Monday, April 10, 2017

Activists urge citizens to use 4/10 DNR advisory process

[Updated from April 1] Tonight's the night.

I have posted items recently here and here about the April 10th Wisconsin Conservation Congress, (WCC), statewide meetings where citizens can discuss ssues and provide important advice to the DNR on many Wisconsin conservation programs and policies including hunting seasons, CAFO permitting, various rules and dozens of additional matters.

Here is a DNR web page about the process.


I am pleased to post a letter from Ashland activists urging participation in the WCC meetings. 


Among their concerns: the possible DNR approval for a massive, 26,000 hog feeding and manure producing operation 


which could pollute Lake Superior, contaminate drinking water and damage the quality of life in one of the most beautiful settings in Northwestern Wisconsin.

The letter is an excellent guide to the WCC process and can serve as a useful template for interested parties regardless of location.

Here is the full text. Note the link to the WCC meeting locations and related procedures.

Vote YES for CLEAN WATER 
The annual Spring Conservation Congress is at 7 p.m., Monday, 10 April 2017. Please attend (preferable) or vote absentee on a variety of important natural resources issues which deserve your attention (like a sandhill crane hunt). 

Of note, questions #66 & 67 address DNR deficiencies under the Clean Water Act. Jim Swanson and various other citizen promulgators of these questions originally drafted language which added that the DNR “incorporate by reference” the Clean Water Act, but DNR heavily edited their resolution to arrive at the current wording.

Despite these “sanitizing” changes, #66 & 67 still warrant a YES vote.  

Importantly, please vote YES on #69 which corrects the problem of  “authority.” With Iowa’s Dale Reicks proposed 26,000 hog CAFO proposed for the shores of Lake Superior and his 10,000,000 gallons of hog manure (annually), the Mayor of Ashland asked DNR to suspend the application process to study manure threats to drinking water. DNR wrote back, “You must understand that if the owner of the facility meets all statutory and administrative code requirements, the Department cannot deny him a permit.” 

Thus, we want to ensure DNR gets that needed authority from the legislature by voting YES  on this particular question which reads as follows: 

QUESTION 69: DNR authority to suspend application for the study of pollution impacts (040116) (requires legislation) Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs) and other significant development requests may pose risks to the environment, and it takes time to fully research and understand the potential effects of proposed developments. 

Recently, it’s been requested that permitting be suspended when matters of 
environmental importance need to be studied. The DNR has stated that they can’t deny them a permit if they meet all statutory and code requirements.

69. Do you support the Legislature giving the DNR authority to suspend any 
application when pollution matters need to be studied by tribes? 

This link will show you where the meeting in your County will be located and lists all the questions to review in advance: 

Also, on or before 10 April 2017, you can vote absentee by 

1)  going into a local DNR service station and marking up a copy of the questionnaire to be sent to Scott Loomans; or if they’re not prepared at your local office as we recently discovered, 

2)  tabulating your vote answers with the corresponding questionnaire numbers & emailing or mailing them to  Scott.Loomans@wisconsin.gov 

Department of Natural Resources 
Scott Loomans, FH/4 
101 South Webster Street 
Madison, WI 53707-7921 

Sincerely, Denise Ciebien & Jim Swanson


Ciebien Law Office, LLC




4 comments:

Anonymous said...

Is membership in the WCC required to respond to question 69?

James Rowen said...

From the posting:
This link will show you where the meeting in your County will be located and lists all the questions to review in advance:

http://dnr.wi.gov/About/WCC/Documents/spring_hearing/2017/2017SpringQuestionnaire.pdf

Also, on or before 10 April 2017, you can vote absentee by

1) going into a local DNR service station and marking up a copy of the questionnaire to be sent to Scott Loomans; or if they’re not prepared at your local office as we recently discovered,

2) tabulating your vote answers with the corresponding questionnaire numbers & emailing or mailing them to Scott.Loomans@wisconsin.gov

Department of Natural Resources
Scott Loomans, FH/4
101 South Webster Street
Madison, WI 53707-7921

Anonymous said...

This link is a very good informational piece about DNR meetings etc. I do not know if Walker and company have gutted the contested case and 6 person complaint hearings. If they have not I suggest being very very aggressive in the use of these two aspects in conjunction with each other. First do the 6 person complaint hearing and if you do not accept the results you can file for the contested case hearing. These can be done pro se successfully. I won one of these some years ago. Made them madder than hell. I was so proud to have my picture taken with my check for re-imbursed costs from the DNR. Be aggressive and I will pass on to you a very important fact about dealing with the DNR. When you request information you need to know that they play games with administrative definitions. If you ask them for "the file" on a project or matter that does not mean you will get all of the information they have. The "file" is defined as being official documents and information. It is not required to include all papers, notes, e-mails, correspondence and internal correspondence and meeting notes. It is not uncommon that "the file" will have only a minor amount of the info that the agency actually has in its' possession. This is one way that they hide information. They remove it from the file and keep it on their desk or in a drawer. There is no document index kept for the "file". Remember this. Your open records request may not get you all that they have. Furthermore EPA in Chicago will many times have far more info when they are acting jointly with DNR. It is not unusual for a review of the records in Chicago to show a very different picture than what the DNR or EPA is saying publicly. Remember that there is no law or regulation requiring them to be truthful and forthcoming. They are allowed to misrepresent information and claim it is their interpretation/opinion.

Anonymous said...

Sorry I forgot to post the link.

http://midwestadvocates.org/assets/resources/citizenguides/Being_Heard_Guide_to_DNR_Hearings.pdf