tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6621691715090523319.post2396569137101277823..comments2023-10-08T04:12:46.273-05:00Comments on The Political Environment: More Outside Media Looking At Waukesha's Water PlayJames Rowenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10203270946492159686noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6621691715090523319.post-51621290890184931612014-03-17T18:57:58.438-05:002014-03-17T18:57:58.438-05:00Bill,
"that water be returned to the Great L...Bill,<br /><br />"that water be returned to the Great Lakes after use."<br /><br />As noted at the recent public hearings, Waukesha plans to return plenty of water from it's leaking sanitary sewer system to replace water it will not be sending back to Lake Michigan. Right? Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6621691715090523319.post-69391380624046627792014-03-17T06:24:40.880-05:002014-03-17T06:24:40.880-05:00Chicago's continued draining of the great lake...Chicago's continued draining of the great lakes via sewage canal makes any compact worthless. Billions of gallons per day into the ocean.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6621691715090523319.post-13871287593563073292014-03-17T05:54:56.616-05:002014-03-17T05:54:56.616-05:00Bill,
I recently saw a document from CH2M HILL da...Bill,<br /><br />I recently saw a document from CH2M HILL dated March 5th, 2014 that states, "In recent years, groundwater levels indicate an increasing trend in the deep aquifer wells." <br /><br />If the utility consulting engineering firm says the aquifer is rising, that's contrary to the application and every single public listening session and presentation by the utility and it's hired firms such as yours.<br /><br />If I were the Canadians I recommend to the 7 others states that it make more sense to take a 20 year wait and see approach because Waukesha's diversion application doesn't meet the criteria if the aquifer isn't dropping and radium can be filtered.<br /><br />I await your response. <br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6621691715090523319.post-28983971707284192442014-03-16T15:30:26.385-05:002014-03-16T15:30:26.385-05:00Someone should tell your "expert'" t...Someone should tell your "expert'" that the Compact is federal law, not a non-binding agreement in principle. The Compact was passed expressly to prohibit the scenarios he bases his premise on, such as transfers to the west or southwest. His column is years behind the times. <br /><br />The Compact limits diversions to straddling counties and requires that water be returned to the Great Lakes after use. Waukesha's precedent is only for the area where water can legally be transferred to -- counties that straddle the basin divide -- and is a precedent for no water loss to the Great Lakes. All points your "expert" ignores in raising fears of transfers to other states that are against federal law. <br />Bill McClenahannoreply@blogger.com