By allowing ads to appear on this site, you support the local businesses who, in turn, support great journalism.
Vernon Land Conservation Committee must grapple with dam challenges
rudrud
GRANT RUDRUD, one of the founding farmers of the Tainter Creek Water-shed Council, speaks to members of the Vernon County Land Conservation Committee in support of a proposal to create two po-sitions for mapping past flood damages, and doing conservation project de-sign, at the committees meeting on Thursday, Oct. 11. Committee member, Supervisors Kevin Larson (left) and Kelli Mitchell (right), listen to his input.
GILLIAN POMPLUN
Updated: Oct 24, 2018, 7:02 PM
Published: Oct 24, 2018, 7:04 PM

VERNON COUNTY - The Vernon County Land and Water Committee continued to grapple with challenges associated with the breach of two of the flood control dams in the county and damage to several others. At their meeting on Thursday, Oct. 11, there was discussion of proposals to use Ho-Chunk funds for various conservation purposes.

The meeting was attended by Committee Chairman Will Beitlich and Vice Chairman Kevin Larson. Other committee members present were Supervisors Rod Ofte, Kelli Mitchell, and Frank Easterday, Vernon County Board Chairman Dennis Brault, Zoning Administrator Susan Burkhamer, and Carol Hall of FSA were also present, as was County Conservationist Ben Wojahn. Farmers from the Tainter Creek Watershed Council present included Grant Rudrud, Jeff Ostrem and Berent Froiland.

Ho-Chunk funds

A large part of the committee’s meeting was taken up in consideration of eight proposals for the funding conservation initiatives from the Ho-Chunk funds. Among those eight were expenditures on the Jersey Valley, Mlsna and Swenson dams; beginning a program of county-wide groundwater testing; and funding of two limited term positions for the purpose of mapping damages from past flooding events, and making project plans for future installation of conservation practices.

Mark Erickson, the county’s PL-566 Dams Manager led the discussion about the proposals to spend funds to help repair the Jersey Valley, Mlsna and Swenson dams.

“The DNR is requiring us to have a plan to repair or abandon the dams by March 19,” Erickson said. “As far as the order to draw down Ostrem, I’ve asked them if we can fix the dam using NRCS Emergency Watershed Protection Program (EWP) exigency funding, will the order to draw it down be void. I’m still waiting for an answer.”

Erickson explained that the Ho-Chunk requests for the dams is intended to provide the matching funds for the EWP funding or for additional funds that may become available from the State of Wisconsin.

Supervisor Rod Ofte asked what had been learned from the various USDA NRCS teams that had been on site evaluating the dams.

“The first team from Oklahoma really just had a mission to glean information that they could use in their modeling,” Erickson said. “The second team from Stillwater documented the damages, and began using a transit to survey the breach surfaces, and will likely be able to provide us with some information by the end of November.”

Erickson explained that the county basically has three choices:

·       Abandon the dams

·       Repair them to pre-flood condition with concrete spillways

·       Rehab them to an upgraded condition as was done with the Klinkner Dam

“We can complete the abandonment or the basic repair in about the same time frame,” Erickson said. “But a rehab, taking into account new precipitation information and new standards, will take about three to five years.”

“We can’t approve funds for requests that aren’t specific,” chairman Beitlich said.

“We’re going to have to spend the money anyhow, so we might as well reserve the funds now,” supervisor Ofte said.

“We’ll need to have the matching funds available in order to take advantage of opportunities that arise through NRCS or the Corps,” Wojahn said. “The specific requisitions will go through the committee when we have more concrete information.”

“We need to do the right thing the first time,” supervisor Easterday said. “Those dams are scary when they’re full, and we’re seeing increased amounts of water running off the hillsides these days.”

“I think you should forward the recommendation to the Finance Committee to set aside the funds, earmarked for use as matching funds,” county board chairman Dennis Brault said.

The committee voted to pass along their recommendation to approve the funds to the finance committee.

Well water testing

Wojahn explained that his request for well water testing funds would be used to conduct sampling, similar to what the Tainter Creek Watershed is doing with DATCP funds, in a couple of townships per year. He proposed a 50/50 cost share between the Ho-Chunk funds and landowners.

“Lafayette and Grant County have embarked on a program of well water testing, and they are essentially way out in front of Vernon County,” Wojahn said. “We need the testing to protect public health and safety, and to help us determine priorities for conservation.”

Berent Froiland reported on the Tainter Creek Watershed Council program to the committee.

“We’re pretty excited about the program, and very interested to see what kind of water we’re drinking,” Froiland said. “We weren’t sure we’d get enough interest to do 40 tests, but actually we got 43 requests and more are expressing interest.”

Froiland went on to explain that the advantage of working with the UW-Stevens Point Center for Watershed Science and Education is that the price for their services is a great value, and they follow up on the testing with a presentation to the community about the general test results. All individual test results are completely confidential to the landowner.

“We’re hoping that what we find out is that we have good water,” Grant Rudrud said.

The committee moved to send the request for well water testing funds forward to the finance committee.

Limited term positions

Another request for expenditure of Ho-Chunk funds was for two limited term positions. The request was proposed by the Land Conservation Department, in concert with the Zoning, Highway and Emergency Management Departments.

The funds would be used to create two limited term positions for the purpose of mapping damages from past flooding events, and making project plans for future installation of conservation practices.

“In order to take advantage of funding opportunities, we need detailed data about where the damages occurred, attached to parcel-based information,” Wojahn explained. “We could combine the two proposed positions into one, but I don’t think that would be wise.”

Wojahn went on to point out the example where the Town of Shelby had spread $250,000 worth of gravel just the week before the late August storm, only to have it all washed away. Now they are replacing that gravel and paying for it twice.

“This is a great example of the kinds of costs that these positions would help to prevent in the future,” Wojahn said. “The positions would easily pay for themselves by avoiding repeated repair of the same infrastructure.”

Tainter Creek Watershed Council farmers Grant Rudrud, Jeff Ostrem and Berent Froiland attended the meeting to represent the watershed council, speak in support of creation of the two positions, and deliver a petition signed by members of the group.

“My grandpa used to grow tobacco where the Jersey Valley parking lot is now, and we never used to see so much water running off the hills,” Rudrud observed. “And the county farm where I used to work as a manager is now all paved over with asphalt and cement too. My grandpa farmed using terraces and strip crops, and those conservation practices helped to fix a lot of problems. There’s less erosion now, but there’s sure a lot of water running off. We need to figure out where all this water is coming from, and I don’t think it’s wise to fix the dams if they’re just going to break again.”

Berent Froiland from the Tainter Creek Watershed Council, presented the group’s petition, and said, “the members of our group are especially interested in the position to map past damages. We kind of got our start after the September 2016 floods which did a lot of damage in the Tainter Creek Watershed.”

Valley Stewardship Network (VSN) Executive Director Shelly Brenneman stated that she thinks it is important to fund both of the two distinct positions, and that VSN would match the $75,000 request to pay for a year of the project design position, and provide in-kind matching services for the mapping position.

“We have an in-house GIS specialist who could assist with the mapping project, and we can also cover the cost of the prairie installation from an existing grant,” Brenneman said. “We would, however, prefer to see the position housed with the county.”

After more discussion, the committee voted unanimously to forward the request to the Vernon County Board’s Finance Committee.

The Finance Committee of the Vernon County Board will meet at 9:30 a.m. on Thursday, Oct. 18 in the County Board Room at the Courthouse in Viroqua.
Hearings set for Badger Hollow Wind Farm permit
Madison June 17, Linden June 24
Badger Hollow map
The proposed Badger Hollow Wind Farm would be near Livingston.
By Steve Prestegard
Published: May 22, 2025, 2:40 PM

The developers of the proposed Badger Hollow Wind Farm near Livingston will argue their case for approval from the state Public Service Commission later this year.

The hearings on Badger Hollow’s Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity application will be held in Madison June 17 and in Linden June 24.

The proposed 118-megawatt wind farm to be built by Invenergy of Chicago would feature 19 wind turbines 574 to 656 feet tall in the Grant County towns of Clifton and Wingville and the Iowa County towns of Eden, Linden and Mifflin, connected by a 345,000-volt tie line, with an additional collector station.

The turbines would be located in a jagged line from east of Cobb to south of Cobb to the American Transmission Co. Hill Valley substation in Montfort, then south past Livingston to northeast of Rewey. The Hill Valley substation is part of the Cardinal–Hickory Creek power transmission line project.

The PSC sent a letter April 11 saying that PSC and state Department of Natural Resources found in a joint environmental review that “no significant impacts on the human or natural environment are likely to occur because of the construction or operation of this project.”

The PSC/DNR determination means the agencies will not do an Environmental Impact Statement, a more detailed environmental review.

The PSC letter said the turbines would produce no more than 44 decibels f sound, below the PSC noise standards of 50 decibels during the day and 45 decibels at night.

The PSC letter said blade flicker, which “some individuals may feel extremely affected while others experience little distraction,” would be expected for 29 hours 47 minutes per year. The letter says the developer is “willing to evaluate options such as vegetative buffers, blinds, and/or turbine curtailment to reduce shadow flicker” if mitigation is needed, including for “non-participating residences or occupied community buildings that receive more than 20 hours of shadow flicker per year.”

The letter said the project is “not expected to have a significant impact on rare species during the construction or operational phase,” including on bats and birds.

The PSC letter said the project would “affect the aesthetics of the area for as long as it is in operation which may be looked at favorably or unfavorably depending on the viewer.”

The deadline for public comment on the environmental review was May 2. One person who commented was Gina Metelica of Platteville, who said the Driftless Region and its sensitive karst geology should not “become a Sacrifice Zone.”

Metelica said in testimony to the PSC that wind farm projects were put on hold in two other areas with karst geology — the Timberwolf Wind Project in Fillmore County, Minn., which was supposed to become operational in 2023, and the Republic Wind Farm in Ohio, which was canceled after 27 of 47 wind turbines were to be located on “areas exhibiting karst features.”

Metelica said the vibrations from wind turbines in karst areas “can accelerate the collapse of sinkholes and impact ground water flow. Construction activities such as driving piles for turbine foundations can generate higher vibration levels which can impact groundwater flow to surrounding wells or the water quality,” including in areas with abandoned lead and zinc mines.

The PSC’s Madison hearing on Badger Hollow will be held in the Hill Farm State Office Building, 4822 Madison Yards Way, Tuesday, June 17 at 10 a.m.

The PSC then will hold a public hearing at the Village of Linden Community Building, 460 Main St., Tuesday, June 24 at 2 and 6 p.m.

Both meetings will be able to be viewed on Zoom at https://us02web.zoom.us/my/pschearings. The meeting will also be shown at www.youtube.com/@PSCWI-Hearings. Those who can’t access the internet will be able to access the meeting audio by calling 312-626-6799 and entering meeting ID 809-513-2930.

The PSC meeting notice says that due to “technical limitations at the Linden hearing location” Zoom may not be able to be used. A notice on Zoom in Linden will be posted at https://apps.psc.wi.gov/apps/Calendar/External/HearingDetails/55.

Comments may also be written by June 26 at https://apps.psc.wi.gov/pages/publicCommentCase.htm?util=9827&case=CF&num=100. or mailed to Docket 9827-CE-100 Comments, Public Service Commission, P.O. Box 7854, Madison, WI 53707-7854.

The proposed Badger Hollow Wind Farm is east of Red Barn, built by Allete Clean Energy of Duluth, Minn., which has 28 turbines producing 92 megawatts. The wind farm is 90 percent owned by Wisconsin Public Service Corp. of Green Bay and 10 percent owned by Madison Gas & Electric.

Red Barn, which began operation in 2023, has been the source of complaints including health effects. The blade of a Red Barn turbine separated from its hub on Annaton Road west of Livingston last September. Two other Red Barn turbines have flaws in blades.

The Badger Hollow project is one of four proposed for this area.

The largest proposed area wind farm is Pattern Energy’s Uplands Wind project, with a map submitted to the Federal Aviation Administration in April that showed 181 possible locations for wind turbines in the 600-megawatt $1 billion project. According to the FAA map three wind turbine locations are immediately west of the Platte Mound and two are south of the Mound between Lafayette County B and U.S. 151. Other locations are near Belmont Mound State Park.

Allete proposed building the Whitetail Wind project in the Town of Clifton, which would install 21 2- to 4.2-megawatt wind turbines to generate 70 megawatts of power east of Red Barn. However, Allete sold the project to Invenergy, the builder of the Badger Hollow Solar Farm east of Montfort, which proposing building the Badger Hollow Wind Farm near the solar project.

Allete’s PSC application lists the towers as 410 to 650 feet tall from ground to the tip of the top blade, with rotor diameter of up to 492 feet. The application said Whitetail Wind is negotiating with a wind turbine supplier “and will confirm the final number and model(s) of turbines” for the project when negotiations conclude.

Allete’s Whitetail Wind application said it has “formal leases/easements” with landowners for more than 5,000 acres in the 12,793-acre project site.

Seven turbines are slated to be located on Wisconsin 80, five on Rock Church Road, four on Grant County E, two on Old 80 Road, one on New California Road, one on Hickory Grove, and one off Hopewell Road, according to the application. Two meteorological towers also would be built on four locations — two off County E, one north of Crow Branch Lane and one west of 80 just south of the north Livingston village limits.

Whitetail Wind does not require a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity from the PSC because the project is smaller than 100 megawatts, according to the application.

Liberty Utilities, a subsidiary of a Canadian utility, is proposing a 30- to 40-turbine project, with turbines up to 656 feet tall, to generate 200 megawatts of electricity in western Grant County. The proposed project area is south of U.S. 18 west of Wisconsin 133 and along Wisconsin 35/133 and generally west of Grant County J.