Hundreds attend Little Rock Lake ‘drawdown’ meeting

by Dennis Dalman

editor@thenewsleaders.com

Several hundred residents listened Feb. 29 to a plan that might improve the quality of Little Rock Lake near Rice and a stretch of the Mississippi River from the lake’s outlet to the dam near Sartell.

Most of the people who attended the two-hour evening meeting at Old Village Hall in Rice are residents who live around Little Rock Lake or along the river. They had all been invited to the meeting by Eric Altena, area fisheries manager for the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources’ Little Falls office.

There are about 500 residents who live along the river from Rice to Sartell, and there are about 400 who live along Little Rock Lake, Altena said.

Altena presented the plan at the meeting in Rice. It would, he said, involve lowering the lake and river levels by three feet for a six-week period. That method, known as a “drawdown,” would be accomplished by opening the hydroelectric dam at Sartell.

Some people at the meeting questioned how such a plan would benefit residents who live along the river. One woman said she is concerned her property values would be affected if the river off of her shore turned into weeds. Others, including some lakeside residents, said lowering the lake and river levels would definitely make recreational navigation difficult if not impossible for the six-week period.

In his presentation including a slide show, Altena acknowledged recreational uses would be affected, which is one of the drawbacks of the process. Other drawbacks could include potential navigational hazards (exposed rocks, for example), possible noxious weed growth in some areas (likely temporary and/or treatable), a temporary unpleasant smell, a temptation by some to use drained areas (illegally) for ATV use and a reduction of hydroelectric capacity at the dam.

Nobody at the meeting in Rice voiced outright opposition to the plan, although many asked questions or expressed some skepticism. Some said they are entirely in favor of the drawdown; others said it’s worth a try, at least.

One man, a resident of Little Rock Lake, said some kinds of algae blooms in water can kill children or pets. He said he worries about his son’s health and safety. People, he said, should welcome the drawdown plan if it can do something against the algae-growth problem.

Another man said, “We should give it (drawdown) a try and see what happens.”

Many in the audience applauded that suggestion – the only applause during the two-hour meeting.

Background

At one time, the area that became Little Rock Lake was a low-lying swampy area. About 100 years ago, a dam by Sartell caused the river level to rise and the low area southeast of Rice filled with water as a reservoir, which became known as Little Rock Lake.

Through the years, runoff from agriculture (such as chemicals and animal wastes) and from leaking or inadequate septic systems caused phosphorous levels to increase drastically in the lake (and streams). That, in turn, caused all kinds of changes in the lake: growth of less-than-desirable weeds, water-clarity issues, growth of harmful algae and adverse effects on fish and other forms of life dependent on the lake water.

In 2007-08, there was a massive blue-green algae bloom in Little Rock Lake that killed fish and caused a rotting smell that covered nearby neighborhoods for weeks.

The lake is part of a 60,000-acre watershed.

Drawdown

According to the plan, a drawdown would benefit both the lake and the river.

It would expose shorelines to air and sun, causing them to dry and to compact so beneficial native vegetation would sprout and grow along the edges. That kind of vegetation and its root systems would capture and use up phosphorous and other nutrients to keep them from pouring into the lake and river.

Shoreline erosion would be prevented, water clarity would improve, as would water habitat for fish and waterfowl.

The drawdown, in combination with other preventive methods, such as planting of shoreline buffers and limiting or eliminating chemicals that get into waterways, would cause an overall improvement, Altena said. He showed many slides and charts of how such drawdowns have improved other waterways in Minnesota.

Altena frankly acknowledged there are no guarantees about how well a drawdown can work, although ones that have been done have resulted in very good to excellent results throughout the state, he pointed out via his slide show.

How is it done?

A drawdown process takes about three years.

To accomplish a three-feet drawdown, data would first have to be gathered in the first year concerning all factors of the lake and river. The very earliest that could be done for the proposed one is 2017.

In the second year, preferably after the July 4 weekend, the water would be drawn down by three feet, via the dam, which would take about three days to do. That would last for six weeks.

During the third year, the entire area would again be documented for any changes that resulted and a future drawdown plan could be determined, probably one that would be initiated at 10-year intervals.

Audience members had questions and suggestions about the drawdown process. Why not do it later in the summer or early fall when river-lake recreation dwindles? Can’t the water be lowered by building a coffer dam at a lake channel?

Altena said it might be possible to do the drawdown later, although ideally it’s best done when the weather is hot and plants can quickly sprout and flourish. A coffer-dam method might be too expensive and problematic, with involvement from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, but it’s definitely worth considering if enough answers can be found, Altena acknowledged. He added a coffer-dam solution would help the lake but not the river.

Another question concerned shore-land changes at the edge of people’s properties. A DNR official said landowners have leeway to have their shorelines as they want them, such as “sand blankets,” with some guidelines and limitations. The DNR, he said, is always willing to work with landowners to help create shorelines to property owners’ liking.

Future

A Minnesota statute lists three rationales for a drawdown, including an agreement of 75 percent of shoreline residents to allow it to be done.

Altena said he wants to be sure all residents have as much information as possible before they are asked for a consensus.

Another public information meeting, he said, will be announced, possibly this coming winter.