NORTHERN GREAT PLAINS
AQUATIC ASSESSMENT
November 1998
U.S. EPA Main library
Mail Code C267-01
109 TW. Alexander Drfw
Research "Wangle Park, NC 27711
Prepared by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,U.S. Forest Service, U.S.
Geological Survey and U.S. Natural Resources Conservation Service
Primary Author - Thomas R. Johnson, USEPA
Working Group Members - Robert Sprentall, USFS; Allen Heakin, USGS-WRD;
Joyce Williamson, USGS-WRD; Walt Duffy, USGS-BRD; Roy Boschee, NRCS
-------
Table of Contents
Executive Summary
Chapter 1 Aquatic Assessment Introduction
Chapter 2 Status of Aquatic Resources 21
Chapters Wetlands and Riparian Habitat 113
Chapter 4 Water Laws and Restoration Programs 141
Chapters Impacts of Human Activities 159
Chapters Water Use 207
Evaluaton of Assessment, Data Gaps and Future Work 237
List of Figures 239
List of Tables 243
References
244
-------
Executive Summary
This assessment of the aquatic resources
of the Northern Great Plains covers the area
from central Montana to the Red River Valley of
North Dakota and from the Canadian border to
Sandhills of Nebraska. Portions of five states
are within the assessment area, Montana,
Nebraska, North Dakota, South Dakota and
Wyoming. The condition and extent of aquatic
resources such as streams, rivers, lakes,
groundwater and wetlands were examined.
Measures of the status and condition of
these resources include information regarding
quality and use of both surface and
groundwater and the status of aquatic species,
both in an overall biodiversity and community
sense and in particular the status of species of
special concern. In addition, the condition of
riparian areas and the condition and extent of
wetland'areas are also examined. Linked with
information on the status and condition of
aquatic resources is a discussion of the
impacts of human activities to these resources,
such as hydrologic modifications and pollution.
Five general questions were proposed at
the outset of the investigation which were
designed to determine the status and impacts
to the various resources. These questions are
presented herewith major findings under each.
The text of the report contains many more.
Question 1 (Chapter 2): What is known about
the current status and apparent trends in water
quality, aquatic habitat and aquatic species in
the Northern Great Plains Assessment Area?
•There are 180 eight-digit hydrologic unit codes
(watersheds) in the Northern Great Plains
Assessment Area.
•Precipitation is highest in the southeastern
portions of the NGPAA (eastern South Dakota
and eastern Nebraska) at more than 20 inches.
It is lowest in northeastern Wyoming and
eastern Montana with less than T5 inches.
•The major aquifer systems located in the
NGPAA include unconsolidated alluvial and
glacial deposit aquifers, the High Plains aquifer
system, the Northern Great Plains aquifer
system and Great Plains aquifer system.
•The hydrograph of the Missouri River has
changed from having two prominent flood
peaks each year to a long steady flow covering
most of the year.
•Most of the watersheds in the NGPAA
experience mean flows of less than 1000 cfs.
A few watersheds in the Yellowstone and
Missouri River mainstems have mean flows of
greater than 10,000 cfs. Much of the NGPAA
experience wide variabilities in flow from year
to year.
•Reservoir area is greatest in watersheds
connected with the Missouri River, reflecting
the existence of larger reservoirs such as
Oahe, Sakakawea and Fort Peck.
•The watersheds with the highest percentages
of assessed miles of streams partially
supporting and not supporting uses include
large sections of the NGPAA, particularly in the
Red River basin, the tributaries to the Missouri
in South Dakota, the Milk and other Missouri
tributaries in Montana and the Platte basin in
Nebraska.
•The watersheds with the lowest percentages
of assessed miles of streams partially
supporting and not supporting uses are the
James Headwaters, the Little Missouri and
parts of the Missouri River in North Dakota.
•The High Plains Aquifer generally has very
good water quality in terms of dissolved solids.
•The greatest number of pesticide detections in
ground water have occurred in Holt and
Wheeler counties in Nebraska; Potter County in
South Dakota; Rolette County in North Dakota
and Teton County in Montana.
•There are 18 TE&SC aquatic species within
the Northern Great Plains Assessment Area.
Of these, 7 are fish and 11 are mollusks.
•There are no aquatic species listed as
threatened. There are 3 endangered species,
1 fish (pallid sturgeon) and 2 mollusks (winged
mapleleaf and fat pocketbook). An additional
-------
Executive Summsry
species is proposed to be listed as endangered
(tcpeka shiner).
•There are 3 candidate species, all of which are
fish (sturgeon chub, sicklefin chub, and topeka
shiner).
•There are 12 species which are of special
concern that are not listed as endangered,
threatened or candidates (global rank of G3 or
lower).
•There is 1 bird species listed as endangered
(least tem) and 1 listed as threatened (piping
plover). These are listed as a result of changes
in the hydrology of the Missouri River.
•The watersheds with the greatest number of
endangered and special concern fish species
are the Lower James, the Upper James and the
Lewis and Clark Lake stretch of the Missouri
River.
Question 2 (Chapter 3): What is the extent
and composition of riparian and wetland areas?
What are the land coverages in the
Assessment Area?
•Eastern Montana has the most riverine
wetlands according to the NRCS. Central and
eastern North Dakota, northeastern Wyoming
and much of South Dakota have the least
amounts of riverine wetlands.
•The greatest decreases in riverine wetlands
during the period 1982 to 1992 have occurred
in northeast Wyoming and central South
Dakota. The greatest increases have occurred
in the Black Hills and Sand Hills.
•The greatest concentration of wetlands in the
NGPAA occur in the Prairie Pothole region of
ND, SD and MT.
•73% of historical wetland acres remain in
Montana; 55% in North Dakota; 65% in South
Dakota; 65% in Nebraska; and about 60% in
Wyoming.
•Most wetland losses have been the result of
conversions for agriculture.
•The greatest losses since presettlement by
percentage have occurred in North Dakota,
with the most extensive drainage occurring in
the Red River Valley.
•Wetland losses in the last ten years have
been reduced to less than 3% per year in most
parts of the NGPAA. However, in many parts
of the NGPAA, increases in wetland acreage
are being noted.
•Recent changes (since 1980s) have seen
wetland losses the Little Missouri basin,
western North and South Dakota, the Red
River Valley, the lower Yellowstone, Niobrara
and Cheyenne Rivers. Recent gains have
been recorded in the Milk, Upper Yellowstone,
Powder, Belle Fourche, Loup, Platte, James
and Sheyenne River basins.
•The Sand Hills and northeastern North Dakota
contain the largest amounts of palustrine
wetlands and the least amounts occur in
western and central South Dakota.
•Increases by percentage in palustrine
wetlands from 1982 to 1992 occurred in the
western and eastern portions of the NGPAA.
Decreases have occurred in much of the
central NGPAA, with the largest in western
North Dakota.
Question 3 (Chapter 4): What laws, policies
and programs for the protection of water
quality, streams, wetlands and riparian areas
are in place, and how do they affect aquatic
resources, other resources and human uses
within the Northern Great Plains Assessment
Area?
•The Clean Water Act, the Safe Drinking Water
Act and the Endangered Species Act are the
three major pieces of federal legislation
available to protect aquatic resources.
•Numerous grant and restoration programs are
available from various federal and state
agencies for the protection and restoration of
aquatic systems.
Question 4 (Chapter 5): What are the current
and potential effects on aquatic resources from
various human activities?
•Human population in the NGPAA is mainly
-------
Northern Great P/a/ns Aquatic Assessment
centered around a number of cities (Billings,
Fargo, Bismarck, Rapid City, Casper, etc).
Much of the area has a low population density.
•Human population growth is occurring fastest
in counties with the larger cities, the area
surrounding the Black Hills, southern Montana,
northeastern Wyoming and in a number of
Indian Reservations.
•Watersheds with the greatest number of
stream miles impacted from dams, diversions
and wetland drainage are the Upper and Lower
Tongue, the Lower Powder, the Sun River, the
Upper Missouri-Dearborn, the Lower Bighorn,
the Lower Souris, Upper Sheyenne, Pembina,
Middle Sheyenne, Upper James, Lower
Sheyenne, Maple River and the Western Wild
Rice River.
•Watersheds with the greatest amount of
irrigated acreage are the Milk, Teton,
Yellowstone, Platte, North Platte, Lower Loup,
Niobrara, ElkhoYn, Belle Fourche, Upper
Tongue and Lewis and Clark Lake. Relatively
little irrigated cropland occurs throughout much
of North Dakota/South Dakota, the Sand Hills
and outside of major river valleys in eastern
Montana and northeastern Wyoming.
•Watersheds with the greatest total number of
NPDES dischargers (major and minor) are
Lewis and Clark Lake, Upper Elkhom, Middle
Platte-Buffalo, Middle North Platte River-
Scottsbluff, Lake Sakakawea, Little Powder
River, Beaver Creek (Cheyenne River
watershed), Lance Creek, Salt Creek (Powder
River watershed) and the Middle North Platte
River-Casper.
•Agricultural activities in general impact the
ability of assessed streams to meet designated
uses across large areas of the NGPAA.
•Watersheds with the greatest number of
assessed stream miles impacted by nutrients
are the Upper Powder, Lower Yellowstone-
Sunday, Middle Milk, Cedar Creek (in North
Dakota), Lower Souris, Upper James, Western
Wild Rice River, Maple River and Lower
Sheyenne.
•Watersheds with the greatest number of
assessed stream miles impacted by siltation
are the Western Wild Rice River, the Lower
Sheyenne, Cedar Creek, Lower Heart, Upper
Powder, Clarks Fork of the Yellowstone, Upper
Missouri-Dearborn and the Smith River.
•Watersheds with the greatest number of
assessed stream miles impacted by irrigated
crop production are mainly in Montana and
Wyoming.
•The Universal Soil Loss Equation predicts the
greatest potential for erosion in the NGPAA to
be in parts of western North Dakota and
southeastern South Dakota.
•The greatest concentration of total animal
units are in parts of Nebraska (due to cattle and
hogs). The lowest concentrations are in a
swath from northeastern' Montana to
northeastern North Dakota.
•The largest areas of harvested cropland are in
eastern and central North Dakota, northeastern
South Dakota, along the Platte River in
Nebraska and northern Montana. The lowest
amounts are in northeastern Wyoming,
southeastern Montana and western South
Dakota.
•Pesticide runoff potential is greatest in the Red
River Valley, the lower James, lower Missouri,
lower Loup and Middle Platte River basins.
The lowest is in western South Dakota,
northeastern Wyoming and most of Montana.
•The greatest amounts of nitrogen fertilizer
used are in eastern and northern North Dakota,
the Platte River Valley and north-central
Montana. The lowest amounts used are in
western South Dakota and northeastern
Wyoming. Nitrogen runoff potential is greatest
in the Platte Valley, eastern South Dakota and
southeastern North Dakota. It is lowest in
northeastern Wyoming and scattered areas of
Montana.
•Sediment delivery potential is greatest in parts
of the Red River Valley, Elm River (James
basin), Lewis and Clark Lake watershed and
the Two Medicine River and the Teton River in
the Upper Missouri basin. It is lowest in
northeastern Wyoming, the Sand Hills and
-------
Executive Summary
southeastern and eastern Montana.
Question 5 (Chapter 6): What are the status
and apparent trends in water usage and
supplies within the Northern Great Plains
Assessment Area including water rights and
uses on National Forest System Lands?
•The greatest total water use in the NGPAA is
in the Platte Valley of Nebraska and the
Missouri River near around Bismarck. Surface
water use is greatest in the Missouri near
Bismarck, in the Yellowstone, Platte and Milk
River basins. Ground water use is greatest in
the Platte, Niobrara, Loup and Elkhom basins.
Watersheds which use more than 25 million
gallons per day of ground water are
predominantly restricted to Nebraska.
•Overall, irrigation is the greatest single type of
use for water in the NGPAA. The greatest total
use (surface and ground) for irrigation is in the
Yellowstone, Platte, Milk, Niobrara, Lower Loup
and Elkhom basins.
•The greatest uses for thermoelectric use are in
the Missouri River near Bismarck and the
Lower South Platte.
•Water use for agriculture (irrigation and
livestock) declined during the period 1985 to
1995 in much of South Dakota, North Dakota,
northern Nebraska and eastern Montana, with
the greatest decreases seen in the Lower Belle
Fourche and the Middle Niobrara watersheds.
The greatest increases were seen in parts of
the Platte, Loup, Powder, Tongue, Upper
Yellowstone and Marias River basins.
•Total water use changes during the period
1985 to 1995 closely match the changes in
agricultural water use.
-------
Aquatic Assessment Introduction
1.1 INTRODUCTION
This assessment of the aquatic resources
of the Northern Great Plains outlines the status
of water quality and quantity for both surface
water and ground water, aquatic habitats
(streams, rivers, lakes, wetlands and riparian
areas) and the aquatic species that use these
habitats. It also describes the impacts of
human activities on water quality, water
quantity and aquatic habitats and organisms,
as well as programs and projects being
undertaken to protect and restore these
resources. The report examined patterns, and
where enough data were available, assesses
future trends. Five questions were posed
regarding the aquatic resources of the Northern
Great Plains that this assessment addresses.
The five questions are listed below, along with
the corresponding chapter. •
a. What is known about the current status and
apparent trends in water quality, aquatic
habitat and aquatic species within the
Northern Great Plains planning area?
(Chapter 2) -
b What is the extent of riparian and wetland
areas and composition? (Chapter 3)
c What laws, policies and programs for the
protection of water quality, streams,
wetlands and riparian areas are in place,
and how do they affect aquatic resources,
other resources and human uses within the
Northern Great Plains Assessment Area?
(Chapter 4)
d. What are the current and potential effects
on aquatic resources from various human
activities? (Chapter 5)
e. What are the status and apparent trends in
water usage and supplies within the
Northern Great Plains Assessment Area?
(Chapter 6)
This assessment is a broadscale effort to
establish current aquatic conditions in the
Northern Great Plains. It will also be used in
the preparation of finer-scale assessments to
be performed at the landscape level. The
landscape scale assessment focusses on the
individual National Grassland Units that are
contained within the larger Northern Great
Plains Assessment Area.
1.2 DESCRIPTION OF THE ASSESSMENT
AREA
The Great Plains cover 600 million acres
spanning from Saskatchewan and Alberta to
•the southwestern United States and Mexico
and from the foothills of the Rocky Mountains
east to Illinois (Ostlie, et al. 1996). This
assessment covers the northern portion of the
Great Plains, approximately 250 million acres,
of which only about four million acres are within
the National Grassland system. The vast
majority of land in this area is in private
ownership. The area included in this
assessment is shown in Figure 1.2.1. The
Northern Great Plains Assessment Area
(NGPAA) consists of portions of five states:
eastern and northern Montana, all of North
Dakota, the western five-sixths of South.
Dakota, northeastern Wyoming, and north
central and northwestern Nebraska. Areas in
Canada that may fall within the ecoregions
used to define this assessment were not
included. The area is drained by two major
river systems. The Red and Souris Rivers flow
to Hudson Bay, and the Missouri River drains to
the Mississippi River and the Gulf of Mexico.
There are numerous important subbasins
including the Sheyenne, a tributary to the Red
River, and the Yellowstone, Little Missouri,
Cheyenne, James, Powder, Niobrara and
Platte Rivers, tributaries to the Missouri River.
-------
Chapter 1 - Introduction
Topography
Elevations range from about 700 to 800
feet above sea level in the North Dakota prairie
pothole country and along the Red River to
6000 feet in the Powder River Basin and
Missouri Escarpment (U.S. Forest Service,
1994). The southern portion of the Northern
Great Plains in the Nebraska Sand Hills ranges
between two thousand and four thousand feet
in elevation.
The northern and eastern parts of the
region are typified by glaciated plains and hills
with numerous kettle lakes and moraines. The
Red River valley is flat with rolling terrain at the
edges. Western and central areas of the
Northern Great Plains are gently sloping to
rolling plains with badlands and tablelands as
one moves further west. The southern portion
contains the Nebraska Sand Hills consisting of
dunes stabilized by vegetation with gently
sloping valleys between the dunes.
The boundary between the western Great
Plains and the glaciated northeastern plains in
central North Dakota is referred to as the
Missouri Escarpment (Keefer, 1974). West of
the escarpment, the country levels off onto the
Missouri Plateau, which stretches to central
Montana, northeastern Wyoming and
northwestern South Dakota. The most eastern
segment of the Missouri Plateau is a 12 to 25-
mile wide strip of irregular terrain of hills and
lakes called the Missouri Coteau (Keefer,
1974). The landscape of the Missouri Plateau
is dominated by plains and low-lying hills
interrupted by entrenched river valleys and
isolated uplands, buttes and mesas. The
Williston and Powder River Basins are
downfolds separate from the adjacent geologic
features (Keefer, 1974). The Williston Basin is
located in western North Dakota, northwestern
South Dakota and eastern Wyoming, while the
Powder River Basin is located in southeastern
Montana and northeastern Wyoming.
Hydrology
The hydrology of the Northern Great Plains
varies considerably over the region. Well
developed dendritic drainages exist in the
central and western parts and fairly
disorganized drainages characterize the
northeastern section (U.S. Forest Service,
1994). Large portions of the northeastern
Northern Great Plains have terminal drainages
which flow to small lakes and wetlands, never
entering the Missouri or Red Rivers. These
drainages are most common in eastern North
Dakota and northeastern South Dakota. The
southern Northern Great Plains (Sand Hills) has
many small lakes and ponds.
The dominant hy.drologic feature of the
Northern Great Plains is the Missouri River.
Exiting the Rocky Mountains in western
Montana, the Missouri Rivertravels eastward to
North Dakota, where it converges with the
Yellowstone River. It then flows southeast and
southward through central South Dakota before
turning eastward again forming the boundary
between South Dakota and Nebraska. Five
dams have been constructed on the Missouri
River in this section, the largest of which form
Fort Peck Reservoir in Montana, Lake
Sakakawea in North Dakota and Lake Oahe in
North and South Dakota. Another larger
reservoir, Canyon Ferry, is just upstream of the
NGPAA on the Missouri.
Geo/ogy/So;/s
The underlying geology of the assessment
area is predominantly Cretaceous shale with
Tertiary sandstone in the Sand Hills and
Quaternary alluvium covering Archean granite
under portions of the Red River Valley (U.S.
Forest Service, 1994). In addition, the Red
River Valley has lacustrine deposits from once
being covered by the Glacial Lake Agassiz.
Glacial till covers the northern and eastern
parts of the assessment area. The central and
8
-------
Northern Great Plains Aquatic Assessment
western portions of the assessment area have
soils of fine to medium texture and in the Sand
Mills, the sandstones are covered by loess and
dune sand.
Climate
The Great Plains climate results from its
orientation on the continent with respect to the
Rocky Mountains and the Gulf of Mexico
(Reichman, 1989). Pacific airflows in from the
west and loses its moisture passing over the
Rocky Mountains, resulting in scarce rainfall,
which in turn yields the arid shortgrass prairies.
Further east, the airflow is warmed and
rehydrated by the northerly flow of moist air
from the Gulf of Mexico. The increased rainfall
yields the mixed and tallgrass prairies.
Therefore, there is a general increase in rainfall
on the Northern Plains from west to east, with
10 to 20 inches per year falling in the west and
17 to 24 inches falling in the Red River Valley,
Sand Hills and eastern South Dakota (U.S.
Forest Service, 1994).
Average temperatures increase from north
to south, from 36° to 45° F in northern Montana
and the Red River Valley to 48° to 52°F in the
Sand Hills (U.S. Forest Service, 1994).
Correspondingly, the growing season ranges
from approximately 100 to 130 days in the
north and northwest to 130 to 160 days in the
south and southeast. Evapotranspiration in the
Sand Hills is about eight to nine inches during
the warmest months (Willhite and Hubbard,
1990).
Grasslands
Fire and grazing are the major factors in
maintaining grasslands across regional scales,
while local variation, however, is more
influenced by topography, soils, and seed
source availability (Harrington and Harmon,
1995). North to south gradients in temperature,
day length, and precipitation, along with the
west to east moisture gradient, affect the
natural distribution of grass species. The
temperature gradient also influences the
distribution of agricultural crops: spring wheat,
rye, oats, and barley are grown in the north;
com is grown in the central plains; and winter
wheat and grain sorghum is grown in the south
(Harrington and Harmon, 1995). The moisture
gradient coincides with the subdivision of the
grasslands into shortgrass steppe, mixed-grass
prairie and tallgrass prairie. The following is a
brief discussion of the vegetation types that
appear on the Great Plains (from Harrington
and Harmon, 1995).
Shortgrass Steppe consists of grasses that are
20 to 50 cm high. Blue grama and buffalo
grass dominate this area, but western
wheatgrass, needle-and-thread, and wiregrass
are also important. These grasses are timed to
grow with spring rains and most go dormant in
the summer. They may have evolved in
response to grazing pressure from native
ungulates as indicated by their lowness and
focus on root production. Shorter grasses can
tolerate years of below normal rainfall
Mixed-Grass Prairie is a transition zone
between shortgrass and tallgrass. Therefore,
it contains species of both regions. Blue grama
and buffalo grass occupy a lower layer, while
little bluestem, needle-and-thread, side-oats
grama and western wheatgrass penetrate
above this level to heights of about 125 cm.
This zone shifts eastward in dry years and
westward in wet ones. These are not species
migrations, but changes in species dominance
within the region. A comparison of climate
factors to vegetation types shows that the
mixed-grass prairie coincides with a region
receiving 50% or less of normal rainfall during
July of major drought years.
Taligrass Prairie contains grasses that grow to
more than two meters in height. It has the
greatest species diversity of the grassland
-------
NGP Boundary
Figure 1.2.1 Northern Great Plains Assessment Area
-------
Northern Great Plains Aquatic Assessment
types with the dominants being big bluestem,
Indian grass, and switchgrass. On drier sites,
little bluestem, side-oats grama, prairie
dropseed, needlegrass and June grass are
common. Climate and fire both play a role in
maintaining tallgrass prairie.
Riparian Forests penetrate into the grassland
region along major streams. They use the local
ground water supply of the stream and, as a
result, are somewhat resistant to major
droughts. Cottonwoods, elms, willows and
ashes are the dominant trees. Their seedlings
germinate during spring flooding.
In the NGPAA, grasses dominate the
landscape, with variations in species depending
on the rainfall and temperature regime of the
area. Bluestem and indian grass mixed with
northern floodplain forest was the original
vegetation of the Red River Valley (U.S. Forest
Service, 1994). To the west and south,
floodplain forest reaches into the grasslands
along the streams, but grasses change to a
wheatgrassrbluestem-needlegrass community.
In the Nebraska Sand Hills, bluestem and
sandreed mix with wheatgrass and
needlegrass. Farther west, a grama-
wheatgrass-needlegrass community begins to
dominate. In some areas, especially in the
southwest portion of the assessment area,
ponderosa pine grows on some of the higher
ridges and slopes leading to higher elevations
(Black Hills, Bighorn Mountains, etc.), •
Land Use
The Red River Valley is considered to be
prime farmland and the landscape is dominated
by agriculture. Wheat, sugar beets and
potatoes are grown here. To the west and
southwest from the Red River Valley, dryland
crops take over as well as cattle grazing.
Reaching the extreme southern and western
parts of the NGPAA. such as the Nebraska
Sand Hills and the Powder River Basin, grazing
becomes the dominant land use.
Mineral extraction is important in some
parts of the assessment area. Surface mining
for coal and oil and gas extraction is common in
parts of Wyoming, Montana and North Dakota.
Metal mining (gold, silver, etc.) is important in
the Black Hills. While not in the assessment
area, this mining has impacted Great Plains
streams beyond the Black Hills.
The human population of the counties
within the NGPAA is 1,953,363 based on 1995
Census Data estimates. This estimate includes
some areas outside the boundary used for the
NGPAA because the population for entire
counties is used, whether or not the entire
county is within the boundary. The majority of
this population lives in eastern and central
North Dakota, eastern South Dakota, the
eastern side of the Black Hills, the North Platte
Valley in Wyoming and Nebraska, and along
the Yellowstone, Milk and Upper Missouri
Rivers in Montana. The areas with very low
population densities are the Sand Hills of
Nebraska, central and western South Dakota
and much of eastern Montana and
northeastern Wyoming outside of major river
valleys. Noticable population increases
occurred between 1985 and 1990 in the
northeast part of the Black Hills and in parts of
central North Dakota.
1.3 WATERSHEDS OF THE NORTHERN
GREAT PLAINS
The NGPAA contains all or portions of 180
eight-digit hydrologic unit codes. This size unit
represents the scale at which the information in
this assessment will be analyzed and
presented. Throughout the document, eight-
digit hydrologic units will be synonymous with
the term watershed. The average size of a
eight-digit hydrologic unit code in the NGPAA is
1,191,087 acres (1861 square miles), with
11
-------
Chapter 1 - Introduction
ranges from 7735 to 4,321,835 acres (12 to
6753 square miles). The watersheds in the
assessment area are depicted in Figure 1.3.1,
along with four of the major drainage areas
(Hudson Bay, Yellowstone River, Platte River
and the rest of the Missouri River basin).
1.4 ECOLOGICAL REGIONS OF THE
NORTHERN GREAT PLAINS
Two major ecological divisions divide the
Northern Great Plains Assessment Area: the
Prairie Division (along the Red River in North
Dakota) and the Temperate Steppe Division
(the remaining area) (U.S. Forest Service,
1994). Within the Prairie Division in the
Northern Great Plains, is the Prairie Parkland
Province and the Red River Section within that
Province.
The Temperate Steppe Division has two
ecological provinces, the Great Plains Steppe
and the Great Plains Dry Steppe. The Great
Plains Steppe Province has four sections: the
Northeastern Glaciated Plains, the North-
Central Great Plains, the Western Glaciated
Plains and the Nebraska Sand Hills. The Great
Plains Dry Steppe Province also has four
sections: the Powder River Basin, the
Northwestern Glaciated Plains, the
Northwestern Great Plains and the Northern
Glaciated Plains. The Black Hills are not
included in the NGPAA, but are discussed as
necessary when they influence the plains
surrounding them or when particular data sets
include them. The ecological sections are
shown in Figure 1.4.1. The following is an
overview of each ecological section within the
NGPAA, with information primarily from
Ecological Subregions of the United States,
U.S. Forest Service (1994), unless otherwise
noted.
Prairie Division
Prairie Parkland Province
This Division and Province contain only one
ecosection within the NGPAA. The Red River
Valley Section encompasses the eastern one-
sixth of North Dakota and a portion of western
Minnesota that is not included in the
Assessment Area. It is 18,300 square miles in
size (including the Minnesota side). The Red
River of the North flows through this section
before crossing the border into Canada,
eventually entering Lake Winnipeg and Hudson
Bay. The Red River is formed by the
confluence of the Bois de Sioux River and
other tributaries. This section was the southern
extension of what originally was the Glacial
Lake Agassiz. Therefore, it is often referred to
as the Glacial Lake Agassiz Plain. Tributaries
to the Red River enter from the uplands to the
east and west. The major tributaries entering
from the North Dakota side are the Sheyenne,
Maple, Goose, Forest, Park, Tongue, and
Pembina Rivers. The original vegetation of this
area was bluestem-indiangrass with northern
floodplain forest along the rivers and streams.
The topography is level, creating
meandering streams. The Red River varies
greatly in flow, with destructive floods occurring
on occasion in April and May from snowmelt
and rainfall (U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, 1992a). Because of the low gradient,
floods that do occur tend to inundate large
areas (North Dakota Department of Health,
1988). Originally there were numerous
wetlands in this region, however, most have
been drained for agriculture. Large numbers of
both nesting and migrating waterfowl were
once supported by these wetlands, but many
have been reduced in numbers, especially
pintail, mallard, teal, and canvasback.
However, others such as Canada goose and
sandhill crane are doing well because of grain
residues from agriculture.
12
-------
U.S. EPA Main Libraiy
Mail Code C267-01
109 TW. Alexander Drive
Research Wangle Park, NC 27711
Major Drainages
Bay
\Missouri River
Yellowstone River
Plane River
Figure 1.3.1 Watersheds and Major Drainage Basins of (he Northern Great Plains
-------
Chapter 1 - Introduction
The land cover in the southern part of this
section is predominately cropland mixed with
riparian woodland and pasture. The central
area grows more small grains and com. The
northern part is a mixture of the same
coverages in the south and central with the
addition of wheat, potatoes and sugar beets.
This region is the most populated area in North
Dakota, with major population centers along the
Red River itself, including the cities of Fargo,
Grand Forks and Wahpeton. Non-irrigated
agriculture is the most important economic
activity in this section. The eastern portion of
the Sheyenne National Grassland is in this
section.
Temperate Steppe Division
Great Plains Steppe Province
The Northeastern Glaciated Plains Section
is located in east-central and northern North
Dakota and covers an area of 27,900 square
miles. The terrain is level to undulating glacial
till and lake plains. Drainage in this area is
disorganized with numerous pothole lakes and
ponds, many of which serve as terminal
drainages, the largest of which is Devils Lake.
The Devils Lake basin became closed after the
last glaciation receded and southerly drainage
into the Sheyenne River ceased (Ryckman,
1995). The Souris River drains the
northwestern part of this section. Its
headwaters are in Canada, but the Souris flows
into the United States and out again, joining the
Assiniboine River and eventually the Red River,
near Winnipeg. Manitoba. The headwaters of
the James River and the Sheyenne River are in
the Northeastern Glaciated Plains as are
several of the smaller rivers that drain to the
Red River, including the Turtle, Maple, Forest
and Park. The Pembina River also enters from
Canada, flowing through this section before
entering the Red River Valley.
Many of the wetlands in this section have
been drained. However, remaining wetlands
provide important habitat for waterfowl. The
depressions, ponds and potholes are used as
resting and feeding grounds along north-south
migration routes and as nesting and rearing
areas for numerous species of ducks. This
area is part of what is commonly referred to as
the Prairie Pothole Region. Despite the
wetland losses that have occurred, this region
is the most productive waterfowl breeding area
in the country. The native vegetation is
wheatgrass-needlegrass-bluestem.
Small grains, corn, riparian woodland,
pasture and mixed cropland occur in the
southeastern part of this section. North of this,
the small grains and corn begin to dominate.
Farther north, wheat, barley and sunflowers are
grown and dominate the land use to the north
and west, mixed in with scattered grassland.
The Turtle Mountains are in the northeastern
portion of this section, near the Canadian
border and have a land cover consisting of
cropland, wetlands, pasture and some
woodlands. Most of the northeastern portions
of the Northeastern Glaciated Plains are
cropland for wheat, potatoes and sugar beets.
The largest cities in this section are
Jamestown, Devils Lake and Minot. The Fort
Totten and Turtle Mountain Indian Reservations
are located in this area. The economy is
predominantly agriculturally based. The
western parts of the Sheyenne National
Grassland is in this section.
The Western Glaciated Plains Section
forms a corridor 11,600 square miles in size
running north to south through east-central
South Dakota. This section is an important
migration corridor for most species of waterfowl
and potholes or associated wetlands provide
breeding habitats for many species. The land
is level to undulating glacial till plains with a
native vegetation of wheatgrass-bluestem-
needlegrass and floodplain forest.
14
-------
Ecosections
I Nor A western
Glaciated Plains
2 Northern
Glaciated Plains
3 Nordieastern
Glaciated Plains
4 Red River Valley
5 Northwestern
Great Plaint
6 Powder River Basin
7 Western
Glaciated Plains
8 North-Central
Great Plains
9 Ulack Hills
10 Nebraska Sand Hills
Figure 1.4.1 Ecological Sections of the Northern Great Plains (from Ecological Regions of the United States, U.S. Forest Service
-------
Chapter 1 - Introduction
Most of this section is drained by the James
River. The southern portion is drained by the
Missouri River and its immediate tributaries
(Choteau Creek). Portions of this section drain
into lakes and wetlands that do not reach either
the James or the Missouri. The Missouri River
is dammed just downstream of this section
(Gavins Point), which forms Lewis and Clark
Lake, whose waters reach up into the southern
tip of the section:
In the northern and central portions of this
section, a mosaic of cropland, riparian
woodland, pasture and wetlands dominate. In
the south, this changes to corn, soybeans and
alfalfa. The largest cities in this section are
Aberdeen, Huron and Mitchell, however, there
are numerous small towns, the economy is
based on agriculture with some manufacturing.
The Yankton Indian Reservation and the
northern portion of the Santee Indian
Reservation in Nebraska are in this section. No
national grassland units fall within the Western
Glaciated Plains.
The North-Central Great Plains Section
extends from northern Nebraska to southern
and central South Dakota and is 16,700 square
miles in size. The area is level to gently rolling
till plains with potholes and well-defined
drainage systems. Prairie potholes are
important habitat for many species of migrating
waterfowl. The native vegetation is
wheatgrass-needlegrass-bluestem and
northern floodplain forest.
The northeastern iparts of this section drain
to the James River, while the Missouri River
flows through the central part. The White River
enters from the Northwestern Great Plains
Section and joins the Missouri River. The
Missouri has two darns in this section, Big Bend
and Fort Randall, which form Lake Sharpe and
Lake Francis Case, respectively. The southern
parts of this section are drained by the Niobrara
and its tributaries such as the Keya Paha River
and Ponca Creek.
The land cover in the northern reaches of
this section is scattered crop and hayland
mixed with bluestem-wheatgrass-needlegrass.
This grass complex is the dominant vegetation
in the western and southwestern region of the
North-Central Great Plains. Croplands of com,
soybeans, and alfalfa mix with riparian
woodland and pasture in the southeast portion.
This section is not heavily populated, the
largest towns being Winner and Chamberlain.
The Rosebud, Lower Brule and Crow Creek
Indian Reservations are within this section.
The southwestern half of the Fort Pierre
National Grassland is in this section.
The Nebraska Sand Hills Section contains
about 19,300 square miles located in north-
central Nebraska. It is an area of loess and
dune sand stabilized by vegetation. The native
vegetation is wheatgrass-needlegrass-
bluestem with bluestern-sandreed. Only a few
minor scattered areas of cropland exist. The
Niobrara River flows through the northern edge
of the Sand Hills, entering from the southern
portion of the Northwestern Great Plains. The
headwaters of the Loup River, its tributaries
(Cedar Creek, Calamus Creek, Dismal River,
• Middle, North and South Forks) and the
Elkhom River are in the Sand Hills. The
Niobrara flows to the Missouri River, the Loup
and the Elkhom flow to the Platte River and
eventually to the Missouri River. The High
Plains Aquifer, which stretches from southern
South Dakota to the Texas panhandle, reaches
its greatest thickness under the Sand Hills
(Bleed, 1990).
The human population in the Sand Hills is
very small. Most towns in this area have only a
few hundred inhabitants. The largest nearby
towns, Valentine and Alliance are on the very
edge outside of the Sand Hills. Most of the
land is in large ranches and cattle production is
16
-------
Northern Great Plains Aquatic Assessment
the main economic activity. The Bessey Unit of
the Nebraska National Forest and the Samuel
R. McKelvie National Forest are in the Sand
Hills.
Great Plains Dry Steppe Province
The Northwestern Glaciated Plains Section
section covers 40,700 square miles in northern
Montana. The terrain is level to gently rolling
glacial till plains and rolling hills on the Missouri
Plateau. There are high density dendritic
drainage patterns on areas of exposed marine
shales. Low to medium density drainage
patterns occur on the better drained glacial till.
The native vegetation is grama-wheatgrass-
needlegrass.
The Marias River and its tributaries flow into
this section from the Rocky Mountains and then
join the Missouri River. The Milk River enters
from Canada (after starting in the United
States) and meets the Missouri River just
downstream from Fort Peck Dam. The Missouri
River mainstem exits the Rocky Mountains,
collects flow from the Marias and Milk, and
enters the Northern Glaciated Plains. The
Missouri River is dammed to produce Fort Peck
Reservoir.
Around the Fort Peck Reservoir in the
southeastern part of this section, the dominant
land cover is grama-wheatgrass-needlegrass
grassland. The central and western parts are
a mixture of grassland and dry cropland.
Irrigated cropland occurs east of the Rocky
Mountains and in the Milk River Valley.
Grassland mixed with conifers spreads out from
the mountains in the west and southwest. A
few small mountain ranges dominated by
ponderosa pine, douglas-fir and other conifers
dot the region. These include the Little Rocky
Mountains, the Sweet Grass Hills, the
Highwood Mountains and the Bear Paw
Mountains. The Little Belt and Judith
Mountains form the southwest limit of this
section.
The major population centers in this section
are Great Falls, Havre, Glasgow and Wolf
Point. All or parts of four Indian Reservations
are contained within this section, including
Blackfeet, Rocky Boys, Fort Belknap and Fort
Peck. • It also includes all of the Charles M.
Russell National Wildlife Refuge surrounding
Fort Peck Lake. The economy is based
primarily on ranching and irrigated agriculture.
There are no national grassland units in the
Northwestern Glaciated Plains.
The Northern Glaciated Plains Section
forms a band from northwestern North Dakota
to north-central South Dakota along the
Missouri River covering 26,900 square miles.
The land is gently undulating to rolling glacial till
plains. The wildlife species here are typical of
riparian areas and prairie potholes. The
streams form low to medium dendritic drainage
patterns, and change to high.density dendritic
patterns where the sedimentary rocks are
exposed due to erosion of badlands.
The Missouri River dominates this region.
It enters this section before the confluence with
the Poplar River, joins the Yellowstone River
and becomes impounded as Lake Sakakawea
behind Garrison Dam. The Missouri then flows
into the Northwestern Great Plains, but
tributaries to it flow west from the Northern
Glaciated Plains. This region is known as the
Missouri Coteau and it contains numerous
terminal lakes, ponds and wetlands.
Dry cropland, grassland, riparian woodland
and pasture dominate the southern part of this
area, which changes to grassland with
scattered cropland and hayland to the north. In
the northwestern portion, dry cropland with
scattered grassland and wheat is the primary
land cover. The far northwestern portion is
covered by wheatgrass-needlegrass.
17
-------
Chapter 1 - Introduction
The largest city in the Northern Glaciated
Plains is Williston, North Dakota. This section
includes the Fort Berthold Indian Reservation
and the northern portions of the Little Missouri
National Grassland. The economy is based on
agriculture, recreation, oil and gas extraction
and coal mining.
The Northwestern Great Plains Section is
located in southwestern North Dakota, western
South Dakota, northwestern Nebraska,
northeastern Wyoming and southeastern
Montana. It is the largest of the ecological
sections in the Northern Great Plains with an
area of 76,100 square miles. The terrain is
gently sloping to rolling shale plains. There are
some steep flat-topped buttes and badlands.
The drainages are long, structurally controlled
second and third order streams with low
gradients and are fed by high density dendritic
first order streams.
The Missouri River is dammed in this
section to produce Lake Oahe After exiting
Oahe Darn it flows into the North-Central Great
Plains. Much of the Little Missouri River's
headwaters and rnainstem flow through the
northwestern part of this section. Both the
Cheyenne and the Belle Fourche Rivers enter
this section from the Powder River Basin, flow
around the Black Hills (collecting their
tributaries), and join the Missouri River, forming
an arm of Lake Oahe. Two important streams
with headwaters in this section are the Niobrara
and the White. The Niobrara enters the Sand
Hills from this section and the White enters the
North-Central Great Plains. A number of
tributaries to the Missouri have essentially their
entire flow in the Northwestern Great Plains
from headwaters to mouth. These include the
Grand, Moreau, Knife, Cannonball, Heart and
Bad Rivers. The Powder River leaves the
Bighorn Mountains and briefly enters this
section before entering the Powder River
Basin. The southwestern edge of this region
contains the North Platte River and its northern
tributaries.
The northern part of this section is
grassland composed of grama and buffalo
grass. Toward the northeast and east this
changes to a mix of grassland, scattered
cropland, hayland and bluestem-indiangrass-
wheat-grass. The southeast is bluestem-
indiangrass-wheatgrass as it grades into the
Sand Hills. Further to the south, a pine-
grassland-brushland mosaic begins, with
stands of pine found along the Pine Ridge
area. A dry cropland/grassland mix
intermingles with these other types up to the
North Platte River, where irrigated crops are
found. The southwest area, which reaches into
and between the southern end of the Bighorn
Mountains and the Laramie Mountains, is
grama-wheatgrass-needlegrass and sagebrush
steppe. The northwestern section contains
grama-buffalo grass, dry cropland, some
grassland/conifer mix and a small amount of
irrigated crops along the Belle Fourche River,
north of the Black Hills.
Major population centers in the
Northwestern Great Plains are Bismarck,
Dickinson, Chadron, Alliance, Pierre, Rapid
City, Hot Springs, and Casper. All or portions
of the following National Grasslands are
located in this section: Thunder Basin, Little
Missouri, Grand River, Cedar River, Oglala,
Buffalo Gap and Fort Pierre. In addition, the
Pine Ridge Unit of the Nebraska National
Forest Pine Ridge and the Custer National
Forest are located here. The Northwestern
Great Plains include portions or all of the
Rosebud, Pine Ridge, Cheyenne River and
Standing Rock Indian Reservations as well as
the Badlands and Theodore Roosevelt National
Parks. The economy is based on irrigated and
dryland agriculture, ranching, tourism, oil and
gas extraction and coal mining.
The Powder River Basin Section covers
45,000 square miles in southeastern Montana
18
-------
Northern Great Plains Aquatic Assessment
and northeastern Wyoming. The landscape, is
gently rolling to steep dissected plains on the
Missouri Plateau with some flat-topped buttes.
Low to medium density drainages occur on
more permeable surfaces.
The Musselshell River rises in the Crazy,
Little Belt and Big Belt Mountains and drains to
the Missouri River at Fort Peck Reservoir. The
Yellowstone River is a major feature of this
section, leaving the mountains, and flowing
through the northern part, exiting to the
Northwestern Great Plains before entering the
Missouri. The Powder River is a dominant
feature of the eastern part, entering from the
Northwestern Great Plains and flowing to its
confluence with the Yellowstone River. As
mentioned earlier, the Belle Fourche and
Cheyenne Rivers have much of their
headwaters in this section.
The western border of this section is formed
by the Bighorn, Beartooth, Little Belt and Crazy
Mountains. Grassland mixed with conifers
covers much of the central portion of this
region, especially along and to the south of the
Yellowstone River. Grama and buffalo grass
mixed with dry cropland is the dominant land
cover in the east-central area, with grama-
wheatgrass-needlegrass/dry cropland more
common further north. In the south, west of the
Black Hills and east of the Bighorns, grarna-
wheatgrass-needlegrass and sagebrush steppe
are the most common.
The major population centers in this section
are Gillette, Sheridan, Miles City and Billings.
This area includes portions or all of the Crow
and Northern Cheyenne Indian Reservations.
The economy is based on agriculture,
ranching, and coal mining. Portions of the
Thunder Basin National Grassland and the
Custer National Forest are located in the
Powder River Basin.
1.5 HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE
The history of the Great Plains has been
driven by the extremes of weather that have
occurred over time. While humans have lived
in the Great Plains for at least 11,000 years
(Floras, 1995), they have been at the mercy of
great droughts and severe winters. The
longest drought period known was the
Altithermal, a two thousand year drought that
caused the abandonment of the Great Plains
(Flores, 1995). Indian peoples moved into the
Great Plains about 1000 years ago, but they
too were dnven out by drought in 1299 (Flores,
1995).
White settlement of the Northern Great
Plains began in the latter half of the 19th
century. The Northern Great Plains were
obtained by the United States from France as
part of the Louisiana Purchase and the
expedition of Lewis and Clark marked the
opening of the area for settlement. Initially, the
plains were an area to pass through on the way
to California or Oregon, but starting in the
1850s, these areas began to be settled, helped
by the passage of the Homestead Act in 1862.
By. the late 1870s and 1880s the Plains
Indian Tribes had been forcibly relocated to
reservations and the free-roaming bison herds
had been eliminated. With this change,
expansion of cattle into the Northern Great
Plains then began with the utilization of the
open range system (Miller, 1990). Speculative
ventures led to overstocking of the range and
overgrazing (Miller, 1990). The large herds
entered the winter of 1886 in poor condition
and severe blizzards nearly destroyed the
industry, with some ranches experiencing
losses of 50 to 75% (Miller, 1990; Manning,
1995). As a result, a transition from open
range to producing hay to winter-feed cattle
began, which is the system used today (Miller,
1990; Manning, 1995).
19
-------
Chapter 1 - Introduction
After World War I, high wheat prices and
the Enlarged Homestead Act led to an increase
in farmers entering the Northern Great Plains
(West, 1990, Obermiller, 1992). Between
70,000 and 80,000 people settled on Montana
farms between 1909 and 1918, however,
60,000 would leave before 1922 (Manning,
1995). Wheat yields, however, did not peak
until 1931 at more than 20 million acres in
production (West, 1990). With so much land in
production during favorable weather years, the
stage was set for the drought that came in the
1930s. The "Dust Bowl" was triggered by a
normal drought, but was made much worse by
the great change that had occurred to the
ecosystems of the Great Plains (Flores, 1995).
As a result of the drought conditions of the
1930s, the United States government began
purchasing submarginal lands from bankrupt
farmers and planted cropland back into grasses
and initiated grazing rotations on rangeland
(West, 1990). These areas were referred to as
Land Utilization (L-U) Projects (West, 1990). In
1937 the Bankhead-Jones Farm Tenant Act
gave these lands to the Soil Conservation
Service (now Natural Resources Conservation
Service) to manage. These lands were later
transferred in 1953 to the Forest Service to
become the national grasslands. Some,
however, were transferred to other federal
agencies, such as the Fish and Wildlife Service
for National Wildlife Refuges, prior to transfer
to the Forest Service.
Agriculture in the Northern Great Plains
underwent another major transformation
following World War II with the introduction of
irrigation from underground aquifers. In 1959,
Nebraska irrigated less than a million acres of
cropland; in 1977, it was seven million
(Manning, 1995). Most of this change occurred
from tapping into the Ogallala Aquifer, which by
1980 was watering 20% of the nation's
cropland (Manning, 1995), only part of which is
in the Northern Great Plains.
The draining of the vast wetland resources
in the Northern Great Plains began with early
settlement, but increased dramatically after the
1940s (Johnson and Higgins, 1997). High
commodity prices and the introduction of
mechanized farming, as well as federal
assistance aided in creating pressures to drain
wetlands (Johnson and Higgins, 1997). The
issuance of Executive Order 11990, which
required that effects of federal projects on
wetlands be evaluated, and the requirements of
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act have
slowed the loss of wetlands.
Major changes in the Missouri River
occurred in the years following World War II.
Most prominent, was the construction of the six
dams on the mainstem of the river. This
brought about dramatic changes in the aquatic
habitat of the river and has led to declines in a
number of species dependent on the rivers
natural flow regime. The creation of the
reservoirs also flooded many prime areas on
the Indian Reservations bordering the river.
During the 1970s, many changes occurred
in how the aquatic resources of the Northern
Great Plains (and all other areas) would be
managed. The passage of the National
Environmental Policy Act mandated that
environmental effects of federal actions be
analyzed. The numerous pollution control acts
such as the Clean Water Act, the Clean Air Act,
etc. brought changes in how wastes are
disposed of into the environment. The
Endangered Species Act requires the recovery
of species that are endangered and
threatened.
The Northern Great Plains are undergoing
another time of change as population shifts,
manifested as losses to most rural areas and
growth in others. These changes will have
differing impacts on the environment than
previous events.
20
-------
Status of Aquatic Resources
2.1 INTRODUCTION
Question 1 What is known about the
current status and apparent trends in
water quality, aquatic habitat and
aquatic species in the Northern Great
Plains Assessment Area?
This chapter examines the condition and
extent of aquatic habitats in the Northern Great
Plains from streams and rivers to lakes and
ground water. These particular habitats are
described in detail in Section 2.2. Wetlands
and riparian areas are discussed separately in
Chapter 3.- Quality of surface waters is
discussed in Section 2.3. On a watershed
basis, the levels of selected parameters
including fecal coliforms, dissolved solids and
dissolved oxygen are compared to water
quality standards. The overall water quality
status for most watersheds as reported by
state environmental agencies is also
presented. In Section 2.4, the quality of
ground water is examined for parameters such
as dissolved solids, nitrates and pesticides.
The condition of aquatic habitat with
respect to certain ecological measures is
examined. In Section 2.5, the status of the
aquatic species inhabiting these environments
is presented and Section 2.6 specifically
examines the status of aquatic species
designated as endangered, threatened or of
special concern. Section 2.7 describes an
analysis of the risk to various aquatic species
using a computer model.
At present, there is no regionwide water
quality monitoring -effort occurring, in the
Northern Great Plains Assessment Area
(NGPAA). Available monitoring information is
mainly the result individual state efforts. In
addition, several U.S. Geological Survey
NAWQA (National Water Quality Assessment)
Program units fall within the NGPAA and more
intensive monitoring is occurring there.
Each section in this report is generally
organized with the following subheadings:
introduction, key findings, data sources, data
quality and gaps, spatial patterns and future
trends.
2.2 STREAMS, RIVERS, LAKES AND
AQUIFERS
Introduction
The Northern Great Plains Assessment
Area contains a wide variety of aquatic
habitats. These include perennial streams
more common in the eastern portions, with
fewer in the west; large rivers such as the
Missouri; streams fed mainly by ground water
in the Nebraska Sand Hills; large expanses of
wetlands and lakes in the eastern and
northern portions; large artificial lakes;
numerous small ponds and stock ponds and
extensive underground aquifers. This section
discusses the characteristics of each
waterbody type and its importance to the
human and wildlife populations that depend.
on them.
Snowpacks are important in providing
moisture to various aquatic systems. The
Northern Great Plains snowpack ranges from
10 to 40 inches deep and, along with the
snowpack in the Rocky Mountains, provides
much of the moisture the region receives
(Huntzinger, 1995). A larger amount of
rainfall in the eastern parts, along with
snowmelt, provides for more perennial
streams. Further west, normally the only
perennial streams are those that flow from
mountains or are fed by ground water. In
some places, infiltration of precipitation to
shallow ground water is the only source of
stream flow. Streams connected only to
21
-------
Chapter 2- Status of Aquatic Resources
ground water often have different temperature
and water quality characteristics than stream
flow originating from runoff (Huntzinger, 1995).
Flooding can occur throughout the Great
Plains, but occurs more frequently in the
eastern part with its greater precipitation.
Snowmelt from the mountains may cause
flooding in the large rivers of the Great Plains,
especially if coinciding with high spring rainfall.
Intermittent / Ephemeral Streams
Intermittent streams are those that are
below the ground water table part of the year
and flow only in response to precipitation
events or ground water discharge (Montana
Department of Environmental Quality, 1994).
Therefore, much of the year they may be dry.
Ephemeral streams are above the ground
water table and flow only when there is
precipitation (Montana Department of
Environmental Quality, 1994). In the Northern
Great Plains, intermittent and ephemeral
streams are common over much of the area,
especially in the western and central parts.
Great Plains streams are harsh
environments for aquatic life. They generally
have sandy bottoms, with the contours of the
bottoms changing rapidly, smothering aquatic
vegetation and burying eggs of fishes (Collins,
1985). In addition, there is very little cover and
water temperatures can rise to lethal levels.
Conditions in intermittent streams regularly
approach the physiological tolerance limits of
organisms and even slight perturbations from
wastewater effluent, siltation or removal of
shade may cause those tolerances to be
exceeded (Zane, et al. 1989). As a result,
plains rivers and streams are not particularly
fertile. However, ihis underestimates their
importance because these streams serve as
focal points for numerous wildlife species and
they have many unique species adapted to this
environment.
Perennial Streams
Perennial streams are those that flow year
round, because there is enough rainfall in the
watershed and they have a continuous
connection to ground water. In the NGPAA,
perennial streams are represented by
numerous streams in the east and the larger
streams in the west, those that flow from the
Black Hills and other mountain areas and
Sand Hills streams fed by ground water.
Since the flow in these streams is more stable
and reliable, there is more biological diversity
instream and in the riparian areas.
Sand Hills streams exist under a unique
set of hydrologic conditions. Precipitation in
the Sand Hills quickly recharges the ground
water and later discharges into springs or
seeps. In contrast, in areas outside of the
Sand Hills with less sandy soils, precipitation
runs off more easily, forming tributaries.
Since Sand Hills streams derive their flow
mostly from ground water ratherthan overland
runoff, they are less likely to be affected by air
temperature, are less likely to freeze during
the winter and have little seasonal
temperature variability (Bentall, 1990). Sand
Hills streams also differ from most other
streams in the Northern Great Plains in that
they have few tributaries, flow at very steady
rates, rarely flood, and are low in dissolved
solids (Bentall, 1990).
Large Rivers
The Missouri River is the dominant
hydrologic feature of the Northern Great
Plains. Originating in the snowmelt of the
Northern Rocky Mountains it drains the vast
majority of the region. _ The historical
hydrologic pattern of the Missouri River
consisted of a peak in March and April from
snowmelt on the plains, a decline in May, a
higher peak in June from snowmelt in the
Rocky Mountains and rainfall throughout the
22
-------
Northern Great Plains Aquatic Assessment
basin and a decline throughout the summer
(Hesse, etal. 1989). This predam hydrograph
defined the channel morphology and floodplain
characteristics of the river (USFWS, 1994).
The historical dominant discharge (flushing
flows that occur about every 1.5 years on
average) were estimated by Hesse and Mestl
(1993) at about 100,000 cfs. This flooding of
the Missouri River is critical to the aquatic life
which has adapted to it. The high spring flows
stimulated the native fish to spawn and
maintained the high turbidity levels to which
these species adapted (Pflieger and Grace,
1987). There are presently four species listed
as threatened or endangered that are
associated with the Missouri Riven the bald
eagle, the least tern, the pallid sturgeon and
the piping plover. Several others are either
proposed for listing, are candidates or are of
special concern.
Between 1938 and 1963 six major dams
were built on the mainstem of the Missouri
River. These six dams can collectively store
92 billion cubic meters of water, which is more
than the mean annual discharge at the mouth
of 70 billion cubic meters (Schmulbach, et al.
1992). Johnson (1992) described the changes
in flow after Lake Sakakawea began filling
behind Garrison Dam in 1953. Between 1928
and 1953, about two-thirds of the annual peak
flows were greater than 2500 cubic meters per
second (Johnson, 1992). The largest peak on
record was 14,150 cubic meters per second in
1952. After 1953 no peak has exceeded 2500
cubic meters per second, however, the total
annual discharge has not changed.
This can be seen in the difference between
the original natural hydrograph and the present
one. The hydrograph now rises in March to a
point much lower than the traditional flood
peaks and stays at this level until November
(Hesse and Mestl, 1993). River meandering
has ceased and the flood pulse and floodplain
connection have been nearly eliminated (U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service, 1994). The dams
have become barriers to fish migration and
sediment transport, have disrupted spawning
cues and the temperature of the water
released from the dams tends to be much
colder than that to which the native fish are
adapted (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
1994). Overbank flooding is also one of the
components of the original river that is missing
from the postdam floodplain environment
(Johnson, 1992).
Other large rivers in the Northern Great
Plains include the Yellowstone, the Red River
of the North and the Platte. The Yellowstone
is one of the largest free-flowing rivers in the
contiguous United States, however a
significant amount of water is diverted from
the river for irrigation. The Red also is
undammed, but water quality problems from
nonpoint and point source pollution affect it
The Platte River itself is largely outside of the
NGPAA, although many of its tributaries
originate within it. The discussion of the
Platte is, therefore, much less extensive than
the other major rivers, but since many
activities affecting it derive from tributaries
within the Northern Great Plains, it is
examined when necessary.
Natural Lakes / Wetlands
The northeastern part of the Northern
Great Plains (eastern and northern North
Dakota and eastern South Dakota) contains
numerous lakes and wetlands and is referred
to as the Prairie Pothole region. Some of the
lakes are large, such as Devils Lake and Long
Lake. The lakes in the northeastern Northern
Great Plains were formed by water filling
depressions left by the retreating glaciers of
the last ice age.
Numerous small, shallow natural lakes
and ponds are also found in the Sand Hills.
Much of the western third of the Sand Hills
23
-------
Chapter 2 - Status of Aquatic Resources
region lacks streams and is referred to as the
Closed Basin Area, containing many lakes and
wetlands (Bleed and Ginsberg, 1990). Many of
the interdunal valleys in the Sand Hills contain
lakes, marshes and wet meadows that receive
water from precipitation, surface runoff and
ground water (Bleed and Ginsberg, 1990). In
general, Sand Hills lakes tend to be alkaline.
The lakes in the Closed Basin Area have the
highest alkalinity and primary production within
them is high due to the abundance of sunlight
and shallow depths (Bleed and Ginsberg,
1990). Lakes in the central and eastern Sand
Hills are lower in alkalinity. Species of algae,
macrophytes, and zooplankton differ due to
varying alkalinity levels (Bleed and Ginsberg,
1990).
Reservoirs
The largest reservoirs on the Northern
Great Plains are those on the Missouri River.
Fort Peck Lake, Lake Sakakawea, Lake Oahe,
Lake Sharpe, Lake Francis Case and Lewis
and Clark Lake. Fort Peck was the first to'be
completed in 1938. Fort Randall Dam (Lake
Francis Case), Garrison Dam (Lake
Sakakawea); Gavins Point (Lewis and Clark
Lake), Oahe Dam (Lake Oahe) and Big Bend
Dam (Lake Sharpe) were all completed in the
period between 1952 and 1963. The largest
three are Oahe, Sakakawea and Fort Peck.
These dams are operated primarily for flood
control, navigation and power production,
depending on the need and the available flow
(U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1994).
Both the reservoirs themselves and the
tailwaters from their releases support fisheries
that were either not present or uncommon in
the Northern Great Plains before the creation
of the dams. For example, according to Owen
and Power (1989) and Riis (1989) fishes in the
Lake Sakakawea and Lake Oahe tailwaters
changed from channel catfish and sauger to
walleye, salmon and trout.
Aquifers
There are three major regional aquifer
systems within the Northern Great Plains
Assessment Area: the High Plains Aquifer
System, the Northern Great Plains Aquifer
System and the Great Plains Aquifer System.
In addition, the unconsolidated and glacial
deposit aquifers overlying these in many
areas are extremely important.
Within the Northern Plains, the High Plains
Aquifer covers southern South Dakota,
southeastern Wyoming and most of Nebraska
(U.S. Geological Survey, 1996). It consists
mainly of aquifers in upper Tertiary and
Quaternary rocks with water at less than 200
feet in depth and generally less than 400 feet
in thickness. This is the aquifer saturating
most of the Sand Hills area. The confining
unit under this aquifer is the Chadron
Formation. There are three aquifers (aside
from the Quaternary dune sands and
alluvium) within this aquifer. These are
located in the Tertiary formations and are the
Ogallala, Arikaree and Brule aquifers.
The Ogallala Formation is the principal
geologic unit in the High Plains Aquifer and
consists of unconsolidated gravel, sand, silt
and clay (U.S. Geological Survey, In Press).
It was deposited by eastward-flowing streams
draining the Rocky Mountains during the late
Tertiary Period. Within the NGPAA, the
Ogallala is located throughout most of central
and western Nebraska (U.S. Geological
Survey, 1988). The Arikaree is in
northwestern Nebraska and southeastern
Wyoming and the Brule is in western
Nebraska (near the North Platte) and
southeastern Wyoming.
Water in the High Plains Aquifer is
generally unconfined (at the water-table) (U.S.
Geological Survey, In Press). Recharge to
the High Plains Aquifer is from precipitation
24
-------
Northern Great Plains Aquatic Assessment
and some infiltration by irrigation and natural
discharge is to springs and streams. Most of
the discharge from the High Plains Aquifer is
by withdrawal by wells, and almost all is for
irrigation (U.S. Geological Survey, In Press).
The Northern Great Plains Aquifer System
underlies most of North Dakota, South Dakota,
eastern Montana and northeastern Wyoming
and it lies mostly within the Williston and
Powder River basins and areas of structural
uplift that flank these areas (U.S. Geological
Survey, 1996a). The major aquifers of this
system are sandstones of Tertiary and
Cretaceous age and carbonate rocks of
Paleozoic age. These aquifers form one of the
largest confined aquifer systems in the United
States. The individual aquifers within this
system in the NGPAA include the Fort Union,
the Hell Creek-Fox Hills, and the Inyan Kara
Group (U.S. Geological Survey, 1988). A
confining layer of Pierre Shale separates the
Inyan Kara from the others above. The Fort
Union formation underlies the Powder and
Williston Basins in Wyoming, Montana and
North Dakota. The Hell Creek/Fox Hills aquifer
is most extensive in a band through central
North Dakota and northwestern South Dakota.
It rims the Powder and Williston Basins. The
Inyan Kara Group is located in a band
surrounding the Black Hills.
Regional movement of water in the
Northern Great Plains Aquifer System is from
recharge areas at high altitudes down the dip
of the aquifers and then upward to discharge
into shallower aquifers or to the land surface
(U.S. Geological Survey, 1996a). The regional
flow in the deep confined aquifers follows long
flow paths from southwest to northeast. Most
of the recharge to the aquifer system is from
precipitation that falls on outcrop areas
exposed by erosion or from streams that cross
aquifer outcrops, seeping downward through
the streambeds into the aquifers (U.S.
Geological Survey, 1996a). Much of the
discharge from the aquifer system is by
upward leakage of water into shallower
aquifers and some water discharges into
lakes and streams near the North
Dakota/Minnesota line (U.S. Geological
Survey, 1996a).
In eastern North Dakota, highly
mineralized water discharges from the lower
aquifers by upward leakage into overlying
unconsolidated deposits (U.S. Geological
Survey, 1996a). Some of this saline water
moves through permeable areas of the
unconsolidated deposits into lakes, streams
and wetlands, causing the surface water to be
saline.
The Great Plains Aquifer System is
composed of lower cretaceous water-bearing
sandstone and underlies most of Nebraska
(as well as western Kansas and eastern
Colorado) (U.S. Geological Survey, In Press).
This system is situated below the High Plains
Aquifer System. Two major aquifers in the
lower cretaceous make up this system, the
Apishapa (lower) and the Maha (upper). The
Maha underlies western South Dakota and
northwestern Nebraska. The Apishapa
underlies western Nebraska. In general,
water in each aquifer flows from west-
southwest to east-northeast (Jorgensen, et al.
1993). The major recharge area is in
southeastern Colorado from precipitation
falling on outcrop areas and flows east-
northeast to central Kansas and eastern
Nebraska (U.S. Geological Survey, In Press).
Some recharge does occur from leakage from
the overlying High Plains Aquifer System as
well.
Overlying these aquifer systems in some
areas are the unconsolidated and glacial
deposit aquifers. The unconsolidated
systems are along streams and valleys
throughout the NGPAA and the glacial deposit
aquifers are very extensive north and east of
25
-------
Chapter 2 - Status of Aquatic Resources
the Missouri River in North Dakota, South
Dakota and Montana. They are recharged by
precipitation and serve as a source of water to
shallow wells and for recharge to.the lower
bedrock aquifers. In North and South Dakota,
most of the cities east of the Missouri River
that use ground water obtain water from glacial
drift aquifers (North Dakota Department of
Health, 1994; South Dakota Department of
Environment and Natural Resources, 1996).
Water from glacial drift aquifers is generally
less mineralized than water from the bedrock
aquifers.
Key Findings
•There are 180 eight-digit hydrologic unit codes
(watersheds) in the Northern Great Plains
Assessment Area.
•Precipitation is highest in the southeastern
portions of the NGPAA (eastern South Dakota
and eastern Nebraska) at more than 20 inches.
It is lowest in northeastern Wyoming and
eastern Montana with less than 15 inches.,
•Stream density is highest in western South
Dakota and is lowest in eastern and central
North Dakota.
•Three major aquifer systems are located in
the NGPAA. They are the High Plains, the
Northern Great Plains and Great Plains aquifer
systems.
•The hydrograph of the Missouri River has
changed from having two prominent flood
peaks each year to a long steady flow covering
most of the year.
•Most of the watersheds in the NGPAA
experience mean flows of less than 1000 cfs.
A few watersheds in the Yellowstone and
Missouri River mainstems have mean flows of
greater than 10,000 cfs. Much of the NGPAA
experience wide variabilities in flow from year
to year.
•Reservoir area is greatest in watersheds
connected with the Missouri River, reflecting
the existence of larger reservoirs such as
Oahe, Sakakawea and Fort Peck.
Data Sources
The eight-digit watershed boundaries were
digitized from 1:100,000-scale maps. The
stream density in each watershed was
determined from the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency's Reach File version 3.0
(RF3). RF3 is based on the 1:100,000-scale
U.S. Geological Survey Digital Line Graph
(DLG) data.
Information on the aquifer systems of the
Northern Great Plains was provided by the
U.S. Geological Survey. Precipitation
information was obtained from the National
Climate Data Center. Missouri River
information was obtained from the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Missouri River
Master Water Control Manual, the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service's Biological Opinion to
the Draft Master Manual and literature
reviews. The streamflow information was
obtained from STORET.
Spatial Patterns
Table 2.2.1 lists all of the eight-digit
watersheds in the NGPAA. There are 180
eight-digit watersheds wholly or partly within
the Northern Great Plains.
Figures 2.2.1 and 2.2.2 show the
precipitation for the Northern Great Plains for
1990 and 1993, respectively. A near normal
precipitation year occurred in 1990 and a wet
year in 1993. There is a general trend of
increasing precipitation from northwest to
southeast. This precipitation pattern
determines much of the aquatic features of
the Northern Great Plains landscape, with
higher stream flows in the east and streams in
the west dependent on streamflow derived
from the higher elevation regions. As can be
seen from Table 2.2.1 and Figure 2.2.3,
stream density in the Northern Great Plains is
26
-------
highest in the Black Hills and adjacent areas of
northeastern Wyoming, western South Dakota
and southwestern North Dakota. It is lowest in
the prairie pothole regions of North and South
Dakota. Nebraska was not included in this
analysis.
The discharge of the Missouri River has
changed since the construction of the
mainstem dams. Formerly two flood peaks
occurred in March/April and June. However,
due to the construction of the mainstem dams,
these peaks have been replaced by a long
steady flow from March through November.
The effects of this change are discussed in
more detail in Chapters 3 and 5.
Figure 2.2.4 shows the amount of reservoir
area in each watershed. The Missouri River
reservoirs stand out with their large individual
areas, but other areas in the Upper James,
North Platte, Belle Fourche, Marais, Sourisand
Sheyenne River watershed also have large
impounded areas.
Streamflow in the NGPAA is shown for the
period 1980 to 1995 in Figures 2.2.5,2.2.6 and
2.2.7. From the minimum flow data recorded,
for the most part at the lowest station in each
watershed, much of the NGPAA experienced
very low flows within this time frame. Only the
Missouri and Yellowstone stand out with
relatively high minimum flows. A comparison of
the low flow data with high flows in Figure 2.2.7
shows the extreme variability present within
these plains river system. Some watersheds
that experienced flows of less than 500 cfs at
the lowest flow have maximum flows of more
than 20,000 cfs. One, the Lower Cheyenne
River, ranged from a low of 5 cfs to a high of
48,400 cfs during tin's period.
Northern Great Plains Aquatic Assessment
2.3 SURFACE WATER QUALITY
Introduction
Surface water quality is affected by many
different factors, both natural and human-
caused. Natural factors include the nature of
the geology and soils of the watershed,
climate (temperature and precipitation) and
ecological factors. Human-caused factors
include pollution from point sources such as
municipal and industrial wastewater plants,
pollution from nonpoint source runoff from
crops, rangeland and cities and modifications
of streams by channelization, diversion, dam
construction and removal of riparian
vegetation. All of these activities, along with
any natural limitations, may impact the quality
of water and therefore, determine whether the
stream or lake can support aquatic life or be
used as a drinking water source.
Point sources can contribute any number
of pollutants to surface water, ranging from
biochemical oxygen demand, ammonia,
suspended solids, pH and fecal coliforms in
municipal wastewater to any of these plus
metals, organics and temperature changes in
industrial wastewater. Nonpoint source
pollution can contribute fecal coliforms,
nutrients and solids from livestock uses to
sediment, pesticides and nutrients from
cropland to any number of hydrologic
modifications that may cause temperature and
sediment changes in streams. In addition,
irrigation of cropland can add salinity and in
some instances pollutants such as selenium.
In this section, data is presented by
watershed showing the condition of surface
water quality. Highlighted are the percentage
and number of miles (for streams) or acres
(for lakes) that are not meeting the beneficial
uses designated for by the state. Table 2.3.1
lists the classification system for waterbodies
used in each State. The states assign these
27
-------
Chapter 2 - Status of Aquatic Resources
uses, which include such designations as
aquatic life, recreation, drinking water and
agriculture along with the specific water quality
criteria necessary to protect the beneficial
uses. The criteria are the actual
concentrations of specific pollutants that are
allowed in the waterbody. A given waterbody
can have from only one to many use
designations. Waterbodies are defined as
individual lakes or stream segments that are
delineated by the state. A few Indian Tribes in
the Northern Great Plains are working toward
designation of beneficial uses for Tribal waters.
States are required by Section 305(b) of
the Clean Water Act to assess the ability of the
waterbodies of the state to meet the uses for
which they are designated and report this to
Congress every two years. The states report
the number of miles of streams and acres of
lakes that are fully supporting, are fully
supporting but threatened, partially supporting
or not supporting uses. However, the actual
number of stream miles assessed within a
given watershed varies greatly and caution
must be used in interpreting this data. For
example, a watershed covering an extensive
area may have had only a small number of
miles assessed and these assessed miles may
not be representative of the entire watershed.
Therefore, while quantitative values are shown
in the figures derived from the 305b data,
these should be recognized as essentially
qualitative and show areas that are potentially
in good or poor condition.
Each state has varying criteria as to how to
determine full support versus partial or
nonsupport, but generally it involves either the
number of exceedances of a standard when
there is monitoring, data or other evaluation „.
methods when there is no data. The State of
Montana, for example, uses the following
definitions for use support (Montana
Department of Environmental Quality, 1994):
Full Support- uses are at natural condition or
best practical condition and water quality
standards are not being violated.
Threatened- fully supporting uses, but a new
activity or an increase in existing activities
may result in water quality standards
violations.
Partial Support- uses are not being supported
at natural or best practical levels and water
quality standards are not being met (this
category includes everything from slight
impairment to nearly not supporting).
A/on Support - has acute toxics or human
health criteria violations, where biological or
physical data indicate severe degradation or
where other data indicate that water quality
standards are violated and one or more uses
cannot be attained.
The U.S. EPA recommends that for uses
to be fully supporting, less than 10% of the
monitored parameters should exceed criteria
(U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
1992). To be partially supporting, between
11 and 25% of values exceed criteria and not
supporting means that more than 25% of
values exceed criteria. South Dakota uses
concentrations of total suspended solids, total
dissolved solids, pH, temperature, dissolved
oxygen, unionized ammonia, fecal coliform,
metals and others to determine total use
support (South Dakota Department of
Environment and Natural Resources, 1996).
Data in this report is also presented for
many of the specific pollutants that are of
widespread importance in the Northern Great
Plains. These pollutants include total solids,
dissolved solids, nutrients, ammonia,
dissolved oxygen (too little, rather than too
much), fecal coliforms a/id biochemical
oxygen demand.
Since eight-digit watersheds cover such a
large area, numerous variations in water
quality criteria and beneficial uses occur within
28
-------
Northern Great Plains Aquatic Assessment
Table 2.2.1 Hydrologic Unit Watersheds (8-digit) that are fully or partly within the Northern Great
Plains Assessment Area, grouped by major drainage basins.
Hydrologic Unit Code
River Basin Name
Souris River Watershed
09010001
09010002
09010003
09010004
09010005
Red River of the North Watershed
09020101
09020104
09020105
09020107
09020109
09020201
09020202
09020203
09020204
09020205
09020301
09020306
09020307
09020308
09020310
09020311
09020313
Saskatchewan River Watershed
10010002 Saint Mary River
Upper Missouri/Marais River Watersheds
10030102 Upper Missouri River-Dearborn
10030103 Smith River
10030104 Sun River
10030105 Belt Creek
10030201 Two Medicine River
10030202 Cut Bank Creek
10030203 Marais River
10030204 Willow Creek
10030205 Teton River
Fort Peck Lake/Musselshell River Watersheds
10040101 Missouri River (Bullwacker-Dog)
10040102 Arrow Creek
10040103 Judith River
10040104 Missouri River (Fort Peck Reservoir)
10040105 Big Dry Creek
Upper Souris River
Des Lacs River
Lower Souris River
Willow Creek
Deep River
Bois de Sioux River
Upper Red River
Western Wild Rice River
Red River (Elm-Marsh)
Goose River
Devils Lake
Upper Sheyenne River
Middle Sheyenne River
Lower Sheyenne River
Maple River
Red River (Sandhill-Wilson)
Red River (Grand Marais-Red)
Turtle River
ForestRiver
Park River
Lower Red River
Pembina River
29
-------
Chapter 2 - Status of Aquatic Resources
Table 2.2.1 continued Hydrologic Unit Watersheds (8-digit) that are fully or partly within the
Northern Great Plains Assessment Area, grouped by major drainage basins.
Hydrologic Unit Code
River Basin Name
10040106
10040201
10040203
10040202
10040204
10040205
Milk River Watershed
10050001
10050002
10050003
10050004
10050005
10050006
10050007
10050008
10050009
10050010
10050011
10050012
10050013
10050014
10050015
10050016
Missouri-Poplar River Watersheds
10060001
10060002
10060003
10060004
10060005
10060006
10060007
Yellowstone Watershed
10070002
10070004
10070005
10070006
10070007
10070008
10080015
10080016
10090101
10090102
Little Dry Creek
Upper Musselshell River
Flat Willow Creek
Middle Musselshell River
Box Elder Creek
Lower Musselshell River
Milk River Headwaters
Upper Milk River
Wild Horse Lake
Middle Milk River
Big Sandy Creek
Sage Creek
Lodge Creek
Battle Creek
Peoples Creek
Cottonwood Creek
Whitewater Creek
Lower Milk River
Frenchman Creek
Beaver Creek
Rock Creek
Porcupine Creek
Missouri River (Prairie Elk-Wolf)
Redwater River
Poplar River
West Fork Poplar River
Missouri River (Charlie-Little Muddy)
Big Muddy Creek
Brush Lake
Upper Yellowstone River
Upper Yellowstone River-Lake Basin
Stillwater River
Clarks Fork of the Yellowstone River
Upper Yellowstone River-Pompeys Pillar
Pryor Creek
Lower Bighorn River
Little Bighorn River
Upper Tongue River
Lower Tongue River
-------
Northern Great Plains Aquatic Assessment
Table 2.2.1 continued Hydrologic Unit Watersheds (8-digit) that are fully or partly within the
Northern Great Rains Assessment Area, grouped by major drainage basins.
Hydrologic Unit Code
River Basin Name
10090201
10090202
10090203
10090204
10090205
10090206
10090207
10090208
10090209
10090210
10100001
10100002
10100003
10100004
10100005
Lake Sakakawea Watershed
10110101
10110102
Little Missouri River Watershed
10110201
10110202
10110203
10110204
10110205
Cheyenne River/Belle Fourche
10120101
10120102
10120103
10120104
10120105
10120106
10120107
10120108
10120109
10120110
10120111
10120112
10120113
10120201
10120202
10120203
Middle Fork Powder River
Upper Powder River
South Fork Powder River
Salt Creek
Crazy Woman Creek
Clear Creek
Middle Powder River
Little Powder River
Lower Powder River
Mizpah Creek
Lower Yellowstone River-Sunday
Big Porcupine Creek
Rosebud Creek
Lower Yellowstone River
O'Fallon Creek
Missouri River (Lake Sakakawea)
Little Muddy Creek
Upper Little Missouri River
Boxelcjer Creek
Middle Little Missouri River
Beaver Creek
Lower Little Missouri River
River Watershed
Antelope Creek
Dry Fork of the Cheyenne River
Cheyenne River (Dry Fork to Lance Cr)
Lance Creek
Lightning Creek
Cheyenne River (Angostura Reservoir)
Beaver Creek
Hat Creek
Middle Cheyenne River-Spring
Rapid Creek
Middle Cheyenne River-Elk
Lower Cheyenne River
Cherry Creek
Upper Belle Fourche River
Lower Belle Fourche River
Redwater River
31
-------
Chapter 2 - Status of Aquatic Resources
Table 2.2.1 continued Hydrologic Unit Watersheds (8-digit) that are fully or partly within the
Northern Great Plains Assessment Area, grouped by major drainage basins.
Hydrologic Unit Code River Basin Name
Lake Oahe Watershed
10130101 Missouri River (Painted Wood-Square Butte)
10130102 Missouri River (Upper Lake Oahe)
10130103 Apple Creek
10130104 Beaver Creek
10130105 Missouri River (Lower Lake Oahe)
10130106 Western Missouri Coteau
10130201 Knife River
10130202 Upper Heart River
10130203 Lower Heart River
10130204 Upper Cannonball River
10130205 Cedar Creek
10130206 Lower Cannonball River
10130301 North Fork Grand River
10130302 South Fork Grand River
10130303 Grand River
10130304 South Fork Moreau River
10130305 Upper Moreau River
10130306 Lower Moreau River
10140101 Missouri River (Fort Randall Reservoir)
Fort Randall Reservoir/White River Watershed
10140102 Bad River
10140103 Medicine Knoll Creek
10140104 Medicine Creek
10140105 Crow Creek
10140201 Upper White River
10140202 Middle White River
10140203 Little White River
10140204 Lower White River
Niobrara River Watershed
10150001 Ponca Creek
10150002 Niobrara River Headwaters
10150003 Upper Niobrara River
10150004 Middle Niobrara River
10150005 Snake River
10150006 Keya Paha River
10150007 Lower Niobrara River
James River Watershed
10160001 James River Headwaters
10160002 Pipestem Creek
10160003 Upper James River
10160004 Elm River
32
-------
Northern Great Plains Aquatic Assessment
Table 2.2.1 continued Hydrologic Unit Watersheds (8-digit) that are fully or partly within the
Northern Great Plains Assessment Area, grouped by major drainage basins.
Hvdrologic Unit Code
River Basin Name
10160005
10160006
10160007
10160008
10160009
10160010
10160011
Lewis and Clark Lake Watershed
10170101
10170102
North Platte River Watershed
10180007
10180008
10180009
10180011
10180012
10180014
South Platte River Watershed
10190018
Platte River Watershed
10200101
Loup River Watershed
10210001
10210002
10210003
10210004
10210005
10210006
10210007
10210008
10210009
10210010
Elkhom River Watershed
10220001
Mud Creek
Middle James River
Eastern Missouri Coteau
Snake Creek
Turtle Creek
Northern Big Sioux Coteau
Lower James River
Missouri River (Lewis & Clark Lake)
Vermillion River
Middle North Platte River-Casper
Middle North Platte River (Glendo Reservoir)
Middle North Platte River-Scotts Bluff
Lower Laramie River
Horse Creek
Lower North Platte River
Lower South Platte River
Middle. Platte River-Buffalo
Upper Middle Loup River
Dismal River
Lower Middle Loup River
South Loup River
Mud Creek
Upper North Loup River
Lower North Loup River
Calamus River
Loup River
Cedar River
Upper Elkhom River
33
-------
1990 Preclpitaton,
Inches
I \9-13
13-17
21 -26
Figure 2.2.1 Precipitation for the Northern Great Plains in 1990
-------
1993 Precipitation,
incites
[\14~19
r : 19-24
Jim 24-29
29-36
Figure 2.2.2 Precipitation for the Northern Great Plains in 1993
-------
Stream Density,
feet/acre
(liU 0.5 -10
10-20
20-30
30-40
Figure 2.2.3 Stream Density by Watershed in the Northern Great Plains
-------
Reservoir Area,
Acres
0 • 5000
6000 - 25000
26000-100000
> 1 00000
Figure 2.2.4 Reservoir Area in the Northern Great Plains
-------
Minimum
F.lotv, eft
No Data
0-500
501 - WOO
1001 - 5000
>5000
Figure 2.2.5 Minimum Flows During the Period 1980 to 1995
-------
Mean flow, cfs
No Data
0-1000
1001 - 5000
5001 - 10000
> 10000
Figure 2.2.6 Mean Flows During the Period 1980 to 1995
-------
Maximum
Elow, cjs
8 No Data
0-5000
5001 • 20000
20001 - 40000
>40000
Figure 2.2.7 Maximum Flows During the Period 1980 to 1995
-------
Northern Great Plains Aquatic Assessment
watersheds. A specific stream segment or
lake within a watershed may have more or less
stringent criteria. This report, therefore,
compares levels of specific pollutants with
common water quality criteria levels in the
Northern Great Plains, not the actual water
quality criteria at the specific station from
which the data was obtained, since they vary
from state to state and segment to segment.
The station in each watershed used was
chosen based on the amount of data available
(ten years or more), whether it was on the
mainstem and how far downstream in the
basin it was (lowest was preferred). This
information was not meant to show the status
of all streams within a watershed, but was
chosen as an integrator of effects from all over
the watershed to varying degrees of
applicability. Another given station in the
same watershed could have better or worse
water quality depending on the segment it is
in. It was decided not to try to use all data
from all stations since this would overwhelm
the broadscale nature of this assessment,
which is meant to show potential proble'm
areas.
The use of the 305(b) report information,
however, seeks to balance the use of data
from only one station (in each watershed) by
adding in the assessments states have done
on numerous segments in each watershed.
Key Findings
•The watersheds with the highest percentages
of assessed miles of streams partially
supporting and not supporting uses include
large sections of the NGPAA, particularly in
the Red River basin, the tributaries to the
Missouri in South Dakota, the Milk and other
Missouri tributaries in Montana and the Platte
basin in Nebraska.
•The watersheds with the highest percentages
of assessed miles of streams not supporting
uses include the Lower James, western South
Dakota Missouri River tributaries, parts of the
Platte basin and some upper Missouri
tributaries in Montana.
•The watersheds with the lowest percentages
of assessed miles of streams partially
supporting and not supporting uses are the
James Headwaters, the Little Missouri and
parts of the Missouri River in North Dakota.
•The watersheds with the lowest percentages
of assessed miles of streams not supporting
uses are in much of North Dakota, eastern
Montana, and the Sand Hills of Nebraska
(Loup and Niobrara drainages).
•The watersheds with the highest percentages
of assessed acres of lakes partially supporting
and not supporting uses are Fort Peck
Reservoir, Lake Sakakawea and Devils Lake.
•Fecal coliforms are highest the in White,
Niobrara, Lower Loup and James River
watersheds. They are generally less than 400
in most monitored watersheds as a median
value.
•Dissolved solids are highest in the North Fork
of the Grand River, the Redwater River in
Montana, O'Fallon Creek, the South Fork of
the Powder, the Little Powder, the Angostura
Reservoir section of the Cheyenne River and
the Eastern Missouri Coteau watersheds.
They are lowest in the Niobrara and Loup
watersheds and the Tongue, Lower
Yellowstone, Upper James and parts of the
Sheyenne, Milk and Upper Missouri River
watersheds.
•Dissolved oxygen is lowest in the Upper Little
Missouri and South Fork of the Moreau
watersheds, however, the problem is
widespread.
•Most lakes in the NGPAA have a trophic
status listed as mesotrophic. Wyoming and
Nebraska have the largest percentage of lakes
listed as eutrophic or hypereutrophic.
•Fish consumption advisories have been
issued for Box Butte Reservoir, Beaver Creek
(Loup Watershed), Merritt Reservoir and Lake
Ogallala in Nebraska; the Missouri River, Red
River and twenty-two lakes in North Dakota
41
-------
Table 2.3.1 Surface Water Beneficial Use Classifications Used by States in the Northern Great Plains
Montana
A (A-closed and A-1)
B(B-1, B-2, B-3)
C-1 and C-2
C-3
Wyoming
1
3
4
South Dakota
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Very high quality (mainly for protection of domestic use).
For domestic use after treatment, growth and propagation of aquatic life (B-1 and B-2 are
for coldwater aquatic life and B-3 is for warmwater aquatic life), agriculture and industry.
Most streams are B in Montana.
Same uses as B, but no domestic drinking water use. ,
Waters naturally high in total dissolved solids, but may support warmwater fishes.
Impacted. An activity does not allow the water to fully support drinking,, recreation or
fishery uses. The goal is to improve these waters to fully support the uses that it can.
No further degradation by point sources is allowed; nonpoint sources must be controlled
through best management practices ^
Waters other than Class 1 that are supporting game fish, have the potential to support game
fish or include nursery areas or food sources for game fish.
Same as Class 2, but for non-game fish.
Waters that do not have the potential to support fish and includes all intermittent and
ephemeral streams. Does have protection for agriculture and industry. '•
Domestic Water Supply Waters
Coldwater Permanent Fishlife Propagation Waters
Coldwater Marginal Fishlife Propagation Waters
Warmwater Permanent Fishlife Propagation Waters
Warmwater Semipermanent Fishlife Propagation Waters
Warmwater Marginal Fishlife Propagation Waters
Immersion Recreation Waters
Limited Contact Recreation Waters
Wildlife Propagation and Stock Watering Waters
Irrigation Waters
Commerce and Industry Waters .
-------
Table 2.3.1 Surface Water Beneficial Use Classifications Used by States in the Northern Great Plains
Nebraska
Recreation
Aquatic Life (Coldwater Class A and B; Warmwater Class A and B)
industrial
Public Drinking Water Supply
Agriculture (Class A and B)
Aesthetics
North Dakota
Agriculture
Industrial
Domestic and Municipal Water Supply
Recreation
Fishing (Cold, Cool, Warm)
_ Aquatic Life
-------
Chapter 2 - Status of Aquatic Resources
and in the Marais, Milk, Missouri, Clarks Fork
of the Yellowstone and Tongue Rivers in
Montana.
•Watersheds with high total solids
concentrations include the White and the
Cheyenne.
•Atrazine is one of the pesticides most often
detected in streams in the eastern NGPAA.
•Nitrates in the Red River have been found to
be at concentrations less than 1 mg/l. In
central Nebraska, the concentrations ranged
from 0 to 1.8 mg/l, with some smaller
agricultural watersheds having values as high
as 3.7mg/l.
•Missouri River water quality is generally good
with a few problems such as low dissolved
oxygen in reservoirs, cold temperatures below
dams and mercury in the Cheyenne River arm
of Lake Dane.
Data Sources
Much of the information used in this
section was obtained from the 305(b) Water
Quality reports prepared by the States *of
Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, South
Dakota and Wyoming. The 1996 reports were
used from Nebraska, South Dakota and
Wyoming, the 1994 report was used for
Montana and the 1998 report was used for
North Dakota. Information from the 1996
303(d) lists of impaired waterbodies was also
used. These reports presented information on
miles and acres of waters assessed and the
condition with regard to meeting designated
uses, the causes (e.g., ammonia, nutrients) of
failing to meet the uses and the sources (e.g.,
agriculture, municipal wastewater). In several
cases use support information was not
presented by watershed and the data had to
be converted into that form. The reports also
provided information on where toxic impacts
were noted and where fish consumption
advisories had been issued. Additional
information on fish consumption advisories
was obtained from the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency's Index of Watershed
Indicators (U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, 1997a).
Information on individual pollutants was
retrieved by the U.S. Geological Survey-Water
Resources Division from the Storet database.
This covered the period from 1980 to 1995.
The data is presented as the minimum,
median and maximum values (whichever is
most informative) for the station used in each
watershed. The information on the effects of
large dams on water quality and much of the
water quality information on the Missouri River
itself was obtained from the Draft
Environmental Impact Statement for the
Missouri River Master Water Control Manual
by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
Data Quality and Gaps
Large areas in the Northern Great Plains
would likely benefit from more water quality
data collection. Fecal colifomn data is lacking
in eastern Montana. Total solids data is
missing for eastern Montana and most of
North Dakota. There is only scattered data for
BOD, with most of Montana, southwestern
North Dakota, northwestern and central South
Dakota and parts of Wyoming lacking
information. Data on ammonia was not
represented geographically because it was
lacking within the Storet dataset and,
therefore, no conclusions over this broad an
area could be obtained. However, it should be
noted again that this analysis is based on one
station in the watershed and there could be
more data from other stations. The station
used though, is the one most likely to have the
most data and is the one generally where data
would be most likely to be regularly collected.
The quality of the information in Storet is
variable for some parameters and needs to be
verified. In addition, there are quality concerns
with regard to the 305(b) reports; much of the
44
-------
Northern Great Plains Aquatic Assessment
assessments are not based on monitoring, but
on evaluations using some other data, and can
also be subjective. Methods for using
available data, preparing the 305(b) reports
and defining use support varies from state to
state, therefore, one should be careful making
direct comparisons between states.
There is some question as to the
relationship between the use of fecal coliforms
as a measure and the causes of waterbome
illnesses to swimmers. Presently, there is
research in developing a better measure, but
currently, only fecal coliform data is
widespread enough to assess this aspect of
water quality.
Spatial Patterns
The quality of waters in the Northern Great
Plains has generally improved in the last 25
years. Much of this improvement has been
due to controls placed on point sources.
According to the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (1990), based on the
305(b) reports submitted by the states, 60% of
the assessed rivers and streams in the
Northern Great Plains were fully supporting
their designated uses (nationwide it was 70%).
The three leading causes of the 40% not fully
supporting are sediment, nutrients and
pathogens. Agriculture was responsible for
77% of the impairment. For lakes and
reservoirs in the NGPAA, 81 % of them were
fully supporting uses, with nutrients, sediment
and organic enrichment being the top three
causes. Agriculture was responsible for 60%
of the impairment.
Figure 2.3.1 presents the assessed miles
of streams in each watershed which are
partially supporting or not supporting uses (i.e.
not fully supporting). Watersheds with over
300 assessed miles not fully supporting uses
include the Lower Yellowstone, Fort Peck
Reservoir, Clarks Fork of the Yellowstone,
Lake Sakakawea, Upper Cannonball, Upper
and Middle James, Upper White, North Platte-
Scottsbluff, and the Middle Platte-Buffalo.
Watersheds with less than 50 miles not fully
supporting uses include parts of the Missouri
River in North and South Dakota, parts of the
Niobrara and Loup Rivers in Nebraska, the
James Headwaters, the Upper Cheyenne
River in Wyoming and the Missouri River
above Fort Peck in Montana.
The miles of streams in each watershed
not supporting uses is presented in Figure
2.3.2. The Lower James River has over 200
miles not supporting. However, a number of
watersheds have more than 100 miles listed
as not supporting, including the White River
basin, Lake Sakakawea, the Grand, Moreau
and Lower Cheyenne in South Dakota, the
Western Wild Rice River in North Dakota, the
Upper Powder and North Platte-Casper in
Wyoming and the Lower North Platte, Lower
Loup and South Loup in Nebraska. Large
areas of the NGPAA have watersheds with
less than 50 miles of assessed streams not
supporting uses.
The percentage of assessed miles of
streams partially supporting or not supporting
uses by watershed is presented in Figure
2.3.3. The majority of watersheds in the
NGPAA have more than 50% of assessed
miles which are not fully supporting designated
uses and large areas that have watersheds
with more than 90% not fully supporting.
Notable areas not supporting include the Red
River basin, the Platte basin, Missouri River
tributaries in western South Dakota and a
number of scattered watersheds in Montana.
Only a few watersheds have less than 10% of
assessed miles listed as not fully supporting.
These include the James Headwaters, parts of
the Souris River basin, the Missouri River
above Fort Peck Reservoir, Big Porcupine
Creek and Boxelder Creek in the Little
Missouri basin.
45
-------
Miles Not Fully
Supporting Uses
Not Assessed
mm 0-50
—ur_ .i.'-.-jj
iiijj -ioo
mUS 101 -300
>300
Figure 2.3.1 Miles of Streams in Each Watershed Not Fully Supporting Designated Uses
-------
Miles Not
Supporting Uses
| | Not Assessed
51 -100
101 - 200
>200
Figure 2.3.2 Miles of Streams in Each Watershed Not Supporting Uses
-------
Percent Miles
Not Fully
Supporting Uses
\~ | Not Assessed
n -so
51 -90
91 -100
Figure 2.3.3 Percentage of Assessed Miles of Streams in Each Watershed Not Fully Supporting Uses
-------
Northern Great Plains Aquatic Assessment
The percentage of miles of streams in
each watershed not supporting uses is
presented in Figure 2.3.4. The western South
Dakota tributaries of the Missouri, the Lower
James, Arrow Creek and Sage Creek stand
out as watersheds with more than 90% of
assessed miles listed as not supporting uses.
In contrast, much of North Dakota, eastern
Montana, central South Dakota and the Sand
Hills of Nebraska have watersheds with less
than 10% of assessed miles not supporting
uses.
Figure 2.3.5 shows the acres of lakes
partially supporting or not supporting uses by
watershed. Fort Peck Reservoir, Lake
Sakakawea and Devils Lake are watersheds
with the largest amounts of assessed lake
acreage not fully supporting uses.
Figure 2.3.6 shows the percentage of
acres of lakes partially supporting or not
supporting uses by watershed. The majority of
watersheds in the NGPAA with assessed lake
acres have percentages of more than 90% not
fully supporting uses. This figure differs
dramatically from 2.3.5 due to small amounts
of assessed acres not fully supporting uses,
but these small amounts have high
percentages.
Table 2.3.2 lists the trophic status of lakes
in the Northern Great Plains. This includes
information from all lakes in each state,
including those not within the Assessment
Area since the information is presented in the
state 305(b) reports by state. Data on trophic
status by watershed were not available for
each state. Trophic status is defined as the
degree of nutrient enrichment of a lake and its
ability to produce algae (Montana Department
of Environmental Quality, 1994). Most
assessments to determine the trophic status
use Carlson's Index, which uses total
phosphorus, chlorophyll a and secchi disc
depth. From the least enriched to the most
enriched, lakes are categorized as
oligotrophic, mesotrophic, eutrophic and
hypereutrophic. The Carlson index value of 35
is a transition between oligotrophic and
mesotrophic and 50 is the transition between
mesotrophic and eutrophic (Montana
Department of Environmental Quality, 1994).
The majority of assessed lakes in the
Northern Great Plains are classified by the
states as mesotrophic. Individual states varied
widely in the percentage of assessed lakes
listed as eutrophic/hypereutrophic. Wyoming
listed the most with 56% and Nebraska was
second with 42%. South Dakota, North
Dakota and Montana listed 17%, 19% and
10%, respectively, as
eutrophic/hypereutrophic. Again, values do
not represent only lakes within the NGPAA.
Sources of fecal' coliform are sewage-
treatment plant discharges and runoff from
feedlots and grazing areas. Where they are
found, it is likely that contamination from
human or animal wastes has occurred. Fecal
coliform criteria apply to streams that have a
recreation beneficial use, with immersion
recreation (swimming) generally having more
stringent criteria than for boating only. The
water quality criteria for fecal coliforms is
generally around 200 MPN (most probable
number) for waters with a recreation use
classification. It can be higher for other
classifications in some States.
Figure 2.3.7 presents the median levels of
fecal coliforms in each watershed where data
was available. The lower White, middle
Niobrara, some lower Loup tributaries, the
Upper Moreau, Keya Paha Creek and Elm
Creek in the James watershed are the areas
with the largest median fecal coliform values.
The maximum levels of fecal coliforms are
shown in Figure 2.3.8. Many of the same
areas with high median fecal coliform levels
also have high maximum levels, but a few
49
-------
Percent Miles Not
Supporting Uses
f | Not Assessed
iiiii} o -10
I 91 -100
Figure 2.3.4 Percentage of Assessed Miles of Streams in Each Watershed Not Supporting Designated Uses
-------
Acres Not Fully
Supporting Uses
| (Not Assessed
0-25000
25001 - 150000
JJ000I - 400000
Figure 2.3.5 Acres of Lakes in Each Watershed Not Fully Supporting Designated Uses
-------
Percent Acres
Not Fully
Supporting Uses
Not Assessed
0- 10
11 -50
51 -90
91 -100
Figure 2.3.6 Percentage of Assessed Acres of Lakes in Each Watershed Not Fully Supporting Designated Uses
-------
Northern Great Plains Aquatic Assessment
Table 2.3.2 Trophic Status of Lakes in the Northern Great Plains States (includes lakes within
these states outside of the Northern Great Plains Assessment Area).
Trophic Status
Oligotrophic
Mesotrophic
Eutrophic
Hypereutrophic
Total Assessed
Total Not Assessed
Number*
52
120
202
153
537
7998
Area (in acres)
345,928
1,604,632
332,188
170,642
2,423,441
317,976
Percent of Assessed
14
66
14
7
'Wyoming not included because lakes were not enumerated (only acreage was reported).
areas are added such as the lower James,
the Missouri and Rapid Creek. Some of
these may be due to infrequent large
discharges of fecals from a source such as a
wastewater treatment plant, but which is not
sustained over the long term. Much of the
Northern Great Plains has low median levels
of fecals, however, individual streams within
these watersheds could have very high
levels. Many areas within Montana and
Wyoming, however, are lacking in Storet
data.
Dissolved solids levels (median) are
presented in Figure 2.3.9. While high
dissolved solids concentrations can result
from the natural geology and soils,
agriculture and some industrial wastewater
dischargers can contribute large amounts.
U.S. EPA guidance recommends a level of
500 mg/l of dissolved solids for drinking
water. Levels of more than 2000 mg/l are
unsuitable for irrigation (National Research
Council, 1973). While cattle can drink water
that has up to 10,000 mg/l total dissolved
solids, swine are limited to below 7000 and
poultry to below 3000 (Olson and Fox,
unknown date). As the figure shows, there
are large areas within the Northern Great
Plains where the median values are far
above the 500 mg/I guidance, especially
parts of the Upper Powder, Little Powder,
Cheyenne, Grand, and Redwater Rivers, as
well as O'Fallon Creek and streams in the
Eastern Missouri Coteau. Maximum levels
(Figure 2.3.10) are highest in the Devils
Lake, Upper Missouri and Apple Creek
watersheds. Some of the lowest dissolved
solids levels are in the Nebraska Sand Hills
and in parts of Montana.
Dissolved oxygen (Figures 2.3.11 and
2.3.12) is critical for aquatic life. Median and
minimum dissolved oxygen levels are
presented, since in this case, there is a
problem when there is too little rather than
too much. Most fish species need levels
greater than 3 or 4 mg/l and juvenile fish
need even higher levels of between 5 to 8
mg/l (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
1995). Dissolved oxygen can be depleted by
the breakdown of organic compounds or by
rapid growth of algae. Typically, dissolved
oxygen water quality criteria range from 5.0
to. 7.0 mg/l for waterbodies classified for
aquatic life, with higher use classifications at
the upper end. Problem areas for median
dissolved oxygen show up in the Upper Little
53
-------
Fecal Coliform,
#/100 ml
| | No Data
0-400
401 -1000
>1000
Figure 2.3.7 Median Fecal Coliform in the Northern Great Plains
-------
Fecal Coliformf
• #1100 ml
No Data
0-10000
10001 - 100000
100001 • 500000
>500000
Figure 2.3.8 Maximum Fecal Coliform Levels in the Northern Great Plains
-------
Dissolved Solids,
mg/l
| No Data
OHO-500
ill 50 J -WOO
0 1001 - 2000
I > 2000
Figure 2.3.9 Median Dissolved Solids Levels in the Northern Great Plains
-------
Dissolved Solids,
mg/l
No Data
0- WOO
1001 • 10000
10001 -25000
>25000
Figure 2.3.10 Maximum Dissolved Solids Levels in the Northern Great Plains
-------
Dissolved Oxygen,
mg/l
y
No Data
0-4
4.1 -8
Figure 2.3.11 Median Dissolved Oxygen Levels in the Northern Great Plains
-------
Dissolved Oxygen,
mg/l
No Data
0-4
4.1 -8
Figure 2.3.12 Minimum Dissolved Oxygen Levels in the Northern Great Plains
-------
Total Solids, mg/l
No Data
0-1000
1001 - 3000
>3000
Figure 2.3.13 Median Total Solids Levels in the Northern Great Plains
-------
Total Solids, mg/l
No Data
0 -1000
1001 • 10000
10001 -25000
>25000
Figure 2.3.14 Maximum Total Solids Levels in the Northern Great Plains
-------
Chapter 2- Status of Aquatic Resources
Missouri River and the South Fork of the
Moreau River. However, when the minimum
levels that have been recorded are reviewed in
Figure 2.3.12 it is obvious that most areas
within the Northern Great. Plains are
susceptible to low dissolved oxygen at some
time or another.
Figures 2.3.13 and 2.3.14 show the
median and maximum levels of total solids,
respectively, in each watershed where data
was available. This data is limited mainly to
South Dakota and parts of Nebraska, with
Montana, Wyoming and North Dakota
generally lacking data. The limited data does
show, however, problem areas in the
Cheyenne, White, Lower James and Lower
Missouri River watersheds. High total solids or
suspended sediment can result from land
cover disturbances, including agriculture,
mining or construction. This loading can affect
aquatic organisms by covering them or their
habitat and can fill reservoirs.
Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD) is* a
measure of the organic material in the water.
This material can be used by algae and other
organisms to create a low dissolved oxygen
situation. Generally, the more BOD, the more
the possibility that low dissolved oxygen may
result. The numbers used in the figure
correlate with technology-based. discharge
limits for National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) permits, which
are 30 mg/l on a monthly basis. This is not a
water quality standard and should only be
referred to as a basis for comparison.
Numerous factors could determine whether
this level (or one higher or lower) is harmful to
the aquatic system. These include
background dissolved oxygen, streamflow
volume and velocity, and mixing.
Nevertheless, a higher BOD value instream is
an indication that dissolved oxygen levels may
be threatened. Figure 2.3.15 presents the
median level of BOD in each watershed
where data was available. Areas such as the
Upper Missouri, Upper Yellowstone, and
Cheyenne River stand out as places where a
relatively high median BOD value in stream
exists. The Missouri River in North Dakota has
areas approaching this value.
Data for ammonia was not widespread
enough in the Northern Great Plains to discern
any spatial patterns across this broad an area.
However, since it is an important pollutant it
should not be ignored. One of the sources of
ammonia is effluent from municipal sewage
treatment plants, this being an area where
additional point source controls could provide
more water quality benefits. Nonpoint
sources, however, are also significant. The
water quality criteria for ammonia varies with
pH and temperature, since the unionized form
is the most dangerous to aquatic life. At high
pH and temperatures, the unionized form is
more prevalent and the total ammonia criteria
under these conditions are very low.
Figure 2.3.16 shows the watersheds where
ammonia has been implicated in state 305b
reports as impacting uses. Watersheds with
the greatest number of miles impacted by
ammonia are the Upper Red, the Upper and
Middle James, parts of the Yellowstone, the
Middle Platte-Buffalo, the Upper Elkhom, Mud
Creek in Nebraska and Rapid Creek in South
Dakota.
On occasion, when sampling of fish tissue
shows a concern, states may issue fish
consumption advisories. These may take the
form of limits on the number of fish that should
be eaten (by either the general population or
for susceptible individuals only) or outright
bans on fish consumption.
Within the NGPAA, in 1994 and 1995,
Nebraska issued fish consumption advisories
for Box Butte Reservoir, Beaver Creek (Loup
River Watershed), Merritt Reservoir and Lake
62
-------
Biochemical Oxyg
Demand, mg/l
| | No Data
RiipjO- IS
16-30
>30
n
Figure 2.3.15 Median Biochemical Oxygen Demand in the Northern Great Plains
-------
Miles Impacted
by Ammonia
Figure 2.3.16 Miles of Assessed Streams in Each Watershed Impacted by Ammonia
-------
Northern Great Plains Aquatic Assessment
Ogallala (Nebraska Department of
Environmental Quality, 1996). These were
issued for mercury in Box Butte and Merritt
Reservoirs; dieldrin in Beaver Creek and Lake
Ogallala and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs)
also in Lake Ogallala. South Dakota
monitored fish flesh in over 44,000 lake acres
for mercury, PCBs, chlordane and toxaphene
and found levels too low to warrant issuing
fish consumption advisories (South Dakota
Department of Environment and Natural
Resources, 1996). Wyoming did not issue any
fish consumption advisories during the 1994-5
period (Wyoming Department of
Environmental Quality, 1996). North Dakota
has issued fish consumption advisories for
eighty-one miles of the Missouri River, 291
miles of the Red River and for twenty-two
lakes for a total of 471,391 acres (North
Dakota Department of Health, 1994). The
largest lakes include Lake Sakakawea,
Jamestown Reservoir, Devils Lake, Lake
Audubon, Lake Ashtabula, Lake Darling and
Lake Tschida. These advisories have been
issued for mercury. In addition, North Dakota
states that 306 miles of the Little Missouri have
elevated levels of toxics (North Dakota
Department of Health, 1994). The toxics
include chromium, copper, lead and arsenic
resulting from highly erosive soils compounded
by overgrazing and oil exploration and
extraction (North Dakota Department of
Health, 1994). Montana has issued advisories
in the Marais, Milk, Missouri, Clarks Fork of the
Yellowstone and Tongue River watersheds
(U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
1997a).
Contamination in wildlife has been studied
in a few areas within the assessment area,
namely the Cheyenne River and the Red
River. In the Cheyenne River, Hesse et al.
(1975) found elevated mercury levels in fish-
eating birds. This contamination derived from
historical discharges of mercury used in gold
mining in the Black Hills tributaries of the
Cheyenne River.
A few studies investigating the water
quality of irrigation projects have been
performed in the Northern Great Plains.
Greene, et al. (1990) sampled aquatic
organisms in the vicinity of the Angostura
Reservoir and irrigation project on the
Cheyenne River. Levels of selenium in fish
downstream of the project was two to five
times more than in fish sampled above. Seven
fish (out of nine) had levels above 10 ug/g
which is above the level suggested to cause
detrimental effects in fish (Greene, et al.
1990). Samples of fish and blackbird eggs
had less than the recommended level of
pesticides and fish had less than the
recommended levels of PCBs.
Roddy, et al. (1991) performed a similar
study for the Belle Fourche project.
Downstream fish had higher arsenic and
selenium. The highest selenium value was 5.7
ug/g, which is lower than the 10 ug/g toxic
effects level for whole fish (Lillebo, et. al,
1988). Duck livers had selenium values
ranging from 6.5 to 27.5 ug/g. Ten ug/g is
considered the threshold of biological effects
for aquatic bird liver samples (Lemly, 1993).
Goldstein, et al. (1996) sampled fish from
various points in the Red River and found no
differences in concentrations of mercury in the
fish with respect to the sampling site. The
authors point out that this is indicative of a
diffuse atmospheric source of mercury rather
than large point sources. Sampling of fish
(fillets) in the Red River in 1990 for mercury by
the Minnesota Department of Natural
Resources found concentrations ranging.from
0.32 ppm to 1.3 ppm (Goldstein, 1995). Fish
consumption advisories were issued by both
Minnesota and North Dakota based on this
data (Goldstein, 1995). The levels of total
PCBs have declined in Red River fish, but
were still high enough as of 1993 for
65
-------
Chapter 2 - Status of Aquatic Resources
Minnesota to maintain a fish consumption
advisory based on the data (Goldstein, 1995).
Pesticides are a water quality concern in
areas of high agricultural activity such as
portions of the Northern Great Plains. Goolsby,
et al. (1991) found pesticides in streams in
Nebraska, North Dakota, South Dakota and
other Midwestern States. Atrazine was
detected the most often and in the largest
concentrations. The values for a number of
pesticides exceeded maximum contaminant
levels (MCLs) as defined under the Safe
Drinking Water Act in about half the samples.
Pesticides have been detected in the Missouri
River and include chlordane, atrazine,
alachlor, diazinon, dieldrin, DDT, simazine and
others (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 1994).
Instream samples for pesticides in the Red
River, a large fraction has detectable
quantities of 2,4-D, g-HCH and atrazine
(Tomes and Brigham, 1994), however, all were
well below the maximum contaminant levels.
Brigham et al. (1994) estimated the total load
of several pesticides at various sampling
points in the Red River basin. The Red River
itself at Emerson, Manitoba (where it crosses
into Canada) had an estimated load of 610
kilograms of atrazine, 1400 kilograms of
bentazon and 280 kilograms of cyanazine.
These loading values indicated that less than
1% of these applied pesticides were
transported out of the basin (Brigham, et al.
1994).
Nutrient loading to waters in the Northern
Great Plains is of concern because of the
large agricultural input Nitrogen and
phosphorus are the two most important
nutrients entering waters. High levels of these
pollutants stimulate plant growth which can
then deplete dissolved oxygen. Impairment
can occur when phosphorus concentrations
exceed 0.05 mg/l in lakes and 0.1 mg/l in
streams (Huntzinger, 1995).
Mueller, et al. (1992) reported on surface
water nutrient sampling results from numerous
U.S. Geological Survey National Water-Quality
Assessment (NAWQA) Program studies,
including a study of the Red River Basin and
Central Nebraska Basins. In data from sites
that had drainage areas of greater than 10,000
square miles, nitrates in the Red River were all
less than 1 mg/l, while the Central Nebraska
basins ranged from 0 to 1.8 mg/l. In smaller
areas draining agricultural regions in Central
Nebraska, nitrates reached as high as 3.7
mg/l. Total phosphorus samples for the large
drainage area in the Red River ranged from
0.1 to 0.5 mg/l and Central Nebraska was
similar. In Central Nebraska, total phosphorus
values were as high as 1.8 mg/l in areas
draining agricultural regions.
Water Quality of the Missouri River
According to the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (1994) water quality is generally
good in the mainstem of the Missouri River.
However, there are some water quality
problems. Low dissolved oxygen in reservoirs
is a problem due to oxygen demanding
sediments in the mainstem lakes. In addition,
since most of the mainstem dams release
water from lower depths, the low dissolved
oxygen in the reservoirs can result in low
dissolved oxygen releases downstream.
There are temperature concerns below the
reservoirs, as well, since the bottom water is
much colder than natural conditions. This
benefits introduced coldwaterfish species, but
is detrimental to the native Missouri River
fishes because it is unsuitable for spawning
and development of warm water fishes (U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service, 1994).
The water quality in some Missouri River
tributaries is at times poor because of nutrients
from runoff, sewage treatment plants, and
pesticides. In Lake Oahe water entering the
lake has slightly elevated levels of arsenic and
-------
Northern Great Plains Aquatic Assessment
mercury. The mercury problem is limited to
sediments in the Cheyenne River Arm. The
source of the mercury is historical mining
areas in the Black Hills. Contaminated fish
were first noticed in 1973. In Lake Francis
Case a huge sediment load is received from
the White River. This sediment remains in the
lake and adds total suspended solids to the
tailwaters of Fort Randall Dam.
Future Trends
Agriculture is a large contributor to water
quality problems in the NGP and will continue
to be so in the near future. Most of the effects
from agriculture are in the form of nonpoint
sources, which are difficult to control and there
are limited regulatory means for control of
them. Debate is currently ongoing concerning
any possible changes in the operation of the
Missouri River dams to improve wildlife habitat
and water quality and it remains to be seen if
changes will occur.
Water quality improvements, however,
have occurred from implementation of point
source controls on municipal and industrial
sources, all of which are required to have
permits to discharge. For the most part these
sources are as tightly regulated as they will
likely be in the near future, with the possible
exception of more ammonia stringent limits for
municipal wastewater plants. With some
exceptions (namely, some concentrated
animal feeding operations), in the Northern
Great Plains, point sources now have
restricted and limited impacts to water quality.
Most benefits to be gained in the future will
result from improvements in nonpoint source
control and minimizing the impacts of
hydrologic modifications.
In areas where population growth is
occurring, residential and commercial
development may have water quality effects.
These changes can increase the number of
point sources, loadings to present point
sources and more stormwater runoff from
construction and from the added roads, streets
and parking lots. Quicker runoff of
precipitation can also affect the hydrology of
streams within the developed area. In the
Northern Great Plains, these effects will be
limited in area compared to the more
widespread effects of agriculture, but in a local
area they can be very important.
2.4 GROUND WATER QUALITY
Introduction
The quality of ground water is affected by
dissolved minerals from surrounding rocks and
by other pollutants added by human activities.
Total dissolved solids is an important indicator
for assessing the quality of ground water.
Total dissolved solids content can vary widely
based on hydrogeologic condition. Ground
water may also naturally contain other
constituents such as sulfates and chlorides
that may make it unusable.
There are no federal rules mandating
beneficial use classifications for ground water,
although many states have ground water
classification systems and standards based on
use. Ground water may have use
classifications applied to it, much like surface
water, and the classifications generally reflect
categories of human uses, such as drinking,
stock watering and irrigation. Table 2.4.1
presents as an example the ground water
classification system used by the State of
Montana. The classification is based on the
total dissolved solids content. There are
federal standards under the Safe Drinking
Water Act which are referred to as maximum
contaminant levels (MCLs). These are
enforceable standards set to protect human
health. MCLs apply at the tap after treatment.
Human activities that can pollute ground
67
-------
Chapter 2 - Status of Aquatic Resources
water include use of agricultural fertilizers and
pesticides, feedlots, landfills and other
wastesites, unmaintained septic tanks, leaking
underground fuel storage tanks and spills of
toxic substances (Brouchard, et al. 1992). In
the NGPAA the most important pollutants that
may be found in ground water are nitrates,
pesticides and dissolved solids. Locally,
ground water is contaminated by toxics from
fuel leakage, toxic spills and hazardous waste
sites.
The maximum contaminant level for nitrate
is 10 mg/l. This is the level necessary to
protect infants from methemaglobinemia (also
known as blue-baby syndrome). This is a
problem for infants up to about four months of
age since they lack the necessary enzyme to
reduce the methemoglobin produced by nitrite
converted from high concentrations of nitrate
(Mueller, et al. 1995). A nationwide analysis
found that 16% of the nitrate samples from
agricultural areas exceeded the drinking water
standard and that concentrations were highest
within 100 feet of the land surface (Mueller,
1995).
Pesticides (herbicides, insecticides and
fungicides) are another pollutant of concern to
ground water in the Northern Great Plains.
There are a number of pesticides with MCLs,
including alachlor (0.002 mg/l), atrazine (0.003
mg/l), 2,4-D (0.07 mg/l) and 2,4,5-T (0.05
mg/l). Most of the MCLs for pesticides are set
for cancer risk, nervous system damage or
liver or kidney damage (U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 1993). There are MCLs for
other pollutants such as metals and organics,
but most of these are limited to specific
localities in the Northern Great Plains.
Key Findings
•The major aquifer systems located in the
NGPAA include unconsolidated alluvial and
glacial deposit aquifers, the High Plains
aquifer system, the Northern Great Plains
aquifer system and Great Plains aquifer
system.
•The High Plains Aquifer generally has very
good water quality in terms of dissolved solids.
•The Great Plains Aquifer has high dissolved
solids in central and southwestern Nebraska.
• Portions of the Northern Great Plains Aquifer
reach extremely high levels of dissolved solids
in North Dakota.
•The greatest number of pesticide detections
in ground water have occurred in Holt and
Wheeler counties in Nebraska; Potter County
in South Dakota; Rolette County in North
Dakota and Teton County in Montana.
•Aquifer vulnerability is greatest in parts of
northeastern Montana, scattered areas in the
Missouri Escarpment in North Dakota as well
as larger areas in Bottineau, McHenry,
Richland and Ransom counties in North
Dakota, much of eastern South Dakota and
areas south of the White River, southeastern
Wyoming, and throughout most of Nebraska.
•Nitrates are above 3 mg/l in greater than 25%
of sampled wells in central South Dakota,
western and north-central Nebraska, eastern
Wyoming and eastern North Dakota.
Data Sources and Methods
The information in this section was
obtained from large-scale ground waterreports
by the U.S. Geological Survey, the report by
the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
entitled, Pesticides in Ground Water Database,
which compiled monitoring information from
1971 to 1991 (U.S, Environmental Protection
Agency, 1992b), state 305(b) reports and
other reports.
Data Quality and Gaps
Large areas in the Northern Great Plains
are missing pesticide monitoring data for wells.
This is not necessarily surprising since where
problems are suspected is where monitoring
-------
Northern Great Plains Aquatic Assessment
Table 2.4.1 Montana's Ground water Classification System
I Suitable for public and private water supplies. Irrigation use with little or no treatment.
Specific conductivity of less than 1000 uSiemans/cm at 25°C.
II Can be used for water supply when better supplies are not available. The primary
purpose is for irrigation, stock watering and industry. Specific conductivity is between
1000 and 2500 uSiemans/cm at 25°C.
Ill Use is for stock watering and industry. Specific conductivity is between 2500 and
15,000 uSiemans/cm at 25°C.
IV Use is for industry only. Specific conductivity is greater than 15,000 uSiemans/cm at
25°C.
tends to be done (i.e. where there is heavy
pesticide or fertilizer use). Much less ground
water monitoring for pesticides appears to
have been done in the Montana and South
Dakota portions of the NGPAA.
Spatial Patterns
Wyoming reports that most of its ground
water is of good quality (Wyoming
Department of Environmental Quality, 1994),
but some of Wyoming's aquifers within the
NGPAA have naturally high levels of fluoride
and selenium. Specifically, the area with
high fluoride encompasses eastern Campbell
County, southeastern Johnson County and
northeastern Natrona County. High
selenium was noted in eastern Natrona
County. Of 63 wells sampled in the North
Platte Alluvial Aquifer in Goshen County, 35
were above 10 mg/I for nitrate (Wyoming
Department of Environmental Quality, 1996).
Twenty-four were sampled for pesticides with
none found above the MCLs (although
pesticides were detected in 18 of the wells)
(Wyoming Department of Environmental
Quality, 1996).
South Dakota states that the pollutant
most frequently found in ground water is
nitrate (South Dakota Department of
Environment and Natural Resources, 1996).
Two aquifers in South Dakota within the
NGPAA were sampled for nitrates and
highlighted in the 1996 305(b) report (South
Dakota Department of Environment and
Natural Resources, 1996). Six wells were
sampled in the Bowdle Aquifer in Potter,
Wafworth and Edmunds Counties in 1994
and two were found to have samples above
10 mg/I for nitrate. Similarly, of four wells
sampled in the Delmont Aquifer of Charles
Mix and Douglas Counties (also in 1994), two
had nitrates above 10 mg/I.
Ground water quality in North Dakota is
reported to be generally good with the
exception of naturally occurring problems in
a few aquifers (North Dakota Department of
Health, 1994). Monitoring has been done in
the Oakes, Icelandic and Warwick aquifers in
North Dakota (North Dakota Department of
Health, 1994). Of the total wells sampled
(137), pesticides were detected in two wells
(1.5%), nitrate was detected in thirty-six wells
(26.3%) and both pesticides and nitrate were
detected in one well (0.7%). Eight (5.8%)
wells had nitrate at a level greater than 10
mg/I.
-------
Chapter 2 - Status of Aquatic Resources
A study of water quality in the High Plains
Aquifer in Nebraska was performed in which
wells were sampled for nitrate and atrazine,
a common pesticide (Druliner, et al. 1996).
Only two areas out of six were in the
NGPAA. These included Box Butte County
in western Nebraska and an area
encompassing Holt, Garfield and Wheeler
Counties in the northeast. For nitrates in Box
Butte County, 11 wells were sampled that
ranged from 2.4 to 13 mg/l, only one
exceeded the 10 mg/l maximum contaminant
level (MCL) set by the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency. In the Holt, Garfield,
Wheeler area, nitrates ranged from 0.1 to 51
mg/l, with 30 out of 75 sampled wells
exceeding 10 mg/l.
An analysis of nitrate data from the states
in the NGPAA determined the percentages of
sampled wells in each state with more than
10 mg/I nitrate (Madison and Brunett, 1985).
Not all of the wells were necessarily within
the NGPAA boundary. In Montana, 3.8%
(2821) wells were above 10 mg/l. In
Nebraska the figure was 9.3% (2326 wells).
In North Dakota, South Dakota and Wyoming
the figures were 4.6% (7387 wells), 6.7%
(1996 wells) and 3.8% (1477 wells),
respectively.
The distribution of nitrate concentrations
in ground water in the Northern Great Plains
was complied by Madison and Brunett
(1985), as well. For most of the region where
there were more than five wells per county in
the database, fewer than 25% of the
sampled wells had nitrate concentrations
greater than 3 mg/l (considered to be above
background levels). A few areas, such as
central South Dakota, western and. north-
central Nebraska, parts of eastern Wyoming,
parts of eastern North Dakota and north-
central and south-central Montana show
more than 25% of the sampled wells with
greater than 3 mg/l nitrate. The rest of the
NGPAA had less than 25% of sampled wells
with greater than 3 mg/l nitrate. This data,
however, does not represent random
samples because known problem areas are
sampled more often (Madison and Brunett,
1985).
The naturally occurring total dissolved
solids concentrations in the Northern Great
Plains Aquifer System was reported by the
U.S. Geological Survey (1996). In the lower
Paleozoic portions of this aquifer system,
water with less than 3000 mg/l dissolved
solids only occurs in the Big Horn Mountains
area and from the Black Hills eastward to
central South Dakota (U.S. Geological
Survey, 1996a). Throughout much of North
Dakota, the lower Paleozoic aquifers contain
total dissolved solids in excess of 100,000
mg/l. In the lower Cretaceous (Inyan Kara
aquifer) part of this system, water with less
than 3000 mg/l dissolved solids occurs only
near the recharge zones (U.S. Geological
Survey, 1996a). In North Dakota this aquifer
has dissolved solids mostly between 3000
and 10,000 mg/l. The upper Cretaceous
aquifers (Hell Creek/Fox Hills), by contrast,
are less than 3000 mg/l in most of its range,
with the exception of a small area in
Bottineau and McHenry Counties in North
Dakota (U.S. Geological Survey, 1996a).
The median total dissolved solids ranges
from 910 mg/l in Montana to 1060 mg/l in
North Dakota (U.S. Geological Survey,
1988). Seventy-five percent of nitrate
samples were less than 1.5 mg/l and
selenium concentrations in 18% of samples
exceeded 2.4 mg/l (U.S. Geological Survey,
1988). The Fort Union aquifer (Lower
Tertiary) has a median total dissolved solids
concentration of 1600 mg/l in Montana and
about 1100 mg/l in Wyoming. Naturally
occurring selenium is 50 to 600 ug/i in some
areas (U.S. Geological Survey, 1988).
In the Great Plains Aquifer System,
70
-------
Northern Great Plains Aquatic Assessment
specifically the Maha Aquifer, total dissolved
solids are less than 5000 mg/1 over much of
Nebraska, but reach very high levels in
central and southwestern Nebraska (U.S.
Geological Survey, In Press). Thomas
County has levels of between 20,000 and
50,000 mg/i, while an area including portions
of Garden and Merrill Counties reaches
levels greater than 120,000 mg/l (U.S.
Geological Survey, In Press).
The High Plains Aquifer System (which
includes the Ogallala Aquifer) generally has
very good water quality. Under the Sand
Hills this system has total dissolved solids
concentrations of less than 250 mg/l and is
generally below 1000 mg/l where it exists in
Nebraska. In South Dakota and Wyoming
the quality of the water from the High Plains
Aquifer is suitable for most uses nearly
everywhere it occurs, although there are
some local total dissolved solids readings of
more than 500 mg/l (U.S. Geological Survey,
1996a). Selenium is a problem in some
areas where the aquifer overlies Pierre Shale
(U.S. Geological Survey, 1996a). The.
median selenium in Wyoming was 8 ug/l
(U.S. Geological Survey, 1988).
In the unconsolidated aquifers in North
Dakota, sampling showed that they are
generally less than the MCL for total
dissolved solids and nitrates, with some local
exceedances for nitrates (U.S. Geological
Survey, 1988). Arsenic exceeds 50 ug/l in an
area greater than 170 square miles in
southeastern North Dakota. Alluvial and
glacial aquifers in Montana had a median
total dissolved solids of concentration of
2000 mg/l (U.S. Geological Survey, 1988). In
the glacial drift/ally vial aquifers in South
Dakota, 75% of samples exceeded the MCL
for total dissolved solids, with a median of
670 mg/l and in the alluvial valley fill aquifers
in Wyoming, 75% of samples had a total
dissolved solids concentration of less than
760 mg/I (U.S. Geological Survey, 1988).
Figure 2.4.1 presents the results of over
20 years of sampling compiled by the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (1992b) for
pesticides. Pesticides were detected most
commonly in Holt and Wheeler counties in
Nebraska; Potter County in South Dakota;
Rolette County in North Dakota and Teton
County in Montana. Low numbers of
detections were recorded in eastern.
southern and western North Dakota, the
Sand Hills of Nebraska and parts of
northeastern Wyoming. Pesticides detected
in the NGPAA counties included 2,4-D, 1,2-
D, aldicarb sulfone, aldicarb sulfoxide,
atrazine, dicamba, MCPA, picloram,
simazine, alachlor, ethyl parathion, methyl
parathion, cyanizine, fonofos, dieldrin,
propachlor and metolachlor. None of the
pesticides detected in Northern Great Plains
counties were above the MCLs, with the
exception of one sample each from Wheeler
and Holt Counties in Nebraska. Wheeler
County had one aldicarb sample at 3 ug/l
and Holt County had one atrazine sample at
22.7 ug/l.
In more recent data, atrazine was
sampled in ten wells in Box Butte County
(Druliner, et al. 1996) and was detected in
two, with a high value of 0.7 ug/l. In Holt,
Garfield and Wheeler counties, forty-two
wells were sampled and atrazine was
detected in twenty-five of them, with a high of
1.8 ug/l. The MCL for atrazine is 3.0 ug/l.
Tomes and Brigham (1994) reported that
the majority of pesticide analyses for ground
water in the Red River basin were not above
laboratory reporting limits and were usually
below MCLs. The wells with reportable levels
were mainly in the southern and
southeastern part of the basin and atrazine
was the most commonly found pesticide.
71
-------
Pesticide Detections
No Data
°
1 -5
6-15
16-20
Figure 2.4.1 Pesticide Detections in Ground Water Wells in the Northern Great Plains
-------
Northern Great Plains Aquatic Assessment
The U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (1991) published a report assessing
the vulnerability of aquifers to contamination
throughout the United States on a state-by-
state basis. For Nebraska, essentially all of
the area within the NGPAA is rated as
vulnerable due to the predominance of
unconsolidated and semiconsolidated
deposits. However, the likelihood of
contamination was rated low due to the low
population density. Population density alone
is not a good predictor of vulnerability,
however, since agricultural areas with low
populations may contaminate aquifers. For
the part of Montana within the NGPAA, most
was rated as moderate to low vulnerability,
except for areas along rivers and portions of
northeastern Montana in Daniels, Valley,
Roosevelt, Blaine and Dawson Counties.
Most of North Dakota is rated as moderate to
low vulnerability. The areas with high
vulnerability include river areas, scattered
areas along the Missouri Escarpment and
larger areas within Bottineau, McHenry,
Richland and Ransom Counties. The
Sheyenne National Grassland is within a high
vulnerability area. Most of western South
Dakota has moderate to low vulnerability,
except for river areas and much of the area
south of the White River. Much of eastern
South Dakota east of the Missouri is rated as
high vulnerability, although it is a mosaic of
high and low. As for the Wyoming portion of
the NGPAA, northeast Wyoming is rated
moderate to low in vulnerability, while
southeastern Wyoming is rated high
(southeastern Converse, southern Niobrara
and almost all of Platte and Goshen
Counties).
Future Trends
The natural causes of poor quality ground
water will, of course, always be a problem. In
the Northern Great Plains, aside from
localized ground water impacts from sites
such as landfills and underground storage
tanks, most impacts to ground water will
come from agricultural uses. Confined
animal feeding operations and the use of
pesticides and nitrogen fertilizer on cropland
are the primary sources of ground water
contamination in this region.
The use of nitrogen fertilizers has grown
considerably since the end of World War II,
but has leveled off. Table 2.4.2 shows the
changes in amounts of nitrogen fertilizer
used through four decades in the top ten
counties within the NGPAA in terms of use in
1985. In addition to the increased amounts
of nitrogen fertilizer used, the percentage of
nitrogen in fertilizer has increased from 6.1 to
20.4% during the period 1950 to 1970
(Madison and Brunett, 1985).
The future impacts to the ground water
resources in the most vulnerable areas will
depend upon any changes in land use in
those areas. For example the vulnerable
areas under the Sand Hills are not
considered to be threatened because great
changes in land use are not expected. This
may not be true for all vulnerable aquifers in
the NGPAA.
2.5 AQUATIC SPECIES
Introduction
Biodiversity is the variety of life and its
processes and it includes the variety of
organisms, the genetic differences among
them and the communities and ecosystems
in which they occur (The Keystone Center,
1991). An actual assessment of biodiversity
includes examining the, links between
species, not just enumerating the species.
However, since other portions of this report
will look at the functioning of the aquatic
systems of the Northern Great Plains, this
section will deal only with the aquatic species
73
-------
Chapter 2 - Status of Aquatic Resources
Table 2.4.2 Trends in Nitrogen Fertilizer Use for the Top Ten Counties in the NGPAA. in pounds
County
Cass, ND
Ouster, NE
Lincoln, NE
Richland, ND
Antelope, NE
Knox, NE
Grand Forks, ND
Cavalier, ND
Boone, NE
1945
5390
4961
4939
3873
5916
4196
4184
3069
4306
1955
281600
843937
840058
202337
1006409
713649
218620
160341
732385
1965
1654264
3484064
3468052
1188632
4154808
2946191
1284285
941925
3023538
1975
8614776
7441282
7407083
6189944
8873860
6292489
6688065
4905186
6457688
1985
16126220
14302790
14078070
13109990
12930340
12586210
12568250
11650150
11478190
richness of the plains.
The information presented in this and the
following section is weighted heavily toward
fishes, since the best information available is
for this group.
Key Findings
•There are fewer endemic fish species in the
NGPAA than in many other areas due to low
topographic relief and the recent origin of the
plains.
•The Missouri River has 138 native fish
species and 35 introduced fish species.
•With a few exceptions, the fish species
diversity increases from west to east
•There are 75 fish species in the Red River
basin, only 51 of which exist on the North
Dakota side.
•Three typical fish habitats are found in the
NGPAA. These are large streams with
variable flow, a sandy substrate and high
levels of turbidity and dissolved solids; prairie
ponds, marshes and small streams that are
clear and relatively stable; and residual pools
of highly intermittent streams.
•The NGPAA has low aquatic -mollusk
diversity. Most of the mollusk species found
here overlap from nearby regions. Diversity is
highest in the eastern portions.
Spatial Patterns
There are fewer endemic species in the
Great Plains than in other areas due to its
recent origin and general lack of physical
barriers (Ostlie, et al. 1997). The only areas
within the Great Plains with a relatively high
degree of endemism are found outside the
NGPAA in areas such as the Hill Country of
Texas and the Black Hills of South Dakota
(Ostlie, et al. 1997). Of approximately 250 fish
species found in the Great Plains area
assessed in The Nature Conservancy Report,
A Status of Biodiversity in the Great Plains,
only 34 (14%) are endemic (a smaller set of
these actually occur in the Northern Great
Plains).
The increase in rainfall on the Northern
Great Plains from west to east influences the
physical characteristics of the waterbodies and
therefore, the fauna that can be supported.
Aquatic vertebrate and invertebrate diversity
generally increases from west to east,
however, a few minnow and killifish species
become increasingly dominant westward
(Cross and Moss, 1987) and most of the fish
species in the Great Plains are native to
eastern North America (Ostlie, et al. 1997).
The Missouri River stands out with a large
number of species even in the west because
of its larger flow.
74
-------
Northern Great Plains Aquatic Assessment
The NGPAA is drained by two major river
systems. These are the Missouri, flowing to
the Mississippi and the Red River of the North
flowing to Hudson Bay. These two systems
are in the Mississippi and Hudson Bay
zoogeographic provinces, respectively.
The Mississippi Province (of which only the
western part is in the Northern Great Plains)
contains all of the Mississippi-Missouri
drainage and is the richest province in North
America in obligatory freshwater fishes with
280 to 300 species (Moyle and Cech, 1982).
The majority of these (88%) are freshwater
dispersants, incapable of traveling long
distances in salt water. This high percentage
indicates that this is an ancient drainage
(Moyle and Cech, 1982). The Mississippi
province is important in North America as a
center of fish evolution (indicated by the
abundance of families such as Centrarchidae,
Percidae and Cyprinidae), as a refuge during
times of glaciation from which species have
been able to reoccupy waters they were forced
to vacate (most of the species found in the
Hudson Bay Province are also characteristic of
the northern parts of the Mississippi Province)
and as a refuge for representatives of past fish
faunas (evidenced by presence of relicts such
as sturgeons and paddlefish) (Moyle and
Cech, 1982).
The western Mississippi drainage has 27
resident native families and 235 resident
native species (Moyle and Cech, 1982). In
order, among native fishes, the Cyprinidae,
Percidae, Catostomidae and Ictaluridae are
the most diverse (collectively they make up
about 70% of the fauna) and the Cyprinidae
and Percidae alone contribute more than 50%
of the species. The Missouri River itself has
138 native fish species. However, when
introduced species are included, the total is
173. Nineteen percent of the Missouri River
fish species are introduced.
The Hudson Bay Province includes most of
central Canada and the portion of the United
States drained by the Red and Souris Rivers.
The fish fauna shows a strong affinity with the
Mississippi River basin, particularly in
freshwater dispersants (Moyle and Cech,
1982). Most of these freshwater dispersants
occur in the southern edges of the drainage
(which is the Red and Souris Rivers). There is
some divergence between the Red and Souris
Rivers, however. There are 29 fish species in
the Red that do not occur in the Souris (Moyle
and Cech, 1982). Underbill (1989) presents
evidence that the major source of fish species
to the Red River basin was through a
connection to the Mississippi drainage. Of the
75 native species in the Red River, 73 of them
are in common with the Mississippi drainage.
These 75 species are not evenly distributed in
the Red River basin, however, since 51 occur
in the North Dakota drainages and 71 on the
Minnesota side (Goldstein, 1995).
According to Cross and Moss (1987) there
are three fish habitats typical of the Great
Plains: large streams with variable flow, a
sandy substrate and high levels of turbidity
and dissolved solids; prairie ponds, marshes
and small streams that are clear and relatively
stable; and residual pools of highly intermittent
streams. The larger, turbid Great Plains rivers
contain the only unique fish species in the
region (Ostlie, et al. 1997, Cross and Moss,
1987). Examples include the pallid sturgeon,
sturgeon chub, sicklefin chub, western silvery
minnow, plains minnow, goldeye, flathead
chub and plains killifish. Examples of Great
Plains fishes whose habitat includes clear,
small streams, ponds and marshes fed by
springs are the topeka shiner and plains
topminnow (Ostlie, et al. 1997).
Within the entire prairie region 90 species
of reptiles and 34 species of amphibians occur
and the numbers of these decrease from east
to west and south to north as well (Com and
75
-------
Chapter 2 - Status of Aquatic Resources
Peterson, 1996). Salamanders are especially
under represented with only 5 species. Only
ten species of herptiles (8 reptile and 2
amphibian) are considered endemic to the
prairie (Com and Peterson, 1996).
With respect to aquatic invertebrates, the
mollusks of the Great Plains are essentially
species that originated in the eastern, boreal
and Rocky Mountain regions (Ostlie, et al.
1997). Freshwater mussels are most diverse
in the southeastern United States and the
diversity decreases significantly in the Great
Plains. The Missouri River and many of its
tributaries are not good habitat for mollusks
due to the sediment load. In the NGPAA, most
of the mollusk species are found in the eastern
portions of North Dakota, South Dakota and
Nebraska.
Table 2.5.1 lists ail of the fish species
known or expected to occur in the NGPAA.
Table 2.5.2 lists the aquatic-dependent
reptiles and amphibians of the NGPAA.
2.6 THREATENED, ENDANGERED AND
SPECIAL CONCERN AQUATIC SPECIES
Introduction
Threatened and endangered species are
those that have been listed by the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service under the Endangered
Species Act. Endangered means that the
species is in danger of extinction throughout
all or a significant portion of its range.
Threatened means any species which is likely
to become an endangered species within the
foreseeable future throughout all or a
significant portion of its range. The term
"species" includes-any subspecies-of fish,
wildlife or plants, and any distinct population
segment of any species of vertebrate fish or
wildlife which interbreeds when mature.
In addition to listed species, the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service keeps a list of species
with the potential to be added to the list,
known as candidates. Formerly there were
three lists, however, this has been recently
modified such that there is now only one
candidate list - those where sufficient
information exists to list, but the process .to do
so has not yet been completed or other
species have a higher priority.
In addition to the federally designated
endangered, threatened and candidate
species, this Assessment also examines
special concern species. This term includes
candidates for listing, those proposed for
listing and those ranked as G1, G2, or G3 by
state natural heritage programs and The
Nature Conservancy. The rankings in this
system (Ostiie, et al. 1997) are as follows:
G1 - critically imperiled; extremely rare,
occurring in five places or less or is highly
vulnerable to extinction,
G2 - imperiled; occurs in 6-20 places or is
vulnerable to extinction,
G3 - rare; locally abundant, but occurs in
only 21-100 locations or is vulnerable to
range-wide extinction,
G4 - apparently secure, and
G5 - demonstrably secure; no apparent
risk.
Most of the focus in this report has been
on those aquatic species that are federally-
listed or are ranked G1-G3 (TE&SC), however,
there are additional aquatic species that are
listed by individual States as endangered,
threatened or of special concern. These are
considered separately in this assessment.
76
-------
Northern Great Plains Aquatic Assessment
Table 2.5.1 Fish Species Reported to Occur in the Northern Great Plains Assessment Area.
Scientific Name
Common Name
Occurrence
Alosa chrysochloris
Ambloplites rupestris
Amia calva
Anguilla rostrata
Aplodinotus grunniens
Campostoma anomalum
Carassius auratus
Carpiodes carpio
Carpiodes cyprinus
Carpiodes velifer
Catostomus catastomus
Catostomus commersoni
Catostomus platyrhynchus
Coregonus clupeaformis
Coitus bairdii
Couesius plumbeus
Ctenopharyngodon idella
Culea inconstans
Cyprinella spiloptera
Cyprinus carpio
Dorosoma cepedianum
Esox americanus vermiculatus
Esox lucius
Esox masquinongy
Etheostoma exile
Etheostoma nigrum
Etheostoma spectibile
Fundulus diaphanus
Fundulus sciadicus
Fundulus zebrinus
Hiodon alosoides
Hiodon tergisus
Hybognathus hankinsoni
Hybognathus placitus
Hybopsis aestivalis
Hybopsis argyritis
Hypentelium nigricans
Ichthyomyzon castaneus
Ichthyomyzon unicuspis
Ictalurus furcatus
Ictalurus me/as
Ictalurus natalis
Skipjack Herring
Rock Bass
Bowfin
American Eel
Freshwater Drum
Central Stoneroller
Goldfish
River Carpsucker
Quillback
Highfin Carpsucker
Longnose Sucker
White Sucker
Mountain Sucker
Lake Whitefish
Mottled Sculpin
Lake Chub
Grass Carp
Brook Stickleback
Spotfin Shiner
Common Carp
Gizzard Shad
Grass Pickerel
Northern Pike
Muskellunge
Iowa Darter
Johnny Darter
Plains Orangethroat Darter
Banded Killifish
Plains Topminnow
Plains Killifish
Goldeye
Mooneye
Brassy Minnow
Plains Minnow
Speckled Chub
Western Silvery Minnow
Northern Hog Sucker
Chestnut Lamprey
Silver Lamprey'
Blue catfish
Black Bullhead
Yellow Bullhead
NE, ND, SD
ND, SD
ND
NE, SD
MT, NE, ND,
NE, ND, SD,
MT, NE, ND,
MT, NE, ND,
NE, SD, WY
NE, SD
MT, NE, ND,
MT, NE, ND,
MT, NE, ND,
ND
MT
MT, NE, ND,
MT, NE, ND,
MT, NE, ND,
NE, ND, SD
MT, NE, ND,
NE, ND, SD
NE.SD
MT, NE, ND,
ND.SD
MT, NE, ND,
MT, NE, ND,
NE.WY
NE, ND, SD
NE, SD, WY
MT, NE, SD,
MT, NE, ND,
NE, ND, SD
MT, NE, ND,
MT, NE, ND,
NE
MT, NE, ND,
SD
NE.ND
NE, SD
NE, SD
MT, NE, ND,
NE, ND, SD
SD
WY
SD.WY
SD, WY
SD.WY
SD.WY
SD, WY
SD.WY
SD, WY
SD
SD, WY
SD, WY
SD, WY
SD, WY
WY
SD, WY
SD.WY
SD, WY
SD, WY
SD.WY
77
-------
Chapter 2 - Status of Aquatic Resources
Table 2.5.1 continued Fish Species Reported to Occur in the Northern Great Plains Assessment
Area.
Scientific Name
Common Name
Occurrence
Ictalurus nebulosus
Ictalurus punctatus
Ictiobus cyprinellus
Ictiobus niger
Lepisosteus osseus
Lepisosteus platostomus
Lepomis cyanellus
Lepomis gibbosus
Lepomis humilis
Lepomis macrochirus
Lepomis megalotis
Lota lota
Luxilus comutus
Macrhybopsis gracilis
Macrhybopsis storeiana
Micropterus dolomieui
Micropterus salmoides
Morone chrysops
Morone saxatilis
Moxostoma anisunim
Moxostoma erythurum
Moxostoma macrolepidotum
Moxostoma valenciennesi
Nocomis biguttatus
Notemigonus crysoleucas
Noturus flavus
Noturus gyrinus
Notropis atherinoides
Notropis blennius
Notropis dorsalis
Notropis heterolepis
Notropis hudsonius
Notropis lutrensis
Notropis rubellus
Notropis shumardi
Notropis volucellus
Notropsis stramineus
Oncorhynchus clarid
Oncorhynchus mykiss
Oncorhynchus nerka
Brown Bullhead
Channel Catfish
Bigmouth Buffalo
Black Buffalo
Longnose Gar
Shortnose Gar
Green Sunfish
Pumpkinseed
Orangespotted Sunfish
. Bluegill
Longear Sunfish
Burbot
Common Shiner
Flathead Chub
Silver Chub
Smallmouth Bass
Largemouth Bass
White Bass
Striped Bass
Silver Redhorse
Golden Redhorse
Shorthead Redhorse
Greater Redhorse
Homyhead Chub
Golden Shiner
Stonecat
Tadpole Madtom
Emerald Shiner
River Shiner
Bigmouth Shiner
Blacknose Shiner
Spottail Shiner
Red Shiner
Rosyface Shiner
Silverband Shiner
Mimic Shiner
Sand Shiner
Cutthroat trout
Rainbow Trout
Kokanee Salmon
ND.SD
MT, NE, ND,
MT, NE, ND,
NE, SD
NE, ND, SD
MT, NE, ND,
NE, SD, WY
ND, SD
NE, ND, SD
NE, ND, SD
ND
MT, NE, ND,
NE, ND, SD,
MT, NE, ND,
NE, ND, SD
ND, SD
MT, NE, ND,
NE, ND, SD
NE
ND
ND.SD
MT, NE, ND,
ND
NE, ND, SD,
MT, NE, ND,
MT, NE, ND,
NE, ND, SD
MT, NE, ND,
NE, ND, SD
NE, ND, SD,
NE, ND, SD
MT, NE, ND,
NE, SD, WY
ND, SD
NE, SD
ND
MT, NE, ND,
MT.WY -
MT, NE, ND,
MT
SD.WY
SD
SD
SD.WY
WY
SD.WY
SD, WY
SD, WY
WY
SD, WY
SD, WY
SD
WY
SD
SD, WY
SD.WY
78
-------
Northern Great Plains Aquatic Assessment
Table 2.5.1 continued Fish Species Reported to Occur in the Northern Great Plains Assessment
Area.
Scientific Name
Common Name
Occurrence
Perca flavescens
Percina caprodes
Percina maculata
Percina phoxocephala
Percina shumardi
Percopsis omiscomaycus
Phenacobius mirabilis
Phoxinus eos
Phoxinus neogaeus
Pimephales notatus
Pimephales promelas
Pimephales vigilax
Polydon spathula
Pomoxis annularis *
Pomoxis nigromaculatus
Prosopium williamsoni
Pungitius pungitius
Pylodictis olivaris
Rhinichthys atratulus
Rhinichthys cataractae
Salmo trutta
Salvelinus fontinalis
Salvelinus namaycush
Scaphirhynchus platorynchus
Semotilus atromaculatus
Semotilus margarita
Stizostedion canadense
Stizostedion lucioperca
Stizostedion vitreum
Umbra limi
Yellow Perch
Logperch
Blackside Darter
Slenderhead Darter
River Darter
Trout-perch
Suckermouth Minnow
Northern Redbelly Dace
Finescale Dace
Bluntnose Minnow
Fathead Minnow
Bullhead Minnow
Paddlefish
White Crappie
Black Crappie
Mountain Whitefish
Ninespine Stickleback
Flathead Catfish
Blacknose Dace
Longnose Dace
Brown*Trout
Brook Trout
Lake Trout
Shovelnose Sturgeon
Creek Chub
Pearl Dace
Sauger
Zander
Walleye
Central Mudminnow
MT, NE, ND, SD, WY
ND, SD
NE, ND, SD
SD
ND
MT, NE, ND, SD
NE, SD, WY
MT, NE, ND, SD
MT, NE, ND, SD, WY
NE, ND, SD
MT, NE, ND, SD, WY
NE, SD
MT, NE, ND, SD
MT, NE, ND, SD, WY
NE, ND, SD
MT
ND
NE, ND, SD
NE, ND, SD
MT, NE, ND, SD, WY
MT, NE, ND, SD, WY
MT, NE, ND, SD, WY
MT, NE, ND, SD, WY
MT, NE, ND, SD, WY
MT, NE, ND, SD, WY
MT, NE, ND. SD, WY
MT, NE, ND, SD, WY
ND, more?
MT, NE, ND, SD, WY
NE.SD
Sources: Lee, et. al., 1980; Page and Burr, 1991; North Dakota Game and Fish Department, 1994
79
-------
Chapter 2 - Status of Aquatic Resources
Table 2.5.2 Amphibian and Reptile Aquatic Species Reported to Occur in the Northern Great
Plains Assessment Area.
Scientific Name
Common Name
Occurrence
Acris crepftanus
Ambystoma tigrinum
Chelydra serpentina
Chrysemys picta belli
Emydoidea blandingii
Graptemys pseudogeographica
Hyla chrysoscelis
Hyla versicolor
Kinostemon flavescens
Nectums maculosus
Pseudacris triseriata
Rana blairi
Rana catasbeiana
Rana pipiens
Rana sylvatica
Trionyx muticus
Trionyx spinifenvs
Northern Cricket Frog
Tiger Salamander
Snapping Turtle
Western Painted Turtle
Blanding's Turtle
False Map Turtle
Cope's Gray Treefrog
Common Gray Treefrog
Yellow Mud Turtle
Mudpuppy
Boreal Chorus Frog
Plains Leopard Frog
Bullfrog
Northern Leopard Frog
Wood Frog
Smooth Softshell
Spiny Softshell
NE.SD
MT, NE, ND, SD, WY
MT, NE, ND, SD, WY
MT, NE, ND, SD, WY
NE, SD
NE, ND, SD
ND.SD
ND, SD
NE
ND
MT, NE, ND, SD, WY
NE, SD
MT, NE, ND, SD, WY
MT, NE, ND, SD, WY
ND, SD
NE, ND, SD
MT, NE, SD
Sources: Freeman, 1990; Holberg and Cause, 1992; Behlerand King, 1979
Key Findings
•There are 18 TE&SC aquatic species within
the Northern Great Plains Assessment Area.
Of these, 7 are fish and 11 are mollusks.
•There are no aquatic species listed as
federally threatened. There are 3 federally
endangered species, 1 fish (pallid sturgeon)
and 2 mollusks (winged mapleleaf and fat
pocketbook). An additional species is
proposed to be federally listed as
endangered (topeka shiner).
•There are 3 federal candidate species, all of
which are fish (sturgeon chub, sicklefin chub,
and topeka shiner).
•There are 12 species which are of special
concern that are not listed as endangered,
threatened or candidates (global rank of G3
or lower).
•There is 1 bird species listed as endangered
(least tern) and 1 listed as threatened (piping
plover). These, are listed as a result of
changes in the hydrology of the Missouri
River.
•In addition to the endangered and special
concern species listed here, there are 11
fish and three herptile species listed by the
various states in the NGPAA as threatened,
endangered or of special concern.
•The watersheds with the greatest number of
endangered and special concern fish species
are the Lower James, the Upper James and
the Lewis and Clark Lake stretch of the
Missouri River.
•The Lower Yellowstone, the Lower Tongue,
Lake Sakakawea and the Fort Peck
Reservoir reach of the Missouri River are
also important areas for special concern fish
species.
•The Western Glaciated Plains contain the
largest number of endangered and special
concern fish species.
80
-------
Northern Great Plains Aquatic Assessment
•The distribution of the pallid sturgeon, the
only presently federally-listed fish species in
the NGPAA is the Missouri River, lower
Yellowstone, lower Powder and lower James
Rivers.
•The overall diversity of special concern
species by ecological province 0.004 - 0.007
per 10,000 hectares. By comparison, the
Black Hills ecological province has 0.063 per
10,000 hectares.
•The Platte, Niobrara, Missouri, Yellowstone,
and Lower Cheyenne Rivers and the Sand
Hills stand out as areas of high amounts of
occurrences of federally-listed species
(includes all species, not only fish and
aquatics).
v
Data Sources
The information on endangered,
threatened and special concern aquatic
species was provided by state natural
heritage programs, the Northern Prairie
Wildlife Research Center and the Biological
Resources Division (BRD) of the U.S.
Geological Survey. The BRD obtained
information on species locations through a
research of literature. Lists of species from
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service were also
used.
Data Quality and Gaps
While some of the records on fish
occurrences were old, most are recent. More
than two-thirds of the fish data is from 1980
or later, and more than 40% of the data is
from 1990 or later. The age of the data for
mollusks and herptiles was as least as
recent. However, there was a significant lack
of good locational data on rare mollusks in
the Northern Great Plains. The list used in
this assessment includes all species that may
be within the NGPAA, even though locations
have not been verified.
Spatial Patterns
Table 2.6.1 lists the threatened,
endangered and special concern aquatic
species of the NGPAA. As stated above
these are aquatic species that are listed
federally or are categorized as G1, G2 or G3.
Figure 2.6.1 presents the distribution of
endangered and special concern fish species
by watershed. Obvious patterns stand out.
It can be seen that most of the special
concern fish species are connected at least
to some extent to the Missouri and James
Rivers. By far the watersheds with the most
special concern fish species are the Lower
James, the Lower Missouri and the Upper
James. These watersheds have as many as
five special concern fish species. The Upper
Missouri, Lake Sakakawea, Lower Powder
and Lower Yellowstone fall in the next
category as having either two or three special
concern species. A similar pattern is
revealed when the number of special
concern species is matched with ecoregions
of the Northern Great Plains.
As seen in Figure 2.6.2, the Western
Glaciated Plains have the most fish species
at risk with six The Northeastern Glaciated
Plains, the North-Central Great Plains and
the Northern Glaciated Plains are close
behind. The least number of special concern
species are in the watersheds and
ecoregions of the Red River Valley, northern
Montana and Nebraska Sand Hills. It needs
to be investigated as to whether these
patterns are due to variations in the numbers
of endemic species or variations in impacts.
Figures 2.6.3 through 2.6.9 present
individual distributions for the seven special
concern fish species. Again, the strong ties
to the Missouri and James Rivers are
evident.
81
-------
Chapter 2 - Status of Aquatic Resources
Table 2.6.1 Threatened, endangered, and special concern (TE&SC) aquatic species occurring
within the Northern Great Plains Assessment Area. These species are either federally listed as
endangered (E), candidate (C), or globally ranked as G1, G2 or G3 by The Nature Conservancy.
Scientific Name
Common Name
Global
Rank
Federal
Rank
Fish .
Acipenser fulvescens
Macrhybopsis gelida
Macrhybopsis meeki
Moxostoma valenciennesi
Notropis anogenus
Notropis topeka
Scaphirhynchus albus
Mollusks
Alasmidonta marginata
Arcidens confnagosus
Cyprogenia aberti
Lampsilis higginsii
Leptodea leptodon
Plethobasus cyphyus
Pleurobema sintoxia
Potamilus capax
Quadnila fragosa
Quadrula metanevra
Venustaconcha ellipsifomnis
Lake Sturgeon G3
Sturgeon Chub G2
Sicklefm Chub G3
Greater Redhorse G3
Pugnose Shiner G3
Topeka Shiner G3
Pallid Sturgeon G1G2
Elktoe G3G4
Rock-pocketbook G3
Western Fan-shell G2
Higgins Eye G1
Scaleshell G1G2
Bullhead (Sheepnose) G3
Round Pigtoe G3G4
Fat Pocketbook G1
Winged Mapleleaf G1
Monkeyface G3
Ellipse G3
C
C
C(PE)
E
E
E
The pallid sturgeon is presently the most
imperiled fish species (if not of all aquatic
species) in the Northern Great Plains. It is a
bottom dweller and is found in areas with a
strong current and firm sand bottom in the
main channel of large turbid rivers (Ashton
and Dowd, 1991). In the Northern Great
Plains this mainly means the Missouri River
with some occurrences in the lower James,
Lower Yellowstone and Lower Powder
Rivers. The pallid sturgeon is slow-growing
and late maturing and feeds on small fish
and immature aquatic insects (Ashton and
Dowd, 1991). There has been no successful
reproduction documented in recent years
(Ashton and Dowd, 1991). Reasons for the
fish's decline include blockage of migration
patterns by dams, alteration of temperature
regimes below dams and reduced spawning
habitat due to changes in flow regimes (U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service, 1995; Ashton and
Dowd, 1991).
The topeka shiner is presently proposed
to be listed as an endangered species. It
occurs in the James River (from mouth up
into North Dakota), the Vermillion, the Lewis
and Clark Lake region of the Missouri River
and in the Upper North Loup River in
Nebraska. It prefers habitats of small,
headwater prairie streams with good water
quality and cool temperatures. The topeka
shiner's decline is most likely attributable to
nutrient and sediment loading to streams
82
-------
0
1
2-3
4-5
Figure 2.6.1 Number of Endangered and Special Concern Fish Species Per Watershed
-------
2
3
4-5
6
Figure 2.6.2 Number of Endangered and Special Concern Species Per Ecoregion
-------
Figure 2.6.3 Pallid Sturgeon Occurrence in the Northern Great Plains
-------
Figure 2.6.4 Topeka Shiner Occurrence in the Northern Great Plains
-------
Figure 2.6.5 Sicklefin Chub Occurrence in the Northern Great Plains
-------
Figure 2.6.6 Sturgeon Chub Occurrence in the Northern Great Plains
-------
Figure 2.6.7 Lake Sturgeon Occurrence in the Northern Great Plains
-------
Figure 2.6.8 Pugnose Shiner Occurrence in the Northern Great Plains
-------
Figure 2.6.9 Greater Redhorse Occurrence in the Northern Great Plains
-------
Chapter 2- Status of Aquatic Resources
from agriculture (Federal Register, 1997).
The sicklefin chub is a candidate for
federal threatened or endangered listing. It
occurs in a range very similar to that of the
pallid sturgeon, although no occurrences are
recorded for the Powder River. Sicklefin
chubs prefer the main channels of large turbid
rivers in areas of strong current over sand or
fine gravel (Ashton and Dowd, 1991). They
are in decline due to habitat loss from altered
flow regimes and loss of turbidity (Ashton and
Dowd, 1991; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
1995).
Sturgeon chubs are also a candidate for
listing, but are more widespread than either
the pallid sturgeon or sicklefin chub. It occurs
in the Missouri, Little Missouri, Yellowstone,
Tongue, Powder, White, Bad and Cheyenne
Rivers. The habitat requirements are swift
current areas of large silty rivers, usually over
a gravel bottom (Ashton and Dowd, 1991).
They are also declining due to habitat loss
from altered flows, possibly from decreased
turbidity (Ashton and Dowd, 1991).
Lake sturgeon is a G3 species found in the
Northern Great Plains only in the Lewis and
Clark reach of the Missouri River. It prefers
the bottom of lakes and large rivers over mud,
sand or gravel (Page and Burr, 1991).
The pugnose shiner, also a G3 species,
occurs in the Upper James in North and South
Dakota and the Lower Sheyenne and Turtle
Rivers in North Dakota. Its habitat includes
clearvegetated lakes and vegetated pools and
runs of creeks and rivers, usually over sand
and mud (Page and Burr, 1991).
The other G3 species, the greater redhorse
is found in the Turtle and Maple Rivers in the
Red River drainage of North Dakota. It prefers
large streams with clear waters and bottoms of
clean sand, gravel or boulders (U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, 1995). It is imperiled by
lowhead dams, channelization, nonpoint
source pollution and degradation of riparian
areas (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1995).
It reaches the western edge of its range in
eastern North Dakota.
Two bird species that warrant mention are
the threatened piping plover and the
endangered least tern. While not specifically
aquatic species, their impediment is a direct
result of changes in the Missouri River.
Habitat required for nesting has been lost from
channelization and from changes in the river's
flow. Both species nest on barren beaches of
sand or gravel, areas which were previously
created by the natural spring flooding regime
and were dry in late summer, but now can be
flooded.
There are 11 species of mollusks that
potentially occur in the NGPAA and are listed
as G3 or less by The Nature Conservancy.
Survey data for these species within the
Northern Great Plains is generally poor,
however. They are listed in this report
because of theirpossible occurrence, although
it is likely that at least some of them do not
occur within the NGPAA. Four species
(higgins eye, bullhead, fat pocketbook and
winged mapleleaf) are not considered to exist
north of Nebraska within the Missouri basin,
and it is not known if they reach up into the
tributaries that are in the NGPAA. Since the
fat pocketbook and winged mapleleaf are
listed as .endangered it is important to
determine more about these species' ranges.
Five other species (monkeyface, western fan-
shell, rock-pocket book, elktoe and round
pigtoe) are thought to exist within South
Dakota and Nebraska, as well as many other
states to the east. Again, however, it is not
certain that they occur within the NGPAA.
One species, the round pigtoe, is known from
the Vermillion watershed, adjacent to the
NGPAA from a 1993 observation. Two
92
-------
Northern Great Plains Aquatic Assessment
species, the ellipse and the scaleshell, almost
certainly do exist within the NGPAA, but the
range is poorly known. The scaleshell was
observed in the Lewis and Clark Lake
watershed in 1982 and the ellipse is
considered a resident of North Dakota. The
scaleshell is listed as a G1G2 species,
underscoring the importance of determining
where it exists.
Table 2.6.2 is a listing of all the aquatic
species either listed or are special concern
species by the individual states. These
overlap in some instances with th^ federal list,
but some unique species are rare in a state
due to a regional decline or the state is at the
edge of a species range.
Overall, the density of special concern
species in the Great Plains is low (Ostlie, et al.
1997). The density of species of concern by
ecoregion province is 0.004 per 10,000
ectares in the Great Plains Steppe Province,
0.005 per 10,000 hectares in the Great Plains
Dry Steppe Province and 0.007 in the Prairie
Parkland (Temperate) Province. As a way of
comparison, the Black Hills Province has 0.063
per 10,000 hectares, the highest in the Great
Plains (Ostlie, et al. 1997). Mapping by Ostlie,
et al. (1997) of patterns of documented
occurrences of federally listed species clearly
show areas tied to aquatic systems. In the
Northern Great Plains, the Platte River, the
Niobrara River, the Missouri River, the
Yellowstone River, the Lower Cheyenne River
and the Sand Hills stand out. This particular
analysis includes all species that use these
aquatic systems, including birds and
mammals.
Future Trends
As of this writing, the topeka shiner is
proposed for listing as an endangered species.
Two other fish, the sicklefin chub and the
sturgeon chub are candidates for listing and it
is presumed they will be proposed for formal
listing some time in the future. This region is
fortunate in that it does not have a great
number of imperiled species compared to
other regions of the country. The Great Plains
with 28% of continental United States land
mass, contain only 6.6% of G1-G3 species
(Ostlie, et al. 1997). As mentioned before,
however, this most likely reflects the lower
number of endemic species, not necessarily
lower impacts. This could also reflect a lack of
adequate surveys in the region.
The Missouri and James Rivers stand out
in the region as areas of significant importance
to imperiled aquatic species. The problems
caused by dams and altered flow on the
Missouri and altered flow and nonpoint source
pollution in the James are likely to continue in
the near future, but pressures to change are
building. The slowing in the loss of wetlands
(see Chapters) should also slow the decline of
many species.
2.7 FUNCTIONAL ANALYSIS FOR
AQUATIC SPECIES
Introduction
Each aquatic species has a set of
conditions under which it can best survive.
Specific ranges of temperature, pH, dissolved
oxygen or current velocity and many others
represent these conditions and if forced
outside of these ranges for a certain length of
time, the species is put at risk. This section
compares the ranges of certain critical
parameters for several aquatic fish species
representing six guilds with the conditions that
exist in the watersheds within their ranges.
Key Findings
•The analysis shows that for fish species
representing four of the six guilds, most
93
-------
Chapter 2 - Status of Aquatic Resources
watersheds where the species exists are in fair
to good condition based on the parameters
used.
•Fortwo species, pallid sturgeon and longnose
dace, the opposite is true - most watersheds
where these species exist have parameters
outside the optimum range at least half of the
time.
Data Sources and Methods
This analysis was done using the program
Netweaver provided for this project by
Pennsylvania State University and Knowledge
Garden, Inc. Netweaver is a knowledge-based
system in which a dependency network is
created to answer specific questions based on
the data provided. The Netweaver program is
linked to the GIS program, ArcView, using the
Forest Service's Ecosystem Management
Decision Support (EMDS) System.
in this project a network was created for six
fish species representing six important guilds
in which the water flow and water quality
parameters necessary for their survival were
available. Therefore, in each species'
dependency network, a number of different
parameters (representing values for each
species) such as dissolved oxygen, flow, pH or
temperature were connected to each other to
ask the question "Where do the parameters
exist within the necessary range to allow this
species to survive?". The parameters were
provided by the U.S. Geological Survey-
Biological Resources Division. These
networks were then linked within the
ArcView/EMDS program to water quantity and
water quality data provided by the U.S.
Geological Survey-Water Resources Division.
The water quality data is from Storet.and the .
flow data is from WATSTORE. The system
provided information as to whether in each
watershed where data was sufficient, if the
conditions necessary for the species existed.
It is important to note that the data was for one
station in the watershed, as mentioned before,
usually the lowest in the watershed.
Therefore, for certain guilds this may not
represent the best habitat and the program will
reflect this. It also must be noted that only a
few parameters were available for each
species (temperature, velocity, etc.) and that
many other factors influence their survival.
Spatial Patterns
The six species (and the guilds they
represent) used in the analysis were emerald
shiner (planktivore in large rivers and
reservoirs); fathead minnow (planktivore in
ponds, lakes, slow rivers and river
backwaters); longnose dace (benthic
invertivore in small clean streams); yellow
perch (benthic invertivore in lakes, ponds, slow
streams and larger rivers); pallid sturgeon
(benthic feeder on larger particles in larger
turbid rivers and reservoirs); and walleye
(piscivore). The parameters used for all
species were temperature and velocity. In
addition, for yellow perch, pallid sturgeon and
walleye, minimum dissolved oxygen needs
were also used and for fathead minnow and
yellow perch, pH requirements were used..
For the analysis, the requirements for each
species was matched with median or mean
water quality or flow data for the one station in
each watershed. Figures 2.7.1 through 2.7.6
present the results of each analysis for each
species.
In Figure 2.7.1, using median/mean data
for temperature and velocity, emerald shiner
could be stressed in 13 watersheds, many in
the upper Missouri River basin. The analysis,
however, rated all other watersheds in its
range as fair. Fathead minnow (Figure 2.7.2)
has 24 watersheds rated as poor, but the
range of this species is wide, therefore, this a
small portion. This is based on temperature,
velocity and pH. As with emerald shiner,
94
-------
il Poor
'] Fair
Figure 2.7.1 Functional Analysis for Emerald Shiner
-------
H Fair
Figure 2.7.2 Functional Analysis for Fathead Minnow
-------
Poor
Good
Figure 2.7.3 Functional Analysis for Longnose Dace
-------
rigure 2,7.4 Functional Analysis for Yellow Perch
-------
Poor
Fair
Figure 2.7.5 Functional Analysis for Pallid Sturgeon
-------
Poor
Good
Figure 2.7.6 Functional Analysis for Walleye
-------
Northern Great Plains Aquatic Assessment
though, the analysis rated all others as fair.
Figure 2.7.3, iongnose dace, shows only five
watersheds rated as good, with the rest of the
range as poor (using median/mean
temperature and velocity). For this species,
this is most likely an artifact of the way the
stations for each watershed were chosen. The
lowest station will most likely have larger flow
and greater turbidity. This is not the preferred
habitat of Iongnose dace or of the other
species in this guild. Stations chosed at
locations more appropriate for this guild would
most likely have shown a different result.
The analysis for yellow perch used the
most data for any species (median/mean
temperature, dissolved oxygen, velocity and
pH) and is presented in Figure 2.7.4. Seven
watershed are rated as poor and all others as
good. The watersheds with the most problems
are located in the Upper Missouri basin.
Figure 2.7.5 presents the analysis for pallid
sturgeon and it shows only one watershed in
this species range listed as fair. All others
rated as poor based on median/mean data for
temperature, velocity and dissolved oxygen.
The one rated as fair is Fort Peck Lake reach
of the Missouri River (10040104). Figure 2.7.6
shows the results for walleye in which
median/mean temperature, dissolved oxygen
and velocity were used. Eight stations rated
as poor with all others good.
2.8 COMMUNITY INTEGRITY/AQUATIC
HABITAT STUDIES
Introduction
This section looks at some of the fish and
macroinvertebrate community studies that
have been done ort-streams and rivers in the
Northern Great Plains and examines some
general community characteristics of
intermittent streams. In addition, this section
includes more detailed reviews of the aquatic
communities, habitat and water quality
characteristics of the James, Powder,
Yellowstone, Missouri, Moreau, Cheyenne and
Red Rivers, since these were rivers for which
this information was available. The recent
work of The Nature Conservancy with respect
to significant aquatic landscapes in the Great
Plains is also included.
There are several biological measures
available to compare fish or other biological
assemblages in a given stream to a reference
or minimally impacted stream (Frenzel, 1996).
These range from a simple measure of
diversity or richness to multiple measures such
as the Index of Biological Integrity (Karr, 1981)
or the Rapid Bioassessment Protocol (RBP)
(Pflakin, etal. 1989).
The Index of Biological Integrity uses
several measures of the fish community to
determine the status of the biotic integrity of a
stream (Karr, 1981). Some of the measures
used include number of species, presence of
species intolerant of pollution, number of
individuals, proportion of omnivores,
insectivores and carnivores, as well as others.
These measures are then used together in an
index that ranks the quality of the site. Since
this index was developed there have been
several variations and other indices
developed. The Rapid Bioassessment
Protocol uses the IBI or benthic
macroinvertebrate measures to assess biotic
integrity and there are several different levels
of complexity depending on the assessment
needs (Pflakin, etal. 1989).
Most of the states in the NGPAA are just
beginning to look at biological/community
measures to determine aquatic condition. The
exception is Nebraska, which is incorporating
a biotic index now into its analysis of use
support. Nebraska combines the IBI and ICI
(Invertebrate Community Index) into the
Combined Biotic Index (CBI) which has a value
between 0.0 and 1.0 (Nebraska Department of
101
-------
Chapter 2 - Status of Aquatic Resources
Environmental Quality, 1996). A stream with a
value nearer to 0 is of good quality and those
with CBIs less than 0.6 were found to be fully
supporting uses, while those above 0.75 were
not supporting (Nebraska Department of
Environmental Quality, 1996).
Key Findings
•The NGPAA contains a large number of
unique aquatic communities including the
Missouri River, Devils Lake, the Lostwood area
and the Nebraska Sand Hills.
•A study applying the IBI to the Platte River
basin found the Dismal River and the Platte
mainstem to have the highest IBI scores and
richest fish assemblages. Sites with greater
hydrologic variability tended to have fewer
species.
•A study of Long Pine Creek found 125
macroinvertebrate taxa, and those found were
indicative of good water quality. A similar
study in Bone Creek (tributary of Long Pine
Creek) found less taxa and indicators of an
organically enriched system.
•The James River has 57 fish species
inhabiting it.
•The Powder River has 32 fish species (25
native) and this system is unique in that it
represents what was originally found in free-
flowing plains rivers.
•The Yellowstone River is one of the longest
free-flowing rivers in the contiguous United
States and has 56 fish species.
•Within the Red River basin on the North
Dakota side (the NGPAA) fish species
richness is greatest in the Sheyenne River and
the Red mainstem with greater than 40
species. It is lowest in the Wild Rice and Elm
Rivers with less than 20 species.
•A survey of the Cheyenne River in South
Dakota found 12 fish species and 14 total taxa
of macroinvertebrates. A similar study on the
Moreau River found 18 fish species and 22
macroinvertebrate taxa.
Data Sources
The information presented in this section
was mainly obtained from literature reviews
and from The Nature Conservancy Report, A
Status of Biodiversity in the Great Plains
(Ostlie, etal. 1997).
Data Quality and Gaps
There 'is a general paucity of ecological
and community-level aquatic studies for
streams within the Northern Great Plains. This
seems to be especially true of many of the
western Missouri River tributaries, although
few streams within the entire NGPAA appear
to have been exhaustively studied.
Analysis
While the Great Plains may contain less
endemic species than many other parts of the
country, it does contain a large number of
unique natural communities. Ostlie, et al.
1997, reported that of the 619 natural
communities occurring in the Great Plains, 304
(49%) are found exclusively or primarily within
the Plains. This figure includes both aquatic
and terrestrial communities and, is of course,
not limited to the Northern Great Plains. It
does show, however, that there are a number
of unique assemblages of species in this
region. Table 2.8.1 lists those aquatic
landscapes of biological significance in the
Northern Great Plains as identified by The
Nature Conservancy (Ostlie, et al. 1997).
The following is a review of community
studies done on several streams in the
Northern Great Plains, as well as a general
overview of the community structure of
intermittent streams, an important component
of Northern Great Plains aquatic systems. In
a number of the studies, fish or
macroinvertebrates were used to determine
the integrity of the community (diversity, Table
102
-------
Table 2.8.2 Threatened, endangered, and special concern aquatic species occurring within the Northern Great Plains Assessment
Area listed by individual states.
Scientific Name
Common Name
Listing by State
Global
Rank
Fish
Acipenser fulvescens
Catostomus catostomus
Cycleptus elongatus
Fundulus diaphanus
Macrhybopsis gelida
Macrhybopsis meeki
Notropis heterolepis
Percopsis omiscomaycus
Phoxinuseos
Phoxinus neogaeus
Polydon spathula
Scaphirhynchus albus
Semotitus margarita
Umbra limi
Herptiles
Emydoidea blandingii
Graptemys psuedogeographica
Rana pipiens
Lake Sturgeon
Longnose Sucker
Blue Sucker
Banded Killifish
Sturgeon Chub
Sicklefin Chub
Blacknose Shiner
Trout-perch
Northern Redbelly Dace
Finescale Dace
Paddlefish
Pallid Sturgeon
Pearl Dace
Central Mudminnow
Standing's Turtle
False Map Turtle
Northern Leopard Frog
NE-T G3
SD-T G5
MT-sc G4'
SD-E G5
MT-sc; SD-T G2
MT-sc; SD-T G3
SD-E; NE-T G5
SD-T G5
SD-T; NE-T G5
SD-E; NE-T G5
MT-sc G4
MT-E; SD-E; NE-E G1G2
MT-sc; SD-T; NE-T G5
SD-E G5
SD-E G4
SD-T G5
MT-sc G5
E - Endangered
T - Threatened
sc - Special Concern
-------
r«bi*z.B.i Aquatic Landscapes of Biological Significance in the Northern Great Plains as identified by The Nature Conservancy
(Osflie, et al. 1997)
Area
Features
Cannonball/Cedar Rivers (ND)
Comertown Prairie (MT)
Devils Lake Basin (ND)
Dismal River (NE)
Keya Paha River (NE, SD)
Little Missouri River (MT, ND, SD, WY)
Lostwood(ND)
Medicine Lake Sandhills (MT)
Flows through the second-highest proportion of good-to-excellent condition native
rangeland in North Dakota. Three state-rare fish species are found here, along with blue
sucker and pallid sturgeon.
Rolling hills interspersed with lakes and ponds. Believed to be the largest remaining,
relatively undisturbed pothole prairie complex in Montana. Important nesting and
migration habitat for shorebird and waterfowl species, including piping plovers.
The largest natural lake in North Dakota. The basin and surrounding wetlands provide
significant migratory and breeding habitat for shorebirds, sandhill cranes and waterfowl.
The river flows through a shallow braided canyon and primarily consists of spring-fed,
near constant flow.
The river is primarily spring-fed and forms the northeast boundary of the. sandhills.
Riparian woodlands and floodplain prairie are the principal natural communities.
*
Highly turbid river that experiences periods of no flow during portions of the year,
providing conditions for a unique ecosystem essential for various forms of aquatic life.
Several rare plant and animal species find habitat in and along the river, including the
sturgeon chub.
High quality example of the prairie pothole landscape mosaic situated on the kettlehole
moraine and outwash of the Missouri Coteau. Numerous lakes and cattail marshes occur
within a matrix of mixed grass prairie. Centers on Lostwood National Wildlife Refuge, a
10,000 acre site that is highly important for waterfowl and shorebirds. the piping plover
is found here. '
The largest sandhill complex in Montana on the southeast side of Medicine Lake.
Medicine Lake National Wildlife Refuge is located within the landscape encompassing the
largest natural lake in northwestern Montana. The piping plover is found here.
-------
Table 2.B.1 continued Aquatic Landscapes of Biological Significance in the Northern Great Plains as identified by The Nature
Conservancy (Ostlie, et al. 1997)
Area
Features
Middle Loup River (NE)
Middle Missouri River (ND, SD, NE)
Milk River (MT)
Nebraska Sandhills (NE, SD)
Niobrara (NE)
North Loup River (NE)
Located in the heart of the sandhills, it is spring-fed and has a constant How. It is
primarily bordered by sandhill prairies and marshes that occur in the lower floodplain.
The whooping crane can be found here.
Includes reaches of the Missouri River that have remained unchannelized or not flooded
beneath reservoirs in central North Dakota and southeast South Dakota and adjacent
Nebraska. The river still maintains some semblance of its former self - wide and
meandering with islands, sandbars, riverine wetlands and riparian forests. Special
concern species present in these stretches include lake sturgeon, piping plover, blue
sucker, whooping crane, bald eagle, scaleshell, sturgeon chub, sicklefin chub, pallid
sturgeon and interior least tem.
The Milk River flows through tracts of native mixedgrass prairie, moist meadows and
shrublands. Several lakes provide staging and nesting areas for the American white
pelican.
/
Numerous wetlands within the landscape make it an important waterfowl and shorebird
stopover. Along the north* edge of the landscape, the Niobrara River has cut a steep
narrow valley. Minnechaduza Creek has several high-quality sandhill fens. The wetlands
provide nesting habitat for numerous waterbird species. Special concern species found
here include piping plover, blue sucker, whooping crane, bald eagle, topeka shiner and
interior least tem.
This is the largest spring-fed, constant flowing river that drains the Nebraska Sand Hills.
Piping plover, whooping crane, bald eagle and interior least tern are found here.
This spring-fed river drains the sandhills. Whooping crane and topeka shiner are found
here.
Park River (ND)
This landscape encompasses all three branches of the river.
-------
Tubla 2.B.1 continued Aquatic Landscapes of Biological Significance in the Northern Great Plains as identified by The Nature
Conservancy (Ostlie, et al. 1997)
Area
Features
Pembina/Tongue Rivers (MB, ND)
Rocky Mountain Front (MT, AB)
Sheyenne Delta (ND)
Snake River (NE)
Souris River (ND, MB, SK)
Southern Missouri Coteau (ND, SD)
Turtle Mountains (ND, MB)
Lowland woodlands and wet thickets are found along the banks of both rivers. The
Pembina has eroded to a depth of 400 feet. A significant diversity of plant and animals
exist.
This area is located in far western edge of the Northern Great Plains. Numerous small
marshes and wetlands occur along several creeks and lakes. Riparian cottonwood
communities and pine butte wetlands and fens occur here.
This area contains one of the most extensive woodlands in North Dakota. Fine examples
of sedge meadow, wetland thickets and fens occur here. The Sheyenne National
Grassland dominates the majority of this site. This area was listed as terrestrial by The
Nature Conservancy, but it has been included here because of the extensive riparian
areas.
An intact river system with a natural hydrograph. It supports populations of the Great
Plains endemic plains topminnow.
The river valley contains extensive oxbows, fens, mixedgrass prairie, riparian forests,
aspen woodlands and sand prairies. The landscape is an important breeding area for
wood ducks and is home to numerous species that require riverine habitats. It provides
habitat for numerous state and provincially-rare species.
Located on a terminal moraine, this area is characterized by numerous pothole wetlands
within a complex of mixedgrass prairie. Piping plover and whooping crane are found
here.-
This is a wooded kettlehole moraine. Numerous lakes and wetlands deft the forested
landscape. Wetlands are used as breeding habitat for ring-necked ducks, red-necked
grebes and several species of colonial waterbirds.
-------
Table 2.8.1 continued Aquatic Landscapes of Biological Significance in the Northern Great Plains as identified by The Nature
Conservancy (Ostlie, et al. 1997)
Area Features
Missouri/Yellowstone Rivers (MT, ND) This area encompasses much of the length of the Yellowstone River and portions of the
Upper Missouri River in Montana. The Yellowstone is the largest unregulated river in the
United States, displaying seasonally high flows of turbid water. It is these natural flow
regimes that maintain the turbid aquatic habitat necessary for many of the large-river
aquatic species in decline throughout the watershed. Together, the Yellowstone and the
Upper Missouri provide the best remaining large-river fish populations within the entire
Missouri River watershed. Species such as sicklefin chub, sturgeon chub, blue sucker,
paddlefish and the pallid sturgeon still occur in relatively large numbers in this area.
Sandbars and unvegetated stretches along these rivers provide important nesting areas
for least tern and piping plover.
-------
Northern Great Plains Aquatic Assessment
abundance, etc.) and make inferences about
water quality. In addition, there is included a
discussion of a number of general studies on
several important river systems in the Northern
Great Plains.
Intermittent Streams
Many streams in the Northern Great Plains
are intermittent Therefore, a general
discussion of aquatic community
characteristics of intermittent streams is
included here. Zane, et al. (1989) reviewed
the literature on the biology of intermittent
streams, which is included here.
Intermittent streams have reduced aquatic
plant and macroscopic algae diversity.
However, emergent aquatic vegetation is
common along the banks of permanent pools
and intermittent streams are inhabited by a
diverse array of diatoms and periphytic algae.
These are the most important primary
producers in these systems and along with
plant litter they compose the food base (Zane,
et al. 1989). Invertebrates dominate
intermittent streams both numerically and
functionally and virtually all biological
processes of intermittent streams are
mediated by macroinvertebrates (such as
aquatic insects). While a few species of
invertebrates are restricted to intermittent
streams, generally there are fewer species in
intermittent streams than in perennial streams.
Plecopterans are reported to be rarely
observed in plains streams (Merritt and
Cummins, 1996). Invertebrate species
assemblages reestablish rapidly in intermittent
streams following drought, provided they have
opportunities and adaptations to survive dry
periods (Zane, et al. 1989). In a study in
eastern South Dakota, of the 60 benthic taxa
collected from riffles, 42 occurred in
intermittent streams and 58 in perennial
streams (McCoy and Hale, 1974). Two
species, a stonefly and a caddisfly, were found
exclusively in intermittent streams. In pools, of
the 21 taxa collected, seven were in
intermittent streams, one of which (a
dragonfly) was absent from perennial streams.
Intermittent streams are dominated by a
relatively small assemblage of fishes that are
highly tolerant of variable and extreme
physical conditions (Zane, et al. 1989). Even
though they consist of relatively few species,
the abundances are often high. Resident
species are primarily small and feed on algae,
detritus and invertebrates. There is some
evidence that intermittent streams may be
important nursery areas before cessation of
flow because they are warm, support
abundant invertebrate forage and lack large
predatory fish (Zane, et al. 1989). In South
Dakota a collection from two intermittent and
five perennial streams found twnty-two species
in the perennial streams, twelve of which also
occurred in intermittent streams (McCoy and
Hale, 1974). These were brassy minnow,
central stoneroller, common shiner, bluntnose
minnow, fathead minnow, blacknose dace,
creek chub, white sucker, black bullhead,
brood stickleback, green sunfish and johnny
darter.
Platte, Loup and Elkhom Rivers, Nebraska
Frenzel and Swanson (1996) sampled the
fish communities at nine sites in the Platte
River basin to determine an index of biological
integrity. Although most of the sampling sites
were just to the south of the NGPAA (one was
in the NGPAA), this study is instructive of
Great Plains streams. The Index of Biological
Integrity (IBI) used in this study consisted of a
combination of six measures. These were the
number of native fish species, the number of
native cyprinid species, the number of
intolerant (to pollution) species, the percentage
of tolerant species, the percentage of
individuals as omnivores and the percentage
of individuals as carnivores. Numbers of
107
-------
Chapter 2 - Status of Aquatic Resources
species ranged from two (Shell Creek, a
tributary to the Platte just east of the Loup
River) to 21 (Platte River near Brady) and total
fish abundance ranged from 41 (Shell Creek)
to 7611 (Platte River near Brady). The IBI
scores ranged from six at Shell Creek to
twenty-four at several locations. The lowest
IBI scores resulted from a few tolerant species
comprising a sample. Higher scores generally
came from samples collected at the Dismal
River and at mainstem Platte River sites which
have a greater degree of habitat complexity
than do the smaller streams. IBI scores
related to species tolerance suggested that
sites with greater percentages of cropland in
the basin had fish communities indicative of
poor water quality (fish were tolerant of
physical or chemical water quality
degradation).
The Dismal River and Platte River sites
were more hydrologically stable in this study
and supported the richest fish assemblages.
In contrast, the other sampled sites showed
greater hydrologic variability, and the fish
communities tended to have fewer species
and larger percentages of trophic generalists.
This corroborates the work of Poff and Allan
(1995) who found that hydrologically variable
sites typically were characterized by.
assemblages of trophic generalists, while
stable sites included more specialists.
Long Pine Creek, Nebraska
The Long Pine Creek watershed (Brown
County, Nebraska) was almost exclusively
rangeland and hay meadows in 1965, but by
the mid 1980s was 30% irrigated cropland
(Maret, 1988). Historically, the streams in this
watershed were of high quality, but water
quality impairments as a result of the land use
changes has occurred (Maret, 1985). Despite
these changes, Long Pine Creek is the longest
self-sustaining trout stream in Nebraska
(Maret, 1988). This study used
macroinvertebrates, which are considered to
be excellent indicators of both long-term
environmental changes such as siltation
(Lenat, et al., 1979) and slug loadings of short
duration (Prophet and Edwards, 1973).
The macroinvertebrate fauna from Long
Pine Creek was found to include at least 125
taxa with the faunal assemblage dominated by
mayflies, caddisflies and midges (Maret,
1988). This type of community structure is
common for Midwestern streams (Maret and
Christiansen, 1981). The taxa found all
through Long Pine Creek were indicative of
good water quality and the diversity of
organisms was relatively balanced. The biotic
index values found were in the good water
quality range.
At least 90 taxa were collected from Bone
Creek (a tributary of Long Pine Creek) and the
predominant organisms were midges, tubificids
and mayflies. Bone Creek fauna was made up
of tubificid worms, which are indicative of an
organic-enriched aquatic environment. It also
had a silt-tolerant group of mayfly species and
chironomids indicative of waters with organic
enrichment and a high silt load. Stoneflies
(indicators of good water quality) were
collected from Long Pine Creek, but not in the
headwaters of Bone Creek. They were
collected in the lower portions of Bone Creek
in the winter and spring, but disappeared in
the summer. Bone Creek generally had a fair
to poor biotic index and the invertebrate
community was composed of,pollution tolerant
organisms (especially in the lower reaches).
Sand Hills Streams, Nebraska
Species richness and dominance were
summarized for several physiographic areas in
central Nebraska, including the Sand Hills (Zelt
and Jordan, 1993). The streams sampled in
the Sand Hills had median fish community
richness of nine species in first to third order
108
-------
Northern Great Plains Aquatic Assessment
streams. The single most dominant species
took up 43% of the sample as a median of
streams sampled. Formacroinvertebrates, the
Sand Hills streams had 24 species as a
median and the most dominant one took up
30%.
James River, North and South Dakota
The James River has one of the lowest
gradients of any river of similar length in North
America (Berry, et al. 1993) and is dominated
by catfish-carp-carpsucker community (Funk,
1970). The James is a typical warmwater
stream with wide flow and temperature
variation, shallow channels with uniform sandy
beds and turbid waters (Winger, 1980; Cross
and Moss, 1987). Berry, et al. (1993)
recognized four river reaches. The first is the
headwater reach in North Dakota, which is
intermittent, incised into glacial drift and slopes
46 cm/km. The second reach is the lake plain
where the glacial Lake Dakota covered the
area. The gradient here is as low as 2.4
cm/km. This reach is dominated by hardwood
timber, oxbows and wetlands. The third reach
near Huron is relatively straight, has greater
channel capacity and a narrower floodplain
than other reaches. The fourth reach is from
Huron to the Missouri River, in which
meanders increase again and the river drops
about 12 cm/km. Fifty to. 65 percent of the
watershed is cropland (com and wheat) and
pasture with about 2% forest, existing as
narrow strips along the river.
There are 40 to 48 genera of
phytoplankton in the James River (Hansen and
Repsys, 1986). Macroinvertebrate diversity
and abundance was found to be greater in
oxbows than in the mainstem and was
dominated by hemipterans, ephemeropterans
and odonates (Larson, 1990). Chironomids
dominated the benthic fauna in the mainstem
(Hansen and Repsys, 1986), but mayflies,
beetles, odonates and dipterans were also
present. The clam community once comprised
17 species, but in 1985 only four were found
(Perkins, 1986). Since 1975, 57 different
species of fish have been found in the river
(Berry, etal. 1993). More species were found
in the river than in tributaries, but the
tributaries contained some species that prefer
high velocities, gravel substrates and clear
water (central stoneroller, topeka shiner,
blackside darter). Species richness has been
reduced in the headwaters more than the
lower parts (Berry, et al. 1993) Five of twenty
species found in 1896 in North Dakota had not
be collected recently, while only one of 20
from the lower river was missing.
The Jamestown Dam in North Dakota has
almost eliminated flooding to the South Dakota
state line but now silt is not deposited overland
and floods do not flush the river substrate
(Berry, et al. 1993). Small dams along the
river have created pools that are fish refuges
during low flow, but also trap organic material
and inhibit fish movement. A drop in the water
table from irrigation pumping and wetland
drainage has resulted in loss of water from
springs and some tributaries have become
intermittent reducing nursery areas for juvenile
fish.
\PowderRiver, Wyoming and Montana
The Powder River in Wyoming and
Montana has been relatively unaffected by
water development, channelization and exotic
species (Hubert, 1993). It is a low gradient
stream with poorly developed riparian areas,
highly fluctuating flows, extremely high
turbidity and an unstable sand bottom. The
river channel is shallow, highly braided and
meanders substantially within the floodplain.
Four tributaries provide most of the flow to the
River. These are Crazy Woman Creek, Clear
Creek, the Little Powder River and Mizpah
Creek. The tributaries tend to have more well-
developed riparian areas, less turbid water and
109
-------
Chapter 2- Status of Aquatic Resources
more stable bottom substrates than the
Powder River (Hubert, 1993).
Of the sites studied by Rehwinkle (1978),
Mizpah Creek had the greatest diversity of
fish, indicating that it has the highest habitat
diversity. The amount of riparian vegetation
along the Powder River has been estimated at
6,010 hectares (Rehwinkle, 1978). The
floodplain of the river and its tributaries are
irrigated 'primarily for hay production. The
biotic productivity of the Powder is low due to
high turbidity and variation in flow and
unstable bottom substrate (Hubert, 1993). The
productivity is higher in the tributaries. The
densities of macroinvertebrates are low, but
they are unique among Montana streams
(Hubert, 1993).
The Powder River and its tributaries
support 32 species of fish, 25 of which are
native (Hubert, 1993). The common species in
the river are flathead chub, brassy minnow,
plains minnow, western silvery minnow,
sturgeon chub, goldeye, river carpsucker,
shorthead redhorse, stonecat, common carp,
longnose dace and channel catfish. Fifteen
species each of fish have been reported from
Mizpah and Crazy Woman Creeks. Large
riverine fish may be migrating upstream during
runoff in spring to spawn in tributaries or
upstream areas of the Powder and this
seasonal movement may be necessary for
some species (Hubert, 1993).
The nearby Tongue River probably had a
fish community similar to the Powder before
water development and several species now
exist only below the farthest downstream
diversion dam (Hubert, 1993). The Powder
River fish community is unique and probably
represents the kind of community that was
formerly found in free-flowing great plains
rivers (Hubert, 1993).
Yellowstone River, Montana
The Yellowstone River is the longest free-
flowing river in the contiguous United States,
however, 31% of the drainage basin is
upstream of storage reservoirs (most of which
are in the Bighorn basin) (Koch, et al. 1977).
The mean annual discharge near the mouth is
362 cms and the Bighorn River is the largest
tributary to the Yellowstone with a mean
annual discharge of 110 cms (White and
Bramblett, 1993). The damming of the
Bighorn caused an 80% reduction in sediment
yield to the Yellowstone (five million metric
tons). Since there has not been any reduction
in sediment transport at the mouth of the
Yellowstone (Koch, 1977), this indicates that
the Yellowstone may be degrading its bed and
banks to produce the extra sediment (White
and Bramblett, 1993). The water quality is
generally good from source to mouth, although
a general deterioration is noted along that
length (White and Bramblett, 1993). The river
has a rich invertebrate fauna dominated by
mayflies (37 species), caddisflies (36 species),
stoneflies (37 species) and true flies (Newell,
1977).
There are 56 species of fish in the
Yellowstone River (White and Bramblett, 1993)
which exist in three zones: upper coldwater or
salmonid zone; transition zone of both
cold water and warm water species; and a lower
warmwater zone (Haddix and Estes, 1976;
Peterman, 1979). Only the last two are in the
Northern Great Plains Assessment Area. The
transition zone extends from the confluence
with the Boulder River to the confluence with
the Bighorn River and contains 30 species
(White and Bramblett, 1993). The lower zone
runs from the Bighorn confluence to the
Missouri River and has 49 species (White and
Bramblett, 1993).
Human activities have modified the
channel morphology of the river much less
110
-------
Northern Great Plains Aquatic Assessment
than other Northern Great Plains rivers
(Silverman and Tomlinsen, 1984). Effects
have occurred from water withdrawal for
agricultural purposes since the vast majority of
all water use in the Yellowstone basin is for
irrigation (Montana Department of Natural
Resources and Conservation, 1981). Water
diversion structures in the tower Yellowstone
are known to influence upstream movement of
paddlefish, shovelnose sturgeon, sauger and
walleye (White and Bramblett, 1993).
Cheyenne and Moreau Rivers, South Dakota
In a survey of the aquatic communities of
the Cheyenne River within the Cheyenne River
Indian Reservation, 14 total taxa of
macroinvertebrates, ranging from 5 to 10 at
various stations were found (Cheyenne River
Sioux Tribe, 1997). Densities ranged from 33
to 382 organisms per square meter. The
diversity index ranged from 1.18 to 2.11, which
is considered to be below the
recommendations for healthy environments
(Wilhm, 1970). The upper and lower stations
were dominated by ephemeroptera and
trichoptera, while the middle station was
dominated by chironomids.
Twelve species of fish in four families were
found (Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe, 1997).
Stations ranged from four to eight species with
cyprinids dominating. Since similar plains
streams support more diversity, it was believed
that the system was being limited, possibly by
poor water quality and a restricted
macroinvertebrate community. The poorwater
quality could have been the result of heavy
metals from historic Black Hills mining.
The Moreau River within the Cheyenne
River Indian Reservation was also sampled for
aquatic species (Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe,
1997): Twenty-two macroinvertebrate taxa
were found, ranging from 10 to 18 at various
stations. Density ranged from 247 to 3107
organisms per square meter. The diversity
index ranged from 1.7 upstream to 3.18
downstream. The three upper stations were
dominated by ephemenoptera and trichoptera
and the lowest station by chironomids. •
Eighteen fish species were collected from
five families (11 at the highest and lowest
stations and 14 at the two middle) (Cheyenne
River Sioux Tribe, 1997). All were dominated
by cyprinids.
Red River of the North, North Dakota
The low topographic relief of the Red River
has led to the installation of dams to reduce
flooding and drainage ditches to carry away
excess water (Goldstein, 1995). Most of the
dams are small, but there are 450 of them in
the U.S. side of the basin and most discharge
water over the top, therefore the impacts are
usually not great (Goldstein, 1995). The
ditching to drain water away is much more
extensive on the Minnesota side (Goldstein,
1995).
.Neel (1985) studied benthic
macroinvertebrates in the Turtle River. One
hundred and thirty-three taxa in 16 orders and
58 families were found, with a total mean
density of 6686 individuals/m2. They were
dominated by the caddisfly genera
Cheumatopsyche and Hydropsyche which
represented 51%, corixid water bugs and
elmid water beetles with 8 and 7%
respectively, and small clams (Pisidium and
Sphaerium), mayflies (Stenonema) and
midges (Chironomidae) at 4% each. Stoaks
(1975) found a similar community structure in
the Forest River, another tributary to the Red
on the North Dakota side. The
macroinvertebrate community of the Red River
are composed of mainly filtering and gathering
collectors (Cummins and Merritt, 1984).
Cvancara (1983) listed 12 species of
pelecypod mussels and eight species of
111
-------
Chapter 2 - Status of Aquatic Resources
sphaeriid (pill) clams for the North Dakota part of the larval fish community below Garrison
of the Red River. The most common mussels Dam.
were Anodonta grandis, Lasmigona
complanata and Lamps/As radiata. The most
common pill clams were Sphaerium lacustre.
S. striatinum, S. transversum and Pisidium
compressum.
Goldstein (1995) compared the species
similarities by streams within the Red River
basin and found they could be categorized into
five regions. These five were: 1) the Wild Rice
and Elm Rivers on the North Dakota side; 2)
the Sheyenne River in North Dakota, the Red
River mainstem and the Otter Tail, Wild Rice,
Red Lake and Buffalo Rivers in Minnesota; 3)
the Maple, Goose, Forest, Park, Pembina and
Turtle Rivers in North Dakota and Two Rivers
in Minnesota; 4) the Clearwater and Roseau
Rivers in Minnesota; and 5) the Thief and
Middle Rivers in Minnesota. Groups two, three
and four had the most commonality, while
groups one and five had the least (Goldstein,
1995). The lowest species richness wasjn
groups one and five with less than twenty
species. Group two had rivers with the
greatest species richness (<40), while groups
three and four had between 20 and 30 species
in their rivers (Goldstein, 1995).
Missouri River below Garrison Dam
Wolf, et al. (1996) studied the larval fish
community below Garrison Dam in the
summers of 1993 and 1994. The abundance
and diversity was lower than expected given
the number of adult fishes found in the
tailwaters and the number of larval fishes
collected in other studies of the Missouri and
Mississippi Rivers. They felt that the low
abundance and diversity were due to the "„_
hypolimnetic discharge (forty meters below the
dam) of cold water from Lake Sakakawea.
The larval fish species found also appeared
later in the season than they would be
expected. There had been no prior evaluation
112
-------
Wetland and Riparian Habitats and Land Cover
rushes, some smartweeds or other water-
31 INTRODUCTION loving plants may be present Cowardin
(1979) defined wetlands as transitional lands
between terrestrial and aquatic systems where
the water table is at or near the surface or the
land is covered with shallow water. It also
must have one or more of the following:
support, at least periodically, hydrophytes; be
predominantly undrained hydric soil or have a
nonsoil substrate saturated with water or
covered by shallow water at some time during
the growing season each year.
Question 2 What is the extent and
composition of riparian and wetland
areas? What are the land coverages in
the Assessment Area?
Wetlands and riparian areas are of vital
importance to wildlife and the functioning of
aquatic systems. These areas are also of
great importance hydrologically to the systems
in which they belong. The Northern Great
Plains contain about 10% of the nation's
wetlands (U.S. Natural Resources
Conservation Service, 1996) and they are of
great significance to the nation and the North
American continent as a whole.
The present extent, historical and future
trends of these areas are examined, as well as
conditions affecting the functioning of these
systems. Section 3.1 introduces the
characteristics and features of wetlands and
riparian areas in general and the specific
nature of those in the Northern Great Plains.
Section 3.2 looks at the extent and condition
of wetlands in the NGPAA. Section 3.3
examines the condition of riparian areas.
Both of these sections present information on
the changes that have occurred to these areas
as a result of changing hydrology. Section 3.4
discusses the effects of large scale land use
changes and the extent of human influence on
the Northern Great Plains landscape.
Wetlands
Wetlands are areas that are inundated or
A way of classifying wetlands is by the
hydrologic systems themselves. There are
three types of wetland systems that occur in
the Northern Great Plains. They are riverine,
lacustrine and palustrine. Riverine are those
associated with rivers and streams. Lacustrine
are associated with lakes and ponds, while
palustrine are marshes, wet meadows, fens,
potholes, bogs and small shallow ponds
(Tiner, 1996). In addition, there are classes
within these systems such as emergent, scrub-
shrub and forested (Cowardin, 1979).
Emergent wetlands are dominated by erect,
rooted, herbaceous hydrophytes. Scrub-shrub
wetlands are dominated by vegetation less
than 20 feet tall and forested wetlands are
dominated by vegetation taller than 20 feet.
Another method of classifying wetlands is
by the length of time water is standing. The
State of North Dakota utilizes the following
classification system for wetlands to describe
the various types that occur within the State
(North Dakota Department of Health, 1994).
Much of this would probably apply to most
palustrine wetlands in the Northern Great
Plains. Temporary wetlands are shallow
saturated by surface or ground water often .-;. depressions which hold^ water or are
enough and for a long enough period of time waterlogged from spring runoff until early
to support (and under normal conditions do
support) a prevalence of vegetation typically
adapted for life in saturated soil conditions
June. They frequently reflood during heavy
summer or fall rains. Seasonal wetlands are
depressions which normally hold water from
(Snyder, 1995). Cattails, willows, sedges, spring runoff until mid-July. Semipermanent or
113
-------
Chapter 3 - Wetland and Riparian Habitats and Land Cover
Intermittent wetlands are located in well-
defined depressions or basins and in normal
years hold water all summer. Freshwater
semipermanent wetlands (commonly called
cattail sloughs) are characterized by a
predominance of cattail and bulrush vegetation
and scattered open water areas. Saline
semipermanent wetlands have a
preponderance of alkali bulrush and scattered
areas of open water. Permanent wetlands are
located in well-defined basins which
characteristically hold water throughout the
year. They become dry only after successive
years of below normal runoff and precipitation.
Freshwater permanent wetlands typically have
a border of aquatic vegetation and open water
areas in the interior. Saline permanent
wetlands are typically devoid of emergent
vegetation and exhibit a white, salt-encrusted
shoreline.
In the Northern Great Plains the most
widespread area of wetlands is known as the
prairie pothole region, an area that includes
eastern South Dakota and eastern and
northern North Dakota. A significant number
of potholes also exist in northern Montana.
The prairie pothole region encompasses about
14% of a larger region of glacial debris, scars,
and depressions created by the last ice age
and covers about 300,000 square miles from
central Alberta to northwestern Iowa (North
Dakota Department of Health, 1994). This
area was formed when glaciers deposited a
dense, clayey glacial till, and as the overlying
ice melted, potholes (kettle lakes) remained
where ice blocks had previously been
imbedded (Winter, 1989). The glacial till
inhibits infiltration of snowrnelt, causing
meltwater to flow overland into potholes.
About 25% of the annual precipitation.in North
Dakota is snow and it accumulates in these
depressions. When the snow melts in the
spring the ground is still frozen, so snowmelt
and spring rains do not readily infiltrate into the
soil (Shjeflo, 1968). Snowmelt and spring
rains are the major source of water to the
prairie potholes. Potholes range from less
than an acre in size to several square miles.
About 79% of prairie potholes are one acre or
smaller in size, and more than 66% are less
than a half acre according to National Wetland
Inventory estimates (Dahl, 1991).
The hydrology and water quality of
wetlands vary over time (Winter, 1989).
Prairie potholes can recharge ground water in
the spring until evaporation and water uptake
by plants causes the water level to drop below
the water table. At that time, ground water
begins to flow back into the wetland. Salinity
of water in the wetland increases as
evaporation concentrates minerals in the water
through the summer and freezing concentrates
them in the winter (LaBaugh, 1989). In spring,
snowmelt dilutes the salinity. Some prairie
wetlands are sustained by ground water inflow,
which provides a constant, but commonly
saline source of water. Other wetlands are
sustained only by runoff and in wet years
generally have freshwater, but during most
years go dry. Some prairie potholes have
brackish water resulting from a combination of
ground and surface water.
The prairie potholes are primarily emergent
wetlands (Stewart and Kantrud, 1973). Water
must be present for significant periods to
create the conditions that support hydrophytic
vegetation which can survive in prolonged
water-logged conditions; but water does not
need to be ponded on the land's surface to
provide wetlands many of their functions,
including making them highly productive
biologically (Dahl, 1991).
In eastern South Dakota, palustrine
wetlands primarily include emergent wetlands
such as marshes and sloughs, in which
coarse, herbaceous vegetation like cattails and
bulrushes are predominant; wet meadows, in
which low, herbaceous vegetation like grasses
114
-------
Northern Great Plains Aquatic Assessment
and sedges are predominant; and vegetated
and shallow-water zones of stock ponds
(Stewart and Kantrud. 1971). Prairie potholes
are the most common type of palustrine
wetland in South Dakota. Lacustrine wetland
areas occur in the numerous glacial lakes in
the eastern part of the State and in artificial
impoundments throughout the State.
Submersed vegetation like widgeongrass and
pondweed are common in lacustrine wetlands.
About 90% of the wetlands in the glaciated
eastern South Dakota are associated with
prairie ponds and lakes (primarily palustrine
emergent wetlands) and the remaining 10%
are riverine and those associated with stock
ponds (Ruwaldt, 1979).
Steeper topography, a better developed
drainage system and a generally more arid
climate are factors that result in fewer
wetlands in the western part of the NGPAA
than in the eastern and northern parts (U.S.
Geological Survey, 1996b). About 60% of the
wetlands in the unglaciated portion of South
Dakota are associated with stock ponds (U:S.
Geological Survey, 1996b).
Further south in the Sand Hills of
Nebraska, wetlands include wet meadows
(where the water table is at or near the land
surface) and marshes that are associated with
lakes (U.S. Geological Survey, 1996b). Most
of the lakes are 10 acres or less in area,
average about 5 feet in depth (McCarraher,
11977) and are considered to be palustrine
wetlands. In the central and eastern parts of
the Sand Hills, lakes and marshes are typically
slightly saline, are in hydrologic connection
with ground water and commonly have surface
outlets (Ginsberg, 1985). Many wetlands in
the western Sand JHills are strongly, alkaline
and have little or no outflow. Lakes that have
high alkalinity are found in areas where the
ground water becomes mineralized as it
moves through the rock formations.
The glaciated areas of the Northern Great
Plains are susceptible to flooding due to the
small topographic gradient The storage
capacity of prairie potholes is very important in
controlling seasonal flooding (U.S. Geological
Survey, 1996b). Shaw (1993) for example
calculated that the flood crest of 1993 could
have been lowered by two feet at St Louis if
2.2 million acre-feet of storage had been
provided, which could have been obtained by
returning less than % of 1% of the drained
wetlands in the basin to wetlands.
Depressions in the Devils Lake basin can store
up to 72% of the total runoff in a 2-year
frequency event and 41% from a 100-year
runoff event (Ludden, 1983). In the southern
Red River Valley, Brun, etal. 1981, correlated
increased streamflows with increase in wetland
area artificially drained.
Wetlands are also important in controlling
polluted runoff containing nitrates and
pesticides as well as filtering sediment
(Robinson, 1995). Restoring just one percent
of a watershed's area to appropriately located
wetlands has the potential to reduce polluted
runoff of nitrates and herbicides by up to 50%
(Crumpton and van der Valk, 1991). However,
it should be noted that under the Clean Water
Act, wetlands are considered to be waters of
the United States, and as such, are not to be
used to treat pollution, except for those
specifically constructed for that purpose.
Stewart and Kantrud (1973) estimated that
67% of the wetlands (by area) in the Prairie
Pothole region are seasonally flooded or
temporarily flooded wetlands. The amount of
snowpack accumulated during winter
determines to what extent a wetland is filled.
Small and temporary wetlands are valuable for
maintaining biodiversity and wildlife habitat
(Robinson, 1995). Many amphibian species
spend at least a part of their life in small
temporary wetland types and some fish
species (such as northern pike) depend on
115
-------
Chapter 3 - Wetlands and Riparian Habitats and Land Cover
wetlands for part of their life cycle, most often.
for spawning.
The wetland habitat provided to migratory
waterfowl contributes greatly to the overall
biodiversity of North America (Knopf and
Samson, 1995). Temporary wetlands that are
inundated primarily in the winter or early spring
are considered to be the backbone of
productivity in the prairie wetland ecosystem
and temporary and seasonal wetlands tend to
be the first to provide open water for migrating
waterfowl (Robinson, 1995). These wetlands
are large producers of food supplies such as
insects, worms, crustaceans and amphibians
and certain plants. These food resources are
necessary to complete migration and the
historic wetlands in the Great Plains have
influenced the evolution of shorebird migration
(this complex of wetlands are required now for
these birds when migrating from the Gulf of
Mexico to Alaska) (Skagen and Knopf, 1993).
These wetlands are also important as
breeding areas themselves. The prairie
pothole region produces at least half of North
America's waterfowl and a large number of
marsh and aquatic birds (Kantmd, etal. 1989).
It has been estimated that as many as 5.3
million dabbling ducks depend on small,
temporary wetlands in the prairie pothole
region (Robinson, 1995). Seven bird species
and subspecies federally listed as threatened
or endangered are known to use wetlands
frequently or peripherally in the Rocky
Mountain/Great Plains Region (Finch and
Ruggerio, 1993). The Prairie Pothole region
comprises only 10% of the waterfowl breeding
area in the North American continent, but
produces 50% of the ducks in an average year
(Smith, et al, 1964) and 23 species of ducks
have nested at least once in North Dakota
(Faanes and Stewart, 1982). Researchers
have found an average of 140 ducks per
pothole per year in eastern South Dakota (U.S.
Geological Survey, 1996b).
The composition of invertebrate species in
the Prairie Potholes is determined by the
hydrology of the wetland (Kantrud, et al,
1989). Seasonally flooded wetlands are
dominated by invertebrates that can complete
their life cycle before they dry out, meaning
that species that can fly, survive drying or
produce eggs that can survive drying are more
common ' (Swanson, 1984);. Salt
concentrations also influence invertebrate
fauna - as basins dry, many become more
saline and salt-resistant species such as brine
shrimp may dominate (Swanson, 1984).
Riparian Areas
The riparian zone is the area of vegetation
paralleling streams and rivers that is
influenced by the presence of water. The
running water of these ecosystems provides a
source of oxygen, water and minerals to this
zone and these communities are usually
flooded annually and are subject to erosion
and deposition of materials (Mitsch and
Grosselink, 1986). This provides fora highly
productive system due to this convergence of
energy and materials. The riparian corridor
encompasses the stream channel and the
terrestrial landscape from the highwater mark
towards the uplands where vegetation may be
influenced by elevated .water tables or
flooding, and by the ability of the soil to hold
water (Naiman, et al. 1993). The riparian
corridor is often small in headwater streams
and in mid-sized streams, the corridor is larger,
being represented by a distinct band of
vegetation whose width is determined by long-
term (>50 year) channel dynamics and the
annual discharge regime (Naiman, et al.
1993). Riparian corridors on large streams are
characterized by well-developed complex
floodplains with long periods of seasonal
flooding, lateral channel migration, oxbow
lakes in old river channels, a diverse
116
-------
Northern Great Plains Aquatic Assessment
vegetative community and moist soils
(Naiman, etal. 1992). The diversity of riparian
corridors is maintained by the natural
disturbance regime, the nature of the
disturbance (floods, fire, landslides, debris
torrents, channel migration} and the ability of
the biotic system to adjust to constantly
changing conditions (Kalliola et ai. 1992).
In the Northern Great Plains, especially in
the west, riparian zones are extremely
important for wildlife and basically function as
oases (Mitsch and Grosselink, 1986). Riparian
areas are an example of the edge effect; there
is usually more wildlife here than in the
uplands. The reasons for the greater wildlife
diversity include the predominance of woody
communities (nesting and roosting sites,
shading of stream, production of leaf litter
adds to organic input to stream), presence of
surface water and soil moisture, diversity and
interspersion of habitat features and corridors
for dispersal and migration of animals (Mitsch
and Grosselink, 1986).
«
Riparian zones support disproportionately
large numbers of species compared to the
relatively tiny area they occupy (Naiman, et al.
1993). These areas may contain the majority
of a region's amphibians and reptiles (Erode
and Bury, 1984). Many species of small
mammals, bats, songbirds, amphibians and
reptiles reside solely in riparian habitats
(Seabloom, et al. 1978; Johnsgaard, 1979;
Erode and Bury, 1984). In the Great Plains,
73% of 325 breeding bird species are reported
to use riparian woodlands and 45% (117
species) of 260 regular breeders nest in
riparian areas (Johnsgaard, 1979). Riparian
habitats are valuable in the spring and fall as
migratory corridors Jor songbirds (Stevens, et
al. 1977) and as staging areas for whooping
crane and sandhill cranes (Frith, 1974). In the
Northern high plains, cavity nesters were
found to be more abundant in cottonwood-
dominated vegetation types than in three other
vegetation types (Hopkins, et al. 1986).
However, expansion of riparian areas onto the
Great Plains, as a result of fire suppression
has created continuous corridors, facilitating
dispersal and permitting faunal mixing of
previously isolated species between eastern
and western United States (Knopf and Scott,
1991).
Riparian zones are highly valued as areas
of wildlife habitat, recreation, timber, livestock
forage and water, travel passageways for
animals and humans, buffer zones between
managed and natural areas; natural filters of
surface runoff and waste, stabilizers of
shorelines and stream channels, interceptors
for precipitation and insulation for streams
(Melton, etal. 1984).
Before the construction of dams and
reservoirs, rivers of the Great Plains were
dynamic systems with widely fluctuating flows,
large bed loads of sand and silt, numerous
unvegetated islands and multiple channels
(Cross and Moss, 1987; Graf, 1988). The
locations of point bars, islands and channels
shifted frequently because of the high spring
flows and large bed loads of sand and silt
(Cross and Moss, 1967). Reservoirs have
altered these characteristics. Water releases
from these reservoirs follow a seasonal
pattern: spring runoff is held and released as
needed by irrigators and municipalities through
the remainder of the year. The result is a
reduction in spring flows (floods) and an
augmentation of low flows during the summer
and fall. This change in the hydrology is
leading, in many places on the plains to a loss
of the native cottonwood riparian communities
and potentially to the local loss of species
dependent upon them, especially cavity
nesting birds (Knopf and Scott, 1990).
Reservoirs also trap sediment because the
reduced velocity causes sediment to settle out,
consequently, water released from reservoirs
is relatively sediment free. According to
117
-------
Chapter 3 - Wetlands and Riparian Habitats and Land Cover
Schmulbach, et al. (1992) the sediment load at
the mouth of the Missouri River is now 50% of
what it was before closing of the mainstem
dams (125 millions tons now as opposed to
250 million tons before the construction of the
dams).
In alluvial rivers, the moderated flows and
removal of sediment degrade riverbeds
downstream from reservoirs (Hammad, 1972;
Petts, 1979; Williams and Wolman, 1984;
Graf, 1988). In braided river channels,
channels are cut off and multiple channels are
reduced to a single channel (Williams, 1978;
Graf, 1988). The degradation associated with
the removal of sediment in the Missouri River
is the most severe after the lowest dam
(Gavins Point) since this is where the river
attempts to recapture its sediment load
(Schmulbach, et al. 1992). Associated with
the incision of the single remaining channel,
side channels and backwaters are reduced in
abundance or eliminated due to lowering of
water levels. Side channels are departures
from the main channel in which there is a
current during normal river stages and are
important to fishes (Schmulbach, et al. 1975;
Ellis, et al. 1979). Backwaters have a low
current velocity and are partially separated
from the main channel by bars that were
formerly islands. The degradation of
backwaters is significant, because they tend to
have more diverse fish assemblages and are
important habitats in the life cycle of many
native fishes (Carter, et al. 1985).
Other impacts to riparian areas include
ground water pumping from alluvial aquifers,
livestock grazing, land clearing for agriculture
or to increase water yield, mining, road
development, recreational demand, fire,
elimination of native organisms such as beaver
and introduction of exotic organisms
(Stromberg, 1993; Busch and Scott, 1995).
Livestock are an important factor in the
degradation of riparian areas in the west,
including the Northern Great Plains. Livestock
tend to congregate in riparian areas, eating
vegetation and trampling streambanks (Manci,
1989). This leads to erosion and sedimentation
and increases in stream temperatures.
3.2 WETLAND HABITAT CONDITION
Introduction
i
This section looks at the extent and
condition of wetlands in the Northern Great
Plains. The areal extent of historical wetlands
are compared with the present extent and the
causes for the loss are discussed. The water
quality of wetlands is discussed, including both
natural and human influences.
Key Findings
•The greatest concentration of wetlands in the
NGPAA occur in the Prairie Pothole region of
ND, SD and MT.
•73% of historical wetland acres remain in
Montana; 55% in North Dakota; 65% in South
Dakota; 65% in Nebraska; and about 60% in
Wyoming.
•Most wetland losses have been the result of
conversions for agriculture.
•The greatest losses since presettlement by
percentage have occurred in North Dakota,
with the most extensive drainage occurring in
the Red River Valley.
•Recent wetland losses have been reduced to
less than 3% (over a ten year period) in most
parts of the NGPAA. However, in many parts
of the NGPAA, increases in wetland acreage
are being noted.
•Recent changes (since 1980s) have seen
wetland losses the Little Missouri basin,
western North and South Dakota, the Red
River Valley, the lower Yellowstone, Niobrara
and Cheyenne Rivers. Recent gains have
been recorded in the Milk, Upper Yellowstone,
Powder, Belle Fourche, Loup, Platte, James
and Sheyenne River basins.
118
-------
Northern Great Plains Aquatic Assessment
•The Sand Hills and northeastern North
Dakota contain the largest amounts of
palustrine wetlands and the least amounts
occur in western and central South Dakota.
•Increases by percentage in palustrine
wetlands from 1982 to 1992 occurred in the
western and eastern portions of the NGPAA.
Decreases have occurred in much of the
central NGPAA, with the largest in western
North Dakota.
•Wetland water quality is impacted mainly from
siltation from soil erosion from cropland.
Pesticides can also impact wetland water
quality in cropland areas.
•The Upper Missouri River (above Sioux Falls)
has 74% of the mapped wetlands of the entire
river, 53% of which occur in the four major
deltas of Fort Peck, Lake Sakakawea, Lake
Oahe and Lewis and Clark Lake. The Missouri
River from Gavins Point Dam to Ponca has 90
acres of wetlands per mile and is the most
natural of the reaches below Fort Peck
Reservoir.
Data Sources
The information in this section was
obtained from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service's National Wetlands Inventory, the
U.S. Geological Survey- Biological Resources
Division, the Natural Resources Conservation
Service's National Resources Inventory, the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Index
of Watershed Indicators and from the
literature. Much information was obtained
from the publication Prairie Basin Wetlands of
the Dakotas (Kantrud, etal. 1989).
Data Quality
The information, on historical and recent
wetlands losses (Figures 3.2.2 and 3.2.3) were
derived from EPA's Index of Watershed
Indicators, which in turn obtained its
information by compiling data from the
National Wetlands Inventory and the National
Resources Inventory. These two systems use
different hydrologic accounting units (8-digit
versus 6-digit) and have different sampling
methods. The IWI interpolated the 6-digit
information into 8-digits, therefore there is
error associated with it. In addition, the NRI
does not collect data on federal lands.
Furthermore, the NWI data Is reported by
state, so that there is less reliability compared
to historical data for watersheds that cross
state fines. The NWI database has not been
completed for the entire NGPAA. Maps are
not completed for most of Montana and maps
that have been completed for southwestern
North Dakota, western South Dakota and
eastern Wyoming have not been digitized.
The only areas in the NGPAA with completed
electronic versions of NWI maps are central
and eastern South Dakota, most of North
Dakota, most of Wyoming and National
Grassland areas in western South Dakota and
eastern Wyoming.
Spatial Patterns and Trends
Figure 3.2.1 presents an estimation of the
concentration of palustrine wetlands ' by
1:250,000 quadrangle. This estimation was
derived by determining the area of palustrine
wetlands in a sample of 1:24,000 quadrangles
in each larger 1:250,000 quadrangle. These
wetlands were originally mapped under the
National Wetlands Inventory. The map is
meant to show the relative amount on a
regional scale, not actual numbers. Not
surprisingly, the prairie pothole areas of South
Dakota, North Dakota and Montana have the
greatest palustrine wetland area. The large
blank area in eastern Montana is due to a lack
of completed wetland information.
Figure 3.2.2 depicts the rate of wetland
loss based on long-term (historical) losses
(i.e., from the 1780s to the 1980s). This
information is derived from EPA's Index of
Watershed Indicators, but the presentation has
119
-------
Chapter 3 - Wetlands and Riparian Habitats and Land Cover
been changed from a relative ranking of
wetland loss to percentages (however, see
cautions under Data Qualify and Gaps). The
greatest historical losses have been in North
Dakota with losses between 40 and 50%. The
larger number of wetlands there, however,
means that even with losses that high, there is
still a significant amount of wetlands
remaining. The least historical losses have
been in large parts of Montana, South Dakota
and Nebraska. As can be seen in Figure
3.2.3, recent (since 1980s) large gains in
wetlands have occurred in Montana (Milk and
Upper Yellowstone basins), with smaller gains
in Wyoming (North Platte, Powder, Tongue
and Belle Fourche basins), Nebraska (Loup
and Platte basins) and the James and
Sheyenne basins in North and South Dakota.
Wetland losses have occurred recently in
much of central and western South Dakota,
central and western North Dakota plus the Red
River Valley, the lower Yellowstone basin in
Montana, the Niobrara in Nebraska and the
upper Cheyenne in Wyoming. The greatest
losses have occurred in the Little Missouri
River basin. According to the information
available from the National Wetlands
Inventory, the EPA's Index of Watershed
Indicators and the National Resource inventory
of the NRCS, it appears as though the trend of
wetland loss is slowing and is reversing in
some areas.
The amounts in acres of palustrine
wetlands according to NRCS are presented in
Figure 3.2.4. The Sand Hills and northeastern
North Dakota are areas with large amounts of
palustrine wetlands (MLRAs 65,55A, 55B and
53B). The least amounts occur in western and
central South Dakota. The darkest areas on
the map in the northeastern portion of the
NGPAA reflect the location of the prairie
pothole region. The Red River Valley has
notably less than adjacent areas due to
extensive drainage.
The percentage change in palustrine
wetlands from 1982 to 1992 according to the
NRCS is presented in Figure 3.2.5. Slight
decreases have occurred in much of the
central NGPAA, with the largest in western
North Dakota in MLRA 58C (Northern Rolling
High Plains - Northeastern Part). Increases
occurred in the western and eastern portions
of the NGPAA, with the greatest increases in
the Black Hills.
j
Montana
In Montana there are 840,000 acres of
wetlands, which is 0.9% of the State (Dahl,
1990). Most of these are palustrine. In
eastern Montana wetlands are fresh and saline
marshes and greasewood scrubland adjacent
to rivers and in unglaciated parts of eastern
Montana (U.S. Geological Survey, 1996b).
Wetlands occur in floodplains of streams in the
Missouri and Yellowstone basins and are
commonly associated with constructed
livestock ponds. In glaciated areas of northern
Montana wetlands are predominantly prairie
potholes (U.S. Geological Survey, 1996b).
About 73% of Montana's predevelopment
(historical) wetlands remain (Dahl, 1990).
Most wetland losses have been due to
conversion of wetlands to croplands,
particularly in the prairie pothole region of
northern Montana. As of the mid-1980s about
20,000 acres of prairie in eastern Montana had
been artificially drained for agriculture (Dahl,
1990).
North Dakota
Most of North Dakota's remaining wetlands
are located in the Prairie Pothole region, which
extends from the MissouriJDoteau in central
North Dakota eastward to the Red River Valley
(North Dakota Department of Health, 1994).
Wetland losses (by acreage) have not been as
severe in North Dakota as in other parts of the
region (North Dakota Department of Health,
120
-------
Figure 3.2.1 Concentration of Palustrine Wetlands in the Northern Great Plains
-------
Percent Historical
Wetland Loss
Figure 3.2.2 Historical Wetland Loss in the Northern Great Plains {1780s to 1980s) from the National Wetlands Inventory
-------
Percent Recent
Wetland Changes
j | -3 - -1.5
•1.5-O
0-3
3.1 -11
Figure 3.2.3 Recent Wetland Changes (between 1982 and 1992) as Measured by the National Resources Inventory
-------
Palustrine Wetlands
Acres
iioo-soooo
50001 - 100000
100001 -2SOOOO
250001 • SOOOOO
500001 • 12SOOOO
Figure 3
.2.4 Amount of Palustrine Wetlands in the Northern
Great Plains by Major Land and Resource Area
-------
Percent Change in
Palustrine Wetlands
•16--S
•S-O
O- 10
> 10
Figure 3.2.5 Percent Change in Palustrine Wetlands between 1982 and 1992 in the Northern Great Plains
-------
Chapters- Wetlands and Riparian Habitats and Land Cover
1994). However, drainage, sedimentatioYi;
nutrient enrichment and pesticide
contamination threaten wetland integrity (North
Dakota Department of Health, 1994).
Originally, there were about 5 million acres of
wetlands in the State (11% of the State), but
by the 1980s wetlands there were only 2.7
milliion acres '(6% of the State), a 45%
reduction (Dahl, 1990). Recent statewide
estimates of losses continue at 1000 to 2000
acres per year (North Dakota Department of
Health, 1994). According to Stewart and
Kantrud (1973) there are 2.2 million acres of
wetlands (81% of the State's wetlands) within
the prairie pothole region of North Dakota.
Approximate wetland numbers and areas by
water regime were estimated at 698,000
temporary (113,000 hectares), 1,474,000
seasonal (583,000 hectares), and 127,000
semipermanent (345,000 hectares).
The most extensive drainage of wetlands
in North Dakota has occurred in the Red River
Valley where 1.2 million acres of wet meadows
have been drained (U.S. Geological Survey,
1996b). A survey for North Dakota stated that
10.6% of the area of all privately owned
natural basin wetlands in the Prairie Pothole
Region of the State were drained from 1966 to
1980 (Kantrud, et al. 1989). The survey did not
include temporary basins, so the loss rate is a
conservative estimate (Kantrud, etal. 1989).
South Dakota
The most prevalent wetland type in South
Dakota is the palustrine emergent wetland (the
prairie pothole). South Dakota once had
2,735,100 acres of wetlands, today 1,780,000
remain, which represents about 3.6% of the
State, a loss of 35% (Dahl, 1990). However,
according to the 1992 National Resources
Inventory conducted by the U.S. Natural
Resources Conservation Service, 3,004,400
acres of wetland were found (South Dakota
Department of Environment and Natural
Resources, 1996). Ruwaldt (1979) estimated
from a wetland inventory in 1973-4 that 71 % of
South Dakota's wetlands were palustrine, 19%
were mixed palustrine and lacustrine
associated with prairie ponds and lakes and
stock ponds and 10% were riverine.
Agricultural conversions have accounted
for most wetland losses in South Dakota (U.S.
Geological Survey, 1996b). Northeastern
portions of South Dakota have had relatively
low drainage rates (1.5% of area of wetlands
destroyed), whereas rates were as high as
7.5% in southeastern South Dakota (Kantrud,
et al. 1989). Wittmier (1982) estimated that
34,505 hectares of temporary, seasonal, and
semipermanent basins have been drained in
South Dakota since 1964.
Nebraska
The estimated wetland acreage in the
Sand Hills in 1980 was 1,322,451 acres (U.S.
Geological Survey, 1996b). This included
112,478 acres of open water wetlands, 64,521
acres of marshes, 1,130,954 acres of
subirrigated meadows and 14,498 acres of
riparian wetlands. Nebraska as a whole has
lost about lost about 1 million acres (35%) of
the State's original wetlands (Dahl, 1990), with
agriculture conversions being the principal
cause of these. losses. Agricultural
conversions account for the loss of 28,000
acres (15%) of the original wetlands in the
Sand Hills (U.S. Geological Survey, 19965).
Wyoming
Wetlands in Wyoming cover about 1.25
million acres, or 2% of the State (Dahl, 1990).
Twenty-six percent of these are palustrine,
35% are mixed lacustrine and palustrine, 9%
lacustrine and 30% are riverine (U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, 1955). This estimate,
however, did not include much of the plains.
Between the 1780s and 1980s Wyoming lost
126
-------
Northern Great Plains Aquatic Assessment
38% (by area) of its wetlands (Dahl, 1990).
Wetland Water Quality
The primary cause of wetland degradation
in the Prairie Pothole Region (and probably for
most wetlands in the Northern Great Plains) is
agriculture (Finer 1984). The most common
form of degradation is from siltation caused by
soil erosion from adjacent cropland (Kantrud,
et al. 1989). Row crops generally result in
more soil erosion than small grains, because
of the additional cultivation required during the
growing season (Kantrud, et al. 1989).
Agricultural chemicals contribute to
degradation of wetland water quality. Most of
the cropland in the Dakotas is treated with
herbicides, but insecticide use is restricted
primarily to sunflowers, which are now more
widely grown (Kantrud, et al. 1989). Kantrud,
et al. (1989) thought that the potential for
agricultural chemicals to enter prairie wetlands
and impact wildlife was high, particularly for
the most toxic and widely used insecticides
(Grue et al. 1986). The impact of herbicides on
prairie wildlife is indirect and comes primarily
from elimination of food and cover (Hudson et
al. 1984; Hill and Camardese 1986).
Some natural characteristics of wetlands
affect their water quality. When anaerobic
conditions occur in either summer or winter
they are referred to as summerkill or winterkill
(Kling, 1975; Nickum, 1970). Summerkill lakes
produce high midsummer populations of
planktonic algae that later die, causing oxygen
depletion and a summer fish kill (Kling, 1975).
Winterkills occur when snow cover on the ice
reduces photosynthesis, resulting in oxygen
depletion within the water (Kantrud, et al.
1989) and increases in total dissolved solids,
carbon dioxide, ammonia and hydrogen sulfide
can also occur.
The location of wetlands with respect to
soils and geology can affect water quality
(Kantrud, et al. 1989). Wetlands located in
outwash (highly permeable sand and gravel)
had higher specific conductance and higher
concentrations of sodium, potassium, sulfate
and alkalinity (Kantrud, et al. 1989). Those
located on till (low permeable silt and clay) had
higher concentrations of calcium (Swanson et
ai. 1988). Wetlands that are saline in North
Dakota tend to be located in outwash and are
topographically low, serving as ground water
discharge areas that concentrate salts
(Kantrud, et al. 1989).
Missouri River Wetlands
In the entire Upper Missouri River (from the
inlet to Fort Peck Reservoir to Sioux City) there
are 306,000 acres of floodplain (U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers, 1994). The upper river
has 55% of the total floodplain acreage of the
Missouri River, but 74% of the mapped
wetlands, 53% of which occurs in the four
major deltas (inlets to Fort Peck, Lake
Sakakawea, Lake Oahe and Lewis and Clark
Lake). These four deltas supported more than
59,000 acres of wetlands in 1991 (72% of all
wetlands along the upper river). Delta
wetlands expand during droughts because
plants take over receding shoreline. However,
delta wetlands are less diverse wetland
complexes than riverine reaches because
fluctuating water levels preclude trees and
other species intolerant of long periods of
inundation. In the major deltas, wetland types
vary, ranging from 39% scrub-shrub/56%
emergent in Lake Oahe to 55% scrub-
shrub/37% emergent at Fort Peck. Forested
wetlands range from 8 to 15% in the deltas.
The wetlands of the delta in Lewis and Clark
Lake are 83% emergent.
In the Missouri River from Fort Peck Dam
to Lake Sakakawea abandoned channels and
several oxbow lakes remain in the floodplain
(U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 1994). Fifty-
127
-------
Chapter 3 - Wetlands and Riparian Habitats and Land Cover
six percent of the wetlands in this reach are
emergent characterized by large stands of
reed canarygrass and common reed and 39%
are scrub-shrub characterized by cottonwood
and willow. Scrub-shrub wetlands consist
primarily of thin bands of sandbar willow along
the shorelines.
The Missouri River from Garrison Dam to
Lake Oahe is restricted to one main channel
with very few side channels (U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers, 1994). Emergent wetlands
comprise 68% of the wetlands and consist of
quackgrass, bluegrass and mints with reed
canarygrass and slough sedge in some areas.
Most of the rest of the wetland acreage is
scrub-shrub at 22% consisting of cottonwood,
indigo bush and peachleaf willow. This reach
supports only 38 acres/mile of wetland. Large
diurnal and seasonal variations in river flow
due to peaking operations of the dam impede
wetland establishment and survival and
islands are periodically scoured.
From Fort Randall Dam to Lewis and Clark
Lake has few side channels and 30% of the
wetland acreage is forested, consisting of
peachleaf willow and cottonwood with some
sandbar willow. Fifty-six percent of the
wetland acreage is emergent with reed
canarygrass and common reed and extensive
stands of cattail and softstem bulrush have
developed in old channels and backwaters.
The Gavins Point Dam to Ponca reach has
90 acres of wetlands per mile and is the most
natural of all the reaches below Fort Peck
Reservoir. Emergent wetlands cover 46% and
scrub-shrub cover 49% of the area. Emergent
wetlands have reed canarygrass with cattails
in old channels, backwaters and near islands '
and scrub-shrub wetlands have dense stands
of sandbar willow with peachleaf willow and
cottonwood in less frequently flooded areas.
Future Trends
The rate of wetland loss has slowed to less
than 3% per year and is increasing in many
areas as a result of wetland protection laws
and incentives. As long as these protections
remain in place, this condition is expected to
improve or at least hold stable. The water
quality problems in wetlands are largely the
result of, nonpoint source pollution from
agriculture. Efforts to impact nonpoint source
pollution will affect the quality of the water in
wetlands.
3.3 RIPARIAN HABITAT CONDITION
Introduction
This section discusses the condition and
extent of riparian areas and riverine wetlands
in the NGPAA. Several studies are highlighted
that examined the condition of riparian areas
along some of the major streams in the area
and the effects that dams and diversions
(hydromodification) have had on them. The
extent and changes in riverine wetland area
are also presented.
Key Findings
•Eastern Montana has the most riverine
wetlands according to the NRCS. Central and
eastern North Dakota, northeastern Wyoming
and much of South Dakota have the least
amounts of riverine wetlands.
•The greatest decreases in riverine wetlands
during the period 1982 to 1992 have occurred
in northeast Wyoming and central South
Dakota. The greatest increases have
occurred in the Black Hills and Sand Hills.
•Several studies on riverine habitat in the
Missouri, Marais and North Platte Rivers
indicate that establishment of young
cottonwoods has declined in many areas
downstream from dams.
128
-------
Northern Great Plains Aquatic Assessment
•This loss of cottonwood regeneration is due
to alterations of the magnitude of peak river
flows. These reductions in peak flows cause
a loss of new alluvium deposits, which are
necessary for establishment of cottonwood
seedlings.
•The loss of high flows has also cut off access
to seasonally flooded backwaters, which are
spawning, nursery and feeding areas for fish
and feeding and breeding areas for migratory
waterfowl.
Data Sources
Much of the information in this section
came from literature surveys of research done
on the riparian areas in the Northern Plains.
Many of the studies focused on the effects of
dams and diversions. The Biological
Resources Division of the U.S. Geological
Survey supplied information from the National
Wetlands Inventory. The Natural Resources
Conservation Service's National Resources
Inventory data was also used.
Spatial Patterns and Trends
Figure 3.3.1 presents the amounts of
riverine wetlands by NRCS' major land and
resource areas (MLRA). The most exists in
eastern Montana (MLRA 58A - Northern
Rolling High Plains - Northern Part). The least
is in central and eastern North Dakota,
northeastern Wyoming and much of South
Dakota (outside of the southeastern and
northwestern parts). The amount of riverine
wetlands is not synonomous with amounts of
riparian area. However, in the absence of
good riparian area information is can serve as
one measure of the condition of the floodplain
habitat. It is also important to compare the
scale on this figure versus the amounts of
palustrine wetlands in Figure 3,2.4. Palustrine
wetlands are considerably more common
overall.
The change in riverine wetland acreage
from the period 1982 to 1992 by NRCS
MLRAs is presented in Figure 3.3.2. The
greatest decrease was. in northeastern
Wyoming and central South Dakota (MLRAs
58B and 63A) with losses between 5 and 11
percent. The greatest increase was in the
Black Hills and the Sand Hills (MLRAs 62 and
65) with gains of more than 10 percent.
Moderate increases occurred in large areas
throughout the NGPAA in northern Montana,
northern and eastern North Dakota and
western South Dakota and Nebraska.
Figure 3.3.3 depicts the miles of streams
within each watershed impacted by vegetation
removal or streambank alteration as reported
by in the state 305b reports. Montana reports
this impact more than the other states, with the
Yellowstone, Missouri, Milk and the Powder
Rivers having watersheds with more than 100
miles of assessed streams impacted.
However, the North Platte-Scottsbluff, the Red
River and parts of Wyoming also are impacted
significantly. Much of North Dakota, South
Dakota and Nebraska are not reported to be
impacted by streambank alteration or
vegetation removal. This could be an artifact
of how closely this impact is montored in these
states.
The following is a summary of a number of
studies regarding the effects of
hydromodification on several aquatic systems
within the Northern Great Plains Assessment
Area. Hydromodification includes the loss of
spring flood flows due to dams and diversions,
the addition of flow in late summer from
irrigation return, channelization and the
removal of riparian vegetation.
Laramie River/Greyrocks Dam, Wyoming
Patton and Hubert (1993) studied the
changes in the Laramie River downstream
from Greyrocks Reservoir. The Laramie River
129
-------
Chapter 3 - Wetlands and Riparian Habitats and Land Cover
once had numerous shallow side channels but
few remain. The side channels that currently
exist provide shallow riffles that are important
to small-stream fishes but such riffles and side
channels are becoming rare. Fish
assemblages were sampled from the main
channel, remnant side channels and
backwaters. Species richness and diversity
were greatest in backwaters and greater in the
main channel than the side channels. The
side channels contained fishes common in
small streams, the main channel contained
fishes usually associated with larger streams.
The findings suggest that the side channels in
the Laramie River, while not having the
greatest diversity compared with other stream
habitats, are particularly important to some
species, including white sucker, johnny darter
and Iowa darter. In addition, two species that
are rare in the Laramie River, longnose dace
and plains topminnow, were collected only in
side channels. The loss of side channels due
to the dam could affect the future of these
fishes in the river.
*
Missouri River, All States
The condition of the riparian zone of the
Missouri River and the impacts of the
mainstem dams upon it is reviewed in the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers Draft Environmental
Impact Statementforthe Missouri River Master
Water Control Manual (U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers, 1994) and the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service Biological Opinion on that
Draft EIS (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
1994).
Cottonwood and willow have historically
dominated the Missouri River floodplain forests
because of the highly dynamic nature of the
river channel (Johnson, et al. 1976). In the
past, as the river meandered, it deposited
alluvium on the inside of river curves (point
bars), but on the opposite side it eroded banks
often covered with forest vegetation (Johnson,
et al. 1976). These point bars were optimal
habitat for the establishment of cottonwood
and willow seedlings, which need moist
mineral soil located just above the river stage
(Noble, 1979). In addition, seed dispersal of
cottonwood and willow occurred primarily in
June, coinciding with receding spring water
levels and the exposure of recent alluvial
deposits (Fenner, et al. 1985). Only
cottonwood and willow germinate and persist
under these conditions. If such sites with
young seedlings remained uneroded,
cottonwood-willow forests developed. If
meandering by the river were to miss a
particular forested area for a century or so, the
cottonwood-willow forest would be replaced by
green ash, box elder, american elm and bur
oak (which can reproduce in the cottonwood
understory) (Johnson, etal. 1976). Eventually,
as the river channel shifted back across the
floodplain, established forest was lost to
erosion on the outside of the bend and new
cottonwood forests became established inside
(Johnson, etal. 1976). Since cottonwood and
willow cannot reproduce under forest
conditions, river meandering is necessary to
maintain these communities on the floodplain.
The mainstem dams have dramatically
reduced the rate of river meandering by
altering the magnitude of peak flows (Johnson,
et al. 1976). Flow alteration and a decline in
the meandering rate would cause a reduction
in the amount of new alluvium produced for
cottonwood and willow regeneration and an
increase in the successional ages of
established forests due to an extension in their
lifespans (Johnson, et al. 1976). The net
effect would be to reduce the area of
cottonwood forests in, favor of species of the
later successional types. This change would
have major consequences because forests
with cottonwood as a dominant have the
maximum diversity of vascular plants
(Keammerer, et al. 1975) and birds (Hibbard,
1972). Peaks in species number and
130
-------
Riverine Wetlands,
Acres
600 - 25000
25001 -50000
50001 -100000
> J00000
Figure 3.3.1 Amount of Riverine Wetlands in the Northern Great Plains by Major Land and Resource Areas
-------
Riverine'Wetlands,
% Change
•U "5
-5-0
0- 10
10-20
Figure 3.3.2 Percent Change in Riverine Wetlands between 1982 and 1992 by Major Land and Resource Areas
-------
Streambank
Modification
Impacts, miles
| | Not Assessed
51-100
> 100
Figure 3.3.3 Miles of Assessed Streams in Each Watershed Impacted by Riparian Vegetation Removal and/or
Streambank Alteration
-------
Chapters - Wetlands and Riparian Habitats and Land Cover
population sizes of birds are reached in older
successional forests because of their high
vertical stratification (Hibbard, 1972), and
additionally, the large size and hollow trunks
and branches of older cottonwoods provide
habitat for cavity nesting birds such as
woodpeckers and wrens (Hibbard, 1972). The
smaller size and sounder limbs of tree species
in the newly dominating forests will not provide
as many nesting cavities (Johnson, 1992).
In the upper Missouri river there is reduced
cottonwood vigor, branch loss and high
mortality in mature riparian cottonwood forests
caused by reduced frequency of spring
flooding and lowered water table (U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers, 1994). Portions of the
Missouri River in central Montana are generally
devoid of cottonwood seedlings and most of
the trees present are mature or overmature
(Behan, 1981). Despite this, however, Busch
and Scott (1995) referred to the stretch of the
Missouri River between Fort Benton and Fort
Peck Reservoir as one of the last semi-
naturally functioning reaches along the entire
Missouri River. It is also a National Wild and
Scenic River. While some of the water in this
part of the river is regulated by dams, this
section is above all of the larger dams. The
riverine reaches in the Upper Missouri River
(as opposed to the reservoirs) contain 23,300
acres of wetland and 49,650 acres of riparian
vegetation and the riverine reaches support
72% of the riparian vegetation in the upper
river (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 1994).
In the reach from Fort Peck Dam to Lake
Sakakawea there are many sandbars, islands
and side channels (U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers, 1994). The riparian vegetation
consists of cottonwood and green ash and has
a density of 67 acres/mile. This is lower than
for any other part of the upper reach, due to
clearing. In the Garrison Dam to Lake Oahe
reach, the riparian forest comprises just over
half of the riparian vegetation and consists of
cottonwood, slippery elm, green ash and box
elder. Sandbar willow, peachleaf willow and
cottonwood occur along river sandbars. The
acreage of riparian forest in this reach has
been drastically reduced since settlement and
by construction of Garrison Dam (U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers, 1994).
Johnson, et al. (1976) detected numerous
changes after the construction of Garrison and
Oahe Dams. These included a decline in the
growth of most tree species, low seedling
recruitment of cottonwood and willow and low
survivorship of box elder and american elm
seedlings. Cottonwood and willow are
predicted to decline in the future to be
dominated by american elm, box elder and
green ash (Johnson, 1992), with green ash
eventually totally dominating the system,
growing in dense stands, with a resulting
decline in habitat diversity. Fauna! diversity
may then also decrease.
The reach of the Missouri River from Fort
Randall Dam to Lewis and Clark Lake is a
national recreation river. Nearly all of the
riparian vegetation is forest, dominated by
cottonwood mixed with green ash, russian
olive, slippery elm and box elder. The Missouri
River from Gavins Point Dam to Ponca is also
a national recreation river and is the only
segment downstream of Gavins Point Dam
that has not been channelized. It has a wide
braided channel with numerous islands and
backwaters. However, as mentioned in
Chapter 2, this is the area where significant
erosion is occurring for the river to regain its
lost sediment load. Riparian vegetation in this
reach has been severely reduced by clearing
for agriculture. Over one-half of the remaining
area is forested, dominated by cottonwood,
with lower densities of green ash, slippery elm,
red cedar, russian olive, mulberry and box
elder.
According to the Fish and Wildlife Service
134
-------
Northern Great Plains Aquatic Assessment
(1994) habitat of the Upper Missouri River has
been affected by the suppression of high
flows. This loss of high flows has cut off
access to seasonally flooded backwaters
which provide spawning, nursery and feeding
areas for fish and feeding and breeding areas
for migratory birds. This same loss of
connection to off-channel areas has reduced
nutrient inputs to the upper river and resulting
in a loss of productivity (U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, 1994).
Seventeen species of ducks, three species
of geese and one swan species occur along
the Missouri River and it supports sixty-one
species of shorebirds, wading birds and
waterbirds (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,
1994). All are dependent on Missouri River
hydrology for supplying sandbars, shorelines
and shallow water zones. The River provides
breeding habitat for endangered interior least
tern, bald eagle, and threatened piping plover.
It provides migration and wintering habitat for
endangered peregrine falcon and whooping
crane and potentially provides habitat for
endangered eskimo curlew, gray bat and
Indiana bat (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,
1994).
North Platte River, Wyoming
Miller, et al. (1995) looked at changes in
the Rawhide Wildlife Management Area along
the North Platte River in southeastern
Wyoming that had occurred between 1937
and 1990 after shifts in flooding and intensity
of flooding of the river. They found that the
river declined in wetted area by 75% during
that time frame. They also found that the areal
proportion occupied by older cottonwoods
increased, while that of younger cottonwoods
decreased, although some traditional
measures appeared insensitive to these
changes. The proportion of the landscape that
changed land types declined with increasing
distance from the river. Further modification of
the landscape structure and continued decline
in cottonwood recruitment and increases in
cottonwood mortality are expected. The
reasons for these changes are alterations in
the flow regimes toward reduced peak annual
flows (a result of dams) and enhanced low
flows (irrigation return flow and transmountain
diversions).
Friedman, et al. (1997) state that a
decrease in the peak flows in the Platte River
temporarily increases cottonwood regeneration
because of channel narrowing, however,
cottonwoods decline over the long-term
because of decreases in the necessary
physical disturbances.
Marais River/Tiber Reservoir, Montana
Rood and Mahoney (1995) found that
there is a deficiency of cottonwood seedlings
downstream from the Tiber Dam that probably
results from stabilized river flows (the dam
traps spring flood flows and augments flows at
other times). The reasons for the loss of
cottonwoods were competition with grasses
and shrubs encroaching due to lack of
flooding, poor seedling establishment due to a
lack of spring flooding, reduced formation of
sandbars for seedling recruitment site due to
reduction of erosion and deposition process,
loss of sediment for bar expansion because
silt now settles out in the reservoir, and an
entrenched channel, which may have resulted
from the combination of a lack of flooding and
loss of sediment. They predict that there will
be a progressive decline of the riparian
cottonwood forests downstream from the dam
unless a more dynamic river flow pattern is
reestablished.
Future Trends
Pressures on riparian areas in the Northern
Great Plains can be expected to continue.
People are attracted to riparian areas much as
135
-------
Chapters - Wetlands and Riparian Habitats and Land Cover
wildlife are. Development and recreation will
continue to threaten riparian areas, especially
in areas with increases in population.
Changes in the operations of the dams may
occur in the future, but without changes
resulting in a more natural hydrograph, the
riparian systems will continue to decline, as will
the populations of the species dependent on
them. Pressures from irrigated agriculture
(diversions) will likely continue in certain areas
of the western Northern Great Plains.
3.4 LAND COVER AND AQUATIC
SYSTEMS
introduction
Land use directly impacts the condition of
aquatic systems. Areas with considerable
acreage of row crops can have increased
loadings of silt, nutrient and in some cases,
pesticide to streams and lakes. Urbanized
areas can contribute runoff from streets and
siltation from road and building construction.
In this section, the land cover of watersheds
within the NGPAA are compared for the
amounts of cropland versus grassland or
forest that they contain. Cropland and pasture
coverages are separated from each other and
categorized as areas of intensive human use.
These areas are where humans have most
radically changed the landscape from the
original condition and these are areas where
one would expect aquatic systems to be
impacted. This is not to say that aquatic
systems in areas that are not cropland are not
under stress and that these areas are pristine;
they certainly are not. However, impacts are
generally greater from changing the land cover
as opposed to stressing the cover that is some
semblance of the original.
Key Findings
•Intensive human influence is greatest in the
eastern and northeastern portions of the
NGPAA, reflecting the greater concentrations
of cropland. It is least in west, southwest and
central portions of the NGPAA.
•Grassland cover is greatest in central South
Dakota, northeastern Wyoming, the Sand Hills
and northern and southeastern Montana.
•Forest coverage is greatest in the western
and southwestern margins of the NGPAA, as
well as the Black Hills.
Data Sources
Land coverages were provided by
Information in this section was provided by
CALMIT at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln
from AVHRR data at a resolution of about 1
square kilometer. The data was provided as
numerous coverages, including, sagebrush,
grassland (wheatgrass, grama, etc.), cropland
(wheat, com, etc.), dry cropland, ponderosa
pine forest and others. These were further
grouped into 10 categories by EPA Region VIII
and the cropland coverages were grouped
together for the intensive human influence
analysis.
Spatial Patterns
Both natural and human-caused changes
to the landscape can affect water quality and
aquatic systems. Natural events such as fires
or storms can add materials to aquatic
systems, and the type and amounts of
materials added depend on the nature of the
land cover. Changes humans make to the
landscape can be dramatic as well. Utilization
of grasslands by grazing can change the
runoff regimes and add materials to streams.
However, the most dramatic changes involve
large-scale replacement _ of the native
ecosystems with agricultural systems,
especially row crops. This section examines
the extent of some of these coverages to
highlight areas where intensive human
influence on the landscape has occurred. This
136
-------
Northern Great Plains Aquatic Assessment
will give an idea of where in the NGPAA the
aquatic systems may be most impacted as a
result of human activities. This assessment
does not mean to imply that areas not
highlighted are unimpacted. All of the NGPAA
has been affected by human use at one time
or another, this section looks at the relative
amounts of human influence throughout the
Northern Great Plains.
Intensive human influence on the
landscape is presented in Figure 3.4.1. Areas
of cropland, dry cropland and cropland/pasture
mixtures were added together to get a
percentage of human influence in each
watershed. Eastern North Dakota, eastern
South Dakota, northeastern Nebraska and
northeastern Montana are areas with greater
than 90% cropland in each watershed. Areas
of extensive cropland also exist throughout
much of North Dakota, central Nebraska and
western South Dakota. The North-central
Great Plains, Western Glaciated Plains, Red
River Valley, Northeastern Glaciated Plains
and Northern Glaciated Plains are the
ecosections with the greatest intensive human
influence in the NGPAA. In contrast,
northeastern Wyoming, central South Dakota,
the Sand Hills and northern and southeastern
Montana show less cropland and less
intensive human use. These areas match
closely the non-cropped grassland areas
depicted in Figure 3.4.2. Figure 3.4.3 presents
the watersheds with the greatest amount of
coniferous forest areas, with the western and
southwestern margins of the NGPAA, as well
as the Black Hills containing the greatest
amounts.
137
-------
Percent Human
Influence
0- 10
10-40
40-60
60-90
90-100
Figure 3.4.1 Intensive Human Influence in the NGPAA: Percentage of Cropland and Pastureland Coverages by Watershed
-------
Grassland
Percentage
0- JO
W-4O
40-60
60-90
90-100
Figure 3.4.2 Percentage of Grassland Coverages by Watershed
-------
Coniferous Forest
Percentage
0-10
10-25
25-50
>50
Figure 3.4.3 Percentage of Coniferous Forest Coverages by Watershed
-------
Water Laws and Restoration Programs
4.1 INTRODUCTION
Question 3 What laws, policies and
programs for the protection of water
quality, streams, wetlands and riparian
area are in place, and how do they affect
aquatic resources, other resources and
human uses within the Northern Great
Plains Assessment Area?
This chapter describes the various laws,
regulations and restoration programs in place
to protect water quality and aquatic species.
Section 4.2 focusses on laws. Highlighted are
the Clean Water Act, the Safe Drinking Water
Act and the Endangered Species Act
However, a number of federal and state laws
are discussed. Section 4^3 introduces the
numerous aquatic restoration programs such
as grants and incentives provided that affect
aquatic resources.
t
4.2 LAWS AND REGULATIONS
Introduction
This section summarizes the components
of the Clean Water Act, the Safe Drinking
Water Act and the Endangered Species Act
These are the three major pieces of federal
legislation available to protect aquatic
resources.
Clean Water Act
The Federal Water Pollution Control Act
(commonly referred to as the Clean Water Act)
was originally passed in 1948. That version
and subsequent versions until 1965 basically
only provided funds for building sewage
treatment plants and supporting efforts for
interstate cooperation. The 1965 Act directed
states to set water quality standards
establishing water quality goals for interstate
waters. The greatest change, however, came
with the reauthorization in 1972. This Act
made discharging of effluent to waters of the
United States a privilege, not a right, and a
permit was required to do so. It also made it
illegal to dredge or fill waters of the United
States without a permit. Prior to this, states
set water quality standards and dischargers
were expected to meet them, but a direct
responsibility of the dischargerforthe pollution
had to be proven. This was often very difficult
The 1972 Act set goals of restoring and
maintaining the biological, physical and
chemical integrity of the nation's waters and
no discharge of pollutants.
The Clean Water Act was reauthorized in
1977 and 1987. The 1987 reauthorization
added Section 319, a program to deal with
nonpoint source pollution. The following
sections describe the programs under the
Clean Water Act that deal with water quality
standards, point source pollution, nonpoint
source pollution and wetlands loss.
Water Quality Standards
Water quality standards consist of three
elements. The first, designated uses,
describes existing and/or potential uses of a
waterbody. Uses include recreation,
agriculture, drinking water supply and aquatic
life protection. The second element, water
quality criteria, are expressed as numeric
pollutant concentrations or narrative
requirements, that are designed to protect the
designated uses. The third element, an
antidegradation policy, maintains and protects
the existing water quality (where water quality
is better than minimally required by the water
quality criteria) and existing uses, whether or
not such uses have been designated.
States and tribes set water quality
141
-------
Chapter 4 - Water Laws and Restoration Programs
standards and are required to review their
standards even/ three years and revise them
if necessary. States and tribes adopt the
standards, which are submitted to the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for
approval. If the EPA disapproves a standard,
the changes necessary are communicated to
the state or tribe. If the state or tribe fails to
make the required changes, the EPA can
promulgate a federal standard to replace it.
There are several important uses for water
quality standards in the protection of the
nation's waters. These include calculating
permit limits for point source dischargers,
calculating total maximum daily . loads
(TMDLs), issuing water quality certifications for
actions affecting water quality and require a
federal license or permit, preparing various
reports that document current water quality
conditions and developing, revising and
implementing nonpoint source management
plans.
Point Source Control
Under Section 402 of the Clean Water Act,
the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) established an approach in
which dischargers to waters of the United
States must at a minimum meet established
technology-based effluent limitations. These
limitations are developed for different
categories of dischargers (mines, oil refineries,
domestic wastewater treatment plants, etc.)
and are based on best available technology.
For example, all sewage treatment plants need
to meet a certain limit for BOD, whereas mines
have to meet certain limits for different metals.
These limits were very successful in reducing
much of the pollution to U.S. .waters. '
However, a drawback was that technology-
based limits did not take into account the
waterbody receiving the discharge. These
limits did not necessarily match what was
necessary to protect aquatic life or drinking
water uses. Also, technology-based limits do
not exist for all potential pollutants. In the
1980s, the water quality-based permitting
approach was overlaid onto the technology.
based method, such that dischargers now
must meet technology-based limits for their
category and water quality based limits derived
from the water quality standards for the
waterbody, whichever is more stringent for a
given pollutant. Water quality-based limits are
derived from the water quality criteria for the
waterbody to which the point source is
discharging. There are additional complicating
factors in converting the water quality criteria
to permit limits, which include determining the
dilution flow in the stream, mixing zones that
may be used or any temporary modifications to
the criteria.
NPDES permits are typically issued for five
years in duration and in addition to the actual
limits for individual pollutants, permits include
monitoring and reporting requirements and
may include compliance schedules (for
construction of treatment facilities, etc.) to
meet the limits in the permit. Compliance
schedules only apply to water quality-based
limits; they no longer apply to the technology-
based limits because the time frames for
compliance, with these limits have passed.
Individual states or tribes may apply for and
receive the authority to administer the NPDES
program, thereby issuing the permits directly,
instead of EPA. Most states in the United
States now are authorized to administer the
NPDES program. There are some individual
components of the NPDES program that are
not delegated to all the states in the Northern
Great Plains Assessment Area, which will be
discussed, but all have the basic authority to
issue permits for direct dischargers to surface
waters. A discharger must apply to the state
(or EPA if non-delegated) for a permit, and
cannot discharge until one is received. To
discharge without a permit is a violation of the
Act.
142
-------
U.S. EPA Main Library
Mail Code C267-01
109 TW. Alexander Drive
Research Wangle Park, NC 27711
The NPDES program contains several
important programs within it in addition to the
individual discharger controls. These are
pretreatment, biosolids and storm water
programs. The pretreatment program controls
discharges from industrial facilities into the
wastewater treatment system of municipalities
through individual permits issued by the cities
to the industries. The pretreatment program
is run by EPA for all the states in the Northern
Great Plains, except South Dakota and
Nebraska. The biosolids program regulates
the disposal or land application of sewage
sludge from municipal wastewater treatment
plants. Presently, none of the states in the
Northern Great Plains have delegation to
administer this program. The storm water
program controls discharges to surface waters
from industrial facilities, construction sites and
larger cities as a result of storm water runoff.
Certain industrial facilities and construction
sites are permitted under large general
permits, but each state is responsible for the
program since it is considered part of the basic
NPDES permitting program. The general
permits contain requirements for developing a
storm water pollution prevention plan and
certain best management practices must be
employed, depending on the industry.
Currently, only cities with populations greater
than 100,000 need individual permits. At
present, there are no cities in the Northern
Great Plains that are required to have a permit
under the storm water program. However,
phase II of the stormwater program will have
lower population thresholds and will most likely
include some cities in the NGPAA.
Important point sources within the NGPAA
are municipal wastewater plants, oil wells and
refineries, coal mines and feedlots with more
than 1000 animal units. An animal unit is
equivalent to one beef cow and other animals
are set equal to this. For example, a confined
animal feeding operation consisting of hogs
would need 2500 animals to be regulated as a
Northern Great Plains Aquatic Assessment
point source. Operations with less than 1000
beef cattle or less than 2500 hogs are
considered to be nonpoint sources under the
Clean Water Act unless they are designated
as a point source due to a significant water
quality impairment Feedlots of eligible size
are required to contain runoff from the site up
to certain sized storms.
A distinction should be made for irrigation
return flows as well. Although many irrigation
returns may emanate from what would
normally be considered distinct point sources,
they are exempt from the definition of a point
source by Section 502(14) of the Clean Water
Act. Therefore, irrigation returns are not
required to have NPDES permits and are
considered nonpoint sources.
Additionally, some states have permitting
programs with respect to discharges to ground
water. For example, the South Dakota ground
water discharge permit program requires
permits when discharges are above ground
water quality standards and the program
includes three permits: a permit for
construction, a water quality variance (which
limits the area and quality of discharge) and
the discharge permit (South Dakota
Department of Environment and Natural
Resources, 1996).
Nonpoint Sources
The 1987 amendments to the Clean Water
Act added Section 319, a program designed to
address nonpoint source pollution. Nonpoint
source pollution is that which does not enter
surface waters through a discrete point source
or has been exempted from classification as a
point source (i.e., irrigation return flows).
Nonpoint source pollution can originate from a
broad area and can be from sources that are
intermittent (e.g. runoff from precipitation
events). Nonpoint source pollution originates
from atmospheric deposition, runoff from
143
-------
Chapter 4 - Water Laws and Restoration Programs
agricultural lands (crops, range), runoff from
land-disturbing activities, runoff from feedlots
with less than 1000 animal units, poorly
maintained on-site wastewater systems (septic
tanks), runoff from road construction and
maintenance, hydrologic modification and
removal of riparian vegetation, as well as
many other sources. Nonpoint source
pollution is much more difficult to control
because it is generally less visible and
methods that would be employed to control
point sources might not be effective (i.e.,
permits).
Nonpoint source pollution is a major threat
to the nation's waters. The 1994 Report to
Congress (305(b) Report) summarizing all the
states' assessment efforts for that two-year
cycle stated that 36% of streams and 37% of
lakes had impaired water quality. Of the
impaired streams, 60% of the impairment was
due to agriculture, the leading (but not only)
source of nonpoint source pollution (U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, 1995).
Agriculture was responsible for 50% of the
impairment of lakes in the country. Fully 22%
of all assessed streams in the nation are
impaired due to agriculture.
Section 319 required the states to identify
nonpoint source problems, develop nonpoint
source assessment reports, adopt nonpoint
source management programs to control
nonpoint sources and implement the
management programs over multiple years
(Council for Agricultural Science and
Technology, 1992). The EPA is authorized
under Section 319 to provide grants to states
and tribes to assist them in implementing their
programs. The programs are subject to
approval by EPA _and all states, including
those in the Northern Great Plains, have EPA-
approved programs. Approximately half of the
funding provided to the states by EPA each
year is available for statewide program activity
(staffing, outreach, etc.) and the other half is
for specific nonpoint source projects (Council
for Agricultural Science and Technology,
1992). The nonpoint source projects to be
funded within a state are chosen by state
nonpoint source task forces, which are
generally made up of representatives from
public agencies and private groups.
Tribes with approved nonpoint source
management programs are also eligible for
funding under Section 319. The nonpoint
source management plans should include, in
part, an emphasis on a watershed approach,
measures designed to remedy present
problems and prevent future problems, and
state identification of Federal lands which are
not managed consistently with state nonpoint
source objectives. Implementation of plans
should include a mix of regulatory programs,
non-regulatory programs and financial and
technical assistance. Improvements in water
quality affected by nonpoint sources are
acheived through the implementation of best
management practices (BMPs). These can be
structural and/or nonstructural techniques to
prevent or reduce the nonpoint source
pollution. Examples, among many, include
fencing or proper grazing sytems, sediment
basins, irrigation water management (sprinkler
systems, canal lining), grass buffer strips and
installation of culverts to prevent erosion
(Colorado Water Quality Control Division,
1990; State of Utah. 1995).
Wetlands Protection
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act
prohibits the discharge of dredged or fill
material into waters of the United States (e.g.,
rivers, lakes, streams, wetlands) without a
permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
The removal of material fs also regulated.
Dredged or fill material includes soil, sand,
gravel or other material. Wetlands are defined
by the Corps of Engineers and the
Environmental Protection Agency as "those
144
-------
Northern Great Plains Aquatic Assessment
areas that are inundated or saturated by
surface or groundwater at a frequency and
duration sufficient to support and that under
normal circumstances do support a prevalence
of vegetation typically adapted for life in
saturated soils."
Common types of activities that are
regulated include channel construction and
maintenance, transportation improvements,
construction of water resource projects (dams,
levees, etc.) and fills to create development
sites. Some activities that may destroy
wetlands such as drainage and groundwater
pumping may not be regulated because they
often do not involve discharging dredged or fill
material. Certain activities are exempt from
needing a permit. These include (among
others) normal farming or ranching of a
wetland area (does not involve filling it);
maintenance of damaged structures such as
bridge abutments, darns, levees, etc.;
construction or maintenance of farm or stock
ponds or irrigation ditches; and maintenance
(but not construction) of drainage ditches.'
Discharges of dredged or fill material can
be authorized by either an individual or general
permit issued by the Corps of Engineers or an
authorized state or tribe. No states ortirbes in
the Northern Great Plains are presently
authorized. Individual permits would apply to
a specific action. General permits can be
issued on state, regional or nationwide basis.
General permits must cover actions that are
similar in nature and will cause minimal
adverse environmental effects individually or
cumulatively. A permit for an action to
discharge dredged or fill material must be
denied if the action does not comply with the
Section 404(b)(1) guidelines. The guidelines .'
under this Section were developed by both the
EPA and the Corps of Engineers and contain
criteria used to evaluate the impacts of a
proposed action. The guidelines include
requirements that no discharge can be
permitted if there is a practicable alternative
with less adverse impact on the aquatic
environment and no discharge can be
permitted if it would violate other laws such as
state water quality standards or the
Endangered Species Act. In addition, under
Section 401 of the Clean Water Act, states
(and in some circumstances, EPA) can certify
that the action will comply with water quality
standards. The EPA does have the authority
under Section 404(c) to 'Veto" a permit if the
EPA finds that it will have unacceptable
adverse effects.
Enforcement of the 404 program is carried
out by both the EPA and the Corps of
Engineers. The Corps has the lead on
enforcement of violations of Corps-issued
permits and also a significant amount of
enforcement against unauthorized discharges.
The EPA focuses its enforcement efforts on
unpermitted discharges of dredged or fill
material.
States have an important role in the 404
program under Section 401 of the Clean
Water Act. The Corps cannot issue a 404
permit if the state denies certification that the
action will not violate the state's water quality
standards. This certification is necessary for
many other federal permits as well (including
EPA-issued NPDES permits).
Other Important Clean Water Act Provisions
Section 305(b) of the CWA requires states
to submit a report to Congress every two years
detailing the condition of the waters within that
state, whether they are meeting the
designated uses and what the causes and
sources of the impairment are. Causes of
impairment mean the individual parameters or
actions such as nutrients, metals, thermal
modifications or habitat alterations. Sources
of impairment include things such as
rangeland, municipal point sources or resource
145
-------
Chapter 4 - Water Laws and Restoration Programs
i,
extraction.
Section 303(d) requires that every two
• years that states send the EPA a list of every
impaired waterbody. Impaired waterbodies are
those that do not meet designated uses.
Additionally, states must list impaired
waterbodies for which a total maximum daily
load (TMDL) will be performed. TMDLs are the
total load of a particular pollutant that a stream
or lake can assimilate from all sources and not
exceed water quality standards. The TMDL
process analyzes what the loading of a
particular pollutant is from point and nonpoint
sources and partitions what is allowed to be
contributed from both. This has a direct effect
on the NPDES permits for the stream or lake
where a TMDL has been done, in that it may
set the limits for that pollutant lowerthan might
otherwise be calculated through a straight
dilution calculation. This may happen because
other sources (both point and nonpoint) are
also contributing and using up part of the
capacity of the waterbody to assimilate
pollutants. In addition, for many TMDLs
involving nonpoint sources, stream and
riparian condition information are needed.
Safe Drinking Water Act
The Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) was
first passed in 1974, and most recently
reauthorized in 1996. It regulates the quality
and protects supplies of drinking water, both
surface and ground water. It requires the EPA
to set Maximum Contaminant Level Goals
(MCLGs) forpublicwatersystems (notstreams
or lakes) and either Maximum Contaminant
Levels or specific treatment techniques for the
specific contaminants. MCLGs are
nonenforceable goals set at the level where no '„.
known or anticipated adverse effects on the
health of persons occur. MCLs are to be set
as close to the MCLG as is feasible
considering the best technology available with
an allowance to consider costs. Treatment
techniques are set only if it is not feasible to
determine the level of a contaminant in
drinking water.
SDWA also requires the preparation of
Wellhead Protection Programs by each state
to protect public water supply wells from
contamination (Council for Agricultural Science
and Technology, 1992). The Wellhead
Protection Programs must include the
following components: delineation of Wellhead
Protection areas, source identification,
description of management approaches,
contingency plans and site controls for new
wells (Council for Agricultural Science and
Technology, 1992). South Dakota's wellhead
protection program was approved by the EPA
in 1992, although most efforts to date have
been in the Big Sioux Aquifer area which is
outside of the NGPAA (South Dakota
Department of Environment and Natural
Resources, 1996). Montana's program was
submitted in 1993. North Dakota's program
was approved by EPA in 1992 and as of 1994
there were 72 public water systems
participating in the wellhead protection
program, which is 25% of systems in the state
and 40% of the population served by systems
using groundwater (North Dakota Department
of Health, 1994).
The Underground Injection Control
Program (U 1C) is another important component
of the Safe Drinking Water Act. The Act
requires states to develop a UIC program to
prevent contamination of underground drinking
water supplies by injection wells (Council for
Agricultural Science and Technology, 1992).
There are five categories of wells, which are
listed below (from Pettyjohn, et al. 1991):
Class I - used to inject hazardous and non-
hazardous waste beneath the lowermost
formation containing an underground
source of drinking water.
146
-------
'Northern Great Plains Aquatic Assessment
Class II - used to inject brine from oil and
gas production.
Class III - used in conjunction with solution
mining of minerals.
Class IV - used to inject hazardous or
radioactive wastes into or above an
underground source of drinking water
(banned nationally).
Class V - none of the above but which
typically inject non-hazardous waste into or
above an underground source of drinking
water (also known as shallow injection
wells).
Class V wells include agricultural drainage
wells receiving such inflows as field drainage,
irrigation return flow and feedlot waste
(Council for Agricultural Science and
Technology, 1992). Class V wells can be
authorized to operate if their existence was
reported to the states or the EPA with the
specified time and they do not cause the
violation of an MCL in an underground drinking
water source. Septic systems fall under this
authority as well, however, those that serve
single-family residences and those that are
used only for sanitary waste and the capacity
to serve 20 people or less are exempt.
The South Dakota UIC program presently
regulates the underground injection of oil and
gas wastes and has applied for the authority to
regulate in situ mining and Class V wells
(South Dakota Department of Environment
and Natural Resources, 1996). South Dakota
does presently have minimum construction
requirements for septic systems (South Dakota
Department of Environment and Natural
Resources, 1996). Jhe North Dakotaprogram
has permitted three Class I wells and with 75%
of the state surveyed, there were 613 Class V
wells in 1994, which are permitted by rule in
North Dakota (North Dakota Department of
Health, 1994).
The Underground Storage Tank (UST) and
Leaking Underground Storage Tank (LUST)
programs protect ground and surface water by
remediating leaking underground storage
tanks and establishing standards for new
tanks. South Dakota was granted the UST
program in 1995 and regulations include tank
notification, performance standards,
requirements for new UST systems, financial
responsibility, upgrading of existing systems,
release detection, reporting of spills and
closure (South Dakota Department of
Environment and Natural Resources, 1996).
South Dakota also has Leaking Underground
Storage Tank trust fund for identifying parties
responsible for contamination and for cleanup
when these parties cannot be found and a
Petroleum Release Compensation Fund to
help smaller tank owners with the costs of
cleanup (South Dakota Department of
Environment and Natural Resources, 1996).
Wyoming has applied for primacy of the UST
program and has similar requirements as
South Dakota including a tax on mineral
royalties to help pay for cleanups (Wyoming
Department of Environmental Quality, 1996).
Endangered Species Act
The earliest version of the Endangered
Species Act was passed in 1966. It allowed
listing of species as endangered and directed
the Departments of Interior, Agriculture and
Defense to seek to protect listed species and
attempt to preserve their habitats. The
reauthorization of 1969 added the ability to list
foreign species and prohibit their importation.
However, it was the Endangered Species Act
of 1973 that significantly changed how
endangered species would be protected in the
United States. The 1973 Act stated its
purposes as providing "a means whereby the
ecosystems upon which endangered species
depend may be conserved..." and "...to provide
a program for the conservation of such
species...".
147
-------
Chapter 4 - Water Laws and Restoration Programs
\\
The Act (and its subsequent amendments
in 1978,1982 and 1988) defined categories of
endangered and threatened. It included plants
and invertebrates, along with vertebrates as
being eligible for protection. It defines species
as any species, subspecies, or variety of plant
or species, subspecies or population of animal.
It allowed for the designation of experimental
populations of a species that could be subject
to lesser restrictions.
The criteria for listing a species includes
present or threatened destruction of habitat;
overutilization by commercial, recreational,
scientific or educational purposes; disease or
predation; or inadequacy of existing regulatory
mechanisms or other natural or man-made
factors affecting its continued existence. The
Act under Section 9 prohibits the taking of an
endangered animal species by anyone and
recent court cases have reaffirmed that
destruction of habitat is a take, not just direct
harm to the species. Section 4 requires critical
habitat to be designated concurrently (when
prudent) with the listing of a species and
economic factors are required to be
considered when designating critical habitat.
Economics is not to be taken into account
when listing. Anyone can petition the U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) to add or
remove a species from the list The FWS has
90 days to decide whether more information is
needed, whether the listing may be warranted
and 1 year to make its finding. Previously,
there were three categories of candidate
species for listing. This has been reduced to
one, which is a list of those where substantial
information exists to support listing. The
former category 2 species are no longer listed
(those for whom information existed indicating
listing may be appropriate, but further ,
information was needed).
Section 7 of the Act requires all federal
agencies to undertake programs for the
conservation of endangered and threatened
species and prohibits them from authorizing,
funding or carrying out any action that would
jeopardize a listed species or modify its critical
habitat. An amendment in 1978, however,
allowed a cabinet-level committee to convene
and elect to allow a federal agency to
undertake an action that would jeopardize a
species. If an action by a federal agency may
affect a listed species, it is required to consult
with the U(.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The
federal agency provides information to the
FWS on whether it believes the action will
jeopardize the species or adversely modify its
habitat The FWS issues an opinion on
whether the action will jeopardize the species.
In determining jeopardy, the FWS first looks at
the present status of the species, and then
adds to this baseline the effects of the
proposed federal action, along with cumulative
effects such as state and private actions
reasonably certain to occur. The FWS
identifies reasonable and prudent alternatives
that can be implemented which would avoid
jeopardy. An incidental take permit is issued
with the Biological Opinion to allow some
taking of individuals or habitat along with
reasonable and prudent measures necessary
to reduce the amount of incidental take.
Section 4 contains the requirements for
recovery plans. A recovery plan outlines the
major recovery actions that will be needed for
the species.
Several states within the NGPAA have
state endangered species laws. Nebraska has
probably the most comprehensive in that il
covers both animals and plants, recovery
plans and state agency consultation is
required and critical habitat designation is
authorized (Center for Wildlife Law, 1996).
Montana's act covers only animals, but
recovery plans are required; state agency
consultation and critical habitat designation is
not required. South Dakota's act covers both
plants and animals, but has no requirement foi
148
-------
Northern Great Plains Aquatic Assessment
recovery plans, consultation, or critical habitat
North Dakota and Wyoming do not have state
endangered species acts, although
management programs for endangered
species are authorized under separate
statutes in North Dakota (Center for Wildlife
Law, 1996).
Other Laws
Table 4.2.1 lists other federal and state
laws that have some impact on protection of
water quality and aquatic habitat and
describes the section(s) that relate to that
issue.
There are otherwetiand protection statutes
besides the Clean Water Act that are worth
mentioning such as the Emergency Wetland
Acquisition Act, the Farm Bills of 1985, 1990
and 1996 and Title IV of the Tax Reform Act of
1986 (Leitch and Baltezore, 1992). The
Emergency Wetland Acquisition Act requires
states to include wetland priority plans in their
state comprehensive outdoor recreation plans.
The Food Security Act of 1985 (and changes
in 1990 and 1996), referred to as
Swampbuster, discourages wetland
conversion for agricultural purposes by
denying farm program benefits, such as
deficiency payments, Commodity Credit loans,
and federal crop insurance, on all land the
farmer manages if the operator converts any
wetland on that land. This threat of ineligibility,
when there are low crop prices, makes this act
effective in limiting wetland damage; it loses its
effectiveness to protect wetlands as crop
prices rise. There are about 7.5 million acres
of wetlands in the Northern Great Plains
subject to the Food Security Act regulations
(U.S. Natural Resources Conservation
Service, 1996). The Tax Reform Act of 1986
removed the ability to deduct drainage
expenses of wetland drainage costs not in
compliance with the swampbuster provision
and the gains on the sales of converted
wetlands are treated as income rather than
capital gains, which are taxed at a lower rate.
The Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and
Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) is another law which
has some important provisions relating to the
protection of aquatic systems. Under FIFRA,
the EPA can require labeling to inform the
pesticide applicator that the pesticide must be
used in a manner that prevents water supply
contamination (Council for Agricultural Science
and Technology, 1992). In addition, the EPA
may restrict, cancel, ortemporarily suspend all
or some pesticide uses that pose
unreasonable risks to human health or the
environment through contamination of water
supplies. The EPA can also require states to
develop chemical-specific state management
plans for particular pesticides as a condition
for continued use of that pesticide (Council for
Agricultural Science and Technology, 1992).
4.3 AQUATIC RESTORATION
PROGRAMS
This section describes the various federal
funding sources available to restore or protect
aquatic resources. All of these are
nonregulatory and are available through a
number of federal agencies such as the Forest
Service, the Natural Resources Conservation
Service, the Environmental Protection Agency,
the Fish and Wildlife Service, the National
Park Service and the Corps of Engineers to
name a few. Much of this information was
obtained from the following sources: U.S.
General Accounting Office (1996), U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (1997b),
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (1997c)
and U.S. Department of Agriculture (1996).
149
-------
Table 4.2.1 A Summary or omer Statutes mat nave included provisions for the protection or maintenance of water quality, aquatic
habitat or aquatic species. .
Name ~ Purpose with respect to water quality and responsible agency
Water.Resources Planning Act
Rivers and Harbor Act
Wild and Scenic Rivers Act
Executive Order 11190 (Wetlands)
••*"-
Migratory Bird Conservation Act
Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act
Fish and Wildlife Act
National Environmental Policy Act
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
Federal, Insecticide, Fungicide and
Rodenticide Act
Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation and Liability Act
Clean Air Act
Executive Orders for wetland and
federal floodplain management
prepares regional or river basin plans to conserve, develop and use water
(Water Resources Council and OMB)
governs dumping of water into, and the excavation of, navigable waterways
(COE)
preserves rivers and their riparian areas of special recreational and aesthetic
value
governs conservation and use of salty and freshwater wetlands (DOI)
governs conservation of migratory waterfowl and fisheries (FWS)
disclosure of environmental effects of federal projects (responsible federal
agency)
hazardous waste control (EPA, states)
pesticides, registration (EPA, states)
superfund cleanups of abandoned waste sites (EPA)
i
atmospheric deposition - acid precipitation, toxics (EPA, states)
requires wetland and floodplain values to be considered during planning of
actions
-------
Table 4.2.1 (cont.) A Summary of Statutes that have included provisions for the protection or maintenance of water quality, aquatic
habitat or aquatic species. .
Name
Purpose with respect to water quality and responsible agency
National Forest Management Act
Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act
Soil and Water Resources Conservation Act
Toxic Substances Control Act
Federal Land Policy and Management Act
Wilderness Act
National Parks and Recreation Act
Executive Order 1014
Executive Order 11644
Surface Mining and Reclamation Act
Examples of State Statutes:
North Dakota No-Net Loss
SDCL 34A-2 South Dakota General Water
Pollution Control Statute
National Forest System lands planning (USFS)
reclamation of mined areas, mainly coal mine reclamation (OSM)
i
requires the identification and evaluation of alternative methods for
conservation, protection and enhancement of soil and water resources
requires testing of existing chemicals for toxicity (EPA)
planning for BLM lands (POI)
prohibits roads and vehicles in National Wilderness Preservation System
(USFS, DOI)
sets aside national parks (DOI)
t
establishes National Wildlife Refuges (DOI)
controls use of off-road vehicles in public lands
surface mine reclamation for coal mines (DOI)
protects wetlands in watersheds greater than 80 acres,
gives South Dakota the authority to regulate pollution, monitoring and
cleanup of state waters, this includes ground water and above and
underground storage tanks
-------
Chapter 4 - Water Laws and Restoration Programs
Department of Agriculture
Cooperative State Research. Education and
Extension Service
National Research Competitive Grants
Program supports research on key problems
of national and regional importance in
biological, environmental, physical and social
sciences relevant to agriculture and food and
the environment, including water resources
assessment and protection. This program was
authorized by Section 2(b) of the Act of August
4, 1965, Public Law No. 89-106.
Sustainable Agriculture Research and
Education Program, among other goals,
supports investigations and education in the
use of pesticides and fertilizers in agriculture.
Grants are to universities, agriculture
experiment stations, nonprofit organizations or
federal or state governments.
Farm Service Agency
Environmental Quality Incentives Program
establishes conservation priority areas to deal
with water, soil, and related natural resource
problems. It establishes five to ten year
contracts to provide technical assistance and
pay up to 75% of the costs of conservation
practices, but is limited to $50,000 per
contract. EQIP was authorized by the 1996
Farm Bill which provided for $200 million
annual funding.
Conservation Reserve Program was
authorized under the 1985, 1990 and 1996
Farm Bills. Its purpose is to improve soil and
water quality by reducing soil erosion and
sedimentation and establish wildlife habitat by ,
providing direct cost-share payments, annual
rental payments and technical support. Cost-
share payments are limited to up to 50% of the
cost to establish groundcover for erosion-
reduction purposes. A total of up to 36.4
million acres are allowed to be enrolled at any
one time.
Farm Debt Cancellation Conservation
Program was authorized by 1985 Farm Bill
(Food Security Act). Its purpose is to protect
marginal and sensitive lands under federal
farm loans by buying easements for
conservation, recreation, and wildlife
purposes. Program participants are given debt
cancellation on outstanding loan balances in
exchange for conservation measures. The
1996 Farm Bill took away easements and
authorized the entering into of contracts for
these measures.
Wildlife Habitat Incentives Program provides
for $50 million to be cost-shared with
landowners for developing habitat for upland
wildlife, wetland wildlife, endangered species,
fisheries and other wildlife.
Forest Service
Stewardship Incentive Program was
authorized by the 1990 Farm Bill with the
purpose of encouraging private landowners to
manage their forest land in ways that improve
water quality, including tree planting and the
implementation of BMPs for stream crossings
and streamside management. Assistance is
provided in direct payments, technical support
and education. The federal cost-share cannot
exceed 75% of the total cost.
Natural Resources Conservation Service
Emergency Wetland Reserve Program was
authorized by the 1990 Farm Bill and
Emergency Supplemental Appropriation Ads
of 1993 and 1994. Its purpose is to protect
and restore wetlands affected by the 1993
Midwestern flood through acquisition of
easements and provision of technical and
restoration cost-share assistance. The
assistance is provided in direct payments at
152
-------
Northern Great Plains Aquatic Assessment
fair market agricultural land values for
permanent easements and 30-year
easements, payments for restoration costs of
100 percent for permanent easements and
50% for 30-year easements
River Basin Surveys and Investigations
provides planning assistance to federal, state
and local agencies for the development of
coordinated water and related land resources
programs, with priority given to solving
upstream flooding of rural communities,
improving the quality of water emanating from
agricultural nonpoint sources, wetland
preservation, drought management for
agriculture and rural communities, and
assisting state agencies in developing
strategic water resource plans. Assistance is
provided as studies, monitoring and technical
support, It was authorized by the Watershed
Protection and Flood Prevention Act, PL 83-
566.
Rural Abandoned Mine Program was
authorized by the Surface Mining Control and
Reclamation Act of 1977, Section 406, PL 95-
87. Its purpose is to protect people and the
environment from the adverse effects of past
coal mining practices and to promote the
development of soil and water resources of
unreclaimed mined lands. Assistance is
provided in direct payments of up to 100% in
cost-share funds for conservation practices
determined to be needed for reclamation,
conservation, and development of up to 320
acres per owner of rural abandoned coal mine
land and waters affected by coal mining
activities.
Soil and Water Conservation Program was
authorized by the. Soil Conservation and
Domestic Allotment Act of 1936. Its purpose is
to plan and carry out a national resource
conservation program and to provide
•leadership in the conservation and use of the
nation's soil, water and related resources.
Assistance is provided in the form of technical
soil and water conservation resource
assistance to state and local governments and
advisory and counseling services to the
general public in order to promote total
resource planning and management, improve
water quality and natural resources, and
reduce point and nonpoint source pollution.
Watershed Protection and Flood Prevention
(Small Watershed Program) provides technical
and financial assistance to state agencies and
units of local government in planning and
carrying out projects to protect, develop and
utilize the land and water resources in small
watersheds. This includes total resource
management and planning to improve water
quality and solve problems caused by flooding,
erosion, and sediment damage, conservation,
development, utilization and disposal of water.
Assistance is provided in studies, monitoring,
loans, cost-share grants, and technical
assistance for the installation of land treatment
measures. The cost-share rates depend on the
type of measure, structural or nonstructural.
Up to 100% is provided for construction costs
for structural measures with flood prevention
purposes, up to 50% for structural measures
with other purposes and up to 75% for
installation cost for nonstructural measures.
This program was authorized by PL 83-566.
Wetlands Reserve Program was authorized by
the 1990 Farm Bill. Its purpose is to protect
and restore wetlands through acquisition of
easements and provision of technical and
restoration cost-share assistance. Assistance
is provided by direct payments at fair market
values for permanent easements and 30-year
easements, payments for restoration costs of
100% for permanent easements and 50 to 75
percent for 30-year easements. The program
has an enrollment cap of 975,000 acres.
153
-------
Chapter 4 - Water Laws and Restoration Programs
Rural Utilities Service
Water and Waste Disposal Systems for Rural
Communities was authorized by the
Consolidated Farm and Rural Development
Act It finances new and improved rural water
and waste disposal facilities through direct
loans, loan guarantees and grants to construct
or improve drinking water, sanitary sewer, solid
waste and storm drainage facilities. The loans
are made for useful life of the facilities, 40
years or state law limitation, whichever is
shorter. Grants cannot exceed 75% of project
costs.
Department of Defense
Army Corps of Engineers
Flood Plain Management Services provides
information and data on floods and actions to
reduce flood damage potentials, encourage
prudent use of the nation's flobdplains and
support comprehensive flood plain
management. Assistance is provided in the
form of studies and technical support. This
program was authorized by the Flood Control
Act of 1960, Section 206.
Planning Assistance to States was authorized
by the Water Resource Development Act of
1974. Its purpose is to cooperate with states
and tribes in the preparation of plans for the
development, utilization and conservation of
water and related land resources within their
respective boundaries by providing studies
and technical support.
Department of the Interior
Geological Survey -
National Water Quality Assessment (NA WQA)
Program's role is to assess the conditions and
trends in quality of ground and surface water.
The program consists of 59 study units in the
United States. These include the Red River,
Central Nebraska, North Platte River, Belle
Fourche/Cheyenne Rivers and the
Yellowstone/Powder Rivers in the Northern
Great Plains.
Bureau of Reclamation
Irrigation Drainage Program. This is an
initiative begun in 1986 with the purpose of
developing coordinated remediation plans and
implement corrective actions where irrigation
drainage has affected endangered species,
migratory birds and/or has caused water
quality problems.
General Investigations Program. This was
authorized by the Reclamation Act of 1902, PL
89-72 and PL 102-575. Its purpose is to
conduct studies to meet current and future
water quality, quantity and environmental
needs through the management of water
supplies by structural and nonstructural
means. Assistance is provided in technical
assistance to states and feasibility studies
which require 50% cost-sharing from a
nonfederal entity.
Water Treatment Technology Program works
with the .private sector and academic
institutions to reduce the cost of water
treatment and desalting technology in order to
improve water supply. Assistance is provided
in studies, monitoring and technical support
It was authorized by PL 57-161, 96-480 and
98-502.
National Park Service
Rivers, Trails and Conservation Assistance
Program authorized by the Wild and Scenic
Rivers Act, National Trails Act and the Outdoor
Recreation Act. Its purpose is to advocate and
assist community-based conservation action,
including river restoration and water quality
enhancement. Assistance is provided in the
154
-------
Northern Great Plains Aquatic Assessment
form of short-term planning, including studies
and technical assistance forthe assessment of
resources, identification of land protection
• strategies and organizational development.
No federal funding is provided.
Fish and Wildlife Service
National Wetlands Inventory (NWI)
coordinates the gathering, analysis,
dissemination and evaluation of information
regarding the location, quantity and ecological
importance of wetlands (EPA, 1997b).
Contaminants Identification and Assessment
was authorized by the Migratory Bird
Conservation Act, the Federal Water Pollution
Control Act, the Endangered Species Act, and
the Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation and Liability Act (Superfund).
Its purpose is to identify and assess the effects
of contaminants on Fish and Wildlife Service
lands, Trust Resources and other biological
resources on and off Fish and Wildlife Service
lands using short- and medium-duration
studies of contaminant exposure and effect.
Contaminants Prevention was authorized by
the same laws as the previous one. Its
purpose is to prevent the adverse effects of
contaminants to Trust resources using
technical support. No federal funding is
provided.
Natural Resource Damage Assessments were
authorized by same laws as the previous two.
Their purpose is to provide funding for the
assessment of damage to water quality and
Trust resources from oil spills and/or other
hazardous substance releases, so that the
restoration or replacement of these injured
resources are paid for by responsible parties.
Assistance is provided in the form of on-the-
ground restoration activities paid for with
damages collected from polluters.
Sport Fish Restoration/Pumpout Station
Grants were authorized by the Clean Vessel
Act of 1992 with the purpose of providing
financial assistance to support state projects
for the construction, renovation, operation,
maintenance of pumpout and/or dump stations
for sewage waste from recreational vessels.
Assistance is provided in the form of grants
and education.
Habitat Conservation Project Planning was
authorized by the Fish and Wildlife
Coordination Act, the Federal Water Pollution
Control Act and the Federal Power Act. Its
purpose is to pursue opportunities and
cooperative efforts with other government
agencies and private partnerships to protect,
restore and enhance fish and wildlife habitats;
provide technical assistance to the private
sector to maximize wildlife conservation in
wetlands, associated uplands and riparian
areas; and advocate conservation and
enhancement of fish and wildlife resources
and habitats that may be affected by energy
and water resource development. Assistance
provided is technical assistance and advanced
planning/consultation services.
North American Waterfowl Management Plan
was authorized by the North American
Wetlands Conservation Act of 1989. Its
purpose is to support a strategy for
cooperative public/private wetland habitat
conservation that will reverse the decline in
waterfowl and other wildlife species in the US,
Canada and Mexico. Assistance is provided in
the form of grants. Public and private partners
must contribute an equal amount to what they
receive.
Cooperative Endangered. Species
Conservation Fund-Grants to States provides
assistance to states for the development of
programs to conserve threatened and
endangered species. States can receive up to
75% of the program costs. This was
155
-------
Chapter 4 - Water Laws and Restoration Programs
authorized by the Endangered Species Act.
Partners for Wildlife Habitat Restoration
Program provides financial and technical
assistance to private landowners to restore
habitat such as wetlands, riparian areas, and
native grasslands. Federal monies make up
no more than 60%. This program was
authorized by the Fish and Wildlife Act of 1956
and the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act.
North Dakota Wildlife Extension Program -
This program is designed to enhance
waterfowl production on private lands in North
Dakota through contracts for wetland
restoration and creation projects on land
adjacent to CRP land.
Bureau of Indian Affairs
Fish, Wildlife and Parks Programs on Indian
Lands promotes the conservation,
development and utilization offish, wildlife and
recreational resources for Indian Tribes.
Assistance is in the form of direct payments.
The Indian Self-Determination and Education
Assistance Act authorized this program.
Water Resources on Indian Lands Program
assists Tribes with water resource projects and
the associated planning. Assistance is in the
form of direct payments. The Indian Self-
Determination and Education Assistance Act
authorized this program.
Department of Transportation
Wetland Mitigation was authorized by the
Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency
Act (ISTEA) of 1991. Its purpose is to ensure
that improvements developed for the.surface
transportation system do not adversely affect
wetlands through grants, technical support,
research and education.
Stormwater Mitigation was also authorized by
ISTEA with the purpose of improving and
protecting water quality from the potential
adverse effects of nonpoint source
discharges/stormwater runoff from highway
and transit facilities. Assistance is provided
with, grants, technical support, research and
education.
Environmental Protection Agency
Indian General Assistance Program Grants
were authorized by the Indian Environmental
General Assistance Program Act of 1992. The
purpose is to provide general assistance
grants and technical assistance to Indian tribal
governments and intertribal consortia to
develop and build capacity to administer
regulatory and multimedia environmental
programs on Indian lands. Assistance is
provided in the form of grants, studies,
monitoring, technical support, research, and
training to support environmental program
development and capacity building.
Indian Set-Aside WastewaterTreatmentGrant
Program was authorized by section 518(c) of
the Clean Water Act with the purpose of
assisting Indian tribes in planning, designing
and building wastewater treatment systems.
Assistance is provided with grants and
technical support. This program pays up to
100% of the costs.
Nonpoint Source Implementation Grants,
authorized by section 319(h) of the Clean
Water Act, assist states in implementing
agency-approved section 319 statewide
nonpoint source management programs.
Assistance is provided in the form of grants. A
nonfederal match of .at least 40 percent of
project or program costs is required, except for
tribes which may on a case-by-case basis
receive approval for a lesser match.
Public Water Systems Supervision assists
states and tribes in implementing National
156
-------
Northern Great Plains Aquatic Assessment
Primary Drinking Water Regulations.
Assistance is provided in grants to states and
tribes with primary enforcement authority for
the National Primary Drinking Water
Regulations. Federal assistance is limited to
75% of eligible costs. This grant program was
authorized by the Safe Drinking Water Act
Research, Special Studies Demonstrations,
Technical Assistance and Training authorized
by the Safe Drinking Water Act, develops or
expands the capabilities of state and municipal
programs to protect groundwater sources of
public water systems from contamination;
provide technical assistance to small public
water systems to achieve and maintain
compliance with National Drinking Water
Regulations. Assistance is provided in grants,
studies, technical support, research and
education.
Small Community Wastewater and Technical
Assistance and Outreach Program, authorized
by the Clean Water Act, provides on-sjte
assistance to small communities with
wastewater treatment facility operating
problems. Assistance is provided in the form
of grants.
State Revolving Funds Capitalization Grants,
authorized by the Clean Water Act, provides a
long-term source of financing to the states for
the construction of wastewater treatment
facilities and the implementation of other water
quality management activities. Assistance
provided is in the form of grants to states and
loans to local communities, intermunicipal and
interstate agencies and Indian Tribes.
Underground Injection Control Grants were
authorized by the Safe Drinking Water Act with ',.
the purpose of assisting states and tribes in
assuming the primary role in implementing and
enforcing UIC regulations. Assistance is
provided by grants to states and tribes with
primacy. Federal assistance to states is
limited to 75%.
Water Pollution Control - State and Interstate
Program Support, authorized by section 106 of
the Clean Water Act assists states, territories,
interstate agencies and qualified tribes in
establishing and maintaining adequate
measures for prevention and control of surface
water and ground water pollution. Assistance
is provided in the form of grants. Funds
cannot be used for construction, operation, or
maintenance of wastewater treatment plants.
Water Quality Grants were authorized by
section 104(b)(3) of the Clean Water Act.
Their purpose is to stimulate the creation of
unique and new approaches to meeting
stormwater, sludge, pretreatment, point source
control requirements. Assistance is provided
by grants to states, tribes, organizations and
individuals.
Wetlands Protection - State Development
Grants were authorized by the Clean Water
Act, with the purpose of encouraging the
development of state and tribal wetland
protection programs or to enhance those that
already exist. Assistance is provided in grants
and technical assistance. Funds must be used
for the development, not operation, of a
program and states and tribes must provide at
least a 25% match.
Advance Identification of Wetlands is
conducted by the EPA and the Corps of
Engineers with state and local involvement for
wetland areas that have important values and
are under pressure from development. The
result is a designation of areas as suitable or
unsuitable for use as a discharge site and an
anticipatory method of protecting the most
valuable areas.
Clean Lakes Program, authorized by Section
314 of the Clean Water Act, is a grant program
to provide assistance to States for restoration
157
-------
Chapter 4 • Water Laws and Restoration Programs
of publicly-owned lakes. It has not been
funded since Fiscal Year 1994.
Community-BasedEnvironmentalProtections
an EPA approach to manage the quality of air,
water, land and living resources in a place as
a whole while working with numerous partners,
including the local community (EPA, 1997b).
EPA's role varies in each area.
Sole Source Aquifer Protection is authorized
under Section 1424(e) of the Safe Drinking
Water Act of 1986.
Source Water Protection is a community-
based approach to protecting sources of
drinking water from contamination (EPA,
1997b).
Wellhead Protection Program protects
groundwater sources of drinking water from
contamination. The recharge area is
delineated, nonpoint sources of pollution
are identified and the community is informed
and implements solutions (EPA, 1997b).
State of North Dakota
Environmental Easement Program - This
program is designed to ensure long-term
protection of environmentally sensitive land.
Eligible land includes riparian corridors, CRP
land coming out of retirement and critical
wildlife habitat for threatened and endangered
species. Land is protected using permanent or
maximum duration easements.
North Dakota Habitat Stamp and Interest
Money Programs - These programs provide 25
to 35 percent cost-sharing for wetlands
restored or developed under the Agricultural
Conservation Program or CRP. At least
21,000 acres have been restored or enhanced
in North Dakota through this program.
158
-------
Impacts of Human Activities
5.1 INTRODUCTION
Question 4 What are the current and
potential effects on aquatic resources
from various human activities?
The impacts to water quality, aquatic
species and aquatic habitats from human
activities is examined in this chapter. These
include human population described in section
5.2, hydrologic modifications such as dams,
diversions and channelization described in
section 5.3, effects from point source
dischargers such as cities and industries and
nonpoint source effects such as runoff from
cropland (section 5.4). Included as well are
sections summarizing impacts to ground water
(5.5) and aquatic species (5.6).
5.2 HUMAN POPULATION
Introduction
V
An overall indicator of impacts, though not
necessarily directly, is human population.
Human population throughout the NGPAA is
generally low, with no cities having a
population greater than 85,000. However,
where population is concentrated, greater and
different impacts can occur. This parameter is
discussed up front due to the varying impacts
population may have on aquatic systems.
Key Findings
•Human population in the NGPAA is mainly
centered around a number of cities (Billings,
Fargo, Bismarck, Rapid City, Casper, etc).
Much of the area has a low population density.
•Human population growth is occurring fastest
in counties with the larger cities, the area
surrounding the Black Hills, southern Montana,
northeastern Wyoming and in a number of
Indian Reservations.
Data Sources
This information was obtained from U.S.
Census Bureau data estimates for 1995 and
changes in population was determined by
comparing the 1980 Census figures and the
1995 estimates.
Spatial Patterns
Figure 5.2.1 shows the distribution of
population in the Northern Great Plains. The
counties with the largest population
correspond to the largest cities such as
Yellowstone County, Billings, MT; Cascade
County, Great Falls, MT; Pennington County,
Rapid City, SD; Natrona County, Casper, WY;
Cass County, Fargo, ND; Grand Forks County,
Grand Forks, ND; Burleigh County, Bismarck,
ND and Ward County, Minot, ND. All of these
counties have more than 50,000 people. Also
important in gauging impacts and trends are
the changes in population (Figure 5.2.2). The
population changes between 1980 and 1995
from Census Bureau data are shown. Most of
the counties in the Northern Great Plains are
losing population. The counties that are
gaining are those with most of the larger cities
and those in or close to Indian Reservations.
The largest percentage increases are in Cass
and Burleigh Counties, ND; Pennington, Todd
and Lawrence Counties, SD; Campbell
County, WY; and Glacier, Lewis and Clark,
Stillwater and Yellowstone Counties, MT.
Change with regard to where people move
effects the aquatic environment in a number of
ways. Population increases in a certain area
cam mean more development and therefore
changes to the hydrologic regime of local
streams, non point source pollution, more
stormwater runoff, larger loadings to municipal
treatment plants and sometimes an increase in
the number of point sources (separate
municipal discharges, new industrial
discharges).
159
-------
Total Population
440-10000
10001 • 25000
25001 - 50000
50001 - 125000
Figure 5.2.1 Total Population Per County in the Northern Great Plains
-------
Percent Change
in Population
Figure 5.2.2 Percentage Change in Population by County from 1980 to 1995
-------
Chapter 5 - Impacts of Human Activities
5.3 HYDROLOGIC EFFECTS
Introduction
Hydrologic and aquatic habitat
modifications occur throughout the Northern
Great Plains under many different
circumstances, especially in areas with
cropland (irrigated and non-irrigated), livestock
grazing, flood control and development.
Discussed in this section are modifications
to both the habitat in and around waterbodies
and modifications to flow. These include the
removal of streamside vegetation, excavation
of streambed material, alteration of the natural
drainage pattern by development activities,
channelization, dewatering and damming (U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, 1995).
Removal of streamside vegetation increases
erosion and destabilization of banks since
roots are important in holding soil in place.
The removal of vegetation also causes
stream temperatures to increase due to loss of
shade. Temperature increases can be high
enough to be detrimental to aquatic
organisms. Excavation of streambed material
can remove nesting and spawning habitat for
fish. Development activities add pavement
and, therefore, additional flow to nearby
streams which increases the intensity,
magnitude and energy of runoff (U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, 1995).
These flow changes can lead to erosion and
later deposition of sediment as the stream
adjusts to the new hydrology. These runoff
changes can also alter peak flows within
nearby aquatic systems. Wetland drainage
can also change the hydrology by adding
additional flow that-would have been released..
more slowly.
Channelization can lead to the loss of side
channels, oxbows, backwaters and sandbars,
all important habitat to native species and
increase downstream flooding. The effects of
dewatering through diversions for irrigation or
other uses are important, since the reduction
in flow at critical times or the loss of water
entirely is devastating to the aquatic
community.
Many of the effects of dams have been
discussed previously in this report such as the
trapping of sediment, changes in temperature
downstream, blocking of migration patterns
and the loss of high flood flows. The loss of
high flood flows can cause the loss of
spawning cues for fish, reduce cottonwood
and willow regeneration and cut off fish and
wildlife access to backwaters (U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, 1994).
In the parts of the NGPAA with large
amounts of row crops, runoff will be greater
than from natural or pasture conditions, also
affecting the hydrology of streams. Grazing of
riparian areas in which large amounts of
vegetation are removed will also change the
flow regime, causing water to move more
quickly through the system.
Key Findings
•Watersheds with the greatest number of
stream miles impacted from channelization arc
the Middle Platte-Buffalo, the Upper Tongue,
the Niobrara Headwaters, the Lower Souris
River, the Maple River in North Dakota, the
Lower Sheyenne, the Middle Musselshell and
the Smith River.
•Watersheds with the greatest number of
stream miles impacted from dams, diversions
and wetland drainage are the Upper and
Lower Tongue, the Lower Powder, the Sun
River, the Upper Missouri-Dearborn, the Lower
Bighorn, the Lower Souris, Upper Sheyenne,
Pembina, Middle Sheyenne, Upper James,
Lower Sheyenne, Maple River and the
Western Wild Rice River.
•Watersheds with the greatest amount of
162
-------
Northern Great Plains Aquatic Assessment
irrigated acreage are the Milk, Teton,
Yellowstone, Platte, North Platte, Lower Loup,
Niobrara, Elkhom, Belle Fourche, Upper
Tongue and Lewis and Clark Lake. Relatively
little irrigated cropland occurs throughout much
of North Dakota, South Dakota, the Sand Hills
and outside of major river valleys in eastern
Montana and northeastern Wyoming.
Data Sources
Information on water use changes for the
years 1985,1990 and 1995 was obtained from
the U.S. Geological Survey's WATSTORE
database. Most of the information regarding
impacts to water quality from impoundments,
channelization, diversions, etc. came from
state 305(b) reports for 1994 and 1996, as well
as the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Draft
Environmental Impact Statement for the
Missouri River operations and from literature
reviews.
Data Quality and Gaps
As mentioned earlier, it is difficult to
compare the information within state 305b
reports across statelines and this should be
done with caution. For example, differing
definitions of impacts from hydrologic
modification between states, leads to differing
amounts of stream miles that are considered
impacted by hydrologic modification. In
addition, it must be stressed that these refer to
assessed stream miles. The population
surveyed in any given watershed may or may
not be enough to. draw conclusions about the
entire watershed.
Spatial Patterns
Figure 5.3.1 shows the miles of assessed
streams impacted by channelization in the
NGPAA, that is, the miles of streams that are
not fully supporting designated uses as a
result of channelization. Watersheds with
more than 50 miles of assessed streams
impacted by channelization are the Middle
Platte-Buffalo, the Upper Tongue, the Niobrara
Headwaters, the Lower Souris River, the
Maple River in North Dakota, the Lower
Sheyenne, the Middle Musselshell and the
Smith River. Figure 5.3.2 presents the miles
of assessed streams impacted by hydrologic
modifications.such as dams, diversions and
wetland drainage. Watersheds with more than
100 miles impacted by these activities are the
Upper and Lower Tongue, the Lower Powder,
the Sun River, the Upper Missouri-Dearborn,
the Lower Bighorn, the Lower Souris, Upper
Sheyenne, Pembina, Middle Sheyenne, Upper
• James, Lower Sheyenne, Maple River and the
Western Wild Rice River.
The acreage of irrigated land per
watershed in the Northern Great Plains is
shown in Figure 5.3.3 and Rgure 5.3.4
presents this information by county. This
information is included here due to the effects
irrigation has on the hydrology of streams as a
result of dams and diversions. There are also
water quality effects which are unique to
irrigated areas, described in Section 5.4. The
western and southern areas of the NGPAA
have the most irrigated land, with the highest
in the Platte, Teton and Yellowstone river
basins. There is a total of 3,619,018 acres of
irrigated cropland in the NGPAA (U.S. Natural
Resources Conservation Service, 1992).
Future Trends
Wetland losses appear to be slowing or
even reversing in some parts of the NGPAA,
which will most likely contribute to an improved
hydrology in those areas. It remains to be
seen if any changes in the operations of
various dams in the region will occur,
therefore, improving the hydrologic regimes of
the downstream stream reaches. Changes in
the amounts of water used for irrigation are
occurring in the NGPAA. For example, water
-------
Chapter S - Impacts of Human Activities
use (both ground and surface) for agriculture
increased in the southern and western portions
of the NGPAA, while it decreased in many
areas in the central NGPAA (see Chapter 6).
Changes in surface water use for agriculture
will have corresponding effects on the aquatic
systems in those areas.
5.4 POINT/NONPOINT SOURCE POLLUTION
EFFECTS
Introduction
Point Sources
Point sources are discharges that originate
from a distinct point such as a pipe or a ditch.
They are regulated under the National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) and a permit is required to discharge
to waters of the United States. The most
important point sources within the Northern
Great Plains are municipal facilities,
agricultural processing facilities, mines,
refineries, oil and gas production facilities and
certain sized feedlots. It is important to note
that stormwater runoff from industrial sites and
from some cities is defined as a point source
under the Clean Water Act.
While mines, refineries and oil and gas
facilities may discharge metals and organic
chemicals, most pollutants from the majority of
point sources in the NGPAA are constituents
such as biochemical oxygen demand (BOD),
ammonia, fecal colifomns, suspended solids
and pH. These are the most common
pollutants controlled in Northern Great Plains
NPDES permits.
Nonpoint Sources _.
Nonpoint source pollution includes runoff
from animal feeding operations not required to
have an NPDES permit, grazing areas,
cropland, urban areas (not covered by
stormwater regulations), septic tanks, roads
and road construction, atmospheric deposition
and irrigation return flows, which are exempt
as a point source. Livestock feeding areas
and grazing areas can contribute nutrients,
sediment and pathogens to waterbodies.
Cropland runoff can contain nutrients,
sediment and pesticides. Irrigation return
flows may contain most of these, in addition to
salinity and sometimes toxics such as
selenium.1 Urban runoff can have nutrients,
pathogens and other pollutants such as
pesticides from lawns and organics from
parking lots and other areas. Roads and road
construction can contribute sedimentto nearby
streams. This includes roads constructed for
natural resource exploration and extraction.
Nonpoint source pollution is the greatest
water qualify problem in the Northern Great
Plains, both because of its prevalence and the
lack of regulatory controls available. Its
prevalence is due to agriculture's dominance in
the region.
Key Findings
•Areas with the most major NPDES
dischargers are in the Platte River basin, the
Missouri River near Bismarck, the Black Hills
and the Billings, Montana area.
•Watersheds with the greatest total number of
NPDES dischargers (major and minor) are
Lewis and Clark Lake, Upper Elkhom, Middle
Platte-Buffalo, Middle North Plane River-
Scottsbluff, Lake Sakakawea, Little Powder
River, Beaver Creek (Cheyenne River
watershed), Lance Creek, Salt Creek (Powder
River watershed) and the Middle North Platte
River-Casper.
•Watersheds with the greatest number of
assessed stream miles reported impacted by
municipal point sources are in the Yellowstone,
Milk, Platte, Loup, Powder and Cheyenne
basins.
•Watersheds with the greatest number of
164
-------
Channelization
Impacts, miles
Not Assessed
Figure 5.3.1 Miles of Assessed Streams in Each Watershed Impacted by Channelization
-------
Hydrologic
Impacts, miles
Not Assessed
O
1-50
51 -100
>100
Figure 5.3.2 Miles of Assessed Streams in Each Watershed Impacted by Hydrologic Disturbance, such as Dams,
Diversions and Wetland Drainage
-------
Irrigated Acreage,
WOO Acres
5* -200
>200
Figure 5.3.3 Irrigated Acreage by Watershed in the Northern Great Plains
-------
Irrigated
Cropland, Acres
0 - 25000
25001 • 50000
500O1 - 100000
> woooo
Figure 5.3.4 Acres of Irrigated Cropland by County in the Northern Great Plains
-------
Northern Great Plains Aquatic Assessment
assessed stream miles impacted by pathogens
(fecal coliforms) include Lake Sakakawea,
Lower Heart River, Upper James, White River,
Lower Yellowstone, Lower Powder, Fort Peck
Reservoir, Lower Cheyenne and Middle Platte-
Buffalo.
•Watersheds with the greatest number of
assessed stream miles impacted by organic
enrichment are the Lower, Middle and Upper
James, the Upper Sheyenne and the Lower
Souris.
•Watersheds with the greatest number of
assessed stream miles impacted by metals are
predominantly in the Yellowstone and Upper
Missouri (including Lake Sakakawea) basins.
•Watersheds with the greatest number of
assessed stream miles impacted by animal
feeding operations are in the Sheyenne,
James, White, Cheyenne, Souris, Lake
Sakakawea, Knife, Heart and Cannonball
basins.
•Watersheds with the greatest number of
stream miles impacted by resource extraction
(mining, oil and gas) activities are the Clacks
Fork of the Yellowstone, Smith River, Lower
Powder, Upper Powder, Clear Creek (Powder
Basin), Lower Yellowstone, Upper Little
Missouri and Cheyenne River-Angostura
Reservoir.
•The greatest number of mines of all types
are located in northeastern Wyoming, western
South Dakota, the Black Hills region and
mountain areas along the western edge of the
NGPAA.
•Agricultural activities in general impact the
ability of assessed streams to meet designated
uses across large areas of the NGPAA.
•Watersheds with the greatest number of
assessed stream miles impacted by nutrients
are the Upper Powder, Lower Yellowstone-
Sunday, Middle Milk, Cedar Creek (in North
Dakota), Lower Souris, Upper James, Western
Wild Rice River, Maple River and Lower
Sheyenne.
•Watersheds with the greatest number of
assessed stream miles impacted by siltation
are the Western Wild Rice River, the Lower
Sheyenne, Cedar Creek, Lower Heart, Upper
Powder, Clarks Fork of the Yellowstone, Upper
Missouri-Dearborn and the Smith River.
•Watersheds with the greatest number of
assessed stream miles impacted by irrigated
crop production are mainly in Montana and
Wyoming.
•Watersheds.with the-greatest number of
assessed stream miles impacted by
nonirrigated crop production are primarily
centered on North Dakota.
•Watersheds with the greatest number of
assessed stream miles impacted by grazing
and rangeland uses are in the Yellowstone
basin, Upper Missouri-Dearborn, Middle Milk,
Upper Powder, Cedar Creek, Lower Heart,
Lower Souris, Lake Sakakawea, Lower Little
Missouri and the Lower Sheyenne.
•Watersheds with the greatest number of
assessed stream miles impacted by thermal
modification are the Sun, Smith, Lower Belle
Fourche, Lower Grand, Redwater and Poplar
Rivers.
•Watersheds with the greatest number of
assessed stream miles impacted by salinity
are in the Yellowstone and Tongue basins.
•The Universal Soil Loss Equation predicts the
greatest potential for erosion in the NGPAA to
be in parts of western North Dakota and
southeastern South Dakota.
•The greatest concentration of total animal
units are in parts of Nebraska (due to cattle
and hogs). The lowest concentrations are in a
swath from northeastern Montana to
northeastern North Dakota.
•The largest areas of harvested cropland are
in eastern and central North Dakota,
northeastern South Dakota, along the Platte
River in Nebraska and northern Montana. The
lowest amounts are in northeastern Wyoming,
southeastern Montana and western South
Dakota.
•Pesticide runoff potential is greatest in the
Red River Valley, the lower James, lower
Missouri, lower Loup and Middle Platte River
169
-------
Chapter 5 - Impacts of Human Activities
basins. The lowest is in western South
Dakota, northeastern Wyoming and most of
Montana.
•The greatest amounts of nitrogen fertilizer
used are in eastern and northern North
Dakota, the Platte River Valley and north-
central Montana. The lowest amounts used
are in western South Dakota and northeastern
Wyoming. Nitrogen runoff potential is greatest
in the Platte Valley, eastern South Dakota and
southeastern North Dakota. It is lowest in
northeastern Wyoming and scattered areas of
Montana.
•Sediment delivery potential is greatest in
parts of the Red River Valley, Elm River
(James basin), Lewis and Clark Lake
watershed and the Two Medicine River and
the Teton River in the Upper Missouri basin. It
is lowest in northeastern Wyoming, the Sand
Hills and southeastern and eastern Montana.
•There are six superfund sites on the National
Priority list in the NGPAA.
Data Sources
The information on point sources in this
section was obtained from U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency databases including the
Permits and Compliance System (PCS) and a
database of permits by watershed developed
by EPA Region VIII. Data from the Index of
Watershed Indicators was also used.
Information on impacts from point sources
came from state 305(b) reports. Information
on the numbers of livestock was obtained from
the National Resources Inventory of the U.S.
Natural Resources Conservation Service.
Information on nonpoint sources was
obtained from state 305(b) reports, the
National Resources Inventory from the U.S. ,
Natural Resources Conservation Service, the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Index
of Watershed Indicators, the U.S. Geological
Survey's information on pesticide application
(based on pesticide use data from 1990 to
1993 and 1995 from the National Center for
Food and Agricultural Policy and on crop
acreage from the 1992 Census of Agriculture
from NRCS).
Data Quality and Gaps
As was mentioned earlier with regard to the
305(b) reports, much of the assessments are
not based on monitoring, but on evaluations
using other data and methods for using
available data, preparing the 305(b) reports
and defining use support varies from state to
state. Comparisons between states should be
made with caution.
Spatial Patterns and Trends
Figure 5.4.1 shows the number of major
point source dischargers by watershed and
Figure 5.4.2 shows the total number, major
and minor, dischargers per watershed. A
major discharger is generally defined as a
-municipal facility that discharges an average of
more than one million gallons per day or an
industrial facility that meets certain discharge
volume and effluent constituent criteria. The
largest number of major NPDES dischargers
are in the Platte River basin, the Missouri River
near Bismarck, the Black Hills and the Billings,
Montana area. The largest number of total
dischargers (major and minor) are in the Lewis
and Clark Lake, Upper Elkhom, Middle Platte-
Buffalo, Middle North Plane River-Scottsbluff,
Lake Sakakawea, Little Powder River, Beaver
Creek (Cheyenne River watershed), Lance
Creek, Salt Creek (Powder River watershed)
and the Middle North Platte River-Casper
watersheds. It is important to note that sheer
numbers of point source dischargers do not
necessarily translate into larger effects than an
area with fewer. This is because point sources
are controlled under NPDES. However, a
large number in an area can be a problem if
effluent limits for each have not been
developed in conjunction with other point
170
-------
Northern Great Plains Aquatic Assessment
sources. In addition, a few large point sources
can be more important than many small ones
in terms of pollutant loading. Tables 5.4.1 and
5.4.2 list the watersheds with the most NPDES
major permits and total permits.
The assessed miles of stream impacted by
municipal point sources is shown in Figure
5.4.3. The watersheds with greater than 100
miles of streams impacted are in the Milk,
Yellowstone, Powder and Platte basins.
Significant impacts are also reported for the
Cheyenne, Loup and Upper Elkhom basins.
Figure 5.4.4 shows the location of mines of
all types (coal, hard rock, sand and gravel,
etc.) within the NGPAA. The areas with the
greatest concentration are in the Black Hills,
western North Dakota, northeastern Wyoming
and in mountainous areas along the western
boundary of the NGPAA. Information for mines
in Nebraska was not available for this analysis.
Figure 5.4.5 shows the miles of assessed
streams in each watershed impacted by mining
and oil and gas extraction. Those with more
than 100 miles impacted are the Smith, Clarks
Fork of the Yellowstone, Lower Powder, Upper
Powder and Clear Creek (within the Powder
River basin). Significant impacts also exist
within the Upper Little Missouri, Lower
Yellowstone, Cheyenne River-Angostura
Reservoir, Belt Creek and Crazy Woman
Creek watersheds.
Lake Sakakawea and the Lower Heart
have more than 200 miles of impacts from
pathogens, as measured by fecal coliforms
(Figure 5.4.6). Other areas where pathogens
are important contributors to impacting uses
include Fort Peck Reservoir, the White River
basin, Lower Cheyenne, Upper James, Lower
Yellowstone, Middle Platte-Buffalo, Lower
Little Missouri and the Knife River. Figure
5.4.7 shows the miles of assessed streams
impacted by organic enrichment and low
dissolved oxygen, with the James, Sheyenne
and Souris basins having the greatest impacts.
The greatest impacts from metals, including
mercury, (Figure 5.4.8) are in some of the
Upper Missouri tributaries, the Yellowstone
basin (including the Tongue and Powder
Rivers), Lake Sakakawea and the Upper
Souris. Figure 5.4.9 shows the miles of
assessed streams impacted by animal feeding
and holding operations. -Watersheds within
the Sheyenne, James, White, Cheyenne,
Souris, Lake Sakakawea, Knife, Heart and
Cannonball basins are the most affected.
The miles of assessed streams impacted
by agricultural uses, including both cropland
and livestock impacts are shown in Figure
5.4.10. As is presented, impacts from
agriculture on the ability of streams to meet
designated uses is very widespread
throughout the NGPAA. This is not surprising
since agriculture is a major activity in this
region. Figure 5.4.11 presents the miles of
assessed streams whose beneficial uses are
impacted by nutrient loadings. The Upper
Powder, Lower Yellowstone-Sunday, Middle
Milk, Cedar Creek (in North Dakota), Lower
Souris, Upper James, Western Wild Rice
River, Maple River and Lower Sheyenne River
watersheds all have more than 200 assessed
miles of streams not fully supporting uses due
to nutrients. Figure 5.4.12 'presents this
situation with respect to siltation, with the
Western Wild Rice River, the Lower
Sheyenne, Cedar Creek, Lower Heart, Upper
Powder, Clarks Fork of the Yellowstone, Upper
Missouri-Dearborn and the Smith River most
impacted.
Salinity impacts are presented in Figure
5.4.13. Areas where irrigation is important
show up as areas with high salinity impacts,
such as the Yellowstone and Powder basins,
but also the Upper Missouri tributaries and
northwestern South Dakota. The Yellowstone
basin, Upper Missouri-Dearborn, Middle Milk,
Upper Powder, Cedar Creek, Lower Heart,
171
-------
Figure 5.4.1 Major NPDES Dischargers by Watershed in the Northern Great Plains
-------
0-5
6-15
16-30
>30
Figure 5.4.2 Total NPDES Dischargers (Major and Minor) by Watershed in the Northern Great Plains
-------
Chapter 5 - Impacts of Human Activities
Table 5.4.1 Watersheds in the Northern Great Plains Assessment Area with the Most Major
NPDES Dischargers.
Code
10130101
10070004
10120202
10200101
10120203
10180009
10190018
10100004
All Others
Name
Missouri R (Painted Woods-Square Butte)
Upper Yellowstone-Lake Basin
Lower Belle Fourche River
Middle Platte River-Buffalo
Redwater River
Middle North Platte River-Scotts Bluff
Lower South Platte River
Lower Yellowstone River
Major Dischargers
5
5
5
4
4
3
3
3
2 or less
Table 5.4.2 Watersheds in the Northern Great Plains Assessment Area with the Most Total
Number of NPDES Dischargers.
Code
10120107
10200101
10180009
10170101
10180007
10110101
10090204
10120104
10220001
10090208
Name
Beaver Creek
Middle Platte River-Buffalo
Lower South Platte River
Missouri River-Lewis and Clark Lake
Middle North Platte River-Casper
Missouri River-Lake Sakakawea
Salt Creek
Lance Creek
Upper Elkhom River
Little Powder River
Total Dischargers
80
75
47
46
44
37
35
35
32
31
Lower Souris, Lake Sakakawea, Lower Little
Missouri and the Lower Sheyenne have the
greatest number of miles of assessed
streams not supporting uses due to grazing
(Figure 5.4.14). Figure 5.4.15 shows the
miles of streams impacted by irrigated crop
production with Montana and Wyoming
showing most of the impacts. Rgure 5.4.16
shows the miles of streams impacted by
nonirrigated crop production with impacts
centered on North Dakota, especially in the
Cedar Creek, Lower Heart, Lower Souris,
Western Wild Rice, Maple and Lower
Sheyenne watersheds. Significant impacts
also occur in northern Montana and eastern
and northwestern South Dakota. Thermal
modification impacts the largest areas in the
Poplar, Redwater, Sun and Smith River
watersheds in Montana and the Lower Belle
Fourche and Lower Grand watersheds in
South Dakota (Figure 5.4.17).
The amount of harvested cropland per
county in the Northern Great Plains is
presented in Figure 5.4.18. The largest
areas of cropland occur in large areas of
North Dakota (especially the eastern),
northeast South Dakota, along the Platte in
Nebraska and in north-central and
northeastern Montana. There is a total of
42,055,081 acres of harvested cropland in
the counties within the NGPAA (U.S. Natural
174
-------
Municipal Point
Source Impacts,
miffs
Figure 5.4.3 Miles of Assessed Streams in Each Watershed Impacted by Municipal Point Sources
-------
Figure 5.4.4 Location of Mines (All Types) in the Northern Great Plains
-------
Resource Extraction
Impacts, miles
| | No t Assessed
l> 100
Figure 5.4.5 Miles of Assessed Streams in Each Watershed Impacted by Resource Extraction (Mines, Oil and Gas)
-------
Pathogen Impacts,
miles
Not Assessed
0
1-100
101 -200
>200
Figure 5.4.6 Miles of Assessed Streams in Each Watershed Impacted by Pathogens
-------
Organic Enrichment
Impacts, miles
Figure 5.4.7 Miles of Assessed Streams in Each Watershed Impacted by Organic Enrichment or Low Dissolved Oxygen
-------
Metals Impacts,
miles
Not Assessed
0
1-50
51-100
> 100
Figure 5.4.8 Miles of Streams in Each Watershed Impacted by Metals
-------
Animal Feeding
Operations
Impacts, miles
Not Assessed
0
I -50
51 -100
>100
Figure 5.4.9 Miles of Assessed Streams in Each Watershed Impacted by Animal Feeding or Holding Operations
-------
Agriculture
Impacts, miles
Not Assessed
0
1-100
101 - 200
>200
Figure 5.4.10 Miles of Assessed Streams in Each Watershed Impacted by Agriculture (Cropland and Livestock)
-------
Nutrient Impacts,
miles
Not Assessed
0
1-100
101-200
>200
Figure 5.411 Miles of Assessed Streams in Each Watershed Impacted by Nutrients
-------
Siltation Impacts,
miles
Not Assessed
0
I- WO
101 -200
>200
Figure 5.4.12 Miles of Assessed Streams in Each Watershed Impacted by Siltation
-------
Salinity Impacts
miles
t Assessed
0
I -100
101 - 200
>200
Figure 5.4.13 Miles of Assessed Streams in Each Watershed Impacted by Salinity
-------
Grazing Impacts,
miles
Not Assessed
0
I- 100
101-200
>200
Figure 5.4.14 Miles of Assessed Streams in Each Watershed Impacted by Grazing and Rangeland Uses
-------
Irrigated Crop
Impacts, miles
Not Assessed
°
I-100
101 -200
>200
Figure 5.4.15 Miles of Assessed Streams in Each Watershed Impacted by Irrigated Crop Production
-------
Nonirrigatcd Crop
Impacts, miles
Not Assessed
I- 100
101 -200
>200
Figure 5.4.16 Miles of Assessed Streams in Each Watershed Impacted by Nonirrigated Crop Production
-------
Thermal
Modification
Impacts, miles
[ | Not Assessed
~~
1-50
51-100
>100
Figure 5.4.17 Miles of Assessed Streams in Each Watershed Impacted by Thermal Modifications
-------
Harvested
Cropland, Acres
pf|0. 700000
00001 -250000
250001 • 500000
> 500000
Figure 5.4.18 Acres of Harvested Cropland by County in the Northern Great Plains
-------
Northern Great Plains Aquatic Assessment
Resources Conservation Service, 1992).
Figure 5.4.19 shows the amount of total
animal units by county. Total animal units is
a means of gauging the impact of livestock
by setting the numbers of various livestock
(hogs, sheep, etc.) equal to one beef cow in
terms of the waste produced. Therefore, if
one beef cow is the unit of measurement, ten
sheep are equal to one beef cow.
Additionally, 0.7 milk cows and 2.5 hogs are
each equal to one beef cow. A larger
number of hogs or sheep is needed to equal
the potential impact of a smaller number of
beef or milk cows. This follows the EPA
regulations for concentrated animal feeding
operations. A certain number of total animal
units in a confined animal feeding operation
is regulated as a point source. This is
generally the equivalent of 1000 beef cattle
(and therefore, 10,000 sheep, 2500 hogs or
700 milk cows). However, the regulations
allow for controls on lesser numbers if water
quality impacts are evident. Farms with
lesser numbers are generally considered to
be nonpoint sources and most operations are
smaller.
There is a total of 6,367,614 total animal
units (based on beef cattle, milk cows, hogs
and sheep) in the NGPAA. Several counties
in Nebraska stand out as areas with the
highest number of total animal units, and
therefore the highest potential impact from
livestock operations. There is a general
pattern of higher total animal units in the
central, southern and western areas of the
Northern Great Plains, with much less in the
northeastern portions. The total number of
beef cattle in the NGPAA is 4,803,302, with
the greatest concentration in the Sand Hills
of Nebraska and southern and central
Montana. The total number of hogs is
2,794,254 and the greatest concentration is
in eastern South Dakota, southeastern North
Dakota and eastern Nebraska, with very low
numbers elsewhere in the NGPAA. The total
number of sheep is 1,847,398 with the
greatest numbers in Garfield and Carter
Counties in Montana, Harding and Butte
Counties in South Dakota and Campbell,
Johnson, Natrona and Converse Counties in
Wyoming. It must be stressed that these
numbers only indicate where potential
impacts may-be highest, a number of factors
such as runoff potential, management
practices, and proximity to streams, all affect
how much manure reaches streams. Sheer
numbers do not necessarily correlate to
nitrogen loading, but do show an area to be
at increased risk.
Figure 5.4.20 presents areas where the
most nitrogen fertilizer was used for the year
1985. This data was developed by
Alexander and Smith (1990) by
disaggregating state-level fertilizer use to the
county level in proportion to the amount of
fertilized acreage in the counties. Eastern
and northern North Dakota, the Platte River
of Nebraska and portions of north-central
Montana have the heaviest amounts of
nitrogen fertilizer use. This matches the
large amount of total harvested and irrigated
cropland in those areas. Figure 5.4.21
presents information on fertilizer sales by
county with data from 1991.
The Lower James, Vermillion, Lewis and
Clark Lake, Middle Platte, Loup, Upper
Elkhom and several Red River watersheds
are among the areas with the highest
potential to deliver nitrogen to streams and
rivers (Figure 5.4.22). This information is
from the Index of Watershed Indicators (U.S.
EPA, 1997a) and the National Resources
Inventory (U.S. NRCS, 1992) and is based
on the amount of nitrogen applied, the types
of crops grown, the nitrogen uptake of the
crops, rainfall and surface runoff potential.
For this reason, the maps showing the
amounts of nitrogen fertilizer applied and
191
-------
Total
Animal Units
0 - 25000
•I 25001 • 50000
50001 -100000
> 100000
Figure 5.4.19 Total Animal Units by County in the Northern Great Plains (Beef Cattle, Milk Cattle, Hogs and Sheep)
-------
Nitrogen Fertilizer
Use, tons/year
17.5-250
251 - WOO
1001 - 2500
>2500
Figure 5.4.20 Nitrogen Fertilizer Use by County in the Northern Great Plains in 1985
-------
Nitrogen Fertilizer
Sales, tons
0-5000
5001 - JOOOO
iOOOI -15000
>15000
Figure 5.4.21 Nitrogen Fertilizer Sales Per County in 1991
-------
Moderate
Figure 5.4.22 Nitrogen Runoff Potential from Farm Fields within the Northern Great Plains as Modified from the Index
of Watershed Indicators
-------
Chapter 5 - Impacts of Human Activities
sold does not necessarily match the map of
potential nitrogen runoff. Additionally, the
runoff potential map is a relative ranking of
where the potential is greatest within the
NGPAA and it is modified from the Index of
Watershed Indicators, which ranks on a
national scale. For this reason, what is high
in the Northern Great Plains may not be high
nationally compared to other areas. This
was meant to show where potential is highest
or lowest relative to watersheds within the
NGPAA. For the NGPAA, those watersheds
with a national ranking in the top one-third
were placed in the high potential category
(the national ranking used the top 524 out of
2110 as high). Some of the watersheds in
the NGPAA were high nationally as well. For
example, out of 2110, the Lewis and Clark
Lake watershed (10170101) ranked 124th
and the Lower James (1016011) ranked
322nd.
Areas with the lowest nitrogen runoff
potential are in the Upper Cheyenne, Powder
and parts of the Milk and Musselshell
watersheds. The Wild Horse Lake
watershed (10050003) ranked the lowest in
the entire NGPAA (2084th), with the Salt
Creek (10090204), Antelope Creek
(10120101), Dry Fork of the Cheyenne
(10120102), Lightning Creek (10120105) and
Snake River (10150005) watersheds just
above it.
Figure 5.4.23 shows the potential runoff
for pesticides, with the Lower and Middle
James, Vermillion, Lewis and Clark Lake,
Medicine Creek and Fort Randall Reservoir
watersheds, as well as parts of the Red River
watershed having the greatest potential.
This map is also derived from the Index of
Watershed Indicators information in a similar
manner as the nitrogen runoff potential (i.e.
national ranks rescaled into the Northern
Great Plains). On a national scale there
were 1577 watersheds ranked for pesticide
runoff potential based on the amount of
pesticides used, crops grown and rainfall
amounts and those ranked 395 or greater
were labeled as high potential. Those
ranked as "high potential" within the NGPAA,
were those that ranked roughly in the top
third nationally. The top three watersheds in
the NGPAA are Lewis and Clark Lake
(10170101) which ranked nationally 124th
out of 1577, the Vermillion watershed
(10170102) at 127th and the Lower James
(10160011) at 204th.
The lowest potential is for areas in
southern Montana, western South Dakota
and northeastern Wyoming. Wild Horse
Lake (1005003), Boxelder Creek (10110202)
and Frenchman Creek (10050013) all ranked
near the bottom nationally for potential
pesticide runoff.
The areas within the NGPAA where the
largest number of pesticides are used in the
heaviest amounts (more than 31 pounds per
square mile) are eastern North Dakota with
12, eastern South Dakota with 8, western
Nebraska with 5 and eastern Nebraska with
3 (U.S. Geological Survey, 1998).. All other
areas in the NGPAA use only one pesticide
at levels greater than 31 Ibs/square mile
(though they may be different pesticides).
Pesticides with the heaviest and most
widespread use are2,4-D1.alachlor, atrazine,
cyanazine, EPTC, and metalachlor (U.S.
Geological Survey, 1998). Figures 5.4.24
and 5.4.25 show where the largest amounts
of atrazine and 2,4-D are used, respectively,
in the Northern Great Plains.
Figure 5.4.26 presents the sediment
delivery potential by watershed. This also
was adapted from the Index of Watershed
indicators. The IWI integrated information on
rainfall, crop growth, agricultural
management practices and erosion potential
(among others) to develop the sediment
196
-------
Insufficient Data
Low
Moderate
High
Figure 5.4.23 Pesticide Runoff Potential from Farm Fields within the Northern Great Plains as Modified from the Index of
Watershed Indicators
-------
Atrazine Use,
Ibs/square mile
| | Not Reported
~~| 0 - 25000
25001-50000
50001 -100000
> 100000
Figure 5.4.24 Use of Atrazine in the Northern Great Plains
-------
2,4-D Use,
Ws/square mile
3000 • 25000
25001 - 50000
50001 • 100000
> 100000
Figure 5.4.25 Use of 2,4-D in the Northern Great Plains
-------
Moderate
Figure 5.4.26 Potential for Sediment Delivery to Streams from Cropland and Rangeland within the Northern Great Plains
as Modified from the Index of Watershed Indicators
-------
Northern Great Plains Aquatic Assessment
delivery potential rankings. The entire
NGPAA ranked as low to moderate on
national scale, but this was adapted to show
which areas had the highest potential within
the NGPAA. A total of 2106 watersheds
were ranked nationally (with 530 and above
as high potential), but the highest potential in
the NGPAA was defined as being roughly
within the top third nationally. The
watersheds that are within the top third
nationally are the Pembina, the Red River
(Elm-Marsh), Lewis and Clark Lake, the Elm
River (James basin), the Two Medicine River
and Big Sandy Creek (Milk basin). However,
the highest of these, the Two Medicine River
watershed (10030201) in Montana ranked
only 533rd nationally, therefore, none were
ranked high on a national scale.
Low potential for sediment delivery exists
in the Sand Hills of Nebraska and much of
northeastern Wyoming. The South Fork of
the Powder River (10090203) and Salt Creek
10090204) ranked 2091st and 2090th,
respectively, nationally.
The potential agriculture erosion rate by
major land resource area in tons per acre per
year estimated from NRCS' Universal Soil
Loss Equation (USLE) is presented in Figure
5.4.27. The USLE is used to predict soil loss
from sheet and rill erosion from a specific
area taking into account rainfall, cropping
management systems or ground cover and
applied conservation pracitices. The USLE
does not estimate sediment yield to given
point in a watershed, it estimates only what is
lost to erosion, not what is deposited
downstream. Parts of western North Dakota
(MLRA 58A) and southeastern South Dakota
(MLRA 102B) are the areas with the highest
potential erosion rates, with the Black Hills,
the Sand Hills, eastern Montana and
northeastern North Dakota as the lowest
(MLRAs 55A, 58A, 60B, 64, 65, 66 and 62).
Figure 5.4.28 shows the miles of
assessed streams not fully supporting
designated uses due to highway construction
and maintenance. The Upper Musselshell,
Upper Yellowstone, Lower Tongue, Smith
and Belt River watersheds have the greatest
impacts from these sources. Road
construction and maintenance can affect
water quality because-often soil is exposed
to erosion. The amount of road length near
streams can indicate potential impacts.
There are six superfund sites on the
National Priority List within the NGPAA.
These are the Arsenic Trioxide Site in
Richland County, North Dakota; the Minot
Landfill in Ward County, North Dakota;
Ellsworth Air Force Base in Pennington
County, South Dakota; Whitewood Creek in
Lawrence County, South Dakota; Mouat
Industries in Stillwater County, Montana and
the Mystery Bridge/US Highway 20 Site in
Natrona County, Wyoming. The Whitewood
Creek site is actually in the Black Hills but
has effects downstream in the plains.
Future Trends
Population growth in certain areas may
lead to more point source impacts from
increased discharges, a greater number of
discharges and stormwater runoff during and
after construction. Any increases in the
number and size of animal feeding
operations or resource extraction activities
will also create new point source impacts.
The number of Superfund sites is unlikely to
grow significantly, and those that exist will
have localized effects.
. Agriculture is the greatest, though by no
means the sole, contributor of nonpoint
source pollutants in the NGPAA. Therefore,
changes in the extent and type of agricultural
operations, as well as efforts to alleviate
present sources, could have dramatic
207
-------
LISLE, tons/acre/year
0.3 -0.7
mm 22 .3.8
Figure 5.4.27 Soil Loss by Major Land and Resource Area as Calculated by the Universal Soil Loss Equation
-------
Highway Impacts,
miles
Not Assessed
Q
1-50
51-100
> 100
Figure 5.4,28 Miles of Assessed Streams in Each Watershed Impacted by Highway Construction/Maintenance
-------
Chapter S - Impacts of Human Activities
impacts on nonpoint source pollution to
aquatic systems.
5.5 IMPACTS TO GROUND WATER
The water quality of ground water, much
like that of surface water can be affected
both by localized and very widespread
sources. In the case of ground water,
however, movement is generally much
slower and any pollutants reaching it will be
much more difficult to remove. Localized
impacts could include landfills, spills or
injection wells; while widespread impacts
occur from fertilizer and pesticide
applications.
Wyoming lists fertilizer application,
landfills, mines, pesticide application, shallow
injection wells, storage tanks, surface
impoundments, transportation of materials,
waste tailings and oil and gas exploration
and production as the major sources of
anthropogenic ground water contamination
(Wyoming Department of Environmental
Quality, 1994). Not all of these are
necessarily important within the NGPAA.
In South Dakota the ten highest priority
sources of ground water contamination are
agricultural chemical facilities, animal
feedlots, fertilizer applications, storage tanks
(aboveground and underground), surface
impoundments, landfills, septic systems,
mining and mine drainage and mine waste
tailings, and pipelines and sewer lines (South
Dakota Department of Environment and
Natural Resources, 1996).
Montana states that mining and mine
drainage, septic tanks, shallow injection wells
and above and below ground storage tanks
as the highest priority major sources of
ground water contamination (Montana
Department of Environmental Quality, 1994).
Dryland farming in Montana has caused
saline seeps in the eastern part of the state
(U.S. Geological Survey, 1988). These are
wet salty areas that are discharge zones for
shallow water-table aquifers.
Ground water use is discussed in Chapter
6 and the areas of greatest use are outlined
there. Within the NGPAA, Nebraska by far
has the greatest ground water use. This is
concentrated within the Platte basin and its
tributraries and is mainly drawn from the
Ogallalla Formation of the High Plains
Aquifer.
5.6 IMPACTS TO AQUATIC SPECIES
The impacts described in this chapter,
from hydrologic modifications, habitat
modifications, point and nonpoint source
pollution can all affect the survival of aquatic
plant and animal populations. In the
Northern Great Plains, fish species are
threatened specifically by diversions for
irrigation, changes in hydrology due to dams,
loss of riparian vegetation, the introduction of
non-native species and channelization
(Ostlie, et al. 1997).
There are several Great Plains fish
species that were common 30 years ago that
are now seriously threatened (Ostlie, et al.
1997). Declines are occurring in both small
stream fish and those adapted to large turbid
rivers. Small, cool, spring-fed stream
habitats are now becoming rare (Ostlie, et al.
1997) and the flow modifications to the larger
turbid rivers are leading to the decline in
native fishes. Fish species that are the best
adapted to plains rivers habitats are in the
most danger, while those less adapted to
fluctuating, turbid rivers have increased
(Ostlie, etal. 1997).
Dams and channelization of the Missouri
River have altered or eliminated sandbars,
floodplain forests and underwater aquatic
204
-------
habitats (Ashton and Dowd, 1991). Only 80
miles of forested floodplain remain along the
Missouri River out of an original 500 miles of
riparian bottomland timber and this change
has affected the breeding habitat of the
piping plover, interior least tern, whooping
crane and wintering habitat of the bald eagle
(Ashton and Dowd, 1991). In addition, the
spawning habitats and migrations of pallid
sturgeon, paddlefish, sturgeon chub, sicklefin
chub and finescale dace have been altered
or eliminated, as well as habitats for the
spiny softshell and false map turtles (Ashton
and Dowd, 1991).
Other major impacts to aquatic species
are nonpoint sources from agriculture and
wetland drainage. The addition of sediment
to waters is a major impact from agricultural
and other practices. Draining of wetlands
eliminates habitat outright for a number of
species. The northern redbelly dace, banded
killifish, trout-perch and central mudminnow
are included in those fish species that have
lost habitat (Ashton and Dowd, 1991).
«
Richter, et al. 1997 found through a
survey of biologists that fishes in the western
united states are primarily suffering both
historically and currently from competition
with exotic species and secondarily from
habitat removal and damage and altered
hydrologic regimes due to agricultural
surface water depletions and augmentations
as well as altered hydrology and habitat
removal from agricultural and hydroelectric
impoundments.
205
-------
Water Usage
6.1 INTRODUCTION
Question 5 What are the status and
apparent trends in water usage and
supplies within the Northern Great
Plains Assessment Area?
This chapter examines the use of both
surface water and ground water in the
Northern Great Plains, specifically, how much
is used for various types of activities. These
include public water supply, thermoelectric
cooling, agriculture and irrigation, to name a
few. The trends over a ten-year period for total
use, use by source (ground and surface) and
by type of use are examined.
6.2 WATER USAGE AND SUPPLIES
Key Findings
•The greatest total water use in the NGPAA is
in the Platte Valley of Nebraska and the
Missouri River near around Bismarck. Surface
water use is greatest in the Missouri near
Bismarck, in the Yellowstone, Platte and Milk
River basins. Ground water use is greatest in
the Platte, Niobrara, Loup and Elkhom basins
(Ogallala Aquifer - High Plains Aquifer
System). Watersheds which use more than 25
million gallons per day of ground water are
predominantly restricted to Nebraska.
•Overall, irrigation is the greatest single type of
use for water in the NGPAA. The greatest total
use (surface and ground) for irrigation is in the
Yellowstone, Platte, Milk, Niobrara, Lower
Loup and Elkhom basins.
•The greatest uses for thermoelectric use are
in the Missouri River near Bismarck-and the
Lower South Platte.
•The greatest uses for public supply are, not
surprisingly, in watersheds with the largest
population.
•Water use for agriculture (irrigation and
livestock) declined during the period 1985 to
1995 in much of South Dakota, North Dakota,
northern Nebraska and eastern Montana, with
the greatest decreases seen in the Lower
Belle Fourche and the Middle Niobrara
watersheds. The greatest increases were
seen in parts of the Platte, Loup, Powder,
Tongue, Upper Yellowstone and Marais River
basins.
•Total water use changes during the period
1985 to 1995 closely match the changes in
agricultural water use.
Data Sources
Most of the water use information was
obtained from the Water Resources Division of
the U.S. Geological Survey's WATSTORE
database. Information from the years 1985,
1990 and 1995 was used. Streamflow
information was obtained from Storet and
covers the period 1980 to 1995.
Data Quality and Gaps
WATSTORE provided good coverage of
the NGPAA, with all of the watersheds
represented with detailed data categorized by
types of use, as well as totals for ground and
surface water usage. Categories such as
livestock, mining, irrigation, public supply,
thermoelectric cooling and a number of others
are in the database. The system has
information in five year increments, allowing
for the trend information presented in this
report on changes between 1985 and 1995.
Spatial Patterns and Trends
Table 6.2.1 lists the amounts of water
supplying domestic, industrial and agricultural
uses in the Northern Great Plains by
watershed in 1995. Table 6.2.2 lists the total
amounts of ground water, surface water and
both used by watershed in 1995.
207
-------
Chapter 6 - Water Usage
Table 6.2.1 Water use in million gallons per day for each watershed in the Northern Great Plains
Assessment Area.
Code
09010001
09010002
09010003
09010004
09010005
09020101
09020104
09020105
09020107
09020109
09020201
09020202
09020203
09020204
09020205
09020301
09020306
09020307
09020308
09020310
09020311
09020313
10010002
10030102
10030103
10030104
10030105
10030201
10030202
10030203
10030204
10030205
10040101
10040102
10040103
10040104
10040105
10040106
10040201
10040202
10040203
Name
Upper Souris R
Des Lacs R
Lower Souris R
Willow Cr
DeepR
Bois de Sioux R
Upper Red R
Wild Rice R
Red R (Elm-Marsh)
Goose R
Devils Lake
Upper Sheyenne R
Middle Sheyenne R
Lower Sheyenne R
Maple R
Red R (Sandhill-Wilson)
Red R (Grand Marais-Red)
Turtle R
Forest R
ParkR
Lower Red R
Pembina R
St Mary R
Upper Missouri-Dearborn
Smith R
Sun R
Belt Cr
Two Medicine R
Cut Bank Cr
Marais R
Willow Cr
Teton R
Missouri R (Bullwacker-Dog)
Arrow Cr
Judith R
Missouri R (Ft Peck Reservoir)
Big Dry Cr
Little-Dry Cr
Upper Musseishell R
Middle Musseishell R
Flat Willow Cr
Domestic
3.36
0.57
0.54
0.54
0.65
0.82
5.18,
0.55
0.26
0.6
2.31
0.49
0.45
1.69
0.91
3.23
0.02
0.27
0.33
0.85
0.32
1.42
0.07
8.44
0.22
0.77
0.07
0.15
1.16
1.24
0.15
0.59
0.18
0.12
1.23
0.08
0.11
. 0.05
0.36
0.66
0.06
industrial
0.44
0.05
0.09
0
0.02
0.03
1.06
0.08
0
0.01
0.01
0
0
0.77
0
0.02
0.01
0.02
0
0.01
0.1
0.18
0
0.63
0.11
0
0
0
0.3
0.22
0
0.02
0
0
0.11
0
0
0
0
0.01
0
Agriculture
0.85
0.26
18.06
0.96
0.44
0.3
0.42
7.72
1.71
1.04
1.61
0.32
2.62
8.40
0.42
0.35
0.14
3.65
1.51
0.14
0.16
0.25
1.97
49.99
213.56
433.01
1.69
91.57
70.47
167.80
6.63
210.92
7.18
33.13
73.24
42.61
5.68
3.36
400.49
72.97
18.32
208
-------
Northern Great Plains Aquatic Assessment
Table 6.2.1 Water use in million gallons per day for each watershed in the Northern Great Plains
Assessment Area.
Code
10040204
10040205
10050001
10050002
10050003
10050004
10050005
10050006
10050007
10050008
10050009
10050010
10050011
10050012
10050013
10050014
10050015
10050016
10060001
10060002
10060003
10060004
10060005
10060006
10060007
10070002
10070004
10070005
10070006
10070007
10070008
10080015
10080016
10090101
10090102
10090201
10090202
10090203
10090204
10090205
10090206
mncmsn?
Name
Box Elder Cr
Lower Musselshell R
Milk R Headwaters
Upper Milk R
Wild Horse Lake
Middle Milk R
Big Sandy Cr
Sage Cr
Lodge Cr
Battle Cr
Peoples Cr
Cottonwood Cr
Whitewater Cr
Lower Milk R
Frenchman Cr
Beaver Cr
Rock Cr
Porcupine Cr
Missouri R (Prairie Elk-Wolf)
Redwater R
Poplar R
West Fork Poplar R
Missouri R (Charlie-Little Muddy)
Big Muddy Cr
Brush Lake
Upper Yellowstone R
Upper Yellowstone R-Lake Basin
Stillwater R
Clanks Fork of the Yellowstone R
Domestic
0.16
0.09
0.07
0.31
0.04
1.69
0.2
0.08
0.04
0.05
0.08
0.09
0.04
0.78
0.03
0.14
0.06
0.15
0.57
0.39
0.49
0.06
0.29
0.6
0.14
1.62
11.47
0.27
1.07
Upper Yellowstone R-Pompeys Pillar 0.92
Pryor Cr
Lower Bighorn R
Little Bighorn R
Upper Tongue R
Lower Tongue R
Middle Fork Powder R
Upper Powder R
South Fork Powder R -
SaltCr
Crazy Woman Cr
Clear Cr
MiHrflP Pnw/rter R
0.19
0.62
0.2
4.27
0.23
0.07
0
0
0.08
0
0.84
011
Industrial
0
0
0
0
0
0.02
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.08
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.05
0
0
0.05
0
0
0,12
9.68
0
0.02
0
0.06
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.01
n
Agriculture
56.11
12.61
4.43
3.47
2.31
284.98
3.17
6.88
9.38
26.79
34.52
12.22
6.21
90.64
7.07
69.41
12.70
1.00
72.84
15.87
7.44
2.50
54.38
10.70
1.84
422.66
320.74
71.91
603.72
104.14
14.49
226.30
176.73
552.08
40.71
70.98
134.9
44.40
28.45
63.19
218.74
17 Q*
209
-------
Chapter 6 - Water Usage
Table 6.2.1 Water use in million gallons per day for each watershed in the Northern Great Plains
Assessment Area.
Code
10090208
10090209
10090210
10100001
10100002
10100003
10100004
10100005
10110101
10110102
10110201
10110202
10110203
10110204
10110205
10120101
10120102
10120103
10120104
10120105
10120106
10120107
10120108
10120109
10120110
10120111
10120112
10120113
10120201
10120202
10120203
10130101
10130102
10130103
10130104
10130105
10130106
10130201
10130202
10130203
10130204
Name
Little Powder R
Lower Powder R"
Mizpah Cr
Lower Yellowstone R-Sunday
Big Porcupine Cr
Rosebud Cr
Lower Yellostone R
O'Fallon Cr
Missouri R (Lake Sakakawea)
Little Muddy Cr
Upper Little Missouri R
Boxelder Cr
Middle Little Missouri R
Beaver Cr
Lower Little Missouri R
Antelope Cr
Dry Fork Cheyenne R
Upper Cheyenne R
Lance Cr
Lightning Cr
Cheyenne R (Angostura Resevoir)
Beaver Cr
HatCr
Middle Cheyenne R-Spring
Rapid Cr
Middle Cheyenne R-Elk
Lower Cheyenne R
Cherry Cr
Upper Belle Fourche R
Lower Belle Fourche R
Redwater R
Missouri R (Painted Woods)
Missouri R (Upper Lake Oahe)
Apple Cr
Beaver Cr
Missouri R (Lower Lake Oahe)
Western Missouri Coteau
Knife R
Upper Heart R
Lower Heart R
Upper Cannonball R
Domestic
0.1,1
0.06
0.03
1.65
0.03
0.33
2.4 u
0.31
2.23
0.18
0.19
0.04
0.18
0.23
0.34
0
0
0
0
0
0.17
1.38
0.07
1.49
5.94
1.2
0.27 •
0.51
3.12
2.78
1.23
1.08
1.14
6.93
0.41
0.8
0.53
1.01
4.07
3.07
0.35
Industrial
0
0
0
0.14
0
0
0.96
0.01
4.2
0
0
0
0.05
0.01
0.21
0
0
0
0
0
0.07
0
0
0.39
1.69
0.22
0
0
0.09
1.06
0.16
4.13
0.1
0.11
0
0
0 -
0.02
0.11
0.07
0
Agriculture
3.16
10.48
6.76
254.44
8.69
8.59
411.82
6.17
8.94
3.16
13.65
2.27
2.49
1.22
1.49
7.13
5.25
6.52
11.63
9.23
3.93
6.24
12.91
35.52
2.59
1.43
1.97
0.77
19.01
94.02
7.26
7.77
10.06
9.93
1.15
19.08
3.46
3.02
1.38
7.57
0.82
210
-------
Northern Great Plains Aquatic Assessment
Table 6.2.1 Water use in million gallons per day for each watershed in the Northern Great Plains
Assessment Area.
Code
10130205
10130206
10130301
10130302
10130303
10130304
10130305
10130306
10140101
10140102
10140103
10140104
10140105
10140201
10140202
10140203
10140204
10150001
10150002
10150003
10150004
10150005
10150006
10150007
10160001
10160002
10160003
10160004
10160005
10160006
10160007
10160008
10160009
10160010
10160011
10170101
10170102
10180007
10180008
10180009
10180011
miftnni9
Name
Cedar Cr
Lower Cannonball R
North Fork Grand R
South Fork Grand R
Grand River
South Fork Moreau R
Upper Moreau R
Lower Moreau R
Missouri R (Ft Randall Reservoir)
BadR
Medicine Knoll Cr
Medicine Cr
Crow Cr
Upper White R
Middle White R
Little White R
Lower White R
Ponca Cr
Niobrara River Headwaters
Upper Niobrara R
Middle Niobrara R
Snake R
Keya Paha R
Lower Niobrara R
James R Headwaters
Pipestem Cr
Upper James R
ElmCr
MudCr
Middle James R
Eastern Missouri Coteau
Snake Cr
Turtle Cr
Northern Big Sioux Coteau
Lower James R
Missouri R (Lewis & Clark Lake)
Vemnillion R
Middle North Platte R-Casper -
Middle North Platte R (Glendo Res)
Middle North Platte R-Scotts Bluff
Lower Laramie R
Hnrce r.r
Domestic
0.29
0.21
1.71
0.09
0.22
0.07
0.08
0.32
3.58
0.61
0.15
0.16
0.23
2.18
0.21
0.51
0.78
0.41
0.6
2.98
1.17
0.08
0.46
0.64
0.64
0.2
5.25
0.72
0.29
1.99
0.12
0.48
0.53
0.52
4.41
4.93
3.25
7.89
1.4
8.53
1.09
"4*
Industrial
0
0
0.04
0.02
0
0
0
0
0.4
0.05
0
0
0
0.14
0
0
0.01
0.03
0.02
0.29
0.12
0
0.01
0.04
0.07
0
2.81
0
0
1.76
0
0.07
0
0
0.26
0.75
0.13
0.1
0.03
5.6
0
nm
Agriculture
1.10
0.85
0.99
0.57
0.89
0.33
0.78
0.6
29.45
1.44
1.64
0.65
2.11
18.36
2.63
6.48
2.59
2.59
17.69
266.66
53.34
63.28
16.39
127.51
0.55
1.96
17.17
1.40
0.58
13.16
0.82
1.64
2.92
1.49
7.02
111.42
17.84
91.89
60.40
630.21
109.12
71H9
211
-------
Chapter 6 - Water Usage
Table 6.2.1 Water use in million gallons per day for each watershed in the Northern Great Plains
Assessment Area.
Code
Name
Domestic Industrial Agriculture
10180014 Lower North Platte R
10190018 Lower South Platte R
10200101 Middle Platte R-Buffato
10210001 Upper Middle .Loup R
10210002 Dismal R
10210003 Lower Middle Loup R
10210004 South Loup R
10210005 Mud Cr
10210006 Upper North Loup R
10210007 Lower North Loup R
10210008 Calamus R
10210009 Loup R
10210010 CedarR
10220001 Upper Elkhom R
2.07
3.33
8.25
0.39
0.23
1.3
0.96
0.93
0.22
0.91
0.13
2.89
0.55
3.71
0.32
0.48
1.58
0.03
0
0.14
0.07
0.21
0
0.09
0
0.32
0.04
1.91
169.25
175.28
1021.15
8.86
14.01
228.24
103.19
83.73
45.96
163.21
9.94
150.47
65.17
193.23
212
-------
Northern Great Plains Aquatic Assessment
Table 6.2.2 Total
Assessment Area
Watershed Code
09010001
09010002
09010003
09010004
09010005
09020101
09020104
09020105
09020107
09020109
09020201
09020202
09020203
09020204
09020205
09020301
09020306
09020307
09020308
09020310
09020311
09020313
10010002
10030102
10030103
10030104
10030105
10030201
10030202
10030203
10030204
10030205
10040101
10040102
10040103
10040104
10040105
10040106
10040201
10040202
10040203
10040204
Water Use by Source
Ground Water
3.09
0.78
10.33
2.56
0.99
0.48
4.35
10.53
1.95
1.67
3.15
1.37
3.28
8.00
1.38
0.41
0.02
4.95
1.73
0.43
0.12
1.09
0.06
1.92
0.54
3.40
0.17
2.07
1.61
3.77
0.33
1.29
0.42
0.53
3.40
1.07
0.61
0.34
3.50
1.71
0.24
1.00
for each Watershed in
Surface Water
0.62
0.17
12.85
0.35
0.18
0.17
11.81
0.46
0.04
0.49
0.63
0.25
0.39
2.66
0.36
6.79
0.14
0.21
0.21
0.26
1.43
0.98
1.98
64.24
213.47
430.65
1.58
90.62
71.11
166.71
6.55
210.51
6.95
32.92
72.03
41.81
5.21
- .3.07
397.46
72.34
18.14
55.32
the Northern Great Plains
Total
3.71
0.95
23.18
2.91
1.17
0.65
16.16
10.99
1.99
2.16
3.78
1.62
3.67
10.66
1.74
7.20
0.16
5.16
1.94
0.69
1.55
2.07
2.04
66.16
214.01
434.05
1.75
92.69
72.72
170.48
6.88
211.80
7.37
33.45
75.43
42.88
5.82
3.41
400.96
74.05
18.38
56.32
213
-------
Chapter 6 - Water Usage
Table 6.2.2 (cont)
Assessment Area
Watershed Code
' 10040205
10050001
10050002
10050003
10050004
10050005
10050006
10050007
10050008
10050009
10050010
10050011
10050012
10050013
10050014
10050015
10050016
10060001
10060002
10060003
10060004
10060005
10060006
10060007
10070002
10070003
10070004
10070005
10070006
10070007
10070008
10080015
10080016
10090101
10090102
10090201
10090202
10090203
10090204
10090205
10090206
Total Water Use by Source for each Watershed in the Northern Great Plains
Ground Water
7.07
0.07
0.23
0.24
7.08
0.45
0.39
0.27
0.62
0.76
0.29
0.11
3.22
0.12
1.15
0.43
0.30
2.13
0.77
2.34
0.62
0.63
4.83
1.22
4.35
1.38
5.18
2.78
2.08
2.87
0.45
5.12
2.14
1.69
2.43
1.16
2.09
2.76
1.52
0.38
2.56
Surface Water
12.32
4.43
3.68
2.11
280.57
3.00
6.68
9.15
26.22
33.84
12.02
6.14
86.80
6.98
68.39
12.33
0.93
71.57
15.59
5.93
1.94
54.17
6.91
0.77
421.17
175.01
342.04
69.47
604.04
113.01
14.23
222.51.
175.01
556.71
39.75
70.89
135.19
.. 44.88
29.10
63.22
217.13
Total
19.39
4.50
3.91
2.35
287.65
3.45
7.07
9.42
26.84
34.60
12.31
6.25
92.02
7.10
69.54
12.76
1.23
73.70
16.36
8.27
2.56
54.80
11.74
1.99
425.52
176.39
347.22
72.25
606.12
115.88
14.68
227.63
177.15
558.40
42.18
72.05
137.28
47.64
30.62
63.60
219.69
214
-------
Northern Great Plains Aquatic Assessment
Table 6.2.2 (cont.)
Assessment Area
Watershed Code
10090207
10090208
10090209
10090210
10100001
10100002
10100003
10100004
10100005
10110101
10110102
10110201
10110202
10110203
10110204
10110205
10120101
10120102
1.0120103
10120104
10120105
10120106
10120107
10120108
10120109
10120110
10120111
10120112
10120113
10120201
10120202
10120203
10130101
10130102
10130103
10130104
10130105
10130106
10130201
10130202
10130203
10130204
Total Water Use
Ground Water
0.89
10.00
0.39
0.28
3.44
0.19
1.90
6.43
5.43
5.24
2.46
2.53
0.30
1.16
0.47
1.43
6.53
0.66
18.83
11.32
2.99
2.92
5.45
2.07
2.90
14.23
2.01
0.45
0.63
21.46
5.95
4.96
4.94
1.84
10.65
1.34
4.61
2.88
1.67
0.76
1.34
0.86
by Source for each Watershed
Surface Water
17.77
5.37
10.15
6.51
270.40
8.53
8.25
410.47
5.58
22.05
0.90
13.12
2.01
1.97
1.09
0.91
8.68
5.26
7.37
0.47
7.16
1.32
4.32
10.95
43.55
3.37
2.09
1.76
0.54
22.45
97.27
11.75
884.38
13.38
5.76
0.28
. 15.86
- .1.51
8.48
4.79
8.06
0.53
in the Northern Great Plains
Total
18.66
15.37
10.54
6.79
273.84
8.72
10.15
416.90
11.01
27.29
3.36
15.65
2.31
3.13
1.56
2.34
15.21
5.92
26.20
11.79
10.15
4.24
9.77
13.02
46.45
17.60
4.10
2.21
1.17
43.91
103.22
16.71
889.32
15.22
16.41
1.62
20.47
4.39
10.15
5.55
9.40
1.39
215
-------
Chapter 6 - Water Usage
Table 6.2.2 (cont.) Total Water Use by Source
Assessment Area
Watershed
10130205
10130206
10130301
10130302
10130303
10130304
10130305
10130306
10140101
10140102
10140103
10140104
10140105
10140201
10140202
10140203
10140204
10150001
10150002
10150003
10150004
10150005
10150006
10150007
10160001
10160002
10160003
10160004
10160005
10160006
10160007
10160008
10160009
10160010
10160011
10170101
10170102
10180007
10180008
10180009
10180011
Code Ground Water
0.76
0.59
0.71
0.33
0.68
0.20
0.28
0.66
6.99
2.17
1.75
0.28
1.50
10.13
0.86
7.47
2.64
1.25
12.21
249.08
48.41
1.83
14.02
118.02
1.12
1.99
21.66
2.63
0.35
12.01
1.02
1.18
2.57
1.41
6.81
101.30
18.98
15.04
12.98
163.76
16.40
for each Watershed
Surface Water
0.63
0.49
1.31
0.35
0.58
0.20
0.58
0.36
31.18
2.73
0.47
0.63
0.75
15.47
1.97
0.48
1.69
1.47
6.69
24.90
6.90
61.53
3.10
12.36
0.38
0.18
5.25
0.46
0.38
5.35
0.36
0.66
0.83
0.49
5.81
25.82
2.12
271.38
50.91
487.92
110.50
in the Northern Great Plains
Total
1.39
1.08
2.02
0.68
1.26
0.40
0.86
1.02
38.17
4.90
2.22
0.91
2.25
25.60
2.83
7.95
4.33
2.72
18.90
273.98
55.31
63.36
17.12
130.38
1.50
2.17
26.91
3.09
0.73
17.36
1.38
1.84
3.40
1.90
12.62
127.12
. 21.10
286.42
63.89
651.68
126.90
216
-------
Northern Great Plains Aquatic Assessment
Table 6.2.2 (cont.) Total Water Use by Source for each Watershed in the Northern Great Plains
Assessment Area
Watershed Code
10180012
10180014
10190007
10190018
10200101
10210001
10210002
10210003
10210004
10210005
10210006
10210007
10210008
10210009
10210010
10220001
Ground Water
30.20
70.67
0.20
152.64
596.81
8.63
14.06
80.42
100.10
81.37
17.92
51.01
9.46
145.97
62.46
195.23
Surface Water
41.60
103.01
4.88
734.80
456.63
3.69
0.21
150.83
6.07
4.28
28.30
116.28
0.72
14.71
4.13
15.56
Total
71.80
173.68
5.08
887.44
1053.44
12.32
14.27
231.25
106.17
85.65
46.22
167.29
10.18
160.68
66.59
210.79
The total amount of water used in 1995 in
million gallons per day by watershed is
presented in Figure 6.2.1. The Missouri
River near Bismarck, the Middle Platte-
Buffalo, the Lower South Platte, the North
Platte-Scottsbluff, Clarks Fork of the
Yellowstone and the Upper Tongue are
watersheds where more than 500 million
gallons per day are withdrawn. A little over a
billion gallons of water per day are used in
the Middle Platte-Buffalo watershed (much
the use is outside of the NGPAA). Water
use for thermoelectric cooling and irrigation
drive these amounts. The Yellowstone, Milk
and Loup Rivers are also important areas for
total water use. Total consumptive use of
water (Figure 6.2.2) is greatest in the Platte
watershed and other irrigated areas. Some
high total use areas such as the Missouri
River in central North Dakota fall out since it
is not consumptive.
Examining the source of the water used
as shown in Figures 6.2.3 and 6.2.4 presents
some obvious regional differences. By far,
most of the groundwater use is in Nebraska
in the Platte, Niobrara and Loup watersheds.
Several watersheds have withdrawals of
more than 100 million gallons per day of
ground water. In contrast, while very large
amounts of surface water are also used in
the North Platte basin, some areas where
little groundwater is used show large
amounts of surface water use. These
include central North Dakota, mainly a result
of large thermoelectric cooling uses and the
Yellowstone, Clarks Fork of the Yellowstone,
the Milk and the Marais Rivers for irrigation.
Irrigation and thermoelectric cooling
overwhelm most other uses of water in the
Northern Great Plains. Figure 6.2.5 shows
the total water use for irrigation, and the
map, with a few exceptions, is very similar to
the map of the total water use. Irrigation is
done in the western and southern portions of
the Northern Great Plains, with surface water
supplying much of the irrigation water in the
west (along with the North Platte) and ground
water supplying the watersheds in Nebraska
217
-------
Total Water
Use, MGD
0-100
101 - 500
501 - 1000
> 1000
Figure 6.2.1 Total Water Use in 1995 in the Northern Great Plains
-------
Consumptive
Water Use, MGD
o • so
51 -100
101-250
>250
Figure 6.2.2 Total Consumptive Water Use in 1995 in the Northern Great Plains
-------
Surface Water
Use, MOD
101 - 250
251 - 500
>500
Figure 6.2.3 Total Surface Water Use in 1995 in the Northern Great Plains
-------
Ground Water
Use, MOD
0-50
51-100
101 - 250
>250
Figure 6.2.4 Total Ground Water Use in 1995 in the Northern Great Plains
-------
Irrigation Water
Use, MGD
0-50
51-100
101-500
>500
Figure 6.2.5 Total Water Use for Irrigation in 1995 in the Northern Great Plains
-------
Northern Great Plains Aquatic Assessment
with irrigation water (see Figures 6.2.6 and
6.2.7). Sufficient rainfall in the north and
east reduces the need for irrigation in those
areas. Figure 6.2.8 presents amounts of
wateriest in irrigation, with again, the Platte,
Loup and Yellowstone basins standing out.
More than 200 million gallons of water per
day are consumed in the Middle North Platte
and Middle Platte watersheds. The map of
total consumptive loss of water looks very
similar to the consumptive use map for
irrigation water, indicating that this activity is
the greatest consumptive user of water.
Figure 6.2.9 presents the largest use of
water for thermoelectric cooling, with more
than 500 million gallons per day used in
central North Dakota and the Lower South
Platte. The North Platte near Casper also
has significant uses of water for
thermoelectric cooling. In general, the vast
majority of this water is returned to the river
after use and very little is consumed.
Other uses of water in the Northern Great
Plains include public water supply, mining
and hydroelectric generation. Figure 6.2.10
shows where the greatest withdrawals for
public water supply occur. Not surprisingly,
these match where the largest cities and
towns are located. Only seven watersheds
withdraw more than 10 million gallons per
day for public supply and they are mainly on
the margins of the NGPAA. Large portions
of the NGPAA are dependent upon ground
water for domestic supply, even though
these may not be large, they are significant
For example, according to the North Dakota
Department of Health, groundwater provides
drinking water for 60% of the state's
population (95% of all rural residents) and 47
billion gallons are withdrawn annually from
North Dakota aquifers (North Dakota
Department of Health. 1994). In South
Dakota as well, more than three-fourths of
the population uses groundwater for
domestic use and almost 50% of the 450
million gallons of water used per day in South
Dakota is groundwater (South Dakota
Department of Environment and Natural
Resources, 1996).
Figures 6.2.11 and 6.2.12 show the
greatest withdrawals for ground water and
surface water, respectively, for mining. The
large ground water withdrawals in Wyoming
represent coal mining activities, while the
large surface water withdrawals represent
sand and gravel operations in Nebraska and
hard rock mining in the Black Hills. Figure
6.2.13 represents the water use for
hydroelectric facilities. This matches the
location of the largest dams on the Missouri
River, with other important hydroelectric
facilities on the North Platte and Platte
Rivers. An average of more than 10 billion
gallons per day of water is used for
hydropower generation on the mainstem
dams of the Missouri River (with the
exception of Fort Peck, which is somewhat
lower).
Figure 6.2.14 presents the changes in
water use for agriculture between 1985 and
1995. Large increases in agricultural water
use have occurred in Loup, Platte, Tongue,
Powder, Upper Yellowstone and Marais River
basins watersheds. Decreases have
occurred in much of the central NGPAA,
especially in the Lower Belle Fourche and
Middle Niobrara basins. Figure 6.2.15 shows
the changes in ground water use between
1985 and 1995. The Middle Platte-Buffalo
and Lewis and Clark Lake show the greatest
increases in ground water use. The Middle-
Platte-Buffalo had by far the greatest
increase with more than 233 million gallons
per day more of ground water use in 1995
than in 1985. Figure ~ 6.2.16 presents
changes in surface water use between 1985
and 1995. This map and the total water use
map (Figure 6.2.17) are similar to the change
in agricultural water use map, showing the
223
-------
Ground Water
Irrigation
Use, MGD
0-50
51-100
101 - 250
>250
Figure 6.2.6 Ground Water Irrigation Use in 1995 in the Northern Great Plains
-------
Surface Water
Irrigation
Use, MGD
0-50
51 -100
101 - 250
>250
Figure 6.2.7 Surface Water Use for Irrigation in 1995 in the Northern Great Plains
-------
Consumptive
Irrigation
Use, MGD
0-50
SI-100
101 .250
>250
Figure 6.2.8 Consumptive Irrigation Use in 1995 in the Northern Great Plains
-------
Thermoelectric
Water Use, MGD
Bill 0-25
26-500
>500
Figure 6.2.9 Thermoelectric Water Use in 1995 in the Northern Great Plains
-------
Public Water
Supply Use,
MGD
Figure 6.2.10 Water Use for Public Supply in 1995 in the Northern Great Plains
-------
Ground Water
Use far
Mining, MGD
0,01 -3
3.01 - 8
>8
Figure 6.2.11 Ground Water Use for Mining in 1995 in the Northern Great Plains
-------
Surface Water
• Use for
Mining, MGD
0.0 1 . 3
Figure 6.2.12 Surface Water Use for Mining in 1995 in the Northern Great Plains
-------
Hydroelectric Water
Use, MOD
0 - WOO
1001 - 5000
5001 - 10000
10001 - 36000
Figure 6.2.13 Water Use for Hydroelectric Facilities in 1995 in the Northern Great Plains
-------
Water Use Trends
for Agriculture,
MGD
-900 - -51
•50 • -0.01
0-50
51-410
Figure 6.2.14 Changes in Agricultural Water Use between 1985 and 1995 in the Northern Great Plains
-------
Ground Water
Trends, MGD
Figure 6.2.15 Changes in Ground Water Use between 1985 and 1995 in the Northern Great Plains
-------
Surface Water
Use Trends, MGD
-100 - 0
0-50
50- 100
> 100
Figure 6.2.16 Changes in Surface Water Use between 1985 and 1995 in the Northern Great Plains
-------
.Total Water
Use Trends, MOD
<-50
•50-0
0-50
>50
Figure 6.2.17 Changes in Total Water Use (Ground and Surface) belween 1985 and 1995 in the Northern Great Plains
-------
significance of irrigation and other agricultural
uses to the region. When agricultural use
increases or decreases in a watershed, it is
heavily reflected in the total usage.
Water Uses On National Forest Lands
Water use on the National Grassland
Units primarily consists of primarily for
livestock uses. The Forest Service generally
only applies for water rights for drilling wells
and surface water for dams, both of these to
serve mainly livestock.
Some new pressures are beginning to
occur, however. One example is in the
Sheyenne National Grassland where the
underlying ground water is being requested
for domestic use due to contaminated ground
water surrrounding it.
Future Trends
In some parts of the NGPAA, water use
and demands are on the increase, mainly in
areas where agriculture and growth of cities
are occurring. In some areas, however, the
opposite is happening, with agricultural and
public water use declining. Even in areas
where it is declining; however, lower quality
of sources may drive the need for hew
supplies.
236
-------
Evaluation of the Assessment, Data Gaps and
Future Work
The Northern Great Plains is a vast area
containing many different types of aquatic
resources ranging from small isolated
wetlands to large reservoirs and from small
streams to large rivers and vast aquifers.
This assessment only begins to reach into a
basic understanding of the condition of these
resources. There is both much more data
that could have been analyzed and many
data gaps that still need to be filled in the
knowledge of this region.
Considering the large scale of this effort,
there was much more depth that could have
been covered. Many more stations with
water quality and quantity data could be
analyzed rather than one station from each
watershed. However, greater detail at this
scale was not possible in the time frame for
the assessment. It is hoped that information
presented at the scale in the report will lead
to further investigation of those areas that
obviously need a closer look. The report also
suffered from a necessary reliance upon
305b report data. There are numerous
problems with reporting this data across a
region, as was discussed in Chapter 2,
including differing definitions of impaired,
differing uses of source or cause categories
and especially great variability in number of
miles assessed in any given watershed. In
order to get a sense of the condition of water
quality across this region, however, there
was little alternative to this data.
There are, however, large gaps in data for
this region. This probably results from both
the great distances and limited funds for
sampling and from, the perception that the
problems are not as great in this region as in
others. There is a lack of water quality data
fora number of parameters for many stations
in the region probably for the reasons
mentioned. The data used for certain water
quality parameters came mostly from the
Storet database and errors were found.
Storet is undergoing modernization and
hopefully in the future this database will be
more reliable. However, sampling has to be
done in these areas, much of the problem
with Storet was lack of data. There are
needs for more biological sampling to assess
biological and ecological condition of many
areas within the region. Much work has been
done, but it is generally limited to a few
particular areas. That is beginning to
change, however, as a number of agencies
begin to focus resources on the Missouri
River and the larger basin. Other types of
monitoring that would be valuable in the
region are fish tissue monitoring, possibly
greater groundwater sampling efforts and a
more regional analysis of riparian condition.
Another area in the assessment that
could have used more development was the
functional analysis described in Section 2.7.
This assessment was only able to analyze six
fish species, comparing their physiological
needs with the measured conditions in the
watersheds they inhabit. In future work,
many more species used in the analysis
(including species other than fish), as well as
more parameters and especially more
stations. As was discovered, the station
chosen to represent a particular watershed
may not represent the best habitat for a
given species, while others in the watershed
may be fine, giving the impression of
problems that may not exist. Conversely, the
one station chosen may be the best habitat
for a given species and its condition in the
watershed may not be as healthy as
presented.
Future work planned for this region
includes several large-scale monitoring
efforts. One is the U. S. EPA's
237
-------
Environmental Monitoring and Assessment
Program's (EMAP) Western Initiative which
will focus on the Upper Missouri River Basin.
Another is the U. S. EPA Region 8 Regional-
EMAP project centered on development of
' indices of biological integrity for small
streams in eastern Montana and riverine
wetlands in North Dakota. In addition, a
number of federal and state agencies have
put forth a proposal called the Missouri River
Environmental Assessment Program to carry
out monitoring and research studies for the
mainstem of the Missouri River. Many of
these agencies have been involved for the
past few years in a study of the benthic
fishes of the Missouri River from Montana to
Missouri. The work by The Nature
Conservancy and Natural Heritage Programs
on critical areas of biological significance will
help focus on where the areas in the best
condition are. All of these studies and others
will begin to shed light on a system that has
been neglected in terms of environmental
monitoring.
238
-------
List of Figures
Figure 1.2.1 The Northern Great Plains Assessment Area
Figure 1.3.1 Watersheds of the Northern Great Plains Assessment Area
Figure 1.4.1 Ecological Regions of the Northern Great Plains Assessment Area
Figure 2.2.1 Precipitation During 1990
Figure 2.2.2 Precipitation During 1993
Figure 2.2.3 Stream Density
Figure 2.2.4 Amount of Reservoir Area in each Watershed
Figure 2.2.5 Minimum Flows During the Period 1980 to 1995
Figure 2.2.6 Mean Flows During the Period 1980 to 1995
Figure 2.2.7 Maximum Flows During the Period 1980 to 1995
Figure 2.3.1 Miles of Streams Not Fully Supporting Uses
Figure 2.3.2 Miles of Streams Not Supporting Uses
Figure 2.3.3 Percentage of Miles of Streams Not Fully Supporting Uses
Figure 2.3.4 Percentage of Miles of Streams Not Supporting Uses
Figure 2.3.5 Lake Acres Not Fully Supporting Uses
Figure 2.3.6 Percentage of Lake Acres Not Fully Supporting Uses
Figure 2.3.7 Median Levels of Fecal Conforms
Figure 2.3.8 Maximum Levels of Fecal Coliforms
Figure 2.3.9 Median Levels of Dissolved Solids
Figure 2.3.10 Maximum Levels of Dissolved Solids
Figure 2.3.11 Median Levels of Dissolved Oxygen
Figure 2.3.12 Minimum Levels of Dissolved Oxygen
Figure 2.3.13 Median Levels of Total Solids
Figure 2.3.14 Maximum Levels of Total Solids *•
Figure 2.3.15 Median BOD
Figure 2.3.16 Stream Miles Impacted by Ammonia
239
-------
Figure 2.4.1 Pesticides in Ground Water
Figure 2.6.1 Distribution of Endangered and Special Concern Fish Species by Watershed
Figure 2.6.2, Distribution of Endangered and Special Concern Fish Species by Ecoregion
Figure 2.6.3 Pallid Sturgeon Occurrence
Figure 2.6.4 Topeka Shiner Occurrence
Figure 2.6.5 Sicklefm Chub Occurrence
Figure 2.6.6 Sturgeon Chub Occurrence
Figure 2.6.7 Lake Sturgeon Occurrence
Figure 2.6.8 Pugnose Shiner Occurrence
Figure 2.6.9 Greater Redhorse Occurrence
Figure 2.7.1 Functional Analysis for Emerald Shiner
Figure 2.7.2 Functional Analysis for Fathead Minnow
Figure 2.7.3 Functional Analysis forLongnose Dace
Figure 2.7.4 Functional Analysis for Yellow Perch
Figure 2.7.5 Functional Analysis for Pallid Sturgeon
Figure 2.7.6 Functional Analysis for Walleye
«
Figure 3.2.1 Concentration of Palustrine Wetlands in the Northern Great Plains
Figure 3.2.2 Historical Wetlands Loss
Figure 3.2.3 Recent Wetlands Changes
Figure 3.2.4 Acres of Palustrine Wetlands
Figure 3.2.5 Changes in Palustrine Wetlands
Figure 3.3.1 Riverine Wetlands in the Northern Great Plains Assessment Area
Figure 3.3.2 Changes in Riverine Wetlands
Figure 3.3.3 Miles of Streams within each Watershed Impacted by Vegetation Removal or Streambank
Alteration
Figure 3.4.1 Intensive Human Influence
Figure 3.4.2 Grassland Areas in the Northern Great Plains
Figure 3.4.3 Coniferous Forest Areas in the Northern Great Plains
240
-------
Figure 5.2.1 Human Population in the Northern Great Plains
Figure 5.2.2 Changes in Human Population
Figure 5.3.1 Miles of Streams Impacted by Channelization
Figure 5.3.2 Miles of Streams Impacted by Hydrologic Modifications
Figure 5.3.3 Acres of Irrigated Land by Watershed
Figure 5.3.4 Acres of Irrigated Land by County
Figure 5.4.1 Major Point Source Dischargers
Figure 5.4.2 Total Point Source Dischargers
Figure 5.4.3 Miles of Streams Impacted by Municipal Point Sources
Figure 5.4.4 Location of Mines
Figure 5.4.5 Miles of Streams Impacted by Resource Extraction
Figure 5.4.6 Miles of Streams Impacted by Pathogens
Figure 5.4.7 Miles of Streams Impacted by Organic Enrichment and Low Dissolved Oxygen
Figure 5.4.8 Miles of Streams Impacted by Metals
Figure 5.4.9 Miles of Streams Impacted by Animal Feeding and Holding Operations
Figure 5.4.10 Miles of Streams Impacted by Agriculture
*
Figure 5.4.11 Miles of Streams Impacted by Nutrients
Figure 5.4.12 Miles of Streams Impacted by Siltation
Figure 5.4.13 Miles of Streams Impacted by Salinity
Figure 5.4.14 Miles of Streams Impacted by Grazing
Figure 5.4.15 Miles of Streams Impacted by Irrigated Crop Production
Figure 5.4.16 Miles of Streams Impacted by Nonirrigated Crop Production
Figure 5.4.17 Miles of Streams Impacted by Thermal Modifications
Figure 5.4.18 Harvested Cropland
Figure 5.4.19 Total Animal Units
Figure 5.4.20 Nitrogen Fertilizer Use, 1985
Figure 5.4.21 Nitrogen Fertilzer Sales, 1991
Figure 5.4.22 Potential Nitrogen Runoff
241
-------
Figure 5.4.23 Potential Pesticide Runoff
Figure 5.4.24 Atrazine Use
Figure 5.4.25 2.4-D Use
Figure 5.4.26 Sediment Delivery Potential
Figure 5.4.27 Universal Soil Loss Equation Values for the Northern Great Plains
Figure 5.4.28 Miles of Streams Impacted by Highway Construction/Maintenance
Figure 6.2.1 Total Water Use
Figure 6.2.2 Total Consumptive Use
Figure 6.2.3 Total Ground Water Use
Figure 6.2.4 Total Surface Water Use
Figure 6.2.5 Total Water Use for Irrigation
Figure 6.2.6 Surface Water Irrigation Use
Figure 6.2.7 Ground Water Irrigation Use
Figure 6.2.8 Consumptive Use of Water for Irrigation
Figure 6.2.9 Thermoelectric Cooling Water Use
Figure 6.2.10 Public Water Supply Use
Figure 6.2.11 Ground Water Withdrawals for Mining
Figure 6.2.12 Surface Water Withdrawals for Mining
Figure 6.2.13 Hydroelectric Facility Water Use
Figure 6.2.14 Changes in Agricultural Water Use
Figure 6.2.15 Changes in Ground Water Use
Figure 6.2.16 Changes in Surface Water Use
Figure 6.2.17 Changes in Total Water Use
242
-------
List of Tables
Table 2.2.1 Watersheds of the Northern Great Plains Assessment Area
Table 2.3.1 Beneficial Use Classifications for Surface Water
Table 2.3.2 Trophic Status of Lakes in the Northern Great Plains States
Table 2.4.1 Ground Water Classification System in Montana
Table 2.4.2 Trends in Nitrogen Fertilizer Use
Table 2.5.1 Fish Species in the Northern Great Plains
Table 2.5.2 Aquatic Amphibian and Reptile Species of the Northern Great Plains
Table 2.6.1 Threatened, Endangered and Special Concern Aquatic Species in the Northern Great Plains
Table 2.6.2 Threatened, Endangered, and Special Concern Aquatic Species as listed by the Individual
States
Table 2.7.1 Species Used in the Netweaver Analysis with Guilds Represented
Table 2.8.1 Aquatic Landscapes of Biological Significance
Table 4.2.1 Other Statutes with Provisions for Protecting Aquatic Resources
Table 5.4.1 Watersheds with the most Major NPDES Dischargers
Table 5.4.2 Watersheds with the most Total Number of Dischargers
Table 6.2.1 Total Water Use by Category
Table 6.2.2 Total Water Use by Source
243
-------
References
Alexander, R.B. and R.A. Smith. 1990. County-
Level Estimates of Nitrogen and Phosphorus
Fertilizer Use in the United States 1945 to 1985.
U.S. Geological Survey. Open-File Report 90-130.
Rest on, VA.
Ashton, D.E. and E.M. Dowd. 1991. Fragile Legacy.
Endangered, Threatened and Rare Animals of South
Dakota. South Dakota Department of Game, Fish
and Parks, Report No. 91-04. Jamestown, ND:
Northern Prairie Wildlife Research Center Home
Page.
http://www.npsc.nbs.gov/resource/distr/others/sdra
re/sdrare.htm (Version 16JUL97)
Behan, M. 1981. The Missouri's Stately
Cottonwoods, How Can We Save Them? Montana
Magazine. Sept:76-77.
Behler, J.L. and F.W. King. 1979. TTie Audubon
Society Field Guide to North American Reptiles and
Amphibians. Alfred A. Knopf, New York. 743 p.
Bentall, R. 1990. Streams. \n: An Atlas of the Sand
Hills. Bleed. A. and C. Flowerday, Eds. University of
Nebraska, Lincoln, NE. p. 93.
Berry, C.R., W.G. Duffy, R. Walsh, S. Kubeny, D.
Schumacher and G. Van Eeckhout. 1993. The
James River of the Dakotas. In: Proceedings of the
Symposium on Restoration Planning for the Rivers
of the Mississippi River Ecosystem. Hesse, L.W.,
C.B. Stalnaker, N.G. Benson and J.R. Zuboy, eds.
Biological Report 19. National Biological Survey,
October 1993. p. 70-86.
Bleed, A. 1990. Groundwater. In: An Atlas of the
Sand Hills. Bleed, A. and C. Flowerday, Eds.
University of Nebraska-Lincoln, p. 67.
Bleed, A. and M. Ginsberg. 1990. Lakes and
Wetlands. In: An Atlas of the Sand Hills. Bleed, A.
and C. Flowerday, Eds. University of Nebraska,
Lincoln, NE. p. 115.
Brigham, M.E., L.H. Tomes and D.L Lorenz. 1994.
Load Estimates for Pesticides in the Red River of
the North Drainage Basin. American Geophysical ^
Union, EOS Transactions, Abstracts for Fall
Meeting, December 5-9,1994. p. 230.
Brode, J.M. and R.B. Bury. 1984. The Importance
of Riparian Systems to Amphibians and Reptiles. In:
California Riparian Systems: Ecology, Conservation
and Productive Management. Warner, R.E. and
K.M. Hendrix, Eds. University of California Press,
Berkeley, CA. p. 30-36.
Brouchard, D.C., M.K. Williams and R.Y.
Surampalli. 1992. Nitrate Contamination of
Groundwater: Sources and Potential Health Effects.
AWWA Journal. September 1992.
Brun, L.T., J.L. Richardson, J.W. Enz, and J.K.
Larson. 1981. Stream flow changes in the southern
Red River Valley. N.D. Farm Res. 38:1-14.
Busch. D.E. arid M.L. Scott. 1995. Western
Riparian Ecosystems. In: Our Living Resources.
LaRoe, E.T., et. at. Eds. U.S. Department of the
Interior. National Biological Survey. Washington,
D. C.
Carter, J.G., R.A. Valdez, RJ. Ryel and V.A.
Lamarra. 1985. Fisheries Habitat Dynamics in the
Upper Colorado River. J. Freshwater Ecol. 3:249-
264.
Center for Wildlife Law and Defenders of Wildlife.
1996. Status of Biodiversity. A Status Report on
State Laws, Policies and Programs. Center for
Wildlife Law, Albuquerque, NM and Defenders of
Wildlife, Washington, DC. 218pp.
Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe. 1997. Aquatic
Ecological Surveys of the Moreau and Cheyenne
Rivers, South Dakota, 1997. Report Prepared for
the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe, Eagle Butte, SD.
Collins, J.T. 1985. Natural Kansas. University of
Kansas Press. 226 p.
Colorado Water Quality Control Division. 1990.
Nonpoint Source Management Program. Prepared
in association with the Colorado Nonpoint Source
Task Force. October, 1990.
Com, P.S. and Peterson, C.R. 1996. Prairie
Legacies-Amphibians and Reptiles. Pages 125-134
In: Prairie Conservation. Preserving North America's
Most Endangered Ecosystem. Samson, F.B. and
F.L. Knopf, Eds. Island Press.
Council for Agricultural Scierice and Technology.
1992. Water Quality: Agriculture's Role. Task Force
Report, ISSN 0194-4096; no. 120, December 1992.
Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet and E.T.
LaRoe. 1979. Classification of Wetlands and
244
-------
Northern Great Plains Aquatic Assessment
Deepwater Habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service Report FWS/OBS-79/31.131 p.
Cross, F.B., R.L. Mayden and J.D. Stewart. 1986.
Fishes in the Western Mississippi Basin (Missouri,
Arkansas and Red Rivers). In: The Zoogeography
of North American Freshwater Fishes. Hocutt, C.H.
and E.O. Wiley, Eds. John Wiley and Sons, New
York, p. 363-412.
Cross, F.B. and R.E. Moss. 1987. Historic Changes
in Fish Communities and Aquatic Habitats in Plains
Streams of Kansas. In: Community and Evolutionary
Ecology of North American Stream Fishes.
Matthews, W.J. and D.C. Heins, Eds. University of
Oklahoma Press, Norman, OK. p. 155-165.
Crumpton, W.G. and A. van der Valk. 1991.
Transformation and Fate of Nitrate, Atrazine and
Alachtorin Freshwater Wetlands. Leopold Grant 90-
63. Iowa State University, Ames, IA.
Cummins, K.W. and R.W. Merritt. 1984. Ecology
and Distribution of Aquatic Insects. In: An
Introduction to the Aquatic Insects of North America.
Merritt, R.W. and K.W. Cummins, Eds.
Kendall/Hunt Publishing Co., Dubuque, IA. p. 59-65.
Cvancara, A.M. 1983. Aquatic Mollusks of North
Dakota. North Dakota Geological Survey Report of
Investigation. No. 78,128 p. , *
Dahl, T.E., 1990. Wetlands-Losses in the United
States, 1780's to 1980's. U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service Report to Congress, U. S Fish and Wildlife
Service, Washington, D.C.
Dahl, T.E., C.E. Johnson and W.E. Frayer. 1991.
Wetlands - Status and Trends in the Conterminous
United States, mid-1970s to mid-1980s. U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service Report to Congress, U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service, Washington, D. C. 22 p.
Druliner, A. D., H. H. Chen and T. S. McGrath.
1996. Relations of Nonpoint-Source Nitrate and
Atrazine Concentrations in the High Plains Aquifer to
Selected Explanatory Variables in Six Nebraska
Study Areas. U.S. Geological Survey. Water-
Resources Investigations Report 95-4202. Lincoln,
NE.
Ellis, J.M., G.B. Farabee and J.B. Reynolds. 1979.
Fish Communities in Three Successional Stages of
Side Channels in the Upper Mississippi River.
Trans. Mo. Acad. Sci. 13:5-20.
Faanes, C.A., and R.E. Stewart. 1982. Revised
Checklist of North Dakota Birds. Prairie Nat.
14:81-92.
Federal Register. 1997. Proposed Rule To List the
Topeka Shiner as Endangered. October 24, 1997.
Volume 62, Number 206. Page 55381-55388. U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Department of
Interior.
Fenner, P., W.W. Brady and D.R. Patton. 1985.
Effects of Regulated Water Flows on Regeneration
of Fremont Cottonwood. Journal of Range
Management. 38(2):135-138.
Finch, D. M. and LF. Ruggerio. 1993. Wildlife
Habitats and Biological Diversity in the Rocky
Mountains and Northern Great Plains. Natural Areas
Journal. 13:191-203.
Flores. D. 1995. History, Environment and the
Future of the Great Plains. In: Conservation of
Great Plains Ecosystems. Johnson, S.R. and A.
Bouzaher, Eds. Kluwer Academic Publishers, p. 3.
Freeman, P. 1990. Reptiles and Amphibians. In:
An Atlas of the Sand Hills. Bleed, A, and C.
Flowerday, eds., University of Nebraska-Lincoln, p.
67.
Frenzel, S.A. 1996. An Application of
Bioassessment Metrics and Muttivariate Techniques
to Evaluate Central Nebraska Streams. U.S.
Geological Survey. Water-Resources Investigations
Report 96-4152. Lincoln, NE.
Frenzel, S A and R.B. Swanson. 1996. Relations
of Fish Community Composition to Environmental
Variables in Streams of Central Nebraska, USA.
Environmental Management, Vol. 20, No. 5, p. 689-
705.
Friedman, J.M., M.L Scott and G.T. Auble. 1997.
Water Management and Cottonwood Forest
Dynamics Along Prairie Streams. In: Ecology and
Conservation of Great Plains Vertebrates. Knopf,
F.L. and F.B. Samson, Eds. Springer-Vertag, New
York, NY. p. 49-69.
Frith, C. 1974. The Ecology of the Platte River as
Related to Sandhill Cranes and Other Waterfowl in
SouthcentralNebraska. M.S. Thesis, Kearney State
College, Kearney, NE, 115 p.
Funk, J.L. 1970. WarmwaferSfreams. A Century of
245
-------
References
Fisheries in North America, American Fisheries
Society Symposium 7:141-152.
Ginsberg, M. 1965. Nebraska's Sandhills Lakes - A
Hydrogeologic Overview. Water Resources Bulletin.
v. 21, no. 4, p. 573-578.
Goldstein, R.M. 1995. Aquatic Communities and
Contaminants in Fish from Streams of the Red River
of the North Basin, Minnesota and North Dakota.
U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources
Investigations Report 95-4047. Mounds View, MM.
Goldstein, R.M., M.E. Brigham and J.C. Stauffer.
1996. Comparison of Mercury Concentrations in
Liver, Muscle, Whole Bodies, and Composites of
Fish from the Red River of the North. Canadian
Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences. 53:244-
252.
Goolsby, D.A., E.M. Thurman and D.W. Kolpin.
1991. Herbicides in streams - Midwestern United
States. In: Irrigation and Drainage: Proceedings of
the 1991 National Conference, Honolulu, HI, July 22-
26, 1991. W. F. Ritter, ed., American Society of
Civil Engineers, New York, NY.
Graf, W.L 1988. Fluvial Processes in Dryland
Rivers. Springer-Verlag, New York.
Greene, E.A., C.L. Sowards and E.W. HansmaTin.
1990. Reconaissance Investigation of Water
Quality, Bottom Sediment and Biota Associated with
Irrigation Drainage in the Angostura Reclamation
Unit, Southwestern South Dakota 1988-89. U.S.
Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigators
Report 90-4152.
Grue, C.E., L.R. De Weese, P. Mineau, G.A.
Swanson, J.R. Foster, P.M. Arnold, J.N. Huckins,
P.J. Sheehan, W.K. Marshall, and A.P. Ludden.
1986. Potential Impacts of Agricultural Chemicals
on Waterfowl and Other Wildlife Inhabiting Prairie
Wetlands: An Evaluation of Research Needs and
Approaches. Trans. N. Am. Wildl. Nat. Resour. Conf.
51:357-383.
Haddix, M.H. and C.C. Esles. 1976. Lower
Yellowstone River fisheries study, Final Report. /
Montana Department'of Fish and Game, Helena, "
MT.
Hammad, H.Y. 1972. River Bed Degradation After
Closure of Dams. Proceedings of the American
Society of Civil Engineers, Hydraul. Div. 98:591-
607.
Hansen, R.A. and A.J. Repsys. 1986. The James
River Demonstration Project in South Dakota:
Assessments on the Effects of Dredging Activities on
Selected Physical, Chemical and Biological
Parameters. South Dakota Department of Water
and Natural Resources, Pierre, SD.
Harrington, J.A. and J.R. Harmon. 1995. Climate
and Vegetation in Central North America: Natural
Patterns and Human Alterations. In: Conservation of
Great Plains Ecosystems. Johnson, S.R. and A.
Bouzaher, Eds., Kluwer Academic Publishers, p.
135.
Hesse, L.W., R.L. Brown and J.F. Heisinger. 1975.
Mercury Contamination of Birds from a Polluted
Watershed. Journal of Wildlife Management. 39(2).
Hesse, L.W. and G.E. Mestl. 1993. An Alternative
Hydrograph for the Missouri River Based on the
Precontrol Condition. North American Journal of
Fisheries Management 13:360-366.
Hesse, L.W., J.C. Schmulbach, J.M. Carr, K.D.
Keenlyne, D.G. Unkenholz, J.W. Robinson and G.E.
Mestl. 1989. Missouri River Fishery Resources in
Relation to Past, Present and Future Stresses. In:
Proceedings on the International Large River
Symposium. D.P. Dodge, Ed. Canadian Special
Publication of Fisheries Aquatic Sciences 106. p.
352-371.
Hibbard, E.A. 1972. Vertebrate Ecology and
Zoogeography of the Missouri River Valley in North
Dakota. Doctoral Dissertation. North Dakota State
University, Department of Zoology, Fargo, ND.
Hill, E.F., and M.B. Camardese. 1986. Lethal Dietary
Toxicities of Environmental Contaminants and
Pesticides to Cotumix. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Tech.
Rep. 2.147 pp.
Holberg, T. and C. Cause. 1992. Reptiles and
Amphibians of North Dakota. North Dakota
Outdoors, 55(1):7-19.
Hopkins, R.B., F.J. Cassel and A.J. Bjugstad. 1986.
Relationships Between Breeding Birds and
Vegetation in Four Woodland Types of the Little
Missouri Grassland. Research Paper RM-270, U.S.
Forest Service Rocky Mountain Forest and Range
Experiment Station, Fort Collins, CO.
246
-------
Northern Great Plains Aquatic Assessment
Hubert, W.A. 1993. The Powder Riven A Relatively
Pristine Stream on the Great Plains. In:
Proceedings of the Symposium on Restoration
Planning for the Rivers of the Mississippi River
Ecosystem. L.W. Hesse, C. B. Stalnaker, N.G.
Benson and J.R. Zuboy, Eds. Biological Report 19.
National Biological Survey, October 1993. p. 387-
395.
Hudson, R.H., R.K. Tucker, and M.A. Haegele.
1984. Handbook of Toxicity of Pesticides to
Wildlife. 2nd ed. Fish Wildl. Serv. Resour. Publ.
153.90pp.
Huntzinger, T.L 1995. Surface Water A Critical
Resource of the Great Plains. In: Conservation of
Great Plains Ecosystems. Johnson, S.R. and A.
Bouzaher, Eds. p. 253-273.
Johnsgaard, P. A. 1979. Birds of the Great Plains.
University of Nebraska Press, Lincoln, NE. 539 p.
Johnson, R.R. and K.F. Higgins. 1997. Wetland
Resources of Eastern South Dakota. Brookings:
South Dakota State University. 102 pp.
Johnson, W.C. 1992. Dams and Riparian Forests:
Case Study from the Upper Missouri River. Rivers.
Vol. 3 No. 4, pp. 229-242.
Johnson, W.C., R.L Burgess and W.R. Keammerer.
1976. Forest Overstory Vegetation and
Environment on the Missouri River Floodplain in
North Dakota. Ecological Monographs. 46(1): 59-
84.
Jorgensen, D.G., J. O. Helgesen and J. L. Imes.
1993. Regional Aquifers in Kansas, Nebraska, and
Parts of Arkansas, Colorado, Missouri, New Mexico,
Oklahoma, South Dakota, Texas and Wyoming -
Geohydrologic Framework. USGS Survey
Professional Paper 1414-B. Washington, D.C.
Kalliola, R., J. Salo, M. Puhakka and M. Rajasilta.
1992. New Site Formation and Colonizing
Vegetation in Primary Succession on the Western
Amazon Floodplains. Journal of Ecology. 79:877-
901.
Kantrud, HA, J.B. Hillar, and A.G. van der Valk.
1989. Vegetation of Wetlands in the Prairie Potholes
Region. In: Northern Prairie Wetlands. A.G. van der
Valk, ed. Iowa State University Press, Ames, IA. p.
132-187.
Karr, J.R. 1981. Assessment of Bfotic Integrity
Using Fish Communities. Fisheries, v. 6, p. 21-27.
Keammerer, W.R., W.C. Johnson and R.L. Burgess.
1975. Floristic Analysis of the Missouri River
Bottomland Forests in North Dakota. Canadian Field
Naturalist. 89(1):5-19.
Keefer, W.R. 1974. Regional Topography,
Physiography and Geology of the Northern Great
Plains, USGS Report 74-50, Prepared for the
Northern Great Plains Resources Program.
The Keystone Center. 1991. Final Consensus
Report of the Keystone Policy Dialogue on Biological
Diversity on Federal Lands. The Keystone Center.
Keystone, CO.
Kling H.J. 1975. Phytoplankton Successions and
Species Distribution in Prairie Ponds of the
Erickson-Elphinstone District, South-Western
Manitoba. Fish. Mar. Serv. Tech. Rep. No. 512.
Winnipeg. 31 p.
Knopf, F.L. and F.B. Samson. 1995. Conserving
the Biotic Integrity of the Great Plains. In:
Conservation of Great Plains Ecosystems. Johnson,
S.R. and A. Bouzaher Eds. Kluwer Academic
Publishers, p. 121.
Knopf, F.L and M.L. Scott. 1990. Altered Flows
and Created Landscapes in the Platte River
Headwaters, 1840-1990. In: Management of
Dynamic Ecosystems. Sweeney, J.M. Ed. West
Lafayette, IN: North Central Section of The Wildlife
Society, pp. 47-70.
Koch, R., R. Curry and M. Weber. 1977. The Effect
of Altered Streamflow on the Hydrology and
Geomorphology of the Yellowstone River Basin,
Montana. Technical Report 2, Montana Department
of Natural Resources and Conservation, Helena.
LaBaugh. J.W. 1989. Chemical Characteristics of
Water in Northern Prairie Wetlands. In: Northern
Prairie Wetlands, van der Valk, A. Ed. Iowa State
University Press, Ames, IA. p. 56-91.
Larson, S.V. 1990. Waterfowl Breeding Pair and
Brood Usage of Oxbows and Riverine Habitats on
the James River. M.S. thesis, South Dakota State
University, Brookings, SD.
Lee, D.S., C.R. Gilbert, C.H. Hocutt, R.E. Jenkins,
247
-------
References
D.E. McAllister and J.R. Stauffer. 1980. Atlas of
North American Freshwater Fishes. Publication
#1980-12, North Carolina Biological Survey. 867 pp.
Leftch, J.A. and J.F. Baltezore. 1992. The Status of
North Dakota Wetlands. Journal of Soil and Water
Conservation, p. 216-219.
Lemly, D. 1993. Guidelines for Evaluating
Selenium Data from Aquatic Monitoring and
Assessment Studies. Environmental Monitoring and
Assessment 28:83-100.
Lenat, D.R.. D.L. Penrose and K.W. Eagleson.
1979. Biological Evaluation of Non-point Source
Pollutants in North Carolina Streams and Rivers.
Raleigh, North Carolina Division of Environmental
Management. 167 p.
Lillebo, P.M., S. Shaner, P. Carlson, N. Richard and
P. Dubany. 1988. Regulation of Agricultural
Drainage to the San Joaquin River - Appendix D.
Water Quality Criteria for Selenium and Other Trace
Elements for Protection of Aquatic Life and Its Uses
in the San Joaquin Valley. California State Water
Resources Board Report W.O.85-1,151 p.
Ludden, A.P., D.L Frink, and D.H. Johnson. 1983.
Water Storage Capacity of Natural Wetland
Depressions in the Devils Lake Basin of North
Dakota. J. Soil Water Conserv. 38:45-48.
McCarraher, D.B., 1977. Nebraska's Sandhills
Lakes. Nebraska Game and Parks Commission,
Lincoln, NE. p. 67.
McCoy and Hales. 1974. A Survey of 8 Streams in
Eastern South Dakota. Proceedings of the South
Dakota Academy of Sciences. 53:202-219.
Madison, R.J. and J.O. Brunett. 1985. Overview of
the Occurrence of Nitrate in Ground Water of the
United States. In: National Water Summary 1984.
U.S. Geological Survey. Water-Supply Paper2275.
Manci, K.M. 1989. Riparian Ecosystem Creation
and Restoration: A Literature Summary. U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service Biological Report 89(20):1-59.
Jamestown, ND: Northern Prairie Science Center
Home Page, http://www.npsc.nbs.gov/resource/'
literatr/ripareco/ripareco.htm (Version 31MAR97).
Manning, R. 1995. Grasslands. Viking, New York,
NY.
Maret. T.R. 1985. Water Quality in the Long Pine
Rural Clean Water Project 1979-1985. Nebraska
Department of Environmental Control, Lincoln, NE.
194 p.
Maret, T.R. 1988. A Water-Quality Assessment
Using Aquatic Macroinvertebrates from Streams of
the Long Pine Creek Watershed in Brown County,
Nebraska. Transactions of the Nebraska Academy
of Sciences, XVI: 69-84.
Maret, T.R. and C.C. Christiansen. 1981. A Water
Quality Survey of the Big Blue River, Nebraska.
Transactions of the Nebraska Academy of Sciences,
9:35-47.
Melton, B.L., R.L. Hoover, R.L. Moore and D.J.
Pfankuch. 1984. Aquatic and Riparian Wildlife. Pp.
261-301 In: Managing forested lands for wildlife.
Hoover. R.L and D.L. Willis, Eds. Colorado
Division of Wildlife, Denver, CO. 459 p.
Miller, J.R., T.T. Schulz, N.T. Hobbs, K.R. Wilson,
D.L. Schrupp and W.L. Baker. 1995. Changes in
the Landscape Structure of a Southeastern
Wyoming Riparian Zone Following Shifts in Stream
Dynamics. Biological Conservation. 72371-379.
Miller, S. 1990. Land Development and Use. In:
Atlas of the Great Plains. A. Bleed and C.
Flowerday, eds., University of Nebraska, Lincoln,
NE. p. 207.
Mitsch, W.J. and J.G. Crosslink. 1986. Wetlands.
Van Nostrand Reinhold Company, New York. 529 p.
Montana Department of Health and Environmental
Sciences. 1994. The Montana 305(b) Report.
Water Quality Division. Montana Department of
Health and Environmental Sciences. Helena, MT.
June, 1994.
Montana Department of Natural Resources and
Conservation. 1981. How a River Runs: A Study of
Changes in the Yellowstone River Basin. Montana
Department of Natural Resources and Conservation,
Helena, MT.
Moyle, P.B. and JJ. Cech. 1982. Fishes: An
Introduction to Ichthyology? Prentice-Hall,
Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey.
Mueller, O.K., PA Hamilton, D.R. Helsel, K.J. Hrtt
and B.C. Ruddy. 1995. Nutrients in Ground Water
and Surface Water of the United States - An
248
-------
Northern .Great Plains Aquatic Assessment
Analysis of Data Through 1992. U.S. Geological
Survey. Water-Resources Investigations Report 95-
4031.
Naiman, R.J., H. Decamps, and M Pollock. 1993.
The Role of Riparian Corridors in Maintaining
Regional Biodiversity. Ecol. Appl. 3,209-212.
National Research Council. 1973. Water Quality
Criteria, 1972. A Report of the Committee on
National Water Quality Criteria, Environmental
Studies Board, National Academy of Sciences and
National Academy of Engineering. Ecological
Research Series. U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Washington, D. C. EPA/R3/73/033.
Nebraska Department of Environmental Quality.
1996. Draft 1996 Nebraska Water Quality Report.
Water Quality Division. Nebraska Department of
Environmental Quality. April 1996. Lincoln, NE.
Neel, J.K. 1985. A Northern Prairie Stream.
University of North Dakota Press, Grand Forks, ND.
274 p.
Newell, R.L. 1977. Aquatic Invertebrates of the
Yellowstone River Basin. Montana. Technical
Reports, Montana Department of Natural Resources
and Conservation, Helena, MT.
Nickum, J.G. 1970. Limnology of Winterkill Lakes in
South Dakota. In: A Symposium on the
Management of Midwestern Winterkill Lakes.
Schneberger, E., Ed. North Central Division
American Fisheries Society. Spec. Publ. 1. p. 19-
25.
Noble, M.G. 1979. The Origin ofPopulus deHoides
and Salix interior Zones on Point Bars Along the
Minnesota River. The American Midland Naturalist.
192(1):59-67.
North Dakota Department of Health. 1994. Water
Quality Assessment 1992-1993: The 1994 Report to
Congress of the United States. North Dakota
Department of Health, Bismarck, ND.
North Dakota Department of Health and
Consolidated Laboratories. 1988. North Dakota
Nonpoint Source Assessment Report, Bismarck, ND.
North Dakota Game and Fish Department. 1994.
Fishes of the Dakotas. Jamestown, ND: Northern
Prairie Wildlife Research Center Home Page.
http://www.npsc.nbs.gov/resource/ distr/
others/sdrare/sdrare.htm (Version 16JUL97)
Obermiller, F.W. 1992. The Past, Present & Future
of Grazing on the National Grasslands. Association
of National Grasslands, Inc., Speech. 15th Annual
Meeting. Hot Springs, South Dakota. September
25,1992.
Olson, O.E. and D.G. Fox. Date Unknown.
Livestock Water Quality. Great Plains Beef Cattle
Feeding Handbook. Cooperative Extension Service
- Great Plains States. GPE-1401.
Ostlie, W.R., R.E. Schneider, J.M. Aldrich, T.M.
Faust, R.LB. McKim and S.J. Chaplin. 1997. The
Status of Biodiversity in the Great Plains. The
Nature Conservancy, Arlington, VA. 326 pp.
Owen, J. and GJ. Power. 1989. Creel Census of
Lake Sakakawea. North Dakota Game and Fish
Department Report No. A-1177.
Page, LM. and B.M. Burr. 1991. A Field Guide to
Freshwater Fishes. Houghton Mifflin Company.
New York, NY.
Patton, T.M. and W.A. Hubert. 1993. Reservoirs on
a Great Plains Stream Affect Downstream Habitat
and Fish Assemblages. Journal of Freshwater
Ecology. Vol. 8, Number 4.
Perkins, K. 1986. Final Report James River
Dredging Project: Unionids. South Dakota
Department of Water and Natural Resources, Pierre,
SD.
Peterman, L.G. 1979. The Ecological Implications of
Yellowstone River Flow Reservations. Montana
Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks, Helena, MT.
Pens, G.E. 1979. Complex Response of River
Channel Morphology Subsequent to Reservoir
Construction. Prog. Phys. Geog. 3:329-362.
Pettyjohn, W.A., M. Savoca and D. Self. 1991.
Regional Assessment of Aquifer Vulnerabirity and
Sensitivity in the Conterminous United States. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency. Ada, OK.
EPA/600/2-91/043.
Pflakin, J.L., MT. Barbour, K.D. Porter, S.K. Gross,
and R.M. Hughes. 1989. Rapid Bioassessment.
Protocols for Use in Streams and Rivers - Benthic
Macroinvertebrates and Fish. U.S. Environmental
249
-------
References
Protection Agency. EPA/444/4-89-001.
Pflieger, W.L. and T.B. Grace. 1987. Changes in
the fish fauna of the lower Missouri River, 1940-
1983. In: Community and Evolutionary Ecology of
North American Stream Fishes, Matthews, W. and
D. Heines, Eds. University of Oklahoma Press,
Norman, Oklahoma, p. 166-177.
Poff, N.L and J.D. Allan. 1995. Functional
organization of stream fish assemblages in relation
to hydrologic variability. Ecology. 76:606-627.
Prophet, C.W. and N.L. Edwards. 1973. Benthic
Macroinvertebrate community structure in a great
plains stream receiving feedlot runoff. Water
Resources Bulletin. 9(3):583-589.
Rehwinkle, B.J., M. Georges and J. Wells. 1978.
Powder River Aquatic Ecology Project. Final Report,
Montana Department of Fish and Game, Helena,
MT.
Reichman, O.J. 1987. Konza Prairie, A Tallgrass
Natural History. University of Kansas, Lawrence, KS.
Reily, P.W. and W.C. Johnson. 1982. The Effects
of Altered Hydrologic Regime on Tree Growth Along
the Missouri River in North Dakota. Canadian
Journal of Botany. 60(11):2410-2423.
«
Richter, B.D., D.P. Braun, M.A. Mendelson and L.L.
Master. 1997. Threats to Imperiled Freshwater
Fauna. Conservation Biology. 11(5):1081 - 1093.
Riis, J.C. 1989. Angler Use and Sport Fishing
Harvest Survey on Lake Oahe and Oahe Tailwaters,
1986-1988. Completion Report. Study No. 2109,
Job No. 2. South Dakota Department of Game, Fish
and Parks. Pierre, SD.
Robinson, A. 1995. Small and Seasonal Does Not
Mean Insignificant: Why It's Worth Standing Up for
Tiny and Temporary Wetlands. Journal of Soil and
Water Conservation, November-December, 1995.
Roddy, W.R., E.A. Greene and C.L. So wards. 1991.
Reconaissance Investigation of Water Quality,
Bottom Sediment and Biota Associated with:
Irrigation Drainage in the Belle Fourche Reclamation "
Project, Western South Dakota 1988-89. U.S.
Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigatons
Report 90-4192.
Rood, S.B. and J.M. Mahoney. 1995. River
Damming and Riparian Cottonwoods Along the
Marais River, Montana. Rivers. Vol 5, No. 3.
Ruwaldt, J.J., L.D. Flake and J.M. Gates. 1979.
Waterfowl Pair Use of Natural and Man-made
Wetlands in South Dakota. Jounal of Wildlife
Management, v.43, p. 375-383.
Ryckman, F. 1995. North Dakota's Rivers and
Streams. North Dakota Outdoors March 1995.
Schmulbach, J.C., G. Gould and C.L. Groen. 1975.
Relative Abundance and Distribution of Fishes in the
Missouri River, Gavins Point Dam to Rulo,
Nebraska. Proc. S. Dak. Acad. Sci. 54:194-222.
Schmulbach, J.C., L.W. Hesse and J.E. Bush.
1992. The Missouri River - Great Plains Thread of
Life. In: Becker, C.D. and Nietzel, D.A. eds. Water
Quality in North American River Systems. Battelle
Press, p. 137-158.
Seabloom, R.W., R.D. Crawford and M.G.
McKenna. 1978. Vertebrates of Southwestern
North 'Dakota: Amphibians, Reptiles, Birds,
Mammals. Research Report no. 24, Institute of
Ecological Studies, University of North Dakota,
Grand Forks. 549p.
Shaw, D.T. 1993. Measuring What Might Have
Been. St. Louis Post-Dispatch, Sunday, December
26, p. 6B.
Shjeflo, J.B. 1968. Evapotranspiration and the
Water Budget of Prairie Potholes in North Dakota.
U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 585-B,
49 p.
Silverman, A.J. and W.D. Tomlinsen. 1984.
Biohydrology of mountain fluvial systems: The
Yellowstone (Part 1). Project G-853-02 Completion
Report. U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, VA.
Skagen, S.K. and F.L. Knopf. 1993. Towards
Conservation of Midcontinental Shorebird
Migrations. Conservation Biology. 7:293-305.
Smith, A.G., J.H. Stoudt and J.B. Gollop. 1964.
Prairie Potholes and Marshes. In: Waterfowl
Tomorrow. Linduska, J.P., Ed. U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, Washington, D.C. p. 39-50.
Snyder, D. 1995. What Farmers Should Know
About Wetlands. Journal of Soil and Water
Conservation. November-December 1995. p. 630-
250
-------
Northern Great Plains Aquatic Assessment
633.
South Dakota Department of Environment and
Natural Resources. 1996. The 1996 South Dakota
Report to Congress, 305(b) Water Quality
Assessment. South Dakota Department of
Environment and Natural Resources, Pierre, SD.
Southern Appalachian Assessment. 1996. Aquatic
Technical Report. Report 2 of 5. Southern
Appalachian Man and the Biosphere Reserve
Cooperative. July 1996. 166 p.
State of Utah. 1995. Nonpoint Source Management
Plan for Hydrologic Modifications. March, 1995.
Stevens, L, B.T. Brown, J.M. Simpson and R.R.
Johnson. 1977. The Importance of Riparian Habitat
to Migrating Birds. In: Proceedings, Symposium on
Importance, Preservation and Management of
Riparian Habitat. General Technical Report RM-43,
U.S. Forest Service Rocky Mountain Forest and
Range Experiment Station, Fort Collins, CO. p. 156-
164.
Stewart, R.E. and H.A. Kantrud. 1971. Classification
of Natural Ponds and Lakes in the Glaciated Prairie
Region. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Resource
Publication 92. 57 p.
Stewart, R.E. and H.A. Kantrud. 1973. Ecological
Distribution of Breeding Waterfowl Populations in
North Dakota. Journal of Wildlife Management, v.
37, no. 1, p. 39-50.
Stoaks, R.D. 1975. Seasonal and Spatial
Distribution of Riffle Dwelling Aquatic Insects in the
Forest River, North Dakota. Ph.D. Dissertation,
North Dakota State University. 162 p.
Stromberg, J.C. 1993. Fremont Cottonwood-
Goodding Willow Riparian Forests: A Review of
Their Ecology, Threats and Recovery Potential.
Journal of the Arizona-Nevada Academy of Science.
26:97-110.
Swanson, G.A. 1984. Dissemination of Amphipods
by Waterfowl. J. Wildl. Manage. 48:988-991.
Swanson, G.A., T.C. Winter, V.A. Adomaitis, and
J.W. LaBaugh. 1988. Chemical Characteristics of
Prairie Lakes in South-central North Dakota-Their
Potential for Influencing Use by Fish and Wildlife.
U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Tech. Rep. 18.44 pp.
Tiner, R.W. 1996. Wetland Definitions and
Classifications in the United States. In: National
Water Summary on Wetland Resources. U.S.
Geological Survey. Water-Supply Paper 2425.
Tomes, L.H. and M.E. Brigham. 1994. Nutrients,
Suspended Sediment and Pesticides in Waters of
the Red River of the North Basin, Minnesota, Norm
Dakota, South Dakota, 1970-1990. USGS Water-
Resources Investigations Report 93-4231.
Underfill!, J.C. 1957. The Distribution of Minnesota
Minnows and Darters in Relation to Pleistocene
Glaciation. Minnesota Museum of Natural History.
Occasional Papers No. 7,45 p.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 1994. Draft
Environmental Impact Statement for the Missouri
River Master Water Control Manual Review and
Study and Technical Appendices (Vol. 1-8). U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers, Missouri River Division,
Omaha, Nebraska.
U.S. Department of Agriculture. 1996. 1996 Farm
Bill Conservation Provisions. U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Washington, D. C. April 1996.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1991.
National Water Quality Inventory. 1990 Report to
Congress. Office of Water, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Washington, D. C.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1992a. EPA
Region 8 Watershed Inventory. U.S. EPA Region 8.
Denver, CO.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1992b.
Pesticides in Ground Water Database, A
Compilation of Monitoring Studies: 1971-1991. EPA
734-12-92-001. August 1992.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1993. The
Safe Drinking Water Act. A Pocket Guide to the
Requirements for the Operators of Small Water
Systems. U.S. EPA Region IX. San Francisco, CA.
June 1993.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1995.
National Water Quality Inventory. 1994 Report to
Congress. Office of Water, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Washington, D. C. EPA841-R-
95-005.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1997a. The
251
-------
References
Index of Watershed Indicators. Office of Water,
Washington, D.C. EPA-841-R-97-010. September
1997.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1997b.
Catalog of Federal Funding Sources for Watershed
Protection. EPA841-B-97-008. September 1997.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1997c.
Federal Programs and Initiatives Related to
Resource Conservation in Urban and Urbanizing
Areas. Working Draft. May, 1997.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1955. Wetlands
Inventory of Wyoming. U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, Billings, MT. 33 p.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1994. Draft
Biological Opinion on the Missouri River Mater Water
Control Manual Review and Study and Operations of
the Missouri River Main Stem System, Prepared by
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Region 6, Denver,
Colorado and Region 3, Fort Snelling, Minnesota.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1995. North
Dakota's Federally Listed Endangered, Threatened,
and Candidate Species 1995. U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, Bismarck, ND. Jamestown, ND: Northern
Prairie Wildlife Research Center Home Page.
http://www.npsc.nbs.gov/ resource/ distr/ others/
nddanger/nddanger.htm (Version 16JUL97).
U.S. Forest Service. 1994. Ecological Subregions of
the United States: Section Descriptions. U.S.
Department of Agriculture. U.S. Forest Service.
Washington, D. C.
U.S. General Accounting Office. 1996. Water
Quality, A Catalog of Related Federal Programs,
Report to Congressional Committees. June 1996
GAO/RCED-96-173.
U.S. Geological Survey. 1988. National Water
Summary 1986 - Hydrologic Events and Ground-
Water Quality. Water-Supply Paper 2325. USGS,
Washington, D.C.
U.S. Geological Survey. 1996a. Ground Water
Atlas of the United States, Segment 8: MT, ND, SD,
WY. Hydrologic Investigations Atlas 730-I. Reston, '
VA.
U.S. Geological Survey. 1996b. National Water
Summary on Wetland Resources. U.S. Geological
Survey, Water-Supply Paper 2425.
U.S. Geological Survey. In Press. Ground Water
Atlas of the United States, Segment 3: KS, MO, NE.
Hydrologic Investigations Atlas. U.S. Geological
Survey, Reston, VA.
U.S. Geological Survey. 1998. Pesticide National
Synthesis Project. National Water Quality
Assessment Home Page, http://
water.wr.usgs.gov/pnsp/use92/index.html.
U.S. Natural Resources Conservation Service. 1996.
America's Northern Plains: An Overview and
Assessment of Natural Resources. U.S. Department
of Agriculture. Natural Resources Conservation
Service. 16 pp. Jamestown, ND: Northern Prairie
Wildlife Research Center Home Page, http://
www.npwrc.org/resource/otherdata/amnorpln/
amnorpln.htm (Version 15AUG97).
West, T. 1990. U.S. Forest Service. Management
of the National Grasslands. Agricultural History. Vol
64, No. 2. p. 86.
White. R.G. and R.G. Bramblett. 1993. The
Yellowstone Riven Its Fish and Fisheries. In:
Proceedings of the Symposium on Restoration
Planning for the Rivers of the Mississippi River
Ecosystem. Hesse, L.W., C.B. Stalnaker, N.G.
Benson and J.R. Zuboy, Eds. Biological Report 19.
National Biological Survey, October 1993. p. 396-
414.
Wilhm. J. 1970. Range 8f Diversity Index in
Benthic Macroinvertebrate Populations. Journal of
Water Pollution Control Federation 42:221-224.
Willhite, D. and K. Hubbard. 1990. Climate. In: An
Atlas of the Sand Hills. Bleed, A. and C. Flowerday,
Eds. University of Nebraska, Lincoln, NE. p. 17.
Williams, G.P. 1978. TTie Case of the Shrinking
Channels - the North Platte and Platte Rivers in
Nebraska. U.S. Geological Survey Circular 781.
Williams, G.P. and M.G. Wolman. 1984.
Downstream Effects of Dams on Alluvial Rivers.
U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1286.
Winger, P.V. 1980. Physical and chemical
characteristics of warmwater streams: A review, in:
The Warmwater Streams Symposium. Krumholz,
L. Ed. American Fisheries Society, Bethesda, MD.
p. 32-44.
252
-------
Northern Great Plains Aquatic Assessment
Winter, T.C. 1989. Hydrologic Studies of Wetlands
in the Northern Prairie. In: Northern Prairie
Wetlands. van der Valk, A. Ed. Iowa State
University Press, Ames, IA. p. 16-55.
Wittmier, H. 1982. Wetlands: Their Status and
Acquisition in South Dakota. South Dakota Bird
Notes. 34:33-38.
Wolf, A.E., Willis, D.W. and Power, GJ. 1996.
Larval Fish Community in the Missouri River below
Garrison Dam, North Dakota. Journal of Freshwater
Ecology, Volume 11, Number 1.
Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality.
1996. 1996 Wyoming Water Quality Assessment.
Water Quality Division. Wyoming Department of
Environmental Quality. September 1996.
Cheyenne WY.
Zale, A.V., D.M. Leslie, Jr., W.L. Fisher and S.G.
Merrifield. 1989. The Physiochemistry, Flora, and
Fauna of Intermittent Prairie Streams: A Review of
the Literature. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
Washington, D.C., Biological Report 89(5).
Zelt, R.B and P.R. Jordan. 1993. Water-Quality
Assessment of the Central Nebraska Basins:
Summary of Data for Recent Conditions through
1990. U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Renort
93-422, 179 p.
253
------- |