Clean Water Updates

Posted November 11, 2025- Latest rumors out of Madison have the Water Sports Industry again preparing to introduce bad legislation on Wakeboats.

Now we know that we have all heard these rumblings before, but there is a very good reason for being vigilant in this case. The Water Sports Industry Association has been running ads promoting "One Standard Rule" (See Photo) One does not need to be a rocket scientist to know what one standard rule means.

One Standard Rule across Wisconsin could mean every lake regardless of size or depth must comply with whatever numbers are adopted by the State Legislature? The question then becomes, what happens to local town ordinances? We have seen the legislature pass bills with language preventing counties and towns from being more protective than the state. One only needs to look at the state restrictions on towns and counties Shoreland Protection Ordinances.

We would like to remind everyone of Senate President Felzkowski's statement to WXPR for a May article.  Wake boats, housing, and PFAS among top concerns brought up in Northwoods listening session | WXPR 

“The legislation will ensure local control with no limitations on it. We are looking at the spreading of invasives. We are looking at public safety, and we are looking at distance from shore,” Felzkowski said."

Language preventing towns from creating their own ordinances would be nothing more than an industry sponsored political power grab. Anything less than ensuring local control with no limitations would be unacceptable.

Summary of Lakes at Stake Wisconsin's latest newsletter

The Wakeboat Industry, led by the Water Sports Industry Association (WSIA), is preparing to introduce a wake surfing bill in the Wisconsin State Assembly. Their PR campaign—seen across social media—promotes a 200-foot distance from shore as a supposed safety measure.

However, lake advocates warn this proposal is misleading and inadequate:

• Many Wisconsin lakes already require 200–300 feet for slow-no-wake zones, yet damage and safety issues persist.
• The proposed limits won’t protect shorelines, fisheries, or other lake users from the large wakes these boats generate.
• The Industry’s claim of “keeping lakes accessible for everyone” ignores the environmental harm and costly shoreline repairs caused by a small fraction of wakeboat users.
• 
  

Despite repeated requests, the Industry has refused to collaborate on independent testing with UW or UWM scientists or to acknowledge credible research showing wake-induced damage in waters less than 20 feet deep.

Advocates believe the Industry’s true goal is to preempt local ordinances—potentially overturning or weakening 72 existing local wakesurf restrictions on about 15% of eligible lakes—to boost boat sales.

Wisconsin residents are urged to:

• Stay alert for the introduction of the “bad bill.”
• Contact legislators to oppose measures that remove local control or fail to protect lake ecosystems and safety.
• Support science-based regulations that ensure all users can enjoy Wisconsin’s waters responsibly.

Sign up for Lakes at Stake newsletter here:  Join Our Email List — Lakes at Stake 

Posted November 7, 2025- Mining company reiterates its position on drilling in Oneida County.

Information garnered from a Wisconsin Public Radio November 5th article Canadian mining company plans to expand drilling in northern Wisconsin - WPR   states that Green Light Metals (GLM) a Canadian junior mining company is planning to drill in Oneida County in the spring of 2026. A quote from one of the company's directors in the WPR article stated: 

"Some of the funds will support exploration of the company’s Lobo sites near Crandon. Donohue said the company hopes to conduct drilling at those deposits in the spring. The cash influx will also fund airborne geophysical surveys, property payments for lease agreements with private landowners, project support and corporate expenses for the next year."

The Lobo sites mentioned near Crandon are actually in the Town of Schoepke in Oneida County. If you have been paying attention to past OCCWA mining news, you would know that this has long since been a possibility. 

Currently GLM is involved with exploration drilling (Bend Deposit) in Taylor County not far from Medford. The WPR article covers the latest influx of money to GLM which will fund further drilling in Taylor County as well as the stated drilling plans for Oneida County.

We at OCCWA are in the process of putting together a full article on this latest development which you will be able to find on our homepage. Stay tuned!

Posted October 5, 2025- Knowles Nelson Program (KNP) funding at stake while legislators present very different bills.

In an OCCWA July 3rd article penned by Beckie Gaskill, she stated why the funding for KNP is at serious risk.

"Despite bipartisan roots and overwhelming public support, it’s been tied up in legislative gridlock for years — hamstrung by red tape, political games, and repeated attempts to raid or restrict its funding. Now, in 2025, there’s a glimmer of hope in the form of new stand-alone legislation aimed at protecting and fully funding the program. But it won’t get far without a serious show of support from the people who use and love the land."

Four months later some progress has been made. Two separate Bills, (see photo) one Republic led and one Democratic led are being considered. The only thing that the two Bills have in common is that they address funding the Knowles Nelson Program. After that the veer off into very different directions.

Despite those differences, Team Knowles Nelson is hopeful for compromise. In an August 27 article  New Bill, New Path for Knowles-Nelson Compromise – Knowles Nelson Stewardship they shared their hopes in the excerpt:

 "We applaud the hard work of Senators Habush Sinykin and Testin and Representatives Kurtz and Miresse to lead their caucuses in the effort to craft a compromise that legislators and the Governor can all support. What now lies ahead is blending these proposals in a way that stays true to the soul of Knowles-Nelson while navigating the fraught terrain of split government.

 Sen. Testin responded to the newly introduced legislation in a statement saying, “I am glad to see that lawmakers on both sides of the aisle have an interest in reforming and reauthorizing the Knowles-Nelson Stewardship Program. I look forward to reviewing the legislative proposal brought forward by my Democrat colleagues to see where we can work together and find common ground.”

Locally, Oneida County's Senator Mary Felzkowski has been quite critical of KNP and has demonstrated that with her attempts to block the Pelican River Forest in Oneida County several years back. In a recent Wisconsin Examiner article  Wisconsin Democrats introduce proposal to save Knowles-Nelson Stewardship Program • Wisconsin Examiner Senator Felzkowski was quoted:

"Sen. Mary Felzkowski (R-Tomahawk), one of the program’s strongest critics, has suggested she’d support re-authorizing the program if it included provisions that capped the amount of government-owned land in a county or allowed counties to sell off existing conservation land."

The Senators position of selling off public land (conservation land) is concerning. In fact, that very same idea at the Federal level recently has been met with much public consternation.

What still rings true from Becki Gaskill's above referenced article is that funding for the Knowles Nelson Program will not get far without a serious show of support from the people who use and love the land. With that in mind, please consider sending a message to Governor Evers, Senator Felzkowsi, and your local state representative to continue to fund the Knowles Nelson Program.

What can you do?

It’s now time to get in touch with your legislators again and urge them to get to work crafting a Knowles-Nelson compromise that works for Wisconsin. Take action today and ask legislators to stay true to these priorities when negotiating a Stewardship reauthorization:

• Fund both land acquisition and land management.
• Create an oversight structure that: encourages constructive dialog; brings stakeholders, legislators, and agency professionals together; and that follows a clear, time-limited process for reviewing and voting on major grants.
• Supports our growing outdoor recreation economy by investing in the infrastructure we need to get out and enjoy all the places that make Wisconsin special.

In literally takes minutes for you to easily send your position on supporting Knowles Nelson with the link provided below.

The Knowles Nelson Take Action link

Take Action – Knowles Nelson Stewardship 

Posted October 22, 2025- Latest WXPR articles provide PFAS information from Oneida County as well as latest remediation research.

Expanded PFAS testing

In an October WXPR post More wells in Oneida County are testing positive for PFAS | WXPR  , Katie Thoresen shares the latest DNR PFAS test results from their expanded testing efforts in Oneida County. So far in limited expanded test sampling, there were seven well test results exceeding Wisconsin DHS' allowable limits for PFAS. Those exceedances were in the towns of Crescent, Newbold, and Pine Lake.

With the DNR having federal funding available to test up to 450 wells, more property owner participation will be necessary to reach this goal. The expanded free testing for now, is being offered by the DNR in the form of U.S. postal mailing to targeted locations. The targeted locations are properties located near agricultural fields in the towns of Crescent, Newbold, Pine Lake, Pelican, and Sugar Camp. If you think your property fits this description and you would like your water tested for PFAS, we recommend contacting the DNR's Mark Pauli at Mark.Pauli@wisconsin.gov or by phone at (715) 499-0612.

Soil remediation

Considering the recent DNR/EPA soil sample testing results for PFAS in the town of Stella, soil remediation will definitely be on the table down the road. An October 21st WXPR article  A look at how researchers are trying to get PFAS out of soil | WXPR shares the latest research on PFAS remediation options.  Phytoremediation the uptake of PFAS into plants and thermal desorption (applying high temperatures to the soil) are some of the possible solutions. Replacing the contaminated soil is also an option, one that has been used by the mining industry to clean up other types of soil contamination.

Interestingly there is current research looking at immobilizing the PFAS in the soil. A quote from the above WXPR article expounds on that process.

"Liang says there’s also been promising research into different material that could be added to the soil to immobilize the PFAS—which she says may be a good solution for agricultural fields that are contaminated.

“We know PFOA/PFOS, they tend to stay in soil, so why not just leave them there, but then make them immobilized in the soil? We have been studying different materials we can amend to the soil,” said Liang. “These materials will bind to PFAS. The binding is so tight that PFOA/PFOS will not migrate to groundwater and will not go to the plants growing in the soil.”

Liang says short-term studies have proven effective, but long-term studies are still needed for this method."

Who pays for remediation?

The question of who will pay for remediation remains up in the air for now. There are three potential options that could provide funding for remediation:

1. EPA designates the Stella/Oneida County contamination as a Superfund site with federal taxpayer dollars initially paying for remediation and the EPA having the ability recoup expenses from parties determined responsible.

2. Wisconsin taxpayers' foot the bill for the cleanup with the DNR recouping some of the expenses from the parties determined responsible for the contamination. This case is only possible if the Wisconsin Spills Law remains intact.

3. Wisconsin taxpayers' foot the bill with no monies recouped from responsible parties. This case is possible if the Wisconsin Spills Law is weakened to the point where the DNR does not have the ability to hold polluters financially responsible.

We at OCCWA have been covering the Wisconsin Spills Law political taffy pull for the past 2 years. The main point of contention being the definition of responsible party. Without some kind of agreement on responsible party language, none of the states PFAS designated dollars ($125 million) will be released to aide private well owners. Also, the DNR's ability to hold polluters responsible remains in question.