rum river 1w1p - mille lacs swcd...sep 09, 2019 · r esource c a te g o ry - 2 s u b c a te g o ry...
TRANSCRIPT
Monday, September 9, 2019
Mille Lacs County CourthouseRum River 1W1P Technical Advisory Committee Meeting #1
Facilitator: Jen Kader, Freshwater
Writer: Julie Blackburn, Respec
Welcome and introductions
1W1P overview
Nomenclature and Future Content
Principles for how we will work together
Aggregated Data
What is coming out of the participant conversations
Initial identification of criteria for prioritization
Wrap up and next steps
Agenda
1W1P Overview
› A plan that:⁄ Is shaped and supported by water management entities and stakeholders⁄ Is understandable and usable⁄ Is fundable
⁄ Leads to resource improvements
› In other words, our charge is to help you through the hard work of planning together.
Our goals
WHERE WE'RE GOING
4
How we'll get there
5
› An iterative process
› Merging the science with stakeholder priorities and ground-truthed by local staff
› Following BWSR guidance, while making something that is uniquely yours in a way that works for you.
Rum River 1W1P
6
Work plan
› Determine agreed upon priority resources, issues, and locations
› Set clear goals for what can be accomplished in ten years
› Build an implementation table to do just that
› Define an organizational arrangement that supports implementation of the plan
Definitions
Process
Draft Table of Contents
Nomenclature and Future content
8
Rum River 1W1P
1W1P Content Development Process: at a glance
Issues List Prioritized Issues List
Issue Statements
Measurable Goals
Strategies & Outputs
Implementation Table
Rum River 1W1P
10
Developing plan content In Reality: it’s a messy process!
Surface Water
Lakes
Unimpaired Lakes
Nearly/ Barely
Improving Trend
4 Named Lakes
Tier 1
Tier 2
Tier 3
Tier 4
Tier 5
Issue Statements
Issues
Measurable Goals
Strategies & Outputs
Implementation Plan
Priority Issues
Evaluation/ModelingAchievability
Cost AssessmentAchievability
Nesting and Tiers
Categorizing
Categorizing & Prioritizing
Rum River 1W1P
11
Developing plan content In Reality
Surface Water
Lakes
Unimpaired Lakes
Nearly/ Barely
Improving Trend
4 Named Lakes
› It is a messy process!› Recommend that:
⁄ Issue Statements be developed at the 2nd
or 3rd Tier resource concern level.⁄ Desired Future Conditions be established
for the same level.⁄ Measurable Goals (Plan goals) be
established for Tier 3 level.
Tier 1
Tier 2
Tier 3
Tier 4
Tier 5
Rum River 1W1P
12
Developing Issue statements and goals In Reality
Surface Water
Streams
Impaired
TSS
Nearly/ Barely
4 AUIDs
› Example 1: ⁄ Issue Statement Tier 3:
» Excess sediment in streams is harming aquatic life.
⁄ Desired Future Condition Tier 3:» All impaired streams are restored to
unimpaired status. ⁄ Measurable 10-year Plan Goal:
» TSS loading in impaired streams will decrease by 15%.
Tier 1
Tier 2
Tier 3
Tier 4
Tier 5
Rum River 1W1P
13
Table of COntents
› Writing the content for the beginning and end of the plan will occur throughout the process
⁄ Surveys, data gathering, one on one calls, etc. to develop content
› Content for the issues and priorities will be developed through the committees and defined approval process
INTRODUCTION⁄ GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF THE AREA COVERED BY THE PLAN⁄ ONE WATERSHED ONE PLAN PRIMER⁄ VISION STATEMENT⁄ PLANNING PARTNERSHIP, ROLES, AND REPSONSIBILITIES⁄ PURPOSE AND EXTENT OF THE PLAN⁄ PLAN APPROVAL AND ADOPTION
ANALYSIS AND PRIORITIZATION OF ISSUES⁄ AGGREGATION OF BACKGROUND INFORMATION⁄ PUBLIC MEETINGS AND COMMENTS⁄ PRIORITY VALUES, CONCERNS, AND GOALS⁄ EMERGING ISSUES
MEASURABLE GOALS⁄ PRIORITY CONCERNS⁄ MEASURABLE GOALS⁄ GEOGRAPHICAL MANAGEMENT AREAS
TARGETED IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN PROGRAMS⁄ INCENTIVE PROGRAMS⁄ BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICE SELECTION⁄ CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS⁄ PREVIOUS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS⁄ OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE (O&M) PLANS⁄ REGULATORY CONTROLS AND ENFORCEMENT⁄ POTENTIAL RESEARCH, STUDIES, DATA ACQUISITION, AND DATA
MANAGEMENT
PLAN ADMINISTRATION AND COORDINATION⁄ FORMAL AGREEMENTS⁄ DECISION MAKING AND STAFFING⁄ COORDINATION OF SHARED SERVICES⁄ COLLABORATION WITH OTHER UNITS OF GOVERNMENT⁄ COLLABORATION WITH NONGOVERNMENTAL PARTNERS⁄ WORK PLANNING⁄ ASSESSMENT AND EVALUATION⁄ PLAN AMENDMENTS
Principles for working together
Rum River 1W1P
Ground rules
› Everybody participates
› One idea per post-it note
› Use complete thoughts
› Stay focused on the question
Aggregated data
Rum River 1W1P
Categorizing each Individual data point
I D I s s u e S o u rc e D a te E n te rE n te re d Bs s u e P g #R e s o u rc e I s s u eP rio rity I s s u e ?
S p e c ific R e s o u rc e I d e n tifie d
R e s o u rc e C a te g o ry -1 S u b c a te g o ry -1
R e s o u rc e C a te g o ry -2 S u b c a te g o ry -2 N O T E S
1 BWSR Response to Rum River 1W1P notification FINAL.pdf 8/19/2019 KAT 2 Watershed Citizen Empowerment – The key to effective watershed management is recognizing the people who live and work within the watershed are independent actors who make daily choices that will have cascading influences with unexpected water quality outcomes. Most, if not all, of those who live, work, and play within the watershed would like to see the natural environment protected or enhanced, particularly the water resources. With the understanding that governmental funding will never be able to address all of the problems within the watershed, it is critical to ensure that these individuals have the knowledge and access to resources to empower them to make wise choices that lead to desired water quality goals. As the policy committee is composed of elected and appointed officials, we encourage the policy committee members to create a sound watershed ethical framework in which government agencies recognize and empower the watershed residents to make decisions that allow for the individual and community management of locally important water resources and other features of the environment.
Yes n/a Leadership Public Outreach Leadership Stakeholder Involvement
2 BWSR Response to Rum River 1W1P notification FINAL.pdf 8/19/2019 KAT 2 Protection of Healthy Ecosystems – The upper portion of the Rum River Watershed is composed of large tracks of forest and substantial wetland complexes. These healthy ecosystems provide an important mix of ecosystem services that protect water quality, provide wildlife habitat, contribute to economic development (forest products), and allow for many dispersed recreational opportunities. The planning efforts surrounding these large tracts of healthy woodlands and wetlands should seek to protect these resources and manage land uses in such a way as to minimize any unintentional degradation of the upper watershed. Future development and management of these healthy ecosystems should come from a point of first, doing no harm.
Yes n/a Natural Resources Manage, Enhance, and Restore Habitat
Leadership Policy and Regulation [or Land Use Management]
3 BWSR Response to Rum River 1W1P notification FINAL.pdf 8/19/2019 KAT 2 Twin Cities Metropolitan Area Drinking Water Protection – According to the US Forest Service, the Rum River is the second most threatened tributary for the Twin Cities metropolitan area drinking water supply, which comes from the Mississippi River. Therefore, it is critically important for the planning partnership to consider ways to at least mitigate any additional impairment, if not seek to reduce impairments, that may hinder the Twin Cities ability to affordably treat and manage their drinking water supply.
Yes Rum River Surface Water Surface Water Quality Not Applicable n/a
4 BWSR Response to Rum River 1W1P notification FINAL.pdf 8/19/2019 KAT 2 Local Controls – One of the best ways for ensuring high quality water and the protection of local natural resources is to ensure these resources do not become impaired in the first place. While financial incentives and activities are useful for restoring a system after it has been degraded, local controls provide an important check on unwise land uses and development. With development and land use conversion being a significant potential risk to water resources in the central and lower portions of the watershed, effective local land use controls are an important tool in water quality protection. The Rum River planning partnership should seek to ensure that current and future land use controls are effectively implemented in such a way as to balance growth needs with water quality and natural resource protection.
Yes n/a Leadership Policy and Regulation [or Land Use Management]
Surface Water Surface Water Quality
5 BWSR Response to Rum River 1W1P notification FINAL.pdf 8/19/2019 KAT 2 Intergovernmental Partnerships – There are a diverse set of landowners within the watershed. While the majority of landowners are private citizens, land is also owned by the state, by the Mille Lacs Band of the Ojibwe, by the counties, and by municipalities within each county. During the plan development process, it will be important to be as inclusive as possible to ensure that all landowners understand the value of the Rum River One Watershed One Plan and participate as a valued entity in the planning and implementation phases of the process. In order to be fully inclusive, the planning partnership and/or consultant should consider a suite of outreach and communication strategies to maximize the ability of partners to provide input, clarify their ability to participate in watershed management, and incorporate the comprehensive watershed management plan’s implementation activity into their own local governing processes. The Mille Lacs Band of the Ojibwe has used PTMApp for some of their lands and the planning partnership should work with the band to ensure the results are included in the planning process, with Band approval.
Yes n/a Leadership Public Outreach Leadership Stakeholder Involvement
R u m R iv e r W a te rs h e d P rio rity I s s u e s
Rum River 1W1P
Resource categories and subcategories
Emerging Issues Groundwater Leadership Natural Resources Quality of Life Surface Water
Chlorides Drinking Water Supply Administrative PrioritiesManage, Enhance, and Restore Habitat
Aquatic Consumption
Altered Hydrology
Climate Change and Resilience
Groundwater Quality Collaboration Fish Habitat Aquatic RecreationDrainage System Management
Contaminants of Emerging Concern
Groundwater Quantity Financing Wetland Habitat Public Safety Erosion & Sediment Control
Land Development & Changes
Infiltration & Recharge Maintenance Upland Habitat Other Flooding & Floodplain
Reduce Pesticide & Fertilizer Impacts
Protect Groundwater Resources
Policy and Regulation [or Land Use Management]
Invasive SpeciesProtect Surface Water Resources
Other Other Public Outreach Preserve Prime Farmland Stormwater Management
Stakeholder InvolvementPreserve Sites of High Ecological Value
Surface Water Quality
Other Protect Soil Health Water Rate & QuantityOther Other
Rum River 1W1P
Resource categories and subcategories
Emerging Issues COUNTChlorides 3Climate Change and Resilience 7Contaminants of Emerging Concern 4Land Development & Changes 14Reduce Pesticide & Fertilizer Impacts 7Other 1
Groundwater COUNTDrinking Water Supply 15Groundwater Quality 5Groundwater Quantity 4Infiltration & Recharge 3Protect Groundwater Resources 20Other 1
Leadership COUNTAdministrative Priorities 12Collaboration 13Financing 2Maintenance 10Policy & Regulation [Land Use Mgmt] 29Public Outreach 15Stakeholder Involvement 4Other 1
Natural Resources COUNTManage, Enhance, and Restore Habitat 15Fish Habitat 6Wetland Habitat 7Upland Habitat 21Invasive Species 8Preserve Prime Farmland 0Preserve Sites of High Ecological Value 14Protect Soil Health 1Other 1
Quality of Life COUNTAquatic Consumption 0Aquatic Recreation 15Public Safety 2Other 1
Surface Water COUNTAltered Hydrology 16Drainage System Management 8Erosion & Sediment Control 16Flooding & Floodplain 11Protect Surface Water Resources 22Stormwater Management 27Surface Water Quality 87Water Rate & Quantity 7Other 1
Identifying criteria for prioritization
Rum River 1W1P
Prioritization criteria
› Targeted Resource screening
⁄ Applied at the resource issue level screening
› Comparative evaluation of quantifiable metrics
⁄ Data Trends⁄ Resource Condition ⁄ Biological Significance
› Relies on stakeholder determined threshold for ranking
› Macro-Level Criteria⁄ Applied when selecting
plan priorities
› Can include:⁄ Level of effort⁄ Level of impact achieved⁄ Stakeholder preference⁄ Multiple benefits⁄ Priority locations⁄ ‘shifters’ – things that if
accomplished, make high priority actions easier to achieve
› Micro-level criteria⁄ Applied during the
implementation phase
› Can include: ⁄ Project readiness⁄ Meets multiple benefits⁄ Addresses a priority
issue identified in the planning process
⁄ Supports high priority outputs
⁄ Riskiness/likelihood of success
Rum River 1W1P
Targeted Resource Screening
Ranking priority Priority Value Metric
1 Directly contributing to impaired Stream Reach (AUID)
2 Contribution/pollutant loading to a downstream Impaired reach
3 Altered Hydrology
4 Number of impairments per segment between endpoints
5 Achievability
6 On-Channel Impaired lakes
7 Drinking Water Impact
8 Disturbed Area
22
Priority Value Metric Scoring/Breakpoints
Lake Size to Drainage Area Ratio Ratio <10 = 1.0Ratio 11-25 = 0.66Ratio 26-50 = .033Ratio > 50 = 0.0
Lakeshed Land-Use Disturbance % <25 % = 1.025-40% = 0.5>40% = 0.0
Nearly/BarelyWithin 10% of WQ standard = 1.0More than 10% lower than WQ standards = 0.66More than 10% exceeding WQ standards = .33
P-Sensitivity Highest = 1.0Higher = 0.66High = 0.33
Water Clarity Trend(evaluated using both improving and declining trend)
Improving = 1.0No Trend = 0.66Declining = 0.33Declining = 1.0No Trend = 0.66Improving = 0.33
Lakes of Biological Significance Outstanding =1High = 0.66Moderate = 0.33
Lake Benefit:Cost Assessment Priority Score
Highest =1Higher = 0.66High = 0.33
› Define the metrics to evaluate the resources within each resource category or issue statement category
› Establish breakpoints for what will be prioritized
Rum River 1W1P
Targeted Resource Screening
› Results of screening metrics
› Four first tier prioritized lakes
› Eight second tier prioritized lakes
› The remaining are not prioritized in the plan
23
What’s coming out of participant conversations?
› 3 identical workshops, held on different days in different parts of the watershed
⁄ Anoka⁄ Onamia
⁄ Princeton
› Survey
What we did
Kickoff event workshops
25
What we did
Kickoff event workshops
26
All workshopsValues Concerns Strategies All
Emerging issues 13 37 9 59Groundwater 15 13 0 28Leadership 51 44 119 214
Natural resources 69 45 21 135
Quality of life 31 18 3 52Surface water 98 74 28 200Not applicable 1 3 1 5
Next Steps
Rum River 1W1P
Rum River 1W1P Technical Committee Next Steps
› October 14 – Columbus day⁄ Are there conflicts with this date
› Synthesis of issues⁄ Presentation and review of categorized main themes⁄ Refinement
› Draft Issue statements⁄ Review consultant recommendations⁄ Refinement
› Geographical management areas⁄ Review potential alignment of management areas
Monday, September 9, 2019
Mille Lacs County CourthouseRum River 1W1P Technical Advisory Committee Meeting #1
Facilitator: Jen Kader, Freshwater
Writer: Julie Blackburn, Respec