date:
By: Attest:
Doug Huebsch, Board of Commissioners Chair John Dinsmore, Clerk
EXHIBIT A
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED PROJECT AND THE ISSUANCE OF
PRIVATE ACTIVITY BONDS
OTTER TAIL COUNTY, MINNESOTA
Notice is hereby given that the Board of Commissioners of Otter Tail County, Minnesota (the “County”)
will meet on Tuesday, November 5, 2019, at 10:00 a.m., or as soon thereafter as reasonably possible in
the Commissioners’ Room, of the Government Services Center, which is located at 515 Fir Ave W. in
Fergus Falls, Minnesota, for the purpose of conducting a public hearing to consider giving host approval
to the issuance by the City of Bertha, Minnesota (the “Issuer”) of revenue obligations, in one or more
series, under Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.152 through 469.1655 (the “Act”), in order to finance the
cost of a project and refinance existing projects (together, the “Projects”) located in the County and the
City of Wadena, Minnesota (the “City”). Each of the Projects will be owned and operated by Tri-County
Hospital, d/b/a Tri-County Health Care (the “Borrower”), a Minnesota nonprofit corporation and
organization described in Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended.
The proposed project (the “2019 Project”) will consist of financing (a) the acquisition of land,
constructing and equipping an approximately 120,000 square foot replacement critical access hospital
and clinic facilities to be located at 63835 Highway 10 in Otter Tail County adjacent to the City (the
“New Facilities”); (b) related renovations to the existing hospital and clinic facilities located at 415
Jefferson St N and 4 Deerwood Avenue NW, within the City of Wadena, Minnesota (the “Existing
Facilities”); (c) financing capitalized interest; and (d) paying costs associated with the financing. The
New Facilities will be owned and operated by the Borrower in conjunction with the Existing Facilities.
The Projects are located in the jurisdiction of the City and the County (together, the County, the Issuer
and the City are referred to as the “Host Municipalities”). The total amount of the obligations to be issued
presently being estimated at not to exceed $81,000,000.
The obligations and interest thereon shall not be payable from nor charged against any funds of the Host
Municipalities other than revenue pledged for the payment thereof, nor shall the Host Municipalities be
subject to any liability thereon. No holders of the obligations shall ever have the right to compel any
exercise of the taxing power of the Host Municipalities to pay the obligations or the interest thereon, nor
to enforce payment against any property of the Host Municipalities. Such obligations shall not constitute
a charge, lien or encumbrance, legal or equitable, upon any property of the Host Municipalities, nor shall
the same constitute a debt of the Host Municipalities within the meaning of any constitutional or statutory
limitations.
In conjunction with the refinance of existing projects, the Issuer has been requested by the Borrower to
refund the following obligations (a) the Issuer’s $1,743,638 Health Care Facilities Revenue Note, Series
2017A (Tri-County Health Care Project); (b) the Issuer’s $5,456,362 Health Care Facilities Revenue
Note, Series 2017B; (c) the City of Verndale, Minnesota $1,743,638 Health Care Facilities Revenue Note,
Series 2017A; and (d) the City of Verndale, Minnesota $5,456,362 Health Care Facilities Revenue Note,
Series 2017B (together the “Series 2017 Notes”).
The proceeds of the Series 2017 Notes were used to finance and refinance capital expenditures at the
Existing Facilities, as follows: (a) constructing and equipping a portion of a 30,000 square foot expansion
and remodel of the existing hospital, affecting emergency room services, surgery, lab, radiology, medical
Exhibit A, page 2
records, dietary, materials management, business office and physical therapy; (b)(i) constructing and
equipping a rural health clinic located at 214 First Street NW, Bertha, Minnesota; (ii) constructing and
equipping a 2,200 square foot expansion, remodeling and other improvements to the Wadena Clinic,
located at 415 Jefferson Street North and 4 Deerwood Avenue NW in the City; and (iii) a remodel of the
existing hospital affecting pharmacy, registration, gift shop and administration; and (c) constructing of a
one-story slab on grade, free standing, approximately 17,563 square foot building and related
improvments located adjacent to 240 Shady Lane Drive in the City to be used as a 16-bed short term
community based residential treatment facility for persons in acute psychiatric status.
All persons interested may appear and be heard at the time and place set forth above or may submit
written comments to the Clerk of the Board of Commissioners in advance of the hearing. Written
comments should be submitted to the County Administrator’s office, 520 Fir Ave W., Fergus Falls, MN
56537. Individuals requiring special accommodations should contact the County Administrator’s office
prior to the date of the public hearing.
Wayne Stein
County Auditor-Treasurer
Tuesday, October 9, 2019
Publish: Tuesday, October 15, 2019 and Tuesday, October 22, 2019
EXTRACT OF MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS OF
OTTER TAIL COUNTY, MINNESOTA
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting of the Board of Commissioners
of Otter Tail County, Minnesota, was duly called and held in the Commissioners’ Room of the
Government Services Center, located at 515 Fir Avenue West in Fergus Falls, Minnesota, on
Tuesday, November 5, 2019, at 10:00 a.m.
The following Commissioners were present: _____________________________
and the following Commissioners were absent: ________________________________
MOTION: Commissioner _________________________ moved to adopt Resolution
No. __________, entitled “Resolution Approving the Issuance of Revenue
Obligations by the City of Bertha, Minnesota, to Finance a Project by Tri-County
Hospital, d/b/a Tri-County Health Care”
SECOND: Commissioner _______________
RESULT: On a roll call vote the motion was carried.
Ayes:
Nays:
Not Voting:
Absent:
M:\DOCS\20319\000001\ROL\183758502.DOCX
XX.XX.2016
POMME DE TERRE RIVER
Comprehensive Management Plan
Big Stone, Grant, East Otter Tail, Stevens, Swift, and Wilkins Counties and
Soil Water Conservation Districts and the Pomme de Terre River Association
This Comprehensive Local Water Management Plan was funded with a
planning grant from the Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources and
supported with staff time and resources from Big Stone, Grant,
East Otter Tail, Stevens, Swift, and Wilkins Counties and Soil Water
Conservation Districts, and the Pomme de Terre River Association. Emmons & Olivier Resources, Inc.
Cover Image: Pomme de Terre River. Photo Credit: MPCA
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – DRAFT OCTOBER 2019
Page i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF FIGURES III
LIST OF TABLES III
LIST OF APPENDICES IV
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS V
ACRONYMS VI
GLOSSARY VII
1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1
2 PRIORITIZATION OF ISSUES AND RESOURCES 11
PRIORITIZING ISSUES 13
PRIORITIZING AREAS FOR IMPLEMENTATION 13
IDENTIFYING MEASURABLE GOALS 15
SUMMARY 15
3 ISSUES, GOALS AND IMPLEMENTATION ACTIVITIES 18
GROUNDWATER 19
3.1.1 Drinking Water Protection 19
3.1.2 Groundwater Conservation 20
HYDROLOGY 22
3.2.1 Altered Hydrology 22
LAKES, WETLANDS, AND SHALLOW BASINS 24
3.3.1 Poor Quality Lakes 24
3.3.2 High Quality Lakes 27
3.3.3 Protect and Restore Perennial Cover and Shallow Basins 30
RIVER & STREAMS 31
3.4.1 Excess pollutants 31
3.4.2 Loss of In-Stream Habitat 33
ECOSYSTEM HEALTH 35
3.5.1 Aquatic Invasive Species Management 35
SOCIOECONOMIC FACTORS 36
3.6.1 Watershed Outreach 36
3.6.2 Lakeshore Owner Education 38
4 TARGETED IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE 40
TARGETED IMPLEMENTATION PLAN STRUCTURE 40
PRIORITIZATION OF PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS 49
4.2.1 Identification of Roles and Responsibilities towards Implementation 50
ACCOUNTING FOR LOCAL FUNDS 51
5 EXISTING IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAMS 53
INCENTIVE PROGRAMS 53
5.1.1 Cost-Share Programs 53
5.1.2 Low-Interest Loans 53
5.1.3 Regulatory Assistance Programs 54
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – DRAFT OCTOBER 2019
Page ii
5.1.4 Conservation Easements 54
5.1.5 Land Acquisition 54
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS 57
5.2.1 Drainage 57
5.2.2 Permanent Protection 59
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE 61
REGULATION AND ENFORCEMENT 61
5.4.1 County Regulation 62
5.4.2 Regulatory & Enforcement Programs 64
5.4.3 Comprehensive Land Use Plans 65
INFORMATION, OUTREACH, AND EDUCATION PROGRAMS 65
DATA COLLECTION AND MONITORING 66
5.6.1 County and Soil and Water Conservation District (SWCD) Monitoring Data 67
5.6.2 Federal, State, and Private Organizations 69
5.6.3 Monitoring Sites 74
5.6.4 Assessment of Plan Progress 76
5.6.5 Data Collection, Analysis and Sharing Locally Collected Data 77
PROGRAMMATIC GAPS 78
6 PLAN ADMINISTRATION AND COORDINATION 79
ORGANIZATION STRUCTURE OR FORMAL AGREEMENTS 79
DECISION-MAKING AND STAFFING 79
6.2.1 Joint Powers Board 80
6.2.2 Technical Advisory Committee 80
6.2.3 Share Services / Fiscal / Administrative Agent 80
COLLABORATION WITH OTHER UNITS OF GOVERNMENT 81
6.3.1 Collaboration with Non-Governmental Organizations 81
FUNDING 82
6.4.1 Local Funding 82
6.4.2 State Funding 82
6.4.3 Federal Funding 82
6.4.4 Collaborative Grants 83
6.4.5 Other Funding Sources 83
WORK PLANNING 84
6.5.1 Project Selection within Targeted Implementation Areas 84
6.5.2 Funding Request 85
ASSESSMENT, EVALUATION AND REPORTING 85
6.6.1 Annual Evaluation 86
6.6.2 Partnership Assessment 86
6.6.3 Five Year Evaluation 86
6.6.4 Reporting 87
PLAN AMENDMENT PROCESS 87
6.7.1 Plan Amendment Process 87
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – DRAFT OCTOBER 2019
Page iii
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1-1. Pomme de Terre River Planning Area and Priority Areas ........................................................................ 2
Figure 2-1. Schematic of the Comprehensive Watershed Management Planning Process ...................................... 11
Figure 2-2. Best management practice targeting illustration to achieve measurable reductions in water quality ... 12
Figure 2-3. Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan Priority Areas (Northern Region)
................................................................................................................................................................... 16
Figure 2-4. Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan Priority Areas (Southern Region)
................................................................................................................................................................... 17
Figure 5-1. All streams in the Pomme de Terre Watershed with Monitoring Data .................................................. 74
Figure 5-2. All lakes in the Pomme de Terre Watershed with monitoring data ....................................................... 75
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1-1. Anticipated roles for plan implementation to be incorporated into governance structure. .................... 10 Table 2-1. Comprehensive Watershed Priority Model feature description and resources ...................................... 14
Table 3-1. Pace-of-Progress Measures for Drinking Water Protection ................................................................... 20
Table 3-2. Pace-of-Progress Measures for Groundwater Conservation .................................................................. 21
Table 3-3. Pace-of-Progress Measures for Altered Hydrology ................................................................................ 23
Table 3-4. Observed Water Quality Conditions for Poor Quality Lakes (2017 MPCA Assessment) .......................... 24 Table 3-5. Existing Phosphorus Loads and Load Reduction Goals for Poor Quality Lakes ........................................ 25
Table 3-6. Poor Quality Lake Projected Implementation and Estimated Load Reduction ........................................ 26
Table 3-7. Observed Water Quality Conditions for High Quality Lakes (2017 MPCA Assessment) ........................... 27
Table 3-8. Existing Phosphorus Loads and Load Reduction Goals for High Quality Lakes ........................................ 28
Table 3-9. High Quality Lake Phosphorus Load Reductions by Activity, lb/yr .......................................................... 29 Table 3-10. Existing Sediment Loads and Load Reduction Goals for Drywood Creek and the Pomme de Terre River
Corridor ...................................................................................................................................................... 32
Table 3-11. Existing Phosphorus Loads and Load Reduction Goals for Drywood Creek and the Pomme de Terre
River Corridor .............................................................................................................................................. 32
Table 3-12. Drywood Creek Sediment and Phosphorus Load Reductions by Activity .............................................. 33
Table 4-1. Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan Budget Summary Table (2021-
2030) .......................................................................................................................................................... 41
Table 4-2. Groundwater Issues & Goals Targeted Implementation Schedule (2021-2030) ..................................... 41
Table 4-3. Altered Hydrology Issues & Goals Targeted Implementation Schedule (2021-2030) .............................. 42
Table 4-4. Lakes, Wetlands, and Shallow Basins Issues & Goals Targeted Implementation Schedule (2021-2030) .. 44
Table 4-5. Rivers and Streams Issues & Goals Targeted Implementation Schedule (2021-2030) ............................. 45
Table 4-6. Ecosystem Health Issues & Goals Targeted Implementation Schedule (2021-2030) ............................... 47
Table 4-7. Socioeconomic Factors Issues & Goals Targeted Implementation Schedule (2021-2030) ....................... 47
Table 4-8. Estimated Water Management Activity Funds Allocated in the Pomme de Terre watershed in 2017 ..... 52
Table 5-1. Existing Incentive Programs .................................................................................................................. 55
Table 5-2. Summary of Public Drainage System..................................................................................................... 58
Table 5-3. Summary of Permanent Protections ..................................................................................................... 60
Table 5-4. Existing Operations & Maintenance Programs ...................................................................................... 61
Table 5-5. Existing Regulatory and Enforcement Programs .................................................................................... 64 Table 5-6. Existing Public Participation and Engagement Programs ....................................................................... 65
Table 5-7. Existing Data Collection & Monitoring Programs ................................................................................... 66
Table 5-8. Lakes historically (prior to 2007) monitored by Stevens County ............................................................ 67
Table 5-9. Stream sites historically monitored by Stevens County ......................................................................... 67
Table 5-10. Stream sites historically monitored by Stevens County ....................................................................... 67 Table 5-11. Lakes historically monitored by the Grant County SWCD .................................................................... 67
Table 5-12. Stream sites historically monitored by the Grant County SWCD .......................................................... 67
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – DRAFT OCTOBER 2019
Page iv
Table 5-13. Stream sites historically monitored by the Grant County SWCD .......................................................... 67
Table 5-14. Stream sites historically monitored by Swift County ........................................................................... 68
Table 5-15. Stream sites historically monitored by Swift County ........................................................................... 68
Table 5-16. Lakes monitored for Pomme de Terre SWAG ...................................................................................... 69
Table 5-17. Stream sites monitored for the Pomme de Terre SWAG ..................................................................... 69
Table 5-18. Lakes monitored for the Lake Monitoring Program ............................................................................. 70
Table 5-19. Lakes monitored for the Lake Monitoring Program ............................................................................. 70
Table 5-20. Lakes monitored for the MPCA Citizen Lake Monitoring Program ....................................................... 71 Table 5-21. Stream sites monitored for the MPCA Citizen Stream Monitoring Program ......................................... 71
Table 5-22. Stream sites monitored for the MPCA Major Watershed Pollutant Load Monitoring Network ............. 71
Table 5-23. Lakes monitored for the MN DNR Shallow Lakes Program .................................................................. 72
Table 5-24. Lakes monitored for the MN DNR Shallow Lakes Program .................................................................. 72
Table 5-25. Stream site monitored for the MDA Surface Water Pesticide Water Quality Monitoring Program ....... 72
Table 5-26. Lakes monitored for the U.S. EPA National Lakes Assessment ............................................................. 73
Table 5-27. Existing monitoring data available to evaluate progress toward the Plan goals.................................... 77
Table 6-1. Targeting Tools by Project Type ............................................................................................................ 84
Table 6-2. Measuring Tools by Project Type .......................................................................................................... 85
Table 6-3. MPCA WRAPS Cycle II Schedule for the Pomme de Terre River Watershed ........................................... 86
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix A – Land and Water Resource Inventory
Appendix B – Documents Reviewed and Public Engagement
Appendix C – Zonation Tool Supporting Information
Appendix D – Pomme de Terre River Association Joint Powers Agreement
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – DRAFT OCTOBER 2019
Page v
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan was developed with the participation of numerous people. Partnering Counties, Soil and Water Conservation Districts (SWCD), and the Pomme de Terre River Association wish to acknowledge the following groups and individuals for their involvement in the planning process. Without their hard work and dedication, this Plan would not have been possible.
County Board of Commissioners Planning Committee
Big Stone County Board of Commissioners Adam Maleski, Big Stone SWCD
Beau Peterson, Big Stone SWCD
Darren Wilke, Big Stone County
Environmental Services
Danny Tuckett, Big Stone County
Environmental Services
Danica Mazurek, Douglas SWCD
Danielle Anderson, Douglas SWCD
Andy Rice, Douglas SWCD
Joe Montonye, Grant SWCD
Greg Lillemon, Grant County Land
Management
Brad Mergens, West Otter Tail SWCD
Ben Underhill, West Otter Tail SWCD
Bill Kalar, Otter Tail County Land &
Resource Management
Kyle Westergard, Otter Tail County Land
& Resource Management Matt Solemsaas, Stevens SWCD
Bill Kleindl, Stevens County
Environmental Services
Andy Albertsen, Swift SWCD
Pete Waller, BWSR
Brad Wozney, BWSR
Emily Siira, MN DNR
Ryan Bjerke, MN DNR
Annette Drewes, MN DNR
Paul Wymar, MPCA
Amanda Strommer, MDH
Grant County Board of Commissioners
Otter Tail County Board of Commissioners
Stevens County Board of Commissioners
Swift County Board of Commissioners
Douglas County Board of Commissioners
Soil and Water Conservation District Board of Supervisors
Big Stone SWCD Board of Supervisors
Grant SWCD Board of Supervisors
West Otter Tail SWCD Board of Supervisors
Stevens SWCD Board of Supervisors
Swift SWCD Board of Supervisors
Douglas SWCD Board of Supervisors
Pomme de Terre River Association / Policy Committee
Paul Barsness Clint Schuerman
Keith Englund Keith Swanson
Jeanne Ennen Rod Wenstrom
Joe Fox Dale Schlieman
Paul Groneberg Dan Morill
John Lindquist Jay Backer
Dave Lonegran Tim Kalina
Citizen Advisory Committee
Dennis Mosher Dan Gahlon
Tom Amundson Ed Brands
Rob Westby Blaine Hill
Loreli Westby Doug Wulf
Pat Prunty Jason Kirwin
Mark Starner Dale Ennen
Ruth Hubbard Byron Giese
Richard Mickelson Brian Wojtalewicz
Gary Nelson Tim Koosman
John Etnier Randy Hanson
Helen Etnier
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – DRAFT OCTOBER 2019
Page vi
ACRONYMS
BMP Best Management Practice
BWSR Board of Water and Soil Resources
CWMP Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan
DWSMA Drinking Water Supply Management Area
E. coli Escherichia coli
EPA Environmental Protection Agency
FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency
FY Fiscal year
GIS Geographic Information Systems
HSPF Hydrological Simulation Program - Fortran
HUC Hydrological Unit Code
IBI Indices of Biological Integrity
IWM Intensive Watershed Monitoring
JPA Joint Powers Agreement
LGU Local Unit of Government
LWRI Land and Water Resource Inventory
MDA Minnesota Department of Agriculture
MDH Minnesota Department of Health
MGS Minnesota Geologic Survey
M-IBI Macroinvertebrate-Based Index of Biological Integrity
MNDNR Minnesota Department of Natural Resources
MNDOT Minnesota Department of Transportation
MPCA Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
NRBG Natural Resources Block Grant
NRCS Natural Resources Conservation Service
NWI National Wetland Inventory
NWIS National Water Information System
PTMApp Prioritize, Target and Measure Application
SWCD Soil and Water Conservation District
TMDLs Total Maximum Daily Loads
TP Total Phosphorus
TSS Total Suspended Solids
U of M University of Minnesota
USDA United States Department of Agriculture
USFWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
USGS United States Geologic Survey
WCA Wetland Conservation Act
WRAPS Watershed Restoration and Protection Strategy
1W1P One Watershed, One Plan
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – DRAFT OCTOBER 2019
Page vii
GLOSSARY
Aquifer – A body of permeable rock that can contain or transmit groundwater.
Baseflow – Sustained flow of a stream in the absence of direct runoff. It includes natural and human-induced streamflow.
Natural base flow is sustained largely by groundwater discharges.
Benefitted Properties – The impact a drainage system has on land in terms of improving the market value of the land or the
impact (and costs associated with that impact) that the land has on the drainage system because of land use that accelerates
drainage, transports sediment or increases volume demand in a drainage system.
Best Management Practice (BMP) – One of many different structural and nonstructural practices and methods that can be
used in both agricultural and urban settings that decrease runoff, erosion, and pollutants and improve water quality, soil health,
and land use activities.
Calcareous Fen – A rare and distinctive wetland characterized by a substrate of non-acidic peat and dependent on a constant
supply of cold, oxygen-poor groundwater rich in calcium and magnesium bicarbonates.
Chlorophyll-a – A green pigment, present in all green plants and in cyanobacteria, responsible for the absorption of light to provide energy for photosynthesis. Typically used to measure the amount of algae present in water.
Climate Change – A long-term change in climate measures such as temperature and rainfall. Changes in climate have a large impact on water quality as well as lake and wetland water levels and stream and river flows.
Community Public Water Supply Wells – A well that serves more than 25 people or has more than 15 piped connections providing water to the public in their primary living space (where people live and sleep; homes, apartments, nursing homes, prisons, etc.)
Contaminants – Substances that, when accidentally or deliberately introduced into the environment, may have the potential to harm living organisms, including people, wildlife and plants.
Dissolved Oxygen – The level of free, non-compound oxygen present in water or other liquids. It is an important parameter in assessing water quality because of its influence on the organisms living within a body of water.
Drainage Authority – A board or joint county drainage authority having jurisdiction over a drainage system or project. (Minn. Stat. § 103E.005, Subd. 9). Pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 103D.625, the managers of a watershed district established pursuant to Minn. Stat. 103D shall take over a joint county or county drainage system within the watershed district and the right to
maintain and repair the drainage system if directed by a joint county drainage authority or a county board.
Drainage System – A system of ditch or tile, or both, to drain property, including laterals, improvements, and improvements of outlets, established and constructed by a drainage authority. "Drainage system" includes the improvement of a natural
waterway used in the construction of a drainage system and any part of a flood control plan proposed by the United States or its agencies in the drainage system. (Minn. Stat. § 103E.005, Subd. 12.).
Drinking Water Supply Management Area – The surface and subsurface area surrounding a public water supply well, including
the wellhead protection area, that must be managed by the entity identified in a wellhead protection plan. This area is
delineated using identifiable landmarks that reflect the scientifically calculated wellhead protection area boundaries as closely
as possible.
Drinking Water Supply Management Area Vulnerability – An assessment of the likelihood that the aquifer within the DWSMA
is subject to impact from overlying land and water uses. It is based upon criteria that are specified under Minnesota Rules, part
4720.5210, subpart 3.
Escherichia coli (abbreviated as E. coli) – A fecal coliform bacteria that comes from human and animal waste. The
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) uses E. coli measurements to determine whether fresh water is safe for recreation.
eLINK – Web-based grant tracking system hosted by the Board of Water and Soil Resources.
Flooding – A general and temporary condition where two or more acres of normally dry land or two or more properties are
inundated by water or mudflow (Federal Emergency Management Agency, 2016).
Groundwater – Water located below ground in the spaces present in soil and bedrock.
Groundwater Dependent Natural Resources – Natural resources, especially fens, wetlands, lakes, and streams, whose
characteristics would change significantly if they were deprived of groundwater.
Groundwater Recharge – The process of water infiltrating through the ground surface to become groundwater.
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – DRAFT OCTOBER 2019
Page viii
Hydrology – The movement of water. Often used in reference to water movement as runoff over the soil after a rainfall event
as it contributes to surface water bodies.
Hydrologic & Hydraulic Model – A continuous simulation computer model that predicts natural (hydrologic) and artificial
(hydraulic) flow paths, volumes, and rates in a defined area of land.
Impervious Surfaces – Surfaces that severely restrict the movement of water through the surface of the earth and into the soil
below. Impervious surface typically refers to man-made surfaces such as non-porous asphalt or concrete roadways, buildings,
and heavily compacted soils.
Index of Biotic Integrity (IBI) – A biological assessment tool that provides a framework for translating biological community
data into information regarding ecological integrity (“the capability of supporting and maintaining a balanced, integrated,
functional organization comparable to that of the natural habitat of the region”, Frey 1977). It utilizes a variety of attributes
(“metrics”) of the biological community, each of which responds in a predictable way to anthropogenic disturbance. The
metrics are based on ecological traits of the organisms present at a given site, represent different aspects of ecological
structure and function, and are scored numerically to quantify the deviation of the site from least-disturbed conditions. When
the individual metric scores are summed together, the composite IBI score characterizes biological integrity (Karr et al 1986).
Infiltration – Penetration of water through the ground surface.
Invasive Species – Organisms not endemic to a geographic location. They often displace native species and have the potential
to cause environmental change.
Lakeshed – The area of land for which surface runoff drains to the same downstream lake.
Macroinvertebrate – Organisms without backbones, which are visible to the naked eye without the aid of a microscope.
Aquatic macroinvertebrates live on, under, and around rocks and sediment on the bottom of lakes, rivers and streams.
Natural Environment Lake – The strictest of three lake classifications found in Minnesota’s Shoreland Management Program.
Natural Environment Lakes usually have less than 150 total acres, less than 60 acres per mile of shoreline, and less than three
dwellings per mile of shoreline. They may have some winter kill of fish; may have shallow, swampy shoreline; and are less than
15 feet deep. Classification used to determine lot size, setbacks and, to a certain degree, land uses on the adjacent land.
Natural Shoreline – A shoreline with native, deep-rooted vegetation that stabilize erosion, provide wildlife habitat, and filter
pollutants from overland runoff.
Nitrate – A negatively charged compound (NO3-) that is water soluble, available for plant uptake, and a product of both organic
matter and synthetic fertilizer.
Nonstructural Practices – Annual management practices that directly reduce the amount of pollutants and runoff generated
from agricultural fields including cover crops, conservation tillage, and soil health practices.
Nutrients – A group of chemicals that are needed for the growth of an organism. Within surface water systems, nutrients such as phosphorus and nitrogen can lead to the excessive growth of algae.
Nutrient Reduction Strategy – A statewide assessment of nutrient sources and the magnitude of nutrient reductions needed to meet in-state and downstream water quality goals.
Other Waters – Perennial, seasonal streams or drainage ditches excluding watercourses depicted on the DNR Protection map.
Peak flows – Term typically used to define the characteristic high flow period of a stream or river.
Perennial Crops – Crops which are alive year-round and are harvested multiple times before dying (e.g. alfalfa). Conversion of annual fields into perennial fields (perennial cropland) offers many benefits including reduced soil erosion, reduced pollutant loads and reduced irrigation demand.
Pollutant – A substance that makes land, water, air, etc., dirty and not safe or suitable to use.
Pollution Sensitivity – The level of risk of groundwater degradation through the migration of waterborne contaminants.
Prioritization – Determining the relative importance and precedence of the resources and issues identified in the plan. This includes determining what items should be tackled in the first 10-years of the Plan.
Priority Areas – Areas that have been identified by planning partners to focus implementation efforts for restoration or
protection. These areas are where planning partners will measure progress towards goals.
Protection – Strategies that protect high quality and threatened resources that are essential to preventing further degradation
and future impairment of Minnesota’s waters.
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – DRAFT OCTOBER 2019
Page ix
Protection Area – Higher quality areas where preventive measures will be implemented to maintain quality
Public Drainage Systems – A system of ditch or tile, or both, to drain property, including laterals, improvements, and
improvements of outlets, established and constructed by a drainage authority. "Drainage system" includes the improvement of
a natural waterway used in the construction of a drainage system and any part of a flood control plan proposed by the United
States or its agencies in the drainage system. (Minn. Stat. § 103E.005, Subd. 12.).
Public Water Suppliers – Entities that provide water for human consumption through pipes or other constructed conveyances
to at least 15 service connections or serves an average of at least 25 people for at least 60 days a year.
Radionuclides – Radioactive atoms.
Restoration – Strategies that seek to restore or improve the quality of a resource which is currently impaired, threatened,
and/or degraded.
Restoration Area – Low quality areas where improvement activities will be implemented to improve quality.
Riparian – A vegetated ecosystem alongside a waterbody; characteristically have a high water table and are subject to periodic
flooding.
Runoff – Water from rain, snow melt, or irrigation that flows over the land surface.
Secchi Depth – Used as a lake monitoring tool. The depth at which an opaque disk, called a Secchi Disk is used to gauge the
transparency, and ceases to be visible from the water’s surface.
Source Reduction Practices – Best management practices that provide treatment by reducing the amount of water quality
constituents, for example, land conversion to perennial vegetation, no-till, cover crops, and nutrient management.
Stakeholder – an individual or group with an interest or concern in watershed management
Stormwater Best Management Practices (BMPs)/Infrastructure – Methods used to control the speed and total amount of
stormwater that flows off a site after a rainstorm and used to improve the quality of the runoff water.
Stream Channel – A natural waterway, formed by fluvial processes, that conveys running water.
Stream Connectivity – The term used to define the longitudinal connection a stream has along its length and the lateral
connection a stream has with its floodplain and adjacent uplands.
Structural Practices – Long duration constructed practices to treat pollutants and runoff. Common structural practices include water and sediment control basins, alternative tile intakes, rain gardens, cattle exclusions, waste pit closures, grade
stabilization, terraces, grassed waterways, wetland restorations, buffer strips, and perennial vegetation.
Subwatershed – A smaller geographic section of a larger watershed unit with a typical drainage area between 2 and 15 square miles and whose boundaries include all the land area draining to a specified point.
Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) – The total amount of a pollutant or nutrient that a water body can receive and still meet state water quality standards. TMDL also refers to the process of allocating pollutant loadings among point and nonpoint sources.
Total Phosphorus – A measure of the amount of all phosphorus found in a water column, including particulate, dissolved, organic and inorganic forms.
Total Suspended Solids (TSS) – A measure of the amount of particulate material in suspension in a water column.
Turbidity – The cloudiness of the water that is caused by large numbers of individual particles that are generally invisible to the naked eye.
Watershed – An area of land that flows to the same water resource of concern
Watershed Issue - A factor or stressor that results in an adverse impact to a watershed resource of concern.
Water Quality – Water quality is a term used to describe the chemical, physical, and biological characteristics of water, usually in respect to its suitability for a particular use. In the case of surface waters, uses are typically swimming and fishing. In the case of groundwater, uses are typically drinking and irrigation.
Wellhead Protection Plan – A plan developed to prevent contaminants from entering an aquifer where a public water supplier draws drinking water.
Zonation – A model that uses geographic information and user input weighting to identify locations on the landscape that have
varying degrees of environmental sensitivity or management priority.
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – DRAFT OCTOBER 2019
Section 1: Excutive Summary Page 1
1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
“The mission of the Pomme de Terre River Association is to protect and improve the surface and
ground water resources of the Pomme de Terre River Watershed by addressing water quality and
quantity issues while also promoting healthy and sustainable agriculture, industrial, and recreational
based economy for the region.” The Pomme de Terre River Association (PDTRA) is a functioning watershed-based entity that provides the ability for both Joint Powers Board members and landowners to address issues on a watershed scale. Founded in 1981, the PDTRA created a partnership between: - Big Stone County - Big Stone County Soil & Water Conservation District - Douglas County - Douglas County Soil & Water Conservation District - Grant County - Grant County Soil & Water Conservation District - Otter Tail County - West Otter Tail County Soil & Water Conservation District - Stevens County - Stevens County Soil & Water Conservation District - Swift County - Swift County Soil & Water Conservation District The Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan has been developed to meet the requirements of the One Watershed, One Plan (1W1P) program which is described under Minnesota Statute §103B.801. This program supports partnerships of local governments in developing prioritized, targeted, and measurable implementation plans at the major watershed scale. Moving forward with the Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan and implementation, the PDTRA will be the primary entity for plan execution and fiscal responsibilities. The Pomme de Terre River watershed is located in west central Minnesota. The two largest cities in the watershed are Morris and Appleton. The watershed covers approximately 874 square miles (559,968 acres) of which 74% of the land is used for cropland and pasture. The watershed drains through the Pomme de Terre River, before discharging into the Minnesota River below Marsh Lake. At its headwaters in Ottertail County, the watershed is dominated by lakes and Hardwood Forests. As the Pomme de Terre River flows south, the landscape transitions to mostly cropland. Within the Minnesota River basin, the Pomme de Terre watershed has some of the best water quality. However, there is still need for improvement as many stream segments and lakes are impaired for aquatic life, recreation and consumption. The Land and Water Resources Inventory (Appendix A) describes important watershed characteristics that set the context for the other plan elements. The Pomme de Terre River Watershed is illustrated in Figure 1-1.
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – DRAFT OCTOBER 2019
Section 1: Excutive Summary Page 2
Figure 1-1. Pomme de Terre River Planning Area and Priority Areas
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – DRAFT OCTOBER 2019
Section 1: Excutive Summary Page 3
The Plan identifies five priority areas where the majority of the work will be completed in the next 10 years (see Section 2.4 Prioritizing Issues and Resources). These priority areas were identified using local values; high-level priorities identified in the state’s Nonpoint Priority Funding plan; various modeling tools (e.g. Zonation conservation model and watershed pollutant loading model results) and current impairment results. The five priority areas include (from north to south):
− Northern Lakes Area
− Christina/Pelican Lakes Area
− Pomme de Terre River Lakes Chain Area
− Pomme de Terre River Corridor
− Drywood Creek Area In addition, the Plan identifies 11 priority issues that address:
− Drinking Water Protection − Excess Pollutants
− Groundwater Conservation − Loss of In-Stream Habitat
− Altered Hydrology − Aquatic Invasive Species
− Poor Quality Lakes − Watershed Outreach
− High Quality Lakes − Lakeshore Owner Education
− Protect and Restore Perennial Cover and
Shallow Basins
Some priority issues are unique to a priority area and others are an issue for the entire watershed. The Plan identified 20 measurable goals, which were developed to address the priority issues in the 10-year timeframe of the plan. Specific and targeted implementation activities were identified that are needed to achieve plan goals. Summaries of priority issues, goals and implementation activities by priority area are provided on the following pages.
Pomme de Terre Reservoir - Morris
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – DRAFT OCTOBER 2019
Section 1: Excutive Summary Page 4
Watershed Wide (All Counties)
Priority Goal Implementation Activities Status
Drinking Water Protection
Section 3.1.1
Provide educational resources to private well owners about water testing programs and available treatment
options for nitrate and arsenic
Host annual well water nitrate/arsenic testing clinic and coordinate to make testing kits available to the public
Drinking Water
Protection Section 3.1.1
Reduce the number of conduits to the
groundwater system (e.g. abandoned
wells) to protect groundwater quality by sealing abandoned wells
Provide cost-share assistance to well owners for sealing of
unused wells.
Groundwater
Conservation
Section 3.1.2
Assist agricultural producers with groundwater conservation by
promoting water conservation
measures that improve water use efficiencies
Promote and encourage the adoption of irrigation management BMPs
Request County Geologic Atlas
Identify recharge areas from Atlas
Continue ongoing observation well monitoring
Altered
Hydrology
Section 3.2.1
Reduce annual runoff by 0.08 inch of
runoff (or 3,527 acre-feet) at the outlet
of the Pomme de Terre River watershed
Increase perennial vegetation
Restore wetlands
Implement structural agricultural BMPs
Implement nonstructural BMPs
Altered
Hydrology Section 3.2.1
No increase in runoff from public water
basins during peak run-off periods
Identify non-contributing areas
Pursue management plans for existing and controlled outlets on
public water basins
Aquatic
Invasive Species Section 3.5.1
Work towards preventing spread of AIS
by improving coordination of County programs across the planning area
Annual workshops to coordinate County AIS plans and implementation
Attend DNR District-led meetings
Continue implementing education programs
Work with local law enforcement agencies on inspections
Watershed Outreach Section 3.6.1
Facilitate strategic networking, learning,
and participation of targeted groups to assess, build, and leverage community capacity
Establish and facilitate Networking/Advisory Groups for targeted groups
Establish soil health teams for Northern and Southern Regions
with 2 meetings per year
Regional tours on prioritized portions of the watershed to
facilitate partnerships, highlight improvements, and discuss areas
Watershed Outreach Section 3.6.1
Increase adoption of BMPs by
increasing engagement and communication with residents, local landowners and agricultural producers
BMP-focused demonstrations/workshops
Soil health field days
Continue the work being initiated by the WRAPS Cycle II by
identifying a target audience for BMP adoption through follow-up interview on changes made over time
Watershed Outreach Section 3.6.1
Provide information about how land-use decisions impact the watershed and its resources to locally elected and appointed decision-makers
Conduct a 5-year watershed tour to re-evaluate progress,
reconnect with partners, and create new partnerships
Host conversation/meeting on the state of local water quality and
watershed management to all types of local and state/federal officials
Create and host consistent orientation to all types of newly
elected local officials
Watershed Outreach Section 3.6.1
Encourage soil and water stewardship and awareness across all generations
Coordinate with UMN Extension to Host Aqua Chautauqua within
watershed
Conduct annual Kayak Tour on the Pomme de Terre River and provide education about streamside ecology
Continue K-12 curriculum about watershed management
Create a StoryMap to highlight 1W1P plan priority areas and existing conservation practices/programs
Create a list serve to share information about the watershed on a routine basis
Status Key:
- No Change
- Improving Progress
- Slowed or Declining Progress
- Activity Completed
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – DRAFT OCTOBER 2019
Section 1: Excutive Summary Page 5
Northern Lakes Area (Otter Tail County)
Priority Goal Implementation Activities Status
Poor Quality
Lakes
Section 3.3.1
Achieve a phosphorus reduction in
direct drainage runoff of 57 lb/yr to
North Turtle Lake (based on project feasibility)
Series of meetings to identify in-lake management and engage
affected landowners
Inspect subsurface sewage treatment systems
Update noncompliant septic systems
Conduct shoreline condition inventories
Implement shoreline restoration projects for erosion control
Implement structural agricultural BMPs
Implement nonstructural BMPs
High Quality Lakes Section 3.3.2
Achieve a phosphorus reduction in
direct drainage runoff of 25 lb/yr to South Turtle Lake, 135 lb/yr to Stalker Lake, and 126 lb/yr to Clear Lake (based
on project feasibility)
Inspect subsurface sewage treatment systems
Update noncompliant septic systems
Conduct shoreline condition inventories
Implement shoreline restoration projects for erosion control
Implement structural agricultural BMPs
Implement nonstructural BMPs
Lakeshore
Owner Education Section 3.6.2
Increase shoreland owner
understanding of why there are
shoreland regulations and how to be better stewards of the watershed’s lakes shoreline
Provide annual lakeshore management education and outreach to lakeshore owners
Distribute education materials to existing lakeshore owners in tax mailing
Distribute educational materials to new lakeshore owners at
property transfer
Status Key:
- No Change
- Improving Progress
- Slowed or Declining Progress
- Activity Completed
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – DRAFT OCTOBER 2019
Section 1: Excutive Summary Page 6
Christina-Pelican Lakes Area (Otter Tail, Grant, & Douglas County)
Priority Goal Implementation Activities Status
Poor Quality
Lakes
Section 3.3.1
Achieve a phosphorus reduction in
direct drainage runoff of 59 lb/yr to Lake Christina (based on project feasibility)
Series of meetings to identify in-lake management and engage
affected landowners
Inspect subsurface sewage treatment systems
Update noncompliant septic systems
Conduct shoreline condition inventories
Implement shoreline restoration projects for erosion control
Implement structural agricultural BMPs
Implement nonstructural BMPs
High Quality Lakes
Section 3.3.2
Achieve a phosphorus reduction in direct drainage runoff of 14 lb/yr to Eagle Lake, 95 lb/yr to Spitzer Lake, and
29 lb/yr to Pelican Lake (based on
project feasibility)
Inspect subsurface sewage treatment systems
Update noncompliant septic systems
Conduct shoreline condition inventories
Implement shoreline restoration projects for erosion control
Implement structural agricultural BMPs
Implement nonstructural BMPs
Lakeshore Owner Education
Section 3.6.2
Increase shoreland owner understanding of why there are shoreland regulations and how to be better stewards of the watershed’s lakes
shoreline
Provide annual lakeshore management education and outreach to lakeshore owners
Distribute education materials to existing lakeshore owners in tax mailing
Distribute educational materials to new lakeshore owners at property transfer
Protect and Restore
Perennial
Cover and Shallow Basins Section 3.3.3
Protect existing water quality of shallow basins by maintaining wetland and
grassland currently enrolled in
conservation programs and increasing
the amount of perennial vegetation and wetland storage in the watershed
Implement perennial vegetation and protect wetlands
Status Key:
- No Change
- Improving Progress
- Slowed or Declining Progress
- Activity Completed
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – DRAFT OCTOBER 2019
Section 1: Excutive Summary Page 7
Pomme de Terre River Lakes Chain (Grant & Stevens County)
Priority Goal Implementation Activities Status
Drinking Water
Protection
Section 3.1.1
Protect public drinking water supplies with moderate and high vulnerability
(Barrett)
Convert cropland to perennial vegetation
Review wellhead protection plans and serve on wellhead
protection planning teams
Contact landowners about completing BMPs projects
Poor Quality Lakes Section 3.3.1
Achieve a phosphorus reduction in
direct drainage runoff of 275 lb/yr to Perkins Lake, 98 lb/yr to Barrett Lake, and 142 lb/yr to Pomme de Terre Lake
(based on project feasibility)
Series of meetings to identify in-lake management and engage affected landowners
Inspect subsurface sewage treatment systems
Update noncompliant septic systems
Conduct shoreline condition inventories
Implement shoreline restoration projects for erosion control
Implement structural agricultural BMPs
Implement nonstructural BMPs
High Quality Lakes Section 3.3.2
Achieve a phosphorus reduction in direct drainage runoff of 4 lb/yr to Elk
Lake (based on project feasibility)
Inspect subsurface sewage treatment systems
Update noncompliant septic systems
Conduct shoreline condition inventories
Implement shoreline restoration projects for erosion control
Implement structural agricultural BMPs
Implement nonstructural BMPs
Lakeshore Owner Education
Section 3.6.2
Increase shoreland owner understanding of why there are shoreland regulations and how to be
better stewards of the watershed’s lakes
shoreline
Provide annual lakeshore management education and outreach
to lakeshore owners
Distribute education materials to existing lakeshore owners in tax mailing
Distribute educational materials to new lakeshore owners at
property transfer
Status Key:
- No Change
- Improving Progress
- Slowed or Declining Progress
- Activity Completed
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – DRAFT OCTOBER 2019
Section 1: Excutive Summary Page 8
Pomme de Terre River Corridor (Stevens & Swift County)
Priority Goal Implementation Activities Status
Drinking
Water
Protection
Section 3.1.1
Protect public drinking water supplies
with moderate and high vulnerability
(Morris and Appleton)
Convert cropland to perennial vegetation
Review wellhead protection plans and serve on wellhead
protection planning teams
Contact landowners about completing BMPs projects
Excess Pollutants Section 3.4.1
Achieve a phosphorus reduction of 382 lb/yr and a sediment reduction of 2,501 tons/yr in direct runoff to the Pomme
de Terre River
One-on-one conversations with landowners to enroll in cost-
share programs for top-ranked structural and non-structural
practices
Implement structural agricultural BMPs
Implement nonstructural BMPs
Restore drained shallow basins
Implement nutrient management plans
Implement ag. pit closures
Excess Pollutants Section 3.4.1 Reduce stormwater runoff impacts
Implement BMPs associated with urban stormwater runoff (e.g., rain gardens)
Work with cities to develop stormwater management plans in urban areas
Loss of In-Stream
Habitat
Section 3.4.2
Improve in-stream habitat by reducing sedimentation due to stream bank
erosion
Implement BMPs to reduce erosion due to livestock
Implement pasture management and rotational grazing plans
Complete streambank stabilization projects
Implement side water inlets where appropriate
Loss of In-Stream Habitat
Section 3.4.2
Improve riparian habitat by establishing and maintaining perennial buffers and floodplain connections
Implement buffer on “other waters” coming into the main stem of the Pomme de Terre River
Status Key:
- No Change
- Improving Progress
- Slowed or Declining Progress
- Activity Completed
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – DRAFT OCTOBER 2019
Section 1: Excutive Summary Page 9
Drywood Creek Area (Stevens, Swift, & Big Stone County)
Priority Goal Implementation Activities Status
Poor Quality
Lakes Section 3.3.1
Achieve a phosphorus reduction in
direct drainage runoff of 99 lb/yr to Artichoke Lake (based on project feasibility)
Series of meetings to identify in-lake management and engage
affected landowners
Inspect subsurface sewage treatment systems
Update noncompliant septic systems
Conduct shoreline condition inventories
Implement shoreline restoration projects for erosion control
Implement structural agricultural BMPs
Implement nonstructural BMPs
Excess Pollutants Section 3.4.1
Achieve a phosphorus reduction of 209 lb/yr and a sediment reduction of 1,029 tons/yr in direct runoff to Drywood Creek
One-on-one conversations with landowners to enroll in cost-
share programs for top-ranked structural and non-structural practices
Implement structural agricultural BMPs
Implement nonstructural BMPs
Restore drained shallow basins
Implement nutrient management plans
Implement ag. pit closures
Loss of
In-Stream
Habitat Section 3.4.2
Improve in-stream habitat by reducing
sedimentation due to stream bank
erosion
Implement BMPs to reduce erosion due to livestock
Implement pasture management and rotational grazing plans
Complete streambank stabilization projects
Implement side water inlets where appropriate
Loss of In-Stream
Habitat
Section 3.4.2
Improve riparian habitat by establishing and maintaining perennial buffers and
floodplain connections
Implement buffer on “other waters” coming into the main stem
of the Pomme de Terre River
Status Key:
- No Change
- Improving Progress
- Slowed or Declining Progress
- Activity Completed
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – DRAFT OCTOBER 2019
Section 1: Excutive Summary Page 10
All of the plan elements will be implemented by the Counties and SWCDs under a Joint Powers Agreement (JPA) that describes the structure of the Pomme de Terre River Association Joint Powers Board (PdTRA JPB). The PdTRA JPB is a watershed based entity within the Pomme de Terre River Watershed that provides the ability for both JPA members and land occupiers to address issues on a watershed scale rather than by individual geographical areas of each local unit of government. Table 1-1 identifies the roles of the Pomme de Terre River Association Joint Powers Board and Staff as well as the Technical Advisory Committee in plan implementation. Staff representatives from each of the JPB members will coordinate the implementation of plan activities and collaborate to obtain the grants and funding necessary to implement the plan. The Joint Powers Board and Staff will meet regularly to ensure progress is being made toward achieving the goals of the plan. The Technical Advisory Committee will be called to provide expertise, assist in work plan development and implementation and to assist with performance-tracking.
Table 1-1. Anticipated roles for plan implementation to be incorporated into governance structure.
Entity Primary Implementation Role/Function
Pomme de Terre River Association Joint Powers
Board
- Adopting the Plan
- Implementation of the Plan
- Amending the Plan
- Allocating funding sources
- Approving work plans
- Approving contractual agreements
- Approving fiscal reports and budgets
- Approving reports required by BWSR
- Approve grant applications and accept grant funds
- Approve assessment on plan progress and measurable results
- Establish committees
Pomme de Terre River
Association Staff
- Prepare work plan
- Prepare fiscal reports and budgets
- Prepare reports required by grantors
- Prepare and submit grant applications
- Complete assessment on plan progress and measure results
- Provide general administrative and fiscal functions
Technical Advisory Committee
- Provide expertise and scientific data
- Develop recommendations for Plan Implementation
- Assist with work plan development and implementation
- Identify and coordinate grant opportunities
- Assist with assessment on plan progress and measure results
- Provide recommendations to the PdTRA JPB
Individual County Boards and Soil and Water Conservation Districts
- Approving the Plan prior for submittal to the Board of Soil and Water
Resources
- Local Adoption of the Plan
- Implementation of the Plan
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – DRAFT OCTOBER 2019
Section 2: Prioritization of Issues and Resources Page 11
2 PRIORITIZATION OF ISSUES AND RESOURCES According to the Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources guidance, this part of the planning process of prioritizing issues and resources should result in:
“A prioritized list of issue statements that clearly convey the most pressing problems, risks, and
opportunities facing the watershed, and maps depicting locations of priority resources”.
Figure 2-1. Schematic of the Comprehensive Watershed Management Planning Process
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – DRAFT OCTOBER 2019
Section 2: Prioritization of Issues and Resources Page 12
This section of the Plan describes the process the Planning Partners used to identify the watershed concerns and issues that will be addressed within the 10-year timeframe of this Plan (generally depicted in Figure 2-1). Not every issue can be addressed everywhere in the watershed within the timeframe of the plan, therefore the prioritization process addresses both “what” issues are a priority and “where” on the landscape these issues should be addressed first (Figure 2-2). For example, lake eutrophication may be identified as a priority issue to address in the Pomme de Terre River Watershed, but a smaller subset of impaired lakes will be targeted for implementation practices within the 10-year timeframe of the plan. Priority issues were identified first, and then priority areas were identified within the Pomme de Terre River Watershed to focus implementation efforts that address the priority issues. At the start of the planning process, the Policy, Planning, and Citizen’s Advisory Committee attended an organized Bus Tour of the watershed where members presented watershed concerns, issues and existing conservation practices. Members of the Citizens Advisory Committee and other members of the public were invited to participate in a series of three Water Conversations where smaller work groups discussed issues and concerns related to water resources management, provided feedback on priority areas, and reviewed measurable goals and suggested implementation strategies within the communities they represented.
Figure 2-2. Best management practice targeting illustration to achieve measurable reductions in water quality
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – DRAFT OCTOBER 2019
Section 2: Prioritization of Issues and Resources Page 13
PRIORITIZING ISSUES The process of identifying a comprehensive list of watershed issues and concerns involved significant review and incorporation of existing local and regionally-relevant plans and studies. In total, over 50 documents were compiled and reviewed to inform the Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan planning process (Appendix B), including notification letters from plan review authorities and other stakeholders with priority issues and concerns for consideration in the plan development process. From the comprehensive list of watershed issues and concerns, the Planning Partners identified eleven priority issues that will be addressed with specific goals and implementation activities within the 10-year timeframe of the Plan:
− Drinking Water Protection − Excess Pollutants
− Groundwater Conservation − Loss of In-Stream Habitat
− Altered Hydrology − Aquatic Invasive Species
− Poor Quality Lakes − Watershed Outreach
− High Quality Lakes − Lakeshore Owner Education
− Protect and Restore Perennial Cover and
Shallow Basins
PRIORITIZING AREAS FOR IMPLEMENTATION The comprehensive watershed priority model is a process developed to rank where on the landscape priority issues and concerns need to be addressed within the watershed. The comprehensive watershed priority model uses the output from a variety of modeling and prioritization tools, and other watershed characteristics, represented as a series of maps. These maps highlight commonalities and differences in the spatial distribution of restoration and protection needs across the watershed. A priority area is an area where a number of restoration and protection areas are concentrated. The models and tools used to guide the prioritization process in the Pomme de Terre River Watershed are listed in Table 2-1. In addition, the Planning Partners considered what could reasonably be achieved within the timeframe of the Plan, and secondary benefits to downstream resources. For example, the improvements in the headwaters to the Pomme de Terre River have benefits to resources located downstream, and improvements in the Pomme de Terre River Watershed have benefits to the Minnesota River and the Mississippi River
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – DRAFT OCTOBER 2019
Section 2: Prioritization of Issues and Resource Concerns Page 14
Table 2-1. Comprehensive Watershed Priority Model feature description and resources
Comprehensive Watershed
Priority Model Feature Resource Description
Impaired or fully supporting
lakes and streams
2013 Pomme de Terre River
Watershed Restoration and
Protection Strategies report
Aquatic Life Use and Recreation Use support
maps
Priority Management Zones
2013 Pomme de Terre River
Watershed Restoration and
Protection Strategies report
Priority management zones for Buffers,
Severe Erosion Sites, Shoreline Stabilization,
Stormwater Control and Wetland Restoration
Nearly or barely impaired
lakes
Improving or declining trends
in water quality
2017 Minnesota Pollution
Control Agency Lake Water
Quality Assessment
In-lake phosphorus concentrations near the
water quality standards, and long-term
trends in lake and stream water quality
Conservation Priority Areas 2017 Pomme de Terre River
Zonation Tool
A value-based model for prioritizing areas for
watershed management: Protecting
Groundwater, Reducing Erosion & Runoff,
Protecting/Improving Lakes & Rivers, Lands of
Concern, and Fish & Wildlife Habitat. Detailed
information regarding the Zonation
conservation prioritization software can be
found in Appendix C.
High sediment, phosphorus
or water yields
Pomme de Terre River
Watershed Hydrologic
Simulation Program-Fortran
watershed pollutant loading
model (1995-2009)
Long-term annual average magnitude of
pollutants (as pounds per acre per year) or
water (as inches per acre per year)
discharged by each subwatershed to surface
water resources
Locations of existing BMPs County and Soil Water
Conservation District data
Water and sediment control basins, rain
gardens, alternative tile intakes, etc.
Locations of existing
easements
County and Soil Water
Conservation District data
Wildlife Production Area, Scientific & Natural
Areas, Prairie Bank, Nature Conservancy,
Reinvest In Minnesota, Wildlife Management
Areas, etc. Five key areas were identified through the Comprehensive Watershed Priority Model that have a concentration of restoration and protection priorities (Figure 2-3 and Figure 2-4).
• Northern Lakes Area: Selected for its highly valued lakes and the need to minimize impacts from future lakeshed development. North Turtle Lake, is impaired for nutrients and suffers from intense seasonal algae blooms, while Clear, Stalker, and South Turtle Lakes currently have high quality water and habitat.
• Christina/Pelican Lakes Area: Selected for its highly valued lakes and the need to minimize impacts from future lakeshed development. Eagle and Spitzer Lakes currently have high water quality. Christina Lake is an important lake for waterfowl but is impaired for nutrients and impacts the water quality of downstream Pelican Lake, which is highly valued for recreational opportunities. This area was also selected because of the concern of high
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – DRAFT OCTOBER 2019
Section 2: Prioritization of Issues and Resource Concerns Page 15
lake levels and the need to increase storage on the landscape through the protection and restoration of wetlands and grasslands.
• Pomme de Terre River Lakes Chain Area: Selected for its highly valued lakes for recreational opportunities, and the need to minimize impacts from existing and future land use practices. Pomme de Terre, Barrett, and Perkins lake are impaired for nutrients. This lake chain is located along the Pomme de Terre River mainstem, and therefore have a large impact on downstream river water quality.
• Drywood Creek Area: Contains a number of resources that are impaired for or being impacted by high pollutant loads, such as nutrients, sediment, and bacteria. There are also a number of shallow basins important to migratory bird habitat that are in need of restoration and/or protection.
• Pomme de Terre River Corridor: Encompasses the direct drainage area to the lower Pomme de Terre River which is impaired for turbidity, aquatic life, and bacteria. The lower Pomme de Terre River passes through the City of Morris and flows into the Minnesota River south of Appleton. Sediment runoff, bank de-vegetation, and erosion have resulted in a loss of riparian habitat and floodplain connections along the Pomme de Terre River Corridor. The Planning Partners also identified a number of issues that require action on a watershed-wide scale. For example, altered hydrology impacts occur across the watershed and land use practices need to be implemented across the watershed.
IDENTIFYING MEASURABLE GOALS The measurable goals articulate the level of improvement in each priority resource the Planning Partners would like to achieve by the end of the 10-year timeframe of the Plan. Goals from existing local water plans and other documents were considered for inclusion in the plan as well as the institutional knowledge of staff and key stakeholders in the area. In addition, WRAPS, TMDLs and a suite of modeling tools were used to identify goals and the level of implementation needed to achieve those goals. The Planning Partners formed subcommittees to develop measurable goals and identify implementation activities for a set of related issues.
SUMMARY The priority issues and resources were assigned specific goals and implementation activities to be completed within the 10-year timeframe of the plan, as summarized in Section 3. Within each Priority Area, implementation efforts were further focused within targeted implementation areas to achieve the measurable goals identified for the priority resources over the 10-year timeframe of the plan. Watershed management requires an adaptive management approach, and the relative importance of the resources and issues may change over the 10-year period of the Plan. The Planning Partners will consider these factors during annual work planning, as described in Section 6.4.
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – DRAFT OCTOBER 2019
Section 2: Prioritization of Issues and Resource Concerns Page 16
Figure 2-3. Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan Priority Areas (Northern Region)
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – DRAFT OCTOBER 2019
Section 2: Prioritization of Issues and Resource Concerns Page 17
Figure 2-4. Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan Priority Areas (Southern Region)
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – DRAFT OCTOBER 2019
Section 3: Issues, Goals & Implementation Activities Page 18
3 ISSUES, GOALS AND IMPLEMENTATION ACTIVITIES After issues were defined, the Planning Partners created issue statements to better communicate the idea of each issue. Goals and implementation activities were later developed that aligned with the issue statements. Issues are grouped by Hydrology; Groundwater; Lakes, Wetlands, and Shallow Basins; Rivers; Ecosystem Health; and Socioeconomic Factors. For each issue, the following information is provided:
1. Issue Statement: For each Priority Issue, the Issue Statement includes a more refined description of each sub-issue as it relates to the priority area(s).
2. Priority Area Summary: Identification of the specific implementation area(s) within the broader priority areas for this issue and a brief description of why this area(s) was identified as a priority for the first 10-year timeframe of the Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan.
3. Desired Future Condition (Long-term Goals): Statement describing the desired long-term, future condition of a priority resource, regardless of timeframe.
4. 10-Year Measurable Goals: The quantifiable change expected in a priority resource after implementing the first 10-year plan (2021-2030).
5. Justification for the Goals: Explanation of how the Planning Partners established the 10-year goals for the Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan.
6. Targeted Implementation Activities: Implementation activities that will achieve the measurable goal(s). These are countable projects, activities, services, or products that can be tracked as progress towards achieving the goals. Note that some implementation activities address more than one issue and achieve more than one goal. Costs for these implementation activities are listed only once in the implementation table, but a description of the implementation activity is noted under each issue they address in the written Plan.
7. Pace of Progress: Summary of how the 10-year goal will be achieved by implementing the corresponding Targeted Implementation Activities.
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – DRAFT OCTOBER 2019
Section 3: Issues, Goals & Implementation Activities Page 19
GROUNDWATER Groundwater accounts for the majority of water that is pumped to meet agricultural, industrial, public and private drinking water and natural resource needs. There are three Community Public Water Supply Wells that have high to moderate potential contaminant risk. Some Private drinking water wells contain contaminants such as nitrates. Several groundwater-dependent natural resources including calcareous fens, designated trout streams and other unique and sensitive native plant communities requires an adequate supply of high quality groundwater.
3.1.1 Drinking Water Protection
Issue Statement and Background Of the nine community public water supply wells, three are located in high to moderate Drinking Water Supply Management Area vulnerability settings: Appleton (population 1,412), Barrett (population 415) and Morris (population 5,205). There are also 54 non-community public water suppliers and over 1,300 domestic water supply wells in the Pomme de Terre watershed. These suppliers provide drinking water to people at their places of work, gather or play (schools, offices, campgrounds, churches, etc.). One concern for drinking water in the Pomme de Terre River watershed is high arsenic levels, which occurs naturally in rocks and soil across Minnesota and can dissolve into groundwater. There are a couple of private wells in the northern portion of the Planning Area with nitrate concentrations at or above the Health Risk Level of 10 mg/L (Final Township Testing Nitrate Report: Otter Tail County, 2015-2017). Nitrate levels could become a greater concern for drinking water if land use isn’t
managed properly. In addition, unsealed abandoned wells could contribute to the
contamination of the drinking water supply.
Priority Area Summary Communities with high or moderate vulnerabilities, private well owners in areas of moderate or high pollution sensitivity, and areas with nitrate readings of 3ppm or higher.
Desired Future Condition (Long-Term Goal): Partner with the state to establish/track long-term monitoring of groundwater arsenic and nitrate concentrations. Public and private wells with safe and adequate drinking water.
10-Year Measurable Goals:
Goal 1: Protect public drinking water supplies with moderate and high vulnerability with best management practice technical assistance in Appleton, Morris, and Barrett.
Goal 2: Provide educational resources to private well owners about water testing programs and available treatment options for nitrate and arsenic.
Goal 3: Reduce the number of conduits to the groundwater system (e.g. abandoned wells) to protect groundwater quality by sealing abandoned wells.
Justification for Goals: During the plan development process, the MN Department of Health consulted with the cities of Morris, Appleton and Barrett. Communities indicated that they could use assistance finding and sealing wells in their Drinking Water Supply Management Area (DWSMA).
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – DRAFT OCTOBER 2019
Section 3: Issues, Goals & Implementation Activities Page 20
To ensure that homeowners have safe drinking water, the Planning Partners will host annual well screening clinics. Since complete inventory of abandoned wells has not been performed to date, the goal of sealing 134 wells was established using past well-sealing records for Stevens and Swift SWCDs.
Targeted Implementation Activities: • Conversion of 500 acres of cropland to perennial vegetation through perpetual easements or 10 to 15 year contracts. • SWCD Staff will review wellhead protection plans and maintain/improve coordination with Cities on partnering opportunities. Staff will also serve on wellhead protection planning teams. • Contact landowners about completing BMPs projects within Drinking Water Supply Management Areas. • Host annual well water nitrate and arsenic testing clinics and coordinate with environmental labs to have nitrate and arsenic testing kits available to the public. • Provide cost-share assistance to 134 well owners for sealing of unused wells. Prioritizing moderate and high pollution sensitivity areas and Drinking Water Supply Management Areas.
Pace of Progress: Table 3-1 outlines the measures for determining the progress towards the 10-year measurable goals for Drinking Water Protection.
Table 3-1. Pace-of-Progress Measures for Drinking Water Protection
Type of Project Measure for Pace-of-Progress
Cropland Conversion Track the number of acres enrolled in DWSMAs
Wellhead Protection Planning Attendance at Wellhead Protection Planning meetings
Education and Outreach: BMPs in DWSMAs Number of landowners contacted in DWSMAs
Education and Outreach: Host drinking water testing clinics Number of clinics/workshops held and request trend analysis from MDH every five years
Well Sealing Completed inventory of unsealed wells and number of participants in cost-share program
3.1.2 Groundwater Conservation
Issue Statement and Background There are a number of natural resources in the Pomme de Terre watershed that are wholly or partially dependent upon groundwater, including: calcareous fens, a tullibee lake (Stalker), groundwater-dependent lakes and plant communities, baseflow in the Pomme de Terre River, and one trout stream (Long Lake Creek just north of Long Lake in Otter Tail County). In addition, industry, agriculture, and business uses depend on groundwater. There are 185 agricultural irrigation wells, five golf course wells and five industrial processing wells in the Pomme de Terre River Watershed. The lack of groundwater data and evaluation makes it
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – DRAFT OCTOBER 2019
Section 3: Issues, Goals & Implementation Activities Page 21
difficult to understand trends in surface/groundwater interactions and groundwater quantity. An evaluation is needed to better characterize surface water/groundwater interactions and assess where additional information needs to be collected.
Priority Area Summary Goals for groundwater conservation are based on data collection and analysis, implementation of conservation practices, and will be addressed watershed-wide.
Desired Future Condition (Long-Term Goal): Sufficient groundwater is available in the Pomme de Terre Watershed to support a healthy natural resource base and economic uses. In addition, there is sufficient groundwater data to characterize quality and quantity trends.
10-Year Measurable Goals:
Goal 1: Assist agricultural producers with groundwater conservation by promoting water conservation measures that improve water use efficiencies
Goal 2: Fill groundwater monitoring data gaps through request of the County Geologic Atlas and continuation of ongoing observation well monitoring efforts.
Justification for Goals: Groundwater is important for the surface waters and natural resources of the watershed as well as for irrigation, industry and drinking water. The first step in developing a sustainable groundwater management plan is the development of a groundwater information database, which includes a water budget. It will take a collaborative approach to develop a sustainable groundwater management system through raising awareness of water conservation practices and collecting groundwater information.
Targeted Implementation Activities: • Promote and encourage the adoption of irrigation water management BMPs that increase water conservation and decrease conditions for nitrogen loss.
• Counties will request the County Geologic Atlas, including staff time to locate wells to support atlas development. • Identify and focus BMPs/conservation on recharge/vulnerable areas identified from the hydrogeologic section of the County Geologic Atlas (Section B). • Continue ongoing observation well monitoring efforts.
Pace of Progress: Table 3-2 outlines the measures for determining the progress towards the 10-year measurable goals for Drinking Water Protection.
Table 3-2. Pace-of-Progress Measures for Groundwater Conservation
Type of Project Measure for Pace-of-Progress
Irrigation Water Management BMPs Invest 40 hours per year to target fields with irrigation
scheduling plans or flow regulation
Increase acreage enrolled in conservation programs Track the number of acres enrolled
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – DRAFT OCTOBER 2019
Section 3: Issues, Goals & Implementation Activities Page 22
Type of Project Measure for Pace-of-Progress
County Geologic Atlas Number of counties with the development of Geologic Atlas
in progress
BMPs on recharge/vulnerable areas Recharge and vulnerable areas identified
Observation Well Monitoring Number of observation wells monitored per year
HYDROLOGY
3.2.1 Altered Hydrology
Issue Statement and Background Altered Hydrology is the change in the river’s water balance and hydrologic regime. This regime is influenced by a loss of water storage (including soil and wetlands water storage) and increased impervious surfaces. The Pomme de Terre River watershed’s hydrology has changed over the last 90 years. Because of several broad factors, the landscape has transitioned from perennial to agricultural landcover impacting infiltration rates and evapotranspiration patterns. These hydrologic changes will be further exacerbated by climate change. There has been a loss of
wetland, soil water holding capacity, and increased impervious surfaces on the landscape
impacting infiltration and river flows. Streams have been transformed into efficient drainage systems that quickly remove excess water for agricultural production and/or development. There has also been a change in the amount of rainfall and an increase in the severity of rainstorms. The combination of environmental and landscape changes has led to increased surface runoff, a change in the timing and magnitude of river flows and a degradation of aquatic habitat. These alterations of the river’s water balance and hydrologic regime are summarized by the term “altered hydrology”.
Priority Area Summary Altered hydrology needs to be addressed at the watershed-scale.
Desired Future Condition (Long-Term Goal): Reduce annual runoff by 0.5 inch over the entire watershed.
10-Year Measurable Goals:
Goal 1: Reduce annual runoff by 0.08 inch of runoff (or 3,527 acre-feet) at the outlet of the Pomme de Terre River watershed.
Goal 2: No increase in runoff from public water basins during peak run-off periods.
Justification for Goals: Goals were established by reviewing the annual runoff volume measured at USGS 05294000 Pomme de Terre River at Appleton, MN. According to this information, the average annual runoff from 1949-2017 has increased 1.5 inches. Increases in runoff are due to three factors: climate, land use and altered hydrology (e.g. changes in storage and drainage). The Planning Partners decided to establish a goal based on how much additional storage they could
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – DRAFT OCTOBER 2019
Section 3: Issues, Goals & Implementation Activities Page 23
reasonably achieve within 10 years. Practices that add storage on the landscape will also mitigate future hydrologic changes from climate change. Additionally, the Planning Partners did not establish a goal for drainage system management since less than 10% of the watershed utilize public drainage systems and half of the area served is in Stevens County. Opportunities to engage Drainage Authorities are addressed elsewhere in the Plan (e.g. Socioeconomic Factors).
Targeted Implementation Activities:
• Implement 20,840 acres of perennial vegetation including the use of state and federal conservation programs, inclusive of 500 acres that are specific to the Drinking Water Protection priority areas.
• Complete 2,920 acres of wetland restoration, inclusive of 2,720 acres that will be targeted within priority areas.
• Implement 581 structural agricultural best management practices (BMPs) based on PTMApp and best professional judgment inclusive of 383 practices that will be targeted within priority areas.
• Implement 9,340 acres of nonstructural BMPs based on PTMApp and best professional judgment inclusive of 7,370 acres that will be targeted within priority areas.
• Identify previously completed BMPs and create spatial database, develop database for tracking projects in the future.
• Identify public water basins that do not flow to the Pomme de Terre River and may exceed the ordinary high water level.
• Pursue management plans for existing controlled outlets on public water basins that did not originally flow to the Pomme de Terre River to address upstream and downstream concerns.
• Pursue management plans for future proposed controlled outlets on public water basins that currently do not flow to the Pomme de Terre River to address upstream and downstream concerns.
Pace of Progress: While the implementation of runoff volume reduction practices should result in lower flows at the Hoffman and Appleton stream gauges, other factors such as climate change, changes in land use and/or drainage system management may mask the benefits of these projects. Instead, the Planning Partners have decided to measure the pace of progress on a project-by-project basis according to Table 3-3.
Table 3-3. Pace-of-Progress Measures for Altered Hydrology
Type of Project Measure for Pace-of-Progress Estimated
Acre-ft Storage
Nonstructural Practices (i.e.
conservation tillage, residue
management, crop rotation,
cover crops, and perennial
vegetation cover)
Total year-end acreage with nonstructural conservation
practices. A process for better understanding and tracking
adoption rates will also be explored through Soil-Health
related activities under Socioeconomics. 3,527
Wetland Restoration Track acreage and storage volume provided in acre-feet
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – DRAFT OCTOBER 2019
Section 3: Issues, Goals & Implementation Activities Page 24
Type of Project Measure for Pace-of-Progress Estimated Acre-ft Storage
Structural Practices (e.g.
Alternative Tile Intakes, filter strips, contour buffer strips,
water and sediment control
basins)
Track number of practices implemented, and storage
associated in acre-feet if appropriate 0
Management Plans for
controlled outlets Track the number of plans developed 0
LAKES, WETLANDS, AND SHALLOW BASINS The major lakes within the northern region of the Pomme de Terre River Watershed include: Pelican Lake, Pomme de Terre Lake, Lake Christina, Barrett Lake, North Turtle Lake, Stalker Lake, and Eagle Lake. These lakes provide fishing and recreation opportunities, with developed shorelines. Some of these lakes are shallow and have been extensively managed to provide fish and waterfowl habitat. Midway through the watershed there is a significant transition in geology, lake morphology, and land use. Increased runoff in the southern portion of the Pomme de Terre Watershed is one cause of poor lake water quality for Artichoke Lake, Lake Oliver, and Drywood Lake.
3.3.1 Poor Quality Lakes
Issue Statement and Background Lakes can be impaired for aquatic recreation use due to elevated nutrients that cause unsightly algae blooms and can make swimming undesirable or unsafe, such as excess phosphorus from unstable lake shorelines, extensive land use and drainage alterations in their watersheds, and/or lake sediments. Lakes can also be impaired for aquatic life and not support native and diverse fish and/or aquatic plant communities. There are 217 lakes (DNR-designated and greater than 10 acres) within the watershed, 44 of which have been assessed.
15 lakes are currently, or likely to be, impaired for aquatic recreation in the Pomme de Terre
River Watershed. To date, no lakes have been assessed as impaired for aquatic life.
Priority Area Summary Lakes impaired for eutrophication that will be addressed first include: Artichoke, Barrett, Perkins, Pomme de Terre, Christina, and North Turtle.
Desired Future Condition (Long-Term Goal): 10-year growing season average in-lake phosphorus concentration, chlorophyll-a concentration, and Secchi depth that meet the water quality standards (Table 3-4). Lake fish and aquatic plant communities that meet aquatic life use standards.
Table 3-4. Observed Water Quality Conditions for Poor Quality Lakes (2017 MPCA Assessment)
Lake
Surface
Area (ac)
Observed Water Quality Conditions
Total Phosphorus (ug/L) Secchi Depth (m)
Northern Glaciated Plains Lake Standard < 90 > 0.7
Artichoke 1,970 225 1.0
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – DRAFT OCTOBER 2019
Section 3: Issues, Goals & Implementation Activities Page 25
Lake
Surface
Area (ac)
Observed Water Quality Conditions
Total Phosphorus (ug/L) Secchi Depth (m)
Perkins 516 105 0.7
North Central Hardwood Forests Lake Standard < 40 > 1.4
Barrett 530 65 1.6
Pomme de Terre 1,816 49 1.0
North Turtle 1,773 84 2.1
Christina 3,971 73 0.6
10-Year Measurable Goals:
Goal 1: Achieve lake-specific phosphorus reductions for direct drainage runoff to Artichoke, Barrett, Christina, Perkins, Pomme de Terre, and North Turtle Lakes based on current project feasibility (Table 3-5).
Table 3-5. Existing Phosphorus Loads and Load Reduction Goals for Poor Quality Lakes
Poor Quality
Lake
PTMApp Existing
Watershed Phosphorus
Load [lb/yr]
Long-Term Goal: TMDL
Reductions Needed to
Meet Water Quality
Standards [lb/yr]
10-Year Measurable
Goal: Reductions Based
on Feasibility (lb/yr)
Artichoke 1,713 576 99
Barrett 1,485 561 98
North Turtle 606 126 57
Perkins 1,777 519 275
Pomme de Terre 762 79 142
Christina 437 135 59
Justification for Goals: Goals are based on what is achievable for County and SWCD staff. Reaching out and finding landowners to voluntarily install BMPs on their land is the biggest challenge and limiting factor for implementation. Where the goal is exceeded based on the locally determined achievable level of implementation (e.g., Pomme de Terre Lake), those resources will be reallocated to lakes where the 10-year measurable goal is not achieved (e.g., Artichoke and Barrett Lakes). The Planning Partners will re-assess progress towards the lake goals annually and determine if and where resources need to be re-allocated.
Targeted Implementation Activities: • Lake outreach process. Series of meetings to identify possible in-lake management and engage affected landowners in lake water quality management. • Conduct an average of 950 hours of Subsurface Sewage Treatment Systems inspections
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – DRAFT OCTOBER 2019
Section 3: Issues, Goals & Implementation Activities Page 26
per year. • Update 102 septic systems found noncompliant through Subsurface Sewage Treatment Systems inspections. • Conduct shoreline condition inventories on a parcel-by-parcel basis using a uniform process. • Implement 47 shoreline restoration projects for erosion control based on shoreline inventories. • Implement 113 structural agricultural best management practices (BMPs) based on PTMApp and best professional judgment within the lakesheds (practices overlap with BMPs listed in Altered Hydrology). • Implement 3,640 acres of nonstructural BMPs based on PTMApp and best professional judgment within the lakesheds (practices overlap with BMPs listed in Altered Hydrology).
Pace of Progress: Table 3-6 summarizes the estimated load reduction expected from implementation of each activity using:
• PTMApp for structural and nonstructural practices.
• Phosphorus reductions from an expected number of septic systems to be updated from noncompliant to compliant over the next ten years, the average number of persons per household by County from the 2010 Census, and an average of 1.95 pounds of phosphorus produced per person per year.
• BWSR Water Erosion Pollution Reduction Estimator for shoreline restoration projects. An average reduction of 0.2 pounds of phosphorus per year per 2,500 square feet of shoreline restoration project was used to estimate the expected reductions for the yet identified specific shoreline restoration projects in the watershed.
Table 3-6. Poor Quality Lake Projected Implementation and Estimated Load Reduction
Poor Quality
Lake
PTMApp Structural
Practices
PTMApp
Nonstructural Practices
Septic system
improvements Shoreline restorations
Number
of
Practices
[#]
Estimated
Load
Reduction
[lb/yr]
Number
of
Practices
[acres]
Estimated
Load
Reduction
[lb/yr]
Number
of
Practices
[#]
Estimated
Load
Reduction
[lb/yr]
Shoreline
Restoration
Area
[square ft]
Estimated
Load
Reduction
[lb/yr]
Artichoke 7 6.4 650 89.9 2 1.9 5,000 0.4
Barrett 8 7.3 530 73.0 16 16.8 12,500 1.0
North Turtle 16 13.4 250 34.8 5 5.2 40,000 3.3
Perkins 56 52.7 1520 209.6 10 11.6 12,500 1.0
Pomme de Terre 12 13.7 540 74.4 49 50.2 37,500 3.2
Christina 14 17.3 150 20.9 20 20.2 10,000 0.8
*All values are approximate and may change with field verification.
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – DRAFT OCTOBER 2019
Section 3: Issues, Goals & Implementation Activities Page 27
3.3.2 High Quality Lakes
Issue Statement and Background Seven lakes that have high biological diversity are close to surpassing the water quality threshold: Clear, Eagle, Elk, Pelican, South Turtle, Spitzer, and Stalker. While these lakes
currently support recreation, they could become degraded in the future if phosphorus loads
increase or there are changes to the in-lake plant and fish communities. Loss of shoreline vegetation and upland natural areas with tree cover reduce the ability of the catchments surrounding these lakes to hold and filter water, adding to the phosphorus problem. Agriculture is the largest land use.
Priority Area Summary High Quality lakes with water quality conditions near the state water quality thresholds and high biological diversity that will be addressed first include: Clear, Eagle, Elk, Pelican, South Turtle, Spitzer and Stalker Lakes.
Desired Future Condition (Long-Term Goal): Maintain or improve water quality (as measured by the growing season average in-lake phosphorus concentration and Secchi depth) compared to observed conditions in the 2017 MPCA Assessment (Table 3-7).
Table 3-7. Observed Water Quality Conditions for High Quality Lakes (2017 MPCA Assessment)
High Quality Lake Surface Area (ac)
Observed Water Quality Conditions
Total Phosphorus (ug/L) Secchi Depth (m)
Clear 399 37 2.5
Eagle 907 12 5.7
Elk 207 31 2.1
Pelican 3,761 49 0.8
South Turtle 837 18 5.2
Spitzer 731 22 3.0
Stalker 1,357 21 2.9
Lake Christina Overlook
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – DRAFT OCTOBER 2019
Section 3: Issues, Goals & Implementation Activities Page 28
10-Year Measurable Goals:
Goal 1: Achieve lake-specific phosphorus reduction in direct drainage runoff to: Clear, Eagle, Elk, South Turtle, Spitzer and Stalker Lakes based on current project feasibility (Table 3-8).
Table 3-8. Existing Phosphorus Loads and Load Reduction Goals for High Quality Lakes
High Quality Lake
PTMApp Existing
Watershed Phosphorus
Load [lb/yr]
Long-Term Goal: 12%
Load Reduction [lb/yr]
10-Yr. Measurable Goal:
Reductions Based on
Feasibility (lb/yr)
Clear 456 55 126
Eagle 116 14 14
Elk 143 17 4
Pelican 1,257 151 29
South Turtle 281 34 25
Spitzer 80 10 95
Stalker 1,358 163 135
Justification for Goals: Goals are based on what is achievable for County and SWCD. Identifying landowners willing to install Best Management Practices on their land is challenging and a limiting factor for implementation. Where the goal is exceeded based on the locally determined level of implementation (e.g., Eagle, Pelican, and Spitzer Lakes), resources will be reallocated to lakes where the goal is not yet achieved (e.g., South Turtle, Clear, Stalker, and Elk). The Planning Partners will re-assess progress towards the lake goals annually and determine if and where resources need to be re-allocated.
Targeted Implementation Activities: • Conduct an average of 280 hours of Subsurface Sewage Treatment Systems inspections per year. • Update 130 septic systems found noncompliant through Subsurface Sewage Treatment Systems inspections. • Conduct shoreline condition inventories on a parcel-by-parcel basis using a uniform process. • Implement 82 shoreline restoration projects for erosion control based on shoreline inventories. • Implement 82 structural agricultural best management practices (BMPs) based on PTMApp and best professional judgment within the lakesheds (note that these practices overlap with BMPs identified under Altered Hydrology). • Implement 1,150 acres of nonstructural BMPs based on PTMApp and best professional judgment within the lakesheds (note that these practices overlap with BMPs identified
under Altered Hydrology).
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – DRAFT OCTOBER 2019
Section 3: Issues, Goals & Implementation Activities Page 29
Pace of Progress: Table 3-9 summarizes the estimated load reduction expected from implementation of each activity using:
• PTMApp for structural and nonstructural practices.
• Phosphorus reductions from an expected number of septic systems to be updated from noncompliant to compliant over the next ten years, the average number of persons per household by County from the 2010 Census, and an average of 1.95 pounds of phosphorus produced per person per year.
• BWSR Water Erosion Pollution Reduction Estimator for shoreline restoration projects. An average reduction of 0.2 pounds of phosphorus per year per 2,500 square feet of shoreline restoration project was used to estimate the expected reductions for the yet identified specific shoreline restoration projects in the watershed.
Table 3-9. High Quality Lake Phosphorus Load Reductions by Activity, lb/yr
High Quality
Lake
PTMApp Structural
Practices
PTMApp Nonstructural
Practices
Septic System
Improvements Shoreline Restorations
Number of
Practices
[#]
Estimated Load
Reduction
[lb/yr]
Number of
Practices
[acres]
Estimated Load
Reduction
[lb/yr]
Number of
Practices
[#]
Estimated Load
Reduction
[lb/yr]
Shoreline Restoration
Area
[square ft]
Estimated Load
Reduction
[lb/yr]
Clear 4 54.7 480 66.3 4 3.9 7,500 0.6
Eagle 1 0.2 70 9.2 4 4.3 7,500 0.6
Elk 1 0.4 0 0 3 3.3 0 0.04
Pelican 1 0.5 0 0 27 27.7 5,000 0.4
South Turtle 4 1.5 80 10.4 10 11.0 20,000 1.6
Spitzer 0 0 30 4.7 75 77.9 150,000 12.2
Stalker 71 58.2 490 67.9 7 7.5 15,000 1.2
*All values are approximate and may change with field verification.
Pomme de Terre River - Morris
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – DRAFT OCTOBER 2019
Section 3: Issues, Goals & Implementation Activities Page 30
3.3.3 Protect and Restore Perennial Cover and Shallow Basins
Issue Statement and Background Shallow lakes, wetlands (basins), and perennial cover in the Pomme de Terre River Watershed are important for storing water. There are many shallow lakes in the Pomme de Terre River watershed, including nationally recognized Lake Christina in Grant and Douglas Counties, which provide critical staging areas for migrating waterfowl in both spring and fall. Shallow basins also support colonial nesting water birds (e.g., shorebirds) and other wildlife, which provide quality bird watching and hunting opportunities. Shallow basins provide hydrologic benefit in the form of water retention, which in turn reduces peak flows in nearby streams and can help reduce in-stream erosion. Some shallow
lakes and wetlands have been drained to support cultivated cropland. There is an estimated 44,594 acres of restorable wetlands which equates to approximately 8% of the watershed. Restoration and protection of wetlands and perennial cover will have indirect benefits on downstream water quality through increased water storage and improved water quality in shallow basins before runoff discharges downstream.
Priority Area Summary Shallow basin protection and restoration and associated perennial cover will be addressed first in the Christina-Pelican Lakes Area.
Desired Future Condition (Long-Term Goal): Clear water and diverse submerged aquatic plant communities in shallow basins that support migrating and breeding waterfowl and support improved downstream water quality. There is a net increase in shallow basins as a result of creating new or restoring formerly drained shallow basins.
10-Year Measurable Goals:
Goal 1: Protect existing water quality of shallow basins by maintaining wetland and grassland currently enrolled in conservation programs and increasing the amount of perennial vegetation and wetland storage in the watershed.
Justification for Goals: The Planning Partners estimated the total acres of wetlands and grasslands within the Christina-Pelican Lakes Priority Area. The goal is based on the number of expiring conservation program acres, which are at risk for conversion.
Targeted Implementation Activities: • Protect/manage a total of 2,700 acres of wetlands and grassland enrolled in various conservation cover programs or enrolled as new acres of perennial vegetation.
Pace of Progress: Total year-end acreage of perennial vegetation, including currently protected and newly protected acres of perennial vegetation will be tracked over the 10 years.
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – DRAFT OCTOBER 2019
Section 3: Issues, Goals & Implementation Activities Page 31
RIVER & STREAMS Beyond the Pomme de Terre River, the watershed has few large streams and creeks, limited to the Pomme de Terre tributaries; Pelican Creek in the Northern Region, and Muddy Creek and Dry Wood Creek in the Southern Region. The remaining streams are small, unnamed resources. Sixteen stream reaches are currently impaired for aquatic recreation and aquatic life uses. Altered hydrology, poor habitat, and high levels of phosphorus and sediment are the principal stressors for the aquatic life impairments. Many of the impaired stream reaches are located in the Southern Region of the watershed which has more highly altered land cover and drainage than the Northern Region. The lower 27 miles of the Pomme de Terre River, from the Swift County Road 20 bridge down to where the river enters the Minnesota River below Appleton, is a state water trail.
3.4.1 Excess pollutants
Issue Statement and Background Excess levels of phosphorus, sediment, and E. coli are impacting the Pomme de Terre River and its tributaries. Sediment inputs to streams come from soil erosion and in-stream channel erosion, often driven by higher stream flows from altered hydrology and changes in land use practices. Phosphorus and E. coli inputs to streams come primarily from agricultural runoff, urban runoff, feedlot runoff, and wastewater discharge. Nutrient concentrations and turbidity levels both steadily increase along the mainstem Pomme de Terre River, with the highest concentrations located in the most downstream section. Phosphorus in this system has been observed to be directly contributing to the dissolved oxygen and turbidity impairments also present in this region. Excess phosphorus and sediment in streams can result
in the loss of habitat in addition to direct harm to aquatic organisms. The priority area for the river corridor encompasses the HUC-12’s recognizing that the contributing drainage area is where the work needs to take place to address excess pollutants.
Priority Area Summary Implementation to reduce pollutants to the Pomme de Terre River will be addressed first in the Drywood Creek Area and Pomme de Terre River Corridor.
Desired Future Condition (Long-Term Goal): The long-term phosphorus reductions needed from watershed runoff for the benefit of water quality will be based on achieving the 2014 Minnesota Nutrient Reduction Strategy goals of 12% reduction in phosphorus pollution by 2025 from baseline conditions (mid-1990’s). The long-term sediment reductions needed will be based on the Pomme de Terre Watershed Total Maximum Daily Load sediment reduction goals of 73% for Drywood Creek and 53% for the Lower Pomme de Terre River. These goals may be modified in the future as other state initiatives are completed.
10-Year Measurable Goals:
Goal 1: Achieve set resource-specific phosphorus reduction goals based on current project feasibility from baseline conditions (mid-1990s) in the Drywood Creek and Pomm de Terre River Corridor Priority Area in the next 10 years (by December 31, 2030).
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – DRAFT OCTOBER 2019
Section 3: Issues, Goals & Implementation Activities Page 32
Goal 2: Achieve set resource-specific sediment reduction goals based on current project feasibility from baseline conditions (mid-1990’s) in the Drywood Creek and Pomme de Terre River Corridor Priority Area in the next 10 years (by December31, 2030).
Goal 3: Reduce stormwater runoff impacts through BMP implementation in Cities.
Table 3-10. Existing Sediment Loads and Load Reduction Goals for Drywood Creek and the Pomme de
Terre River Corridor
PTMApp Existing
Watershed Sediment
Load
[tons/yr]
Long-Term Goal: TMDL Reductions Needed to
Meet Water Quality
Standards
[tons/yr]
10-Yr. Measurable Goal:
Reductions Based on
Feasibility
[tons/yr]
Drywood Creek Area 24,700 18,032 1,029
Pomme de Terre River Corridor 46,200 24,486 2,501
Table 3-11. Existing Phosphorus Loads and Load Reduction Goals for Drywood Creek and the Pomme de
Terre River Corridor
PTMApp Existing
Watershed Phosphorus
Load
[lb/yr]
Long-Term Goal: TMDL
Reductions Needed to
Meet Water Quality
Standards
[lb/yr]
10-Yr. Measurable Goal:
Reductions Based on
Feasibility
[lb/yr]
Drywood Creek Area 2,192 263 209
Pomme de Terre River Corridor 31,850 3,822 382
Justification for Goals: Goals are based on what is achievable for County and SWCD staff to achieve over the next 10-years. Reaching out and finding landowners to voluntarily install BMPs on their land is the biggest challenge and limiting factor for implementation.
Targeted Implementation Activities: • One-on-one conversations with 35 landowners per year of top-ranked structural and nonstructural practices (from PTMApp) to enroll in cost-share programs. • Implement 188 structural agricultural best management practices (BMPs) based on PTMApp and best professional judgment within Drywood Creek Area and the Pomme de Terre River Corridor Priority Areas (note that these practices overlap with BMPs
identified under Altered Hydrology). • Implement 2,580 acres of nonstructural BMPs based on PTMApp and best professional judgment within Drywood Creek Area and the River Corridor Priority Areas (note that
these practices overlap with BMPs identified under Altered Hydrology). • Restore 20 acres of drained shallow basins (note that these practices overlap with BMPs identified under Altered Hydrology). • Implement 4 nutrient management plans.
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – DRAFT OCTOBER 2019
Section 3: Issues, Goals & Implementation Activities Page 33
• Implement 4 pit closures. • Implement 60 BMPs associated with urban stormwater runoff (i.e. rain gardens). • Work with cities to develop stormwater management plans in urban areas. Activities include completing steps of stormwater infrastructure inventory, hydrologic analysis, BMP-recommendation development, and development of stormwater erosion and sediment control standards for municipal ordinance and policy inclusion, using MN Stormwater Manual as a guide as part of this assessment.
Pace of Progress: Table 3-12 summarizes the estimated load reduction expected from implementation of each activity using PTMApp, Board of Water and Soil Resources septic calculator, and average load reductions per foot width of standard buffer.
Table 3-12. Drywood Creek Sediment and Phosphorus Load Reductions by Activity
Drainage Area: Activity
Estimated Load Reductions
Number of Practices [#] Phosphorus (lb/yr) Sediment (tons/yr)
Drywood Creek HUC 10
PTMApp Structural Practices 38 44 241
PTMApp Nonstructural Practices 1,180 163 750
Wetland restorations 10 2 38
River Corridor a
PTMApp Structural Practices 150 176 1,006
PTMApp Nonstructural Practices 1,400 194 1,250
Wetland restorations 10 12 245
a Existing load for the River Corridor was estimated by area weight using the proportion in Lower Pomme
de Terre and Middle Pomme de Terre HUC 10 watersheds.
*All values are approximate and may change with field verification.
3.4.2 Loss of In-Stream Habitat
Issue Statement and Background Sediment runoff, bank de-vegetation, and erosion have resulted in a loss of riparian habitat and floodplain connections along the Pomme de Terre River Corridor. The 2012 Stressor Identification report identified cattle pasture erosion issues, over widening, excessive fine sediments, channel instability, and floodplain disconnection issues along Drywood Creek and the Pomme de Terre River mainstem, south of Barrett. Cattle on streambanks increase erosion. Higher runoff and peak stream flows weaken stream banks, increase erosion, and cause
a change in the stream shape and increase in fine sediment in the stream. Floodplains connected to the river can mitigate the impacts of altered hydrology by buffering the impacts of higher flows, reducing downstream erosion, and providing opportunities for groundwater recharge. Vegetated riparian areas trap sediment, nutrients and pesticides, minimizing downstream contributions. Invasive species migration is also an issue in the watershed, and
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – DRAFT OCTOBER 2019
Section 3: Issues, Goals & Implementation Activities Page 34
therefore connectivity improvements may need to be balanced with other aquatic invasive species management needs.
Priority Area Summary Improving in-stream habitat, riparian habitat, and floodplain connections will be addressed first within the Pomme de Terre River Corridor and Drywood Creek Area.
Desired Future Condition (Long-Term Goal): Stream channels that maintain physical, chemical and biological functions of a stream, and its associated riparian zone, necessary for meeting the life history requirements of desired aquatic species. In-stream habitat that supports a diverse population of aquatic species. River reaches with run-riffle-pool complexes and vegetated banks. Mature and diverse deep-rooted native vegetation (grasses, shrubs, trees, etc.), stable banks, and connected floodplains along the Pomme de Terre River Corridor.
10-Year Measurable Goals:
Goal 1: Improve in-stream habitat by reducing sedimentation due to stream bank erosion.
Goal 2: Improve riparian habitat by establishing and maintaining perennial buffers and floodplain connections.
Justification for Goals: In-stream habitat in the Pomme de Terre Watershed has been degraded from excess sedimentation due to stream bank erosion from 1) livestock trampling, agricultural drainage outfalls, and loss of perennial riparian buffers; and 2) high bank shear stress in channel reaches disconnected from the floodplain.
Targeted Implementation Activities: • Implement 1 BMP per year to reduce erosion due to livestock such as installing crossings and exclusion fencing. Provide alternative water sources. • Implement 1 pasture management and rotational grazing plan per year. • Complete 1 Streambank Stabilization Project per year. • Implement 35 side water inlets where appropriate. • Implement 120 acres of buffer on "other waters" coming into the main stem of the Pomme de Terre River.
Pace of Progress: The pace of progress measures for In-Stream Habitat will be based on the number of DNR-identified erosion sites addressed and the acre-feet of voluntary buffers or nonstructural practices implemented beyond the required width.
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – DRAFT OCTOBER 2019
Section 3: Issues, Goals & Implementation Activities Page 35
ECOSYSTEM HEALTH Ecosystem health describes the ability of a watershed to support diverse ecosystems, including lakes, streams, prairies, forests, and wetlands. The condition of an ecosystem is based on the quality and connectedness of available habitat, diversity of plant and animal species, and number of rare and unique natural resources. There is a need to maintain, restore and enhance critical habitats to improve water quality, increase infiltration, maintain biodiversity and support wildlife. Given the linear nature of the Pomme de Terre watershed and the interconnectedness of its resources, maintaining or restoring open space and water quality will also have impacts to downstream resources.
3.5.1 Aquatic Invasive Species Management
Issue Statement and Background Aquatic invasive species threaten the habitat and water quality of lakes and streams in the Pomme de Terre River Watershed. Existing and possible future aquatic invasive species include
starry stonewort, zebra mussels, curlyleaf pondweed, purple loosestrife, and carp. There is a need to protect lakes and streams at risk for spread of invasive species from other infested water bodies.
Priority Area Summary Aquatic invasive species threaten the habitat and water quality of all lakes in the Pomme de Terre River Watershed and should be protected watershed-wide.
Desired Future Condition (Long-Term Goal): Aquatic Invasive Species (AIS) are actively managed to prevent spread and control of existing or future AIS populations in the Planning Area.
10-Year Measurable Goals:
Goal 1: Work towards preventing spread of AIS by improving coordination of County programs across the planning area.
Justification for Goals: Each of the Counties or SWCDs administer an Aquatic Invasive Species Plan. However, the Planning Partners recognize the need to better coordinate these programs across the Planning Area. There are opportunities to share information on existing and new AIS, and to share resources for regional and statewide training.
Targeted Implementation Activities: • Annual workshops to coordinate County AIS plans and implementation, or PdTRA holds one meeting per year to discuss AIS. • Attend DNR District led twice annual County meetings to share ideas with other watersheds. • Continue implementing education programs identified in County AIS plans (explore partnering on innovative techniques including geo-tagging, radio, billboards). • Inspection – Work with local law enforcement agencies.
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – DRAFT OCTOBER 2019
Section 3: Issues, Goals & Implementation Activities Page 36
Pace of Progress: The pace of progress measures for Aquatic Invasive Species Management will be based on: • Hosting one Planning Area workshop per year. • Attending a DNR County meeting twice per year.
SOCIOECONOMIC FACTORS Human interaction with the environment causes complex, often substantial impacts that affect the entire watershed. Watershed management can address human-environment interactions by reviewing legal systems, promoting best practices, encouraging natural resource-conscious land use decisions and promoting stewardship. Watershed management efforts are most successful when stakeholders develop robust, coordinated collaborations that empower synergies, leverage efficiencies, work through peer-to-peer relationships, and create multiple approaches to actively manage the watershed’s water and natural resources. Many local, regional, and state public and private entities have a vested interest in water resource management and the protection of our water resources and natural environment. Although the source of interest may differ, many of these entities often have overlapping or common goals. There are numerous stakeholder groups in the Pomme de Terre River Watershed. Engaging these groups in watershed management would promote stewardship and assist in meeting the goals of the Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan. Watershed management programs and projects should provide opportunities to gather and share information, engage stakeholders in the planning and design of restoration and protection activities, promote watershed stewardship, and educate stakeholders on issues critical to protecting and conserving the Pomme de Terre River Watershed.
3.6.1 Watershed Outreach
Issue Statement and Background In some areas of the Pomme de Terre River Watershed, there is a lack of education and understanding about the connection between land use and the impacts on soil and water resources. There is also a lack of interest in and acceptance of management practices that help
protect and improve water quality and quantity. For example, some residents do not know about the importance of a healthy shoreline buffer and the required permits for doing certain work to private shoreland. Finally, there is a misconception that the Pomme de Terre River and creeks are a drainage system without community, recreational, or ecosystem value.
Priority Area Summary Environmental education, water and soil resource awareness, and watershed stewardship should be promoted throughout the entire Pomme de Terre River Watershed. These efforts should target all ages, races, and socio-economic statuses.
Desired Future Condition (Long-Term Goal): Citizens understand and value the watershed’s resources, actively conserve watershed resources, and participate in the implementation of the Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan by being watershed stewards and advocating
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – DRAFT OCTOBER 2019
Section 3: Issues, Goals & Implementation Activities Page 37
for more sustainable land use decision-making. Local governments, including elected officials and staff, have a basic understanding of watershed management and the Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan which facilitates more sustainable land use decisions.
10-Year Measurable Goals:
Goal 1: Facilitate strategic networking, learning, and participation of targeted groups to assess, build, and leverage community capacity (i.e. community resources and values) to become aware of water quality issues.
Goal 2: Increase adoption of BMPs by increasing engagement and communication with residents, local landowners and agricultural producers to improve water literacy and promote a basic understanding of watershed management.
Goal 3: Provide information about how land-use decisions impact the watershed and its resources to locally elected and appointed decision-makers who have a role in addressing the relationship between land use and natural resource protection.
Goal 4: Encourage soil and water stewardship and awareness across all generations including future agricultural producers and water recreation enthusiasts to ensure that conservation efforts are maintained into the future.
Justification for Goals: Goals are based on current levels of involvement from SWCD and County staff, ongoing work that is being completed through a 2018-2021 Public Participation Plan and identified gaps in programs. Watershed outreach goals are geared towards improving community approval and buy-in of voluntary BMPs instillation and water-conservation minded decision making that will help leverage the success of other goals.
Targeted Implementation Activities: • Establish and facilitate Networking/Advisory Groups for targeted groups (lakeshore, urban, agriculture, etc.). Provide leadership training every other year. • Establish soil health teams for Northern and Southern Regions. 2 meetings per group per year. • Regional tours (every 2 years) on prioritized portions of the watershed to facilitate partnerships, highlight improvements, and discuss upcoming priorities for the area. • 2 BMP-focused (i.e raingardens, lakeshore restoration, native plantings, land retirement programs, etc.) demonstrations/workshops in the watershed each year. • Soil health field days. • Continue the work being initiated by the WRAPS Cycle II by identifying a target audience for BMP adoption through follow-up interview on changes made over time. • Conduct a 5-year watershed tour to re-evaluate progress, reconnect with partners, and create new partnerships. • Host conversation/meeting on the state of local water quality and importance of watershed management to all types of local officials and state/federal officials. • Create and host consistent orientation to all types of newly elected local officials on the Pomme de Terre watershed and include previously elected (current) local officials to reinforce the message (city, SWCDs, counties, townships, etc.).
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – DRAFT OCTOBER 2019
Section 3: Issues, Goals & Implementation Activities Page 38
• Coordinate with UMN Extension to Host Aqua Chautauqua within watershed. • Conduct annual Kayak Tour on the Pomme de Terre River to raise awareness of the resource and provide education about streamside ecology. • Continue K-12 curriculum about watershed management. • Create a StoryMap to highlight 1W1P plan priority issues, areas, and existing conservation practices/programs in the watershed and post on the PdTRA website. • Create a list serve to share information about the watershed on a more routine basis.
Pace of Progress: Pace of progress measures for Education & Outreach will be based on the:
• Number of networking groups create & maintained.
• Establishment of soil health team and demonstration plots.
• Number of tour participants and pre-/post-event surveys.
• Number of locals reached through outreach materials, meetings, and workshops.
• Number of BMP cost-share sign-ups as a result of demonstrations/workshops.
• Number of locally elected and state/federal officials attending meetings.
3.6.2 Lakeshore Owner Education
Issue Statement and Background The amount of impervious surfaces in the drainage area to Recreational Development and General Development Classified lakes is increasing, bigger homes are being built with bigger septic systems, and other development activities are decreasing the amount of high quality habitat found along the lakeshore. For lakes with existing development, there are issues related to redevelopment activity as seasonal cabins are converted to larger homes. For the smaller, undeveloped lakes (e.g. Natural Environment Lakes) there are issues with the development of new cabins and homes. Increased development contributes to shoreline
erosion, increases in the amount of nutrients and sediments getting into lakes, and increased
run-off through loss of deep rooted vegetation (native grasses, shrubs, trees, etc.). In addition, development in shallow lake bays may need to be addressed differently than the rest of the lake. An additional pressure on the larger, developed lakes (e.g., Stalker) is the second ring of development which occurs beyond the first ring (lakeshore) development. As more people look to increase density around already developed lakes, there are impacts to adjacent wetlands or waters. The filling of wetlands to gain access or to locate auxiliary buildings has implications to the quality of the downstream resource.
Priority Area Summary Shoreline development and degradation is an issue for lakes throughout the Northern Region which are almost fully developed and will be addressed first in lakes in the Northern Lakes Area, Pelican-Christina Lakes Area, and the Pomme de Terre River Lakes Chain Area.
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – DRAFT OCTOBER 2019
Section 3: Issues, Goals & Implementation Activities Page 39
Desired Future Condition (Long-Term Goal): Shoreline redevelopment and second tier development that is managed to protect the stability of the lake shoreline and minimize nutrient and sediment runoff to lakes.
10-Year Measurable Goals:
Goal 1: Increase shoreland owner understanding of why there are shoreland regulations, why there are limitations to impervious surface coverage, why vegetation and land alterations impact lake water quality, habitat and lake aesthetics, and how to be better stewards of the watershed’s lakes shoreline.
Targeted Implementation Activities:
• Provide annual lakeshore management education and outreach to the lakeshore owners at 6 lake association/sportsmen’s /Otter Tail Coalition of Lake Associations meetings per year.
• Educational materials distributed to existing lakeshore owners via brochure with link in tax mailing.
• Educational materials distributed to new lakeshore owners at property transfer – develop brochure for new owners, develop an approach to determine how best to distribute material.
Pace of Progress: Pace of progress measures for Lakeshore Owner Education will be based on the:
• Number of locals reached annually through outreach materials.
• Number of education and outreach lake association/sportsmen meetings.
Arial Photography of the Pomme de Terre Watershed
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – DRAFT OCTOBER 2019
Section 4: Targeted Implementation Schedule Page 40
4 TARGETED IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE This section describes the Targeted Implementation Schedule which identifies when and where specific actions will be implemented within the Pomme de Terre River watershed to achieve the desired goals for the 10-year timeframe of the Plan. The Targeted Implementation Schedule includes both structural (capital improvement) and programmatic elements recognizing that effective watershed management needs to address the root causes and drivers of environmental impacts, not just the symptoms, in order to achieve long-term (sustainable) solutions. The inclusion of an action in the Targeted Implementation Schedule is a statement of intent by the Planning Partners. Implementation rests on further PdTRA JPB decisions to budget for and fund the action which will be made in response to routine evaluation of performance in achieving the goals of this Plan. Similarly, over the period of 10 years, as priorities evolve and new concerns emerge or new approaches are developed, the Planning Partners may choose to undertake an action not included in the Targeted Implementation Schedule. The listing of actions in the Targeted Implementation Schedule is not intended to exclude other actions that are consistent with the issues, goals and policies identified in Section 3.0. In such cases, undertaking an action not explicitly identified in the Targeted Implementation Schedule may require amending the Plan as described in Section 6.0 Plan Administration and Coordination.
TARGETED IMPLEMENTATION PLAN STRUCTURE The Targeted Implementation Schedule of the Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan is presented in Table 4-2 through Table 4-7 that includes the following items:
• Implementation activities for the priority issues and concerns (actions).
• Link to the corresponding priority concern(s) and goal(s).
• Location targeting where action will occur.
• Estimated cost.
• Estimated time when implementation of the activity will occur within the 10-year timeframe of the Plan.
• Project lead and project partners.
• Description of how outcomes of the action will be measured.
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – DRAFT OCTOBER 2019
Section 4: Targeted Implementation Schedule Page 41
Table 4-1. Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan Budget Summary Table (2021-2030)
[Note: The final budget tables will include inflation and be rounded to the nearest $1,000]
Pomme de Terre River Issues & Goals Category
Schedule for the Next 10 Years (2021-2030)
2021
$
2022
$
2023
$
2024
$
2025
$
2026
$
2027
$
2028
$
2029
$
2030
$
10-Year Cost
$
ALTERED HYDROLOGY 5,034,956 5,220,801 5,105,485 5,370,668 5,412,104 5,600,926 5,716,190 5,970,947 6,024,160 6,214,309 55,670,542
GROUNDWATER 115,015 94,353 121,903 91,353 118,903 47,790 75,340 52,170 81,340 55,250 853,417
LAKES, WETLANDS AND SHALLOW BASINS 496,391 516,884 623,567 651,748 622,667 643,537 651,607 727,738 622,667 657,448 6,214,254
RIVERS AND STREAMS 114,451 108,016 112,801 108,241 107,476 114,091 112,126 107,566 106,801 107,521 1,099,097
ECOSYSTEM HEALTH 84,372 3,444 4,569 3,444 3,669 3,444 4,569 3,444 4,569 3,444 118,968
SOCIOECONOMIC FACTORS 93,760 79,760 84,960 85,823 96,248 88,560 84,960 79,760 53,395 58,420 805,645
TOTAL 5,938,945 6,023,258 6,053,285 6,311,277 6,361,067 6,498,348 6,644,792 6,941,625 6,892,932 7,096,392 64,761,923
Table 4-2. Groundwater Issues & Goals Targeted Implementation Schedule (2021-2030)
[Note: The final budget tables will include inflation and be rounded to the nearest $1,000]
ID
#
Measurable
Goals
Implementation
Activity
Priority
Area
Schedule for the Next 10 Years (2021-2030)
Major
Funding
Entity(ies)
Project
Lead
Local Project Lead
Project
Partners
Activity
Outcome
Measurability 2021
$
2022
$
2023
$
2024
$
2025
$
2026
$
2027
$
2028
$
2029
$
2030
$
10-Year
Project
Cost Big Stone Douglas Grant Otter Tail Stevens Swift PdTRA 3.1.1-A
Protect public drinking water supplies with moderate and high vulnerability with best management practice technical assistance in Appleton, Morris, and Barrett.
Conversion of 500 acres of cropland to perennial vegetation through perpetual easements and 10 to 15 year contracts by 2029
DWSMA's within Pomme de Terre River Lakes Chain, River Corridor
41,788 57,801 85,351 57,801 85,351 14,238 41,788 14,238 41,788 14,238 454,382 Federal,
State SWCDs S S S BWSR, MDH, NRCS, FSA # of acres enrolled
3.1.1-B
SWCD Staff will review wellhead protection plans and maintain/improve coordination with Cities on partnering opportunities. Staff will also serve on wellhead protection planning teams.
DWSMA's within Pomme de Terre River Lakes Chain, River Corridor
2,912 2,237 2,237 2,237 2,237 2,237 2,237 2,237 2,237 2,237 23,045 State SWCDs S S S Cities, MDH, MN Rural Waters
Wellhead meetings attended
3.1.1-C Contact landowners about completing BMP projects within DWSMA areas.
DWSMA's within Pomme de Terre River Lakes Chain, River Corridor
1,635 1,635 1,635 1,635 1,635 1,635 1,635 1,635 1,635 1,635 16,350 State SWCDs S S S S Cities, MDH Number of landowners contacted
3.1.1-D
Provide resources to private well owners about water testing programs and available treatment options for nitrate and arsenic.
Host annual well water nitrate and arsenic testing clinics and coordinate with environmental labs to have nitrate and arsenic testing kits available to the public
Northern Lakes Area, Pomme de Terre River, Lakes Chain, Pomme de Terre River Corridor Watershed Wide
8,110 8,110 8,110 8,110 8,110 8,110 8,110 8,110 8,110 8,110 81,100 State,
Local SWCDs S S S S BWSR, MDH, Schools, County Fairs
Number of clinics held
Wetland Restoration
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – DRAFT OCTOBER 2019
Section 4: Targeted Implementation Schedule Page 42
ID
#
Measurable Goals
Implementation
Activity
Priority Area
Schedule for the Next 10 Years (2021-2030)
Major
Funding Entity(ies)
Project Lead
Local Project Lead
Project Partners
Activity
Outcome Measurability 2021
$
2022
$
2023
$
2024
$
2025
$
2026
$
2027
$
2028
$
2029
$
2030
$
10-Year
Project
Cost Big Stone Douglas Grant Otter Tail Stevens Swift PdTRA 3.1.1-E
Reduce the number of conduits to the groundwater system (e.g. abandoned wells) to protect groundwater quality by sealing abandoned wells.
Provide cost-share assistance to 134 well owners for sealing of unsealed, unused wells. Prioritize abandoned wells for sealing within moderate and high pollution sensitivity areas and Drinking Water Supply Management Areas
Pomme de Terre River Corridor Watershed Wide 9,480 9,480 9,480 10,080 10,080 10,080 10,080 10,080 10,080 10,080 99,000 State SWCDs S C Cities, BWR, MDH
Number of Abandoned Wells Sealed
3.1.2-A
Assist agricultural producers with groundwater
conservation by
promoting water conservation measures that improve water use
efficiencies and reduce
water demand.
Promote and encourage the adoption of irrigation water management BMPs that increase water conservation and decrease conditions for nitrogen loss
Pomme de Terre River Corridor 3,840 3,840 3,840 3,840 3,840 3,840 3,840 3,840 3,840 3,840 38,400 State SWCDs S S MDH USDA, DNR, MDA
Number of fields with irrigation scheduling plans or flow regulation.
3.1.2-B
Counties will request of the County Geologic Atlas, including staff time to locate wells to support atlas development.
Watershed Wide 41,400 5,400 5,400 1,800 1,800 1,800 1,800 1,800 1,800 1,800 64,800 State,
Local Counties C
S
C
S
C
S
C
S
C
S
C
S X MGS, SWCDs
Number of Counties with the development of Geologic Atlas in progress.
3.1.2-C
Identify and focus BMPs/conservation on recharge/vulnerable areas identified from the hydrogeologic section of the County Geologic Atlas (Section B)
Watershed Wide - - - - - - - 4,380 6,000 7,460 17,840 State,
Local Counties C S C S MGS, SWCDs Recharge and vulnerable areas identified
3.1.2-D Continue ongoing observation well monitoring efforts Watershed Wide 5,850 5,850 5,850 5,850 5,850 5,850 5,850 5,850 5,850 5,850 58,500 State SWCDs S S S S Cities, Counties, MDH, DNR
Annual observation well monitoring
Table 4-3. Altered Hydrology Issues & Goals Targeted Implementation Schedule (2021-2030)
[Note: The final budget tables will include inflation and be rounded to the nearest $1,000]
ID
#
Measurable
Goals
Implementation
Activity
Priority
Area
Schedule for the Next 10 Years (2021-2030) Major
Funding
Entity(ies)
Project
Lead
Local Project Lead
Project
Partners
Activity
Outcome
Measurability 2021
$
2022
$
2023
$
2024
$
2025
$
2026
$
2027
$
2028
$
2029
$
2030
$
10-Year
Project
Cost Big Stone Douglas Grant Otter Tail Stevens Swift PdTRA 3.2.1-A
Reduce annual runoff by 0.08 in. (or 3,527 acre ft.) at the outlet of the Pomme de Terre River Watershed.
Implement 20,840 acres of perennial vegetation including the use of state and federal conservation programs, inclusive of 500 acres that are specific to the Drinking Water Protection priority areas.
Watershed Wide 1,686,700 1,566,497 1,509,572 1,420,698 1,351,430 1,414,518 1,373,846 1,394,182 1,379,296 1,344,074 14,440,813 Federal,
State SWCDs C
S S S S S S NRCS, FSA, BWSR
Total year-end acres with perennial cover. Tracked annually
3.2.1-B
Complete 2,920 acres of wetland restoration inclusive of 2,720 acres that will be targeted within priority areas.
Watershed Wide 1,754,120 1,984,565 2,082,942 2,247,353 2,477,799 2,576,176 2,740,587 2,971,033 3,069,409 3,233,821 25,137,805 Federal,
State
SWCDs
C S S S S S S NRCS, FSA, BWSR
Total year-end acres with perennial cover. Tracked annually and storage volume provided in acre-feet
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – DRAFT OCTOBER 2019
Section 4: Targeted Implementation Schedule Page 43
ID
#
Measurable
Goals
Implementation
Activity
Priority
Area
Schedule for the Next 10 Years (2021-2030)
Major
Funding
Entity(ies)
Project
Lead
Local Project Lead
Project
Partners
Activity
Outcome
Measurability 2021
$
2022
$
2023
$
2024
$
2025
$
2026
$
2027
$
2028
$
2029
$
2030
$
10-Year Project Cost Big Stone Douglas Grant Otter Tail Stevens Swift PdTRA 3.2.1-C
Continued from above:
Reduce annual runoff by 0.08 in. (or 3,527 acre ft.) at the outlet of the Pomme de Terre River Watershed.
Implement 581 structural agricultural best management practices based on PTMApp and best professional judgment inclusive of 383 practices that will be targeted within priority areas.
Watershed Wide 449,677 546,318 449,677 569,699 449,677 546,318 473,059 546,318 449,677 546,318 5,026,737 State SWCDs C
S S S S S S NRCS, FSA, BWSR, DNR, USFWS
Number of BMPs implemented and acre-feet of storage associated
3.2.1-D
Implement 9,340 acres of nonstructural agricultural best management practices based on PTMApp and best professional judgment inclusive of 7,370 acres that will be targeted within priority areas.
Watershed Wide 1,041,699 1,075,301 1,041,699 1,108,903 1,108,903 1,041,699 1,108,903 1,041,699 1,108,903 1,075,301 10,753,007 Federal, State SWCDs C
S S S S S S
NRCS, FSA, BWSR, MDA, UofM, Soil Health Team
Total year-end acres with soil-health practices under single and multi-year contracts. Tracked annually. A process for better understanding and tracking adoption rates will also be explored.
3.2.1-E
Identify previously completed BMPs and create spatial database, develop database for tracking projects in the future.
Watershed Wide 91,000 38,440 13,775 13,775 13,775 13,775 13,775 13,775 13,775 13,775 239,640 State PDTRA C
S S S S S S X SWCDs, Counties, DNR, USFWS
Database for tracking projects (include practices from DNR and USFW).
3.2.1-F
No increase in runoff in non-contributing
areas during
peak run-off periods.
Identify public water basins that do not flow to the Pomme de Terre River and may exceed the ordinary high water level.
Watershed Wide 2,300 1,800 2,300 1,800 500 - 500 - 500 - 9,700 State BWSR SWCDs, Counties
GIS layer
3.2.1-G
Pursue management plans for existing controlled outlets on public water basins that did not originally flow to the Pomme de Terre River to address upstream and downstream concerns.
Watershed Wide 4,730 3,940 2,760 4,220 5,010 4,220 2,760 1,970 1,300 510 31,420 Local Counties S S S S S Environmental Lab, DNR
# water management plans based on identified basins
3.2.1-H
Pursue management plans for future proposed controlled outlets on public water basins that currently do not flow to the Pomme de Terre River to address upstream and downstream concerns.
Watershed Wide 4,730 3,940 2,760 4,220 5,010 4,220 2,760 1,970 1,300 510 31,420 Local Counties C C C C C
SWCDs, Environmental Lab, DNR
# water management plans based on identified basins
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – DRAFT OCTOBER 2019
Section 4: Targeted Implementation Schedule Page 44
Table 4-4. Lakes, Wetlands, and Shallow Basins Issues & Goals Targeted Implementation Schedule (2021-2030)
[Note: The final budget tables will include inflation and be rounded to the nearest $1,000]
ID
#
Measurable
Goals
Implementation
Activity
Priority
Area
Schedule for the Next 10 Years (2021-2030)
Major
Funding Entity(ies)
Project
Lead
Local Project Lead
Project
Partners
Activity
Outcome Measurability 2021
$
2022
$
2023
$
2024
$
2025
$
2026
$
2027
$
2028
$
2029
$
2030
$
10-Year
Project
Cost Big Stone Douglas Grant Otter Tail Stevens Swift PdTRA 3.3.1-A
Achieve lake-specific phosphorus reductions for direct drainage runoff to Artichoke, Barrett, Christina, Perkins, Pomme de Terre, and North Turtle Lakes based on current project feasibility (Table 3-5).
Lake outreach process. Series of meetings to identify in-lake management and engage affected landowners in lake water quality management.
Christina-Pelican Lakes Area, Pomme de Terre River Lakes Chain, Drywood Creek Area 20,070 12,870 2,870 1,970 1,970 7,670 1,970 1,970 1,970 7,670 61,000 State,
Local SWCDs, Counties C S C S C S C S C S Lake Associations
A series of outreach meetings for 3 lakes.
3.3.1-B Conduct 950 hours of Subsurface Sewage Treatment Systems inspections
Christina-Pelican Lakes Area, Pomme de Terre River Lakes Chain, Drywood Creek Area 5,800 5,800 5,800 5,800 5,800 5,800 5,800 5,800 5,800 5,800 58,000 State,
Local Counties C C C C C Lake Associations
A series of outreach meetings for 3 lakes.
3.3.1-C Update 102 Septic Systems found noncompliant through SSTS inspections
Christina-Pelican Lakes Area, Pomme de Terre River Lakes Chain, Drywood Creek Area 102,000 102,000 102,000 102,000 102,000 102,000 102,000 102,000 102,000 102,000 1,020,000 Local Counties C C C C C Townships, MPCA
Number of updated Septic Systems and calculated Phosphorus Reductions
3.3.1-D Conduct shoreline condition inventories on a parcel-by-parcel basis using a uniform process
Christina-Pelican Lakes Area, Pomme de Terre River Lakes Chain, Drywood Creek Area - 45,220 - - - - - 45,220 - - 90,440 State SWCDs, Counties C S C S C S C S C S DNR
Resulting feet of shoreline identified as requiring additional conservational activities.
3.3.1-E Implement 47 shoreline restoration projects for erosion control based on shoreline inventories
Christina-Pelican Lakes Area, Pomme de Terre River Lakes Chain, Drywood Creek Area 43,971 9,804 56,442 85,523 56,442 71,612 70,352 84,623 56,442 85,523 620,734 State SWCDs S S S S S Lake Associations, Counties
Calculated Phosphorus Reductions
3.3.1-F
Implement 113 structural agricultural best management practices (BMPs) based on PTMApp and best professional judgment within the lakesheds (note that these practices overlap with BMPs identified under Altered Hydrology).
Christina-Pelican Lakes Area, Pomme de Terre River Lakes Chain, Drywood Creek Area See AH See AH See AH See AH See AH See AH See AH See AH See AH See AH See AH State SWCDs S S S S S
Lake Associations, Counties, NRCS, FSA
Calculated Phosphorus Reductions
3.3.1-G
Implement 3,640 acres of nonstructural BMPs based on PTMApp and best professional judgment within the lakesheds (note that these practices overlap with BMPs identified under Altered Hydrology).
Christina-Pelican Lakes Area, Pomme de Terre River Lakes Chain, Drywood Creek Area See AH See AH See AH See AH See AH See AH See AH See AH See AH See AH See AH Federal,
State SWCDs S S S S S
Lake Associations, NRCS, FSA, Soil Health Team
Calculated Phosphorus Reductions
3.3.2-A
Achieve lake-specific phosphorus reduction in direct drainage runoff to: Clear, Eagle, Elk, South Turtle, Spitzer and Stalker Lakes based on current project feasibility (Table 3-8).
Conduct 280 hours of Subsurface Sewage Treatment Systems inspections
Northern Lakes Area, Christina-Pelican Lakes Area, Pomme de Terre River Lakes Chain 1,164 1,164 1,164 1,164 1,164 1,164 1,164 1,164 1,164 1,164 16,400 Local Counties C C Townships, MPCA
SSTS landowners identified and informed
3.3.2-B Update 130 Septic Systems found noncompliant through SSTS inspections
Northern Lakes Area, Christina-Pelican Lakes Area, Pomme de Terre River Lakes Chain 130,000 130,000 130,000 130,000 130,000 130,000 130,000 130,000 130,000 130,000 1,300,000
Local Counties C C Townships, MPCA
Number of updated Septic Systems and calculated Phosphorus Reductions
3.3.2-C Conduct shoreline condition inventories on a parcel-by-parcel basis using a uniform process
Northern Lakes Area, Christina-Pelican Lakes Area, Pomme de Terre River Lakes Chain - 16,640 - - - - - 16,640 - - 33,280 State SWCDs, Counties C S C S DNR
Resulting feet of shoreline identified as requiring additional conservational activities.
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – DRAFT OCTOBER 2019
Section 4: Targeted Implementation Schedule Page 45
ID
#
Measurable Goals
Implementation
Activity
Priority Area
Schedule for the Next 10 Years (2021-2030)
Major
Funding Entity(ies)
Project Lead
Local Project Lead
Project Partners
Activity
Outcome Measurability 2021
$
2022
$
2023
$
2024
$
2025
$
2026
$
2027
$
2028
$
2029
$
2030
$
10-Year
Project
Cost Big Stone Douglas Grant Otter Tail Stevens Swift PdTRA 3.3.2-D
Continued from above:
Achieve lake-specific phosphorus reduction in direct drainage runoff to: Clear, Eagle, Elk, South Turtle, Spitzer and Stalker Lakes based on current project feasibility (Table 3-8).
Implement 82 structural BMPs for erosion control based on shoreline inventories.
Northern Lakes Area, Christina-Pelican Lakes Area, Pomme de Terre River Lakes Chain - - 131,905 131,905 131,905 131,905 146,935 146,935 131,905 131,905 1,085,298 State SWCDs S S Lake Associations
Calculated Phosphorus Reductions
3.3.2-E
Implement 82 structural agricultural best management practices (BMPs) based on PTMApp and best professional judgment within the lakesheds (note that these practices overlap with BMPs identified under Altered Hydrology).
Northern Lakes Area, Christina-Pelican Lakes Area, Pomme de Terre River Lakes Chain See AH See AH See AH See AH See AH See AH See AH See AH See AH See AH See AH State SWCDs S S Lake Associations
Calculated Phosphorus Reductions
3.3.2-F
Implement 1,150 acres of nonstructural BMPs based on PTMApp and best professional judgment within the lakesheds (note that these practices overlap with BMPs identified under Altered Hydrology)
Northern Lakes Area, Christina-Pelican Lakes Area, Pomme de Terre River Lakes Chain See AH See AH See AH See AH See AH See AH See AH See AH See AH See AH See AH Federal,
State SWCDs S S Lake Associations
Calculated Phosphorus Reductions
3.3.3-A
Protect existing water quality of shallow basins by maintaining wetland
and grassland
currently enrolled in conservation programs and increasing the
amount of perennial vegetation in the watershed.
Protect/manage a total of 2,700 acres
of wetlands and grassland enrolled in
various conservation cover programs or enrolled as new acres of perennial vegetation.
Christina-Pelican Lakes Area 193,386 193,386 193,386 193,386 193,386 193,386 193,386 193,386 193,386 193,386 1,933,863 State, Federal SWCDs S S
Townships, MPCA, DNR, USFW, NRCS, FSA
Acres of expiring land contacted: re-enrolled/ enrolled expiring acres over the 10 year period, or treated through another management tool
Table 4-5. River and Streams Issues & Goals Targeted Implementation Schedule (2021-2030)
[Note: The final budget tables will include inflation and be rounded to the nearest $1,000]
ID
#
Measurable
Goals
Implementation
Activity
Priority
Area
Schedule for the Next 10 Years (2021-2030)
Major
Funding
Entity(ies)
Project
Lead
Local Project Lead
Project
Partners
Activity Outcome
Measurability 2021
$
2022
$
2023
$
2024
$
2025
$
2026
$
2027
$
2028
$
2029
$
2030
$
10-Year
Project
Cost Big Stone Douglas Grant Otter Tail Stevens Swift PdTRA 3.4.1-A Achieve set resource-specific phosphorus and sediment reduction goals based on current project feasibility from baseline conditions (mid-1990s) in the Drywood Creek and Pomme de Terre River Corridor Priority Area in the next 10 years (by December 31, 2030).
One-on-one conversations with 35 landowners per year of PTMApp top-ranked and best professional judgment of structural and nonstructural practices to enroll in cost-share programs.
Drywood Creek Area, River Corridor 6,315 6,090 6,315 6,315 6,090 5,415 5,640 5,640 5,415 5,595 58,830 State SWCDs S S S BWSR, NRCS Number of Landowners Reached
3.4.1-B
Implement 188 structural agricultural best management practices (BMPs) based on PTMApp and best professional judgment within Drywood Creek Area and the Pomme de Terre River Corridor Priority Areas (note that these practices overlap with BMPs identified under Altered Hydrology)
Drywood Creek Area, River Corridor See AH See AH See AH See AH See AH See AH See AH See AH See AH See AH See AH State SWCDs S S S BWSR, NRCS Phosphorus and Sediment reductions
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – DRAFT OCTOBER 2019
Section 4: Targeted Implementation Schedule Page 46
ID
#
Measurable Goals
Implementation
Activity
Priority Area
Schedule for the Next 10 Years (2021-2030)
Major
Funding Entity(ies)
Project Lead
Local Project Lead
Project Partners Activity Outcome Measurability 2021
$
2022
$
2023
$
2024
$
2025
$
2026
$
2027
$
2028
$
2029
$
2030
$
10-Year
Project
Cost Big Stone Douglas Grant Otter Tail Stevens Swift PdTRA 3.4.1-C Continued from above:
Achieve set resource-specific phosphorus and sediment reduction goals based on current project feasibility from baseline conditions (mid-1990s) in the Drywood Creek and Pomme de Terre River Corridor Priority Area in the next 10 years (by December 31, 2030).
Implement 2,580 acres of nonstructural BMPs based on PTMApp and best professional judgment within Drywood Creek Area and the River Corridor Priority Areas. (note that these practices overlap with BMPs identified under Altered Hydrology)
Drywood Creek Area, River Corridor See AH See AH See AH See AH See AH See AH See AH See AH See AH See AH See AH Federal,
State SWCDs S S S BWSR, NRCS Phosphorus and Sediment reductions
3.4.1-D Restore 20 acres of drained shallow basins (note that these practices overlap with BMPs identified under Altered Hydrology)
Drywood Creek Area, River Corridor See AH See AH See AH See AH See AH See AH See AH See AH See AH See AH See AH Federal,
State SWCDs S S S BWRS, NRCS Phosphorus and Sediment reductions
3.4.1-E Implement 4 nutrient management plans Drywood Creek Area, River Corridor 8,000 8,000 8,000 8,000 8,000 8,000 8,000 8,000 8,000 8,000 80,000 Federal,
State SWCDs S S S BWSR, NRCS Phosphorus and Sediment reductions
3.4.1-F Implement 4 agriculture pit closures Drywood Creek Area, River Corridor 4,300 4,300 4,300 4,300 4,300 4,300 4,300 4,300 4,300 4,300 43,000 Federal,
State SWCDs S S S BWSR, NRCS Phosphorus and Sediment reductions
3.4.1-G
Reduce stormwater runoff
impacts through BMP
implementation in Cities.
Implement 60 BMPs associated with urban stormwater runoff (i.e. rain gardens) Cities 47,993 47,993 47,993 47,993 47,993 47,993 47,993 47,993 47,993 47,993 479,932 State SWCDs S S BWRS, NRCS Phosphorus and Sediment reductions
3.4.1-H
Work with cities to develop stormwater management plans in urban areas. Activities include completing steps of stormwater infrastructure inventory, hydrologic analysis, BMP-recommendation development, and development of stormwater erosion and sediment control standards for municipal ordinance and policy inclusion, using MN Stormwater Manual as a guide as part of this assessment.
Cities 6,750 - 5,100 - - 6,750 5,100 - - - 23,700
State,
Local
Cities, MPCA S S SWCDs Number of plans developed
3.4.2-A
Improve in-stream habitat by reducing sedimentation due to stream bank erosion.
Implement 1 BMP per year to reduce erosion due to livestock such as installing crossings and exclusion fencing. Provide alternative water sources.
Drywood Creek Area, River Corridor 8,910 9,990 8,910 9,990 8,910 9,990 8,910 9,990 8,910 9,990 94,500 Federal,
State SWCDs S S NRCS, DNR
# implemented and sediment and phosphorus reductions
3.4.2-B Implement 1 pasture management and rotational grazing plan per year. Drywood Creek Area, River Corridor 1,410 2,490 1,410 2,490 1,410 2,490 1,410 2,490 1,410 2,490 19,500 Federal,
State SWCDs S S NRCS, DNR # implemented and sediment and phosphorus reductions
3.4.2-C Complete 1 Streambank Stabilization Project per year Drywood Creek Lakes Area, River Corridor 13,520 14,600 13,520 14,600 13,520 14,600 13,520 14,600 13,520 14,600 140,605 State SWCDs S S NRCS, DNR
# implemented and sediment and phosphorus reductions
3.4.2-D Implement 35 side water inlets where appropriate. Drywood Creek Lakes Area, River Corridor 12,348 9,648 12,348 9,648 12,348 9,648 12,348 9,648 12,348 9,648 109,980 State SWCDs S S NRCS, DNR # implemented and sediment and phosphorus reductions
3.4.2-E
Improve riparian habitat by establishing and maintaining perennial buffers and floodplain connections.
Implement 120 acres of buffer on "other waters" coming into the main stem of the Pomme de Terre River. River Corridor 4,905 4,905 4,905 4,905 4,905 4,905 4,905 4,905 4,905 4,905 49,050 Federal,
State SWCDs S S S DNR, BWSR, FSA, NRCS
Total year-end acres with perennial cover (include acres from DNR and USFWS), tracked annually
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – DRAFT OCTOBER 2019
Section 4: Targeted Implementation Schedule Page 47
Table 4-6. Ecosystem Health Issues & Goals Targeted Implementation Schedule (2021-2030)
[Note: The final budget tables will include inflation and be rounded to the nearest $1,000]
ID
#
Measurable
Goals
Implementation
Activity
Priority
Area
Schedule for the Next 10 Years (2021-2030)
Major
Funding Entity(ies)
Project
Lead
Local Project Lead
Project
Partners
Activity
Outcome Measurability 2021
$
2022
$
2023
$
2024
$
2025
$
2026
$
2027
$
2028
$
2029
$
2030
$
10-Year
Project
Cost Big Stone Douglas Grant Otter Tail Stevens Swift PdTRA 3.5.1-A
Work towards preventing spread of AIS by improving coordination of County programs across the planning area.
Annual workshops to coordinate County AIS plans and implementation, or PdTRA holds one meeting per year to discuss AIS
Watershed Wide 3,129 2,004 3,129 2,004 3,129 2,004 3,129 2,004 3,129 2,004 25,665 State PDTRA C S C S C S C S C S C S
DNR, AIS detectors, MAISR (U of M), Lake associations
One Planning Area workshop per year
3.5.1-B Attend DNR District led twice annual County meetings to share ideas with other watersheds
Watershed Wide 3,712 540 540 540 540 540 540 540 540 540 8,572 State County C C C C C C
DNR, AIS detectors, MAISR (U of M), Lake associations
DNR County meeting twice per year; # of collaborative meetings
3.5.1-C
Continue implementing education programs identified in County AIS plans (explore partnering on innovative techniques including geo-tagging, radio, billboards)
Watershed Wide 10,494 - - - - - - - - - 10,494 State County, SWCD C
S
C
S
C
S
C
S
C
S
C
S
DNR, AIS detectors, MAISR (U of M), Lake associations
Group to define what AIS they are focusing on - TBD at annual of bi-annual meetings.
3.5.1-D Inspection – Work with local law enforcement agencies. Watershed Wide 67,037 900 900 900 900 900 900 900 900 74,237 State,
Local County C C C C
DNR, AIS detectors, MAISR (U of M), Lake associations
# inspections
Table 4-7. Socioeconomic Factors Issues & Goals Targeted Implementation Schedule (2021-2030)
[Note: The final budget tables will include inflation and be rounded to the nearest $1,000]
ID
#
Measurable
Goals
Implementation
Activity
Priority
Area
Schedule for the Next 10 Years (2021-2030)
Major
Funding
Entity(ies)
Project
Lead
Local Project Lead
Project
Partners
Activity Outcome
Measurability 2021
$
2022
$
2023
$
2024
$
2025
$
2026
$
2027
$
2028
$
2029
$
2030
$
10-Year
Project Cost Big Stone Douglas Grant Otter Tail Stevens Swift PdTRA 3.6.1-A
Facilitate strategic networking, learning, and participation of targeted groups to assess, build, and leverage community capacity to become aware of water quality issues.
Establish and facilitate Networking/Advisory Groups for targeted groups (lakeshore, urban, agriculture, etc.). Provide leadership training every other year.
Watershed Wide 2,180 1,980 2,180 1,980 2,180 1,980 2,180 1,980 2,180 1,980 20,800 State SWCDs C
S S S S S S X UM Extension
# of networking groups created & maintained (i.e. New Lake Associations or other Ag/urban advisory groups)
3.6.1-B Establish soil health teams for Northern and Southern Regions. 2 meetings/group/year Watershed Wide 11,730 11,730 11,730 11,730 11,730 11,730 11,730 11,730 11,730 11,730 117,300 State, Local SWCDs C
S S S S S S X Establishment of soil health team and demonstration plots
3.6.1-C
Regional tours (every 2 years) on prioritized portions of the watershed to facilitate partnerships, highlight improvements, and discuss upcoming priorities for the area.
Watershed Wide 5,000 -- 5,000 -- -- -- 5,000 -- 5,000 -- 20,000 Local PDTRA C
S
C
S
C
S
C
S
C
S
C
S X LGUs # of tour participants, Gauge Tour learning gains through pre-event and follow-up surveys
3.6.1-D
Increase adoption of BMPs by increasing engagement and communication with residents, local landowners and agricultural producers to improve water literacy and promote a basic understanding of watershed management.
2 BMP-focused (i.e. raingardens, lakeshore restoration, native plantings, land retirement programs, etc.) demonstrations/workshops in the watershed each year
Watershed wide 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 50,000 State SWCDs C
S S C S S S S X
# of locals reached annually and number of BMP cost-share sign-ups as a result of demonstrations/workshops
3.6.1-E Soil health field days Watershed Wide 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 100,000 State,
Local SWCDs S S S S S S X
# of attendees, number of sign-ups for continuous education and potential plot demonstration
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – DRAFT OCTOBER 2019
Section 4: Targeted Implementation Schedule Page 48
ID
#
Measurable Goals
Implementation
Activity
Priority Area
Schedule for the Next 10 Years (2021-2030)
Major
Funding Entity(ies)
Project Lead
Local Project Lead
Project Partners Activity Outcome Measurability 2021
$
2022
$
2023
$
2024
$
2025
$
2026
$
2027
$
2028
$
2029
$
2030
$
10-Year
Project
Cost Big Stone Douglas Grant Otter Tail Stevens Swift PdTRA 3.6.1-F
Continued from above:
Increase adoption of BMPs by increasing engagement and communication with residents, local landowners and agricultural producers to improve water literacy and promote a basic understanding of watershed management.
Continue the work being initiated by the WRAPS Cycle II by identifying a target audience for BMP adoption through follow-up interview on changes made over time.
Watershed Wide -- -- -- 6,063 6,063 -- -- -- -- -- 12,125 State PDTRA S S S S S S X
Compile information on behavior and acceptance changes, and educational gains over a longer period of time
3.6.1-G
Provide information about how
land-use decisions impact the watershed and its resources to locally elected and appointed decision-makers who have a role
in addressing the relationship
between land use and natural resource protection.
Conduct a 5-year watershed tour to re-
evaluate progress, reconnect with partners,
and create new partnerships
Watershed Wide -- -- -- -- 10,225 -- -- -- -- 10,225 20,450 Local PDTRA C S C S C S C S C S C S X
# of tour participants, Gauge Tour learning gains through pre-event and follow-up surveys
3.6.1-H
Host conversation/meeting on the state of local water quality and importance of
watershed management to all types of local
officials and state/federal officials.
Watershed wide 970 970 970 970 970 970 970 970 970 970 9,700 State,
Local PDTRA C S C S C S C S C S C S X
# of locally elected and state/federal officials attending meetings. Gauge educational gains through before, during, and follow-up surveys.
3.6.1-I
Create and host consistent orientation to all
types of newly elected local officials on the Pomme de Terre watershed and include previously elected (current) local officials to
reinforce the message (city, SWCDs,
counties, townships, etc.)
Watershed wide 4,340 4,340 4,340 4,340 4,340 4,340 4,340 4,340 4,340 4,340 43,400 Local PDTRA C
S
C
S
C
S
C
S
C
S
C
S X UMN Extension
Number of locally elected and state/federal officials attending meetings. Gauge educational gains through before, during, and follow-up surveys.
3.6.1-J
Encourage soil and water
stewardship and awareness across all generations, including future agricultural producers and water
recreation enthusiasts, to ensure
that conservation efforts are maintained into the future.
Coordinate with UMN Extension to Host
Aqua Chautauqua within watershed Watershed wide 8,800 -- -- -- -- 8,800 -- -- -- -- 17,600 State PDTRA X UMN Extension Number of attendees
3.6.1-K
Conduct annual Kayak Tour on the Pomme de Terre River to raise awareness of the
resource and provide education about
streamside ecology
Watershed wide 1,750 1,750 1,750 1,750 1,750 1,750 1,750 1,750 970 970 15,940 Local PDTRA X UMN Extension Number of participants
3.6.1-L Continue K-12 curriculum about watershed
management Watershed wide 22,325 22,325 22,325 22,325 22,325 22,325 22,325 22,325 4,340 4,340 187,280 State, Local SWCDs,
PDTRA S S S S S X Schools Number of students reached through educational programs
3.6.1-M
Create a StoryMap to highlight 1W1P plan priority issues, areas, and existing conservation practices/programs in the
watershed and post on the PdTRA website
Watershed wide 5,400 5,400 5,400 5,400 5,400 5,400 5,400 5,400 - - 43,200 State PDTRA X Creation of story map that helps landowners find information.
3.6.1-N Create a listserv (e.g. vertical response) to share information about the watershed on a
more routine basis
Watershed wide 7,400 7,400 7,400 7,400 7,400 7,400 7,400 7,400 -- -- 59,200 State PDTRA X
Increase continued outreach to participants with the ability to gauge number of people being reached with materials and educational gains over time with surveys
3.6.2-A Increase lakeshore owner understanding of why there are
lakeshore regulations, why there
are limitations to impervious
surface coverage, how vegetation and land alterations impact lake water quality, habitat and lake
aesthetics, and how to be better
stewards of the watershed’s lake shoreline.
Provide annual lakeshore management education and outreach to the lakeshore
owners at 6 lake association/sportsmen’s /
Otter Tail COLA meetings per year.
Pomme de Terre River Lakes Chain, Christina-Pelican
Lakes Area, Northern
Lakes Area
4,953 4,953 4,953 4,953 4,953 4,953 4,953 4,953 4,953 4,953 49,530 State,
Local
Counties,
SWCDs C
S
C
S
C
S
C
S X Lake Associa-tions Number of meetings
3.6.2-B Educational materials distributed to existing lakeshore owners via brochure with link in tax mailing.
Pomme de Terre
River Lakes Chain, Christina-Pelican Lakes Area, Northern
Lakes Area
2,160 2,160 2,160 2,160 2,160 2,160 2,160 2,160 2,160 2,160 21,600 State, Local
Counties, SWCDs, PDTRA C
S
C
S
C
S
C
S X Lake Associa-tions
Number of landowners that materials are provided too.
3.6.2-C
Educational materials distributed to new lakeshore owners at property transfer –
develop brochure for new owners, develop
an approach to determine how best to distribute material.
Pomme de Terre River Lakes Chain,
Christina-Pelican
Lakes Area, Northern Lakes Area
1,752 1,752 1,752 1,752 1,752 1,752 1,752 1,752 1,752 1,752 17,520 State,
Local Counties C C Realtors Number of new landowners that materials are provided too.
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – DRAFT OCTOBER 2019
Section 4: Targeted Implementation Schedule Page 49
PRIORITIZATION OF PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS As the Planning Partners evaluated the implementation activities identified during the plan development process, the following criteria were applied in determining which of the activities should be eliminated, implemented first or implemented later in the 10-year timeframe of the Plan:
Existing/Ongoing Activity
− Is the implementation activity something that is currently being performed uniformly by the counties/SWCDs in the Planning Area? If not, is it a local priority or a Plan priority?
Suitable Entity
− Is the PDTRA the most appropriate entity to implement the activity in question or is another
entity more appropriate (e.g. state agency)?
Priority Areas
− Does the action address the issue(s) and goal(s) of the priority resources and areas described
in Section 2.0 Analysis and Prioritization of Issues and Resource Concerns?
Watershed
− Does the action address issue(s) and goal(s) that were determined to be a priority for the entire watershed and are necessary for successful, future implementation at a local scale (e.g., Education and Outreach, well sealing, Long-Term Flood Evaluation Study)?
Address a Gap in the Knowledge Base
− Does the implementation activity enhance the Planning Partners’ understanding of the resource protection and/or restoration needs thereby allowing the PDTRA to make more effective management decisions?
Recommendation from the Civic Engagement Process
− Were the projects/implementation activities recommended by citizens of the watershed involved in the plan development process?
Allocation of Resources
− The Targeted Implementation Schedule distributes the annual budget to its various
programs with an emphasis on “shovel-ready” water quality improvement projects.
Funding
− Priority was given to those actions that are not currently funded by the counties/SWCDs at
a level needed to achieve the goal(s) of the Plan.
2017 Drywood Dam Removal Project
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – DRAFT OCTOBER 2019
Section 4: Targeted Implementation Schedule Page 50
4.2.1 Identification of Roles and Responsibilities towards Implementation The Planning Partners will work under the direction of the Pomme de Terre River Association Joint Powers Board (PDTRA JPB) to develop policies and guidelines that will be used to address the Targeted Implementation Schedule. It is anticipated that this will include the adoption of cost share policies to define how and when funding will be used towards the measurable goals within the Planning Area. It is also anticipated that certain roles and decision authorities will be delegated to staff to allow for efficient plan implementation. It is not anticipated that the PDTRA JPB will have a role in approving landowner contracts to install landowner projects; that role and responsibility will belong to an individual Planning Partner where the project is being installed or implemented. The PDTRA JPB is the decision-making entity with a contracted fiscal agent and currently employs a coordinator to manage a reporting system whereas each Planning Partner or outside consultant will identify their accomplishments towards the Targeted Implementation Schedule. The PDTRA JPB has a responsibility to ensure that resources and accomplishments are being directed towards implementation activities identified and sufficient level of effort towards the measurable goals are being made. As the Planning Partners move forward with implementing the Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan, they will be making decisions about who will be responsible for completing the various steps that go into installing individual projects or implementing activities identified in Table 4-2 through Table 4-7. It is anticipated that a variety of options will be considered during the life of the Plan to determine methods on how targeted implementation activities will best be accomplished. Consideration will be given to contracting for services, using existing Plan Partner staff, hiring staff through an identified Plan Partner or using a retainer agreement for services. To assist with the process of identifying roles and responsibilities towards implementation, a workload analysis will be completed in conjunction with the short-term work plan and budgeting effort (biennial or triennial work plan). The purpose of the workload analysis will be to
1. Refine the anticipated hours and costs to complete individual implementation activities based on actual fund availability;
2. Consider whether the implementation activity is either on-going or involves a limited duration;
3. Assess capacity among Plan Partner staff; and
4. Evaluate capacity and willingness of other Federal, State or local partners to
assist with implementation. Conducting this workload analysis will allow the Plan Partners to have a strategic plan for both staffing and contracting needs and will be used to account for changing demands in the actual pace of progress towards goals and implementation activities.
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – DRAFT OCTOBER 2019
Section 4: Targeted Implementation Schedule Page 51
ACCOUNTING FOR LOCAL FUNDS Funding for implementation of the Plan will come from a variety of local, state and federal sources. One of the final steps in the development of the Targeted Implementation Schedule was to estimate current water management expenditures for the Pomme de Terre River watershed in order to set a baseline of activity. To conduct this estimate, each local unit of government and the Pomme de Terre River Association was asked to identify how much locally generated money (funds derived from the ad valorem levies, fees, services, or donations from citizens, local organizations, or local chapters of national organizations) they accounted for in one year in order to project what is expected to be used within the watershed in future years. Dollars were organized by program type. If a program was a county wide program, the dollars were prorated to only reflect the percentage of land area within the Pomme de Terre River Watershed. If a program already reflected the Pomme de Terre watershed, one hundred percent of the program dollars were accounted for. Since the accounting activity only looked at 2017, some programs have no state or local dollars even though the planning entities may have received money for these programs in past or future years. A summary of estimated funds for the Pomme de Terre watershed in 2017 is provided in Table 4-8. Federal dollars are included in the table to reflect the contributions of federal partners to the Pomme de Terre watershed. Theses dollars could have reflected multiple federal sources implemented by the local units of government, but upon completion of the exercise local units of government only reflected dollars that they had some role in. Federal dollars are primarily USDA-NRCS Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP) dollars implemented in the Pomme de Terre watershed.
First recorded Minnesota Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program wetland easement
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – DRAFT OCTOBER 2019
Section 4: Targeted Implementation Schedule Page 52
Table 4-8. Estimated Water Management Activity Funds Allocated in the Pomme de Terre watershed in 2017
Source State Dollars
in 2017
Local Dollars
in 2017
Match/Local/Federal
in 2017
BWSR Cooperative Weed Management Area $1,678 - $2,043
BWSR Easement Delivery $3,067 - -
BWSR State Cost Share Program $15,674 - $2,749
BWSR WCA $19,808 - $18,034
BWSR Clean Water Funds - Buffer $25,104 - -
BWSR Clean Water Funds - Competitive $170,365 - -
BWSR Clean Water Funds – Local Capacity $116,382 - $18,842
County to SWCDs $116,590 - $1,007
County - AIS $52,369 - -
County -Drainage - - -
County -Feedlots $13,138 - $8,257
County -Shoreland $6,832 - $3,181
County -SSTS $28,706 - -
County-Water Planning $16,956 - $6,040
Federal Dollars (USDA Programs) - $4,130,091 *
Fees for Services and Products $45,703 - -
Municipalities - Stormwater - - -
Non-Profit Dollars $2,264 - -
Non-Profit Dollars – Watershed Wide - - -
Other Non-state Grants - - -
Well Sealing - - -
MDA MAWQCP $3,308 - $827
BWSR CREP Implementation - - -
MPCA – Grants - Competitive $46,591 - -
Regional Agencies $18,973 - -
Conservation Delivery $12,711 - -
Irrigation Scheduling $6,750 - -
Farm Bill Assistance $31,678 - $7,371
County Buffer Aid $47,761 - $77,626
Septic Upgrade Cost Share $1,138 - $864
Totals $803,545 $4,130,091 $146,841
Total Local, State and Federal Dollars $5,080,477
*Indicates an acknowledgement that match for federal programs from landowners is a significant resource but is
currently highly difficult for Local Government staff to track. As Table 4-8 indicates, there is approximately $5,000,000 currently being allocated to water management activities in the Pomme de Terre River Watershed.
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – DRAFT OCTOBER 2019
Section 5: Existing Implementation Programs Page 53
5 EXISTING IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAMS The programs described below form the current baseline of watershed management in the Pomme de Terre River Planning Area and are the tools and systems that will be used to implement the actions identified in the targeted implementation schedule. These programs include incentive programs, operations and maintenance programs, a capital improvement program, regulatory and enforcement programs, data collection and monitoring, and outreach and engagement programs. Through the Pomme de Terre River Association (PDTRA), Local Government Units utilize joint resources to coordinate like-programs within the watershed when appropriate. PDTRA will continue this coordination and information-sharing platform through the implementation of the Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan.
INCENTIVE PROGRAMS Incentive programs are formal programs used to encourage participation in certain activities or programs. Various mechanisms can be used for conducting incentive programs, including technical and/or financial assistance or providing other benefits for enrolling in programs. Financial incentives may be used to encourage landowners to install or adopt land management practices that improve or protect water quality. This section describes the local incentive programs that the Planning Partners will use to achieve the goals in the Plan. SWCDs in the Planning Area intend to evaluate ranking criteria of current incentive programs that will assign higher priority to potential projects located in the Priority Area(s) and targeted drainage areas identified in this Plan which is described in more detail in Section 6.5.1 Project Selection Process.
5.1.1 Cost-Share Programs A cost-share program is where the costs for erosion control, sedimentation control, or water quality improvements are shared between the landowner and a funding agency. Numerous cost-share programs are available at the local, state, and federal level. Cost-share programs often provide funding for structural practices (e.g. water and sediment control structures, grassed waterways, wetland restoration, or controlled drainage practices) or nonstructural practices (e.g. cover crops, no-till, or nutrient management). Landowners seeking cost-share assistance should contact their local SWCD office to obtain information on available programs.
5.1.2 Low-Interest Loans Low- or no-interest loans provide financing at below-market rates, and are often combined with flexible repayment terms. Low- or no-interest loans can be based on a “revolving” Model where the repayments are then redistributed to new loan recipients. Low interest loans may be available for livestock waste-management system updates, septic system replacement, conservation tillage equipment, small community wastewater-treatment systems, or other projects.
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – DRAFT OCTOBER 2019
Section 5: Existing Implementation Programs Page 54
5.1.3 Regulatory Assistance Programs Regulatory assistance programs often require landowners to achieve certain standards (i.e. water quality, buffer widths, etc.) in return for (1) certainty that the standard will not change for a defined period, (2) recognition of participation, and (3) priority for other financial and technical assistance. An example of regulatory assistance is the Minnesota Agricultural Water Quality Certification program.
5.1.4 Conservation Easements Conservation easements are voluntary legal agreements that are made by a landowner and a qualified agency or non-profit organization. These easements permanently conserve targeted resources to prevent land uses that are incompatible with the long-term health of the watershed while keeping land in private ownership. Conservation easements are available through state and local government agencies as well as several non-profit organizations such as The Nature Conservancy and the Minnesota Land Trust. Conservation easements are recorded on property deeds and inspected regularly to ensure that the provisions of the easement agreement are maintained. The Planning Partners recognize the value in taking a comprehensive, long-term approach to land conservation by working with willing landowners and partners to protect and restore important land throughout the watershed. Landowners interested in protecting and restoring their land are encouraged to contact their County’s Soil and Water Conservation District staff to discuss options and opportunities.
5.1.5 Land Acquisition The PDTRA partners recognize the value in taking a comprehensive, long-term approach to land conservation by working with willing landowners and partners to protect and restore important land throughout the watershed. The following table summarizes the various incentive programs offered by the counties and Soil and Water Conservation Districts in the Pomme de Terre River watershed. The specific types of conservation practices and BMPs supported by these incentive programs is summarized in the table to clarify which programs can be accessed for implementation of the Plan.
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – DRAFT OCTOBER 2019
Section 5: Existing Implementation Programs Page 55
Table 5-1. Existing Incentive Programs
Big Stone Douglas Grant Otter Tail Stevens Swift PDTRA
Program Funding Entity C S C S C S C S C S C S
Agricultural Nonstructural Practices - Cover Crops, Conservation Tillage, Soil Health Practices, Buffers & Filter Strips
Nonstructural Land Management Practices (NLMP)
BWSR, NRCS X X X X X
Working Lands DNR X X X
Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) FSA X X X X X X
Continuous Conservation Reserve Program (CCRP) FSA X X X X X X
Conservation Stewardship Program (CSP) NRCS X X X X X X
Agriculture BMP Loan Program MDA X X X X X
Agricultural Structural Practices – Water and Sediment Control Basins, Alternative, Tile Intakes, Cattle Exclusions, Waste Pit Closures, Grade Stabilization, Terraces, Grassed Waterways, Wetland Restoration
State Cost-Share BWSR X X X X X X
Clean Water Funds Competitive Grants BWSR X X X X X X X
319 Competitive Grants MPCA X X X X X X X
Environmental Quality Incentive Program (EQIP) NRCS X X X X X X
Conservation Stewardship Program (CSP) NRCS X X X X X X
Agriculture BMP Loan Program MDA X X X X X
Stormwater/Urban Practices - Well Sealing, Rain Gardens, Septic Systems
Abandoned Well Sealing Cost-Share County X X X X X X
Septic Loan Program MDA X X X X X X X
Clean Water Funds - Competitive Grants BWSR X X X X X X X
319 Competitive Grants MPCA X X X X X X X
Restoration/Protection - Wetland Restoration, Streambank & Shoreline Restoration/Protection
Clean Water Funds - Competitive Grants BWSR X X X X X X X
319 Competitive Grants MPCA X X X X X X X
Wetland Restoration Program X
Invasive Species Management - Management of Aquatic and Terrestrial Invasive plant species
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – DRAFT OCTOBER 2019
Section 5: Existing Implementation Programs Page 56
Big Stone Douglas Grant Otter Tail Stevens Swift PDTRA
Program Funding Entity C S C S C S C S C S C S
Cooperative Weed Management Area Program (CWMA) BWSR X X X
Aquatic Invasive Species Prevention Aid County X X X X X X
Other Conservation Programs
Walk-In Access Program MN DNR X X X X X
Forest Stewardship Plans USFS X X
Pollinator Support X X X X
Other Technical Assistance and Services - Services Provided by local Soil and Water Conservation Districts
Tree Sales SWCD X X X X X
Seed Sales SWCD X X X X X
Drill Seeding SWCD X X X
Contract Mowing SWCD X X X
Equipment/No-Till Drill Rental Program SWCD X X X X
Irrigation Scheduling SWCD X X
Technical assistance for BMP implementation and contract development.
SWCD X X X X X X
Note: C stands for County and S stands for Soil and Water Conservation District (SWCD)
* Through Ag BMP Loan Program (MN Dept of Ag)
Cattle Exclusion Project
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – DRAFT OCTOBER 2019
Section 5: Existing Implementation Programs Page 57
Capital Improvements Capital improvements are beyond the “typical” financial means of the Planning Partners and include larger, non-recurring expenditures for the construction, repair, retrofit or increased utility or function of physical facilities, infrastructure or environmental features Capital improvement projects are often completed in cooperation with multiple entities including counties, SWCDs, watershed management organizations, cities/townships, state agencies and private landowners. The first step in the implementation of capital is studies to identify the most appropriate project. Projects will be chosen using multiple prioritization factors such as project feasibility, cost-benefit analysis, landowner cooperation, and available financing. In many cases, ownership of these improvements and on-going operations and maintenance responsibilities reside with the landowner. Members of the Joint Powers Board or the Planning Committee’s individual and representative Boards are expected to discuss the means and methods for funding new capital improvements with potential funding partners. Capital improvement projects completed through this Plan will be operated and maintained by the sponsoring organization. As part of the regular review of the Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan’s progress described in Section 6.6.1, Planning Partners will review the status of any capital projects as part of its annual work planning.
5.2.1 Drainage The public drainage systems within the watershed are managed by drainage authorities on behalf of the landowners receiving benefit from the drainage system. The individual county governments serve as the drainage authority. These drainage systems, typically open ditches or in some cases underground tiles, were established to enhance agricultural production on lands frequently too wet to produce crops. The cost for original establishment of the public drainage system and subsequent improvements is borne by the benefitted properties. The drainage authority acts on behalf of all the benefitted property owners to assess fees for the level of drainage benefit each landowner receives. Chapter 103E of the Minnesota Statutes, known as the Minnesota Drainage Law or Drainage Code, provides the regulatory framework for managing the public drainage systems. Additionally, under Minnesota Statute 103E.011 §Subd. 5, a drainage authority may accept and use funds from sources other than, or in addition to, those derived from assessments based on the benefits of the drainage system for the purpose of wetland preservation or restoration or creation of water quality improvements or flood control. The sources of funding authorized under this subdivision may also be used outside the benefited area but must be within the watershed of the drainage area. A summary of the public drainage system and the entities responsible for managing these systems is provided in Table 5-2.
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – DRAFT OCTOBER 2019
Section 5: Existing Implementation Programs Page 58
Table 5-2. Summary of Public Drainage System
County Public Drainage System(s)
Drainage
Authority
Record
Keeping
Big Stone No public drainage systems in the Pomme de Terre Watershed Big Stone County Engineer/ County
Hard copies of original
plans, repair reports,
etc. at Highway Dept.
Douglas No public drainage systems in the Pomme de Terre Watershed Douglas County
Hard copies of original plans, maintenance and repair reports. GIS shapefiles available.
Grant
County Ditch 31
Grant County Grant County Highway Department
County Ditch 1
Judicial Ditch 1
County Ditch 30
County Ditch 23
Otter Tail
County Ditch 52 - Pelican Creek
Otter Tail
County Board
Hard copy original
maps. New is in
electronic maps.
Maintenance and repair
reports are electronic
and hard copy.
Judicial Ditch 3
County Ditch30
County Ditch 43
County Ditch 70
County Ditch 10
County Ditch 67(R) – Unnamed Stream
County Ditch 11
Stevens
County Ditch 2
Stevens County
Engineer/County
Yearly status reports, digital and hard copy maps, surveys and maintenance reports. Ditch map available on Stevens County website.
County Ditch 3
County Ditch 4 – Muddy Creek
County Ditch 5 – Unnamed Stream
County Ditch 10
County Ditch 11
County Ditch 14
County Ditch 16
County Ditch 17
County Ditch 18
County Ditch 21 – Unnamed Stream
County Ditch 22 – Unnamed Stream
County Ditch 25
County Ditch 43
County Ditch 31
Judicial Ditch 2
Swift
County Ditch 63 Branch 4B
Swift
County
Hard copies and
GIS shapefile
County Ditch 63
County Ditch 81
Judicial Ditch 2
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – DRAFT OCTOBER 2019
Section 5: Existing Implementation Programs Page 59
5.2.2 Permanent Protection Permanent protection measures are necessary to ensure conservation areas are protected in perpetuity, in an undisturbed, natural state and to ensure that projects, designed to meet the goals of the Plan, are operated and maintained at an effective performance level. Permanent protection is typically provided via a conservation easement. An easement is a limited right of use that one entity has on someone else’s property. The Planning Partners’ role in acquiring conservation easements would likely entail connecting private landowners to existing state and Federal programs so that the landowner could enter into a binding agreement to preserve the property. Under an existing program, the State or Federal government would hold the easement and be responsible for enforcing its conditions. The land-use restrictions placed on the property would remain in place even if the property changes ownership. Permanent protection over a project would work in a similar fashion. Typically, stormwater management projects and BMPs, whether regional facilities or located on an individual property, are protected by a drainage or utility easement. These easements are needed for draining water (stormwater runoff) and installing utilities such as water, sewer and storm sewer lines, gas lines, and buried phone, electric, and cable lines. They are also needed to ensure that access is provided for ongoing maintenance of the BMPs. These easements are usually created when a property is developed and are typically located along border lot lines. However, some properties contain easements that are not placed in these typical locations. Easements can also serve as protective buffers for environmentally sensitive areas such as lakes, streams, and wetlands. Like conservation easements, these easements would remain in place if the property changes ownership. In this case, the Planning Partners would not have a role in the acquisition of a drainage and utility easement or recorded buffer as these requirements typically fall under existing city or county ordinance. A summary of permanent protection programs and the entities responsible for managing these programs is provided in Table 5-3. Soil and Water Conservation Districts also promote many other easement programs provided by State, Federal, and Non-Governmental entities though they may not be the main contact for implementation. Program include but are not limited to:
- US Natural Resource Conservation Service: Agricultural Conservation Easement Program,
- US Fish and Wildlife: Wetland, Tallgrass Prairie, and Grassland Easements,
- MN Department of Natural Resources-Native Prairie Bank,
- Board of Water and Soil Resources-Wetland Bank and Mitigation easements, and other Fee Title options.
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – DRAFT OCTOBER 2019
Section 5: Existing Implementation Programs Page 60
Table 5-3. Summary of Permanent Protections
Big Stone Douglas Grant Otter Tail Stevens Swift
Program Funding
Entity C S C S C S C S C S C S
Land Retirement Programs including RIM/Federal Easements – state’s RIM program and USFWS has
permanent easements, USDA wetland restoration easement program (WREP)
Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program (CREP)
FSA X X X X X X
Reinvest in
Minnesota
(RIM)
BWSR
X X X X X X
Local Easements
SWCD
Conservation
Easement
X
Easement in the Northern region of the Watershed
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – DRAFT OCTOBER 2019
Section 5: Existing Implementation Programs Page 61
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE Municipal and county governments, as well as watershed management entities are responsible for inspecting, operating and maintaining stormwater infrastructure projects, public works, facilities, and natural and artificial watercourses completed or owned by the county, municipality or watershed management entity. Operations and maintenance of any capital improvement implemented through this Plan will be the responsibility of the landowner where the practice is installed, unless an alternative agreement is made. After construction of a project, the responsible party will perform regular inspections and maintenance to ensure the project functions at its design capacity over its intended life expectancy. Operation and Maintenance plans must be prepared before construction and should include the expected activities, timing of activities, and inspection schedule. In addition, the Operation and Maintenance plan should include the procedural activities that will take place in the event inspections determine that maintenance is required or if required maintenance has not been performed, including potential penalties or enforcement actions. Minnesota State Rules Chapter 8400.1700 and 8400.1750 outline the program requirements for the projects funded through state cost-share programs. While there are numerous public works/facilities (e.g. bridges, culverts, dams, wastewater treatment facilities) located in the Pomme de Terre River Planning Area, the counties have the Operation and Maintenance Programs in place to ensure that this infrastructure is operating as designed. Additionally, each county’s drainage management program addresses the on-going Operation and Maintenance needs of the public drainage system as described in Section 5.2.1. The Pomme de Terre River Association has Operation and Maintenance Plans for raingardens, shoreline restoration projects, and pasture buffers. Landowners are required to have a maintenance plan in place for lakeshore/streambank protection projects and WASCOBs when the PDTRA provides cost-share for project implementation. Inspections of these practices/projects are made by SWCD staff every 1st, 5th and 9th year of the project.
Table 5-4. Existing Operations & Maintenance Programs
Big Stone Douglas Grant Otter Tail Stevens Swift
PDTRA Program Funding
Entity C S C S C S C S C S C S
Ditch inspection X X X X
Note: C stands for County (including Cities) and S stands for SWCD
Regulation and Enforcement Many of the Planning Area’s priority concerns can be addressed, at least partially, through local regulations and policies, especially zoning and other land use ordinances. This plan calls for local authorities (counties) to maintain local regulatory controls, and certain land management practices, as well as improved coordination by the Planning Partners of regulatory activities to reduce impacts from altered drainage, and increased groundwater demands. The Planning Partnership does not intend to develop or enforce any of its own regulations or policies. Instead the Planning Partners will coordinate enforcement with local governmental authorities.
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – DRAFT OCTOBER 2019
Section 5: Existing Implementation Programs Page 62
5.4.1 County Regulation Minnesota statutes administered by the Planning Partners are described below. The responsibility for implementing these authorities will remain with the respective counties. There are multiple types of state law and local ordinances in the Pomme De Terre River Planning Area:
• Subsurface Sewage Treatment Systems
• Wetland Conservation Act
• Shoreland Management
• Floodplain Management
• Feedlot Management
• Buffer Management
• Soil Loss Ordinances
• Noxious Weed Law
• Zoning, Erosion and Sediment Control and Stormwater Management The following subsections provide detail regarding these few selected laws or ordinances:
Subsurface Sewage Treatment Systems (SSTS) Program These regulations cover subsurface sewage treatment systems, also known as septic systems. The major goals of SSTS programs are to protect the public health and the environment through effective, modern treatment of domestic sewage from residences or other small-scale establishments. SSTS regulations are based on the following state laws:
1. Minimum technical standards for individual and mid-size SSTS (Chapter 7080 & 7081);
2. A framework for local administration of SSTS programs (Chapter 7082) and;
3. Statewide licensing and certification of SSTS professionals, SSTS product review and registration, and establishment of the SSTS Advisory Committee. (Chapter 7083).
Wetland Conservation Act (WCA) The Wetland Conservation Act was designed to maintain and protect Minnesota’s wetlands and the benefits they provide and reach the goal of no-net-loss of wetlands. The Wetland Conservation Act requires any proposal to drain, fill, or excavate to follow these guidelines: 1) avoid all wetland disturbances; 2) If unable to avoid impact, minimize any impact on the wetland; and, 3) replace any lost wetland acres, functions, and values. Some activities are exempt from replacement, check with your local agency. The Wetland Conservation Act is administered under Minnesota Administrative Rules, Chapter 8420, Wetland Conservation.
Shoreland Management Ordinances Minnesota state law (Minn. Rules §§ 6120.2500 – 6120.3900) delegates authority to regulate shorelands to Local Government Units. Shorelands include both river and lake shore areas. This authority includes regulating the subdivision, use, and development of shorelands along public waters to preserve and enhance the quality of surface waters, conserve the economic and natural environmental values of shorelands, and provide for the wise use of waters and related land resources. Local governments enforce this statute with a land use ordinance requiring a 50 foot buffer around public waters. These ordinances are the backbone of land use controls to protect and provide orderly development of Minnesota's shorelands.
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – DRAFT OCTOBER 2019
Section 5: Existing Implementation Programs Page 63
Floodplain Management Floodplain zoning regulations are designed to minimize loss of life and property, disruption of commerce and governmental services, extraordinary public expenditure for public protection and relief, and interruption of transportation and communication during a flood threat. Risk Mapping, Assessment, and Planning (Risk MAP) is a Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) program that helps communities identify, assess, and reduce their flood risk. By combining quality engineering with updated flood hazard data, FEMA provides accurate and easy-to-use information to enhance local mitigation plans, improve community outreach, and increase local awareness to flood hazards. The Local Government Units will participate and share any information about data that may be available that could be utilized to more accurately map flood risk.
Feedlots The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) established rules for local governments to manage feedlot in Minn. Rules § 7020. Counties may be delegated by the MPCA to administer the program for feedlots that are not required to have a state or federal operating permit. The feedlot rule regulates the collection, transportation, storage, processing and disposal of animal manure and livestock processing activities and provides assistance to counties and the livestock industry. The rules apply to all aspects of livestock production areas including the location, design, construction, operation and management of feedlots, feed storage, stormwater runoff and manure handling facilities. Most counties provide feedlot regulatory oversight and technical assistance programs and maintain a feedlot inventory.
Buffer Management In 2015, the Minnesota legislature enacted the Buffer and Soil Loss Legislation (Minnesota Statute, Section § 103F.48), commonly referred to as the Minnesota Buffer Law. This law requires a 50-foot average, 30-foot minimum width, continuous buffer of perennial vegetation around public waters identified in the DNR Buffer Protection Map. Additionally, a 16.5-foot minimum width continuous buffer of perennial vegetation is mandatory along all public drainage systems. In some cases where a County may be enforcing its own buffer ordinance, the County-specific ordinance will take precedence over the Minnesota Buffer Law. Additionally, a list of Alternative Practices, approved by the local County, Soil and Water Conservation District, and BWSR, may be installed in lieu of a buffer where practices have an equivalent water quality benefit. This Law also requires “Other Waters” (waterways not identified in the DNR Buffer Protection Map) to be summarized for protection through the Local Water Plan approved by Counties and Soil and Water Conservation Districts though an amendment. Amendments may be referred to in the Land and Water Resource Inventory.
Noxious Weed Law The Noxious Weed Law addresses plants that are noxious because they can harm people, animals, the foods we eat, and nature. The Minnesota Department of Agriculture, county, city and township officials inspect land and ask owners to control and eradicate noxious weeds that are present in order to keep them from spreading and harming neighboring lands. Landowners that refuse to comply with an order to control noxious weeds are in violation of
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – DRAFT OCTOBER 2019
Section 5: Existing Implementation Programs Page 64
the Noxious Weeds Law and are subject to having the county contract the work to be performed, with all costs being added to their property taxes, or a summons to district court.
Zoning, Erosion and Sediment Control and Stormwater Management County zoning and subdivision ordinance controls promote the public health, safety and general welfare of the public; protect agricultural land from urban sprawl; and provide a basis for the orderly development of land resources. The county zoning ordinance addresses land use impacts on steep slopes, impacts of grading and filling, erosion and sediment control and stormwater management requirements. Some counties have a resolution to their Right-of-Way ordinance to refrain from farming the ditch bottoms, which may or may not include signage. It should be noted that member communities also have stormwater ordinances, which regulate the impacts of stormwater to the watershed’s lakes, rivers, streams and wetlands.
5.4.2 Regulatory & Enforcement Programs In many cases, the counties maintain and administer the regulatory program while enforcement activities are delegated to the Soil and Water Conservation Districts. For specific details about each planning partner’s programs, see Table 5-5, below. Information regarding which department administers the program is included in the Table.
Table 5-5. Existing Regulatory and Enforcement Programs
Big Stone Douglas Grant Otter Tail Stevens Swift
Program C S C S C S C S C S C S
Riparian Buffer Ordinance
(Buffer Initiative) X X X X X X X
Erosion Control & Stormwater Management X X X X
Feedlot Ordinance X X X X
Floodplain Management X X X X
Noxious Weed Law X X X X X X X
Shoreland Management X X X X X X
Soil Loss Ordinance
Subsurface Sewage
Treatment System Program X X X X X X
Wetland Conservation Act Authority X X X X X X
Zoning Ordinance X X X X
Right-of-Way
Ordinance/Policy X X X
Note: C stands for County and S stands for SWCD
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – DRAFT OCTOBER 2019
Section 5: Existing Implementation Programs Page 65
5.4.3 Comprehensive Land Use Plans A comprehensive plan is a document that outlines the general policies and goals of the county and should be considered as the county reviews, creates and amends ordinances and regulations, considers County Board resolutions on specific issues and established procedures for policy-making. Most of the counties have a Comprehensive Land Use Plan which guides the various land uses in the watershed.
INFORMATION, OUTREACH, AND EDUCATION PROGRAMS Public Participation and Engagement programs utilize education and outreach to address issues impacting a priority concern and make progress towards a measurable goal. The underlying goals are to raise awareness of water resources, and to encourage behavior that benefits the watershed.
Table 5-6. Existing Public Participation and Engagement Programs
Big Stone Douglas Grant Otter Tail Stevens Swift PDTRA
Program C S C S C S C S C S C S
Aquatic Invasive Species Plan X X x X X X X
MN Agricultural Water Quality Certification Program (MAWQCP)
X X X X X X
Awards Program X X X X X
K-12 Education (e.g. Envirothon, field trips) X X X X X X X X
Nitrate Testing X X X X X X
Household Waste Management Program (e.g. Take it to the Box, Waste Pesticide Collection Program)
X X x X X X
Outdoor Education Days (e.g. Conservation Tours, Field Days)
X X X X X X X
Social Media Program X X X X X X X X X X X
Tours and Demonstrations X X X X X X
Newsletter X X X X X
Shoreland Protection and Restoration X X X X X X X
Note: C stands for County and S stands for SWCD
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – DRAFT OCTOBER 2019
Section 5: Existing Implementation Programs Page 66
Data Collection and Monitoring The Planning Partners have a solid baseline of programs to collect data and monitor various components across the Planning Area. These programs will dovetail with efforts to assess the impacts of the One Watershed, One Plan targeted actions.
Table 5-7. Existing Data Collection & Monitoring Programs
Big Stone Douglas Grant Otter Tail Stevens Swift
PDTRA Program Funding
Entity C S C S C S C S C S C S
Precipitation Monitoring * DNR / NWS X X X X X X
Surface Water Monitoring MPCA X X X X X
GIS Inventory of Wells & Septic Systems SWCD X
Observation Well Monitoring (levels)** DNR X X X X X
Well Water Testing MDH X X x X X
Intensive Watershed Monitoring (10 year cycle)
MPCA X
Note: C stands for County and S stands for SWCD
*Volunteer run program – reported to Minnesota State Climatology Office
**Monitored for the MN DNR
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – DRAFT OCTOBER 2019
Section 5: Existing Implementation Programs Page 67
5.6.1 County and Soil and Water Conservation District (SWCD) Monitoring Data
Stevens County
Table 5-8. Lakes historically (prior to 2007) monitored by Stevens County
Lake Name Perkins Hattie
Lake ID 75-0075-00 75-0200-00
Table 5-9. Stream sites historically monitored by Stevens County
Stream Station
Pomme de Terre R.
at CSAH-8, 5 Mi.
S. of Morris
Pomme de Terre R.
at CR-74, 7 Mi.
NE of Morris
Pomme de Terre R.
at CR-76, 11 Mi.
NE of Morris
Station ID S002-884 S002-885 S002-886
Table 5-10. Stream sites historically monitored by Stevens County
Stream
Station
Pomme de Terre R.
at CSAH-10, 3
Mi SE of Morris
Pomme de
Terre R.
at CSAH-20, 9
Mi NE of Morris
Pomme de
Terre R.
at MN-9, 2
Mi SE of Morris
Pomme de
Terre R.
at CSAH-5, 2.5
Mi S of Morris
Pomme de
Terre R.
at US-59, 4.5
Mi S of Morris
Station ID S002-887 S002-888 S004-411 S004-592 S004-593
Grant County Soil and Water Conservation District
Table 5-11. Lakes historically monitored by the Grant County SWCD
Lake Name Pelican Elk Barrett Pomme de Terre
Lake ID 26-0002-00 26-0040-00 26-0095-00 26-0097-00
Table 5-12. Stream sites historically monitored by the Grant County SWCD
Stream Station
UNN STR (Pelican Lk. outlet)
at CSAH-10,
1.5 M.i S of Ashby
UNN STR (Pelican Lk.
inlet) at CSAH-82,
2.5 Mi. E of Ashby
Pomme de Terre R.
at CR-36, 1.7 Mi.
N of Barrett
Station ID S004-581 S004-582 S004-583
Table 5-13. Stream sites historically monitored by the Grant County SWCD Stream Station
Pomme de Terre R.
at CR-52, 5 Mi. NE
of Elbow Lake
Pomme de Terre R. below
dam at PDT LK,
4 Mi. E of Elbow Lake
Pomme de Terre R.
at CSAH-2 (Hawkins Ave)
at Barrett
Station ID S004-585 S004-586 S004-584
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – DRAFT OCTOBER 2019
Section 5: Existing Implementation Programs Page 68
Swift County
Table 5-14. Stream sites historically monitored by Swift County
Stream
Station
Pomme de Terre R. on
CSAH 20, 7 Mi. NW of Holloway
Pomme de Terre R. at US
59, 2.25 Mi. NE of Appleton
Pomme de Terre R. at 190th
Ave. 4 Mi. NW of Holloway
Pomme de Terre R. at
CSAH-7, 7 Mi. N of Holloway
Pomme de Terre R. AT
CSAH-22, 9 Mi.NW of Holloway
Pomme de Terre R. AT
CSAH-36, 3 Mi. NE of Appleton
Drywood Creek at CR-55,
13 Mi. NW of Holloway
Pomme de Terre R. at CR-
56, 6 Mi. NW of Holloway
Station ID S001-710 S001-725 S004-570 S004-571 S004-572 S00-573 S004-574 S004-575
Table 5-15. Stream sites historically monitored by Swift County
Stream Station
Pomme de
Terre R. at
US-12 Bridge,
3 Mi. NE of
Holloway
Pomme de Terre R. AT 185th Ave,
6 Mi. NW of Holloway
Drywood
Crk. at 190th
Ave, 11.5 Mi
NW of
Holloway
Pomme de
Terre R., 70th
ST NW, 10 Mi.
N of Holloway
Pomme de
Terre R. ON
CR-51 (Before
Marsh Lake) 2
Mi. S Appleton
Pomme de
Terre R. UPSTR
OF MN-119 /
MN-7 / US-59
at Appleton
Station ID S004-576 S004-577 S004-578 S004-579 S004-580 S000-195
Pomme de Terre River - Appleton
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – DRAFT OCTOBER 2019
Section 5: Existing Implementation Programs Page 69
5.6.2 Federal, State, and Private Organizations
Pomme de Terre River Association
● Major Watershed Project
− This project was developed in accordance with the MPCA Major Watershed initiative. It was completed in June of 2013 with the main goal to prioritize project locations for a more targeted use of funding from government agencies. The document lists areas where voluntary practices and projects could be implemented in the watershed to improve water quality, habitat, and recreational value. Monitoring for this project was conducted in 2012 and started up again in 2017 - 2018 for the second cycle.
● Surface Water Assessment Grant (SWAG) monitoring
− This grant is provided by the MPCA to local groups that expand their overall capacity to conduct monitoring. The SWAG was granted to the Pomme de Terre River Association in 2017 and has been used for monitoring lakes and stream sites. The data from lakes monitored for this grant are in Table 5-16 and stream sites monitored are in Table 5-17.
Table 5-16. Lakes monitored for Pomme de Terre SWAG
Lake Name Ina Barrett Middle South
Turtle
North
Turtle Johnson Sewell Fiske Oliver
(East)
Oliver
(West)
N.
Dry-
wood
Lake ID 21-0355-00
26 -0095-00
56 –0252-00
56 -0377-00
56 -0379-00
56-0393-00
56-0408-00
56-0430-00
76-0146-01
76-0146-02
76 -0169-00
Table 5-17. Stream sites monitored for the Pomme de Terre SWAG
Stream
Station
Pomme de
Terre R.
UPSTR of
MN-119 /
MN-7 /
US-59 at
Appleton
Pomme
de Terre R
at CR-76,
11 Mi NE of Morris
Pelican
Crk at
160th
AVE, 3 Mi SW of
Ashby
Pomme
de Terre R
at MN-9,
2 Mi SE of Morris
Muddy
Crk at
490th
AVE, 3 Mi SW
of Morris
Drywood
Crk at
200th Ave
NW, 12 Mi SE of
Alberta
Pomme
de
Terre
River
Station ID S000-195 S002-886 S004-410 S004-411 S004-412 S004-13 S009-
449
Biotic Stressor Identification Study
− Monitoring was conducted by the MN Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) for a study of local stressors limiting biotic communities in the watershed. The document was produced in June of 2012 and used data collected by the MPCA and the Pomme de Terre River Association.
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – DRAFT OCTOBER 2019
Section 5: Existing Implementation Programs Page 70
● Other Monitoring
− The Pomme de Terre River Association has collected other monitoring data not directly associated with the projects listed above. This monitoring includes “Watershed Project Monitoring” in 2010 to 2012 and “Water Monitoring” in 2007 to 2008.
Minnesota Coalition of Lakes Association (MN COLA) This is a volunteer organization committed to preserving, protecting, and improving the waters and shore lands of the State of Minnesota through advocacy, education, and sharing of best practices. Organizations join as members and work in their jurisdictions to continue and extend the work of the MN COLA. These organizations are partaking in the Lakes Monitoring Program, explained below. Volunteer monitoring is conducted by some of the member organization, including the Otter Tail County COLA and others. This volunteer work contributes to the “Lakes Monitoring Program” described below.
Lakes Monitoring Program In this program, monitoring of lakes in the region is conducted by volunteers. Over 500 volunteers are trained annually by RMB Environmental Laboratories staff to collect samples. The ultimate goal of the program is to quantify the physical, chemical, and biological condition of lakes to be used for future research analysis.
Table 5-18. Lakes monitored for the Lake Monitoring Program
Lake Name Spitzer Eagle Jolly Ann S. Turtle N. Turtle Long Johnson Sewell
Lake ID
56-
0160-
00
56 -
0253-
00
56-
0370-
00
56-
0377-
00
56 -
0379-
00
56-
0390-
00
56-
0393-
00
56 -
0408-
00
Table 5-19. Lakes monitored for the Lake Monitoring Program
Lake Name German Fiske Stalker Clear Ten Mile Un named Swan
Lake ID 56-0423
-00
56-0430
-00
56-0437
-00
56-0559
-00
56-0613
-00
56-0780
-00
56-0781
-00
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) This agency provides multiple services to the Pomme de Terre Watershed. Some of these services are described below.
● Watershed Restoration and Protection Strategies (WRAPS)
− The most recent WRAPS study was completed in March of 2013. It provides monitoring information over a 10-year cycle to assess the results of the data and develop strategies for restoration.
● Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) Assessments
− A TMDL assessment was completed for this watershed by the MPCA in January of 2015. This study included 5 reaches of Dry Wood Creek and 1 reach of the Pomme de Terre River. It also included North Turtle Lake in Otter Tail County, Christina Lake in Douglas County, and Perkins Lake and Hattie Lake, in Stevens County.
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – DRAFT OCTOBER 2019
Section 5: Existing Implementation Programs Page 71
● Citizen Stream and Lake Monitoring
− Monitoring program primarily collecting Secchi disk depth for lakes and Secchi tube measurements for streams. Data from this program are used in stream and lake assessments and to develop reports on watershed health and improvement strategies.
Table 5-20. Lakes monitored for the MPCA Citizen Lake Monitoring Program
Lake Name Pelican Elk Barrett Pomme
De Terre (Null) Torgerson Middle Eagle
Lake ID 26-
0002-00
26-
0040-00
26-
0095-00
26-
0097-00
26-
0117-00
56-
0251-00
56-
0252-00
56-
0253-00
Lake Name Jolly Ann S. Turtle N. Turtle Long Sewell Fiske Stalker Clear
Lake ID 56-
0370-00
56-
0377-00
56-
0379-00
56-
0390-00
56-
0408-00
56-
0430-00
56-
0437-00
56-
0559-00
Lake Name Ten Mile Hansel Indian Larson Fossan Swan Perkins Hattie
Lake ID 56-0613-00 56- 0615-00 56- 0639-00 56- 0651-00 56-0656-00 56-0781-00 75-0075-00 75-0200-00
Table 5-21. Stream sites monitored for the MPCA Citizen Stream Monitoring Program
Stream
Station
Pomme de Terre R,
3.1 Mi NW of
Dalton
Pelican Crk at BRG on UNN RD, 2 Mi SW
of Ashby
Pomme de Terre R at CR-51 BRG, 5.5 Mi W of
Ashby
Pomme de Terre R on CR-47 BRG, 5.5 Mi N
of Barrett
Pomme
de Terre
R at BRG
on UNN
ROAD, 4
Mi S of
Barrett
Pomme de Terre R at Township RD 179, 4 Mi SW of
Hoffman
Muddy
Crk at
490th
Ave, 3
Mi SW
of
Morris
Pomme
de Terre
R AT
CSAH-37,
4.5 Mi
SW of
Dalton
Station ID S001-
890
S002-
055 S002-056 S002-057 S002-058 S002-414 S004-
412 S004-510
● Watershed Pollutant Load Monitoring Network
− The MPCA monitors pollutant loads in Minnesota’s rivers and streams to assist in watershed modeling, determining sources of pollutants, and developing reports around the state.
Table 5-22. Stream sites monitored for the MPCA Major Watershed Pollutant Load Monitoring Network
Stream Station
Pomme de Terre R.
UPSTR OF MN-119 / MN-7 /
US-59 at Appleton
Pomme de Terre R. at
CR-76, 11 Mi NE of
Morris
Station ID S000-195 S002-886
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) This agency provides multiple monitoring services that benefit the Pomme de Terre Watershed including wetland monitoring, groundwater monitoring, surface water monitoring, and a watershed health assessment.
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – DRAFT OCTOBER 2019
Section 5: Existing Implementation Programs Page 72
● Wetland Monitoring
− The MN DNR has conducted random sample surveys since 2006 using both GIS technology and sample plots in the field. These surveys are used to understand the gain and loss of wetlands in the state of Minnesota.
● Groundwater Monitoring
− Monitors groundwater levels through a series of observation wells located statewide.
● Surface Water Monitoring
− Maintains a flow gauge on the Pomme de Terre River near Hoffman.
● Geomorphic Assessments
− Conducts geomorphic assessment at the same seven sites evaluated during WRAPS Cycle 1 once every ten years.
● Shallow Lakes Program
− This program is focused on wildlife enhancement in the shallow water zone, generally less than 15 feet deep, the zone that provides the most important wildlife habitat. Monitoring is conducted in many of these lakes to develop strategies to protect and enhance wildlife habitat.
Table 5-23. Lakes monitored for the MN DNR Shallow Lakes Program
Lake Name Artichoke Anka Christina
Lake ID 06-0002-00 21-0353-00 21-0375-00
Table 5-24. Lakes monitored for the MN DNR Shallow Lakes Program
Lake Name Little Tamarack Unnamed Harstad
Slough Clear Flax Gorder Unnamed
Lake ID 26-
0076-00
56-
0433-00
56-
1083-00
75-
0161-00
75-
0192-00
75-
0201-00
75-
0203-00
75-
0209-00
● Sentinel Lakes
− This is a monitoring program for Minnesota’s most common lakes. This information is collected for the purpose of developing management approaches to address negative impacts caused by development. The only lake in the Pomme de Terre Watershed currently being monitored for this program is Artichoke Lake. Artichoke Lake is a Tier 2 Sentinel Lake and is not sampled annually. The next sampling of Artichoke Lake by MPCA will be in 2027-2028. The information available is shown in the table below.
Minnesota Department of Agriculture (MDA)
● Surface water quality monitoring
− The MDA runs this monitoring program to provide information on the concentrations of agriculture chemicals, including pesticides and fertilizers, in surface waters. Data is available for only one stream site in the Pomme de Terre watershed.
Table 5-25. Stream site monitored for the MDA Surface Water Pesticide Water Quality Monitoring Program
Stream Station Pomme de Terre R. UPSTR of MN-119 / MN-7 / US-59 at Appleton
Station ID S000-195
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – DRAFT OCTOBER 2019
Section 5: Existing Implementation Programs Page 73
● Groundwater quality monitoring
− This program operated by the MDA provides detailed information on the concentrations of agriculture chemicals, including pesticides and fertilizers, in groundwater. Its focus is to monitor vulnerable groundwater in the agricultural and urban areas of the state. Three groundwater monitoring sites have been tested every year since 2004 in the Pomme de Terre River Watershed.
Minnesota Department of Health (MDH)
● Minnesota Well Index
− This index provides information on the wells and borings in Minnesota. Information includes location, depth, geology, construction, and static water level. The wells can be found through a web-based map or a text search.
● Public Water Supply Testing & Monitoring
− The MDH monitors and tests for contaminants found in public water supply source waters. This includes Manganese, Radionuclides, Nitrate, and more. Reports can be found on their website. MDH works with public water suppliers to establish Drinking Water Supply Management Areas and Wellhead Protection Plans.
United States Geological Survey
− The USGS has many resources available for monitoring. For example, the National Water Information System (NWIS) is an application that provides long-term storage of water data. Through this program, information for the Pomme De Terre Watershed includes:
▪ A site inventory of wells grouped by county,
▪ one real-time streamflow station (the Pomme de Terre River at Appleton, Minnesota) including daily (discharge and gage height) and monthly (discharge mean) streamflow data,
▪ water quality samples grouped by county, and
▪ groundwater inventory levels grouped by county. This information can be found on the USGS website under the Pomme de Terre watershed.
United States Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA)
● National Lakes Assessment
− This program is a statistical survey of the current condition of lakes, ponds, and reservoirs in the United States.
Table 5-26. Lakes monitored for the U.S. EPA National Lakes Assessment
Lake Name
Un-
named
(West)
Un
name
d
Fiske Fiske
Un
name
d
Silver Un-
named
Un-
named
Un
name
d
North
Drywood
Lake ID
26-
0043-
02
26-
0111-
00
56-
0430-
00
56-
0430-
00
56-
0630-
00
75-
0164-
00
75-
0205-
00
75-
0205-
00
76-
0166-
00
76-
0169-
00
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – DRAFT OCTOBER 2019
Section 5: Existing Implementation Programs Page 74
5.6.3 Monitoring Sites
Figure 5-1. All streams in the Pomme de Terre Watershed with Monitoring Data
*Note: some stream sites are shown that have monitoring parameters not listed in the preceding tables.
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – DRAFT OCTOBER 2019
Section 5: Existing Implementation Programs Page 75
Figure 5-2. All lakes in the Pomme de Terre Watershed with monitoring data
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – DRAFT OCTOBER 2019
Section 5: Existing Implementation Programs Page 76
5.6.4 Assessment of Plan Progress In the short-term, implementation of activities and measuring progress toward goals will be tracked by project type as described in Table 6-2. In the long-term, the Planning Partners will use monitoring data to assess trends in water quality improvement. It should be recognized that there are other factors which will confound the direct relationship between watershed activities and changes in resource trends such as climate change, land-use patterns and drainage management. Table 5-27 identifies the information available to evaluate progress toward the Plan’s goals as well as any new monitoring needed to improve understanding of baseline conditions or assess particular resources.
Water Quality Monitoring
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – DRAFT OCTOBER 2019
Section 5: Existing Implementation Programs Page 77
Table 5-27. Existing monitoring data available to evaluate progress toward the Plan goals
Priority Resources Biology Water Quality Water Quantity
High Quality Lakes Fish and Aquatic
Plant Surveys
Total Phosphorus, Chlorophyll-
a, and Secchi Depth
Lake Levels
Clear (56-0559) Y All 2017-2018 Y
Eagle (56-0253) Y All 1996-2018 Y
Elk (26-0040) Y All 1991-2018 Y
Pelican (26-0002) Y All 1991-2018 Y
South Turtle (56-0377) Y All 2009-2017 Y
Spitzer (56-0160) N All 2009-2018 Y
Stalker (56-0437) Y All 1998-2017 Y
Poor Quality Lakes Fish and Aquatic
Plant Surveys
Total Phosphorus, Chlorophyll-
a, and Secchi Depth Lake Levels
Artichoke (06-0002) Y All 2008-2018 Y
Barrett (26-0095) Y All 1991-2017 Y
North Turtle (56-0379) Y All 2009-2018 Y
Perkins (75-0075) Y All 1992-2018 Y
Pomme de Terre (26-0097) Y All 1991-2018 Y
Christina (21-0375) N All 1999-2006 Y
Pollutant Impaired Streams Fish and Macroinvertebrate
Community Surveys
Total Phosphorus and Total Suspended Solids
Concentrations
Continuous Daily Stream
Flows
Drywood Creek Y Both 2007-2018 –
data at multiple stations (3) N
Lower Pomme de Terre River Y Both 1972-2018 –
data at multiple stations (23) Y
Groundwater N/A Arsenic, nitrate and manganese
concentrations Groundwater Levels
Drinking Water Protection N/A Nitrate-nitrogen concentrations N/A
Groundwater Conservation N/A Gap: develop groundwater (GW) monitoring program Gap: develop GW monitoring program
Altered Hydrology N/A N/A Lake Levels, Stream Gauge
& Peak Stream Flows
Pomme de Terre River N/A N/A Y
Monitoring data collected by:
MDH DNR MPCA Volunteers
5.6.5 Data Collection, Analysis and Sharing Locally Collected Data The Planning Partners and other entities involved in data collection are committed to performing periodic analysis of the data for quality control purposes (monthly) and to evaluate trends (every 5 years). The Planning Partners are also committed to continuing to collect data in a manner that is consistent with state compatibility guidelines and will submit locally collected data to the appropriate state agency for entry into public databases (e.g. Environmental Quality Information System, EQuIS).
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – DRAFT OCTOBER 2019
Section 5: Existing Implementation Programs Page 78
PROGRAMMATIC GAPS The Planning Partners currently rely on the 10-year Watershed Restoration and Protection Strategy monitoring cycle to assess water quality changes. This plan is based on the assumption that there will be another round of monitoring in 2027, that Watershed Pollutant Load Monitoring Network monitoring will continue at the two sites along the Pomme de Terre River near Morris and Appleton, and that there will be continued coordination of the MCPA Citizen Stream and Lake Monitoring Program. However, future monitoring efforts will depend on available funding levels through the MPCA. Other future planning efforts on the local level include working with Lake Associations to obtain annual lake data. There may be future opportunities to increase voluntary citizen monitoring within the watershed through a locally-led voluntary effort. The Planning Partners and state agencies recognize that these gaps need to be addressed in order to establish baseline conditions and to track performance over time. Programmatic gaps for public drainage system management by drainage authorities include:
• Modernization of ditch management – Implement systems that allow staff to better track drainage improvements, view historic documents, upload drainage files, create and track maintenance requests, conduct inspections and report violations from mobile devices, etc.
• Connecting the drainage authorities to other sources of outside funding for maintenance (e.g. BWSR’s Multi-Purpose Drainage Management Grant Program). No other programmatic gaps to implement the Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan were identified by the Planning Partners.
2017 Pomme de Terre River Run
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – DRAFT OCTOBER 2019
Section 6: Plan Administration and Coordination Page 79
6 PLAN ADMINISTRATION AND COORDINATION The Targeted Implementation Schedule (Section 4) and the Plan Implementation Programs (Section 5) will be coordinated between the Counties, the Soil and Water Conservation Districts, and the other partners through decision making and staffing, collaboration, funding, and work planning.
ORGANIZATION STRUCTURE OR FORMAL AGREEMENTS The Pomme de Terre River One Watershed, One Plan is a coalition of Counties and Soil and Water Conservation Districts who make up the existing Joint Powers Board and Technical Advisory Committee. The Association currently operates under a Joint Powers Agreement, By-Laws, and has Shared Services contracts in place between each of the Local Entities partaking in grant allocations. An amendment to the Joint Powers agreement was passed by the Pomme de Terre River Association Joint Powers Board for the purpose of implementing this Plan. The legal name defined under this Joint Powers Agreement is the Pomme de Terre River Joint Powers Board. A copy of the Joint Powers Agreement being is attached as Appendix D.
DECISION-MAKING AND STAFFING The Pomme de Terre River Association (PDTRA) is a functioning watershed-based entity that provides the ability for both Joint Powers Board members and landowners to address issues on a watershed scale rather than by individual geographical areas of each local unit of government. Founded in 1981, the PDTRA created a partnership between Otter Tail, Grant, Douglas, Stevens, Big Stone, and Swift Counties and Soil and Water Conservation Districts (SWCD). The PDTRA does not have land use authority or taxing authority. Those authorities are maintained by the individual local units of government. However, the PDTRA does have decision making authority for pursuing and managing federal or state grant opportunities, allocating local funding sources and implementing the Plan. PDTRA and local partners will be responsible for reviewing and approving the Plan prior to submittal to the Board of Water and Soil Resources and adopting the Plan. PDTRA and locals will also be responsible for making amendments as needed and for measuring results over the ten-year timeframe of the Plan. Through collaborative planning and funding, the PDTRA promotes and provides technical assistance and cost-share for voluntary conservation practices, provides education and outreach opportunities, participates in water quality monitoring, and engages in prioritized planning Best Management Practice Implementation. From 2007 – 2019, the PDTRA has utilized nearly $4,000,000 in funding to implement a variety of watershed management activities through the use of competitive and non-competitive grant funding from State and Federal sources. Moving forward with the Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan and Targeted Implementation schedule, the PDTRA will be the primary entity for plan execution and fiscal responsibilities.
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – DRAFT OCTOBER 2019
Section 6: Plan Administration and Coordination Page 80
6.2.1 Joint Powers Board
Purpose: Approve work plans, amendments, fiscal reporting, annual assessments, review recommendations and provide direction to the Technical Advisory Committee. The Pomme de Terre River Joint Powers Board includes of one elected official from each County Board of Commissioners and Soil and Water Conservation District Supervisors from each District included within this agreement. The Joint Powers Board will operate under the approved By-laws and Joint Powers Agreement to carry out responsibilities listed within the Plan. The Joint Powers Board will meet monthly throughout the ten-year lifespan of the plan to discuss business of the Plan.
6.2.2 Technical Advisory Committee
Purpose: Provide technical input and assist in implementation of the Plan, identify collective funding, program, and partnership opportunities, review priorities, evaluate direction from the board, and make recommendations to the Joint Powers Board to consider regarding the targeting efforts within the work plan of future grants. The Technical Advisory Committee is comprised of one representative of each Soil and Water Conservation District and County included in the Pomme de Terre River Watershed. Each member of the committee shall be a member of each respective unit of government and shall be appointed by the respective unit of government. The Technical Advisory Committee also invites other partnering State and Federal Agencies including, but not limited to, MN Pollution Control Agency (MPCA), Board of Water and Soil Resources (BWSR), US Department of Natural Resources (DNR), US Fish and Wildlife Service(USFWS), Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), MN Department of Agriculture (MDA) to serve as non-voting members. The Technical Advisory Committee will meet monthly throughout the ten-year lifespan of the Plan to discuss implementation activities of the Plan.
6.2.3 Share Services / Fiscal / Administrative Agent
Implementation: Members of the Pomme de Terre Technical Advisory Committee leverage education, watershed planning, monitoring, and implementation opportunities through collaboration and use of shared-services. Shared services between Soil and Water Conservation Districts are accomplished through a Contract for Service which has been used and signed between members of the Pomme de Terre River Association at the execution of any collaborative grant funding. These contracts are signed by each entity outlining required time tracking and project completion packets in order to receive reimbursement for staff time and cost-share. It is the expectation that federal and state agency planning partners provide in-kind staff assistance to carry out the implementation activities identified within this Plan and not only provide or oversee program funds. These shared and coordinated services among federal and state agency staff, while not required to be identified within this Plan, will be discussed throughout the ten-year life of the Plan by the Technical Advisory Committee and are considered critical to meeting the goals of the Plan.
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – DRAFT OCTOBER 2019
Section 6: Plan Administration and Coordination Page 81
Administration: Administrative services shall be provided under the direction and control of the Joint Powers Board. These services shall include, but are not limited to, financial, legal and general administration. The Board may enter into contract and/or agreements with one or more of its member entities as a host entity or fiscal agent to carry out the functions of the Pomme de Terre River Association. As of 2019, the contracted Fiscal Agent for the Pomme de Terre River Association is the Stevens County Soil and Water Conservation District.
Coordination: The Pomme de Terre River Association has employed a Project Coordinator to assist the Joint Powers Board in carrying out its duties and responsibilities since 2007. It is expected that the Pomme de Terre River Association will continue the employment of a Coordinator to aid in carrying out the implementation plan so long as funding and program opportunities exists. Currently, the Stevens Soil and Water Conservation District holds a Host Entity Contract with the Pomme de Terre River Association to allow day-to-day operations. Duties of the Coordinator include, but are not limited to, applying for grant opportunities on behalf of the Pomme de Terre River Association, providing staff time for educational and outreach opportunities, aiding in program development, coordinating collaboration between the Planning Partners, and reporting measurable progress to the Board of Water and Soil Resources.
COLLABORATION WITH OTHER UNITS OF GOVERNMENT The Pomme de Terre River Association will continue coordination and cooperation with other governmental units at all levels. Agencies including MN Pollution Control Agency (MPCA), Board of Water and Soil Resources (BWSR), Department of Natural Resources (DNR), US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), MN Department of Agriculture (MDA), and MN Department of Health (MDH) and Farm Service Agency (FSA) have provided input on the planning process through comment letters and participation in the Technical Advisory Committee. They are important resources in watershed management in providing program funding, technical assistance, and project opportunity. Cooperation between the Pomme de Terre River Association and Local units of government such as municipalities, township boards, county boards, and drainage authorities are also important to achieving plan goals. Partnerships may take various forms, including but not limited to, providing matching funds or in-kind services for grant applications, sharing of staff or other resources, and collaborating on project administration and implementation. The Pomme de Terre River Association and existing partners will also continue to collaborate and identify emerging partners throughout the lifespan of the Plan when it is appropriate.
6.3.1 Collaboration with Non-Governmental Organizations Plan partners expect to continue and build on existing collaboration with others when opportunities exist that align with plan objectives, including non-governmental organizations, while implementing this plan. Current and potential future partnerships include, but are not limited to The MN Land Trust, Pheasants Forever, Ducks Unlimited, University of Minnesota Extension, local sporting groups, local service clubs, and Lake Associations, Corn Growers, Soybean Growers, Farm Bureau, Farmers Union, and others.
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – DRAFT OCTOBER 2019
Section 6: Plan Administration and Coordination Page 82
FUNDING Local, state, and federal sources of funding were evaluated for each implementation activity by the Planning Partners. The Planning Partners also expect to pursue grant opportunities collaboratively to fund implementation of the Targeted Implementation Schedule. Dependent upon individual project partners, other sources of funding may be evaluated as well. Cost within the Targeted Implementation Schedule are estimates based on past and current capacity, program availability, and limiting factors such as staff time. Numbers can be expected to increase and decrease over the lifetime of the Plan’s opportunities arise and program availability changes. It is expected that BWSR will allow for some flexibility to allow for unforeseen changes. The amount of funding provided by State, Federal and local sources for implementation of the Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan will have a significant impact on the Plan success.
6.4.1 Local Funding Local funds for County offices and Soil and Water Conservation Districts can be derived from a variety of sources, including tax levies, fees, services and in-kind services, or local organizations. Local funding can be used to accomplish regional initiatives and goals where state and federal funds are unavailable or lacking. Local funding will be used as match for other utilized State and Federal grants. Members of the Pomme de Terre River Association may provide direct funding as they may determine from time to time. In addition to, or in lieu of financial support, the members may also contribute services, personnel, or personal property to the Pomme de Terre River Association in such amounts as the members may determine from time to time in order to accomplish plan goals. Members are not expected to make any individual contribution unless it is approved by all members of the Joint Powers Board. The total estimate of local funds needed for implementation over the 10-year timeframe of the plan is $2,715,172. Note that most implementation activities include some type of local contribution, but local funds may not always represent the majority of funding for a given activity.
6.4.2 State Funding State funding includes all funds derived from existing block grants, regulatory programs or base cost share grants and program implementation. State funding excludes general operating funds obtained from BWSR, counties, service fees, and grants or partnership agreements with the federal government or other conservation organizations. The total estimate of state funds needed for implementation over the 10-year timeframe of the plan is $23,259,244.
6.4.3 Federal Funding Federal funding includes programs such as, but not limited to, the Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP), Conservation Reserve Program (CRP), Conservation Stewardship Program (CSP), and Federal Section 319 competitive grants provided though The
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – DRAFT OCTOBER 2019
Section 6: Plan Administration and Coordination Page 83
Environmental Protection Agency. The Pomme de Terre River Association has a past record of utilizing such funding to leverage state dollars used to provide Technical Assistance and Project Development as well as for project implementation cost-share. The Pomme de Terre River Association will continue to pursue federal dollars where the purpose of an initiative described in plan aligns with the goals of various federal agencies and programs. The total estimate of federal funds needed for implementation over the 10-year timeframe of the plan is $38,787,508.
6.4.4 Collaborative Grants The Pomme de Terre River Association has a rich history of collaboratively applying to competitive and non-competitive grants (including Clean Water Funds, Federal Section 319, Surface Water Assessment Grant, and Watershed Restoration and Protection Strategy Implementation) in order to achieve watershed-wide objectives and will continue to do so as opportunities that align with plan objectives present themselves.
6.4.5 Other Funding Sources Non-governmental funding sources exist that provide technical assistance and fiscal resources to implement projects whose objectives align with the goals of the Pomme de Terre River Association. Though the Pomme de Terre River Association has not historically contracted services directly with non-governmental organization, it is important to recognize the impact other conservation organizations have on the overall goals of the watershed and the potential that this plan could be used to explore future opportunities for partnerships. Private sector companies, including agribusinesses, are often overlooked as a potential source of implementation funding. Many agribusiness companies are working to improve water quality, others provide technical or financial support for implementing management and structural water quality BMPs. Most often this is through Field to Market: The Alliance for Sustainable Agriculture. This Plan could be used to explore private sector funding, especially when the estimated water quality benefits have monetary value.
Pomme de Terre River – Jake Krohn
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – DRAFT OCTOBER 2019
Section 6: Plan Administration and Coordination Page 84
WORK PLANNING The Pomme de Terre River Association annual budgeting process and will include budget projections, staff capacity, project prioritization, and scheduling details. The Joint Powers Board will develop and approve the work plans under advisement of the Technical Advisory Committee. Individual district budgets and workplans may include priorities included within the Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan annual workplan. Each work plan will be based on progress made toward goals and new initiatives aimed at either maintaining or accelerating progress in targeted sub-watersheds. Staff and financial resource availability will be considered. Feedback and guidance received will be integrated into the work plan. The work plan will include an indication of each local government’s responsibilities for implementing the Plan. The responsibilities of each local government will be adopted and implemented separately by each local government but under advisement and direction of the Plan Partners. After Plan adoption, the Planning Partners’ annual work plans will be developed or revised to include implementation activities identified in this Plan. When feasible, the activities will be coordinated with other agency plans, projects, and timelines.
6.5.1 Project Selection within Targeted Implementation Areas Implementation of best management practices is based on staff capacity to perform outreach to willing landowners. The Planning Partners identified the feasible number of landowners they could contact over the 10-year timeframe of the Plan. Pollutant reductions from the top ranked practices by cost benefit was used to modify the 10-year measurable goals of the Plan. During the annual work planning process, top ranked practices identified through tools outlined in Table 6-1 will be reviewed in the field by Local staff to determine feasibility.
Table 6-1. Targeting Tools by Project Type
Project Type
Targeting Methodology
Priority Area Scale Field Scale
Shoreline/streambank restorations GIS Terrain Analysis Shoreline inventories (Implementation Activity)
DNR Erosion Sites surveys
Septic system
improvements Septic system inspections
Wetland restorations PTMApp to help identify specific locations for BMPs. Urban BMPS – WRAPS Priority Management Zones
Results from PTMApp will be reviewed by local staff to verify site-specific feasibility. Non-structural BMPs
Structural BMPs
Local staff will use their Best Professional Judgement and PTMApp regarding the potential for project implementation within PTMApp or locally identified parcels, and contact landowners to discuss specific project implementation opportunities. Locations of septic system improvements will be based on septic inspections conducted by county
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – DRAFT OCTOBER 2019
Section 6: Plan Administration and Coordination Page 85
staff or licensed private inspectors within the targeted implementation areas (Poor Quality Lakes and High Quality Lakes). The total number of septic system upgrades will be based on compliance and inspection reports. Pollutant reductions achieved from implementation of practices within the targeted implementation areas will be completed annually using the measuring tools listed in Table 6-2.
Table 6-2. Measuring Tools by Project Type
Project Type
Measuring Tool
Priority Area Scale Field Scale
Shoreline/streambank
restorations BWSR Water Erosion Pollution Reduction Estimator
Septic system
improvements
University of Minnesota Estimator for individual Subsurface Sewage Treatment Systems
(Phosphorus reductions from an expected number of septic systems to be updated from noncompliant to compliant over the next ten years, the average number of persons per household by County from the 2010 Census, and an average of 1.95 pounds of phosphorus produced per person per year.)
Wetland restorations The cumulative pollutant and flow reduction of all projects within a Priority Area will be based on inputting implemented practices in the existing Hydrological Simulation Program - Fortran - Scenario Application Manager (HSPF-SAM) model. This will be completed by the Planning Partners in partnership with MPCA.
The pollutant reduction of each individual project will be based on PTMApp reduction assumptions.
Non-structural BMPs
Structural BMPs
6.5.2 Funding Request Funds are currently used for activities that restore or protect natural resources in the watershed, including board and staff leadership, project identification, outreach, reporting, budgeting, and technical support. The counties utilize general funding to support work related to shoreland, Subsurface Sewage Treatment Systems (SSTS), stormwater, wetland, feedlots and other local ordinances. Natural Resource Block Grant (NRBG) funds are used by counties and Soil and Water Conservation Districts for local water plan implementation, administrative duties, and the Wetland Conservation Act (WCA). Existing grants fund technical assistance and financial incentives for erosion control and other natural resource projects on private property. Additional work and staffing time will be supported through successful grant awards from, but not limited to: MPCA, BWSR, DNR, MDH, and USDA. The Planning Partners will consider Clean Water Fund dollars as a major funding source for this Plan. In order to ensure competitiveness within this funding pool, the Plan Partners will ensure that their proposed project aligns with high-level state priorities, key implementation items, and non-point funding priority criteria prior to submitting a grant application.
ASSESSMENT, EVALUATION AND REPORTING Assessment and evaluation of the implementation activities within the Plan are critical in tracking progress. Progress reports for various funding sources will provide a record of project performance
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – DRAFT OCTOBER 2019
Section 6: Plan Administration and Coordination Page 86
and how funds were utilized. Progress reporting will also occur through the Board of Soil and Water Resources eLINK system. County monitoring and enforcement records will provide progress reports on implementation activities involving Subsurface Sewage Treatment Systems, well sealing, and land use ordinance changes. A system for tracking and reporting activities internally and at the local level will be developed as State grant opportunities to implement the Plan become available.
6.6.1 Annual Evaluation The purpose of the annual evaluation will be to assess progress towards each of the Plans stated goals. The Joint Powers Board will also review plan progress and give feedback that will help set the upcoming year’s priorities. Members of the Technical Advisory Committee will provide their individual and representative Boards with annual updates on the progress of the plan’s implementation in accordance with Board of Soil and Water Resources. Additional evaluation will occur through separate annual planning documents of each participating local government unit. In addition, the Pomme de Terre Watershed will have completed a Cycle II Watershed Restoration and Protection Strategy (WRAPS) that will include an updated listing of impaired waters, biological stressors, and Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDL). It is important the Pomme de Terre River Association evaluates the TMDL and WRAPS information (estimated for completion in 2020/21). Adjustments can be made prior to the five-year evaluation if the changes necessary.
Table 6-3. MPCA WRAPS Cycle II Schedule for the Pomme de Terre River Watershed
6.6.2 Partnership Assessment The structure of the partnership is expected to continue as it has since 1981 and will adhere to the standing Pomme de Terre River Association By-Laws and Joint Powers Agreement. Changes to the partnership structure will be handled through By-Law and Joint Powers Amendments and rely on the voting power of the Joint Powers Board. Partnerships (State and Federal agencies) will be assessed to determine if increased collaboration is necessary to complete plan goals.
6.6.3 Five Year Evaluation The Technical Advisory Committee and Joint Powers Board will conduct a five year plan evaluation using information from previous annual evaluations. The five year evaluation will
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – DRAFT OCTOBER 2019
Section 6: Plan Administration and Coordination Page 87
enable the Committees and the Planning Partners to assess whether any new information needs to be included to improve plan prioritization, targeting, and measurability. The Joint Powers Board will formally recommend amendments and an updated plan to the Board of Water and Soil Resources for final approval and adoption.
6.6.4 Reporting Annual reporting requirements for the Board of Soil and Water Resources will be administered per the BWSR Grant Administration Manual. Funding administration requirements are:
• Annual eLINK grant reporting, including NRBG and competitive grants
• Annual website reporting with current project details
• Financial Statements including combined balance sheet, income statement, budgetary comparison statement, notes to the financial statement, and Management’s discussion and analysis. Reporting on collaborative grant funding will be completed by Pomme de Terre River Association staff. All other reporting for funding (local, state, or federal) utilized directly through the individual offices will be reported on by respective entities.
PLAN AMENDMENT PROCESS
6.7.1 Plan Amendment Process This plan extends through December 31, 2030. Revision of the plan may be needed through an amendment prior to the plan update if significant changes emerge in the priorities, goals, policies, administrative procedures, or plan implementation programs. Revision may also be needed if issues emerge that are not addressed in the plan. All amendments to this plan will follow the procedures set forth in this section. This plan will remain in full effect until a revision is approved by BWSR. Plan amendments may be proposed by any agency, person, or Local Government to the Technical Advisory Committee. Proposals must be reviewed by the Technical Advisory Committee before it is recommended to the Joint Powers Board. The Joint Powers board must then review and approve initiation of the amendment process. All recommended plan amendments must be submitted to the Technical Advisory Committee along with a statement of the problem and need, the rationale for the amendment, and an estimate of the cost to complete the amendment. Preparers of this plan recognize it may need to be periodically amended to remain useful as a long-term planning tool. However, the structure and intent of this plan is to provide flexibility to respond to short-term emerging issues and opportunities. The Technical Advisory Committee will review and revise its long-range work plan and/or implementation programs through the annual budget and Annual Work Plan. Technical information (especially water quality data) will require frequent updating, such as when new, site-specific data is generated by state, federal, and regional agencies, counties, cities, or individuals. Generally, these technical updates and studies are considered part of the normal course of operations consistent with the intent of this plan and not a trigger for a
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – DRAFT OCTOBER 2019
Section 6: Plan Administration and Coordination Page 88
plan amendment. However, when the technical information results in a policy that is a significant change of direction from the plan or the implementation of a projects or implementation programs, a plan amendment may be required.
6.7.1.1 Criteria and Format for an Amendment Plan participants recognize the large work effort required to manage water-related issues. The plan provides the framework to implement this work by identifying priority issues, measurable goals, and action items. Examples of situations where a plan amendment may be required include the following:
• Addition of a capital improvement project that is not described by the plan
• Addition of new programs or other initiatives that have the potential to create significant financial impacts or controversy when inconsistent with the issues, goals, and policies Plan amendment criteria includes the following:
• Any Local Government Unit (LGU) can propose an amendment.
• Costs are covered by the LGU who proposes the amendment unless the Joint Powers Board decides to split costs out because there is mutual benefit among multiple partners.
• The Technical Advisory Committee will review proposals and recommend proposal to the Joint Powers Board who will make final approval to move forward with amendment through a resolution with a majority vote.
• The Pomme de Terre River Association holds the hearing.
• Majority vote of the Joint Powers Board to submit plan to BWSR for review and approval – doesn’t need prior approval by each individual LGU If the Technical Advisory Committee , Joint Powers Board or BWSR decides that a plan amendment is needed, the Pomme de Terre River Association will follow a process similar to the County plan amendment processes:
Step 1: Consult— the Technical Advisory Committee and Joint Powers Board consults with the BWSR Board Conservationist to review the water plan amendment process. Determine the extent of the amendment and review process and the correlated level of effort needed. Extensive amendments typically take 18 months to complete. Set a due date for amendment completion and work backward to develop an internal timeline. Discuss the participants who will be involved with the amendment review and the level of involvement, which depends on the nature of the amendment.
Step 2: Self-Assessment and Develop Proposed Amendment— The Technical Advisory Committee and The Joint Powers Board performs self-assessment to evaluate progress on current plan. This should include a review of Performance Review and Assistance Program (PRAP) reports and other related information. The Technical Advisory Committee and Joint Powers Board reviews current plan sections and develops a list of sections to amend, noting
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – DRAFT OCTOBER 2019
Section 6: Plan Administration and Coordination Page 89
areas where information is missing or out of date. Review state reports/plans for the area where the amendment is proposed, such as Groundwater Restoration and Protection Strategies (GRAPS) and Watershed Restoration and Protections Strategies (WRAPS), for possible inclusion into the plan. The BWSR website contains information on how to use the WRAPS reports in water plans. At the discretion of the Joint Powers Board, drafts of proposed plan amendments may be sent to all plan review authorities for input before beginning the formal review process.
Step 3: Submit Petition— The Technical Advisory Committee will recommend that a petition to BWSR that the Joint Powers Board must then approve prior to submission. The petition to amend the Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan can be in the form of a letter or memo to the BWSR Board Conservationist. The petition may be submitted electronically. The petition should contain background on the Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan, the purpose(s) for the amendment, and a general summary of the amendment (areas of the plan that will be amended and scope of the amendment if known). The petition should include the proposed amendment, the date of the public hearing, and a copy of the signed resolution passed by the Joint Powers Board indicating the intent to amend the Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan. The Resolution to Amend template is located on the BWSR website. BWSR Board Conservationist consults with the BWSR Regional Manager, other BWSR staff, and board members and provides feedback to the Joint Powers Board regarding the petition and proposed amendment.
Step 4: Notify—The Joint Powers Board will maintain a distribution list for copies of the plan and, within 30 days of adopting an amendment, distribute copies of the amendment to the distribution list. Generally, electronic copies of the amendment will be provided or documents made available for public access on the Pomme de Terre River Association website (http://www.pdtriver.org). Printed copies will be made available upon written request and printed at the cost of the requester.
2018 One Watershed, One Plan Open House Event
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – October 2019
APPENDIX A:
Land and Water Resource Inventory
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – October 2019
Pomme De Terre River Comprehensive W atershed Management Plan
Appendix A. Land and W ater Resource Inventory
DR AFT OCTOBER 2019
Land & W ater Resource Inventor y Appendix A | 1
PLAN APPENDIX A – LAND AND WATER RESOURCE INVENTORY (LWRI)
Table of Contents
PLAN APPENDIX A – LAND AND WATER RESOURCE INVENTORY (LWRI) ................. 1
WATERSHED OVERVIEW ....................................................................................... 4
TOPOGRAPHY ........................................................................................................... 6
SOILS ........................................................................................................................... 8
A.3.1 Soil Texture ............................................................................................................... 8
A.3.2 Hydrologic Soil Groups ............................................................................................ 8
A.3.3 Crop Productivity ...................................................................................................... 9
GEOLOGIC SETTING .............................................................................................. 12
CLIMATE AND PRECIPITATION .......................................................................... 14
A.5.1 Climate .................................................................................................................... 14
A.5.2 Precipitation ............................................................................................................ 14
A.5.3 Climate Trend Expectations .................................................................................... 17
WATERSHED HYDROLOGY ................................................................................. 20
A.6.1 Flooding .................................................................................................................. 23
SURFACE WATER RESOURCES ........................................................................... 25
A.7.1 Streams and Lakes .................................................................................................. 25
A.7.2 Wetlands ................................................................................................................. 28
A.7.3 Public Waters .......................................................................................................... 30
A.7.4 Public Drainage System .......................................................................................... 30
A.7.5 Dams ....................................................................................................................... 31
GROUNDWATER RESOURCE DATA ................................................................... 34
A.8.1 Public Water Supply ............................................................................................... 34
A.8.2 Private Water Supply .............................................................................................. 39
WATERSHED HEALTH ........................................................................................... 41
GROUNDWATER AND SURFACE WATER APPROPRIATIONS ...................... 43
PERMITTED WASTEWATER DISCHARGES ....................................................... 43
WATER BASED RECREATION AREAS AND LAND OWNERSHIP ................. 45
FISH AND WILDLIFE HABITAT ........................................................................... 46
A.13.1 Fish and Aquatic Habitat ..................................................................................... 46
A.13.2 Wildlife Habitat ................................................................................................... 46
UNIQUE FEATURES AND SCENIC AREAS ......................................................... 48
Pomme De Terre River Comprehensive W atershed Management Plan
Appendix A. Land and W ater Resource Inventory
DR AFT OCTOBER 2019
Land & W ater Resource Inventor y Appendix A | 2
A.14.1 Federally-listed Plant and Animal Species.......................................................... 48
A.14.2 State-listed Plant and Animal Species ................................................................. 49
A.14.3 Ecologically Sensitive, Unique, and Important Areas ........................................ 50
LAND USE AND LAND COVER ............................................................................ 52
SOCIOECONOMIC CONTEXT ............................................................................... 55
GAP ANALYSIS ....................................................................................................... 58
REFERENCES ........................................................................................................... 59
List of Figures
Figure A- 1. Topography of the Pomme de Terre River Watershed (LIDAR Derived Elevations) 7
Figure A- 2. Soils of the Pomme de Terre River Watershed ........................................................ 10
Figure A- 3. Crop Productivity Index ........................................................................................... 11
Figure A- 4. General Geomorphology of the Pomme de Terre River Watershed ........................ 13
Figure A- 5. West Central MN Annual Temperature, 1895-2016 ................................................ 15
Figure A- 6. 30-year averages (1981-2010) for subbasin-averaged monthly precipitation totals in
the Pomme de Terre Watershed (Minnesota State Climatology Office) ...................................... 16
Figure A- 7. West-Central MN Average Annual Precipitation by Decade .................................. 16
Figure A- 8. Plant Water Use versus Precipitation Seasonal Trends ............................................ 19
Figure A- 9. Pomme de Terre Watershed Overview .................................................................... 21
Figure A- 10. Altered Watercourses in the Pomme de Terre Watershed ..................................... 22
Figure A- 11. FEMA Floodplain Mapping in the Pomme de Terre River Watershed ................ 24
Figure A- 12. Existing and Historic Wetland Resources in the Pomme de Terre River Watershed
....................................................................................................................................................... 29
Figure A- 13. DNR Public Waters Basins and DNR River and Stream Centerlines .................... 32
Figure A- 14. Open Public Drainage Systems in the Pomme de Terre Watershed ...................... 33
Figure A- 15. Depth to Water Table and Vulnerable Groundwater Areas in the Pomme de Terre
River Watershed............................................................................................................................ 35
Figure A- 16. Groundwater Pollution Sensitivity. Source: Minnesota Geologic County Atlas
Regional Hydrogeologic Assessment Watershed Health ............................................................. 36
Figure A- 17. Nitrate Results and Pollution Sensitivity of Wells in the Pomme de Terre
Watershed ..................................................................................................................................... 37
Figure A- 18. Arsenic monitoring results in the Pomme de Terre Watershed. ............................ 38
Figure A- 19. Vulnerability of Drinking Water Supply Management Areas in the Pomme de
Terre Watershed ............................................................................................................................ 40
Figure A- 20. Private wells in the Pomme de Terre Watershed by subwatershed ........................ 41
Figure A- 21. Pollution Sensitivity of the Uppermost Aquifers in the Pomme de Terre Watershed
....................................................................................................................................................... 42
Figure A- 22. Active permits as of 2017 by water use type in the Pomme de Terre Watershed .. 44
Figure A- 23. Annual water use by use type from 2008-2017 in the Pomme de Terre Watershed
....................................................................................................................................................... 44
Figure A- 24. Water use by source type from 2008-2017 in the Pomme de Terre Watershed ..... 44
Figure A- 25. Land Cover of the Pomme de Terre River Watershed ........................................... 54
Figure A- 26. Population density in the Pomme de Terre River Watershed (2010) ..................... 56
Figure A- 27. Population change in the Pomme de Terre River Watershed (2000-2010)............ 56
Pomme De Terre River Comprehensive W atershed Management Plan
Appendix A. Land and W ater Resource Inventory
DR AFT OCTOBER 2019
Land & W ater Resource Inventor y Appendix A | 3
List of Tables
Table A- 1.Cities in the Pomme de Terre River Watershed ........................................................... 4
Table A- 2. Townships in the Pomme de Terre River Watershed .................................................. 4
Table A- 3. Average Annual Temperature and Temperature Trends in the Pomme de Terre
Watershed ..................................................................................................................................... 15
Table A- 4. Average Annual Precipitation and Precipitation Trends in the Pomme de Terre
Watershed ..................................................................................................................................... 16
Table A- 5. Lake and stream aquatic life and aquatic recreation use impairments in the Pomme
de Terre River Watershed (2018 Impaired Waters List) .............................................................. 26
Table A- 6. Primary sources of pollutants and stressors of impaired water bodies in the Pomme
de Terre River Watershed.(Pomme de Terre River WRAPS, MPCA) ......................................... 27
Table A- 7. Public Drainage Authorities of the Pomme de Terre River Watershed .................... 30
Table A- 8. State funded Conservation Easements within the watershed (MN DNR Zonation
materials)46 .................................................................................................................................... 48
Table A- 9. Federally listed species found in the Pomme de Terre Watershed 47 ........................ 48
Table A- 10. State-listed species found in the Pomme de Terre Watershed ................................. 49
Table A- 11. MN DNR NPC types and acreage found within the Pomme de Terre Watershed .. 51
Table A- 12. MCBS Area by rating within the Pomme de Terre Watershed51 ............................ 51
Table A- 13. Land Use by Ownership Type (NRCS Rapid Watershed Assessment: Pomme de
Terre River Watershed)................................................................................................................. 52
Table A- 14. Public Lands in the Pomme de Terre Watershed (USDA) ...................................... 53
Table A- 15. Land use breakdown by Region. ............................................................................. 53
Table A- 16. Total population and percentages living in urban or rural areas, by county. .......... 55
Table A- 17. Total population by age group, by county. .............................................................. 55
Table A- 18. Employment by industry, by county for population 16 years and older. ................ 57
Table A- 19. Median Household Income (in 2015 inflation-adjusted dollars) by county ............ 58
Pomme De Terre River Comprehensive W atershed Management Plan
Appendix A. Land and W ater Resource Inventory
DR AFT OCTOBER 2019
Land & W ater Resource Inventor y Appendix A | 4
This Land and Water Resource Inventory (LWRI) is intended to catalog and briefly summarize the
data available for the Pomme de Terre Watershed. The objective of the LWRI is to describe the
characteristics of the Watershed and provide the context for the issues, goals and actions identified
in the One Watershed, One Plan – Pomme de Terre Watershed (1W1P). The name, location, and
publisher or agency of any relevant datasets is included within each section of the LWRI. Datasets
can be accessed through the URL links provided in the Datasets Referenced section or through
inquiring at the agency websites or offices. In many cases, hyperlinks to the reports being referenced
are provided in the body of the text.
WATERSHED OVERVIEW
The Pomme de Terre River Watershed, located in west central Minnesota, south of Fergus Falls and
west of Willmar. The watershed stretches approximately 80 miles and flows from north to south. Six
counties are located within the watershed. Those counties, and the proportion of each county making
up the watershed, include Swift (12.8%), Big Stone (3.2%), Stevens (39.5%), Grant (17.9%), Douglas
(3.6%), and Otter Tail (23.0%). The watershed includes portions of 10 Cities (Error! Reference
source not found.) and 48 Townships (Table A- 2).
Table A- 1.Cities in the Pomme de Terre River Watershed
Member Community County
% Area within Pomme de
Terre Watershed
MS4 Community
[Yes/No]
Alberta City Stevens 100% No
Appleton City Swift 71% No
Ashby City Grant 100% No
Barrett City Grant 100% No
Chokio City Stevens 100% No
Dalton City Otter Tail 100% No
Donnelly City Stevens 59% No
Fergus Falls City Otter Tail <1% No
Morris City Stevens 100% Yes
Underwood City Otter Tail 18% No
Table A- 2. Townships in the Pomme de Terre River Watershed
Member Community County
Percent Area within Pomme de Terre
River Watershed
Aastad Township Otter Tail 5%
Akron Township Big Stone 6%
Appleton Township Swift 42%
Artichoke Township Big Stone 66%
Baker Township Stevens 81%
Buse Township Otter Tail 6%
Pomme De Terre River Comprehensive W atershed Management Plan
Appendix A. Land and W ater Resource Inventory
DR AFT OCTOBER 2019
Land & W ater Resource Inventor y Appendix A | 5
Member Community County
Percent Area within Pomme de Terre
River Watershed
Clitherall Township Otter Tail 15%
Dane Prairie Township Otter Tail 67%
Darnen Township Stevens 100%
Donnelly Township Stevens 2%
Eagle Lake Township Otter Tail 95%
Edison Township Swift 6%
Elk Lake Township Grant 56%
Erdahl Township Grant 85%
Evansville Township Douglas 4%
Everglade Township Stevens 2%
Everts Township Otter Tail 8%
Fairfield Township Swift 92%
Framnas Township Stevens 52%
Hegbert Township Swift 94%
Hodges Township Stevens 46%
Horton Township Stevens 100%
Land Township Grant 58%
Leaf Mountain Township Otter Tail 50%
Lien Township Grant 51%
Lund Township Douglas 81%
Malta Township Big Stone 1%
Millerville Township Douglas 3%
Moonshine Township Big Stone 2%
Moore Township Stevens 18%
Morris Township Stevens 100%
Moyer Township Swift 31%
Pelican Lake Township Grant 100%
Pepperton Township Stevens 61%
Pomme de Terre Township Grant 42%
Rendsville Township Stevens 54%
Roseville Township Grant 27%
Sanford Township Grant 27%
Pomme De Terre River Comprehensive W atershed Management Plan
Appendix A. Land and W ater Resource Inventory
DR AFT OCTOBER 2019
Land & W ater Resource Inventor y Appendix A | 6
Member Community County
Percent Area within Pomme de Terre
River Watershed
Scott Township Stevens 100%
Shible Township Swift 21%
St. Olaf Township Otter Tail 100%
Stevens Township Stevens 89%
Sverdrup Township Otter Tail 32%
Swan Lake Township Stevens 54%
Synnes Township Stevens 100%
Tara Township Swift 21%
Tordenskjold Township Otter Tail 95%
Tumuli Township Otter Tail 92%
TOPOGRAPHY
High-resolution (3-meter) LiDAR data was downloaded from the MnTOPO viewer application. For
display purposes, the digital elevation model (DEM) was added to ArcGIS 10.3 and symbolized to
accentuate the watersheds highest and lowest elevations. The Pomme de Terre River watershed
starts its journey within the Alexandria Glacial Moraine at a peak elevation of just over 1,700 feet
above sea level. The northern third of the watershed contains wooded hills, grassy meadows,
wetlands, and lakes with undulating peaks and valleys and slopes ranging from 6-45%. Below the
headwaters, the Pomme de Terre enters the Northern Glaciated Plains Ecoregion via a narrow valley
that characterizes the skinny, middle portion of the watershed, which contains gently sloping to
moderately steeply sloped hills (6-12%).
Areas south of Pomme de Terre Lake have generally less topographic relief in comparison with the
northern portions of the watershed. Drainage on the southeastern side of the river in this ecoregion
is off the Big Stone Moraine, characterized by landscapes that are gently sloping, to moderately steep
(6-12%). Waters falling on the western side of the basin drain the Fergus Falls Till Plain, an outwash
plain of nearly level to moderately sloping (0-6%) lands with poorly drained soils associated with
the Red River Valley. The portion of the watershed that is south of the ridgeline that divides the
Muddy Creek and Dry Wood Creek is very also very flat, with slopes less than 5%. The Pomme de
Terre River gradient drops an average of 3.5 feet per mile resulting in an elevation of 940 feet above
sea level at the mouth of the Pomme de Terre River; a drop of 760 feet from the watersheds peak
elevation (Figure A- 1).
Pomme De Terre River Comprehensive W atershed Management Plan
Appendix A. Land and W ater Resource Inventory
DR AFT OCTOBER 2019
Land & W ater Resource Inventor y Appendix A | 7
Figure A- 1. Topography of the Pomme de Terre River Watershed (LIDAR Derived Elevations)
Pomme De Terre River Comprehensive W atershed Management Plan
Appendix A. Land and W ater Resource Inventory
DR AFT OCTOBER 2019
Land & W ater Resource Inventor y Appendix A | 8
SOILS
Soil texture and Hydrologic Soil Group varies throughout the Pomme de Terre River Watershed as
shown in Figure A- 2. These characteristics of the soil are important in understanding the health of
the watershed and can influence how natural processes like the wind and the rain shape the
landscape.
Soil erosion is natural, but it can have negative impacts on the health of the watershed. In determining
soil susceptibility to erosion, the MNDNR determined that landscapes in Minnesota with the steepest
agricultural lands have the highest potential for erosion1. Within the Pomme de Terre, erosion
susceptibility is relatively high in the northern part of the watershed and relatively low in the
southern part of the watershed.
A.3.1 Soil Texture
Glacial sediments (outwash and till) cover the entire Pomme de Terre River Watershed. In
general, soils immediately bordering the Pomme de Terre River corridor are more coarsely
textured, glacial outwash soils with high groundwater infiltration rates. Similarly, in the
headwaters area, sandy, coarsely textured, glacial outwash soils dominate, allowing for high
groundwater inflow rates that recharge the headwater lakes, ultimately contributing to the
excellent water quality of the watersheds’ headwaters lakes. The sandy, coarsely textured
soils in the headwaters area are not ideal for farming; therefore, the headwaters portion
contains a higher percentage of forests and shrub land relative to the rest of the watershed.
As the Pomme de Terre moves south from the headwaters towards the middle and southern
portions of the watershed, dominant soil types transition from coarsely textured glacial
outwash to glacial till, largely comprised of finely-textured clay loams. These finely textured
soil series have lower infiltration rates and consequently contribute more runoff per unit area
in comparison with headwater soils. The ability of these clay loam soil series to retain water
makes these soils ideal for growing crops. The southern half of the watershed has two distinct
sections for defining soil; soils east of the Pomme de Terre River are generally coarsely
textured, well-drained silty and loamy soils while soils to the west of the Pomme de Terre
River are composed of poorly drained clayey and loamy soils.
A.3.2 Hydrologic Soil Groups
Northern Region
The dominant soil series in Ottertail County includes Hydrologic Soil Group (HSG) “C” soils,
which often contain one or more layers that impede the downward movement of water,
resulting in slow infiltration rates and moderately high runoff rates. In Grant and Douglas
County, the dominant soil series transitions to HSG “B/D”. HSG “B/D” soils typically are well
drained, but may have a confining layer within the first 60 inches of the soil profile that
produces a high water table. The prevalence of subsurface tile drainage within the currently
cropped portions of the Pomme de Terre watershed allows “B/D” soils to act more like “B”
soils.
Pomme De Terre River Comprehensive W atershed Management Plan
Appendix A. Land and W ater Resource Inventory
DR AFT OCTOBER 2019
Land & W ater Resource Inventor y Appendix A | 9
Southern Region
Dominant soil series in Stevens/ Swift County include HSG “B/D” and “C” soils with the
exception of areas immediately adjacent to the Pomme de Terre River which is dominated by
HSG “A” and “B” soils.
A.3.3 Crop Productivity
Crop productivity index (CPI) ratings from the Natural Resources Conservation Service
provide a relative ranking of soils based on their potential for intensive crop production. An
index can be used to rate the potential yield of one soil against that of another over a period
of time. Ratings range from zero to 100%. The higher numbers indicate higher production
potential. These rankings are shown in Figure A- 3. In the northern region of the watershed,
CPI values, on average, are lower than in the southern region. The sections with a higher CPI
correlate with the HSG “A”, “A/D”, and “B” soils, while sections with lower CPI correlate with
HSG “C”, “C/D”, and “D” soils. Overall, the northern region is less productive for crops and has
more variability than the southern region.
Pomme De Terre River Comprehensive W atershed Management Plan
Appendix A. Land and W ater Resource Inventory
DR AFT OCTOBER 2019
Land & W ater Resource Inventor y Appendix A | 10
Figure A- 2. Soils of the Pomme de Terre River Watershed
Pomme De Terre River Comprehensive W atershed Management Plan
Appendix A. Land and W ater Resource Inventory
DR AFT OCTOBER 2019
Land & W ater Resource Inventor y Appendix A | 11
Figure A- 3. Crop Productivity Index
Pomme De Terre River Comprehensive W atershed Management Plan
Appendix A. Land and W ater Resource Inventory
DR AFT OCTOBER 2019
Land & W ater Resource Inventor y Appendix A | 12
GEOLOGIC SETTING
The Pomme de Terre River generally serves as a dividing point for the underlying geology of the
watershed, from the Red River Lobe to the Des Moines Lobe and shown in Figure A- 4.
Northern Region
The Des Moines Lobe covers the northeastern 2/3 of the Pomme de Terre Watershed. The
fine-loamy till of the Des Moines Lobe is characterized by more than 18% clay, typically less
than 50% sand, and a high content of shale. As the Des Moines Lobe retreated, it left behind
extensive outwash plains and small to large ice-block basins that now contain lakes or
marshes (Ottertail County, 2018).The Red River Lobe covers the northwestern 1/3 of the
Pomme de Terre Watershed. Silt and clay-rich lacustrine deposits associated with Lake
Agassiz and floodplain alluvium deposited throughout the Red River valley characterize the
fine-grained sediments of the Red River Lobe.
Southern Region
The Red River Lobe covers the majority of the southern half of the Pomme de Terre
watershed with the exception of the southeastern 1/3, which is comprised largely of the Des
Moines Lobe interspersed with fluvial deposits associated with the Pomme de Terre River
valley.
Pomme De Terre River Comprehensive W atershed Management Plan
Appendix A. Land and W ater Resource Inventory
DR AFT OCTOBER 2019
Land & W ater Resource Inventor y Appendix A | 13
Figure A- 4. General Geomorphology of the Pomme de Terre River Watershed
Pomme De Terre River Comprehensive W atershed Management Plan
Appendix A. Land and W ater Resource Inventory
DR AFT OCTOBER 2019
Land & W ater Resource Inventor y Appendix A | 14
CLIMATE AND PRECIPITATION
It is important to understand and prepare the Pomme de Terre Watershed for future climatic
variabilities as it may require more frequent shifting of watershed management practices. In the last
thirty-five years, the Pomme de Terre Watershed has experienced higher trends in both precipitation
and temperature. Most notable is the increase in extreme temperatures and precipitation events.
A.5.1 Climate
In west-central Minnesota, the average temperature increase per decade was 0.14˚F from
1895-1969, which changed to an increase of 0.53˚F per decade from 1970-2016. The Pomme
de Terre Watershed is no exception. As seen in Figure A- 5, the Pomme de Terre Watershed
appears to be following the same increasing trend.
While some of these trends appear small, these relatively small changes to the status quo can
disrupt the long established processes of a delicately balanced ecosystem. One small
disruption has the potential to set off an unpredictable chain reaction that may or may not
result in serious impacts to the ecosystem.
A.5.2 Precipitation
In the Pomme de Terre Watershed, average total accumulation of precipitation is highest in
the summer months, with June being the greatest at approximately 3.95 inches. During the
winter months, average total accumulation is lowest, with the least accumulation in February
at approximately 0.64 inches. The greatest increase in precipitation is from May to June when
total accumulation increases by 1.10 inches. The greatest decrease in precipitation is from
October to November, when total accumulation decreases by 1.36 inches. Average annual
precipitation in the watershed is 29.95 inches (Table A- 4).
According to precipitation data from the State Climatology Office, average annual
precipitation has increased by 10% from the 20th Century, at 23.8 inches, to the late 1990s-
2010s, at 26.3 inches (Figure A- 7). In those recent years, the Pomme de Terre Watershed has
experienced multiple extreme storm events. Flooding is a frequent occurrence in the Pomme
de Terre Watershed. There have been multiple precipitation events where certain reported
areas accumulated over 6 inches of precipitation in 24 hours; the most notable events are the
flash floods that occurred in 1991, 1993, and 2005. Flooding in the relatively rural Pomme de
Terre Watershed often leads to damaged crops and impassable roadways.
It is reasonable to assume that extreme precipitation events will continue to occur in the
future. If plants, wetlands, and soils are in a natural and functioning state, they have the ability
to absorb and hold great amounts of water; both reducing and delaying runoff water before
it enters surrounding creeks and rivers. This in turn reduces the severity of flooding would
allow nearby communities more time to prepare for unavoidable flooding events.
Pomme De Terre River Comprehensive W atershed Management Plan
Appendix A. Land and W ater Resource Inventory
DR AFT OCTOBER 2019
Land & W ater Resource Inventor y Appendix A | 15
Figure A- 5. West Central MN Annual Temperature, 1895-2016
Table A- 3. Average Annual Temperature and Temperature Trends in the Pomme de Terre Watershed
Measurement Parameter Plan Area Average
Average Normal Annual Temperature (˚F)
(1980 – 2010) 42.7 ˚F
Temperature Trend
(1895 – 2017) +0.2 ˚F/decade
Temperature Trend
(1980 – 2017) +0.4 ˚F/decade
Pomme De Terre River Comprehensive W atershed Management Plan
Appendix A. Land and W ater Resource Inventory
DR AFT OCTOBER 2019
Land & W ater Resource Inventor y Appendix A | 16
Figure A- 6. 30-year averages (1981-2010) for subbasin-averaged monthly precipitation totals in the
Pomme de Terre Watershed (Minnesota State Climatology Office)
Table A- 4. Average Annual Precipitation and Precipitation Trends in the Pomme de Terre Watershed
Measurement Parameter Plan Area Average
Average Normal Annual Precipitation (in)
(1981 – 2010) 25.95 (in.)
Precipitation Trend
(1895 – 2017) + 0.26 in/decade
Precipitation Trend
(1980 – 2016) + 0.87 in/decade
Figure A- 7. West-Central MN Average Annual Precipitation by Decade
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov DecINCHES30-Year (1981-2010) Average Monthly
Precipitation in the Pomme de Terre
Watershed
Pomme De Terre River Comprehensive W atershed Management Plan
Appendix A. Land and W ater Resource Inventory
DR AFT OCTOBER 2019
Land & W ater Resource Inventor y Appendix A | 17
A.5.3 Climate Trend Expectations
Temperature trend:
As shown above, the short-term temperature trend in the Pomme de Terre Watershed shows
a positive 0.4˚F increase per decade. This is double the rate of the long-term trend which is a
positive increase of 0.2˚F per decade.
Impacts of increasing temperatures in the Pomme de Terre Watershed include a longer
growing season (increased water needs for agriculture), changes to soil frost depth and
duration (implications for manure spreading), warmer waters (increases instances of low DO
and hypoxia, increased frequency of algal blooms, thermal resistance to vertical mixing,
stresses cold water fisheries) and increases in terrestrial invasive species since warmer
temperatures allow them to survive more easily, multiply and expand their ranges.
Seasonal temperature trends:
Summer (June – August) temperature trends in the Pomme de Terre Watershed, measuring
back to 1895, shown an average temperature increase by a rate of 0.1˚F per decade. Fall
(September – November) temperature trends in the Pomme de Terre Watershed, measuring
back to 1895, show an average increase in temperature of 0.2˚F per decade. Winter
(December – February) temperature trends in the Pomme de Terre Watershed is by far the
fastest changing. On average, the winter season in the Pomme de Terre Watershed is
increasing in temperature at a rate of 0.4˚F per decade. This increase greatly outpaces the
other three season’s temperature rate increases and will result in shorter winters, with less
snow, more ice, frequent rain events, and more rapid spring snowmelt. Spring (March – May)
temperature trends shown an average temperature increase of 0.2˚F per decade.
Average ice out dates:
The average ice out dates measured in the Pomme de Terre Watershed generally falls
between April 1 and April 7. As winter temperatures continue to increase, it is expected that
the average yearly ice out date will take place earlier and earlier as time goes on. Impacts of
earlier ice out dates include less ice coverage on surface waters (results in greater
evaporation of surface waters and lower water levels, concentrating pollutant loads).
Dew points:
The Pomme de Terre Watershed has an average annual Dew Point of 32˚F. As summer
temperatures and evaporation rates trend higher in the Pomme de Terre Watershed, it is
expected that higher dew point averages and extremes will be observed. Impacts of higher
dew point averages and extremes include increased need for energy production (e.g. air
conditioning), higher demands on community water supplies and human and agricultural
animal safety concerns such as heatstroke, heat exhaustion, decreases in performance (e.g.
drop in food consumption, reduction in productivity) and increased mortality rates.
Seasonality in MN precipitation trends (comparing back to 1895):
Summer (June – August) precipitation trends in the Pomme de Terre Watershed shown an
average rate increase in precipitation by 0.06 inches per decade. Fall (September –
November) precipitation trends in the Pomme de Terre Watershed show an average increase
in precipitation of 0.13 inches per decade. Winter (December – February) in the Pomme de
Pomme De Terre River Comprehensive W atershed Management Plan
Appendix A. Land and W ater Resource Inventory
DR AFT OCTOBER 2019
Land & W ater Resource Inventor y Appendix A | 18
Terre Watershed is increasing in precipitation by 0.01 inches per decade. Spring (March –
May) precipitation trends show a precipitation increase of 0.05 inches per decade.
Impacts of changes in precipitation patterns and more extreme events include increased risk
of flooding, increased variability of stream flows, increased velocity of water during high flow
periods, soil loss, decreased groundwater recharge (rain from extreme events falls too
quickly to be absorbed in the ground) and taxes existing infrastructure. Increased flooding
also results in increased loads of sediment and nutrients in the watershed.
Evaporation Trends:
As average and extreme temperatures continue to increase, evaporation rates are also
expected to increase. Impacts of changes in evaporation include increased water loss from
the surfaces of waterbodies, water loss from the soil profile which is challenging for shallow
rooted plants and other organisms that reside in the first few inches of soil and increases the
need for irrigation. The conversion of crop types from small grains and hay to corn and
soybean has caused an offset in timing of peak runoff periods with peak plant water use
(Figure A- 8) resulting vulnerable leaching periods in the soil.
Wind Trends:
The Pomme de Terre Watershed in general sees moderate to high wind speeds with
averaging wind speeds of 10.1 miles per hour. Wind is largely dependent on the variation in
air temperatures; since the poles are warming faster than the equator, there is a smaller
global temperature differential, reducing the speed of wind. Global wind speeds have
decreased by 5 to 15% over the last three decades, and are expected to decrease another 15%
in the coming century2. Impacts of changes in wind speed include potential changes to lake
thermal and mixing dynamics.
Pomme De Terre River Comprehensive W atershed Management Plan
Appendix A. Land and W ater Resource Inventory
DR AFT OCTOBER 2019
Land & W ater Resource Inventor y Appendix A | 19
Figure A- 8. Plant Water Use versus Precipitation Seasonal Trends
Pomme De Terre River Comprehensive W atershed Management Plan
Appendix A. Land and W ater Resource Inventory
DR AFT OCTOBER 2019
Land & W ater Resource Inventor y Appendix A | 20
WATERSHED HYDROLOGY
The Pomme de Terre River Watershed (a ‘subbasin’ or HUC-8 watershed in the USGS hydrologic
hierarchy) drains approximately 874.9 square miles through one primary channel, the Pomme de
Terre River. At its headwaters, the watershed is dominated by Lakes and Hardwood Forests. As the
Pomme de Terre River flows south, the landscape transitions into a wider and flatter flood plain with
fewer trees along its banks. Further information can be found on the Pomme de Terre River
watershed page on the MPCA website:
https://www.pca.state.mn.us/water/watersheds/pomme-de-terre-river
The watershed is divided into six HUC-10 minor watersheds:
Upper Pomme de Terre Watershed: This 85,668-acre watershed drains the lake-rich
headwaters through the Pomme de Terre River.
Pelican Creek Watershed: This 84,853-acre watershed has a high density of lakes some of
which are very large and relatively shallow.
Middle Pomme de Terre Watershed: This 138,251-acre watershed is the largest of the
HUC-10 watersheds. It is a very long, narrow watershed containing several small lakes and
many reaches of the Pomme de Terre River.
Muddy Creek Watershed: This 92,150-acre watershed contains Muddy Creek and Hattie
Lake. Land use is almost exclusively cropland.
Drywood Creek Watershed: This 61,984-acres watershed is the smallest of the HUC-10
Watersheds. The watershed is home to Artichoke Lake, which was used by the EPA as an
ecoregion reference lake in the 1980s.
Lower Pomme de Terre Watershed: This 97,493-acre watershed includes the long reach
of the Pomme de Terre River that outlets into the Lac Qui Parle River.
For some components of this document, the watershed has been divided into a northern and
southern region for ease in displaying geographically information and to reflect the distinct
characteristics of the northern and southern portions of the watershed. The Pomme de Terre River
Watershed, its HUC-10 minor watersheds and the two mapping regions are shown in Figure A- 9.
GIS data for the hydrographic position index (HPI) is available through MNDNR3, and provides a
visual of the hydrology and geomorphology in the sub-watershed to determine the locations of
drainage boundaries and water conveyance landforms within the watershed4. Runoff information is
available via the Agricultural Runoff Model (ARM), which is incorporated into Pomme de Terre
Watershed’s HSPF model.
Within the Pomme de Terre Watershed, approximately 195 miles of streams have been altered, 205
miles no longer have a definable channel, and 34 were impounded (Figure A- 10).
Pomme De Terre River Comprehensive W atershed Management Plan
Appendix A. Land and W ater Resource Inventory
DR AFT OCTOBER 2019
Land & W ater Resource Inventor y Appendix A | 21
Figure A- 9. Pomme de Terre Watershed Overview
Pomme De Terre River Comprehensive W atershed Management Plan
Appendix A. Land and W ater Resource Inventory
DR AFT OCTOBER 2019
Land & W ater Resource Inventor y Appendix A | 22
Figure A- 10. Altered Watercourses in the Pomme de Terre Watershed
Pomme De Terre River Comprehensive W atershed Management Plan
Appendix A. Land and W ater Resource Inventory
DR AFT 7 -30-2019
Land & W ater Resource Inventor y Appendix A | 23
A.6.1 Flooding
Flooding within the Pomme de Terre River Watershed occurs on Lake Christina, Artichoke
Lake, and a reach of Dry Wood Creek above Highway 12. None of the communities within the
watershed experience large-scale flooding. The pink areas shown in Figure A- 11 (Zone A)
represent areas with a 1% annual chance of flooding and a 26% chance of flooding over the
life of a 30-year mortgage determined using approximate methodologies. Base flood
elevations (BFE) have not been determined for Zone A. Zone AE has the same definition as
Zone A except that Zone AE is determined using detailed methods and BFE are known. More
information on flooding can be found at the Federal Emergency Management Agency
website5.
Pomme De Terre River Comprehensive W atershed Management Plan
Appendix A. Land and W ater Resource Inventory
DR AFT 7 -30-2019
Land & W ater Resource Inventor y Appendix A | 24
Figure A- 11. FEMA Floodplain Mapping in the Pomme de Terre River Watershed
Pomme De Terre River Comprehensive W atershed Management Plan
Appendix A. Land and W ater Resource Inventory
DR AFT 7 -30-2019
Land & W ater Resource Inventor y Appendix A | 25
SURFACE WATER RESOURCES
The land use and general water quality transition through the watershed. The northern, headwater
region of the watershed is rich with lakes, wetlands, forests, and grasslands. Moving south down the
watershed, the land use transitions to predominately row crops in the central and southern regions
of the watershed. The water quality is generally good in the north and degrades in the south of the
watershed.
Detailed monitoring and assessment information is included in the following reports on the MPCA
Website:
Pomme de Terre River Watershed Monitoring and Assessment Report
https://www.pca.state.mn.us/sites/default/files/wq-ws3-07020002b.pdf
Assessment Report of Selected Lakes Within the Pomme de Terre River Watershed
https://www.pca.state.mn.us/sites/default/files/wq-ws3-07020002.pdf
Pomme de Terre River Watershed Biotic Stressor Identification: A study of local stressors
limiting the biotic communities in the Pomme de Terre River Watershed.
https://www.pca.state.mn.us/sites/default/files/wq-iw7-36n.pdf
A.7.1 Streams and Lakes
Beyond the Pomme de Terre River, the watershed has few large streams and creeks, limited
to the Pomme de Terre tributaries: Pelican Creek in the Northern Region, and Muddy Creek
and Dry Wood Creek in the Southern Region. The remaining streams are small, unnamed
resources. There are 68 stream reaches in the watershed, and 40 of these were assessed for
aquatic recreation and aquatic life use impairments in 2018. Chemistry and biological data
for streams is aggregated by the MPCA from a number of data collection organizations and is
available on their website. Data can be selected by geography and station type and can be
viewed on a map6. See Table A- 5 for streams impaired for aquatic recreation and aquatic life
uses on the 2018 Impaired Waters List.
The Pomme de Terre River stretches 125 miles from Stalker Lake down to the Minnesota
River, where it is the northernmost tributary. It travels through meadows, forests, marshland,
and some agricultural areas. The largest lakes on the river are Ten Mile Lake, Pomme de Terre
Lake, Barrett Lake, and Perkins Lake.
Other major lakes within the Pomme de Terre River Watershed include Pelican Lake, Lake
Christina, Hattie Lake and Artichoke Lake. Out of the total 87 lakes in the watershed, 36 were
assessed for aquatic recreation (nutrient/eutrophication biological indicators) and aquatic
life in 2016. Chemistry data for lakes can be collected at the MPCA website and other lake
characteristics can be viewed on MNDNR’s Lake Finder application7. See Table A- 5 for lakes
impaired for aquatic recreation and aquatic life uses on the 2018 Impaired Waters List.
According to the Pomme de Terre Watershed Clean Water Accountability Progress Report8
phosphorous and bacteria are the main causes of impairments to aquatic recreation in the
lakes and streams. Altered hydrology, poor habitat, and high levels of nitrogen and sediment
are the principal stressors for aquatic life impairments. According to the Pomme de Terre
River Watershed Monitoring and Assessment Summary, nutrient concentrations and
turbidity levels are steadily increasing along the main section of the Pomme de Terre River,
Pomme De Terre River Comprehensive W atershed Management Plan
Appendix A. Land and W ater Resource Inventory
DR AFT 7 -30-2019
Land & W ater Resource Inventor y Appendix A | 26
with the highest concentrations located in the most downstream section. According to the
Pomme de Terre River Watershed Report9, the primary pollutant sources and stressor
sources, as identified in the Watershed Approach work including the Stressor ID report and
the Lakes Assessment report, are summarized in Table A- 6. These sources represent the likely
primary sources as identified in the Watershed Approach work and do not necessarily
represent a comprehensive list of pollutant and stressor sources.
Table A- 5. Lake and stream aquatic life and aquatic recreation use impairments in the Pomme de Terre River
Watershed (2018 Impaired Waters List)
Lake or reach
ID Waterbody Name Description
Affected
Designated Use Pollutant/Stressor
07020002-501 Pomme de Terre
River
Muddy (Mud) Cr to
Minnesota R
(Marsh Lk)
Aquatic
recreation Fecal Coliform
Aquatic life
Dissolved oxygen, Benthic
macroinvertebrate and Fish
bioassessments, Turbidity
07020002-506 Pelican Creek
T130 R41W S4,
north line to
Pomme de Terre R
Aquatic
recreation E. coli
Aquatic life Benthic macroinvertebrate and
Fish bioassessments, TSS
07020002-511 Muddy Creek
T124 R44W S3,
west line to
Pomme de Terre R
Aquatic
recreation E. coli
07020002-515 County Ditch 22 Unnamed ditch to
Unnamed cr Aquatic life Fish bioassessments
07020002-534 Unnamed creek Unnamed cr to
Unnamed cr Aquatic life Fish and Macroinvertebrate
bioassessments
07020002-540 Unnamed creek Unnamed cr to
Pomme de Terre R Aquatic life Fish and Macroinvertebrate
bioassessments
07020002-547 Unnamed creek Unnamed cr to
Pomme de Terre R Aquatic life Fish and Macroinvertebrate
bioassessments
07020002-549 Judicial Ditch 2 Judicial Ditch 63 to
Unnamed cr Aquatic life Fish and Macroinvertebrate
bioassessments
07020002-551 Unnamed creek Unnamed cr to
Unnamed cr Aquatic life Fish and Macroinvertebrate
bioassessments
07020002-556 Dry Wood Creek Dry Wood Lk to
Pomme de Terre R
Aquatic
recreation E. coli
Aquatic life
Benthic macroinvertebrate and
Fish bioassessments, Dissolved
oxygen, Turbidity
07020002-562 Pomme de Terre
River
Perkins Lk to
Muddy (Mud) Cr Aquatic life Fish bioassessments
07020002-563 Pomme de Terre
River
Barrett Lk to to
North Pomme de
Terre Lk
Aquatic life Fish bioassessments
07020002-566 Unnamed creek Unnamed cr to
Artichoke Cr Aquatic life River eutrophication
07020002-576 Unnamed creek Unnamed cr to -
95.964 45.545 Aquatic life Fish bioassessments
26-0095-00 Barrett AT BARRETT Aquatic
recreation
Nutrients (eutrophication
biological indicators)
Pomme De Terre River Comprehensive W atershed Management Plan
Appendix A. Land and W ater Resource Inventory
DR AFT 7 -30-2019
Land & W ater Resource Inventor y Appendix A | 27
Lake or reach
ID Waterbody Name Description
Affected
Designated Use Pollutant/Stressor
21-0375-00 Christina Aquatic
recreation
Nutrients (eutrophication
biological indicators)
76-0149-00 South Drywood Near Correll Aquatic
recreation
Nutrients (eutrophication
biological indicators)
76-0169-00 North Drywood AT BARRETT Aquatic
recreation
Nutrients (eutrophication
biological indicators)
75-0200-00 Hattie 5 MI S OF ALBERTA Aquatic
recreation
Nutrients (eutrophication
biological indicators)
76-0146-01 Oliver (east
portion)
10.5 MI N OF
APPLETON Aquatic life Fish bioassessments
76-0146-02 Oliver (west
portion)
10 MI N OF
APPLETON Aquatic life Fish bioassessments
75-0075-00 Perkins Aquatic
recreation
Nutrients (eutrophication
biological indicators)
56-0379-00 North Turtle UNDERWOOD Aquatic
recreation
Nutrients (eutrophication
biological indicators)
56-0377-00 South Turtle 3 MI E OF
UNDERWOOD Aquatic life Fish bioassessments
Table A- 6. Primary sources of pollutants and stressors of impaired water bodies in the Pomme de Terre River
Watershed.(Pomme de Terre River WRAPS, MPCA)
Impaired Waterbody Primary Sources of Pollutants/Stressors
HUC-10
Subwatershed Water Body Fertilizer & manure run-off Livestock overgrazing in riparian Failing septic systems Wildlife Poor riparian vegetation cover Upland soil erosion Bank erosion/excessive peak flows Low base flow Channelization Dams Upstream influences Internal sources Upper PdT River North Turtle Lake ●
Pelican Creek Christina Lake ● ● ●
Middle Pomme de Terre River
PdT River, 563 ● ● ● ● ● ●
Perkins Lake ● ● ●
PdT River, 562 ● ● ● ● ●
Muddy Creek Hattie Lake ● ● ●
Dry Wood Creek Dry Wood Creek, 556 ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
Lower Pomme de Terre River
Unnamed Creek, 551 ● ● ● ● ●
PdT River, 501 ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
Pomme De Terre River Comprehensive W atershed Management Plan
Appendix A. Land and W ater Resource Inventory
DR AFT 7 -30-2019
Land & W ater Resource Inventor y Appendix A | 28
A.7.2 Wetlands
The majority of the Pomme de Terre watershed is located in counties that have experienced
more than a 50% loss in pre-settlement wetland acreage with the exception of the
headwaters portion of the watershed in which 50-80% of the pre-settlement wetland acreage
remains. The historic landscape of the Pomme de Terre watershed had many more seasonal
and perennial wetlands, especially in the southern two-thirds of the watershed. Wetlands
throughout the watershed have been drained using ditches and tile lines to accommodate
agriculture, communities and roads.
Figure A- 12 compares the extent of current wetland acreage with restorable wetland acreage
based on a Restorable Wetlands GIS layer created by Ducks Unlimited in 2000. NWI wetlands
with a “d” modifier (partially drained/ ditched) were also added to Figure A- 12 to provide a
comprehensive estimate of potentially restorable wetlands. The Northern Region of the
watershed currently contains an estimated 21,739 acres of wetland, 5,419 of which are
partially drained or ditched. The estimated restorable wetland acreage for the Northern
Region was 5,481 acres, equivalent to approximately 25% of the existing wetland acreage.
The Southern Region of the watershed currently contains an estimated 20,559 acres of
wetland, 6,565 of which are partially drained or ditched. The estimated restorable wetland
acreage for the Southern Region was 37,193 acres, equivalent to approximately 180% of the
existing wetland acreage. Two wetlands within the watershed were assessed for impairments
in 2016.
Pomme De Terre River Comprehensive W atershed Management Plan
Appendix A. Land and W ater Resource Inventory
DR AFT 7 -30-2019
Land & W ater Resource Inventor y Appendix A | 29
Figure A- 12. Existing and Historic Wetland Resources in the Pomme de Terre River Watershed
Pomme De Terre River Comprehensive W atershed Management Plan
Appendix A. Land and W ater Resource Inventory
DR AFT 7 -30-2019
Land & W ater Resource Inventor y Appendix A | 30
A.7.3 Public Waters
Within the Pomme de Terre Watershed, there are about 2,034 recorded public basins with
670 of those over 10 acres. The northern region has approximately three times the acres of
lakes and ponds, while the southern region has about three times the miles of streams. This
is shown in Figure A- 13, with data from the MNDNR Public Waters Inventory (PWI) 10.
A.7.4 Public Drainage System
Extensive drainage systems occur in both the urban and agricultural areas of the Pomme de
Terre River watershed. While drainage systems were installed to remove excess water and
lower the water table for agricultural production and/or development, there may be
unintended consequences to the hydrologic system including changes in substrates, peak
flow, water quantity, water quality and groundwater recharge11.
The public drainage systems within the watershed are managed by drainage authorities on
behalf of the landowners receiving benefit from the drainage system.
Table A- 7 identifies public drainage authorities for each county within the Pomme de Terre
River Watershed. These drainage systems, typically open ditches or in some cases
underground tiles, were established to enhance agricultural production on lands frequently
too wet to produce crops. The cost for original establishment of the public drainage system
and subsequent improvements is borne by the benefitted properties within the area tributary
to the ditch. The drainage authority acts on behalf of all the benefitted property owners to
assess fees for the level of drainage benefit each landowner receives. Chapter 103E of the
Minnesota Statutes known as the Minnesota Drainage Law or Drainage Code provides the
regulatory framework for managing the public drainage systems.
Benefitted property owners also frequently connect private drainage systems including both
open ditches and subsurface tile lines to public ditches. These lawfully connected private
drainage systems are paid for and managed by the individual landowner. Subsurface
perforated tile lines are very common throughout the arable lands within the watershed.
Open public drainage systems are shown in Figure A- 14.
Table A- 7. Public Drainage Authorities of the Pomme de Terre River Watershed
County
Public
Drainage
System(s)
Who is Drainage
Authority? Record Availability Additional
Comments
Big Stone Yes Big Stone County /
County Board
Hardcopy Plans & Reports at Highway
Department
Contact Hwy Dept at 320-839-2594.
No specific
ditch related
concerns
Douglas
Yes, but
none in
PdT
Douglas County Contact Tom Anderson 320-762-2961
No public
drainage
systems in
PdT
Grant Yes Grant County Highway
Department
Hardcopy Plans & Reports at Highway
Department
Some information may be digitized.
No specific
ditch related
concerns
Pomme De Terre River Comprehensive W atershed Management Plan
Appendix A. Land and W ater Resource Inventory
DR AFT 7 -30-2019
Land & W ater Resource Inventor y Appendix A | 31
County
Public
Drainage
System(s)
Who is Drainage
Authority? Record Availability Additional
Comments
Otter Tail Yes Otter Tail County
Hard Copy original maps. new is in
electronic maps. Maintenance and repair
reports are electronic and hard copy.
Physically visit the Otter Tail County
Drainage authority to obtain information
from servers.
Contact Kevin Fellbaum with Otter Tail
County, 218-998-8492.
Ditch
maintenance
needed
Stevens Yes Stevens County
Yearly status reports, digital and hardcopy
maps, surveys, maintenance reports.
Ditch map is on Stevens County website
www.stevens.mn.co
Bill Kleindl 320-208-6558
No specific
ditch related
concerns
Swift Yes Swift County Parks,
Drainage & Wetlands
Not currently available to public. Hard
copies and a GIS shapefile available
through Swift County PDW.
Contact Mike Johnson
Mike.johnson@co.swift.mn.us
320-843-5341
No specific
ditch related
concerns
A.7.5 Dams
Surface water drainage within the Pomme de Terre Watershed has been significantly
manipulated to post European settlement. There are more than 10 impoundments along the
main stem of the Pomme de Terre River with many additional impoundments within the
tributary areas. These impoundments serve multiple purposes that benefit economic
development and wildlife habitat. The dams also alter river hydrology and create biotic
barriers along the river; for that reason the MPCA identified dams as stressors to biotic life
within the Pomme de Terre Watershed. The USDA as well as local agencies including MnDNR
and MPCA have data on the dams in the Pomme de Terre. To restore biotic passage through
the river system there is interest in removing dams no longer serving a purpose. One recent
example of this is the dam removed on Drywood Creek, a tributary to the Pomme de Terre
River.
Pomme De Terre River Comprehensive W atershed Management Plan
Appendix A. Land and W ater Resource Inventory
DR AFT 7 -30-2019
Land & W ater Resource Inventor y Appendix A | 32
Figure A- 13. DNR Public Waters Basins and DNR River and Stream Centerlines
Pomme De Terre River Comprehensive W atershed Management Plan
Appendix A. Land and W ater Resource Inventory
DR AFT 7 -30-2019
Land & W ater Resource Inventor y Appendix A | 33
Figure A- 14. Open Public Drainage Systems in the Pomme de Terre Watershed
Pomme De Terre River Comprehensive W atershed Management Plan
Appendix A. Land and W ater Resource Inventory
DR AFT 7 -30-2019
Land & W ater Resource Inventor y Appendix A | 34
GROUNDWATER RESOURCE DATA
Within overlying till deposits, good quality ground water is available everywhere in the watershed.
High yield aquifers are largely confined to ice-contact sand and gravel till deposits within the
Alexandria Moraine and the outwash plain of the river. According to a 1966 report by United States
Geological Survey, these same aquifers also have the potential to be easily contaminated. The
Cretaceous and Precambrian rocks beneath the drift are poor aquifers and few wells are completed
in them. The north half of the watershed is separated from the south half by a groundwater divide.
Water flows through the north half from northeast to southwest. Calculated underflow from the
south half of the watershed is a negligible quantity. Depth to the water table and groundwater
vulnerable to pollution is shown in Figure A- 15.
Contaminants of concern for all drinking water can be human sourced or naturally occurring. Of
greatest concern is arsenic, which affects large regions due to the geologic sensitivity of the
watershed. Nitrates are also a concern and could become a greater issue if land use is not managed
properly. Nitrate monitoring results overlaid with pollution sensitivity of wells and arsenic
monitoring results are shown in Figure A- 17 and Figure A- 18.
MDNR has prepared three Regional Hydrologic Assessments (RHAs) that cover the Pomme de Terre
watershed. From north to south, the RHAs are Otter Tail, Traverse-Grant, and Upper Minnesota River
Basin. Each RHA has maps and data on:
Surficial geology
Quaternary stratigraphy
Surficial hydrogeology
Groundwater pollution sensitivity
Other studies of local interest
A.8.1 Public Water Supply
There are nine public water suppliers located in the following communities: Appleton, Ashby,
Barrett, Chokio, Dalton, Donnelly, Elbow Lake, Morris, and Underwood. A number of these
wells are located in high to moderate vulnerability settings including Appleton, Barrett and
Morris. The City of Alberta has high levels of naturally occurring arsenic in their water supply
while the Cities of Appleton, Barrett and Morris have low levels of nitrates in the
groundwater. The City of Chokio is in need of upgrading their current water treatment
system.
Pomme De Terre River Comprehensive W atershed Management Plan
Appendix A. Land and W ater Resource Inventory
DR AFT 7 -30-2019
Land & W ater Resource Inventor y Appendix A | 35
Figure A- 15. Depth to Water Table and Vulnerable Groundwater Areas in the Pomme de Terre River Watershed
Pomme De Terre River Comprehensive W atershed Management Plan
Appendix A. Land and W ater Resource Inventory
DR AFT 7 -30-2019
Land & W ater Resource Inventor y Appendix A | 36
Figure A- 16. Groundwater Pollution Sensitivity. Source: Minnesota Geologic County Atlas Regional Hydrogeologic Assessment Watershed Health
Pomme De Terre River Comprehensive W atershed Management Plan
Appendix A. Land and W ater Resource Inventory
DR AFT 7 -30-2019
Land & W ater Resource Inventor y Appendix A | 37
Figure A- 17. Nitrate Results and Pollution Sensitivity of Wells in the Pomme de Terre Watershed
Pomme De Terre River Comprehensive W atershed Management Plan
Appendix A. Land and W ater Resource Inventory
DR AFT 7 -30-2019
Land & W ater Resource Inventor y Appendix A | 38
Figure A- 18. Arsenic monitoring results in the Pomme de Terre Watershed.
Pomme De Terre River Comprehensive W atershed Management Plan
Appendix A. Land and W ater Resource Inventory
DR AFT 7 -30-2019
Land & W ater Resource Inventor y Appendix A | 39
There are 54 noncommunity public water suppliers in the Pomme de Terre watershed. These
suppliers provide drinking water to people at their places of work, gather or play (schools,
offices, campgrounds, churches, etc.). These wells face the same groundwater quality issues
that public water supplies face. Samples from noncommunity public water supply systems
are most often collected either by the Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) or the local
health department.
All nontransient public water supply systems are required to collect lead and copper samples.
Some systems may be required to collect additional samples if they are treating the water to
remove a regulated contaminant and/or have a population over 1000. In these cases, MDH
will supply the system with the necessary bottles and precise guidelines for taking the
samples. Facilities such as schools, offices, factories, and childcare are tested for the following
contaminants:
arsenic
bacteria (total coliform)
copper
lead
nitrates
nitrites
volatile organic chemicals (VOCs)
soluble organic chemicals (SOCs)
inorganic chemicals (IOCs)
In Figure A- 19, Drinking Water Supply Management Areas (DWSMA) for the watershed are
ranked based on vulnerability12. These areas are managed by the entity identified in a
wellhead protection plan11. During the 2018 Pomme de Terre 1W1P Watershed Bus Tour,
MDH included the following information about the Ashby, Barrett, and Morris DWSMAs:
The Ashby DWSMA is 213 acres.
The Barrett DWSMA is 442 acres, and is one of the most vulnerable but most
protected DWSMA. Many acres of conservation easements have been secured by the
Grant County SWCD for this community’s wellhead protection area and for the area
around Barrett Lake.
The Morris DWSMA is 2,814 acres, and has the greatest number of and shallowest
(most average 58-82 feet) public water supply (PWS) wells. This community
provides drinking water to the city of Alberta.
A.8.2 Private Water Supply
Many residents of Pomme de Terre watershed rely on a private well for the water they drink.
Because there is no public entity is responsible for water testing or management of a private
well after drilling is completed, these well owners have the sole responsibility for the health
and safety of their drinking water. There are 1,344 known private wells in the watershed,
shown in Figure A- 20.
Pomme De Terre River Comprehensive W atershed Management Plan
Appendix A. Land and W ater Resource Inventory
DR AFT 7 -30-2019
Land & W ater Resource Inventor y Appendix A | 40
Figure A- 19. Vulnerability of Drinking Water Supply Management Areas in the Pomme de Terre Watershed
Pomme De Terre River Comprehensive W atershed Management Plan
Appendix A. Land and W ater Resource Inventory
DR AFT 7 -30-2019
Land & W ater Resource Inventor y Appendix A | 41
Figure A- 20. Private wells in the Pomme de Terre Watershed by subwatershed
Bedrock geology information is available from statewide maps13. Additional information on
groundwater quantity and quality is available from county SWCD management plans.
Information about wells, well construction, and groundwater quality can be assembled from
the Minnesota Well Index14. Wellhead Protection Plans for public water supplies have
information on local aquifers and groundwater flow patterns. Information on drinking water
quality can be found via the MDH15. The MPCA has information on closed landfill facilities16
and data can be accessed through MNDNR17. Pollution sensitivity of the uppermost aquifers
are shown in Figure A- 2118.
WATERSHED HEALTH
The Watershed Health Assessment Framework (WHAF), a tool developed by the MN DNR, provides
an organized approach for exploring the complexity of natural and human communities as they
continuously exchange material, energy, organisms and information. The WHAF can reveal patterns
of ecological health from multiple viewpoints, and encourage information sharing and collaboration;
fostering innovative ideas that help the health and resilience of our natural and human
communities. The WHAF is an approach that uses a 5-component framework to consistently evaluate
watersheds from different perspectives.
Biology: "The study of life, encompassing the plants and animal species present in the
stream, riparian lands and contributing watershed."
Connectivity: "The maintenance of pathways that move organisms, energy, and matter
throughout the watershed."
Geomorphology: "The study of landscape features; from their origins and evolutions to
the processes that continue to shape them."
Hydrology: "The inter-relationships and interactions between water and its environment
in the hydrologic cycle."
Water Quality: "The chemical, biological, and physical characteristics of water; the
current condition and future susceptibility of surface water and groundwater to
degradation."
An interactive tool allowing users to access information about the Pomme de Terre River Watershed
and view watershed health indices is available at the following website:
https://www.dnr.state.mn.us/whaf/index.html
Pomme De Terre River Comprehensive W atershed Management Plan
Appendix A. Land and W ater Resource Inventory
DR AFT 7 -30-2019
Land & W ater Resource Inventor y Appendix A | 42
Figure A- 21. Pollution Sensitivity of the Uppermost Aquifers in the Pomme de Terre Watershed
Pomme De Terre River Comprehensive W atershed Management Plan
Appendix A. Land and W ater Resource Inventory
DR AFT 7 -30-2019
Land & W ater Resource Inventor y Appendix A | 43
GROUNDWATER AND SURFACE WATER APPROPRIATIONS
Permits for appropriations of surface water and ground water are provided by the MNDNR for all
users withdrawing more than 10,000 gallons of water per day or 1 million gallons per year. Active
water use permit information can be accessed online through the DNR Site-Specific Water Use
Database (SWUDS)19.
According to this information, as of 2017, active permits in the Pomme de Terre Watershed totaled
329, with permits for agricultural irrigation being the greatest (Figure A- 22). The water use from
these permitted entities is measured in millions of gallons, and the greatest amount of water in the
10-year period from 2008-2017 was used in the years 2012 and 2015 (Figure A- 23). This, in a large
part, is attributed to the increase in water level maintenance during those years. Water level
maintenance uses surface water, which explains the increase in surface water use during those years
(Figure A- 24). Average annual water use during the 10-year period was approximately 5,407
millions of gallons, with the greatest use from agricultural irrigation.
PERMITTED WASTEWATER DISCHARGES
NPDES permitted discharges located in the watershed are available at the MPCA website. Discharge
monitoring reports are available to download for the Pomme de Terre Watershed and can also be
viewed in the Wastewater Data Browser20. Data can be organized by facility, watershed, station type,
among additional attributes. Environmental hazards located in the watershed can be accessed from
the MPCA What’s in My Neighborhood Database21, which is a more general data source than the Data
Desk Request method. Data on feedlots can be obtained from the MN Geospatial Commons 22, but will
likely not be applicable to the project area. These datasets related to pollutant sources and permitted
discharges have been synthesized and summarized in the 2013 WRAPS report for the Pomme de
Terre River Watershed: https://www.pca.state.mn.us/sites/default/files/wq-ws4-01.pdf. According
to the Pomme de Terre River Watershed TMDL, counties within the Pomme de Terre watershed
estimate compliance with sub-surface sewage treatment systems (SSTS) to be between 25%-75%23.
The City of Morris is a municipal separate storm sewer system (MS4) community and is required to
have an MS4 General Stormwater Permit for any stormwater and to develop, implement, and enforce
a stormwater pollution prevention plan (SWPPP). They applied for a permit in 2016, which they have
now received24. An MS4 is a system of conveyances that is owned and operated by a public entity,
collects stormwater, is not combined with a sewer, and is not a part of a public treatment system.
MS4s are subject to regulation for reasons outlined in the Clean Water Act and Minnesota Rule
709025.
Pomme De Terre River Comprehensive W atershed Management Plan
Appendix A. Land and W ater Resource Inventory
DR AFT 7 -30-2019
Land & W ater Resource Inventor y Appendix A | 44
Figure A- 22. Active permits as of 2017 by water use type in the Pomme de Terre Watershed
Figure A- 23. Annual water use by use type from 2008-2017 in the Pomme de Terre Watershed
Figure A- 24. Water use by source type from 2008-2017 in the Pomme de Terre Watershed
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
8000
9000
10000
Millions of GallonsYear
Water Use by Use Type per Year (2008-2017)
Water Level Maintenance
Agricultural Irrigation
Water Supply
Special Categories
Industrial Processing
Non-Crop Irrigation
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
2017201620152014201320122011201020092008Millions of GallonsYear
Water Use by Source per Year (2008-2017)
Groundwater
Surface Water
Pomme De Terre River Comprehensive W atershed Management Plan
Appendix A. Land and W ater Resource Inventory
DR AFT 7 -30-2019
Land & W ater Resource Inventor y Appendix A | 45
WATER BASED RECREATION AREAS AND LAND OWNERSHIP
The Pomme de Terre watershed is home to many water features including lakes, rivers, and wetlands
that provide opportunities for recreation, hunting, and fishing. In addition, according to the
Protected Areas Database of the United States, over 68,000 acres of public lands and easements26 are
located within the watershed and provide further opportunity for recreation and sportsmanship.
Over 340 miles of streams and rivers and over 55,000 acres of lakes and wetlands are designated by
the MN DNR as Public Waters including five Aquatic Management Areas (AMAs). AMAs provide
angler and management access, protect critical shore land habitat and provide areas for education
and research. AMAs in the Pomme de Terre River Watershed include: East Lost Lake, Tamarack, Eagle
Lake, Melby Lake, and north Turtle Lake. The Watershed is also home to one MN DNR designated
State Water Trail (i.e., 30 mile reach of Pomme de Terre River to confluence with Minnesota River)27.
However, no State- or Federally-designated wild, scenic and recreation rivers are located within the
Pomme de Terre watershed. Public waters are accessible via 37 access sites administered by DNR,
USFWS, and various cities within the watershed28. Two public fishing piers, located at Artichoke and
Barret lakes, and one public shore fishing site, located at Appleton Mill Pond, also provide public
access to aquatic resources and provide designated places to fish29.
Other natural areas for recreational enjoyment include: a section of the Northern Tallgrass Prairie
National Wildlife Refuge, Evansville, Crystal Lake, and Ashby State game Refuges, Clear Lake and
Harstad Slough State Waterfowl Refuges, Egret Island Scenic and Natural Area (SNA), 42 publically
accessible Wildlife Management Areas, state forest areas, 103 Waterfowl Production Areas, over
four-thousand acres of conservation easement, and local parks associated with lakes and rivers.
These areas provide space and opportunity for fishing, hiking, cross-country skiing, biking,
snowmobiling, birdwatching, geocaching, morel hunting, and viewing of rare and endemic plants,
canoeing, swimming, and bird watching all across the Pomme de Terre Watershed. Additionally,
Inspiration Peak State Wayside Park is located along the northeast border of the watershed and
provides magnificent vistas, rising over 1,700 feet above lakes and woodland, to one of the highest
points in the state. No Regional parks are located within the Watershed.
There are many aquatic resources and natural areas in the watershed conducive to recreation
activities including seven lakes (i.e., South Turtle, Swan, Stalker, Long, Clear, Ten Mile, and Eagle
lakes) the MPCA has identified as fully supporting aquatic recreation; all of which are located in the
norther third of the watershed. However, it is also important to note that based on the MPCA 2016
impaired waters list, 12 stream reaches, 17 lakes, and two wetlands are identified as impaired for
aquatic life, aquatic recreation, and/or aquatic consumption and no assessed streams were identified
as fully supporting aquatic recreation30.
Additional information on water based recreation areas is available through the MN Geospatial
Commons including state aquatic management areas31, state administered lands32, wildlife
management areas33, state parks34, MN Water Trails, Wild and Scenic Rivers35, and public water
access sites. Land ownership and generalized land ownership data is also available for all the
Watershed’s counties.
Pomme De Terre River Comprehensive W atershed Management Plan
Appendix A. Land and W ater Resource Inventory
DR AFT 7 -30-2019
Land & W ater Resource Inventor y Appendix A | 46
FISH AND WILDLIFE HABITAT
Data for fish and wildlife habitat is available primarily from the MNDNR interactive maps.
Specifically, GIS data is available for Wildlife Management Areas33, Wildlife Refuge Inventory,
Designated Wildlife Lakes36, Trout streams and lakes37. Data for rare and endangered species38 as
well as Natural Heritage Inventory Data can be obtained from MNDNR.
A.13.1 Fish and Aquatic Habitat
The Pomme de Terre Watershed is home to 217 lakes and numerous wetlands, many of
which, including Lake Christina, Lost Lake, Eagle Lake, Tamarack Lake, Melby Lake, Pomme
de Terre Lake, Artichoke Lake, North Turtle Lake, Swan Lake, Ten Mile Lake, and Stalker
Lakes, provide habitat for fish and aquatic life. Although the drainage network within the
watershed is not highly developed, several larger tributaries and the Pomme de Terre River
provide suitable habitat for fish. Pelican Creek, Muddy Creek, and Dry Wood Creek are
permanent tributaries to the Pomme de Terre River, whereas remaining tributaries in the
watershed are mostly intermittent streams with small drainages that often do not have
flowing water throughout the summer months.
As mentioned in the previous section, the Pomme de Terre contains five MN DNR Aquatic
Management Areas; Lost Lake (ID# 56037800), Eagle Lake (ID# 56025300), Tamarack lake
(ID# 56043300), Melby Lake (ID# 26007700), and North Turtle Lake (ID# 56037900) (MN
DNR 2017). No fish data is available for Tamarack or Melby lakes. However, the remaining
three lakes are known to support populations of black bullhead, black crappie, bluegill, brown
bullhead, green sunfish, hybrid sunfish, lake sturgeon, largemouth bass, northern pike,
pumpkinseed, rock bass, tullibee (cisco), walleye, yellow bullhead, yellow perch, bowfin
(dogfish), common carp, greater redhorse, shorthead redhorse, white sucker, banded
killifish, bluntnose minnow, fathead minnow, Johnny darter, logperch, and golden shiner.
Streams within the watershed are known to support many of the aforemention fish species
and additionally support largescale stoneroller, silver redhorse, banded darter, bowfin,
mimic shiner, rock bass, central stoneroller, tadpole madtom, golden redhorse, common
shiner, creek chub, bluntnose minnow, black cappie,stonecat, hornyhead chub, spotfin shiner,
blackside darter, spottail shiner, channel catfish, emerald shiner, sand shiner, freshwater
drum, whaite bass, and orage spotted sunfish (MN DNR 2017). One stream reach has been
identified as a designated trout stream (Unnamed Stream M-055-179-074) located in the far
north-central portion of the watershed 37.
A.13.2 Wildlife Habitat
The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources and U.S. Forest Service Ecological
Classification System (ECS) identify contiguous areas of increasingly uniform physiological
and ecological features based on the National Ecological Unit Hierarchy design criteria. The
ECS in Minnesota is described by the MN DNR as a three-tier hierarchy including Provinces,
Sections, and Sub-sections. Subsections are the most resolute level of classification, covering
smaller and more congruent ecological areas with similar geologic processes, vegetation,
local climate, topography, and soils39.
Pomme De Terre River Comprehensive W atershed Management Plan
Appendix A. Land and W ater Resource Inventory
DR AFT 7 -30-2019
Land & W ater Resource Inventor y Appendix A | 47
The majority of the Pomme de Terre Watershed is located within the Prairie Parkland (PP)
Province and the northeast end of the watershed is located in the Eastern Broadleaf Forest
(EBF) Province. The portion of the watershed within the EBF Province is further identified
within the Minnesota and Northeast Iowa Morainal Section and Hardwood Hills (HH)
Subsection39. The far northwest corner of the watershed falls within the Red River Valley
Section and Red River Prairie (RRP) Subsection. The remainder of the watershed covers area
identified as the North Central Glaciated Plains Section and the Minnesota River Prairie
(MRP) Subsection.
The three subsections found within the Pomme de Terre Watershed differ slightly in
topography, soils, geology, climate, hydrology, and historic vegetation. The HH Subsection
was historically vegetated by mixed hardwood forest and tallgrass prairie and the MRP and
RRP subsections were historically vegetated predominately by tallgrass prairie and wet
prairie with hardwood and floodplain forests found along stream and river corridors39. All
three subsections within the watershed are characterized by thick loamy glacial till and as a
result, are highly suitable for row crop agriculture. Although land use within the watershed
is currently dominated by agriculture, public and conservation lands offer habitat space
within the highly fragmented landscape40.
A unit of the Northern Tallgrass Prairie National Wildlife Refuge is also located within the
watershed; west of the Pomme de Terre River near the southern border of Stevens County.
The refuge is home to tallgrass prairie, Dakota skipper, grasshopper sparrows, and greater
prairie chickens41. The watershed is also home to Egret Island Scientific and natural Area
(SNA). This SNA is a low wooded island located in the center of Pelican Lake, which has the
largest concentration of nesting colonial waterbirds in Minnesota. Protected bay and
marshes within the island provide excellent nesting habitat for black-crowned night herons,
great egrets, cattle egrets, snowy egrets, great blue herons, western grebes, tricolored herons,
little blue herons, and least bitterns 42. Two other lakes within the Pomme de Terre are
identified as important to wildlife and waterfowl. Lake Anka and Lake Christina are both MN
DNR Designated Wildlife Lakes and Lake Christina is additionally designated as a Migratory
Waterfowl Feeding and Resting Area36. Furthermore, the watershed contains 18 Lakes of
Biological Significance, which range in rating from moderate to outstanding43. These lakes
are primarily located in Northern half of the watershed.
The watershed contains 42 WMAs including La Qui Parle WMA, which includes Marsh Lake
within the Minnesota River Valley44. This WMA protects prairie pothole wetlands and native
prairie tracts and is home to the largest American white pelican colony in North America45.
The Lac Qui Parle- Big Stone Important Bird Area overlaps the southern portion of the Pomme
de Terre Watershed. This IBA encompasses a wide area along the Minnesota River and over
200 bird species are recorded annually. The watershed also encompasses over 4,000 acres
of state funded conservation easements (Table A- 8) and approximately 24,713 acres of land
enrolled in the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP)46.
Pomme De Terre River Comprehensive W atershed Management Plan
Appendix A. Land and W ater Resource Inventory
DR AFT 7 -30-2019
Land & W ater Resource Inventor y Appendix A | 48
Table A- 8. State funded Conservation Easements within the watershed (MN DNR Zonation materials)46
Easement Type Contracts Acres
CREP I 69 184.5
PWP 4 103.4
RIM 64 2,018.5
RIM-WRP 18 1,732.7
Total 155 4,039.1
UNIQUE FEATURES AND SCENIC AREAS
Data for unique features and scenic areas include SNAs, Natural Area Registry, Wild and Scenic
Rivers, MBS Sites of Biodiversity Significance, all of which is available through the MN Geospatial
Commons22. Natural Heritage Inventory data was requested as part of the zonation process. The
watershed contains many important unique and rare resources, which occur throughout the
northern and southern portions of the watershed.
A.14.1 Federally-listed Plant and Animal Species
According to the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) IPaC report for the Pomme de Terre
Watershed, three federally-listed species have potential to be found within the Pomme de
Terre Watershed including the gray wolf (Canis Lupus), northern long-eared bat (Myotis
sepentrionalis), and the Dakota skipper (Hesperia dacotae). IPaC did not identify any a
designated critical habitat for these three species within the Pomme de Terre watershed. In
addition, IPac identified 26 USFWS Birds of Conservation Concern that are likely to be found
within the Pome de Terre Watershed at various times of the year 47.
Table A- 9. Federally listed species found in the Pomme de Terre Watershed 47
Species Common Name
(Scientific Name) Status Habitat
Gray Wolf
(Canis lupus) Threatened Habitat is variable including temperate forest, mountains,
tundra, and grasslands.
Northern long-eared bat
(Myotis septentrionalis) Threatened
Hibernates in caves and mines - swarming in surrounding
wooded areas in autumn. Roosts and forages in upland
forests during spring and summer. Townships containing
northern long-eared bat roost trees and hibernacula - links
to Minnesota DNR PDF
Dakota Skipper
(Hesperia dacotae) Threatened
Moist bluestem prairie with wood lily (Lilium
philadelphicum), harebell (Campanula rotundifolia) and
smooth camas (Zygadenus elegans) and dry-mesic upland
prairie found on ridges and hillsidesw with bluestem
grasses, needlegrasses, and purple coneflower (Echinacea
angustifolia).
(USFWS, 2017)
Pomme De Terre River Comprehensive W atershed Management Plan
Appendix A. Land and W ater Resource Inventory
DR AFT 7 -30-2019
Land & W ater Resource Inventor y Appendix A | 49
A.14.2 State-listed Plant and Animal Species
According to data provided by the MN DNR38, the Pomme de Terre Watershed contains
records of 47 rare species including five state-endangered, seven state-threatened, and 32
state species of concern, and three species identified as not listed but are included in the NHIS
database.
Table A- 10. State-listed species found in the Pomme de Terre Watershed
Group Common Name (State Status)
Mammals Northern Grasshopper Mouse
(SPC) Prairie Vole (SPC)
Birds
American Bittern (NL)* American White Pelican (SPC)* Bald Eagle (NL)*
Burrowing Owl (END) Forster’s Tern (SPC)* Henslow’s Sparrow (END)
Hooded Warbler (SPC) Lark Sparrow (SPC) Loggerhead Shrike (END)
Marbled Godwit (SPC)* Purple Martin (SPC)* Red-shouldered Hawk (SPC)
Trumpeter Swan (SPC)* Upland Sandpiper (NL)
Amphibian/
Reptiles Blanding’s Turtle (THR)* Great Plains Toad (SPC)* Mudpuppy (SPC)*
Fish Least Darter (SPC)* Pugnose Shiner (THR)*
Mollusks
Black Sandshell (SPC)* Creek Heelsplitter (SPC)* Elktoe (THR)*
Fluted-shell (THR)* Mucket (THR)* Round Pigtoe (SPC)*
Jumping Spider Habronattus viridipes (SPC) Paradamoetas fontana (SPC)*
Butterflies/
Moths
Dakota Skipper (END, Fed-
THR)
Leonard’s/Pawnee Skipper
(SPC) Poweshiek Skipperling (END)
Regal Fritillary (SPC)
Caddisflies Limnephilus secludens (END)*
Vascular Plants
American Ginseng (SPC) Few-flowered Spikerush (SPC)* Hair-like Beak Rush (THR)*
Hill’s Thistle (SPC) Olive-colored Southern Naiad
(SPC)* Prairie Mimosa (SPC)*
Prairie Moonwort (SPC) Red Three-awn (SPC) Sea Naiad (SPC)*
Short-pointed Umbrella-
sedge (THR)*
Small White Lady’s-slipper
(SPC)* Spiral Ditchgrass (SPC)*
Sterile Sedge (THR)*
1 Common name with current state status in parentheses, unless noted; an asterisk (*) indicates that these species are
dependent on aquatic resources or features.
2 State Status: END = Endangered, THR = Threatened, SPC = Special Concern, NL = Not Listed but in our NHIS database, Federal
Status (Fed) C = Candidate for Federal listing. THR = Threatened
Nine of the listed plant species are dependent on high water quality, minimal disturbance,
and have direct relationships to groundwater and are therefore sensitive to disturbances
Pomme De Terre River Comprehensive W atershed Management Plan
Appendix A. Land and W ater Resource Inventory
DR AFT 7 -30-2019
Land & W ater Resource Inventor y Appendix A | 50
such as erosion, drainage, invasive species, and lake bounce. All observations of the listed
mussels are located along the Pomme de Terre River. Most mussels rely on rivers with high
water clarity without impediments to fish migration (e.g. dams). Channelization, sediment
pollution, and other physical alterations to stream habitat can effect fish movement and
quality substrate availability for mussels.
In addition to the individual listed species identified in Table A- 10, there are also a number
of colonial waterbird nesting areas within the watershed. This includes colonies of great blue
heron, double-crested cormorant, and multiple species of grebe. Lake Christina has been a
noted nesting location for western grebe, Forester’s tern, American white pelican, red-necked
grebe, and black-crowned night heron among others.
A.14.3 Ecologically Sensitive, Unique, and Important Areas
The Pomme de Terre Watershed is home to several sensitive/unique water resources
including five calcareous fens in the northeast portion of the watershed (Eagle Lake 22 SW,
Eagle Lake 28, Eagle Lake 27 NW, Eagle Lake 22 SE, and Eagle Lake 27 NE) and two wild rice
areas in north end of watershed (Tamarack Lake (56043300) and Unnamed Lake
(56108300)). No Highly Sensitive Lake Shore areas are identified within the Watershed.
The watershed also contains mapped areas of sensitive plant communities and ecological
important areas. A project by South Dakota State University identified and mapped areas of
Potentially Undisturbed Lands (PUDL) within several counties in south and western
Minnesota. The research identifies areas with the highest probability of being native sod and
maps approximately 8,931-acres of PUDL in the Pome de Terre Watershed portions of Swift
and Big Stone Counties48. In addition to PUDL, 7 MN DNR Native Prairie banks are located
within the watershed, several right-of-way prairies, and several areas of MN DNR Prairie Core
Areas, Identified in the MN DNR Prairie Conservation Plan, also intersect the north and south
ends of the watershed49. According to the MN DNR Native Plant Communities (NPC) data, the
watershed contains 22 different native community types; covering approximately 7,830
acres. Most mapped NPCs are located in northeast very southern edge of the watershed
(Table A- 11). Most of the mapped native plant communities are within tracts of land
identified by the Minnesota County Biological Survey as Areas of Biodiversity Significance
(MCBS). MCBS areas depict unique areas with varying levels of native biodiversity that may
contain native plant communities, rare plants/animals, and/or animal aggregations.
Biodiversity significance ranks are based on the number of rare species identified, overall
quality of the native plant community, size of the site, and context within the landscape (i.e.,
connection or isolation to/from other high quality ecological corridors) 50. One site within
the watershed is identified as Outstanding and 21 sites are identified as High; most of with
are found within the northern portion of the watershed. The watershed also contains 371
Moderate and Below MCBS sites. The following table is a breakdown of these areas based on
Biodiversity Significance Rating (Table A- 12). No Regionally Significant Ecological Areas or
Corridors are identified within the watershed, as this data is not available for the counties
encompassed in the watershed.
Pomme De Terre River Comprehensive W atershed Management Plan
Appendix A. Land and W ater Resource Inventory
DR AFT 7 -30-2019
Land & W ater Resource Inventor y Appendix A | 51
Table A- 11. MN DNR NPC types and acreage found within the Pomme de Terre Watershed
Native Plant Community Acres
State (S)/Global (G)
Conservation Ranks
FDs37b - Pin Oak - Bur Oak Woodland 1,170.5 S3
FWMM_CX - Fen/Wet Meadow/Marsh Complex 79.2 CMX
MHc37b - Sugar Maple - Basswood - (Aspen) Forest 450.5 S4
MHs38 - Southern Mesic Oak-Basswood Forest 176.7 -
MHs38b - Basswood - Bur Oak - (Green Ash) Forest 1,909.8 S3
MRn83a - Cattail - Sedge Marsh (Northern) 9.1 S2
MRn83b - Cattail Marsh (Northern) 18.9 S2
MRp83a - Cattail - Sedge Marsh (Prairie) 71.0 S1
OPn92a - Graminoid Rich Fen (Basin) 18.2 S4
OPn92b - Graminoid - Sphagnum Rich Fen (Basin) 1.9 S4
OPp93a - Calcareous Fen (Northwestern) 38.7 S2/G2
UPn12d - Dry Hill Prairie (Northern) 15.7 S1/G2
UPs13b - Dry Sand - Gravel Prairie (Southern) 963.9 S2
UPs13d - Dry Hill Prairie (Southern) 938.3 S2/G1
UPs23a - Mesic Prairie (Southern) 1,688.2 S2/G2
WFs55a - Lowland Aspen Forest 11.9 S4
WMn82a - Willow - Dogwood Shrub Swamp 17.4 S5
WMn82b - Sedge Meadow 51.2 S4/S5
WMp73a - Prairie Meadow/Carr 17.8 S3/G2G3
WMs83a - Seepage Meadow/Carr 91.2 S3
WMs83a1 - Seepage Meadow/Carr, Tussock Sedge Subtype 6.5 S3
WPs54b - Wet Prairie (Southern) 84.0 S2/G2G3
Total Acres 7830.5
Conservation rank of a community association plant or NPC is based on a one to five scale: 1 = critically
imperiled 2 = imperiled 3 = vulnerable to extirpation or extinction 4 = apparently secure 5 = demonstrably
widespread, abundant, and secure. (MN DNR Native Plant Communities Data, 2017)
Table A- 12. MCBS Area by rating within the Pomme de Terre Watershed51
Rating Acres
Below 5,676.3
High 2,204.4
Moderate 11,244.1
Outstanding 58.9
Grand Total 19,183.6
Pomme De Terre River Comprehensive W atershed Management Plan
Appendix A. Land and W ater Resource Inventory
DR AFT 7 -30-2019
Land & W ater Resource Inventor y Appendix A | 52
LAND USE AND LAND COVER
The Pomme de Terre Watershed has experienced significant shifts in land use, demands on the land,
and the expansions of human developments. According to the map of presettlement vegetation in the
Pomme de Terre Watershed (Marschner Map of Original Vegetation) the northern section of the
watershed was predominantly a combination of prairie, oak openings and barrens, big woods
interspersed with aspen-oak woodlands, and lakes. The central and southern sections were
predominantly a combination of prairie, wet prairie, river bottom forest, and lakes 52. Prior to the
European settlement in the 1800’s, native peoples grew crops, set fires, and affected the lands in
other ways. After the Europeans began to settle to area, demands on the landscape drastically
changed and this shift accelerated rather rapidly resulting in the modern conditions seen today.
Human settlement within the watershed influenced a change in how the land was utilized. Other
human influences on land use include the suppression of fires, which has resulted in changes in fire-
dependent plant communities.
Land use within the watershed is largely agricultural, with crop and pasture lands accounting for
approximately 81% of the overall Watershed Area. Cropland is used predominantly for growing corn
and soybeans as well as hay, pasture, and small grains (Figure A- 25). The Rapid Watershed
Assessment Report of the Pomme de Terre summarized that the main resource concerns on the
cropland are wind and water erosion and flooding resulting in cropland runoff. Associated with the
cropland runoff are increased sediment and pollutant loadings to surface water. Additional resource
concerns include surface and groundwater quality, Agricultural waste management, and declining
wildlife habitat.
Urban development pressure is low in most areas, with occasional farms, timberland, and lakeshore
being parceled out for recreation, lake or country homes and expanding suburban populations. Table
A- 13 describes the types of land use and the ownership types of the Pomme de Terre River
Watershed. Table A- 14 shows the type, number and acreage of the public lands within the watershed
dedicated to conservation.
Land cover data can be obtained from the National Land Cover Database (NLCD) Land Cover data
available at MN Geospatial Commons 40. Roadways are also included in land cover and can be
obtained from MNDOT. The AgroEcoregions of Minnesota data from the MDA is also available at MN
Geospatial Commons 53 .
Table A- 13. Land Use by Ownership Type (NRCS Rapid Watershed Assessment: Pomme de Terre River Watershed)
Landcover/use
Public Private Tribal
Total Acres Percent
Acres Percent Acres Percent Acres Percent
Forest 1,888.1 0.34 32,565.75 5.82 0.0 0.00 34453.85 6.15%
Grain Crops 2,093.2 0.37 16,857.76 3.01 0.0 0.00 18950.93 3.38%
Grass, etc 8,123.3 1.45 70,160.80 12.53 0.0 0.00 78284.10 13.98%
Orchards 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00%
Row Crops 7,113.4 1.27 332,408.83 59.36 0.0 0.00 339522.20 60.63%
Shrub, etc 12.3 0.00 538.97 0.10 0.0 0.00 551.31 0.10%
Pomme De Terre River Comprehensive W atershed Management Plan
Appendix A. Land and W ater Resource Inventory
DR AFT 7 -30-2019
Land & W ater Resource Inventor y Appendix A | 53
Landcover/use
Public Private Tribal
Total Acres Percent
Acres Percent Acres Percent Acres Percent
Wetlands 8,492.6 1.52 33,391.74 5.96 0.0 0.00 41884.29 7.48%
Residential/
Commercial 97.1 0.02 3,813.71 0.68 0.0 0.00 3910.81 0.70%
Open Water 1977.18 -- 40,442.41 -- 0.0 0.00 42419.59 7.58%
Totals 29797.11 5.32% 530,180 94.68% 0.0 0.00% 559977.08 100%
Table A- 14. Public Lands in the Pomme de Terre Watershed (USDA)
Public Land Type Count Acres
Waterfowl Production Area (USFWS) 314 21,428.4
Wildlife Management Area (MNDNR) 40 4,482.5
Lac Qui Parle WMA (MNDNR) 1 24327.7
Scenic Natural Area (MNDNR) 1 34.4
Total 356 50,273.0
Table A- 15. Land use breakdown by Region.
Land use
North Region South Region
Acres Percent Acres Percent
Open Water 35,617 15.9% 13,834 4.1%
Developed 11,869 5.3% 19,444 5.8%
Barren 78 0.0% 388 0.1%
Forest 25,287 11.3% 3,973 1.2%
Shrub/Scrub 910 0.4% 16 0.0%
Grassland 20,206 9.0% 5,243 1.6%
Pasture/Hay 26,903 12.0% 9,912 3.0%
Cropland 94,279 42.1% 257,572 76.7%
Wetland 8,814 3.9% 25,369 7.6%
Total 223,963 100% 335,750 100%
Future development and land use information for communities in the watershed are available in the
City of Appleton’s Comprehensive Plan54(p26), City of Fergus-Falls’ Capital Improvement Plan (2019-
2023)55, and Stevens County’s Comprehensive Plan56(pp33–36).
Pomme De Terre River Comprehensive W atershed Management Plan
Appendix A. Land and W ater Resource Inventory
DR AFT 7 -30-2019
Land & W ater Resource Inventor y Appendix A | 54
Figure A- 25. Land Cover of the Pomme de Terre River Watershed
Pomme De Terre River Comprehensive W atershed Management Plan
Appendix A. Land and W ater Resource Inventory
DR AFT 7 -30-2019
Land & W ater Resource Inventor y Appendix A | 55
SOCIOECONOMIC CONTEXT
The name ‘Pomme de Terre’ translates from French to apple of the earth, usually referencing
potatoes. However, this particular name represents the “potato-like” prairie turnip that French
explorers observed being commonly eating by the Sioux. The Pomme de Terre River and its
tributaries flow through six counties on its way to Marsh Lake in the Minnesota River: Otter Tail,
Grant, Douglas, Big Stone, Swift, and Stevens. Stevens County comprises the largest area of the
watershed. Roughly 15,000 people live in the Pomme de Terre watershed. The two largest cities are
Morris (pop. 5,295) and Appleton (pop. 1,350), but the watershed is mostly rural, with developed
areas making up only five percent of the land use.
The following sections describe the socioeconomic context of the Pomme de Terre River Wateshed.
When possible, the information is specific to the watershed but due to the scale of available data-sets,
some of information provided pertains to the six counties that make up the Pomme de Terre
Watershed. In this case, the information is referenced as being for the “six surrounding counties”.
The population of the six surrounding counties—Big Stone, Douglas, Grant, Otter Tail, Stevens, and
Swift is significantly larger than that of the population within the Pomme de Terre portion of each
county. There are significant differences in the urban and rural populations for each of the six
counties. In Stevens County, more than 50% of the population lives in an area defined by the U.S.
Census Bureau as “urban.” Douglas and Swift counties also have large proportions of the total
population living in urban areas, 47% and 33% respectively. In comparison, 100% of the populations
of Big Stone and Grant counties live in “rural” areas. Table A- 16 shows the total population and the
urban/rural comparison and Table A- 17 provides a breakdown of the total population by age for
each of the six counties.
Table A- 16. Total population and percentages living in urban or rural areas, by county.
Big Stone Douglas Grant Otter Tail Stevens Swift
Total 5,050 37,456 5,956 58,085 9,693 9,419
Urban 0% 47% 0% 26% 53% 33%
Rural 100% 53% 100% 74% 47% 67%
Table A- 17. Total population by age group, by county.
Big
Stone Douglas Grant Otter Tail Stevens Swift
Total 5,050 37,456 5,956 58,085 9,693 9,419
Under 18 yrs 1,042 7,982 1,360 12,591 2,037 2,150
18 to 24 yrs 342 2,666 366 4,175 1,979 667
25 to 44 yrs 928 8,415 1,280 11,228 1,988 2,036
45 to 64 yrs 1,436 10,020 1,557 16,602 2,038 2,554
65 yrs and over 1,302 8,373 1,393 13,489 1,651 2,012
85 yrs and over 257 1,246 253 2,010 355 381
Pomme De Terre River Comprehensive W atershed Management Plan
Appendix A. Land and W ater Resource Inventory
DR AFT 7 -30-2019
Land & W ater Resource Inventor y Appendix A | 56
The population density within the Pomme de Terre River Watershed averages about 17 people per
square mile. The population decreased by 1,533 from 2000 to 2010. Figure A- 26 and Figure A- 27
illustrate population density and population change in the watershed 57.
Figure A- 26. Population density in the Pomme de Terre River Watershed (2010)
Figure A- 27. Population change in the Pomme de Terre River Watershed (2000-2010)
Pomme De Terre River Comprehensive W atershed Management Plan
Appendix A. Land and W ater Resource Inventory
DR AFT 7 -30-2019
Land & W ater Resource Inventor y Appendix A | 57
The economic base of the Pomme de Terre River Watershed is primarily agricultural, with 74 percent
of the land used for cropland and pasture 58.There are 966 farms in the watershed. Approximately 48
percent of the operations are less than 180 acres in size, nearly 37 percent are 180 to 1000 acres in
size, and the remaining farms are larger than 1000 acres. 65 percent of the producers are full time
operators and do not rely on off farm income 59.
Number of Farms 966
Number of Operators 966
Number of Full Time Operators 635
Number of Part Time Operators 331
Total Crop/Pastureland Acres 338,500
However, the six counties that surround the watershed have a huge variety of employers. The largest
employers in all six counties are in the educational, health care and social assistance industries.
Employment in agricultural and related industries is relatively small, ranging from only 2.8% to
12.9%. Other major industries include retail trade, construction, and manufacturing. Table A- 18
contains more information on the employment by industry in the six counties.
Median annual household income in the six Counties surrounding the watershed is $34,947, roughly
75% of the national average. Approximately 10% of the residents are below the national poverty
level. The median value of homes is $67,733.
Table A- 18. Employment by industry, by county for population 16 years and older.
Big
Stone Douglas Grant Otter
Tail Stevens Swift
Employed population 16 yrs and up 2,406 18,975 2,943 27,662 5,058 4,865 INDUSTRY Agriculture, forestry, fishing and
hunting, and mining 12.9% 2.8% 10.8% 5.4% 10.8% 10.7%
Construction 9.5% 7.0% 8.8% 8.2% 6.0% 6.3%
Manufacturing 8.1% 14.8% 9.6% 13.9% 11.4% 15.6%
Wholesale trade 3.1% 3.3% 2.8% 2.8% 1.1% 4.4%
Retail trade 14.3% 15.3% 12.0% 10.6% 11.0% 10.8%
Transportation and warehousing,
and utilities 5.1% 4.0% 4.8% 5.9% 2.3% 5.0%
Information 1.0% 1.3% 1.0% 1.8% 2.8% 2.4%
Finance and insurance, and real
estate and rental and leasing 2.7% 6.1% 4.7% 4.5% 2.1% 3.4%
Professional, scientific, and
management, and administrative
and waste management services
3.2% 6.0% 5.4% 6.3% 5.0% 5.2%
Educational services, and health
care and social assistance 27.9% 23.1% 24.9% 25.1% 30.3% 22.8%
Pomme De Terre River Comprehensive W atershed Management Plan
Appendix A. Land and W ater Resource Inventory
DR AFT 7 -30-2019
Land & W ater Resource Inventor y Appendix A | 58
Big
Stone Douglas Grant Otter
Tail Stevens Swift
Employed population 16 yrs and up 2,406 18,975 2,943 27,662 5,058 4,865
Arts, entertainment, and recreation,
and accommodation and food
services
3.7% 9.3% 5.1% 6.1% 9.3% 4.3%
Other services, except public
administration 4.2% 4.6% 6.7% 5.4% 4.4% 4.9%
Public administration 4.3% 2.4% 3.4% 3.9% 3.6% 4.2%
Table A- 19. Median Household Income (in 2015 inflation-adjusted dollars) by county
Big Stone Douglas Grant Otter Tail Stevens Swift
Less than $10,000 6.9% 6.2% 4.9% 6.8% 10.4% 7.0%
$10,000 to $14,999 8.2% 4.4% 5.8% 5.7% 4.7% 5.6%
$15,000 to $24,999 11.4% 10.4% 10.6% 10.5% 9.6% 11.9%
$25,000 to $34,999 10.1% 8.9% 13.0% 9.9% 10.7% 10.9%
$35,000 to $49,999 15.4% 15.6% 15.5% 15.0% 12.1% 15.3%
$50,000 to $74,999 21.1% 21.4% 20.6% 21.2% 18.8% 19.9%
$75,000 to $99,999 12.4% 13.4% 14.1% 13.5% 13.6% 13.0%
$100,000 to $149,999 9.6% 12.9% 10.1% 11.5% 13.4% 12.3%
$150,000 to $199,999 2.3% 3.4% 2.4% 3.2% 2.5% 2.2%
$200,000 or more 2.7% 3.3% 2.9% 2.8% 4.1% 1.9%
Median household
income $47,794 $54,531 $50,174 $52,365 $52,302 $49,035
Mean household
income $60,692 $69,973 $64,181 $65,406 $66,134 $60,251
GAP ANALYSIS
The MPCA suggests further research to identify if additional dams are inhibiting fish movement by
limiting connectivity. In addition, MCPA suggests further research on the sources of nutrient
pollution and how the hydrologic regime has been altered over time.
Pomme De Terre River Comprehensive W atershed Management Plan
Appendix A. Land and W ater Resource Inventory
DR AFT 7 -30-2019
Land & W ater Resource Inventor y Appendix A | 59
REFERENCES
1. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MDNR). Soil Erosion Susceptibility - Minnesota.
2019 [accessed 2019 Apr 11].
https://www.dnr.state.mn.us/whaf/about/scores/geomorphology/soil_erodibilty.html
2. Barton BT. Reduced wind strengthens top-down control of an insect herbivore. Ecology.
2014;95(9):2375–2381. doi:10.1890/13-2171.1
3. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MDNR). Hydrographic Position Index. 2019
[accessed 2019 Apr 11].
http://arcgis.dnr.state.mn.us/public/rest/services/environment/mndnr_hydrographic_position_in
dex/MapServer?
4. Vaughn S. Hydrographic Position Index (HPI). Minnesota Department of Natural Resources; 2018.
p. 41.
5. Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). FEMA Flood Map Service Center. 2019
[accessed 2019 Apr 19]. https://msc.fema.gov/portal/home
6. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA). Environmental Data Application - Minnesota
Pollution Control Agency. 2019 [accessed 2019 Apr 25].
https://cf.pca.state.mn.us/water/watershedweb/wdip/search_more.cfm
7. MNDNR. LakeFinder - Minnesota DNR. 2019 [accessed 2019 Apr 25].
https://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/index.html
8. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA). Pomme de Terre Watershed: Clean Water
Accountability Progress Report. 2016. https://www.pca.state.mn.us/sites/default/files/lrwq-ws-
2sy16a.pdf
9. Hauger J, Boettcher J, Ganske L. Pomme de Terre River Watershed Report. Minnesota Pollution
Control Agency; 2013.
10. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MDNR). Draft NWI Update Viewer. 2019 Jan 17.
https://gisdata.mn.gov/dataset/water-nat-wetlands-inv-2009-2014
11. Laing K. Pomme de Terre River Watershed Biotic Stressor Identification. Minnesota Pollution
Control Agency; 2012.
12. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MDNR). Drinking Water Supply Management Area
for Surface Water (DWSMA-SW) - Minnesota Geospatial Commons. 2009 Mar 23 [accessed 2019
Apr 10]. https://gisdata.mn.gov/dataset/water-mgmnt-area-surface-water
13. Jirsa MA, Boerboom TJ, Chandler VW, Mossler JH, Runkel AC, Setterholm DR. S-21 Geologic Map
of Minnesota-Bedrock Geology. 2011 [accessed 2019 Apr 18].
http://conservancy.umn.edu/handle/11299/101466
14. Minnesota Department of Health (MDH). Minnesota Well Index (MWI). 2019 [accessed 2019
Apr 11]. https://www.health.state.mn.us/communities/environment/water/mwi/index.html
Pomme De Terre River Comprehensive W atershed Management Plan
Appendix A. Land and W ater Resource Inventory
DR AFT 7 -30-2019
Land & W ater Resource Inventor y Appendix A | 60
15. Minnesota Department of Health (MDH). Drinking Water Quality: MNPH Data Access - MN Dept.
of Health - MN Data. 2019 [accessed 2019 Apr 18].
https://data.web.health.state.mn.us/drinkingwater
16. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA). Closed Landfill Program. Minnesota Pollution
Control Agency. 2009 Nov 16 [accessed 2019 Apr 18]. https://www.pca.state.mn.us/waste/closed-
landfill-program
17. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MDNR). MPCA Closed Landfill Facilities -
Minnesota Geospatial Commons. 2017 Mar 29 [accessed 2019 Apr 18].
https://gisdata.mn.gov/dataset/env-closed-landfill
18. Adams R. Pollution Sensitivity of Near-Surface Materials. St. Paul, MN: Minnesota Hydrogeology
Atlas Series HG-02; 2016. p. 16. Report No.: Plate 1.
19. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MDNR). Site-specific Water Use Database
(SWUDS). Water use - Water Appropriations Permit Program. 2019.
http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/waters/watermgmt_section/appropriations/wateruse.html
20. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA). Wastewater data browser. Minnesota Pollution
Control Agency. 2016 Mar 21 [accessed 2019 Apr 10].
https://www.pca.state.mn.us/data/wastewater-data-browser
21. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA). What’s In My Neighborhood Database. 2019.
http://www.pca.state.mn.us/index.php/data/wimn-whats-in-my-neighborhood/whats-in-my-
neighborhood.html
22. Minnesota Geospatial Information Office. Minnesota Geospatial Commons. [accessed 2015 Aug
30]. https://gisdata.mn.gov/
23. Campbell E, Ganske L, Hauger J, MacLean S, Regan C, Weiss S. Pomme de Terre Total Maximum
Daily Load Report. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency; 2015.
https://www.pca.state.mn.us/sites/default/files/wq-iw7-36e.pdf
24. City of Morris. Part 2 Application for MS4 General Stormwater Permit: City of Morris. 2016 Aug
18 [accessed 2019 Apr 10]. https://www.pca.state.mn.us/sites/default/files/wq-strm4-
49l%20%28Revised%29%20-%20040717.pdf
25. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA). Municipal stormwater (MS4). Minnesota Pollution
Control Agency. 2009 Nov 16 [accessed 2019 Apr 10].
https://www.pca.state.mn.us/water/municipal-stormwater-ms4
26. Homer C, Fry J, Barnes C. The National Land Cover Database. United States Geological Survey;
2012.
27. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MDNR). Minnesota Water Trails - Minnesota
Geospatial Commons. 2019 Apr 3 [accessed 2019 Apr 9]. https://gisdata.mn.gov/dataset/trans-
water-trails-minnesota
Pomme De Terre River Comprehensive W atershed Management Plan
Appendix A. Land and W ater Resource Inventory
DR AFT 7 -30-2019
Land & W ater Resource Inventor y Appendix A | 61
28. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MDNR). Public Waters (PW) Basin and
Watercourse Delineations - Minnesota Geospatial Commons. 2017 Feb 22 [accessed 2019 Apr 9].
https://gisdata.mn.gov/dataset/water-mn-public-waters
29. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MDNR). Public Water Access Sites in Minnesota -
Minnesota Geospatial Commons. 2017 Sep 27 [accessed 2019 Apr 9].
https://gisdata.mn.gov/dataset/loc-water-access-sites
30. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA). Minnesota’s Impaired Waters List. Minnesota
Pollution Control Agency. 2016 Jun 15 [accessed 2019 Apr 10].
https://www.pca.state.mn.us/water/minnesotas-impaired-waters-list
31. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MDNR). State Aquatic Management Area (AMA)
Aquisitions - Minnesota Geospatial Commons. 2019 Apr 16 [accessed 2019 Apr 18].
https://gisdata.mn.gov/dataset/plan-mndnr-fisheries-acquisition
32. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MDNR). State Administered Lands - DNR
Management Units, Minnesota - Minnesota Geospatial Commons. 2019 Apr 12 [accessed 2019 Apr
18]. https://gisdata.mn.gov/dataset/bdry-dnr-managed-areas
33. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MDNR). Publicly Accessible State Wildlife
Management Areas - Minnesota Geospatial Commons. 2019 Apr 8 [accessed 2019 Apr 9].
https://gisdata.mn.gov/dataset/bdry-dnr-wildlife-mgmt-areas-pub
34. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MDNR). State Parks, Recreation Areas, and
Waysides - Minnesota Geospatial Commons. 2019 Apr 5 [accessed 2019 Apr 9].
https://gisdata.mn.gov/dataset/bdry-dnr-lrs-prk
35. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MDNR). Designated Water Features - Wild, Scenic
and Recreational Rivers - Minnesota Geospatial Commons. 1997 [accessed 2019 Apr 9].
https://gisdata.mn.gov/dataset/water-wild-and-scenic-rec-rivers
36. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MDNR). Designated Wildlife Lakes - Minnesota
Geospatial Commons. 2016 Dec 8 [accessed 2019 Apr 9]. https://gisdata.mn.gov/dataset/env-
designated-wildlife-lakes
37. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MDNR). State Designated Trout Streams,
Minnesota - Minnesota Geospatial Commons. 2018 Jun 21 [accessed 2019 Apr 9].
https://gisdata.mn.gov/dataset/env-trout-stream-designations
38. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MDNR). Endangered, Threatened and Special
Concern Species - Minnesota DNR. 2019 [accessed 2019 Apr 10].
https://www.dnr.state.mn.us/ets/index.html
39. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MDNR). Ecological Classification System (ECS) -
Minnesota DNR. 1993 [accessed 2019 Apr 9]. https://www.dnr.state.mn.us/ecs/index.html
40. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MDNR). NLCD 2011 Land Cover - Minnesota
Geospatial Commons. 2011 [accessed 2019 Apr 10]. https://gisdata.mn.gov/dataset/biota-
landcover-nlcd-mn-2011
Pomme De Terre River Comprehensive W atershed Management Plan
Appendix A. Land and W ater Resource Inventory
DR AFT 7 -30-2019
Land & W ater Resource Inventor y Appendix A | 62
41. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). Northern Tallgrass Prairie. 2019 [accessed 2019 Apr 9].
https://www.fws.gov/refuge/northern_tallgrass_prairie/
42. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MDNR). Egret Island Scientific and Natural Area:
Minnesota DNR. 2019 [accessed 2019 Apr 9].
https://www.dnr.state.mn.us/snas/detail.html?id=sna00974
43. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MDNR). DNR Hydrography - Lakes of Biological
Significance - Minnesota Geospatial Commons. 2015 Apr 23 [accessed 2019 Apr 9].
https://gisdata.mn.gov/dataset/env-lakes-of-biological-signific
44. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MDNR). Lac qui Parle WMA - Minnesota DNR.
2019 [accessed 2019 Apr 10].
https://www.dnr.state.mn.us/areas/wildlife/lac_qui_parle_wma.html
45. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MDNR). American White Pelican - Species Profile.
2019 [accessed 2019 Apr 10].
https://www.dnr.state.mn.us/rsg/profile.html?action=elementDetail&selectedElement=ABNFC010
10
46. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MDNR). State Funded Conservation Easements
(RIM Reserve) - Minnesota Geospatial Commons. 2019 Feb 6 [accessed 2019 Apr 9].
https://gisdata.mn.gov/dataset/bdry-bwsr-rim-cons-easements
47. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). IPaC: Information for Planning and Consultation. 2019
[accessed 2019 Apr 9]. https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/
48. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MDNR). Potentially Undisturbed Land (Virgin
Sod) - FSA Common Land Unit Derived - Minnesota Geospatial Commons. 2015 Sep 11 [accessed
2019 Apr 9]. https://gisdata.mn.gov/dataset/env-potentially-undisturbed-land
49. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MDNR). Minnesota Prairie Conservation Plan.
2011.
50. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MDNR). Native Plant Communities - Minnesota
Geospatial Commons. 2019 Apr 8 [accessed 2019 Apr 9]. https://gisdata.mn.gov/dataset/biota-
dnr-native-plant-comm
51. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MDNR). MBS Sites of Biodiversity Significance -
Minnesota Geospatial Commons. 2019 Mar 28 [accessed 2019 Apr 9].
https://gisdata.mn.gov/dataset/biota-mcbs-sites-of-biodiversity
52. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MDNR). Presettlement Vegetation - Minnesota
Geospatial Commons. [accessed 2019 Apr 10]. https://gisdata.mn.gov/dataset/biota-marschner-
presettle-veg
53. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MDNR). AgroEcoregions, Minnesota - Minnesota
Geospatial Commons. [accessed 2019 Apr 10]. https://gisdata.mn.gov/dataset/agri-agroecoregions
Pomme De Terre River Comprehensive W atershed Management Plan
Appendix A. Land and W ater Resource Inventory
DR AFT 7 -30-2019
Land & W ater Resource Inventor y Appendix A | 63
54. Fidler R, Bruer L, Koepp J, Moe D, Andreas L, Heinecke M, Molden J, Ehrenberg L, Syltie C,
Hendrickx G, et al. Our Innovative Path: City of Appleton Comprehensive Plan (2018-2028). City of
Appleton: Upper Minnesota Valley: Regional Development Commission; 2018. p. 92.
55. City of Fergus-Falls. Capital Improvement Plan. 2019 [accessed 2019 Apr 18].
https://www.ci.fergus-falls.mn.us/index.asp?SEC=16880342-E383-4B97-A214-
945CC2EEE900&DE=52CAD533-C223-4C72-B491-6EFD1FBCF2BB&Type=B_BASIC
56. Stevens County, Minnesota. Stevens County Comprehensive Plan. 2017.
https://www.co.stevens.mn.us/DocumentCenter/View/1208
57. Esri. U.S. Population Change 2000 to 2010. ArcGIS. 2018 May 2 [accessed 2019 Apr 10].
https://www.arcgis.com/home/item.html?id=a6cb3e1caa7549418b1a5945bcb36717
58. Hauger J. Summary - Restoring and Protecting Waters: Pomme de Terre River Watershed.
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA); 2013.
59. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA). Pomme de Terre River Watershed Monitoring and
Assessment Report. 2011.
60. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MDNR). Migratory Waterfowl Feeding and
Resting Areas - Minnesota Geospatial Commons. 2016 Dec 30 [accessed 2019 Apr 9].
https://gisdata.mn.gov/dataset/env-migratory-waterfowl-areas
61. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MDNR). Public Fishing Sites in Minnesota -
Minnesota Geospatial Commons. 2019 Jan 28 [accessed 2019 Apr 9].
https://gisdata.mn.gov/dataset/struc-fishing-sites-in-minnesota
62. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MDNR). Scientific and Natural Area Units -
Minnesota Geospatial Commons. 2019 Apr 8 [accessed 2019 Apr 9].
https://gisdata.mn.gov/dataset/bdry-scientific-and-nat-areas
63. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MDNR). State Forest Statutory Boundaries and
Management Units - Minnesota Geospatial Commons. 2019 Apr 5 [accessed 2019 Apr 9].
https://gisdata.mn.gov/dataset/bdry-state-forest
64. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MDNR). DNR Fisheries Fish Hatcheries -
Minnesota Geospatial Commons. 2018 Jan 16 [accessed 2019 Apr 9].
https://gisdata.mn.gov/dataset/struc-fish-hatcheries
65. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MDNR). Cisco Refuge Lakes, Minnesota -
Minnesota Geospatial Commons. 2012 [accessed 2019 Apr 9].
https://gisdata.mn.gov/dataset/biota-cisco-refuge-lakes
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – October 2019
APPENDIX B:
Documents Reviewed and
Public Engagement Process
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – October 2019
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan –OCTOBER 2019
Identification of Potential W atershed Concerns and Issues Appendix B | 1
PLAN APPENDIX B – DOCUMENTS REVIEWED AND PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT PROCESS
This appendix includes the following information used to identify the priority concerns and issues
addressed in the Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan:
1. List of reports, plans, and studies reviewed as part of the Comprehensive Watershed
Management Plan development process (Table B-1)
2. Record of the various meetings conducted during the plan development process (Table B-2)
a. Summary of public engagement meetings
b. Summary of CAC meetings
c. Summary of Joint Powers Board Meetings
d. Summary of Planning Committee Meeting
3. Plan Review Agency Notification Letters
a. Board of Water and Soil Resources (BWSR)
b. Minnesota Department of Agriculture (MDA)
c. Minnesota Department of Health (MDH)
d. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MNDNR)
e. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA)
Table B- 1. List of Documents Reviewed during Planning Process
Jurisdiction Source Document Name Date Document Type
City Appleton City of Appleton Wellhead Protection
Plan (part 2) 2007 Water Management Plans
City Ashby City of Ashby Wellhead Protection Plan
Amendment 2012 Water Management Plans
City Barrett City of Barrett Wellhead Protection
Plan 2009 Water Management Plans
City Chokio City of Chokio Wellhead Protection
Plan Amendment 2013 Water Management Plans
City Dalton City of Dalton Wellhead Protection Plan 2013 Water Management Plans
City Donnelly City of Donnelly Wellhead Protection
Plan 2016 Water Management Plans
City Morris City of Morris Wellhead Protection Plan
(part 2) 2007 Water Management Plans
City Underwood City of Underwood Wellhead
Protection Plan 2016 Water Management Plans
County Big Stone 2014-2023 Big Stone County Local
Water Management Plan 2013 Water Management Plans
County Douglas
2009-2019 Douglas County
Comprehensive Local Water
Management Plan
2009 Water Management Plans
County Grant 2010-2015 Grant County Local Water
Management Plan Amendment 2010 Water Management Plans
County Otter Tail 2009-2019 Otter Tail County Local
Water Management Plan 2009 Water Management Plans
County Stevens Stevens County Comprehensive Plan 2017 Water Management Plans
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan –OCTOBER 2019
Identification of Potential W atershed Concerns and Issues Appendix B | 2
Jurisdiction Source Document Name Date Document Type
County Stevens Stevens County Comprehensive Plan 2017 Water Management Plans
County Stevens 2010-2015 Stevens County Local Water
Management Plan Amendment 2010 Water Management Plans
County Swift 2014-2023 Swift County Local Water
Management Plan 2014 Water Management Plans
MDA MDA
Commercial Nitrogen and Manure
Applications on Minnesota's 2012 Corn
Crop Compared to the U of M Nitrogen
Guidelines.
2012 Guidelines
MNDNR MN EQB Beyond the Status Quo: 2015 EQB
Water Policy Report 2015 Water Quality, TMDLs, and
WRAPS Studies
MNDNR MNDNR
Evaluating Animal Agriculture Impacts
on Water Quality: Data Gaps in a West
Central Minnesota Case Study
2015 Water Quality, TMDLs, and
WRAPS Studies
MNDNR MNDNR Freshwater Society Inspiring Action for
Nonpoint Source Pollution Control 2017 Water Quality, TMDLs, and
WRAPS Studies
MNDNR U of M Minnesota Water Sustainability
Framework 2011 Water Quality, TMDLs, and
WRAPS Studies
MNDNR Freshwater
Society
Inspiring Action for Nonpoing Source
Pollution Control 2017 Water Quality, TMDLs, and
WRAPS Studies
MNDNR MNDNR Hydraulic Impacts of Quarries and
Gravel Pits 2005 Water Quality, TMDLs, and
WRAPS Studies
MNDNR MNDNR
Final Report to the State Wildlife Grant
Program Lake Christina Reclamation:
Ecosystem Consequences of
Biomanipulation
2006 Water Quality, TMDLs, and
WRAPS Studies
MNDNR MNDNR
Pollution Sensitivity of Near Surface
Materials (includes a map in the
Minnesota Hydrogeology Atlas
subfolder)
2016 Water Quality, TMDLs, and
WRAPS Studies
MNDNR MNDNR Watershed Context Report: Pomme de
Terre River 2017 Water Quality, TMDLs, and
WRAPS Studies
MNDNR MNDNR Minnesota Prairie Conservation Plan 2011 Statewide Conservation Plan
MPCA MPCA Watershed Context Report 2017 Water Quality, TMDLs, and
WRAPS Studies
MPCA MPCA
Pomme de Terre River Watershed
Clean Water Accountability Progress
Report
2016 Water Quality, TMDLs, and
WRAPS Studies
MPCA MPCA Pomme de Terre River Fecal Coliform
TMDL Implementation Plan 2008 Water Quality, TMDLs, and
WRAPS Studies
MPCA MPCA Pomme de Terre River Turbidity TMDL
Implementation Plan 2011 Water Quality, TMDLs, and
WRAPS Studies
MPCA MPCA Pomme de Terre River Watershed
TMDL 2015 Water Quality, TMDLs, and
WRAPS Studies
MPCA MPCA Pomme de Terre River Watershed
Biotic Stressor Identification 2012 Water Quality, TMDLs, and
WRAPS Studies
MPCA MPCA
Assessment Report of Selected Lakes
within the Pomme de Terre River
Watershed
2010 Water Quality, TMDLs, and
WRAPS Studies
MPCA MPCA Pomme de Terre River Watershed
Monitoring and Assessment Report 2011 Known Pollutant Modeling and
Assessment Efforts
MPCA MPCA Pomme de Terre River Watershed
Report (WRAPS) 2013 Water Quality, TMDLs, and
WRAPS Studies
MPCA MPCA The Minnesota Nutrient Reduction
Strategy 2014 Water Quality, TMDLs, and
WRAPS Studies
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan –OCTOBER 2019
Identification of Potential W atershed Concerns and Issues Appendix B | 3
Jurisdiction Source Document Name Date Document Type
MPCA MPCA Regional Fecal Coliform Source
Inventory 2007 Known Pollutant Modeling and
Assessment Efforts
PdTRA PdTRA
Pomme de Terre River Major
Watershed Restoration and Protection
Strategies and Implementation Plan
2013 Water Quality, TMDLs, and
WRAPS Studies
PdTRA PdTRA Incorporation of the PTMApp Model
Report 2016 Model/Project
PdTRA PdTRA
Pomme de Terre WRAPS
Implementation Plan Clean Water
Assistance Grant projects: 2017
2017 Model/Project
PdTRA PdTRA 2011 Pomme de Terre Clean Water
Fund Grant Final Project Summary 2011 Model/Project
PdTRA PdTRA 2012 Pomme de Terre Clean Water
Fund Grant Final Project Summary 2012 Model/Project
PdTRA PdTRA 2014 Pomme de Terre Clean Water
Fund Grant Final Project Summary 2013 Model/Project
PdTRA PdTRA Pomme de Terre Watershed Targeted
BMP Implementation Project 2017 Model/Project
PdTRA PdTRA 2015 Pomme de Terre WRAPS
Implementation Plan 2015 Model/Project
Nonprofit Freshwater
Society
Freshwater Society, 2016. "Protecting
groundwater-sourced drinking water" 2016 Publication
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan –OCTOBER 2019
Identification of Potential W atershed Concerns and Issues Appendix B | 4
Table B- 2. Summary of Public Engagement Meetings
Meeting Date Location Meeting Objectives
Planning Committee Meeting July 12,
2017
ARS Soils Lab
Conference Room, 803
Iowa Avenue Morris
MN 56267
Project kick-off. Review work plan and data
collection. Stakeholder Engagement Plan.
Planning Committee Meeting August 2,
2017
ARS Soils Lab
Conference Room, 803
Iowa Avenue Morris
MN 56267
Opportunity to learn about the Planning Area,
One Watershed One Plans, and provide input
on priority concerns.
Watershed Bus Tour September
13, 2017 Watershed-wide Introduction to the watershed and the plan
development process.
Planning Committee Meeting October 4,
2017
ARS Soils Lab
Conference Room, 803
Iowa Avenue Morris
MN 56267
Intro to issues identification process and
comprehensive watershed priority scheme.
Zonation discussion (Paul Radomski –
MNDNR). Planning for public kick-off meeting.
Joint Powers Board Meeting October 13,
2017
ARS Soils Lab
Conference Room, 803
Iowa Avenue Morris
MN 56267
Update from PdTRA Coordinator on plan
progress.
Public Information/Kick-Off
Meetings
October 23,
2017
Dalton Community
Center, Dalton, MN Watershed stations. Overview of 1W1P.
World Café Exercise and identification of
issues and concerns. October 26,
2017 Old No. 1, Morris, MN
Joint Powers Board Meeting November 6,
2017
ARS Soils Lab
Conference Room, 803
Iowa Avenue Morris
MN 56267
Work plan progress and update on Public
Information/Kick-Off Meetings.
CAC Meetings
November 6,
2017
Dalton Community
Center, Dalton, MN
Intro to plan development process. Define
CAC role in plan development process. World
Café Exercise and identification of issues and
concerns.
November 6,
2017
AgCounty Farm Credit
Service, Morris, MN
Planning Committee Meeting November 8,
2017
ARS Soils Lab
Conference Room, 803
Iowa Avenue Morris
MN 56267
Review draft Issues Identification Matrix and
Land and Water Resources Inventory. Next
steps for Zonation process.
Planning Committee Meeting February 7,
2018
ARS Soils Lab
Conference Room, 803
Iowa Avenue Morris
MN 56267
Review comprehensive watershed priority
scheme and identification of priority
issues/concerns and priority areas.
Planning Committee Meeting March 7,
2018
ARS Soils Lab
Conference Room, 803
Iowa Avenue Morris
MN 56267
Finalize priority management areas. Finalize
issue prioritization and issue statements.
CAC Meetings
March 7,
2018
Stevens County SWCD
Office, Morris, MN Review comprehensive watershed priority
scheme and identification of priority
issues/concerns and priority areas. March 8,
2018
Dalton Community
Center, Dalton, MN
Planning Committee Meeting April 4, 2018
ARS Soils Lab
Conference Room, 803
Iowa Avenue Morris
MN 56267
Review Priority Areas map. Review Resource
Concerns draft issue statements and goals
(Streams/Lakes/Rivers, Wetlands,
Groundwater, and Habitat).
Planning Committee Meeting June 6, 2018
ARS Soils Lab
Conference Room, 803
Iowa Avenue Morris
MN 56267
Review issue statement, goal and
implementation activity structure. Revisit
issue statements. Review goals.
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan –OCTOBER 2019
Identification of Potential W atershed Concerns and Issues Appendix B | 5
Meeting Date Location Meeting Objectives
Joint Powers Board Meeting June 8, 2018
ARS Soils Lab
Conference Room, 803
Iowa Avenue Morris
MN 56267
Work plan progress. Review identification and
prioritization of resources and issues and
development of priority areas map.
Joint Powers Board Meeting July 13, 2018
ARS Soils Lab
Conference Room, 803
Iowa Avenue Morris
MN 56267
Update from PdTRA Coordinator on plan
progress and check-in with Joint Powers
Board.
Planning Committee Meeting July 23, 2018
ARS Soils Lab
Conference Room, 803
Iowa Avenue Morris
MN 56267
Review and discuss draft goals. Discuss how
PTMApp will be using in the CWMP
development process.
Planning Committee Meeting August 1,
2018
ARS Soils Lab
Conference Room, 803
Iowa Avenue Morris
MN 56267
Finalize issue statements. Review and discuss
draft goals.
Joint Powers Board Meeting August 10,
2018
ARS Soils Lab
Conference Room, 803
Iowa Avenue Morris
MN 56267
Update from PdTRA Coordinator on plan
progress, issue statements, goals, and priority
areas documents.
Planning Committee Meeting September
13, 2018
ARS Soils Lab
Conference Room, 803
Iowa Avenue Morris
MN 56267
Introduction to programs and funding.
Planning Committee Meeting October 3,
2018
ARS Soils Lab
Conference Room, 803
Iowa Avenue Morris
MN 56267
Setting Altered Hydrology Goals (Henry Van
Offelen – MPCA). Review and discuss draft
goals (In-Stream Habitat, Education and
Outreach, Altered Hydrology). Assign working
groups for measurable goals/implementation
plan subcommittees.
Planning Committee Meeting November 7,
2018
ARS Soils Lab
Conference Room, 803
Iowa Avenue Morris
MN 56267
Federal Partner Program presentations.
Summaries from Groundwater, Water
Quality, and Altered Hydrology subcommittee
meetings. Introduction to Targeted
implementation Plan Structure.
Planning Committee Meeting December 5,
2018
ARS Soils Lab
Conference Room, 803
Iowa Avenue Morris
MN 56267
Summaries from Shoreland, In-Stream
Habitat, and Education and Outreach
Subcommittee Meetings. Review draft
Targeted Implementation Schedule.
Joint Powers Board Meeting December
14, 2018
ARS Soils Lab
Conference Room, 803
Iowa Avenue Morris
MN 56267
Update from PdTRA Coordinator
Implementation Plan and framework.
Joint Powers Board Meeting March 8,
2019
ARS Soils Lab
Conference Room, 803
Iowa Avenue Morris
MN 56267
Update from PdTRA Coordinator on work plan
progress. Revisited priority issues and
reviewed drafted goals.
Planning Committee Meeting March 13,
2019
ARS Soils Lab
Conference Room, 803
Iowa Avenue Morris
MN 56267
Reviewed Targeted Implementation Schedule.
Planning Committee Meeting April 3, 2019
ARS Soils Lab
Conference Room, 803
Iowa Avenue Morris
MN 56267
Reviewed final sections of plan including
Accounting of Local Funds, Implementation
Programs and Administration & Coordination.
Discussed expectations for internal review
process.
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan –OCTOBER 2019
Identification of Potential W atershed Concerns and Issues Appendix B | 6
Meeting Date Location Meeting Objectives
Joint Powers Board Meeting April 12,
2019
ARS Soils Lab
Conference Room, 803
Iowa Avenue Morris
MN 56267
Update from PdTRA Coordinator on Targeted
Implementation Schedule.
Planning Committee Meeting May 1, 2019
ARS Soils Lab
Conference Room, 803
Iowa Avenue Morris
MN 56267
Internal review of draft Comprehensive
Watershed Management plan.
Bemidji Brainerd Detroit Lakes Duluth Mankato Marshall New Ulm Rochester
403 Fourth Street NW 1601 Minnesota Drive 26624 N. Tower Road 394 S. Lake Avenue 12 Civic Center Plaza 1400 East Lyon Street 261 Highway 15 South 3555 9th Street NW
Suite 200 Brainerd, MN 56401 Detroit Lakes, MN 56501 Suite 403 Suite 3000B Marshall, MN 56258 New Ulm, MN 56073 Suite 350
Bemidji, MN 56601 (218) 828-2383 (218) 846-8400 Duluth, MN 55802 Mankato, MN 56001 (507) 537-6060 (507) 359-6074 Rochester, MN 55901
(218) 755-2600 (218) 723-4752 (507) 344-2821 (507) 206-2889
Central Office / Metro Office 520 Lafayette Road North Saint Paul, MN 55155 Phone: (651) 296-3767 Fax: (651) 297-5615
www.bwsr.state.mn.us TTY: (800) 627-3529 An equal opportunity employer
July 11, 2017
Pomme de Terre Watershed Planning Group
C/O Stephanie Adams, Watershed Project Coordinator
Pomme de Terre River Association
12 Hwy 28 E, Ste.2
Morris Mn 56267
RE: Response to request for priority issues and plan expectations (One Watershed, One Plan).
Dear Stephanie,
Thank you for the opportunity to provide priority issues and plan expectations for the development of
the Pomme de Terre Watershed plan under Minnesota Statutes section 103B.101, Subd. 14. We
appreciate the partner’s willingness to participate in development of a watershed-based plan. These
are locally led, locally owned plans.
The Board of Water and Soil Resources (BWSR) has the following overarching expectations for the plan:
Process
The planning process must follow the requirements outlined in the One Watershed, One Plan –
Operating Procedures document, adopted by the BWSR Board on March 23, 2016 and available
on the BWSR website: www.bwsr.state.mn.us/planning/1W1P/index.html. More specifically,
the planning process must:
o Involve a broad range of stakeholders to ensure an integrated approach to watershed
management.
o The state agencies are involved in two primary ways: as members of the local Advisory
Committee and as a plan review authority. The state roles are not optional, see relevant
laws. Involving state agencies within the Advisory Committee ensures the most recent
and applicable information are available while developing the plan and result in closer
alliance of local and state priorities.
o Reassess the established Pomme de Terre River (PDT) Joint Powers Board agreement to
ensure continued implementation occurs efficiently and with minimized risk. This step
is critical if the plan proposes to continue submitting joint grant applications and/or
share services.
Minnesota Board of Water & Soil Resources • www.bwsr.state.mn.us
Plan Content
The plan must meet the requirements outlined in the One Watershed, One Plan – Plan Content
Requirements document, adopted by the BWSR Board on March 23, 2016 and available on the
BWSR website: www.bwsr.state.mn.us/planning/1W1P/index.html. More specifically, the plan
must have:
o Offer the attached ‘Compiling a Land and Water Resources Inventory Supplement’, July
2017, which provides additional considerations for what types of information to include,
where to find the information, and how to use it. The inventory should help explain why
the issues exist in the watershed, and ultimately provides the justification for the
actions identified in the plan.
o The selection of priority resources via a thorough analysis of issues, using available
science and data, is needed because not all identified resource concerns or identified
issues can be addressed in the timeframe of a ten year plan – some will be addressed
before others.
o Sufficient measurable goals to indicate an intended pace of progress for addressing the
priority issues.
o A targeted and comprehensive implementation schedule, sufficient for meeting the
identified goals.
o A thorough description of the programs and activities required to administer,
coordinate, and implement the actions in the schedule; including work planning (i.e.
shared services, collaborative grant-making, decision making as a watershed group and
not separate entities) and evaluation.
BWSR has the following specific priority issues:
While prioritizing, targeting and measuring please utilize the products of the PTMApp being
developed by the PDT via local funds and an Accelerated Implementation Grant and consider
the use of DNR’s Zonation Tool/process with the PTMApp.
The state’s Nonpoint Priority Funding Plan (NPFP) outlines a criteria-based process to prioritize
Clean Water Fund investments—if planning partners are intending to pursue Clean Water Fund
as a future source of funding, partners are strongly encouraged to consider the high-level state
priorities, keys to implementation, and criteria for evaluating proposed activities in the NPFP,
available on the BWSR website: http://bwsr.state.mn.us/planning/npfp/index.html
The local drainage authorities within the planning boundary must be included as stakeholders
in the plan development process to capture both the extent and the limitations of drainage
authority responsibility and authority for participating in the planning and implementation of
conservation practices involving public drainage systems and their associated drainage areas.
Recognizing and acknowledging the strategy of the PDT to address surface water quality by
focusing on the PDT’s three predominant land use types (urban, lakeshore and
rural/agricultural), and minimizing their impact/effects on surface water quality. BWSR offers
the below, some which may help achieve multiple benefits within the watershed:
Minnesota Board of Water & Soil Resources • www.bwsr.state.mn.us
o Urban Land Use
Inventory, and develop city storm water plans (Appleton & Morris are the largest
cities) to minimize loadings to the Pomme de Terre River,
Drinking water supply protection and improvement via the Minnesota
Department of Health’s programs and plans which provide implementation
recommendations.
o Lakeshore Land Use, predominately in the upper portions of the PDT watershed-
Reduce runoff from lands adjacent to lakes, such as rain gardens,
maintaining/restoring vegetation other than manicured lawns,
Address SSTS, specifically imminent public health threat (IPHT) and failing
systems, throughout the watershed but primarily within shoreland management
areas will reduce pollutants from entering ditches, streams, rivers, lakes and the
groundwater.
o Rural/Agricultural Land Use
Improve soil health by increasing organic material in the soil profile– increases
infiltration.
Implement Drainage Water Management Systems on pattern tiled fields, note
MDA has a demonstration site in Wilkin County.
Consider projects and activities consistent with multipurpose drainage criteria
outlined in Minnesota Statutes §103E.011, and §103E.015. Incremental
installation of side water inlets as per §103E.021, Subd. 6, as a means to control
erosion and sedimentation, improve water quality, or maintain the efficiency of
the drainage system. Note §103E enables public-private funding partnerships
involving 103E drainage systems.
Minimize livestock animal waste from entering waters.
Promote the use of an Irrigation strategy that provides crops sufficient water to
prevent plant moisture stress, but also prevents water from percolating below
the root zone and leaching nitrogen into the groundwater.
Assist landowners/occupiers with the implementation of Best Management
Practices to address sheet and rill erosion, example - water and sediment control
basins.
Enrollment of marginal agricultural land to be set-a-side program, vegetation or
wetland restorations.
Protection and restoration of wetlands provides benefits for water quality, habitat and wildlife,
and flood damage reduction. The plan should support the continued implementation of the
Wetland Conservation Act and look for opportunities to improve effective and efficient
coordination across jurisdictional boundaries.
Minnesota Board of Water & Soil Resources • www.bwsr.state.mn.us
The plan should also identify high priority areas for wetland restoration and strategically target
restoration projects through sound watershed-based prioritization, thus providing the most
value to the local residents as well as the state in general. We encourage the planning team to
work with BWSR to identify wetland preservation and restoration priorities based on watershed
needs, sound land use and other factors important to the watershed. The Restorable Wetland
Prioritization Tool is one resource that to be used to help identify areas for wetland
restoration, but other regional tools are being developed that will have greater utility. Lastly,
the state is also embarking on a wetland prioritization plan that will guide wetland mitigation in
the future. Wetland restoration and preservation priorities you identify in your plan may be
eligible for inclusion in this statewide plan in the future.
The State’s Re-Invest in Minnesota (RIM) Reserve easement program considers several site
specific and landscape scale factors when funding applications. Though it is dependent on
specific program terms, the State does consider local prioritization of areas for easement
enrollment.
Strongly consider using the water quality goals found within the Watershed Restoration and
Protection Strategies (WRAPS) or Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL), as well as the
implementation strategies while discussing the 1W1P Implementation schedule.
Incorporate the Other Water Courses maps or summaries of the local partners.
Continue to participate in the coordination of data collection and monitoring initiated in
2016/2017 with the state’s monitoring agencies.
Planning partners are strongly encouraged to consider the potential for more extreme weather
events and their implications for the water and land resources of the watershed in the analysis
and prioritization of issues.
We encourage the plan to reflect the differences between the upper and lower watershed in the
selection of priority issues and implementation items. We commend the partners for their
participation in the planning effort. We look forward to working with you through the rest of the
plan development process and the eventual implementation of the plan. If you have any questions,
please feel free to contact me.
Sincerely,
Pete Waller, Board Conservationist, Detroit Lakes
cc: Pomme de Terre Watershed Planning Group (via email)
Camilla Correll, EOR (via email)
Barbara Weisman & Nathan Kestner, MDNR (via email)
Heidi Peterson & Ryan Lemickerson, MDA (via email)
Jenilynn Marchand, MDH (via email)
Juline Holleran & Paul Wymar, PCA (via email)
Ryan Hughes, BWSR (via email)
Attached: One Watershed, One Plan – Compiling a Land and Water Resources Inventory, July 2017
Pomme de Terre Watershed
One Watershed One Plan
Minnesota Department of Agriculture
Nitrogen and Pesticide Use
The Minnesota Department of Agriculture surveys farmers through the National
Agricultural Statistics Service. The most recent nitrogen use survey was for the 2014
crop year and the most recent pesticide use survey was for the 2013 crop year.
The following nitrogen use information is from the 2014 nitrogen use report, specifically
the Southwestern and West Central BMP region.
1
Nitrogen use in the Pomme de Terre Watershed: 2014 Crop Year
More than five responses are required for any individual category to be reported.
No manure fields are included in the fertilizer section.
Fertilizer section
Figure 1 details the distribution of nitrogen fertilizer rates in the SW BMP region for corn
following soybeans; the corresponding corn yields are detailed in red.
Figure 1. Average nitrogen fertilizer rates and yields on corn following soybeans in the SW BMP region for 2014: 385 fields.
2
In the SW BMP region, nitrogen fertilizer rates ranged from an average of 121 pounds
per acre in Lincoln County to 157 pounds per acre in Redwood County as shown in
Table 1.
Table 1. Average county nitrogen fertilizer rates and corn yields for the SW BMP region for corn following soybeans.
Average County Nitrogen Fertilizer Rates for the SW BMP Region for corn following
soybeans
County
Number of
Farm Fields
Average Nitrogen
Rate
Pounds per Acre
Average Corn
Yield
Bushels per Acre
Big Stone 8 126 143
Chippewa 21 148 165
Cottonwood 23 148 172
Douglas 16 126 146
Grant 7 141 160
Jackson 29 151 175
Kandiyohi 14 146 167
Lac qui Parle 16 144 164
Lincoln 11 121 156
Lyon 22 145 158
Murray 23 150 171
Nobles 32 146 169
Pipestone 12 141 163
Pope 19 147 162
Redwood 38 157 173
Renville 31 150 159
Rock 5 151 181
Stevens 15 146 158
Swift 11 147 176
Traverse 11 152 156
Yellow Medicine 21 145 162
3
Figure 2 details the distribution of nitrogen fertilizer rates in the SW BMP region for corn
following corn; the corresponding corn yields are detailed in red.
Figure 2. Average nitrogen fertilizer rates and yields on corn following soybeans in the SW BMP region for 2014: 104 fields.
4
In the SW BMP region, nitrogen fertilizer rates ranged from an average of 138 pounds
per acre in Lyon County to 177 pounds per acre in Renville County as shown in Table 2.
Table 2. Average county nitrogen fertilizer rates and corn yields for the SW BMP region for corn following corn.
Average County Nitrogen Fertilizer Rates for the SW BMP Region
for Corn Following Corn
County
Number of
Farm Fields
Average Nitrogen
Rate
Pounds per Acre
Average Corn
Yield
Bushels per Acre
Big Stone ** ** **
Chippewa 5 173 169
Cottonwood 5 156 179
Jackson 10 164 176
Kandiyohi 6 165 157
Lac qui Parle ** ** **
Lincoln ** ** **
Lyon 5 138 157
Murray 9 166 173
Nobles 5 165 185
Pipestone 6 168 163
Pope ** ** **
Redwood 15 157 168
Renville 5 177 164
Rock 6 165 176
Stevens 6 157 154
Swift 7 162 162
Traverse ** ** **
Yellow Medicine ** ** ** ** Less than five responses.
5
Figure 3 details the distribution of nitrogen fertilizer rates in the SW BMP region for corn
following corn following alfalfa; the corresponding corn yields are detailed in red.
Figure 3. Average nitrogen fertilizer rates and yields on corn following corn following alfalfa in the SW BMP region for 2014: 12 fields.
Less than five fields were included in the SW BMP Region for corn following corn
following alfalfa county analysis, therefor there is no discloser of information.
6
Figure 4 details the distribution of nitrogen fertilizer rates in the SW BMP region for corn
following alfalfa; the corresponding corn yields are detailed in red.
Figure 4. Average nitrogen fertilizer rates and yields on corn following alfalfa
in the SW BMP region for 2014: 11 fields.
Less than five fields were included in the SW BMP Region for corn following alfalfa
county analysis, therefor there is no discloser of information.
7
Manure section
Table 3 details the percentage of respondents on if the farmer knew the amount of
nitrogen that is in the manure applied for the 2014 corn crop. Table 3. The farmers’ knowledge of nitrogen content of manure being applied for the 2014 corn crop.
BMP Region
Knowledge of the
Actual Amount of
Nitrogen Applied
Percentage of
Respondents
Southwestern and West Central Yes 37
Southwestern and West Central No 63
§ Percent was calculated using only those respondents who answered yes or no to the question.
Table 4 details the nitrogen rates and corn yields in Southwestern and West Central
BMP regions on corn following various crops. These are corn fields applied with manure
and commercial nitrogen fertilizer.
Table 4. Average amount of nitrogen applied from manure and commercial nitrogen fertilizer and corresponding corn yields to previous crops by BMP
region.
BMP Region Previous Crop
Average Nitrogen Rate From
Manure And Commercial
Fertilizer
Pounds per Acre
Average Corn
Yield
Bushels per Acre
Southwestern and West Central Soybeans 177 182
Southwestern and West Central Corn 178 182
Southwestern and West Central Corn/Alfalfa ** **
Southwestern and West Central Other ** **
8
Table 5 details the total amount of nitrogen applied to fields from both manure and
commercial nitrogen.
Table 5. Average amount of nitrogen applied to fields from both commercial
fertilizer and manure.
BMP Region
Main Source of
Manure
Average Nitrogen Rate From
Manure And Commercial
Fertilizer
Pounds per Acre
South Western and West Central All 180
South Western and West Central Dairy 159
South Western and West Central Beef 198
South Western and West Central Hog 179
South Western and West Central Poultry **
South Western and West Central Other **
9
10
An equal opportunity employer.
Protecting, Maintaining and Improving the Health of All Minnesotans
7/10/17
Stephanie Adams
12 Hwy 28 E St 2
Morris, MN 56267
Dear Stephanie:
Subject: Initial Comment Letter – Pomme de Terre, One Watershed One Plan
Thank you for the opportunity to submit comments regarding water management issues for
consideration in the 1W1P planning process for the Pomme de Terre Watershed Planning
Area. Our agency looks forward to working closely with the local government units,
stakeholders, and other agency partners on this watershed planning initiative.
The Minnesota Department of Health's (MDH) mission is to protect, maintain, and improve
the health of all Minnesotans. An important aspect to protecting citizen health is the
protection of drinking water sources. MDH is the agency responsible for implementing
programs under the federal Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA).
Source Water Protection (SWP) is the framework MDH uses to protect drinking water sources.
The broad goal of SWP in Minnesota is to protect and prevent contamination of public and
private sources of groundwater and surface water sources of drinking water using best
management practices and local planning. Core MDH programs relevant to watershed planning
are the State Well Code (MR 4725), Wellhead Protection (MR 4720) and surface water / intake
protection planning resulting in a strong focus in groundwater management and protecting
drinking water sources.
One of the three high level state priorities in Minnesota’s Nonpoint Priority Funding Plan is to
“Restore and protect water resources for public use and public health, including drinking
water” which aligns with our agency’s mission and recommendations to your planning process.
2
MDH Priority Concerns:
Protection of Public Water Supply Drinking Water Sources
Prioritize Protecting Drinking Water Supply Management Area in the Pomme de Terre
Watershed 1W1P.
The Drinking Water Supply Management Area (DWSMA) boundaries establish a protection area
through an extensive evaluation that determines the contribution area of a public water supply
well, aquifer vulnerability and provides an opportunity to prioritize specific geographic areas for
drinking water protection purposes.
Aquifer vulnerability determines the level of management required to protect a drinking water
supply and provides an opportunity to target implementation practices in accordance with the
level of risk different land uses pose. The attached Public Water Supply Summary Spreadsheet
identifies the high potential and low potential contaminant risk DWSMAs in the basin and sub
watersheds. DWSMAs with high potential contaminant risk have groundwater that is
moderately or highly vulnerable to contamination from land use activities. DWSMAs with low
potential contaminant risk have well protected groundwater that has low vulnerability to
contamination from land use activities. Some DWSMAs have variable vulnerability. These
DWSMAs are a mixture of at least two vulnerabilities that may be comprised of low, moderate,
high, very high vulnerable areas. This spreadsheet can be used to prioritize projects in areas
with high potential contaminant risk. As some of DWSMAs extend across multiple watersheds
and subwatersheds, they are listed multiple times in the spreadsheet.
Protect Water Quality and Quantity
Storm water infiltration basins and water storage may be of concern in vulnerable DWSMAs.
Surface water storage and storm water infiltration can alter both the quality and quantity of
groundwater in the surrounding area through groundwater mounding. Groundwater mounding
may alter local hydraulic gradients, decrease the removal of certain pollutants, and mobilize
contaminants that are in soil or groundwater. Metals, nitrate, and phosphorus are typically
present at low concentrations in urban stormwater, and present a low risk to groundwater.
Chlorides, however, are a significant concern because they are typically present in high
concentrations near roads and commercial areas. MDH in cooperation with MPCA has
developed a guidance on stormwater and wellhead protection. It can be found in the
Minnesota Stormwater Manual at
https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php/Stormwater_and_wellhead_protection
Ensuring that public water supply systems have no well interference conflicts promotes public
health, economic development and community infrastructure by maintaining a potable public
drinking water supply for the community. Increase local awareness of available resources and
technology for soil moisture monitoring and management of irrigated land.
Encourage Local Government Units to utilize Wellhead Protection Plans to assess needs and
changes in land use (zoning and ordinance development, and enrollment in CRP programs) to
protect groundwater quantity and quality.
3
Prioritize Drinking Water Supply Management Areas impacted by Nitrate.
Prioritize these protection areas for working with landowners on nutrient management and
other sources of nitrogen such as failing septic systems. Additionally, it is important to target
highly vulnerable DWSMAs for working with landowners on the advantages of small grain
crops, perennial vegetation, nutrient and water requirements of corn and soybeans. Vulnerable
DWSMAs are the most likely to be impacted by nitrates. According to the spreadsheet, Morris,
Appleton, and Barrett have low levels of nitrates in the groundwater. Prioritize these protection
areas for working with landowners in enrollment in CRP programs, nutrient management, and
other sources of nitrogen such as failing septic systems.
Prioritize Protecting Noncommunity Public Water Supplies in the Pomme de Terre Watershed
1W1P
Noncommunity public water supplies provide drinking water to people at their places of work
or play (schools, offices, campgrounds, etc.). Land use and management activities should
consider effects on these public water systems. Find information regarding noncommunity
public water supplies in the watershed in reports titled Source Water Assessments at
http://www.health.state.mn.us/divs/eh/water/swp/index.htm#swa
Protection of Drinking Water Sources for Private Wells
Prioritize Protection of Private Wells
Many residents of Pomme de Terre Watershed rely on a private well for the water they drink.
However, no public entity is responsible for water testing or management of a private well after
drilling is completed. Local governments are best equipped to assist private landowners
through land use management and ordinance development, which can have the greatest
impact on protecting private wells. Other suggested activities to protect private wells include:
hosting well testing or screening clinics, providing water testing kits, working with landowners
to better manage nutrient loss, promoting household hazardous waste collection, managing
storm water runoff, managing septic systems, and providing best practices information to
private well owners. Utilize information regarding pollution sensitivity of the upper most aquifers
and wells, and nitrate and arsenic results from well testing to further target areas within the
watershed for implementation activities.
Unused “Abandoned” Wells
Prioritize Sealing Abandoned Wells
Unused, unsealed wells can provide a conduit for contaminants from the land surface to reach
the sources of drinking water. This activity is particularly important for abandoned wells that
penetrate a confining layer above a source aquifer.
Sealing wells is a central practice in protecting groundwater quality, however when resource
dollars are limited it is important to evaluate private well density to identify the populations
most at risk from a contaminated aquifer.
4
Attached you will find information regarding drinking and groundwater prioritization with
PTMapp and a listing of the data and information MDH can provide to help you in the planning
process. Thank you for the opportunity to be involved in your watershed planning process. If
you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at (218) 308-2153 or
Jenilynn.Marchand@state.mn.us.
Sincerely,
Jenilynn Marchand, Principal Planner
Minnesota Department of Health
Source Water Protection Unit
705 5Th St NW, Suite A
Bemidji, MN 56601-2933
Attachments
CC: Trent Farnum, Source Water Protection Unit
Carrie Raber, Source Water Protection Unit
Chris Elvrum, Well Management Section
Pomme de Terre 1W1P Interagency Core Team
5
Prioritizing Groundwater & Drinking Water Protection in the 1W1P Planning Process
Watershed models used for prioritizing and targeting implementation scenarios in the One Watershed
One Plan (1W1P), whether PTMapp, HSPF SAM or others, leverage GIS information and/or digital
terrain analysis to determine the flow paths of runoff across the landscape and the pour points where
concentrated flow reaches surface water features. While this is an effective approach for targeting
surface water contaminates, it does not transfer to groundwater concerns because it only accounts for
the movement of water on the land’s surface. Unfortunately, targeting tools are not currently
available to model the impact on groundwater resources. Therefore, the Minnesota Department of
Health suggests using methodologies applied by the agency to prioritize and target implementation
activities in the Source Water Protection program.
These methodologies for public water supply systems include:
• Identifying Drinking Water Supply Management Areas (DWSMA) located in the watershed.
• Examining the vulnerability of the aquifer to contamination risk to determine the level of
management required to protect groundwater quality. For example, a highly vulnerable
setting requires many different types of land uses to be managed, whereas a low vulnerability
setting focuses on a few land uses due to the long recharge time and protective geologic layer.
These methodologies for private wells include:
• Evaluating the vulnerability of the upper most aquifers to determine the areas within the
watershed most at risk from different land uses. Geologic atlases provide this information
where available, as well as the statewide geomorphology layer, or the DNR’s statewide aquifer
sensitivity layer.
6
Data and information MDH can provide:
Drinking Water Statistics – 100% of citizens and businesses get their drinking water from
groundwater in the Pomme de Terre Watershed. This information can help you
understand where people are obtaining their drinking water and develop
implementation strategies to protect the sources of drinking water in the watershed.
A spreadsheet of the public water supply systems in the watershed, status in wellhead
protection planning, and any drinking water protection concerns or issues that have
been identified in protection areas. This information can help you understand the
drinking water protection issues in the watershed, prioritize areas for implementation
activities, and identify potential multiple benefits for implementation activities.
Shape files of the Drinking Water Supply Management Areas (DWSMA) in the watershed
are located at http://www.health.state.mn.us/divs/eh/water/swp/maps/index.htm.
This information can help you prioritize and target implementation activities that
protect drinking water sources.
A figure detailing the “Pollution Sensitivity of the Upper Most Aquifer” in the Pomme de
Terre Watershed. This information can help you understand the ease with which
recharge and contaminants from the ground surface may be transmitted into the upper
most aquifer on a watershed scale. Individual wellhead protection areas provide this
same information on a localized scale. This in turn can be used to prioritize areas and
implementation activities.
A figure detailing “Pollution Sensitivity of Wells” in the Pomme de Terre Watershed. This
information can help you understand which wells in the watershed are most geologically
sensitive based on the vulnerability of the aquifer in which the well is completed. This
information allows for targeting of implementation activities to the sources of water
people are drinking.
A figure detailing “Pollution Sensitivity of Wells and Nitrate Results” in the Pomme de
Terre Watershed Underlain by Geologic Sensitivity Ratings from Wells”. This
information takes what we know about the sensitivity of wells to contamination and
combines it with nitrate results to highlight areas of the watershed where there is
known nitrate contamination of the water people are drinking. This figure can help
prioritize implementation activities aimed at reducing nitrate levels in the sources of
drinking water.
A figure detailing “Pollution Sensitivity of Wells and Arsenic Results” in the Pomme de
Terre Watershed Underlain by Geologic Sensitivity Ratings from Wells”. This
information can help you understand which wells in the watershed contain elevated
arsenic levels.
July 12, 2017
Ms. Stephanie Adams
Watershed Projects Coordinator
Pomme de Terre River Association
12 Highway 28 East, Suite 2
Morris, MN 56267
RE: Response to Request for Water Management Issues and Priority Concerns to be Addressed in the
Pomme de Terre River One Watershed, One Plan
Dear Ms. Adams:
The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) appreciates the opportunity to provide priority
concerns for the Pomme de Terre River One Watershed, One Plan (1W1P).
Background Information
In 2010, a comprehensive approach was taken to assess all of the watershed’s surface water bodies for
aquatic life, recreation, and fish consumption use support, where data was available. For details on the
data behind that assessment, refer to the Pomme de Terre River Watershed Monitoring and Assessment
Report (wq-ws3-07020002b) and the Assessment Report of Selected Lakes within the Pomme de Terre
River Watershed (https://www.pca.state.mn.us/water/watersheds/pomme-de-terre-river).
Within the Pomme de Terre River watershed (Watershed), there are 19 impairment listings; two for
fecal coliform or E.coli, two for turbidity, three for aquatic macroinvertebrate bio assessments, five for
fishes bio assessments, and four lakes listed for nutrient eutrophication.
Impairment Type Number of Listings Beneficial Use
Turbidity; Total Suspended Solids 2 Aquatic Life
Nitrates 0 Drinking Water
Fecal Coliform; E. coli 2 Aquatic Life
Aquatic Macro-invertebrate bio assessment 5 Aquatic Life
Fishes bio assessment 5 Aquatic Life
Lake; Nutrient/eutrophication 4 Aquatic Recreation
Dissolved Oxygen 1 Aquatic Life
Specific reduction goals for the impaired lakes and stream reaches can be found in the following
documents:
Pomme de Terre River Watershed WRAPS Report
Ms. Stephanie Adams
Page 2
July 12, 2017
Pomme de Terre River Watershed TMDL Report
Pomme de Terre River, Muddy Creek to Marsh Lake, Fecal Coliform TMDL
Turbidity TMDL Assessment for the Pomme de Terre River Final Report:
https://www.pca.state.mn.us/water/watersheds/pomme-de-terre-river
These impairments are illustrated on the maps below.
Ms. Stephanie Adams
Page 3
July 12, 2017
A stressor identification process is documented in the Pomme de Terre River Watershed Biotic Stressor
Identification Study (Study) for the reaches listed for aquatic life impairments. In this Study, a summary
of the primary stressors to the biological community by impaired reach can be found in Table 25 on page
148. In the Study, seven primary stressors are identified; they are:
Altered hydrology;
Poor habitat;
Low dissolved oxygen;
High phosphorous;
High turbidity;
High nitrates; and
Fish barriers (dams).
MPCA Water Management Priorities in the Pomme de Terre River Watershed
The following priorities need to be addressed within the 1W1P. They address the impairments that are
found across the Watershed. The MPCA identified these priorities through scientific analysis in the
MPCA reports listed below.
Pomme de Terre River Watershed Monitoring and Assessment Report:
https://www.pca.state.mn.us/sites/default/files/wq-ws3-07020002b.pdf
Assessment Report of Selected Lakes Within the Pomme de Terre River Watershed:
https://www.pca.state.mn.us/sites/default/files/wq-ws3-07020002.pdf
Pomme de Terre River Watershed Biotic Stressor Identification:
https://www.pca.state.mn.us/sites/default/files/wq-iw7-36n.pdf
Biota (Aquatic Life)
Address the stressors to aquatic life in the 1W1P. Aquatic life use impairments within the
Watershed are complex. Biotic impairments are a result of nonpoint source pollution and
localized stress linked to poor habitat condition and altered hydrology. High nitrogen and
phosphorus levels are likely impacting macroinvertebrate communities in the southern part of
the Watershed. Stabilizing hydrology, increasing riparian buffer width, and stabilizing stream
banks would greatly help the in-stream habitat.
Altered Hydrology
Seek changes to the landscape that reduce the volume, rates, and timing of runoff and increase
the base flows needed to prevent continued and further impairments. A primary stressor to the
majority of the biotic impairments in the Watershed is altered hydrology. Other pollutants
(turbidity, nutrients, bacteria, etc.) are delivered because of altered hydrology. Managing the
hydrology to provide a consistent base flow is imperative for the survival of the biological
communities in the Watershed. Increasing rainfall infiltration and water retention, and
Ms. Stephanie Adams
Page 4
July 12, 2017
improving riparian conditions are activities that are needed to stabilize hydrology and reduce
impairments.
Turbidity and Total Suspended Solids (Aquatic Life)
Reduce and control sediment entering into the water bodies of the Watershed. Total suspended
solids (TSS) and turbidity, which is a measure of water clarity affected by sediment, algae, and
organic matter, is a common impairment and stressor to aquatic life in the Watershed. Reducing
TSS will also likely reduce the means by which other pollutants are conveyed (phosphorus and
bacteria).
Resource:
Pomme de Terre River Turbidity Total Maximum Daily Load Implementation Plan:
https://www.pca.state.mn.us/sites/default/files/wq-iw7-18c.pdf
Nutrients (Aquatic life/Eutrophication)
Reduce nutrient delivery to the Watershed. High levels of nutrients (phosphorus) are driving
nuisance algae blooms in the Watershed’s impaired lakes, and threatening other lakes that are
on the verge of becoming impaired. Algae blooms can deprive lakes of their oxygen as the algae
die off and decay, causing fish kills. High levels of algae cause increased levels of turbidity,
degrading aquatic recreation and aquatic life. Blue-green algae can also be deadly to humans.
The MPCA anticipates more lakes and stream reaches will be listed as impaired following the
intensive monitoring phase of the second watershed cycle (now underway). Stream monitoring
has documented high concentrations of total phosphorus. With the implementation of the new
River Eutrophication Standards (https://www.pca.state.mn.us/water/water-quality-standards-
river-eutrophication-and-total-suspended-solids), the MPCA suspects that new stream
impairments are likely to emerge.
Management plans that appropriately value the nutrient worth of manure and previous crops
and focus on the timing and intensity of the fertilizers and manure applications will help reduce
the amount of phosphorus and nitrogen reaching the river. These reductions would also aid in
the low dissolved oxygen problems present in some parts of the Watershed.
Bacteria (Aquatic Recreation)
Control pathways delivering human and livestock feces to the Pomme de Terre River. High levels
of bacteria are widespread across the southern portion of the Watershed. The abundance of
feedlots, feedlot runoff, improper manure management, and over-grazed pastures in the
Watershed may correlate with this finding. High bacteria levels are also attributed to
noncompliant septic systems.
Resource:
Pomme de Terre Fecal Coliform Implementation Plan:
https://www.pca.state.mn.us/sites/default/files/wq-iw7-08c.pdf
The MPCA recognizes all the hard work and cooperation from the local partners within the Pomme de
Terre River watershed, and offers our continued support in the 1W1P pilot project. Thank you for the
opportunity to provide comments during the planning process.
Ms. Stephanie Adams
Page 5
July 12, 2017
Please contact Paul Wymar, MPCA, at 507-476-4282 or paul.wymar@state.mn.us if you have any
questions or would like additional information.
Sincerely,
Wayne Cords
This document has been electronically signed.
Wayne Cords
Manager, Southeast Region
Watershed Division
507-344-5245
wayne.cords@state.mn.us
cc: Rebecca Flood, MPCA
Scott MacLean, MPCA
Paul Wymar, MPCA
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – October 2019
APPENDIX C:
Zonation Tool Supporting Information
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – October 2019
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – DRAFT OCTOBER 2019
Appendix C: Zonation Tool Supporting Information Page 1
Appendix C – Zonation Tool Supporting Information
C.1 Introduction As threats to Minnesota’s watersheds continue to mount, it is becoming increasingly important to identify and conserve high-priority areas. Identification of these priority areas, including sources of point and non-point pollution, will be crucial for targeting actions to improve water quality. There are multiple opportunities for protection or restoration in any watershed. Identifying which practices to implement and where in the landscape to implement them can help more effectively target efforts and more efficiently utilize limited resources. To prioritize land within the Pomme de Terre River watershed, we used a process that included the values-based model Zonation. This process began with the identification of the goals of the watershed and concluded with a review of the results. The identification of priority areas was based on the quantitative analysis (using Zonation) of a suite of data layers. Planning team members decided on what landscape features were included in the model and set the weights on those features via a pairwise questionnaire survey. The process was framed within the DNR’s healthy watershed conceptual model, and included biology, hydrology, water quality, and geomorphology components. An additional component, designed to capture other “lands of concern” within the watershed was also included. This approach recognized that attempts to solve clean water needs within the watershed are not separate from other natural resource needs; each priority area should provide multiple benefits. The model used in this process helps achieve this goal by identifying areas that provide multiple benefits while incorporating data valued by the community.
C.2 Methods Values-based models, such as Zonation, are an efficient method for prioritizing places on the landscape for protection or restoration of water resources. These models integrate individual landscape features with context and connections, and use an objective function to identify priority resource areas. The use of an additive benefits (i.e., multiple benefits) objective function in the value model allows for the inclusion of multiple landscape features. Value models also lend themselves to collaborative efforts, by providing an opportunity for participants to decide what features are valued and the ranking of those valued features. In addition, value models and the DNR five-component healthy watershed model used to structure the content in the value model are simple concepts that are easy to explain and apply at the local government scale. Value models do not provide guidance on what practices should be implemented where, so additional analysis and/or discussion on effective and appropriate best management practices will be necessary when project planning. The Zonation model was based on the 5 Components of the MN DNR Watershed Health Assessment Framework (http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/whaf/index.html):
• Biology
• Connectivity
• Geomorphology
• Hydrology
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – DRAFT OCTOBER 2019
Appendix C: Zonation Tool Supporting Information Page 2
• Water Quality The 5 component approach recognizes that clean water needs are not separate from other conservation needs; and each conservation activity should provide multiple benefits. The Zonation model helps achieve this ‘multiple benefits’ goal by identifying areas that optimize benefits by incorporating data valued by the community. The first step of the four-step process involved determining which features should be included in the Zonation model. The analysis included 26 features (i.e., data layers), grouped within five components (Table C- 1). Each data layer was on the same grid with a resolution of 30 by 30m. We used high-resolution data to maximize local planning realism and for greater practicality in local government water resource planning and implementation. Weights from the surveys were used to identify which features were valued more. Within the five-component healthy watershed framework, for example, water quality features could be weighted higher than biological features. The feature-specific weights used in Zonation were set using the analytic hierarchy process (AHP; Saaty and Peniwati 2007). A hierarchical survey (components → features) comprised of pairwise comparisons was used to identify the preferences of a diverse group of individuals within the watershed. Individual components of watershed management are linked to multiple other aspects of watershed management (i.e., multiple benefits). Therefore, the objective of the pairwise survey is to help participants focus on the value they place on individual components of watershed management by considering them in pairs for all unique combination of pairs. Each individual taking the survey used his or her judgment about the relative importance of all survey elements. The relative importance values included “equal,” “prefer,” and “strongly prefer.” Individual responses were aggregated with a geometric mean, and the pairwise comparison matrix was constructed to compute the feature-specific weights consistent with the AHP. Members of the Policy Committee took a survey consisting of the broad-scale components, and Advisory Committee members provided preferences for both the broad-scale components and the fine-scale features. The value models were developed using Zonation software (Moilanen et al. 2009). Zonation produces a nested hierarchy of spatial priorities. It begins with the full landscape and iteratively removes cells that contribute least to the objective; therefore, the removal order is the reverse order of the priority ranking. Zonation assumes that the full watershed is available for consideration. In these models, the lakes were masked out prior to analysis. This focused the prioritization on the terrestrial parcels, in accordance with the protection and restoration goals of the Pomme de Terre River watershed. Zonation’s algorithms seek maximal retention of weighted normalized landscape features. To produce a map that identified areas on the landscape that provide multiple benefits, we used the additive benefit function within Zonation. This function aggregates values by summation across features: V(P) = ΣwjNj(P)zj where the value of a parcel V(P) is equal to the summation of weighted w normalized features of the parcel Nj(P) to the power of z (set to 0.25 for all features).
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – DRAFT OCTOBER 2019
Appendix C: Zonation Tool Supporting Information Page 3
Additionally, Zonation allows ranking to be influenced by neighboring parcels, so that highly valued areas can be aggregated, and fragmentation of areas can be minimized. We utilized the distribution-smoothing algorithm in Zonation, which assumes that fragmentation (low connectivity) generally should be avoided for all features. Initial analyses indicated that a connectivity distance of 200m may be appropriate for local government efforts targeted at the watershed scale. We found that very small connectivity distances made no difference in prioritization, since the connectivity effect did not extend very far, and very large connectivity distances aggregated cells across unrealistically large areas. We also found that across a modest range of connectivity distances the results were minor. Analysis of the spatial distribution of the conservation priority scores identified clusters of high priority areas; these clusters are identified as hotspots (Figure C- 3).
C.3 Zonation Data Layers The fine-scale components from the survey are represented spatially in the Zonation model with a unique input data layer as described in Table C- 1.
Table C- 1. Descriptions for features (i.e., data layers) used in the Pomme de Terre River Zonation model
Objective Description
Protect or Improve Waters of Concern - Groundwater
Focus on Groundwater
contamination
susceptibility
The pollution sensitivity of near-surface materials from the transmission time of water
through 3 feet of soil and 7 feet of surficial geology, to a depth of 10 feet from the land
surface. Source: DNR; Pollution Sensitivity of Near-Surface Materials.
Focus on Drinking Water
Supply Management Area
(DWSMA) vulnerability &
Drinking source water
assessment areas (SWA)
The risk associated with potential contaminant sources within a public water supply
DWSMA to contaminate its drinking water supply. This risk is based on the aquifer's
inherent geologic sensitivity, the assessed vulnerability of the public water supply
well(s), and the composition of the groundwater. In highly vulnerable DWSMAs, there is
a strong causal relationship between land use activities on the surface and groundwater
quality. Also includes source water assessment area (SWA) is the surface and subsurface
area surrounding a public water supply well that completely contains the scientifically
calculated time-of-travel area. Source: MDH.
Focus on Areas with high
density of wells
The groundwater irrigation well installation density (installations per square mile).
Source: DNR.
Protect or Improve Waters of Concern – Lakes and Rivers
Focus on
Impaired waters
Catchments (i.e., drainage basins) upstream of impaired waters within the watershed.
Identified as impaired by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA).
Focus on Catchments with
high pollution
Estimated total suspended solids, total nitrogen, and total phosphorus by catchment as
determined by a hydrological model that uses water quality and water flow/level
monitoring data and physical process equations. Source: HSPF model.
Focus on Catchments of
lakes vulnerable to
nutrient addition
The relative susceptibility of a lake to phosphorus pollution (based on lake morphology
and catchment hydrology). Source: DNR and MPCA; Lakes of Phosphorus Sensitivity
Significance.
Protect or Restore Shoreland All lands located within 300 feet of a protected water stream or 1000 feet of a lake.
Reduce Erosion & Runoff
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – DRAFT OCTOBER 2019
Appendix C: Zonation Tool Supporting Information Page 4
Objective Description
Focus on Areas with high erosive potential Stream Power index: This is an index of the channelized flow erosive potential. Calculated from LiDAR data.
Protect Existing wetlands Remaining wetlands as documented by the National Wetland Inventory (NWI).
Restore Drained wetlands Drained, potentially restorable wetlands in agricultural landscapes based on an inventory and analysis.
Protect or Restore Stream riparian areas Stream riparian areas and potential flood zones (based on location, elevation and soil type).
Protect or Restore Stream buffers Public waters and public ditches that require permanent vegetation buffers. Source: Buffer Protection Map, DNR.
Reduce Soil erosion risk
Susceptibility of soils to erosion. This variable is from the BWSR and UMN’s
Environmental Benefits Index; it was calculated from a subset of the universal soil loss
equation.
Focus on Areas with high
water yields (runoff)
Estimated annual water yield (inches/acre or cubic feet per second (cfs)/acre) by
catchment as determined by hydrological models. Source: HSPF model.
Protect or Improve Fish & Wildlife Habitat
Protect Rare plants or
animals
Locations of species currently tracked by the DNR, including Endangered, Threatened, and Special Concern plant and animal species as well as animal aggregation sites.
Excluded locations with high uncertainty. Source: DNR.
Protect Sites of
biodiversity significance
Areas with varying levels of native biodiversity that may contain high quality native
plant communities (e.g., native prairies, fens, quality forests, meadows, swamps, etc.),
rare plants, rare animals, and/or animal aggregations. Identified by Minnesota
Biological Survey. Source: DNR.
Protect or Restore Lakes of biological significance Catchments of high quality lakes. List of high quality lakes based on dedicated biological sampling. Source: DNR’s Lakes of Biological Significance.
Protect or Restore
Native prairie and Prairie
Core Areas
Intact native prairie and areas identified in the Prairie Plan as core areas. Source: DNR.
Protect or Restore USFWS
priority wetlands
Wetland complexes with the potential to impact populations of focal species (black terns, migrant shorebirds, ducks, and pheasants). Factors include integrity of the surrounding wetland complex, the juxtaposition of wetland and grassland areas, and the potential for significant water quality enhancement benefits for shallow lakes. Source: USFWS.
Protect or Restore USFWS
priority grasslands
Grassland complexes with the potential to impact populations of focal species (marbled
godwit, nongame birds, migrant shorebirds, ducks, and pheasants). Factors include
integrity of the grassland patch, the surrounding landscape context (% grassland and
terrain relief), juxtaposition of grassland and wetland, the potential for significant water
quality enhancement benefits for shallow lakes, and the potential to create large
grassland patches with minimal cropland retirement. Source: USFWS.
Protect or Restore Lands of Concern
Implement BMPs on
Vulnerable cultivated
cropland
Land cover type is cultivated crops (areas used for the production of annual crops or
actively tilled areas) with land capability class indicating serious limitations for
agriculture. Land capability classification shows, in a general way, the suitability of soils
for most kinds of field crops. Classification from NRCS where classes 4-8 have serious
limitations for agriculture. Classes 4-8 are used to identify areas for potential
conservation investments.
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – DRAFT OCTOBER 2019
Appendix C: Zonation Tool Supporting Information Page 5
Objective Description
Protect Lands close to
protected lands
Lands close to protected lands may be more important for conservation, as larger, contiguous areas often have more value than smaller, fragmented lands. The data are the inverse distance to existing protected lands.
Protect or Improve
Urban areas and
undeveloped lands
adjacent to urban areas
Urban lands have opportunities for improved management of stormwater runoff. Those
areas close to existing development may be more likely to be developed, and some of these lands that provide important ecosystem services may be of conservation value.
Implement BMPs on
Areas with high wind
erodibility
Areas with high wind erodibility indices. Source: Soil Survey Geographic Data Base
(SSURGO).
C.4 Results Policy Committee preferences were used to set the broad-scale weights within the Zonation model. Policy Committee pairwise questionnaire survey results identified the Protect Groundwater component of the value model inputs as the highest weight, followed by Reduce Erosion & Runoff. The Protect/Improve Fish & Wildlife Habitat component was assigned the lowest weight (Table C- 1 and Table C- 2). The fine-scale weights were derived from questionnaires completed by both the Policy and Advisory Committees (Table C- 3). The Zonation model was run using the weights derived from the questionnaire. The Zonation output map ranked lands as to their importance for land management activities that would provide greater protection of ecosystem functions, especially water quality, and to their importance for application of various land best management practices. The Zonation priority map identified several potential priority areas. Many of the lands bordering the Pomme de Terre River were ranked high. The area around Lake Christina, particularly to the northwest, was ranked high as well. High priority ranked lands were identified near the city of Barrett, as well as near Donnelly and Dalton. Lands surrounding several lakes, including Tamarack, Ten Mile, and German Lakes were also ranked high (Figure C- 2 and Figure C- 3).
Table C- 2. Broad-scale component and feature weights used in the Zonation model. Weights were obtained
from a questionnaire using the analytic hierarchy process (AHP; weights sum to 100).
Component (broad-scale) Prioritization* Weight
Weight Used in
Model
Protect Groundwater 22.1 22.1
Protect/Improve Lakes & Rivers 24.6 24.6
Reduce Erosion & Runoff 26.2 26.2
Protect/Improve Fish & Wildlife Habitat 12.1 12.1
Protect/Improve Lands of Concern 15.0 15.0
*Policy Committee broad-scale preferences were used
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – DRAFT OCTOBER 2019
Appendix C: Zonation Tool Supporting Information Page 6
Table C- 3. Broad-scale component and feature weights used in the Zonation model. Weights were obtained
from a questionnaire using the analytic hierarchy process (AHP; weights sum to 100).
Feature (fine-scale) Prioritization Weight
Weight Used in
Model
Protect Groundwater
Drinking water mgmt area vulnerability 44.2 15.1
Groundwater contamination susceptibility 31.2 10.7
Areas with high well density 24.6 8.4
Protect/Improve Lakes & Rivers
Impaired waters 23.0 3.4
Catchments with high pollution 28.1 4.1
Catchments of lakes vulnerable to TP pollution 30.4 4.4
Shoreland 18.5 2.7
Reduce Erosion & Runoff
Areas with high erosive potential 15.1 4.4
Stream riparian areas 14.0 4.0
Soil erosion risk 14.6 4.2
Existing wetlands 14.7 4.2
Drained wetlands 14.9 4.3
Stream buffers 14.1 4.1
Areas with high water yield 12.6 3.7
Protect/Improve Fish & Wildlife Habitat
Rare features 9.4 0.8
Sites of biodiversity significance 16.3 1.4
Lakes of biological significance 18.7 1.7
Native prairie/prairie core 20.7 1.8
USFWS priority wetlands 19.0 1.7
USFWS priority grasslands 16.0 1.4
Protect/Improve Lands of Concern
Vulnerable cultivated croplands 39.6 5.3
Lands close to public lands 16.5 2.2
Urban areas & adjacent undeveloped lands 19.9 2.7
Areas with high wind erodibility 24.0 3.2
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – DRAFT OCTOBER 2019
Appendix C: Zonation Tool Supporting Information Page 7
Figure C- 1. The component (broad-scale) weights obtained from a questionnaire using the analytic hierarchy
process (AHP; weights sum to 100). Policy Committee weights were used to set the data weights used in the
Zonation model.
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – DRAFT OCTOBER 2019
Appendix C: Zonation Tool Supporting Information Page 8
Figure C- 2. Priority map from Zonation analysis.
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – DRAFT OCTOBER 2019
Appendix C: Zonation Tool Supporting Information Page 9
Figure C- 3. Priority map from Zonation analysis with hotspots. Hotspots derived using median conservation
(WRSCR) score from Zonation output.
Zonation Inputs: Water Quality
The pollution sensitivity of
near-surface materials from
the transmission time of water
through 3 feet of soil and 7
feet of surficial geology, to a
depth of 10 feet from the land
surface.
Source:DNR; Pollution
Sensitivity of Near-Surface
Materials.
Focus on Groundwater
contamination susceptibility
Protect or Improve Waters of Concern –Groundwater
Zonation Inputs: Water Quality
The risk associated with potential
contaminant sources within a public water
supply DWSMA to contaminate its drinking
water supply. Also includes source water
assessment area (SWA) is the surface and
subsurface area surrounding a public water
supply well that completely contains the
scientifically calculated time-of-travel area.
Source: MDH.
Focus on Drinking Water
Supply Management Area
vulnerability & Drinking
source water assessment
areas (SWA)
Protect or Improve Waters of Concern –Groundwater
Zonation Inputs: Water Quality
The groundwater irrigation well installation
density (installations per square mile).
Source: DNR.
Focus on Areas with high
density of wells
Protect or Improve Waters of Concern –Groundwater
Protect or Improve Waters of Concern –Lakes and Rivers
Catchments (i.e., drainage basins)
upstream of impaired waters within
the watershed. Identified as impaired
by the Minnesota Pollution Control
Agency (MPCA).
Focus on Impaired waters
Zonation Inputs: Water Quality
Estimated total suspended solids by
catchment as determined by a hydrological
model that uses water quality and water
flow/level monitoring data and physical
process equations.
Source: HSPF model.
Focus on Catchments with
high pollution (TSS)
Protect or Improve Waters of Concern –Lakes and Rivers
Zonation Inputs: Water Quality
Estimated total nitrogen by catchment as
determined by a hydrological model that
uses water quality and water flow/level
monitoring data and physical process
equations.
Source: HSPF model.
Focus on Catchments with
high pollution (TN)
Protect or Improve Waters of Concern –Lakes and Rivers
Zonation Inputs: Water Quality
Estimated total phosphorus by catchment
as determined by a hydrological model that
uses water quality and water flow/level
monitoring data and physical process
equations.
Source: HSPF model.
Focus on Catchments with
high pollution (TP)
Protect or Improve Waters of Concern –Lakes and Rivers
Zonation Inputs: Water Quality
The relative susceptibility of a lake to
phosphorus pollution (based on lake
morphology and catchment hydrology).
Source: DNR and MPCA; Lakes of
Phosphorus Sensitivity Significance.
Focus on Catchments of
lakes vulnerable to nutrient
addition
Protect or Improve Waters of Concern –Lakes and Rivers
Zonation Inputs: Water Quality
All lands located within 300 feet of a
protected water stream or 1000 feet of a
lake.
Protect or Restore Shoreland
Protect or Improve Waters of Concern –Lakes and Rivers
Zonation Inputs: Water Quality
Stream Power index: This is an index of
the channelized flow erosive potential.
Calculated from LiDAR data.
Focus on Areas with high
erosive potential
Reduce Erosion & Runoff
Zonation Inputs: Water Quality
Remaining wetlands as documented by
the National Wetland Inventory (NWI).
Protect Existing wetlands
Reduce Erosion & Runoff
Zonation Inputs: Water Quality
Drained, potentially restorable wetlands in
agricultural landscapes based on an
inventory and analysis.
Restore Drained wetlands
Reduce Erosion & Runoff
Zonation Inputs: Water Quality
Stream riparian areas and potential flood
zones (based on location, elevation and
soil type).
Protect or Restore
Stream riparian areas
Reduce Erosion & Runoff
Zonation Inputs: Water Quality
Public waters and public ditches that
require permanent vegetation buffers.
Source: Buffer Protection Map, DNR.
Protect or Restore Stream
buffers
Reduce Erosion & Runoff
Zonation Inputs: Water Quality
Susceptibility of soils to erosion. This
variable is from the BWSR and UMN’s
Environmental Benefits Index; it was
calculated from a subset of the universal
soil loss equation.
Reduce Soil erosion risk
Reduce Erosion & Runoff
Zonation Inputs: Water Quality
Estimated annual water yield (inches/acre
or cubic feet per second (cfs)/acre) by
catchment as determined by hydrological
models.
Source: HSPF model.
Focus on Areas with high
water yields (runoff)
Reduce Erosion & Runoff
Zonation Inputs: Water Quality
Locations of species currently tracked by
the DNR, including Endangered,
Threatened, and Special Concern plant
and animal species as well as animal
aggregation sites. Excluded locations with
high uncertainty. Source: DNR.
Protect Rare plants or
animals
Protect or Improve Fish & Wildlife Habitat
Zonation Inputs: Water Quality
Areas with varying levels of native
biodiversity that may contain high quality
native plant communities (e.g., native
prairies, fens, quality forests, meadows,
swamps, etc.), rare plants, rare animals,
and/or animal aggregations. Identified by
Minnesota Biological Survey.
Source: DNR.
Protect Sites of biodiversity
significance
Protect or Improve Fish & Wildlife Habitat
Zonation Inputs: Water Quality
Catchments of high quality lakes. List of
high quality lakes based on dedicated
biological sampling. Source: DNR’s Lakes
of Biological Significance.
Protect or Restore Lakes of
biological significance
Protect or Improve Fish & Wildlife Habitat
Zonation Inputs: Water Quality
Intact native prairie and areas identified in
the Prairie Plan as core areas.
Source: DNR.
Protect or Restore Native
prairie and Prairie Core Areas
Protect or Improve Fish & Wildlife Habitat
Zonation Inputs: Water Quality
Wetland complexes with the potential to
impact populations of focal species (black
terns, migrant shorebirds, ducks, and
pheasants). Factors include integrity of the
surrounding wetland complex, the
juxtaposition of wetland and grassland
areas, and the potential for significant
water quality enhancement benefits for
shallow lakes. Source: USFWS.
Protect or Restore USFWS
priority wetlands
Protect or Improve Fish & Wildlife Habitat
Zonation Inputs: Water Quality
Grassland complexes with the potential to
impact populations of focal species
(marbled godwit, nongame birds, migrant
shorebirds, ducks, and pheasants).
Factors include integrity of the grassland
patch, the surrounding landscape context
(% grassland and terrain relief),
juxtaposition of grassland and wetland, the
potential for significant water quality
enhancement benefits for shallow lakes,
and the potential to create large grassland
patches with minimal cropland retirement.
Source: USFWS.
Protect or Restore USFWS
priority grasslands
Protect or Improve Fish & Wildlife Habitat
Zonation Inputs: Water Quality
Land cover type is cultivated crops (areas
used for the production of annual crops or
actively tilled areas) with land capability
class indicating serious limitations for
agriculture. Land capability classification
shows, in a general way, the suitability of
soils for most kinds of field crops.
Classification from NRCS where classes
4-8 have serious limitations for agriculture.
Classes 4-8 are used to identify areas for
potential conservation investments.
Implement BMPs on
Vulnerable cultivated
cropland
Protect or Restore Lands of Concern
Zonation Inputs: Water Quality
Lands close to protected lands may be
more important for conservation, as larger,
contiguous areas often have more value
than smaller, fragmented lands. The data
are the inverse distance to existing
protected lands.
Protect Lands close to
protected lands
Protect or Restore Lands of Concern
Zonation Inputs: Water Quality
Urban lands have opportunities for
improved management of stormwater
runoff. Those areas close to existing
development may be more likely to be
developed, and some of these lands that
provide important ecosystem services may
be of conservation value.
Protect or Improve Urban
areas and undeveloped lands
adjacent to urban areas
Protect or Restore Lands of Concern
Zonation Inputs: Water Quality
Areas with high wind erodibility indices.
Source:Soil Survey Geographic Data
Base (SSURGO).
Implement BMPs on
Areas with high wind
erodibility
Protect or Restore Lands of Concern
Pomme de Terre 1W1P HSPF ModelPTMApp: Hydro-conditioned DEM
Pomme de Terre 1W1P HSPF ModelPTMApp: Stream Power Index Rank
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – October 2019
APPENDIX D:
Pomme de Terre River Association
Joint Powers Agreement
Pomme de Terre River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan – October 2019
APPENDIX E:
BWSR Local Funding Authorities
1
Pomme de Terre River Association
Joint Powers Agreement
Article 1
Enabling Authority
THIS AMENDED AND RESTATED AGREEMENT is made by and between the political
subdivision organized and existing under the Constitution and laws of the State of
Minnesota, hereafter collectively referred to as "Parties", and individually as "Party"
which are signatories to this "Agreement."
Minnesota Statutes, Section 471.59 provides that two or more governmental units may
by Agreement jointly exercise any power common to the contracting Parties or any
similar powers including those which are the same except for the territorial limits within
which they may be exercised. The agreement may provide for the exercise of such
powers by one or more of the participating governmental units on behalf of the other
participating units. The term "governmental unit" as used in this section includes every
city, county, town, school district, other political subdivision of this or any adjoin state,
and any agency of the State of Minnesota of the United States, and includes any
instrumentality of a governmental unit means an instrumentality having independent
policy making and appropriating authority.
In consideration of the mutual promises and Agreements contained herein and subject
to the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Sections 471.59 and all other applicable
statutes, rules and regulations, the following Parties:
Big Stone County, Douglas County, Grant County, Otter Tail County, Stevens
County, Swift County, Big Stone SWCD, Douglas SWCD, Grant SWCD, West Otter Tail
SWCD, Stevens SWCD, Swift SWCD
hereto agree as follows:
Article 2
Purpose
The purpose of this agreement is the joint exercise of powers by the undersigned
governmental units to develop and implement plans with regard to protection of property
from damage of flooding; controlling erosion of land; protection of property, streams and
lakes from sedimentation and pollution; and maintaining and improving the quality of water
in the streams, lakes and ground water: all in accordance with the intent of Section 471.59
of Minnesota Statutes.
2
A. Coordinate with local, state, and federal agencies to encourage landowners to voluntarily
change their land use practices to improve the quality of water resources within the Pomme
de Terre River watershed.
B. Provide other similar or related services and programs as determined by the
Board.
C. Establish a mechanism whereby additional and/or alternative programs and services
may be developed for the benefit of the Parties and in furtherance of the objectives of the
Parties.
D. Collectively develop and adopt a coordinated watershed management plan for
implementation per the provisions of the plan.
Article 3
Name
The name of this joint power entity shall be Pomme de Terre River Association
hereinafter sometimes referred to as PDTRA.
Article 4
Agreement to Participate
4.1 Members. The members (entities) under this agreement are those Counties and
Soil and Water Conservation Districts lying within the boundaries of the
watershed of the Pomme de Terre River, namely, Big Stone County, Douglas
County, Grant County, Otter Tail County, Stevens County, Swift County, Big
Stone SWCD, Douglas SWCD, Grant SWCD, West Otter Tail SWCD, Stevens
SWCD, Swift SWCD.
4.2 Compliance. A Party agrees to abide by the terms and conditions of the
Agreement; including but not limited to the Joint Powers Agreement, bylaws,
policies and procedures adopted by the Board.
4.3 Financial Obligation. In addition to grant funding received, members may
provide additional direct funding as they may determine from time to time. In
addition to, or in lieu of financial support, the members may also contribute
services, personnel, or personal property to the PDTRA in such amounts as the
members may determine from time to time. Each member is not expected to
make any individual contribution unless it is approved by all the Members.
Article 5
Governance
5.1 Governing Board. A governing board shall be formed to oversee the operation
of the PDTRA and shall be known as the Board.
3
5.1.1 Membership. The Board shall be comprised of one representative of
each County Board of Commissioners and each Soil and Water Conservation District
included in this agreement. Each member of the Board shall be a member of each
respective unit of government and shall be appointed by the respective unit of
government.
5.2 Terms; Vacancies. The term of appointment shall be set by the respective unit
of government. The appointing entity shall appoint a designee as soon as a vacancy
occurs.
5.3 Officers of the Board. The Board shall elect a Chair, Vice Chair, and
Secretary/Treasurer from its membership who shall serve two year terms.
5.3.1 Election of Officers. The JPB will elect officers at the first meeting of the
year in every even-numbered year. Officers will be elected for two-year terms. A
special election shall be held to replace any officer who is no longer a member of the
JPB. The duties of the Officers shall be described in the By-laws of the JPB.
5.3.2 Committees. The Board shall have the authority to appoint such
committees as it deems necessary to fulfill the purpose of the organization.
5.4 Meetings. The Board shall comply with the Minnesota Statutes Chapter 13D
(Open Meeting Law).
5.5 Voting. A quorum for any JPB meeting shall be over 50% of the JPB
membership.
5.6 By-Laws. The Board may adopt by-laws to govern its operations. Such by-laws
shall be consistent with the Agreement and applicable law.
5.7 Amendments. This Agreement may be amended from time to time as deemed
necessary.
5.8 Records, Accounts and Reports.
5.8.1 Records and Reports. The books and records, including minutes and
the original fully executed Agreement, of the Board shall be subject to the provisions of
Minn. Stat. Ch. 13. They shall be maintained at the official location of the host entity
and/or fiscal agent as determined by the By-laws of the Board.
5.8.2 Receipts and Disbursements. The PDTRA will ensure strict
accountability for all funds of the organization and will require reports on all receipts and
disbursements made to, or on behalf of the PDTRA.
4
5.8.3 Audits. The Board shall have an annual third party audit of the books and
accounts of the PDTRA and shall make a file report to its Members at least once each
year.
5
Article 6
Powers of the Board
6.1 General Powers. The Board is hereby authorized to exercise such authority and
powers common to the Parties as is necessary and proper to fulfill its purposes and perform
its duties. Such authority shall include the specific powers enumerated in this Agreement or
in the bylaws.
6.2 Specific Powers.
6.2.1 Administrative Services. The Board shall establish policies and procedures
for the administration of the affairs of the Board.
Administrative services shall be provided under the direction and control of the Board.
These services shall include, but are not limited to, financial, legal and general
administration. The Board may enter into contract and/or agreements with one or more of its
member entities as a (Host Entity/Fiscal Agent) to carry out the functions of the PDTRA.
The Board shall ensure adherence to the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act.
6.2.2 Employees. The Board may employ, train, pay, discipline, discharge and
otherwise manage personnel needed to assist the PDTRA Board in carrying out its duties
and responsibilities. Employees of the Board shall not be considered employees of the
Parties to this Agreement for any purpose including, but not limited to, salaries, wages or
other compensation or fringe benefits; worker’s compensation; unemployment
compensation or reemployment insurance; retirement benefits; social security; liability
insurance; maintenance of personnel records and termination of employment.
6.2.3 Contracts. The Board may enter into contracts and/or agreements necessary
for the exercise of its duties and responsibilities to govern the PDTRA. The board may take
such action as is necessary to enforce such contracts to the extent available in equity or at
law. Contracts and/or agreements let and purchases made pursuant to this Agreement shall
conform to the requirements applicable to contracts and/or agreements required by law (i.e.
fiscal management, personnel management).
6.2.4 The PDTRA may apply for and accept gifts, grants, or loans of money or other
personal property from the United States, the State of Minnesota, or any other body,
organization, political subdivision, or person, whether public or private. The board may enter
into any agreement required in connection therewith, and hold, use, or dispose of any such
money or other property in accordance with the terms of the gift, grant, loan or agreement
relating thereto.
6.2.5 Insurance. The Board shall obtain liability, property and auto insurance and
may obtain such other insurance it deems necessary to indemnify the Board and its
members for actions of the Board and its members arising out of this Agreement.
6.2.6 Budget.
6.2.6 A. Budget and work plan. The PDTRA will develop an annual work
6
plan budget, dependent on budget reserves and/or anticipated continued Grants and
Project funding. The work plan and budget may be modified as needed to meet actual grant
or other funding amounts and requirements.
6.2.6 B. Budgeting and accounting services. The PDTRA may contract with one or
more of its member entities (Fiscal Agent) to provide any and all budgeting and accounting
services necessary or convenient for the PDTRA. Such services shall include, but not be
limited to: management of all funds, including County contributions and grant monies;
payment for contracted services; and relevant bookkeeping and record keeping. The
contracting and purchasing requirements of the Fiscal Agent shall apply to transactions of
the Board. The PDTRA, through a separate contract or joint powers agreement, shall
enumerate the authorities and duties of the Fiscal Agent. The parties shall retain their
authority to request reports pertaining to any and all budgeting and accounting services. All
interest earned from established PDTRA funds shall be credited back to that same fund.
6.2.6 C. Employee accommodation. The PDTRA may enter into a contract and/or
agreement with one or more of its member entities (Host Entity) to provide office space
necessary to carry out the duties and responsibilities of administration on behalf of the
PDTRA.
6.2.7 Watershed Management Plan
6.2.7 A. Submittal of the Plan. The PDTRA will recommend the plan to the Parties of
this agreement. The PDTRA will be responsible for initiating a formal review process for the
watershed-based plan conforming to Minnesota Statutes Chapters 103B and 103D,
including public hearings. Upon completion of local review and comment, and approval of
the plan for submittal by each party, the PDTRA will submit the watershed-based plan jointly
to BWSR for review and approval.
6.2.7 B. Adoption of the Plan. The Parties agree to adopt and begin implementation
of the plan within 120 days of receiving notice of state approval, and provide notice of state
approval, and provide notice of plan adoption pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Chapters
103B and 103D.
Article 7
Indemnification and Hold Harmless
7.1 Applicability. The PDTRA shall be considered a separate and distinct public
entity to which the Parties have transferred all responsibility and control for actions
taken pursuant to this Agreement. PDTRA shall comply with all laws and rules that
govern a public entity in the State of Minnesota and shall be entitled to the protections
of Minnesota Statutes 466.
7.2 Indemnification and Hold Harmless. The PDTRA shall fully defend, indemnify
and hold harmless the Parties, employees, and officials against all claims, losses,
liability, suits, judgments, costs, and expenses by reason of the action or inaction of the
Board and/or employees and/or the agents of the PDTRA. This Agreement to indemnify
and hold harmless does not constitute a waiver by any participant of limitations on
liability provided under Minnesota Statutes, Section 466.04.
7
To the full extent permitted by law, actions by the Parties pursuant to this Agreement
are intended to be and shall be construed as a "cooperative activity' and it is the intent
of the Parties that they shall be deemed a 'single governmental unit' for the purpose of
liability, as set forth in Minnesota Statutes Section 471.59, Subd. 1a (a); provided further
that for purposes of that statute, each Party to this Agreement expressly declines
responsibility for the acts or omissions of the other Party.
The Parties of this Agreement are not liable for the acts or omissions of the other
participants to this Agreement except to the extent to which they have agreed in writing
to be responsible for acts or omissions of the other Parties.
Article 8
Withdrawal and Termination
8.1 Withdrawal. A Party shall have the right to withdraw from this agreement and
association hereby created, in the following manner:
8.1.1 The board of the withdrawing Party shall pass a resolution declaring its
intention to withdraw on December 31 and shall send a certified copy of such resolution
to the Chair of the PDTRA Executive Board at least 6 months prior notice.
8.1.2 Upon receipt of the resolution of withdrawal, the Chair of the PDTRA
Executive Board shall send a copy of said resolution to each Party's Board.
8.1.3 Withdrawal by a Party shall not result in the discharge of any legal or
financial liability incurred by such Party before the effective date of withdrawal. All such
liabilities shall continue until properly discharged or settled by the withdrawing county to
the approval of the remaining member counties, which approval shall not be
unreasonably withheld.
8.1.4 A withdrawing Party shall not be entitled to a refund of funds paid, or
forgiveness of funds owed to the PDTRA prior to the effective date of withdrawal. A
withdrawing member shall not be entitled to the return of any personal property, given,
granted or loaned by it to the PDTRA unless specified by written agreement.
8.2 Effective Date and Obligations. This agreement and the PDTRA created
hereby, shall continue indefinitely in full force and effect until all grant funds are
exhausted or until all member Parties, or all remaining member Parties, mutually agree
to terminate the agreement by joint resolution passed by the member Parties respective
Boards.
8.3 Termination. This agreement shall remain in effect until rescinded or terminated
by a 2/3 vote (8) or until the objectives of the plan have been fulfilled.
8
8.3.1 Effects of Termination. The termination of this agreement shall not act
to discharge any liability incurred by the Board or by the Parties during the term of the
Agreement.
8.3.1 A Financial obligations shall continue until discharged by law, the
Agreement or any other agreement.
8.3.1 B Property acquired by the PDTRA and surplus funds shall be
distributed and returned to the Parties by percentages pursuant
to Article 4.1 of the Bylaws.
9
Article 9
Counterparts
This Agreement may be executed in two or more counterparts, each of which shall be
deemed an original, but all of which shall constitute one and the same instrument.
Counterparts shall be filed with the Chair of the PDTRA who will maintain them at the
PDTRA host entity office.
In witness whereof, the undersigned governmental units, by action of their governing
bodies, has caused this Agreement to be executed in accordance with the authority of
Minnesota Statute 471.59.
APPROVED AS TO FORM: _________________________
Governmental Unit
_________________________ _________________________
County Attorney Board Chair
_________________________ _________________________
Date Date
ATTEST____________________
County Auditor OR Administrator