2005-01-27_AgendaPacket - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Better data quality results in better water resource management deCZSZOnS. he old adage, "Any job worth doing is worth doing well" could be the mantra of the pilot volunteer water quality moni- toringplan trainings that have been developed by the Minnesota Lakes Association (MLA) and the Rivers Council ofMinnesota (RCM) in conjunc- tion with the River Network (RN). As citizen volunteers, we all feel that our monitoring efforts are worth doing; however, we aren't always sure of how well we're actually doing.. This has result- ed in a general lack of confidence in citizen data. This can be overcome by developing a strategic and focused water quality monitoring plan to ensure that water quality data collected is mean- ingful and useful. Better data quality results in better water resource management decisions. The Legislative Commission on Minnesota Resources (LCMR) provided RCM and MLA with funding from 2003 to 2005 to assist citizen groups in developing successful water quality monitoring plans. Two pilot train- ing workshops have been conducted. The results of the monitoring plans developed by participat- ing groups will be evaluated to hone their experi- ences into an on-going program to assist other lake and river groups in developing successful monitoring programs that produce reliable, credible data in acost-effective manner. Each pilot training workshop was lim- ited to seven lake and river groups. A total of only 14 groups were trained though over 90 well- qualified groups applied. Training one was held in early 2004 and the second was held this past summer. Common to all participating groups was an interest in citizen management of their lake or river and a desire to have their volunteer- collected data utilized. The 14 groups represent- ed adiverse geography, size, and range of moni- toring activities. Each participating group received an implementation grant of $3,000 once their monitoring plan was completed. The training included athree-day workshop conducted in two sessions with time in-between to process the information and work Training Group One Beltrami County Lakes and River Association Chippewa River Watershed Project Dodge County Environmental Quality Norway/Games Lakes Association Pelican Lakes Association of St. Anna Sauk River Watershed District Suomi Area Lakes Association Training Group Two Briggs Lake Chain Association Cannon River Watershed Partnership Dam, Lilly & Long Lake Watershed Management Plan Committee Green Lake Improvement District Hungry Jack/Leo/West Bearskin Watershed Committee Pelican Lake Association Wadena Soil and Water Conservation District on their monitoring plan. A workbook and step- by-step instructions along with a companion document with supplemental information has been developed. During the workshop, groups started developing their monitoring plan with the aid of the workbook and individualized assistance from the workshop facilitators, who also provide assis- tance throughout the planning process. Each group brought a team of two to four individuals to the training workshop. Teamwork is the best way to achieve a viable monitoring plan and makes it easier to create a shared vision and formulate monitoring goals based on the assessment of the watershed, water resources and group capabilities. Teams included volunteer leaders, volunteer monitors, watershed or conservation organization staff, data users and technical advisors. Ideas worked on at the train- ing sessions were brought home, discussed, refined and incorporated into the group's final monitoring plan. Page 3 Sandra Holm, CITIZEN MONITORING PROGRAM DIRECTOR, MINNESOTA LAKES ASSOCIATION