Devils Lake Water Management and Damage Control Proposal
By Blake Snortland

1. Introduction

    How would you feel if one spring morning you woke up and found your property and home flooded?  How, then, would you feel, if you knew that you could have done something to prevent it, but your efforts were hampered by people who complained about how much damage spreading the water around would cause?  For the people of Devils Lake, this event is already happening.

a.    Devils Lake Current Situation

Figure 1- Devils Lake Historical Lake Levels

(People)

    Since 1993, Devils Lake has risen over 25 feet, and now covers nearly 400 sq miles. The City of Devils Lake, ND is located about 90 miles west of Grand Forks, and is named for the lake that it borders. Over the past few years it has received much attention due to the lake's rising water levels and the problems that this flooding has presented to the city. This can be seen above in Figure 1. Devils Lake is what is known as a closed basin lake, meaning that it has no natural outlets. Lakes like this are dependant on rainfall to determine their size, and thus fluctuate very rapidly.

    Starting in the early 1990s, the region has fallen into a cycle of above average precipitation, and as a result shown in Figure 1 the lake has reached record high levels in a very short period of time. At its current level the lake is naturally spilling into neighboring Stump Lake, and if the wet season continues, the combined lakes threaten to flood the Sheyenne River.

    The waters of Devils Lake and Stump Lake not only cover hundreds of thousands of acres of land as a result of their high water levels, but they also contain high concentrations of salt and other pollutants that environmentalists fear would cause damage to the ecosystems of the Sheyenne River, and all connected waterways, if an outlet for Devils Lake was constructed. The City of Devils Lake itself is protected by a dike, but there has been a constant struggle to keep the highways leading to Devils Lake above the rising water level.

    Hundreds of homes have needed to be moved to escape the rising waters, and dozens more have been abandoned altogether. Area farmers have felt the effects as well, losing nearly one hundred thousand acres of farmland to the lake. In the year 2000, the U.S. Geological Study stated, "The recent lake-level rise has caused flood damages exceeding $300 million" (U.S. Geological Study). In the five years since then, another $200 million dollars have been spent. To date, more than $500 million have already been spent building up roads and moving homes to higher ground but this figure is predicted to double if nothing is done soon to ease the flooding. The Devils Lake flooding problem is not going to go away, and something can either be done about it now, or something must be done later after the flooding has become a bigger, uncontrollable problem.

a.    Solution Proposal

II. Why Something Must be Done

Figure 2 - North Dakota Water Map

(North Dakota State Water Commission)

Figure 3 - North Dakota Water Basins

(U.S. Geological Survey)

    Figure 2, above, shows the location of Devils Lake in the Northeastern quarter of North Dakota, and Figure 3 shows all of North Dakota's water basins.  As one can see, all of North Dakota's water basins, with the exception of the Devils Lake basin, flow into rivers and from there out of the state.  However, the Devils Lake basin is a closed basin.  It has no natural outlet with which to expel its water.  Since there are no rivers flowing into the Devils Lake basin, and no rivers flowing out of it, it is completely dependant on rainfall and snowmelt runoff to determine the lake's size.  The City of Devils Lake itself, which simply bordered the lake 10 years ago, is now surrounded by it, and is rapidly becoming an island.  The government has been building up roads, constructing dikes, and relocating homes, that has cost the taxpayers over $500 million already, and it is only going to continue. 

    The problem of flooding in the Devils Lake region isn't going to go away on its own.  The building of roads and dikes has been only a temporary solution.  A permanent solution to the problem has become necessary to alleviate the damages that Devils Lake is causing.  Something must be done to relieve the pressure that is building up inside Devils Lake, rather that simply containing it.

III. Possible Solutions

Figure 4 - Possible Solutions

The three plans outlined above can all work to reduce water levels in Devils Lake.

a. "Do Nothing" Plan

    - Plan 1 represents the wishes of those who are opposed to the construction of an artificial outlet to release water from Devils Lake.  This plan relies on wishful thinking, hoping that the rainfall will subside, and evaporation will take its course to lower lake levels.  However, according to estimates by the Regional Weather Information Center at the University of North Dakota, "The present wet conditions are expected to continue beyond the first decade of the new century into 2015" (Osborne, 12).

b. Federal Outlet Plan

    - Plan 2 represents the Federal Government's plan to drain water from Devils Lake.  It drains water from Pelican Lake, which is connected to Devils Lake.  This will lower the lake level slightly more than the state plan, and use a sand filter to remove most biota, pathogens, and pollutants from the water.  This outlet has a good chance of working to remove the problematic water from Devils Lake, and has received approval from the Army Corps of Engineers and Secretary of State, Colin Powell.  In an Associated Press article, it states, "Secretary of State Colin Powell has told the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers that a federally funded outlet to drain Devils Lake floodwaters would not violate a water quality  treaty with Canada" (Nicholson). However, it also costs more than six times as much as the North Dakota plan.

            c. State Outlet Plan

    - Plan 3 represents the State of North Dakota's plan to drain the water.  This plan takes water from Devils Lake's western side.  The North Dakota outlet is the quickest solution to an already devastating problem.  Like the Federal Plan, the outlet will not drop the lake to its original level, but it will prevent the lake from rising any further.  The North Dakota plan also has an $800,000 operating cost, but even if the outlet is used for 150 years, it would still be cheaper than the Federal plan.  However, the North Dakota outlet has only a small screen filter to remove plants and animals from the water, not pathogens.  We will address this problem later in our proposal.

            Our group suggests that North Dakota follow its own plan, because it is the best solution that addresses the most possible problems that its opponents have.  The benefits of this proposal will save millions of dollars, not to mention many acres of farmland.  However, not all people agree with our group’s recommendation.

IV. Affected Groups

Figure 5 – Affected Water Areas

(Manitoba Water Stewardship)

    Figure 5, above, shows where the water released from Devils Lake will go once it is released, and thus what that water affects.  The yellow portion of the map represents the Devils Lake water basin.  The pink area of the map represents all the water that flows into the Red River of the North, and on into Lake Winnipeg and then into the Hudson Bay. Obviously, anyone affected by the drain will have their own opinions about the matter.  Many groups oppose the construction of an outlet from Devils Lake including Canada, the province of Manitoba, Minnesota, Missouri, the International Joint Commission, the American Environmental Protection Agency, the Army Corps of Engineers, and a private interest group, People to Save the Sheyenne.  Basically, the only party involved currently endorsing the plan is the State of North Dakota.

    a. Non-Native Biota

    There are some concerns about what biota and pathogens which will be transferred by letting water from Devils Lake flow out to other water sources are also a major reason for opposing the outlet.  According to Dwight Williamson of the provincial Manitoba Conservation Department, "The impact would be catastrophic!" (Chliboyko).  According to Mr. Williamson, Devils Lake has at least 12 various non-native biota and pathogens that would most likely spread to areas like Lake Winnipeg through the outlet.  This could be a problem if the Devils Lake biota out-compete the native inhabitants.

    This is a problem, but according to some experts, one that can't be helped and couldn't be avoided by leaving the lake alone and not building the outlet.  Dr. Otto Helweg, the Dean of Engineering at NDSU and a leading expert on the problems surrounding Devils Lake said in a personal interview, "The transfer of non-native biota is happening all the time; whether the outlet is put in or not" (Helweg).  Dr. Helweg also mentioned how the microscopic organisms or pathogens are already being spread by fisherman.  The microorganisms attach to their tackle and their boats, and then the fishermen take their boat to a new water area, thus spreading the microorganisms and pathogens.  It appears that the biota are moving and there is nothing we can do to stop them.  However, with a drain, a filter could be put in to reduce the transfer of non-native biota as much as possible.

    The Federal outlet would use a sand filter, which would prevent all wildlife, and most pathogens from escaping Devils Lake through the outlet.  The State plan includes a ¼" screen to filter out wildlife, but has no means of filtering out the pathogens.  This, however, is not a problem according to Sagsveen.  He states in an Associated Press article that there is no need for a sand filter to capture organic materials, because, "there were no biota of concern present in Devils Lake that were not otherwise present in the Sheyenne River" (Associated).

    Also concerning non-native biota transfer is the idea that if the outlet is allowed to be constructed, then North Dakota will attempt to reinstate a 60 year old project called the Garrison Diversion.  This project was designed to transfer water from the Missouri river to irrigate dry areas of North Dakota.  This plan also included an inlet to Devils Lake.  The Garrison Diversion project has been shut down several times in the past, but the opponents to the Devils Lake outlet are worried that if the Devils Lake Outlet is allowed to pass, then the Garrison Diversion will be allowed to pass in the future, thus furthering the contamination of other waters.  The Garrison Diversion was first suggested to help bring water to the eastern part of the state.  Since Devils Lake has too much water, the chances of the reinstatement of the Garrison Diversion seem quite low.

         b. Salinity Factors

    One party opposed to the drain is our neighboring Canadian province of Manitoba.  One of their concerns is that the salt and phosphorous levels of Devils Lake are higher than that of the Sheyenne River and thus will pollute all the water that the Sheyenne interacts with, including Canadian waters.  Water quality levels can be seen later in Figure 6, where it shows the dissolved solids level in Devils Lake's west end to be a little more than twice as high as the level in the Sheyenne River.  This could constitute a violation of the 1909 Canada-U.S. Boundary Waters Treaty which forbids the transfer of polluted waters from one country to another.  This might be a problem if the lake was allowed to overflow naturally, but with an outlet in the west end of the lake, it shouldn't be a problem.

Figure 6 - Recent Salinity Levels in Devils Lake Area

(U.S. Geological Survey)

    Figure 5, above, shows the levels of pollutants and dissolved Sulfates in the Devils Lake water.  The east end lake waters and the waters in Stump Lake are very polluted, and if the lake floods over, those waters will be what go into the Sheyenne River.  The waters in Stump Lake are 24 times as polluted as the Sheyenne.  However, if water is drained from the west end of Devils Lake, the differences in pollutant level from the Sheyenne is minimal.  The West End waters are only about twice as saline as the Sheyenne.  Clearly, the West End waters are much cleaner than the West End, and it would be preferable to have a controlled outlet of twice as dirty water, than an uncontrolled release of the extremely polluted water from Stump Lake.

    Also, the North Dakota Department of Health has placed a limit of 450 mg/L sulfate standard for the Sheyenne River.  According to a report by the NDDH, "It should also be noted that the Corps modeling indicates a 300 mg/L sulfate constraint causes only slight increases in the frequency of the Red River water quality standards and objectives.  [...]  The 300 mg/L sulfate at the insertion point is the current constraint that the Corps and State are basing their water quality analysis on.  This is considerably lower than the 450 mg/L sulfate standard that is enforced by the Health Department on the Sheyenne River" (North).  The so-called pollutants that would be drained into the Sheyenne River and other surrounding water systems wouldn’t become damaging until they exceeded 450 mg/L.  Both the State and Federal plans won’t exceed 300 mg/L.  Thus, the argument concerning pollution is not a concern.

    The neighboring governments of Canada, Manitoba, Missouri, and Minnesota, all oppose the Devils Lake outlet for these reasons.  Also The International Joint Commission, which oversees transborder water issues and the American Environmental Protection Agency have not approved the Devils Lake Outlet.  Also, a group known as the People to Save the Sheyenne, an organization of North Dakotans who oppose the outlet, is mounting many opposing arguments to the outlet's construction.  Right now North Dakota has started building the outlet anyway, and the opposing sides are still arguing against it.  But, if one looks at all the facts, most of the concerns regarding the outlet can be put to rest.

        c. People to Save the Sheyenne (PSS)

            i. Outlet is Ineffective

    The People to Save the Sheyenne is one of the strongest groups that are opposed to the Devils Lake Outlet.  They have four major reasons for claiming that an outlet won't work to solve the Devils Lake flooding problem.  One is that there is an, "Ineffectiveness of the State Water Commission's proposed projects -*300cfs Emergency Outlet won't work" (People).  The People to Save the Sheyenne, hereafter referred to as PSS, believe that the outlet is not big enough to reduce the lake level enough to reclaim land that has already been flooded.  However, this is not the main goal of the Devils Lake emergency outlet.  The goal of the outlet is to prevent further rising of the lake and prevent it from spilling into the Sheyenne River uncontrollably.  The North Dakota Department of Health states in a report, "Under a wet scenario, if a State 100-cfs outlet project were to operate for 10 years, it will remove approximately 17 inches off of Devils Lake" (North).  The current plan calls for a 300-cfs outlet, tripling the removal of water, draining 51 inches in 10 years.  As said above on page 5, the UND weather center only expects this wet cycle to continue for another 10 years, into 2015.  If this emergency outlet can hold off the flood until then, the natural evaporation course of Devils Lake will fix the problem by itself, beginning to lower the lake to its normal levels. 

            ii. "Wall of Water"

   The PSS's second reason for not using an outlet they call, "The Myth of a 'Wall of Water' - Misinformation regarding a catastrophic overflow from Devils Lake to the Sheyenne River" (People).  They say that some people believe that once Devils Lake naturally overflows into the Sheyenne, the water will erode the natural outlet causing much more water (anything above 1447 feet above sea level) than expected (anything above 1449 feet above sea level) out of Devils Lake into the Sheyenne River.  They claim that there is no concrete evidence that this will happen.  While it is true that the "Wall of Water" is only a theory, it is feasible and backed by some evidence done by a U.S. Geological Survey that says the sediments lining the Tolna Coulee are susceptible to erosion.  If the soil erodes, the amount of water that would be released from Devils Lake would be greater than expected.  Their belief that the "Wall of Water" will not occur is simply a theory that they have no credible evidence for, while there is evidence to state that it will occur.  Thus, argument number 2 is not valid.

            iii. "Save the Wetlands"

    The PSS's third argument calls for the closing of drains that drain into Devils Lake. They call it, "The Contribution of Wetland Drainage in the Devils Lake Basin to Flooding Problems at Devils Lake" (People).  Basically, they want to stop water being drained from neighboring wetlands into Devils Lake.  There are over 22,700 of these drains.  The results of closing these drains would be more costly than keeping them open.  The wetlands would fill up with water, flooding land in other parts of the state instead of Devils Lake.  This would simply be creating more problems that would need to be handled.  Closing over 22,000 drains would also take a great deal of money and manpower that could be better used elsewhere.  Also, according to North Dakota State Engineer David Sprynczyantyk, the drains that drain the wetlands only contribute 53,000 acre-feet of water to the flooding of Devils Lake.  This is only a slight fraction of the problem.  Thus, using the wetlands as alternative "rain barrel" is not a good idea.

            Iv. Lack of Public Support

    PSS's fourth and final argument for opposing the outlet is a, "Lack of Public Support for an Outlet from Devils Lake" (People).  They present some evidence that shows that there isn't that much support for an outlet from Devils Lake.  However, it is common knowledge that most people won't care about an issue unless it directly affects them.  Mostly, the only people who will be directed by this issue are the people near Devils Lake, and those people living on or near the Sheyenne River, near where the outlet would empty.  Everyone else in the state probably doesn't care that much about paying for an issue that doesn't directly affect them.  Thus, the State Government made the right decision in not directly having the people decide the outcome of the outlet, but acting in a way that would be best for the state as a whole.  Argument number four is speculative and doesn't show any real evidence that the people of North Dakota don't want an outlet either, so the point is rather pointless.

            v. Inaccurate Information

    It should be noted that most of the information on the People to Save the Sheyenne's website, is four to five years old and fairly out of date.  The lake has risen over 4 feet since that time, and  now many of their arguments are now irrelevant, because they refer water levels that the lake has already reached and surpassed.  In argument four, they refer to problems they have been having with Governor Schafer and his administration.  Governor Schafer hasn't been in office since the year 2000, and now Governor Hoeven is ultimately in charge of North Dakota’s water issues. 

V. Conclusion

    In conclusion, if the drain is not put in, the possibility of flooding would do everything that the protesters don't want.  The polluted water would be released, the non-native biota would be transferred, and hundreds of millions of dollars would be taken in damages.  If the drain is put in, the damage would be stopped, and the important biota and saline releases would be greatly reduced.

    The problem of flooding in Devils Lake is going to get much worse before it gets better if nothing is done to stop it.  An outlet from the west end of the lake is the best solution to relieving the water, and it meets the demands of the protesters of the outlet as much as possible.  It may not be a solution that it perfect for everyone, but it is best for as many people as possible under the circumstances.

PsychoNoble Articles
    PsychoNoble Home
 

Works Cited

Associated Press. "Devils Lake Opponents Want State Supreme Court to Stop Project." WCCO.com. 4/18/2005.  4/28/05.  http://wcco.com/localpolitics/local_story_108182632.html

Chliboyko, James.  "Trouble Flows North."  Canadian Geographic. Nov/Dec.  2003:  23.

Helweg, Otto.  Personal Interview.  4/20/05.

Manitoba Water Stewardship.  "North Dakota Water Project Proposals: Garrison Diversion and Devils Lake Outlet". 5/4/05.  http://www.gov.mb.ca/waterstewardship/water_info/transboundary/north_dakota.html

Nicholson, Blake.  "Powell: Outlet would not violate Boundary Waters Treaty".  Associated Press.  1/22/04.

North Dakota Department of Health.  "State of North Dakota Water Quality Report for the Devils Lake Outlet Project". 5/1/05 http://www.health.state.nd.us/PublicComment/DevilsLakeOutletDischargePermit/DLStateWCReport.pdf

North Dakota State Water Commission.  "North Dakota Water Resources".  5/4/05.  http://savethesheyenne.org/NDWR%20map_devils%20lake.jpg

Osborne, L.F. Impacts of regional climate variability in the Red River of the North Basin: University of North Dakota Regional Weather Information Center Report No. 2000-1, 2000

People to Save the Sheyenne.  "Why An Outlet Won’t Work".  4/26/05.  5/1/05. http://savethesheyenne.org/

U.S. Geological Survey.  "Climatology, Hydrology, and Simulation of an Emergency Outlet".  5/4/05.  http://nd.water.usgs.gov/pubs/wri/wri004174/htdocs/index.html

-.  "North Dakota River Basin Map for Current Streamflow Conditions".  5/4/05.  http://nd.water.usgs.gov/data/basinmap.html

Cover Page Photograph

Onsite photograph taken by Jared Langley