Final Report
Conservation District Workshop and Tour
June 6 and 7, 2007
Summary
A successful tour and workshop was completed to provide an exchange between RRBC
Board members and Conservation District personnel on June 6 and 7, 2007. The tour
commenced at Grand Forks and visited the University of Minnesota Crookston Agriculture
Research Center, the Kelly’s Slough National Wildlife Refuge and Turtle River State Park
including touring a Riverbank restoration project by the Red River Basin Riparian Project
program.
The workshop for Conservation District personnel was held at the Ramada Inn where 30
conservation minded individuals from Minnesota, North Dakota and Manitoba shared their
expertise and interest related to tile drainage. The attendees were very interested in the issues
discussed regarding tile drainage, especially in the matters of consistency of permitting
regulations and effects of water quality and quantity. The audience was supportive of the RRBC
facilitating these types of workshops that allowed them to understand basin issues and the need
for all conservation resource offices to work together for the betterment of the land and water
resources in the basin.
Background
The First Annual Red River Basin Conservation Symposium was held in
conjunction with the Red River Basin International Summit January 21 and 22, 2007.
Participants of the Symposium identified that there needed to be continued opportunities
for Conservation Districts to meet and learn about issues relating to land and water in
the Red River Basin. They also wanted to include summer tours and workshops as well
as the formalized Symposium.
Planning for the Conservation District tour and workshop began in March 2007. It
was suggested that combining the RRBC summer Board tour and the Conservation
District tour would be a good mechanism for exchange between Board members and CD
personnel, as well as providing the opportunity for the two groups to learn about the
same issues that affect the Basin. Ruth Lewis, RRBC contractor, communicated with the
Conservation Steering Committee proposing the combining of the tour and then having a
workshop the next day on June 7th.
The Conservation Steering Committee held a teleconference on April 4, 2007, to
further discuss the tour and workshop agenda. Steering committee members are
concerned with tile drainage issues. Some of the issues relating to tile drainage include:
they don’t know enough about it and are concerned about what local controls may need
to be put in place for drainage related issues where land is not covered by a permitting
authority. Other issues of concern to the committee included identifying the Red River
Watershed, in proportion to local watersheds and how they are connected. The
committee agreed that if someone could be found to give a short presentation on
developing public participation programs that would be useful. The committee wanted to
make sure that there was ample time for discussion and not just presentation. The
committee also wants to work on getting an action oriented goal by the group.
Tour program
The RRBC tour is always held the first Wednesday of the month of June. This
year that date was June 6th. A preliminary tour agenda was prepared which included
visits to the University of Minnesota – Crookston campus to learn about the Tile
Drainage Research conducted by Extension; tour the Shelby WAFFLE pilot site
conducted by the Energy and Environment Research Center (EERC); Grand Forks
Greenway Project; Kelly’s Slough NWR administered by the US Fish and Wildlife
Service; River bank restoration projects conducted by the Red River Basin Riparian
Project; and Turtle River State Park restoration after the 2000 flood.
The final tour agenda did not include the WAFFLE site nor the Greenway project
since the WAFFLE site had been decommissioned and the Greenway tour was too
lengthy in time. Therefore the agenda was set as:
June 6 – 1PM – Bus tour leaves from Grand Forks, Ramada Inn Hotel
2:00 – University of Minnesota Crookston – Agriculture Research Station,
Tile Drainage research – Jochum Wiersma, Small Grains Research, MN
Extension Water quality implications; Corey Hanson, Red Lake
Watershed District
3:00 – return to Ramada, break and pickup additional riders
2nd stop:
Kelly’s slough wetland complex –
4:00 – 5:00 tour the award winning flood reduction/water quality and wetland
enhancement project – Roger Hollevoet, US Fish and Wildlife
Service
3rd stop: look at Riparian River bank enhancement projects on the way to the
Turtle River State Park – Craig Brumbaugh, ND State Forest
Service/Red River Basin Riparian project
Dinner at Turtle River State Park, hosted by the Red River Basin Commission;
presentation by Steve Crandall, Park manager
Workshop program
Contacts were made with individuals in Canada, Minnesota and North Dakota to see if
they would be willing to give presentations on tile drainage issues and research and
Public Participation or if they could advise of others who might be willing and available. A
draft agenda was developed so that a preliminary invitation could be developed and
distributed to conservation district personnel in the Basin. The preliminary agenda was
sent to the steering committee on April 27, 2007, who forwarded it on to conservation
district offices within their respective jurisdictions. The invitation requested that an RSVP
be sent to Kathy Spanjer at the Red River Basin Commission office. The final agenda
was developed and sent out to committee members to forward on as a second notice to
encourage participation on May 21, 2007. Additionally, invitations were sent to NRCS
RC&D Coordinators in Fargo and Grafton, as well as NRCS Area offices in North Dakota
and Minnesota, and Conservation District offices in South Dakota.
The final agenda developed was:
June 7 –
Breakfast – 7:00-8:00am hosted by Red River Basin Commission
8:30 AM
Tile Drainage – what we know, and what we don’t know
Welcome, Introductions
9:00 – 10:30 Speakers:
Kristen Blann, Fresh Water Ecologist, Nature Conservancy; Research
with University of Minnesota on Tile Drainage impact to aquatic
ecosystems
Mark Dittrich, Agricultural Resources Management & Development
Division, Minnesota Department of Agriculture
Bruce Shewfelt, Leader – Irrigation and Drainage, Agriculture and AgriFood Canada
Leonard Binstock, CEO – Agriculture Drainage Management Coalition
10:30 – 10:45 Break
10:45- Personal experiences from Conservation Districts on tile drainage in the Red
River Basin: Group discussion on issues/concerns with tile drainage – relating
to water quality, flooding, impacts to other conservation programs
Noon – break for lunch - hosted by the Red River Basin Commission
1:30
2:15
3:00
Citizen participation – what does this mean, what is the value, and how to use
CPP in conservation development Speaker: Lynette Flage - ND Extension,
Discuss role of Conservation Districts with RRBC Natural Resources Framework
Plan; 2nd Annual Symposium
Adjourn - Grab a cookie and soda for the road
Attendance:
Twenty three individuals attended the workshop. Of the 23, four gave
presentations. Representatives from USDA Natural Resource Conservation Service,
Minnesota Soil and Water Conservation Districts, ND Soil Conservation Districts, MN
Board of Water and Soil Resources, ND State Soil Conservation Committee, MN
Extension, MN Department of Agriculture, ND Department of Health, MB
Agriculture/Agri-Food and PFRA, ND Extension, Red River Basin Commission and
private drainage companies were represented.
Appendix 1 provides a list of those in attendance.
Discussion Section: 10:45 – noon
Following the presentations each individual was given the opportunity to provide
their concern of tile drainage or other conservation Red River Basin issues based on
their districts experience. Overall there were concerns with water quality and drainage
pattern changes; permitting issues; and cumulative effect concerns that need to be
addressed with research
Specific concerns are chronicled in Appendix 2
Public Participation – Lynette Flage, NDSU Extension
Lynnette provided insightful reasons for needing to involve the public in decision
processes. Her program titled “The Who, What, When, Where and How of Public
Participation” included helpful strategies in understanding the complexities and value of
public participation programs. Lynette highlighted information from the International
Association for Public Participation as well as material developed through the ND
Extension Service.
Lynette is available for future workshops that would go more in-depth into developing a
public participation program.
Discussion of role of Conservation Districts with RRBC Natural Resources Framework Plan and
the 2nd Annual Symposium:
Due to concerns of weather and flooding several members of the audience
needed to leave the program. However, many individuals indicated that they enjoyed
this workshop and the tour the day before – especially since they related by topic.
Members of the Steering committee who were in attendance stated that they were willing
to continue being associated with the Conservation Steering committee. As for the 2nd
Symposia, individuals felt that it needed to be longer than 2007, but associated with the
RRBC Summit Conference.
Final thoughts:
There is a high interest by conservation resource personnel to continue having
workshops, symposiums and tours to discuss conservation issues within the Red River Basin.
Personnel realize that there are issues bigger than what they deal with in their local jurisdictions
which affect the entire basin. It is difficult to find the ideal time for the maximum number of
personnel to attend these programs; however, if key individuals are able to attend, they can
spread the word to their constituents through other avenues such as state area meetings.
The Red River Basin Commission can also increase the capacity of information sharing
through its website by publishing key research information generated by the states, province
and federal agencies within the basin. Conservation personnel will soon come to recognize that
they can rely on the RRBC for information, or can ask for specific information and the staff of the
RRBC will be able to find the answer.
Appendix 1
List of Attendees
Paul Thompson – NRCS
Kyle Glazewski – Grand Forks SCD
Craig Schrader – MN Extension, Mankato
Mark Dittrich – MN Department of Agriculture
Scott Hochhalter - ND State Soil Conservation Committee
Richard Webb – NRCS Area II, North Dakota
Chris Nelson – NRCS Devils Lake
Andy Wingenbach – NRCS Devils Lake
Make Sauer – ND Department of Health
Chad Severts – Board of Water and Soil Resources
Pete Waller – Board of Water and Soil Resources
Brian Dwight – Board of Water and Soil Resources
Tanya Hanson – District Manager, Red Lake SWCD
Duane Weber – RLSWCD
Rachelle Winter – Water Plan Coordinator, Pennington, SWCD
Barbara Olive – RRBC
Roger Ellingson –
Leonard Binstock – CEO Agriculture Drainage Management Coalition
Bruce Shewfelt- Agriculture &Agri-Food Canada, PFRA
Ruth Lewis – Red River Basin Commission
Wayne Stautz – Cass County SCD
Jennifer Breuer – Richland County SCD
Appendix 2
Discussion Points
1) Concern with soil testing prior to development of tiling.
Major concern was with water quality degradation from tiling saline or sodic soils.
Discussion: higher levels of saline/sodium in water when tiling initiated, usually
decreases with time.
2) Water quantity levels
a. Is there greater amount of water going into natural surface drainage?
i. Problem is in being able to quantify the level of drainage because of the
small number of acres in tile drainage, as compared to the large amount
of fields that use surface drainage.
b. Red Lake County
i. In the 1980’s there were sandy soils with high water table; but there was
too shallow drainage to the Hill River. 1990’s with the increase in rain,
the tiled land was providing increased yields, and so the amount of tiled
lands increased. There has been an increase in erosion in channels.
Need to retain water for 48hours.
c. Minnesota Watershed Districts
i. Deal with the unknown of the drainage systems, related to quantity of
water. Timing is the largest issue of concern. Will there be longer base
flows, increased mean flows.
ii. How will aquatic ecosystems be impacted with changes in the water
quantity flow issues – timing of high flows, year-round flows;
1. Robinson, from the U.K. showed information about reducing flashy
flows and peak event concerns
2. need to model for landscape level water quantity concerns
d. outlet manipulations for crops
i. Five state research (Leonard Binstock) may help answer some of these
questions.
For crop production
Flow management for weather events
Draw down times to increase storage ability?
3) Authorities that approve tile installation –
a. In the RRB there are various entities that approve projects
i. E.g. – MN Watershed Districts; MN county water plans – but if a
geographic area is not within a Watershed then the County Commission
has to decide, and rules are not consistent.
ii. MN Wetland Conservation Act – administered by SWCD’s
b. ND has US Army Corps of Engineers, State Water Commission and Health
Department that have some aspect of permitting tile drains. For landowners
applying for permits it is an arduous task. Companies that install drain tile
require the landowner to get the permits which sometimes take too long and the
landowner misses out on being able to install.
1. The ACOE only is involved as relates to jurisdiction of 404 waters
-404 waters require a water quality certificate from the NDDOH.
The certificate from NDDOH requires monitoring of the discharge
so that water quality limits are not violated.
4) Cumulative Effects
a. Of dispersed acreages with tiling add to overall drainage concerns. Most surface
water is Nitrogen deficient, tiling increases the nitrogen. What are some
treatment options?
i. North Dakota needs mapping and reporting of number of acres, location
& number of drains. ND SWC permit process doesn’t always include
NDDOH.
ii. MN Board of Water and Soil Resources has new guidelines that will
address the cumulative effect problems – Brian Dwight can provide
information.
iii. Energy and Environment Research Center (EERC) at Grand Forks does
flyover digital photos, which show strip of land drying out, this could be a
monitoring method?
iv. Water quality concerns with soluble pesticides and herbicides?
v. NDSU – soils research on tile drain and sprinkler irrigation at Oakes –
shows problems (sandier soils)
5) Minimum till and No till projects with tile drainage
a. Cooperative conservation programs – perhaps can correlate with tile drain;
especially for residue requirements.
b. There are no tile drain demos in North Dakota –
i. Need: Nitro/water flows; BMP’s for nitrogen – deeper rooted crops to use
Nitrogen; North Dakota farmers tend to use less N fertilizer
ii. Potential research?
1. EERC – Richard Shockey
2. Hans Kandel, formerly with MN Extension, now with ND
Extension, who has done tile research
3. soil types and education to farmers
4. what about increasing corn crop and intensity of rotations?
6) Conservation Programs
a. Patchwork regulations, need streamlining
b. Incentives and regulations for BMPs
c. Cumulative economics to farmer and community
i. What is extent of tile drain potential cost/benefit?
1. typically 5yrs will recoup investment