Topic: Canoeing the Shellrock
started by: MADDOG
Posted by MADDOG on May 31 2008,10:33 am
Canoe trip scheduled for Shell Rock River June 14The Shell Rock River Watershed District is named for its outlet, and the public will have a chance to see the natural beauty of the river by canoe Saturday, June 14. The District, in partnership with School District 241 Community Education, will host a canoe trip down the Shell Rock River, from the dam on Albert Lea Lake to County Road 7.
The Shell Rock trip will start at 10 a.m. and end around 1 p.m., depending on weather and water conditions. Participants are encouraged to pre-register to ensure space and equipment. They should park at the boat landing on County Road 19 (South Shore Drive). From there, the District will provide rides to the launch site on the Shell Rock River. At the trip’s end, a bus will provide transportation back to the boat landing.
These canoe events are open to the public. Anyone under age 14 must be accompanied by an adult. All participants must sign a liability waiver.
To register:
Call the Watershed District at 377-5785
Or stop at the watershed office on the first floor of the historic county courthouse
The trip includes use of canoes, paddles and life jackets. The public is allowed to bring their own canoe if they prefer. Wearing a life jacket is mandatory and people are encouraged to bring their own for the optimal fit. Participants bringing children must bring life jackets for them. Rain gear is also advised.
These canoe trips offer a great chance to see wildlife and learn a new sport.
These events are limited to 22 paddlers each, so call soon to reserve a seat.
Posted by Counterfeit Fake on May 31 2008,10:08 pm
These trips are a great way to try out canoing. The river does most of the work for you, if you want to take it easy or aren't proficient at paddling.
Posted by hairhertz on May 31 2008,10:23 pm
take a child, they'll never forget it
Posted by Madd Max on Apr. 09 2009,10:03 pm
(hairhertz @ May 31 2008,10:23 pm)
QUOTE
take a child, they'll never forget it
I wonder if there will be a trip this year.
Will children in the future even have the opportunity to canoe down the shell rock river?
Will the county board stand up for the citizens that enjoy to canoe, fish, site see and enjoy nature?
Will the county commissioners find a way to give citizens access to our public waters (Shell Rock River) below a new dam?
Or will our county commissioners let one person control access to the head waters of the Shell Rock River for the next 100 years?
Posted by MADDOG on Apr. 10 2009,6:56 am
QUOTE
Or will our county commissioners let one person control access to the head waters of the Shell Rock River for the next 100 years?
That seems to be the case. I doubt if the Watershed District will even ask for "permission" to take this trip anymore. I've spoken to numerous local and state officials in the last couple of weeks.
I can say one thing. A DNR official told me that the dam is NOT owned by one person, (even though one person is telling the county he will give them it) the river IS public waters and he DOES NOT own the dirt under the dam or river.
What ever happened with the great deal that the county board and Jensen were working out? One county commissioner said and I quote, "We can have a deal worked out with Greg Jensen in two hours."
That was six months ago.
Greg Jensen has told me that I can use it anytime I want, just give him a call first.
Posted by Madd Max on Apr. 10 2009,7:37 am
(MADDOG @ Apr. 10 2009,6:56 am)
QUOTE
What ever happened with the great deal that the county board and Jensen were working out? One county commissioner said and I quote, "We can have a deal worked out with Greg Jensen in two hours."
That was six months ago.
:
That was six months ago.
:
Albert Lea Tribune 10.09.08
QUOTE
Jensen said the county board had appointed Belshan and Glen Mathiason to negotiate a deal on the dam. Belshan and Jensen on Wednesday said the deal is done except for a few last details
Six months to the day and still no deal
QUOTE
Jensen and Belshan called the deal they worked out less expensive than the joint bridge-dam plan. They said the bridge will be cheaper, the dam will be cheaper and the county doesn’t have to pay for land
.In less then three months we could stand to lose around $200,000.00 because of the County commissioners dragging there feet. How is that saving the county money?
I want to hear peoples responces when the county commissioners tells us that they are going to raise property taxes to fund a new dam because they let state funding slip away.
Posted by gljoefan on Apr. 10 2009,9:27 am
I heard last week that they are close to a deal again, but no access. If that is the case, I am not sure why we would spend a nickel on the dam?
Posted by sumpdump on Apr. 10 2009,2:49 pm
The ONLY people that let any money or funding slip away is your watershed board. Not the people that owned the land around the dam. You think certain individuals help things up, well your greatly mistaken. Look to all your great leaders on these committee’s that you've help put in place. I’m sick of reading the same garbage about blaming the land owners for what your elected officials can’t accomplish....... 
Posted by MADDOG on Apr. 10 2009,2:59 pm
And which great leaders are your referring to? The watershed board still has their money. It's been moved to a different account.
Posted by gljoefan on Apr. 10 2009,3:22 pm
(sumpdump @ Apr. 10 2009,2:49 pm)
QUOTE
The ONLY people that let any money or funding slip away is your watershed board. Not the people that owned the land around the dam. You think certain individuals help things up, well your greatly mistaken. Look to all your great leaders on these committee’s that you've help put in place. I’m sick of reading the same garbage about blaming the land owners for what your elected officials can’t accomplish.......
I am not blaming anyone. If the dam belongs to Greg, then were done here let's move on.
Sump..do you think the public should spend dollar one on a private dam?
Posted by Madd Max on Apr. 11 2009,9:47 am
(gljoefan @ Apr. 10 2009,3:22 pm)
QUOTE
a private dam?
Where is the proof that it's a private dam?
Everything I can find says itis own buy the county.
Posted by Dump Pewlenty on Apr. 15 2009,9:03 am
(Madd Max @ Apr. 10 2009,7:37 am)
QUOTE
In less then three months we could stand to lose around $200,000.00 because of the County commissioners dragging there feet.
.
.
Sounds like the clock is ticking.
Posted by hootchfish on Apr. 18 2009,7:41 pm
(Madd Max @ Apr. 11 2009,9:47 am)
QUOTE
(gljoefan @ Apr. 10 2009,3:22 pm)
QUOTE
a private dam?
Where is the proof that it's a private dam?
Everything I can find says itis own buy the county.
Bruce Palmer would know.
Posted by Blackwell on Apr. 19 2009,1:34 pm
(hootchfish @ Apr. 18 2009,7:41 pm)
QUOTE
Bruce Palmer would know.
Looks like it was settled in 2001
County ready to resolve dam ownership dispute
Staff
Published Thursday, November 8, 2001
Freeborn County will take a step forward on the stalled restoration project for Albert Lea Lake Dam, or Juglans Dam.
Thursday, November 08, 2001
Freeborn County will take a step forward on the stalled restoration project for Albert Lea Lake Dam, or Juglans Dam. It has confirmed that the county is the legal owner of the dam, and it will start negotiating with the landowner about an easement.
The dam holding the water pouring into Shell Rock River requires major renovation to control the lake's water level. But the project has been stalled due to the ambiguity of ownership.
In 1958 the county gave away a part of old County Road 19 and a bridge crossing over the dam to a private landowner when it rerouted the road. Since then the ball has been bouncing among the county, the landowner and the state regarding the responsibility for overhauling the structure.
County attorney Craig Nelson accepted the an opinion by the State Attorney General Office and concluded that the county owns the dam.
Nelson pointed out during the county board meeting on Tuesday that the easement right still needs to be cleared to start the restoration.
The 1958 county resolution implies the county's willingness to maintain some authority for the dam, stating "reserving however to the County of Freeborn, its agents and invitees, the right of access to, egress and ingress across said premises to and from the Juglans Dam situated on or near the above described premises."
However, no easement rights of the county were ever recorded before and after the resolution
Posted by MADDOG on Apr. 19 2009,5:21 pm
Thank you very much Mr. Blackwell. I didn't have time to post that article before I had to leave this morning.
Posted by howie on Apr. 20 2009,1:03 am
(MADDOG @ Apr. 19 2009,5:21 pm)
QUOTE
Thank you very much Mr. Blackwell. I didn't have time to post that article before I had to leave this morning.
Dog,
You are closer to the Board than most. Do you think any or all of the Board Members believe they own it? Which ones>?
Posted by MADDOG on Apr. 20 2009,6:26 am
The big question isn't who owns the dam. I don't think anyone can question who owns it if you read back through the history of it.If you're looking at who walked away from insuring public access to the Shell Rock?
QUOTE
ADJOURNED MEETING OF THE COUNTY BOARD
October 7, 2008
The Chair opened the meeting to the public for comments on County Hwy 19 bridge replacement. Those in favor of the Bridge/Dam Project presented by the Shell Rock River Watershed are: Larry Anderson, Ken Nelson, Michael Kennis, Tony Trow, Carol Bertelson, Don Sorenson, Harley Miller, Dave Mullenbach, Roger Nelson, Scott Hanna, Marlys Webber, Randy Kerr. Those against the project: Gordon Jensen
Commissioner Behrends offered the following resolution:
RESOLUTION 08-159
Approval of the Bridge/Dam Project
MOVED, to accept Shell Rock River Watershed’s Bridge/Dam replacement project and move forward with the replacement of the bridge and dam.
Resolution seconded by Commissioner Shoff.
After discussion, a vote was taken and the Chair declared the resolution failed for a lack of a majority vote. The vote is as follows: Ayes – Shoff, Behrends and Nays – Belshan, Nelson and Mathiason.
Comissioner Belshan offered the following motion:
MOVED, have the County Engineer proceed with getting plans prepared for the repairs of bridge #815 on County Hwy 19.
Motion seconded by Commissioner Nelson.
After discussion, a vote was taken and the Chair declared the motion approved. The vote is as follows: Ayes – Belshan, Berhends, Nelson, Mathiason, and the Nays- Shoff.
Funny how just a few miles south, recreation is accessible. Worth county knows the river is public.
October 7, 2008
The Chair opened the meeting to the public for comments on County Hwy 19 bridge replacement. Those in favor of the Bridge/Dam Project presented by the Shell Rock River Watershed are: Larry Anderson, Ken Nelson, Michael Kennis, Tony Trow, Carol Bertelson, Don Sorenson, Harley Miller, Dave Mullenbach, Roger Nelson, Scott Hanna, Marlys Webber, Randy Kerr. Those against the project: Gordon Jensen
Commissioner Behrends offered the following resolution:
RESOLUTION 08-159
Approval of the Bridge/Dam Project
MOVED, to accept Shell Rock River Watershed’s Bridge/Dam replacement project and move forward with the replacement of the bridge and dam.
Resolution seconded by Commissioner Shoff.
After discussion, a vote was taken and the Chair declared the resolution failed for a lack of a majority vote. The vote is as follows: Ayes – Shoff, Behrends and Nays – Belshan, Nelson and Mathiason.
Comissioner Belshan offered the following motion:
MOVED, have the County Engineer proceed with getting plans prepared for the repairs of bridge #815 on County Hwy 19.
Motion seconded by Commissioner Nelson.
After discussion, a vote was taken and the Chair declared the motion approved. The vote is as follows: Ayes – Belshan, Berhends, Nelson, Mathiason, and the Nays- Shoff.
Posted by Madd Max on Apr. 20 2009,8:30 am
This is from a flyer Canoeing the Shell Rock River < www.co.cerro-gordo.ia.us >
Safety: •
Always wear your personal flotation device (PFD).
• Be aware of potential hazards such as lowhead dams, snags, rapids, and fences.
• NEVER attempt to run lowhead dams; ALWAYS portage around them.
• DO NOT ATTEMPT FLOAT TRIPS AT HIGH WATER LEVELS. ALL rivers are unpredictable and dangerous at this time.
Cerro-Gordo county tells people to portage around low head dam
Yet in Freeborn County they want to make that impossible at the Shellrock River Dam by not allowing a Safe portage around the dam or access to the shell rock just below the dam.
Posted by hootchfish on Apr. 20 2009,9:01 am
I've caught lots of nice walleyes and pike from the dam down to Glenville, the rivers you do have are a great asset recognized only by a limited few really.Your lakes are in rough shape, BUT they too are a great community asset, I can only imagine the pressure they'd get if they were in better condition.
I've thought it over and there is no doubt a tradeoff, MORE people, MORE money, or just a good fishing spot.
I like quality water and the temptation is to restore it, but thousands of people are enjoying it as it is already, maybe just cleaning the shores regularly is good enough for now.
Dredging never makes sense unless you stop the siltation sources and that will be incremental at best.
Posted by hymiebravo on Apr. 21 2009,7:54 pm
QUOTE
I like quality water and the temptation is to restore it, but thousands of people are enjoying it as it is already, maybe just cleaning the shores regularly is good enough for now.
For decades now water quality in area lakes and rivers has been chiefly ignored.
If your goal is to promote recreation and clean waterways. You really need to persue these types of things, that promote the lakes and the outdoors.
You are dealing with quite a backlog of neglect and apathy, that you have to battle against.
Bold measures are needed to counteract that, and garner attention, enthusiam and support, to acheive that end.
Posted by sumpdump on Apr. 22 2009,6:23 am
The dam is still owned by the state, the land around the dam was owned by a private land owner. Since this land owner owend property on both sides of the dam, the dam was left in place to gain access to the other side of the dam. This land owner never claimed to own the dam. When the dam was to be taken out, moved, the county, state still had to provide access to the other partial of land on the east side of the river. To my understanding this had been negotiated, but fell through your board after they cut out Harvey Miller. The only people keeping anyone off the shell rock, are your elected officals and board members draggin their feet and arguing amognst their selves. Now that Jensen owns it, well I hope he puts up a good front and plays the game and keeps everyone out just for the fact that everyone thinks they should have access to it. You want access to the river, think you should have the right to go on the land to get there, well pay for it just like other had to do. Hell I would love to have access to school section lake, but you know what, someone owns private land all around it, and I can't afford to buy any to get access to it, so tough titty for me.
End rant.
Posted by gljoefan on Apr. 22 2009,9:20 am
(sumpdump @ Apr. 22 2009,6:23 am)
QUOTE
This land owner never claimed to own the dam.
< http://www.albertleatribune.com/news....m-plans >
According to this, he claims to own the dam. At one time, I thought he was willing to even repair it.
I liked the plan the watershed had, but Mr. Jensen did not. Ok in my book, it's his land. But that should also mean no public dollars.
Posted by sumpdump on Apr. 22 2009,11:27 am
Oh wow. I guess that didn't register in my melon. I knew he owned the land, but I missed that part where he claimed to own the dam.
Posted by Botto 82 on Apr. 22 2009,12:09 pm
(hymiebravo @ Apr. 21 2009,7:54 pm)
QUOTE
If your goal is to promote recreation and clean waterways. You really need to persue these types of things, that promote the lakes and the outdoors.
You are dealing with quite a backlog of neglect and apathy, that you have to battle against.
Bold measures are needed to counteract that, and garner attention, enthusiam and support, to acheive that end.
You are dealing with quite a backlog of neglect and apathy, that you have to battle against.
Bold measures are needed to counteract that, and garner attention, enthusiam and support, to acheive that end.
Forget about it. There just isn't that kind of money out there anymore, with that new jail and high school to pay for. Add to that the worsening economy, and tax-and-spendocrats like Brown and Sparks on the loose, and you're not going to come up with the kind of capital necessary to reverse decades of Wilson effluent and people dumping their old cars in the lake, ag runoff, and so on.
You could blow the dam and let nature take its course with the old lake bed, but that's probably a little TOO bold for most.
Posted by Madd Max on Apr. 22 2009,5:46 pm
Old dam agreement discoveredStaff
Published Sunday, November 11, 2001
The ambiguous legal situation of the Albert Lea Lake Dam, which has been delaying the crucial dam restoration project, was cleared up Thursday when the county found the original document stipulating the right of the county to access to the dam.
Sunday, November 11, 2001
The ambiguous legal situation of the Albert Lea Lake Dam, which has been delaying the crucial dam restoration project, was cleared up Thursday when the county found the original document stipulating the right of the county to access to the dam.
The origin of the problem goes back to 1958 when the county decided to gave a portion of old County Road including the bridge over the dam to landowner C. D. Palmer. The easement right for access immediately became an issue when the dam was constructed in 1922 and needed to be improved for maintaining the water level of the lake.
The solution came from a family member of Palmer who visited the County Attorney's Office with a county board declaration issued to Palmer.
The document, signed in October 1958 by the chairman of county board, T. C. Nelson, and County Auditor Robert D. Hanson, says the county would reserve the right of access to the dam and turn over a portion of old County Road 19 to the landowner "as a private road or for whatever purposes he chooses that does not interfere with the operation of the remaining portion of said County-State Aid Highway No. 19."
County Attorney Craig Nelson told County Board Chair David Mullenbach and Administrator Ron Gabrielsen about the document last week.
"The legal concern is all clear now for the county to start the project," said Nelson.
County officials want to restore the outdated structure on the lake's south end, but ownership of the dam has been unclear since 1958. The project could cost more than $240,000.
Posted by MADDOG on Apr. 22 2009,8:01 pm
Here. I'm posting from a libbie. 
QUOTE
NRCS: Implementing the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act)
-Watershed Rehabilitation
Funding Provided: $50,000,000
Program Description:
The authority for rehabilitation of aging watershed dams is included in section 14 of the Watershed Protection and Flood Prevention Act (PL 83-566). Any of the over 11,000 dams in 47 states that were constructed under the four watershed programs (PL-534, PL-566, Pilot, or RC&D) are eligible for assistance under this authority. Many of these dams are nearing the end of their 50-year design life. Rehabilitation of these dams is needed to address critical public health and safety issues in these communities. Priority for funding of projects is based on a priority ranking system that considers the condition of the dam and number of people at risk if the dam should fail. NRCS may provide technical assistance and 65% of the total rehabilitation project cost.
< Congressman Tim Walz >
page 22
-Watershed Rehabilitation
Funding Provided: $50,000,000
Program Description:
The authority for rehabilitation of aging watershed dams is included in section 14 of the Watershed Protection and Flood Prevention Act (PL 83-566). Any of the over 11,000 dams in 47 states that were constructed under the four watershed programs (PL-534, PL-566, Pilot, or RC&D) are eligible for assistance under this authority. Many of these dams are nearing the end of their 50-year design life. Rehabilitation of these dams is needed to address critical public health and safety issues in these communities. Priority for funding of projects is based on a priority ranking system that considers the condition of the dam and number of people at risk if the dam should fail. NRCS may provide technical assistance and 65% of the total rehabilitation project cost.
< Congressman Tim Walz >
Posted by hymiebravo on Apr. 23 2009,3:37 pm
(Botto 82 @ Apr. 22 2009,12:09 pm)
QUOTE
(hymiebravo @ Apr. 21 2009,7:54 pm)
QUOTE
If your goal is to promote recreation and clean waterways. You really need to persue these types of things, that promote the lakes and the outdoors.
You are dealing with quite a backlog of neglect and apathy, that you have to battle against.
Bold measures are needed to counteract that, and garner attention, enthusiam and support, to acheive that end.
You are dealing with quite a backlog of neglect and apathy, that you have to battle against.
Bold measures are needed to counteract that, and garner attention, enthusiam and support, to acheive that end.
Forget about it. There just isn't that kind of money out there anymore, with that new jail and high school to pay for. Add to that the worsening economy, and tax-and-spendocrats like Brown and Sparks on the loose, and you're not going to come up with the kind of capital necessary to reverse decades of Wilson effluent and people dumping their old cars in the lake, ag runoff, and so on.
You could blow the dam and let nature take its course with the old lake bed, but that's probably a little TOO bold for most.
Well there should be funds available via the watershed sales tax, and various other government funds. As partially evidenced by MADDOG there. As well as the "carp zapper", that was put in place at Pickeral Lake, which was in the news as of late.
That was only about $250,000 was it? lol
It really is amazing how long the discussion as to what should be done there has went on. That quoted newspaper article was from 2001?
I would imagine that as long as the lake was being used as a waste sewer. Public interest in that dam was very low. And nobody really cared about it.
I find it amazing how people still to this day use the lakes as garbage dumps. As evidenced by the shorelines. As well as further up the banks as well.
One dividend that opening that dam area up for recreation could provide. You would have more people out that way, who might deter some of these folks who like to throw their garbage out on lake shores.
I think that combined with some sinage around the lakes, that area in particular, could help too.
ALEDA has their little signs around. Why not the watershed?
Posted by Madd Max on Apr. 24 2009,8:17 am
(hymiebravo @ Apr. 23 2009,3:37 pm)
QUOTE
It really is amazing how long the discussion as to what should be done there has went on. That quoted newspaper article was from 2001?
Ownership dispute delays dam solution
Staff
Published Tuesday, October 23, 2001
It seems natural to believe every bit of land and every structure across the county is under somebody's ownership.
Tuesday, October 23, 2001
It seems natural to believe every bit of land and every structure across the county is under somebody's ownership. But a dam at the outlet of Albert Lea Lake seems to be an exception: Nobody claims to own it.
The ambiguity of the ownership has been stalling the restoration of the 89-year-old dam for years. The county aims to get things straight before the neglected structure causes more damage to the basin and lake.
The Albert Lea Lake Dam is at the south end of the lake where the water pours into the Shell Rock River. A 57-foot-long spillway holds the lake about two feet higher than the river surface. The dam has been abandoned for a long time and is too obsolete to maintain the water level of the lake.
The current dam was constructed by the county in 1922 under a County Road 19 bridge. The original structure had existed since late last century. There was no requirement to obtain a permit from the state to build a dam in those days.
In the late 1950s the county road was relocated toward the lake. Then the county board passed a resolution in 1958 to hand over the portion of the road including the bridge to a private landowner.
The ownership problem came up as early as the 1960s, when the county started arguing the overhaul of the dam.
State statute stipulates that the owner of a dam constructed before the state regulation was applied must maintain and operate the dam in a manner approved and prescribed by the Department of Natural Resources (DNR).
The state law also demands the state to take over the control of an abandoned dam owned by a private entity.
The county considered either the state or the landowner was to be responsible for the restoration.
But in the state's opinion, the county retains the possession. A document issued by State Assistant Attorney General Matthew B. Seltzer in August 1999 said, "All of the facts that have been presented to me indicate that the dam was built by a public agency and it continues to be owned and controlled by that public agency."
The ownership argument stems from the problem of money and the question of who is going to pay for the restoration.
The estimated cost for the project is $240,000 according to the DNR.
If the state owned the dam, the DNR would have full responsibility for funding. If it were a landowner's possession, the landowner would have to fix the dam with financial support from the state. If the county were the owner, an available grant from DNR would cover only half of the cost and the county would have to raise at least $120,000 from local property taxes.
The restoration seems urgent.
If the dam were to collapse, the water would infringe the vast crop land in the Shell Rock River basin. The shallow depth of Albert Lea Lake is another concern. If the water would escape from the outlet, most of the lake bottom would come up to the surface.
The old dam also threatens the ecosystem of the lake.
Randy Tuchtenhagen, of county environmental services, points out the obsolete structure does not equip a system to control the water level of the lake. The drastic frustration of the water level affects water quality and living environment for aquatic animals.
The shape of the spillway allows "rough fish" such as carps to jump over the two-foot rise from the river to the lake. Rough fish monopolize the water vegetation and scare other fish. They also wind up the mud and worsens the water quality, according to Tuchtenhagen.
The county board has asked County Attorney Craig Nelson to conduct a survey to identify the legal owner of the dam and report it to the county board.
this shows that as far back as 1999 the state has ruled that the County has control of the dam.
Posted by Blackwell on Apr. 27 2009,1:00 pm
So what do people really think??Locals speak out at county meeting
The following are comments made by local residents on the proposed bridge-dam project during the Tuesday meeting of the Freeborn County Board of Commissioners. It would have had a variable-crest dam. The plan had been approved 4-3 in August by the Shell Rock River Watershed District Board of Managers, but it was rejected Tuesday by the commissioners 3-2:
Larry Anderson, president of the Fountain Lake Sportsman’s Club, said the club favors the plan as approved by the watershed district. He said it is more hazardous for inspections of the dam in its present place, and he added it is safer for fisherman to have a parking lot than to park on the side of the road.Anderson also is a candidate for Albert Lea City Council.
Ken Nelson has lived in Albert Lea Lake for 58 years. He said has worked on improving the lake and many people have worked for years on the proposal that became the bridge-dam project before the county Tuesday. He said they have documented damage to the shores of the lake by winter ice and by floods. He said 18 years of progress is being trumped by one man, Greg Jensen, who Nelson said has a desire for his own private domain.
“If ever there was a pursuit of action, the time is now,” Nelson said.
Michael Kenis also lives on the lake. He said he has seen the shoreline taken by the ice. He said when the Albert Lea sewer plant operated at Frank Hall Park, it created an ice buckle in the lake, which relieved pressure on the shore. When that plant shut down, the ice began pushing against the shores.
He said the Department of Natural Resources initially said that is what happens to a prairie lake, but the University of Minnesota did research and confirmed it is a glacial lake.
“Whatever dam goes in, it needs to protect the shoreline,” Kenis said.
He said there is some soil runoff from farm fields, but “the biggest erosion is coming from its own shoreline.”
Kenis said the variable aspect of the crest of the dam would allow for the killing of Asian carp. He said a variable-crest dam is in the best interest of lakeshore owners.
Tony Trow lives on Fountain Lake. He said he has participated in the effort to clean lakes and approve a half-cent sales tax, some of which was to help pay for the dam.
“The Albert Lea Lake plan was drafted by a broad, coalition of Freeborn County citizens,” he said.
The plan for the bridge-dam would help control fish, provide a safe spot for fishing and a launch for canoeists, Trow said.
“Now there’s been a change in ownership that is threatening to unravel these painstaking and extensive plans,” he said.
He said people are unable to travel the river from the lake and asked for using eminent domain to make access safe.
“What we do on that dam is another 100-year project,” Trow said.
Carol Bartleson of Albert Lea said her concern is the issue with Jensen is clouding the judgment of the commissioners on doing the right thing.
“He is now holding you guys hostage,” she said.
She said the actions taken by the county will affect future generations.
“Do the right thing today. Think of your children and grand-children,” Bartleson said.[/B
][B]Don Sorensen of Albert Lea said he has spent 35 years canoeing the rivers of America.
“We have got a resource here that is not recognized or understood,” he said.
He called for three things:
1. public access to the river
2. a carp barrier
3. a variable-crest dam.
He added he would be happy to get arrested for crossing the dam in a boat.
All the comments came before the commissioners took action. Sorensen said if the plan is rejected, “I recommend the Shell Rock River Watershed District zip up its purse and walk away from this project.”
Former watershed district board member Harley Miller spoke. He said the dam could have been done last winter if the county hadn’t gotten involved to combine the dam project with the bridge project. He voted against combining the two because he said it could complicate matters.
“At this time I can stand here and look you right in the eye and say I told you so,” Miller said.
He said the watershed district legally can’t pay Barr Engineering for drafting the plans, the county will have to. And he said the Army Corps of Engineers needs to grant a permit for moving the dam and that would need a hydrographic study. He said there are fewer problems with keep the dam in its present position.
Miller said matters become complicated when two boards are involved.
“The lines of authority are pretty cloudy to me,” he said.
And he added the Shell Rock River Watershed District is not authorized to spend its funds on recreational amenities such as fishing spots or parking lots.
Former Commissioner Dave Mullenbach said he voted in 2003 on the comprehensive plan for Albert Lea Lake.
“This is a lifetime opportunity to close this ownership issue forever,” he said.
He said the public overwhelmingly supports cleaning the lakes and the bridge-dam plan. He said the commissioners should approve the project for the sake of the Freeborn County people.
“If you don’t do the right thing and responsible thing, I don’t think you deserve to sit in those chairs,” Mullenbach said.
Roger Nelson said he agrees with what other people said. He said in 1995 people had talked about doing something about the dam and now there is finally projess.
Gordon Jensen spoke against it. He lives near the dam, and he said he doesn’t want noise from parties in the parking lot.
He said he doesn’t mind a variable-crest dam but don’t lower the water level for good when building the new dam. He said Fountain Lake needs to be addressed, too.
“You boys have the cart in front of the horse,” he said.
Scott Hanna leads local boys on canoe rides down the Shell Rock River. He said he always requested permission from former landowner Lloyd Palmer and now has received permission from new landowner Greg Jensen.
Hanna said he has concerns about access to the river. He said kids travel to Freeborn County from northern Iowa and southern Minnesota for the local waters.
“If you had access to the Shell Rock River, I guarantee you there will be more use of the public waterway,” Hanna said.
Marlys Webber lives on Albert Lea Lake. She said she agrees with the supporters of the project.
Albert Lea-Freeborn County Chamber of Commerce Director Randy Kehr said the chamber’s board favors public access on the Shell Rock River.
“Our waters are extremely important to us,” he said.
Posted by Madd Max on Apr. 30 2009,11:33 am
City. 19 to close for bridge replacement Motorists who like to take Freeborn County Road 19 will have to go another way starting Monday.
Contractor Minnowa Construction of Harmony will begin working on removing the 104-foot timber bridge over the Shell Rock River at the outlet of Albert Lea Lake, according to the Freeborn County Highway Department. The bridge — often called the Jugland Bridge — is held up with old timber pilings, and engineers have concerns about rotting wood.
A new 120-foot, three-span, concrete-slab bridge will take its place. The contract price tag is $720,000, paid mainly with bridge bonding funds.
The bridge replacement had been the subject of much controversy last year — particularly in September and October — as Shell Rock River Watershed District officials had intended to partner with the county government on a joint bridge-dam project.
On Oct. 7, the Freeborn County commissioners on a 3-2 vote shot down that plan after a heated and emotional public hearing, even though in January 2007 they unanimously favored drawing up plans for a bridge-dam. In October, the opposing commissioners said they were nearing a separate deal for the 86-year-old dam with new adjacent landowner Greg Jensen. That deal remains to be unveiled
County Engineer Sue Miller had told county and watershed leaders that if the bridge-dam project fails, the county needed to pursue replacing the bridge without a new dam. The creosote had worn off the timber pilings supporting the County 19 bridge at the lake’s outlet and the wood was rotting, she said in October.
The detour route for County 19 will be County 81, County 84 and County 26. The construction work should last about 2 1/2 months if there are no weather or material delays.
So the bridge will be fixed soon.
But:
Still we have no word on when the Dam will be replaced
Still we have no word on an agreement with Mr. Jensen
Still we have no word on what the total cost will be to replace the dam
Do we even have a blue print or design for a new dam at its original site
Posted by Blackwell on Jun. 20 2009,6:40 am
(MADDOG @ May 31 2008,10:33 am)
QUOTE
Canoe trip scheduled for Shell Rock River June 14
The Shell Rock River Watershed District is named for its outlet, and the public will have a chance to see the natural beauty of the river by canoe Saturday, June 14. The District, in partnership with School District 241 Community Education, will host a canoe trip down the Shell Rock River, from the dam on Albert Lea Lake to County Road 7.
The Shell Rock trip will start at 10 a.m. and end around 1 p.m., depending on weather and water conditions.
These canoe trips offer a great chance to see wildlife and learn a new sport..
The Shell Rock River Watershed District is named for its outlet, and the public will have a chance to see the natural beauty of the river by canoe Saturday, June 14. The District, in partnership with School District 241 Community Education, will host a canoe trip down the Shell Rock River, from the dam on Albert Lea Lake to County Road 7.
The Shell Rock trip will start at 10 a.m. and end around 1 p.m., depending on weather and water conditions.
These canoe trips offer a great chance to see wildlife and learn a new sport..
It's to bad that because of one person and the inability of our county commissioners to come up with any type of an agreement, wonderful events like this will not be held anytime in the near future.
Posted by Mamma on Jun. 20 2009,7:39 am
I own some land along the river. Last week we had a group of guys come down the river in a raft. They decided to have a little drinking party on our land and threw beer cans all over the river bank. My husband just happened to be near the river and heard them. They picked up all the cans and moved on....but bet they dumped all their cans somewhere else. If this is the kind of recreation that is going to happen, then I'm glad they will have to start their journey somewhere else.
Posted by Paul Harvey on Jun. 20 2009,7:43 am
^I guess they must of missed this... Posted by MADDOG on Jun. 20 2009,8:57 am
(Mamma @ Jun. 20 2009,7:39 am)
QUOTE
I own some land along the river. Last week we had a group of guys come down the river in a raft. They decided to have a little drinking party on our land and threw beer cans all over the river bank. My husband just happened to be near the river and heard them. They picked up all the cans and moved on....but bet they dumped all their cans somewhere else. If this is the kind of recreation that is going to happen, then I'm glad they will have to start their journey somewhere else.
Honest? I know ballpark where you live. I'm wondering just where they would have been able to put a raft in being that Co. Rd. 19 is tore up. There can't be many places they could up river from you.
Posted by Madd Max on Jun. 20 2009,11:33 am
Seems a little odd to me to. being that Glenville Days was going on. I didn't notice any cars parked up on the Game reserve road by the bridge on Saturday or Sunday when I drove by Mamma you didn't indulge in one or two too many at the Street Dance did you?
Posted by MADDOG on Jun. 20 2009,12:05 pm
(Madd Max @ Jun. 20 2009,11:33 am)
QUOTE
Mamma you didn't indulge in one or two too many at the Street Dance did you?
Uh oh!
Posted by Mamma on Jun. 21 2009,12:06 pm
Don't know where they put in. I think they told my husband they started at the bridge on 84 and were going to Northwood. It wasn't over the weekend. It was a weekday. I suppose they had someone waiting at the other end to pick them up. They were partying here around 4, so I doubt if they made it to Northwood before dark. They didn't have much for paddles.
Posted by Madd Max on Jun. 23 2009,3:46 pm
Was there little party Noth of of Glenville, or South of Glenville on the Shellrock???
Posted by Mamma on Jun. 24 2009,6:46 am
Probably one of each!
Posted by Madd Max on Jun. 24 2009,7:29 am
Yep, most like all the way down to Northwood if they made it.
Posted by sid hartman on Jun. 28 2009,12:07 am
(Mamma @ Jun. 20 2009,7:39 am)
QUOTE
I own some land along the river. Last week we had a group of guys come down the river in a raft. They decided to have a little drinking party on our land and threw beer cans all over the river bank. My husband just happened to be near the river and heard them. They picked up all the cans and moved on....but bet they dumped all their cans somewhere else. If this is the kind of recreation that is going to happen, then I'm glad they will have to start their journey somewhere else.
mama be honest,that was me with another white guy and a mexican"nothing against mexicans we were rafting down the river we didnt have beet cans we were yelling at the hispanic one because he tipped us over and got us wet when papa came down and yelled at us we left and mama quit drinking so much
'
Posted by Mamma on Jun. 28 2009,6:18 am
Be honest.....Papa didn't yell at you either. You had bottles too. Maybe you don't remember. We have nothing against someone having a good time. Just pick up after yourselves. Hubby did say that one of you had more sense than the others. Was that you?
Posted by Blackwell on Jun. 29 2009,11:14 pm
[QUOTE]Jensen said the county board had appointed Belshan and Glen Mathiason to negotiate a deal on the dam. Belshan and Jensen on Wednesday said the deal is done except for a few last details Albert Lea Tribune 10/09/08[
Boy those last few details must really be a stickler. What's it been 9 months now.
Posted by Two Bears on Jul. 04 2009,12:35 am
Is the State on MN buying Jensens land to add to the state park ?
Posted by Joe The Plumber on Jul. 04 2009,2:54 pm
(Mamma @ Jun. 28 2009,6:18 am)
QUOTE
Be honest.....Papa didn't yell at you either. You had bottles too. Maybe you don't remember. We have nothing against someone having a good time. Just pick up after yourselves. Hubby did say that one of you had more sense than the others. Was that you?
MAMMA ,
Plug your ears because you might not want to hear my suggestion about how we could turn that little river/creek into a money maker.
" TUBE RENTAL. "
Rent tubes with a shuttle bus service. Great event for families too.
I'm sure a lot of you have been to Somerset,Wisconsin before. If you haven't I will fill you in. They have two tourist spots in that little town. They have Apple River where they rent Inner Tubes so you can float down the river and get a shuttle ride back to the start. The name of the rental place I went to was Floate-Rite-Park.
http://www.floatrite.com/
They also have an outdoor area for concerts.
Posted by Mamma on Jul. 05 2009,7:21 am
That's not a bad idea. But you have to consider that most of the year the Shellrock is not deep enough to do that. You'd be draggin a$$ through most of the river. Right now it is deeper than usual, due to the rain.
Posted by Joe The Plumber on Jul. 05 2009,11:50 am
(Mamma @ Jul. 05 2009,7:21 am)
QUOTE
That's not a bad idea. But you have to consider that most of the year the Shellrock is not deep enough to do that. You'd be draggin a$$ through most of the river. Right now it is deeper than usual, due to the rain.
MAMMA ,
Good Point about the water levels.
When the water level is LOW we will have a sign that says " LOW WATER , NO FAT A$$. "
Posted by MADDOG on Jun. 04 2010,8:42 pm
It's about time to bring this one up again. Beings how we are almost years since anything has been done right with the dam. And just to help support that the commissioners screwed up again by allowing one person to influence their decision on the dam even going against the wishes of the DNR and watershed. Whether it was the commissioner's lack of balls or just no foresight into the future.The reason for bringing this topic up again? What is happening south of our border again? We all know how Iowa uses the Shellrock River for recreation and even some tourism starting at Northwood. Now Winnebago County is taking advantage of the Winnebago River which headwaters at Bear Lake. Their Conservation Board along with the county supervisors are developing the "Winnebago River Water Trail." This will be a low impact canoe area. Canoe accesses start just two miles south of the border which is roughly four miles south of Bear Lake at Dahle Park with another one just a couple miles south of that at the Lande River Con. Area, one just south on Leland at Ambroson Park and another in Forest City at Pammel Park.
Posted by MADDOG on Jun. 04 2010,8:47 pm
You can spot these signs along highway 69 with the first one just two miles south of Emmons and the next canoe low impact landing about three miles west of Lake Mills.
Posted by MADDOG on Jun. 04 2010,8:49 pm
Many people have put in a lot of their time to start to clear the river of debris along the farmlands the river goes through. Tomorrow, June 6, there will be a Winnebago River cleanup to prepare for next week. Anyone wishing to help should meet at the Pammel Park shelterhouse in Forest City at 1:00 PM.
Posted by MADDOG on Jun. 04 2010,8:52 pm
At each of these canoe access points you will find one of these signs.
Posted by MADDOG on Jun. 04 2010,8:54 pm
Judging from the sign, the county was capable of gaining access to the river and getting landowners to help and participate. Evidently they don't have any anus holes who bought up the land just to keep people out.
Posted by MADDOG on Jun. 04 2010,8:58 pm
Next week on June 13 the county will be having a dedication of the Winnebago River Water Trail in Pammel Park. People are invited to float or canoe down a portion of the river to the park where a picnic supper and family events are planned along with music, a bonfire and entertainment as they dedicate the state's most recent water trail! If anyone is interested in participating, let me know. Pre-registration is required.< winnebago conservation board >
Posted by MADDOG on Jun. 04 2010,9:02 pm
Gee whiz. A tiny little county like that can do all this and their river isn't even attached to a large lake like the Shellrock nor do they have one of the nicest state parks in southern Minnesota just across the lake.. Talk about tourism that never had the chance. They have that and we have this.
Posted by MADDOG on Jun. 04 2010,9:04 pm
With this next to it. Thanks to the county commissioners.
Posted by Blackdog on Jun. 04 2010,9:36 pm
I go their all the time!! Its fun!!!When its hot i just jump right out of the canoe and do the wiggle waddle and then jump back aboard and have a good cold
Schimdt,s beer.
Y dont all you whine babys wake up and grab your own ass and a twelvey and get loose???
Posted by Madd Max on Jun. 04 2010,10:04 pm
(MADDOG @ Jun. 04 2010,9:02 pm)
QUOTE
Gee whiz. A tiny little county like that can do all this and their river isn't even attached to a large lake like the Shellrock nor do they have one of the nicest state parks in southern Minnesota just across the lake.. Talk about tourism that never had the chance. They have that and we have this.
Don't forget how it looks on the other side
Posted by Madd Max on Jun. 04 2010,10:07 pm
Will these County Commissioners ever fix this Dam??? Or am I going to have to run for County Commissioner again!!!!
Posted by riffraff on Jun. 04 2010,10:37 pm
/////////////////
Posted by MADDOG on Jun. 07 2010,6:48 am
Sorry Max but I don't think the county should touch the dam. With the current position the county board has taken, if they participate in any repairs to the dam, they will set precedence for any court in the future. They have already , in essense, ceded the rights of a public waterway to a private individual. Their inability to take the proper action a couple years ago has already set the course for a court of law, and it isn't in the favor of the public. The DNR long ago determined the dam as county property. You know it and I know it. By contributing to the repair, the county would be telling any future court that the dam and waterway are private, but will be maintained by public tax dollars. Let the dam remain as it is. If it fails, the responsibility falls more so on Jensen than us. Let him seek help from the state.Belshan said at the time he voted against taken control of the dam that the property owner has rights. Well, let the property owner's right pay for the dam. Nelson and Mathiason vote with him. In a couple years, we won't have to worry about either of them.
The only course we have at present is to maintain distance from this issue until we have a county board with the rights of the public in their heart.
The board has avoided this issue for a while. Let them maintain the status quo. It's been almost two years since the county board chose not to come to the assistance of the watershed and DNR. They need to remember their stance. The last thing we need is for the county to step up and take away any future hope we might have to OPEN THIS PUBLIC WATERWAY TO THE PUBLIC.
Posted by Madd Max on Jun. 09 2010,10:25 am
(MADDOG @ Jun. 07 2010,6:48 am)
QUOTE
The only course we have at present is to maintain distance from this issue until we have a county board with the rights of the public in their heart.
.
.
You are right Maddog the Shell rock is a PUBLIC WATERWAY and the citizens should demand that this dam get fixed. We as citizens must demand access and save portage around the dam. The County must take control and ownership of the Dam and land around the dam once and for all.
You are right I don't see this board having the Backbone to sand up for the rights of the citizens that elected them. Two years from now this WILL be an ISSUE. The question is will the Dam last another two years, and who will Jensen have in his back pocket in the next election?
Posted by MADDOG on Jun. 09 2010,3:03 pm
That fellow in the background is easy to identify. Tuttle wasn't around when the commissioners lost their backbone, but it's probably safe to guess how she would be told to vote?
Posted by Madd Max on Jun. 11 2010,12:45 pm
(MADDOG @ Jun. 09 2010,3:03 pm)
QUOTE
That fellow in the background is easy to identify. Tuttle wasn't around when the commissioners lost their backbone, but it's probably safe to guess how she would be told to vote?
Have to agree Maddog
Posted by hymiebravo on Jun. 12 2010,3:04 pm
Let that be a lesson to you kids. Be extremely leery and suspicious of anyone, who listens to, or pedals so called: " Classic Rock"
Posted by hymiebravo on Jun. 12 2010,3:15 pm
(MADDOG @ Jun. 09 2010,3:03 pm)
QUOTE
That fellow in the background is easy to identify. Tuttle wasn't around when the commissioners lost their backbone, but it's probably safe to guess how she would be told to vote?
Let's face it Tuddle and pretty much every other voting member/commissioner have lived in the era of lake neglect.
Which has been around since before many of us posting here.
The enthusiasm still is pretty lackluster for area waterways. I would say Albert Lea Lake in particular is really a sort of disregarded lake for the most part. Always has been.
The only way to get anyone's interest is if it is in the form of a government salaried board position or something it seems.
Well that is one example anyway. Lake shore property might be another.
The so called leadership most recently wanted to focus on big silly government buildings and other highly touted ideas.
It is silly that that resource, area waterways, still continues to be largely ignored. IMO
Posted by MADDOG on Jun. 12 2010,4:24 pm
QUOTE
The so called leadership most recently wanted to focus on big silly government buildings and other highly touted ideas.
And that's likely a big part of the reason, or at least the excuse the SRRWD used to force another taxing body into this county. One that cannot be controlled. When the SRRWD formed, I believe it was more for self interest of some than anything else. If you look back to 2004 you will see my posts seldom had anything good to say about it. I still believe that of many of the original board members.I have since changed my opinion of the current board and employees for the most part. I DO believe at least one if not two board members still have self interest in personal property or business in mind today.
I have since grown to respct a couple of the original board members and would go out of my way to stop and say hi to them. Heck, they might even give me a little now. I'm sure these two men just plain despised me. Fred Nelson once called me and the 'group' I hung out with a malcontent.
It was Mr. Nelson's dam design that set the whole plan in motion for what the DNR and watershed board had in the works to do not only for this county but whole area. I think I still have a copy of the design plans of both the dam and park/canoe/fishing area somewhere I can dig up.
Boards can and usually move slowly simply because it usually is weeks in between meetings. (Look how long it took the county board to make a decision with SHIP.)
I would be surprised if the SRRWD knew that Jensen planned on undercutting them otherwise there would have been special or emergency meetings held. No, their plans for a small park site were dashed by one man and a county board with no backbone.
This might seem like no big deal to many people now, but in 15-20 years if the watershed board can continue with their long term plans, Albert Lea Lake will be a different place. It will always be the same prairie lake, but it will be much more friendly for recreation and nature. Nearly all of the shoreline is already privately owned. The dam area is one of only a couple spots on the south shore with public access. What good will the lake be to your children and grandchildren if they can't even get to the shores to enjoy it?
Iowa is making pulic use of the rivers that flow out of Freeborn County. We're making sure we will never have it.
< River celebration is Sunday in Forest City >
Perhaps someone can gain access with a canoe on the Shellrock and post some pictures of the beauty of the river from a canoe view?
Posted by MADDOG on Jun. 14 2010,10:00 am
(MADDOG @ Jun. 12 2010,4:24 pm)
QUOTE
It was Mr. Nelson's dam design that set the whole plan in motion for what the DNR and watershed board had in the works to do not only for this county but whole area. I think I still have a copy of the design plans of both the dam and park/canoe/fishing area somewhere I can dig up.
Here's the Albert Lea Dam park plan design as it was destined only for demise. Attached in a PDF file so it can be enlarged to look at. As you can see, it was ready to issue permit.
Posted by Madd Max on Jun. 14 2010,11:08 am
(MADDOG @ Jun. 12 2010,4:24 pm)
QUOTE
What good will the lake be to your children and grandchildren if they can't even get to the shores to enjoy it?
exactly, this is the reason I am going to keep fighting to make the county step up and do what is right for the citizens here. The County Commissioners need to fix this dam and allow safe portage around the Dam. If My County Commissioner does not do anything to get this issue resolved I Will run against her (Tuttle) and I WILL make this a Campaign Issue .
Posted by MADDOG on Jul. 08 2010,9:48 am
Looking at the last post from MM from close to a month ago. QUOTE
If My County Commissioner does not do anything to get this issue resolved I Will run against her (Tuttle) and I WILL make this a Campaign Issue .
I doubt that will be an issue anymore. I see that Sen. Sparks is pushing for the dam repair now.
QUOTE
The letter from Sparks was encouraging county officials to move forward on the project because House legislators are re-examining unspent appropriations. At this time the DNR has approved matching funds for the dam of up to $150,000, to be used by July 1, 2011.
I'd say that either Jensen gives easement to the people of Freeborn County to go around the dam to have access to the river or pony up 150K himself. He claim ownership of the land around and under the river. If the dam lets go, let the chips fall where they may.
Posted by Madd Max on Jul. 08 2010,3:00 pm
(MADDOG @ Jul. 08 2010,9:48 am)
QUOTE
I doubt that will be an issue anymore.
Funny how things can change in a short period of time isn't it MADDOG.
Safe portage around the Albert Lea Lake dam should be a priority. The Shellrock River is a public waterway so the public should have public access to this waterway. In regards to a safe portage around the dam, isn’t it in the best interest of public safety to provide safe passage around the Albert Lea Lake Dam? Can you imagine what the county’s liability would be if someone is hurt or killed because there was no safe public portage around the dam?
Posted by alcitizens on Jul. 08 2010,6:00 pm
[Madd Max] QUOTE
If My County Commissioner does not do anything to get this issue resolved I Will run against her (Tuttle) and I WILL make this a Campaign Issue.
I don't think she'll be doing anything to get it resolved..
Here you go, you might need one of these.>>>>
Posted by alcitizens on Jul. 10 2010,9:35 pm
QUOTE
Thanks to Sparks for letter to the county
Published Saturday, July 10, 2010
I would like to thank Sen. Dan Sparks for pressing the Freeborn County Board of Commissioners to move forward on fixing or replacing the Albert Lea Lake dam. I have been advocating for this project to proceed for some time, having made it a campaign issue when I ran for county commissioner back in 2008. I have also been bringing up this issue periodically at commissioners meetings ever since.
Sen. Sparks is correct in his concerns. The fact is, House legislators are re-examining unspent appropriations. Since these funds have been set aside for this very project since 2005, and the state budget is looking at a large deficient in the next biennium, there is a very real danger that these funds could be lost if they are not spent on this project by July 1, 2011.
I am encouraged in hearing that Freeborn County Administrator John Kluever will be in contact with the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources to identify funding sources and work on the permit process. Please contact your county commissioner and tell them not to let the funding for the replacement of the Albert Lea Lake dam slip away. The time is now to get this project done.
Mike Lee
Albert Lea
< http://www.albertleatribune.com/news...-county >
Published Saturday, July 10, 2010
I would like to thank Sen. Dan Sparks for pressing the Freeborn County Board of Commissioners to move forward on fixing or replacing the Albert Lea Lake dam. I have been advocating for this project to proceed for some time, having made it a campaign issue when I ran for county commissioner back in 2008. I have also been bringing up this issue periodically at commissioners meetings ever since.
Sen. Sparks is correct in his concerns. The fact is, House legislators are re-examining unspent appropriations. Since these funds have been set aside for this very project since 2005, and the state budget is looking at a large deficient in the next biennium, there is a very real danger that these funds could be lost if they are not spent on this project by July 1, 2011.
I am encouraged in hearing that Freeborn County Administrator John Kluever will be in contact with the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources to identify funding sources and work on the permit process. Please contact your county commissioner and tell them not to let the funding for the replacement of the Albert Lea Lake dam slip away. The time is now to get this project done.
Mike Lee
Albert Lea
< http://www.albertleatribune.com/news...-county >
Posted by Madd Max on Aug. 02 2010,10:23 pm
My son-in-law posted this picture of Rose Hill lake near Wessington SD on his facebook page. The dam blew out and emptied the lake after 10 inches of rain fell in a downpour last week. Could this be the future of Albert Lea Lake if something is not done about replacing the dam soon.
Posted by MADDOG on Aug. 02 2010,10:26 pm
What would it look like downstream? I'd say there would be some pee-O'd farmers. I guess then there would be some conversation on just who owns the dam .
Posted by Madd Max on Aug. 02 2010,10:41 pm
I sure would hate to see this
Posted by Madd Max on Aug. 02 2010,10:42 pm
end up looking like this
Posted by alcitizens on Aug. 02 2010,11:31 pm
I like the idea that JENSEN will be responsible for the end of Albert Lea Lake. We will have a beautiful river running through Albert Lea. The County will still be able to sell many acres of riverside lots with no need to portage canoe's or have to deal with JENSEN.The Shell Rock River will only be bigger, better and more popular than ever...
Posted by Sitting Bull on Aug. 08 2010,2:34 pm
August 8, 2010PRESS RELEASE
United States Army Corps of Engineers approves and funds Project Management Plan for Shell Rock Restoration Project.
The Shell Rock River Watershed District recently obtained final approval from the US Army Corps of Engineers for the completion of a feasibility report on the restoration of a significant portion of the watershed in Freeborn County. According to Brett Behnke, Shell Rock River Watershed Administrator, “This is exciting news for Freeborn County and the entire river basin”
The multi-year feasibility study is the first step in the restoration of up to 2,720 acres of Albert Lea Lake and related wetlands. Behnke added, “We have been pursuing this opportunity for a number of years and just recently finalized the paperwork to move forward with this federally funded planning process. This is a tremendous boost to our community-wide effort to clean up and restore our water resources.”
The project is officially called the “Freeborn County Section 206 Aquatic Ecosystem Restoration Project” or the “206 Restoration Project” for short. The Project Management Plan provides a roadmap for the SRRWD and US Army Corp of Engineers to complete the feasibility study in 2012. According to Andy Henschel, the local Director of Field Operations, who is spearheading this project, “Utilizing this federal resource will accelerate our already successful efforts in restoring water and habitat quality in the watershed. This project will allow us to improve shore land erosion, flood control and overall habitat and water quality.”
The Corps has allocated $100,000 for this first phase and has appointed a 16 person project team consisting of engineers, analysts, a community planner and an archeologist. The feasibility study will address and identify the problems and the objectives of the project.
The Project Management Plan can be obtained from the Shell Rock River Watershed District Office and will be posted on the District website at < www.shellrock.org. >
A summary of the projects goals are as follows:
Topsoil conservation and erosion and sedimentation control
Shore land conservation and restoration
Development and implementation of lake management plans
Partnerships to identify and reduce pollution entering Albert Lea Lake
Maintaining and enhancing fisheries and aquatic habitat
Maintaining efficient storm water systems
Implementation of storm water best management practices (BMPs)
Flood control and floodplain preservation
Wetland protection, enhancement, and restoration
Groundwater protection
Partnerships and data sharing
Education and public involvement
The overall restoration plan, if implemented, is budgeted at $7.48 million, with $4.8 million from the Army Corps of Engineers and $2.68 million from local funding and/or in-kind services.
For more information, call Brett Behnke at 507-377-5785 or Andy Henschel at 507-391-2795
Posted by hairhertz on Aug. 08 2010,3:41 pm
yeah
Posted by City Worker on Aug. 09 2010,1:43 am
This would be a good way to dreage albert lea lake. Then we could make the lake deeper and build a new dam. You got to look at the sunny side of it. If the Dam does blow out , I will feel sorry for the people that live down stream of the dam.
Posted by Madd Max on Aug. 11 2010,12:48 pm
(Sitting Bull @ Aug. 08 2010,2:34 pm)
QUOTE
A summary of the projects goals are as follows:
Topsoil conservation and erosion and sedimentation control
Shore land conservation and restoration
Development and implementation of lake management plans
Partnerships to identify and reduce pollution entering Albert Lea Lake
Maintaining and enhancing fisheries and aquatic habitat
Maintaining efficient storm water systems
Implementation of storm water best management practices (BMPs)
Flood control and floodplain preservation
Wetland protection, enhancement, and restoration
Groundwater protection
Partnerships and data sharing
Education and public involvement
The overall restoration plan, if implemented, is budgeted at $7.48 million, with $4.8 million from the Army Corps of Engineers and $2.68 million from local funding and/or in-kind services.
For more information, call Brett Behnke at 507-377-5785 or Andy Henschel at 507-391-2795
Topsoil conservation and erosion and sedimentation control
Shore land conservation and restoration
Development and implementation of lake management plans
Partnerships to identify and reduce pollution entering Albert Lea Lake
Maintaining and enhancing fisheries and aquatic habitat
Maintaining efficient storm water systems
Implementation of storm water best management practices (BMPs)
Flood control and floodplain preservation
Wetland protection, enhancement, and restoration
Groundwater protection
Partnerships and data sharing
Education and public involvement
The overall restoration plan, if implemented, is budgeted at $7.48 million, with $4.8 million from the Army Corps of Engineers and $2.68 million from local funding and/or in-kind services.
For more information, call Brett Behnke at 507-377-5785 or Andy Henschel at 507-391-2795
This new is interesting
So does this mean that the Army Corps of Engineers could or would pick up the cost of replacing the Albert Lea Lake Dam?
Flood control and floodplain preservation, Wetland protection, enhancement, and restoration
After watching the watershed meeting I am getting the feeling that the Army Core will replace the dam and the watershed will keep repairing the dam until the army core replaces it.
Dan B will this save the county and the watershed each about $150,000.00 by the Army core of Engineers replacing the dam?
Posted by Madd Max on Aug. 15 2010,6:59 am
Funding approved for A.L. Lake damThe Shell Rock River Watershed District recently got approval and funding to restore a large portion of the watershed in Freeborn County. Included in this plan is the building of a new dam on Albert Lea Lake.
“It’s been such an issue, but we feel this is probably the best route to take,” Andy Henschel said. “This has been in the works for quite a while.”
Henschel is the director of field operations for the Shell Rock River Watershed District. He said that the money the district has set aside for the dam from the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources is still there for them to use. It is possible that funding from this restoration project also could pay for dam expenses.
Funding for the entire plan is budgeted at about $7.5 million. Almost $5 million will be from the Army Corps of Engineers and about $2.5 million will come from local funding from sales tax and in-kind services, which is local staff time used for the project.
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has allocated $100,000 for the first phase of the project and has also appointed a 16-person team of engineers, analysts, a community planner and an archaeologist. Of that team, three are local staff who have been traveling to Rock Island, Ill., to discuss the project with the rest of the team. The first phase includes a study to address problems and objectives of the project. The study will finish in 2012.
Henschel said the study takes about two years because feasibility planning can take almost a year, and then after that there’s a design phase before implementation can happen. During the design phase the Albert Lea Dam will be designed and will include some new features. Henschel said the group wants to incorporate new things like an electric fish barrier, to keep out Asian carp, and a fish passage, so northerns can migrate up the river and spawn in the lake. He also said there are other new projects he’s excited about.
“We’ll be working on a deep water habitat and also formation or creation of islands to reduce shoreline erosion problems,” Henschel said. “So there are some interesting pieces of the project that could possibly take place for Albert Lea Lake.”
Henschel said the project has been in the works for about eight years, and finally this spring the Army Corps of Engineers said they could move forward with the project.
The project is officially called the Freeborn County Section 206 Aquatic Ecosystem Restoration Project. It will restore almost 3,000 acres of Albert Lea Lake and other wetlands. Fountain Lake and the Shell Rock River will benefit from reduced sediment inputs, but the project does not affect either water body significantly. The Albert Lea Lake watershed is about 157,000 acres in size and is located entirely in Freeborn County.
Next Tuesday, the Freeborn County Board of Commissioners will consider a request from the watershed district for the submission of a letter to the Lessard Sams Outdoor Hertiage Fund to assist with the purchase of the land adjacent to the Albert Lea Dam as part of this restoration project. Look to the Tribune website for more information as it becomes available.
Project goals include:
Topsoil conservation and erosion and sedimentation control
Shore land conservation and restoration
Development and implementation of lake management plans
Partnerships to identify and reduce pollution entering Albert Lea Lake
Maintaining and enhancing fisheries and aquatic habitat
Maintaining efficient storm water systems
Implementation of storm water best management practices (BMPs)
Flood control and floodplain preservation
Wetland protection, enhancement and restoration
Groundwater protection
Partnerships and data sharing
Education and public involed
Posted by danbelshan on Aug. 15 2010,10:38 am
Just say noThank goodness the County Board (3 to 2 I believe) didn't listen to the group that wanted us to build a dam/bridge, parking lots (millions local $$$$$) and also wanted us to sue the land owner for comdemnation which could take years in court and cost plenty (local $$$$).
What did happen
The boards have worked with all parties to come to a reasonable and financially sound plan. Looking for dollars from other sources. (DNR, Corp of Engineers, the new sales tax etc.)
Lesson learned.
The loudest lobbying group which had special interest in their own lakeshore erosion, ties to engineering and design groups and consultants doesn't always have to get their way.
Outcome I Hope For
If everything goes as planned the local taxpayers will have little if any local dollars invested, the dam will get built with public access around it and the property south of the dam will be purchased for public land for all to enjoy.
Posted by MADDOG on Aug. 15 2010,11:01 am
This had to be a secondary plan because the board didn't move to condemn. The shuffle between the SRRWD and the board in the purchase of the land from Palmer created this issue. QUOTE
“It’s been such an issue, but we feel this is probably the best route to take,” Andy Henschel said. “This has been in the works for quite a while.”
Will this cost the local taxpayer more money because of this?
QUOTE
It is possible that funding from this restoration project also could pay for dam expenses.
That is yet to be determined. Besides, this plan for the additional purchase of land was long ago started. It did not happen since the board chose not to condemn. What did we learn. That the board chose to vote against the will of the people in chosing not to condemn.
QUOTE
Original Plan
QUOTE
Outcome I Hope For
If everything goes as planned the local taxpayers will have little if any local dollars invested, the dam will get built with public access around it and the property south of the dam will be purchased for public land for all to enjoy.
If everything goes as planned the local taxpayers will have little if any local dollars invested, the dam will get built with public access around it and the property south of the dam will be purchased for public land for all to enjoy.
My opinion on why? Because a few commissioners sided with one or two landowners who didn't want the possiblility of people able to canoe down the river. I was there. One person spoke in favor of the board. I spoke to the watershed members and DNR afterwards. I know where their thoughts were. Neither could believe what the board had failed to do.
Will there be a parking area and launch for canoes and kayaks? I'll be checking into that.
How fast will this happen? This will be years on the future.
QUOTE
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has allocated $100,000 for the first phase of the project and has also appointed a 16-person team of engineers, analysts, a community planner and an archaeologist. Of that team, three are local staff who have been traveling to Rock Island, Ill., to discuss the project with the rest of the team. The first phase includes a study to address problems and objectives of the project. The study will finish in 2012.
The majority of this project has nothing to do with the original dam project (which would have been completed already.) Thank god for the efforts of the Watershed Board in being able to move this project forward after that mess was created.
Posted by danbelshan on Aug. 15 2010,1:24 pm
(danbelshan @ Aug. 15 2010,10:38 am)
QUOTE
Just say no
Thank goodness the County Board (3 to 2 I believe) didn't listen to the group that wanted us to build a dam/bridge, parking lots (millions local $$$$$) and also wanted us to sue the land owner for comdemnation which could take years in court and cost plenty (local $$$$).
What did happen
The boards have worked with all parties to come to a reasonable and financially sound plan. Looking for dollars from other sources. (DNR, Corp of Engineers, the new sales tax etc.)
Lesson learned.
The loudest lobbying group which had special interest in their own lakeshore erosion, ties to engineering and design groups and consultants doesn't always have to get their way.
Outcome I Hope For
If everything goes as planned the local taxpayers will have little if any local dollars invested, the dam will get built with public access around it and the property south of the dam will be purchased for public land for all to enjoy.
Thank goodness the County Board (3 to 2 I believe) didn't listen to the group that wanted us to build a dam/bridge, parking lots (millions local $$$$$) and also wanted us to sue the land owner for comdemnation which could take years in court and cost plenty (local $$$$).
What did happen
The boards have worked with all parties to come to a reasonable and financially sound plan. Looking for dollars from other sources. (DNR, Corp of Engineers, the new sales tax etc.)
Lesson learned.
The loudest lobbying group which had special interest in their own lakeshore erosion, ties to engineering and design groups and consultants doesn't always have to get their way.
Outcome I Hope For
If everything goes as planned the local taxpayers will have little if any local dollars invested, the dam will get built with public access around it and the property south of the dam will be purchased for public land for all to enjoy.
Timing is everything.
Posted by MADDOG on Aug. 15 2010,2:11 pm
(danbelshan @ Aug. 15 2010,1:24 pm)
QUOTE
Timing is everything.
Is that because the Watershed Board may have pulled off not losing the $150K from the state that was set to expire soon?
Madd Max wants to know too.
QUOTE
Dan B will this save the county and the watershed each about $150,000.00 by the Army core of Engineers replacing the dam?
Posted by danbelshan on Aug. 15 2010,2:51 pm
(MADDOG @ Aug. 15 2010,2:11 pm)
QUOTE
(danbelshan @ Aug. 15 2010,1:24 pm)
QUOTE
[b]Timing is everything.
Is that because the Watershed Board may have pulled off not losing the $150K from the state that was set to expire soon?
Madd Max wants to know too.
QUOTE
Dan B will this save the county and the watershed each about $150,000.00 by the Army core of Engineers replacing the dam?
Good questions
Don't know
if the Watershed Board "may have pulled off" anything .
You will have to ask them.
I do know
Last I heard from adm is the DNR $150,000 is available to the County as it always has been and the Board will likely start the process to use that funding.
Don't know
at this time if it will save $300,000 that Madd Max speaks about . I sure hope it does.
It seems a few more government $$$$ are around since the recession. We just have to go out and find them.
Posted by Two Bears on Aug. 17 2010,10:07 am
I see the tribune has a article about the dam project going forward, I wonder what the plan is to get the land needed to do the project with a public access from jensen.
Posted by danbelshan on Aug. 17 2010,12:44 pm
(Two Bears @ Aug. 17 2010,10:07 am)
QUOTE
I see the tribune has a article about the dam project going forward, I wonder what the plan is to get the land needed to do the project with a public access from jensen.
Good question I hope this helps.
There has been talk since we turned down the the original plan (of condemning land with possible lawsuits, and spending lots of local money on the Bridge/Dam) about getting some of the new sales tax money which was voted in a couple of years ago called the Lessard Sams Outdoor Heritage Fund to assist with the purchase of land around the Jugland Dam.
< http://www.lsohc.leg.mn/FY2011/Quick_Facts_Info.pdf >
The County Board today passed a resolution of support to apply for getting $2,576,500 of that sales tax funded grant to be used to purchase 257 acres at the headwaters of the Shellrock River. The Shellrock River Watershed will be the fiscal agent receiving funds for the project.
Federal money from the Corp of Engineers will also be gone after to pay for dam replacement .
If successful the parcel can hopefully have public use to provide recreation on the river such as tubing, fishing , nature trails and camping.
Let's hope we are successful getting this done.
And thank goodness the bridge/dam plan was never approved by the County Board or we would have lost this opportunity.
Posted by ICU812 on Aug. 17 2010,1:05 pm
10 grand an acre?I know this won't be popular but:
That dam (variable) should have been put in under the bridge when that project was done.
Let the wildlife enjoy the river without us hassling them. It is a nice sanctuary for them. We got the whole lake on the other side, isn't that enough?
Posted by danbelshan on Aug. 17 2010,1:24 pm
(ICU812 @ Aug. 17 2010,1:05 pm)
QUOTE
10 grand an acre?
That dam (variable) should have been put in under the bridge when that project was done.
That dam (variable) should have been put in under the bridge when that project was done.
Could say that's "water under the bridge"?
Posted by ICU812 on Aug. 17 2010,1:32 pm
Yeah, just tough to let go. Whatever happens should turn out pretty cool. The plan that is drawn out would be pretty sweet.
Posted by Madd Max on Aug. 17 2010,5:16 pm
Watershed District Clears Key Hurdle for Restoration ProjectAlbert Lea, MN. A Shell Rock River Watershed District application for state funding was recently granted a hearing by the Lessard-Sams Outdoor Heritage Council (LSOHC). According to District Administrator, Brett Behnke, “This is a crucial step toward obtaining funds for the acquisition of 257 acres of habitat at the headwaters of the Shell Rock River. We have an option to purchase this property from the landowner and need state assistance to complete the acquisition.”
On Monday, August 16th the LSOHC selected the District’s project, Shell Rock River Headwaters Restoration Project, as one of 28 proposals to receive a hearing next week. In July, Minnesota conservation organizations submitted 44 requests totaling over $202 million for consideration by the Lessard-Sams Outdoor Heritage Council.
According to Director of Field Operations, Andy Henschel, “This acquisition is not only the cornerstone of the entire 206 Restoration Project to be funded by the Army Corps of Engineers but it will provide a significant opportunity to invest in fish and wildlife habitat and create new outdoor recreation opportunities for the public. Now, we are asking for community-wide support for our application and would appreciate any letters or words of encouragement to help with the process.”
The Council anticipates recommending to the 2011 Legislature $86 million in conservation efforts from the Outdoor Heritage Fund.
The LSOHC was established by the legislature to provide annual recommendations on how the funds from the Outdoor Heritage. The Outdoor Heritage Fund receives one-third of the money raised by the constitutional amendment creating the Outdoor Heritage, Clean Water, Parks and Trails, and Arts and Cultural Heritage; sales tax dedicated funds. Information about the LSOHC can be found at: < http://www.lsohc.leg.mn/index.html. > The Shell Rock River Watershed District previously received funds from this source for the construction of three fish barriers in the District.
More information on the Shell Rock River Headwaters Restoration Project is available at the District’s website at < www.shellrock.org. >
Posted by Two Bears on Aug. 18 2010,12:20 am
Yeah Baby !
Posted by Madd Max on Aug. 26 2010,10:38 am
Can state help fund A.L. Lake dam?ST. PAUL — Two representatives from the Shell Rock River Watershed District appeared before the Lessard-Sams Outdoor Heritage Council Wednesday afternoon to ask for more than $2.5 million for purchase of the land around the Albert Lea Lake Dam.
Andy Henschel, director of field operations for the watershed, and Brett Behnke, district administrator for the watershed, appeared before the council. Behnke introduced the project and Henschel talked in detail about the goals of the project before the council asked both men questions. The watershed district’s hearing was one of 28 heard by the council on Tuesday and Wednesday.
“It was a big day, but we had a great response from the council members,” Behnke said.
If the council picks the project to list with its recommendations, the state would buy the land, specifically 257 acres, from the current landowner, Greg Jensen, and then the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources would eventually own and manage the land. The price per acre for this purchase would be about $10,000.
One council member specifically asked Henschel if he thought that was a high price for an acre of land.
“We’re in the process of appraisal,” Henschel said.
He said the watershed district’s attorney, Matt Benda, and staff are working on getting the price appraised. Another council member then asked if the district would rebuild the dam if the council did not approve the project or recommended a smaller amount of money than requested.
“We sure would like full funding,” Henschel said.
Henschel said because the dam will be replaced even if the council didn’t approve funding or as much funding as requested, the district would find other ways of funding the project. He also said that rebuilding the dam will positively be part of the larger restoration project, but that the district would appreciate funding from the state. Council members also asked some general facts about the dam. Henschel said as far as he knows the dam was built in the 1800s.
Another council member asked whether the dam had been assessed for safety and studied for fish passage and biological impacts.
“It is in very poor shape,” Henschel said. “We do have major funding to reconstruct a new dam that would allow for fish passage.”
The funding Henschel talked about was the Shell Rock River Headwaters Restoration Project in conjunction with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. He clarified for the council that the money being requested was specifically for ownership of both banks of the first 1.4 miles of headwaters on the Shell Rock River, the dam, as well as woods and aquatic habitat.
The watershed district made an information packet for all the council members and included numerous letters of support from outdoor and environmental organizations, including the DNR, as well as from area government entities.
The next step is to wait until the council convenes again and decides which projects to fund on Sept. 16. If council members decide to support the watershed district’s project, they will include the project in their recommendation to the Minnesota Legislature, where it would have a good chance of being included in a bill, according to Judy Erickson, a legislative consultant who was with the watershed district representatives Wednesday. The council could choose to recommend less than the amount requested, too. The council anticipates recommending $86 million in conservation projects to the Legislature.
Though the watershed district asked the council for $2,576,500, just one small part of a bigger project, the Shell Rock River Headwaters Restoration Project. The project is officially called the Freeborn County 206 Aquatic Ecosystem Restoration Project. It will restore almost 3,000 acres of Albert Lea Lake and other wetlands. Fountain Lake and the Shell Rock River will benefit from reduced sediment inputs, but the project does not affect either water body significantly. The Albert Lea Lake watershed is about 157,000 acres in size and is located entirely in Freeborn County. A federal grant has been secured for $4.8 million and local funding and in-kind services will produce about $2.68 million to fund the project with an estimated cost of $7.48 million.
Posted by MADDOG on Aug. 26 2010,10:59 am
I wonder how much the land sold for two years ago when Jensen bought it? I doubt he paid that much for swamp land.
Posted by ChrisWilliams on Aug. 26 2010,4:01 pm
He clarified for the council that the money being requested was specifically for ownership of both banks of the first 1.4 miles of headwaters on the Shell Rock River, the dam, as well as woods and aquatic habitat.Last I knew, Mr. Jensen only owned the east side of the river.... How do they propose to get the 1.4 miles of land on the west side. Something stinks here, and it's not dead fish.
Posted by Two Bears on Oct. 12 2011,2:37 pm
Did the sale go through?
Posted by ICU812 on Oct. 12 2011,9:44 pm
(Two Bears @ Oct. 12 2011,2:37 pm)
QUOTE
Did the sale go through?
yeah, but the state only paid like 10 grand an acre for it.
Posted by alcitizens on Oct. 12 2011,11:16 pm
Turned out to be a good investment by Jensen.. 
Posted by sumpdump on Oct. 14 2011,2:11 pm
So, when does the DNR take possesion? Is it a park we can enter?