Welcome to Oneida County Clean Waters Action
Exploring the issues that affect our rivers, lakes and ground water.
Clean Water Updates
Current issues updated as necessary to keep our Clean Water supporters informed.
Posted 9/30/24- Silent Sports Magazine covers (American Stewards of Liberty) ASL influence in Oneida County Mining saga.
OCCWA had the pleasure of meeting Silent Sports Magazine writer Michael McFadzen during the mining dust-up last month. Silent Sports magazine is a Midwest based publication which is actually available in paper form, but also have a website you can visit. Silent sports have always been popular in the Northwoods and with the formation of the recent 70,000-acre Pelican River Forest one would expect a boost in an already vibrant local tourism industry.
You can check out Michael's article here Out-of-State Group Influencing Wisconsin’s Natural Resource Policies - Silent Sports (silentsportsmagazine.com)
Our local secret ASL group might not exactly appreciate the coverage, but we at OCCWA say "Thanks for coming Silent Sports!".
Posted 9/27/24- Wisconsin Manufacturers and Commerce (WMC) lawsuit to weaken the Wisconsin Spills Law headed to WI Supreme Court.
Initiated in 2021 WMC's lawsuit to weaken the Spills Law is headed to the Wisconsin Supreme Court. The court’s decision could have far-reaching implications for the state’s ability to protect Wisconsinites from toxic environmental pollution. Local implications of the lawsuit will affect the town of Stella as well as any other newly discovered PFAS contamination in our county. Midwest Environmental Advocates who are participating in the lawsuit defending The Spills Law stated
"Under the Spills Law, the DNR is currently providing critical assistance to people in Marinette, Peshtigo, the Town of Stella in Oneida County, the Town of Campbell in La Crosse County, and other communities impacted by PFAS contamination.
Midwest Environmental Advocates (MEA) has been participating in the case since the beginning on behalf of Citizens for a Clean Wausau, Clean Water Action Council of Northeast Wisconsin, River Alliance of Wisconsin, Wisconsin Environmental Health Network, and Doug Oitzinger, a former mayor of Marinette and a current alderperson."
This WMC lawsuit is at the heart of our states political debacle of attempting to provide money to assist Wisconsin landowners with PFAS assistance. The legislature stepped in to accomplish WMC's objective of weakening of the Spills Law while withholding $125 million in PFAS assistance as the carrot. The governor choosing to protect then Spills Law failed to bite, which leads us to the current stalemate. It now appears the Wisconsin Supreme Court will at least decide the WMC portion of this drama. There's no telling how long the legislative nonsense will last.
Midwest Environmental Advocates statement here Supreme Court Agrees to Take WMC Toxic Pollution Case | Midwest Environmental Advocates (midwestadvocates.org)
Posted 9/10/24- Wisconsin Conservation Voters starts online petition to set groundwater standards for PFAS.
In a completely ridiculous process started 7 years ago Wisconsin legislators failed to allow standards to be set for PFAS in groundwater. Groundwater by the way, which is drinking water for over 50% of our state's residents. One wonders if those who source water from their own well are considered Citizen, Second Class?
The initial buffoonery started when after a process lasting years, the National Resources Board (NRB) dropped the ball on setting groundwater PFAS standards. A Wisconsin Examiner Article documented the shenanigans involved- Conservation groups lament policy damage of Prehn’s extra time on Natural Resources Board • Wisconsin Examiner Excerpt- "In February 2022, (Fred) Prehn and the other Republican-appointed members of the (NRB) board refused to approve a limit for certain types of PFAS pollution in the state’s groundwater. While the board did set limits for drinking and surface waters, the decision against groundwater limits could potentially leave the millions of Wisconsinites who get their drinking water from private wells without any recourse if their well is contaminated."
The legislative nonsense that followed the NRB debacle is documented by another Wisconsin Examiner article Pro-polluter PFAS bill would leave taxpayers holding the bag • Wisconsin Examiner Excerpt- "In the last state budget, Gov. Evers proposed investing over $100 million for PFAS testing and cleanup. Republican legislators responded by setting aside $125 million, initially making it seem like they were surpassing the governor’s proposal. However, there was a catch – the spending authority was removed from the budget, ensuring that the money wouldn’t leave Madison anytime soon."
So that brings us to the here and now with 50% of Wisconsin residents facing zero options from the state when it comes to PFAS contamination. The Wisconsin Conservation Voters online petition states " We are calling on the Wisconsin Legislature for urgent action on PFAS so all Wisconsinites can have access to safe groundwater NOW. For more than seven years, Wisconsin residents and families have been waiting for enforceable, health-based standards for our state's primary source of drinking water: groundwater. This public health crisis requires emergency action as residents continue to drink water that is contaminated with PFAS levels above safe drinking water thresholds established by EPA. The Wisconsin State Legislature should act immediately to implement state groundwater standards equivalent to the EPA Safe Drinking Water Standards."
OCCWA has joined a coalition of groups and residents struggling with PFAS contamination and are pressing Wisconsin lawmakers to set groundwater standards for the chemicals in a new petition. Please consider signing the Wisconsin Conservation Voters petition at the following link https://secure.everyaction.com/b5cx_fOIa0KMBi7Z3Wwr4Q2
Pushback on legislative indifference in an election year can be very persuasive.
Posted 9/19/2024- Blue Green Algae Alert
With heavy rains this summer increasing nutrient runoff and now longer than normal high temperatures, blue green algae blooms are showing up in Oneida County. Be aware that these types of algal blooms can be toxic to humans as well as pets.
DNR health warnings:
If you think you are experiencing symptoms related to exposure to blue-green algae (e.g., stomach cramps, diarrhea, vomiting, headache, fever, muscle weakness, difficulty breathing), contact your doctor or the Wisconsin Poison Center (1-800-222-1222) right away.
If your pet displays symptoms such as seizures, vomiting or diarrhea after contact with surface water, contact your veterinarian right away.
What are Blue Green Algae?
From the DNR website Blue-Green Algae | | Wisconsin DNR
Blue-green algae, also known as Cyanobacteria, are a group of photosynthetic bacteria that many people refer to as "pond scum." Blue-green algae are most often blue-green in color, but can also be blue, green, reddish-purple, or brown. Blue-green algae generally grow in lakes, ponds and slow-moving streams when the water is warm and enriched with nutrients like phosphorus or nitrogen.
When environmental conditions are just right, blue-green algae can grow very quickly in number. Most species are buoyant and will float to the surface, where they form scum layers or floating mats. When this happens, we call this a "blue-green algae bloom." In Wisconsin, blue-green algae blooms generally occur between mid-June and late September, although in rare instances, blooms have been observed in winter, even under the ice.
How can you reduce Blue Green Algae blooms?
Locally, landowners and interested citizens can help minimize the problems associated with algal blooms by working together with partners in their watershed to reduce the amount of nutrients that reach nearby lakes, streams and ponds. You can help reduce nutrient concentrations by promoting the following practices in your community:
- Use lawn fertilizers only where truly needed.
- Prevent yard debris (e.g., leaves, grass clippings, etc.) from washing into storm drains.
- Support local ordinances that require silt curtains for residential and commercial construction sites.
- Plant and maintain vegetative buffer strips along shorelines of lakes, ponds and streams. Note: Native plants are much more effective at filtering runoff than the typical grass species found on residential lawns.
WXPR coverage here Warm September leads to lingering blue green algae blooms on Northwoods lakes | WXPR
DNR YouTube Video Blue-green algae (youtube.com)
Posted 9/4- Five organizations form coalition to address Wave Boats on Wisconsin lakes. Our friends at Wisconsin lakes are one of the five organizations that have formed a coalition to protect our Northwood lakes. They along with Wisconsin’s Green Fire, Lakes at Stake Wisconsin, Last Wilderness Alliance, and the Wisconsin Wildlife Federation shared a press release Wisconsin Lakes, Wisconsin’s Green Fire, Lakes at Stake Wisconsin, Last Wilderness Alliance, Wisconsin Wildlife Federation: New Coalition Created to Protect WI Lakes – WisPolitics stating their intentions to work together to form meaningful legislation regulating Wave Boats.
We at OCCWA have worked with Wisconsin Lakes, Wisconsin's Green Fire, and Last Wilderness Alliance on this and other issues and can tell you that our lakes are in good hands. Barring our legislators pandering to the boating industry rather than acknowledging the wave (No pun intended) of public concern, we hope sensible science-based legislation will be adopted.
Wisconsin Lakes website coverage Wisconsin Lakes Joins Coalition Calling for WDNR Aid on Local Wakesports Ordinances - Wisconsin Lakes | Wisconsin Lakes
WSAW news coverage New coalition aims to protect Wisconsin lakes from wake damage caused by boating (wsaw.com)
Shoosh, secret planning, not secret anymore.
Well, the cat is out of the bag. American Stewards of Liberty (ASL), the group that none of our state or local legislators want to admit they're working with admitted they're working in Oneida County. An excerpt from the ASL 2024 Strategic Plan states "In Wisconsin, it is to stop the federal funding of a conservation easement that will permanently restrict 56,000 acres of forest land from being fully utilized". Yes that 56,000-acres of forest is our newest Oneida County gem, Pelican River Forest.
Also, less secret but every bit as interesting is ASL's involvement with the Heritage Foundation's Project 25. Another ASL 2024 Strategic Plan excerpt "American Stewards of Liberty is also a contributor to other organization’s efforts, such as the The Heritage Foundation’s “Project 2025.” We are serving to help develop executive and secretarial level policies that restore property rights for the Department of the Interior and the Department of Agriculture that will be ready to be implemented under the next conservative administration."
Well, what exactly does restore the property rights for the Department of the Interior mean? In a roundabout way, could it mean mining in Oneida County? Principle #4 in the ASL Strategic Plan states " Federal lands must be managed for the benefit of the American people. The principal uses of these lands shall be national security, the development and utilization of domestic energy supplies, mineral extraction, timber production, domestic livestock grazing, wildlife habitat, rights-of-way, outdoor recreation and other constructive uses." Yes, Mineral Extraction is a fancy name for mining.
Hmm, allow private corporations to mine on Federal lands (citizens land) for free? Unlike the oil industry, the mining industry pays no royalties to the government for exploitation of Federal land. Following along these principals, how long before Oneida County is back to proposing mining in our county forests (citizens forests)?
Well, funny you should ask, Oneida County's P&D Committee has just proposed adding mining language to the county's newest version of their Land Use Comprehensive Plan. The proposed language is "Allow for necessary metallic mining through the County’s non-metallic mining and metallic mining exploration, bulk sampling, and mining ordinance while balancing the interest of County residents to comply with state laws." So, what do you think?
Residents should be aware that a public hearing and County Board vote will be coming up later this year on a new Comprehensive Plan. If you're not comfortable with anti-conservation language in the plan, we urge you to speak up by attending the hearing or contacting your County Supervisor. See Supervisor contact info here County Board – Oneida County, WI (oneidacountywi.gov)
For the latest news on ASL's secret activity in our county see Wisconsin Examiner article by Henry Redman, Right-wing opponent to conservation lists Wisconsin as part of 2024 plans • Wisconsin Examiner
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.
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)
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!
County Residents Reaffirm No Mining in Lynne
County Board agrees with public and rejects latest Mining Resolution proposal.
By Eric Rempala August 20, 2024- In 1990 a sulfide ore deposit was discovered under the lands owned by Oneida County in the Town of Lynne in Western Oneida County which are enrolled in the County Forest Program. The ore body consists primarily of Zinc, but also contains significant concentrations of lead, copper, and silver, and a minor amount of gold. For more information, see the Noranda Minerals Wisconsin, Corp. “Summary Geologic and Geotechnical Report for the Lynne Project” which is available on the Oneida County Website - https://www.oneidacountywi.gov/archive/mining/Lynne%20Summary%20%26%20App%20C-F9c68.pdf?docid=10160&locid=135
In 2018, an advisory referendum was put to the voters of Oneida County asking whether they would like to see a mine in the Town of Lynne. The question read like this:
“After performing their due diligence, should Oneida County allow leasing of County owned lands in the Town of Lynne for the purpose of metallic mineral exploration, prospecting, bulk sampling, and mining?”
The citizens of Oneida County soundly defeated that referendum by a vote of 11,927 to 7129 (62% to 48%.) Many people hoped that, with an overwhelming majority of citizens having expressed their view, the issue of mining in the Town of Lynne was dead.
This summer, however, the members of the Oneida County Board received unsolicited inquiries from two different mining companies.
On Friday August 16th, two business days in advance of its August 20th Board meeting, Oneida County posted an agenda for the meeting that included: “Offered by Supervisor Scott Holewinski to Entertain Any Unsolicited Inquiries for Exploration, Prospecting, Bulk Sampling and Mining Operations on County Owned Land Following Procedures Set forth in Chapter 9.61 of the County Ordinance.”
Resolution 75-2024 was attached to the agenda. That resolution, which was offered by Mr. Holewinski rather than any committee of the County Board, stated that Mr. Holewinski and the chair of the Forestry, Land and Outdoor Recreation Committee had received unsolicited inquiries from two different mining companies.
The resolution, if passed, would have designated the Forestry, Land, and Outdoor Recreation Committee as the body to “entertain” unsolicited offers from mining companies for exploration, mining, etc. on County owned lands.
By the time of the meeting _approximately 200 people sent emails to the County Clerk about this issue. Every one of those emails opposed mining. Dozens of citizens attending the August 20th meeting. 32 of them spoke during the public comment section. Of those 32, 31 spoke against mining, while one spoke in favor of gathering more information.
Those speaking against mining in the Town of Lynne, included the Lynne Town Chair Jeff Viegut, members of the Lac du Flambeau Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians, and a number of other citizens.
Celeste Hockings, Natural Resources Director of the Lac du Flambeau band appeared on behalf of Tribal President John Johnson Sr. Ms. Hockings read a letter to the board. The letter stated that the Band is opposed to mining in Oneida County. Another member of the Lac du Flambeau band (His name could not be determined from the meeting tape) read from a resolution or similar document opposing mining in Oneida County and indicating that the tribal council would seek any and all legal avenues to challenge any mining in Oneida County.
Citizens speaking in opposition to a mine in the town of Lynne raised a number of issues, including the proximity of the ore body to the Willow Flowage, the relatively wet nature of the land above or near the ore body, the number of lakes, streams and wetlands in the area, the reliance of Oneida County on recreational tourism dollars, the potential for contamination of surface and groundwater by sulfuric acid and heavy metals which are present in sulfide mine tailings, and the feeling that the board should represent the will of the citizens as expressed in the referendum vote.
One board member mused about the potential that mining technology may have changed in six years since the referendum. Given the fact that sulfide mines produce tailings, and sulfide tailings leach sulfuric acid when exposed to water, it’s unclear what type of technology might now exist that would prevent or minimize contamination.
At the meeting, Board Chair Scott Holewinski disclosed that he had been contacted by the mining companies back on June 14, 2024, and in the days after that, but that he did not respond to them. He also recounted that County Board Member Russ Fisher told him that he had been contacted by Kyle Christianson of the Wisconsin Counties Association (WCA) about County business.
Mr. Holewinski said that he himself then contacted Mr. Christianson on three occasions in July, and that Mr. Christianson inquired about the County’s stance on the Lynne Deposit and said that the WCA was working to help counties get the best deals with mining companies. Mr. Holewinski also said that Mr. Christianson asked for a meeting in Madison to discuss potential mining at the Lynne Deposit.
Mr. Holewinski said that he traveled to Madison on August 12th where he and Board Member Russ Fisher met with Stephen Donohue of Green Light Metals, Mark O’Connell, President and CEO of the WCA, Kyle Christianson, and Attorney Andrew Phillips who represented the WCA. Mr. Holewinski said they discussed the history of the Lynne Deposit, other deposits in Northern Wisconsin, the mining ordinance, and “the resolution that I’m taking to the County Board in August.” Mr. Holewinski also said that he told them that he wanted to “get the will of the County Board before any formal discussion of the Lynne Deposit should move forward.”
After Mr. Holewinski spoke, County Board Member Steven Schreier asked questions and raised issues about the sequence of events, transparency, why the matter wasn’t simply referred to the Forestry Committee, the involvement, if any, of the WCA or a mining company in preparing an Oneida County Resolution, and whether Mr. Holewinski expected to be reimbursed by the County for travel costs.
Oneida County Forest Director Jill Nemec indicated to the board that the land containing the ore deposit is enrolled in the County Forest Program, and that, before mining could take place, there would be a potential that the Wisconsin DNR would have to approve and that, depending on the type of mining, the land might have to be removed from the County Forest Program, which is apparently a fairly involved process.
At the meeting, Karl Jennrich, Head of the County Planning and Zoning Department read to the board portions of the County Code. Some members of the board seemed to believe the code already gives authority to the Forestry, Land, and Outdoor Recreation Committee to receive unsolicited offers from mining companies.
After discussion, the Board voted 13-6 to reject resolution 2024. At this time, it’s not clear what will happen next concerning the County’s dealing with mining companies over the ore body in the Town of Lynne.
WXPR Coverage: Resolution to clarify procedure raises concerns of mining interest in Oneida County | WXPR
WJFW Coverage: Meeting report begins at the 7-minute mark 5pm Newscast | | wjfw.com
Thank you one and all.
Personally, it was wonderful seeing many of those who stood tall during the 2018 Protect the Willow action again. It was also gratifying to see new faces both young and old voicing their concerns. Public participation such as this warms one's heart and reminds us of what we can accomplish together protecting our most valuable resource, clean water.
County Chairman Puts Mining in Lynne Back on the Table!
Public urged to participate in hastily organized attempt to override 2018 referendum results.
By Dan Butkus August 17, 2024-
Sulfide mining in Lynne? Here we go again.
An Oneida County Resolution, #75-2024, was introduced to next week’s County Board meeting on August 20. It seeks to allow the Forestry, Land, and Outdoor Recreation Committee to “entertain unsolicited inquiries for exploration, prospecting, bulk sampling, and mining operation on County owned land…”. This would run counter to the County referendum which indicated over 62% of those voting opposed a metallic sulfide mine in the Town of Lynne. In 2012, the County Board failed to adopt previous resolutions that would have allowed the committee to proceed with leasing County Land for mining. This resolution being offered on Tuesday would open the doors of county land to mining exploration.
Why now? (you might ask) It seems the County has received two such unsolicited inquiries for exploration. The County has not yet responded. And it looks like Mr. Holewinski, who is sponsoring this resolution on his own, wants to be able to say “yes” to the mining companies. This resolution did not come up through committee, but spontaneously appeared out of Scott Holewinski’s desires to open the doors of Oneida County to metallic mining.
First, Valhalla Metals out of Fairbanks, Alaska, back in June wished to meet with the County to discuss leasing land from Oneida County, in the Town of Lynne. Obviously, it’s not to set up a campground and picnic tables. Then as recently as last week, Green Light Metals met with Chairman Holewinski and Supervisor Fisher in Madison. It was there that Mr. Holewinski indicated he’d need to pass a resolution at the County Board meeting the following week before they could discuss the opportunity.
Springing this on the constituents of Oneida County without proper vetting at the committee level is a pathetic attempt to ram this through. It falls in line with Mr. Holewinski’s desire to change the Comprehensive Land Use Plan relative to mining. From prior articles, you know this to be the handiwork of American Stewards of Liberty.
Thing is, it may work unless you act. I ask that you contact your County Supervisor and express your opposition to this resolution. Show up at the County Meeting on Tuesday, August 20. It’s at 9:30 am in the County Board Room. Register a public comment against this resolution. Tell them they cannot sneak this through.
**OCCWA Take Action**
OCCWA urges anyone who can attend the meeting on Tuesday at 9:30 to please attend. We look forward to seeing you! See Details County Board – Resolution packet is attached to the agenda – Oneida County, WI (oneidacountywi.gov)
Also, if you cannot attend, we ask that you take a few short minutes to send an email in opposition of mining on County Forest before 4pm Monday to County Clerk Tracy Hartman occlerk@oneidacountywi.gov In your email you should state your name and address as well a clear statement of your position. All emails received before 4 pm Monday will be acknowledged during the County Board Meeting on Tuesday.
As you know OCCWA does not accept money, rather we depend on the people of Oneida County to help in protecting our county's water and resources.
Thank you for your consideration.
Special thanks- to Dan Butkus for penning this article. Dan stepped in without hesitation to help with very tight timeline due to the county's hastiness on this issue. From all of us at OCCWA, thank you!
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.
More Than Our Climate is Changing
The effects of a warmer climate on our Northwood landscape and native species.
By Tom Wiensch July 30, 2024-
Photo credit Len Hyke
CLIMATE CHANGE AND THE NATURAL RESOURCES OF WISCONSIN AND THE GREAT LAKES REGION: The changing landscape and species of the Northwoods
Global warming and the climate change that it causes have been topics of serious discussion in America and around the world for over 20 years. In Wisconsin and other parts of the Upper Great Lakes Region, climate change seems to be reducing the range and abundance of a number of species of animals and reducing the clarity of lakes. Examples of affected species include walleye, brook trout, loons, flying squirrels, and snowshoe hares in Wisconsin and moose in neighboring Michigan and Minnesota. It also appears that, if climate change continues, the composition of our forests will change.
The remainder of this article will discuss the effects of climate change on these species and the habitat in which they live.
WALLEYE
Walleyes are one of the most popular fish among Wisconsinites. Sadly, a 2018 study published in the Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Species has demonstrated that walleye numbers in Wisconsin waters are declining. i
There may be multiple factors affecting the number of walleyes in Wisconsin waters. For instance, a 2018 study published by the National Academy of Sciences showed that walleye were being overharvested.ii Importantly though, that study showed that the reason for overharvest was that bag limits were set based on walleye abundance, without properly considering walleye productivity.
Another study published in February 2024 in the Journal of Limnology and Oceanography Letters has shown that changing ice-out dates are affecting the ability of young walleye to survive.iii It used to be that ice left Wisconsin lakes at approximately the same time each year. Now, as air temperatures have increased, the ice-out dates are highly variable, often happening much earlier than they used to.Walleye are one of the most popular fish among Wisconsinites. Sadly, a 2018 study published in the Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Species has demonstrated that walleye numbers in Wisconsin waters are declining.
The study has shown that walleye used to spawn shortly after ice-out, which meant that when the eggs hatched and young walleye began feeding, zooplankton were present as an abundant food source. Although walleye have begun spawning slightly earlier than they used to, they still spawn later than the new ice out times, often meaning that many young walleye starve to death due to the lack of zooplankton to eat.
BROOK TROUT
Although perhaps not as popular among anglers as walleye, brook trout are the only stream trout native to Wisconsin. Many anglers consider brook trout to be among the most beautiful of fish.
Non-native brown trout from Europe and rainbow trout from the West Coast have been stocked in some Wisconsin streams and in some streams these trout, especially browns, have established breeding populations. A number of streams, especially in the driftless area of Wisconsin, contain large numbers of brown trout and in many cases, few if any brook trout.
Brook trout require colder water than do brown and rainbow trout. The Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources has found that the number of brook trout in Wisconsin has been declining, especially since 2006.iv The DNR has also found that higher summer temperatures have benefited brown trout at the expense of brook trout.v So far, most of the impact on brook trout has occurred in Southern Wisconsin.
The Upper Wolf River, Wisconsin’s largest trout river offers an example of what warming temperatures do to trout. Until its character was changed by early logging, the Wolf was a brook trout stream.vi While it still contains some brook trout, the Upper Wolf now contains brown trout, many of which are stocked and many smallmouth bass.vii Increased warming is likely to further reduce the ability of the Wolf to support trout.
LOONS
Loons are one of the most beloved bird species in Northern Wisconsin and across the northern lakes of the United States. Their numbers have been substantially declining in recent years. A study has shown that the loon population in Wisconsin has decreased by 22% over the 27 years leading up to 2020.viii
The study found that loon chick body mass, and the number of loon chicks had fallen dramatically, such that the number of immature (not yet breeding) loons had declined by 46% in 27 years.
A study published in the journal “Ecology” has shown that loon populations in Northern Wisconsin are declining due to a decrease in water clarity caused by an increase in heavy summer rains, which in turn have been caused by climate change.ix The heavier summer rains cause more material to wash into lakes, making the water murkier. Loons are sight-predators, and decreased water quality makes it more difficult for them to catch fish for themselves and their young. This has led to underweight, unhealthy loon chicks, many of which die before reaching adulthood.
FLYING SQUIRRELS
There are two distinct species of flying squirrels in Wisconsin – Northern Flying Squirrels and Southern Flying Squirrels.
A 2020 study by the Natural Resources Institute of the University of Minnesota – Duluth has shown that the northern end of the range of southern flying squirrels is moving north by as much as 12 miles per year.x Meanwhile, the northern flying squirrels are being driven north, and are now listed as a “species of concern” by the states of Wisconsin and Michigan.xi
SNOWSHOE HARES
Snowshoe hares are also known as “northern varying hares.” These relatively large hares reside in Northern Wisconsin and other northern states. The Pauli Lab of the University of Wisconsin – Madison reports that the southern end of the range of the snowshoe hare in Wisconsin has receded north by over 18 miles since 1980 and that this range reduction has been caused by a lack of snow cover.xii Snowshoe hares are brown colored in the summer, and white in the winter. As the snow season decreases, they are increasingly left with
white coats at a time when they need to be brown to be camouflaged to avoid excess predation. This has led to a reduction in numbers in the southern part of their range.
MOOSE
Moose are present in Minnesota and Upper Michigan and are occasionally seen in Wisconsin. The reintroduction of 59 moose to the Upper Peninsula in the 1980’s spurred hope that the species might become plentiful in the U.P. again. Some hoped that moose would migrate south and redevelop a permanent herd in Wisconsin.
Unfortunately, the moose population in Michigan seems to have topped out in the range of 400-500 animals, with the population not having increased from 2019 to 2023.xiii It is not entirely clear why the Michigan moose population has plateaued and why not enough moose have migrated to Wisconsin to establish a stable population here. The situation involving moose in Minnesota, however, may be instructive regarding the moose in Michigan and Wisconsin.
The moose of Minnesota have been in serious decline, and that decline has been studied. Between 2006 and 2017, the moose population of Minnesota declined by 58%.xiv There are two distinct populations of moose in Minnesota, one in the northeast and one in the northwest. The population in the Northwest has declined from a one-time 4000 animals to 100 animals by the year 2000.xv Although there are multiple reasons for the decline of moose in Minnesota, one of the causes is an over-abundance of ticks, caused by warmer winters and longer summers.xvi Colder weather used to kill ticks. Warmer temperatures mean that many more survive the winter to become parasites on moose and other animals. A study in the State of New Hampshire found that 70% of moose calves there were dying, with most deaths being caused by ticks.xvii
PLANT POPULATIONS
The contiguous 48 United States is divided into 12 plant hardiness zones. The United States Department of Agriculture develops maps showing the zones.
These temperature-based maps allow gardeners and others to determine what plants they will be able to grow.
The 1990 pant hardiness map, based on data from 1974-1986, placed Rhinelander Wisconsin in hardiness zone 3.xviii In 2012, Rhinelander Wisconsin was in hardiness zone 4a, with average coldest winter temperatures of between -30 and -25 degrees Fahrenheit. By 2023, Rhinelander became part of hardiness zone 4b, with average coldest winter temperatures between -25and -20 Fahrenheit.xix
If this trend continues, the make-up of the plant communities of Northern Wisconsin will likely change. The Environmental Protection Agency has issued a bulletin titled “What Climate Change Means for Wisconsin.”xx That bulletin indicates:
“Changing the climate is likely to shift the ranges of plants and
animals. For example, rising temperatures could change the
composition of Wisconsin’s forests. As the climate warms, the
populations of paper birch, quaking aspen, balsam fir, and black
spruce may decline in the North Woods, while oak, hickory, and
pine trees may become more numerous.”
Anticipating the disappearance of its northern boreal forests within 50 years, the State of Minnesota has been planting tree species that previously thrived 150 miles south of where they are now being planted.xxi
SUMMARY
Wisconsin was once home to moose, caribou, and lynx. Those animals were extirpated from our state long ago. Extirpated animals can be reintroduced, but only if the habitat is amenable to their existence. If the warming trend continues, will it ever be possible to reintroduce caribou, moose, or lynx to our state? The answer is quite likely “no.”
Worse, if temperatures keep increasing at the current rate, will we even be able to maintain populations of the plants and animals that now occupy Northern Wisconsin?
What will Northern Wisconsin look like in 50 or 100 years? Will there still be black spruce swamps or stands of birch and aspen? Or will we have forests similar to those that currently exist in Southern Wisconsin?
Will our streams still contain the beautiful brook trout? Or will they have been replaced by non-native brown trout or bass? And in the streams not amenable to brown trout spawning, will trout populations have to be maintained through the expensive stocking of inferior hatchery-raised trout?
Will we have lakes with abundant self-sustaining walleye populations where we can hear the cries of loons in the evening? Or will there be silence as the sun sets on lakes devoid of wild walleye? Will the walleye population even be able to be sustained by the use of expensive fish hatcheries?
Will there still be occasional moose sittings in Wisconsin? Will we still see northern flying squirrels? Will we still have snowshoe hares, or will the Northwoods be strictly cottontail rabbit country?
Hopefully it is not inevitable that Wisconsin’s north will change so that our forests will become unrecognizable, our lakes will become murky, and the iconic fish and other animals of the North will be only a fading memory. Time will tell.
i https://blog.limnology.wisc.edu/2018/04/12/study-confirms-walleye-populations-are-in-decline/
iii https://news.wisc.edu/walleye-struggle-with-changes-to-timing-of-spring-thaw/
vi https://wi101.wisc.edu/wolf-river/
vii https://dnr.wisconsin.gov/topic/Lands/FisheriesAreas/2740upperwolfriver.html
viii https://tomahawkleader.com/2024/05/09/northwoods-loon-population-in-decline/ ix https://abcnews.go.com/General/climate-change-threatens-loon-population-new-study-shows/story?id=109092273
x https://nrri.umn.edu/news/flying-squirrels
xi https://www.lccmr.mn.gov/projects/2023/approved_work_plans/2023-090_approved_workplan.pdf
xii https://pauli.russell.wisc.edu/climate-change-and-snowshoe-hares/
xv https://www.sdstate.edu/news/2023/08/whats-behind-minnesotas-moose-population-decline
xviii https://www.motherjones.com/food/2012/01/long-overdue-plant-hardiness-map-hothouse/
xix https://apps.npr.org/plant-hardiness-garden-map/
xx https://19january2017snapshot.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2016-09/documents/climate-change-wi.pdf
Supreme Court Delivers Knowles Nelson Victory
Blocking Pelican River Forest funding by Felzkowski and Joint Finance Committee ruled illegal.
By Kathleen Cooper July 23, 2024- The Wisconsin Supreme Court ruled on July 5 that the Republican-controlled Joint Finance Committee cannot legally block conservation projects initiated by Democratic Governor Tony Evers. In a rare bipartisan opinion, the court ruled 6-1 that provisions that require the Joint Finance Committee to unilaterally block projects and land acquisitions funded with money from the Knowles-Nelson Stewardship program violate the separation of powers between the legislative and executive branches. Justice Rebecca Bradley, one of the more conservative judges on the Supreme Court, wrote that the legislature gave the power to distribute stewardship money when it established the program, and that the blocking of funding by the legislature violates the separation of powers between the executive and legislative branches.
One of the greatest achievements of our state legislature is the Knowles-Nelson Stewardship Program. Established in Wisconsin in 1989 with bipartisan support, this fund provides money to care for our state’s land and water, as well as to build the trails, campgrounds, and boat landings that allow Wisconsinites to get out and enjoy our state.
In the past, the Wisconsin Joint Finance Committee had the self-proclaimed power to stop Knowles-Nelson funding for conservation projects. This is what put the acquisition of the Pelican River Forest conservation easements project in jeopardy. One anonymous objector, (who turned out to be Mary Felzkowski, our state senator) was able to withhold the funding. Thankfully, private funding for the conservation easements in the Pelican River Forest were acquired, after almost two years of hard work by our governor, concerned citizens, and conservation groups, and in spite of the fact that Tom Tiffany (our congressional representative) tried to block the funding on the federal level.
Republicans have long criticized the Knowles-Nelson Stewardship program, stating that it prevents land from being developed and takes parcels off local tax rolls. This is misleading, especially as it pertains to the Pelican River Forest, because even though the conservation easements prevent the forest from being developed, it is still private land and a working forest, with responsible timber harvesting and trails for ATV’s, snowmobiles, and hiking, as well as plenty of wetlands, rivers, and forestland in which to hunt, fish, kayak, or just to enjoy its beauty.
When Ms. Felzkowski withheld the Knowles-Nelson funding for the PRF, there was a public outcry, because forestland is the trademark of the Northwoods, fueling our record setting tourist industry, and providing jobs in logging and timber production. She then held “listening sessions' in various towns that border this forest. However, she really didn’t listen to her constituents, who, one by one, spoke out in favor of the PRF. In fact, at the beginning of the meeting in Rhinelander, she stated “No matter what you say, I’m not changing my mind.” That closed off and defiant attitude defeats the purpose of a listening session. She also stated that she is in favor of mining in northern Wisconsin (which was most likely behind her opposition to the PRF). She kept proclaiming that northern Wisconsin had “too much” public land as an argument against the PRF, which is misleading, because again, PRF is private land, and is taxed.
Tom Tiffany was no better. He has a close affiliation with an anti-conservation group called the American Stewards of Liberty, a Texas group that is anti-conservation, anti-endangered species, and anti-public land. Mr. Tiffany orchestrated meetings of the ASL and the Oneida County Board chair Scott Holewinski, who, under the advice of Tiffany and the ASL, drafted a letter to the US Forest Service, which was unapproved and unknown about by the county board. This letter voiced his opposition to the project, not as a private citizen, but as Oneida County Board Chairman, in an attempt to urge the federal government to withhold payment for the Pelican River Forest. Tiffany and Holewinski’s scheme did not work, because the project did go through, thanks to Governor Evers and several conservation organizations.
Our local, state, and federal elected officials need to stop pandering to the interests of extractive and other industries and start listening to the people they represent. We want the clean air, clean water, forestland, and wildlife that makes Oneida County not only a top tourist destination in Wisconsin, but also keeps us healthy and happy. Our children and grandchildren will thank us for our vigilance in keeping our Northwoods beautiful and thriving.
WXPR Coverage of Wisconsin Supreme Court decision Legislative trick that slowed the Pelican River Forest project in the Northwoods ruled improper | WXPR
County Supervisors Promote Mining Despite Public Opinion
P&D Committee's pro-mining language in Comp Plan just part of County's history of ignoring public.
By Karl Fate July 9, 2024- Back in 2009 a group of County Board Supervisors spent three years trying to lease public lands in the Town of Lynne for a mine in a vast wetland area upstream of the Willow Flowage. The public was opposed to the proposal, and most importantly, so were the people in the local area of impact.
After the legitimate concerns of taxpayers had been disrespected for three years by the committee in charge, the Lynne Town chair informed the County that the Town would block a rezone of the area to “Manufacturing and Industrial”, a prerequisite for the construction of a mine at the site.
The County Board Chair at the time, Ted Cushing, was reported in a local newspaper saying, “If they chose to exercise those powers, then so be it. Personally, I think everyone who pays taxes in this county should have a weigh-in on this because that’s the only way you’re going to get a true cross section in terms of a correct answer (to the question of whether mining proposals should be sought).” “Cushing added that the county board could move in that direction next month by approving a public referendum on the issue.”
Ultimately, after a summer of bizarre manipulations at the Committee level, in 2012 the County Board finally listened to the owners of the property in question and squashed the leasing scheme for good.
The referendum question would have to wait for six more years, resurfacing in the wake of Tom Tiffany’s repeal of the wildly popular “Prove it First” Law. The repeal of the law was interpreted by some as a requirement that mining must take place and must be promoted regardless of what the local taxpayers thought about it. In Oneida county a Metallic Mining Ordinance was passed to promote a mining district in the County, removing several important protections including essential local controls, by allowing metallic mining as a matter of right in those zoning districts where sulfide deposits were known, including Lynne. Local concerns during public meetings and at the public hearing were disrespected and rendered moot by elected representatives Tom Tiffany, Dave Hintz, and Scott Holewinski who were all pushing a mine at Lynne.
Five days after the June 6th, 2018 “public hearing” on the new ordinance, the P&D Committee met to discuss the hearing results, but the meeting eventually turned into a discussion of the next move to push a mine when Mr. Holewinski decided to stray off the agenda and discuss leasing public property in the Town of Lynne. It was during these “off agenda” discussions that the referendum question resurfaced. Mr. Holewinski was convinced two days later to drop his proposal to lease Lynne until after the referendum results were known.
The supervisors pushing the referendum were those most rabidly pushing a mine at Lynne, and they were the same supervisors that ignored the facts on the ground year after year that was the basis for the public concerns and opposition. Had those supervisors been listening, the result would not have been surprising when more than 62% of voters rejected leasing Lynne for a mine.
Tom Tiffany, perhaps unhappy that his latest mining fantasy is floundering, has infected our county government with a radical, anti-conservation group from Texas. Perhaps Scott Holewinski thinks he can jump-start a mine by putting language from this Texas group, that is anti-conservation and promotes metallic mining in the county, into the comprehensive land-use plan.
It's ironic that some of the same supervisors that insisted on the referendum question now want to ignore the answer to the question. The people of Oneida County are the owners of the Lynne Site and they clearly do not want a mine there. Isn’t it time that our elected representatives start listening to property owners, taxpayers, and voters and start advocating for local control and the protection of our water resources?
OCCWA Reference:
Current language proposal by P&D Committee for the county's next Comprehensive Plan, Natural Resources Chapter 2, Goal #6:
Goal 6: Allow for necessary metallic mining through the County’s non-metallic mining and metallic mining exploration, bulk sampling, and mining ordinance while balancing the interest of County residents to comply with state laws.
Comprehensive Plan Changes Put Mining Back on County's Radar
P&D Committee sneaks NECESSARY METALLIC MINING language into Comprehensive Plan.
By Kathleen Cooper June 20, 2024- Attention Oneida County Residents!
There are important changes underfoot for the Oneida County Land Use Plan. Counties in Wisconsin are required to write land use plans and to update them every ten years. The latest proposed updates from the Oneida County P&D Committee are alarming.
Under Chapter 2: Natural, Agricultural, and Cultural Resources, Goal 6, the language in the Comprehensive Land Use Plan of 2013 reads: “Encourage the USDA Forest Service to obtain their Allowable State Quantity (ASQ).” (This refers to the timber harvest from the forest land in Oneida County.)
The P&D Committee's proposed changes to Goal 6: “Allow for necessary metallic mining through the County’s non-metallic mining and metallic mining exploration, bulk sampling, and mining ordinance while balancing the interest of County residents to comply with state laws.”
This is problematic for many reasons. No metallic sulfide mine has ever been demonstrated to operate in the long term without damaging the environment in the United States or Canada. These mines destroy our land, pollute our air, and poison our water, which is our most valuable resource in Oneida County. Sulfuric acid (also known as battery acid) occurs when sulfides from the mines are exposed to oxygen and water. This deeply acidic water can leach toxic substances from the mine, including sulfates and heavy metals like arsenic, lead, and mercury. Rainfall, runoff, and the failure of impoundments and liners can result in a toxic stew that infiltrates the groundwater and contaminates nearby lakes and streams, where it directly sickens and kills fish and other aquatic species. Metal mining also harms our health. In 2017 half of all toxic chemicals that were released or disposed into the environment originated from the metal mining industry - nearly 2 billion pounds of them, and 72 percent of toxic chemicals disposed onto land came from metal mining that year. Exposure to these toxic heavy metals can damage every organ system in the human body, including damage to the nervous system, kidney damage, bone loss, cancer, skin disorders, liver damage, gastrointestinal disorders, and developmental disorders in infants and children, to name a few. Sulfide mines also use large amounts of water, which depletes our groundwater, and has led to surrounding private wells drying up.
The economic impact to Oneida County’s tax base as a result of mining is questionable. Mining is a boom or bust industry. Due to mechanization, the mines employ far fewer people and are less likely to hire locals. Overall, about half of these mines inflict an overall negative impact on the local economy, because once the minerals are extracted, the mines are abandoned, leaving the taxpayers to clean up the environmental mess the mines have created in many instances. Recent data is unavailable, but in 1988 the cleanup costs associated with acid mine drainage for just one year reached $30 billion. In contrast, tourism, which will be threatened in the event of the establishment of sulfide mines in our area, generates more than $20 billion of economic activity a year in Wisconsin. It seems like the only ones who make money from mines are the mining companies themselves, as well as the politicians who allow them to operate.
So, my question is, do you think these proposed changes to the Oneida County Comprehensive Land Use Plan are a good idea? They are basically an open invitation to mining companies, telling them that Oneida County is open for the pollution and destruction of our land, forests, lakes, rivers, and overall health that mining will bring. If you object to these changes, please tell your county board supervisor, talk to your neighbors, and show up for Planning and Development Committee meetings, as well as Oneida County Board meetings. Please make a stand for our property values, our land, our water, our air, and our children.
Monitor ongoing P&D changes here Oneida County Comprehensive Plan 2024 | North Central Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission (ncwrpc.org)
OCCWA Commentary: The concerning language change of NECESSARY METALLIC MINING may not seem monumental at first glance. Tie it in with our counties last changes to their questionable pro mining industry Mining Ordinance, and the concerns magnify.
The last change to Oneida County's Mining Ordinance added mining as a permitted activity in zones 1A Forestry and General Use. The change allows mining in almost all of the county while eliminating both Town and public input. Keep in mind that the zoning changes were not mandated by the state.
Concerns of who our local representatives are pandering to while squashing the public's ability to give input are justified and need to be monitored. In the meantime, let them know your opinion on the new Comprehensive Plan language as well as the county's Mining Ordinance.
P&D Committee email contacts:
Bob Almekinder ralmekinder@oneidacountywi.gov
Scott Holewinski sholewinski@oneidacountywi.gov
Michael Timmons mtimmons@oneidacountywi.gov
Mitchell Ives mives@oneidacountywi.gov
Dan Hess dhess@oneidacountywi.gov
Water Quality Threatens Loons
Loons: Is the Iconic Bird of the Northwoods Going to become Scarce?
By Tom Wiensch June 6, 2024- I grew up in Southern Wisconsin and never heard a loon call until I was a teenager. I remember swimming in the pea green waters of Lake Monona in Madison in the 1970’s. There are historical accounts of loons having nested on Southern Wisconsin Lakes. By the 1970’s though, there were certainly no loons spending the summer on the degraded waters of Lake Monona.
I’ll always remember hearing a loon for the first time on a summer vacation in Northern Minnesota. What animal is more of an icon of the Northwoods than the loon? Black bears? Whitetail deer? Maybe or maybe not. Loons have captured the hearts of Northwoods residents and visitors for a very long time. Their images decorate everything from paintings to sweatshirts.
Now, loon numbers are declining in Northern Wisconsin. A recent study has shown that decreasing water clarity caused by climate change is making it harder for loons to thrive. (“Climate Change-Associated Declines in Water Clarity Impair Feeding by Common Loons” Walter H. Piper, Max R. Glines & Kevin C. Rose, Journal of the Ecology Society of America, March 31, 2024; https://esajournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ecy.4291
)
The study used satellite imagery to calculate water quality on 127 lakes in Oneida, Vilas, and Lincoln Counties from 1995 to 2021, examined weather conditions, and looked at the body mass of loons.
The conclusion of the study was that climate change is causing decreasing lake clarity which, in turn, is making it more difficult for loons, to find food. The result is that loons can’t put on the weight necessary to survive. The authors of the study stressed that decreased water clarity in July is especially tough on loon chicks, as they are too young to fly to clearer lakes to get food. Mother loons may leave to find food, but in the face of feeding difficulties likely aren’t able to find enough to feed their chicks.
In addition to working to combat climate change generally, there are a number of other things that we can do to help maintain the clear, clean lakes that have
been so loved in Northern Wisconsin, and to help loons thrive. Here are some ideas:
1. Maintain Natural Shorelines
Lakeside landowners can work to prevent runoff and soil erosion. This can be done by not clearcutting lake lots, by minimizing the creation of impervious surfaces, and by maintaining natural vegetation along lake shores. Healthy, natural vegetation slows runoff and helps prevent bank erosion and deposition of soil into lakes. Viewing corridors should be made in accordance with zoning regulations, and natural vegetation should be allowed to thrive on lake properties. This will preserve loons and will also maintain the natural beauty of shorelines.
2. Limit Wakes
Boaters can be careful to limit their wakes in near-shore areas, including areas near islands. Wisconsin law generally prohibits boaters from operating boats at speeds above “slow-no-wake” within 100 feet of any shoreline. The law also generally prohibits operators of personal watercraft from operating at speeds above “slow-no-wake” within 200 feet of shorelines. Creating wakes too close to shorelines has the potential to cause shoreline erosion and can also cause loon eggs to float out of nests. Wake boats pose a unique risk, as they are designed to create large waves/wakes. Consider whether and where to use these boats and operate them with extreme caution. In addition to causing shoreline erosion, studies and modeling have shown that wake boats have the capacity to churn up lake bottoms in at least 15’ and likely in 33’ of water. Obviously, this decreases water clarity. A number of Wisconsin towns have passed ordinances regulating wake boats, and the Wisconsin Legislature may pass a state law regulating them in the near future. Always follow the law and remember that there is nothing wrong with exercising even more caution than the law requires.
3. Avoid Nesting Areas
Respect prohibitions on landing on islands during loon nesting season, and generally avoid going on islands or other loon nesting areas from ice-out through the month of July. Nesting
time is an especially sensitive time for loons, and human presence can impair successful breeding.
4. Carefully Choose and Properly Discard Fishing Tackle
Loons have been found to have been poisoned by ingesting sinkers and lead jigs. Tin sinkers are now readily available. Non-lead jigs are not so easy to find, but hopefully that will change. Please consider non-lead options. Also, please dispose of old fishing line properly. I was recently teaching a great-nephew to fish on a lake in another state. We didn’t catch anything out of the murky lake water, but I did find and pick up several balls of snarled fish line that had been left on the ground. Loons and other birds and animals can become hopelessly entangled in discarded line. Please dispose of used tackle properly.
The clean lakes of Northern Wisconsin, and the beautiful loons that grace the waters are not something to be taken for granted. Many lakes in many parts of the country carry a heavy load of sediments and nutrients that are unappealing and can’t support loons. The lakes of the Northwoods are really something special. With some reasonable action, we can work to maintain the lakes, and the loons for generations to come.
OCCWA Note: (See photo) Loon Rescue Loon rescue | Facebook is a phenomenal group headed by Kevin and Linda Grentzer. They in concert with Marge Gibson's Raptor Education Group INC. Raptor Education Group, Inc. do a fantastic and unheralded job of rescuing loons as well as other Northwoods birds. Give their sites a gander!
From Loon Rescue Facebook page- " Loon rescue is about saving the world one loon at a time. We do many loon rescues ourselves, and we can also recommend techniques to guide you through a loon rescue. Call 715-966-5415 or 715-453-4916"
DNR Addresses Additional PFAS Questions
DNR follows up on questions not addressed in the last Town of Stella meeting on May 1st.
By Eric Rempala June 4th, 2024- To be sure the DNR has been quite busy addressing PFAS across the state. When they last met with Oneida County residents (See our May 2nd post) they were unable to address all of OCCWA's and residents pre-submitted questions. To that point the DNR has most graciously answered those questions and provided answers by email, which we share with you below. Reviewing these questions, we hope, will give a much more complete picture of where the PFAS issue in Stella stands.
Once again, we have to compliment the DNR for their timely and professional response.
1) Has there been any determination on which biosolid is most likely for the contamination, municipal wastewater treatment plant or Industrial?
No, not at this time. The DNR has not determined the source(s) of the contamination.
2) Are there any plans of testing soil in the Stella area?
The DNR is currently working on a plan to collect limited soil samples from fields in the Stella area where land spreading occurred, as well as deeper soil samples to assist in understanding the migration of PFAS. This work will be conducted under an EPA Site Inspection plan which gathers information for the EPA Superfund scoring process. The sampling will take place in late summer or the fall of 2024.
3) Any thoughts on soil remediation, such as soil replacement or phytoremediation?
It is too early in the process to determine a remedy for soil contamination. The degree and extent of soil contamination needs to be assessed prior to determining a remedial action approach for soil.
4) Is there any consideration for providing a one source community well?
A community drinking water system sourced by its own groundwater source(s) or connected to an existing community water system could be a potential solution. The feasibility of this as an option would depend on a variety of factors such as engineering viability, cost, and public will. For this option to be viable, a municipal entity would be the primary entity to propose, construct and manage ongoing operation, maintenance, and overall future fiscal responsibility. Currently the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law can provide some funding for the potential development of community water system in rural PFAS impacted areas.
Since Stella already has exceptionally high PFAS levels, is there any consideration to banning biosolid spreading that has any PFAS content?
5) No, not at this time. There are no current federal or state standards regulating PFAS concentrations in biosolids or industrial sludge. The department has developed an Interim strategy for land application of biosolids and industrial sludges containing PFAS PFAS_BiosolidsInterimStrategy.pdf (wisconsin.gov) to assist facilities in making decisions on handling biosolids and industrial sludge.
6) Does the DNR have the pre-1996 paper records of certified spreading in Oneida County?
No, the department does not have these records.
7) Is there any plan to offer free well testing to areas that may be suspected due to biosolid spreading records evaluation?
The DNR continues to seek and request additional resources to potentially expand PFAS sampling for those who may be impacted. The DNR submitted a 13.10 request to the State Legislature’s Joint Finance Committee that would allow the DNR to access the $125 million PFAS Trust Fund. If granted access, the DNR would distribute funding to counties and local communities to support sampling efforts in impacted and potentially impacted communities across Wisconsin.
8) Can surface water testing be effective in identifying hot spots in county if there is a lack of volunteered well testing options?
Surface water testing can sometimes be used to identify potential areas of contamination, but not always. Typically, surface water testing is combined with other lines of evidence (groundwater sampling, soil sampling and historical land use information) to identify areas or potential areas of contamination. Generally, groundwater flows into surface water, so if results from a lake surface water test come back high, that could be indicative of a hot spot. A low result from the lake surface water test, however, would not necessarily mean wells in the area are safe. Groundwater flow paths due to varying geology can be complicated, and it should not be assumed groundwater flows in the direction towards the closest waterbody. The DNR is aware of several sites in the state where wells are contaminated, but nearby surface water concentrations of PFAS are low since the groundwater is not flowing in the direction of the nearest surface water.
9)Would DNR consider offering free PFAS testing to Oneida County Lake Associations? No, not at this time. The DNR has sampled waterbodies throughout the area at sites that we have determined to be high priority. Additional sampling will occur in 2024. The information gained through this sampling will help to define and determine the extent of the area of contamination in surface water.
10) Have all Oneida County municipal WWTP's had their sludge tested for PFAS?
No. PFAS sampling is included in Wisconsin Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (WPDES) permits as they are reissued. It may take up to 5 years for all facilities in Oneida County to have PFAS sampling requirements for sludge included in their permits.
11) Does the DNR have an opinion on the recent Oneida County PFAS Resolution?
The DNR continues to utilize a public health-led approach to address PFAS in Wisconsin, which includes gathering and sharing information about PFAS presence in drinking water. The DNR has been made aware of several counties that have conducted outreach to private well owners to inform and/or encourage sampling, and in some cases has provided access to free or subsidized sampling and analysis.
(12) When contamination impacts a community, it requires coordination and cooperation across units of government to help mitigate the risk to human health and the environment. The DNR submitted a 13.10 request to the Joint Finance Committee that would allow the DNR to access the $125 million PFAS Trust Fund. If granted access, the DNR would distribute funding to counties and local communities to conduct sampling, disrupt exposures and begin to work on mitigation.
13) Also is there any consideration to speeding up the process to stop any excessive PFAS biosolid spreading sooner?
It is unclear what process is being referred to. The department will update the Interim Strategy as new information becomes available. EPA is currently conducting a Risk Assessment related to PFAS in biosolids. EPA uses Risk Assessments to characterize the nature and magnitude of health risks to humans and ecological receptors (e.g., plants and animals) from chemical contaminants and other stressors. The EPA is scheduled to complete the Risk Assessment for PFAS in biosolids at the end of 2024.
14) Are permits still being issued for sludge/sewerage dumping?
Land application of municipal biosolids, industrial sludge and septage is still allowed in accordance with Wisconsin Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (WPDES) permits and septage licenses.
15) How long are sludge/sewerage permits good for? Can these permit time lengths be shortened?
Wisconsin Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (WPDES) permits are issued for 5 years. There are procedures in code for revoking and reissuing or modifying permits. Shorter permit terms are also allowable under code. Who monitors sludge/sewerage dumping and how often? Facilities are required to monitor and self-report to the Department. Reporting is done on an annual basis
16). Can contaminated soil be treated?
Current treatment options for PFAS are mostly limited to situations when PFAS is in water. Groundwater that is in contact with soils can be treated for PFAS. If unsaturated soils contain PFAS contamination, these soils can be excavated and disposed at a licensed landfill or, in some situations, the excavated soil is incinerated.
17) Can contaminated stream/lake water be treated?
Contaminated water can be treated to remove PFAS; however, in most situations, the water must be captured and run through an engineered treatment system. Thus, the size of the water body, flowrate of the stream and how the stream or lake are connected to groundwater will influence how effective treatment will be at improving water quality in the lake or stream. Treating surface water is more applicable in small defined areas like a localized spill with a very small defined outflow that can be handled by a granular activated carbon (GAC) bed. This would likely not be a practical approach for large waterbodies, rivers, and extensive areas of contamination.
Governor Evers Hikes the Pelican River Forest
Local Pelican River Forest supporters take a hike with governor on a beautiful Northwoods morning.
By Kathleen Cooper May 23, 2024- Governor Evers came to the Northwoods on Wednesday, May 22 to enjoy the beauty of the Pelican River Forest by hiking the logging roads with a group of supporters of the Pelican River Forest. This land constitutes the largest conservation acquisition in the history of the State of Wisconsin, with 70,000 contiguous acres now protected by conservation easements. This land is privately owned and remains a working forest that is available for logging and recreation for perpetuity. As Governor Evers said, “This is something that will last forever. There are very few times that the legislature, Governor, anybody can say that. These folks can.”
As they hiked, various participants spoke about how this historical conservation effort came about. Ron James talked about the Water Walk that took place in March 2020, sponsored by the Sokaogon Chippewa Tribe, when the land was facing exploratory drilling by Badger Minerals. He said that they had tied prayer ties to the trees, offering prayers for the land. When he came back a couple of weeks later, the trees had been clear cut and the ties were lying in the mud in preparation for the drilling. Badger Minerals later announced that it was not going to pursue further mining exploration in that area in September 2020 after completing exploratory drilling months before. Tina Van Zile, of the Sokaogon Chippewa community, spoke about the power of the prayers that had been offered for the land four years ago. She quoted Fran Van Zile, an elder of the Sokaogon Chippewa community, “They (the prayers) do (have power). You know, there’s power in that. We believe that, and so look at where we’re at today.”
Tina went on to speak of the kinship that the Indigenous people feel for the land and its inhabitants-the trees, the wildlife, and the plant species. She spoke of our sacred connections to each other and the land, connections that are often forgotten in our modern busy lives. The hushed silence of the others after she spoke seemed to be a tacit agreement that acknowledged the truth and power in her words.
Charles Carlin from Gathering Waters spoke about the people from different types of groups-hikers, ATV enthusiasts, hunters, fishermen, snowmobilers, and others-who came together to make this acquisition a reality.
Eric Rempala spoke of the efforts of the people in attendance and others who worked to make the purchase of the conservation easements in the Pelican River Forest a reality. He also urged the group to work towards making this forest the working forest it is intended to be, so that the financial benefits to the counties would outweigh any hesitancy in future conservation efforts.
Ron Gropp, the Forest Legacy Program manager for the Wisconsin DNR Division of Forestry said that the DNR would ensure that the terms and conditions of the easement are being met, and that the conservation values that are protected by the easement were being protected.
As we basked in the knowledge that we were all a part of making the Pelican River Forest conservation easements become a reality, the forest seemed to agree, by displaying its exceptional beauty. The trees and vegetation were shimmering with water droplets after the heavy rain of the night before, and the creeks were swollen with fast running, clean water. Even the mosquitoes gave us a break, due to the winds blowing all around us. In spite of our differences, we all recognized each other as brothers and sisters, friends of the forest. As Governor Evers stated in his State of the State address in January, “This is a big deal, folks.” Indeed, it is.
Many thanks to Governor Evers, who, after the Joint Finance Committee had withheld the funds to purchase these conservation easements, secured federal funding to purchase them. His legacy will live on to be enjoyed by our children, grandchildren, and great grandchildren. Thanks also to all the people in the Northwoods and beyond who helped to make the Pelican River Forest conservation easements a reality.
WXPR Katie Thoresen coverage https://www.wxpr.org/podcast/wxpr-the-stream/2024-05-23/supporters-gather-to-celebrate-pelican-river-forest-conservation
Should Your Town Consider Wave Ordinance?
Infromation and assistance developing Wave Boat ordinance offered to towns, and it's FREE!
ENHANCED WAKES FROM WAKE SURF BOATS—HELP IS AVAILABLE TO PROTECT YOUR LAKES! By Last Wilderness Alliance May 10, 2024-
You may have noticed recent reports in local papers regarding Oneida and Vilas towns acting to protect their lakes from the very large waves from wake surfing. On May 9, Newbold passed an ordinance prohibiting enhanced wakes on all its 22 lakes over 50 acres. On May 8 Lake Tomahawk passed a proposal to begin the process and has already submitted a draft ordinance to the DNR for review. Winchester in Vilas Co. has also passed such an ordinance and three more Vilas towns have ordinances through the DNR review process and ready for action by their town boards in coming weeks.
Wake surfing is a quite new sport and has expanded rapidly the last ten years in Wisconsin, particularly in the southern part of the state. In wake surfing, a special boat designed to take on up to 5000 lbs of ballast water plows the water at transition speed in a strongly stern down manner, making a wake up to 4 feet high. This wake is big enough to allow surfing without a tow rope, just like surfing an ocean wave.
Wake surfing creates a host of problems, particularly on our northern glacial lakes, which are almost all too small and too shallow for the sport. The giant waves travel long distances across the lake creating great problems for anglers, water skiers, and all smaller boats. According to the industry’s own data, the waves a full 300’ from the surfer are still 13” high… this is higher than the freeboard of most small fishing boats. Many smaller boats must simply leave the lake when a wake surf boat chooses to operate.
Environmental damage can be severe. Shoreline is ripped up unless the lake is very large and the boats to operate far from shore. Lake bottom is jetted by the downward prop wash of these strongly stern-down boats with up to 600HP engines, throwing sediment into the water column and ripping up aquatic vegetation unless the boats always operate in very deep water.
The introduction of invasives is a particular problem. The ballast tanks cannot be fully emptied—when the boats travel between lakes they transfer up to 20 gallons of water. There is no good cure for this, as local boat dealers do not offer services to sterilize ballast tanks. And even if they did, there is no good way to ensure wake surfers did sterilize their ballast tanks between lakes. To make matters worse, all the wake boat manufacturers require that boat owners add up to two gallons of antifreeze to each ballast tank before overwintering. With some of these boats having five ballast tanks, that is a lot of antifreeze going right into our lakes when the boats are first used each year.
For those towns wishing to protect their lakes, help is available free of charge. A local nonprofit group, The Last Wilderness Alliance, provides free services to towns to explore and establish an ordinance. They assist in drafting an ordinance appropriate to the town and to secure the necessary DNR review and endorsement. They have assisted many towns across Wisconsin, always working at no charge. More information is available on their website LastWildernessAlliance.org. A link on that site allows anyone wishing to explore an ordinance to be in touch and learn more about the process for securing an ordinance.
A representative of the Last Wilderness Alliance, Richard Phillips, says-- “We are happy to assist any Wisconsin town in developing a wake surfing ordinance and getting it placed into law. Wisconsin is one of the few states that allows towns to pass ordinances controlling boating on their lakes. We encourage all towns with lakes that may receive wake surf boat use to consider passing a law to protect their lakes. We have considerable experience, having helped many towns enact ordinances … and we work for free.” The organization may be contacted through a link at this site https://lastwildernessalliance.org/contact
DNR, DHS Stella PFAS Presentation
Two-hour informational meeting answers many questions, with many more yet to be determined.
By Eric Rempala May 2, 2024- OCCWA attended the May 1st combined Wisconsin DHS and DNR presentation hosted by Oneida County's Department of Health. The presentation covered recent PFAS developments in the town of Stella and included a public Q&A session. The meeting took place at Rhinelander's James Williams Middle School rather than Stella Town Hall due crowding concerns. Attendance at the presentation was estimated at 100 attendees of which most were Stella residents.
The Wisconsin Department of Health Services led off the presentation with general information of what PFAS are and the health hazards that ingesting them can cause. The DHS emphasized ingestion was main culprit of PFAS accumulation in the body. The DHS dismissed concerns about PFAS entering the body through skin absorption. Stella specific handouts and a link p03610.pdf (wisconsin.gov) for more information and contacts were shared. Guidance for drinking water, fish consumption, gardening, and surface water recreation, were included in both.
Next up was the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources. A good portion of the DNR's time was spent sharing promising results from recent well drilling in Stella. The new deeper wells have been testing clean or at a low enough level where filtering is effective. Multiple property owners have drilled new deeper wells using the DNR recommended method.
The recommended method uses the pouring of a concrete 20 ft plug at the top of the bedrock layer which helps separate the lower bedrock aquifer from the upper ground gravel/sand aquifer. The reason being is that ground aquifers have higher PFAS levels, and you don't want them to contaminate the cleaner bedrock aquifers below.
The DNR also revealed that they are expanding the Stella free testing circle to 3 miles. Property owners in the expanded area should look for a DNR offer letter to arrive by June. If an owner chooses to accept the free testing, they can receive a test kit from the DNR's Rhinelander Service Center by presenting their letter. The Service Center address is 107 Sutliff Ave.
Also addressed were multiple questions from Stella residents asking if the septage spreading around Starks is a factor contributing to the PFAS problem. The DNR representative dismissed that concern stating that septage pumped from a homeowner's septic tank would not have severe PFAS contamination as might biosolid/sludge from an industrial site or wastewater treatment plan.
The DNR briefly discussed their Superfund Preliminary Assessment application (See our February 16 post). Federal Superfund designation would bring federal tax dollar assistance to help address the contamination. By no means is the application a guarantee that the Superfund designation would be applied, but the Stella contamination level may well score high to qualify. This application process and designation would most likely take years to finalize.
There was also discussion on whether the DNR certified biosolid spreading records in Oneida County could help lead to discovering other potential PFAS contamination in county. Stella is not the only town biosolids were spread in Oneida County. The problem with using the records is that since PFAS was not determined to be hazardous when the applications were made, it will be difficult now to determine which applications actually had high PFAS contamination. To address this issue the DNR is sending questionnaire letters to all past biosolid spreading entities asking detailed questions as to what products they used and when, to try and determine which applications would be a concern. This is no small endeavor and will take an undetermined amount of time.
The DNR had no less than six or seven representatives on hand for this presentation. Representatives were from Oneida County as well as Madison. We at OCCWA have the highest regard for the DNR's commitment and the work they have done so far. They have been professional and extremely helpful in all our groups interactions. We would ask residents of Oneida County to consider the difficult process that lies ahead. During the meeting, the statement was made that this "will be a long slog". There will be many years of investigation and remediation before we can put this issue behind us.
The DNR representatives emphasized they are available to answer any and all citizens concerns. To that point, a specific Stella Questions phone number has been established 888 626-0605 along with a specific email address Dnrstellapfas@wisconsin.gov We were told these contacts will be monitored daily.
OCCWA would like to acknowledge the Oneida County Health Department for the tremendous job they did in relocating the presentation site and facilitating the meeting. As for local government, Oneida County supervisors attending the presentation were Lenore Lopez, Steven Schreier, and Collette Sorgel. Sadly, no State Legislators were in attendance to our knowledge.
Must Read WXPR Coverage
Once again Katie Thoresen hits it out of the park with her coverage! I can't emphasize enough how valuable Katie and WXPR are to this community. DNR: Initial new well installations look to be successful in treating PFAS contamination in Stella | WXPR
Helpful Links
Oneida County Health Department presentation link Water Quality – Oneida County Public Health Department (oneidacountywi.gov)
American Rescue Plan Act well replacement flyer ARPAFlier.pdf (wisconsin.gov)
Wisconsin Department of Health Services PFAS link Chemicals: Perfluoroalkyl and Polyfluoroalkyl (PFAS) Substances | Wisconsin Department of Health Services
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources PFAS Contamination in the Town of Stella | | Wisconsin DNR
Mining the Common Denominator
County Board opposition to Pelican River Forest tied to mining despite 2018 referendum results?
By Karl Fate February 28, 2024- The fact that our County Government spent so much time fighting the immensely popular private property called the Pelican River Forest illustrates how our current Board, chaired by Scott Holewinski, has devolved into a partisan political quagmire, and exposes the hypocrisy of some elected Wisconsin Representatives and County Board members.
This all started when then State politician Tom Tiffany interfered in a local county election and then proceeded to launch an attack on local control, aided by his political cronies on the County Board, allowing real estate developers to chop up even the tiniest of our lakes into 100-foot lots. This threw away decades of hard work and investment by many Counties across the North that was focused on protecting their lakes.
In 2018 Tiffany’s repeal of the wildly popular “Prove it First” law, gave some County Board Supervisors an excuse to remove a vital local control from the Towns for the purpose of creating a Mining District in the Northwoods centered around the Lynne Deposit that lies under a vast wetland area upstream of the Willow Flowage in the Town of Lynne. The fact that so-called property rights advocates would deliberately strip local control from property owners, could not be any more outrageous and hypocritical. This scheme only died because the Referendum question asking for the support of voters in the County was rejected substantially at the ballot box. Now, that method of gauging public opinion has been removed thanks to Mary Felzkowski and other State Politicians.
Between 2009 and 2018 our County Government spent an enormous amount of time and considerable resources promoting something that the people of the County did not want, and more recently our County Government spent considerable time and energy trying to block something that most people strongly favored. This is clearly an unacceptable way for our elected representatives to operate and could have been avoided had they been listening to the people they are supposed to represent.
The common denominator for these cases is a small number of supervisors and Representatives pushing a mine that the local people do not want, one on public land at Lynne near the Willow Flowage, and the other adjacent to the Upper Wolf River in the Town of Schoepke. Our County is poorly served when our County Government becomes infected with partisan politics because our elected officials stop listening while they are serving other interests. Get the Politics out of our Courthouse and start representing the public’s interest!
Advisory Referenda Method of Gauging Public Opinion Stripped Away
Direct quote from the June 16th, Felzkowski Flyer emailing on banning advisory referenda.
"Preventing local governments from using hot-button political advisory referendums, on issues they have no direct control over, to increase partisan voter turnout."
Please note the assertion "issues they (local governments) have no direct control over".
The 2018 Lynne referendum where 63% of voters opposed mining is an example of an advisory referenda that has now been stripped away by our legislature.
It's noteworthy that the June 16th, 2023, Flyer link is conspicuously absent from Senator Felzkowski's webpage log. News (wisconsin.gov)