Reclassification of Portions of Lakes for Resource Protection (306-star07-07)

8/9/2019 Reclassification of Portions of Lakes for Resource Protection (306-star07-07)

1/65

Minnesotas Lake Superior Coastal Program

Reclassification of Portions of Lakes for ResourceProtection

Authors Name and Affiliation:Tristan Beaster, Conservation Technician

Cook County Soil and Water Conservation District

Date of Completion: May 31, 2008

Project No. 306-STAR07-07Contract No. B08882

This project was funded in part under the Coastal Zone Management Act, by NOAAs Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management, in cooperation withMinnesotas Lake Superior Coastal Program. The State of Minnesota Board of


2/65

Reclassification of Portions of Lakes for Resource Protection

Introduction Not all lakes can withstand the same intensity of impacts from human

activities. In an effort to address this reality, the Minnesota Department ofNatural Resources classified lakes in 1976 based on factors such as lake area,depth, and shoreline: surface area ratio. The resulting classifications governlocal land use practices on lakes. A significant disadvantage of this classificationsystem is that it applies one class to an entire lake, without taking into accountdifferent environmental conditions that exist along the shore of the lake.

The purpose of this project was to begin a pilot program that would seek toidentify sensitive areas of lakes in Cook County, so that these portions of lakescould become candidates for a more restrictive classification system. The goalis to protect especially sensitive lakeshore environments.

Work Completed The project was conceived as taking place through four phases. Phase one

would define lake criteria to be used for reclassification, design GIS and fielddata gathering methods and protocols, and select lakes to be studied for theproject. Phase two would involve existing data collection and interpretation.Phase three would be the field data gathering portion. Phase four would be thepresentation of the findings to the public and local officials with recommendationsfor lake reclassification.

Phase one of the project was effectively completed during the grant period

ending May 31, 2008. It began with the formation of an ad hoc work group of thelocal Water Plan Advisory Committee. Three work group members and theSWCD Conservation Technician began a process to meet the objectives ofphase one. First, the group decided to invite lake associations to be a part of


3/65

Results The project work group met four times during the grant period (February

15, May 11, April 2, and May 12). Six lakes were identified by the work group aspriority lakes to be studied. A list of criteria to be used for assessing sensitivitywas developed with the input of state agency experts (Appendix E.). Using thislist of criteria, initial GIS operations were conducted for Caribou, Bigsby, Tait, andHungry Jack lakes, resulting in GIS shapefiles and informational maps to be usedduring phase four.

Several potentially sensitive areas were delineated for each of the lakesfor which GIS operations were conducted (Appendix A). These areas are eitherisolated bays, shallow bays, or within 100 meters of a stream inlet or outlet, or acombination of the above. Preliminary field surveys on Bigsby lake suggest thatisolated, shallow bays also favor the growth of emergent and floating leavedvegetation another criteria piece that was identified for our study. These areascould be candidates for reclassification, as they possess many characteristics ofthe sensitivity criteria that the project work group identified during their meetings.As the project now passes on to phases two and three, we will be able toquantitatively identify these sensitive areas of the lakes included in the study.

Conclusions Lake ecosystems and their surrounding communities are complex and

variable. Methods of studying and protecting lakes in northeast Minnesota willtherefore have to be different than methods of doing the same in other parts ofthe state. We modeled this project off of a similar study done in Cass County,

Minnesota. However, several changes had to be made in the sensitivity criteriain order to more accurately reflect lake ecosystems in Cook County. Theseincluded adding additional criteria for steep slopes and exposed bedrock, andmodifying criteria for aquatic vegetation because of the general lower productivity


4/65

Reclassification of Portions of

Lakes for Resource Protection

Digital Products --

A. Final ReportB. Ad hoc Work Group Materials

i. Correspondenceii. Letters to Lake Associationsiii. Meeting Agendas and Minutesiv. Presentations

C. GIS MapsD. GIS ShapefilesE. Criteria, Lake Reports, and Data Collection Sheets

Soil & Water Conservation DistrictCook County, Grand Marais, MN

July 31, 2008 306-STAR07-07


5/65

Cook County Soil & Water Conservation District

Court House, 411 West 2nd

Street, Grand Marais, MN 55604(218) 387-3647 Fax (218) 387-3042 www .co.cook.mn.us

February 4, 2008

From: Tristan Beaster, Cook SWCD

To: Cook County Lakes Reclassification Work GroupRe: Materials for review

Hello Work Group Members!

Thank you once again for volunteering to take part in this important project. I have compiled somedocuments for you to review before our first meeting and to keep as references throughout the project.The first packet consists of the available lake information from the Minnesota DNR Lakefinder website andfrom Dave Stark. It includes general lake characteristics, fisheries, water level, and water quality data.The second packet consists of draft maps of county zoning districts and land ownership information. Inorder to focus our efforts, I have only included information on the lakes that have lake associations. Thepackets arent perfect, but they should serve well to provide the group with a starting point for discussionand a source for future reference.

These are some things to keep in mind as you are browsing through the information.

1. For the STAR grant, the pilot lake must be within the Lake Superior Coastal zone.

2. The number and size of lakes to be studied should allow for completion of the projectwithin the budget allowed. This should take into account the time required for reports,presentations, and meetings after field work is completed.

3. Lakes should be selected and prioritized based on the need for resource and water quality
mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]


6/65




March 3, 2008

From: Tristan Beaster, Cook SWCD

To: Cook County Lakes Reclassification Work Group

Re: Materials for review

Hello Work Group Members!

I thank you for a productive 1 st meeting, I am very much looking forward to being a part of this group.

You will recall that at our last meeting we decided to send invitations to participate in the project to lakeand property owner association representatives from various lakes around the county in an attempt to selectwhich lakes we will study. I hope to update the group on this selection process at the meeting.

I would also ask the group to review the materials I have provided to provide a starting point for discussionon criteria to be used to study the lakes. We began discussion on this topic at the last meeting, and I hopethat we can continue to make progress. This is very much a pilot project, and our next task involves acertain amount of sailing into uncharted waters. Fortunately, there are other professionals in the state thatare working on the same project, and hopefully we will be able to gather some of their expertise.

Please take a look at the materials. If anyone has any questions or would like to have additionalinformation, let me know and I will try to have it ready by the meeting.


7/65

A G E N D A

Cook County Water Advisory CommitteeLakes Reclassification Ad hoc Work Group

Court House, Grand Marais, Minnesota

4:00 p.m.. I. Call meeting to order

II. Make adjustments to agenda

III. Review Coastal Program Grant Application

IV. Discuss criteria for selection of lakes

V. Discuss duties of work group

VI. Schedule next meeting

A D J O U R N


8/65

A G E N D A



March 11, 2008

4:00 p.m.. I. Call meeting to order


III. Update on lake selection process

IV. Discuss criteria for study of lakes

A D J O U R N


9/65




Reclassification of Portions of Lakes for Resource ProtectionWork Group Meeting Minutes

Upstairs Conference Room

Cook County CourthouseGrand MaraisMarch 11, 2008

Present:Tristan BeasterBiz Clark Jim Johnson

Chel AndersonKaren EvensPeter Barsness

Clark called meeting to order at 4:00 p.m.

Beaster gave an update on the BWSR Clean Water Legacy grant work plan.

The group was updated on the lake selection process for the project. At the time of themeeting, representatives from the following lake, property-owner, or other type of

h d d d h h


10/65

A G E N D A



April 2, 2008

4:00 p.m. I. Call meeting to order


III. Presentation : Project overview and status

IV. Prioritize criteria for study of lakes

6:00 p.m. A D J O U R N


11/65




Reclassification of Portions of Lakes for Resource ProtectionWork Group Meeting Minutes

ITV Room

Cook County CourthouseApril 2, 2008

Present:Tristan BeasterBiz Clark Chel AndersonGary Maciejewski

Clark called meeting to order at 4:00 p.m.

Beaster gave a presentation outlining the purpose and need for the project.

The work group discussed the Minnesota DNR lakeshore sensitivity manual and

classification criteria. Ideas submitted by various lake associations of sensitive andunique features on lakes were incorporated into the discussion.

Some of the criteria for sensitivity discussed were:


12/65

A G E N D A



June 16, 2008

5:30 p.m*. I. Call meeting to order


III. Approve minutes from past meetings

IV. Grant and project update

6:00 p.m. A D J O U R N


13/65




Reclassification of Portions of Lakes for Resource ProtectionAd Hoc Work Group formed from the Water Plan Advisory Committee

Meeting Minutes

Commissioners Meeting RoomCook County CourthouseMay 12, 2008

Members Present:Biz Clark Work Group Chair, Cook Coalition of Lake AssociationsChel Anderson Work Group Member, DNR Ecological Resources

Jim Johnson Work Group Member, Cook County Commissioner, District 4

Others Present:Tristan Beaster Cook SWCDLinda Hendrickson Hungry Jack LakeBarb Bottger Hungry Jack LakeKaren Evens MPCA-DuluthJohn Bottger Hungry Jack Lake

Paul Radomski DNR Shoreland Rules Update CommitteeSteve Persons DNR Area fisheries SupervisoriesCliff Bentley DNR Area Hydrologist


14/65

to the public, it was decided that field studies and sampling should be done to achieve agreater amount of certainty in the identification of the sensitive areas.

The group discussed the overall purpose of the study. The question was raised as towhether the study was being done purely to gather more information on the lakes, or tobe eventually written into ordinance. The issue of public perception was also raised. Themembers emphasized that the study and any resulting recommendations had to bedefensible and evidence-based. Paul R. explained that the criteria list was created using aprincipled approach based on parts of the lake ecosystem known to be sensitive based onavailable scientific studies. Efforts at communicating the progress of the project to the

public needed to be earnest in order to get public buy-in to the project. Karen E.suggested that a more formal record of correspondence be maintained to show whatrepresentatives have been participating in the process.

Specific criteria were discussed. Paul R. had questions about exposed bedrock, steepslope, and substrate criteria. Steve P. had suggestions for identifying certain individualaquatic plant species rather than gathering data on all plant species. Also suggested wasfield identification of wetlands located onshore because of the lack of reliability inNational Wetlands Inventory data. With these modifications, the members present feltcomfortable using the criteria to start the field work for the study.

IV. Decide on priority lakes for pilot study

The group discussed the prioritization process, including what factors were considered indetermining priority for the study. Those factors included; location within the CoastalZone, geographic diversity within the county, lake association interest, ecologicaldiversity, and size of lake. The lakes for the study, in order of priority, are:

1. Caribou/Bigsby Lakes *


15/65




March 11, 2008

John Oberholtzer184 West Deer Yard RoadGrand Marais, MN 55604

Dear Mr. Oberholtzer,

The Cook County Soil and Water Conservation District (SWCD) received a grant from the Lake SuperiorCoastal Program to study the adequacy of the Countys lake classification system. You may recall the stateof Minnesota originally developed a three tier lake management system based upon certain key lakefeatures such as development, size, shape and depth. More recently, Cook County reclassified lakesaccording to a five tier system ranging from special natural environment to general development withthe former class providing the highest form of resource protection. However, recent lake studies suggestthat the application of one classification on a given lake may overlook special areas on that lake that needmore protection. These areas might be termed sensitive environments and could include shallow bays, rarehabitats, wetlands or spawning sites.

Accordingly, the SWCD has selected several pilot lakes for more in depth study to determine if sensitiveareas could be identified and, if so, using what criteria. Your lake has been suggested for study as there isan association in existence, water quality studies have been performed on your lake and it has, according to

existing lake data, one or more shallow bays that could qualify as sensitive environment(s).

Much of the preliminary study can be done by accessing and compiling existing data. However, there maybe some field work that would be done at a later date to verify data and discover other features not in the


16/65




July 1, 2008

Larry MullenCaribou Lake Association

Dear Mr. Mullen,

As you know, the Cook County Soil & Water Conservation District has been working on the initial stagesof a pilot project intended to identify sensitive areas of lakeshore so that we may better protect this valuableresource. The purpose of this letter is to update your organization on the status of the project. A work group of the local Water Plan Advisory Committee met monthly February June to study the topic of

lakeshore sensitivity and make decisions as to what lakes should be studied and how they should bestudied. Lakes were chosen based on a number of factors, including existing development pressures,potential for development, and lake association interest. We also felt that it was important to select lakesfrom the various geographic areas within the county.

The work group also discussed criteria that will be used to study the lakes and gather the data required todetermine areas of highest sensitivity. Many of these criteria were derived from a previous studyconducted in Cass County by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, however, important editswere made to more accurately reflect the features of lakes in Cook County. Specifically, criteria were

added for steep slopes and exposed bedrock. These criteria were reviewed and endorsed by local andregional DNR professionals, and it is our belief that they will be an effective means of delineating sensitiveshorelines for lakes in Cook County.


17/65




July 1, 2008

John OberholtzerDeer Yard Lake Homeowners Association

Dear Mr. Oberholtzer,

As you know, the Cook County Soil & Water Conservation District has been working on the initial stagesof a pilot project intended to identify sensitive areas of lakeshore so that we may better protect this valuableresource. The purpose of this letter is to update your organization on the status of the project. A work group of the local Water Plan Advisory Committee met monthly February June to study the topic of lakeshore sensitivity and make decisions as to what lakes should be studied and how they should be

studied. Lakes were chosen based on a number of factors, including existing development pressures,potential for development, and lake association interest. We also felt that it was important to select lakesfrom the various geographic areas within the county.

We are obliged to inform you that Deer Yard Lake was not chosen for inclusion in this study. However,new funding opportunities may allow us to conduct such a study in the future. If an opportunity arises, wewill be sure to let you know of it.

We thank you for your interest in this project. If you have any further questions please do not hesitate to

contact me.

Sincerely,


18/65




July 1, 2008

John and Jenny Hughes,Gunflint Lake Association

Dear Mr. and Mrs. Hughes,

As you know, the Cook County Soil & Water Conservation District has been working on the initial stagesof a pilot project intended to identify sensitive areas of lakeshore so that we may better protect this valuableresource. The purpose of this letter is to update your organization on the status of the project. A work group of the local Water Plan Advisory Committee met monthly February June to study the topic of lakeshore sensitivity and make decisions as to what lakes should be studied and how they should be

studied. Lakes were chosen based on a number of factors, including existing development pressures,potential for development, and lake association interest. We also felt that it was important to select lakesfrom the various geographic areas within the county.

We are obliged to inform you that Gunflint Lake was not chosen for inclusion in this study. However, newfunding opportunities may allow us to conduct such a study in the future. If an opportunity arises, we willbe sure to let you know of it.

We thank you for your interest in this project. If you have any further questions please do not hesitate to

contact me.

Sincerely,


19/65




July 1, 2008

John and Barb BottgerHungry Jack Lake Association61 Bunn TrailGrand Marais, MN 55604

Dear Mr. and Mrs. Bottger



The work group also discussed criteria that will be used to study the lakes and gather the data required todetermine areas of highest sensitivity. Many of these criteria were derived from a previous studyconducted in Cass County by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, however, important editswere made to more accurately reflect the features of lakes in Cook County. Specifically, criteria wereadded for steep slopes and exposed bedrock. These criteria were reviewed and endorsed by local andregional DNR professionals, and it is our belief that they will be an effective means of delineating sensitiveshorelines for lakes in Cook County.


20/65




July 1, 2008

Mike SherfyPoplar Lake Association50 Rockwood RoadGrand Marais, MN 55604

Dear Mr. Sherfy,





21/65

Cook County Soil & Water Conservation DistrictCourt House, 411 West 2 nd Street, Grand Marais, MN 55604(218) 387-3647 Fax (218) 387-3042 www .co.cook.mn.us

July 1, 2008

Gary MacieweskiTait Lake Association279 Caps TrailLutsen, MN 55612

Dear Mr. Macieweski,





22/65


July 1, 2008

Jim LaibTrout Lake Association

Dear Mr. Laib,

As you know, the Cook County Soil & Water Conservation District has been working on the initial stagesof a pilot project intended to identify sensitive areas of lakeshore so that we may better protect this valuableresource. The purpose of this letter is to update your organization on the status of the project. A work group of the local Water Plan Advisory Committee met monthly February June to study the topic of lakeshore sensitivity and make decisions as to what lakes should be studied and how they should bestudied. Lakes were chosen based on a number of factors, including existing development pressures,

potential for development, and lake association interest. We also felt that it was important to select lakesfrom the various geographic areas within the county.


We are pleased to inform you that Trout Lake was chosen for inclusion in this study. The next step is tobegin the necessary field work for the project. This summer, SWCD staff will be conducting surveys of


23/65


July 1, 2008

Randy SwanstromWest Bearskin Lake Association41 S. Bearskin Rd.Grand Marais, MN 55604

Dear Mr. Swanstrom,




R l ifi ti f P ti f L k


24/65

Reclassification of Portions of Lakesfor Resource Protection

April 2, 2008 presentation to the project work group

by Tristan Beaster, Cook SWCD Conservation Technician



Street, Grand Marais, MN 55604(218) 387-3647 Fax (218) 387-3042 www. co.cook.mn.us

Reclassification of Portions of Lakes
mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]


25/65


Lakeshore development affects the lake ecosystem Reduction in aquatic vegetation abundance

Reduction in woody biomass and fish spawning habitat Change in bird community structure Increase in runoff

Reclassification of Portions of Lakes


26/65

What Are We Trying to Protect?Water Quality

Wildlife HabitatAestheticsProperty ValuesOur Quality of Life



27/65

Lake Classifications

DNR first classified lakes in 1976 based on: Lake depth.

Development density. Shoreline : surface area ratio. Soil type and slope.

Cook County revised the classification system in theShoreland management regulations.


28/65

Lake Classifications

Special Natural Environment

Natural Environment

Special Recreational Development

Recreational Development

General Development

Mostrestrictive

Leastrestrictive

h l h l


29/65

Are there Natural Environment shorelineson this Recreational Development lake?

Answering thisquestion requiresextensive andintensive study of thelakes resources.

The new Alternative ShorelandManagement Standards allowreclassification of portions of lakes to a more restrictive class.


30/65

Studying a lake

Cass County Intra-lake land use project Selected 6 pilot lakes for the project

Used GIS-based criteria to assess lakeshore sensitivity Shallow bays Isolated bays Buffers around inlets and outlets Wetlands present on shore or in the lake

Other experiences


31/65

Studying a lake

DNR established a science-based SensitiveLakeshore Identification Manual Aquatic habitat survey Near-shore vegetation Citizen shoreline description Frog calling survey

Near-shore fish and aquatic animals Bird Survey


32/65

Cook SWCD project work plan

Select lakes to be included in the project Select GIS and field-based criteria to be used to

assess lakeshore sensitivity Conduct GIS operations and field data gathering Delineate sensitive shorelines Report our findings and make recommendations


33/65

Dollars and Cents

Funding for this project comes from two sources Lake Superior Coastal Program

STAR grant (short-term action request)

Board of Water and Soil Resources (BWSR) Clean Water Legacy protection funds

Caribou / Bigsby Lakes Buffer Analysis of Sensitive Features


34/65

Legend

100 meter Stream buffer

Isolated Bays

Caribou Lake Shallow Bays


35/65

Explanation of buffer analysis procedures.

Re-Digitized ShorelineThe shoreline for each lake was manually digitized as a polyline at a scale of

1:4,000 using FSA 2003-2004 Aerial photos available on the DNR Data Deli WMSServer. The purpose of this operation was to create a more accurate shapefile of thelakeshore boundary than was initially available.

Isolated Bays

A buffer operation was applied to the Re-Digitized Shoreline file. The bufferdistance was set at 100 meters. A new shapefile was created (Isolated Bays). The extentof the boundary of the isolated bays was manually delineated. An imaginaryperpendicular line between the shore and where the buffer overlapped itself defined theboundaries of the isolated bay.

Shallow BaysThe boundary of the littoral zone was delineated from DNR bathymetric data

where available(available on the DNR Data Deli website). A shapefile was created bytracing the outline of the 15-foot depth line from the bathymetry data. A 200 meterbuffer was applied to the shapefile. Where the buffer did not overlap the re-digitizedshoreline, that shoreline was defined as a shallow bay. *Note* this operation was notconducted for Bigsby Lake because the depth is less than 15 ft for the entire lake.

Shoreline within 100 meters of a streamA 100m buffer was applied to the DNR 24k streams layer (available on the DNR

Data Deli website). A shapefile was created by tracing the re-digitized shoreline where itintersected the buffer.

Hungry Jack Lake Buffer Analysis of Sensitive Features


36/65

-Data Source: MN DNR Data Deli WMS Server

Cook County Soil & Water Conservation DistrictCourt House, 411 West 2ND Street, Grand Marais, MN 55604

(218) 387-3647 Fax (218) 387-3042 www.co.cook.mn.us

Map Created 4/16/2008

0 1,500 3,000750 Feet 1:18,000

Legend

100m Stream Buffer

Shallow Bays

Isolated Bays

Re-Digitized Shoreline

Tait Lake Area Percent of Slope


37/65

/Data Source: Cook County GIS Server



This map is for educational purp oses only.

It is not intended to be used for navigation.

Map Created 3/21/20080 3,300 6,6001,650Feet

1:24,000Slope derived from County Digital Elevation Model (DEM)

Slope

0 - 10

10 - 20

20 - 30

30 - 50

50 - 100

100 - 150

150 - 200200 - 400

Tait Lake Buffer Analysis of Sensitive Features


38/65

Data Source: MN DNR Data Deli WMS Server




Legend

100 m Stream Buffer

Isolated Bays

Shallow BaysRe-Digitized Shoreline

-0 1,000 2,000500

Feet

1:12,000

Tait Lake National Wetland Inventory Polygons


39/65

/ Data Source: MN DNR Data DeliCook County Soil & Water Conservation District

Court House, 411 West 2ND Street, Grand Marais, MN 55604(218) 387-3647 Fax (218) 387-3042 www.co.cook.mn.us

This map is for educational purp oses only.



0 0.5 10.25Miles

1:24,000

National Wetlands Inventory

Uplands

Wetland Types

1 - Seasonally Flooded Basin

2 - Inland Fresh Meadow

3 - Shallow Marsh

4 - Deep Marsh

5 - Open Water Littoral

6 - Shrub Swamp

7 - Wooded Swamp

8 - Bog

Caribou Lake Zoning


40/65

LSR

FAR-1

FAR-1

FAR-1

FAR-1

FAR-1

FAR-1

FAR-2

FAR-2

LSR

LSRLSR

LSRFAR-3

Caribou

Bigsby

Ward

M i s t l e t o e R d

S C a r i b

o u D r

P e n i n s u l a P

o i n t T r l

W D e e r

y a r d L

k

N o r t h B

i g s b y R

d

a w m i l l D r

E v e rg r e e n Rd

U S F S 1 4 1 2

W h i t e S k y T r l

S a w m i l l

FAR-1

Danie ls

Bearskin and Hungry Jack Lakes Zoning


41/65

FAR-1

FAR-1

FAR-3

FAR-3

FAR-3

LSR

LSR

LSR

FAR-1

LSR

FAR-1

FAR-1

FAR-1

FAR-1

FAR-3

FAR-1

RC/R

FAR-3

FAR-1

FAR-1

RC/R

LSR

LSR

LSRLSR

LSR

RC/R

LSRLSR

FAR-1

RC/R

RC/R

RC/R

FAR-3

LSR

FAR-3

RC/R

RC/R

RC/R

RC/R

RC/R

RC/R

FAR-1 FAR-1FAR-1

Bear sk in

Flour

Hungry J ack

Danie ls

Duncan

Rudy

Moss

Wampus

Clea rwa te r

Spen Lake

Unnamed

Ruby

Zoning Districts

FAR-1

FAR-2

FAR-3

LSR

R-1

RC/R

Land Ownership

Private

COOK CO-STATE MN

STATE OF MINNESOTA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

USFS (SUPERIOR NATL FOREST)

Roads

/0 2,800 5,6001,400

Feet



This map is of for educational p urposes only.It has not been approved by Cook County Planning and Zoning.


1:25,000


FAR-1

FAR-3

Poplar, Leo, Road Lakes Zoning


42/65

FAR-3

FAR-1 FAR-1

FAR-1

LSR

FAR-3

LSR

LSR

RC/R

FAR-1

LSR

LSR

LSR

LSR

LSR

LSR

LSR

RC/R

RC/R

RC/R

RC/R

RC/R

LSR

LSR

RC/R

FAR-1

FAR-3

LSR

RC/R

LSR

LSRRC/R

LSR

LSR

FAR-3

RC/R

LSR

FAR-1

Poplar

Leo

Lizz

Swamp

Hungry J ack

Meeds

SquintRoad

Lace Lake

Prune

SwampMeeds

Zoning Districts

FAR-1

FAR-2

FAR-3

LSR

R-1

RC/R

Land Ownership

Private

COOK CO-STATE MN

STATE OF MINNESOTA



Roads

/0 2,500 5,0001,250

Feet




It is not intended to be used for navigation.Map Created 2/1/2008

Tait Lake Zoning


43/65

FAR-1

FAR-2

LSR

FAR-1

FAR-1FAR-2

Tai t

Wi l l s

C a r i b

o u

T r l

U S F S 3 4 0 D

Ca p s T rl

C l a r a

L a k e R d

S C a p

s T r l

U S F S 1 6 3

P o r t e r ' s B l v d

B i l l i e s T r l

Zoning Districts

FAR-1

FAR-2

FAR-3

LSR

R-1

RC/R

Land Ownership

Private

COOK CO-STATE MN

STATE OF MINNESOTA



Roads

/0 2,500 5,0001,250

Feet





1:25,000


S 3

0 6

Trout Lake Zoning


44/65

FAR-1

FAR-2

FAR-1

LSR

LSR

RC/R

RC/RLSR

Trout

Bogus

Marsh

Scabba rd

Boys

T r o u t L a k e R d

U S F S

3 0 8

U S F S

B o g u s L

a k e R d

M a k

e r L n

Zoning Districts

FAR-1

FAR-2

FAR-3

LSR

R-1

RC/R

Land Ownership

Private

COOK CO-STATE MN

STATE OF MINNESOTA



Roads

/0 2,500 5,0001,250

Feet





1:25,000



45/65

Name: Bearskin, West

Nearest Town: Grand Marais

Primary County: Cook

Survey Date: 08/26/2002

Inventory Number: 16-0228-00

Public Access Information

Ownership Type DescriptionMinnesota DNR Gravel State-owned access on E end of lake, with parking for six vehicles.US Forest Service Carry-in Short trail from Hungry Jack Lake, at W end of West Bearskin L.

Parking for four vehicles.

Lake Characteristics

Lake Area (acres): 494.00Littoral Area (acres): 94.00Maximum Depth (ft): 78.00Water Clarity (ft): 19.00

Dominant Bottom Substrate : N/AAbundance of Aquatic Plants : N/AMaximum Depth of Plant Growth (ft): N/A

Did you know? Each year, DNR fisheries personnel stock game fish fry and fingerlings in lakes lackinghabitat for natural reproduction.

Fish Sampled up to the 2002 Survey Year

Number of fish per net

Species Gear Used Caught Normal Range Average FishWeight (lbs)Normal Range

(lbs) Bluegill Gill net 0.2 N/A - N/A 0.14 N/A - N/A

Trap net 0.8 0.4 - 2.7 0.15 0.1 - 0.4

Green Sunfish Gill net 0.3 0.1 - 2.5 0.06 N/A - N/ATrap net 1.5 0.1 - 0.8 0.08 0.1 - 0.1

Lake Trout Gill net 2.7 0.8 - 4.3 3.56 1.2 - 3.1
http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#littoralhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#littoralhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#sechidiskhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#sechidiskhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#bottomhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#bottomhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#plantshttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#plantshttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#gillnethttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#gillnethttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#normalrangehttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#normalrangehttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#avgwghthttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#avgwghthttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#avgwghthttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#normalrangehttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#normalrangehttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/fish/sunfish/index.htmlhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/fish/sunfish/index.htmlhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/fish/sunfish/index.htmlhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/fish/sunfish/index.htmlhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/fish/sunfish/index.htmlhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/fish/sunfish/index.htmlhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#normalrangehttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#avgwghthttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#avgwghthttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#normalrangehttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#gillnethttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#plantshttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#bottomhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#sechidiskhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#littoral


46/65

Yellow Perch 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1

Fish Stocked by Species for the Last Five Years

Year Species Age Number2001 Lake Trout Yearling 5,0002003 Lake Trout Yearling 5,0552005 Lake Trout Yearling 2,575

Lake Trout Yearling 2,594

Status of the Fishery (as of 08/26/2002)

The lake trout catch in 2002 was similar to past catches in this lake, and was about average compared toother lake trout lakes in the area. Average size of lake trout collected in 2002 was excellent. Most of thelake trout collected in 2002 appeared to have been produced naturally. Only two of the 24 fish taken borefin clips identifying them as stocked fish, and all lake trout stocked since 1970 in this lake have been finclipped. Lake trout growth rates had been fast, probably because of the excellent forage base provided by arelatively dense rainbow smelt population.Smallmouth bass abundance appeared to have been about average for a lake of this type; however, theaverage size of the fish collected in 2002 was above average. Smallmouth bass growth rates had beenrelatively slow.Bluegill and northern pike were present in 2002, but apparently not in very high numbers. Most of thebluegill collected were small fish, two or three years of age.

Period of record: 08/04/1999 to 06/01/2007# of readings: 144Highest recorded: 150.02 ft (05/05/2001)Lowest recorded: 147.78 ft (10/03/2006)Recorded range: 2.24 ftAverage water level: 148 83 ft
http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#stockinghttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#stockinghttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#stockinghttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#stocking


47/65

Lake Water Quality Data Summary

Total Phosphorus Mean : ppb (parts per billion)Total Phosphorus Standard Error : ppbTotal Phosphorus # of Observations :

Chlorophyll-a Mean : ppbChlorophyll-a Standard Error : ppbChlorophyll-a # of Observations :

Secchi Disk Mean : 6.727610619 metersSecchi Disk Standard Error : 0.077052024 metersSecchi Disk # of Observations : 113

Alkalinity Mean : ppm (parts per million)Color Mean : Platinum-cobalt UnitsCarlson Trophic Status for Total Phosphorus :Carlson Trophic Status for Chlorophyll-a :Carlson Trophic Status for Secchi Disk : 32.53136913Overall Trophic Status : O(O=oligotrophic, M=mesotrophic, E=eutrophic, H=hypereutrophic)
http://glossary%28%27/gloss/glossary.cfm?term=Mean%27,%27400%27,%27250%27)http://glossary%28%27/gloss/glossary.cfm?term=Mean%27,%27400%27,%27250%27)http://glossary%28%27/gloss/glossary.cfm?term=Mean%27,%27400%27,%27250%27)http://glossary%28%27/gloss/glossary.cfm?term=Standard_Error%27,%27400%27,%27250%27)http://glossary%28%27/gloss/glossary.cfm?term=Standard_Error%27,%27400%27,%27250%27)http://glossary%28%27/gloss/glossary.cfm?term=Standard_Error%27,%27400%27,%27250%27)http://glossary%28%27/gloss/glossary.cfm?term=Number_of_Observations%27,%27400%27,%27250%27)http://glossary%28%27/gloss/glossary.cfm?term=Number_of_Observations%27,%27400%27,%27250%27)http://glossary%28%27/gloss/glossary.cfm?term=Number_of_Observations%27,%27400%27,%27250%27)http://glossary%28%27/gloss/glossary.cfm?term=Alkalinity%27,%27400%27,%27250%27)http://glossary%28%27/gloss/glossary.cfm?term=Alkalinity%27,%27400%27,%27250%27)http://glossary%28%27/water/glossary/color.html','500','250')http://glossary%28%27/water/glossary/color.html','500','250')http://glossary%28%27/water/glossary/tsi.html','600','378')http://glossary%28%27/water/glossary/tsi.html','600','378')http://glossary%28%27/water/glossary/tsi.html','600','378')http://glossary%28%27/water/glossary/color.html','500','250')http://glossary%28%27/gloss/glossary.cfm?term=Alkalinity%27,%27400%27,%27250%27)http://glossary%28%27/gloss/glossary.cfm?term=Number_of_Observations%27,%27400%27,%27250%27)http://glossary%28%27/gloss/glossary.cfm?term=Standard_Error%27,%27400%27,%27250%27)http://glossary%28%27/gloss/glossary.cfm?term=Mean%27,%27400%27,%27250%27)


48/65

Name: Caribou

Nearest Town: Lutsen





Ownership Type DescriptionMinnesota DNR Gravel Gravel ramp and parking area on west side of lake off County Road

4. Parking available for about five vehicles.







(lbs) Northern Pike Gill net 1.7 1.2 - 3.9 2.48 1.5 - 2.4

Trap net 0.7 N/A - N/A 2.96 N/A - N/ASmallmouth Bass Gill net 1.6 0.2 - 0.7 ND 0.3 - 2.2

Trap net 0.2 0.4 - 1.9 0.11 0.2 - 0.6

Walleye Gill net 13.6 3.0 - 13.2 0.69 0.7 - 1.3Trap net 0.7 0.5 - 2.7 1.17 0.8 - 1.5

White Sucker Gill net 7.7 2.6 - 11.7 2.37 1.7 - 2.4
http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#littoralhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#littoralhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#sechidiskhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#sechidiskhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#bottomhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#bottomhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#plantshttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#plantshttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#gillnethttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#gillnethttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#normalrangehttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#normalrangehttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#avgwghthttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#avgwghthttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#avgwghthttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#normalrangehttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#normalrangehttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/fish/northern/index.htmlhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/fish/northern/index.htmlhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/fish/bass/smallmouth/index.htmlhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/fish/bass/smallmouth/index.htmlhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/fish/walleye/index.htmlhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/fish/walleye/index.htmlhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/fish/walleye/index.htmlhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/fish/bass/smallmouth/index.htmlhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/fish/northern/index.htmlhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#normalrangehttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#avgwghthttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#avgwghthttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#normalrangehttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#gillnethttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#plantshttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#bottomhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#sechidiskhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#littoral


49/65

tatus of the Fishery (as of 07/18/2005)

The number of walleye caught per gill net ranked in the middle of all assessments done on this lake, butwas higher than three-fourths of the netting results for this class of lake. The average weight of walleyecaught was below the average for the lake and the lake class. The most recent walleye stocking occurred in2004 and 1990, but all walleye caught in gill nets were naturally produced. Ages of gill-netted walleyewere 2-7 and 9. Growth rates had been close to the average for the lake class.The number of northern pike caught per gill net ranked above the middle for the lake historically and belowthe middle for the lake class. The average weight was above the middle value for the lake, and above three-fourths of the values recorded for the lake class. Northern pike caught by gill nets were age 1 to age 5.Growth after age 1 had been fast for this area.The gill-net catch of smallmouth bass declined in 2005 compared to the two previous assessments (2003and 1998), but was still the third highest for the lake. It was higher than three-fourths of the catchesrecorded for this class of lake. The 2005 trap-net catch was low for both the lake and the lake class. Thegrowth rate of bass appeared to be somewhat slow for this area for the first two years, and then to increase.The number of yellow perch caught in gill nets was the third highest for the lake and among the highervalues for the lake class. The average size was small, but a few larger fish were caught.The number of white sucker caught per gill net ranked just above the middle value in assessments of boththis lake and similar lakes. The average weight of white sucker was higher than roughly three-fourths of thevalues recorded for the lake and the lake class.In addition to the standard gill nets and trap nets, small-mesh (0.25-inch) trap nets were set. These netscaught age-0 fish, including many smallmouth bass and yellow perch, several white sucker, a few black

crappie and walleye, and one northern pike.

Water Level DataPeriod of record: 05/18/2004 to 05/18/2004# of readings: 1Highest recorded: 140.28 ft (05/18/2004)Lowest recorded: 140.28 ft (05/18/2004)Recorded range: 0 ftAverage water level: 140.28 ft

OHW elevation: 140.5 ftDatum: ASSUM (ft)

Benchmarks
http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/waters/surfacewater_section/hydrographics/ohw.htmlhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/waters/surfacewater_section/hydrographics/ohw.htmlhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/waters/surfacewater_section/hydrographics/ohw.html


50/65


51/65

Name: Hungry Jack






Ownership Type DescriptionUS Forest Service Carry-in Off Co. Rd. 65, in small bay on N shore. Parking available for four

vehicles.County Unknown Unimproved dirt ramp off Co. Rd. 65 on W end of lake. Roadside

parking available for two or three vehicles.




Did you know? There are 15,000 miles of fishable streams in Minnesota, including 2,600 miles of trout

streams.




(lbs) Bluegill Gill net 1.4 N/A - N/A 0.10 N/A - N/A

Trap net 5.3 2.4 - 6.0 0.06 0.1 - 0.3Green Sunfish Gill net 0.8 0.2 - 0.9 0.07 N/A - N/A

Trap net 1.3 0.3 - 2.8 0.05 0.1 - 0.3
http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#littoralhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#littoralhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#sechidiskhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#sechidiskhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#bottomhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#bottomhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#plantshttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#plantshttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#gillnethttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#gillnethttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#normalrangehttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#normalrangehttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#avgwghthttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#avgwghthttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#avgwghthttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#normalrangehttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#normalrangehttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/fish/sunfish/index.htmlhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/fish/sunfish/index.htmlhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/fish/sunfish/index.htmlhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/fish/sunfish/index.htmlhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/fish/sunfish/index.htmlhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/fish/sunfish/index.htmlhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#normalrangehttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#avgwghthttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#avgwghthttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#normalrangehttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#gillnethttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#plantshttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#bottomhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#sechidiskhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#littoral


52/65

Green Sunfish 22 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 23 Hybrid Sunfish 21 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 24 Lake Trout 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 3

Northern Pike 0 0 0 0 6 13 1 0 20Smallmouth Bass 0 2 1 2 4 0 0 0 9Walleye 0 0 2 1 1 5 3 0 12Yellow Perch 4 4 4 0 0 0 0 0 12


Year Species Age Number2000 Lake Trout Yearling 5,0992001 Walleye Fingerling 3,8442002 Lake Trout Yearling 4,5232003 Walleye Adult 57

Walleye Fingerling 4,9302004 Lake Trout Yearling 2,282

Lake Trout Yearling 2,4062005 Walleye Fingerling 13,922


The walleye catch was one of the lowest in this lake in recent years, and lower than usual for this lake class.The average size of walleye was large, however. Several year classes were identified, but it was not clearfrom this small sample whether recent stocking of fingerlings (in odd years) had contributed significantly tothe catch.

The smallmouth bass catch was normal for this lake and for the lake class. Bass were larger than averagefor the lake, but about average in size for the lake class. Several year classes were present.Three lake trout were caught. All were yearlings that had been stocked in spring 2004. Yearlings had also
http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/fish/sunfish/index.htmlhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/fish/sunfish/index.htmlhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/fish/northern/index.htmlhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/fish/northern/index.htmlhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/fish/bass/smallmouth/index.htmlhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/fish/bass/smallmouth/index.htmlhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/fish/walleye/index.htmlhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/fish/walleye/index.htmlhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#stockinghttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#stockinghttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#stockinghttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/fish/walleye/index.htmlhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/fish/walleye/index.htmlhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/fish/walleye/index.htmlhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/fish/walleye/index.htmlhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/fish/walleye/index.htmlhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/fish/walleye/index.htmlhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/fish/walleye/index.htmlhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/fish/walleye/index.htmlhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/fish/walleye/index.htmlhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/fish/walleye/index.htmlhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/fish/walleye/index.htmlhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/fish/walleye/index.htmlhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#stockinghttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/fish/walleye/index.htmlhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/fish/bass/smallmouth/index.htmlhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/fish/northern/index.htmlhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/fish/sunfish/index.html


53/65

Lowest recorded: 1679.68 ft (09/01/2007)Recorded range: 1.79 ftAverage water level: 1680.52 ftLast reading: 1680.33 ft (11/23/2007)Datum: 1929 (ft)

Total Phosphorus


Mean : 8 ppb (parts perbillion)Total Phosphorus Standard Error : 1 ppbTotal Phosphorus # of Observations : 3

Chlorophyll-a Mean : 1.7 ppb

Chlorophyll-a Standard Error : 0.3 ppbChlorophyll-a # of Observations : 3

Secchi Disk Mean : 5.2 metersSecchi Disk Standard Error : 0.1 metersSecchi Disk # of Observations : 73

Alkalinity Mean : ppm (parts per million)Color Mean : Platinum-cobalt UnitsCarlson Trophic Status for Total Phosphorus :34Carlson Trophic Status for Chlorophyll-a : 36Carlson Trophic Status for Secchi Disk : 36Overall Trophic Status : O

(O=oligotrophic, M=mesotrophic, E=eutrophic,H=hypereutrophic)


54/65

Name: Poplar




Inventory Number: 16023900


Ownership Type DescriptionPrivate Property EarthenUS Forest Service Concrete New concrete access at the west end of the lake is reached from a

road the Gunflint Trail (Co. Rd. 12). Parking for many vehicles.


Lake Area (acres): 763.99Littoral Area (acres): 290Maximum Depth (ft): 73Water Clarity (ft): 11.3 (10.5-13)

Dominant Bottom Substrate : Detritus (Abundant)Abundance of Aquatic Plants : 22 Varieties SampledMaximum Depth of Plant Growth (ft): 3.2 (1-9)

Fish Sampled for the 2006 Survey Year



(lbs) Black Crappie Trap net 1.59 0.1 - 0.4 0.07 0.4 - 1.1 Blacknose Shiner Trap net 0.03 N/A N/A N/A Burbot Gill net 0.62 0.2 - 1.0 1.21 0.6 - 1.5Central Mudminnow Trap net 0.03 N/A N/A N/A

Hybrid Sunfish Trap net 0.22 N/A 0.06 N/A Lake Whitefish Gill net 0.31 1.6 - 15.5 1.12 1.0 - 2.1 Northern Pike Gill net 0.56 0.6 - 2.4 1.26 2.1 - 4.9
http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#littoralhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#littoralhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#sechidiskhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#sechidiskhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#bottomhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#bottomhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#plantshttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#plantshttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#gillnethttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#gillnethttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#normalrangehttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#normalrangehttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#avgwghthttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#avgwghthttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#avgwghthttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#normalrangehttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#normalrangehttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/fish/crappie/index.htmlhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/fish/crappie/index.htmlhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/fish/northern/index.htmlhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/fish/northern/index.htmlhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/fish/northern/index.htmlhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/fish/crappie/index.htmlhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#normalrangehttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#avgwghthttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#avgwghthttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#normalrangehttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#gillnethttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#plantshttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#bottomhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#sechidiskhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#littoral


55/65

Species 0-5 6-8 9-11 12-14 15-19 20-24 25-29 >29 Total Black Crappie 46 1 3 1 0 0 0 0 51 Blacknose Shiner 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1

Burbot 0 0 0 2 7 1 0 0 10Central Mudminnow 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 Hybrid Sunfish 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 Lake Whitefish 0 0 1 2 2 0 0 0 5 Northern Pike 0 3 0 3 10 2 2 0 20Pumpkinseed 17 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 19Smallmouth Bass 61 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 64Walleye 0 2 0 10 5 0 0 0 17White Sucker 1 0 1 0 12 4 0 0 18Yellow Perch 146 5 2 0 0 0 0 0 153


Year Species Age Number2006 Walleye Fry 300,0002005 Lake Trout Yearling 7,2182003 Lake Trout Yearling 7,407

Walleye Adult 26Walleye Fingerling 10,776


Walleye abundance in Poplar Lake in 2006 appeared to have been low, as it has been for the past 20 years.All attempts to improve walleye abundance by stocking have so far failed, although it did appear thatstocking could have accounted for most of the walleye collected in 2006. The northern pike catch in 2006was also low, and most of the northern pike collected were small. Few smallmouth bass were taken,although there were indications that a strong year class had been produced in 2005 Recent lake trout
http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/fish/crappie/index.htmlhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/fish/crappie/index.htmlhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/fish/northern/index.htmlhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/fish/northern/index.htmlhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/fish/bass/smallmouth/index.htmlhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/fish/bass/smallmouth/index.htmlhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/fish/walleye/index.htmlhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/fish/walleye/index.htmlhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#stockinghttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#stockinghttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#stockinghttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/fish/walleye/index.htmlhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/fish/walleye/index.htmlhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/fish/walleye/index.htmlhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/fish/walleye/index.htmlhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/fish/walleye/index.htmlhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/fish/walleye/index.htmlhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/fish/walleye/index.htmlhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/fish/walleye/index.htmlhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/fish/walleye/index.htmlhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#stockinghttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/fish/walleye/index.htmlhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/fish/bass/smallmouth/index.htmlhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/fish/northern/index.htmlhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/fish/crappie/index.html


56/65

Township: 64 Range: 1 Section: 6

Description: At Norwester Resort on northeast end of lake, high point on 4'x 3' gray boulder 5'east of the boat access and 10' from the waters edge.

Elevation: 1856.89 ftDatum: 1929 (ft)

Date Set: 05/22/1990 Benchmark Location


Description: At Fred Dells home- a 3/8"x 8" spike set vertically in the top center of a 1.4' birchstump 8' from the waters edge in line with the dock.

Elevation: 1858.29 ftDatum: 1929 (ft)

Date Set: 06/05/1996 Benchmark Location


Description: At Rockwood Lodge and Outfitters on the northwest side of lake, a 5/16" bolt andwasher in the northwest side of transformer pole on the south side of road about 45' east of lakelevel gage and dock.


Total Phosphorus Mean : 11 ppb (parts per billion)

Total Phosphorus Standard Error : 1 ppbTotal Phosphorus # of Observations : 5

Chlorophyll-a Mean : 1.8 ppbChlorophyll-a Standard Error : 0.2 ppbChlorophyll-a # of Observations : 6

Secchi Disk Mean : 3.9 metersSecchi Disk Standard Error : 0.1 meters

Secchi Disk # of Observations : 59Alkalinity Mean : 13 ppm (parts per million)C l M 30 Pl i b l U i
http://glossary%28%27/gloss/glossary.cfm?term=Mean%27,%27400%27,%27250%27)http://glossary%28%27/gloss/glossary.cfm?term=Mean%27,%27400%27,%27250%27)http://glossary%28%27/gloss/glossary.cfm?term=Mean%27,%27400%27,%27250%27)http://glossary%28%27/gloss/glossary.cfm?term=Standard_Error%27,%27400%27,%27250%27)http://glossary%28%27/gloss/glossary.cfm?term=Standard_Error%27,%27400%27,%27250%27)http://glossary%28%27/gloss/glossary.cfm?term=Standard_Error%27,%27400%27,%27250%27)http://glossary%28%27/gloss/glossary.cfm?term=Number_of_Observations%27,%27400%27,%27250%27)http://glossary%28%27/gloss/glossary.cfm?term=Number_of_Observations%27,%27400%27,%27250%27)http://glossary%28%27/gloss/glossary.cfm?term=Number_of_Observations%27,%27400%27,%27250%27)http://glossary%28%27/gloss/glossary.cfm?term=Alkalinity%27,%27400%27,%27250%27)http://glossary%28%27/gloss/glossary.cfm?term=Alkalinity%27,%27400%27,%27250%27)http://glossary%28%27/water/glossary/color.html','500','250')http://glossary%28%27/water/glossary/color.html','500','250')http://glossary%28%27/water/glossary/color.html','500','250')http://glossary%28%27/gloss/glossary.cfm?term=Alkalinity%27,%27400%27,%27250%27)http://glossary%28%27/gloss/glossary.cfm?term=Number_of_Observations%27,%27400%27,%27250%27)http://glossary%28%27/gloss/glossary.cfm?term=Standard_Error%27,%27400%27,%27250%27)http://glossary%28%27/gloss/glossary.cfm?term=Mean%27,%27400%27,%27250%27)


57/65

Years for which data has been collected

Year Average Secchi Reading (meters).

1989 4.0

1990 4.5

1991 4.6

1992 4.1

1993 4.3

1994 3.9

1995 4.5

1996 3.8

1997 4.3
http://www.pca.state.mn.us/data/eda/STresults.cfm?stID=16-0239&stOR=MNPCA1&year=1989http://www.pca.state.mn.us/data/eda/STresults.cfm?stID=16-0239&stOR=MNPCA1&year=1989http://www.pca.state.mn.us/data/eda/STresults.cfm?stID=16-0239&stOR=MNPCA1&year=1990http://www.pca.state.mn.us/data/eda/STresults.cfm?stID=16-0239&stOR=MNPCA1&year=1990http://www.pca.state.mn.us/data/eda/STresults.cfm?stID=16-0239&stOR=MNPCA1&year=1991http://www.pca.state.mn.us/data/eda/STresults.cfm?stID=16-0239&stOR=MNPCA1&year=1991http://www.pca.state.mn.us/data/eda/STresults.cfm?stID=16-0239&stOR=MNPCA1&year=1992http://www.pca.state.mn.us/data/eda/STresults.cfm?stID=16-0239&stOR=MNPCA1&year=1992http://www.pca.state.mn.us/data/eda/STresults.cfm?stID=16-0239&stOR=MNPCA1&year=1993http://www.pca.state.mn.us/data/eda/STresults.cfm?stID=16-0239&stOR=MNPCA1&year=1993http://www.pca.state.mn.us/data/eda/STresults.cfm?stID=16-0239&stOR=MNPCA1&year=1994http://www.pca.state.mn.us/data/eda/STresults.cfm?stID=16-0239&stOR=MNPCA1&year=1994http://www.pca.state.mn.us/data/eda/STresults.cfm?stID=16-0239&stOR=MNPCA1&year=1995http://www.pca.state.mn.us/data/eda/STresults.cfm?stID=16-0239&stOR=MNPCA1&year=1995http://www.pca.state.mn.us/data/eda/STresults.cfm?stID=16-0239&stOR=MNPCA1&year=1996http://www.pca.state.mn.us/data/eda/STresults.cfm?stID=16-0239&stOR=MNPCA1&year=1996http://www.pca.state.mn.us/data/eda/STresults.cfm?stID=16-0239&stOR=MNPCA1&year=1997http://www.pca.state.mn.us/data/eda/STresults.cfm?stID=16-0239&stOR=MNPCA1&year=1997http://www.pca.state.mn.us/data/eda/STresults.cfm?stID=16-0239&stOR=MNPCA1&year=1997http://www.pca.state.mn.us/data/eda/STresults.cfm?stID=16-0239&stOR=MNPCA1&year=1996http://www.pca.state.mn.us/data/eda/STresults.cfm?stID=16-0239&stOR=MNPCA1&year=1995http://www.pca.state.mn.us/data/eda/STresults.cfm?stID=16-0239&stOR=MNPCA1&year=1994http://www.pca.state.mn.us/data/eda/STresults.cfm?stID=16-0239&stOR=MNPCA1&year=1993http://www.pca.state.mn.us/data/eda/STresults.cfm?stID=16-0239&stOR=MNPCA1&year=1992http://www.pca.state.mn.us/data/eda/STresults.cfm?stID=16-0239&stOR=MNPCA1&year=1991http://www.pca.state.mn.us/data/eda/STresults.cfm?stID=16-0239&stOR=MNPCA1&year=1990http://www.pca.state.mn.us/data/eda/STresults.cfm?stID=16-0239&stOR=MNPCA1&year=1989


58/65

Name: Tait

Nearest Town: LutsenPrimary County: Cook

Survey Date: 07/10/2000Inventory Number: 16-0384-00


Ownership Type DescriptionUS Forest Service Concrete On SW shore, off Forest Road 340. Parking for several vehicles.




Did you know? Habitat acquisition of lands next to lakes and streams protects spawning areas andshoreline vegetation, and it increases access to fishing waters.




(lbs) Bluegill Trap net 0.2 0.3 - 6.4 0.02 0.1 - 0.3 Northern Pike Gill net 2.5 2.0 - 6.3 1.66 1.3 - 2.4

Trap net 1.2 N/A - N/A 2.62 N/A - N/APumpkinseed Sunfish Trap net 0.3 0.4 - 2.6 0.03 0.1 - 0.2

Walleye Gill net 7.8 3.0 - 9.8 1.01 0.9 - 1.6Trap net 1.2 0.5 - 1.9 1.38 1.1 - 2.0
http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#littoralhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#littoralhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#sechidiskhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#sechidiskhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#bottomhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#bottomhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#plantshttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#plantshttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#gillnethttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#gillnethttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#normalrangehttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#normalrangehttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#avgwghthttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#avgwghthttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#avgwghthttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#normalrangehttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#normalrangehttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/fish/sunfish/index.htmlhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/fish/sunfish/index.htmlhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/fish/northern/index.htmlhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/fish/northern/index.htmlhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/fish/sunfish/index.htmlhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/fish/sunfish/index.htmlhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/fish/sunfish/index.htmlhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/fish/walleye/index.htmlhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/fish/walleye/index.htmlhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/fish/walleye/index.htmlhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/fish/sunfish/index.htmlhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/fish/sunfish/index.htmlhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/fish/northern/index.htmlhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/fish/sunfish/index.htmlhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#normalrangehttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#avgwghthttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#avgwghthttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#normalrangehttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#gillnethttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#plantshttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#bottomhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#sechidiskhttp://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/surveys.html#littoral


59/65

The walleye catch in gill nets in the 2000 assessment was within the normal range for this lake class, and itwas similar to catches observed in the past on this lake. The walleye population was entirely self-sustained,with several strong year classes produced since 1994. Most of the walleye collected were less 18 inches inlength. Walleye growth rates were about average for the area; five-year-old walleye collected in Julyaveraged 16.3 inches in length.The northern pike catch was also normal for the lake class, and similar to past catches. Over half the catchconsisted of two-year-old fish, but northern pike as old as six years, and as large as 35 inches, werecollected. Northern pike growth rates were fairly fast, at least for younger fish.Good walleye and northern pike growth rates were due to the presence of average-sized populations of yellow perch and white sucker to provide forage. In addition to providing forage, some of the yellow perchcollected would have been large enough to have been of interest to anglers.Tait Lake supported small populations of panfish, but the fish were small and probably of little interest toanglers. Bluegill were found in this lake for the first time in 2000; pumpkinseed sunfish have been present

since at least 1990.

Total Phosphorus


Mean : 16 ppb (parts perbillion)Total Phosphorus Standard Error : 2 ppbTotal Phosphorus # of Observations : 6

Chlorophyll-a Mean : 4 ppbChlorophyll-a Standard Error : 0.3 ppbChlorophyll-a # of Observations : 6

Secchi Disk Mean : 2.1 metersSecchi Disk Standard Error : 0 meters

Secchi Disk # of Observations : 57

Alkalinity Mean : 20 ppm (parts per million)Color Mean : 30 Platinum-cobalt Units

Carlson Trophic Status for Total Phosphorus :44Carlson Trophic Status for Chlorophyll-a : 44Carlson Trophic Status for Secchi Disk : 49Overall Trophic Status : M(O=oligotrophic, M=mesotrophic, E=eutrophic,H=hypereutrophic)

8/9/2019 Reclassification of Portions of Lakes for Res

Reclassification of Portions of Lakes for Resource Protection (306-star07-07)

Documents

Transcript of Reclassification of Portions of Lakes for Resource Protection (306-star07-07)