County, Minn. This is a typical lake in Minnesota and I think circumstances like this are to be seen around the country: an absolutely magnificent lake which has been used for years and years as a dumping ground for industrial sewage and municipal sewage and for agricultural run-off. It is now virtually a destroyed lake. Among other things, there is a State park on its shores, but the smell is so bad that people who stay there often write the State later, urging that the park be closed. This could be one of the most magnificent recreational areas for all of southern Minnesota and northern Iowa, as it is at the cross section of two major interstate highways. It could be a magnificent place for Americans generally, but the cost of cleaning up that lake is something like $2 or $3 million. Of course, this is completely beyond the reach of the local community. Senator BOGGS. Let me interrupt, Mr. Chairman. Senator EAGLETON. Senator Boggs. Senator BOGGS. On that point-the cost of cleaning up the lakewould you be able to put a time on it? Would it take 2 years or 3 years? Have you heard any estimates? Senator MONDALE. Senator Boggs, I would like to ask the chairman for permission to include in the record following my testimony of what the problems were a summary of the Albert Lea Lake program, because I think it shows the local real estate problems, and it shows the kind of cost involved. It shows the sources of pollution. It is a good case study of the cost of cleaning up and keeping clean. I got the idea for this whole proposal from those people. They did all of the work. They did all of the statistical effort, but they just don't have the money. Even with this research bill that passed as a result of the contribution of the good people of Freeborn and Albert Lea, they didn't get a penny to do any more research. I would like to put that in the record because I think with adequate financial assistance they can move fairly fast. Senator EAGLETON. Without objection, the supplement will be added to the Senator's testimony. (The information referred to follows:) Sen. WALTER F. MONDALE, U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C. CITY OF ALBERT LEA, Albert Lea, Minn., March 16, 1971. DEAR SENATOR MONDALE: It is my pleasure to give to you a few of the facts and circumstances regarding the lake improvement program here in the Alber Lea area. The Albert Lea area is the headwater of the Shellrock River where over 14 sq. miles of land and 4,000 acres of lakes form the drainage basin from which the Shellrock River flows via the Cedar and Mississippi Rivers to the Gulf of Mexico The lake areas, even in their natural state, were fairly shallow with a depth of about 4'. The early 1940's, under WPA sponsorship, a dredging program was begun or Fountain Lake. Fountain Lake, as you remember, is situated in the midst of Albert Lea and has a totally built-up residential area around the shoreline. The dredge used was a 12' all electric dredge and operated on a 24-hour basis with a 1: to 24 man crew. At the beginning of World War II, this project, along with many other similar WPA projects, was abandoned. In 1962, in response to the interes of citizens and community leaders, the question was raised of whether or no the community could, at its own expense, afford to operate a dredging progran to complete Fountain Lake. Investigations were made at this time of the possi bility of Federal aid or other outside financing and it was found to be non available. Therefore, the City of Albert Lea and Albert Lea Township were faced with the question of whether to purchase and operate the dredge on their own. The proposed basis for sharing the cost on this venture was the percentage or ratio of respective assessed valuation-this being approximately 90% for City and 10% for Township. Additionally, it was estimated at this time that this was estimated at this time that this would carry approximately a 21⁄2 mill levy for each governmental unit. A hearing was held and the question was discussed before nearly 120 organizations and interest groups from the area. It was through the overwhelming support of these groups and the public in general that it was decided that the City and Albert Lea Township jointly purchase a dredge and embark on a continuing program of dredging. The primary intended purpose of this program was to return Fountain Lake to a state of condition where it might be used and enjoyed by the people of the community and the surrounding area. It is important to remember at this juncture that this was not merely a joint City-Township project but rather an endeavor which enjoyed the backing from the full community and its citizens. The dredge purchased late in 1962 was an 8'' hydraulic jet dredge, at a cost of $95.000 including ancillary equipment. From the years between 1962 and 1970, approximately 275 acres of lake were dredged to an approximate depth of 8'. Incidentally, to this primary purpose of improving the lake itself, the deposited dredge spoils added nearly 60 acres of needed land to the City park system. The cost of dredging per year was approximately $37,000 and was shared on the 90% City and 10% Township basis. This amount is equivalent to 3.5% of the total local property taxes levied. At the end of 1970, the dredging program on Fountain Lake was completed with the lake being restored to a point where it could be used for recreational purposes as well as being an asset to the community. Early in 1971, the 8'' dredge was moved to Albert Lea Lake, a much larger lake having an area of 2,625 acres. We cannot hope to complete this project with our existing dredge or existing resources within our lifetimes but we have merely started work on Albert Lea Lake on a pilot project basis. In retrospect, there are many lessons to be learned from operations over the past 30 years of operation. First, and most importantly, lakes can be restored and the process of euthrophication is a reversible one. Secondly, the cost of such a project is expensive but it is one that will not become less expensive over the ensuing years. Thirdly, it is an endeavor which despite the cost is worthwhile in that not only are the beneits of such work invaluable but the alternative of not doing this work is incalculable. Fourthly, it is a venture which in order to succeed must have the support over a broad basis, cutting across governmental lines and boundaries. I am taking the liberty of enclosing a copy of the minutes of the hearing in 1962 regarding the issue of whether or not to proceed with the dredging of Fountain Lake. I think that you will find some of the points expressed are as timely and important today as they were over nine years ago in 1962. I believe that this will be of additional interest to you. I hope that this information has been of some help to you and of help to those who are faced with the tough decision of committing sizeable resources now for immeasurable benefits for the future. Very truly yours, JOHN W. ELWELL, City Manager. DR. NILES R. SHOFF, Albert Lea., Minn., March 19, 1971. Sen. WALTER MONDALE, DEAR SENATOR MONDALE: This is in response to your request relative to the past history of lake reclamation in Albert Lea. Throughout the past this community has been militantly interested in lake Improvement with activity commencing in the mid thirties. The governmental deLineation of responsibility was always a concern and a problem, because the lakes volved fell within the boundaries of different governmental jurisdictions. In addition, municipal and industrial wastes were either not treated or ineffectively treated prior to discharge into the bodies of water. State and local agencies with popular support began in the early 1950's to require improvements in the municijal and industrial sewage treatment plants. It was at this time a group of citizens, such as Ken Allen, the late editor of the Albert Lea Tribune; Mel Mawhinney, of the Smith Douglas Fertilizer Company; E. C. Omundson, City Sanitarian; Mervin Aus, a dentist; Merton Head, a small businessman; myself and others spearheaded an organization for the private solicitation of funds for the purpose of studying lake pollution, its sources and possible solutions. This fund drive was successfully completed and resulted in the hiring of Adolph Meyer, Hydrologist, who made a written report and a copy of which was provided in our testimony on your Clean Lake Acts Bill. Concurrent with that study we enlisted the cooperation of the State Board of Health and the Pollution Control Commission, who also supplied us with additional data on the problems and solutions. It was at this time, (1958) that I was elected Mayor of the city of Albert Lea and using the data supplied by the foregoing, determined that leaching into the lake from septic tanks would have to be terminated to slow up the eutrophication of Fountain Lake, our central lake. I immediately recommended and the City Council adopted a four step annexation program, which would bring into the city four large contiguous sub divisions, which were causing pollution problems from leaching septic tanks. Over the ten year period as Mayor, all four large units were annexed. In 1960 exploratory discussions were held with other governmental agencies to enlist financial aid in lake reclamation and in late 1961 a joint method was discussed and agreed upon between Albert Lea township and the city of Albert Lea. The agreement constituted a commitment that each governmental unit would levy two and one half mills for lake reclamation which would be approximately 90% city and 10% township. A joint public hearing was held and enabling joint legislation was introduced and passed. (City Manager Elwell supplied the minutes of this meeting in his recent communication to you.) As a result of this action an eight inch hydrolic jet dredge was purchased and work was begun in Dane Lake, a small section tributary to Fountain Lake, as a trial working area. From here it was moved after Dane Lake was completed to Fountain Lake of approximately seven hundred acres. It was amazing to notice the difference in the quality of lake water before and after dredging; as weed growth was removed and algae growth was significantly reduced plus the reduction of bacteria. The agreement was that so far as possible sludge would be used to reclaim marginal land for park and recreational purposes. This was followed except in one case where we had no land available to reclaim. The following shows the table of operating costs and cubic yards removed. Note: The operating cost in the above table does not include engineering, the cost of land acquisition, berm construction etc. The average expenditure for the last eight years for this project has been $37,000 per year. The dredge worked approximately ten hours per day for a five and a half month dredging season of six days per week. Our agreement was that we would work at lake reclamation within the framework of the funds budgeted and available per year. In this manner we dredged 275 acres of lake area and reclaimed and restored 90 acres of land for recreational purposes. If funds had been available and with the trained personnel for dredge operation and maintenance we would have been able to do in two or three years what has taken us eight years to accomplish. This would have speeded up lake restoration created less nuisance to adjacent property owners, enabled greater citizen use of recreational land because of slowness in reclaiming land and would have helped quicker in the full use and enjoyment of water sports. Dredging appears to be the only realistic approach to reclaiming eutrophying akes, as the removal of the nutrient sludge is exceedingly important and then with good watershed conservation and siltration traps or buffers, the people can then control the ecological factors to reverse the eutrophication of these lakes. In my estimation federal grants or aid is a necessary factor to achieve any semblance of constructive action because of the involvements of several governmental jurisdictions. I know you are extremely conversant with our project and the pride we have in what we have accomplished, but it is like the first faltering steps of a child "who has just begun to walk." We have now moved the dredge to Albert Lea Lake, that has approximately 2600 acres of surface water; Helmer Myre State Park some fine residential homes and limited recreational value because of the depth of silt. At our present rate it would take up to thirty years to complete yet it is the head water of the Shell Rock River (interstate water) and of untold recreational value. We can talk of pollution lake eutrophication and environment but we must reverse these factors which have been coming on for many years. We are and will continue to do so to the best of our ability but we would like others to help us solve their problem also. It is unfair for us to shoulder this burden alone because more will benefit than those just in Albert Lea township and the city of Albert Lea. We commend you for your vision and leadership in this broad spectrum program that will help solve this problem that is growing worse faster than most suspect. The time for help is now and we hope you are successful as nothing is so nauseous to the people's senses as a dying lake. Sincerely yours, NILES R. SHOFF. Senator MONDALE. I might add a summary for the record of some work being done near Detroit Lakes in Minnesota, where they have done some creative new thinking about filtration and circulation proj ects. I would like to put that in the record, because Detroit Lakes has been a national leader in this work. (The information referred to follows:) WINSTON C. LARSON & ASSOCIATES, CONSULTING MUNICIPAL ENGINEERS, Senator MONDALE, Renate Office Building, Washington, D.C. DEAR SIR: As per your request, we are herewith enclosing a summary description of the proposed Detroit Lakes project pertaining to waste treatment plant effluent diversion and lake study. Under separate cover we are forwarding the following detailed information relative to this project: 1. Descriptive material to be used in the formal grant application. 2. Maps of the area. 3. Laboratory data on water quality and a 1969 water and nutrient budget. 4. A copy of MSPE Engineering Publication describing the lakeshore improvement project on Detroit Lake completed in 1967 for your information. We are also enclosing a copy of the Supplemental Fund Request for Continuation of FWQA Project 16010 DFI. We believe this describes the requirements for additional funds. As you will recall, the original project allocated $103,650.00 for this work, of which approximately $72,000.00 became available due to fiscal year budget requirements. Local sources have contributed $34,500.00 towards the proj ect as of this date. We are enclosing three copies of this information so that you may contact Congressman Blatnik's office and the office of Senator Burdick and furnish them with this information if you so desire. We wish to express our thanks to your office for the interest shown in our project. We also wish to thank you for the time given us during our recent visit to Washington, accompanied by Mr. Irvine and Mr. Leighton. Very truly yours, 59-068 0-71-pt. 1-24 WINSTON C. LARSON. EUTROPHICATION PROGRAM DIVERSION OF WASTEWATER NUTRIENTS TO DEMONSTRATE THEIR UTILIZATION BY Project Proposal by Pelican River Watershed District CONTENTS SUMMARY DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT-NEED FOR PROJECT-ESTIMATE OF COST Dated: March, 1971 Prepared by Winston C. Larson, Professional Engineer, Pelican River Watershed District. Information to Office of Senator Mondale of Minnesota, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C. SUMMARY DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT The basic objective of the project is to remove major sources of artificial fertilization to a waste enriched lake, and after this has been accomplished to note the changes resulting from removal by complete diversion. The general approach has been to acquire an understanding of lake limnology prior to nutrient reduction and then note the changes resulting from the removal of artificial fertilization. A prior research project has made evaluations which included physical and chemical lake characteristics, weed and phytoplankton populations, primary production by planktonic and attached vegetation, nutrient interactions and extent of removal, inflow and outflow of nutrients via surface inlets and outlets, and controls exercised by basic lake and weather conditions. Data is available to indicate fundamental consequences of long term enrichment, particularly as affecting lake succession, conditions favoring ascendancy of weeds and phytoplankton, and potential of intra-lake cycling of waste nutrient residues. Data has been collected on the nutrient removal accomplished per weight unit of harvested weeds and fish. A prior research project has made evaluations of the nutrient input and output to the various lakes related to this project, and particularly as to the effects of wastewater effluent on the total nutrient budget. This project offers an excellent opportunity to evaluate the effects of long term artificial enrichment to eutrophication, accelerated weed growth and heavy blooms of blue-green algae, and the approximate time period required for recog nition of effects of changed nutrient supply in eutrophic lakes. An additional objective of the project is to utilize a well treated wastewater effluent by re-cycling of nutrients to beneficial natural processes. In many cases this appears to be an economically feasible approach to advanced waste treatment. The project also presents as an objective the renovation of the more intensively used shoreline of a highly eutrophic lake. Natural processes create the development of weed growths in shoreline areas which eventually impinges the water surface. If this encroachment is not retarded, the shoreline will develop the characteristics of a marshy area. NEED FOR PROJECT This project is expected to demonstrate the value of the removal of major artificial fertilization to a waste enriched lake. It should indicate: 1. Approximate time period required for recognition of effects of changed nutrient supply in eutrophic lakes. 2. Duration of nutrient tie-up in plankton, weeds, and bottom sediments. 3. Effects of flush-out period for restoration of an eutrophic lake. 4. If re-cycling of wastewater effluent by irrigation practice is a practical and economical approach to the problem, in lieu of other advanced waste treatment processes. 5. Suitability of wastewater effluent and controlled water supply for the production of waterfowl. 6. Whether eutrophic lakes, with deteriorated shortlines, can be developed into desirable recreational areas, when the nutrients entering such a lake have been reduced. |