-------
99cmr
1133
TWIN CITIES METROPOLITAN AREA
I '
I L L..
-------
lOOcra
MISSISSIPPI RIVER AND SIGNIFICANT TRIBUTARIES
IN AND BELOW TWIN CITIES METROPOLITAN AREA
FCMUARY 1964
£TJ -INDUSTRIAL WASTE
ANOKA
HENMEPIN
I
RAMSCY
?- 'CDCNAi. C**T*IOOE CO.
*-N«P co »ive«ioc »L»m
J- MOaf T«AO PHOOUCTS CO
A-NO*TM 1TAP. COMCftCTE MOO CO
T- MKttfft OAN>AL$ MIDLAND co
4-llt* CNOSS HEMOEK'NG CO.
t-NiPCO viLMft*tM PLANT
10- tOPHfft ITATI SILICA CO
ii- fluff* «i*«r co
if- mmi vALifv «ILK moe cooc A
II* AM* CUTlTAi SUQAff CO
14- NAM MALT'** CO
'f- 9 l.tlAM Cft MPIR ^IMM OIV
IV CA»»'tL IMC.
if- «•» CO MAC* 0O* PLANT
i|- r«IN C1TT ftA»«l « TOVrM CO.
iff* Ml • CO. HIM MI00C PLANT
fO- MINN HMtO* UflVlCt
fl* TWIN C'TT WMI • TOWIN* CO
n- MwrrHvciTiiiii KCVIMIM co
!»• J-L,»XllLT I A NO • fftAVtL CO.
14* ft MUL AHMOMtA PKOO. CO
n- »HAT *o*f»i** OIL co
ft- ««TN*ttT co*r Kit LI me.
«T- tflttN HIMINt • MF*. CO.
f«- HUDSON art co,
C*' WI(M MALT1M< CO.
10- rOOTC TANNiNff CO
)'- Nil! CO. *f 0 WIN*
»COTT
COMMUNITY SEWAGC SOURCES
^-NO rKCATMCNT
- CCDAtt WOVE SUtO
- ussa
- SOUTK ST PAUL
- *CWPO*T
- ST PAUL PANK
'- IMVCft ftdOVe T«P
I* COTTACC AMOVE T*F
• MCTNO'OLITAN AffCA
Xr
HOUSTON
-------
1135
M. M. Margraves
MR. STEIN: Thank you for a very comprehensive
statement. I think it gives us all a very clear picture
of what Minnesota is doing.
I find myself in essential agreement with the
major points.
As a matter of fact, considering the magnitude
of the tasks facing you and the size of your staff and
appropriation, I think this notion of a cooperative study
should be welcomed by both sides, because you certainly
have enough work to keep you busy throughout the State.
Are there any comments or questions?
MR. SMITH: I would like to make one comment.
MR. STEIN: Yes, sir.
MR. SMITH: I believe Dr. Margraves misspoke on
the amount of the budget. There is a $100,000 contingency
fund for the two-year period. In addition, the budget for
this fiscal year is approximately $205,'"500, and for next
year is $217,000.
MR. STEIN: I believe Mr. Poston may have a
comment on that.
MR. POSTON: Well, you have answered my question.
I knew that there were funds.
Maybe I am a bureaucrat and used to bigger
figures, or something, but I felt that it was a little bit
-------
1136
M. M.Hargraves
low from what I knew.
MR. SMITH: I should actually say of the $205,000
183,000 of that is Federal money.
MR. STEIN: Yes. That Is why we knew this was of}.
DR. HARGRAVES: I misspoke primarily because this
is essentially what the Legislature has given us —• and it is
only this past Legislature that has done this -- and this
contingency fund oan only be spent at the moment upon conference
with them, and with their agreement that it should be spent.
So that the amount of Federal money we have is essentially
on top of the figures that I quoted.
MR. STEIN: Well, the Federal grart, as I
understand it, is about $83,000 a year. Obviously, in order
to qualify for that money, you have to put in considerably
more than $17»000 of State funds to match, and the budget
must necessarily be high.
MR. SMITH: It would be approximately $122,000
added.
MR. STEIN: Yes. Mr. Wilson?
MR. WILSON: Mr. Chairman, it is now the noon
hour and I assume you are going to adjourn shortly, but I
would just like to add a brief comment pertaining to some of
the points that Dr. Hargravea brought out. It will only take
-------
1137
M. M, Margraves I
m« a couple of ralnutea to do so, If you wish to hearrme now
or wait until after lunch.
!
MR. STEIN: I thought, depending upon how many j
people we have to hear, depending on the feeling of the 1
i
conferees — i
MR. WISNIEWSKI: I understand Minnesota has
about 13 people who will be appearing. ;
!
MR. SMITH: I have statements from many more ;
i
than 13. i
I
MR. WISNIEWSKI: So that will take well into i
the afternoon. You will have to break for lunch sometime.
That is what I mean. i
MR. STEIN: All right. How long will your state-
ment take? j
i
MR. WILSON: Just two or three minutes. |
MR. STEIN: Why don't you go ahead? ;
-------
1138
C. S. Wilson
STATEMENT OP CHESTER S. WILSON, CONFEREE
AND SPECIAL ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL,
LEGAL COUNSEL, MINNESOTA WATER POLLUTION
CONTROL COMMISSION
MR. WILSON: I simply wanted to call attention
to this fact:
One of the speakers from the State of Wisconsin
remarked that Mr. Wisniewski didn't have to ask people; he
could go out and tell them. I think that everyone should
be reminded that we cannot do that under our Minnesota law
so promptly and with auch effect.
Under our laws, as Dr. Hargraves pointed out,
we were reminded a few years ago by a court decision, the
first time the Minnesota Commission undertook to do that,
to go out and tell somebody something, the court constantly
slapped them down and told them that "t was necessary for
them first to hold a hearing and establish a standard for
a small country ditch before they could tell the creamery
to go and clean up its mess.
The same thing appllee to every pollution
situation in the State, and notably to this Twin Cities
situation.
-------
1139
C. S. Wilson
So, In preparation for backing up the expansion
of the Twin Cities plant, which was already underway, in
order to make sure that the results of that expansion will
be effective and that all minor sources of pollution in
this tremendous metropolitan area would be dealt with by
the time that plant goes into operation in 1966, the Comrais- !
i
sion provided that beginning in the spring of 1962, long }
i
before these duck kills happened and long before this
conference waa conceived of, the Minnesota Commission, upon
its own initiative, launched the program for adopting
standards for this entire section of the Mississippi River
that Dr, Hargraves described.
That took eight days of hearings, involved the
taking of over 1,000 pages of testimony, at which, as I
remarked, we were greatly aided by the witnesses from the
Public Health Service; and, as a result of the adoption of
those standards, the Minnesota Commission is now in a
position to back up this effort to clean up this portion of
the Mississippi River.
Now, I might say that we are not too sure that
those standards are going to stick. Dr. Hargraves has
mentioned that those standards involved loopholes. We are
already in court on an appeal contesting the validity of
those standards. We have to demonstrate that they are
-------
1140
C. S. Wilson
reasonable and based upon evidence, before we can enforce
them; but the Commission IB doing all it can to lay the
foundation for the very thing that Wisconsin la able to
do without going through all this trouble.
That is one of the reasons why we are very glad
to acclaim our neighbor, Wisconsin, for progress in water
pollution, that they have not been handicapped by the
necessity of adopting a standard for all the waters in the
State.
You can see what that is going to mean. If we
do not get cooperation from these *tl towns that haven't
got sewage treatment plants, if we do not get cooperation
from the 450 industries that we are going to have to go
after, we are going to have to go through that aame process
with every one of them — hold a hearing and adopt a
standard -- before we can issue them an order.
That is one of the things that I wanted to call
attention to, Mr. Chairman. The thing that I should like
to emphasize, from long, long experience as a prosecuting
and law-enforcement attorney, is that this Commission has
no inspection force and no police force.
With its small staff of engineers, if they have
to go out and perform the service of investigating cases
like these oil spills, or attempting to institute
-------
C. S. Wiloon
prosecutions of local violation*, they simply have to neglect
their tremendously important duties of advancing the progress
of construction of sewage treatment plants.
It seems to me that one of the most important
things for all people concerned with the advancement of
pollution control in this State is to recognize the neces-
sity of getting behind the efforts of the Minnesota Commis-
sion to get what it takes to do these things and put over
the program.
MR. STEIN: Thank you, Mr. Wilson.
Are there any other comments or questions?
(No response.)
MR. STEIN: If not, may I suggest this: Can we
adjourn for lunch for just one hour? Is that possible?
DR. HARGRAVES: How about fifty minutes and be
back at one?
MR. STEIN: We will be back in fifty minutes,
and I hope you will return promptly so that we can start.
(Whereupon, at 12:10 p.m., the conference was
recessed for lunch.)
-------
1142
AFTERNOON SESSION
(1:25 p.m. )
MR. STEIN: May we reconvene? j
j
Dr. Margraves9 :
DR. HARGRAVES: It is now time for the Minnesota ;
conferees to call on our friends and critics to make !
j
v-ontributions to this conference, so that we can have further'
constructive material go into this report.
However, before we start, 1 would like to augment :
what Mr. Stein said yesterday — it seems like the other j
day, but what he said yesterday -- that this is a conference.'
I think a lot of people do not understand the
implications here. This is not a hearing. It has nothing
to do with police power at the moment. It Is a conference
in which the States and the Federal Government, representa-
tives of each, have gotten together to talk over the
problems that exist and decide what "s best to do.
You are here largely at our invitation, whether
you know It or not, or the invitation of the Wisconsin
Committee, and you are here to give us all help on better
understanding the problem that exists.
Consequently, if you have a lot of criticism
that we can take and have taken In hearings, there will be
other times for that, and I am sure that you are sympathetic
with what I say and will be cooperative In making your
-------
1143
statement and not In reduplicating a lot that has been done,
because we have practically two pages, if not three, of
people who have been requesting an opportunity to air their
views. We have asked many groups to combine their statements
with the represented like types of organizations.
With that, I will ask Mr. Smith to start going !
*
i
down through our agenda, and we will call on these individuals
!
I
In an order — I shouldn't say necessarily of importance,
but of stature, if you will, in government, and so on, aa
is done in most hearings.
I will turn this over at the moment to Mr. Smith.
MR. SMITH: The first group to be heard from
i
this afternoon will be the Upper Mississippi River Conserva- j
tion Committee. '
j
Is Mr. Nord in the room? Is there anyone from i
that group here?
(No response. )
MR. SMITH: I have, Mr, Chairman, copies of a
resolution by tM.s group which I would like to present for
the record.
DR. HARGRAVES: It is a short one. Can't it be j
read? Do you want me to read it, or do you want to read It? j
"POLLUTION RESOLUTION OF THE TWENTIETH
ANNUAL UMRCC MEETING, JANUARY 7,
HELD AT PEORIA, ILLINOIS
-------
1144
"The Upper Mississippi River Conservation
Committee, an organization consisting of representa-
tives of the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, Con-
servation Agencies of the States of Minnesota,
Wisconsin, Iowa, Illinois and Missouri, and cooperat-
ing agencies welcomes the opportunity to aid in
evaluating the effect of pollution upon fish and
wildlife and associated recreational uses of the
Mississippi River. This committee believes that
there is a prcfound effect of this pollution on fish
and wildlife and it requests that particular con-
sideration be given to this matter at the conference
to be held in the Twin Cities on February 7, 1964.
"In providing service in this connection,
the Committee offers material relative to fish and
wildlife and aquatic recreation resulting from its
surveys and studies conducted since 194**."
They offer this material. Is this to be offered
as an exhibit?
MR. STEIN: That is included in the record right
now.
Will you continue, unless there are comments or
questions?
MR. SMITH: The next on the list will be any
legislative committee representatives who may be present
-------
1145
and wish to make a statement.
(No response.)
MR. SMITH: Also, any legislators present who
would like to make a presentation?
(No response. )
MR. SMITH: Then we go from there to the State
Departments represented. We do have a prepared repcrt
submitted in ten copies from the Department of Conservation,
the Division of Game and Pish, Mr. Chairman.
This is rather detailed. Much of the material,
I understand, has been discussed in one form or another by
other persons participating.
MR. STEIN: Would you want that included in the
record as if read?
MR. SMITH: I believe so. Dr. Moyle?
DR. MOYLE: Yes, we would prefer to have it
Included in the overall record.
MR. STEIN: This will be included.
(The statement of the State of Minnesota Depart-
ment of Conservation, Division of Game and Fish, is as
follows:
-------
1146
STATE OP MINNESOTA
Department of Conservation
Division of Game and Piah
Game and Flan Values of the Mississippi River
between the Rum River at Anoka and the
Chippewa River below Lake Pepin
SUMMARY
The Division of Game and Pish, Minnesota Depart-
ment of Conservation, is concerned with the recreational
and economic values of the fish and game resources of the
Mississippi River between Anoka and the Chippewa River.
This section of the Mississippi River Includes such major
tributaries as the St. Croix River below Taylors Palls and
the Minnesota River below Henderson, The Division is
carrying on limited management of these resources. Prin-
cipal activities are fishery surveys of the Mississippi
River below St. Paul, supervision of commercial fisheries,
and acquisition and development of two wildlife management
and public hunting areas and three public access areas
along the Mississippi River below St. Paul.
Pish kills associated with insufficient dissolved
-------
1X47
i
oxygen have occurred frequently in Pool 2 of the Mississippi:
River. Pollution is a probable cause of oxygen deficiency J
i
in parts of Pool 2. I
Fisheries surveys of the Mississippi River have
shown: (l) that several kinds of common warm-water game
fish are present above and below St. Anthony Falls; (2) i
that fewer game fish and smaller rough fish were present in
1956 in Spring Lake, a part of Pool 2, than in Pools 3, 4
i
and 5; (3) that average numbers of fish and pounds of fish j
caught in Pools 3 and U were lower in 1963 than in 1957; and ;
i
(4) that In Pool 3 the decrease in average numbers and j
*
pounds of fish caught in 1963 was more pronounced in areas
in and near the main channel than in a backwater lake little
affected by river flow. Similar surveys have not been made
on the St. Croix or Minnesota Rivers but game and rough
fish are known to be present in these rivers.
The value of commercial fish caught in Pools 2,
3, 4 and 5 of the Mississippi River in 1962 was approxi-
i
t
mately $97,500, of which $25,900 went to Minnesota fishermen.\
The catch In Pool 2 in recent years was higher than in Pools
3 and 5 but fish from Pool 2 are frequently off-flavor. |
i
Off-flavor has lowered the selling price and limited the
market of fish from Pool 2. The value of commercial fish
caught In the St. Croix River In 1962 was about $17,600.
No commercial fishing la done In the Minnesota River.
-------
1148
There IB sport fishing In nearly all the stretches
of the Mississippi River, St. Croix River and Minnesota Riv«|r
under consideration, but sport fishing is heaviest in Pools
3 and 4 of the Mississippi River and in the St. Croix River.
The Minnesota River is lightly fished. Sport fishermen have
rarely been seen on Pool 2 of the Mississippi River during
aerial counts in recent years. The aerial counts together
with ground counts of fishermen indicate low angling pressur^
on all pools of the Mississippi River compared to Minnesota
lakes. Success of anglers on fools 4 and 5 was lower in j
i
1956 and, due to more panfish caught, higher In 1962 than is!
usual on Minnesota lakes. :
The expenditures of spoilt fishermen, based on an'
economic survey conducted by the Division of Game and Fish
in 1957, are estimated to amount to about $750,000 for Pools |
{
3t 4, and 5 for the twelve months, April 1, 1962 to March 31J
1963. '
i
Waterfowl use the Mississippi River and its i
j
baclcwatere heavily and the St. Croix River and Minnesota
River to a lesser extent during migration. Some waterfowl
neat along these rivers. B'urbearing animals are trapped
along the Mississippi, St. Croix, and Minnesota rivers.
Future use of these areas by fishermen and
hunters is expected to Increase, particularly if stream
conditions remain about the same or are improved. Greatest
-------
1149
increase In use oan be expected on the Mississippi River.
It Is the opinion of the Division of Game and Fish that
present water quality standards adopted for the Mississippi
River In the Mlnneapolis-St. Paul area promise to prevent
further deterioration and may result in some Improvement of
conditions for fish in the river above Lock and Dam No. 2.
However, present and foreseeable conditions under the |
existing standards do not justify significant fisheries or
game management work on the Mississippi River between
St. Paul and Lock and Dam No. 2. To properly manage for
fish, dissolved oxygen content should not be less than 5
ppm for more than 8 hours in any 24 hour period, and at no
time less than 3 ppro.
STATE OF MINNESOTA
Department of Conservation
Division of Game and Pish
Game and Fish Values of the Mississippi River
between the Rum River at Anoka and the
Chlppewa River below Lake Pepin
i
-------
1150
INTRODUCTION
The Division of Game and Fish, Minnesota
Department of Conservation, Is concerned with the recrea-
tional and economic values of the fish and game resources
of the Mississippi River, its bottom lands, backwaters, and
tributaries between the Rum River at Anolca and the Chippewa i
River below Lake Pepln. Various parts of this area support !
commercial fishing, sport fishing, hunting and other
recreational activities connected with fish and wildlife.
Principal management programs other than regulation of
limits and seasons include surveys to obtain Information on
fish populations and fisherman use, supervision of commer-
cial fisheries, and acquisition and development of public
accesses and of wildlife management and public hunting areas
Recreational uses of water other than those re-
lated to fish and wildlife are of substantial Interest to
the Division of Game and Fish, as Is water pollution abate-
ment, but primary responsibilities In these fields are
assigned to other agencies.
In general, fish and game information contained
herein Is related to navigation pools as designated by the
U.S. Corps of Engineers. However, a ttrctch of approxi-
mately 14 mlle« of river lying between the head of the Upper
St. Anthony Pool at approximately Camden In north
-------
1151
Minneapolis and the Rum River Is not Included In a navlgatlor
pool. Although about 14 miles of river in Pool 4 lies below
the mouth of the Chlppewa River, Pool 4 is here considered
In Its entirety to utilize available fishery data. Naviga-
tion Pool 4, with reference to fishery data, is divided Into
Pool 4A comprising Lake Pepln, and the remainder of Pool 4
comprising the area above and below Lake Pepin. In several
instances data from Pool 5 are Included for further
comparison.
FISH
Fish management in the area of the river con-
sidered, other than for survey work, has been limited to
supervision of commercial fisheries, diversion of flow into
a backwater area In Pool 3 to prevent oxygen deptetlon in
winter, and transfer of catohable size catfish in most
winters from Spring Lake, a part of Pool 2, to the river*
above Minneapolis where greater utilization is expected.
Fish kills have been reported more frequently
in Pool 2 than farther downstream in Pools 3 and 4. in
Pool 2 fish kills have oeen associated with lack of or low
level* of dissolved oxygen that are probably attributable
tso pollution. Fish kills probably due to pollution have
been reported from Pool 2 both in late winter when there
low flow and ice cover and in Bummer In the main channel
-------
in the lower part of Pool 2. Data regularly collected by
Minneapolis-St. Paul Sanitary District personnel^/
I/Mississippi river analytical data tables, Minneapolls-St.
Paul Sanitary District^ Compiled annually.), and other
data gathered by the State Department of Health?/ (2/ Report
on investigation of the Mississippi River from the mouth of
the Rum River to the mouth of the St. Crolx River.
Minnesota Department of Health, Section of Water Pollution
Control, July and August, 1960 and August and September,
1961. 41 pages plus tables and figures.) indicate the
occurrence at times of oxygen levels too low for fish life
in parts of Pool 2 below St. Paul.
Fisheries survey work on the Mississippi ftiver
has included electrofishlng, test netting, creel census,
and fisherman counts. Commercial fishing records provide
additional data.
Pish populations
Common fish species known to be present in the
several pools, both above and below St. Anthony Falls, are
listed in Table 1 which is appended. This is not a complete
species list but shows that common warm-water game fishes
such as walleyes, sauger, northern pike, smallmouth bass
and blueglll are present in those stretches of the river.
-------
1153
Both game fish and rough fish occur In the
section of the Mississippi River Including Pool 1 and above
it as far as the Rum River. As to game fish, an electro-
fishing survey in 7.5 miles of the Mississippi River below
the Rum River In I960 revealed at least moderate-sized
populations of bluegills and smallmouth bass. In this area
and downstream Into Pool 1 fishermen report satisfactory
fishing for walleyes and smallroouth bass.
Pish population data were obtained in Pools
2, 3, 4, 4A and 5 In 1956 by test netting with gillnet* and
trapnets. Mean catches of these nets are shown In Table 2
which is appended. It will be noted that both gillnet and
trapnet catches of game fishes were lower In Spring Lake
(part of Pool 2) than in the pools below (Pools 3» 4* **A and
5). This relationship holds for both numbers and pounds of
game fish taken. Poundage of rough fish taken per trapnet
set was also lower in Spring Lake than In the other pools.
In general at that time, it appeared the rough fish were
fairly abundant In Spring Lake but those taken were smaller
than rough fish from the other pools. The apparent smaller
size might be attributed to removal of larger rough fish
by commercial fishing on Spring Lake.
Comparative fish population data were obtained In
Pools 3* * and 5 In 1957 and 1963 by test netting with trap-
nets. The average numbers and pounds per set of all species
-------
game and rough fish, from each pool in the two years were:
Nutnber per set founds per aet
Pool
3
4
5
mL
90
152
49
.7
.3
.0
1963
3R
43
30
.0
.6
.1
1957
82
121
36
.0
.0
.2
1963
52
51
34
.3
.3
.6
It appears that fish were less abundant in Pools 3 arsd 4 in
1963 and about the same or slightly less abundant in Pool 5
in 1963. The differences between the catches in the two
years is influenced considerably by greater abundance of carp
in the 1957 catches, but it appears from the catch data that
there has been some general decline in the size of the fish
populations In Pools 3 and 4.
A breakdown of the above comparative fish popula-
tion data from Pool 3 by areas within the Pool shows the
decrease in average numbers and pounds of fish of all species
per trapnet set in 1963 was most pronounced in tailwaters of
the Hastings Dam and in North Lake and Sturgeon Lake through j
which there Is a flow of the river. Least Indication of
change was found In Dushane Lake, a backwater area little
influenced by river flow. The catch values for different
areas In Pool 3 were:
-------
1155
Pool 3 Areas Number per set Pounds per set
1957 3L563. 1957 1963
Tailwaters of
Hastings Dam 155.7 50.2 155.5 60. P
North Lake 55-2 28.8 70.2 44.9
Sturgeon Lake 91.3 33.6 46.7 49.6
Dushane Lake 54.2 40.8 42.7 55.6
Commercla1 fishing
Commercial fishing la carried on in Pools 2, 3> 4, ]
4A and 5 by fishermen licensed by Minnesota or Wisconsin. '
Flahlng Is done with glllnets, seines and set lines. The
principal species taken are carp, buffalofish, drum (sheeps-
j
i
head) and channel catfish. Usually about two-thirds of the '
i
weight of the commercial catch is of carp. i
(
The commercial catch for the years 1958-1962 Is i
I
shown for Pools 2, 3* 4, 4A and 5 in Table 3 which Is ;
i
appended. Average yearly catch from these pools has been j
about 2.5 million pounds. Value of the catch in 1962 was
approximately $97,500 of which about $25,900 went to
Minnesota fishermen and about $71,600 went to Wisconsin
fishermen.
It will be noted from Table 3 that greatest
Intensity of commercial take was in Pools 4 and 4A where,
respectively, an average of 32.6 and 58.2 pounds of rough
-------
1156
fish per acre per year were taken during the 1958-1962 period
However, the catch In Pool 2 averaged 28.0 pounds per acre pej?
year for the four years 1959-1962. The commercial catch from
Pool 2 (oaught almost entirely in Spring Lake) indicates the
presence of a commercially harvestable rough fish population
in this part of the river. However, fish taken from Pool 2
are frequently off-flavor and such off-flavor lowers the
selling price and limits sales. Usually the fish taken in
Pool 2 are sold to buyers who can hold them In ponds until
the off-flavor disappears.
Sport fishing
There Is aport fishing throughout the stretch of
Mississippi River under consideration but it is heaviest in
Pools 3 and 4. Above Minneapolis there is considerable
angling from the mouth of the Rum River downstream into
Pool 2. Pishing is most concentrated at a few places such
as near the Coon Rapids Dam, the Highway 100 Bridge and the
Pord Dam. No quantitative estimate of fishing pressure in
or above Pool 2 has been made. Spring Lake in Pool 2 has
•ome angler use, probably more than the main part of Pool 2.
However, on aerial censuses of fishermen on the River in
recent years fishermen were rarely seen on Pool 2. This
light fishing pressure is confirmed by the local State Game
-------
1157
Warden. Off-flavor in game flah taken from Pool 2 has been
reported by sport fishermen. In 1956 fishing succeed for
walleyes, northern pike and catfish in Spring Lake of Pool 2
was reported to be low and to have declined during the pre-
ceding 15 years.
Counts of fishermen on Pools of the Mississippi
River were made from the air and from the ground during the
fishing year, April 1, 1962 to March 31, 1963. Estimates
of the total number of man-hours of fishing per acre per year
in Pools 3, 4, and 5 of the Mississippi River are compared !
below with similar data from five south-central Minnesota
lakesi
Total angling hours
Water Pishing year per acre per year
Pool 3 62-63 1.8
Pool 4 62-63 10.9
Pool 5 62-63 12.5
Inland lakes 57-58 47.4
A survey of the economic value of the sport
fishery on the Mississippi River, which was conducted in
1957-2/ (2/ The economic value of the Minnesota sport fishery
on the Mississippi River, Section of Research and Planning,
Minnesota Division of Game and Pish, 1957.), Indicated the
average yearly expenditure per person for fishing on the
-------
1158
Mississippi River was about $50. Baaed on the estimated
numbers of fishermen using Pools 3> 4 and 5 in the fishing
year, April 1, 1962 to March 31, 1963, the sport fishermen
expenditures related to these pools were*
Pool
3
4
5
Expenditure per year
$ 42,200
$ 549,200
$ 162,150
$ 753,550
Creel censuses on Pools 3* 4 and 5 during the
summers of 1956 and 1962 indicate fairly good sport fishing
success. The figures for average number of fish caught per
hour of fishing are compared below with similar data from
14 Minnesota Lakes:
Water
Pool 3
Pool 4
Pool 5
Inland lakes
1956
0.36
0.37
0.38
0.71
1962
«•
0.84
0.94
The higher catch rate in 1962 reflects mostly larger catches
cf sunfish made in that year.
-------
1159
GAME
Game management activities along the Mississippi !
!
i
River are principally development and maintenance of wildlife j
i
i
management and public hunting grounds and acquisition and |
development of public accesses for the benefit of fishermen
and boaters as well as hunters.
At the present time there are seven public accesses;
recognized by the Division of Game and Fish for the part of i
i
the river being considered. Of these the Division of Game I
i
and Pish owns three as Indicated below? ;
Mississippi River At Champlin (Champlin Village) j
Mississippi River Pool 2 St. Paul (Ramsey County) j
i
Vermllllon River Pool 3 Near Hastings (Game and Fish) i
North Lake Pool 3 Near Etter (Game and Fish) j
Sturgeon Lake Pool 3 Near Eggleston (Game and Fish) I
i
',
Lake Pepln Pool 4 Near Frontenac (Minnesota Highway j
Department) •
i
Lake Pepln Pool 4 Near Lake City (Minnesota Highway
Department)
It is expected that more accesses will be acquired and
developed In the future.
At the present time two Wildlife Management and
Public Hunting Areas located on bottom lands of Pool 3 are
influenced by the river. These areas are the Gores-Pool 3
-------
1160
Wilt containing 5*^30 acres In Dakota and Ooodhue Counties
and the Wood Duck Unit, now being acquired, to contain 463
acres in Dakota County.
Management of theae areas will be intensified in
the future and it is expected that hunter use will increase.
Waterfowl
Migrating waterfowl use the Mississippi River and !
its backwaters, particularly below the Twin Cities. There
also is some waterfowl nesting along the Mississippi River
between the Rum River and the Chlppewa River below Lake Pepln.
Data obtained by the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service Indicate j
!
i
the largest number of birds using the river In the area below
Pool 5 to the Iowa line on any one day during the spring
ranged from 119,801 to 296,870 birds In the years 1959 through
1963. While these data were collected from the area down-
stream from Lake Pepln, It seems reasonable that they may be
projected to indicate potential waterfowl use of Pools 4, 3
and 2 upstream. A decline in waterfowl use of Pool 2 during
the past several years is reported by the local State Game
Warden. Waterfowl hunter use of parts of Pools 2, 3 and 4
la considered moderate to heavy.
Ducks killed or affected by oil in Pools 2, 3 and
4 in the spring of 1963 give further indication of waterfowl
-------
1X61
use. In this Instance, It was calculated that 4,800 birds
were killed by oil (a«e report on Waterfowl Mortality Caused
by Oil Pollution of the Minnesota and Mississippi rivers in
1963 which is appended). Following losa due to oil between
March 28 and about April 2, 1963, an estimated 10,000 water-
fowl were observed between St. Paul and Red Wing on April 9
and an estimated 20,000 were observed between Red Wing and
the lower end of Lake Pepin on April 11.
Furbearers
Muskrats, beaver and mink are common along the I
Mississippi River and in backwater areas. A considerable j
i
amount of trapping is done along the entire stretch of river |
i
under consideration, but no accurate statistics of the
trapping pressure are available.
TRIBUTARIES
St. Croix River
Sport and commercial fishing is carried out on the
St. Croix River between Taylors Falls and the mouth, a
distance of approximately 45 mllea. For the years 1958
through 1962 a yearly average of 369,225 pounds of rough fish
-------
1162
(including catfish) were taken by commercial fishermen. The
value of the commercial catch from the St. Crolx River in
1962 was approximately $17,600. There is no quantitative
information on the use of the St. Croix River by sport fisher-
men but letters, telephone reports, press releases and
observations by Division of Game and Fish field personnel
provide evidence of considerable sport fishing. Of 348 boats
counted from the air on about 20 miles of river between
Prescott and Stillwater on Memorial Day, 1963* 18 appeared
to be engaged in fishing. Off-flavor in walleyes caught
downstream from Hudson, Wisconsin has been reported by sport
fishermen. Common species of fish in the St. Crolx River
are shown in Table 4 which is appended.
There are no Division of Game and Fish wildlife
management or public hunting areas along the St. Crolx River
below Taylors Palls. One public access owned by the Minnesota
Highway Department is located at Stillwater. Some waterfowl
use the river during migration and some ducks, principally
wood ducks, neet along the river. Waterfowl hunters use the
river upstream from Stillwater. Trapping is done for beaver
and mink and a limited amount for muskrat along the St. Croix
River.
Minnesota River
-------
1163
The Minnesota River from the mouth of the river to
Henderson, approximately 69 miles upstream, contains some
game fish. Sport fishing, primarily for catfish and walleyes,
is done at a few places such an the falls and rapids near
Carver. No commercial fishing Is carried out in this part
of the Minnesota River. I
i
Information on fish in the Minnesota River was i
t
obtained in a survey conducted in 1950-% (-/Survey of the •
i
Minnesota River. Section of Research and Planning, Minnesota j
Division of Game and Pish, March, I960.) The common species j
i
of fish recorded between the mouth of the river and rtenderson
are shoxm on Tablf lj> which is appended. The data on abundance!
i
of fish are insufficient to allow comparison with other fishingj
waters but are Indicative of a relatively low population. j
j
Game fish made up a snail part of the total sample (6.9 per i
cent between the mouth and Shakopee, and 16.9 percent between j
!
Shakopeo and Henderson). !
!
The Minnesota River between the mouth and Henderson
is lightly fished compared to other fishing waters in
Minnesota. A few fishermen contacted near Shakopee In 1958,
indicated general satisfaction with fishing success at that
time. In 19^3 the local State Game Warden observed some
reduction In fishing between Shakopee and Henderson which was
attributed locally to a reaction to oil pollution in the
spring of 1963. In some winters game fish are rescued by
-------
1X64
seining by state crews from backwater lakes In the Mendota
area when dissolved oxygen levels drop.
There are no Division of Game and Fish wildlife
management or public hunting areas along the Minnesota River
below Henderson. One public access is presently being
acquired near State Highway 65 in Bloomlngton. Waterfowl use
the Minnesota River and flood-plain lakes during migration,
i
although to a lesser extent than they do the Mississippi Riverj
and its backwaters downstream. Some ducks nest along the j
Minnesota River. Waterfowl hunter use of flood-plain lakes
below Shakopee is quite extensive and several areas are
controlled by hunting clubs. Most flood-plain lakes are not i
affected by the river except at times of unusually high flow. !
t
Muskrats are common along the Minnesota River and other fur- j
bearers are present. Trapping is done between Henderson and I
the mouth of the river.
Future Uses
The Mississippi River between the Rum River and
the St. Croix River is at present little used by fishermen
compared to the Navigation Pools downstream. In general the
Mississippi River is fished less intensively than many other
fishing waters in the state at the present time. It is
probable, however, that the Mississippi River both between
-------
1165
the Rum River and the St. Crolx River and In the pools
downstream will be used more by fishermen In the future and
values related to fishing will Increase If stream conditions
are suitable for fish life.
Present water quality standards adopted for the
Mississippi River between the Rum River and Lock and Dam No. 2
promise to prevent further deterioration and may result in
some improvement of conditions for fish in the river above
i
Lock and Dam No, 2, particularly if flow patterns remain about
the same. However, present and foreseeable conditions under
the existing standards do not insure a sustained population
of rough fish or game fish of good quality in all parts of j
i
i
Pool 2 and do not justify significant fisheries or game managej-
i
i
ment work on the Mississippi River between St. Paul and Lock j
and Dam No. 2. To properly manage for fish, dissolved oxygen
content should not be less than 5 ppm (parts per million) for
more than 8 hours in any 24 hour period, and at no time less
5/
than 3 ppm. (*" Aquatic life water quality criteria, first
progress report. Aquatic Life Advisory Committee of the Ohio
River Valley Water Sanitation Commission, Sewage and Industri-
al Wastes, Vol. 27, No. 3, May, 1955.)
The St. Crolx River below Taylors Palls and the
Minnesota River below Henderson probably will also be used
more In the future by fishermen and will Increase In values
related to fishing if stream conditions are suitable for fish.
-------
1166
In the lightly fished Minnesota River, both pollution abate-
ment and other Improvement of the stream la desirable.
It is probable that game management activities
will be expanded and be intensified along the sections of the j
Mississippi River, Minnesota River and St. Crolx River under
consideration. It is probable also, that waterfowl hunter
use of portions of these areas will be heavier in the future
and that trapping of furbearers will continue.
Bernard R, Jones, Supervisor
Biological Services Unit
Section of Research and Planning
Approved
John B. Moyle, Supervisor
Section of Research and Planning
-------
-1 ,- ' 1X67
STATE OF MIMESOTA
Department of Conservation
Division of Game and Fish
Table 1.- Conuion species of fieh in the Mississippi River between the Rum
River and Chippewa River I/
Rum
Species to
Game Species
Walleye
Sauger
Northern pike
Black crappie
White crappie
Largemouth bass
Smallmouth bass
Rock bass
White bass
Bluegill
Channel catfish
Shovelnose sturgeon
Fathead catfish
Green sunfish
Pumpkins eed sunfiea
Rough fish
Carp
Sheepshead
Brown bullhead
Bigmouth buffalo
Northern carpsucke^.
Northern redhorse
Loagnose gar
Shortnose gar
Bowfin
Mooneye
Gizzard shad
Common sucker
Spotted sucker
Yellow bullhead
Black bullhead
Golden shiner
Yellow perch
River sucker
River
Camden
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
)f
I
P
P
P
P
Upper p ..
St. Anthony
Pool 1
P « Present
a
o
•H
(4
o
-------
-J4-
1168
STATE OF MIVKKSOTA
Department of Conservation
Division of 4**« aad Fi»k
Table 2.- Mean numbers and weight* of fiah per set lift in the upper
navigation pools of the Mississippi Diver in 1956
Waters
(Same Fish per set
Number Pounds
Qill Trap Gill Trap
net net net net
Rough Fish per
Number
Gill
net
Trap
net
Pounds
Gill Trap
net net
Rum River to Camden
Upper St. Anthony Pool
Pool 1
Mo comparable data
Ne comparable data
No comparable data
Pool 2
(Spring Lake)
Pool 3
Pool 4
(includes part of
Lake Pepin)*
Pool 4A
(includes part of
1.7
4.0
1.3
8.6
31.7 19.3
1.9 0.5
4.1 7.6
19.9 1^.8
21.0 ^f.3
6.2 21.7
12.6 3.0
9.1 ^.1
5.8 5^.8
8.7 9.3
Lake Pepin)*
Pool 5
26.
2.
8
7
14.8
3.5
13.8
2.6
9
5
.0
.1
7
2
.2
.8
10.3
5.3
9.5
5.4
36.0
20.6
* In 1956 only, la subsequent years Pool 4A designated Lake Pepin and
Pool 4 the areas above and below Lake Pepin la Navigation Pool 4.
-------
-15-
STATE OF MIMHESOTA
Department of Conservation
Division of Game and Fish
Table 3«- Commercial fish catch in the upper navigation pools of the
Mississippi River by licensed fishermen, Minnesota and
Wisconsin combined
Pool No.
Year Acres *
1962
1961
I960
1959
1958
Mean
Average pounds
per acre per year
2
(11,811)
331,587
344,345
326,524
322,025
none
331,618**
28.0
3
(17,950)
46,035
104,180
118,812
21,160
16,763
65,710
3.4
4
(13,820)
467,628
358,508
450,617
419,165
554,923
4>O , IbO
32.6
4A
(25,000)
1,402,451
1,378,206
1,178,273
1,553*024
1,763,898
l,4^,iyo
58.2
5
(12,580)
178,004
218,768
163,349
121,4-39
95,410
i»,39b
12. -L
* Corp»of Engineers data.
** 4-y«ar average, no fishing done in Pool 2 in 1958.
-------
1170
STATE OP MINNESOTA
Department of Conservation
Division of Game and Plah
Table 4.- Common species of fish in the St. Crolx River below
Taylors Palls I/
Game Fish Rough Fish
Lake Sturgeon Gar (short nose and long noae)
Northern pike Gizzard shad
Channel catfish Mooneys
Flathead catfish Carp
Rock bass Qulllback
White bass Blue sucker
Smallraouth bass Bigtnouth buffalo
Black crappie Northern redhorse
Sauger Sheepshead
Walleye
I/ This list indicates those species known to be present
through fisheries surveys and fisherman reports. It is not
a complete list of species.
-------
1171
STATE OP MINNESOTA
Department of Conservation
Division of Game and Pish
Table 3.- Common speclea of fish In the Minnesota River
between the mouth of the river and Henderson I/
Rough Flan
Carp
Gizzard shad
Sheepshead
Northern redhorse
Carp sucker
Bigmouth buffalofish
Qulllback
Shortnose gar
Silver redhorse
Common sucker
Dogfiah
Hog sucker
Smallmouth buffaloflsh
I/ This list Indicates those species known to be present
through fisheries surveys and fisherman reports. It is
not a complete list of species.
Game Pish
Sauger
White bass
Northern pike
White crapple
Plathead catfish
Black crappie
Walleye
Largemouth bass
Channel catfish
Smallmouth basa
* » *
-------
1172
MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OP CONSERVATION
DIVISION OP GAME AND PISH
Waterfowl Mortality Caused by Oil Pollution
of the Minnesota and Mississippi Rivers In 1963
INTRODUCTION
Following breakup of Ice on the Minnesota and
Mississippi Rivera In late March and early April, 1963, many
waterfowl, especially ducks, were killed by oil on the surface
of the water. Other birds were harmed when their feathers
became coated with varying amounts of oil. Waterfowl losses
I occurred on approximately 60 miles of the Mississippi River
i
j
ifrotn the mouth of the Minnesota River downstream to Lake Pepin
The major loss, however, occurred in three areas: (1) Spring
Lake in Navigation Pool No. 2 above Hastings, Minnesota,
(2) North and Sturgeon Lakes in Navigation Pool No. 3 below
Hastings and (3) the headwaters of Lake Pepln including Mud
Lake on the Wisconsin side of the main channel.
The oil responsible for the waterfowl and other
wildlife damage and mortality carae from two sources* (l)
the Honeymead Products Company Plant at Mankato, Minnesota
from which it was estimated 1-1 1/2 million gallons of soy-
oil escaped to the Blue Earth River on January 23* 1963*
-------
1X73
and (2) the Richards Oil Company at Savage, Minnesota
where an estimated one million gallons of petroleum oil de-
scribed as a "low viscosity cutting oil" escaped to the
Minnesota River and adjacent marshland sometime In December,
1962. I/ ( i/ Estimates of quantities of oil are from the
Section of Water Pollution Control, Minnesota, Department of
Health.)
The purpose of this report is to summarize prin-
cipal activities of the Division of Game and Fiah, Minnesota
Department of Conservation and to set forth the character and
extent of waterfowl and other wildlife losses attributed to
oil pollution of the Mississippi and Minnesota Rivers in
iMarch and April, 1963.
MOVEMENT AND APPEARANCE OP THE OIL
The petroleum oil escaped to the Minnesota River
near Savage from a marsh which was flooded with oil when
storage facilities failed at the Richards Oil Company. Oil
from this source was noted at the Black Dog Plant of the
Northern States Power Company 4 to 5 miles below Savage on
December 23, 1963. Some oil from this source probably flowed
i
bo the river at times during January and February, 1963, and
i substantial amount evidently entered the river during the
>erlod of spring runoff. A large quantity of oil, apparently
-------
1174
petroleum oil, was evident on the Minnesota River In early
and mid-March but It should be noted that later the petroleum
oil could not be distinguished by field observation from light
slicks of soybean oil. Analyses of seven oil samples from the
Mississippi River on several dates by the Minnesota Department
of Health showed petroleum oil present In only one Instance
after March 25 suggesting that by this date much of petroleum
oil had moved downstream ahead of the soybean oil or had
I
otherwise dissipated. (Appendix A) j
Soybean oil reached the Minnesota River via a shortj
stretch of the Blue Earth River when storage facilities of the'
Honeytnead Products Company plant failed In January 1963 during
a period of very cold weather. The soybean oil apparently
moved very little until breakup of ice In the Minnesota River
in late March, but then it flowed rapidly downstream. This
oil is of a very heavy consistency at temperatures below
freezing. At the time of aerial observation of oil and census
of waterfowl on March 26, heavy orange-red slicks of soybean
oil were seen in the main channel at Lock and Dam No. 2, on
the Mississippi River at Hastings.
Oil entered Spring Lake in Pool No. 2, the area
of heaviest waterfowl damage, when the Ice went out on March
28 and moved downstream Into the upper end of Lake Pepln
when Ice went out on this lake, about April 2. Personnel of
the Corps of Engineers, U.S. Army, reported the largest
-------
1175
amount of oil went through Look and Dam No. 3 about 12 mllea
above Lake Pepin on April 2. Members of a tow barge crew
reported oil on Lake Pepin in the vicinity of Maiden Hook on
April 3 and localized accumulations of oil were eeen at this
time and later by Division of Game and Pish personnel on the
bottom and along shore in the vicinity of Bay City and
Prontenac. Traces of oil were seen by Game and Pish personnel
at Lake City approximately midway on Lake Pepin but apparently
t
no significarib amount of oil reached the outlet of Lake Pepin. j
|
The character of soybean oil on and in the water j
i
changed with time. The thick orange-colored slicks which were
first observed changed to pliable greyish and somewhat rubbery
floating masses. These masses were stringy, rope-like or
somewhat rounded. In a few places a sticky layer of similar
color was deposited on the bottom. As oil moved downstream
from the sources it lodged in small shoreline indentations,
accumulated on beaches, and coated debris and shoreline
vegetation. Soybean oil was most evident, since it left a
varnish-like crust on beaches, debris and vegetation. Only
limited areas of bottom were apparently covered with soybean
oil, most notably in Lake Pepin in the vicinity of Bay City
and Prontenac. Light oil slicks were observed to form around
some of the floating consolidated oil masses apparently when
the outer shell or membrane of the masa was ruptured. Light
iridescent slicks of sufficient size to cause concern for
-------
1176
waterfowl were at111 present on backwater lakes of the river
near Lock and Dam No. 3 on April 11, but no significant water-
fowl damage was observed after about April 2. The peak of
waterfowl damage in the areas of major loss occurred within
a day or two after Ice went out.
WATERFOWL RESCUE OPERATION
Movement of soybean oil down the Minnesota River
and Into the Mississippi River was reported by State Game
Wardens the forenoon of March 26. Aerial survey on March 26
by a Division Biologist and Game Manager team and by Game j
j
Wardens revealed approximately 3,000 ducks on the Mississippi j
River between St. Paul and the head of Lake Pepln but no
significant number of ducks on the Minnesota River. None
of the ducks seen on this date appeared to be affected by
oil. Observation by boat on March 27 revealed no waterfowl
affected by oil in the main channel and ice-free backwaters
in Pool No. 2. Spring Lake, the principal water area In
Pool No. 2, was ice covered on March 27. On March 28 the
Ice went out of Spring Lake and in Spring Lake on this date
the first report of oll-aoaked ducks was Investigated and
confirmed by a Division Waterfowl Biologist who found 4 live
and 9 dead ducks. On March 30, 150 live and 24 dead oil-
soaked ducks were collected on Spring Lake and on North Lake
-------
1177
a few miles below Hastings. On the following day, 518 live
birds were rescued In these areas. Intensive rescue opera-
tions were Initiated on April 1 and continued through April 5
when only a few affected live ducks were still being found.
A few 2-man crews were kept In the area to April 12 and
thereafter to April 30 the affected areas were watched by
Division personnel stationed In the area.
Information on the scope of the rescue operations
was obtained from a questionnaire sent to all known partici-
pants (Appendix B). In terms of man-power the rescue opera-
tion involved B8 State Game and Pish employees, 15 U. S. Flah
and Wildlife Service employees and 6 other persons who worked i
(
an aggregate 43$ man days. Equipment use totalled 47 flights i
j
of aircraft, 220 use-days for boats and motors and 37 use-dayaj
!
for trucks. Estimated cost to the Division of Game and Pish I
i
t
was approximately $19,000. Rescue work In addition to the
above waa carried out by the Minnesota National Guard and
private Individuals not reached by the questionnaire.
Most of the live oil-soaked ducks were cleaned at
Carlos Avery Game Farm of the Division of Game and Flah but
many were also cleaned at the Como Park Zoo in St. Paul and
at the private residence of George Serbesku at Spring Lake.
Cleaning agents and procedures used included several house-
hold detergents; the product Amway, manufactured by the Amway
Company; and Triton X-100, a Rohm and Haas Company product.
-------
1178
The latter was worked Into the feathers by hand, followed by
washing the bird after 2 to 3 ffllnutes with a solution con-
taining 1 tablespoon trisodium phosphate and 1 tablespoon of
Calgon per gallon of water. The bird was then rinsed In olea
water. None of the materials or procedures tried resulted
In eaay efficient removal of oil. On many of the birds the
oil had set to a paint-like consistency. Many of the birds
were given an eyedropper of glucose (corn syrup) after rescue
to offset shock.
Pour hundred and sixty-six or 3^ percent of the
washed ducks were alive in pens on July 1 and of this number
approximately 350 flew free before October 1 after moulting
in July and August. The remaining birds flew free prior to
freeze-up on about November 30. Detailed information on care
given and factors related to survival of rescued ducks can be
obtained from the Game Research Unit, Section of Research and
Planning, Division of Game and Pish.
The effectiveness of several recommended eoulsl*
flers and dlspersants and of diatomaceous earth for removal
of oil from the water surface was investigated. Before using
emulsifiers or dispersants, however, it was necessary to
determine their toxlclty to fish, especially since most were
proprietary products whose exact chemical composition was
unknown.
The four products which appeared most promising
-------
1179
and on which preliminary bloassays to determine toxicity to
fish were run are listed below together with the toxicity
data obtained:
Products
Wyandotte ULC
(Wyandottc
Chemical Co.)
Pranks Formula
(T. J. Prank Co.,
Mpls.)
Triton X-100
(Rhom -Haas Co.)
Gamlin Spill
Remover
Time |
Test Solution Tim
Pull strength, 75/ ppm "?.k hours \
!
23 percent active !
\
ingredient j
t
1 ounce per gallon 100/ ppm 24 hours j
25 percent solution 100/ ppm 2*1 hours !
25 percent solution [SO/ ppm 17 hours
The Tim (median tolerance limit) is the concentra~
tion at which 50 percent of the teat figh were killed in the
time indicated.
Field trials on oil slicks were made with Wyandotte
ULC and Franks Formula. Because of immediate availability,
Franks Formula was chosen for initial use at rates of 30 and
60 pounds per acre on light and heavy slicks, respectively.
-------
1180
Wyandotte ULC appeared equally safe and effective at an
initial application rate of approximately 20 gallons per acre.
The use of dlatomaceous earth, suggested by repre-
sentatives of the U. S. Public Health Service, was also
explored. Laboratory work by the Minnesota Department of
Health Indicated about one pound of dlatomaceous earth would
be needed to remove four pounds of pure soybean oil
(Appendix A). Limited field trials indicated several appli-
cations at a rate of possibly 200 to 300 pounds per acre
might be required to remove a moderately heavy oil slick.
The limited experiences with emulsifiers, dls-
persants and diatomaceoua earth as described above suggested
their use would be most practical in relatively small areas
of perhaps 100 acres or less. Also, possible adjustment of
the suggested initial application rates should be considered
in the course of practical use.
Related to duck rescue, also, were the efforts of
the Minnesota National Guard to mechanically remove oil and
divert oil from backwater areas where waterfowl were most
likely to concentrate.
EVALUATION OP WATERFOWL LOSSES
The number of live oil-soaked ducks rescued was
1,369 and the number of dead birds collected in the field and
-------
1181
placed In cold storage was 1,^42. Many dead birda were aeon
but were not collected while live birds could still be found.
The ratio of live ducks rescued to dead ducks seen, based on i
i
the questionnaire completed by Individuals in the field on i
i
i
the rescue operation was 1:2.96 (Appendix B). If this ratio j
is used, recognising there in duplication of counts in both j
categortef5 since undoubtedly some hirds were seen pnd reported!
i
by tnorp than one person, th<- estimated number of dead ducks i
i
on the river including tl>^ dead dunks collected is calculated !
i
at approximately ;!-,nOO. Including the live birds affected
but rescued it would appear that a total of approximately
5,300 birds wer*= affected or killed by oil. However, sinc^
ducks heavily covered with oil tended, to crawl into dense
cover where they were hard to find and some ducks exposed to
oil may have flown several milon before being overcome, the
total number of duoks lost is probably substantially greater
than the calculated loss of about 4,POO (r>,300 minus 466
survivors).
Composition of the duck kill was determined by
examination of 2,7^5 dead birds which had been placed in cold
storage and which were later examined by Waterfowl Biologists.
These were the birds collected dead and those which died
after rescue. The numbers of birds by species found in this
examination are summarized on the following page (see also
Appendix C).
-------
1182
Species Number
Lesser scaup duck 1,800
Rinpneckrd duck U^7
Coots and grebes 268
Golunvyr duck 70
'•fe-^.» ,:uck 35
:3ur*'l' h'vul duck 2
^ile clucks , other than vjood ducks
Total ,.,,-, ,
i
fov:! lost ropresents a real monetary
value. Based on dnt- -ornpllr>o, by the U.S. Pish and Wildlife
Service for- 19^0, the national nve^aj'e expenditure per duck
In the vnterfov:! hunter's bag for that year was $12.00.^
( 2/ Data obtained from the I960 National Survey of Fishing
and Hunting and the Waterfowl Status Report, 1961.) In 1962
the State of Illinois placed a value of $5.00 per bird on
ducks killed by water pollution.^ ( ** Personal communication
May 6, 1963 from William J. Harth, Superintendent, Division of
Fisheries, Illinois Department of Conservation.) It la felt
that a value of not less than $5.00 per bird should be placed
on the waterfowl killed on the Mississippi River in Minnesota
-------
1183 j
in 1963. This value is considered to bo the basic intrinsic :
i
worth of the bird and unrelated to costs of rescue and main- j
i
tenanoe of the birds afterwards. i
i
OTHER WILDLIFE LOSSES
l-'.-jmrnnls and other1 nriimals w-^i"~ reported ac seen :
!<"p.~ ( Mpe>-.'.. !:•; ?) In t!:-: ^oll evlnp; numbers: 26 beaver, 1'"'7
i
nuakr«ts rjnn about r<0 "other;"'1 (includes i°ow, dor;, gulls, :
herons, kingfinher, plgoono, pi", skunk, squirrel, turtles, j
i
blackbirds ynd songbirds). It seemn likely that many of the ;
^nimaln 1o t i?s '"other" f^tcco2'iy died from o''iu3^s unrclntoci •
to o±l nnd the counts of beaver and nuskrat arr.- probnbly j
high since many of thcne anitnnlo v;.'-'re probably seen anc
i
reported by more than one person, j
i
i
i
Fi.ib were apparently directly effected very little I
i
by the oil spills. Of approximately 7,000 dead fiah reported ;
seen, 2^7 were listed as recently dead and most of these were •
carp. Winterkill is common 3n shallow backwater areas of the
river and it was the opinion of persona on rescue work ex-
perienced with fish kills that the dead fish seen most probabl
died from causes other than oil pollution.
Bottom fauna of value as fish food may have been
temporarily effected to some extent in localined areas but it
is doubtful that any significant or permanent loss occurred.
-------
1184
I
This conclusion la substantiated by reports on sampleo col-
lected by U. S. Public Health Service Personnel-^-i/ Progress j
Report to Colonel Leon H. Hagen, Assistant Adjutant General,
Minnesota Department of Military Affairs dated April 30, 1963
from Mr. P. E. DeMartini, Chief, Technical Advisory and
Investigations Section, Technical Services Branch, DWSPC,
U. £. Public Health Service, Cincinnati.) and by data collects
from six stations In the Red Wing-Lake Pepin area by the
Section of Research and Planning, Division of Game and Pish
after oil contamination In 1963 (Appendix D).
/&/ BERNARD R. JONES
3
Bernard R. Jonen, Supervisor
Biological Services Unit
Section of Research and Planning
/S/ ROBERT L, JESSEN
Robert L. Jessen, Research Biologist j
Game Research Unit
Section of Research and Planning
/S/ MILO CASEY
Milo Casey, Regional Game Manager
Section of Game
-------
1185
Approved:
/S/ JOHN B. MOYLB
John B. Moylpj, Supervisor
Section of Research and Planning
i
/S/ DAVID B. VESALL j
David B. Vesall, Supervisor
Section of Game
October 31, 1963
# * * *
-------
1166
Appendix A
MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OP HEALTH
Division of Environmental Sanitation
Section of Engineering Laboratories
LABORATORY STUDIES OF OIL
.'ECOVEREP PROM SAVAGE AiMD MANKATO SPILLS
Nino-toon oil samples have boon collected and
c'iara .1;-ri^rri In this stud;/. The results are summarized In
thr attached table.
Initially samples wore extracted with chloroform.
The chloroform and aqueous phases were separated and the
cMo -o 'O:T)(! phase filtered through nodlum porosity paper.
Part <••-• ;if. chloroform solution was treated with activated
carbon, and both parts were placed on a steam bath to
evaporate the chloroform. Im'ra-red studies were made of
the oil residue.
This treatment was satisfactory for soybean oil,
but the petroleum oil under investigation had volatile
aromatic constituents which were mostly removed during treat-
ment. The use of irtran—2 windows makes it possible to
handle wet samples in the Infra-red apparatus and the pro-
cedure finally used in preparing samples waa simply that of
drawing off as dry a portion as possible after the sample
had been allowed to atand for several hours. This procedure
-------
118?
could be expected to eliminate losses of volatile constitu-
ents in the laboratory, but the samples containing petroleum
oil were still low 1n aromatics. Apparently these materials
tend to disappear rapidly, possibly by evaporation, from the
spilled material.
Oil samples were mechanically removed from the
ducks police J-<-<'• > :\ this study and analyzed directly without
treatment.
At times, the o:< 1 7/vb !-•••> i oil. In boiling water, thr oil
*
i
started to float on the surface,, releasing a considerable j
i
quantity of sand and c!lrt ao well an water-soaked tv:igs and ;
!
leaves. Thr t^nr"'<'n^y to s j nk apparently resulted from the !
i
I
cntr*»prrtfMTb of this heavy nvat^riol in the oily mass. j
*
The use of a finely divided material such an i
i
!
diatomacrous earth, which would not readily separate from
th" oil, h^cl been suggested as n means of causing the oil
to sink to the bottom and remain there until decomposed.
Laboratory experiments Indicated that for pure soybean oil
one pound of diatomaceous earth would be required for every
four pounds of oil. Less diatomaceous earth would probably
bo ner-drd in actual use since the oil would already have
entrapped some fine clay, etc. The stability of thr mixture
-------
use
with time is still being tested.
A BOD (5-day biochemical oxygen demand) study was
made of material collected from the beach at Wacouta,
Minnesota, in Upper Lake Pepin on <\pril 17. The sample was
prepared for the BOD test by macerating 6.4 grams of the
solivj material v:ith 2'!', ml. (milliliters) of water in a
i
Waring blonder. The resulting mixture was then diluted with \
i
BOD dilution Tjater in BOD bottles, seeded with river water, j
o '
and incubatoj for P days at 20 C.
Dilutions v.'hloh provided useful oxygen depletion
data, 'rid the oxygen measurements obtained, were as follows:
Sample Concentration Oxygen mg of Oxygrn j
I
in Laboratory Bottle Depletion consumed per !
(mg/l.)_ (rng/l) mg of sample
r>2 4.3 O.OB
26 2.7 0.10
10.4 1.4 0.13
S.2 1.0 0.19
The increase in thr BOD with greater dilution
appears to be attributable to the low solubility of the
material. The results Indicate a relatively low BOD for
organic material. It would not under conditions in the
stream or lake exert an oxygen demand as great as obtained
-------
1189
in the laboratory, since the sample waa thoroughly macerated
and mixed before the analysis. The material normally occura
In the river in large pieces and would not expose much surface
area to bacterial activity.
It appears that oily material typical of the
sample analyzed would not have sufficient oxygen demand to
significantly affect the oxygen resources of the river.
-------
-9-
1190
Appendix A
E-i
CO
d
M
CO
ri
o
Q
c^
Xi
^
a
«c
Q
S
3 *3 C
O
bO t>0 CD
Cj C bO
p, p^ ±1
co co co
s
o
•o
s
•o
a
a)
o
M
d
o
0)
q|
(J
C
O
0)
bO
1
I
§
O
T)
O
TJ
0}
o
CD
O
0)
•3
M
c
o
Si
co
1
9
o
•o
g
^
TJ
a
o
m
rH
•H
0
«
•H
O.
•H
n
•H
m
CO
•H
X
00
•H
3:
•o
near
rH
to
O
•o
g
VH
0
n
rH
T-l
O
OS M
iH -H
O.^
•H -0
eo o
n cfi
•H
(0 (H
CO 0)
0
rH
CO
o
s
o
•o
a
nJ
o
CO
rH
•H
O
B?
•H
&
•H
CO
CO
•H
00
n
•H
X
bC
•5
5:
•o
CD
near
35
vO
xO sO
co to co o o o
cv cv oi en co en
vO
0
Oi
rH
cV
CN
•Jo
0
0
o
O
t»
O
O
vO
o
z
-------
-10-
Appendix A
X
c
a
CO 2
H <«
i-J 2
3£
3£
WD WQ Wp
q^k «J^. v^.
o o o
rH rH rH
I ! i
*
1 Q"J *
-H •
03 M-) O
CO ft O
•ff f)<
K -rH H
CO -H
•> 03 O
-P -rl
t-i 03 M
a CO 73
•H f-l
Q 2: -P O
^C P*3
^J
g ^
( — 1 <^
£CO
fc
C5 O
hi bq
l rj
hT pcj
<3j O
CO CO
rt -H
» ft! •
Q) * nJ
5 -P *
CD 0) cd
S3 ia; co
Q
w
EH
prl
Ci3 3
C-^ . ^
-=«: o
a o
Q W
j 1 pq
M 5
i
81
*3j ir*^
fT^ f*^ fT^
\o ^o ^o
"^^x '*N\ "^^^
lf\ l/"\ f^ —
cv rv cv
^ ^ ^
«3j OQ Q
rH CV ON
NO NO NO
!
^^
rH
•
cti
•H
P.
P.
•rl
CO
03
•H
to
03
•H
•t
3
-a
0)
1
-p
01
n)
-P
03
-p
0]
nJ
K
pr^
XO
'^S^
CO
cv
KI
CO
cv
NO
!
^R.
o
o
rH
•
a)
o
03
V
2
*rl
^
•«
O
r-H
S*
rj
bO
•H
£C