Watershed District protects local water quality

By Tim King

Tyler Carlson is a friend and a grass fed beef farmer in Todd County. He generously spent some time answering questions about his work in the Sauk River Watershed.

Tim: You’re on the Board of Managers of the Sauk River Watershed District. How did you get that job?

Tyler: When a position opens up, the county places an informational ad in local papers and perhaps other appropriate outlets.  Interested members of the public then submit a letter of interest in the position to the county and the Commissioners approve one applicant to serve on the Board.  I saw the opening in the Herald.

Tim: What is the Sauk River Watershed District? Where is it?

Tyler: A watershed is defined as a geographic area in which all surface waters flow to a single outlet. The Sauk River watershed covers more than 667,000 acres from 5 counties; Douglas, Meeker, Pope, Stearns, and Todd. The River exits into the Mississippi at Sauk Rapids. The SRWD was created in 1986 and is charged with preventing and addressing water resource problems. Operating at a watershed scale is critical in being effective at tackling these problems. The District’s office is located in Sauk Centre.

Sauk River - Wikipedia

Tim: How is the District funded?

Tyler: Administrative costs are largely covered by general property tax levy. Project and program implementation is largely grant funded through the EPA and the Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources.

Tim: What do you guys do? I mean what does the Board of Managers do?

Tyler: The Board meets monthly, with additional meetings for specific projects and educational workshops and conferences.  At our monthly meetings (every third Tuesday at 6:00PM) the Board sets policy and directs the district's long-term activities. The SRWD is also the Drainage Authority for public drainage ditches within the watershed for Stearns and Pope County.  A DA meeting is also held monthly where we manage drainage systems for the benefited landowners under MN State drainage code 103E.

Tim: The Board IS all guys. Why no women?

Tyler: Commissioners can only appoint individuals that apply for the position. The District has had an overwhelming male representation on the board. Since 1986, there have been 3 female managers (all from Stearns County) with the last member serving in 2009. I think it's critically important that we have more diversity on the board.

Tyler Carlson - Thanks to SRWD

Tim: The Sauk River starts in Lake Osakis which is in Todd and Douglas Counties. The Sauk River Watershed District has been trying to clean up Lake Osakis for twenty-five years. Why haven’t you got that done? What’s the problem?

Tyler: Osakis Lake has a large watershed itself (88,722 acres). All lies within the Sauk River Watershed and the lake has many land-use issues. Historically, most projects and programs in the Lake Osakis watershed have been volunteer-driven. Disinterested landowners, limited restrictions on feedlots, grazing management issues, and nutrient management all create significant hurdles to overcome. However, it is important to recognize that farmers and lakeshore owners throughout Minnesota have actually been doing a pretty good job of adopting improved agricultural management practices, erosion control on construction projects, and shore land restrictions. Nevertheless, very few lakes listed for nutrient impairment around the state (and Lake Osakis is one of them) have been successfully restored to state Total Maximum Daily Load standards.  

Phosphorus levels in Lake Osakis are of primary concern, and it turns out that managing phosphorus is very challenging. It's all quite complicated, but I'll try to explain it as clearly and simply as I can. I think it's important for readers to understand this, because these issues affect our watershed locally and water bodies state- and nation-wide.  

Phosphorus exists in two forms: 1) that which is bound to sediment via various metal-oxides and 2) ortho-phosphate which is dissolved in the water column and is readily available for use by aquatic plants. For years, we believed that sediment-bound phosphorus was a much greater contributor to the Total Phosphorus in our lakes and streams. Accordingly, management has focused largely on things like farmland soil erosion and engineered sediment ponds to capture and store sediment from reaching water bodies. While this is critical, we now know that a significant portion of the phosphorus reaching Lake Osakis is in dissolved form. Additionally, evidence is growing that many natural and constructed wetlands, that serve as a sink for sediment, are now acting as a converter of phosphorus from sediment-bound to the dissolved form.  

Dissolved phosphate drives algae blooms. After the algae die and sink to the bottom, their decomposition depletes lake oxygen levels. Under no oxygen conditions lake sediments undergo chemical processes that release phosphate into the water, starting the nutrient cycle again within that same lake or wetland, or pushing the problem downstream to the next body of water. 

While farmers have done much to keep soil in place recently, we have a build-up of phosphorus in our watersheds from decades of over-application of phosphorus fertilizers and manures. To this day, we apply more phosphorus to the land in our watersheds than we send out through crop and livestock sales. This has resulted in what is called "Legacy" phosphorus where many upland soils acres and waterbody sediments are high in phosphorus. In the Sauk River watershed, we could balance our phosphorus imports and exports today (i.e., send as much out of the watershed as we put in), and still continue to see elevated water phosphorus levels for decades to come due to this historical build-up.  

The big picture suggests two things. 1) We must begin to get a handle on appropriate phosphorus application on upland acres with water quality in mind, while also 2) finding ways to treat the phosphorus processes within water bodies. Right now, the cheapest and most effective method for addressing the dissolved phosphorus is through chemical applications. From my work on the SRWD board, treatment with Alum (Aluminum sulfate) is a proven, widely used approach to treating excess phosphorus in water (Alum is commonly used in many industries and is the main ingredient in antacids).  Alum converts to Aluminum hydroxide in water, binds to the dissolved phosphate, and precipitates out of solution and settles to the bottom. This phosphate is then unavailable for re-release.

In addition to addressing these processes involved with dissolved phosphorus, we have to continue to address the movement of sediment within the watershed. This is a challenge in our hydrologically altered agricultural watersheds and with the increasing frequency of heavy rain events. 

In my four years on the board, I have seen that even the most cost-effective water quality related projects are pretty expensive.  Sticker shock, politics, and arguments over who is going to pay the bill result in a lot of opportunities being left on the table.  When water quality project costs are shared among the many stakeholders in the watershed, individual costs are far less significant. Fixing our water quality problems and protecting our lakes and streams for future use will require investment, but the potential return on investment in higher property values plus the economic driver of maintained/improved water recreation is substantial. In my view, we need to stop trying to figure out who to blame and come together as a community and just fix the problem. It sounds simple, but fear and misinformation can undermine the cooperation needed to get there.

Tim: Have there been some successes over the years with Lake Osakis?

Tyler: Yes. The sedimentation ponds at the outlet of Judicial Ditch 2.  They were first operational in May 2003, with some changes made in 2005. The smaller pond was cleaned out in 2009 and  again in 2012. Both ponds are scheduled for clean-out now. The design was for sediment reduction of 50% and phosphorus reduction of 20-30%.  As highlighted above, our understanding of the phosphorus contribution in dissolved form has changed from what we knew in late 80s/early 90s when this project was conceived, so it will require tweaking to reach the phosphorus reduction target. The Board is beginning to examine the various options in this regard.

Tim: Big Birch Lake is another large lake in the District. Are there problems there?

Tyler: Big Birch Lake meets water quality standards for total phosphorus. That’s our primary concern for surface waters.  The lake has zebra mussels but the District has allowed the counties and Lake Association to take the lead on that issue. We are continuing to promote our hayable buffer initiative in that sub-watershed.

Tim: Do you find that State Legislators that are in the District are helpful?  

Tyler: When we need them for something, especially related to drainage systems, they are very willing to help. Right now, I'd say that State legislators seem to have their hands full with other issues and I am unsure as to their commitment to fixing or getting ahead of our water quality challenges.  

Tim: Is there any pending legislation that you’d like to see them support?  

Tyler: No specific legislation comes to mind, though state-level grant funding sources need to be drastically increased. Water quality is easier and cheaper to protect and maintain than it is to bring back from a degraded state. I'd like to see the state government put politics aside and make a big push to get on top of our water issues before they move beyond repair.  

Tim: Why do you think that the work of the Sauk River Watershed District is important?

The SRWD holds educational field days
Photo thanks to SRWD

Tyler: The SRWD is the only local government entity that has the authority to work across county lines. Addressing our water challenges cost-effectively necessitates being able to look upstream and target specific practices and projects in specific areas. Like many of us in central MN, I grew up hunting and fishing in the fields, grasslands, woods and waters of the Sauk River watershed. The stories shared by my parents and grandparents of their youth sometimes leave me in awe of the abundance that was here. We still have an incredible diversity of outdoor resources and recreation opportunities in this area, and we are fortunate to have it, but it could be better. I'd like my kids and grandkids to be able to partake in the rich, rural life that this place and its waters can offer. Without real changes and commitment today, we may not be able to count on these resources being here for future generations.

You can learn more about the Sauk River Watershed District at  http://srwdmn.org