Great Lakes Aquatic Habitat News
The Newsletter of the Great Lakes
Aquatic Habitat Network and Fund
Volume 8, Number 5 • September-October 2000
Great Lakes Aquatic Habitat NewsThe Newsletter of the Great Lakes
|
|
The Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (DNR) has recently issued a highly controversial permit to Perrier Group of America (Perrier) for high capacity wells in central Wisconsin for a commercial spring-water bottling operation. Despite two county boards, five Townships and several citizens referenda urging Perrier to abandon its plans and calling on the DNR to undertake a full Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), the permit was issued on September 20th. The wells, to be located adjacent to “Big Spring” near New Haven, Wisconsin, would draw up to 500 gallons per minute, or 500,000 gallons per day year-round, from the spring.
In defense of its issuance of the permit, the DNR responded that it has no authority to deny a permit based on adverse environmental impacts alone; rather, DNR must and will approve such a permit only if there is no impact on public water supplies. DNR is not obligated to undertake a full EIS study. Furthermore, the DNR indicated that the level of protection stipulated in the permit is unprecedented in the state’s history. From the DNR press release of September 21, “This conditional approval and accompanying agreement…assure us that nearby groundwater, wetlands, creek, springs and other surface waters won’t be harmed by the operation of Perrier’s proposed wells. None of the 9,400 high capacity well applications previously approved in Wisconsin contain provisions to protect nearby groundwater or surface waters.” The permit provides that “no production well can be constructed until pumping rates and well locations are established by the Department assuring that there will be ‘no significant adverse impact to groundwater, surface waters or wetlands.’ These pumping rates and locations will be established only after extensive groundwater, wetlands and aquatic resources studies have been completed.”
Citizen groups from the area, environmentalists, a local Indian tribe and the Wisconsin Attorney General’s office disagree. The impacts discussed in the final Environmental Assessment issued by the DNR were not based on actual high-level pumping tests, but rather on modest short-term pumping trials and theoretical modeling. Several rare fen wetlands are found near Big Spring. The citizen groups argue that the impact to the area’s water resources is still unknown, and no permit should have been issued without this prior knowledge. The DNR is criticized for not engaging the “public trust” doctrine to protect the state’s water resources. Attorney General James Doyle, in a letter to DNR Secretary George Meyer, suggests that the Department of Justice might bring a public nuisance action against the DNR to protect water resources. Several citizen groups have also hinted of a lawsuit. The Ho Chunk Nation has recently indicated that it would join a local group, “Waterkeepers of Wisconsin” in fighting the proposed water withdrawal and bottling plant.
A new guidebook, Dam Removal: A Citizen’s Guide to Restoring Rivers, will be available from River Alliance of Wisconsin this November. The selective removal of old, obsolete dams constitutes one of the most significant and plausible tools for river restoration in the country. The Citizen’s Guide, written for citizens and local officials alike, is based on experiences with small dam removal in Wisconsin. However, the techniques outlined in this comprehensive guidebook are applicable to dam removal initiatives across the country. Topics covered by the guide include: how to undertake initial research, gathering information on repair and removal options, tools for dam removal, strategic advocacy, and post-dam removal restoration. Contact the River Alliance for a copy: (608) 257-2424 or wisrivers@wisconsinrivers.org.
A video on the option of dam removal is also available in November. The video, developed in collaboration with River Alliance of Wisconsin, National Park Service, Trout Unlimited, American Rivers, the Atlantic Salmon Federation and the Natural resources Council of Maine, highlights case studies of successful dam removal in Wisconsin, Maine and California. This 20-minute video is an excellent resource to show at local meetings where dam removal is being considered as an option. The video was funded by the Mississippi Interstate Cooperative Resource Association. For a copy of the video, contact: River Alliance of Wisconsin, (608) 257-2424 or wisrivers@wisconsinrivers.org.
The Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources has signed a letter of intent for issuing water quality certification for filling approximately 35 acres of wetlands for construction of a new middle school within the city limits of Superior. The DNR argues that there is no clear alternative to the wetland site. The high quality wetland hosts a diversity of unusual plants including two state threatened plant species and the only known Wisconsin population of smooth black sedge, a species more characteristic of east coast wetlands.
In the “Notice of Proposed Incidental Taking of Endangered Species,” the DNR contradicts itself. The agency acknowledges that the “proposed project is expected to result in the incidental taking of a number of endangered resources. Seaside crowfoot (Ranunculus cymbalaria, threatened) and arrow-leaved sweet coltsfoot (Petasites sagittatus, threatened) occur as small populations at the proposed site. Also, all currently known Wisconsin populations of smooth black sedge (Carex nigra) are found on or near the proposed school site. (emphasis ours).” The Notice continues, “The Department determined that the expected incidental taking is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of the State populations of…smooth black sedge (Carex nigra),” even though this is the only known site for the species in the state!
The DNR has proposed that a “conservation plan” be developed that includes protecting some off-site areas and transplanting the threatened species from the area to be filled to another site. However, experience has shown that transplanting rare species rarely is successful.
This unexpected letter of intent by the DNR to allow filling such a large and diverse wetland suggests that the decision is being made to appease the Superior community, rather than based on sound scientific information. In fact, a community referendum for construction of the school passed with a clear majority. Much of the city of Superior is located in the Lake Superior “red clay wetlands,” a region of saturated soils that pose difficulties for development.
Citizens have until November to challenge the DNR decision. Wisconsin Wetlands Association is opposing the issuance of any permits for this large wetland fill, which would represent the largest single fill of any individual development project since the establishment of state water quality certification standards for wetlands in 1991.