Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
This project was funded in part under the Coastal Zone Management Act, by
NOAA’s Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management, in cooperation with
Minnesota’s Lake Superior Coastal Program. The State of Minnesota Board of
Water and Soil Resources and the Cook County Soil and Water Conservation
District provided additional cash and staff contributions.
Cook County
♦ Introduction –
Not all lakes can withstand the same intensity of impacts from human
activities. In an effort to address this reality, the Minnesota Department of
Natural Resources classified lakes in 1976 based on factors such as lake area,
depth, and shoreline: surface area ratio. The resulting classifications govern
local land use practices on lakes. A significant disadvantage of this classification
system is that it applies one class to an entire lake, without taking into account
different environmental conditions that exist along the shore of the lake.
The purpose of this project was to begin a pilot program that would seek to
identify sensitive areas of lakes in Cook County, so that these portions of lakes
could become candidates for a more restrictive classification system. The goal
is to protect especially sensitive lakeshore environments.
♦ Work Completed –
The project was conceived as taking place through four phases. Phase one
would define lake criteria to be used for reclassification, design GIS and field
data gathering methods and protocols, and select lakes to be studied for the
project. Phase two would involve existing data collection and interpretation.
Phase three would be the field data gathering portion. Phase four would be the
presentation of the findings to the public and local officials with recommendations
for lake reclassification.
Phase one of the project was effectively completed during the grant period
ending May 31, 2008. It began with the formation of an ad hoc work group of the
local Water Plan Advisory Committee. Three work group members and the
SWCD Conservation Technician began a process to meet the objectives of
phase one. First, the group decided to invite lake associations to be a part of
the project through a formal letter sent out in March. After considering responses
to the letter, the group identified six priority lakes to be included in the study.
Zoning and land ownership maps were created that aided the work group in
prioritizing lakes to be studied.
The lakes that were identified are:
1. Caribou/Bigsby 4. Poplar
2. Tait 5. Trout
3. Hungry Jack 6. West Bearskin
Two of these lakes (Caribou/Bigsby and Trout) are located within the Coastal
Management Zone.
The work group also researched criteria that would be used to study the priority
lakes. For this task, the group received technical assistance from the Minnesota DNR
and the MPCA. Work done for phases two and three contributed match to this STAR
grant. GIS maps and shapefiles were created that identify sensitive resources on or
near the lakes with data that is currently available. Initial field surveys were conducted
during the final two weeks of the grant period to test the workability of the criteria and
data gathering methods.
♦ Results –
The project work group met four times during the grant period (February
15, May 11, April 2, and May 12). Six lakes were identified by the work group as
priority lakes to be studied. A list of criteria to be used for assessing sensitivity
was developed with the input of state agency experts (Appendix E.). Using this
list of criteria, initial GIS operations were conducted for Caribou, Bigsby, Tait, and
Hungry Jack lakes, resulting in GIS shapefiles and informational maps to be used
during phase four.
Several potentially sensitive areas were delineated for each of the lakes
for which GIS operations were conducted (Appendix A). These areas are either
isolated bays, shallow bays, or within 100 meters of a stream inlet or outlet, or a
combination of the above. Preliminary field surveys on Bigsby lake suggest that
isolated, shallow bays also favor the growth of emergent and floating leaved
vegetation – another criteria piece that was identified for our study. These areas
could be candidates for reclassification, as they possess many characteristics of
the sensitivity criteria that the project work group identified during their meetings.
As the project now passes on to phases two and three, we will be able to
quantitatively identify these sensitive areas of the lakes included in the study.
♦ Conclusions –
Lake ecosystems and their surrounding communities are complex and
variable. Methods of studying and protecting lakes in northeast Minnesota will
therefore have to be different than methods of doing the same in other parts of
the state. We modeled this project off of a similar study done in Cass County,
Minnesota. However, several changes had to be made in the sensitivity criteria
in order to more accurately reflect lake ecosystems in Cook County. These
included adding additional criteria for steep slopes and exposed bedrock, and
modifying criteria for aquatic vegetation because of the general lower productivity
of lakes in Cook County.
Geographic data sets necessary to finish this kind of study are incomplete
for this area of the state. Data sets that are needed include a County Soil
Survey, Minnesota County Biological Survey, and a higher resolution Digital
Elevation Model (DEM). Some of these data sets could be available within 18
months, while others likely will not be available for several years.
Cook SWCD recognizes that, in order to conduct a study that is fully
defensible and presentable to the public, other state agency professionals will
need to be involved. During this grant period, the DNR expressed interest in
working with Cook SWCD and Cook County in offering technical assistance in
the future when funding becomes available. We will pursue this option if it is
offered.
♦ Appendices –
A. GIS Maps
B. Lake Sensitivity Criteria
C. Data Collection Sheet
♦ Digital Products --
Reclassification of Portions of
Lakes for Resource Protection
A. Final Report
B. Ad hoc Work Group Materials
i. Correspondence
ii. Letters to Lake Associations
iii. Meeting Agendas and Minutes
iv. Presentations
C. GIS Maps
D. GIS Shapefiles
E. Criteria, Lake Reports, and Data Collection Sheets
Cook County Soil & Water Conservation District
Court House, 411 West 2nd Street, Grand Marais, MN 55604
(218) 387-3647 Fax (218) 387-3042 www.co.cook.mn.us
February 4, 2008
Thank you once again for volunteering to take part in this important project. I have compiled some
documents for you to review before our first meeting and to keep as references throughout the project.
The first packet consists of the available lake information from the Minnesota DNR Lakefinder website and
from Dave Stark. It includes general lake characteristics, fisheries, water level, and water quality data.
The second packet consists of draft maps of county zoning districts and land ownership information. In
order to focus our efforts, I have only included information on the lakes that have lake associations. The
packets aren’t perfect, but they should serve well to provide the group with a starting point for discussion
and a source for future reference.
These are some things to keep in mind as you are browsing through the information.
1. For the STAR grant, the pilot lake must be within the Lake Superior Coastal zone.
2. The number and size of lakes to be studied should allow for completion of the project
within the budget allowed. This should take into account the time required for reports,
presentations, and meetings after field work is completed.
3. Lakes should be selected and prioritized based on the need for resource and water quality
protection. The following items should be considered.
Existing zoning districts and lake classifications and their influence on potential
for development.
Current water quality data and evident trends
Water levels and evident trends
Fishery reports
Observed surface water use
Please take a look at the materials. If anyone has any questions or would like to have additional
information, let me know and I will try to have it ready by the meeting.
March 3, 2008
I thank you for a productive 1st meeting, I am very much looking forward to being a part of this group.
You will recall that at our last meeting we decided to send invitations to participate in the project to lake
and property owner association representatives from various lakes around the county in an attempt to select
which lakes we will study. I hope to update the group on this selection process at the meeting.
I would also ask the group to review the materials I have provided to provide a starting point for discussion
on criteria to be used to study the lakes. We began discussion on this topic at the last meeting, and I hope
that we can continue to make progress. This is very much a pilot project, and our next task involves a
certain amount of sailing into uncharted waters. Fortunately, there are other professionals in the state that
are working on the same project, and hopefully we will be able to gather some of their expertise.
Please take a look at the materials. If anyone has any questions or would like to have additional
information, let me know and I will try to have it ready by the meeting.
ADJOURN
AGENDA
ADJOURN
Cook County Soil & Water Conservation District
Court House, 411 West 2nd Street, Grand Marais, MN 55604
(218) 387-3647 Fax (218) 387-3042 www.co.cook.mn.us
Present:
Tristan Beaster
Biz Clark
Jim Johnson
Chel Anderson
Karen Evens
Peter Barsness
Beaster gave an update on the BWSR Clean Water Legacy grant work plan.
The group was updated on the lake selection process for the project. At the time of the
meeting, representatives from the following lake, property-owner, or other type of
associations had responded to the invitation to participate in the project:
Tait
Mid-Trail area
Caribou
The work group discussed classification criteria, public involvement in the project, and
other similar projects in the state. The group agreed to research lake sensitivity criteria
and develop a preliminary checklist of classification criteria to be presented to the MN
DNR and to affected lake associations. Preliminary thoughts and points of discussion
were to be sent to Tristan Beaster by April 1, for inclusion in the next meeting.
Adjourned at 6:00
AGENDA
April 2, 2008
ITV Room
Cook County Courthouse
April 2, 2008
Present:
Tristan Beaster
Biz Clark
Chel Anderson
Gary Maciejewski
Beaster gave a presentation outlining the purpose and need for the project.
The work group discussed the Minnesota DNR lakeshore sensitivity manual and
classification criteria. Ideas submitted by various lake associations of sensitive and
unique features on lakes were incorporated into the discussion.
Some of the criteria for sensitivity discussed were:
Conservation Tech. agreed to draft a set of proposed criteria for review by the work
group and outside sources, including the MN DNR, to be reviewed again at the next
meeting.
The work group discussed meeting again in May. The specific date and time were to be
determined.
AGENDA
* The work group meeting will begin immediately following the Water Plan
Advisory committee meeting.
Cook County Soil & Water Conservation District
Court House, 411 West 2nd Street, Grand Marais, MN 55604
(218) 387-3647 Fax (218) 387-3042 www.co.cook.mn.us
Meeting Minutes
Members Present:
Biz Clark Work Group Chair, Cook Coalition of Lake Associations
Chel Anderson Work Group Member, DNR Ecological Resources
Jim Johnson Work Group Member, Cook County Commissioner, District 4
Others Present:
Tristan Beaster Cook SWCD
Linda Hendrickson Hungry Jack Lake
Barb Bottger Hungry Jack Lake
Karen Evens MPCA-Duluth
John Bottger Hungry Jack Lake
Paul Radomski DNR Shoreland Rules Update Committee
Steve Persons DNR Area fisheries Supervisories
Cliff Bentley DNR Area Hydrologist
The work group agreed to adjust the agenda to discuss the criteria before deciding on
priority lakes for the pilot study.
Paul R. gave a history of the Cass Co. Intra-lake land use study. Community members in
Cass Co. were concerned about lakeshore development impacts on water resources. The
study started as a field of experts subjectively identifying lakeshore areas they thought
were sensitive. They followed up with a GIS algorithm approach to more objectively
determine sensitive areas around the lake, based on available GIS data. After taking this
to the public, it was decided that field studies and sampling should be done to achieve a
greater amount of certainty in the identification of the sensitive areas.
The group discussed the overall purpose of the study. The question was raised as to
whether the study was being done purely to gather more information on the lakes, or to
be eventually written into ordinance. The issue of public perception was also raised. The
members emphasized that the study and any resulting recommendations had to be
defensible and evidence-based. Paul R. explained that the criteria list was created using a
principled approach based on parts of the lake ecosystem known to be sensitive based on
available scientific studies. Efforts at communicating the progress of the project to the
public needed to be earnest in order to get public buy-in to the project. Karen E.
suggested that a more formal record of correspondence be maintained to show what
representatives have been participating in the process.
Specific criteria were discussed. Paul R. had questions about exposed bedrock, steep
slope, and substrate criteria. Steve P. had suggestions for identifying certain individual
aquatic plant species rather than gathering data on all plant species. Also suggested was
field identification of wetlands located onshore because of the lack of reliability in
National Wetlands Inventory data. With these modifications, the members present felt
comfortable using the criteria to start the field work for the study.
The group discussed the prioritization process, including what factors were considered in
determining priority for the study. Those factors included; location within the Coastal
Zone, geographic diversity within the county, lake association interest, ecological
diversity, and size of lake. The lakes for the study, in order of priority, are:
1. Caribou/Bigsby Lakes *
2. Tait Lake
3. Hungry Jack Lake
4. Trout Lake
5. West Bearskin Lake
6. Poplar Lake
*The group decided to include Bigsby with the Caribou Lake study.
June 16 @ 5:30
July 21 @ 5:30
The work group will meet immediately after the monthly Water Plan Advisory
Committee meetings.
Cook County Soil & Water Conservation District
Court House, 411 West 2nd Street, Grand Marais, MN 55604
(218) 387-3647 Fax (218) 387-3042 www.co.cook.mn.us
John Oberholtzer
184 West Deer Yard Road
Grand Marais, MN 55604
The Cook County Soil and Water Conservation District (SWCD) received a grant from the Lake Superior
Coastal Program to study the adequacy of the County’s lake classification system. You may recall the state
of Minnesota originally developed a three tier lake management system based upon certain key lake
features such as development, size, shape and depth. More recently, Cook County reclassified lakes
according to a five tier system ranging from “special natural environment” to ”general development” with
the former class providing the highest form of resource protection. However, recent lake studies suggest
that the application of one classification on a given lake may overlook special areas on that lake that need
more protection. These areas might be termed sensitive environments and could include shallow bays, rare
habitats, wetlands or spawning sites.
Accordingly, the SWCD has selected several pilot lakes for more in depth study to determine if sensitive
areas could be identified and, if so, using what criteria. Your lake has been suggested for study as there is
an association in existence, water quality studies have been performed on your lake and it has, according to
existing lake data, one or more shallow bays that could qualify as sensitive environment(s).
Much of the preliminary study can be done by accessing and compiling existing data. However, there may
be some field work that would be done at a later date to verify data and discover other features not in the
existing data set.
At some point in the future we will share the results of the study with your lake association. We need your
observations and suggestions and those from the other pilot study lakes before the County acts on any of
the findings. This is a very important project that will help us assess the need for additional measures to
protect Cook County lakes. We hope you agree and will become a part of the study. We need to hear from
you by April 1 in order to include your lake in the project. Please contact me at my address if you have
questions. Thank you in advance for your consideration of this request.
Sincerely,
Tristan Beaster
Conservation Technician
Cook County Soil and Water Conservation District
tristan.beaster@co.cook.mn.us
218-387-3000 ext. 149
Cook County Soil & Water Conservation District
Court House, 411 West 2nd Street, Grand Marais, MN 55604
(218) 387-3647 Fax (218) 387-3042 www.co.cook.mn.us
July 1, 2008
Larry Mullen
Caribou Lake Association
As you know, the Cook County Soil & Water Conservation District has been working on the initial stages
of a pilot project intended to identify sensitive areas of lakeshore so that we may better protect this valuable
resource. The purpose of this letter is to update your organization on the status of the project. A work
group of the local Water Plan Advisory Committee met monthly February – June to study the topic of
lakeshore sensitivity and make decisions as to what lakes should be studied and how they should be
studied. Lakes were chosen based on a number of factors, including existing development pressures,
potential for development, and lake association interest. We also felt that it was important to select lakes
from the various geographic areas within the county.
The work group also discussed criteria that will be used to study the lakes and gather the data required to
determine areas of highest sensitivity. Many of these criteria were derived from a previous study
conducted in Cass County by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, however, important edits
were made to more accurately reflect the features of lakes in Cook County. Specifically, criteria were
added for steep slopes and exposed bedrock. These criteria were reviewed and endorsed by local and
regional DNR professionals, and it is our belief that they will be an effective means of delineating sensitive
shorelines for lakes in Cook County.
We are pleased to inform you that Caribou Lake was chosen for inclusion in this study. The next step is to
begin the necessary field work for the project. This summer, SWCD staff will be conducting surveys of
aquatic vegetation, amphibians, and shoreland plant communities on Caribou Lake. As this is a
collaborative effort, we are looking for volunteers to assist us with the project where appropriate. If you or
any of your association members are interested in providing boat transportation and/or water access to
Caribou Lake, that would be especially helpful.
Once again, we thank you for your continued interest in this project. If you have any further questions
please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
Tristan Beaster
Conservation Technician
Cook County Soil and Water Conservation District
tristan.beaster@co.cook.mn.us
218-387-3000 ext. 149
Cook County Soil & Water Conservation District
Court House, 411 West 2nd Street, Grand Marais, MN 55604
(218) 387-3647 Fax (218) 387-3042 www.co.cook.mn.us
July 1, 2008
John Oberholtzer
Deer Yard Lake Homeowners Association
As you know, the Cook County Soil & Water Conservation District has been working on the initial stages
of a pilot project intended to identify sensitive areas of lakeshore so that we may better protect this valuable
resource. The purpose of this letter is to update your organization on the status of the project. A work
group of the local Water Plan Advisory Committee met monthly February – June to study the topic of
lakeshore sensitivity and make decisions as to what lakes should be studied and how they should be
studied. Lakes were chosen based on a number of factors, including existing development pressures,
potential for development, and lake association interest. We also felt that it was important to select lakes
from the various geographic areas within the county.
We are obliged to inform you that Deer Yard Lake was not chosen for inclusion in this study. However,
new funding opportunities may allow us to conduct such a study in the future. If an opportunity arises, we
will be sure to let you know of it.
We thank you for your interest in this project. If you have any further questions please do not hesitate to
contact me.
Sincerely,
Tristan Beaster
Conservation Technician
Cook County Soil and Water Conservation District
tristan.beaster@co.cook.mn.us
218-387-3000 ext. 149
Cook County Soil & Water Conservation District
Court House, 411 West 2nd Street, Grand Marais, MN 55604
(218) 387-3647 Fax (218) 387-3042 www.co.cook.mn.us
July 1, 2008
As you know, the Cook County Soil & Water Conservation District has been working on the initial stages
of a pilot project intended to identify sensitive areas of lakeshore so that we may better protect this valuable
resource. The purpose of this letter is to update your organization on the status of the project. A work
group of the local Water Plan Advisory Committee met monthly February – June to study the topic of
lakeshore sensitivity and make decisions as to what lakes should be studied and how they should be
studied. Lakes were chosen based on a number of factors, including existing development pressures,
potential for development, and lake association interest. We also felt that it was important to select lakes
from the various geographic areas within the county.
We are obliged to inform you that Gunflint Lake was not chosen for inclusion in this study. However, new
funding opportunities may allow us to conduct such a study in the future. If an opportunity arises, we will
be sure to let you know of it.
We thank you for your interest in this project. If you have any further questions please do not hesitate to
contact me.
Sincerely,
Tristan Beaster
Conservation Technician
Cook County Soil and Water Conservation District
tristan.beaster@co.cook.mn.us
218-387-3000 ext. 149
Cook County Soil & Water Conservation District
Court House, 411 West 2nd Street, Grand Marais, MN 55604
(218) 387-3647 Fax (218) 387-3042 www.co.cook.mn.us
July 1, 2008
As you know, the Cook County Soil & Water Conservation District has been working on the initial stages
of a pilot project intended to identify sensitive areas of lakeshore so that we may better protect this valuable
resource. The purpose of this letter is to update your organization on the status of the project. A work
group of the local Water Plan Advisory Committee met monthly February – June to study the topic of
lakeshore sensitivity and make decisions as to what lakes should be studied and how they should be
studied. Lakes were chosen based on a number of factors, including existing development pressures,
potential for development, and lake association interest. We also felt that it was important to select lakes
from the various geographic areas within the county.
The work group also discussed criteria that will be used to study the lakes and gather the data required to
determine areas of highest sensitivity. Many of these criteria were derived from a previous study
conducted in Cass County by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, however, important edits
were made to more accurately reflect the features of lakes in Cook County. Specifically, criteria were
added for steep slopes and exposed bedrock. These criteria were reviewed and endorsed by local and
regional DNR professionals, and it is our belief that they will be an effective means of delineating sensitive
shorelines for lakes in Cook County.
We are pleased to inform you that Hungry Jack Lake was chosen for inclusion in this study. The next step
is to begin the necessary field work for the project. This summer, SWCD staff will be conducting surveys
of aquatic vegetation, amphibians, and shoreland plant communities on Hungry Jack Lake. As this is a
collaborative effort, we are looking for volunteers to assist us with the project where appropriate. If you or
any of your association members are interested in providing boat transportation and/or water access to
Hungry Jack Lake, that would be especially helpful.
Once again, we thank you for your continued interest in this project. If you have any further questions
please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
Tristan Beaster
Conservation Technician
Cook County Soil and Water Conservation District
tristan.beaster@co.cook.mn.us
218-387-3000 ext. 149
Cook County Soil & Water Conservation District
Court House, 411 West 2nd Street, Grand Marais, MN 55604
(218) 387-3647 Fax (218) 387-3042 www.co.cook.mn.us
July 1, 2008
Mike Sherfy
Poplar Lake Association
50 Rockwood Road
Grand Marais, MN 55604
As you know, the Cook County Soil & Water Conservation District has been working on the initial stages
of a pilot project intended to identify sensitive areas of lakeshore so that we may better protect this valuable
resource. The purpose of this letter is to update your organization on the status of the project. A work
group of the local Water Plan Advisory Committee met monthly February – June to study the topic of
lakeshore sensitivity and make decisions as to what lakes should be studied and how they should be
studied. Lakes were chosen based on a number of factors, including existing development pressures,
potential for development, and lake association interest. We also felt that it was important to select lakes
from the various geographic areas within the county.
The work group also discussed criteria that will be used to study the lakes and gather the data required to
determine areas of highest sensitivity. Many of these criteria were derived from a previous study
conducted in Cass County by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, however, important edits
were made to more accurately reflect the features of lakes in Cook County. Specifically, criteria were
added for steep slopes and exposed bedrock. These criteria were reviewed and endorsed by local and
regional DNR professionals, and it is our belief that they will be an effective means of delineating sensitive
shorelines for lakes in Cook County.
We are pleased to inform you that Poplar Lake was chosen for inclusion in this study. The next step is to
begin the necessary field work for the project. This summer, SWCD staff will be conducting surveys of
aquatic vegetation, amphibians, and shoreland plant communities on Poplar Lake. As this is a collaborative
effort, we are looking for volunteers to assist us with the project where appropriate. If you or any of your
association members are interested in providing boat transportation and/or water access to Poplar Lake, that
would be especially helpful.
Once again, we thank you for your continued interest in this project. If you have any further questions
please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
Tristan Beaster
Conservation Technician
Cook County Soil and Water Conservation District
tristan.beaster@co.cook.mn.us
218-387-3000 ext. 149
Cook County Soil & Water Conservation District
Court House, 411 West 2nd Street, Grand Marais, MN 55604
(218) 387-3647 Fax (218) 387-3042 www.co.cook.mn.us
July 1, 2008
Gary Macieweski
Tait Lake Association
279 Caps Trail
Lutsen, MN 55612
As you know, the Cook County Soil & Water Conservation District has been working on the initial stages
of a pilot project intended to identify sensitive areas of lakeshore so that we may better protect this valuable
resource. The purpose of this letter is to update your organization on the status of the project. A work
group of the local Water Plan Advisory Committee met monthly February – June to study the topic of
lakeshore sensitivity and make decisions as to what lakes should be studied and how they should be
studied. Lakes were chosen based on a number of factors, including existing development pressures,
potential for development, and lake association interest. We also felt that it was important to select lakes
from the various geographic areas within the county.
The work group also discussed criteria that will be used to study the lakes and gather the data required to
determine areas of highest sensitivity. Many of these criteria were derived from a previous study
conducted in Cass County by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, however, important edits
were made to more accurately reflect the features of lakes in Cook County. Specifically, criteria were
added for steep slopes and exposed bedrock. These criteria were reviewed and endorsed by local and
regional DNR professionals, and it is our belief that they will be an effective means of delineating sensitive
shorelines for lakes in Cook County.
We are pleased to inform you that Tait Lake was chosen for inclusion in this study. The next step is to
begin the necessary field work for the project. This summer, SWCD staff will be conducting surveys of
aquatic vegetation, amphibians, and shoreland plant communities on Tait Lake. As this is a collaborative
effort, we are looking for volunteers to assist us with the project where appropriate. If you or any of your
association members are interested in providing boat transportation and/or water access to Tait Lake, that
would be especially helpful.
Once again, we thank you for your continued interest in this project. If you have any further questions
please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
Tristan Beaster
Conservation Technician
Cook County Soil and Water Conservation District
tristan.beaster@co.cook.mn.us
218-387-3000 ext. 149
Cook County Soil & Water Conservation District
Court House, 411 West 2nd Street, Grand Marais, MN 55604
(218) 387-3647 Fax (218) 387-3042 www.co.cook.mn.us
July 1, 2008
Jim Laib
Trout Lake Association
As you know, the Cook County Soil & Water Conservation District has been working on the initial stages
of a pilot project intended to identify sensitive areas of lakeshore so that we may better protect this valuable
resource. The purpose of this letter is to update your organization on the status of the project. A work
group of the local Water Plan Advisory Committee met monthly February – June to study the topic of
lakeshore sensitivity and make decisions as to what lakes should be studied and how they should be
studied. Lakes were chosen based on a number of factors, including existing development pressures,
potential for development, and lake association interest. We also felt that it was important to select lakes
from the various geographic areas within the county.
The work group also discussed criteria that will be used to study the lakes and gather the data required to
determine areas of highest sensitivity. Many of these criteria were derived from a previous study
conducted in Cass County by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, however, important edits
were made to more accurately reflect the features of lakes in Cook County. Specifically, criteria were
added for steep slopes and exposed bedrock. These criteria were reviewed and endorsed by local and
regional DNR professionals, and it is our belief that they will be an effective means of delineating sensitive
shorelines for lakes in Cook County.
We are pleased to inform you that Trout Lake was chosen for inclusion in this study. The next step is to
begin the necessary field work for the project. This summer, SWCD staff will be conducting surveys of
aquatic vegetation, amphibians, and shoreland plant communities on Trout Lake. As this is a collaborative
effort, we are looking for volunteers to assist us with the project where appropriate. If you or any of your
association members are interested in providing boat transportation and/or water access to Trout Lake, that
would be especially helpful.
Once again, we thank you for your continued interest in this project. If you have any further questions
please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
Tristan Beaster
Conservation Technician
Cook County Soil and Water Conservation District
tristan.beaster@co.cook.mn.us
218-387-3000 ext. 149
Cook County Soil & Water Conservation District
Court House, 411 West 2nd Street, Grand Marais, MN 55604
(218) 387-3647 Fax (218) 387-3042 www.co.cook.mn.us
July 1, 2008
Randy Swanstrom
West Bearskin Lake Association
41 S. Bearskin Rd.
Grand Marais, MN 55604
As you know, the Cook County Soil & Water Conservation District has been working on the initial stages
of a pilot project intended to identify sensitive areas of lakeshore so that we may better protect this valuable
resource. The purpose of this letter is to update your organization on the status of the project. A work
group of the local Water Plan Advisory Committee met monthly February – June to study the topic of
lakeshore sensitivity and make decisions as to what lakes should be studied and how they should be
studied. Lakes were chosen based on a number of factors, including existing development pressures,
potential for development, and lake association interest. We also felt that it was important to select lakes
from the various geographic areas within the county.
The work group also discussed criteria that will be used to study the lakes and gather the data required to
determine areas of highest sensitivity. Many of these criteria were derived from a previous study
conducted in Cass County by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, however, important edits
were made to more accurately reflect the features of lakes in Cook County. Specifically, criteria were
added for steep slopes and exposed bedrock. These criteria were reviewed and endorsed by local and
regional DNR professionals, and it is our belief that they will be an effective means of delineating sensitive
shorelines for lakes in Cook County.
We are pleased to inform you that West Bearskin Lake was chosen for inclusion in this study. The next
step is to begin the necessary field work for the project. This summer, SWCD staff will be conducting
surveys of aquatic vegetation, amphibians, and shoreland plant communities on West Bearskin Lake. As
this is a collaborative effort, we are looking for volunteers to assist us with the project where appropriate.
If you or any of your association members are interested in providing boat transportation and/or water
access to West Bearskin Lake, that would be especially helpful.
Once again, we thank you for your continued interest in this project. If you have any further questions
please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
Tristan Beaster
Conservation Technician
Cook County Soil and Water Conservation District
tristan.beaster@co.cook.mn.us
218-387-3000 ext. 149
Reclassification of Portions of Lakes
for Resource Protection
• Natural Environment
• Recreational Development
-
0 1,200 2,400
Feet
4,800 1:24,000
Re-Digitized Shoreline
The shoreline for each lake was manually digitized as a polyline at a scale of
1:4,000 using FSA 2003-2004 Aerial photos available on the DNR Data Deli WMS
Server. The purpose of this operation was to create a more accurate shapefile of the
lakeshore boundary than was initially available.
Isolated Bays
A buffer operation was applied to the Re-Digitized Shoreline file. The buffer
distance was set at 100 meters. A new shapefile was created (Isolated Bays). The extent
of the boundary of the isolated bays was manually delineated. An imaginary
perpendicular line between the shore and where the buffer overlapped itself defined the
boundaries of the isolated bay.
Shallow Bays
The boundary of the littoral zone was delineated from DNR bathymetric data
where available(available on the DNR Data Deli website). A shapefile was created by
tracing the outline of the 15-foot depth line from the bathymetry data. A 200 meter
buffer was applied to the shapefile. Where the buffer did not overlap the re-digitized
shoreline, that shoreline was defined as a shallow bay. *Note* this operation was not
conducted for Bigsby Lake because the depth is less than 15 ft for the entire lake.
-
0 750 1,500
Feet
3,000
1:18,000
Data Source: MN DNR Data Deli WMS Server
Slope
/
Cook County Soil & Water Conservation District
0 - 10 Court House, 411 West 2ND Street, Grand Marais, MN 55604
10 - 20 (218) 387-3647 Fax (218) 387-3042 www.co.cook.mn.us
20 - 30
30 - 50
Data Source: Cook County GIS Server
50 - 100
Slope derived from County Digital Elevation Model (DEM)
1:24,000
100 - 150
This map is for educational purposes only.
Feet 150 - 200 It is not intended to be used for navigation.
0 1,650 3,300 6,600 200 - 400
Map Created 3/21/2008
Tait Lake Buffer Analysis of Sensitive Features
-
0 500 1,000
Feet
2,000 1:12,000
/
1 - Seasonally Flooded Basin (218) 387-3647 Fax (218) 387-3042 www.co.cook.mn.us
2 - Inland Fresh Meadow
3 - Shallow Marsh Data Source: MN DNR Data Deli
4 - Deep Marsh
5 - Open Water Littoral
This map is for educational purposes only.
6 - Shrub Swamp
1:24,000 It is not intended to be used for navigation.
7 - Wooded Swamp
Map Created 3/21/2008
8 - Bog
Caribou Lake Zoning
Rd
s by
Big
rth
No
Bigsby
d R
etoe
FAR-1
Mistl
FAR-1
LSR
LSR
USFS 1
Lk 4 12
rd
ya
FAR-2 er
De
FAR-1 W
LSR
FAR-3
Eve rgreen
R d Ward
LSR
LSR FAR-1
W
hi
FAR-2
te
Caribou
Sk
y
Penin
Tr
l
s
ul a P
oint T
r
uD
Sawmill Dr
Sawm
bo
ari
rl
SC
il
FAR-1 FAR-1
l Ln
/
FAR-3
Ward Lake Rd
LSR
Cedar ln
Agnes
l Blvd
1:23,786
Caribou Trl
il
Feet
Footh
FAR-1
RC/R RC/R
LSR
0 1,250 2,500 5,000
FAR-1
Daniels FAR-3
Duncan
Unnamed LSR
Clearwater
FAR-1
RC/R RC/R
LSR
RC/R RC/R RC/R
FAR-3
LSR FAR-3
LSR
Bearskin
Moss FAR-1
/
RC/R
FAR-1
RC/R
Flour
RC/R FAR-1 LSR
FAR-3 FAR-1
FAR-1
1:25,000
Spen Lake RubyFeet
LSR Rudy FAR-1
FAR-3 RC/R 0 1,400 2,800 5,600
Zoning Districts Land Ownership Cook County Soil & Water Conservation District
Court House, 411 West 2ND Street, Grand Marais, MN 55604
FAR-1 Private (218) 387-3647 Fax (218) 387-3042 www.co.cook.mn.us
Hungry Jack
FAR-1
FAR-3
FAR-1
LSR LSR
Leo
FAR-3
LSR RC/R FAR-1
LSR
LSR RC/R
RC/R
LSR LSR FAR-1 RC/R RC/R
RC/R LSR FAR-3
LSR
LSR LSR
RC/R
Poplar
Road
LSR FAR-1 LSR LSR
Prune
FAR-1
Lizz
FAR-1
FAR-3
/ Feet
Meeds Meeds Swamp Swamp
0 1,250 2,500 5,000
Zoning Districts Land Ownership Cook County Soil & Water Conservation District
Court House, 411 West 2ND Street, Grand Marais, MN 55604
FAR-1 Private (218) 387-3647 Fax (218) 387-3042 www.co.cook.mn.us
Porter's Blv
d
d Caps Trl
ak eR
USFS
ra L
Cla
3 16
Tait
LSR
Bill
ie s Tr
l
FAR-2
l
s Tr
FAR-1 ap FAR-1
C
S
/
D
USFS 340
rl
ou T
b
Cari
1:25,000
Wills
Feet
0
FAR-2 1,250 2,500FAR-1 5,000
Zoning Districts Land Ownership Cook County Soil & Water Conservation District
Court House, 411 West 2ND Street, Grand Marais, MN 55604
FAR-1 Private (218) 387-3647 Fax (218) 387-3042 www.co.cook.mn.us
06
S3
F
US
FAR-1
08
F S3
US
Marsh LSR
Trout
d
eR
Boys
ak
u sL
g
Bo LSR
Bogus
LSR
RC/R n
e rL
Scabbard
RC/R
ak
M
FAR-2
/
Tr
ou
tL
ak
e
Rd
FAR-1
1:25,000
Feet
0 1,250 2,500 5,000
Zoning Districts Land Ownership Cook County Soil & Water Conservation District
Court House, 411 West 2ND Street, Grand Marais, MN 55604
FAR-1 Private (218) 387-3647 Fax (218) 387-3042 www.co.cook.mn.us
Lake Characteristics
Length of Selected Species Sampled for All Gear for the 2002 Survey Year
The lake trout catch in 2002 was similar to past catches in this lake, and was about average compared to
other lake trout lakes in the area. Average size of lake trout collected in 2002 was excellent. Most of the
lake trout collected in 2002 appeared to have been produced naturally. Only two of the 24 fish taken bore
fin clips identifying them as stocked fish, and all lake trout stocked since 1970 in this lake have been fin
clipped. Lake trout growth rates had been fast, probably because of the excellent forage base provided by a
relatively dense rainbow smelt population.
Smallmouth bass abundance appeared to have been about average for a lake of this type; however, the
average size of the fish collected in 2002 was above average. Smallmouth bass growth rates had been
relatively slow.
Bluegill and northern pike were present in 2002, but apparently not in very high numbers. Most of the
bluegill collected were small fish, two or three years of age.
Download lake level data as: [dBase] [ASCII] (If you have trouble try right clicking on the appropriate link
and choosing the "Save ... As" option.)
Benchmarks
Lake Characteristics
Length of Selected Species Sampled for All Gear for the 2005 Survey Year
The number of walleye caught per gill net ranked in the middle of all assessments done on this lake, but
was higher than three-fourths of the netting results for this class of lake. The average weight of walleye
caught was below the average for the lake and the lake class. The most recent walleye stocking occurred in
2004 and 1990, but all walleye caught in gill nets were naturally produced. Ages of gill-netted walleye
were 2-7 and 9. Growth rates had been close to the average for the lake class.
The number of northern pike caught per gill net ranked above the middle for the lake historically and below
the middle for the lake class. The average weight was above the middle value for the lake, and above three-
fourths of the values recorded for the lake class. Northern pike caught by gill nets were age 1 to age 5.
Growth after age 1 had been fast for this area.
The gill-net catch of smallmouth bass declined in 2005 compared to the two previous assessments (2003
and 1998), but was still the third highest for the lake. It was higher than three-fourths of the catches
recorded for this class of lake. The 2005 trap-net catch was low for both the lake and the lake class. The
growth rate of bass appeared to be somewhat slow for this area for the first two years, and then to increase.
The number of yellow perch caught in gill nets was the third highest for the lake and among the higher
values for the lake class. The average size was small, but a few larger fish were caught.
The number of white sucker caught per gill net ranked just above the middle value in assessments of both
this lake and similar lakes. The average weight of white sucker was higher than roughly three-fourths of the
values recorded for the lake and the lake class.
In addition to the standard gill nets and trap nets, small-mesh (0.25-inch) trap nets were set. These nets
caught age-0 fish, including many smallmouth bass and yellow perch, several white sucker, a few black
crappie and walleye, and one northern pike.
Lake Characteristics
Length of Selected Species Sampled for All Gear for the 2004 Survey Year
The walleye catch was one of the lowest in this lake in recent years, and lower than usual for this lake class.
The average size of walleye was large, however. Several year classes were identified, but it was not clear
from this small sample whether recent stocking of fingerlings (in odd years) had contributed significantly to
the catch.
The smallmouth bass catch was normal for this lake and for the lake class. Bass were larger than average
for the lake, but about average in size for the lake class. Several year classes were present.
Three lake trout were caught. All were yearlings that had been stocked in spring 2004. Yearlings had also
been stocked in 2002 and 2000, but these fish were not caught in 2004. The stocking is an attempt to re-
establish lake trout in this lake.
The catch of northern pike was the highest observed in recent assessments in this lake, and was slightly
above average for the lake class. Northern pike were smaller than usual for the lake, and smaller than
average for the lake class. Several year classes were present. Pike had grown faster than average for the
lake class. Age-3 fish had averaged 18.7 inches long at the end of their third year, compared to the lake-
class average of 16.8 inches for the same age.
Yellow perch abundance appeared to be low for the lake, but was normal for the lake class. The average
size was typical for the lake. The largest fish measured 10.6 inches, but most were less than 9.5 inches.
Rainbow smelt numbers have fluctuated widely, and were low at the time of this assessment.
Bluegill abundance appeared to be typical for this lake, but was higher than average for the lake class.
Bluegill were small and grew slowly; all were less than 7 inches long.
A small number of green sunfish, hybrid sunfish, and white sucker were also caught.
Lake Characteristics
Walleye abundance in Poplar Lake in 2006 appeared to have been low, as it has been for the past 20 years.
All attempts to improve walleye abundance by stocking have so far failed, although it did appear that
stocking could have accounted for most of the walleye collected in 2006. The northern pike catch in 2006
was also low, and most of the northern pike collected were small. Few smallmouth bass were taken,
although there were indications that a strong year class had been produced in 2005. Recent lake trout
stocking efforts in this lake appear to have failed completely, and have been discontinued. In contrast, black
crappie abundance in 2006 appeared to have been at an all-time high for this lake, and high compared to
similar lakes. Although few of the black crappie taken in 2006 were over eight inches, many smaller fish
were present and likely to enter the fishery in the next two or three years.
Benchmarks
1990 4.5
1991 4.6
1992 4.1
1993 4.3
1994 3.9
1995 4.5
1996 3.8
1997 4.3
1998 4.8
1999 3.8
2000 3.9
2001 3.6
2002 3.5
2003 3.9
2004 4.2
2005 3.4
2006 3.4
Name: Tait
Lake Characteristics
Length of Selected Species Sampled for All Gear for the 2000 Survey Year
1993 2.0
1994 1.9
1995 2.6
1996 2.2
1997 2.0
1998 2.1
1999 1.9
2000 2.1
2001 2.2
2003 2.5
2006 2.1
Name: Trout
Lake Characteristics
Lake Area (acres): 257.00 Dominant Bottom Substrate: rubble (3-10''), gravel, boulders
Littoral Area (acres): 59.00 (>10'')
Maximum Depth (ft): 77.00 Abundance of Aquatic Plants: common
Water Clarity (ft): 17.00 Maximum Depth of Plant Growth (ft): 8.00
Length of Selected Species Sampled for All Gear for the 1999 Survey Year
Trout Lake has for many years offered good fishing for naturally produced lake trout and stocked rainbow
trout. Occasionally a large lake trout has been taken. In recent years, yellow perch have been relatively
abundant and have reached sizes large enough to interest anglers.
The 1999 population assessment indicated that a fair-to-good number of lake trout were present. The
largest lake trout collected were 24 inches long. Lake trout growth rates were relatively slow. Rainbow
trout numbers appeared to be only fair at best, down from 1996. Those collected were one or two years old
and 11 to 13 inches long. Apparently few survived to older ages. A small number of brook trout were
present in the lake. These were young fish under 10 inches long. Yellow perch were relatively abundant,
and reached 10 inches in length.
Trout Lake's forage fish population included rainbow smelt and several minnow species. Smelt numbers
were lower than in the 1996 and 1993 assessments.
Lake Water Quality Data Summary Secchi Disk # of Observations: 5
Total Phosphorus Mean: 6 ppb (parts per Alkalinity Mean: 16.5 ppm (parts per million)
billion) Color Mean: 7.5 Platinum-cobalt Units
Total Phosphorus Standard Error: 1 ppb Carlson Trophic Status for Total Phosphorus:
Total Phosphorus # of Observations: 5 29
Carlson Trophic Status for Chlorophyll-a: 31
Chlorophyll-a Mean: 1 ppb Carlson Trophic Status for Secchi Disk: 32
Chlorophyll-a Standard Error: 0.2 ppb Overall Trophic Status: O
Chlorophyll-a # of Observations: 6 (O=oligotrophic, M=mesotrophic, E=eutrophic,
H=hypereutrophic)
Secchi Disk Mean: 6.8 meters
Secchi Disk Standard Error: 0.5 meters
Criteria Name Measurement Method Data Required
Distance to Littoral Zone GIS Buffer Analysis Bathymetric contours, 1:24k DRG
B d
Isolated Bays GIS Buffer Analysis DNR 24k Lakes layer, Re-digitized
shoreline from 2003 FSA Aerial
photography
Distance to Inlet/Outlet GIS Buffer Analysis DNR 24k Streams layer
Biodiversity Significance GIS Buffer Analysis GAP Land cover, MCBS Sites of
Biodiversity Significance
Intermittent Streams and Field documentation Field Data sheets linked to GPS
Coldwater Springs/Seeps waypoints
Exposed bedrock Aerial photo interpretation, field High resolution aerial photographs,
verification Field data sheet linked to GPS
waypoints
Frog call counts Field survey, MN DNR manual* Field Data sheets linked to GPS
protocols waypoints. Polygons based on frog
surveys
Soft Bottom Substrate Field survey, MN DNR manual* Field Data sheets linked to GPS
protocols waypoints
Large Woody Habitat Field survey, MN DNR manual* Field Data sheets linked to GPS
protocols waypoints polygon locations
Native emergent and floating Field survey, MN DNR manual* GPS polygons from outlines of plant
vegetation protocols beds or bog fringes
Presence of Loon nests Field survey, existing data MN DNR loon survey and local
k l d
***Separation of criteria and scoring will be done during preliminary data anaylsis.
The criteria listed below reference the same "window concept" described in the DNR Manual*. For a more thorough description of the window concept, please consult that manual
Presence of wetland polygons GIS Buffer Analysis NWI Polygons or photo interpreted NWI polygon or photo interpreted wetland boundary within analysis window
*Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. 2008 Minnesota's Sesitive Lakeshore Identification Manual: a conservation strategy for Minnesota lakeshores (version 1). Division of
Ecological Resources, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources.
Reclassification of Portions of Lakes for Resource Protection
Data Collection Sheet Lake Name
Lake Vegetation Survey Date
Point-Intercept Approach Surveyors
Site Number 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
Depth
Secchi Depth
Aquatic Vegetation
Bulrush
Wild Rice
Cattail
Spikerush
Burreed
Horsetail
Large-leaf pondweed
White waterlily
Yellow waterlily
Watershield
Woody Debris
Large (>8" Diameter)
Upland Plant Comm
Wetland Plant Comm
Bottom Substrate
ty
Ta hit ne y
ni
f / -W Pi nit
w sh) mu
C ine hite mu
-C t)
ub ke
sl ine
)
m
)
am Har arr
d)
us
om
ic
te
ea (F Co
o
th lus e P
Sw p (S r Th
C Bog fero
O Co ope
)
dw s
ra
O p ( C wo
Pl d
Sw (D w)
R ine t C
Be m S g
oo
g
t
st
ro
Bo
do an
sh Sed
sh allo
i
e
e
P an
am eep
on
ub
er ife
am hr
P W
am ld
r
ot us
l
Sw p (A
n
h
-
ar
(
R dP
Si Silt
(
M nd
o
w
Bo ck
H
r
(
G e
de
do
Sa l
ife
an
ve
la
o
to
bl
/
er
k
nd
nd
dr
ul
ea
pe
uc
et
ed
ed
on
ub
ar
ar
ra
pl
th
lif
lt
Sw
Sa
W
M
O
U
R
Code RW RW C/T OC OH FM SeM SM DM S-C AT HS CS OB CB BE BO RU GR SA SS SI MU