Rob Zaleski Rob Zaleski: Groups seek protection for North Woods waters By Rob Zaleski September 3, 2004 About Rob Rob Zaleski is a 32-year veteran of the news business. His columns appear every Monday and Wednesday in the Communities section. Email Rob Email this story to a friend Printer-friendly format Tell us what you think Write a letter to the editor. Denny Caneff (Photo by David Sandell/The Capital Times) Related articles Complete list of the river segments the River Alliance wants to protect OK, so it may not rank up there with Arnold's caveman hetoric at the Republican convention or Serena's U.S. Open attire or the raging debate over whether the Packers can survive without the talented but goofy Mike McKenzie, who has yet to step foot in preseason camp. But anyone who cares about the lakes and streams of northern Wisconsin should be delighted by the deft - though largely unnoticed - move by the River Alliance of Wisconsin and Midwest Environmental Advocates, along with some 42 other conservation groups in the state. Alarmed by the unrelenting development frenzy that threatens the long-term future of those waterways, the coalition recently petitioned the Department of Natural Resources to increase protection for 100 river segments in the state's 20 northern-most counties. How would the DNR do that? By designating those segments as either outstanding or exceptional resource waters, says Denny Caneff, executive director of the River Alliance.

An "outstanding resource water" is one of pristine quality that has no direct sources of pollution. (At the moment, there are just six that meet that criteria, according to the DNR.)

An "exceptional resource water" is just a notch below that, Caneff says. It may have some minor sources of pollution, but any new developments would have to ensure that the current water quality is maintained.

By making such designations, Caneff says, the DNR not only could ensure that future generations are able to enjoy those waters, but would provide a boost to northern Wisconsin businesses whose very livelihoods are dependent on tourism.

"And this is also about legacy," he says. "We altered the landscape of northern Wisconsin forever when we logged the hell out of it in the 1800s, and we should learn from that mistake."

With all the development that's occurred over the last decade, "we're right on the cusp of a second transformation," he argues. "Are we going to suburbanize northern Wisconsin? That's the question."

Caneff says a lot of people probably assume the coalition's action is a response to the so-called Job Creation Act, the much-criticized law that relaxes shoreline building rules and that the pro-development lobby - with a big assist from the Doyle administration - "railroaded through the Legislature" last spring.

Not so, he says.

While the River Alliance and its allies were appalled by that measure, he says, it actually began pursuing this idea last year after reviewing a 1997 DNR initiative that examined the water quality in 1,494 river segments in northern Wisconsin. Although the agency identified hundreds that were of high quality, it has yet to seek greater protection for those waters, Caneff says.

"So we just took their numbers and kind of recast them a bit and narrowed down the list to 433 that deserve special protection," he says. "We told the DNR, 'Here's a list of 433 rivers that we want you to review to see if they qualify as outstanding or exceptional. However, we know that you're bogged down by your work load. So for now we just want you to focus on the top 100 and get those designated.'

"That way we won't have to wait around for five years."

Caneff says the DNR's initial response was positive but says there's still much work to be done. He speculates that it could take five months for DNR staff to review the data before presenting its recommendations to the DNR Board.

If approved by the board, they would then go to the Legislature - probably late next year - and what happens then is anybody's guess, Caneff says.

Actually, that's an extremely optimistic scenario, cautions Bruce Baker, deputy administrator for the DNR's water division.

"We're not against the concept of providing more protection to those streams," he says. However, it's premature to say the DNR will do anything at all, he says, for two reasons: the work load issue and the fact that it would have to change some of its rules, which is always a laborious process.

Caneff says he's fully aware that there are some major hurdles ahead. But he says he's talked to a lot of people in northern Wisconsin in the last year and it's convinced him that those who favor more development are, in fact, "a shrill minority."

"What I hear," he says, "is a growing chorus of boaters and anglers and hunters and lakeshore property owners - folks with grandpa's cabin- who are turning up the volume and asking, 'What's going on here? What are we sacrificing in this big push to develop the North Woods?' "

E-mail: rzaleski@madison.com

Published: 10:48 AM 9/3/04