February 17 Photo contributed by Susan Thompson

Water Quality at Lake Panorama (Part 2)

The common hazard—Nitrates

In last week’s edition, siltation, e-coli bacteria, and blue-green algae were described as the primary water quality issues facing Lake Panorama. In this week’s edition, how our issues are related to water quality issues elsewhere will be looked at and some potential solutions discussed.

Since siltation only indirectly effects most citizens and bacteria issues are easily treated in public water supplies, probably the biggest issue of concern to the outside world regarding water quality (quantity is another issue that won’t be dealt with in this article) is the issue of nitrates (and other nutrients) in surface waters.

Since World War II, agriculture across the world has increased use of nitrogen fertilizers by 500% or more according to some sources. Nitrates and other nitrogen compounds can come from many sources—unprocessed or partially processed human and animal waste, ammonia fertilizer, nitrate fertilizer, nitrates from atmospheric sources (lightning creates nitrogen compounds that end up as nitrates in the water), nitrogen from nitrogen fixing bacteria in soil and in leguminous crops (soybeans, alfalfa) and other minor sources. Although it is not the only source of Nitrogen, fertilizers used for agricultural purposes are receiving the most attention. This attention is due to the fact that conservation programs and improved farming practices can both improve farm profitability and reduce runoff Nitrogen. All nitrates are easily dissolved in water and either flow overland to streams or enter the waters through drainage tile systems throughout the agricultural areas of the world.

The primary known danger of nitrates is in drinking water that derives from surface water sources. Infants are endangered by high nitrates given through the mother’s milk or through formula mixed with

waters with high nitrates. Studies are being funded now to determine if other health effects are possibilities due to public water supplies using high nitrate water sources. Local users of the Raccoon River water, such as the City of Panora and the Des Moines Waterworks, have to treat the water to remove nitrates to a level considered safe. The process to remove nitrates can be very expensive. The City of Des Moines has had to spend considerable sums to remove nitrates from their source waters (primarily from the Raccoon River and also the Des Moines River). These costs are being passed on to Des Moines Water Works customers in higher fees. The Water Works has recently sued three County drainage districts in the northern part of the North Raccoon River watershed where the Water Works allege tests have shown that water from the local drainage systems is higher than safe levels in nitrates than other locations and that, by the definition of the Water Works, is being considered a point source of pollution. They believe the Drainage Districts (districts organized by law to develop drainage in wet regions of their area) have now become point sources for pollution—which are regulated by Federal law. This controversial legal action will hopefully bring the importance of water quality to the attention of the public, but, unfortunately, it is also being used to divide rural and urban interests.

The Bigger Picture— Drinking water issues are not the only ones concerning nitrates. Increasing concentrations of plant nutrients in river systems throughout the world are causing “dead zones” around the mouths of rivers where they meet the oceans. A “dead zone” is an area where aquatic

species can no longer live because of oxygen depletion in the waters of the area. It happens like this---Fresh water streams full of nutrients flow into the salt water ocean. Fresh water is lighter and creates a layer of fresh, nutrient-filled waters that result in huge blooms of cyanobacteria. (Cyanobacteria often crowds out other naturally beneficial algae by secreting a chemical that keeps the other

species from growing and multiplying.) As the bloom of cyanobacteria matures and dies, much of the cellular material of the organism floats to the bottom into the salt water layer below. As the cellular material decomposes, it uses up the oxygen in the water until the level of oxygen is too low for many animal species. Fish and other species that can move rapidly simply leave. Rooted animals or those which cannot swim or move away quickly enough simply die from lack of oxygen (causing more oxygen usage and resulting in deposits of dead cells that will use up new oxygen eventually.) This vicious cycle is interrupted by wind and seasonal changes, but develops again as spring rains wash more nutrient-laden materials into the ocean. The threat is reduction of important seafood sources and other unknown potential changes to local environments and their effects on world sea water quality.

The area just off the mouth of the Mississippi River has been found to have the second largest dead zone in the world. These dead zones are changing the overall ecology of the seas they occur in and may cause issues with food fisheries, shrimping, and may cause changes in temperature and current patterns in the long-term. This is a huge issue of concern for scientists who see the potential for increasing ecologic disaster as dead zone areas grow. Agricultural technology reaching third world countries is emphasizing the value of fertilizers to increase yields and stave off hunger issues. More fertilizer means higher prices for the nutrients, higher yields (a good thing) for third world areas, but increasing artificial nutrient content and development of more dead zones in neighboring seas.

What makes the dead zone issue particularly of concern to Iowa? The Raccoon River watershed is considered to be one of the worst contributors of nitrate nitrogen of all the primary river watersheds in the Mississippi drainage system. This has brought the attention from the Gulf back to the Raccoon River system and our very own stream, the Middle Raccoon, which forms the lake.

Solutions?—The challenge to decrease nutrient loss is huge. Since there are many potential sources, responsibility for the issue should be proportionate. Solutions also have to consider, whether one believes in global warming or not, that recent rises in global temperatures have occurred and seem to be producing additional rains with associated additional nutrient losses. As noted last week, increasing rainfall increases flows and flow rates bring Lake Panorama’s primary problems—silt, nutrients, and eventually cyanobacteria problems.

Slowing water down could be a potential solution toward assisting some of the issues of concern. Agriculture and urban development have both used grading, channeling, and drainage systems (storm sewers in town and tile systems in the country) to speed water away from soils or from urban development. The more rapid movement of water results in higher flood levels, an obvious issue all around the nation during this past year, and increased erosion and siltation, also carrying nutrients—LPA’s primary issues. Holding water back reduces flood levels, lessens erosion, and, if done using

wetland areas, can reduce nutrient loads. But holding back water takes acres out of production and building structures and using equipment to do so is expensive.

To adequately address the problems, some of which are related (nitrates/bacteria/ algae/runoff), it will take cooperation. For example, it is known that many Iowa towns have sanitary systems that overflow and allow untreated sewage into streams during flood times. How much of this is a proportion of the issue—an issue that would take government assistance to solve for small, financially strapped rural towns. How much nitrates come from unfertilized soybean fields? Is the amount of nitrate loss proportional to fertilizer being put on fields? All of these will require research, and appropriate collective decision making to pursue.

The problem for most of agriculture is profitability. An Iowa grain farmer today has little or no control over the prices he/she will be offered for the crops. During cycles of crop surpluses and low global demand, low prices mean the better farmers, ones who produce most efficiently, including using proper fertilization, are the only ones who will do well. These are the farmers most likely to tile and manage drainage. Less efficient farmers, on poorer soils or on less favorable (generally steeper or river bottom type ground) are subject to flood and high water losses also, including erosion and drainage of nutrients into rivers and streams. In either case, the farmer must be profitable if investment can be made in methods to help change cropping practices and develop means to reduce nutrient loss. When farm and other commodity prices rise as they did for a few years recently, more, and usually poorer quality ground, is put into production. Often this is more erosive, steeper soils and adds to the problems.

New methods are being developed to encourage ways to trap nitrogen compounds and keep them on the property. The Rural Improvement Zone has applied for a project called the Conservation Reserve Enhancement Project (CREP) for an area acquired just northeast of Holes 12 and 13 at the Lake Panorama National Golf Course. The project includes acquiring enough ground to put a dam across the stream coming into the development with grassland around it to trap sediments washed from the fields on either side. An area of deep excavation will be done to help trap sediments being transported by the stream. As the water slows from the dam holding it back, the energy of the water is

dissipated and silt particles settle out (much like in the upper end of Lake Panorama where silt accumulates.) This area will occasionally be dredged by dragline or long-stick excavators to remove accumulated sediment. The project, by holding water in a shallow area for a period of time, gives time for some of the nutrients in the water to be used up by plants in the water or in other ways be converted to atmospheric nitrogen again. This should reduce both the nitrates and other dissolved nutrients for this drainage area.

The most effective CREP projects utilize areas of upland farm ground that can be dammed and/or graded to create large marshy areas. This type of habitat is most likely to produce aquatic vegetation that can trap sediment and remove considerable amounts of nitrates from the waters flowing in from surrounding hills, before it gets on downstream. These projects also help slow runoff which assists in reducing erosion and reducing flooding. The Helen’s Cove CREP project should be one of the more effective projects due to its capability to deal with trapping silt and attached nutrients, slowing drainage, and allowing nitrate reduction through aquatic vegetation. Hopefully, the RIZ will be able to do many more of these projects to help smaller lake coves and drainages. Another one is planned for Hughes Cove drainage for the same benefits.

Creating wetlands and related areas like CREP projects is not cheap. It costs to do the work required, but another major cost is land is taken out of production. Some federal and state funds are used in cost-sharing the development of these areas. As in many projects requiring federal assistance, there are expenses for archeology studies and other requirements. Many farmers may not see removing land from production, especially uplands which are likely more fertile, productive and valuable, as a road to surviving economically. These types of projects would be a way, if done on large enough scale, to help almost all of Lake Panorama’s water quality issues.

On the other hand, the public has a vested interest in reducing nutrient loads, reducing flooding, and, as for Lake Panorama, reducing sediment loss. Governments do have programs that help to fund conservation projects, but the funding is limited and often, as it is this year, funds for new conservation reserve projects (CRP--10-year “leases” to keep ground in conservation that is marginal for cropping and significant in improving water quality) will not likely increase acres. Expiring contracts will likely renew thus using up available funds, but will help by keeping those priority areas in permanent vegetation cover.

Improved infrastructure for sanitation systems for cities all across the country will assist in nutrient and other issues across the country and will, of necessity, be government projects. The irony of the Des Moines Water Works dumping the nitrates back into the Raccoon after removal for drinking water treatment is another area where research and capital expenditures need to be made. It is unknown how much lawn and garden fertilization in urban areas contributes to stream nutrient content. In some cases, it could be considerable, and that is another unknown. Typical lawn fertilization programs apply more nitrogen than needed for plant health to keep a lush growth look. Some of this may be unnecessary and wasteful. Encouraging your lawn contractor to use fewer nutrients might be a good idea.

Issues are Bigger than Agriculture versus Water Quality

In the long run, keeping soil on the land, reducing nutrient loss from yards, sanitary systems and other sources, and slowing water loss to reduce flooding will all take considerable changes in farm practices, government policies and funding, taxing policies for farm conservation. Hopefully, more creative solutions, both private and publicly funded, will be made available. These changes will help those who farm the land do so in a way that will improve the quality of Lake Panorama, as well as every other stream, water supply, and ocean beachfront. It’s likely it will take a joint venture of public and private to make a significant difference in the other potentially damaging issues which are not as obvious as Agriculture. For now, CREP projects can assist in improving small drainages for our lake and begin to make a dent in the issues from farming practices. The Lake Panorama Rural Improvement Zone will likely work to maximize project effects on small coves around the lake through creative work with CREP and

cooperation with local landowners. In many cases this could be a win, win situation. That cooperation is critical.

It’s unfortunate that the picture most have of the issues is “agriculture versus water quality” interpretation. Locally, partisan advertising has ridiculed both sides, only polarizing interests more.

The LPA is fortunate to have the resources of the Lake Panorama Rural Improvement Zone. The Zone, now equipped with legislative authority to deal with other water quality issues in addition to siltation, will be a guiding force locally and perhaps a great example regionally, of investing in seeking more knowledge and actually doing something about the water quality issues facing the lake.

If the RIZ is successful with its goals, progress will be made.

Map of the Raccoon River System.↓ The Des Moines lobe is the landform created by the incursion of the last lobe of the continental glaciers that characterized the ice age. Most of the drainage is in the Des Moines lobe area. The whole Raccoon River drainage is pictured below. Lake Panorama is on the Middle Raccoon branch of the river system.

February--March

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat 17 18 19 20

21 22 23 24 25 26 27

28 29

Sadie Hawkins?

March 1 2 3 4 5

6 7

Variance application

deadline Building

Codes 4:30 p.m.

8 9 10 11 12

13 14

Building Codes 7

p.m.

15 16 17

NCAA

MBB Des Moines

18 19 NCAA MBB

Des Moines

20 21 22

LPA Board 5 p.m. Open

forum

23 24 25 26