When Minnesotans passed the Clean Water, Land and Legacy Amendment in 2008 they did so with high expectations. As projects have moved forward throughout the state, so too have efforts to ensure that the projects are meeting those expectations. Every year we work with project managers and visit restorations around the state. Highlights from the projects and lessons learned are communicated back to the restoration community to improve the quality of Legacy Fund restorations in Minnesota.
- Legacy Fund Restoration Evaluation Report
- Appendix A: Program Process and Project Evaluations
- View past reports and evaluations in the MN Legislative Reference Library
Recommendations to improve future restorations
The Restoration Evaluation Program evaluates a diverse set of restoration projects every year. Based on review of these projects a panel of restoration experts identifies common opportunities for improvement and provides recommendations for improving future restorations.
- Documentation
Documentation is critical for planning, tracking, and achieving successful restorations
Documentation is an essential component through all stages of a restoration project. Well documented projects have these attributes and benefits:
- Clear project goals linked directly to desired outcomes provide managers and stakeholders with consistent assumptions.
- Easily observable, quantifiable measures of success allow for the effective tracking of progress towards desired outcomes and directing future actions.
- Facilitate improved communication of lessons learned to benefit future projects.
- Provide a basis to evaluate outcomes and determine if projects are strategic conservation investments.
While many Legacy Fund restoration projects have included thorough documentation, the Restoration Evaluation Panel have noted gaps in achieving a consistent level of documentation across all funded projects. Consistent documentation of essential planning and implementation data is a prerequisite of effective projects. Most commonly, project plans have been deficient in providing clear goals and quantifiable measures of success. Implemented actions are often well documented but not explicitly linked to the overall goal(s) of the funded project.
A project documentation template was designed for project managers to support improved documentation for Legacy Fund restoration projects. Project managers are encouraged to use this template to ensure complete and thorough documentation and to promote consistency across projects. Download the Restoration and Management Plan Template. An example template with sample project data is provided for reference.
Role of project managers in improving documentation:- Consistently document restoration project data in a simple accessible format.
- Designate one project partner to permanently store project data.
- Collect and retain plant material information to understand how plant origin affects restoration outcomes to inform future work.
- Ensure that details of implements actions are recorded and coupled with the initial plan.
- Provide targeted training and grant guidance for project managers.
- Develop checklist of key project data to be archived by project partners.
- Project Teams
More comprehensive project teams should be used to improve ecological outcomes
This recommendation is primarily directed towards projects of a scale, scope and complexity that warrant a multidisciplinary team.
Projects such as stream restorations where multiple habitats and vegetation communities are being managed benefit from more robust teams with diverse professional experience in fields like geomorphology, hydrology, plant and animal ecology, construction site management, and engineering. Using a more multidisciplinary planning process, and bringing more sets of expertise to the table, will ideally minimize instances of nonnative seed use, improve stream channel design, expand limited project goals, and other issues that may arise. Project components sometimes require modification during instillation. It is important that project partners identify contingencies and engage appropriate expertise from a project team during planning and when modifications are needed.
During review of past projects, the panel noted instances where the stated project goals were too narrow, limiting potential opportunities for restoring ecological functions. Some projects did not adequately address critical ecological components in the design and/or installation. Ensuring that project teams include ecologists or agency technical experts, for example, should address some of these concerns. The panel believes that this recommendation will support higher quality restorations resulting in increased multiple benefits by engaging project partners and accelerating “learning in practice,” ultimately supporting project managers in planning and implementing projects with broader ecological goals, specifications, and outcomes.
Role of project managers in improving project teams
- Use multidisciplinary project teams appropriate to project scale/complexity.
- Engage State agency, local government units and technical experts early in the planning phase.
Role of funding organizations
- Include project team requirements in RFP’s.
- Continue to make staff available for consultations.
Role of state agencies
- Consult with project managers regarding technical specifications.
- Restoration Training
Continued development and implementation of training is essential to promote science-based practices
The Restoration Evaluation Program was developed with the ultimate goal of improving restorations throughout the state. The Panel has recommended that statewide efforts to disseminate restoration best practices be continued and bolstered to meet the needs of restoration practitioners. Compiling and disseminating current science-based restoration practices and showcasing exemplar challenges and successes from the field will be critical to improving practice. Effective formal trainings currently exist in Minnesota, including:
- Ecological Restoration Certificate. Five online training components to support dissemination and application of restoration best practices are available through the Ecological Restoration Training Cooperative coordinated by the University of Minnesota in partnership with MN DNR, BWSR and MN Department of Transportation. This program is designed to support foundational restoration skills and knowledge for a wide array of practitioners including professional staff, technicians and community members by sharing the best available knowledge from research and practice.
- BWSR Academy. Annual state of the art training in technical and operational restoration practices. Training provides usable technical skills, to primarily local government staff, for implementing restoration projects and administering programs funded by BWSR grant programs.
- Improving Restorations Webinar Series – offered in partnership by the Restoration Evaluation Program and University of Minnesota Extension.
The Restoration Evaluation Program aims to continue and bolster statewide efforts to disseminate restoration best practices to meet the needs of restoration practitioners.
- Design Criteria for Lakeshore Projects
Utilize minimum design criteria to mimic shoreline’s natural structure and vegetation
The Panel recommends that project managers establish consistent minimum design criteria as guidance for lakeshore projects. Lakeshore projects that were determined to have achieved greater ecological benefits shared the following attributes:
- Designed at a scale to provide significant water quality and habitat benefits based on current science.
- Sited based on a clear need (gully erosion, bank erosion) and/or strategically positioned in the landscape (to intercept an appreciable area of upland runoff with a disturbed landcover type, several times larger than the property or project site).
There are existing local government and State programs that have effectively used minimum design criteria and achieved successful outcomes and abundant participation. Implementation of minimum criteria, such as a native vegetation buffer of at least 75% of the shoreline length and at least 25 feet landward of the Ordinary High Water Level, provide a more appropriate example for promoting social adoption of natural shoreline practices and a greater level of support for achieving larger restoration goals. Bioengineering practices that rely primarily on vegetation and natural materials for shoreline stabilization should also be considered first priority techniques whenever practicable. Design criteria should be established by project managers to accommodate specific project types, such as upland runoff buffer or shoreline habitat restorations. Adaptability to specific conditions and constraints is vital to ensuring effective guidance.
Role of project managers
Establish minimum design criteria based on programmatic goals and local conditions; integrate with existing direction for shoreline restoration from TMDL or local water plan.
- Utilize guidance from state agencies and area technical assistance staff to identify appropriate criteria.
- Specify minimum design criteria in lakeshore BMP agreements (between LGU project managers and landowners)
- Promote the value/technical need for established criteria
- Utilize improved criteria when recruiting and screening potential projects
- Planning for Stream Projects
Detailed project planning and consistent implementation of will produce the best outcomes in stream restoration
The panel recommends that project managers complete consistent project planning for all stream projects. This information is particularly valuable for stream and river restorations due to the complexity, cost, and risks associated. This consistent planning process should include:
- Identifying problems (e.g. stressors or impairments)
- Articulating specific project goals
- Designing strategies to address identified problems and specific goals based on a stream assessment
- Budgeting funds adequate to achieve goals
- Documenting project partner capacity to manage and execute the work
The level of assessment and planning detail should be proportional to the scope, scale, and complexity of the restoration and be completed before work begins on the ground. Preparation and thoughtful application of this information will enable project managers to make informed decisions throughout the project and improve the capacity to achieve desired outcomes. This level of project planning prior to projects hitting the ground will facilitate more consistent implementation of high quality stream restorations in the State.
Roles of project managers
- Engage State agencies, local government units and other technical experts early in, and throughout, the project planning phase
- Secure financial, staff and/or contract resources to complete appropriate project planning
Role of state agencies:
- Identify and promote best practices in consistent project planning detail
- Vegetation for Stream Projects
Well established vegetation is critical for the long-term success of stream projects
Well established vegetation is critical for the long-term success of stream projects. While cover crops can provide temporary stabilization, establishing native vegetation takes planning and diligent maintenance especially in dynamic stream systems that are subject to frequent flooding. Identifying project partners responsible for planning, installing, monitoring, and maintaining vegetation will increase the likelihood project benefits will continue over time.
Roles of project partners
- Establish and apply performance standards for vegetation
- Consistently apply BWSR’s Native Vegetation Establishment and Enhancement
- Guidelines focusing on diverse native vegetation
- Incorporate climate resiliency into vegetation planning
- Improved Project Review by Technical Experts
Utilize technical experts in the review and planning of complex projects
The panel recommends that project managers utilize technical experts in the review and planning of complex projects. Project outcomes will benefit from this review by incorporating current science and best practices more consistently across the state.
Roles of Project Managers:- Identify projects early where technical capacity is needed for planning and implementation.
- Engage state agency, local government units, and technical experts early in the planning phase.
- Request project managers identify technical capacity needs in their request.
- Identify and refer project managers to the appropriate resources and or staff to fit those needs.
The stream restoration efforts on Middle Sand Creek in Anoka County highlight the benefits of incorporating expertise and support from technical experts. Project managers identified early in the planning process the complexity of this stream project and reached out to technical experts from State agencies. The outcomes of this project were improved from guidance on design solutions, feedback on design details, and construction oversight, resulting in multiple benefits including sediment reduction, habitat improvement and flood attenuation.
Roles of State Agencies- Provide technical experts to add capacity to complex projects during planning and implementation.
- Consult with project managers regarding design solutions and technical specifications.
- Improve networks for technical assistance and collaboration with partners such as University of Minnesota Extension.
- Phased Approach for Buckthorn Management
A phased approach to buckthorn management that incorporates the timing and sequencing of actions is needed to achieve effective, long-term control.
The restoration of buckthorn invaded woodlands requires a multi-year effort. The panel recommends that project managers establish a phased approach for buckthorn management incorporating the timing and sequencing of actions.
Roles of project managers- Develop a long-term plan as part of a phased approach to woodland restoration.
- Create plans that include timelines for sequential phases like adequate site preparation, removal methods, herbicide timing/application requirements, and site seeding/planting post removal.
- If goats are used in buckthorn management, project managers should use a browsing plan that aligns with project goals and planned activities.
The buckthorn removal project at Tanglewood Preserve in Washington County used a phased approach for management. Sequenced management actions included: forestry mulching and hand cutting, herbicide treatments, and diverse seedings to provide competition with buckthorn and fuel for prescribed fire. Buckthorn cover was significantly reduced over 7 years to less than 5% from the previous near 100% cover, resulting in reduced invasive species cover, increased native vegetation cover, and improved native plant diversity.
Roles of funding organizations- Provide project managers with resources or templates for phasing and sequencing buckthorn management plans.
- Request that project managers identify their phased plan as part of funding requirements.
- Provide technical resources to support project managers in utilizing best practices to improve outcomes and project longevity.
- Outline of phased approaches and techniques for buckthorn removal
- Details for perennial seed mixes for adequate ground cover and competition for future invasions
- Detailed herbicide application strategies including timing of treatment and herbicide selection
- Improved Seed Selection and Implementation
Guidance during early planning for seed mix selection and implementation is needed to support more consistent planting success.
The panel recognizes the need for guidance in early planning for seed mix selection and implementation to support more consistent planting success.
Roles of project managers- Conduct adequate site assessments to inform appropriate seed selection.
- Reference State Seed Mixes and fact sheets in early project planning and seed selection.
Roles of funding organizations
- Direct project managers and partners to appropriate resources for seed selection/implementation.
- Encourage project managers to follow seed source recommendations that are consistent with current science.
- Update State Seed Mixes and provide guidance to project managers and partners.
- Provide detailed technical resources to project managers to improve outcomes in restoration seeding and planting.
- Climate Change Contingency Planning
Contingency plans for variable weather conditions are an important part of restoration planning in a changing climate, especially for native vegetation establishment.
The panel identifies that climate change is adding complexity to restoration planning and implementation. Variability in precipitation, flooding, and drought necessitates that project managers build contingency plans, especially concerning native vegetation establishment.
Roles of project managers/partners- Create contingency plans such as increased irrigation measures during plant establishment.
- Consider diverse species selection that will tolerate extreme precipitation and drought events.
- For wetland and stream restorations consider a phased approach for vegetation establishment to account for loss of seed or installed plants.
- Plan for increased pressure of invasive species range expansion.
Tettegouche Baptism River High Falls Bridge Lake
Role of state agencies- Provide continued and updated guidance such as BWSR’s Climate Change Considerations for Plant Selection.
- Improved Implementation of Common Carp Barriers
Common carp barriers should be informed by integrated pest management plans, use site-specific designs, and be paired with other carp management efforts.
Carp barriers can be an effective conservation practice when paired with other carp management actions, informed by integrated pest management plans, and when site-specific, field-tested designs are used. Barriers can be a critical component of carp management but are not likely to reduce population levels when used alone. There are alternative strategies to barriers that may help reduce carp recruitment, such as predator fish enhancement via stocking and aeration to prevent winter kills of predator fish. In many cases, increasing mortality of adult carp via removals or water level drawdowns will be necessary to achieve desired outcomes.
The panel identified instances of older carp barrier designs that were unsuccessful due to clogging and enabling carp passage during high water. Experts at the University of Minnesota can help guide specific designs.
Roles of project managers- Prepare and use integrated pest management plans informed by data on migration, population size, and age-structure to guide carp management.
- Tie carp management actions to specific and measurable goals. Typically, management goals are based on reduction in carp biomass below 100 kg/ha (Bajer at al 2009) leading to increased water clarity and reduced total phosphorus.
- Engage experts on appropriate planning and design of carp barriers.
- Plan for regular maintenance of barriers.
- Establish criteria to evaluate carp barrier proposals that considers design, placement, and integration with comprehensive carp management plants to ensure performance of completed projects.
- Provide technical expertise on fisheries considerations of barriers to balance carp control and native fish passage needs.
- Bajer et al 2009. Effects of a rapidly increasing population of common carp on vegetative cover and waterfowl in a recently restored Midwestern shallow lake
- Carp Management and Lake Restoration – U of M AIS Detectors Webinar
- Improved Alum Treatment Approach
A sound approach to alum treatments considers lake characteristics, longevity of the treatment, and specific monitoring needs to inform future management.
Aluminum sulfate (alum) treatments are an in-lake restoration method used to sequester Phosphorus (P) and have been funded by Clean Water Fund grants. Alum treatments are an approach that can support restoration goals but should not be viewed as a complete solution to lake impairments. These treatments support water quality goals when paired with other watershed and lake management efforts. An integrated lake management approach can maximize the benefits of an alum treatment and support desired outcomes for lake conditions.
The panel identified greater success in alum projects that 1) are done in lakes suitable for in-lake restoration (see Huser et al 2016), 2) collect information to assess the effectiveness and longevity of applied alum and, 3) continue comprehensive lake and watershed improvements after treatment.
State funded alum treatments should:- Incorporate specific goals and pre and post measures to evaluate performance and inform future management.
- Be durable. Longevity of alum treatments can vary widely and relevant factors should be considered prior to treatment (e.g., lake-specific characteristics, carp populations, continued external P loading, dosing needs).
- Be applied in split doses when needed to avoid biological impacts or support optimal treatment outcomes. Split dose treatments may be difficult to achieve within grant windows without advance planning.
- Consider an integrated lake management approach to guide alum treatment planning.
- Develop specific goals and track measures to evaluate the success and longevity of alum. treatments. Best practice measures include: pre & post-treatment hypolimnetic P, pre & post sediment P release rates, and sediment cores of aluminum bound P.
- Refine grant requirements to best fit current science on alum treatments and limit problems with implementation.
- Establish a better understanding on the use of alum in Minnesota by reviewing outcomes of completed treatments.
- Huser et al 2016. Longevity and effectiveness of aluminum addition to reduce sediment phosphorus release and restore lake water quality
- Minnesota State and Regional Government Review of Internal Phosphorus Load Control
- Watershed Health Assessment Framework: Lakes
Integrated Lake Management and Alum Treatments
Integrated Lake Management is a holistic approach focused on effective, long-term solutions to lake management. The approach parallels Integrated Pest Management, which is widely used to manage pests and address complex problems effectively. An integrated management approach considers all potential management options, relevant social/ecological factors, and requires a thorough understanding of the system to be restored. For lakes, it is important to consider the external and internal factors influencing the waterbody to make sure all problems are addressed through management. Alum treatments are an effective tool to address internal stressors on water quality but do not mitigate continued external nutrient loading. The DNR Watershed Health Assessment Framework for lakes is a useful tool to assess lake health and begin planning lake restoration and management.
States like Wisconsin require a Lake Management Plan to fund alum treatments. These plans are valuable in prioritizing activities and ensuring implemented actions have the most impact. Additionally, the stakeholder engagement involved with integrated lake management planning can build shared expectations and avoid issues with common outcomes of lake restoration, like increased aquatic plant growth
Contact us for more information
- Wade Johnson, Program Coordinator, 651-259-5075
Learn more about our Legacy funding:
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources
Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources