Reading view

There are new articles available, click to refresh the page.

Gov. Evers names NOAA official as new DNR secretary

Dr. Karen Hyun will be the next secretary of the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources. (Office of Gov. Tony Evers)

Gov. Tony Evers announced Monday that Dr. Karen Hyun will be appointed as the next Secretary of the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources. Hyun currently serves as chief of staff of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). 

The DNR secretary position has been unfilled for more than a year after the resignation of former Secretary Adam Payne in October 2023. In a news release, Evers said that Hyun’s career working on environmental issues makes her “a great asset.” 

“Dr. Hyun’s extensive science background and expertise working in fish and wildlife, shoreline restoration, and coastal management and resilience will make her a great asset to the Department of Natural Resources and to our administration,” Evers said. “Having spent most of her career working in environmental policy, Dr. Hyun brings a wealth of experience navigating many of the issues the department is charged with managing every day, and I’m so excited for her to get started.”

Hyun, who lives in Madison, earned bachelor’s and master’s degrees in Earth Systems from Stanford University before getting her doctorate from the University of Rhode Island in marine science. 

Before joining NOAA, the federal agency that forecasts weather and tracks oceanic and atmospheric conditions — including on the Great Lakes — Hyun worked at the National Audubon Society as director of water and coastal policy before becoming the vice president of coastal conservation in 2018. 

She started her career in 2009 working as a staff member of the U.S. House of Representatives Natural Resources Committee. She then worked in the administration of former President Barack Obama as senior policy advisor to the secretary of Commerce and deputy assistant secretary of fish, wildlife, and parks at the Department of the Interior in 2015. 

“I’m honored to accept this appointment from Gov. Evers to lead the DNR,” Hyun said. “Wisconsin is known for its abundance of natural resources, wildlife, and outdoor recreation opportunities, and I have spent much of my life dedicated to understanding, conserving, and promoting the natural resources and spaces that we all know and love. I look forward to working alongside the dedicated DNR staff to ensure that Wisconsin’s ecosystems, wildlife, natural spaces, and resources remain accessible, safe, and available for generations of Wisconsinites to come.”

Hyun’s appointment is effective Jan. 27.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

DNR is investigating 69,000 gallon Enbridge Line 6 leak

A marker for a segment of Enbridge Line 6. (Photo | Frank Zufall)

A marker for a segment of Enbridge Line 6 in northern Wisconsin. A leak in the line in Jefferson County is now under investigation by the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources. (Photo | Frank Zufall)

The Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (DNR) is investigating a major leak from a pipeline managed by the Canadian oil giant Enbridge. Last weekend environmental groups sounded the alarm after learning that Enbridge’s Line 6 pipeline had spilled the equivalent of 1,650 barrels — more than  69,000 gallons — of crude oil  in the town of Oakland in Jefferson County. 

The DNR issued a statement saying that a report of a two-gallon spill was sent to the state agency on Nov. 11. Notifications were sent by Enbridge to the DNR, the National Response Center (NRC), and the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA). The DNR then visited the site on Nov. 11 and 12, with additional follow-up on Dec. 6, according to the agency. On Nov. 14, the spill quantity was updated to 126 gallons (or 2-3 barrels). On Dec. 13, Enbridge again revised the spill estimation to 1,650 barrels (or 69,300 gallons) of crude oil. 

“Under Wisconsin law, entities that cause environmental contamination are responsible for reporting and remediating the contamination,” the DNR states. “Enbridge is providing weekly updates to the DNR regarding the investigation and cleanup process. As investigation and cleanup is an iterative process, the DNR continues to evaluate appropriate next steps, including any potential enforcement actions such as a corrective action order.”

Using the GPS coordinates from the accident report and Google Maps, Wisconsin Examiner found that the spill occurred near a roadway running through a grassy, wooded area. The spill occurred near a waterway that flows into Lake Ripley, close to  a grouping of nature preserves and campgrounds. The accident report noted that the pipeline’s leak detection systems did not notify anyone of the leak. 

The Line 6 leak occurred during the same week that environmental and tribal groups filed new legal challenges against Enbridge’s proposed Line 5 pipeline reroute. Opponents of Line 5 are concerned  that the pipeline, which currently runs through the Bad River Band of Lake Superior Chippewa’s reservation, will still present environmental hazards even if it is  rerouted around tribal lands. The Bad River Band argues that the pipeline poses a risk to the health of the Bad River, which the tribe relies on for food, medicine, and important cultural practices. Environmental groups echo those concerns, and feel state and federal agencies have failed to adequately evaluate the environmental risks posed by  Enbridge Line 5. 

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

In win for biofuels, stopgap spending bill allows year-round sales of E15 gas nationwide

A spending bill to be debated in Congress this week includes a provision to allow sales of a gasoline blend that includes up to 15% ethanol nationwide throughout the year. (Getty Images stock photo)

A spending bill to be debated in Congress this week includes a provision to allow sales of a gasoline blend that includes up to 15% ethanol nationwide throughout the year. (Getty Images stock photo)

A spending bill U.S. House appropriators released Tuesday evening to keep the government open into next spring includes a provision to allow sales of a gasoline blend that includes up to 15% ethanol nationwide throughout the year.

After years of prohibiting the blend, known as E15, from being sold at gas stations during the summer months, the Environmental Protection Agency this year allowed year-round sales in eight Midwestern states. The provision in the stopgap funding bill would allow E15 sales in all states throughout the year.

The provision is a major win for corn producers and their allies in Congress from both parties. Supporters of ethanol, which is derived from corn, say it boosts U.S. production and lowers gas prices.

Sen. Deb Fischer, a Nebraska Republican who sponsored a bill to make the blend available all year, said the move was part of the GOP agenda to “unleash American energy.”

“My bill puts an end to years of patchwork regulations and uncertainty — year-round, nationwide E15 will now be a reality,” Fischer said. “This legislation also delivers on the mandate we received in November to unleash American energy. Not only will my bill lower gas prices and give consumers more choices, but it will also create new opportunity for American producers, who are especially hurting right now from lower prices.”

House Energy and Commerce ranking Democrat Frank Pallone of New Jersey applauded inclusion of the measure, saying it would help reduce gas prices and bolster U.S. energy production.

“By allowing for a higher blend of ethanol in our gasoline, Americans can rely more on homegrown biofuels that save drivers money at the pump and help insulate Americans from dramatic global price fluctuations,” Pallone said in a statement.

U.S. Rep. Don Bacon, R-Neb., one of a handful of farm-state House Republicans pushing for the E15 provision, said in a statement, “Year around E-15 is the most important policy we can embrace for Midwestern farmers and ranchers. I was glad to advocate for this on the Agriculture Committee and to our Speaker, and glad to see it embraced. I also know our entire Nebraska delegation was pulling for this. It is a team win.”

At a U.S. Senate Environment and Public Works Committee hearing last year, Sen. Debbie Stabenow, a Michigan Democrat who chairs the Senate Agriculture Committee, and Sen. Pete Ricketts of Nebraska promoted E15 availability as a way to lower greenhouse gas emissions and lower prices.

The EPA issued a waiver in May 2022 to allow the blend to be available nationwide throughout the year, as President Joe Biden’s administration sought to tame gas prices.

The stopgap measure, known as a continuing resolution, would keep the government funded at current levels through mid-March. It includes a few additional provisions, including funding to rebuild the Francis Scott Key Bridge in Maryland.

The House and Senate are expected to pass the catch-all measure before members depart for their holiday break on Friday. Biden is expected to sign the bill.

Nebraska Examiner reporter Aaron Sanderford and D.C. Bureau senior reporter Jennifer Shutt contributed to this report.

Ecological concerns loom as new legal actions filed against Enbridge Line 5

A sign protesting Enbridge Line 5 in Michigan. (Laina G. Stebbins | Michigan Advance)

“The land does not belong to us, it is borrowed by us from our children’s children” said Robert Blanchard, chairman of the Bad River Band of Lake Superior Chippewa. “We harvest our wild rice from the waters, we hunt from the land, fish from the lake, streams, and rivers to feed our families and gather the medicines to heal our relatives.” 

The Bad River Band cites this relationship with the land in its fight against the Enbridge Line 5 pipeline, which has operated in trespass on the Bad River Band’s reservation for years. Now, the Band and its allies are challenging the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (DNR) decision to grant permits that the Canadian oil company Enbridge will need to construct a re-route of the pipeline. The new route no longer trespasses on the reservation, it will still run through the Bad River watershed. The tribe and a coalition of state environmental groups say a spill in that area could be devastating.

Last Thursday, Midwest Environmental Advocates, 350 Wisconsin, the Sierra Club of Wisconsin and the League of Women Voters of Wisconsin filed a petition for a contested case hearing with the DNR, challenging DNR permitting for Line 5. Shortly after filing the challenge, Midwest Environmental Advocates received a report of a 69,000-gallon oil spill in Jefferson County.

According to an accident report shared with Wisconsin Examiner, the spill originated from Enbridge’s Line 6 pipeline. Some 1,650 barrels of crude oil are estimated to have leaked from the pipeline, with 42 gallons to a barrel. When plugged into Google Maps, GPS data in the accident report point to a roadway running through a grassy, wooded area. The map shows that the spill occurred near a waterway that flows into Lake Ripley, not far from a group of nature preserves and campgrounds. Although the pipeline segment had a leak detection system, the accident report states that this didn’t alert anyone to the leak, which was first noticed on Nov. 11 by an Enbridge technician.

Line 6 is one of four pipeliness that run from Superior, Wisconsin, to Illinois. It carries crude oil from Superior to Lockport, Illinois.

Anti-Line 5 graffiti at Enbridge’s pumping station in Mackinaw City, Mich., May 12, 2021. (Laina G. Stebbins | Michigan Advance)

Tony Wilkin Gibart, executive director of Midwest Environmental Advocates, said in a statement that the Line 6 spill highlights the dangers of Line 5. “Consider that in the very same week that DNR issued permits for Line 5 based on its conclusion that the risk for a spill would be ‘low,’ DNR was investigating a significant oil leak on another Enbridge pipeline in Wisconsin,” said Gibart. “DNR’s reasoning for approving Line 5 defies common sense.”

In November, the DNR decided to issue wetland and waterway permits to Enbridge as a step towards moving the pipeline off the Bad River reservation. The DNR highlighted that the wetland permits would include over 200 conditions which Enbridge would need to honor, and which would keep the company in compliance with Wisconsin’s wetland and waterway standards. Both the DNR and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers would need to approve the permits before construction of the reroute could begin. 

“Many of our people will feel the effects if we lose these resources,” said Blanchard. “In my view, the DNR failed our children when it gave Enbridge the permits to build this reroute. They failed to consider the company’s multiple disasters in Minnesota and in Michigan, which are still being cleaned up. They failed to consider our tribe, our water quality, and the natural resources of the entire Bad River watershed. As a tribal chairman and an elder, it’s my responsibility to protect the generations still to come. That’s why we are fighting this reroute in court.”

The Band is represented by EarthJustice in a lawsuit filed against the DNR which, like the petition filed last week by the environmental groups, accuses the state agency of producing an inadequate final Environmental Impact Statement on the reroute which violates the Wisconsin Environmental Protection Act. 

Blanchard highlighted his tribe’s reliance on wild rice fields growing along the Bad River and Lake Superior, as well as natural medicines, wild game, and the land itself which are crucial to the Bad River Band’s cultural practices and way of life. Every year the tribe holds an annual wild rice harvest, and Bad River Band members hunt and gather from the land all year. 

“If something was to happen during that time, or when that pipeline is in place, you know, it’s really going to affect a lot of things that we do here, and the way that we do things here on the reservation as far as our way of life,” Blanchard warned. 

Currently the Line 5 pipeline crosses the Bad River inside the boundaries of the reservation. If the reroute goes through,  Enbridge would construct 41 miles of new pipeline to cross the river outside of reservation land. The reroute would still place the natural resources the tribe relies on in danger if an oil spill or leak were to occur. 

Enbridge sign
Enbridge, Sti. Ignace | Susan J. Demas

Stefanie Tsosie, senior staff attorney at Earthjustice, also warned that constructing new pipeline damages natural formations and resources which are often irreplaceable. “Once construction starts they can’t undo the damage,” Tsosie said in a statement. “Enbridge has a terrible track record for pipeline construction and operation. And this place — this watershed and this territory — is not another place they can just plow through.” 

Opponents to the pipeline point to a history of ecological disasters due to spillage from Enbridge pipelines. In 2010, millions of gallons of crude oil contaminated the Kalamazoo River, creating a crisis which took years to address. Over the past 50 years, Enbridge’s Line 5 pipeline has spilled over 1 million gallons in dozens of different incidents

Today, an area known as the “meander” is also creating concern for the Bad River Band. “The river is changing course, and it does that throughout the way it runs,” said Blanchard. At the meander where the pipeline crosses,  he added, “If we have high water events, flooding, harsh winter with a lot of ice build up, and all that breaks loose in the spring, then we get this high water that very well could take that pipeline out, and cause a spill.”

A billboard promoting Enbridge Inc. (Susan Demas | Michigan Advance)

The tribe is monitoring the situation regularly, but this does little to ease their anxieties. The meander is “quite difficult to get to,” said Blanchard, and it’s also just one area of concern along the pipeline’s route. “A few years back, we had an exposed pipeline coming down one of the sidehills up there,” said Blanchard. “There was quite a ways where the pipeline was exposed and just kind of hanging in mid-air, which could have been disastrous if it wasn’t found and something done about it.”

If Line 5 were rerouted, it would still go through other wetlands and habitats outside the reservation. “These are some of the most treasured areas in Wisconsin,” said Brett Korte, an attorney with Clean Wisconsin. “When we think of the beauty of our state, our precious freshwater resources, the places we must protect, these areas are at the top of the list.” 

In a statement, Korte added, “This push from Canadian oil giant Enbridge is getting national attention because what it’s proposing to do here in Wisconsin is dangerous.”

This report was updated with additional information about Line 6.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

In Michigan and Wisconsin, cities are finding rooftops alone may not achieve solar energy goals

Man in yellow jacket stands on snow-covered roof next to solar panel and American flag.
Reading Time: 6 minutes

A new contract between Kalamazoo, Michigan, and utility Consumers Energy signals a change in direction for the city’s clean energy strategy as it seeks to become carbon neutral by 2040. 

Solar was seen as a pillar of the city’s plans when it declared a climate emergency in 2019 and set a goal of zeroing out carbon emissions by 2040. After spending years exploring its options, though, the Michigan city is tempering a vision for rooftop solar in favor of large, more distant solar projects built and owned by the utility. It’s not alone either, with Grand Rapids, Milwaukee, Muskegon and other cities taking a similar approach.

“Folks want to see solar panels on parking lots and buildings, but there’s no way as a city we can accomplish our net-zero buildings just putting solar panels on a roof,” said Justin Gish, Kalamazoo’s sustainability planner. “Working with the utility seemed to make the most sense.” 

Initially there was skepticism, Gish said — “environmentalists tend to not trust utilities and large corporate entities” — but the math just didn’t work out for going it alone with rooftop solar.

The city’s largest power user, the wastewater treatment pumping station, has a roof of only 225 square feet. Kalamazoo’s largest city-owned roof, at the public service station, is 26,000 square feet. Spending an estimated $750,000 to cover that with solar would only provide 14% of the power the city uses annually — a financial “non-starter,” he said.

So the city decided to partner with Consumers Energy, joining a solar subscription program wherein Kalamazoo will tell Consumers how much solar energy it wants, starting in 2028, and the utility will use funds from its subscription fee to construct new solar farms, like a 250-megawatt project Consumers is building in Muskegon

Under the 20-year contract, Kalamazoo will pay a set rate of 15.8 cents per kilowatt-hour (kWh) — 6.4 cents more than what it currently pays — for 43 million kWh of solar power per year. If electricity market rates rise, the city will save money, and Kalamazoo receives Renewable Energy Credits (RECs) to help meet its energy goals. 

The subscription is expected to eliminate about 80% of Kalamazoo’s emissions from electricity, Gish said. The electricity used to power streetlights and traffic signals couldn’t be covered since it is not metered. As the city acquires more electric vehicles — it currently has two — electricity demand may increase, but city leaders hope to offset any increases by improving energy efficiency of city buildings.  

Consumers Energy spokesperson Matt Johnson said the company relies “in part” on funds from customers specifically to build solar and considers it a better deal for cities than building it themselves, “which would be more costly for them, and they have to do their own maintenance.”  

“We can do it in a more cost-effective way, we maintain it, they’re helping us fund it and do it in the right way, and those benefits get passed on to arguably everybody,” Johnson said. 

Grand Rapids, Michigan, joined the subscription program at the same time as Kalamazoo. Corporate customers including 7-Eleven, Walmart and General Motors are part of the same Consumers Energy solar subscription program, as is the state of Michigan.

Costs and benefits

“There’s a growing movement of cities trying to figure out solar — ‘Yes we want to do this, it could save us money over time, but the cost is prohibitive,’” said John Farrell, co-director of the Institute for Local Self-Reliance. 

Until the Inflation Reduction Act, cities couldn’t directly access federal tax credits. The direct-pay incentives under the IRA have simplified financing, Farrell said, but cities still face other financial and logistical barriers, such as whether they have sufficient rooftop space.  

Advocates acknowledge deals with utilities may be the most practical way for budget-strapped cities to move the needle on clean energy, but they emphasize that cities should also strive to develop their own solar and question whether utilities should charge more for clean power that is increasingly a cheaper option than fossil fuels.

“Our position is rooftop and distributed generation is best — it’s best for the customers, in this case the cities; it’s best for the grid because you’re putting those resources directly on the grid where it’s needed most; and it’s best for the planet because it can deploy a lot faster,” said John Delurey, Midwest deputy director of the advocacy group Vote Solar. “I believe customers in general and perhaps cities in particular should exhaust all resources and opportunities for distributed generation before they start to explore utility-scale resources. It’s the lowest hanging fruit and very likely to provide the most bang for their buck.”

Utility-scale solar is more cost-effective per kilowatt, but Delurey notes that when a public building is large enough for solar, “you are putting that generation directly on load, you’re consuming onsite. Anything that is concurrent consumption or paired with a battery, you are getting the full retail value of that energy. That is a feature you can’t really beat no matter how good the contract is with some utility-scale projects that are farther away.”

Delurey also noted that Michigan law mandates all energy be from clean sources by 2040; and 50% by 2030. That means Consumers needs to be building or buying renewable power, whether or not customers pay extra for it. 

“So there are diminishing returns (to a subscription deal) at that point,” Delurey said. “You better be getting a price benefit because the power on their grid would be clean anyways.” 

“Some folks are asking ‘Why do anything now? Just wait until Consumers cleans up the grid,’” Gish acknowledged. “But our purchase shows we have skin in the game.” 

A complement to rooftop

In 2009, Milwaukee adopted a goal of powering 25% of city operations — excluding waterworks — with solar by 2025. The city’s Climate and Equity Plan adopted in 2023 also enshrined that goal. 

For a decade, Milwaukee has been battling We Energies over the city’s plan to install rooftop solar on City Hall and other buildings through a third-party owner, Eagle Point Solar. The city sought the arrangement — common in many states — to tap federal tax incentives that a nonprofit public entity couldn’t reap. But We Energies argued that third party ownership would mean Eagle Point would be acting as a utility and infringing on We Energies’ territory. A lawsuit over Milwaukee’s plans with Eagle Point is still pending.

In 2018 in Milwaukee, We Energies launched a pilot solar program known by critics as “rent a roof,” in which the utility leased rooftop space for its own solar arrays. Advocates and Milwaukee officials opposed the program, arguing that it encouraged the utility to suppress the private market or publicly owned solar. In 2023, the state Public Service Commission denied the utility’s request to expand the program.

Wisconsin’s Citizens Utility Board opposed the rent-a-roof arrangement since it passed costs it viewed as unfair on to ratepayers. But Wisconsin CUB Executive Director Tom Content said the city’s current partnership with We Energies is different since it is just the city, not ratepayers, footing the cost for solar that helps the city meet its goals.

Solar panels on a roof in a city
Solar panels atop Milwaukee’s Central Library. (City of Milwaukee)

Milwaukee is paying about $84,000 extra per year for We Energies to build solar farms on a city landfill near the airport and outside the city limits in the town of Caledonia. The deal includes a requirement that We Energies hire underemployed or unemployed Milwaukee residents.

The Caledonia project is nearly complete and will provide over 11 million kWh of energy annually, “enough to make 57 municipal police stations, fire stations and health clinics 100% renewable electricity,” said Milwaukee Environmental Collaboration Office director Erick Shambarger. 

The landfill project is slated to break ground in 2025. The two arrays will total 11 MW and provide enough power for 83 city buildings, including City Hall – where Milwaukee had hoped to do the rooftop array with Eagle Point. 

Meanwhile, Milwaukee is building its own rooftop solar on the Martin Luther King Jr. library and later other public buildings, and Shambarger said the city will apply for direct pay tax credits made possible by the Inflation Reduction Act — basically eliminating the need for a third-party agreement.

“Utility-scale is the complement to rooftop,” said Shambarger. “They own it and maintain it, we get the RECs. It worked out pretty well. If you think about it from a big picture standpoint, to now have the utility offer a big customer like the city an option to source their power from renewable energy — that didn’t exist five years ago. If you were a big customer in Wisconsin five years ago, you really had no option except for buying RECs from who knows where. We worked hard with them to make sure we could see our renewable energy being built.”

We Energies already owns a smaller 2.25 MW solar farm on the same landfill, under a similar arrangement. Building solar on the landfill is less efficient than other types of land since special mounting is needed to avoid puncturing the landfill’s clay cap, and the panels can’t turn to follow the sun. But Shambarger said the sacrifice is worth it to have solar within the city limits, on land useful for little else.

“We do think it’s important to have some of this where people can see it and understand it,” he said. “We also have the workforce requirements, it’s nice to have it close to home for our local workers.”

Madison is also pursuing a mix of city-owned distributed solar and utility-scale partnerships. 

On Earth Day 2024, Madison announced it has installed 2 MW of solar on 38 city rooftops. But a utility-scale solar partnership with utility MGE is also crucial to the goal of 100% clean energy for city operations by 2030. Through MGE’s Renewable Energy Rider program, Madison helped pay for the 8 MW Hermsdorf Solar Fields on a city landfill, with 5 MW devoted to city operations and 3 MW devoted to the school district. The 53-acre project went online in 2022.

Farrell said such “all of the above” approaches are ideal.

“The lesson we’ve seen generally is the more any entity can directly own the solar project, the more financial benefit you’ll get,” he said. “Ownership comes with privileges, and with risks. 

“Energy is in addition to a lot of other challenging issues that cities have to work on. The gold standard is solar on a couple public buildings with battery storage, so these are resiliency places if the grid goes down.”

A version of this article was first published by Energy News Network and is republished here under a Creative Commons license.

In Michigan and Wisconsin, cities are finding rooftops alone may not achieve solar energy goals is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.

Pierce Co. town passes ordinance requiring factory farm permits

Cows in a western Wisconsin dairy farm. (Henry Redman | Wisconsin Examiner)

A Pierce County town of about 600 residents passed an ordinance requiring factory farms to obtain permits before moving into or expanding in the community. 

The decision follows a handful of other western Wisconsin communities in passing similar ordinances to limit the proliferation of concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs) in the region. Those other communities have faced legal challenges to their ordinances and one rescinded its regulation after a change in elected leadership. 

The town of Maiden Rock overlooks the Mississippi River’s Lake Pepin. On Monday, the town’s board unanimously passed the ordinance which will require any proposed CAFOs within the community to obtain a license to operate from the town board. When applying, CAFO operators must have a third-party engineer supply plan for how the farm will manage its waste, emissions and runoff.

Pierce County has seen increased expansion of factory farms this year, with a dairy in the town of Salem announcing plans to expand from 1,700 to 6,500 cows. 

Once an application is received, the ordinance requires the board to send a letter to all residents within a three mile radius of the proposed farm informing them of a public hearing. The board will be able to grant or deny the license and if granted, impose conditions on how the CAFO must operate. 

The ordinance also requires the CAFO to fund third-party enforcement of the permit conditions. 

In the board’s materials about the ordinance, the board highlighted the enforcement mechanisms, noting that state regulations surrounding CAFOs in the state largely rely on self-reporting to the state Department of Natural Resources — a system that has resulted in large manure spills going unreported. The materials also note that a pending lawsuit from the state’s largest business lobby is attempting to strip the DNR of its authority to regulate CAFOs. 

The ordinance was drafted by a commission appointed by the board to study CAFOs. At a public hearing on the ordinance, nearly 100 residents attended and all spoke in favor of its passage. The first 23 pages of the ordinance document outline the threats CAFOs can pose to a community’s groundwater, air quality, public health, local agricultural economy and infrastructure. 

“Our town is blessed with a stunning mix of farmland, woods and bluffs overlooking the Mississippi River’s Lake Pepin,” a fact sheet about the ordinance states. “Rush River, a Class 1 trout fishing destination, is sustained by cool spring-fed streams. Everyone relies on private wells for human and animal consumption. CAFOs with thousands of animals are proposing to spread thousands of truckloads of waste in the Town. State and county laws have almost no control over these huge facilities. Without an ordinance, their impact on roads, wells, health and the economy are unknown.”

Western Wisconsin advocacy group, Grassroots Organizing Western Wisconsin (GROWW) celebrated the ordinance’s passage, saying it’s a victory for communities standing up to protect themselves. 

“I think the town board heard loud and clear that the residents of the town wanted the ordinance,” Danny Akenson, a field organizer for GROWW, said in a statement. “It’s a result of the community banding together and sharing their stories and fears. We’ve heard it all. Landowners have had their land used for manure spreading without permission. Residents have had to call the Sheriff’s Department to escort them out of their own driveway due to heavy truck traffic on country roads. Families have had to live with poisoned water that causes sickness and cancer.”

“We know that one town standing up and protecting themselves isn’t enough,”  Akenson continued. “Everyone deserves to have access to clean water and safe roads. Across Wisconsin, whether you’re in Maiden Rock or Milwaukee, corporate greed gets in the way of that dream becoming reality. In 2025, we hope to see even more towns stand up and pass ordinances of their own.”

Several other communities in the region have passed similarly constructed ordinances and have faced opposition from industry groups. The town of Eureka in Polk County is currently fighting a lawsuit against its ordinance. A ruling in that case is expected in early January. 

The board’s fact sheet on the ordinance notes that at a state Senate hearing in March, a Wisconsin Farm Bureau representative testified that farm groups want the state government to preempt operations ordinances against CAFOs because state law currently allows them. 

Akenson told the Wisconsin Examiner that the ordinances are allowed under the state constitution. 

“Maiden Rock’s ordinance is backed up by both Wisconsin’s Constitution and our state statutes. We’re a state that values local control,” he said. “Corporate industry groups show up with lawsuits to try and bury small towns in legal costs and paperwork. Checks and balances threaten their profits and power to consolidate markets, and they hope to scare other communities from taking action.”

“In our view, that’s what’s happening in Eureka right now,” he added. “Despite these threats, more and more towns are taking steps to protect themselves by passing ordinances. People are tired of the intimidation tactics by industry representatives. The people on the ground in Pierce County and all across the state aren’t backing down.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

❌