Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Groundwater Mapping topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
State geologic survey seeks county support for two‑year groundwater mapping project; CIP request anticipated
Summary
The Wisconsin Geological and Natural History Survey proposed a two‑year groundwater mapping project for Sawyer County that would produce water‑table, surficial geology and groundwater susceptibility maps; the presenter recommended the project be included in the county CIP for 2026.
A hydrogeologist from the Wisconsin Geological and Natural History Survey told the Sawyer County Land, Water and Forest Resources Committee that a two‑year groundwater mapping project would produce water‑table, depth‑to‑water, surficial geology, recharge and groundwater‑susceptibility maps for the county and recommended adding the project as a CIP request for 2026.
Amy Wiersma said groundwater provides 100% of local drinking water in Sawyer County and that mapping helps answer where groundwater flows, where it sits near the surface and where groundwater is most vulnerable to contamination. She presented Burnett County as a recent example and said Burnett paid about $250,000 for an extensive suite of products; because the state already plans surficial geology mapping, Sawyer County’s two‑year cost to the county could be roughly $101,000 to $106,000 if the county must cover geolocation or GIS support.
Wiersma outlined components: geolocation/verification of well records, a water‑table map, depth‑to‑water, surficial geology, groundwater recharge and depth‑to‑bedrock, all feeding a final groundwater susceptibility map. She said LCO tribal staff have already started geolocating wells on the reservation and that those efforts would be incorporated.
Committee members asked whether maps would be updated over time, what spatial resolution would be (Wiersma said map scale would be county scale, about 1:100,000, with susceptibility rasters at roughly 30‑meter resolution), and how products would be delivered (GIS layers, printable maps, and a technical report). The county administrator indicated the project would likely be funded from CIP (outside the levy). Wiersma said a final publication and GIS deliverables would be provided and suggested county uses for well siting, landfill or municipal wellhead protection, and tourism/rooming house water planning.
The presentation was informational; Wiersma asked that the committee consider the CIP request during budget deliberations.
