Quietnorth Archives

Action Alert! Protect the Stewardship Fund!

2007-06-04T19:30:00.000-07:00

LET’S KEEP WISCONSIN A GREAT PLACE TO ENJOY THE GREAT OUTDOORS:
CONTACT YOUR LEGISLATORS NOW ABOUT THE STATE STEWARDSHIP FUND
Since 1989, the state’s Knowles-Nelson Stewardship Fund has helped save more than 475,000 acres of our most beautiful scenery and pristine lands and waters for all Wisconsinites to enjoy – now and forever. The Stewardship Fund is also one of the programs that has made Wisconsin such a great place to hike, bike, ski, paddle and otherwise enjoy the great outdoors.
Many of the places we know and love, and perhaps now take for granted, have been made possible by the Stewardship Fund. This includes the Ice Age Trail, Willow and Turtle Flambeau Flowages, Hank Aaron Trail in Milwaukee, almost all of our state rails-to-trails and many of our state and local parks. Most recently, Stewardship dollars were used to purchase the new Straight Lake State Park which will be devoted to silent sports and quiet recreation.
Right now our lawmakers in Madison are in heated debates over the future of the Stewardship Fund. Some argue that the Stewardship program is a luxury we can no longer afford. Others say that we’ve done enough already; our job of protecting Wisconsin’s special places is done; our parks and trail systems are good enough.

Without legislative support, we will lose the Stewardship Fund and with it the power to protect our pristine waters and priceless natural lands.

YOU CAN HELP – but you need to act by June 7!

The members of the Joint Finance Committee will take a decisive vote on the Stewardship Fund on June 8.

Contact the chairs of the Joint Finance Committee and your representatives in the Senate and Assembly today and tell them to support the Governor’s proposal to renew and strengthen the Stewardship Fund. That means:

- Funding the Stewardship program at $105 million a year to keep pace with skyrocketing land values and inflation.

- Extending Stewardship through 2020.

- Continuing to invest in local and state parks, trails and waterways for hikers, bicyclists, paddlers, skiers and other silent sports enthusiasts.

- Ensuring that peaceful places are set aside for those of us who enjoy non-motorized, quiet, nature-based activities.

To contact the chairs of the Joint Finance Committee, write to:

Senator Russ Decker, P.O. Box 7882, Madison, WI 53707
Representative Kitty Rhoades, P.O. Box 8953, Madison, WI 53708-8953
Or call them at 1-800-362-9472

Be sure to send copies of your letters to your Senate and Assembly Representatives at:
o Senators, P.O. Box 7882, Madison, WI 53707-7882
o Representatives whose last names begin with the letters A-L
P.O. Box 8952, Madison, WI 53708-8952
o Representatives whose last names begin with the letters M-Z
P.O. Box 8953, Madison, WI 53708-8953
Don’t know who your legislators are? Go to waml.legis.state.wi.us/ to find out

Don’t know what to say? Here’s a sample letter for you to use:

Dear Representative

As it stands currently, the Stewardship Program, which helps to purchase lands that are important to Wisconsin for natural resource preservation and outdoor recreation and tourism, is due to expire in 2010.

The Governor has called for extending the Stewardship Program through 2020 and increasing funding for the program from $60 million to $105 million in 2011 as part of his 2007-2009 Biennial Budget.

Across Wisconsin, citizens enjoy the lands preserved by the Stewardship fund, from hiking and biking to skiing and fishing. From the majestic solitude of the Turtle Flambeau Flowage to the urban Lakeshore State Park and Hank Aaron State Trail in Milwaukee - north, south, east or west – the Stewardship Fund protects the landscapes that make Wisconsin a national treasure. We must continue to protect this rich natural resource.

The Stewardship fund is about preserving our quality of life. I want to enjoy Wisconsin’s pristine lands on a weekend off or perhaps on an evening when I get home from work. I want to spend time with friends and family on land I know will be protected for generations to come.

Please support the Governor’s proposal to increase Stewardship funding from $60 million to $105 million. We must protect our pristine lands, not only for ourselves but for future generations.

Sincerely,

For more information go to www.gatheringwaters.org/stewardship.

Action letter from Sue Drum: Time to Stop ATV trails

2007-02-13T09:39:00.000-08:00

Time to Stop ATV Trails in the Northern Highland American Legion State Forest

This is a call to action for Vilas County Citizens and all Wisconsin residents who value the health of the Northern Highland American Legion State Forest. As the largest of the 7 state forests with 222,000 acres, the NHAL represents the last of the forest blocks in Wisconsin large enough to truly protect and preserve habitat for northern wildlife.

It appears that the majority of the 16 Stakeholders assembled to find suitable ATV trail sites and routes are in favor of ATVs in our state forest, as are Dennis Leith and Bob Dall. The Natural Resources Board will receive the proposed ATV trail sites that the Stakeholders agree on by consensus, and will vote on this proposal at their May or June meeting. When the trail proposal is scheduled, I will let you know.
The important point is that the Natural Resource Board members make the final decision on whether or not ATV trails are placed in our NHAL State Forest.

I am convinced that an ATV trail or trails can only be stopped if enough people come to the aid of this valuable public resource, and recognize the value of maintaining the integrity of the forest ecosystem, as well as its scenic and esthetic qualities.

Let Vilas County, still undamaged by ATVs become the “control” in the ATV experiment, where the “control” serves as the unaltered base against which change, caused by ATV trails, can be measured. As ATV trails grow in the surrounding northern counties, let the NHAL remain an example of an intact, undamaged forest.

Here is my suggested plan of action.
Please feel free to comment and add your own improvements.

1. We must bury the Natural Resource Board (NRB) in letters of opposition. Write at least one, strong letter, expressing your personal thoughts and e-mail it to Laurie Ross, Executive Staff Assistant at NRB. Write boldly on your letter, “Please forward to all the NRB members.” Laurie will distribute your letter to all members. Of course you may also slow mail your letter to Laurie Ross or to individual NRB members.
LaurieRoss@wisconsin.gov or Laurie Ross, Executive Staff Assistant, PO Box 7921, Madison WI 53707-7921, phone: 608 – 267-7420
Attached is a list of other key people to include in your “TO:” and another group to
“CC”.
I’m afraid it will take at least 1000 letters to make an impact. We, the non-motorized users concerned about preserving our wild resources, are the majority. Can you try to activate a crisis network to move others to action before it is too late?

2. I have updated our Northwoods Citizens for Responsible Stewardship (NCRS) web site, which was established during the referendum campaign in 2003-2004. http://www.ncrs.info now has a new category, NHAL State Forest Stakeholders – 2007. You will find the following information on our web site:
a. List of key people to contact by e-mail, as I have attached to this e-mail.
b. The ATV Directive from the Master Plan
c. DNR Criteria that Stakeholders should consider when siting an ATV trail
d. 4 maps of the proposed trails and routes- Iron Cty, Loop with bridge over the lower Manitowish River, southern and northern half of the Lake Tomahawk to Sayner Trail, and the current proposal to extend the Sayner trail from Sayner to Star Lake area and end on Hiway K at the boundary of the NHAL
e. Northern Rivers Initiative – their high ranking of the Manitowish river from Rest Lake dam to the Turtle Flambeau Flowage, sent to me by Tom Aatila, Upper Chippewa Basin Watershed Supervisor, Park Falls.
f. Lower Manitowish River – judged Exceptional River by DNR scientists
g. An accurate documentation of ATV trail miles in Wisconsin, county by county. I find 8,507 year around miles of trails and routes. In 2003 the Wisconsin Department of Tourism recorded only 5,555 miles of state-funded trails.
h. Statistics you may find useful
i. Several letters of opposition sent to Dennis Leith and Bob Dall and testimony presented at the State Trails Policy Committee chaired by Roger Breske. This includes letters by John Bates and many NCRS members.

I will post updated maps and actions as they occur. Pass our website, http.//www.ncrs.info, (ncrs.info) to everyone you can.

The maps of proposed ATV trails use existing forest service roads (Lake Tomahawk route), town roads, snowmobile trails and logging roads. Very little of the proposed trails will need to be new. Forest service roads and town roads already allow street licensed vehicles like motorcycles, trucks and cars. These roads, especially forest service roads are poorly maintained and presently used mostly by hunters. Therefore traffic is light. ATVs will be a spring, summer, fall motorized addition. Damage to the forest and disturbance of the non-motorized users will be directly proportional to the level of ATV traffic. Let’s draw the line, in favor of forest health, by not adding ATVs!

I believe it is possible to site ATV trails on public land without impacting non-motorized users or damaging the natural resource. The DNR has developed ATV trail design standards that promote sustainable trail construction and maintenance. All new ATV trails, since 2004, must comply with these standards if they are to receive state funds. This important DNR step 1 needs to be followed by step 2. The DNR, using their own State Trails Council, should develop a comprehensive, statewide ATV trail plan. This plan would accurately account for all existing ATV trails and routes and try to provide appropriate and sustainable links. Therefore perhaps 5 to 10 miles of new trail might connect two 50 mile sections effectively producing over 100+ miles of new trail with very little loss of public land. Also a cost effective way to increase trail mileage.

The DNR also needs a reliable traffic count for existing ATV trails so they can anticipate future traffic levels and additional trail requests. It is wrong to force trails into a valuable and sensitive resource like NHAL without first developing a statewide plan that could present suitable alternate ATV trail sites.

Gaylord Nelson, a man with vision wrote these words:
“The bottom line comes to this – in the next few decades when total recreation visits to the public lands expand to one and one-half billion or more and the off-road vehicular mix expands by a factor of 4 or more then, sad to say, our rare heritage of natural lands could become history. The only way to save these special lands is to change the current management practices dramatically – and soon. This will mean significantly reducing all activities that degrade the land or water, impact on critical habitats, or intrude upon the tranquility and enjoyment of these lands. No other nation has undertaken to set aside such a large and magnificent portion of its landscape as a commons. If a significant slice of natural America is to be preserved for this and future generations, it must be here on these lands. There is no other place.”

“Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful citizens can change the world: indeed, it’s the only thing that ever has.” Margaret Mead

Let me know if I can be of help.
Sue Drum
NCRS, Secretary
11384 CTH B
Presque Isle, WI
715-686-2655
drumsa@centurytel.net

ATV association game plan....

2007-01-02T08:23:00.000-08:00

fyi

From: Randy Harden
============================================

Dear WATVA members:

Once in awhile something comes along that jumps out at you, something that if we don’t become knowledgeable and then involved, it could take a direction that could really hurt our ATV sport and this industry. An example would be back in late 1999 and early 2000 when our ATV registration program was in jeopardy of losing almost a million dollars, in danger of being transferred to the state’s general revenue account, in what we termed a “legal steal”.

We’re proud to say WATVA and our membership responded in a BIG way to that threat. We appealed to lawmakers and the Governor and went to great lengths to get the information out to you and asked you to call, to send letters or visit your state lawmakers and the Governor’s office. We did our part; you did yours and the Wisconsin ATV program dollars we’re fully restored where they belonged, back into the ATV account!!

Something just as dramatic and just as important COULD happen again. I’m not saying it has happened yet, but if a few things unfold the wrong way, we’ve got the makings for a major catastrophe in our ATV registration program! Let me give you a little background to set the stage.

A local WATVA chapter in Langlade County (White Lake ATV Club) has been working diligently for an ATV trail system that would eventually hook Langlade to Forest County. At question has always been a segment of the proposed new trail that extends south into White Lake. This situation became a procedural issue about a certain segment of the proposed new trail to the point that the issue became contentious. Senator Roger Breske was then asked to pull together a meeting between the DNR and county folks, our local WATVA chapter (the White Lake Club) and our WATVA government relations and land use team. The same meeting also had some local silent sports enthusiasts present.

The meeting results were somewhat muddled to say the least. Could a certain segment of the proposed new trail be considered to go farther south into White Lake than the DNR told us it could? Also at issue was the a policy that centered around a funding stipulation of how in its use the adjoining property was currently designated – would an ATV trail on that segment violate a ruling of this sort ? As the meeting progressed Senator Breske suggested he would submit to the state legislature that an ATV trails study committee be formed to help investigate these kinds of issues as we told him we commonly have objections such as this based on less than clear and accurate facts, at least from our point of view. In the end it was decided this special legislative committee would encompass all trails as the logic was we ATVers interact with and contend with all trail users at one time or another.

Basically we felt then and we still feel today that Senator Breske is really trying his best to help the ATV tourism industry. His suggestion was acted upon in Madison and a special leg council was approved to study and recommend legislative initiatives to address trails in general and ATV access issues specifically. Once the committee was approved, the process for selecting other lawmakers and some citizens was out of Senator Breske’s control. Its important to be clear on this statement, Senator Breske had no control on who would make up the committee, he only made suggestions. The final make up of the committee was not Roger Breske’s doing, that was decided by other lawmakers and staff on the Joint Legislative Council.

In the end 4 other lawmakers were selected to this study committee plus 5 citizens. Senator Breske was appointed the chairman from the bipartisan Legislative Council under which this special committee operates. The 5 citizens include 2 very capable ATV representatives, 2 fellow State Trails Council members < recall that I sit on the Governors State Trails Council representing motorized recreation myself >, one representing equestrians and the other representing cross country skiing and silent sports in general. The 5th representative that was selected is the editor of Silent Sports Magazine, a personality that has constantly proven in his magazine editorials and blogs and message boards everywhere to make his views well known related to ATV recreational use. As you can see the ATV citizen representation numbers and extreme position against motorized silent sport editor on this special committee are discerning to us. Much like my position on the State Trails Council wher
eat I am asked to represent the ATV, dirt bike and 4 x 4 truck community <1 person for three different groups>, this special citizen group has two ATV reps while other non-motorized groups have 3 and one is extremely prejudice and biased.

This Special Legislative Committee’s primary responsibility is to examine major trail issues and problems identified by the legislature. At the first two meetings there were hours and hours of public testimony, including our own. By far there were many more testimonies in number from anti-motorized folks but really nothing we haven’t come to expect or anticipate. For those of you that responded to our all WATVA survey, clearly our major challenges remain in taking steps to further improve our image to the general public. I can say we’ve make major strides in that department but as evidenced by all these negative testimonies, we still have a ways to go.

This is major concern number two, who are the real ATVers and our leaders? Yes we know who you are but do the lawmakers and other decision makers that are NOT ATV advocates and biased against ATV enthusiasts, do they really understand that we do have capable WATVA chapter leaders who are as concerned about environmental impacts and sustainable trail systems as the opposition to ATV trails? The way the majority of public testimony read, you would think ATVers have caused the earth to tilt on its axis!!

This special committee is again meeting on January 4th down in Madison. Their senior analyst and staff attorney for the Legislative Council has sent out 7 bill drafts that have been submitted to this committee for consideration and possible action to vote on. The intent of the chair (Senator Brekse) is to discuss these bill drafts to reach a consensus and make any requested changes and then take final action by voting to approve or not approve them.

As I understand the procedure, if the committee decides on action to approve (with or without adjustments) they would then send these bill on to the main Joint Legislative Council asking for introduction in the upcoming legislative session. Keep in mind the primary purpose of a bill draft is to propose changes to state statutes. The bill draft may create a new provision in the statutes, repeal an existing one or make modifications to one currently in place. These changes occur when, and if, the Legislature passes a bill and then the bill is signed by the Governor.

This is important to note because if a “bad or harmful to us” piece of legislation does gets introduced, we must influence it to counter it in either an Assembly and/or Senate Committee hearing via our testimony. You can bet the anti-motorized crowd will also make their presence known there too. Should it come to this, it is then we will be e-mailing and calling upon you, the members, to again speak up loud and clear with your state senators and state representatives telling them the “real story” versus the doom and gloom they hear from the others. We can also make similar voices heard in the Governor’s office as he can veto a proposed bill that gets passed if he so chooses. Then again, the anti-motorized group has the same option open to their point of view.

This message is to get you “on call and ready” in case the upcoming decisions go badly for the ATV program.

What generally happens is we represent you, we make the personal appearances and testimony to support your calls and letters. Of course anyone is invited to also attend in person if their schedule permits attending these committee hearings but they generally happen during the weekday making it inconvenient for most folks to attend. Regardless, your calls and letters to your state lawmakers are powerful, especially when we are testifying and know you have sent them as we reference them at that time.

Ok enough on that now, here are the initial bill drafts summaries. The intent of the bill draft for the committee is to offer a starting point for discussion. So that you know, WATVA will be attending the January 4th meeting to listen and hear what is decided. There is no public input that day but it is a public meeting.

You can bet we’ll be watching these closely. I assume by the time of the Annual Meeting in Stevens Point on March 31 and April 1 we’ll have lots of updated information to share with you.

Bill draft #1) Relates to trespass by operators of snowmobiles, ATVs and other off-road vehicles -

Current state law contains a general provision on trespass for any person entering the land of another without the express or implied consent of the owner or occupant. This provision applies whether or not the person is on a vehicle or not. It also has one especially for trespassers on a motorized vehicle. The current penalty is a Class B forfeiture which is a civil penalty not to exceed $1,000. However, current law is enforced by local law enforcement authorities, as DNR wardens do not have authority at this time to enforce the trespass statute if the person is not on a motorized vehicle. The trespass citation is enforced by a citation system, similar to a bond for a traffic citation. In essence the typical deposit for a trespass citation who pleads no contest is only $249.

The NEW DRAFT, as it appears before the 1/4/07 meeting, expands the property that is subject to trespass by applying the prohibition to public property as well as private property. I would assume this applies to those ATVers that go off trail while on public property trail systems. It also increases the penalty. If the judicial conference sets the deposit amount at the minimum of $250, the deposit for this violation would then be $438 . It is also possible the DA could issue a complaint and summons and seek forfeiture up to the maximum of $1,000.

Initial thoughts of WATVA government relations & land use team: Indeed as I write this we do not had sufficient insights to be sure of the intent other than what we’ve interpreted ourselves by reading their draft nor have we had time to discuss with you, our constituents, to gather your input and insights. However, WATVA has generally agreed with increasing trespass penalties for those rogue riders who violate the trespass laws. WATVA has spoken about adding an element of restitution for offenders that trespass and cause property damage on top of the violation fines. If we’re going to introduce stronger language then we think we should ask the offenders to also pay for damages plus the fines. We also think the same should apply to trespassers who cause property damage but are not riding a snow or off-highway vehicle.

Bill draft #2) Relates to increasing certain appropriation segments within the ATV registration program in the following areas. No set amount of increases have been established at this point in time but these are the areas to be considered.

A) Trails currently located on state property – the current appropriation amount is $225,000.
B) State law enforcement positions – current full time equivalent (FTE) was recently increased from 4 to 9 equaling $1,088,000 in 05-06 and $1,102,000 in 06-07.
C) Trails currently located on county property - the current appropriation amount is $1,600,000 on 05-06 & the same for 06-07.
D) Recreation aides via the ATV safety program – The Safety Enhancement grant is currently $250,000 and has been this same figure since 2001
E) County Law Enforcement – Financial aide to county sheriff’s that participate in ATV enforcement is shown at $200,000 but DNR LE has applied for an emergency 13.10 order to increase this year (05-06) to $400,000. DNR staff (Larry Freidig) had indicated he submitted his budget to increase to $500,000 in 06-07 but needs confirmation if that is so?

Initial thoughts of WATVA government relations & land team: As stated above, we have not had sufficient time to discuss with our constituents to gather their input but our initial input for each appropriation is logged below –

A) It is certain that some trails currently located on state property need major rehabilitation and updates such as the Richard Bong Rec area in Kenosha County. Initial estimates to get that location to a point that better serves the ATV / OHV community is estimated in the $500,000 range. This would be a one time rehab project but more annual maintenance should be planned for because more ATV traffic will obviously use this property once it is improved. Brigit Brown should be consulted for these details. We are also working very hard to get ATV trails implemented in the Northern Highlands – American Legion State Park up in Vilas, Oneida and Iron Counties. We need to anticipate a fairly high funding level to get these high profile systems installed the proper way. This property will be under a microscope if we are successful in this 10 year battle to finally realize some Atv trails in our state’s largest forest!
B) WATVA greatly supported increasing the FTE back in 2002 – 2003 from its 4 FTE to its current 9 FTE. This permitted additional Recreational Safety Warden positions being added and accounting for a Madison administration position, thus conserving a field warden funding. As of this writing we have not had time to confer with the Bureau of Law Enforcement to hear what their analysis of staffing needs are related to current ATV positions. WATVA was proud to support the more than doubling of FTEs from 4 to 9 but hesitates to support additional increases without first conferring with the Dept.
C) Without a doubt, this is the one segment of appropriations that should be given the most priority. The majority of ATV trails in Wisconsin are on county property and we need to keep these trails maintained and within Best Management Practices (BMP). The Wisconsin County Foresters Association (WCFA) should be conferred for input, they are the organization that has the in-depth knowledge and on the ground understanding of needs.
D) The Safety Enhancement Grant, established back in 2001, has produced our sport with a huge positive image as it enabled the recipient of the grant (NOHVIS Group at current time) the ability to provide human support to start new clubs, help existing ones, work with county, city, village, town, state and federal land managers pertaining to ATV access challenges. The focus of this program is to do the work that better recruits safety instructors and the Ride Smart Trail Patrol Ambassadors. Another key element that continues to produce positive results is in helping and mentoring instructors to conduct more ATV safety class graduates. To highlight the value of this program, it is designed to promote public operation of ATVs in a safe and ethical manner, provide support to local clubs, collect data such as our surveys that produced the positive results of the Dept. of Tourism Economic & Demographic Profile of ATVers and other important findings, continue recruiting and
helping train instructors and ambassadors, increase grassroots involvement, help create outreach programs that inform local communities about the positives the ATV industry can bring to those that invite us, and build and improve relationships with the tourism industry, dealerships, manufactures, the snowmobile community and others. This program has operated at the same financial level through massive gasoline price hikes and normal cost of living increases.
E) Much effort and energy has been spent to encourage county law enforcement to participate in the ATV enforcement program. To maximize the best work results of the Trail Ambassador’s we need ample levels of credentialed law enforcement to support our self-policing. Many counties have started to participate as we have wanted but now this line item category needs additional dollars to keep up with the increased county participation! WATVA and the Wisconsin County Forests Association (WCFA) have asked the DNR to fund an emergency request for this year to increase this level from $200,000 to $400,000 using unallocated dollars generated by higher than projected ATV sales. As we understand it, Larry Freidig requested the future levels be increased to $500,000 in his budget submission. WATVA also feels strongly that the law be adjusted to permit town or city police departments the ability to apply and qualify for this fund, no different than county law enforcement. There are s
ome town police departments that can do ATV enforcement as effectively as county or state officials but have no ability to apply for these funds. We feel this should be addressed with the same overview criteria by the DNR Bureau of Law Enforcement.

Bill Draft #3) Relates to increasing revenue into the ATV fund. The previous bill draft pertained to categories of spending levels for the ATV program, this bill pertains to how those spending increases would be paid for and funded! These are some outrageously high percentage increases in this draft, one of the main reasons WATVA wanted to put you all on high alert. I have categorized the spending segments below:

A) Public registration – Every two years is currently $30
B) Private & Ag registration – Once per owner is currently $15 one time
C) Commercial / Dealer plates – Currently $90 for three plates, $30 per plate additional over 3
D) Non-resident trail pass – Currently annual only at $18 per year

Initial thoughts of WATVA government relations & land team: As we stated above, we have not had sufficient time to discuss with our full board or with you, our members, but these are our initial thoughts.

A) Public use registration, currently at $30 for two years, Keep in mind the first registration fee level was $12 from 1986 through 2003. WATVA and our members were generally supportive, based on the
surveys we received and meetings we attended, to increase the fees to $30, as long as the dollars stay in the ATV program. The first draft bill all of a sudden has the $30 two year fee increasing to a whopping $75!!! While WATVA and our members will likely be supportive of certain increases if we agree on the need and results, this percentage increase is totally out of line without a huge public awareness forum that shows why the program fees would increase to this level.
B) Private use registration, currently at $15 for a one time fee for agricultural or private use would be increased to $20. At least the percentage of increase is not as drastic as the public increase.
C) Commercial ATV certificate is currently at $90 for two years. This bill is proposing to raise that fee to $125 for 3 dealer plates. For any plates over the 3 included in the $125 cost, the current additional cost for more than 3 plates is $30. This bill would raise that additional plate fee to $50. We need to speak with our Wisconsin Powersports dealers Association and WATVA dealer members but this is also a substantial percentage of increase from $90 to $120 which equates to $40 per plate per year, with $50 per plate for a those dealers that buy more than 3 which is even more than the $75 every two years for public registration!
D) Non-resident trail pass, a new provision we asked for back in 2003, is currently priced at $18 ($17.25 plus resale fee of .75). The new proposal is to increase to $75 (with $74.25 base with .75 to retailer). This new proposal also establishes a new 7 day non-resident trail pass for a fee of $37.25. I assume that total would be $38 after adding the 75 cent retailer fee.

Bill draft #4) A new bill to create an ATV damage claim program. You may recall we met last year with our peer group in Minnesota as their state instituted such a plan but they had some bad experiences with abuses in their program with some disingenuous anti-motorized folks who then tried to take advantage of their ATV dollars. The concept is to establish a funding source and system to pay claims for the cost of restoring property that is damaged by the operation of ATVs. Currently there is no ATV damage claim program.

Initial thoughts of WATVA government relations & land team: In the past the WATVA leadership has generally accepted this concept and has looked to the leadership of the ORV Council who has spent time and effort to establish criteria and oversight management to avoid abuses that Minnesota has experienced. As long as the ORV Council and WATVA remain part of the review team for this new category, we would likely support this initiative. As we stated on each reply above, I write this BEFORE having an opportunity to have input from our WATVA clubs and leadership and members so my answer is subject to getting our members thoughts and input before taking an official response. As with most things, the details of the program parameters would determine our support or opposition.

Bill draft #5) An act to repeal and recreate a new formula for the state gas tax that goes into our ATV program. Currently our state gas tax provision that is combined with our registration fees uses an outdated and very underformualted figure of 25 gallons of gas used on average per year by Wisconsin ATVers. This gallon figure was instituted in the original legislation back in 1986. Federal surveys used for the RTP program have consistently shown the gallons used on average are close to 70 gallons per year. Snowmobiles, boats and ATVs all use a formula that calculates the gallons used off road. Snowmobiles currently use the 50 gallon mark for their tax formula plus a multiplier that includes some GPR dollars. The ATV fund does not get that benefit even though the Dept. of Tourism and Minnesota study clearly show ATVing contributes a huge economic impact to Wisconsin’s general economy in sales tax revenue, in travel expenditures, and in payroll and jobs.

Initial thoughts of WATVA government relations & land team: WATVA has been concerned about this outdated formula for years and brought it up in the legislation we worked with lawmakers on in 2003. At that time the Wisconsin DOT representatives admitted to us the ATV program was being shorted in gas tax revenue but then proceeded to tell us they felt the boating program was getting too much and they weren’t sure about the snowmobile gas tax percentages and formula. At that time our expenditures were not oversubscribed so we chose to ask our lawmaker sponsors to pull the increase gallons request until we could work with the Snowmobile community, DOT and DNR to find an agreed upon method and formula that the ATV program wouldn’t take away from the snowmobile program without consensus on the formula that made that determination. WATVA and the association of Wisconsin Snowmobile Clubs (AWSC) have been working hard over the past years to find ways to work together and in partne
rship as indeed many Wisconsin citizens either ATV and snowmobile while many other snowmobilers’ have converted to ATVing. WATVA recognizes the value the other programs (snow and boating) bring to Wisconsin and do not want to drive a wedge between the three groups. We’d much prefer to make this change in a concerted effort with our two state agencies and the AWSC and boating colleagues. We feel certain if a new law forces the 50 gallon formula for ATVing, the DOT will simply take away from the other programs to realize the same level of their funding. Our other concern of just picking a 50 gallon figure versus doing a more scientific survey is that we will again be shorting the ATV program because we feel strongly the gallons are closer to 70 on average, not 50!

Bill draft #6) A new bill relating to promulgating of rules to establish standards for certifying ATV trails and routes. Under current statutes, the DNR is directed to encourage and supervise a trail system of trails and routes.

Initial thoughts of WATVA government relations & land team: WATVA is unsure of the intent here. While we fully support responsible trail siting, planning, and maintenance to provide sustainable trails that we can enjoy the ATV trails for generations to come, the recent addition of the policy for state owned trails has been such a system of bogged down administrative paperwork because the anti-motorized crowd has used it as a tool in some instances to insert their differences and definitions of standards to the point that it has great potential to be abused in this manner. Just as the state asked for input from a diverse group on their first set of guidelines then seemed to disappear and take their policy internal to make their own decisions on what was best and then ask us all to abide by those standards. The county land managers who oversee the vast majority of our trail systems weren’t even asked for their input on the current policy which we feel is an injustice to t
hen as the state asks them to abide by standards that are possibly flawed in their views anyway. WATVA is concerned because we felt we were heading in the right direction in this regard several years ago but then the process seemed to us to be high jacked to arrive at guidelines that many county managers feel are unworkable. Now trying to force it may not produce the desired results?

Bill draft #7) This draft applies to where and how the individual ATVs display registration identification. Currently ATVers receive two stickers from the DNR that are to be placed on the each side of the ATV. This bill creates a new requirement that the ATV owner displays in a more prominent manner. We assume this will be a rear plate? It doesn’t say but that the Dept. should make rules.

Initial thoughts of WATVA government relations & land team: WATVA did a rider survey on this concept change back in 2002-2003. The results showed a slight majority of riders that supported a rear license plate type identification. WATVA recently did an all membership survey in 2006, showing a more favorable percentage of members that supported a different method of displaying. We did speak with the Bureau of Customer Service and Licensing (DNR) some time back who advised us that the DNR has spent thousands of dollars on integration to get consistency in how they provide registration sticker for snowmobiles, ATVS and boats. I quickly found if we asked for plates, it would not be consistent with their efforts and be a very costly change. WATVA then conferred with our peers in Minnesota once again as they use a rear plated identification/registration system whereat the owners have to provide their own plate made to certain dimensions the state provides. We feel strongly that
if a rear plate is required, the owner should likewise provide their own plate according to state specified dimensions, include a number assigned from the state AND include the same two stickers they currently get, with one sticker on the plate and one on the left side. In this manner the state system remains the same with the exception of formulating a number to match the stickers which would be placed on the ATV owners rear plate along with one of the stickers with the remaining sticker placed on the left side of the ATV which is more visible from the trail as they pull off to the right. The sticker on the left side is more visible plus it has to match the number on the rear plate to curtail those owners who own more than one machine, preventing them from switching plates if they own more than one ATV. Again, we need time and more details to prepare you, our membership and leaders, with ample opportunities to comment to these proposed changes!!

=========================================================

I know this is a lot of reading to digest; we ourselves have had little time to prepare before the January 4th meeting. Like my memo states, this may or may not go anywhere, we’ll know more soon but we wanted you to be ready and prepared ahead of time.

This is but one reason you want to send representatives or attend the March 31 & April 1 workshops and meeting yourself in Stevens Point! We will be discussing these topics, where we are on them, what happened at these meetings and where you think we want to take it ourselves as we meet with other lawmakers and land managers throughout the state.

Remember to “Ride Smart – Get Involved and Tell Others” to do the same!

Randy Harden
President
Wisconsin ATV Association

A danger to our loons....

2006-11-14T17:32:00.000-08:00

Dear Colleagues - I'll keep you posted on the situation described below, it could have an impact on Wisconsin's breeding loon population.

Kevin Kenow, USGS, found that nearly all Wisconsin loons fitted with satellite transmitters migrated through Lake Michigan during fall migration. The die-off described below has potential serious implications for Wisconsin's loon population as strong adult survival rates are critical to the long term stability of the population. It is likely many loons from the Michigan UP and Minnesota also stage in Lake Michigan during fall migration.

Several thousand loons have died from botulism toxicity during fall migration on Lake Erie the past several years, however we only know of one Wisconsin bird involved in that die-off as we believe most of WI birds do not migrate that far east before heading south. However, with botulism turning up in Lake Michigan, there may be a greater risk impact in Wisconsin. It appears the botulism outbreak is involved with the invasion of the Great Lakes by exotic invasive species, round goby and mussel in Lake Erie, where they anticipate the largest botulism kill yet in 2006.

For those of you that keep track of loon carcasses in Wisconsin, please keep your eye out for our color-banded loons if they turn up. We have color marked nearly 2000 individual loons from WI 1991-2006 and they may turn up in this die off.

I will let you know if I hear more over the fall. Mike

From: Kevin P Kenow [mailto:kkenow@usgs.gov]
Sent: Saturday, November 11, 2006 7:28 AM
To: Meyer, Michael W - DNR
Subject: Botulism outbreak in Lake Michigan

Mike,

Hope you made it back into the USA. Looks like it will be quite important for you to look at adult survival in your marked population this next year if this Lake Michigan botulism outbreak becomes big.

Kevin

*****

Botulism is killing migratory birds in Lake Michigan

The die-off of loons, grebes, cormorants and other migrating birds is linked to invasive species of mussels and fish in the Great Lakes.
Tom Meersman, Star Tribune
Last update: October 24, 2006 ? 9:34 PM

Hundreds of loons, grebes, mergansers, cormorants and other migrating birds have been killed in Lake Michigan recently, most likely from bacteria linked to non-native fish and mussels.
Biologists at Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore estimated this week that 2,600 dead birds have washed up on beaches during the past two months. It is the first large-scale bird die-off in Lake Michigan in decades.

"I've worked here for almost 30 years and I've never seen anything like it," said Steve Yancho, chief of natural resources at the park's office in Empire, Mich. He said the cause of the deaths seems to be Type E botulism, which occurs naturally in the sediment of the lake, but rarely enters the food chain.

Many wildlife biologists around the Great Lakes have noted similar mass bird deaths since 1999 in Lakes Erie, Ontario and Huron. Lake Superior seems to be the only Great Lake that has not been affected so far, said Doug Jensen, aquatic invasive species coordinator for the Minnesota Sea Grant at the University of Minnesota Duluth.

He said he doesn't know whether similar problems will occur in Lake Superior, because scientists are still trying to understand how water temperature and other factors may play a role in transforming the botulism bacterium into a potent neurotoxin.

What's clear from the evidence, said Jensen, is that the die-offs involve the interaction of two invasive species -- quagga mussels and a type of fish called round gobies -- which came originally from the Black and Caspian seas. They were carried into the Great Lakes in the ballast water of oceangoing ships and have been spreading since their arrival in the late 1980s.

Biologists believe that the birds die as the neurotoxin makes its way through the aquatic food chain.

First, invasive quagga mussels move into a lake-bottom area, filter the sediment and accumulate the botulism's bacteria, which produce the toxin. Then, the round gobies eat the mussels and become contaminated. Finally, migrating birds spot the dead or dying gobies, eat them and in turn get poisoned.

The toxin attacks the birds' nervous system and paralyzes their muscles, causing large numbers to drown when they can no longer flap their wings or hold up their necks.

Large bird die-offs have occurred in late summer when gulls eat poisoned fish, but especially in the late fall when migrating birds are searching for food.

New York biologists picked up more than 17,000 dead birds along the southern shore of Lake Erie in 2002. The toxin has also killed tens of thousands of other fish that consume gobies, and the gulls that feed on them.

Yancho said the botulism outbreak at Sleeping Bear Dunes occurred just after the piping plover, an endangered bird species, left the area.

"Had they been here when this was going full speed, it could have been disastrous," he said, adding that there are only 50 pairs of piping plovers left in the Great Lakes.

Helen Domske, senior extension specialist at the New York Sea Grant, is especially concerned about loons.

"They're wonderful birds that are such a critical part of the ecosystem," she said. "You start to wonder what kind of impact so many deaths is having on the entire [loon] population."

Tom Meersman ? 612 673-7388 ? meersman@startribune.com

No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.14.2/528 - Release Date: 11/10/2006
Delete

Sue Drum's testimony

2006-10-26T10:35:00.000-07:00

TESTIMONY – State Trails Policy Committee – Friday, November 10th, Merrill City Hall

Given by Sue Drum
11384 CTH B
Presque Isle, WI 54557
715-686-2655
drumsa@centurytel.net

There is a greater need than more ATV trails on public land.

“There is a need to preserve and enhance our natural resources: our air, land and water, our wildlife, fish and forests and the ecosystems that sustain all life.” Sound familiar? That is the Mission Statement of the WDNR.

Only public land stands in the way of continuous human development and degradation of the land. More than half of Vilas County is public land and so far Vilas is the only northwoods county without ATV trails.

Presently a Stakeholder group is trying to carve ATV trails into the Northern Highland- American Legion State Forest; the forest that protects the headwaters of three major rivers, The Wisconsin, the Manitowish and the Flambeau.

Vilas County has more natural lakes than any other county, 1300+; Oneida has 1100 lakes and ATV trails; Iron has 217 lakes and ATV trails; Forest has 824 lakes and ATV trails. With more lakes comes more rivers, creeks and sensitive wetlands, more aquatic species, all very vulnerable to motorized use.

I would like to call your attention to the people wearing green ribbons. They represent silent sport enthusiasts and nature lovers. They share many characteristics.

1.They are green
2. They are low impact, “leave no trace” users of public land
3. They believe in healthy, outdoor exercise
4. They love and respect the beauty and integrity of nature
5. They understand the urgency to preserve undisturbed land as habitat
6. Like the land, they can not co-exist with ATVs or other off highway vehicles in spring, summer and fall
7. They outnumber ATV trail users 4 to 1
8. They are a major economic force in the northwoods. They are the reason Vilas County leads all other northern counties in tourist revenue.

The Northern Highland American Legion State Forest hosts 2.2 million visitors a year. (Yellowstone with 10 times the acreage has only a million more visitors per year.) These northwoods visitors come in peace, without ATVs, to enjoy the wildflowers, the birds and the beauty of the undeveloped lakeshores on our public lands.

Today these people took their time to come and ask, that as you consider more trails, you save at least one county, Vilas, for the silent sport and nature lovers.

In all valid scientific experiments there must be a control. The control remains unchanged by the experimenter. The control becomes the norm by which to compare change. If you connect ATV trails across the land, there will be no way to measure the damage. Soil erosion, loss of plants, loss of animals, diminished wetlands, loss of trees. Severe ATV damage, whether on trail or off trail, is often long term and can take 5, 10, 15 years to become apparent. Without a control, we will begin to accept the slow, degradation of our land as normal. Our ancestors will never know what they have lost.

Public lands are a commons. Everyone has the right to use them but no one has the right to harm them.

These people, the silent sport and nature lovers, represent the majority, who use public land in harmony with nature. As keepers of the land, they have earned, at minimum, one county where they don’t have to encounter ATVs in their camps, along their riverbanks and on their trails.

Please keep us in mind as you consider how to use our besieged public lands.

Letter from Sue Drum Clarifying the mission of the Stakeholder's group

2006-10-23T13:49:00.000-07:00

Hi Mark,

I see in the article that Debbie Munson Badini says the Stakeholders were appointed by the Natural Resources Board. Actually we were appointed by Paul Delong, Chief Forester, and we are supposed to assist and advise the WDNR in recommending ATV trail locations, with an emphasis on regional trail connectors. This stakeholder group was outlined in the NHAL State Forest Master Plan approved by the Natural Resources Board in 2005, the Treehaven meeting at which you testified. The WDNR will look over our recommendations, modify them if they wish and present them, again, to the Natural Resources Board in April 2007.

The article also says that we are, "directed to find trail locations that would have the least impact on the land and that would not displace established state forest users-" with ATV riders. All of our work is supposed to be based on the DNR's 2 year old "Guidance for All-Terrain Vehicle Use on Department Lands". In this publication it states under Social Considerations - "Trails should be located to minimize impacts to other recreational uses, such as camping, hiking, wildlife viewing, hunting, or fishing that are already established on the property. --- Existing appropriate recreational uses will generally have priority over new proposals if conflicts cannot be mitigated. Impacts to other property users, such as noise and dust must be mitigated." I think, hope, Debbie believes the word"displace" is the same as "minimize impacts" when as you were sharp enough to see, if we are not going to "displace" any users we now have a mulitple use trail where motorized and non-motorized mingle happily. I was pretty sure that most of the DNR agreed that this type of multiple use didn't work.

I am really alarmed by the quote from Dennis Leith, " Taking the time to do this right ---- will mean greater success and more possible routes in the future, once the sustainability of the ATV trail is proven." Oh - Oh! We already have over 6,000 miles of ATV trails and routes to prove that these
machines damage the natural environment both off trail (illegal riding) and on trail (legal riding). I really don't like the implication that we will continue to build ATV trails and then decide if they are sustainable. I will ask Dennis about that statement.

In the Criteria for determining ATV use on department lands we are supposed to evaluate the effect of the trail on resources before it is built.
"The trail should not be in a location where significant adverse impacts on natural resources cannot be prevented through proper siting and trail construction and maintenance. --- trails should be located away from identified sensitive areas such as high-quality natural communities, wetlands, nesting areas, wild resources, scenic areas, and unique aquatic or terrestrial habitat. ---Whenever possible trails should be located away from waterways to minimize potential impacts and discourage inappropriate use."

I don't see how we can even suggest a trail so close to the Manitowish River. As John Bates wrote in a letter to Dennis Leith, "The Manitowish wetland complex is listed as a high priority area in the biological inventory done by the state for the master planning process and the river is designated as an Outstanding River by the state".

Mark, on another subject, are you free to testify, Friday, November 10th, 10:00 AM in Merrill at the Merrill City Hall Council Chambers, 1004 First Street , at the State Trails Policy Committee, Chaired by Roger Breske? As you know Joel Patenaude is on the committee and he and Brook Waalen feel it is very important for our side to speak up to counter all the ATV propaganda given by ATV clubs and advocates at the first meeting. October 5, 2006. We will probably be given only 5 minutes to make a point. Let me know if you can go. I'm going to try to coordinate messages with Brook and others so we cover all the major objections to more and more ATV trails. web site again is" www.legis.state.wi.us/lc/3_COMMITTEES/Special%20Committees/2006/TRAIL/index.htm

Sue Drum
11384 CTH B
Presque Isle, WI 54557
715-686-2655
drumsa@centurytel.net

Letter to the Stakeholder's group from Merrill Horswill

2006-10-15T20:28:00.000-07:00

Dear Mr. Leath,

As you know, invasives species are becoming an
enormous threat to the ecology and economy of the
Northwoods. Invasives like Eurasian water milfoil and
garlic mustard have already infected much of Illinois
and southern Wisconsin and the lakes and communities
there have spent untold amounts on their control and
are still losing the battle. But here in the
Northwoods, we still have the chance to prevent their
spread. As you may know, Vilas County Lakes
Association and the Vilas County Land and Water
Conservation Department were awarded the Governor’s
Crusader Invader Award for their education and
prevention measures to prevent aquatic invasive
species.
We now need to focus on the spread of terrestrial
invasive species. I am concerned that a Trail System
for off road vehicles (ORV) will hasten the spread of
these invasives into the Northwoods. As anyone can see
from trailers of muddy vehicles being transported
across the state, there is a real and present danger
of bringing invasive seeds from Illinois and southern
Wisconsin.

Launching an ORV with seeds in tire treads is just
like launching a boat into our lakes with Eurasian
water milfoil. I have seen such evidence in Iron
County. I was on a wildflower hike this spring on the
Uller Trail with the Northwoods Native Plant Society,
including botanists from throughout the Northwoods.
While on the hiking trail we saw native wildflowers
and no invasives. However, where that trail crossed
the ORV trail, garlic mustard lined the motorized
trail, a clear indication that it was brought by ORVs.
Garlic mustard, as an one example of an invasive, has
the potential of taking over a wooded area and
actually preventing the growth of new trees,
eliminating the native plants and subsequently the
animals and birds that depend on them. Reducing
productive forests and limiting popular tourist
wildlife viewing sites has an impact on the economy of
the infected areas while combating invasives becomes a
burden to local taxpayers.

I have attached a recently completed study that shows
the potential of ORVs to spread invasive species.
Please consider this danger to the ecology and economy
of an area and cost to taxpayers when determining
state trail locations and guidelines.

Sincerely,
Merrill Horswill
PO Box 199
Presque Isle, WI 54557

Letters from John Bates and Chris Phillips concerning ATV trails

2006-10-15T19:04:00.000-07:00

Dear Committee Members,

Mr. Bates' well crafted letter speaks to the issue that I raised at the
last
meeting (October 9) regarding evaluation of the first proposed ATV
trail
connector. We must be assured that the policing of the trail by
established
authorities and by users is adequate to protect the resources of the
trail
corridor. This is why I recommended that we establish an evaluation
methodology to determine if protective criteria are met after the trail
is
open and what changes can be made to correct the problems. Instead,
the
decision was made to move on to search for another trail corridor in an
area
that will be even more contentious.

I believe that further "behavior changes" in the ATV community will be
necessary in order for the sport to gain greater acceptance in the
community
as a whole. I believe that the offenders in the ATV community are a
minority of riders. The problem, however, is that even one machine can
do
an incredible amount of damage. I have witnessed some positive change
in
recent years: The amount of damage along our highways from ATV use
seems to
have decreased. Another example: I recently led a group of hikers on a
five
day walk on the North Country Trail in Ashland and Bayfield counties.
The
last time I did this hike there were numerous places where ATVs had
illegally trespassed on the trail. This time there was virtually no
ATV
footprint.

Most of us remember the difficulties that the snowmobile community
experienced in the past. Many of these problems have been resolved,
especially with regard to landowners. Snowmobiles, however, have a far
lesser impact on the ground than ATVs. When the snow melts, the
footprint
of the snowmobile trail mostly disappears. The challenge of an
environmentally sustainable ATV trail is much more difficult but not
impossible. I believe we need to proceed carefully and prudently to
get the
job done right. If we go too fast, we will cause more alienation and,
ultimately, fail in our mission.

Denny, please feel free to share my comments with the rest of the
committee.

Dave Phillips

----- Original Message -----
From: "John Bates"
To: ; ;
; ;

Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2006 8:49 AM
Subject: letter to Dennis Leith regarding placement of an ATV trail in
a
wetland complex

>I am CC'ing a letter to all of you that I sent this morning to Dennis
>Leith. Thank you for taking the time to read it.
>
> John Bates
>
> ---
>
> 10/11/06
>
> Dear Denny,
>
> I hope you are well and enjoying your retirement - I'd enjoy the
chance to
> sit and talk sometime!
>
> Today though I'm writing specifically about the ATV trail that has
again
> been proposed to run on the old railroad surface along Hwy. 47, as
well as
> along Sandy Beach Road. As you know, on either side of the railroad
tracks
> and Sandy Beach Road lays extensive wetlands, most of which are sedge
> meadow or a sedge/bog complex. I live right across from the railroad
track
> along Hwy. 47, and hike it regularly with my wife and dog, so know
the
> site very well. And we on occasion bike and hike along Sandy Beach
Road.
> We also paddle the Manitowish River extensively, and I lead trips on
the
> river every year.
>
> I must utterly disagree with the potential placement of an ATV trail
> anywhere near wetlands, and in particular these wetlands. I've seen
many
> times how ATV riders leave the trail to experience the joy of mud in
our
> wetlands, which they fail to recognize as a biological community.
Twice
> this summer we've seen ATV riders illegally on the Hwy. 47 railroad
track
> going into the wetlands and just chewing them up. This is, of course,
not
> isolated incidents, but rather a long standing resume item for ATV
riders.
> They like mud. We see them as they go by our house just about every
day as
> they head up into Iron County to ride, and see them return with their
> machines absolutely caked in mud. Again, this is not a few folks, but
the
> rule rather than the exception. This is not hyperbole on my part, but
> fact. I would encourage any members who doubt this statement to come
sit
> with us someday along Hwy. 51 and watch the trailers heading south in
> order to form their own opinion.
>
> The DNR's first command, as you know far better than I, is to protect
and
> enhance natural habitats. The placement of an ATV trail anywhere near
> wetlands is simply a recipe for environmental degradation. If an ATV
trail
> has to be placed somewhere, it should only, ONLY, be placed in
uplands in
> areas that have no significant ecological designation by the
Department.
> As you know, the Manitowish wetland complex was listed as a high
priority
> area in the biological inventory done by the state for the master
planning
> process. The river is a high priority area as well, and is designated
as
> an Outstanding River by the state. To have ATVs crossing the river
> anywhere is, again, an invitation to riders to test out their
machines in
> the river bed or along a shoreline.
>
> I respect your ability to work with diverse people to reach
reasonable
> compromise regarding use of the state forest lands and waters. This
is not
> reasonable. There is very little law enforcement ability available
through
> our wardens to oversee this proposed trail, again as you well know.
And to
> expect the ATV associations to somehow police all their trails 24/7
is a
> pipe dream. No organization can reasonably suggest they have the
> capability to do so, including those of us who paddle, ski, or engage
in
> any recreational activity.
>
> Please share this letter with your stakeholders group, and seek a
> reasonable alternative to placing a trail in sensitive wetlands.
Their
> destruction to whatever degree would also greatly harm the case
ATVers are
> trying to make for themselves, and put in jeapordy their uses
elsewhere in
> the state forest.
>
> I would be happy to join a hike along the railbed and along Sandy
Beach
> Road if that would help in any manner for your members to see the
quality
> of these wetlands and to imagine the negative scenarios that could
arise.
>
> Thank you for your thoughtful consideration.
>
> John Bates, Manitowish, Iron County
>

From Joel Patenaude...

2006-10-15T19:02:00.000-07:00

Forwarded Message [ Download File | Save to Yahoo! Briefcase ]
Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2006 10:48:10 -0500
From: "Joel"
To: "Brook Waalen" , "drums >> "Alan & Sue Drum""
Subject: Re: State Trails Policy Committee needs to hear other side
Plain Text Attachment [ Scan and Save to Computer | Save to Yahoo! Briefcase ]
Brook,

FYI, looking through my material from the last meeting, I see that Dale
Crisler and Tim McRaith, co-coordinators of the IAT Superior Lobe
Chapter, sent a letter to the committee.

They note the following:

1) Five miles of IAT have been surrendered to ATVs and "users of the
Ice
Age Trail have been displaced and are now required to use the shoulders
of roads" including a bridge on State Hwy. 48.

2) An inn-to-inn hiking program between Birchwood and Haugen is no
longer a tourism option. Neither is a hiking route from the
Burnett/Baron County Line to the Murphy Flowage Rec Area.

3) They conclude, "Before any additional funding is authorized for
ATVs,
we feel ATV funds should be allocated to pay for the trail that has
been
confiscated at the expense of those who wish to enjoy Wisconsin's
solitude and natural wonders on the Ice Age Trail."

I e-mailed both Crisler and McRaith to encourage them to testify at the
next meeting. Their important letter is getting lost in the shuffle.

Joel

Brook Waalen wrote:

>Joel,
>
>I'll be there.
>
>Item of interest: A staffer from the American Hiking Society is
passing
>through Wisconsin and is currently on the Ice Age Trail. This fall he
>hiked sections of the Tri-County Corridor up north and the entire
Gandy
>Dancer. He reported on Monday that the ATV damage on the Gandy Dancer
is
>ubiquitous.
>
>Brook
>715-472-2922
>brookwaalen@lakeland.ws
>
>
>
> _____
>
>From: Joel [mailto:silentsports@charterinternet.com]
>Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2006 5:04 PM
>To: Sue and Alan Drum; Brook Waalen; Mark Haag; Jim Wise; Ron Bergin;
>Dar Ward, Bicycle Federation of Wisconsin; Dale and Penny Schaber;
>iat@iceagetrail.org
>Subject: State Trails Policy Committee needs to hear other side
>
>Dear Sue Drum & Northwoods Citizens for Responsible Recreation,
>
>I just got the notice that the next meeting of the the Special
Committee
>on State Trails Policy will be Nov. 10 in Merrill. It falls right when
I
>need to be laying out the December magazine but I'll try to be there.
>
>All the testimony heard last Thursday at the first meeting of the
State
>Trails Policy was related to increasing ATV trails and access to
trails.
>The committee desperately needs to hear the other side; where and how
>ATVs have been detrimental to nonmotorized trails, other users,
private
>property ect. Without having to face the other side, this committee
runs
>the risk of thinking multiple use trails are actually a good idea and
>ATVs ought to have free reign of our parklands.
>
>The new SCORP (the 2005-2010 Wisconsin Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor
>Recreation Plan) has just been released by the DNR and includes, for
the
>first time, a chapter on "compatibility and conflict." It states
>outright, "It is evident that ATV riding is incompatible with every
>other land-based activity but snowmobiling."
>
>The full SCORP is worth reading; it includes alot of ammo for our
side.
>It is available here:
>http://www.dnr.state.wi.us/planning/scorp/reports/demog_profiles/
>
>The author of the compatibility/conflict section, UW-Madison Prof.
David
>Marcoullier, is serving on the committee, as is Mike McFadzen,
>cross-country skiing and biking advocate who is also the current
>chairman of the Governor's Council on State Trails. I am serving on
the
>committee as well, but the three of us need outside support just to
>bring the silent sports perspective to the table, let alone to the
>forefront.
>
>Here's one thing for which we might want to agitate.
>
>WATVA VP Rob McDonald told the committee his organization is working
>with Ice Age Trail chapters and other nonmotorized folks on the issue
of
>ATV damage but that "we haven't found a solution." I asked him if he's
>looked at or would support replicating what Minnesota has: A
designated
>restitution fund for property owners that can demonstrate ATV have
>wrecked their land but can not ID who was responsible. McConnell said
>the Minnesota fund, which started with $500,000, was "fatally flowed"
>and "there's a problem with the people who have applied for the
money."
>He did not provide details even when I pressed him during a break in
the
>proceedings.
>
>Interestingly, when I asked WATVA President Randy Harden about a year
>ago if he would support such a concept, he said yes, unequivocably.
And
>last June, I asked Wisconsin State Parks Director Bill Morrissey the
>same question. He said I was the first to suggest it but that it was a
>good idea and he would make that part of any OHV recreation area
>proposal his department might make. I need to do some research on how
>the Minnesota fund has been used, but I think that this might be a
path
>we should pursue.
>
>But to get support for this concept or any other means to control the
>proliferation of ATV riding on public lands, we need to catalog the
>damage and costs of remediation so far. If possible, we should get
land
>managers and local law enforcement to testify to the widespread nature
>of the problem. We need to get folks from all corners of the state to
>tell the committee what they're dealing with.
>
>Because so far, all we've heard are stories of ATV riders 1) being
>threated with tickets and arrest if they merely cross nonmotorized
>trails, 2) facing beauracratic hurdles to extending legal ATV trails,
3)
>how not enough ATV registration fees and fuel taxes are coming back to
>the counties for ATV trail maintenance, and 4) how thousands more
miles
>of year-round ATV trails are needed in this state.
>
>Hearing only this, committee chairman Breske said repeatedly, "This is
>what this committee is for, to clear up this garbage." Another
lawmaker
>on the committee, Rep. Ott, railed about how there are not enough
things
>for young people to do, and the solution is to provide more places
where
>they can ride ATVs. (Nevermind addressing the youth obesity epidemic
>we're facing, just so long as the kids are outside!)
>
>We need to shift the tone and substance of this debate toward the
>quality and kind of trails and healthful recreational opportunities we
>ought to have in this state. We heard a bit about how nonmotorized
trail
>funding is down 30 percent and still falling, but we need to hear more
>about the long-term implications of this.
>
>Yes, I did get the disc but I haven't had a chance to absorb its
>contents.
>
>Just to write this I had to take a break from working on the November
>issue of the mag, and I don't have time to spare this week. If you can
>get a head start on rounding up our allies, submitting materials to
the
>committee and on the docket to testify Nov. 10, please do. Feel free
to
>use some of the thoughts I'm sharing here.
>
>Joel Patenaude, Editor
>Silent Sports magazine
>
>P.S. The committee heard from Holly Tomlanovich, treasurer of the
Vilas
>County Alliance of ATV Clubs. She didn't say much substantive, but
left
>many committee members with the impression that it is really
unfortunate
>Vilas County has only a half mile of ATV trail. Your eloquent letter,
>pointing out that the lack of ATVs has helped Vilas County
economically,
>was included in out packets but not discussed.
>
>See what we're up against?
>
>
>
>Sue and Alan Drum wrote:
>Joel, I just received notice from Beth Piliouras that the next State
>Trails meeting is Friday November 10th, 10:00 AM, Merrill City Hall.
I
>used to live in Merrill so I'll be there. Sue
>
>

Action Alert....

2006-10-15T18:54:00.000-07:00

Hi Northwoods Citizens for Responsible Stewardship,

I want you to be aware of the actions of the recently formed State Trails Policy Committee, Chairman, Senator Roger Breske, whose first meeting was October 5, 2006. This group has several state legislators on the committee and is set-up to make new laws or change old laws regarding state trails. The first meeting was a warning to those of us who wish to protect the environment against many additional ATV trails on public land. Please inform yourself by reading the attachments that include the following:
1. a Recap of the October 5, 2006 meeting - check out this web site - www.legis.state.wi.us/lc/3_COMMITTEES/Special%20Committees/2006/TRAIL/index.htm It tells you the members on the committee and what letters were given to the committee at their first meeting. Notice I send a letter from NCRS.

2. Notice the list of those who testified, in person, at the first meeting. ATV advocates predominate including our old friend Frank Trimmel and Holly Tomlanovich.

3. Notice that the next meeting is November 10th, 10:00 AM in Merrill at the Merrill City Hall, Council chambers, 1004 First Street,
Merril, WI They are again asking for Public Testimony.

4. Notice that you can e-mail or call Beth Piliouras in Roger Breske's office with questions.

5. Notice Randy Hardin's reply to Committee Member, Mike McFadzen,which also gives an e-mail address that gives the cost per mile to build and maintain ATV trails.

I need at least 10 to 12 of you to testify, in person, at the November 10th, Merrill meeting. Please let me know if you can do this and we will coordinate topics so we cover the broad range of ATV trail negative effects on nature, other users, future generations and our current health. I imagine you will only get about 5 minutes to speak. Please also read the attached e-mail from Joel Patenaude, Editor of "Silent Sports" and committee member. It is a cry for help from our side as he informs you of what occured at the first meeting. Brook Waalen also represents another large group of conservationists against uncontrolled expansion of ATV trails , and he has appeared at the Natural Resource Board meeting when they were considering the 2,00 - 7,000 acre ATV play area, and again before the Governor's State Trails Committee. He has a wonderful, upto date, illustrated talk on current ATV trail problems.
Joel suggests that you read the full SCORP report because it has lots of ammunition for our side. http://www.dnr.state.wi.us/planning/scorp/reports/demog_profiles/

I'm not quite sure what is happening here. The DNR is spending money and time to set up a Stakeholder Group to find a sustainable trail in the NHAL State Forest for ATVs. The State Trails Policy Committee, which sounds like it represents all trail users has turned into a forum for more ATV trails. If you combine silent sport users with naturalists, with tourists and homeowners who want peace and quiet, we outnumber ATV advocates at least 4 to 1. Why are our interests being overshadowed by ATV interests?

At this time please e-mail me if you can travel to Merrill on Nov. 10th to testify. We will become more organized later. If you can not testify please write a letter to the State Trails Policy Committee, addressed to Beth Piliouras at Elizabeth.Piliouras@legis.wisconsin.gov
Her phone number in Senator Roger Breske's office is 608-266-2509

2006-10-15T18:51:00.000-07:00

SUSTAINABLE ATV TRAIL STAKEHOLDERS GROUP
NORTHERN HIGHLAND-AMERICAN LEGION STATE FOREST
WISCONSIN DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES

MEETING MINUTES

ATTENDANCE
Stakeholder Representatives: K. Anderson, K. Canfield, R. DeBruyne, A. Helm, A. Eschenbauch, M. Matteson, M. Musiedlak, M. Obrien, N. Poulton, B. Schumann, M. Schouweiler, T. Thompson, D. Wenninger
Team Leader, D. Leith; Meeting Facilitator, B. Klase; GIS Specialist, N. Janicki; Core Planning Team members: B. Schepper, B. Dall; Visitor: Gary Eddy, DNR Law enforcement and safety

WELCOME & INTRODUCTIONS
Denny Leith, Team Leader
Welcomed guest, Gary Eddy of WDNR Madison, and introduced substitute participants: Al Eschenbauch for NCRS, Martha Schouweiler for State Trails Council, and Mike O’brien for Iron Co.
News and updates:
Denny has been in contact with LDF Tribe to keep them updated on the Stakeholder group’s progress.
Received a request from Sen. Roger Breske’s office to attend a Stakeholder’s field trip. Denny will respond.
Housekeeping items – Requests for members’ phone #s and addresses – share them with each other individually as not all wanted them distributed.
Handouts – Meeting agenda and minutes, trail siting criteria outline and worksheet. Also shared information about a State Trails Policy group and public hearing that was received from Sen. Breske’s office.

GROUP DISCUSSION
Bill Klase, Meeting Facilitator, UWEX
Reviewed meeting rules and protocols and Aug. 8 meeting minutes.
The group agreed participation from visitors during meetings is OK, and a useful resource, if meeting protocols are followed.

GROUP ACTIVITY
Proceed with work tasks –
Bob Dall presented a review of Tim Miller’s power-point overview about trail siting criteria and the master plan directive.

CONSENSUS – Bill Klase presented a criteria worksheet and the group agreed this is a good tool for applying siting criteria to proposals.

Discussion:
The group focused their attention on Option #1 in Iron Co. They will discuss other proposals later.

Trail siting –
- Discussed limiting town road use, focusing on least intrusive areas, Iron Co. vs. Vilas Co. potentials. Examined GIS maps to best fit the proposed trail to existing management classes and topography.

Trail management –
- Some essentials include education and communication, good signage, cooperation from everyone involved, future monitoring and evaluation of impacts, adequate law enforcement.
- Existing management plans can be adjusted to accommodated timber
management operations and trail management.

Question: Can a trail use complaint or problem be resolved?
- Mitigating problems is the key and needs to be an on-going process.
- DNR holds trail closure authority, used as a last option if circumstances can’t be mitigated.

A group subcommittee will meet at 9 AM, at the Manitowish River wayside on Hwy. 51, on Thursday, Sept. 28 for a field trip to check the group’s proposed trail option #1 in Iron Co.

Bob Dall is making vehicle & lunch arrangements. Please let Bob know ASAP if you plan to attend but aren’t listed here, or if you need to confirm:

B. Dall, S. Drum, B. Klase, D. Leith, M. Musiedlak, P. Obrien, N. Poultan, B. Schepper, B. Schumann, T. Thompson, … others?

CALENDAR
Thurs., Sept. 28, Subcommittee to field-check trail option #1
meet at Manitowish River Wayside on Hwy 51, 9 AM.

Mon., October 9, regular meeting, 10 AM – 2 PM, at Reuland’s Catering
Agenda items for next meeting?
Discuss field trip findings.
Discuss trail options

Wed., November 1, regular meeting, 10 AM – 2 PM, at Reuland’s Catering

PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT –
A brief time period is allowed at end of meetings if needed for Public and Media Q & A.

ADJOURN

Date: Friday, Sept. 15, 2006
Times: 10:00 AM - 2:00 PM
Location: Reuland’s Catering,
Hwy. 51 N., Arbor Vitae, WI

NOTE –
IF UNABLE TO ATTEND A MEETING PLEASE CONTACT TEAM LEADER, DENNIS LEITH

Agenda or Team Related Questions?
Contact: Dennis Leith – 715-358-9226, HYPERLINK "mailto:Dennis.Leith@dnr.state.wi.us" Dennis.Leith@dnr.state.wi.us
Meeting Information or Special Dietary Needs?
Contact: Bob Dall – 715/365-8993, HYPERLINK "mailto:Robert.Dall@dnr.state.wi.us" Robert.Dall@dnr.state.wi.us

ATV alert from Sue Drum...

2006-10-15T18:34:00.000-07:00

Hi everyone,

The stakeholder meetings continue. The last meeting was October 9th,2006 and the meeting before that was September 15, 2006, attended by Al Eschenbauch, in my place, who took excellent notes and spoke against ATV trails when necessary. The 16 stakeholders have managed to complete a proposed trail that connects to Iron County trails in Mercer. A field trip was scheduled Sept 28th, 2006 to drive the proposed route and locate conflicts, especially wetlands. Al Eschenbauch went on the field trip in my place. Attached are field notes from the Sept 28 trip and meeting minutes from Sept 15 meeting. As you know one of the criteria the stakeholders were given was to find a trail that attached to existing trails. Iron County has the only ATV trails that come near the NHAL State Forest. The proposed trail route begins at the existing ATV trail along County J in Iron County and follows Cedar Lake Road until it hits Circle Lily Road across J. It follows Circle Lily road to the point where it runs along the County line between Iron and Vilas County and passes in front of about 17 homes on Circle Lily lake. The homes are on private land but the Town of Manitowish plows the road and owns it. The trail then jogs slightly into Vilas County following a powerline and curves back into Iron County following a powerline that runs along the North side of Hiway 51 and is also a snowmobile trail. The trail crosses Hiway 51 just East of Circle Lily Creek on state property that borders Lance's Repair Shop on 51. Still following a snowmobile trail the ATVs ride along Manitowish Access Road toward a Wayside on Hiway 51. When the road stops they have to bushwack a trail on the south side of 51 to the Wayside. This wayside has a canoe landing also used as an undeveloped boat landing, and an old bridge structure on the far side of the Manitowish River. They will build a bridge across the Manitowish to connect to Sandy Beach Road, which is a wide gravel town road and use a logging road to connect to an existing snomobile trail that runs parallel to Hiway 47 back toward Hiway 51 and picks up an existing ATV trails at Chuck's Bar on the corner of Hiway 51 and Hiway 47 and 182. There is a snowmobile bridge across the Manitowish near this corner.

I spoke with Kim Herron, the new Director of North Lakeland Discovery Center, and showed him and Zach Wilson and Mark Charon the proposed map for the ATV trail. Mr. Herron's reaction was, because of his ample past experience with ATV trails, he would want strong assurance that the ATV riders would not follow Circle Lily Road to East Circle Lily Road and into the Discovery Center trail system. He want's to know what sort of enforcement is in place and what action would be taken if trespassing occurs. The Mission statement for Discovery Center is not compatible with ATV use on trails. Also from the past history of ATV riders he believes that they will attempt to reach Dietz gas station in Manitowish Waters.
John Hanson, Chairman of the Town of Manitowish Waters, told me their town has a "No" ATV ordinance for town roads. However he did not see a problem with the use of Circle Lily Road, as this question had already been asked and he said he polled the 17 homeowners along the road and it was about a 50/50 split "for" and "against".
John Bates whose home is next to Chuck's Bar, on the Manitowish River, sent an eloquent letter, which I will attach separately,
opposing the proposed ATV trail and calling attention to the sensitive nature of the Manitowish River wetland area and the designation of the Manitowish as an Outstanding River by the state. I am sending you John's letter along with a reply by Dave Phillips, a stakeholder who has experience dealing with ATV trails as a Member of the Governor's State Trails Committee, and who is very sympathetic to preserving natural lands. He is our ally.
I also plan to contact the owner of Hawks Nest a business on Hiway 51 that rents canoes and rafts for trips down the Manitowish. They depend on the 51 wayside for take out and put in.
Although this proposed trail leaves Vilas County pretty much untouched, it still still places a great deal of sensitive wetland close to the ATV trail. I would like to protect necessary wetland habitat everywhere, not just in Vilas County which is so far untouched by ATVs.
I don't see any clear action that our group can take at this point as far as Stakeholder meetings. Our next meeting is scheduled for Nov. 1st and the one after is Nov. 30th. They are open to the public and any of you who wish to come and listen can do so and can speak at the end of the meeting. As you can see from the attachments they are at Rueland's Catering on Hiway 51 just north of Hiway 70, from 10:00 to 2:00. If you would write a letter to Dennis Leith or Robert Dall expressing your views on the proposed trail and any trail in our State Forest that would be helpful. Dennis.Leith@dnr.state.wi.us Robert.Dall@dnr.state.wi.us
Let me know your suggestions.
Sue Drum
11384 CTH B
Presque Isle, WI 54557
715-686-2655
drumsa@centurytel.net

P.S. I really need your help in regard to a second state trails group, Chaired by Roger Breske, that has the power to make legal changes in state trail policy. I am addressing this problem in a second letter.

Attachments
Attachment scanning provided by:

Wisconsin State Journal: Sport fishing v. Derbies

2006-09-06T17:54:00.000-07:00

Derbies Anathema To Sport Fishing
Wisconsin State Journal :: OPINION :: A10
Saturday, September 2, 2006
JIM DOHERTY
Years ago, whenever my son and I got up early at our family cabin near Lac du Flambeau to go musky fishing, we usually had the 140-acre lake to ourselves.
We didn't care if we caught anything. The point was to enjoy a beautiful Northern morning together.
The other day when Jimmy and his son rowed out to try their luck, they counted nearly 20 motorboats on the water. As they watched, one boater reeled in a fish, held it over his head and whooped. Then he cranked up his motor and showed his catch to a friend. Finally, after several moments had gone by, he released the fish by throwing it high into the air. The fish landed on its side with a splash and the boater resumed casting.
Welcome to the boorish world of the Musky Derby, a contest to see who can catch the biggest fish.
You may think competition is the antithesis of fishing, but each summer in Wisconsin dozens if not hundreds of derbies are held on lakes large and small. Some focus on muskies, others on bass or walleyes. Most charge a nominal entrance fee, but some contestants paid $500 this summer for the privilege of participating in a well-known annual event on the Minoqua lake chain.
No true sportsmen I know would be caught dead in these obscene spectacles.
The point is not angling, about which Izaak Walton wrote, "God never did make a more calm, quiet, innocent recreation." The point is profit and promotion for the gear shops and other organizers, and bragging rights for the winners, not to mention thousands of dollars in cash prizes and other loot -- boats, motors, trailers, rods, reels, you name it.
Derbies are orgies of materialism that, one Department of Natural Resources official told me recently, "bring out the worst in fishermen." Boy, do they ever.
On derby days, public landings are so plugged with gigantic boats and motors that non-contestants are denied access. Not that they'd enjoy the scene if they could get on the lake.
Typically derby boats tear around chopping weeds, silting up the water and disturbing residents and other fishermen with their noise, turbulence and bad manners. Some contestants have been caught sneaking in large fish caught on other lakes to improve their chances of winning.
Many of the lunkers landed during musky derbies are brutally mishandled and languish in boat live wells for hours. At the end of the day, they're penned up on or near shore for gawkers and TV cameramen before being released.
"Muskies are big," says one DNR fisheries biologist, "but they're too fragile to survive that kind of mauling."
Presently the DNR's role is limited to issuing permits. Wardens have little supervisory control.
Perhaps goaded into action by the belated recognition that these unregulated brawls are not doing Vacationland's image much good, the Wisconsin Legislature is now considering a measure that, if passed, will give the DNR some of the tools it needs to eliminate the worst abuses.
That's better than nothing, of course, but it boils down to regulating a perversion that should not be tolerated at all.
I've got another idea: Let's ban derbies altogether. They're an affront to genuine sport fishing and an embarrassment to the state.

Governor's Directive to Reduce Mercury

2006-08-25T15:50:00.000-07:00

Governor Doyle Announces Directive to

Reduce Mercury Emissions by 90%

Also Calls for Ban on Certain Mercury Products

Governor Jim Doyle today directed the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (DNR) to develop a rule achieving a 90% reduction of mercury emissions from coal-fired power plants – the single largest source of mercury to Wisconsin lakes and rivers – through rules and incentives. The Governor also called for a ban on and increased recycling of certain mercury products such as mercury thermometers and dental products.

“Wisconsin must continue to be a leader in controlling mercury emissions so we can protect our children, pregnant women and others from the devastating impacts of mercury pollution,” Governor Doyle said. “Mercury is a real threat not only to our rivers and lakes but also to the health of our citizens. This tough standard will ensure that Wisconsin remains at the forefront of controlling this environmental hazard.”

Governor Doyle directed the Department of Natural Resources to achieve a 90% reduction in mercury emissions from coal-fired power plants through rules and incentives. The DNR is to work with the utilities and environmental and conservation groups to develop the rule as soon as possible. Coal-fired power plants contribute over 40% of the annual mercury emissions within the state. Controlling these mercury emissions is necessary to protect public health and the environment over the long-term.

The Governor also called for ban on mercury in products such as utility lights in car trunks, thermostats, barometers and thermometers and for the recycling of mercury thermostats and mercury-containing amalgam from dental offices. He also called for a ban of mercury products in schools. The Governor directed the DNR to work with state legislators to enact the comprehensive ban.

“A broken mercury fever thermometer or spilled liquid mercury poses an unnecessary threat to children in our homes and schools,” Governor Doyle added.

When mercury containing products are disposed with other solid waste, mercury can seep into the soil and eventually the groundwater. In Wisconsin, it is estimated that 6,600 pounds of mercury are placed into solid waste facilities each year.

Fish consumption is the primary pathway of human exposure to mercury. Currently, nearly all of Wisconsin’s lakes, rivers and streams are under a mercury advisory to limit the consumption of fish.

Women of child-bearing age and children under the age of 15 are advised not to eat large sport fish – walleye, northern pike, and bass – more than once a month and panfish – bluegill and crappie – more than once a week. Men are warned not to eat walleye and northern pike more than once a week.

In addition to the health risks that mercury pollution poses, it also has an economic impact because of reduced recreation and tourism. The sport fishing industry accounts for nearly 30,000 jobs and generates $2.3 billion statewide. Among states, Wisconsin ranks second in the number of fishing licenses sold to nonresidents.

- 30 -

<<8.25.06 - Mercury Rule V2 - final.pdf>>

Invasive species meeting details

2006-08-14T18:22:00.000-07:00

Last Wilderness Conservation Association invites you
to:

Invasives Among Us!
A Program on Terrestrial Invasive Species
Presque Isle Community Center
Wednesday, August 16 at 7pm

Vilas County has been a leader in the fight against
Aquatic Invasive Species as evidenced by Crusader
Invader Award. Now we need to work in another area.

Terrestrial invasives have been transported to our
area. One example, garlic mustard (Alliaria
petiolata), was recently discovered in Presque Isle.
Garlic mustard is rapidly spreading woodland biennial
weed that can displace most native plants within ten
years and is a major threat to the survival of
Wisconsin's woodlands. Seeds remain in the soil for up
to ten years, requiring yearly control efforts.
Helping with the Presque Isle garlic mustard
identification and control are botanists from the
Ottawa and Chequamegon-Nicolet National Forests, the
Great Lakes Indian Fish and Wildlife Council, the
Wisconsin DNR, Manitowish Waters Aquatic Invasive
Coordinator, the town of Presque Isle and a group from
Presque Isle representing many other organizations
called “Weed Warriors”.

Since cooperation has been key to the identification
and control of the Presque Isle garlic mustard
infestation, the program will also look at a concept
called Cooperative Weed Management (CWMA), the
integration of plant management resources across
jurisdictional boundaries and open many funding
possibilities.

Program Participants
Patrick Goggin, Vilas County Conservationist
Ian Shakelford, Botanist & Invasive Species
Coordinator, Ottawa NF
Marjory Brzeskiewicz, Botanist Chequamegon-Nicolet NF,
Chanelle Delay, Botanist, Chequamegon-Nicolet NF Eagle
River
Steve Garske, Botanist, Great Lakes Indian Fish &
Wildlife Commission
Miles Falck, Wildlife Biologist, Great Lakes Indian
Fish & Wildlife Commission
Becky Sapper, Invasive Species Coordinator, The Nature
Conservancy
Colleen Matula, Forest Ecologist, WI DNR
Maggie Bishop, Director, Trees for Tomorrow

I hope you can attend this important meeting. Please
contract me for more information about Invasives Among
Us!

Merrill Horswill 686-2874

ATV Stakeholder's group meeting notes-August

2006-08-14T15:19:00.000-07:00

SUSTAINABLE ATV TRAIL STAKEHOLDERS GROUP MEETING – Tuesday, August 8, 2006
Notes taken by Sue Drum, Northwoods Citizens for Responsible Stewardship

Dennis Leith introduced Steve Petersen, the new NHAL State Forest Superintendent.

We introduced ourselves and the only new member was Tom Thompson from the Iron County Board, Mercer. Now all three county boards are represented, Vilas by Ron Debruyne, Oneida by Matt Matteson, and Iron.

Bill Klase our facilitator reminded us that our goal is to find an appropriate and sustainable ATV trail site in the NHAL. Sustainable is defined as: a. ecologically sustainable – minimal ecologic impact b. physically sustainable – the trail retains its shape throughout time without abrupt change due to human or natural forces c. social/economic – accepted and supported by affected parties

We reviewed the trail developed by Mike Musiedlak, Vilas County Alliance of ATV Clubs Inc. The trail began in Lake Tomahawk and followed a snowmobile trail N.E. around Hasbrook Lake then past Sweeny Lake, heading East along Cty. J right of way to pick up the snowmobile trail near Buffalo Lake and ziz-zag its way into Vilas County to Hiway 70, with a short eastern spur along Hiway 70 to approach the Shell Gas Station. The trail continues north of Hiway 70 on a snowmobile trail squeezing between Bittersweet Lake wilderness management area and a native community management area where native red and white pine are cultivated. Eventually the trail ends at Hiway N to the west of Sayner at the bike trail and parking lot near South Plum Lake. Mike produced photographs that showed the trail is presently a 2-track clearing that can accommodate a truck or car.

As Mike attempted to extend the trail north, south or east we quickly accepted the fact that bicycle trails, including the Razorback Ridges mountain bike and cross country ski trails, many campgrounds, lakes and semi-remote areas precluded ATV trails.

We were reminded that trail criteria demanded not only sustainability but also that our trail should connect to a regional network of ATV trails.

John Bilogan, Cty. Forest Association, Rhinelander, thought we should stretch the meaning of “connecting” to include the 19.77-mile, stand alone trail from Lake Tomahawk to Sayner. He said that the Wisconsin County Forest Association wants the state to develop ATV trails on their property to take the heat off county forests for more trails when they already have too many. If people don’t think 20 miles of trail is enough, Bilogan said, then we should get rid of the 10 miles of stand alone trail in Oneida County near the Willow Flowage. Ron Debruyne pointed out that when you count the routes he could enjoy an entire day riding the 20+ miles of trails and routes. He thinks 20 miles is plenty long.

Ken Anderson thinks we should use existing snowmobile trails since that land is already disturbed and forest fragmentation would not occur for new trails. ( I think ATV’s are not snowmobiles. ATVs enter the forest at the critical spring, summer, season when plants and animals are waking up from winter, eating and reproducing. ATVs are far more damaging to native communities than snowmobiles. Hikers use snowmobile trails in the spring and summer as do some mountain bikers, all quiet, low impact uses. )

We decided to set aside the Lake Tomahawk to Sayner route and return to the route we started in the Northwest corner that linked to Mercer trails in Iron County. The only one who objected was Mike and Randy Harden who wanted to make sure we could still work on the north/south, east/west route. Mike said he would have to drive an hour to reach Mercer and he wanted an ATV trail near his home. ( I think that people who live in the northwoods accept the fact that they will do a lot of driving. We gladly drive an hour or more to launch our canoe into scenic waters.)

Sulo Wainio who usually arrives at the stakeholder meeting, even though he is not a stakeholder, before 10:00 a.m. to talk to DNR personnel and ATV advocates, jumped up from the public spectator section and pointed out the land behind his Thirty Point Bar on Cty. W. He wants us to locate an ATV trail there using the many logging roads and a snowmobile route. The strategy of the ATV advocates seems to be to locate a trail anywhere in the NHAL State Forest in order to get their toe in the door. Once a trail is developed and legal then they will push for expansion. This strategy has worked in the past.

Dennis Leith said we should try to connect with Iron County trails and Tom Thompson from Iron County, said Mercer would like to expand their trails. Presently the Mercer/Hurley area has over 200 miles of trails and routes.

Dennis Leith had arranged for Randy Hoffman, endangered resource specialist from Madison, to speak to us after lunch. Here are some points Randy emphasized.
He stressed that sustainable forest management provided a plan for the future that benefited both our children and us. Randy was proud of The Land Legacy Report, a DNR publication that “describes the special places in Wisconsin that will be critical to meet conservation and recreation needs for the next fifty years. Legacy Places are what make Wisconsin Wisconsin.”

Randy also mentioned the (Look up Crog report)CROG Report (Community Restoration and Old Growth) which determines the best areas to restore old growth forest characteristics. To date the Biotic Inventory Report has identified over 54,000 plant and animal species in Wisconsin but Randy feels they have just scratched the surface because they have not counted all the insects, fungi, and other hard to find species.

Randy said that researchers at the U. of WI are trying to protect biodiversity. No parts of the forest are pristine but there are many levels of disturbance. Areas with low levels of disturbance support high levels of biodiversity (especially wetlands) and the DNR preserves these areas as “native communities”. People need undisturbed areas to experience and enjoy natural beauty. Scientists need undisturbed areas to use as “ecological reference areas”. Long term monitoring of undisturbed areas allows scientists to understand which species belong in a natural community and by comparison, determine species lost from disturbed areas. We don’t know everything, Randy said. We don’t know how to restore a natural community without a “blueprint”. The forest plan for the NHAL tries to preserve many different areas like Semi-remote areas, Wilderness and Wild Lakes, Native Community with passive management, Wild Resource Management, Forest Production Management and Recreation Management .

A sustainable trail does not harm the resource!

I think the word “sustainability” is gaining in popularity, everywhere. It promises an enriched future by keeping our northwoods resources intact. Is it possible to insert a sustainable ATV trail into our forest? We’ll see.

The next Stakeholder meeting is scheduled for Friday, September 15th at 10:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. at Reulands Catering. I can not attend this meeting so Al Eschenbauch from Presque Isle, will take my place.
The field trip to look at the Iron Cty, trail has been put off until October 9th meeting. Phyllis Obrien form the Iron Cty, Chamber and Bill Schuman from Asso. of Wi. Snowmobile Clubs, know the area and will take a video of possible trail routes to help us settle on at least one solid proposal.

Sue Drum
11384 CTH B
Presque Isle, WI 54557
715-686-2655
HYPERLINK mailto:drumsa@centurytel.net drumsa@centurytel.net

Legislature: Let them eat manure! From Tami Jackson

2006-08-14T15:10:00.000-07:00

Legislators Favor Campaign Contributors Over Safe Water
Committees tell constituents, “Here’s manure in your water”

http://www.wisdc.org/pr081006.php

Madison - A proposal to reduce incidents of drinking water being polluted by manure was rejected by legislators because a small group of large agribusiness interests, who complained the rules were too strict, have spent nearly $916,000 on legislative elections since 2000, the Wisconsin Democracy Campaign says.
The proposal, which was rejected at an August 3 hearing by the Senate and Assembly Agriculture committees, would have regulated manure spreading by the state’s 150 large factory farms that have 700 or more animals. The spreading of large amounts of animal waste, particularly on frozen ground, has been the source of more than four dozen incidents of well contamination and fish kills over the past two years.

One incident seriously sickened a Luxemburg family with three small children. In another case earlier this year, animal waste was blamed for contaminating more than six dozen wells in the Brown County Town of Morrison so badly that some residents said their tap water smelled like manure. The state is paying tens of thousands of dollars to help residents dig new wells, but environmentalists argue the new wells could be polluted in a short time without regulations to control future manure spreading.

After eight hours of testimony – much of which the Senate ag committee skipped – the Senate committee told state officials to revise the proposal because it was “arbitrary and capricious, and imposes an undue hardship,” according to Committee Chairman Dan Kapanke. Here are a few of the real reasons for the committee’s action:

Elections are three months away, and agricultural interests are big contributors. Agricultural interests made $454,408 in large individual and political action committee contributions to legislators from 2000 through 2005. Most of it, $371,663, was made to Republicans who control the Assembly and Senate and determine the fate of proposals like the manure rule;
The Wisconsin Farm Bureau Federation spent an additional $461,478 between 2000 and 2005 on advertising, mailings and other electioneering activities, known as independent expenditures, to support legislative candidates who vote with agriculture;
Half of the legislators – particularly Republicans – on the Senate and Assembly agricultural committees are among the agriculture industry’s top recipients of campaign contributions. Eighteen of the 20 legislators on the committees received $80,914 in campaign contributions from agricultural special interests from 2000 through 2005, and 15 of the 20 members have benefited from $71,570 in independent spending on their behalf by the Farm Bureau Federation (see Table).
Five members of the Assembly ag committee later attacked a group representing hunters and fishermen for criticizing legislative action on the issue. Here are some of their comments:

“As members of the Assembly Agriculture Committee, our first duty is to consider Wisconsin’s agriculture industry,” said Republican Representative Debi Towns of Janesville, one of the agriculture industry’s leading recipients of campaign contributions. She received $8,164 in contributions from 2002 through 2005, and the Farm Bureau Federation has spent an additional $10,965 on electioneering activities to support her in her last two elections.

“. . .those folks know better than to use children’s health to try to force through a rule, which was just too far-reaching,” said Republican Representative Mary Williams of Medford, who received $4,795 in contributions from agricultural interests from 2002 through 2005. The Farm Bureau Federation has spent $11,536 on election activities to support her in her last two elections.

Table
Campaign Contributions and Independent Expenditures
from the Agriculture Industry to Members of the
Senate and Assembly Agriculture Committees
2000-2005

Name
Party
Contributions
Independent
Expenditures
Rep. Jerry Petrowski
R
$17,600
$2,159
Sen. Dan Kapanke
R
$11,695
$2,294
Rep. Debi Towns
R
$8,164
$10,965
Sen. Ron Brown
R
$7,055
$0
Sen. Neal Kedzie
R
$5,200
$6,859
Rep. Gabe Loeffelholz
R
$4,800
$8,123
Rep. Mary Williams
R
$4,795
$11,536
Rep. Scott Suder
R
$4,100
$1,437
Rep. Alvin Ott
R
$3,975
$77
Rep. John Ainsworth
R
$3,190
$77
Rep. Amy Vruwink
D
$1,805
$15,646
Sen. Luther Olsen
R
$1,600
$11,019
Rep. Barbara Gronemus
D
$1,550
$77
Sen. Dave Hansen
D
$1,450
$0
Sen. Jon Erpenbach
D
$1,300
$0
Rep. John Steinbrink
D
$1,250
$77
Sen. Mark Miller
D
$935
$0
Rep. Louis Molepske
D
$450
$1,147
Rep. Bob Ziegelbauer
D
$0
$77
Rep. Joseph Parisi
D
$0
$0

No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.10.8/413 - Release Date: 8/8/2006

Manure runoff rules...from The Wisconsin Association of Lakes

2006-08-10T09:11:00.000-07:00

Sent: Tuesday, August 08, 2006 2:56 PM
Subject: Manure Management Discharge Rules press release

Last week Thursday the Assembly and Senate committees on agriculture held a public hearing on the Manure Management Discharge Rules (NR 243). These rules apply to Wisconsin’s 150 largest farms (called Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations or CAFOs). These farms have more than 1000 animal units and are required to get a point source pollution permit under the federal Clean Water Act. Wisconsin’s CAFOs make up less than 1% of Wisconsin’s farms but produce 10% of the manure. 90% of our CAFOs currently have enough manure storage to comply with the requirements outlined in NR 243.

Over the past several springs manure runoff has contaminated rural families drinking water, killed fish (including some recently restored trout streams, and undermined the public and private investment made to keep lakes clean and healthy. NR 243 would help remedy these problems. NR 243 has taken 4 years to develop; 5 agribusiness lobby groups, three producers (including 1 CAFO), and 3 representatives from DATCP and NRCS were on the technical advisory committee to write these rules.

I have attached the testimony WAL delivered to the legislative committees with details on how manure runoff effects lakes in general, and specific examples of how manure pollution has impacted lakes and lakefront property owners. This attachment also has the talking points on the rule that the environmental community developed together.

Unfortunately, the hearing reflected agribusiness lobbying efforts. It was clear early on the committees had made up their mind to reject the rule and return it to DNR before testimony began. Agribusiness lobby groups and politics appear to be afoot.

The Senate committee voted to return the rule to DNR 5-2. The environmental community met on Friday to determine how to respond; this is a public health issue (people are drinking contaminated water). The strategy has been to call attention to the legislature’s decision with regard to these rules through press releases etc. The Wisconsin Wildlife Federation, Wisconsin League of Conservation Voters, Clean Wisconsin, River Alliance of Wisconsin, Midwest Environmental Advocates, and WAL have all been working closely together on this issue and are doing press work. Some groups are also doing behind the scenes negotiations to move these rules forward. The intention is to hold legislators accountable to the many constituents that have contacted them about these rules.

I have pasted a press release from WAL below my signature.

Tami Jackson
Development and Communications Director
Wisconsin Association of Lakes
One Point Place, Suite 101 / Madison, WI 53719
608-662-0923 phone
608-833-7179 fax

Are large corporation profits more valuable than clean drinking water?

Your legislature seems to think so.

Last Thursday there was a joint meeting of the State Senate and Assembly Agriculture committees to hear public testimony on Manure Management Discharge Rules (NR 243).

The Senate Agriculture Committee voted to return proposed rule (NR 243) to the DNR for unspecified modifications. Many members of the Assembly Committee didn’t even show up for the hearing, and the Senate Committee members missed five out of eight hours of public testimony before they voted. Unfortunately it appears the wants of Wisconsin’s 150 large factory farms outweigh the basic human needs of our state’s citizens.

Many Wisconsin citizens had taken the day off work and had traveled considerable distances to testify on how manure runoff had contaminated their wells and drinking water, degraded the water quality of lakes, killed fish, and undermined the dollars invested to restore and keep our water resources safe and healthy. Unfortunately they got a rude awakening as to whose concerns rank most important under our Capitol dome.

The Manure Management Discharge rules (NR 243) apply only to Wisconsin’s 150 Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs), those farms that have so many manure producing animals they require a discharge permit under the federal Clean Water Act. CAFOs make up less than 1% of Wisconsin’s farms, but produce more than 10% of the manure.

Farmers choose to become a CAFO. And, because they are large, they need to take responsibility for their actions and operate their businesses in a manner that does not harm their neighbors.

But Agribusiness lobby groups—many of which negotiated compromises on the proposed NR 243 as members of the DNR advisory team that drafted the rule—convinced the Agricultural committees that these few large farmers should be treated differently from other polluters. They advocated that the few bad actors that are causing people to become sick and degrading our shared resources because of poor manure management should not be “burdened” by having to take responsibility for their actions or follow rules.

We don’t believe that most farmers willfully want to make their neighbors sick, lower water quality, and hurt our fish and our lakes. But it’s happening, all over the state. People are getting sick. Fish are suffocating. Plants are choking to death in a watery haze of manure.

The many, many Wisconsin farmers who operate responsibly and are good stewards of our land should be embarrassed by and ashamed of their lobby groups and the few farmers that don’t follow good manure management practices.

Let us be clear.

When people are getting sick from their own tapwater, that is not ok.

When manure runoff makes our lakes unswimmable because of e coli and fecal coliform bacteria, that is not ok.

When manure runoff makes our nationally renowned trout streams and lakes are unfishable because all the fish are dead, that is not ok.

When manure runoff changes clear lakes into algae basins, that is not ok.

When manure runoff creates nutrient rich waters invasives like Eurasian water milfoil prefer, that is not ok.

When our elected representatives take the paid lobbyist positions more seriously than the public health of their constituents, that is not ok.

We needed these rules before another spring pockmarked by manure runoff events, sick kids, and dead fish. The legislature has let all of us down.

they gave an ATV party and noone came....

2006-07-25T18:39:00.000-07:00

Dear Northwoods Citizens for Responsible Stewardship,

Saturday, June 22, I had a heart-warming ATV experience. I drove to Eagle River to observe the 9:00 a.m. ATV parade down main street. Remembering a similar ATV parade last year led by Frank Tremmel with positive ATV press coverage, I figured this parade would be a major event. They had the perfect set-up, sponsored by Randy Harden’s WATVA and Randy Harden’s NOHVIS insurance group, and riding for the charity, Angel On My Shoulder, a non-profit organization that helps those afflicted with cancer.

Guess What? They threw a parade and nobody came. About 20 people, shopping on main street stopped to watch. As they turned the corner and returned up the side street just off main street, not a soul could be seen on either side of the street. I was the only person standing on the corner taking pictures and many of the riders waved at me. They looked beautiful. Their machines were spotless and many wore colorful racing outfits. They were friendly and polite. The parade Marshall was Roger Breske in the lead ATV cart and the Rhinelander band was seated on a large flatbed truck. I don’t think the band played for more than 5 minutes, total. There were several big vans representing ATV wholesalers and two jeeps bearing Angel On My Shoulder banners. The fire truck released his siren a few times on main street, but otherwise the parade was very subdued.
No T.V. no press at the parade, or for that matter almost no press coverage before the race. The two local newspapers printed a standard press release which was hidden on back pages the week of the event. Channel 12 TV gave the event a short announcement on Thursday night news

Considering the advance information Harden sent out to his members I was surprised at Eagle River’s response. Jim Knuth received an anonymous letter signed by Randy Harden which was simply headed “Vilas County Topic”. Randy called Vilas County ATVs “Spotted Owl of the Northwest” and said, “ Vilas was infamous in reference to a past countywide, non-binding referendum that was as contentious and biased against ATVs as any I’ve witnessed anywhere. If we can come to an agreement in our NH-AL ATV stakeholder group, we’ll be on our way, breaking down past negative barriers to finally realize some positive ATV riding in Vilas County.” To paraphrase the rest of the letter, “ If you do nothing else this season, bring your ATV and join us Friday night, July 21 and Saturday July 22 at the Ride for Charity. We cannot and must not fail to have anything but a spectacularly large turnout. ----I’m counting on each and every one of our ATV enthusiasts to help us send a message, loud and clear. ATVing has arrived in Vilas County and you can play an important role by being part of it!------Show your support for our Vilas County clubs, they’ve endured years of anti-ATV hardships. ------Let’s showcase the best qualities our sport has to offer Vilas County and show them how many ATVers in Wisconsin might just come and spend some of our hard earned dollars in their county versus trailering right on by into ATV friendly communities.”

I showed the letter to a small group of members in Presque Isle and they suggested that I ignore the event. Only sending a letter to the editor if our viewpoint against ATVs was challenged in the press. I did nothing and everything worked out perfect. Once more Vilas County residents and visitors showed that they had no interest in welcoming ATVs.

Sue Drum
11384 CTH B
715-686-2655
drumsa@centurytel.net

Welcome to Quietnorth Archives...

2006-07-25T18:37:00.000-07:00

The purpose of this blog is to serve as an archive for the longer letters that I get at quietnorth. Please visit quietnorth.blogspot.com for ordinary posts.