Milwaukee Riverkeeper quoted in Waukesha Freeman

Environmentalists continue opposition to water application
Coalition says Waukesha will set precedent in Great Lakes diversions

WAUKESHA – A coalition of environmentalist groups are looking to continue encouraging the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources to stop its review of the city’s application to divert Lake Michigan water past the subcontinental divide through the Great Lakes Compact.

    The group is skeptical of the city’s future water supply studies and feels that some options were thrown out of the process too early. They also say that Waukesha’s application for Great Lakes water will set a precedent for other communities, meaning the coalition wants the city’s application to be perfect.

    “We know there are communities lined up behind Waukesha,” said Peter McAvoy, attorney and vice president of environmental health with the Sixteenth Street Community Health Center, an organization that is registered as a lobbyist group and provides health care, education and social services to low-income residents in Milwaukee. “That is why we are interested in doing this and doing this right. ... The bottom line is we think the application they have put together so far is incomplete.”

    The group is formed of members from Milwaukee Riverkeeper, Midwest Environmental Advocates, River Alliance of Wisconsin, Clean Wisconsin, Sixteenth Street Community Health Center, Waukesha County Environmental Action League, Wisconsin Wildlife Federation and National Sierra Club. Several members of the coalition met with The Freeman editorial board Thursday to voice their concerns about Waukesha’s quest to receive Lake Michigan water.

    If Waukesha alone was requesting a diversion of Great Lakes water, there would not be much of an impact on the Great Lakes, said Melissa Malott, attorney and water program director for Clean Wisconsin, a Madison-based lobbyist group acting as an environmental voice.

    Instead, the more communities connecting to Lake Michigan could cause a negative impact on the Great Lakes, Malott said.

    “The biggest threat to the Great Lakes is death by 1,000 straws,” Malott said.

    Duchniak said he disagrees with the group’s statements because the city has a goal of returning 100 percent of the water to the Great Lakes.

    “There would be no death because we would be returning all our water we are taking, unlike groundwater where we are taking the water and not returning it,” Duchniak said.

    Duchniak said Waukesha, with its return flow, would have no impact on Lake Michigan water levels, unlike Chicago, which diverts two billion gallons of water per day from the lake without returning it.

    Communities outside of the Great Lakes basin are required to return the water. Waukesha is proposing to return the water through Underwood Creek, but the city also is considering the Root River.

    The DNR last month requested the Waukesha Water Utility submit additional information about the proposed return flows, information which Duchniak is in the process of providing.

    However, Cheryl Nenn, a biologist with Milwaukee Riverkeeper, said the application takes only a cursory glance at different return flow options and primarily focuses on Underwood Creek.

    “The only alternative they have looked at in any kind of detailed way is the Underwood Creek option, which in some ways make sense, it is the closest creek,” Nenn said. “It would be clearly the cheapest in having to lay a pipe to Underwood Creek.”

    Nenn is concerned about the water quality and flooding impacts to the stream. Significant work already has been done in the water way to try to improve the stream, Nenn said.

    “You could not pick a more challenged stream,” Nenn said.

    The Waukesha Water Utility, in its application under the Great Lakes Compact, includes a study about the potential environmental impacts for a return flow through Underwood Creek.

    The application indicates that the analysis of the effects on Underwood Creek states that the return flow will not adversely impact the physical integrity of Underwood Creek.

    Instead, Duchniak previously has told The Freeman that Underwood Creek could benefit from the return flow. Underwood Creek dries up during the summer months, which has a negative environmental impact on the natural habitat, Duchniak said.

    Members of the environmental coalition said they supported the DNR’s decision to hold the application until further information could be provided about the estimated water sales costs from Oak Creek, Racine and Milwaukee, as well as more details about the return flow.

    McAvoy said the group does not feel the city’s water supplies were thoroughly analyzed because options were discounted too early and the city could look at combining different resources.

    Another resource the city could look at, McAvoy said, is using recycling water by collecting used water and treating the water.

    “I think that they need to look at the alternatives that they say that they have looked at,” McAvoy said. “They need to do that more thoroughly.”

    Duchniak said there are issues with corrosion and water quality when water utilities have to combine more than two sources.

    “The more different sources you have, the more difficult it becomes and the DNR recognizes that within their rules,” Duchniak said. “That is addressed in the application.”

    The group has met several times with the Waukesha Water Utility, and although they said they have not had a bad meeting, they feel their questions have not been addressed. WEAL water team member Laurie Longtine said her organization sent in seven pages of questions that were not addressed in the application.

    “It hasn’t been responded to in any way,” Longtine said.

    Duchniak said the water utility has received more than 200 pages of comments and questions about the application. If the comments were not directly answered in the application, the additional information is found in the appendixes.

    Additionally, the city drafted a 50-page response to the group’s questions and concerns, Duchniak said.

    “We spent months working on responses to all of those issues,” he said.

    Meanwhile, McAvoy said the environmental coalition is not looking to take political sides after Nenn praised Mayor Jeff Scrima for his opposition to a water sales deal with Milwaukee and to the Great Lakes application.

    “I probably shouldn’t say this, but Mayor Scrima is right for asking questions,” Nenn said.

    Scrima did not immediately return a message left from The Freeman seeking comment.