Paddling with Mike Svob
More river protection on the horizon in Wisconsin On several occasions, a trout fisherman friend of mine has told me how disconcerting it is to land a big fish while angling alone, only to realize suddenly that he has no one present to share the joy with. As a canoeist and kayaker, I've had the same experience many times over the years. I always prefer paddling with friends, but sometimes especially during the week when poor "working stiffs" have
to make a living companions aren't always available and I have to set out alone. At such times, the giddy exhilaration of negotiating long boulder gardens or witnessing the antics of an otter close-up or basking in a spectacular sunset is tempered by not having someone with whom to share the moment.
One such day came almost a decade ago on a Wisconsin river that few paddlers are familiar with. Only a few months before, I had begun the "field work" (day after day and month
after month of paddling, note-taking and photographing) for the first of my guidebooks, Paddling Northern Wisconsin.
On an overcast, chilly and occasionally drizzly April day, I found myself several miles north of Hayward, lowering my trusty old Mad River ME into the Totogatic River near the outlet of the Totogatic Flowage for a 9-mile paddle into the almost unknown.
As usual, I had done as much homework as I could by plying local coffee shop patrons with questions and
visiting the nearest DNR ranger station. In that fashion I learned that the river setting was quite wild and undeveloped, that there were lots of rapids, and that I should be on the lookout for a couple of big waterfalls. During the course of my four to five hours on the river that day, I barely noticed the dampness and chill in the air and had a marvelous albeit solitary experience (which I'll describe in greater detail next month).
On that day and on many since, I've been grateful
for Wisconsin's relatively progressive record of stewarding wild places like the Totogatic, especially compared to less conservationally minded states, like neighboring Illinois. Nevertheless, anyone who paddles a lot can cite numerous examples of streams, even in Wisconsin, that could have benefited from a higher level of protection; river sections, for example, that have been over-dammed, fouled with pollutants, stripped of bankside vegetation, or overpopulated with houses, piers and other
development.
The Wild Rivers Act
Four decades ago, Wisconsin led the nation in the effort to provide such protection. In 1965 it was the first state to create a Wild Rivers Act (State Statute 30.26) aimed at keeping selected streams in as natural a state as possible. Specifically designated for state protection were three gorgeous and eminently paddleable rivers in northeastern Wisconsin: the Pine, Popple and Pike.
As if to underscore how progressive Wisconsin was in
addressing this issue, the Wild Rivers Act came a few years before the passage of the much better known National Wild and Scenic Rivers program (which, incidentally, included parts of three rivers in Wisconsin: the St. Croix, Namekagon and Wolf). To his eternal credit, the late Sen. Gaylord Nelson of Wisconsin was in the forefront of both the state and federal river preservation programs.
What has puzzled me repeatedly over the years, however, is the fact that the number of streams
covered by the Wild Rivers Act has been stuck at only three for more than four decades. When the act was submitted to the Legislature in 1965, it went through with virtually no opposition. Surely during the intervening years other equally deserving streams could have been added to the list.
Of course, this is not to say that the state has been standing still in terms of river preservation. Consider, for example, that the state has led the nation in the number of dams removed as a
result of the efforts of such organizations as the River Alliance of Wisconsin, the DNR and Trout Unlimited. Moreover, many counties have been in the forefront of enacting regulations that forestall unbridled development along streams that flow through their jurisdiction.
The DNR's Outstanding and Exceptional Resource Waters program also provides protections for numerous waterways in the state. And, of course, the fact that so much riparian acreage in Wisconsin is owned by federal,
state or county governments (within national, state or county forests, for instance) is a safeguard against unrestricted development.
Nevertheless, the inclusion of additional streams in the Wild Rivers Act is a "consummation devoutly to be wished" for wilderness preservation advocates. In protecting the Pine, Popple and Pike, for example, the DNR (under state administrative code Natural Resources 302.04) disallows new dams or piers, bank grading over 10,000 square feet,
channel changes, new bridges (except approved foot bridges), bridge access to residences and highway bridges.
Among other restrictions is the stipulation that only natural materials (not the ugly riprap refuse that we see on so many streams) may be used for shoreline erosion protection, and only in areas where the erosion is caused by "human disturbance." No structures may be built in the river, and all utility corridors (big eyesores on many rivers) must be low-impact.
I'm sure that all of us have favorite paddling streams where we would like to see such provisions in force.
Expanding the list
Well, the good news is that there's a strong effort under way to add two more streams to the Wild Rivers Act. One, as you might guess, is the still relatively remote and wild Totogatic, and the other is the short uppermost stretch of the St. Croix (which was somehow omitted from the 1969 National Wild and Scenic Rivers Act that included most of the rest
of the river).
Unlike the Pine, Popple and Pike, which are in the upper northeastern corner of the state, the Totogatic and the St. Croix Headwaters segment are located (in fairly close proximity) in the northwest quadrant of Wisconsin.
Most of the 70-mile-long Totogatic would be included in the designation (starting at Totogatic Lake in Bayfield County), except for four flowages and dams along its course (Totogatic, Colton and Minong flowages and Nelson Lake), all the way to
its mouth on the Namekagon. The much shorter St. Croix segment comprises the section from the river's source (at the downstream end of Upper St. Croix Lake, near Solon Springs) to the St. Croix Flowage in Gordon eight miles altogether.
A quiet, slow paddle on this part of the St. Croix takes you past wetlands, wild rice beds and cedar swamps, with abundant birds and waterfowl and, I'm told, good fishing. Incidentally, the two lakes at either end of this river segment already have some
protection as Outstanding Resource Waters. I'll devote a future Silent Sports column to a detailed trip description of the 8-mile St. Croix Headwaters section.
This effort to include the Totogatic and St. Croix in the Wild Rivers Act has a grass-roots origin. For example, the Totogatic initiative began with a request from Washburn County, which for the past couple years has worked with the County Lakes and Rivers Association, interested citizens and the DNR to advance the proposal. In
Douglas County, the Friends of the St. Croix Headwaters, a citizen organization in the Solon Springs/Gordon area, asked for state support in seeking Wild Rivers designation. As the idea gained momentum, there were many discussions involving outdoor groups, stakeholders, DNR staff, the five county boards through which the two rivers pass, and others.
The proposal received statewide attention when it was included in Gov. Jim Doyle's Conserve Wisconsin agenda, unveiled in August 2005.
Then, in November 2005, the DNR and the University of Wisconsin Cooperative Extension held a series of area meetings to provide information and seek citizen input (in Hayward, Siren, Solon Springs and Minong). In addition, Wisconsin state Sen. Robert Jauch, D-Poplar, hosted a public listening session in December.
At the sessions, the response was generally positive. Jauch was presented with several resolutions of support from northern Wisconsin lake and river groups. To date, the only
significant reservations expressed have had to do with the replacement of existing snowmobile trail bridges over both rivers if and when they fail, and the amount of shoreland alteration that can be done by private landowners along the river.
General acceptance of the proposal is enhanced by the fact that there will be no condemnation of private property, that already-existing piers, docks and dams will be grandfathered in, and that the Wild River regulations won't replace existing
county requirements but will supplement them. Many of the specific questions and concerns raised in connection with the proposal are addressed in a four-page paper available from the DNR ("Questions on Designating the Totogatic and the St. Croix Headwaters as State 'Wild Rivers,'" November 1, 2005).
In the final analysis, the addition of the Totogatic and St. Croix Headwaters segment to the Wild Rivers Act will require approval by the state Legislature. The topic will again
be discussed with lawmakers in Madison during Superior Days, February 28 through March 1.
Here's hoping that it will progress through the legislative process in relatively hassle-free fashion. Watch for the bill to be introduced in case you want to express your opinion.
I would like to thank Wisconsin DNR staffers Bob Martini in the Rhinelander office and Kathy Bartilson in Spooner for steering me toward the various sources of information on this timely subject.
Next month: Paddling the Totogatic.
Mike Svob is a native Illinoisan and longtime northwoods devotee. He has canoed and kayaked for more than 30 years in 18 states and several foreign countries but regards Wisconsin as paddling paradise and home. He now spends a majority of the year in Tucson, Arizona. He is the author of Paddling Illinois, Paddling Northern Wisconsin and Paddling Southern Wisconsin, all published by Trails Books. |
