EFFECTS Q-F ERAENAGE GN WELDUFE
EN YHEZ NONY RUN WATERSHED,
LAC GUI PARLE AND YELLQW
MEMCENE CGEfiNTEESt MENNESGTA

 

THS_

Thesis {'or We Degree of M. S.
MlCHEGAN STATE UNIVERSITY
Keith W. Harmon
1964

 

THESIS

LIBRARY

Michlgan State
University

 

 

ROOM USE OHLY7

 

39m”!

ABSTRACT

EFFECTS OF DRAINAGE ON WILDLIFE IN THE STONY
RUN WATERSHED, LAC QUI PARLE AND YELLOW
MEDICINE COUNTIES, MINNESOTA

by Keith W. Harmon

The Stony Run Watershed located in Lac qui Parle and Yellow
Medicine Counties, Minnesota contained 2, 578 acres of permanent
wetlands and Z, 500 acres of seasonally flooded wetlands. Wildlife data
indicating the importance of wetlands to waterfowl, ring-necked

pheasants (Cholihicus phasianus), and white-tailed deer (Odocoileus

 

 

virginianus) were obtained from similar wetlands outside the watershed

 

and were assumed to be representative of the wetlands in the Stony Run
Watershed. Waterfowl production was estimated to be 0. 76 ducklings
per acre of water (Bue, 1950). Pheasant densities in wetland cover
were estimated to be 2. 8 to 3.7 birds per wetland acre during the
1961-62 winter. Deer counts during the winters of 1961-62 and
1963-64 averaged . 035 deer per wetland acre.

Judicial Ditch 21, which was locally—financed, drained 2, 151 . 8
acres of permanent wetlands and approximately 2, 500 acres of
seasonally flooded wetlands. Waterfowl losses were estimated to be
1, 635 ducks annually during years of normal rainfall. Pheasants
and deer using wetlands for winter cover are estimated to be reduced

by 73 percent.

EFFECTS OF DRAINAGE ON WILDLIFE IN THE STONY
RUN WATERSHED, LAC QUI PARLE AND YELLOW
MEDICINE COUNTIES, MINNESOTA

By

Keith W . Harmon

A THESIS

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

MASTER OF SCIENCE

Department of Fisheries and Wildlife

1964

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page
INTRODUCTION ............ . ........... 1
STUDY AREA . . ...................... . 3
METHODS . . ......................... 5

WILDLIFE POPULATIONS IN WETLAND HABITAT . . . . . 7

EFFECTS OF THE DRAINAGE ON WILDLIFE. . . ..... 9
CONCLUSIONS ............. . . . ......... 12
SUMMARY................... ...... ...13
LITERATURECITED........ ...... 14
TABLES .......... . ..... . ....... .... 16
FIGURES. . ............. . . . . . . ....... 18
APPENDIX ...... ...... . ..... 27

ii

INTRODUCTION

The drainage of prairie marshes by federal subsidies has been
well documented (Jahn, 1961; Reuss, 1958; and Seaton, 1959).

Public Law 87-732, which requires U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service
approval for federal cost-shared drainage, as well as other laws
designed to reduce wetland drainage, has not successfully curtailed
the draining of permanent wetlands or seasonally—flooded basins.

I have observed, in the past several years, an increase in locally-
financed drainage projects. These projects have acted to eliminate
the objectives of federal anti—drainage legislation.

Local drainage projects are usually established at the request
of a majority (51 percent) of the landowners by a board of county
commissioners or by a State of Minnesota District Court, if more than
one county is involved. Most southwestern Minnesota counties contain
fifty or more such legal drainage systems.

This study is to document one locally-sponsored and financed
drainage project, to determine the loss of wetland wildlife habitat
resulting therefrom, and to determine the evident and probable effects
on wildlife populations.

I wish to thank Dr. George A. Petrides for guiding my course of
graduate study in the Department of Fisheries and Wildlife at Michigan
State University and for considerable editorial advice. I also wish to
thank Jerome Janecek and LeRoy Rutske of the Minnesota Division of
Game and Fish for their participation in the aerial counts. Special
thanks are due to Area Game Managers Les KOOpmann and Jim Ruos

and to Regional Game Manager Hiram Southwick of the Minnesota

Division of Game and Fish. Their dedicated efforts made possible the

saving of the remaining wetlands in the Stony Run Watershed.

STUDY AREA

The Stony Run Watershed is located in Lac qui Parle and Yellow
Medicine Counties, Minnesota. These two counties lie in a portion of
Minnesota that was originally vegetated by tall-grass prairie (Barnes,
1948). The physical features of the watershed were detemined in
large part by glaciation (Elwell e_t 3:1. , 1929).

The watershed is approximately 13 miles long and 5 miles wide.
It contains 31, 200 acres of nearly-flat to undulating land. Elevations
are from 940 feet to 1070 feet above sea level. Stony Run Creek runs
northeast into the Minnesota River.

Soils were formed from glacial parent materials under a prairie
climate (Elwell _e_t a_l. , 1929). Parnell soil, poorly-drained and
developed from medium to heavy textured glacial till, is restricted
to marshes and the floodplain. The major upland soil type is Barnes.
This type is well drained and was developed from medium textured
glacial till (Anon. , 1956).

Weather data collected at Montevideo, Minnesota, seven miles
northeast of the study area, lists the average annual temperature as
44.10 F. with average extremes of 72.80 F. in July and 12.10 F. in
January. The average annual precipitation is 25. 53 inches (Strub,
1960).

Using Shaw and Fredine's (1956) wetland classification system,
aerial photographs taken in 1955 showed 2, 578 acres in 86 permanent
wetland areas. The wetland areas consisted of 16 meadows (Type II)
containing 304 acres, 44 shallow marshes (Type III) containing 1, 341
acres, and 26 deep marshes (Type IV) containing 933 acres (Table 1).

In addition to the permanent wetlands, Southwick (1957) estimated that

there were 80 seasonally-flooded basins (Type 1) containing 2, 500
acres (Table 1). Wetland acreage comprised 16.2 percent of the
watershed.

The majority of the wetland acreage in the watershed was in
private ownership. The Minnesota Division of Game and Fish had
purchased, through the "Save Minnesota Wetlands" program, 669. 3

acres of permanent wetlands (Table 2).

METHODS

At the time the study was undertaken, Judicial Ditch 21 was
in the final stages of construction. All privately owned wetlands
had been drained and the wetland complex around the remaining state-
owned marshes had been altered. Data indicating the importance of
wetland habitat to wildlife were obtained from wetland areas outside
the watershed (Figure 1). Soil Conservation Service soils maps
showed that these wetlands had soil types similar to the wetlands in
the Stony Run Watershed. Agricultural practices on the adjacent
cropland were also similar. I have therefore assumed that the data
obtained were applicable to the wetlands formerly found in the Stony
Run Watershed.

Waterfowl production estimates (Bue, 1950) were based on a
duck brood survey conducted in 1950 on 12 state-owned areas known
as the St. Leo Marshes. These are located 10 miles west of the study
area in Yellow Medicine County, Minnesota (Figure 1) and contained
350 acres of permanent wetlands. Aerial photographs taken in 1950
showed maximum to nearly maximum water levels.

I censused ring-necked pheasants (Cholchicus phasianus) winter-

 

ing on the Shaokatan Wildlife Management Unit located in Lincoln
County, Minnesota (Figure 1) by airplane during the winter of 1961—62.
Approximately 20 inches of snow covered the ground then. The pilot
circled the Unit until an observer and I agreed on the approximate
number of pheasants using the area. No winter cover, except for
farmhouse windbreaks, was present within a three mile radius of the

Unit. Aerial observations within this radius indicated that the pheasants

in the area were in the wetland cover on the Unit. Several days later
the same observer and I, using a dog, attempted to flush and count
the pheasants on one-half the unit only, in order to eliminate recount-
ing birds that had been flushed and counted previously. Observations
during the aerial count indicated that the pheasants were distributed
more or less evenly throughout the entire marsh. The ground count
was therefore started at the most accessible point and run in a north
south direction until approximately half the area was covered.

During the winters of 1961-62 and 1963-64, an aerial deer count
was conducted on seven Wildlife Management Units (Figure 1).
Observations were made (Harmon and Janecek, 1962 and Harmon and
Rutske, 1964) when heavy snow cover made sighting conditions favor-
able. Each Unit was circled at an altitude of 150 feet. If the two
observers disagreed on the number of deer counted, the count was
repeated. Intensive farming practices (drainage, burning, and fall
plowing) adjacent to the wetlands had eliminated all winter cover within
several square miles of each Unit. Observations were also made on
adjoining land to determine if any movement had occurred prior to the
count. No evidence of movement was observed and the counts were
considered to be indicative of the true number of deer on the Unit.

Wetland acreages and classification (Type II, III, and IV), before
drainage, were determined from 1955 large-scale aerial photographs.
The aerial photographs indicated that maximum to nearly maximum
water levels were present.

A photographic flight made in 1961 failed to show the total effects
of Judicial Ditch 21 since construction of the ditch was not complete
at that time. In order to determine the effects of Judicial Ditch 21,
I made a ground check of all wetlands within the watershed. Observ-
ations were also made in the watershed while conducting the 1964

aerial deer count.

WILDLIFE POPULATIONS IN WETLAND HABITAT

The general importance of wetlands for the courtship, rearing
young, feeding, and migration of waterfowl is common knowledge to
game management personnel. Waterfowl brood data collected on the
St. Leo Marshes indicated that 0. 76 ducklings per acre of water were
being produced (Bue, 1950). Farming practices and soil types in the
St. Leo area are essentially the same as in the Stony Run Watershed
and I have assumed that a waterfowl production estimate of 0. 76
ducklings per acre of water per year also occurred in the study area
during years of normal precipitation.

Winter cover is considered necessary in Minnesota to reduce
losses of pheasants during blizzards. A study by Carlson (1947) in
Minnesota showed that cover types such as cattail (m spp. ),
bulrush (Scirpus spp. ), and willow (S3131 spp.) were preferred by
pheasants as winter cover. I have assumed that the willow referred
to by Carlson was located on marsh shorelines since willow, except
in wetlands, is ,not common in southwestern Minnesota. Aerial and
ground observations on the 213-acre Shaokatan Wildlife Management
Unit indicated a winter pheasant density of between 2. 8 and 3. 7 birds
per wetland acre.

The 1955 aerial photographs showed that in the Stony Run Water-
shed 2, 578 acres of wetland were available as potential pheasant winter
cover. The precise acreage that would have been available as winter
cover during any one year would depend on the water levels in the
marshes and the invasion of emergent vegetation.

There is evidently little known of the white-tailed deer' 5

requirements in intensively farmed regions. Aerial observations in

southwestern Minnesota showed that deer were using wetlands and
wooded river bottoms as winter cover (Harmon and Janecek, 1962
and Harmon and Rutske, 1964). Thirty-Six percent of the deer ob-
served were using wetlands as winter cover. Data collected on seven
Wildlife Management Units during the winters of 1961-62 and 1963-64 -
averaged . 035 deer per acre on 2, 169 acres of wetland (Harmon and
Janecek, 1962 and Harmon and Rutske, 1964).

The wetland acreage available to deer as winter cover in the
Stony Run Watershed would have varied depending on the amount of
water present in the marshes. The watershed contained 2, 578 acres

of potential winter cover for deer.

EFFECTS OF THE DRAINAGE ON WILDLIFE

Judicial Ditch 21 was constructed under order of the District
Court, Sixth Judicial District and completed during the fall of 1963.
The drainage system consisted of 67 miles of open ditch and 101 miles
of tile (Figure 2.) and cost approximately $1, 000, 000 (O. Skramstad,
Civil Eng. , Personal communications). Eighteen percent of the costs
were paid by state, county, and township agencies. The remainder
was financed by the local landowners (Anon. , 1959).

Judicial Ditch 21 drained 2, 151.8 acres of Type II, III, and IV
wetlands (Figure 3 and Table l). A large percentage of the Type I
marshes was drained, but I was unable to determine the exact amount.
Twenty-six miles of the tile installed as a part of the ditch system
was designed for internal drainage of 1, 760 acres of Type I wetlands.
The remaining Type I marshes are still being tiled by individual land-
owners because of improved drainage tile outlets. I have assumed a
100 percent loss of Type I marshes.

Wetlands owned by the Minnesota Division of Game and Fish were
adversely affected by Judicial Ditch 21 (Figures 4 and 5). .This was
particularly true for those wetland areas in which private interests
remained at the time the ditch was established. Forty-two percent
of the wetland acreage in public ownership was drained (Table 2).

The effect of Judicial Ditch 21 on waterfowl and their habitat
was almost immediate (Figures 6, 7, 8, and 9). Based on Bue's (1950)
data the Stony Run Watershed, before drainage, was producing an
estimated 1, 959 ducks during years of normal water levels (2, 578
acres x 0.76 ducklings per acre of water). The drainage of 2,151.8

acres of permanent wetlands therefore resulted in an estimated annual

9

10

loss of 1, 635 local ducks (2,151.8 acres drained x 0.76 ducklings per
acre of water) during years of normal rainfall. Production on the
426.6 acres of wetlands not crained is expected to be lower in the future
since only when a water area is surrounded by temporary wetlands

will its maximum carrying capacity for brood production be realized
(Schrader, 1955).

Based on the figures I obtained on the Shaokatan Wildlife Manage-
ment Unit, I estimated that during the 1961-62 winter the wetlands in
the Stony Run Watershed could have been wintering between 7, 218
(2, 578 acres x 2.8 pheasants per wetland acre) and 9, 539 pheasants
(2, 578 acres x 3.7 pheasants per wetland acre).

The Game and Fish lands that were drained are being maintained
as winter cover. A total of 708. 7 acres of wetland winter cover remained
after the completion of Judicial Ditch 21. The number of pheasants
wintering in the remaining wetland cover is estimated to be between
1. 984 (708. 7 acres x 2.8 pheasants per wetland acre) and 2, 622 pheasants
(708. 7 acres x 3. 7 pheasants per wetland acre). The actual number of
pheasants wintering in wetland cover during any given year would
depend upon other factors in the environment such as weather during
the nesting season, available safe nesting cover, and water levels in
the marsh. -I have estimated that the drainage of wetlands in the Stony
Run Watershed will result in the loss of approximately 73 percent of
the pheasants dependent on wetlands as winter cover.

Using the data I obtained from seven Wildlife Management Units
containing wetlands similar to those originally found in the Stony Run
Watershed, I have estimated that during the winters of 1961-62 and
1963-64 the wetlands in the watershed could have been supporting

approximately 88 deer (2, 578 acres x . 034 deer per wetland acre).

11

After drainage, a total of 708. 7 acres of wetland winter cover
remained in the watershed. The removal of 1, 869. 3 acres of potential
winter cover is expected to reduce the number of deer dependent on

wetlands as winter cover by approximately 73 percent.

CONCLUSIONS

The loss of wildlife habitat due to the construction of Judicial
Ditch 21 was highly significant. Possibly even more important is
the probability that large, private drainage projects appear to be
draining more permanent wetlands than federally subsidized drainage
projects and are not readily controlled by legislation.

The loss of 2,151.8 acres (83.4 percent) of permanent wetlands
eliminated the Stony Run Watershed as a major waterfowl producing
area. There is little likelihood of ever restoring the wetland areas
drained. Costs of drained wetlands, once in crops, prohibit their
acquisition and restoration by public agencies.

Wetland drainage adversely affects pheasant populations in
certain areas (Midwest Pheasant Council, 1963). The loss of 73
percent of the pheasants dependent on wetlands for winter cover is
expected to have a profound affect on pheasant hunting not only from
the standpoint of pheasant numbers but also from the standpoint of
hunting Opportunities. Some hope remains in the possibility of devot-
ing portions of the land in federal land conversion programs to the
establishment of winter cover for pheasants.

The drainage Of 1, 869. 3 acres of potential winter cover will leave
only a remnant deer population in the Stony Run Watershed since no
wooded river bottoms exist. Deer hunting as a Sport, although limited
prior to the construction of Judicial Ditch 21, is expected to be

practically nonexistent in the future.

12

SUMMARY

Legislation to curtail federally subsidized drainage has not
solved the problem of wetland drainage. Judicial Ditch 21, a locally-
financed and sponsored drainage system eliminated 2, 151. 8 acres of
the 2, 578 acres of permanent wetlands in the Stony Run Watershed.

In addition an estimated 2, 500 acres of seasonally-flooded wetlands
were drained.

Wildlife data, obtained from similar wetlands outside the
watershed, indicated that 0.76 ducklings per acre of water (Bue, 1950)
could have been produced in the Stony Run Watershed. Pheasant
densities in wetland cover were estimated to be 2. 8 to 3. 7 pheasants
per wetland acre during the winter of 1961-62. Deer counted on
seven Wildlife Management Units during the winters of 1961-62 and
1963-64 averaged . 035 deer per wetland acre.

The loss of wetlands due to drainage in the Stony Run Watershed
is expected to result in an estimated loss of 1, 635 ducks annually,
depending on water conditions. The number of pheasants and deer
dependent on wetlands for winter cover are expected to be reduced by
73 percent.

An accelerated program to bring as many of the remaining wet-
lands into public ownership is the only positive means of preserving

wetland habitat for wildlife.

13

LITERATURE CITED

Anonymous. 1956. Report of field examination, Stony Run Watershed,
June 18. U. S. Dept. Agric., Soil Conserv. Serv. St. Paul,
Minn. 9 pp. (mimeo).

Anonymous. 1959. Exhibit 1 and exhibit 3 of viewers report in
Judicial Ditch 21 proceedings. Minn. Div. Game and Fish.
Regional Office. Slayton, Minn. 24 pp. (mimeo).

Barnes, C. P. 1948. Environment of natural grassland. U. S. Dept.
Agric. Yearbook of Agriculture, 1948, pp. 45-49.

Bue, G. T. 1950. Brood counts on the St. Leo Marshes, Yellow
Medicine County. Minn. Div. Game and Fish. St. Paul, Minn.
1 page. (typed report).

Carlson, C. E. 1947. Winter observations on pheasant cover and sex
ratios in Martin County. P. R. Quart. Rept. Minn. Div. Game
and Fish. 7(1): 22-23.

Elwell, J. A., P. R. McMiller, G. B. Bodman, J. S..Hall, H. T.
Petraborg, E. A. Fieger, R. M. Pinckney, and C. H. Hammer.
Soil survey of Lac qui Parle County, Minnesota. 1U. S. Dept.
Agric. Bull. No. 23, 48 pp.

Harmon, K. W., and J. J. Janecek. 1962. Aerial deer census--1962,
Region 111, Area 11. Minn. Div. Game and Fish. St. Paul,
Minn. 4 pp. (typed report).

, and L. H. Rutske. 1964. Aerial deer census--1964,
Region III, Area II. Minn. Div. Game and Fish. St. Paul,
Minn. 3 pp. (typed report).
Jahn, L. R. 1961. The status of waterfowl conservation. The Wilson

Bull., 73(1): 96-106.

14

15

Midwest Pheasant Council. 1963. Proposals for changes in federal
land-conversion programs to benefit pheasants and other
wildlife Species. 2 pp. (mimeo).

Reuss, H. S. 1958. Conservation of wetlands. Proceedings and
debates of the 85th Congress. 7 pp.

Schrader, T. A. 1955. Waterfowl and the potholes of the north
central states. U. S. Dept. Agric. Yearbook of Agriculture,
1955, pp. 596-604.

Seaton, F. A. 1959. Resources for a growing population. Annual
report of Sec. of Int., U. S. Gov. Printing Office, Wash. D. C.
459 pp.

Shaw, S. P., and C. G. Fredine. 1956. Wetlands of the U. 5., their
extent and value to waterfowl and other wildlife. U. S. Fish
and Wildl. Serv. Cir. 39. 65 pp.

Southwick, H. C. 1957. Drainage--Hazel Run and Stony Run. Minn.
Div. Game and Fish. St. Paul, Minn. 1 p. (typed report).

Strub, J. H. 1960. Climatological summary 1931-1960, Montevideo,

Minnesota station. U. S. Dept. Commerce, 1 p.

l6

 

N .92. o .26 .m m 9: 2.83.

 

 

 

 

N .omw o .mmm m cm C/H Omar: mmzmnma QOOQ
o .o 0.3m .H o .3. :2 must $4.32 323%
o.o 0.3m o S E 35; ".3882
o .o o .oom .N o cm 3 99$“; Emma COCOOG kSfimcomweomw
H33» OHOHOm lawn—flea Chasm Chm; .Ofipouh pad 28:9

monod mo 9:58.92 mmoum mo mumpgz on?“ usage?

 

 

 

.HN aofiQ Hmfiofipdh mo :ofiuoduumcoO OE. gonad Odd OHOHOC. 3093232 5639900 0503032 303m?
Com 3.1mm” Mow Odin .Oofimuofim? 99m >COHm 9: GM momsfi 93363 HO mowdonom Cam. mama—932 .H £an

17

 

 

 

NS. 93: mass Wows 283.
92: o.o a Sow a .3... gm 38m
o.o 9mm... 9mm... mama flash
92: o.o 13 as: :856
o.o was was 92. £825
MS odw 95 93: somuogaosmfiao
Conflmup 35.333 Honing. 0H0mom monoxm flab

mo owmucoouom

 

mommon om Codie?

uGoEowmcwz @3623

 

.SOmoGCSZ £03550 maflofluoz 3026.». paw 3.1mm 3w

odd .poflmuofima cam >c0um mg 5 COCMMHU meson Undies» mo meucoouom use an ”#0an ~33de
mo oofiosbmcoo Hound Cam OHOHOQ wommouom Codie? OED adoeommdmg SECS? 1.308 .N 2nt

18

O Waterfowl

El Pheasant
A Deer

   
    
   
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

m
‘5 Lac qui Parle CO.
:3 (\r Stony Run Watershed
£5 0
50’ Yellow Medicine CO.
V)
A A
u A A A
Lincoln Lyon Co. Minnesota
Co.
A
Pipe-
stone Co. Murray CO.
A
Rock Co. Nobles Co.
Iowa

Figure 1. County locations of areas censused to determine water-
fowl, pheasant, and deer population densities in wetland
cover and the census areas' relationship to the Stony
Run Watershed, Lac qui Parle and Yellow Medicine
Counties, Minnesota.

19

.NHOmogflz 6635300 930252 3036.». Cam 3qu flow odd .mom: . EN sou—ED Hmfiofipdh .N madman

3:2 a o
E

Dammmmhka? ZDM WZOHm

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I
r 1:
II
I —
. .I..«
N
Ill .
I I
/ 1&1
x . II
. o .1
I, —.
. I
x/
z/ . I I — I
, I x _
’I
II I
. IIIII \” o
. / x \ Ki . 35. III...
I I) \ II 2
I .

 

1». ./., f. L) :35 ammo

20

.muOmoch/H $632300 62mm “do Odd Odd 650252 3030?
. Hm AofiQ 1333:. Ho :oflodnumnoo Os» amumm 353m .323 pad mwoum vague? Hondz .m muswfm

 

23 a o
E

Qmmmmmfidls ZDM .WZOHm

 

 

21

 

Figure 4. Photo station is southeast of the center of section 30,
T116N. , R41W. The land shown in the lower portion of the photo-
graph is owned by the Minnesota Division of Game and Fish. The
land in the upper portion is privately owned. -August 18, 1958.
Photo by Les Koopmann, Minnesota Division of Game and Fish.

' .
v’.

i
I,
g .

.1

O

i
I

a
I

/
' ‘7;"‘-,.
5' '1‘

\ .
l" -
1

"v

22

I
1
I

“‘1 1
1; ¥ 1. x

.5
,1 ' ”3’1 "
em «1..»
i I iJ“:'l.¥
IO‘

“. .
' " 7‘ '3
'- ' “vi .; "‘ 7
9 _ '..I ' '
\‘ I f a,

 

'q‘ (1'3”. r’. a ‘. ‘1'.’.'(‘!{.(1. ‘4'...8;5 H ’
" 4 'v, ‘1 , /‘ j .5")

h

 

Figure 5. Photo station is the same as in Figure 4. The line
(arrow) is the spoil bank of Judicial Ditch 21. The ditch lies
along the north property line of the Minnesota Division of Game
and Fish land. April 7, 1964. Photo by Keith Harmon, Minnesota
Division of Game and Fish.

23

“a .”

40A.-. -.- . -7._‘ , \.,- -0 . ‘- ’
-_—w—-- .nw .-,~__ '~ -,
-
~ ' .. 1 Q

 

Figure 6. Photo station is on the north line of the NW-l-, section

31, T116N. , R41W., looking south. This marsh is privately owned.
The area had a history of heavy waterfowl use as a migration area
and a reproduction area. August 18, 1958. Photo by Les K00pmann,
Minnesota Division of Game and Fish.

24

 

Figure 7. Photo station is the same as in Figure 6. ‘At the time
this photograph was taken the area had been cropped one year.
Waterfowl value was completely eliminated. The value as a winter-
ing area for pheasants was also destroyed. April 7, 1964. Photo
by Keith Harmon, Minnesota Division of Game and Fish.

 

25

 

Figure 8. Photo station is on the section line between sections 12
and 13, T116N. , R41W. , looking west. A type IV wetland area
prior to the construction of Judicial Ditch 21. August 18, 1958.
Photo by Les Koopmann, Minnesota Division of Game and Fish.

26

 

Figure 9. Photo station is the same as in Figure 8. Judicial Ditch
21 (arrow) lies along the right hand side of the improved county
road. April 7, 1964. Photo by Keith Harmon, Minnesota Division
of Game and Fish.

APPENDIX

Wetland classification from Shaw and Fredine, 1956

Type I - Seasonally flooded basins or flats - Shallow depressions

 

that contain standing water for only a few days in the‘

Spring or after a heavy rain. Areas are usually farmed.

Type II - Meadows - Shallow depressions that contain standing
water for a few days in the spring or after heavy rains.

Soils may be waterlogged within at least a few inches

 

of the surface. Vegetation is primarily sedges (Carex sp. ),

smartweeds (Polygonum spp. ), rushes, docks (Rumex spp. ),

 

and beggarticks (Bidens spp. ).

Type III - Shallow marshes - Marshy depressions which may have

 

variable water depths up to 30 inches. The area is
usually covered with heavy stalked emergents. The
emergents may form a dense cover or have scattered

open water areas .

Type IV - Deep marshes - Water depths to four or five feet.

 

Emergent vegetation, if present, is either confined to a
fringe or to scattered plants or clumps of bulrush or

cattail. Submerged aquatic vegetation may be present.

27

MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY LIBRARI :I

, "II III )Iil' I;
III I I (H
r I, . HI I!.‘.II‘

31

' I

I"
(I)

6

‘ .,
I IIII I II
293 03084 9

 

 

 

. is.

Hmh.