Fillmore SWCD

Promoting Natural Resource Stewardship

Fillmore SWCD

New administrator heading up county district

· ·

Article by Kirsten Zoellner – Fillmore County Journal

Fillmore County Soil & Water Conservation District (SWCD) is a long-standing organization striving to promote natural resource stewardship through educational, technical and financial assistance. Led by staff and a board focusing on various aspects of conservation and stewardship, it offers programs and services in soil health, water management, grazing and nutrient management, windbreaks and buffers, well testing and sealing, tree sales, rain barrels, and more. Last month, the district welcomed administrator Riley Buley. He brings a wealth of knowledge and experience to the role and is eager to be a part of the work.

Growing up in Mankato, Buley enjoyed the outdoors, particularly fishing area lakes with his father. His interest in Minnesota’s water put him on his future path early. A high school science fair project on damaging algal blooms plaguing an area lake led to a nomination for the 2011 International Science and Engineering Fair. “From there, I knew I wanted to pursue a career in water resources,” he says.

Earning both a bachelor’s and master’s degree in aquatic biology from University of Wisconsin – La Crosse, he participated in research in the Driftless Region and the Upper Mississippi River Basin. His academic pursuits didn’t end there. Buley earned his doctoral degree in fisheries, aquaculture, and aquatic sciences at Auburn University.

Returning to the midwest, he worked with tribal governments in Iowa and Wisconsin, managing watershed projects, completing wetland and waterway permitting, and grant and staff management in natural resources. “Many of these projects included assisting landowners in completing aspects permitting and implementing conservation best management practices,” he notes. He also spent four years with the U.S. Geological Survey in La Crosse, Wis., focused on water and aquatic research.

“My wife and I really enjoy the Driftless region and we wanted to put down roots in the area. I saw the posting for the district administrator position with the SWCD and felt that there couldn’t be a better position to apply for. I feel really grateful to be able to work in a field I am passionate about in an area I really enjoy,” he enthuses. “In conservation programs such as the SWCDs, you get to take a hands-on approach on fixing conservation issues such as water quality and soil loss, and I enjoy it.”

Buley acknowledges the transition has been a learning process, but he is eager to take it on. “Being new to the position, I am learning the needs of our area residents and what conservation practices the SWCD can utilize to best help serve them,” he says. “Natural resource management is not a one-size-fits-all approach and I am learning as quickly as possible what methods we can use to best serve the public.”

Stepping up to keep projects moving forward, existing SWCD staff have proven a great boon to the transition and Buley’s got nothing but praise for them and their work.

“The district is truly involved in many projects ranging from soil health and manure management to watershed planning that spans the entirety of the Root River. They are happy to contribute to a range of projects, which is great to see. I am looking forward to seeing how we can continue to provide excellent service to area residents,” he adds. “One thing I have noticed is that my staff and board members are great at assisting individuals to find the conservation answers they are looking for. If our SWCD cannot help you, we will work with you to find someone who can.”

Buley’s also keen to both grow the district’s abilities. “It’s easy to see I am passionate about water resources and I look forward to playing a part in protecting the water resources of the region.” Trained as a researcher, Buley believes district conservation can expand research oriented-projects. “I am looking forward to promoting the projects we perform in this unique region to the rest of the state,” he adds.

“I really can’t highlight enough how excited I am to be back in the Driftless region. There is something about this area that you can feel when you are here,” says Buley. “I think this area is a great testament to how excellent conservation programs promote and preserve stunning natural resources. I am really looking forward to being a part of this work.

For more information about the SWCD and available programs, including the annual tree sale aimed at assisting landowners with trees for conservation purposes at an affordable rate, contact the office at (507) 765-3878 or visit www.fillmoreswcd.org.

Response to Written Questions

· ·

Root River Watershed One Watershed, One Plan
Response to Written Questions
From the RFP for the Five-Year Assessment of the Root River Watershed One Watershed, One Plan Implementation

Q1:
Would the RR 1W1P Partnership consider an HSPF-SAM approach for the Five-Year Assessment of the Implementation of the RR CWMP?

A. The RR 1W1P Partnership would not consider utilizing only HSPF-SAM for the Five-Year Assessment; as PTMApp was used for the development of the Root River Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan, the group would like to continue utilizing PTMApp for the Five-Year Assessment.

Q2:
We have a vision for how this process should be completed and are wondering if you could share your budget so we can determine if our vision aligns with you expectation for this level of effort.

A. The RR 1W1P Partnership proposes a budget of a minimum of $25,000 but no more than $50,000 for Consultant work on the Five-Year Assessment.

Q3:
To what degree will the deliverables for this five-year assessment be reviewed and approved by BWSR? Does the Planning Team have final say in what this assessment looks like or will there be coordination, review and approval by BWSR and if so, who at BWSR will be most directly involved in this effort?

A. There is no approval process through BWSR for the Five-Year Assessment. RR 1W1P Plan Content Requirements include a process for completing a Five-Year Assessment/Evaluation of Implementation efforts. The Root River CWMP currently has a section committing to this Five-Year Assessment. BWSR has developed guidance/recommendations on this assessment work (Attachment D in the RFP) but there is no BWSR requirement on how this is to be completed and what the final product looks like. The RR 1W1P Partnership will have the final say in what the Five-Year Assessment will look like.

Q4:
We noticed that the following bullet from BWSR’s guidance is missing “Identify ongoing challenges and document partnership success”. Was this intentional or does the Planning Team want this component of the evaluation process to be included?

A. The upcoming PRAP assessment will be covering a majority of the bullet in BWSR’s guidance document referencing “Identify ongoing challenges and document partnership success”, therefore, the RR 1W1P Partnership is not including it in the work for the consultant. The consultant will be able to use PRAP results as part of the Five-Year Assessment work.

Q5:
Can you clarify what needs to be completed by the PRAP deadline of April 12th?

A. The April 12th, 2023 deadline for the PRAP is for completion of the CWMP Progress Table (attached at the end of this document).

Q6:
Who is going to be the interface between the PRAP process and the Consultant Team selected for the five-year assessment?
A. Jenny Mocol-Johnson (jennifer.mocol-johnson@state.mn.us) and Adam Beilke (adam.beilke@state.mn.us) with BWSR will be the main contact for the PRAP process.

Q7:
Has the Root River Watershed PTMApp been updated to the newest version of PTMApp? If not, which version be used for this assessment?

A. PTMApp is currently being re-run for the plan area and it will be the latest version of the toolbar with NRCS practice types and the updated economic information. This update should be completed sometime during the winter of 2022-2023.

Q8:
Have all implementation efforts that will be assessed as a part of this project been tracked?
Does tracked information include practice type, location, treated area, and pollutant reduction estimates?
Are the practice locations and associated information available in a GIS shapefile?

A. eLINK is currently the only place that projects have been tracked thus far; there will need to be additional tracking work completed for things outside of eLINK (for example, outreach). Projects entered in eLINK would include BMP type, location, size/treated area, and pollution reduction estimates. eLINK data can be made available as a shapefile. Once per year, BWSR posts eLINK data to the following site: https://gisdata.mn.gov/dataset/env-state-cons-bmp-locs. More data can be provided by BWSR upon request.

Q9:
Provide information as to the water quality monitoring that has been conducted in the last 5 years that needs to be evaluated for this assessment.
Do surface water quality monitoring locations align with the HUC 10 pourpoints used for pollutant reduction values as reported in the plan document?

A. Water quality monitoring in the Root River Watershed for the Watershed Cycle approach was last conducted in 2018 and 2019, with the assessment being completed in 2020. Monitoring locations were based upon State and Local needs and may not always line up with HUC-10 pourpoints. MPCA Watershed Pollutant Load Monitoring Network sites may line up with some HUC-10 pourpoints and provide recent, as well as long-term, monitoring data. MPCA is currently working on the WRAPS Update Report that summarizes changes in water quality to eight Root River subwatersheds. This report is expected to have a draft version available in December/January. Questions regarding the MPCA WRAPS Update Report should be directed to Emily Zanon at emily.zanon@state.mn.us.

Q10:
Will modeled reductions or actual monitoring results be used to evaluate improvements to water quality?

A. Most of the measurable goals from the Plan are based on tools/models which would require the modeled estimations to gauge progress, however, monitoring results are an important part of the Assessment work and should be considered by the Partnership to determine if the work being completed is achieving the overall resource goals, and deciding whether any course corrections are needed. The Five-Year Assessment needs to include whether new information requires any changes to priority locations, issues or activities through a future amendment to the Plan.

Q11:
Will all priority level (A, B, and C) resource concerns be evaluated or just a subset of concerns?

A. The Five-Year Assessment will focus on all of the A and B level resource concerns.

Q12:
What is the budget or range of available budget for this project?

A. The RR 1W1P Partnership proposes a budget of a minimum of $25,000 but no more than $50,000 for Consultant work on the Five-Year Assessment.