This article is part of a larger series that investigates what we know about local tributaries around Lake Pepin. Follow us on Facebook and sign-up for our e-newsletter so you don’t miss the next release. If you have information or pictures for other Lake Pepin tributaries, please email us at: info@lakepepinlegacyalliance.org.

By: Emily Green

A few miles south of Red Wing and midway up the Flower Valley, the Flueger family farm paints an idyllic picture. Against the backdrop of wooded bluffs, a picturesque red barn sits beside a shaded yard, with the gentle babbling of a natural spring as a constant soundscape. The spring feeds Bullard Creek, which winds through the property under two wooden footbridges, past a charming gazebo and through a stone-edged pond, then continues on down the valley, entering the Mississippi River in Wacouta Bay. According to KC Flueger, that spring is the start of Bullard’s perennial flow. Although a watershed map shows the creek snaking and branching much further upstream, Flueger says those are all ephemeral runs that fill with water only after rains or during spring runoff.

A designated coldwater trout stream, Bullard is one of the smallest creeks in the Mississippi River--Lake Pepin (MRLP) watershed. Like the others, its steeply rolling landscape, characteristic of southeast Minnesota, makes it sensitive to precipitation runoff and erosion. European settlers exacerbated the vulnerability by cutting forests and removing perennial vegetation to make way for agriculture—triggering long-term increases in soil runoff from exposed lands and streambank erosion. While Bullard’s watershed history shares that general story, it has avoided the severe disturbance trajectory that some other creeks have seen [1]. Bullard is considered to be in overall good shape with good water quality and good aquatic habitat supporting a decent brook trout population [2]. “It definitely seems to be a fairly stable stream,” said MN Department of Natural Resources (DNR) Area Fisheries Supervisor Kevin Stauffer.

Upland water storage is key to Bullard’s good condition

According to Goodhue Soil and Water Conservation (SWCD) planner Beau Kennedy, Bullard’s current good condition owes to several factors including its small size and the fact that only one-quarter of its land was converted to cropland. Kennedy also said that early and extensive efforts by local landowners to manage and slow surface runoff from the upland farm fields have helped protect Bullard. Since the 1970s, landowners have constructed 68 earthen dams, scattered throughout the watershed, that function to capture and slow runoff from 70% of the ag lands. That makes Bullard “the best treated stream in the area,” said Kennedy.

The dams in Bullard’s watershed are strategically placed near the top of runoff routes and at field edges to contain water during and after rain events, allowing soil and silt to settle out. The collected water is released slowly through a narrow pipe embedded in the berm. Both Flueger and Kennedy stressed what a big difference those dams have made for Bullard Creek, as sediment from soil erosion is a major factor in degrading streams. The dams have also been a boon to local landowners. KC and his brother Barney Flueger recall years before the dams when heavy rains were devastating to crops and properties. “Before the ponds, water used to come down this valley real hard. Water used to wash out driveways all down this whole valley,” said Barney. “Now, with big rains, big snow melts, the creek comes up but it doesn’t wash things out like it used to,” he added.

Local landowners drove water conservation practices

KC and Barney’s uncle Dale Flueger played a role in driving the conservation efforts that have benefited Bullard’s watershed. Dale was one of the founding members of the local Soil and Water Conservation board and, according to Kennedy, he paid attention in the 70s when the importance and value of keeping the soil in place started gaining attention. “I think he was very aware of [the erosion occurring] in other parts of Goodhue county, being on the Soil and Water Board. And at that time there was just a big push for soil conservation . . .  I think there was a rising awareness of not wanting to waste our soils, trying to conserve them as best we can,” said Kennedy. Dale brought in his brother John D. Flueger—KC and Barney’s father—who owned a construction company that was equipped to install the dams and other conservation features.

According to a September 5, 1978 article from the Red Wing Republican Eagle, the first five dams were installed in the upper reaches of the watershed that year, controlling runoff from 1583 acres, at a cost of $83,000. Federal funds paid 75% of the overall project cost and 19 local landowners split the remaining 25%. “Final costs to each landowner ranges from $50 to $1500 depending upon how much benefit he receives,” noted the staff writer Mark Ladwig. Dam-building continued in the ensuing decades. Barney Flueger, who worked for his dad in those years, described each dam project as unique. While a few have now stopped serving their intended purpose because they’ve filled in with silt or trees have grown in, many are still working effectively to limit erosion. “It was money well spent. It helped farmers, kept soil in place, kept their fields from running out. And it created habitat for ducks and a water source for farm animals to drink from in the summer. It was just was kind of a win-win situation all the way around,” declared Barney Flueger. 

Bullard’s growing delta in Wacouta Bay

Although the dams have been effective, Bullard still carries sediment, as all streams naturally do. Bullard’s sediment load is deposited at its mouth in Wacouta Bay, near the head of Lake Pepin, and there’s no doubt that it has contributed to the gradual filling in of the bay over many decades. Local history writer Jotsie Johnson described how, in the late 1800s, Wacouta Bay could receive paddlewheel steamships traveling down the Mississippi River [3]. She also noted that the first steam sawmill west of the Mississippi was constructed near the Wacouta Bay shoreline, because it was an accessible landing point for the rafts of timber being floated from upstream. In contrast, local resident and avid naturalist Bruce Ause, who canoes regularly in the bay, noted that on a recent morning this August, he “couldn't find any place that had more than about 2.5 feet of water.”

MN Pollution Control Agency monitoring has not found Bullard’s sediment concentration levels to exceed standards. Nonetheless, the impact of its sediment load on Wacouta Bay is apparent and unwelcome to many local residents. “Wacouta is a very small little bay. So even the least bit of sediment is going to have a noticeable impact . . . Bullard’s delta affects the area a lot more obviously,” stated Ause. Moreover, Kennedy pointed out that the current situation reflects the cumulative impact of decades of sediment deposition, not to mention some recent years with very high precipitation levels. “The big rains, and high water levels of the past two years are really on people’s minds. They do bring some big changes in a short amount of time,” said Kennedy.

Mainstem Mississippi contributes to Wacouta sediment

Bullard Creek is not the only source of sediment to Wacouta Bay. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Regional Specialist Jon Hendrickson said that while there has been no specific study of sediment sources in Wacouta Bay, he is confident that a substantial portion of that settling in Wacouta Bay is coming from the Mississippi. Hendrickson described spots on the horseshoe peninsula surrounding the bay that get overtopped frequently in high water conditions. Ause added “the northern part [of Wacouta Bay] acts a little like a dam, slows down the current and the sediment just drops out right there in the bay.” The Mississippi-borne sediment adds to that transported by Bullard. “It’s a cumulative impact,” said Ause [4]. 

The sedimentation of Wacouta Bay parallels what is occurring in Lake Pepin as a whole. In that case, sediment is being delivered, primarily from the Minnesota River, at a rate 10 times above what would normally be expected. The accelerated sedimentation threatens Lake Pepin’s navigability, recreational use, and ecology. The conservation lessons of Bullard Creek are highly relevant as there is widespread recognition that water storage in various forms—earthen dams, wetland restoration, and perennial cover—will be critical for reducing the Minnesota River’s sediment load and protecting the health and longevity of Lake Pepin.

When asked what the future might hold for Wacouta Bay, Hendrickson stressed the difficulty of speculating on complex processes, in a complex river system. He noted examples of backwater areas in the Upper Mississippi that have completely filled in with sediment, becoming terrestrial habitat, and others where he thought sediment would continue filling in an area but did not. “I've been working on the river 35 years, and at times I think I've got it figured out what's going to happen here, and then I get some new data. And it's like, ‘Oh, no, I'm completely wrong.’ But it’s clear, with the flooding that we have had in the last 5, 10 years especially, these backwaters are changing,” said Hendrickson.

[1] See our recent blog post about Wells Creek.

[2] Like the other MRLP tributaries, Bullard Creek has elevated levels of E. coli that, in 2012, triggered the MPCA to declare it impaired for aquatic recreation. That impairment will be recommended again in 2021. See the Miller Creek blog post for more info on E. coli in SE Minnesota streams.

[3] Johnson, Jotsie. 2020. Wa-Ku-Ta. Self-published. Available at the Red Wing Library.

[4] Wacouta Bay was included in the feasibility report for the habitat restoration project, which provides the basis for any future work that could occur there. Restoration is now slated to proceed in the area located adjacent to Bay City. Learn more here.

This article is part of a larger series that investigates what we know about eight Lake Pepin tributaries. Follow us on Facebook and sign-up for our e-newsletter so you don’t miss the next release. If you have information or pictures for other Lake Pepin tributaries, please email us at: info@lakepepinlegacyalliance.org.

Other articles in the series will be listed below as they are published:

Miller Creek: Water Protection Efforts Proceed In Miller Creek, Even As E. Coli Situation Baffles

Gilbert Creek: Now Proposed as Exceptional Water Body

Wells Creek: A Dynamic Stream With Many Trout, But Rising Sediment Concerns

Hay Creek: Restoration Efforts Have Made It a Top-Level Trout Stream

Bruce Ause’s Wacouta Nature Notes

Points of Interest on Wacouta Bay, 9/26/2018

Crustwalking, 3/17/2020

Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Reports

Mississippi River Lake Pepin Watershed Restoration and Protection Strategy Report (2015)

Mississippi River-Lake Pepin Tributaries Biotic Stressor Identification (2013)

Mississippi River Lake Pepin Watershed Monitoring and Assessment Report (2012)

Emily Green is a writer, editor, and researcher with particular interests in environmental protection, climate change, and environmental civic engagement.  She has an M.S. degree in conservation biology from the University of Minnesota and a B.A. in English.