Funding Partners:Wisconsin Coastal Management ProgramWisconsin Department of Natural ResourcesUniversity of Wisconsin - Extension

Sue O’Halloran UW-ExtensionAmy Eliot, Lake Superior Research Institute

University of Wisconsin - Superior

Lake Superior Citizen Monitoring Projects

Goals of Project:

• Provide training and support for citizen volunteers • Increase the quality of data collected by citizen volunteers• Increase collaboration between scientists and volunteers

• Provide training and support

• Statewide monitoring program

• Same parameters measured by all monitoring groups

• Easy to measure

• Representative of stream health over time

Marsh Monitoring Program slide information

Variable Method Frequency

Temperature Thermometer Monthly

Water clarity Turbidity tube Monthly

Dissolved oxygen Hach Chemistry kit Monthly

Biotic Index(macroinvertebrates)

D-net sampling Twice a year (spring/fall)

Habitat Site assessment Once a year

Stream flow Float method Monthly

• Provide training and support

Field Training in WAV Methods

WAV Plus

Scientists and volunteers collect stream invertebrate samples at the same time and place

Samples collected 2X per season: spring and fall

Comparisons can be made – between Biotic Index values calculated from data collected by volunteers and scientists

• Increase quality of volunteer data

Lost

18 WAV (2006-2007)

11 WAV Plus (2007-2010)

WI Lake Superior Basin LSRI Volunteer

Monitoring Sites

West Fork Montreal

Pokegama

BarkFlag

SiouxLittle Pokegama

BluffBear

East Fork Flag

Black

Upper Tamarack

Middle

Brickyard

Bay City

Dubois Amnicon

Siskiwit

Professional HBI Volunteer HBIBear Creek Downstream 6.17: Fair 6.79: Fairly PoorLost Creek

Mid-stream 3.51: Very Good 3.10: Excellent

Downstream 5.07: Good 5.02: GoodSioux RiverDownstream 2.18: Excellent 1.73: Excellent

4.82: Good 4.66: GoodUpstream 2.14: Excellent 2.22: Excellent

5.13: Good 5.03: Good

Comparison of Stream Biotic Index Values

Comparison of Professional and Citizen Volunteer DataWater quality and HBI’s for Lake Superior tributaries

58.6%

54.9%

50.9%

55.7%

• Use Great Lakes Coastal Wetland Consortium indicators to evaluate wetland plant and invertebrate community health

•Land cover analysis to determine amount of forested and open lands in each subwatersheds

• Identify subwatersheds where land cover is approaching 60% or greater open lands

• Prioritize these areas for best management practices

Lake Superior Coastal Watershed Assessment

13.9%

20.5%

Monitoring data is needed in order to provide information on the relationship between open land cover and water

quality in streams and coastal wetlands

Lake Superior Coastal Watershed Assessment

MMARSH ARSH MMONITORING ONITORING PPROGRAMROGRAMMMARSH ARSH MMONITORING ONITORING PPROGRAMROGRAM

1.1. Monitor breeding marsh birds and amphibians in the Great Lakes

2.2. Investigate habitat associations of marsh species

3.3. Support wetland conservation efforts

4.4. Increase public awareness of theimportance of wetlands to the Great Lakes

Marsh Monitoring Program in the St. Louis River Area of Concern

Lessons Learned

• Volunteers are interested in collecting meaningful data about the water resources in their community

• Credible data can be generated by citizen volunteers

• Stable funding source(s) should be identified to provide the consistency and level of coordinated effort needed to build and support citizen volunteer programs

Great Lakes Coastal Wetland ConsortiumCommunity Indicators

Monitoring Conducted During 2007-08

• Invertebrate community• Water quality

Added in 2008-09: Plant Community

Sampling Schedule

Plant, invertebrate and water quality samples were collected during mid-summer

Invertebrate and water quality samples were collected from each of the inundated plant zones (wet meadow, emergent and submergent)

Lost Creek Bog Overall IBI: 95Mildly ImpactedWetland community is beginning to show signs indicative of anthropogenic disturbance.

Sioux River Slough Overall IBI: 115Mildly ImpactedWetland community is beginning to show signs indicative of anthropogenic disturbance.

Allouez Bay Overall IBI: 88Moderately ImpactedWetland shows few but obvious signs indicative of anthropogenic disturbance.

Extremely Degraded

Degraded Moderately Degraded

Moderately Impacted

Mildly Impacted

Reference Condition

31 182Great Lakes Coastal Wetland Consortium Index of Biotic Integrity

Coastal Estuary Results 2007-08

Estuary Name River or Stream GLCWC Hydrogeomorphic Class

County

Allouez Bay Bear Creek Lacustrine, sand-spit embayment

Lacustrine, Open embayment

Douglas

Flag River Estuary Flag River Barred drowned river mouth; Barrier-Protected beach lagoon.

Bayfield

Bark Bay Slough Bark River Barrier-Protected beach lagoon Bayfield

Lost Creek Bog Lost Creek No. 1 Riverine: open, drowned river-mouth

Bayfield

Sioux River Slough Sioux River Barrier-Protected beach lagoon Bayfield

VEGETATIVE COMMUNITY INDICATOR SCORES Lake Superior Estuaries in Wisconsin

ALLOUEZ BAY BARK BAY FLAG

RIVERLOST

CREEKSIOUX RIVER

Invasive Cover (Entire Site) 3 5 3 5 3

Invasive Freq. (Entire Site) 3 5 3 5 3

Mean C (Entire Site) 5 5 5 5 5

Invasive Cover (Wet Meadow) 3 5 3 5 3

Invasive Freq. (Wet Meadow) 1 5 3 5 3

Mean C (Wet Meadow) 5 5 5 5 5

Invasive Cover (Submergents) 3 5 5 5 3

Invasive Freq. (Submergents) 3 5 5 5 1

Mean C (Submergents) 3 5 5 5 5

SAV Tolerance 5 5 3 5 5

TOTAL SCORE 34 50 40 50 36

COMBINED NUMERIC

SCORE

COMBINED DESCRIPTIVE

SCORES

0-5 VERY LOW

6-20 LOW

21-40 MEDIUM

41-50 HIGH

Estuary Plant Community Analysis 2008-09

Allouez BayLacustrine, ProtectedSand-spit embayment

Great Lakes Coastal Wetland Classifications

Lost Creek WetlandRiverine SystemBarred, drowned river mouthSuccessional Barrier Beach Lagoon

Sioux River wetlandRiverine SystemBarred, drowned river mouthSuccessional Barrier Beach Lagoon