Oneida County Clean Waters Action

Woolly Alder Aphids

JoAnne Lund's Oneida County Clean Water Minute

Summer “Snowballs”: Woolly Alder Aphids

Walking along the Bearskin State Trail in late summer and early fall, I often see alder branches covered in tufts of thick white fluff. It isn’t snow of course, but colonies of Woolly Aphids, a tiny insect with a complicated life cycle. The fluff is actually waxy filaments secreted by each aphid, together making a continuous covering as protection from predators and parasites. To feed, aphids tap into a plant’s sugary sap, which may pass through their bodies to be excreted in sticky droplets. This excreted “honeydew” is a food source for many beneficial insects, including ants, bees, wasps, flies, and lacewings. How are they beneficial? They feed on many other types of insects in a continuous cycle of connection, cause, and effect.

Some of the aphids leave the colony and find their way to maple leaves, where they lay eggs. In general, there is no damage caused to either plant by the aphids. At this stage you may see tiny flying cotton balls making their way between host plants. If your autumn walk takes you to a streambank lined with alders, keep your eyes open for these wondrous waxy snowballs!

JoAnne Lund is an ecologist and naturalist living in Oneida County. She thrives on kayaking, back-country skiing and nature photography.

New Wave Boat Study, Same Conclusion

Latest Wave Boat study from Connecticut reinforces setting higher end numbers on restrictions.

By Dan Butkus December 24, 2024- Many of us have been following the issue of the impacts of wake boats on our local lakes in Wisconsin. The impacts include powerful waves that can erode shoreline, stir up sediment, safety, and aquatic invasive species transfer. Several states have gone before Wisconsin in attempting to regulate the boats on inland lakes. There is outcry from lake users and pushback from wake boat owners and the boating industry. It’s a tug-of-war over whose data is “real”. But now there is one more study that supports the position that these boats have a large negative impact on lakes. The Lake Waramaug Inter-Local Commission published its report on November 15, 2024. The study was done by Terra Vigilis Environmental Services Group. It included surveys of area residents, a literature review, as well as their own testing and observations. Lake Waramaug is a 656-acre lake in the towns of Kent, Warren, and Washington in Litchfield County Connecticut.

There’s a lot to go through in the report. If you’d like to read the entire report, it can be found through this link: lake_waramaug_final_report.pdf . Several different wake boats and ski boats were used in their study on Lake Waramaug.

There are several key take-away’s from the report. First, they found that wake boats in wake mode (bow-up configuration at slow speeds), create waves at least twice as high as a water ski boat. These waves also have 4 times the wave energy as a ski boat. In order for a wake boat wave to dissipate to the same energy as a ski boat 100 ft from shore, the distance of the wake boat needs to be over 500 ft from shore. This confirms several studies including the University of Minnesota and Water Environment Consultants (WEC) performed on Lakes Rabun & Burton, Georgia, January 2021.

Secondly, the effects of the downward wash from the boat’s motor reaches down to at least 26 ft deep, roiling the water and re-suspending lakebed sediments. Additionally, the wakes created increase suspension of lake sediments near shore. Not only does settling out of re-suspended sediments cover aquatic plants robbing of them of sunlight, Terra Vigilis also noted increased levels of suspended phosphorous in Lake Waramaug, especially around the shoreline.

The following action items for Lake Waramaug Inter-Local Commission were developed by Terra Vigilis:

· “Develop and establish management procedures for large displacement wave action impacts on Lake Waramaug, CT”
· “Develop and establish management procedures to assure a 500-foot minimum distance from the near shore, other vessels and shore structures relative to Wake Board boats in surf mode on Lake Waramaug, CT”
· “Develop and establish management procedures to assure minimum depth areas to be designated and protected from sediment redistribution events from Wake Board boats in surf mode on Lake Waramaug, CT”
· “Develop and establish educational programs to address measured limits of public knowledge regarding safe boating practices for all vessel types and lake usage on Lake Waramaug, CT”
· “Develop and establish educational programs to address public awareness of large wave impacts to the surface and subsurface of Lake Waramaug, CT”
· “Additional study of sediment re-distribution and nutrient release”

Back here in Wisconsin, over 50 environmental and lake organizations as well as businesses that serve water sports have formed a coalition to promote reasonable regulation of wake boats in our state. The new study from Connecticut goes a long way in supporting what the coalition has proposed:

· Operate at least 700 ft from shore
· Operate at depths greater than 30 ft
· Minimize transport of aquatic invasive species (ballast tanks do not completely empty when moving from one lake to another)
· Retain local control for more restrictive regulations by towns/municipalities.

It is hoped that meaningful dialog can take place to provide a state-wide standard for operating wake boats so that their impact on the environment may be managed, and other users of our lakes can coexist with wake boats.

Clean Water Updates

Current issues updated as necessary to keep our Clean Water supporters informed.

Posted 12/23/24- 70,000-gallon oil spill calls attention to Wisconsin's trust in industry reporting.

Though Oneida County does not have any oil pipelines, we'd like to call your attention to the latest oil spill in Jefferson County. As reported by the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel Drone images reveal damage from Enbridge's Line 6 oil spill 70,000 gallons of crude oil leaked from an Enbridge pipeline.

What is concerning is how much carte blanch corporations are given by the state to manage their own environmental impacts and how little the public winds up being informed. An excerpt from the Journals article states as much.

" In Wisconsin, neither the responsible party nor the DNR are required to inform the public of an oil spill, Nobile said, unless there is imminent risk to the public.

Rob Lee, a staff attorney at Midwest Environmental Advocates, said that while the DNR isn't required to notify the public, but it "makes common sense" to do so."

This trust placed in industry self-monitoring is food for thought for those who may be concerned about potential new development in our county. In the case of mining in our county, the county board responded to the 2018 Lynne Mine referendum by adopting a more industry friendly Mining Ordinance. Some will tell you that ACT 134 forced those changes, but actually that's not the case.

In January of 2022 Oneida County decided not to adopt a preemptive ordinance on CAFO oversight. CAFO's are Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations. CAFO's manage large numbers of animals, confined indoors, and spread large quantities of collected manure over neighboring properties. The waste from these operations can contain harmful bacteria, chemicals, antibiotics, and other veterinary drugs. These contaminants can pose a significant threat to human health and the environment. Though we have no CAFO's at this time, trusting potential CAFO's to self-monitor may not be the best plan. You can read OCCWA's 2022 coverage on the rejected CAFO ordinance in our Past Issues Tab.

Ask yourself, how did parts of our county become polluted with PFAS. One would think by considering our history and this recent oil spill story that our county might want to revisit some of the trust placed in the current system.

Posted 12/23/24- Locally, WXPR's Katie Thoresen and John Burton receive Edward R Murrow award for Pelican River Forest coverage.

OCCWA would like to congratulate Katie and John for their receiving the prestigious Edward R Morrow Award WXPR News wins 2024 Regional Murrow Award | WXPR for covering the Pelican River Forest story Pelican River Forest in limbo after lawmaker anonymously objects to funding | WXPR . We can't emphasize how valuable WXPR's coverage is to our county's residents and groups such as ours. We look forward to continuing to share their work for many years to come. Please consider supporting them in this season of giving. | WXPR Public Radio

Posted 12/17/24- P&D to wrap up Comprehensive plan language for final public review.

As reported on numerous occasions, the County's P&D Committee has been working on writing a new Comprehensive Plan for close to two years. Many concerning changes have been made, which OCCWA has drawn attention to. According to the committee they are in the process of wrapping up their efforts. In the latest P&D meeting the committee alluded to the fact that they intend to finalize the adopted changes and bring them to public hearing shortly.

The public hearing will offer one final chance for public comment on the proposed language. Yes, you will get 3 minutes to voice concerns/comments on this vast document. Unless of course, your name is Great Lakes Timber Professionals who received 4 hours of consideration. Comments made at public hearing may or may not adopted by the committee. We understand that wading through all of the plan is more than one person may be willing do. That being said once we at OCCWA get the final product we will try to convey our most pressing concerns to our followers. It would be at this point we would recommend the public giving input. There is an option to send email comments to the committee if you cannot attend in person.

Once the public hearing is done and all final consideration for changes are incorporated, the new Comprehensive Plan will be brought to the County Board for approval. Please stay tuned and we will do our level best to keep residents posted here in our Clean Water Updates.

To track current P&D changes you can view the November 11th P&D changes at Oneida-GOPs-Summary-of-Changes-11.11.2024-1.pdf (note: Changes highlighted are only those made at the most recent meeting) Any future language changes will also be documented on this link. Feel free to share any concerns or suggestions with us through our Contact Us page Oneida County Clean Waters Action .

** Update ** posted 12/12/24- Oneida County Board of Health Committee and Stella Town Board supply letters of support for PFAS study grant.

On December 10th, both the County Board of Health and Stella Town Board meetings considered the letter of support request for a grant to study PFAS levels in Stella residents' blood. (See study's Aim Statement in original post) Both the County and Stella's Town Board agreed to sign letters of support for the potential study.

With the local letters of support as well as letters of support from the DNR and Department of Human Health Services in hand, epidemiologist Dr. Schultz will apply for an NIH grant to fund the project.

For those who were not able to attend either of the meetings, Dr. Schultz has provided a link to a PDF of her Power Point presentation from the Tuesday meetings below. https://uwmadison.box.com/shared/static/3jhvxsiev01zm8jp5niaolxhy73iedb2.pdf

OCCWA will share updates on the progress of the grant process going forward.

Posted 12/5/2024- Epidemiologist solicits letters of support for a grant proposal to measure PFAS in Stella residents.

Dr. Amy Schultz an environmental epidemiologist & researcher at UW-Madison is seeking local letters of support for her submission of an NIH grant proposal to measure PFAS in Stella residents (serum samples). Dr. Schultz has been added to the meeting agendas of the Oneida County's Board of Health Committee and the Stella Town Board. Both meetings will be held on Monday December 10th, 9am for the Board of Health meeting and 5:15 pm for the Stella meeting.

Below is an excerpt from Dr. Schultz' Aim Statement.

"In late 2022, the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources discovered some of the highest drinking water levels of PFAS in the country. In Stella, a town in the northern woods of Wisconsin, PFAS levels as high as 36,000ppt were measured in private wells, with overwhelmingly high PFOA - greatly exceeding the EPA’s health advisory of 4ppt in drinking water for PFOA. Sludge from the local paper mill, a suspected source, showed low levels of PFAS. The source of the exposure has yet to be determined, and no human sampling has occurred. There is an urgent need to measure human exposure in the community and determine what ongoing exposures are still occurring from water and non-water sources. While many community members have switched to drinking bottled or filtered water since learning of the contamination, the long half-life of PFAS in humans allows for a limited but important window to measure historic exposure to PFAS. We hypothesize human exposure in the community is orders of magnitude higher than statewide levels for PFOA, and community members continue to be exposed to PFOA and other PFAS through water and non-water sources from historic and recent spreading of industrial sludge and the biotransformation of PFAS precursors.

We propose the following aims:

Aim 1: Implement a community-based participatory research approach. A community advisory board (CAB) will be formed of community members and meet bi-monthly to inform the research process, and advise on recruitment, return of results, and policy implications of findings. The community will be updated quarterly at town hall meetings and via mailed and online newsletters.

Aim 2: Quantify and characterize PFAS exposure. We will measure serum PFAS levels in a sample of Stella residents (n=160), compare existing statewide levels (n=605), and characterize by household proximity to historic sludge spreading, waterways, drinking water levels, dietary behaviors, etc.

Aim 3: Evaluate sources and routes of ongoing PFAS exposure. Among the highest quartile of PFAS exposure (n=40), we will (a) quantify PFAS in household drinking water, dust, and outdoor soil, (b) examine associations between environmental PFAS and human serum PFAS levels, and (c) what PFAS precursors (i.e. PAPs) in the environment are a source of human PFAS exposure.

Impact: This study will inform residents of their PFAS exposure, ongoing sources, and how to reduce exposure. It will also inform local and state officials of ongoing sources of human exposure in the environment, and whether future monitoring or regulations should consider unique PFAS precursors."

Posted 12/12/24- Northwoods Land Trust (NWLT) and Trees for Tomorrow to hold free event on winter lake ecology January 23rd.

Put your Stormy Kromer on and spend some time out in our winter wonderland, learning about lakes. Consider joining our friends at NWLT for this free event. See press release below.

For Immediate Release

Contact Person: Troy Walters, Northwoods Land Trust – Outreach Coordinator (715) 479-2490

Winter Lake Ecology Program

Join Northwoods Land Trust (NWLT) and Trees For Tomorrow in exploring winter lake ecology. This free event will be held on Thursday, January 23 from 1:00 - 3:30 pm at Trees For Tomorrow. After an indoor introduction, we will venture out on frozen Silver Lake to collect physical data on the lake including ice thickness, water depth, lake temperature, dissolved oxygen, and clarity. There will be opportunities to use underwater cameras to study plant and animal life. Afterward, we'll discuss how these parameters change seasonally and what that means for the organisms that use the lake.

Dress appropriately to be outside for around one hour. To register for the event, please go online at www.northwoodslandtrust.org and click on News & Events, contact the NWLT office at 715-479-2490 or email troy@northwoodslandtrust.org by Monday, January 20. Space is limited.

The Northwoods Land Trust (NWLT) permanently conserves natural shorelands, woodlands and other natural resources to benefit present and future generations in Vilas, Oneida, Forest, Florence, Iron, Price and Langlade Counties. Visit www.northwoodslandtrust.org to learn more about NWLT's conservation services, protected lands, and future events.

Posted 12/5/24- OCCWA signs on to letter calling for legislature to protect public health with actions on safe drinking water.

With all our county's problems related to PFAS contamination, OCCWA is proud to join multiple groups across the state in signing a letter calling for action by our legislators. It is clear that our water issues reach far beyond our county borders. Here's hoping that this coordinated statewide plea is answered. Below is the Wisconsin Conservation Voters press release associated with this action.

**Press Release**

More than 30 groups call on State Legislature to take action on safe drinking water for Safe Drinking Water Act 50th anniversary

Dec 05, 2024

WISCONSIN – More than 30 groups signed onto a letter calling on the State Legislature to protect public health by taking action on safe drinking water. Fifty years ago on Dec. 16, Republican Pres. Gerald Ford signed the Safe Drinking Water Act into law. Fast forward to today, and it is clear: Wisconsin has not used the Safe Drinking Water Act to fully protect our communities.

Too many Wisconsinites are still suffering from contaminated drinking water. PFAS are linked to increased cholesterol levels, thyroid disease, certain cancers, and pregnancy complications. Elevated blood lead levels in children are associated with hearing loss, lower IQs, developmental delays, behavioral challenges, and emotional impacts like anxiety and depression. Contaminants from manure and fertilizers, such as nitrate, are linked to cancer, birth defects, and even infant death.

Across the state, communities are facing costly medical bills associated with exposure to these contaminants. Proactively tackling these issues with statewide investments would better protect public health. It could also save the state up to $2.04 billion annually by helping families avoid the healthcare expenses associated with these contaminants.

Our legislators must take substantive actions to protect Wisconsin communities by:

Supporting $953 million for our public water infrastructure;
Supporting policy changes that protect private well owners; and
Supporting preventative action.

“My son will live with the consequences of lead poisoning for the rest of his life,” said Shyquetta McElroy, Executive Director for the COLE Lead Safe and Healthy Homes Project. “Our state legislators can and must do more to prevent others from going through the same thing. It’s time to meaningfully invest in our water infrastructure and pass preventative policies that protect our families.”

“For more than seven years, my neighbors and I have been fighting for safe drinking water,” said Cindy Boyle, Secretary for SOH20 and a Peshtigo resident dealing with the everyday impacts of PFAS contamination. “Since the Safe Drinking Water Act provides no protections for our groundwater, we are counting on the Wisconsin legislature to deliver.”

“PFAS, lead, and nitrate continue to contaminate the drinking water of tens of thousands of people across our state,” said Peter Burress, Government Affairs Manager for Wisconsin Conservation Voters. “We are proud to be working in coalition with environmental partners from across the state to ensure that our elected officials prioritize safe drinking water in the upcoming legislative session.”

See the full sign-on letter here.

For more information

Peter Burress, Government Affairs Manager, Wisconsin Conservation Voters, 920-421-3601 (mobile/text), or peter@conservationvoters.org

Ryan Billingham, Communications Director, Wisconsin Conservation Voters, 608-208-1129 (office), 608-213-6972 (mobile/text), or ryan@conservationvoters.org

Posted 11/24/2024- Secret is out of the bag on source of questionable Comp Plan language that P&D Committee adopted.

Much of the P&D Committee language changes made in their November 11th meeting came from Great Lakes Timber Professionals Association (GLTPA). The adopted language mirroring Texas based American Stewards of Liberty (ASL) extraction and development on public lands concepts. GLTPA director Henry Schienebeck admitted as much when he stated that his 31 pages of Comp Plan recommendations came from a committee formed by his group and included participation by both U.S. Congressman Tom Tiffany and ASL's Executive Director Margaret Byfield. Finally, someone honest enough to admit to the ASL connection. Isn't that refreshing.

As you may recall from an earlier shared Wisconsin Examiner article Leader of anti-conservation group speaks at timber conference sponsored by UW-Madison center • Wisconsin Examiner

Ms. Byfield was quoted as saying

“Those who truly believe in the agenda, the environmental agenda, typically are atheists,”.

Also, from an excerpt from the article, Byfield revealed more

" In a part of her speech in which she attempted to explain the beliefs of environmentalists, Byfield claimed that half of them are only interested in money and power while the other half are “typically atheists” who worship “Mother Earth” and believe humans don’t have a right to live on the planet."

To be clear. the "A" in OCCWA stands for Action not Atheists, we accept no money donations and describe ourselves as clean water advocates not environmentalists. So, going forward we will continue to monitor the actions of the P&D Committee on this issue and pray for better judgement by them going forward.

See our November 24th Home page article on the unprecedented influence Great Lakes Timber Professionals was granted in our Comprehensive Plan.

For Wisconsin Examiner coverage see Timber industry group, right-wing nonprofit influence Oneida County comprehensive plan • Wisconsin Examiner

Future of Forests Considered

Given Wisconsin's Greenfire's latest report, what does the future hold for Oneida County's Forests?

By Tom Wiensch December 19, 2024, (Photo credit Len Hyke)- The history of forests and forestry in Wisconsin is long and storied. The tales from the big cutover of the late 19th and early 20th centuries, which include mythical creatures and massive tragedies like the Peshtigo Fire, have left an indelible mark on Wisconsin Culture.

More recently, our forests have provided ecosystems and products that sustain traditional indigenous culture, habitat for animals, jobs, raw materials, and recreation. Importantly, our forests also protect our lakes and rivers, sequester carbon, and provide clean air.

Currently, about 46% of Wisconsin is forested. Of Wisconsin’s 72 counties, Oneida County is in the top tier at number 11 with 77% of the County being forested. Oneida County has a substantial county forest of 83,000 acres along with state and national forest lands. The County also contains much of the nearly 70,000-acre Pelican River Forest and other industrial forest land. Historically this has made Oneida County an important part of the forest products and recreation industries in Wisconsin.

As the world changes, though, the forests of Wisconsin and the industries they support are also changing. Recently, Wisconsin’s Green Fire (WGF) issued a report on the risks that Wisconsin’s forests are facing. The report is: Wisconsin’s Green Fire. (2024). Wisconsin forests at risk: engaging Wisconsinites in another century of forest conservation [White paper]. The report is available at: Opportunities Now 2024: Wisconsin Forests at Risk • Wisconsin’s Green Fire

WGF is a professionally staffed organization that was founded in 2017. Its mission is to “advance science-informed analysis and policy solutions that address Wisconsin’s greatest conservation challenges.” As part of that mission, WGF publishes issue papers in its “Opportunities Now” series that summarize science and background information concerning key conservation and environmental issues and makes policy recommendations that support conservation.

The “Forests at Risk” paper describes how ecological, economic, and social changes are affecting Wisconsin forests and are likely to change the ownership and management of the forests in ways that decrease the benefits that forests provide. The paper also makes recommendations and offers hope for the future.

Among the risks to forests and forestry cited by WGF are:

· The loss of tree species and other species. Example – The loss of ash species due to emerald ash borer.
· Over-browsing by deer changing the composition of forests. Examples – Restricted regeneration of white cedar.
· A decline in biodiversity and the condition of forest, caused in part by invasive species. Example – The domination of the understory in some forests by non-native buckthorn.
· Climate change. Examples – The change in forest species and shorter winter logging seasons.
· Changing forest age. Examples – Fewer young forests and very few old growth forests.
· Declining markets for forest products. Example – The decline of pulpwood markets caused in part by the decline in demand for writing paper.
· Landowner goals changing from forestry to development and other non-forestry uses. Example – The decline in forest product prices and increase reforestation costs leading landowners to divide and develop forest land.
· The development of carbon markets. Example – These markets represent a new use for forests, but the markets may not be as accessible to smaller landowners.
· Fragmentation and a decrease in size of private forests. Example – Land is cleared for development, decreasing continuity of forests, and making forests less suitable for certain species.

The “Forests at Risk” paper also offers ideas for actions things that can be done to address the risks our forests are facing. Examples include:

· Working to stop forest fragmentation.
· Preparing for invasive species by researching, monitoring, and keeping forests diverse.
· More strongly integrating the fields of forest management and wildlife management.
· Increasing the recruitment and training of loggers, and assuring their access to financing, insurance, and training certifications.
· Retaining and expanding programs which provide incentives to landowners to keep their lands forested.
· Using regional planning to optimize opportunities to achieve conservation of forests and ensure a supply of forest products.
These are only a few of the steps recommended by WGF. Additionally, other agencies, organizations and individuals have been working to address these issues. Examples:
· The creation of a seedbank which will include black ash seeds by the Great Lakes Indian Fish and Wildlife Commission (GLIFWC) and the Lac Vieux Desert Nursery, as described in an article in the Winter 2024 – 2025 issue of “Mazina’igan: A Chronicle of the Lake Superior Chippewa” published by GLIFWC.
· The work being done by the River Alliance of Wisconsin to launch a Manoomin (wild rice) Stewards Project. Although perhaps not conventionally considered a forest plant, Manoomin is a native plant, culturally significant to Wisconsin’s Native American people, which occupies many lakes within Wisconsin forests.
· The purchase by the State of Wisconsin of a conservation easement on the nearly 70,000-acre Pelican River Forest.
· The efforts of Individuals like Joe and Mary Hovel and groups like the Northwoods Alliance in purchasing land to prevent forest fragmentation.

Finally, WGF calls for a statewide conversation involving all stakeholders, including local, county, state, federal and tribal leaders, conservation and industry organizations, and communities.

WGF is right; the conversation needs to involve all stakeholders. Also, it’s important that all stakeholders act responsibly to conserve the forests of Wisconsin.

In Oneida County, the County Planning and Development Committee is currently working on rewriting the County’s Comprehensive Plan. A re-write is done every ten years and addresses such things as land use. Comprehensive plans are very important, as they establish land use goals, and because state law requires that county ordinances comply with comprehensive plans.

In working on the re-write, the Committee has been accepting written and verbal public comments. Some have commented in favor of the protection of forests in Oneida County for logging, recreation, and the clean air and water that they provide. Others have asked that the plan limit the ability of landowners to conserve forests, restrict such forest recreation projects as bike trail development, and have called for mining in the forests.

It is critical that the leadership of Oneida County bear in mind the fact that logging and recreation are two keystones of our economy. The Comprehensive Plan must recognize these economic facts as well as the cultural and societal importance of forests in Oneida County. The plan should not attempt to restrict the rights of landowners to protect their forests and should recognize that the majority of Oneida County citizens do not wish to have forest land converted into mines. The history and future of Oneida County as a good place to live, work, and play is closely tied to its forests.

Will P&D See Forest for the Trees?

Pelican resident shares concern for P&D Committee's deviation from original values in Comp Plan.

By Ron Eckstein November 17, 2024-

To Members:

Oneida County Planning & Development Committee

Oneida County Conservation & UW-Extension Committee

Thank you for your service to Oneida County and for your important work updating the Oneida County Comprehensive Land Use Plan over the last year and a half.

The 2013 plan served the county well and in the past 12 years many new people and businesses moved into our area. What makes Oneida County an attractive place to live and work is our way of life and our values. Those values include a commitment to our natural resources, clean water, abundant wildlife, recreation opportunities, and productive forests. We recommend Oneida County continue the 2013 policies that attracted those new people and businesses.

To be successful, the updated Comprehensive Plan must remain true to our values. Unfortunately, a comparison of the 2013 plan to the draft 2024 plan shows a dramatic move away from keeping our forests healthy, our wildlife abundant and our outdoor recreation diverse.

Of particular concern are recommendations from the Great Lakes Timber Professionals. We cannot understand why the timber professionals support fragmenting our forestland into small parcels. All research on forest management shows that forest management is not economically feasible on most small parcels in light of today’s large expensive logging equipment. In addition, landowners of small forest parcels are far less likely to conduct timber sales. Parcelization of larger blocks of forest result in fewer timber sales and the subsequent loss of forest productivity and wildlife habitat.

Another important concern is the recommendation to take away the property rights of private forest landowners. Some private landowners want to manage their land to promote sustainable forestry, wildlife habitat and maintain water quality. These landowners may choose to use private conservation easements or sell to a public agency.

The proposed changes are not in the public interest, do not represent our values and they degrade forest productivity, wildlife habitat, clean water, and our way of life. In addition, the recommendations appear to have been written by the American Stewards of Liberty, a Texas group.

Attached are research studies conducted by Wisconsin DNR’s Division of Forestry. Please read them to help understand the relationship between public land, private MFL land and the ability of towns and counties to provide vital services.

FR-833-Evaluating-the-Association-Between-Public-Access-Land-and-Local-Tax-Rates

FR-835-Timber-Sale-Impact-Estimate-for-the-Proposed-Pelican-River-Forest-Easement

FR-834-Economic-Impacts-of-Timberland-Conservation-Easement-Acquisition

Sincerely,

Ron & Jan Eckstein

Epidemiologist Seeks Grant to Test for Pfas

Free testing of Stella residents' blood for PFAS just one part of proposed study.

By Kathleen Cooper November 17, 2024-

In spite of the continued lack of interest in the health of Wisconsinites that have been impacted by PFAS by our state legislators (who have been withholding funds budgeted for PFAS mitigation for the past year and a half), OCCWA has good news that has nothing to do with our state government. Amy Schultz, a scientist at UW Department of Population Health Sciences and Epidemiology Senior Data Scientist, contacted OCCWA for introductions to the Oneida County Health Department and the people in Stella.

Dr. Schultz is in the process of writing a grant submission to the National Institutes of Health (NIH) for a community-based research project to quantify human PFAS exposure and community-level risk for the residents of Stella. As previously stated on the OCCWA website, the Town of Stella was found to have the highest PFAS levels in their groundwater, and consequently in their private wells, of anywhere in Wisconsin. This study will consist of a community-based participatory research approach which will recruit interested Stella residents, who consent to have blood samples taken to detect PFAS levels in their bodies. Dr. Schultz has proposed setting up a 12-day phlebotomy clinic at a community site in Stella where residents will have blood drawn to test for PFAS levels, a test that would normally cost $400-$600. Residents who agree to have their blood tested (for free) will be paid $40. Individual results will be shared with the volunteer participants via mail, and aggregate results will be shared at the Stella Town Hall, in keeping with the privacy of the participants. After the blood tests are completed, 40 participants who had the highest PFAS blood levels will be offered an at-home visit where PFAS levels will be tested in their home environment. These at-home participants will be paid an additional $20.

The purpose of this study is to learn of human exposure to PFAS and PAP’s (which are newer chemicals intended to eventually replace PFAS), to learn of community level risks in Stella compared to the general population, to learn of PFAS in garden and outdoor soil and household dust, and to learn of additional ways to limit exposure.

Participation is optional, but the study is seeking 160 people to participate. These participants will receive updates regularly or as requested, of the findings and final report. Interested participants will be offered the opportunity to serve on the Stella Study’s Advisory Board, guaranteeing local involvement.

This study has limited scope and outreach, but once completed can open the way for additional studies, both locally and statewide, so that we can finally understand the scope of the problem of PFAS contamination, the health consequences of high blood PFAS levels, and possibly may persuade our state legislators to finally release the state funding that they have budgeted for PFAS testing/remediation. Perhaps they will even allocate more money in the next budget session! I know, I am a serial optimist, but I can dream, right?

Many thanks to Dr. Amy Schultz for her interest in and compassion for the rural residents of our state. Also thank you to our Oneida County Board of Health Committee for being proactive on this matter. Last but certainly not least, we at OCCWA would like to acknowledge committee member and Stella resident William (Casey) Crump for his valuable input and commitment to his community on this issue.

Link to Power Point presentation of study overview- https://uwmadison.box.com/shared/static/3jhvxsiev01zm8jp5niaolxhy73iedb2.pdf

Related OCCWA Q&A with Wisconsin DHS following May 1st Stella PFAS meeting

After the May 1st meeting presented by the Wisconsin DNR and Wisconsin DHS addressing the Stella PFAS contamination, OCCWA asked a few questions we felt were not addressed. The questions asked are directly related to the current proposed study. Those questions and answers are posted below.

Question- Does the DHS recommend residents of Stella to have their blood tested for PFAS?
- DHS Answer- DHS does not currently broadly recommend blood testing for PFAS. Blood PFAS levels do not give actionable data yet—for now, we can only compare levels to national averages, we cannot estimate risks for any specific health effects. If individuals are concerned, they can talk with their healthcare providers about whether blood testing would be appropriate—ATSDR has factsheets that address this for both residents and clinicians.
Question- Is there any financial assistance from the DHS or the State of Wisconsin for blood testing?
- DHS Answer- DHS does not have funding available to support blood testing at this time.
Question- Does the DHS recommend cancer screenings and what level of PFAS exposure warrants it?
- DHS Answer- DHS recommends that all Wisconsin residents follow recommended cancer screenings, regardless of PFAS exposure. At this point, DHS is not recommending additional screenings.
Question- Does the DHS or any federal agency plan on any historical medical comparisons of Stella residents to non PFAS contaminated communities.
- DHS Answer- There are not currently plans or resources to investigate a medical comparison. The Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) has conducted some health and exposure studies nationwide and has information available on their website.
Question- Has the DHS studied AMA tracking of PFAS related illnesses in Oneida County and how they rank historically statewide?
- DHS Answer- DHS does not have the resources available to conduct an investigation into health impacts/illnesses at this time.

OCCWA Commentary: In three of the five DHS answers they reference " do not have the resources" (money) or "does not have funding available" (money). This in a state with a $4.6 billion budget surplus and a $1.9 billion rainy day fund. Oh, and by the way, for the last year and a half the legislature can't seem to find a way to release the measly $120 million dollars for PFAS relief for impacted citizens across the state. Though extremely grateful for any beneficial information garnered from the Stella proposed study, one has to ask, what are our legislators thinking?

MEA Protecting Communities Since 1999

Non-profit became necessary due to state eliminating the Office of Public Intervenor.

By Tom Wiensch November 30, 2024- There was a time when Wisconsin had a public agency tasked with taking legal action to protect Wisconsin’s Resources. When that time came to an end, Midwest Environmental Advocates stepped up to handle the job.

In 1967, Republican Governor Warren Knowles created the State Office of the Public Intervenor, which was overseen by the Wisconsin Attorney General and its own citizen advisory committee. Staffed with attorneys, the office legally intervened on behalf of the public on environmental issues in court cases, administrative hearings, and otherwise. The office also provided advice to citizens, agencies, and legislators. Over its history, the office worked to develop mining regulations, took legal action against DDT, successfully fought for access to lakes, called attention to serious potential issues with the proposed Crandon Mine, and more. Sadly, the Office of Public Intervenor was eliminated by the 1995-96 budget of Republican Governor Tommy Thompson.

The elimination of the Office of Public Intervenor left a large void. Despite much public support for revival of the office, Wisconsin government is still without such an office. Thankfully, Midwest Environmental Advocates (MEA), has worked hard to fill the void. MEA was founded in 1999 by Melissa Scanlan, then a far-sighted law student, and now a University of Wisconsin – Milwaukee professor, and Director of the Center for Water Policy.

MEA is a non-profit law center funded by grants and donations which works to protect the rights of people to healthy air, water, and land. Overseen by a board of directors, it employs a small staff, including attorneys. MEA’s work is three pronged, including legal action, policy advocacy, and community education. Since its inception, the organization has been deeply involved in some of the most important environmental issues in Wisconsin.

As part of its mission to provide community education, MEA has produced a series of written guides, podcasts, and webinars on such topics as CAFO’s, PFAS, mining regulations, public trust waters, pipeline regulations and more. These resources are available to anyone at no cost on the MEA website.

In the area of public policy, MEA has advocated for such things as water quality standards for PFAS, prevention of childhood lead poisoning in Milwaukee, a shutdown of the Enbridge Pipeline Number 5 (which currently runs through a water rich area on the tribal lands of the Bad River Band of Lake Superior Chippewa), and much more.

MEA has been at the cutting edge of environmental litigation in Wisconsin. Currently, MEA attorneys are representing Citizens for a Clean Wausau, Clean Water Action Counsel of Northeast Wisconsin, River Alliance of Wisconsin, Wisconsin Environmental Health Network, and former Marinette Mayor Doug Oitzinger, in a case involving Wisconsin’s spill law. That case was filed by Wisconsin Manufacturers and Commerce, Inc. and Leather Rich, Inc., asking, among other things, for

“A declaration that Defendants’ (DNR) policy of regulating substances they refer to as emerging contaminants, including PFAS compounds, as Hazardous Substances in the RR and VPLE programs is an unlawfully adopted rule, and is invalid and unenforceable.”

MEA is opposing the legal relief that WMC and Leather Rich seek and is supporting the ability of the DNR to protect us from PFAS contamination, by preparing a friend of the court brief to the Wisconsin Supreme Court.

Recently, MEA successfully represented a group in Bayfield County in stopping a private company from establishing a water bottling operation within the Lake Superior watershed, a legal battle which took MEA from a local board of adjustment to the Wisconsin Court of Appeals.

In May of 2020, MEA represented the Sierra Club – John Muir Chapter, Honor the Earth, League of Women Voters of Wisconsin, Superior Rivers Watershed Association, and 350 Madison in a request to intervene in a public interest determination concerning Enbridge Pipeline Number 5. Since then, MEA has worked hard at every stage of the matter, and its attorneys are currently in the process of reviewing 898 pages of the final environmental impact statement concerning the pipeline.

These are just a few of the projects that MEA has undertaken to protect Wisconsin’s air, land, and water. More information is available at the MEA website. Also, please remember that, unlike the Office of Public Intervenor, MEA is not publicly funded. Instead, it relies on grants and donations to fund its efforts to protect our resources. Donations can be made through its website – Midwest Environmental Advocates | Legal Services | Policy & Advocacy | Organizing | Wisconsin

Timber Group Gets Big Seat at P&D Meeting

Industry gets 4 hours to influence Comprehensive Plan while public gets 3 minutes.

By Eric Rempala October 24, 2024- The Oneida County Planning and Development (P&D) Committee continues to plow ahead with significant changes to the county's Comprehensive Plan, remember that the current actions are those of the P&D Committee only. The P&D Committee is comprised of five County Supervisors appointed by County Chairman Scott Holewinski.

P&D Committee Member Contacts:

When the P&D process is complete the public will have a chance to weigh in at a public hearing. After the Committe considers all public comment at the hearing, the finished product will be introduced to the County Board where a vote will be taken to approve or reject the newly proposed language. The public will get a final chance for comment before the vote at that County Board meeting. With all this in mind our staff at OCCWA has put together some things for our readers to consider.

The Oneida County Planning and Development Committee has been working on creating a new comprehensive plan for the County, a process which must be undertaken. Comprehensive plans are required under Wisconsin law, and must include a number of elements, among which are land use, agriculture and natural resources. Once a comprehensive plan is adopted, certain county ordinances, including general zoning and shoreland zoning must be consistent with the comprehensive plan. Because of that, comprehensive plans have effects on such things as mining and shoreland and other development, which in turn affect water quality.

In the process of creating its plan, the Committee has received comments from the public. The Great Lakes Timber Producers Association (GLTPA) provided comments. A document titled “GLTPA Oneida County Land Use Plan Comments”, signed by Henry Schienebeck, Executive Director of the Great Lakes Timber Professionals (GLTPA) was provided to Oneida County Planning and Zoning Director Karl Jennrich. Mr. Schienebeck also spoke about the plan at a recent P&D Committee meeting.

GLTPA, which is headquartered in Oneida County, has a website which contains statements that read:

“Our Mission Enhancing Multiple Use Forests for Future Generations”

and

“Provides proven leadership in the Lake States Forest products industry for over 70 years. GLTPA is a non-profit organization proud to represent members in Michigan and Wisconsin and is committed to leading Forest Products Industry in sustainable forest management.”

GLTPA’s comments to the comprehensive plan include recommendations of language that GLTPA believes should be included in the plan. Some of the language that GLTPA recommends including is:

1. COORDINATION
GLTPA RECOMMENDATION - “All land use planning processes, including on all federal and state land, and lands utilizing federal or state funding and including any and all guidance, executive, or other mandated actions, shall coordinate with the county and towns and work to resolve all planning conflicts to the satisfaction of the county and towns prior to finalizing plans or other actions.”
and
“Notification, consultation, and coordination with the county is required at the earliest time possible for any land planning and/or proposed action by state and/or federal agencies, or nonprofit organizations, or for any change in existing activities, newly permitted activities, or changes in regulations that may affect the economic basis of the county. Consultation and coordination with the county is necessary to determine the full scope of potential social and economic effects of proposed activities. The county considers that consultation and coordination must include all impacted towns on all forest management issues.”
QUESTIONS – Does GLTPA believe that the County has the legal authority to control how the State of Wisconsin and the United States manage their lands?

2. PRIVATE LAND SALES
GLTPA RECOMMENDATION - “Conversion of private property to public for nonprofit conservation purposes shall not be approved unless it is determined by the county that the long-term economic impact will be negligible.”
QUESTIONS – Does GLTPA believe that the County has the legal authority to prevent private landowners from selling or gifting their land to the State or other governmental units? Shouldn’t private landowners have the right to sell their land to any willing buyer that they choose?

3. SHORELAND ZONING
GLTPA RECOMMENDATION - “Shoreland restrictions can impair property rights and harm the local economy. All proposed shoreland policy shall be coordinated with the county and be consistent with the county comprehensive plan. County shoreland regulations cannot be more restrictive than state law and administrative code.”
QUESTIONS – Does the County have the legal authority to require “coordination”? What does limiting shoreland protection have to do with timber production?

4. CONSERVATION EASEMENTS
GLTPA RECOMMENDATION - “Oneida County discourages the use of the MFL program in conservation easements. The two programs are inconsistent or at odds in their duration. The MFL program contracts are 25 or 50 years whereas conservation easements are established into perpetuity. The MFL program provides a mechanism for leaving the program. Reducing the tax base in perpetuity is antithetical to the interests of county residents and gives up local control.”

and

“If there are new easements, require any new easements to sunset after 15 years. Allow renewal through an approved re-assessment of the easement’s compliance and compatibility with current conditions. Analyze all existing easements on public lands every 15 years for compliance and compatibility with current conditions, calling for extinguishment of the easement if it does not do so.”

and

“All new conservation easements must contain a buyback provision in the contract, allowing the landowner to make the property whole if they have been negatively impacted by the agreement.”
QUESTIONS – Why does GLTPA want the county to discourage all conservation easements on MFL land, when, in some cases, such as that of the Pelican River Forest Easement, conservation easements have been used to conserve land for forestry purposes? What authority does the County have to discourage or prohibit people from placing easements on their land? Shouldn’t private landowners have the right to place easements on their own land if they wish? Does the County have the legal authority to require private landowners to place length limits and buyback provisions in their private contracts? Why should county government intrude in private contracts in this way?

5. LAND LEASE LIMITATIONS
GLTPA RECOMMENDATION - “Define forested lands as agricultural lands for legal purposes and impose the constitutional requirement for agricultural lands that all leases of such land should be 15 years or less.”
QUESTIONS – Does the County have the legal authority to limit private landowner’s ability to lease their lands? Shouldn’t private landowners be allowed to choose the length of leases they enter into?

6. FLOODPLAIN MAPS
GLTPA RECOMMENDATION – “Coordinate with FEMA to update floodplain maps with new technology.” and “All floodplain maps shall be updated in coordination with the county.”
QUESTIONS - Does the County have the legal authority to control how a federal agency draws maps? What does this have to do with timber production?

7. MINING
GLTPA RECOMMENDATION – “Pursue metallic mining through the county’s non-metallic mining and metallic mining exploration, bulk sampling, and mining ordinance while complying with state laws and balancing any projects with the interests of county residents.”
QUESTIONS – What does this have to do with timber production? If anything, wouldn’t this have the potential to encourage land to be removed from timber production?

8. TRAILS
GLTPA RECOMMENDATION – “Prohibit any further land acquisition or conservation easements for trail projects. Lease agreements must not run for more than 15 years.” NOTE – GLTPA recommends that this language be added to language which reads as follows: “Encourage the development of a comprehensive County-wide trail plan that includes facilities for hikers, bikers, ATVs, and disabled and elderly individuals and a system that ties together attractions and natural and cultural resources throughout the county.”
QUESTIONS – Does the County have the legal authority to stop state or federal agencies, or private landowners from developing trails? What does preventing trail development have to do with timber production?

9. TRANSPORATION
GLTPA RECOMMENDATION – “Evaluate the scope and existence of the Northwoods Transit System by subjecting the enterprise to a cost benefit analysis. At times, the system has been heavily underused, and an updated study should guide whether it is to be continued, and, if so, at what level of subsidy, if any.”
QUESTIONS – What does this have to do with timber production?

10. ROAD PLANNING AND SAFETY, BIKE TRAILS, ETC.
GLTPA RECOMMENDATION - “ELIMINATE ALL OF THE ABOVE!”
NOTE – The part that GLTPA recommends being removed reads:
“Work with local governmental units to plan for a network of interconnected roads in planned development areas to control highway access, preserve rural character, and improve access to these areas. Space roadway access according to minimum standards to increase safety and preserve capacity. Support expanded bike accommodations on County Highways with resurfacing/reconstruction projects and additional off-road bike trails that use grant funding.”
QUESTIONS - Is GLTPA against road planning and safety, and bike trails? Why? What do these things have to do with timber management?

11. LAND DEVELOPMENT
GLTPA COMMENT – “defeats the goal to provide an adequate supply of developable land for the future. Such development may be desirable, depending on community needs, private landowner wishes, and the willingness and ability of developers to pay a fair share of infrastructure costs, which leads to the next policy: . . .”
NOTE – This suggestion is in response to language that reads “Discourage sprawling, low-density development where there is no existing infrastructure and service capacity.”
QUESTIONS - What does this have to do with timber production? Wouldn’t this type of development have the potential to remove timber lands from production?

Although not all of the examples above relate to water quality, they illustrate the breadth of GLTPA’s comments on the comprehensive plan.

At the recent P&D meeting that he attended, Mr. Schienbeck indicated that GLTPA has over 20 directors on its board, and that he worked with a committee to prepare these recommendations. He indicated that Senator Tom Tiffany, Lakeland Times writer Richard Moore, and Margaret Byfield of the Texas based group “American Stewards of Liberty” (ASL) were involved.

The ASL website speaks out against conservation easements and says that it trains local governments in a strategy called “coordination.” The ASL website also indicates that “ASL is the nation’s oldest property rights organization run by Americans steeped in the battle to protect this essential right.” The level of involvement of ASL in creating the GLTPA recommendations is unclear. It is clear, however, that by suggesting government restrictions on the sale, leasing, and other conveyance of private lands, GLTPA is suggesting that the County severely limit, rather than protect private property rights.

A bit over a decade ago, three towns in Oneida County sent “notices of coordination” to Oneida County instead of developing comprehensive plans. Ultimately, the Oneida County Corporation Counsel asked Wisconsin Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen to issue an attorney general’s opinion on the subject. One of the questions asked of Attorney General Van Hollen was:

“Does the use of the word “coordination” in various Wisconsin statutes dealing with municipal planning by itself impose affirmative duties upon certain municipalities that are in addition to any other affirmative obligations that are imposed under those statutes?”

Attorney General Van Hollen’s answer was, ultimately “No.” Tax dollars and time had been expended putting forth these “notices of coordination”, which Attorney General Van Hollen ultimately said had no legal effect.

The questions now are:

Why is GLTPA expending its resources advocating for governmental policies that, in some cases, have little or nothing to do with timber production?
Will Oneida County have its legal counsel offer opinions on whether it has the right to adopt GLTPA’s suggestions, including suggestions to restrict the land use of the state and federal government, private organizations, and private individuals in the ways that GLTPA suggests?
If Oneida County were to include “coordination in its comprehensive plan, would it have any more legal meaning than it did when the three towns sent notices of coordination in lieu of developing comprehensive plans?

Hopefully our elected county officials will adopt policies that are strongly grounded in the law, and that represent the wishes of the voters.

Note – The comments of GLTPA were too long (31 pages) to be included in this article in their entirety. Readers may be able to obtain copies of the written comments submitted by GLTPA from the Oneida County Planning and Zoning Department at Planning & Zoning – Oneida County, WI

Commercial Pathways bring Invasive Species

WDNR looks to educate industries while enforcing state restrictions to curb invasive species problem

By Beckie Gaskill November 20, 2024- This week I was fortunate enough to attend the Upper Midwest Invasive Species Conference (UMISC) virtually. The topic of one of the sessions I attended was pathways by which invasive species find their way from place to place. Part of the focus, of course, was pets that were let loose, but the other part was commercial pathways by which invasives can spread.

The first presenter was Department of Natural Resources (DNR) warden Robert Stroess. He spoke about how Wisconsin attempts to keep illegal invasive species from coming into the state through trade routes, and the challenges with doing that.

Of course, as with AIS on our own lakes, it starts with education. Unfortunately, Stroess said, even after educating suppliers and in-state vendors such as pet stores about Wisconsin Administrative Code NR-40 listed species, over 80% of those businesses who were later checked again were still selling those same invasives.

Stroess said traditionally, the only AIS work wardens did have to do with things like weeds on trailers or getting boaters to empty their live wells of water. But most states are not dealing with these organisms in trade, until recently, Wisconsin was the same, he said.

In 2019, some may remember, a red swamp crayfish was reported in a pet shop. Also, a specialty grocery store was found to be selling three species of carp – big head, silver and grass carp. This is likely just the tip of the iceberg where AIS, and also Terrestrial Invasive Species (TIS), is concerned in trade routes.

While there was great outreach from the AIS education program to different industries about what they could and could not bring into the state, it was doing little in most cases.

“For those businesses that didn’t care,” he said. “It was just noise in the background.” With no connection between AIS outreach and education and the enforcement arm of the department, it was difficult, if not impossible, to know who had already received education on these issues and simply did not care to change their practices. Bait shops, specialty grocers, pet shops and even gardening suppliers, which can spread both TIS and AIS, can be part of the problem.

Even within enforcement itself, individuals were tackling single incidents, such as that red swamp crayfish, and treating them as such. However, that one incident was indicative of a much larger problem. And that was a problem Stroess said was not being delt with effectively at that time.

With that, a dedicated AIS enforcement staff was created. This is a consortium of different entities dedicated to those trade routes, including distributors. Even if a distributor had a disclaimer on their website that they would not ship certain species to Wisconsin, for instance, shipments were still being made.

In the years since those findings, there have been 35,000 individual specimens in trade that they know about that have come to Wisconsin. Estimating high, Stroess felt they might know about 10% of those species that are coming in through various trade industries.

“Nobody knows about it until you turn over those rocks,” he said. “That’s when the landslide starts.”

Third party markets make finding these sellers even more difficult. Pet shops, bait dealers and specialty grocery stores can all be places of interest, Stroess said. Coordinating between pieces of the department, rather than working in with a silo-mentality, is also key. AIS staff and law enforcement and others can document the places where they have done outreach. Then businesses could be held accountable for repeating this behavior.

Stroess said he would look for vendors and contact them to see if he could purchase AIS that was not allowed in the state.

“If they don’t sell it to them, great,” he said. However, if they did sell things to him that were not allowed, he could then build a case against that business. In many cases, it is an interstate cooperation that brings about federal charges against suppliers and sellers.

The Lacy Act of 1981, which was amended again in 2008, regulates “the importation, exportation, transportation, sale, receipt, acquisition, or purchase of any fish or wildlife or plant taken, possessed, transported, or sold in violation of any law, treaty, or regulation of the United States or any Indian tribal law, or foreign law.”

LA Crawfish, Stroess said, was a big offender in the state. Most crayfish boils have been done with red swam crayfish from LA Crawfish. They can escape, or some of them may simply be released. After cracking down on LA Crawfish, they were eventually charged with 15 federal crimes and were ultimately convicted of 10. He assured those at the conference that Wisconsin was dedicating staff and time to this issue, and urged other states, provinces and countries to do the same.

Education and outreach can also be aimed at pet owners. Often, when pets get bigger than people expected them to, or kids are “bored” with a specialty pet, they get released into lakes, rivers, wetlands, or wherever a pet owner thinks they will get along well. It goes without saying that they are wrong – 100% of the time.

All of these avenues have the potential to change ecosystems in our lakes, rivers and wetlands.

All of these avenues have the potential to change ecosystems in our lakes, rivers and wetlands. As local lake lovers, we may not feel we have the power to change interstate, and sometimes international, trade routes. But we can use education and outreach to stop the “demand” side of this “supply and demand” cycle.

Educating our friends and neighbors and helping them learn that there are plants and animals they can still purchase online in many places that are harmful to our environment and potentially our lake ecosystems, can be one of those ways to bring about change. For the most part, people want to do the right thing. Often, however, they are not sure what that is. Outreach regarding the release of exotic pets can help keep AIS such as red swamp crayfish from our lakes and rivers. We can even talk with local pet shops and/or specialty grocery stores if we see a problem invasive in their establishment. While invasive species in commercial trade seems like a huge problem, and it is, that does not mean that we are powerless at the local level to help others understand the problems with invasive species of all kinds, and to help keep them out of the lakes and rivers we love.

Beckie Gaskill is a freelance outdoor and environmental writer as well as a content creator. She runs her own podcast as part of her media company FlaG (Fish Like a Girl) Media. She is a Master Naturalist and sits on the board of several different conservation organizations. She has also started her own digital magazine, The Wisconsin Conservationist. More information regarding that magazine can be found on her website: The Wisconsin Conservationist Magazine – All the news that is important to you (wordpress.com)

Exploring Bogs – Walking on Water, Literally

Local Land Trust provides exploration and education as part of conservation efforts.

By Troy Walters, Northwoods Land Trust Outreach and Monitoring Coordinator November 11, 2024- We are fortunate to live in an area that has some of the highest concentration of lakes in the world. One of the hidden wonders associated with some of these lakes is a unique plant community that has specialized adaptations to thrive in an acidic, low nutrient environment. Bogs are a type of wetland that is composed of a mat of plants and partially decomposed plants that form a surface that grows towards the lake center over time. These mats are solid enough to support animals and even people walking on them, albeit precariously and very bouncy and “sucky” at times.

At the Northwoods Land Trust (NWLT), we offer a number of outdoor programs each year that explore some of the protected properties we own, and occasionally, private conservation easement lands that the landowner is excited to share with others. One such program offered the past couple summers is a bog ecology and exploration opportunity on a property donated to NWLT in the town of Sugar Camp. Participants have the opportunity to walk to the lake edge and step onto this mat of floating vegetation and observe these unique plants up close.

Local expert Susan Knight has offered her expertise to guide participants through glacial history of the lake formation and subsequent plant growth. One of the key plants associated with bogs is sphagnum moss, a water laden plant that creates an acidic environment due to the chemical exchange in their cells. Leatherleaf, a native evergreen shrub, is another critical plant that aids in extending the bog mat lakeward by providing a network of roots where other plants can take hold. We observed several other plants like labrador tea, bog laurel, bog rosemary, and cranberry. There are even some carnivorous plants in a bog; pitcher plant, sundew, and bladderwort of which we observed the first two. Pitcher plants are just that, hollow pitchers that fill with water and contain digestive enzymes. When animals fall into the water, they get digested, and nutrients extracted for the plant. Sundew is a fairly small plant that has a sticky, sweet-smelling drop of liquid on the end of each tentacle. When an insect lands on the drop, it is immobilized, and the plant will close slowly around it. After digestion, the trap can be reset. Bladderworts have not been found at the particular bog we visit but are quite common and are most easily detected with their beautiful, above-ground flower (most common species is yellow). The actual insect-catching “bladder” with trap door is underwater and catches prey based on a pressure difference created by the plant itself. Seach online for some very cool videos that show this speedy trap door capture.

Visit the NWLT website at Northwoods Land Trust and search the news and events tab for future offerings. The newest upcoming program will be exploring lake ecology in winter, hosted and taught by Trees for Tomorrow’s professional naturalists.

Northwoods Land Trust permanently conserves natural shorelands, woodlands and other natural resources to benefit present and future generations in Vilas, Oneida, Forest, Florence, Iron, Price and Langlade Counties.

Forest Protectors Honored With Award

Joe and Mary Hovel receive recognition for a lifetime of conservation efforts.

By Tom Wiensch October 22, 2024- We’re excited to announce that Joe and Mary Hovel of Conover Wisconsin have been awarded the 2024 Land Legacy Award by Gathering Waters, an alliance for land trusts in Wisconsin. Joe and Mary earned this honor by working for decades to conserve land in Northern Wisconsin, Upper Michigan, and in Wisconsin’s Central Sands Region. Between them, they have accomplished as much as many conservation organizations do, advocating for healthy lands, undertaking the purchase and conservation of lands, building kiosks, writing articles and books on conservation, and more.

Their work began with educating the public about the risks of the pesticide Aldicarb when they lived in the central part of the State. Since moving to Conover, Wisconsin years ago, they’ve divided their time between operating a log home building business, raising a family, and working hard on some of the most important land conservation projects to happen in Wisconsin and Upper Michigan.

Their work has included the creation of community forests, land legacy projects and the purchase and conservation of lands that ultimately became part of the Northern Highland – American Legion State Forest. Joe and Mary are humble people who have invested their time and money into preserving lands. At many points in their lives, they likely could have purchased lands, developed them, and greatly enriched themselves. Instead, they have repeatedly worked against land fragmentation and for the common good, moving from one project to another, and protecting lands that are valuable for wildlife habitat, sustainable timber production, and public recreation.

One example of their projects is the Wildcat Falls Community Forest in Upper Michigan. This project saved the land surrounding a beautiful waterfall from being fragmented and developed. Another example is the Upper Wisconsin Legacy Forest in Vilas County Wisconsin, through which flows the upper Wisconsin River. This land includes beautiful boreal forest and is home to spruce grouse – a threatened species in Wisconsin.

Mary and Joe have a passion for the forests and waters of the Northwoods. Their family has extensively paddled the rivers of the north, including some of the National Wild and Scenic Rivers. One of the projects they worked on – The Headwaters Cedar Community Forest in Vilas County, contains wetlands that filter water that flows into the National Wild and Scenic Ontonagon River. Some days Joe and Mary can be found cruising the backroads of Vilas County on their electric bikes, checking out the forests that they have worked to conserve. It’s impossible to study the conserved lands of Northern Vilas County without learning about the work that the Hovels have done.

Joe and Mary have both served in various roles as part of several organizations, including the Northwoods Alliance, a Northern Wisconsin Conservation group that they were instrumental in creating. Details of many of the projects they have worked so hard on can be found at the Northwoods Alliance website - https://www.northwoodalliance.org/ If you know Mary and Joe, or have a chance to meet them, thank them for all they have done to help ensure that the Northwoods will continue to have the beauty and wildness that it has today.

Editor's note: In recent years OCCWA has leaned heavily on Joe Hovel's expertise on sustainable forestry's value to clean watersheds. Joe's input on the recent Pelican River Forest Project being just one such example. Joe and Mary are truly unsung Northwoods heroes. Please join us in congratulating them on this well-deserved honor.

Neonics in the Northwoods

Lake Tom first in county to consider effects of neonicotinoid pesticides on Northwood ecosystem.

By Kathleen Cooper October 15, 2024- I know we are all worried about the upcoming election, the huge storms and wildfires ravaging our country, and wars around the globe, so I will give you something different to worry about neonicotinoids in our groundwater, otherwise known as neonics. You’re welcome, but don’t thank me, thank the EPA and our legislators for looking out for the interests of corporations and big agriculture rather than the health and well-being of the people, ecosystems, and our most precious resource, water.

Neonicotinoids are a class of water-soluble chemicals used to target insects by being absorbed through a plant’s roots, leaves, and fruit. These chemicals cause extensive environmental damage and pose a risk to human health. They are linked to birth defects and hormonal dysregulation, as well as food and water contamination. Children are at the greatest risk, mostly from eating nonorganic food. As a result, children are three times more likely to develop cancer than adults when exposed to these pesticides.

Aside from poisoning our children and ourselves, neonics are killing our pollinating insects, such as bees and butterflies. Birds and aquatic life are also affected. These chemicals are highly persistent and remain present in plant tissues long after applied. Research also shows neonicotinoids can persist in the soil several years after the last application, affecting plants that were not the original targets, and leaching through the soil into our groundwater and private wells. Since neonics remain active in the soil for years, rain or irrigation water can easily carry them long distances to contaminate new soil, plant life, and water supplies. Given neonic’s widespread use, the result has been vast ecosystem contamination, which we notice most often in water. A 2015 study by the US Geological Survey found neonic pollution in more than half of the streams it sampled nationwide. The state of Wisconsin estimates around 43% of 800,000 private wells tested positive for pesticides, and more than half of the pesticides detected aren’t regulated by the state or federal governments. Unfortunately, traditional chlorination treatment typically fails to remove them from tap water, and chlorination actually has the potential to combine with neonics to form even more toxic compounds in tap water.

Despite the threat to our environment, nothing has slowed the widespread application of these insecticides. Neonics are most often used “prophylactically,” or in other words, whether they are needed or not. So, the vast majority of neonic applications- covering hundreds of millions of acres- are treating pest problems that don’t exist. When they do, neonics can actually make those pest problems worse for farmers by killing off beneficial bugs and soil microbes that improve crop health, resiliency, and output. There is some good news regarding the problem of neonic contamination in our water and our food, however. The European Union has completely banned outdoor neonic use in an effort to protect pollinators, water, and the European people, and the Canadian provinces of Ontario and Quebec require a prescription before neonics can be used to coat crop seeds, which has drastically reduced their use. The bad news is that the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), which assesses the human health risks of pesticide ingredients and sets corresponding limits, is failing us. Industry influence has led to underregulating and even deregulation of many pesticides, including those that are banned in other countries. It is virtually left up to the states and civic minded individuals. There are now 11 states that have banned neonics for residential use. These states are California, Colorado, Maine, Maryland, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New York, Rhode Island, Washington, and Vermont. This is a good first step for regulation of these poisons.

There is also good news locally. Lake Tomahawk is considering crafting an ordinance that would prohibit the use of commercial mosquito spray on lawns in Lake Tomahawk, and possibly other insecticides that contain neonics. Commercial mosquito sprays generally do not contain neonics but do contain pyrethroids and pyrethrins. These chemicals not only kill mosquitoes, but also kill insects beneficial to our survival and our ecosystem, such as pollinators and food sources for our birds, wildlife, and aquatic life. They are toxic to pets and humans as well, with our children being the most vulnerable. With so many households locally spraying their yards, the cumulative effect of these chemicals will lead to major contamination in our private wells and waterways. Lake Tomahawk is setting an excellent example of a town that is truly concerned about its citizens and its natural environment. We at OCCWA commend Lake Tom for their insight and encourage other towns and counties to explore this issue.

How to identify neonics? Here is a helpful link from Environment America How to avoid bee-killing pesticides (environmentamerica.org)

How can you create a perfect pollinator garden? Well, the Oneida County Land and Water Conservation Department (OCLW) has a guide here THE PERFECT POLLINATOR GARDEN - Oneida County Land and Water Conservation (oclw.org) Just one example of your county tax dollars devoted to conservation.

Knowles Nelson Program in Jeopardy?

JFC co-chair intimates' program may be in jeopardy after ruling on his committee's legal overreach.

By Tom Wiensch October 10, 2024-

Knowles-Nelson Stewardship Program Facts and History

The Knowles-Nelson Stewardship Program (“KNP”) exists to allow Wisconsin to preserve natural areas and wildlife habitat, protect water quality and fisheries, and create opportunities for outdoor recreation. Created 35 years ago, the program was named after two notable Wisconsin conservationists: Warren Knowles (R) Governor of Wisconsin 1965-17, and Gaylord Nelson (D) U.S. Senator from Wisconsin 1964-81.

Sometimes thought of as a land acquisition fund, the KNP is much more than that, having been used to acquire lands and easements, but also to develop and support recreational infrastructure such as local parks, boat landings, campsites, beaches, and recreational trails.

KNP has helped fund dozens of projects in Oneida County, including:

The Minocqua boat landing
The Town of Sugar Camp Lion’s Park (Play equipment, basketball courts, bleachers etc.)
The Brandy Lake Beach in the Town of Arbor Vitae (Play equipment, wood fiber base, timbers & access pad)
Renovation of the City of Rhinelander Hodag Park Public Boat Landing
The Oneida County Perch Lake Park and Trails (Shelter, restroom & equipment storage)
Fredrick’s Public Boat Landing on the Wisconsin River near McNaughton
The Bearskin State Trail (Snowmobiling, biking, and walking) Aquisition
Minocqua-Kawaguesaga Lakes chemical treatment of invasive Eurasian water milfoil
Acquisition of land for the Northern Highland – American Legion State Forest
Road, parking lot, shelter, water system, toilet, and picnic area at the Town of Newbold Wooden Bridge Park
Lake Tomahawk Boat Launch restroom facilities
City of Rhinelander Boyce Drive Boat landing

An interactive map of KNP projects can be seen here - https://knowlesnelson.org/an-interactive-map-of-knowles-nelson-grants/

The KNP funds are budgeted by the Wisconsin Legislature, and it is currently funded through 2026. A few legislators have called into question whether it should be funded in the future. Among Wisconsin residents, though, KN is very popular. A 2023 survey paid for by The Nature Conservancy and conducted by the nationally recognized bipartisan research team of FM3 Research (D) and New Bridge Strategy (R) found that, although many residents did not know about the KNP, once they were informed about it, an overwhelming majority favored it. More detailed results of the survey can be viewed here - https://www.nature.org/content/dam/tnc/nature/en/documents/2023-Polling-on-Stew-Fund-Results-Press.pdf

The Increasing Veto of Stewardship Projects by Members of the Joint Finance Committee

For much of the history of the Fund, the small Joint Committee of Finance has played a large role in deciding which projects the fund should contribute money to. Under the statutes, any single member of that committee could anonymously stop funding for any project that had a cost of over $250,000 and, more recently that was located north of Highway 64.

In recent years, that Committee has been dominated by Republicans. The Committee currently has 16 members, 12 of whom are Republicans and 4 of whom are Democrats.

Recently, over a period of approximately four years, the Republican controlled Committee blocked 27 projects, or about 1/3 of those that were submitted for approval. In previous years, the anonymous “pocket veto” had been used more sparingly.

Examples of recent blocked projects include:

The Pelican River Forest Conservation Easement (2023.)
A Lake Superior boat launch in the City of Ashland (2024.)
The conservation of the Cedar Gorge along Lake Michigan in Ozaukee County (2022.)
A boardwalk rehabilitation project near the City of Appleton’s airport (2022.)
Acquisition of 93 acres of land in the Crex Meadows Wildlife Area (2021.)

The Pelican River Forest project would have involved the purchase of a conservation easement to ensure that the forest would be available for logging and open to public recreation, a sort of project that would almost certainly enjoyed bi-partisan support in the not-too-distant past. That project was ultimately completed using other funds.

The Wisconsin Supreme Court Strikes Down JFC Members Veto Power

In 2023, Governor Tony Evers brought a legal action concerning the pocket veto. The matter was heard by the Wisconsin Supreme Court, and in 2024, the court ruled that the power of anonymous individual members of the Joint Finance Committee to veto Stewardship spending violated the Wisconsin Constitution. The court’s majority opinion was written by conservative Justice Rebecca Bradley, who wrote “Maintaining the separation of powers between the branches is essential for the preservation of liberty and a government accountable to the people . . .” The court ruled that, once the Legislature budgets money for the KNP, it is a duty of the executive, rather than the legislative branch to determine how that money is be spent. Under this ruling, the DNR (part of the executive branch), and its professional scientists and land managers, rather than individual members of the legislature will carry out the details of how KNP funds are spent.

DNR Budget Request

In September of 2024, the DNR made its budget request for the next two-year budget period. Out of a total agency budget request of 1.2 billion dollars, the DNR has requested $100 million per year for the KNP.

The Reaction of Born and Felzkowsi

Wisconsin Public Radio reported that, after the State Supreme Court handed down its opinion, Republican Representative Mark Born stated:

"It’s unfortunate that Governor Evers’ lawsuit removed all accountability (emphasis added) of the Stewardship program, which helped ensure local voices were heard and that taxpayer resources were spent wisely . . .” Born, who is the co-chair of the Joint Finance Committee also said, “The entire program is now in jeopardy.”

These comments are curious on two levels. First, there is still accountability for KNP expenditures. The Wisconsin Statutes place a number of restrictions on how Stewardship funds can be spent. Also, the DNR is charged with administering the program in accordance with the statutes. In addition, people, including those who live near where projects may take place have the ability to communicate their opinions to the DNR.

Second, it’s unclear why Mr. Born says that the entire KNP is in Jeopardy. There is nothing innate in the court’s ruling that puts the program in Jeopardy. One interpretation of Representative Born’s words could be that he and/or other members of the Republican controlled Wisconsin Legislature may wish to refuse to adequately fund the program now that individual members of the Joint Finance Committee can no longer anonymously veto stewardship projects.

In its report, Wisconsin Public Radio noted that, Republican State Senator Mary Felzkowski, speaking in response to the DNR’s budget Request, and noting that the DNR has been without a secretary for over a year said:

“The likelihood of an agency of this size, that creates so much frustration throughout the state, receiving big increases without an executive head taking accountability is, in my opinion, low . . .”

Ever's Response

Governor Evers has said that he is having a difficult time finding someone willing to act as the DNR Secretary, due to the Republican Held legislature having fired so many of his appointees. The last DNR secretary, Adam Payne served for ten months before resigning, without the legislature ever having confirmed his appointment. On March 12 of 2024, CBS News reported that the Legislature had fired eight more of Evers’ appointees, bringing the total fired by the Legislature since Evers took office in 2019 to 21. The CBS News report indicates that, among those fired were:

“. . . two Universities of Wisconsin regents who voted against a deal that limited campus diversity and four judicial watchdogs who wouldn't commit to punishing liberal state Supreme Court Justice Janet Protasiewicz.”

The Future of Public Lands, Parks, and Recreational Facilities

The extent to which the KNP will be funded in the future remains to be seen. In the meantime, there seems to be strong support for conservation and recreation as a whole, and the KNP specifically. For example, The Wisconsin Waterfowl Association’s website currently contains an article that originally appeared in 2020, supporting KNP funding.

That piece, authored by its executive director included the following statements:

“Now more than ever, outdoor spaces are important to Wisconsinites.”
“But Knowles-Nelson does more than pay for land purchases. It funds trail building, campground development, trails signs, boat launches, and more. We have to take care of the land we have protected, and Stewardship helps us do that.”
“The K-N Stewardship program costs each Wisconsin resident about $15 / year. That’s a really good deal.
“We must be careful with state dollars, but Stewardship is a tiny fraction of Wisconsin’s debt, only 2%. The Stewardship program is an investment in Wisconsin’s future.”

The entire article can be viewed here - https://www.wisducks.org/things-to-know-about-the-knowles-nelson-stewardship-program/

The Congressional Sportsman’s Foundation also posted a piece in support of KNP funding on its website on October 7 of this year. That piece, titled “Key Public Land Acquisition Fund Faces Reauthorization in Wisconsin” indicates that the CSF, along with partners, conducted meetings in Madison with members of the Legislative Sportsmen’s Caucus to stress the importance of the KNP. The CSF site may be viewed here: https://congressionalsportsmen.org/news/key-public-land-acquisition-fund-faces-reauthorization-in-wisconsin/?eType=EmailBlastContent&eId=bc42c3d2-5e45-484b-bba0-75be2842b4ad

Additionally, the following organizations have expressed support for or otherwise acknowledged the importance of the KNP:

The Wisconsin Bike Federation
Ice Age Trail Alliance
Wisconsin Green Fire
The Wisconsin Audubon Council and nine Wisconsin chapters
The Mississippi Valley Conservancy
Pheasants Forever
The Sierra Club
Driftless Area Land Conservancy
The Ruffed Grouse Society

Additionally, “Team Knowles-Nelson”, lists on its website a plethora of organizations as its partners or sponsoring partners. A sampling of those organizations includes:

Gathering Waters Conservancy
Ducks Unlimited
The Conservation Fund
The Wisconsin Society for Ornithology
American Trails
League of Wisconsin Municipalities
The Nature Conservancy
Rails to Trails Conservancy
Wisconsin Trout Unlimited
Wisconsin Counties Association
Wisconsin Wildlife Federation

These many organizations, along with a large majority of Wisconsin residents support the Knowles-Nelson program. The question is now, whether the Republican controlled state legislature will respect the will of the majority and adequately fund the program.

WTMJ Television Coverage Conservation program in jeopardy as DNR asks to triple funding (tmj4.com)

Voting to Protect Clean Water

Northwood Environmental issues should be considered when voting this November 5th.

By Kathleen Cooper September 27, 2024- Unless you have been living in a cave in the Himalayas, I am sure you are tired of hearing about polls, political ads, and especially the divisive vitriol from the candidates running for election. OCCWA is a nonpartisan organization, and does not support any party or political candidate. We do, however, care about clean water in Oneida County, and a healthy environment that supports our lakes, rivers, streams, and groundwater. We also believe that preserving clean water begins locally. With that in mind we ask that you consider clean waters issues when considering candidates on the November ballot.

U.S. Congressman

Incumbent Republican Tom Tiffany began his political career as a Wisconsin State Assemblyman for two years, and then was a Wisconsin state senator for seven years. In 2020 and 2022, Tiffany was elected and re-elected to the US congress from Wisconsin’s 7th district. While Tiffany was a state senator, he introduced Act 134, which repealed Wisconsin’s popular “Prove it First” mining law. The “Prove it First” law required that any mining companies staking a claim in Wisconsin to show one example of a similar mine in the U.S. or Canada that operated for 10years and was closed for 10 years that did not pollute the environment. Since no mine has ever not polluted the environment, especially the water. The “Prove it First” law virtually prohibited mining in Wisconsin. After Act 134 repealed this law, there has been increased mining interests in our area, with one Canadian company, Green Light Metals, stating that they want to turn northern Wisconsin into a mining district on their website. Mining is unpopular with the people of Oneida County, so much so that in a referendum in 2018, a mine in Lynne was voted down by 62% of Oneida County voters. With Tiffany’s influence, however, some of our county leaders are still attempting to establish mining in our water rich environment.

Mr. Tiffany also has a close relationship with an anti-conservation organization called the American Stewards of Liberty, and has been a keynote speaker at an ASL conference. The ASL, at Tiffany’s behest, worked with local officials from Oneida, Langlade, and Forest Counties to block popular conservation efforts, including the Pelican River Forest, by sending a letter to the US Forest Service asking that the federal funds to purchase the Pelican River Forest easement be withheld. The ASL claims to stand for private property rights, but helped Nebraska pass a law forbidding private property owners from selling conservation easements on their own land. Taking a page from ASL, Oneida County officials have attempted to alter their Comprehensive Land Use Plan to make it easier for extraction in county forestland.

Challenger Kyle Kilbourne is running against Tom Tiffany for the 7th congressional district in Wisconsin. On his website, he advocates for preserving public land access for all, “prioritizing the unique needs of rural areas, focusing on environmental stewardship and enhancing the quality of life.” He also understands the challenge of addressing political divisions and environmental neglect. Unlike Tom Tiffany, Mr. Kilbourne is against mining in northern Wisconsin, and actually attended an Oneida County Board meeting to speak up against a resolution that was introduced that would have made the process much easier for mining companies to gain a foothold on our county land.

Senator 12th District

State Senator Mary Felzkowski was elected State Senator in 2020, after serving in the Wisconsin State Assembly since 2012. She is serving on the Wisconsin Joint Finance Committee, and is best known by environmental groups as the dissenting voice on that committee that blocked the Knowles-Nelson funding for the Pelican River Forest. In spite of broad local bipartisan support from northern Wisconsin local governments, Native Nations, outdoor advocacy groups, local businesses (50 of which signed a joint letter in favor of the forest), thousands of people signing petitions in favor of the acquisition, and almost 15,000 messages to the Capitol calling on legislators to support the Pelican River Forest, she told our state legislators that the people of northern Wisconsin were opposed to the Pelican River Forest. She has misled the public by referring to the PRF as “public land that is not taxed,” when in reality, the Pelican River Forest is private land with conservation easements that are open to the public, and therefore is a part of the tax base, and underplayed the economic benefits of tourism and timber production that it would provide. She held several “listening sessions” with the public during this time. She would begin these “listening sessions” by stating that she didn’t care what the public wanted, she wasn’t going to change her mind (on blocking the Knowles-Nelson funding, which are earmarked for just such conservation acquisitions). The Wisconsin State Supreme Court later ruled that the Joint Finance Committee did not have the right to block funding from the Knowles Nelson Fund for conservation purchases.

Mrs. Felzkowski has also stated that she is in favor of mining in northern Wisconsin, which is in direct opposition to the Onieda County 2018 mining referendum.

She has opposed the releasing $125 million budgeted for PFAS remediation for over a year now in affected areas in Wisconsin, one of which is the Stella area in Oneida County, because she does not want manufacturers to be held responsible for the cleanup of these harmful chemicals that have been spread on fields on our county for decades, and have contaminated our private and municipal wells, lakes, wetlands, rivers, and streams.

Mrs. Felzkowski and Assemblyman Rob Swearingen also proposed state regulation of wake boating, introducing legislation that specified that a wake boat could operate on lakes 50 acres or larger and within 200 feet from shore with no depth restrictions (legislation that is identical to what the boat manufacturers wanted) when the science says that wake boating should only be allowed on lakes larger than 1500 acres, in depths of 30 feet, and 500-700 feet from shore. Her proposed Wave Boat bill would also take away local control of wake boating issues.

Andi Rich is the democratic candidate opposing State Senator Mary Felzkowski. She is a businesswoman from Marinette. She has been advocating for clean water in northern Wisconsin for nine years, and states that she intends to put “people over politics and find pragmatic solutions to the challenges we face,” especially protecting our natural resources and supporting our local economies. She states, “My background in environmental protection, combined with my experience as a small business owner, gives me a balanced perspective on how to protect our natural resources while supporting economic growth.” Ms. Rich has stated that the most pressing issue in northern Wisconsin is the need for safe, clean drinking water, and is pushing for stronger environmental regulations, increased funding for water testing and cleanup efforts, and holding polluters accountable. “Protecting our water isn’t just an environmental issue- it’s crucial for our health, economy, and future.” Her hometown, Marinette, also has extremely high PFAS concentrations in their waterways and wells, and she has been actively advocating for PFAS remediation.

Ms. Rich is also opposed to mining in northern Wisconsin, and actively worked to oppose the Back 40 Mine, that would have been situated 150 feet from the Menominee River, which supplies drinking water for both Menominee, MI and Marinette WI. The pollution from the mine would directly affect all the municipalities and rural areas along the Menominee River, and drain into Lake Michigan at Green Bay.

34th Assembly District

Rob Swearingen is a Rhinelander businessman who has served as a Republican in the Wisconsin State Assembly since 2013. During his time in office, he has supported Mary Felzkowski’s positions on water and environmental issues, and co-sponsored Mrs. Felzkowski’s Wave Boat bill.

Dennis Netzel is opposing Rob Swearingen for the 34th Wisconsin District. He states on his Facebook page, “I am a candidate for the 34th Assembly District. I am an American by birth, an agronomist by vocation, a potato grower by desire, and a research scientist by sheer good luck.”

Summation

We at OCCWA urge you to vote thoughtfully on November 5. The full extent of the PFAS problem in northern Wisconsin is just beginning to be known, and we cannot remediate this pollution without the support of our elected officials. The mining issue also weighs heavily on our minds, and even though so far, the people of northern Wisconsin have been able to keep mining interests at bay, sometimes it feels like a game of whack-a-mole. Voting is an important right and privilege, and this election seems to come at a critical time for our water resources. So please vote, not only for the political issues you care about, but also for the precious resource that we sometimes take for granted- our clean water. We never seem to appreciate the good things we have until they are gone. Let’s start appreciating our beautiful water resources now, before it is too late.

How can you ask Candidates their environmental positions? Well, WXPR radio has a solution.

Ahead of the November 5th Election, WXPR is interviewing candidates and reporting on issues important to voters. They want to hear from voters in Oneida, Vilas, Forest, Iron, Price, Lincoln, and Langlade Counties. Responses can be anonymous. Names will only be used with permission. Here is the link where you can ask those questions Election Questions (google.com)

Oneida County Conservation Congress Funding in Jeopardy?

County Board to vote on continuing funding to local Conservation Congress delegates.

By Beckie Gaskill September 20, 2024- Recently, Oneida County Conservation Congress chair Ed Choinski approached the county land and water committee to discuss a reimbursement for Wisconsin Conservation Congress (WCC) delegates from the county to attend the annual meeting of the Congress. This reimbursement, he said, had been ongoing for at least 40 years, but had stopped abruptly this year. There was some confusion regarding from where this expense reimbursement came out of the county, but, he said, the funding did come from the county somewhere. Both the department and the committee stated they understood the importance of the Conservation Congress and would look into how to get the reimbursement reinstated if possible.

But just what is the Wisconsin Conservation Congress and what does it do? The WCC is “the only statutory body in the state where citizens elect delegates to advise the Natural Resources Board (NRB) and the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) on how to responsibly manage Wisconsin’s natural resources for present and future generations,” according to the DNR website. In recent years, many have become aware of the WCC spring hearings. These hearings are held in April every year and they give the public the opportunity to weigh in on proposed rule changes that have to do with a variety of different areas of the state’s natural resources.

This year there were questions regarding possible enhanced wake regulations, which drew a large number of lake lovers and healthy water supporters. The Congress is made up of volunteer citizens from each county who represent the interests of those in their home county, bringing those thoughts, opinions and ideas to the full Congress. The Congress, then, brings their recommendations to the Natural Resources Board on these matters.

The whole process of the spring hearings is unique to Wisconsin. It allows all of the stakeholders in the state weigh in on natural resources matters that are important to them. Much of the spring hearings content is directed at anglers, hunters and trappers, those people who pay license fees that allow the state to manage our natural resources for us all.

At the spring hearings, delegates to the Conservation Congress are elected by those in attendance in person in each county. While the spring hearings questionnaire can be filled out online, a measure that began during the pandemic, delegates, by statute, can only be elected by people attending the spring hearings in person. This not only gives the public a chance to weigh in on natural resources issues, but also to elect the people they believe will best represent the interests of citizens of the county.

Because all WCC delegates are strictly volunteers, they shoulder all of their own expenses of doing this important work, attending meetings, talking to NRB members and various other activities associated with their WCC work. As Choinski said, for the last 40 years, Oneida County has reimbursed WCC delegates from the county for their annual meeting expenses. That total amount per year comes to approximately $2,500. Other counties also reimburse their WCC delegates for their annual meeting expenses.

When Choinski approached the land and water committee earlier this year, county conservationist Michele Sadauskas said she fully understood the importance of the WCC and what the delegates did for the people of the county, but her department budget simply could not fund the reimbursement. The committee then voted to include those funds into the 2025 budget. Should that budget be approved by the full county board, delegates would once again be reimbursed for their expenses for that meeting, alleviating that financial burden from them. This will be an important move to keep the county’s delegates on the Conservation Congress and fighting for the wishes of citizens in the area of natural resources.

OCCWA Position

We at OCCWA support the funding of our local Conservation Congress delegates. This uniquely Wisconsin process where local residents can weigh in on environmental issues is part of the very fiber of our Northwood's lifestyle of Water, Woods, Wildlife, and Way of Life.

In 2024, 678 Oneida County Residents participated in the Conservation Congress with another 2749 online inputs from respondents that indicated they recreate in the county. To put these numbers into perspective, of all the counties in Wisconsin, only Dane County with a much higher population produced slightly higher participation numbers than Oneida County. No surprise to us at OCCWA.

See 2024 Statewide County results here 2024_StatewideResultsByCounty.pdf (wisconsin.gov)

Bayfield County Raises Ante on Wave Boats

Bayfield and Jefferson counties ask WCA to back 700ft/30ft restrictions on enhanced waves.

By Dan Butkus September 5, 2024-Two recent developments have happened back-to-back concerning enhanced wake regulations. First up we have Bayfield County proposing a resolution to be considered at the upcoming Wisconsin Counties Association (WCA) Conference (September 22-24). Their resolution asks counties to back a state legislative standard of 700 ft from shore minimum and 30 ft depth minimum for operation of wake boats in wake mode, aka “bow-up”. In addition, Bayfield’s resolution supports local control for more restrictive local ordinances. Jefferson County’s Executive Committee, acting on behalf of the full Board, recently passed a motion in support of the Bayfield WCA Conference resolution, effectively casting a vote for the resolution.

Each member county of the WCA gets one vote on each resolution. The conference resolutions may be adopted, rejected, or frequently they are postponed indefinitely. Adopted resolutions from the Conference are used in WCA’s lobbying efforts in the coming year. Should Bayfield’s resolution succeed at the Conference later in September, it could be a huge boost for the effort to effectively regulate enhanced wakes.

The second bit of news came out on September 3rd. A press release announced the formation of a coalition of environmental groups that includes Wisconsin Lakes, Last Wilderness Alliance, Wisconsin Green Fire, Lakes at Stake, and Wisconsin Wildlife Federation. Earlier in May, this author addressed the Natural Resources Board (See photo) on behalf of these five organizations concerning devoting DNR staff resources to help Towns with local wake ordinances. The expressed purpose of the coalition is to protect Wisconsin’s waters from the devastating impact of enhanced wakes. They have proposed a policy independent of, but mirroring Bayfield’s WCA Conference resolution. The coalition goes further by identifying residual water in the wake boat ballast as violating Wisconsin’s statutes and administrative code regarding transport of aquatic invasive species. Ballast tanks cannot be completely emptied or decontaminated.
Several other groups have signed on to the original members’ proposal. They include Wisconsin Trout Unlimited, Walleyes for Tomorrow, Vilas County Lakes and Rivers Association, and the Yahara Fishing Club. More groups are looking over the proposal made by the coalition and are considering signing on in support of the policies. This marks a rare occasion where a number of environmental groups have come together in an effort to pressure the Wisconsin Legislature into action.

OCCWA Note: As you may recall Oneida County passed an enhanced wave resolution back in March with limits of 500ft from shore and 20 ft depth. Now Bayfield County leapfrogs those numbers with 7000ft/30ft. No disrespect to our County Board's efforts, they were proactive and protective while being one of the first counties to act in protecting our lakes. Below is an excerpt of our March 21st coverage on Oneida County's resolution.

" It took multiple meetings by both the County Board and the Conservation and UW Extension Committee to finally produce a resolution that the majority of the County Board could get behind, 13 ayes and 6 no. The end result was a Resolution on Enhanced Wake Regulations.

In the resolution the county asks for restricting enhanced wake creation closer than 500ft from shore and in depths less than 20ft. These limits are compromise between the most extreme protections and the woefully minimum numbers offered by Senator Felzkowski and Representative Swearengen's proposal of 200ft from shore and no depth restrictions.

The resolution also calls for the state to allow local governments to set their own limits above state minimums. This has become a necessary ask since most of the state legislation lately prohibits local entities to be more protective of their resources than state limits. Local control?"

Silent Sport Magazine article on Wakeboarding. For the local paddlers and there's a lot of us, Silent Sports Magazine does a fantastic job covering the enhanced wave issue. https://silentsportsmagazine.com/2024/01/02/silent-alarm-proposed-wakeboarding-bill-bad-for-paddling-fishing-and-invasive-species/

DNR Shares Recent Summer PFAS Test Results

Test results for newly drilled wells and from expanded surface water testing shared.

By Eric Rempala August 28, 2024- In recent conversations with several local DNR agents OCCWA was updated on the results of this summer's DNR testing activity in Stella.

Results from expanded surface water testing and newly drilled well tests are provided below. Bear in mind the testing so far has concentrated on the Stella area and any expanded testing to other parts of our county continue to be delayed by the Joint Finance Committee's blocking of designated state PFAS funding. One wonders when large corporation dollars rather than our tax dollars will be spent to clean up contamination they are responsible for. That my friends, is a story for another day.

The Wisconsin DNR shared their expanded Stella area PFAS surface water test results with OCCWA in map form (See Photo at right) These most recent test results are public record but not yet posted on the DNR/Stella website page. The DNR expects the results will be posted on their Stella PFAS page PFAS Contamination in the Town of Stella | | Wisconsin DNR as soon as their IT department processes them, but no timeline was given. Expanding the photo provided on your device should make viewing easier. You can also visit the DNR/Stella website to access previous surface water tests Stella and Rhinelander Surface Water PFAS Testing - Maps and Tables (wisconsin.gov) , and start to put together a bigger view of the Stella area surface water PFAS picture.

Though the map accounts for only PFOA and PFOS, two of the most prolific and oldest forms of PFAS, the DNR actually tested for 34 forms of PFAS which they provided in chart form which is also public record. Since the town of Stella contamination is most likely legacy contamination from many years of land spreading, one would suspect that the highest numbers discovered would be PFOA/ PFOS.

Water bodies that tested below State Water Standards (GOOD) for PFAS are Jennie Webber Creek @ Cross County DR, Jennie Webber Creek @ Roosevelt RD, North Pine Lake Creek, Lily Bass Lake, Tom Doyle Creek, Jennie Webber Lake, Skunk Creek @ River Road, Pine Lake Creek @ Forest Lane, Shepard Creek @ Timber Lane, Gudagest Creek 50 ft above Moen, Del Stengl Lake, Lela Creek, Gutagest Creek @ Spafford Road, Starks Springs Outlet, Starks Creek Downstream of Starks Spring, Angelo Lake Creek @ Tenderfoot Road, and an unnamed water body south of Starks Springs Outlet.

Water bodies tested over State Water Standards for PFOS are Starks Creek Downstream of Starks Springs, Unnamed Spring Run south of Starks Springs, and Sunset Lake.

Water Bodies tested over State Water Standards for PFOA are Jewel Creek, and Sunset Lake.

One important point to consider is that these new test results are only from surface water testing. To assume groundwater in the areas tested are free of PFAS would be a mistake. Only groundwater testing and well water testing will determine the safety of those water sources.

Along with providing the results of this summer's tests the DNR offered an initial assessment of the results.

DNR initial assessment:

"The major finding so far, confirmed from last year, is that the PFAS contamination in surface water appears to be confined in the waterbodies directly surrounding the Stella area where the high PFOA and PFOS values were initially found in private wells. Those waterbodies are Starks Cr, Snowden Lake, the Moen Chain of Lakes, Twin Lakes Creek, North Branch of the Pelican River and downstream of where the North Brach of Pelican River into the Pelican River. As mentioned in the town hall meeting in early May, we know that the general groundwater flow in this area is in a south and west direction, towards the Wisconsin River. Our general thought at this point is that it appears to be reaching these surface waters but doesn’t appear to be reaching surface water beyond the Moen Chain. For example, notice the low PFAS concentrations in lakes Thompson and George from 2023.

The main effort of 2024 was to expand the area sampled to the North and West and get a few additional samples around Stella/Starks that we didn’t sample in 2023. The areas around Jennie Webber and Tom Doyle are low, which is good news. We had public comment and are aware of the old paper plant landfill south of Jennie Webber Lake, and don’t see indications of PFAS coming from the landfill into surface water. Sunset Lake had the highest concentrations of PFOA and PFOS, which is unfortunate, although not too surprising since it’s close to Snowden and directly connected to Starks Creek, which were shown have very high PFAS concentrations in 2023. The high PFOA value at Jewel Cr, slightly above the PFOA surface water standard of 95 ng/L, appears to be unique to the creek itself although the PFOA concentration is elevated in Jennie Weber Cr downstream of the Jewel Cr confluence."

The DNR recommends using the DNR PFAS Interactive Viewer at https://dnr.wisconsin.gov/topic/PFAS/DataViewer where the latest test results have been entered. Simply click on the link and select " Launch PFAS Interactive Viewer".

WDNR shares latest results of expanded well testing in the town of Stella.

Below are the results provided by the DNR for the expanded PFAS testing in Stella. If you recall the DNR earlier expanded the free well testing zone in Stella by an extra half mile circumference. These results are for the expanded area only. We have not been informed of any more expansion of testing at this time. No details as to what these results indicate have been shared.

It bears repeating that the DNR has been extremely transparent with OCCWA on all inquiries made. Also remember the DNR resources (money) for PFAS remediation has been blocked for over a year by the legislature with no release in site.

DNR Results for expanded 2.5 to 3.0 miles area:

As of August 7, 2024:

116 Offer letters sent to part-time and full-time residents

35 Letters sent to residents that didn’t respond to the initial mailing, one more additional mailing will occur

17 letters sent to residents from 2.5 to 3.0 miles that paid for their testing and provided the results to the department. Offer of: resample or reimburse.

69 sampling kits picked-up

62 sampling kits received at the laboratory

57 private well sample results

7 Health Advisory Letters issued
11 wells with PFAS detected below DHS recommended health guidelines (20 ng/L for PFOA+PFOS)
39 wells with no PFAS detected

OCCWA questions on results from newly drilled wells.

1) How many wells have been drilled in Stella using DNR recommended drilling method? (Deep wells drilled into bedrock with cement plug)

ANSWER- To date we have analytical results for 15 ARPA well installations.

2)What percentage of new wells tested at zero PFAS detection?

ANSWER- 7 of 15 or roughly 47%

3)What Percentage of new wells tested at PFAS levels that can be filtered economically?

ANSWER- 8 of 15 or roughly 53%

4) Did any new wells result in PFAS levels that would still require high-cost filtration?

ANSWER- No wells or 0% The highest level treated to date is 2,500 ng/L with two units in series. The post treatment sample indicated 2.7 ng/L (PFOA).

One Point, OCCWA does not believe that 2,500 ng/l would fall under low-cost treatment options. Of course, one's interpretation of cost varies. We hope to have a better idea of the cost involved to filter 2,500 ng/l soon.

Again, we at OCCWA thank the DNR for their transparency responding to our questions. We have shared these results with the Oneida County Conservation and UW Extension Committee and expect discussion under their standing PFAS agenda item in the September meeting.

Opposition to Mining Stronger Than Ever

Protect the Willow sentiment still alive and well with old and new voices, "No still means No!"

By Kathleen Cooper August 22, 2024- I am so proud of my fellow citizens who, on very short notice, took the time from their busy lives to voice their opinions against mining in the Town of Lynne, and in Oneida County. 194 emails were sent to Tracy Hartman, the Oneida County Clerk, opposed to mining and the pro-mining resolution written by board chairman Scott Holewinski. During the August 20 County Board meeting, twenty-seven people spoke in person against mining. There were many more people in attendance who did not speak, but were there to show support against mining. We had only three days' notice to get the word out, and these concerned citizens, from all walks of life and all political persuasions, came together to oppose a threat to our way of life, our air, our land, and our water. I was so inspired by what I heard and what I saw. And our Oneida County Board did the right thing. In an unprecedented move, the board voted to defeat Holewinski’s resolution that would have begun to pave the way for mining in Lynne.

Every speaker had something unique to say. Kyle Kilbourn, a congressional candidate running against Tom Tiffany, took the time from his campaign to voice his opinion against mining in Oneida County, which is the opposite of Tiffany’s pro-mining stance. Eric Rempala spoke about what a sacrifice zone was, which seems like what the mining companies and Scott Holewinski want for our county. A man from Vilas County said sure, let's have mines in Oneida County, because the tourists will drive right through and spend their money in Vilas County. There were tribal citizens from the Lac du Flambeau tribe who reminded the board that this was ceded territory, and that the tribes would take any and all action, including legal action, against a mine in Oneida County. Another resident talked about the Flambeau Mine, which is said to be fully reclaimed, except for thirty-five acres that have been leaking toxic waste into the groundwater since 1997 (which means it is not reclaimed at all). An engineer spoke of the process of sulfide mining, and that there is no way to stop the leaching of sulfuric acid into the environment for perpetuity, with the taxpayers left to clean up the mess. Another woman said that it felt like deja vu to once again have to speak up against mining, especially after the 2018 referendum, that should have put the question to rest. Another mentioned that water-rich Oneida County is the fifth largest source of freshwater in the WORLD, so why are we talking about polluting it? Some people came with no intention to speak, but spoke anyway, without notes, their voices shaky with emotion, but their messages powerful, against mining.

Supervisor Steven Schrier spoke about the lack of transparency on the part of Scott Holewinski and Russ Fisher, who met with the junior mining company Green Light Metals at the Wisconsin Counties Association in Madison, without the consent of the county board, and said nothing about it until drawing up this resolution. Steven also mentioned that there are already ordinances in place for the procedures to follow for mining inquiries, so what is the purpose of this new resolution?

The basic message was “No means NO! We voted against mining in 2018, and we are telling you now! No mining in Oneida County!”

It was a victory for clean air, land, and water. The resolution was defeated by a vote of thirteen no and six ayes. However, it is not over. Certain county board members will stop at nothing, even going rogue, to impose their will on the people of Oneida County. Now that we know how powerful we are, and that we can assemble to fight the good fight at a moment’s notice, we need to be ready when the call comes to do it again. And again. For as long as it takes to finally put this issue to rest.

Many thanks to all of you who wrote emails, called their county board supervisors, showed up at the meeting, and spoke. We could never have defeated this resolution without you. We all came together for the common good, and I could not be prouder. Great job, Oneida County!

Supreme Court Chevron Ruling to Affect Resource Protection?

Initial concerns warranted but only time will reveal ruling's real impacts on Northwoods communities

By Tom Wiensch August 15, 2024-

Laws, Regulations and Court Rulings

In the United States, federal laws and rules are made in several ways. These include laws passed by Congress, case law made by courts, and regulations developed by federal agencies.

Traditionally, Congress has created broad laws to carry out public policy, with agencies then creating regulations to flesh out the details. Such regulation is, by necessity, often quite technical.

The Clean Water Act Example

The Clean Water Act establishes the basic structure for regulating the discharge of pollutants into U.S. waters. The Act also requires the Environmental Protection Agency to create regulations to implement the act.

Under that authority, the E.P.A has created regulations relating to such things as effluent limitations for various industries such as mineral and mine processing, petroleum refining, and waste combustion.

These regulations are science-based and include limits on the amounts of specific chemicals, amounts of suspended solids, and the pH level of effluent which may be discharged into water.

Other Federal Agencies

In addition to the E.P.A. other federal agencies are required to enact regulations. Examples of such agencies, along with examples of the things they regulate include:

1. The Food and Drug Administration - The safety and efficacy of human medicines.

2. The Federal Aviation Administration - Airline safety.

3. The Securities and Exchange Commission – Protection of investors.

4. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission - The disposal of high-level radioactive waste.

The Need for Expertise

Obviously, neither Congress, the President, nor members of the judiciary are equipped with the skills and knowledge necessary to write all of the kinds of detailed, often scientifically based regulations necessary to carry out the aims of broadly written statutes.

For this reason, our government employs agencies and gives those agencies the authority to attend to the finer details of making laws effective. To enact regulations, federal agencies employ chemists, biologists, economists, engineers, physicians, statisticians, and other highly trained and specialized experts. Given the relatively broad nature of federal laws, and the manner in which they are made, it is common for there to be situations in which the laws require interpretation.

The Chevron Case

In 1984, The United States Supreme handed down a decision relating to federal agencies in the case of Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc.

The Chevron case involved a challenge to the decision of President Ronald Reagan’s E.P.A. to narrow the definition of “source” as it applied to air pollution under the Clean Air Act. The change allowed some of those who discharged pollutants to avoid E.P.A. review in certain situations.

The Natural Resources Defense Council sued, challenging the legality of that narrow definition. The United States Supreme Court held against the NRDC. In doing so, the Court ruled that, when laws contain ambiguous terms, courts should broadly defer to the E.P.A. and other independent governmental agencies who interpret those terms, so long as the agencies interpret the terms in ways that are reasonable, and not arbitrary, capricious, or manifestly contrary to the statute.

The legal doctrine of “stare decisis” requires that courts must generally adhere to prior appellate-level court decisions. In the wake of the Chevron decision, American courts did just that, treating Chevron as settled law. In the forty years after Cheron was decided, it was cited as law in thousands of decisions by American courts.

The End of Chevron Deference

On June 28th, 2024, the United States Supreme Court overturned Chevron in the cases of Loper Bright Enterprises v Raimondo and Relentless v Department of Commerce.

In the majority opinion, which was written by Chief Justice John Roberts, the Court ruled that stare decisis did not apply because the Chevron Doctrine was “unworkable” due to the difficulty in determining whether a statute is ambiguous.

The majority also ruled that Chevron had to be overturned because the Administrative Procedure Act required courts to apply their own judgment in cases involving ambiguities in the law. Interestingly, the relevant portion of the Administrative Procedure Act was enacted in 1966. So, that act was in effect at the time the Chevron case was decided, and the Chevron Court was aware of it.

The majority rejected the argument that agencies staffed with scientists and other experts are better suited than judges to decide how ambiguities in the law should be resolved. The Court also ruled though, that the overturning of Chevron did not require that other past cases that had been decided based on Chevron had to be overturned.

Justice Elena Kagan wrote a dissenting opinion. In her dissent, Kagan disputed both the majority’s reasoning in not following precedent and in determining that the 1966 statute required that courts give no deference to agencies.

In that dissent, Justice Kagan gave examples of several previous cases involving scientific/technical issues, which relied on the Chevron decision. The examples included cases which addressed such questions as:

1. Whether population segments under the endangered species act should be considered as separate based on geographical separation, genetic variance, or otherwise.

2. How “geographic areas” should be measured for the purpose of determining Medicare reimbursement to hospitals based on wage differences in different “geographic areas.”

3. What levels of noise would be consistent with “natural quiet” in the context of a law aimed at reducing aircraft noise over The Grand Canyon.

One of the cases that Justice Kagan cited involved the Public Health Service Act which requires the FDA to regulate biological products including proteins. The court handling that case had to address the question of when an alpha amino acid polymer qualifes as such a protein, and whether it must have a specific, defined sequence of amino acids.

In her opinion Justice Kagan wrote that agencies are in a better position to resolve ambiguities, stating:

“. . . because agencies often know things about a statute’s subject matter that courts could not hope to. The point is especially stark when the statute is of a “scientific or technical nature.”” “Agencies are staffed with “experts in the field” who can bring their training and knowledge to bear on open statutory questions. Consider, for example, the first bulleted case above. When does an alpha amino acid polymer qualify as a “protein”?” I don’t know many judges who would feel confident resolving that issue.”

The Future

It’s important to remember that the Chevron deference only applied in cases involving statutory ambiguities. Also, Congress can pass and amend laws so that it is clear how much deference it wishes to grant to administrative agencies. Doing so could make the role of agencies and their experts clearer. Of course, given the fact that gridlock seems to have become a near constant feature of our federal government, that may not be easy to do.

Additionally, The Court made it clear that courts still have the ability to “seek aid from those responsible for implementing particular statutes.” In that regard, the Court mentioned the “respect historically given to Executive Branch Interpretations” (Sometimes known as “Skidmore Deference.”) The frequency and degree to which such respect will be given in the future is unclear.

Some commentators expect that the Loper Bright case will mean enormous changes in environmental law, others disagree, while still others say it is too early to tell. Given the sheer number of cases which previously relied on the Chevron doctrine, it is easy to imagine the number and broad range of administrative laws that courts may have to address in the future without the deference required under Chevron.

When it comes to Wisconsin, it is worth noting that the Court’s opinion relates specifically to a federal law doctrine, and the Court, in overturning Chevron, relied on a federal statute. Thus, the decision would not seem to specifically apply to Wisconsin law.

That said, many federal environmental laws have applicability to situations arising in the various states. For example, the Clean Water Act, the Clean Air Act, the Endangered Species Act, the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, the Pollution Prevention Act and many other federal laws apply in Wisconsin.

Although Loper Bright was only decided on June 28th of this year, there have already been reports (see link at bottom) that the United States Air Force is refusing to comply with an E.P.A. cleanup order concerning PFAS contamination in Tucson Arizona. Reports indicate that Air Force Attorneys are relying on the Loper Bright decision in taking that position. Reporting on that matter is somewhat scant, and it’s unclear how the Loper Bright decision is being argued to apply, and what, if any, statutory ambiguity is at issue.

Of course, PFAS cleanup has been an important topic in Oneida County, as two City of Rhinelander Wells, many private wells, and the Moen’s Chain of lakes have been found to contain PFAS.

Also, regulations under the Clean Water and Clean Air Acts govern mining and mineral processing. Mining has long been a hotly contested issue in Oneida County and other parts of Wisconsin.

In coming years, many questions are likely to arise concerning the Loper Bright Decision and its effects on Environmental Law, including:

1. How greatly will Loper Bright change environmental law?

2. How frequently will judges rely on administrative agency interpretations?

3. To what extent will the political philosophies of individual judges affect the ways in which they interpret legal ambiguities, and the extent to which they rely on administrative agency interpretations in doing so?

4. Will Congress amend some of our most fundamental environmental laws so that the situations in which it wants agencies to interpret law becomes clear?

5. How will Loper Bright affect the mining permit and remediation processes for potential mines?

6. How will Loper Bright affect PFAS regulation and cleanup?

7. How will Loper Bright affect other clean water and air and other environmental issues?

These questions will only be answered with time, litigation, and perhaps acts of Congress.

Note – This piece is not a legal opinion and should not be taken as one or be legally relied upon.

US air force avoids PFAS water cleanup, citing supreme court’s Chevron ruling | US military | The Guardian

Welcome to Oneida County Clean Waters Action