Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Environmental Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Lake groups urge limits on clear cutting in access/viewing corridors; committee hears litigation concerns
Summary
Oneida County lake‑group representatives proposed ordinance language to limit clear cutting in access and viewing corridors (recommendation: no more than 50% removal of trees >6" diameter, with site flexibility). County staff and committee members discussed viability and potential litigation risk; staff suggested an informational report to the County Board.
Representatives of lake groups and county advocates asked the committee April 13 to consider language restricting clear cutting in access and viewing corridors along shorelines.
Ted Rulseh summarized the proposal from the Oneida County Lakes and Rivers Association and Oneida County Clean Waters Action, saying the recommended language would "disallow clear cutting in the access and viewing corridors" by limiting removal to no more than 50% of trees larger than six‑inch diameter, while allowing Planning & Zoning staff site‑specific flexibility. Rulseh said the intent is to have language ready to explain at the Planning & Zoning counter to educate landowners and contractors.
Tom Wiensch noted that Sawyer, Vilas and Marinette counties already have DNR‑approved clear‑cutting restrictions, indicating the approach is viable. Robb Jensen cautioned that if the county is challenged, defending an ordinance could tie up staff and potentially lead to litigation, though he agreed that publishing guidance and counter language could be useful.
Why it matters: Restrictions on clear cutting in shoreland corridors affect shoreline vegetation, habitat and viewshed management and may change how property owners and contractors are advised at the Planning & Zoning counter.
Next steps: Committee suggested LWCD submit a non‑action informational report to the County Board after the election of the Board chair to provide greater depth on the topic; no ordinance vote or formal action was taken at this meeting.
