Three-county group concludes fifth round of well water testing

CAYLA CAVEY with UW-Stevens Point’s Center for Watershed Science and Education was on-hand last Saturday to educate Crawford County residents about the groundwater system, and well water testing results. Cavey made similar presentations to citizens and county boards in Crawford, Vernon and Richland counties, who partner in the Driftless Area Water Study. The Driftless Area Water Study (DAWS) group, composed of conservation and health department staff and community groups, in Crawford, Vernon and Richland counties, recently concluded their fifth round of well water testing. Overall, results were generally good compared to state averages. Some higher test results for coliform bacteria and nitrate were seen in areas dedicated to agriculture or in proximity to septic systems.

At a public education event held in Gays Mills on Saturday, June 27, Crawford County Conservation Director Dave Troester kicked off the presentation. The event was attended by about 50 citizens.

“This past spring’s round of well water testing probably had the best results out of any of the years that we've done sampling,” Troester told the group. “With nitrate levels in particular, there wasn’t a lot of variability between the counties with a fairly consistent trend, and nothing too alarming so that’s good.”

Troester detailed the history of well water testing in Crawford County. He pointed out that the first modern efforts to conduct broader well water testing had been undertaken by the Tainter Creek Watershed Council in Crawford and Vernon counties. He pointed out that after the Southwest Wisconsin Groundwater and Geology study (SWIGG) results had come out in 2018 and 2019, with some fairly alarming results, this stimulated conservation and health professionals in Crawford, Vernon and Richland counties to come together to test wells in those counties. As a result, the DAWS Study was formed.

The goal of DAWS is to develop a picture of groundwater quality in the three counties, and develop a dataset over time that could identify any developing trends.

Troester emphasized that the support of community groups like Crawford Stewardship Project and Valley Stewardship Network had been instrumental in the success of the program.

Cayla Cavey, an educator from UW-Stevens Point and UW-Extension’s Center for Watershed Science and Education, led the group in an educational talk designed to explain how groundwater works in Wisconsin, what an aquifer is, and what their private, individual well water test results mean.

Cavey explained that in the DAWS area, the bedrock is generally dolomite or limestone, which is easily dissolved and can become fractured. This means it can transmit water rapidly from the surface, into bedrock layers containing the aquifer (the zone in the bedrock completely saturated with water). Those bedrock layers are often sandstone, located much deeper in the bedrock profile, which transmit water much more slowly. She emphasized also, that groundwater is tied to surface water, providing baseflow that leads to our area’s world class trout streams.

Across the three counties, 352 well water samples were submitted in this spring’s round of testing. That was 100 from Crawford County, 160 in Vernon County, and 88 in Richland County. Tests were limited to 10 per township in order to achieve good distribution of tests across each of the counties. The analysis tested water for 22 common water quality contaminants.

SWIGG results

SWIGG results from initial rounds of testing in November of 2018 and April of 2019 revealed a picture of well water quality in Grant, Iowa and Lafayette counties. Results in November showed that 16% of 301 wells tested positive for nitrate, with 34% positive for coliform bacteria, and 4% showing E.coli present.

In April of 2019, of 539 wells tested, 15% tested positive for nitrate, with 16% positive for coliform bacteria, and 2% showing E.coli present.

“SWIGG was a big coordinated effort to do hundreds of well water samples, and some of the results that came back were surprising - some would say alarming,” Troester shared. “It was kind of eye-opening for everybody.”

The time of year that wells are tested can also have an impact on well water testing results. SWIGG results showed higher levels of contaminants in the November testing versus the April testing, for instance. In spring, it’s just been winter, with typically less mobility of surface contaminants through the soil and bedrock profiles. In addition, in winter there is less agricultural activity such as spreading of manure or application of fertilizers and agricultural chemicals, and less use of lawn fertilizers.

Bacteria results

Cavey explained that the standard for coliform bacteria in well water is either “present or absent.” State well construction standards maintain that a well should be able to deliver consistently bacteria-free water.

Cavey told the group that presence of coliform bacteria, which can be naturally occurring, isn’t necessarily a health risk. It is, however, an indication that a pathway exists for substances from the soil surface to enter a well.

“In this round of testing, we had about 11% of samples overall throughout the three counties, positive for coliform bacteria, which is pretty on par with what we typically see, especially in a bigger group,” Cavey explained. “So, nothing extremely high or low, pretty average.”

The well water educator said that for any test result positive for coliform bacteria, the sample was then automatically tested for Escherichia coli (E. coli). E.coli is a type of bacteria that naturally lives in the intestines of healthy humans and animals. Any well owner who received a positive result would have been contacted immediately by their county’s health department.

“A positive E.coli result indicates the presence of fecal coliforms, and those are from fecal matter, so human or animal waste,” Cavey said. “E coli can make you sick, and if we have E.coli present in a well, we know that the source of contamination was from human or animal waste.”

Cavey said that in the spring round of testing, results showed that less than 1% of wells tested showed a positive result for E.coli. For those whose wells tested positive, Cavey indicated they would be advised to immediately obtain an alternative source of water for drinking, cooking, brushing teeth and bathing, especially for infants and pregnant women.

Then, a re-test of the well water to confirm the result is recommended. The next step would be to inspect the well for defects, such as cracks or looseness of the well head cap. Then, the well should be disinfected or ‘shocked’ with bleach, and finally, the well should be re-tested to confirm that disinfection was successful.

Nitrate results

The most common groundwater quality contaminant in Wisconsin is nitrate, which is not naturally occurring pretty much at all in groundwater, according to Cavey. Any naturally occurring levels are usually less than 0.2 milligrams-per-liter. She noted that when we see nitrate, it's often from agricultural activity, whether that's fertilizer or biosolids application, or from septic systems or lawn fertilizer.

“Nitrate is something that we don't want to consume in the long term, and especially for some populations at all. There's a health standard for nitrate of 10 milligrams-per-liter,” Cavey detailed. “When we start to see well water testing results above two, getting closer to five, we know that there's some land use impact on a well, whether it be from septic, lawn, agriculture, or oftentimes a combination of things. When we get closer to 10, you may want to start to test annually and address potential treatment options.”

Across Crawford, Vernon and Richland counties, of the 352 wells tested, 95 showed no nitrate detected (27%), 119 showed nitrate at or below naturally occurring levels (34%), 67 showed nitrate levels above the naturally occurring level at 2.1-5% (19%), and 55 showed nitrate levels between 5.1 and 10% (16%).

A total of 13 wells tested positive for nitrate above the health standard of 10 milligrams-per-liter. Of those, nine wells were in the 10.1-20 range (3%), and four were in excess of 20 milligrams-per-liter (1%).

In Crawford County there were only two wells that showed results above the health standard in the northwest part of the county.

In Vernon County, there were a cluster of results above the health standard in Franklin Township and in rural Viroqua, and one sample above 20 milligrams-per-liter in the far northwest part of the county. In Richland County, results above the health standard were more common in far southern parts of the county, near the Wisconsin River, in sandier areas.

Cavey said that the DAWS results compare favorably with statewide averages, where typically 7-10% of wells tested show nitrate levels above the health standard.

“If we were to look at the health effects of nitrate, the most vulnerable population would be infants,” Cavey said. “Nitrate can actually affect how well blood and oxygen get distributed throughout an infant's body, and people who are pregnant are at higher risk for miscarriages and birth defects, if they're drinking water really high in nitrate. Livestock is at risk of this too. Everyone should reduce exposure, because it can increase risks of thyroid issues and certain cancers over time.”

Treatment for nitrate includes a few different options, according to Cavey. She listed reverse osmosis, what we call anion exchange, and then distillation, with reverse osmosis being by far the most common.

“What we do at the land surface is connected to the groundwater, even though we can't necessarily see it,” Cavey emphasized. “What we have here in the Driftless north of the Wisconsin River is a really interesting case where we have agriculture, but it's not uniformly distributed like we have in a lot of other parts of Wisconsin. That leads to a less intense impact from this activity than in areas where we have vast swaths of uninterrupted intensive agriculture. If we were to overlay some of the results from this round of testing, we see the excesses in those areas that are flatter and a little bit more intensive for agriculture.”

Cavey noted that while agriculture is less intensive here, we also have a fractured karst bedrock system that conducts water relatively quickly, overlain by a relatively shallow layer of soil.

“Here, we have a very thin layer of soil to bedrock, so it's just a shorter pathway and an easy pathway for things to move through into the groundwater,” Cavey said.

It is not recommended to drink or cook with water above the standard for nitrate, but that it is fine for bathing and laundry, according to Cavey. She explained that any water treatment systems can be confined to water used for drinking or cooking.

Other contaminants

Cavey detailed that contaminants generally fall into the categories of health threats, aesthetic problems, or both. Contaminants like E.coli, arsenic, pesticides (not analyzed in these tests), lead and nitrate can cause health problems either quickly (acute) or from exposure over time (chronic).

She said that DAWS tests reveal that arsenic is not a big problem in this area, with less than 1% of samples showing positive for arsenic at very low levels. She said arsenic is much more common in eastern Wisconsin.

Manganese is a contaminant that can have both health and aesthetic impacts, if present in well water. She said DAWS results showed less than 1% of samples above the health standard of 0.3 milligrams-per-liter. Aesthetically, manganese can cause black particles in drinking water, and can stain laundry or fixtures.

Lead and copper in well water are contaminants that come primarily from plumbing in the home, with fairly straightforward solutions. Because water in the DAWS counties tends to be very hard, it is much less corrosive, meaning less likely to dissolve lead and copper into drinking water.

“We have a lot of the dolomite geology present in this area, so almost 90% of the samples were considered hard water,” Cavey explained. “Hardness is from minerals in water, like calcium and magnesium, and this ties into the geology of the area. While not a concern for health, some find it a nuisance, and correct it with a water softener. Others find hard water tastes better, and even can provide some health benefits.”

Land Trust pushes ahead with restoration efforts

Plum Creek Conservation Area

AUDUBON’S KRYSTEN ZUMMO, left, is seen conversing with local grazier Mike Mullikin and MVC’s restoration ecologist Mike Reitz (right). Mullikin has been instrumental in helping to prepare the 172-acre portion of the Plum Creek Conservation Area devoted to grazing and prairie, contributing mowing, ditch repair, enthusiasm, and indspendable advice. GILLIAN POMPLUN

Crawford County Independent & Kickapoo Scout

Published: Jul 8, 2026, 1:48 PM

Mississippi Valley Conservancy (MVC) has been forging ahead with conservation projects at their 1,600-acre Plum Creek Conservation Area in rural Wauzeka since acquiring the property in spring of 2022. A group of about 25 citizens assembled at a ridgetop field on the western side of the property for a ‘Grazing for Birds’ field day last Saturday.

There to educate the group were Michael Reitz, MVC Restoration Ecologist, and Krysten Zummo, Audubon Grassland Ecologist, who works with their Conservation Ranching program.

Efforts on the property have included planting 11,200 trees on a ridgetop field in spring of 2024, and now ongoing work on converting 172 acres of ridgetop fields to perennial prairie, and cold and warm season grazing mixes.

A portion of the acres is intended for grazing by beef cattle. Neighboring farmer Mike Mullikin is partnering with them on the grazing project.

In addition, this summer they are also undertaking an ambitious streambank restoration project intended to improve habitat. The idea is to connect Plum Creek to its floodplain, and reduce flooding impacts downstream.

The two ridgetop projects are each designed to provide habitat for different populations of migrating birds.

“One of the goals of the property is get the agricultural fields into some sort of perennial cover - forest, prairie, or some sort of agricultural practice that has perennial cover. That's important for us,” Reitz explained. “We’ve hit all our milestones, and got all tillable acres into some sort of perennial cover. An 18-acre area on the east side of the property planted into trees is designed to provide habitat to support interior forest birds. The 172 acres we’re viewing today is a demonstration of where agriculture and conservation meet - prairie plantings for pollinators - the second biggest in the state by less than an acre, and acres planted into grazing mixes for beef production.”

Zummo explained to the group the benefits of rotational grazing for grassland birds, and Reitz shared information about the two different treatments, plans for the acres planted into prairie, and the scientific research that this would allow.

“We’re working with ways to do it that make more sense for both grazing and grassland bird species, and it's kind of interesting research in that regard,” Reitz told the group. “When we got it, it was all corn, and obviously, corn is not the best thing.”

“You can just say corn sucks, and I grow corn,” Bad Axe Watershed Steward’s Kent McClurg observed. Just lay it out there – but, beans are worse, absolutely.”

“We’re working to see where we can push the field forward in some ways, and be more experimental,” Reitz explained. “We have the 40-acre pasture that we've devoted to agriculture, and we have the rest of the acreage enrolled in CRP prairie plantings.”

Reitz said an early bird survey of the property revealed that the birds really like to be by Plum Creek and the Kickapoo River, so the western upland areas seemed to them to be a good spot to focus their agricultural efforts.

“So, we devoted the 40-acres that we're standing on to pasture, working with grazier Mike Mullikin,” Reitz told the group. “On 32 of the 40 acres we planted a cool season mix. The cows are going to come from his property to the south, rotate across the road, and then make a big loop around. On the other eight acres, we're experimenting with using warm season grasses, a very similar mix to our prairie on the CRP acres. So, seeing where we can mix in native habitat for pollinators and birds with grazing.”

Grazing systems

Flags throughout the field indicated the path for the water pipeline that would be installed, allowing ease for the producer in moving the cattle from paddock to paddock. In the hilly terrain common in the Driftless, the system would be configured for gravity feeding.

“Water is a big thing when moving them constantly, and Mike Mullikin is going to rotate his herd of 25 beef stockers every three days minimum,” Reitz told the group. “The paddocks will be super flexible, and the plan is for the cattle to go in when the forage gets about 16 inches high, and then they mow it down to four inches, and then they move to the next one.”

Zummo explained that as an alternative to the relatively rigid, proscriptive system required by NRCS for grazing systems, Audubon focuses on a process they call ‘adaptive grazing.’

“Other programs give you a set number of acres, with a set number of animals, for a set number of days, and you have to stick to that regimen, Zummo explained. “When adaptive grazing is being used, it's more looking at where have the cattle gotten the grass down to, and deciding to move them based off of the height of the vegetation instead of a set regimen of days. It sounds like it takes a lot of time, but the great thing about it is, you go out there and once you have the main fencing and the water set up, you can move your animals in like five minutes.”

Zummo pointed out that with adaptive grazing, cattle actually gain weight faster because they are being moved in a timely fashion that means they always have access to fresh food. Planting a mix of cool and warm season grasses in your pastures greatly facilitates this process.

Establishment

Reitz explained that they were two years in to the three-year ‘establishment period,’ and after that, grazing would begin. He explained that on the CRP lands, with a native prairie planting, they are prevented from grazing it if they want to use the income to offset the property taxes MVC has voluntarily agreed to pay on the property. For this reason, 578 acres of the western portions of the property is also privately leased for hunting in the fall in order to help pay the property taxes. On eastern portions of the property, almost 1,000 acres are open to hunting and fishing.

“On the CRP property, we will manage it with fire according to our contract,” Reitz explained. “This will provide contrast, with respect to bird habitat, with the portion of the acres managed through rotational grazing, and provide useful insights to those wishing to manage their lands for both birds and grazing.”

Audubon program

Krysten Zummo is a Grassland Ecologist who works for Audubon, and a self-confessed ‘bird nerd.’ She previously worked for MVC in conservation easement development, and was instrumental in the acquisition of the Plum Creek Conservation Area Property.

She administers Audubon’s ‘conservation ranching’ program regionally in the Driftless Regions, and parts of the Great Lakes and Upper Mississippi Region.

“Grassland birds have been the steepest declining group of birds in North America,” Zummo told the group. “Audubon asked itself, ‘what can we do about this’,” because 90% of land in Midwest and Eastern states is privately held, and pretty much all of the grasslands that we have left in North America are either privately held or leased federally for grazing operations. So, Audubon concluded that if we were going to do anything in terms of improving grassland bird habitat, working with those landowners who are doing grazing was really going to be the key way to do that.”

Zummo pointed out that this landscape used to have bison on it that would pass through an area, eat the vegetation down, and then move on. They would not return to that area for a long time, giving that vegetation ample time to regrow.

“We don't have bison here anymore, but we do have cattle, Zummo observed. “Rotational grazing can create that same kind of impact on the ground as what bison would have created.”

Zummo said that grassland birds are less sensitive to the species mix planted in prairie and grazing lands, and much more sensitive to the structure of the lands. She said they don’t like vertical structural elements like trees, which she explained can harbor hunting predators that can predate on them or their nests.

“What we're finding more and more is that grassland birds don't necessarily love or hate a specific species. It's more about the structure,” Zummo said. “We really love grazing for grassland birds, because you can utilize it to create really low areas, which will support birds like upland sandpipers and vesper sparrows and horned larks, and then can also graze on the medium height, which is good for savanna sparrows, some meadowlarks, and other things like that. And then you can have stuff that you set aside for a year or two, and that will bring in henslow sparrows, and birds like that.”

Zuumo shared that the Conservation Ranching Program is actually a production system certification that can be displayed on product packaging. She said they are beginning to develop the dataset, working with producers, wholesalers and retailers, to demonstrate the kind of price premium that might be available from this bird-friendly production model.

“We work with the producers to develop a habitat management plan that's based off of a set of protocols that are run from the national level to the regional level, with a regional set of protocols for the Driftless Region,” Zummo explained. “That habitat management plan is basically the individualized farm-level set of protocols, where I work with a landowner to identify their goals. In the process, we identify ways to improve their grazing as well as to improve bird habitat, and then bring grant funding to bear to support the producer in upgrading their system.”

Zummo said that once the plan is implemented, they go through a third-party audit that checks off that they are meeting all the protocols, which allows them to put the ‘Audubon Certified – Grazed on Bird Friendly Land’ bug on their product labels.

“What we were trying to do is turn consumers into conservationists,” Zummo explained. “When you start seeing this label on packaged products for beef and bison, you know exactly how that that animal was raised, and that it was raised not just to support the grasslands, but the birds and the wildlife that rely on them.”

MVC easements

Karen Solverson, MVC Director of Communications and Outreach, asked Reitz and Zummo to explain what a conservation easement is, and is not.

Reitz explained that the Plum Creek Conservation Area property was purchased from a farmer who had put several farms together, ultimately owning about 11,000 acres. That landowner sold 1,600 acres to Wisconsin DNR on the east side of the Kickapoo River, but wanted to find a way to transfer other parts of the property to a group that would pursue conservation treatments on the acres.

“There was a long period of time involved in getting the funding to purchase such a large acreage, and the landowners were very patient, wanting to make sure that it got to the right place,” Zummo explained. “It was a 10-year or more process between when the conversation started, and when the funding was actually ready and in place to do the transfer.”

Ultimately, one large anonymous donor, with some funding from the Nature Conservancy, produced the funding needed to put the deal in place.

“If you're worried about development or keeping farmland as farmland, or in conservation practices, you can work with us to put an easement on your land, which restricts use in perpetuity, depending on your values,” Reitz explained.

“With conservation easements, there's a whole bunch of landowner rights that come with owning a piece of property,” Zummo clarified. “Allowing the public access is one of those – it’s not required - it's totally up to you.”

Three-county group concludes fifth round of well water testing

Comments