Posted on 11/03/2005 5:40:40 PM PST by SJackson
MADISON — A bill intended to stop the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) from grabbing land by claiming private wetlands are really state-owned lakebeds drew conflicting testimony at a hearing last week.
Assembly Bill 71, authored by Rep. Dan Meyer (R-Eagle River), would give counties the final say on the determination of the ordinary high-water mark (OHWM) on public lakes, which often establishes where wetlands end and lakebed begins.
Saying the policy implications are huge, the northern representative said as much as 120,000 acres of wetlands in Oneida County could be reclassified as lakebeds and taken off the tax rolls.
Meyer has said the law would only impact those cases where the DNR and a county's professional zoning staff disagree over a high-water mark determination, which has occurred in cases in Oneida County.
Testifying before the Assembly Natural Resources Committee against the measure last week was former DNR secretary George Meyer, now executive director of the Wisconsin Wildlife Federation (WWF).
The federation claims the bill has “serious constitutional flaws” because it contradicts the Public Trust Doctrine, giving counties authority over navigable waters that belong to all citizens.
“For more than the last 150 years, this provision has been interpreted to provide that navigable waterways must be held in trust by the Legislature and cannot be given away for private purposes. Allowing a county to set an OHWM more landward than the Department of Natural Resources-determined OHWM would, in fact, be giving public lakebed to private riparian owners,” George Meyer said.
He said the WWF is the largest conservation organization in the state, representing 110 hunting, fishing and trapping clubs located throughout the state of Wisconsin.
----------------
Interesting idea. If I'm not mistaken about a quarter of Wisconsin represents the lake bed of Glacial Lake Wisconsin.
DNR = Damn Near Russia
Is the high water mark the 100 year flood level or some other determination?
“the point on the bank or shore up to which the presence and action of the water is so continuous as to leave a distinct mark either by erosion, destruction of terrestrial vegetation or other easily recognized characteristic.”
There's more info at the DNR link. High water mark is also an important factor in allowing public access.
And how much tax revenue would be lost to 'the children' and 'the publik skools'?
Maybe the feds found out there is oil under there! Can't have Joe Citizen making oil in money now can we?!
I don't know about the taxes. That's based on property value, not acreage. If the assessors "determine" that this doesn't cause a decline in value, then none.
Oil in the new "lakebed", unlikely, but the kind of thing that makes lawyers rich.
That refers to the annual high water mark lines.
Thanks
"Saying the policy implications are huge, the northern representative said as much as 120,000 acres of wetlands in Oneida County could be reclassified as lakebeds and taken off the tax rolls."
"The federation claims the bill has “serious constitutional flaws” because it contradicts the Public Trust Doctrine, giving counties authority over navigable waters that belong to all citizens."
Thanks for ping, SJackson. I think this is pretty interesting. Seems to me like the issue might be having navigable water expanded to include previously deemed wetlands. Public access to that, eh?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.