Wisconsin Association of Lakes logo
Wisconsin Association of Lakes E-News
December 2005
In this issue

Assembly Bill (AB-299) would weaken shoreland protections

Assembly Bill (AB-850) would undermine pier rules, rule process

Let your legislators know you love your lakes!

Wisconsin behind in water conservation

Is “Up North” vanishing?

Problematic blue green algae health risks difficult to predict

 
Save the Date!

Southeast Region Lakes Workshop. Richard T. Anderson Education Center - Waukesha County Technical College (Pewaukee campus). February 18, 2006.

28th annual Wisconsin Lakes Convention. KI Convention Center, Green Bay. April 20-22, 2006. Hands Across the Water. This year's convention will focus on civic engagement skills in supporting clean, healthy, lakes and waterways in Wisconsin.




  • Assembly Bill (AB-299) would weaken shoreland protections
  • Under present law, county shoreland zoning ordinances have included minimum standards for lake shorelines in unincorporated areas. Thousands of lakefront property owners in unincorporated areas have invested millions of dollars in structures that meet the current statewide minimum standards for shoreland development.

    Current law protects these property owners' investments by ensuring that unincorporated land that is being annexed by a city or village retains statewide minimum shoreland standards until the city or village enacts its own ordinance that meets statewide minimum standards or the county government amends its shoreland ordinance to reflect special circumstances.

    AB 299 would immediately eliminate all shoreland zoning requirements for land that is annexed by a city or village. Its passage would dramatically reduce water protections by eliminating protections for some areas on lakes, allowing development to be closer to the water and at greater densities.

    The Wisconsin Association of Lakes feels this bill is likely to undermine property values and threaten the near shore environment; we oppose this bill. When this bill passes the Senate Natural Resources Committee, it will go before the full Senate for approval. We encourage you to contact your State Senator and let him/her know you want him/her to protect your lake by voting against AB- 299.

     
  • Assembly Bill (AB-850) would undermine pier rules, rule process
  • Several members of the Legislature are trying to push through a bill that would change water regulations statutes less than 2 years since they were changed.

    We wonder why this legislation is coming forth at this time. 2003 Act 118, changed the permitting process for piers, codified the pier planner, created an exempt category for piers, and attempted to clarify the whole pier permitting process. The Act gave the DNR the ability to write rules to administer the statute. Yet the rule has not yet gone to the Legislature for approval. Why are they now changing the statute? The stakeholder group that helped draft this rule worked very hard to craft a rule that followed the statute and would be acceptable to most people. Why not let the rule come to the legislature?

    The Wisconsin Association of Lakes opposes AB 850 for the following reasons:

    1. This bill will allow a boat slip for each and every “dwelling” on a piece of property. This means every keyhole residence, and every condominium on a given parcel would be able to have a boat slip. So if a condo unit had 30 units, there could be a single pier with 30 boat slips on a narrow piece of frontage land.
    2. The bill creates substantially more uncertainty for owners of piers that are greater than 6 feet wide and/or longer than to three feet depth of water or long enough to moor a boat. Without requiring registration (a permit) for larger piers, who will know that the pier is, in fact, legal, even under the proposed bill.
    3. Existing piers that are now illegally interfering with another riparians rights or damaging public waters will become legal, with no recourse for those harmed.
    4. The proposed bill changes long standing rules for prohibiting problematic piers. The proposed bill requires the DNR to “prove by a preponderance of evidence that the structure presents an imminent and substantial danger to navigation or the public interest,” and not just “interfering with public rights.” It seems this language is intended to create a set of pier rules that are effectively unenforceable.
    The full text of the proposed bill is available online. We encourage you to contact your assembly representative and let them know your thoughts on this bill.
     
  • Let your legislators know you love your lakes!
  • Conservation Lobby Day 2006 to be held January 25th

    The Wisconsin Association of Lakes is joining a coalition of statewide conservation groups to bring together citizens from across the state to talk with legislators about clean water, quality sporting opportunities, and Wisconsin’s conservation priorities.

    Conservation Lobby Day offers you the opportunity to talk to your legislative representatives about your concerns and hopes for Wisconsin's lakes. Your perspective as a local lake person will help your elected legislator understand the issues that are important to our lakes and vote to protect the things we all value about Wisconsin’s special lakes.

    Two of this year’s Conservation Lobby Day priorities focus on issues that negatively impact many of our lakes: polluted runoff, and declining groundwater levels. We feel there are two additional issues of importantance to lakes that our legislative representatives need to hear more about; shoreland protection, and aquatic invasive species prevention and control. The Coalition and the Wisconsin Association of Lakes are developing talking points on each of these issues, which will be available well in advance of the event.

    Make your voice heard in the Capitol.

    Registration for Conservation Lobby Day 2006 is being handled by the Wisconsin League of Conservation Voters.

    Priority Lake Issues

      Polluted runoff

      Despite being the first state in the country to enact strong polluted runoff rules, runoff remains Wisconsin’s leading water quality problem. Runoff is excess water that washes hard surfaces—such as roads and roof tops—instead of soaking into the ground. As runoff water rushes off the land it carries fertilizers like phosphorus, sediments, salts, and other pollutants into our lakes, causing numerous problems.

      Groundwater decline and Great Lakes water diversion

      Groundwater flow is one of several sources of water for lakes. When the amount of groundwater flowing into a lake is reduced, the total volume of a lake and/or the flow of water through a lake can be reduced, which negatively impacts the lake’s ecosystem, water quality, and recreational uses. Declining groundwater levels—caused by higher water use demands and increased hard surfaces that prevent water from soaking into the ground and higher water use demands— threaten a growing number of our inland lakes.

      Aquatic invasive species prevention and control

      Aquatic invasive species are costing taxpayers millions of dollars by lowering property values, degrading habitat, and displacing native plants, wildlife, and fish species. Invasive species impact recreation by harming native sport fish populations. Invasive plants often form dense mats that make boating, fishing, and swimming difficult. The costs to control invasive species are extremely high. Individual lakes may spend tens of thousands of dollars per year to simply manage (not eradicate) invasive plant populations.

      Shoreland protection

      Protecting natural shorelines prevents polluted runoff from entering lakes, helps control flooding, provides fish and wildlife habitat, preserves privacy and natural scenic beauty, and enhances public rights and private property values. Shorelands are sensitive areas and are critical to our lakes' health.

     
  • Wisconsin behind in water conservation
  • A new report released by Midwest Environmental Advocates examines water conservation in Wisconsin, and finds the state has fallen behind. Increasingly, Wisconsin communities are experiencing water quality and quantity problems. This emerging trend is problematic as water is essential to economic development and sustainability, as well as necessary for the continued health and well being of Wisconsin citizens and our shared natural resources.

    Protecting Wisconsin's Waters: A Conservation Report and Toolkit identifies disincentives to water conservation within our laws and regulatory systems, including some which provide economic incentives to waste water. The report also evaluates water conservation within the context of Wisconsin’s land use laws and policies.

    The report finds water conservation opportunities that exist under current and emerging law, describes existing best management practices and water conservation initiatives, and provides a water conservation toolkit to guide decision-makers.

     
  • Is “Up North” vanishing?
  • Lake ecology is only one aspect of Wisconsin lakes. Our perception of our relationship with lakes is equally important. How we think about lakes affects how we treat them. Our lakes are special places not only because of their natural beauty, but because of the relationships we form with others while enjoying our lake, and the meaning we associate with being at the lake or “Up North.” All of our lake experiences contribute to a “Sense of Place."

    A recent paper by Richard Stedman--Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Sociology at Pennsylvania State University—examines the relationship between our sense of place and lakeshore development in northern Wisconsin. He suggests that “Up North,” has an understood meaning as a place of high environmental quality and escape from civilization.

    Stedman surveyed over 1,000 property owners in northern Wisconsin's lake-rich Vilas County. Conclusions from this survey include:

    • Low levels of development are a perceived characteristic of "Up North" lakes.
    • Increasing the amount of lakeshore development causes a decline in residents' perception that their lake is indeed "Up North."
    • Increasing amounts of lakeshore development leads to residents feeling less satisfied and attached to their lake.
    • Increasing the number of people within a lake community leads to more opportunities for social relationships; positive social relationships can increase residents' sense of attachment to their lake.
    • When people feel attached to their lake, they are more willing to act to protect the lake.
    • Ironically, when people are satisfied with their lake, they are less willing to act to protect it. This suggests that people are often not willing to become involved in lake protection activities until the lake has undergone significant negative change.
    Stedman speculates that developed lakes are no longer “the real Up-North” when they have been impacted by human use; but they do become more social places. We are still attached to developed lakes because of the social relationships. However, developed lakes are felt to be less satisfying, and we are less willing to protect developed lakes against future environmental change.
     
  • Problematic blue green algae health risks difficult to predict
  • Blue green algae are photosynthesizing bacteria that have existed in Wisconsin lakes for millions of years. In recent decades, excessive nutrients from human activities have fueled worsening algal blooms. In addition to the negative impacts associated with algal blooms— excess algae can block sunlight, deplete oxygen in the water, and contribute to fish kills—blue green algae can produce a variety of toxins that can affect human and animal nervous systems, kidneys and skin.

    High concentrations of blue-green algae occurred in 2004 and 2005 in some waters in all regions of Wisconsin, but the algae didn’t always produce the toxins that can pose a health threat to people and animals, according to a new study by the Department of Natural Resources. Not all species of blue-green algae produce toxins, and even those that produce toxins don’t produce them all the time. These findings suggest predicting when blue green algae will be a health risk is more complex than originally thought, and there is no quick and easy way to decide whether water quality is unsafe for water users and local officials.

     
  •