The Missing Aquitard: A short explanation of why you shouldn't drill deep wells near the Yahara chain of lakes by UW Madison Professor Cal DeWitt

Here is an illustration from Wisconsin Geological Survey's Ken Bradbury that shows that he knows the situation with the Eau Claire formation:

You can access this from:
http://www.nelson.wisc.edu/partnerships/programs/docs/bradbury_slideshow.pdf

The whole presentation is worthwhile to read, but the illustration above (from page 5 of this report) is a good summary.

A few things to observe here:

1. A the base of the diagram is "Recambrian crystalline rock" -- note that it steadily rises from the west to the east; this rise in Precambrian bedrock is part of the Wisconsin Arch.  The "Mount Simon aquifer" was formed largely by sand deposition by an ancient sea over this arch. 

2. The "Eau Claire aquitard" (also call the  Eau Claire "Confining unit" was deposited next by the ancient sea, but as the sea got shallower from west to east, the deposition of silt gradually changed to the deposition of sand as the sea reached the beach (the deeper quiet waters allow deposition of silt, which later becomes the "Eau Claire shale" but the shallow more turbulent shallow waters in the foreshore and shore areas deposit sand which later becomes sandstone.

3. The Eau Claire formation thus becomes thinner and thinner from west to east, even as it changes from having much silt (which forms the shale) to having less and less silt and more and more sand (which forms the sandstone).

4. As this thinning progresses from west to east, and as this shift from silt to sand occurs as the sea water becomes shallower to the west toward the shore, the quality of the Eau Claire formation as an aquitard (confining unit) becomes less and less.

5. Upshore from the water the Eau Claire formation disappears altogether.

6. This diminishing and disappearance of the Eau Claire formation is strongly accentuated by the ancient bedrock valley that cuts below the Eau Claire formation as it progresses from north to south---a valley that now contains the Yahara chain of lakes and glacial till deposits---a classic "buried bedrock valley."

The recent work of Wasinee Aswasereelert adds vital information to all of this, and has been published not only as her Master's dissertation in Geology at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, but also published as a refereed paper at:   http://wisconsingeologicalsurvey.org/pdfs/geoscipdf/1_GS19.pdf

Greener Homes & Gardens Feb. 27th

Greener Homes & Gardens Expo
Simple steps you can take now, for a cleaner & greener tomorrow

Date: Wednesday, Feb. 27th
Time: Come anytime between 6:30 and 9:00pm
Place: Ancora Coffee -2690 Research Park Dr., just across Lacy Rd. from Fitchburg City Hall

Visit booths, and talk with experts one-on-one, to learn more about:

*How to enhance the beauty of your yard while protecting our lakes, streams, and ground water with rain gardens, rain barrels, & natural yard care

*Simple, practical steps you can take now to reduce water use inside and outside your home

*How to maintain a greener home & cut your energy bill: lighting, conservation, and energy solutions you can use now

*Your solar energy options

*What a CSA farm is, and how you can enjoy healthy, affordable organic foods all year long

* How to sign up for free hands-on nature education opportunities for your child’s classroom or scout troop

*Homeowner grants for native prairie plants at half price

Register to win great green door prizes:
*Sustain Dane rain barrel, installation included
*Water conserving showerheads
*Energy efficient light bulbs
*Nature books for kids and adults
*Nature curriculum materials from National Audubon Society & Cornell Lab of Ornithology

Please call or email Nancy Hylbert for more information:
271-0956, Nancy.Hylbert@Fitchburg.WI.US

Dr. DeWitt's Presentation Posted

As a follow-up to a previous blog, the city has posted Dr. Cal DeWitt's presentation on their website here.

The slide below is my favorite showing the various layers of bedrock deposits in Dane County (top left is north). The two darkest layers are the thickest areas of the Eau Claire formation which comprise the best aquitard separating our upper and lower aquifers. As you can see, much of the county does not benefit from this layer of shale.

Wake Up Dane County!

Last Tuesday night the room was packed for Dr. Cal DeWitt's remarkable presentation which was entertaining, important, and memorable! If you missed it, you might catch the replay on FACTv.

I'm sorry Channel 15 news was unable to record the unveiling of Dr. DeWitt's latest research during his second presentation to the Plan Commission, which unfortunately was delayed for an hour in order to accommodate people there for other agenda items.

Eau Claire Aquitard and Buried Bedrock Valleys

During his presentation, Dr. DeWitt shared his remarkable and eye-opening discoveries, involving over 700 hours of research since his September 2007 presentation to the Plan Commission. He unearthed to the public, the secrets of the hidden bedrock valleys which lay beneath the surface of Fitchburg. The bedrock was created in layers by various sea deposits over millions of years including a series of deposits from the ancient "Eau Claire Sea."

These deposits of mud, silt, and sand form the Eau Claire Formation and it is the shale in this formation that forms a barrier (aquitard) that separates the upper and lower aquifers. Valleys, cutting through this bedrock, make it look much like the rugged, exposed topography of the driftless area to our west. And the Nine Springs bedrock valley cuts completely through the Eau Claire Formation. After these incisions, however, the valleys around here were filled in by the glacier (which also created a fantastic chain of lakes) and they now lie silently below us.

Through research of previous core samples taken from wells, Dr. DeWitt demonstrated that the aquitard is slowly reduced in thickness from Southwest to Northeast Fitchburg, where it thins as it approaches Lake Waubesa and then disappears completely. This results in a joining of upper and lower aquitards, making them one.

In Northeast Fitchburg, east to west along the 9 Springs E-way, and in much of Madison and Sun Prairie, there is a joining of upper and lower aquifers, and this may more fully explain the reason for Madison's many water quality/contamination problems.

Caution is Urged

Dr. DeWitt strongly urged against drilling any new wells in or near areas where the aquitard is lacking and suggested that Fitchburg steward the land by "sleuthing" the science (hydrology, geology, hydrogeology, limnology) of the area carefully in future planning.

He warned against relying on current groundwater models, when considering new development (such as the Northeast Neighborhood). While these models are helpful for many areas where bedrock is fairly uniform, they do not account for the cutting through of the Eau Claire aquitard by the Nine Springs Bedrock Valley or the thinning of the Eau Claire Shale to zero in the northeast.

Other models being used for runoff similarly must be used wisely; and their current use does not adequately address phosphorus loading inputs. He suggested that unless care is taken to prevent the eutrophication of Lake Waubesa, by reducing the phosphorus runoff below levels found in present and future developed neighborhoods, Fitchburg would eventually pay in increased taxes for future remediation to restore the watershed.

Rosanne Lindsay
Fitchburg

- - - - - - - - - - - - - -

To the 100 or more people that came to listen to Professor DeWitt's talk (some are pictured above before all the seats were filled!), I’m sorry that the Mayor decided to rearrange the agenda at the last minute. I’m glad that you were able to stay that extra hour and I’m sure you agree that this presentation was worth the wait!

Terry Carpenter
Fitchburg

How Will Measures Be Enforced?

Expanded version of Jan. 10, 2008 Letter to Editor, Fitchburg Star
Submitted by Phyllis Hasbrouck
Chair of the West Waubesa Preservation Coaliton

“Just Trust Us”

The main message that I heard from developer Phil Sveum and his team on Dec. 18 was “Just trust us.” They painted a picture of a “green development” in the Northeast Neighborhood, but with no real substance. They are “looking at” encouraging homebuyers to use efficient plumbing fixtures, limit lawn watering, create and maintain raingardens, and use rain barrels. They assure us that when they complete their CDP (comprehensive development plan) it will have measures adequate to protect Lake Waubesa, Swan Creek, the springs and the groundwater.

Should the Plan Commission just take their word for it? How many times have cities been left holding the bag when a stormwater plan went bad? Developers sure are good at sweet talking, but once they finish the project, they are done, and all problems are left to the city.

Can Neighborhood Associations be Depended on?

All of the neighborhood-wide water-saving and stormwater control features of the Sveum plan depend on a Neighborhood Association to carry them out, and that’s a real weakness. It’s hard to find people willing to put in the volunteer hours for the good of the whole neighborhood. Harlan Hills (which was built by Sveum to be an “environmental development”) has a neighborhood association, but it hasn’t stopped people from using the pesticides that Sveum said would be banned. People have mowed down prairie and incorporated pieces into their yards, and concerned residents were told that suing their neighbors is the only way they can get the covenants enforced.

It’s very easy to say, “the outlot raingardens, the repair and plowing of the alleys, and the greenways will all be managed by a dues-collecting neighborhood association,” but the reality may be quite different. A recent Capital Times article talked about the many area residents who buy homes without realizing that their street is private, and that they’ll have to pay for its upkeep. What if new residents of the NEN can’t or won’t keep up the raingardens, alleys and greenways? Will Phil Sveum step in and pay? Will the city? Or will the environment have to pay? I understand that Fitchburg has never allowed private streets. I hope that they stick to their principles when it comes to private allies, greenways, and infiltration features.

What makes anyone believe that the people who move into such a development will be interested in conserving tap water or maintaining raingardens? Congratulations to Commissioner McNally, who brought a sense of reality back to the discussion when he asked whether we could really count on all of these ambitious plans happening!

A Memorandum is not a Promise

The Ruekert-Mielke stormwater report was a list of goals, with no concrete suggestions to describe how the goals would be met. The Montgomery Associates Memorandum on water is a slight improvement. It describes the general sort of techniques that they plan to use, e.g. “providing multiple points of treatment and infiltration of runoff as close to the impervious surfaces as possible.” But we are told to wait until they have a comprehensive development plan to see exactly what kind, how many, and where such measures will be. Can it be that this is the accepted way of approving developments – to just take the say-so of people who have every reason to skimp once they have the approval?

Rob Montgomery, Sveum’s water expert, said “Those [municipal] wells draw water from the lower aquifer relatively isolated from the upper aquifer, and also draw from a wider region of Fitchburg and areas to the west.” People who attend or watch the next Plan Commission meeting at 7 p.m. in City Hall on Jan. 15 will learn that this is not so, when they hear Dr. Cal DeWitt speak on buried bedrock valleys.

The memorandum says that “Water draining off the Par Fore site will be managed to exceed state and local ordinance criteria for water quality, peak discharge rates, and runoff volumes.” Once again, we are told to just trust them. Everything will be done according to the law. But does that mean that it won’t harm the environment? The environment has been gravely harmed by development, and presumably most of that development was done within the law. We need some leadership by people willing to defend the resources that will sustain our grandchildren!

Groundwater, Lakes and Phosphorus

Rob Montgomery’s conclusion was that “placing consideration of the Northeast Neighborhood ‘on hold’ because of regional groundwater management concerns is not warranted. We suggest that an appropriate approach for the Planning Commission is to approve the neighborhood plan including an objective of maintaining groundwater recharge, and recommending appropriate municipal water supply conservation practices.” Translation: “Just write down that it would be good for people to save water and let rainwater infiltrate, and let us go about our business.”

It was encouraging to hear Commissioner Kinney ask Rob Montgomery how he could ensure that the water going in to Swan Creek would be both cleaner and of the same volume post-development. I hope that all the commissioners will be asking skeptical and probing questions, as they are responsible for the welfare of the entire community.

Some commissioners may think that the question of phosphorus has been laid to rest with City Engineer Paul Woodard’s calculations that post-development the NEN will contribute less phosphorus to surface waters than it presently does. While this may be true, (a schedule of corn, corn, and soy results in a lot of phosphorus runoff) it is not the relevant question to ask. Because Lake Waubesa is already partly eutrophic, a large reduction in phosphorus loading is needed, not a small one. Small scale, organic farming could be the best option of all for protecting and restoring Lake Waubesa, and it should be studied.

Workforce Housing and the Future of Fitchburg

Kudos to Alder Allen and Mayor Clauder for bringing up the issue of workforce housing. This is a huge need, but it won’t be met unless the city insists on it. Our proposal for the Northeast Neighborhood, which we will present to the Plan Commission in Feb., contains 30 units of workforce housing, for the farmers, teachers and entrepreneurs who will run the school of organic farming, the farmers market, and the Bike and Breakfast that we envision. The people who will be attracted to inhabit the NEN if our vision is realized will definitely be interested in and dedicated to saving water, infiltrating rainwater, stopping soil loss, rejecting pesticides, and creating a vibrant, closely knit community.

I hope that the Plan Commission and Common Council will remember that the choice before them is not between Mr. Sveum’s proposal and the worst possible development. The choice is between Mr. Sveum’s proposal, just leaving the land in agriculture, or endorsing our plan to preserve our lakes and groundwater while producing healthy food for the community.

Development Threatens Water Quality, Rural Character

Slightly revised version of Jan. 10, 2008 Letter to the Editor, Fitchburg Star
Submitted by Ed Korn, Fitchburg

Concerning the proposed development in the rural area of Fitchburg east of County MM and north of Lacy Road known as the Northeast Neighborhood. This parcel of undeveloped land abuts the Town of Dunn, a community that has worked hard to retain its rural characteristics.

As one example of the effort by the Town of Dunn to control the impact of development there was years ago an informal agreement between the Town chair and Fitchburg mayor that an undeveloped buffer would be left between Fitchburg and Dunn. The proposed Northeast Neighborhood completely ignores that agreement to the detriment of the kind of community Dunn is trying to maintain.

The shallow southern two thirds of Lake Waubesa is flushed and kept clean by three creeks which draw a significant quantity of their water from the Northeast Neighborhood. Changing the land use from agricultural to suburban will likely have a detrimental impact in those creeks and the already marginal water quality of Lake Waubesa.

Leap frog development which this is, is not appropriate land use. It's expensive to provide the municipal services of police, water, sewage, public transportation, and fire safety. Swan Creek is only fractionally built out let alone Green Tech Village. There is also a significant quantity of appropriate land closer to Fitchburg's central core that at this time is far better suited for urbanization. I think the quality of life of both the Fitchburg and Dunn residents would be better served if the Northeast Neighborhood retains its rural character.

Northeast Neighborhood Poorly Planned

Jan. 10, 2008 Letter to the Editor, Fitchburg Star
Submitted by Holly Adams, Fitchburg


I am a resident of the Northeast Neighborhood, and I was hoping that Sveum’s plan for the forests and fields that surround my home would impress me with planning, innovation and forethought. Unfortunately, the plan failed on all three counts.

The neighborhood is not well planned out. The neighborhood is not really a neighborhood, just a large cluster of homes clumped together. There is nothing to build a sense of community, no center, no focal point, no main streets, just winding roads jam-packed with single family homes, condos and duplexes.

I was hoping for more innovation in the design. I was hoping for something that would make Fitchburg unique or identifiable. Instead, I saw a bedroom suburb, the same as I see around Sun Prairie, DeForest, and Cottage Grove. Putting garages in the backs of lots and houses close together will only encourage people to walk if there are places to walk to. However, everything for these families will be a car trip away. A carton of milk, a teacher’s conference, returning a book to the library and a swim lesson will require cars to dart out of this neighborhood in four different directions.

With all the work that has been done to study I thought there would be more forethought in the plan. The last thing I expected to see was a repeat of the Swan Creek neighborhood, except with more homes jammed in. The Northeast Neighborhood was picked as an area to study for future development because of its proximity to the GreenTech development and to the rail corridor that runs parallel to it. No one knows for sure what is going into that rail corridor, but everyone seems sure we want to develop along it. Of course, if it is high speed rail, the chances that there will be a stop between Oregon and Madison are slim, but that matters not to the people who want to tear up the fields and forests to build acres upon acres of vinyl-sided homes in every shade of taupe known to man.

The city of Fitchburg and the School District of Oregon will bear the costs of this development. The city will have to pay for fire and police protection in this remote corner of Fitchburg, the cost of maintaining the roads and alleys that will crisscross the cornfields, and the cost of leapfrogging urban services over vacant land while land in the existing urban services area goes undeveloped. The school district will bear the cost of bussing kids seven miles each way to school; and the cost of building new schools and spaces for children who live on the far outer edge of the district.

But more costly still is the cost all of us will bear as we continue to chew up field and forest for pockets of development. The cost to our lakes, springs, streams and well water. While Fitchburg and Oregon can tax all of us more to help defray the costs to them for services, there is no amount of money anyone can extract that will recompense us when we have drained our wells dry, or killed our lakes.

I grew up in the Northeast neighborhood. I followed the trails through the woods that led through the meadows and out into the fields that are soon to be torn up. I climbed up the trees, and helped friends build tree forts in the oaks that bent out over the corn fields below. When we had the chance to move back to this wonderful corner of Fitchburg, we jumped at it. We watch the turkeys and the deer during the day, and wait for the flying squirrels to soar in at night. I love the parts of Fitchburg that are forward thinking, progressive and unique. I just wish my own neighborhood was going to stay in that part of Fitchburg, and not become part of the poorly-planned, mundane, environmentally-lethal suburbia that one developer envisions.

'Green Plan' is Actually SPRAWL

Jan. 10, 2008 Letter to the Editor, Fitchburg Star
Submitted by Rosanne Lindsay, Fitchburg

Call it what you will, but the proposed Sveum development, on the outer edges of Northeast Fitchburg, is SPRAWL by any name, and raises more questions than it offers answers.

This plan may boast many things, including parks, rain gardens, native plantings, and filling a need to “provide houses in an area that reduces commuting distance” (for whom I might ask)? What it does not do is tell Fitchburg residents who care about increased taxes, what they will pay to provide services (water, sewer, fire, etc) to the NE area. Nor does it convey to those who care about protecting our natural resources, how these measures will be enforced.

The need for “greening” this plan was prompted by concerned citizens who believe that runoff pollution from this development will irreversibly degrade the native fauna and flora, creeks, springs, the Northern Pike Fishery, Lake Waubesa, and one of the highest quality and diverse wetlands in southern Wisconsin, only one mile from the site.

While Mr. Sveum’s effort to respond to citizen concerns was noted by some on the Plan Commission, discussion of specific measures by Sveum to address risks to the basic water chemistry and aquatic habitat conditions on pre-existing water bodies (Swan Creek, Lake Waubesa, Deep Spring), was lacking. These risks have been noted to be high and growing, according to Environmental Toxicologist, Dave Zaber (See 11/16/06 Star article).

Mr. Sveum’s consultant predicted that Swan Creek will not be adversely affected by development and that surface runoff will be cleaner than current conditions. However, he did not talk about accountability. In fact, Sveum et al. admitted that compliance with infiltration on individual lots cannot be enforced so how are we assured that groundwater recharge will be maintained or that runoff and the water bodies will remain clean?

There are accountability mechanisms which should be insisted upon: Sveum’s proposed Northeast Neighborhood, like his Harlan Hills, and Swan Creek developments contrast with the very rigorous accountability mechanisms that Bill Linton imposed in the Fitchburg Center. There, independent associations oversee the management and monitoring of compliance with covenants, much like the Natural Heritage Land trust does for PDR easements in the area.

In Harlan Hills, no additional funds will be provided to restore promised prairie land which is overwhelmed by clover. Mr. Sveum seeded and maintained the prairie for 2 years. Unfortunately, prairie restoration needs 3-5 years of maintenance to ensure proper generation of prairie plants, according to local experts. Promises of “no lawn pesticide application” (to protect the Arboretum) became “certain pesticides acceptable.” And even banned pesticides are sometimes applied because there is little, if any, ability to enforce.

As a result of the heavy rains last August, the Village of Oregon is faced with purchasing several flood-damaged homes, at least partly at taxpayer expense. The homes are downhill from Oregon's new Bergamont and Alpine Valley developments. Some have accused the developers of "design error" from poor stormwater management plans. Others say the developers are not to blame because they complied with the stormwater ordinance and other village requirements. Either way, there is little doubt that the developments exacerbated Oregon's pre-existing flood problems, as some residents had predicted.

These local histories prove that good intentions and inadequate city policies are simply not enough. Maintaining our precious environmental resources--the forests, prairies, wetlands, fisheries, and lakes that make living here so desirable--requires nothing less than full commitment to do whatever it takes to accomplish the goal, be it prairie restoration or preserving Swan Creek and the Lake Waubesa watershed.

Developers can talk all they want about "sustainability" and "green" development but they often fail to follow through. So it must be the city’s job to probe for specifics and examine concerns raised previously about the developer's Northeast Neighborhood Plan, including the suitability of the model being used for hydrological impacts, the absence of cumulative effects analysis, the preservation of rare hydric soils and infiltration, and the threats to our aquifer (groundwater) from a burgeoning population, as described by UW Ecologist Cal DeWitt.

Mr. Sveum also gave the rosy economic prediction that his thousand-home development will not cost the city money. But will Mr. Sveum give the city an enforceable guarantee as the country heads toward a recession? Or will Fitchburg taxpayers be the ones who bear the cost when his prediction proves incorrect? Virtually all Cost of Urban Service studies show that residential development leads to a net drain on local government budgets. What justifies Mr. Sveum’s belief that his Northeast Neighborhood development will be any different? What about reality of the nation’s economy; the shortage of credit to homebuyers resulting from the mortgage meltdown, the perceived need for more housing when many homes stand empty waiting for a buyer, or the fall of the dollar? City officials should require a full Cost of Urban Services Study for all new development proposals as a matter of fiscal responsibility.

The public policy question is one of deciding whether or not “market forces” should allow this sort of development at this location when it makes such a dramatic influence on the area’s natural and recreational resources, as well as contributes to commuter traffic and sprawl. The fact that there is the rail line and the Green Tech Village plan, both of which do far more for the City, is an important alternative that must be given more thought.

Proposed developments, in conjunction with past and present developments, are adversely affecting groundwater and surface water resources throughout Dane county and this problem is particularly acute in this part of Dane County. Let's hope that at future meetings of both the Plan Commission and the Common Council, the city will ask many probing, skeptical questions that will truly serve the interests of the many Fitchburg residents waiting for answers.

And while Mr. Sveum may, indeed, share many of our concerns, he may be the only one to see “green” if the Northeast Neighborhood turns into more Fitchburg SPRAWL.

Bloomquist Takes Stand on Water

Submitted by Phyllis Hasbrouck:

Hooray for Richard Bloomquist! Here is an alder who isn’t afraid to take a stand for what he knows is right, even when he clearly sees that he’s going to lose the vote. If more alders start to express their true feelings and vote their consciences, all sorts of “politically unfeasible” things may start happening!

At the Oct. 9 Fitchburg Common Council meeting, the alders had to decide whether to accept the Plan Commission’s map for a long term Urban Growth Boundary, which includes 3378 additional acres for development, including all of the Northeast Neighborhood.

Not only did Alder Bloomquist speak out against a plan that may endanger our water table, he also had the political courage to point out that though he and the mayor both opposed it, they had very different reasons for doing so.

(We are currently working on getting a short video on You Tube, and will post the link when we succeed.)

He also deserves our thanks for defending the democratic process. He reacted with incredulity to the news that some Plan Commissioners want to severely limit the public’s participation in the planning process.

“Why’d they shut the springs off?”

As the Council took up the question of whether to adopt the Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) map that the Plan Commission (PC) had crafted, Alder Bloomquist surprised many by announcing that he would vote no.

“In the last 60 or 45 days, I’ve had some concerns with what we’re about to do to the city…I have some concerns with water. I have concerns with water recharge of the aquifers underneath us. I have concerns with what we may or may not do with ag ground, that is now inside some of this shaded border. We’ve been told that if we don’t move the borders at all, we have quite a bit of ground at the current rate of development, to last us for several years into the future.

“We’re about to, under the budget, possibly, take up Transfer of Development Rights and Purchase of Development Rights, probably more seriously than anyone thought we might a year ago. And I’m just a little gun shy about putting the kind of land out there, and drawing some maps and have some speculators decide this is what we’re gonna possibly do. One of the resolutions that we have this evening is the McGaw North Neighborhood, with the 5 developers that signed that.

“I just don’t feel comfortable until I hear more about Transfer of Development Rights and Purchase of Development Rights, and keeping certain farm grounds from ever being developed. But mostly I don’t want my name on anything that a generation from now people will say, ‘Why’d they shut the springs off, why’d they do this with the water?’ I just don’t have a comfort level tonight to say I want to see the current Urban Service Area get any bigger, nor the possibility of it getting any bigger. So that is my reason for voting no this evening.”

Alder Steve Arnold replied, “The concerns that you cited, are for me the reasons to support an urban growth boundary.” And he asked Bloomquist to elaborate.

Alder Bloomquist responded,

“…Someone asked me earlier today, if I would be in favor of freezing the current urban service area and not growing and developing any more. And I have a comfort level that would say at the moment, yeah, I’d support that. I’d make the current urban service area, the permanent boundary of the city. But that’s probably not realistic 30 or 40 years down the road, as we grow out. But I’d just really like to know where we’re going with Transfer of Development rights, and Purchase of Development Rights, cause I think there’s been some, almost faith that that’s going to happen, and take the pressure off some the development that’s inside those lines [of the Urban Growth Boundary].

… I have this feeling that if we don’t do this right, we’re gonna screw up the water table, and I think that’s too big of a risk to take. And I’d really like to know more about the water, and the development rights. And if we’re gonna take farm ground that encroaches into some of these areas, and say, even though it’s in the possible Future Urban Development Area, that we’re not gonna do it.

And the more I think about it, is 75 acres the right number? That’s still a lot of ground per year to take out for homes…But it’s just those 2 big things. I don’t want to see the water table screwed up, and I want to know what were gonna do with some of the farm ground.”

A little later, when Alder Arnold asked him if it eased his mind at all to hear that the Plan Commission intends to have a framework for a TDR [Transfer of Development Rights] program by January, Alder Bloomquist laughed and responded, “You should probably quit selling and vote, cause it’s gonna be 7 to 1 anyway.”

When it was the mayor’s turn to speak he said,

“I think this is a real important vote tonight… A lot of the things Richard said, I won’t repeat, cause not only do I think he talked from his heart, he talked from the way I want to talk, of real concern. If you look at the map, on the west side, it’s not balanced…”

Alder Bloomquist later responded,

“Excuse me, Mr. Mayor… I think you and I disagree… on what we consider the shortcomings of the plan. I really don’t care if it’s skewed to one side or the other. …I’m really not anti-development this evening, but I’m not really pro-development to concrete anymore. I’m not really pro-subsistence farming either… I think the taxpayers of Fitchburg will pay for TDR or PDR and keep soils that should be in ag, in ag. I think if it’s explained the right way, that’ll happen. … [Alder] Steve [Arnold] sort of chided on me on have a little bit of faith of keeping farm grounds out. After 57 years, faith is a little thin… so I’ll take some of it at their word, but I’m still going to vote no tonight, but probably not for the reasons the mayor thinks.”

He was right, he lost that vote 7 to 1, but he gained the respect and gratitude of many citizens. We were also glad to hear his incredulous question to Alder Jay Allen: “I’ve been reading the minutes of some of the Plan Commission things. You aren’t really talking about shutting off public participation in the plan process, and not allowing people to speak, are you?”

Alder Allen started to respond with “What…” and Alder Bloomquist interrupted with “No, that was a yes-or-no question.” (For more info on the topic of public participation, see the blog entry Keep "Public" in Public Hearings, and watch the You Tube video of the 10-9-07 Common Council meeting when we post the link in a few days.)

I hope that other alders will take courage from Alder Bloomquist’s willingness to absorb new information, come to uncomfortable conclusions, and then speak out.

No Substitute for Water

Here’s a great line from one of my favorite comedians:

"You never know what you have until it's gone, and I wanted to know what I had, so I got rid of everything." - Steven Wright

Maybe that’s not such a bad idea. What would we really miss? What would we put in its place?

I certainly wouldn’t miss the closet full of project files that I ended up with after I sold my business. Come on… admit it… you also harbor a different, but equally useless, stash. Let’s face it; nobody alive today will ever ask for papers that are already 5 to 25 years old even if we did manage to remember we had them! (Exception: This excludes all documentation required by guys with guns… the IRS.)

In addition to the cardboard-clad “files” of paper, consider all those plastic-encased tubs of trinkets. It probably amounts to quite a pile of stuff weighing us down and not a collection of treasures that lifts our spirits. In fact, this assortment often distracts us from more important things. Oh sure, you have it closeted all right, but how many times are you going to move it from dwelling to dwelling or room to room over the course of your life?

Wouldn’t it be better to clear some of the clutter to create an opening for new thoughts and room for new interests (ok, new stacks of paper and plastic)?

I think Fitchburg residents have an equally useless and distracting set of clutter. (You knew I’d somehow relate this to the Blog’s theme… right?) We seem to shelter tattered ideas and drag them out from time to time instead of tossing them into the recycling bin. Sure we need to preserve some history (those breadcrumbs showing where we have been) but, above all, we need to pay attention to new information.

In case you haven’t guessed where I’m headed, this new input should serve as the basis for our revised vision of Fitchburg in the year 2030 or beyond. Instead of harping about the previous versions of the Future Urban Development plan, let’s listen to experts as they guide us in a new direction. We have more tools and more facts now than at any time in the past. This is both bad and good. We have more ways to destroy our habitat, our environment, our home. But, we also have more ways to measure this destruction and evaluate how to reverse the trend.

(1) One such reversal is to restore wetlands and protect streams and creeks through buffers and stream bank projects. (Water Quality)
(2) Another is to create (and live within) our Water Budget by knowing how much water we extract from the aquifer and how much we put back. (Water Quantity)

Although the Plan Commissioners have looked at farmland preservation and many other factors as they create a new Urban Growth Boundary, they have yet to factor in these two related concerns.

During his presentation on Sept. 4th (described in an earlier entry here), Professor Cal DeWitt recounted a conversation with someone at the Fish Hatchery. He described his research showing that adding a new municipal well probably reduced the flow of an old artesian well one mile away at Nevin Springs Fish Hatchery. The person responded to this discovery by saying “That well’s already built. Right? Then, we can’t do anything about it.” But, as Professor DeWitt pointed out, that’s the way our whole environment deteriorates, of course.

Let’s not destroy this wonderful area by a thousand tiny cuts to our support system.

Instead of only caring about the “top quality” wetlands, streams and lakes, we should be doing everything we can to restore all water resources to their original state. It is foolish to let some resources die an unnatural death at our hands just because we’ve let them degrade up until now. There are ways to protect them from further harm and also to slowly restore them to health.

Creeks and streams have a purpose and we need to appreciate their role. I was amazed to learn that once we’ve degraded a creek to certain level, the city no longer offers it the same protection as one that managed to escape that level of damage. Isn’t this backwards? Shouldn’t we be doing more to protect the one that needs it the most?

Wetlands help clean and regulate the water in our area and we need more of them not less. Our current guidelines protect the “high quality” wetlands more than those we’ve degraded to a greater extent. Again, this is backwards or at least short-sighted. Let’s strengthen the regulations to protect them all (when feasible). We should also identify areas that were once wetlands by evaluating the telltale hydric soils and restore them whenever possible to help prevent catastrophic floods and purify our water for decades to come.

A recent study, Strategic Watershed Restoration and Protection Plan for the West Waubesa Wetlands, by a UW–Madison class evaluated hydric soils in one watershed covering a large portion of Fitchburg along with parts of the Town of Dunn. The map below shows hydric soils identified in the study. For orientation, Hwy 14 runs north and south through the center of the map from McCoy Rd (top) to north of Hwy M (bottom). Click here to view a larger version of the map and for more information about the study, please email me at fitchburgvoices@gmail.com.

Although groundwater recharge has been considered by the Planning Commission, it has been analyzed under the assumption that we want the most “recharge” per acre so areas were considered more valuable if they scored in the top 25% based on infiltration criteria. Although their definition of good infiltration is debatable, even if it’s accurate it misses the point. Dr. Ken Bradbury, Groundwater Expert and Hydrogeologist, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Wisconsin Geological and Natural History Survey, gave a presentation last week explaining the hydrogeology system which underlies the Yahara Basin, including Fitchburg, and describing how scientists model and predict underground water movements. During the Q&A discussion, he indicated that although some recharge areas may be considered more important than others, all are important because some areas recharge different water features than others.

See the problem? If we recharge areas that affect X and not those that affect Y, Y will suffer.

In addition to recharge, the quantity of water we pull from the aquifer is also a big concern. As reported in recent newspaper articles, Dane County is now drinking from a couple of its lakes because numerous high capacity wells in the area are drawing down the aquifer enough that the water is no longer flowing into some lakes and is instead seeping from the lakes into the aquifer.

Dr. Bradbury also stated that in all of Wisconsin there are two areas that are having serious problems with groundwater (Green Bay and Waukesha) and two others that are designated as Groundwater Attention Areas to be watched – the Little Plover River (which recently dried up for the first time ever) and… you guessed it… Dane County.

I recently saw the new documentary film The 11th Hour. Without giving away the “plot” (which you probably already know), I was struck by one very unusual and startling calculation; it would cost the world about $35 trillion a year to perform all of the functions that nature does for us free of charge. That’s something like twice the size of all the world’s economies! Talk about externalities! This free service includes things like turning carbon dioxide into oxygen and pollinating plants. I assume it would also include flood control and water purification.

So, shouldn’t we use the *Precautionary Principle as we plan for our city’s future? The natural world is not just priceless from an aesthetic standpoint but is way beyond reach in economic terms. Will we miss it when it’s gone? Of course! What would we put in its place? The truth is; we can’t afford to replace it even if we knew how!

Please let your Plan Commissioners and Alders know that you want them to protect all of our water resources as they plan for the future of Fitchburg.

Footnote:

* (From Wikipedia) “The Precautionary Principle is a moral and political principle which states that if an action or policy might cause severe or irreversible harm to the public, in the absence of a scientific consensus that harm would not ensue, the burden of proof falls on those who would advocate taking the action.”

Water, Water... Anywhere?

The word is out. Professor Cal DeWitt has sleuthed some amazing and disturbing facts out of the recesses of our aquifers. At Tuesday night’s Planning Commission meeting, he explained the relationship he discovered between Fitchburg’s deep-aquifer, high-capacity Well #10 (located on Granite Circle) and the 125-year-old, upper-aquifer, cased artesian Well #8 (located at Nevin Springs Fish Hatchery). It had been assumed that both wells were drawing from separate aquifers based on their depth profiles (800 feet or more for Well #10 and 180 feet for Well #8), and one mile distance from each other. However, Professor DeWitt found a significant correlation between them that changes the original assumptions.

Nevin Springs was producing 400 gallons of water per minute (gpm) for a number of years until late 2001 when it started dropping. It has since continued at a lower rate of 300-350 gpm. A mile away, Well #10 started pumping in 2001 and within a year was pumping around 600k gallons per day.

As shown in one of his graphs, a pattern appears when comparing the flow volume drawn by the new, municipal well and the decreased flow, about 12 months later, from the artesian well.

The bottom line? About 10% of the pumpage of Well #10 is equal to the losses at Well #8 that show up after a 12-month lag. So, there is a connection between these wells in the upper and lower aquifers and water is traveling at the rate of 14.5 feet per day from Nevin Springs in the direction of the Granite Circle well.

The fact that Professor DeWitt was able to find this relationship buried in the data from many area wells is surprising enough but I received another shock when he told us that we don’t really know how this happens. It appears that, at least sometimes, the upper and lower aquifers are indeed connected even though they separated by an aquitard (made of layers of sedimentary rock) which limits vertical waterflow except in cracks. To complicate matters, the horizontal flow between these two wells is 10s of thousands of times greater than the vertical rate of water flow through the aquitard, perhaps because of long horizontal pipes that formed over the years.

What does this mean? Professor DeWitt urges us to consider the entire groundwater hydrology system before we do something that would stop the flow of water to important springs and lakes in the area. For example, if we turn off Deep Spring and other groundwater resources that refresh Lake Waubesa, the entire southern boot (most of the lake) would die (eutrophy). And distance does indeed make a difference when dealing with solutions. The farther away we stay from precious water resources, the better chance we have to protect them. So, locating any new well in the vicinity of the NE Neighborhood is more of a threat to Lake Waubesa and the natural resources because of its impact on groundwater flow to the watershed.

Although this bombshell was dropped during the agenda item for the NE Neighborhood and Stormwater Plans, it also must be considered for all well drilling activity and increased water use (ie. development) in Fitchburg and beyond. If we fail to consider how new high-capacity wells will draw groundwater from the surrounding area, other springs or wells (including private wells) could dry up. This has happened with many of the famed springs of Waukesha and the Little Plover River in Stevens Point, among others.

[Side Track: According to Devil in the White City by Erik Larson (link here), one entrepreneur wanted to pipe water from a Waukesha spring on his property all the way to Chicago to supply the 1893 World’s Fair. But, Waukesha residents didn’t want the water to leave the city and they showed up with guns, knives and pitchforks to stop the pipeline workers, returning at 2 am with a cannon (!) to drive away them away again. For the rest of the story, see the Lake Lore article on page 4 of the Alliance for the Great Lakes newsletter here.]

Fast forward to Fitchburg 2007.

Professor DeWitt explained the concept and vital need for Groundwater and Watershed Budgets which he likened to other budgets. Simply put, we need to know how much we are depositing (infiltration) into each aquifer and withdrawing (wells and springs) from each aquifer to be sure that we don’t overdraw our account and live beyond our means. To protect against this, he suggests that the City of Fitchburg recommend to Dane County and CARPC (Capital Area Regional Planning Commission) that:

1. they place high priority on developing a policy for a Groundwater Budget for the region; and
2. they work with Fitchburg on procedures for monitoring and evaluating diminished well and spring flow to the city and region.

I am happy to report that, after the presentation, applause (normally against the rules at these meetings) was allowed to acknowledge Professor DeWitt’s efforts, and the Planning Commissioners wisely responded to these sobering data by asking for more information before making a decision about the NE Neighborhood. I’m not sure if they actually ordered a Groundwater Budget but I think that prospect is at least on the radar if not the table.

(NOTE: FACTv recorded the entire meeting including Professor DeWitt's presentation. So, you can contact them to have a DVD made of all or part of the meeting or to rebroadcast it during their Thursday morning request slot. If that doesn't work for you, drop me an email at fitchburgvoices@gmail.com to borrow my copy.)