Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Environment Water Quality topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

County staff present draft 2027–2036 Land and Water Resource Management Plan, highlight priority watersheds and nutrient‑management goals

Dunn County Planning, Resource and Development Committee · June 4, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Staff presented the draft fifth edition of the Land and Water Resource Management Plan, identifying priority issues (partnerships, farmland preservation, water quality, habitat), priority watersheds (Red Cedar, Lower Pine Creek, Ogalli) and a goal to double nutrient‑management plan coverage over 10 years.

Chase, county staff, presented the draft Dunn County 2027–2036 Land and Water Resource Management Plan, the county’s fifth edition plan that outlines priority issues, targeted watersheds, and implementation actions.

The draft centers on four priority issues: building partnerships and community relationships, protecting and preserving agricultural land, improving water quality, and conserving natural resources and habitat. Chase identified priority watersheds that the county will emphasize — the Red Cedar watershed (including work tied to the Red Cedar water‑quality partnership and EPA planning), Lower Pine Creek (a smaller watershed crossing county lines), and the Ogalli watershed (noting the Lake Ogalli Association and potential federal funding through USDA NRCS/Mississippi River Basin Initiative). Chase said a revised private‑well nitrate map (including samples from 2023–2025) will be included in later drafts and currently serves to identify where staff should focus outreach and resources.

Chase summarized implementation methods and action items: the plan favors voluntary participation, farmland‑preservation tools in qualifying townships (Wilson, Grant and Lucas), manure‑storage/performance standards under county code, and interactions tied to complaints and cost‑share program oversight. He described 34 proposed actions ranging across partnerships, technical assistance, nutrient‑management planning and targeted watershed work.

Committee members asked about the nitrate data’s time depth and drivers for rising nitrate concentrations. Chase said the packet map is based on 2023 sampling (roughly 1,000 private‑well samples) and that the county’s wellwater viewer archives samples back to the 1980s; he cautioned that private‑well sampling has variability tied to well construction and casing depth, so the map is a planning tool rather than a deterministic guarantee at any specific parcel. Chase said the plan seeks to double existing nutrient‑management plan coverage (from roughly 25% of cropland to 50%) over 10 years and that additional mapping and outreach will come in subsequent drafts. He said a full draft and a required public hearing on the plan are planned in coming months before state land‑and‑water board presentation and final county adoption.

Chase said staff will return with the full draft (anticipated late June) and that the plan must be presented to the state land and water conservation board and then to the county board for approval; the current plan expires at year‑end.