DOCSLIB.ORG

The Wisconsin and Minnesota State Line Along the St. Louis River: Lake Superior to the State Line Meridian

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Wisconsin and Minnesota State Line Along the St. Louis River: Lake Superior to the State Line Meridian The Wisconsin and Minnesota State Line along the St. Louis River: Lake Superior to the State Line Meridian. The 1852 General Land Office “State Line Survey.” A Supreme Court Judicial Line Decided Oct. 1921. Report of Retracement of the State Line: January, 2018. Anthony Lueck, Land Surveyor License in Minnesota and Wisconsin Lives in Duluth, Minnesota Work Experience: U.S. Forest Service Engineers-Engineering Technician St. Louis County Surveyors Office-Survey Technician Krech-Ojard and Associates Consulng Engineer-Land Surveyor North Country Land Surveying-Land Surveyor USGS Map showing Minnesota-Wisconsin Boundary along the St. Louis River running southwesterly of St. Louis Bay & Superior Bay west of Lake Superior. The Minnesota and Wisconsin Boundary Line Surveys -1852 GLO Survey along St. Louis River: Lake Superior Entry [mouth] of the St. Louis River to the State Line in Township 48 North Range 15 West by the General Land Office Survey by U.S. Deputy Surveyor George R. Stuntz directed by Congress. -1861 Lake Survey Maps: The Twin Ports of Lake Superior Harbor and St. Louis River maps and charts from the Corps of the Topographical Engineers. -1916 to 1918 Hearings: 1916 Minnesota files complaint. 1917 Tesmony hearings. 1918 Briefs filed by Minnesota & Wisconsin to the Supreme Court for State Line. -1919 & 1920 U.S. Supreme Court on Boundary Dispute: September 1919 the Supreme Court heard the case. March 1920 Decree for the Boundary. October 1920 a Survey Commission appointed to survey the State Line. -1921 Commissioners Survey: Descripon of the Supreme Court surveyed along the St. Louis River between the States of Minnesota and Wisconsin. -A Present (2018) Day Review of 1921 Monuments and State Center Line Survey. Map of Northern Wisconsin borders with Michigan and Minnesota from 1850. DATES LEADING TO THE STATE LINE SURVEYS DURING EARLY SETTLEMENT AND COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE TWIN PORTS OF NORTHERN MINNESOTA AND WISCONSIN. • AUGUST 6, 1846: WISCONSIN ENABLING ACT BY CONGRESS • MAY 29, 1848: WISCONSIN STATEHOOD-30th State in the Union • MARCH 3, 1849: MINNESOTA TERRITORY CREATED BY CONGRESS • OCTOBER 14 –NOV. 10, 1852: G.L.O. WISCONSIN STATE LINE SURVEY • FEBRUARY 26, 1858: MINNESOTA ENABLING ACT BY CONGRESS • MAY 11, 1858: MINNESOTA STATEHOOD-32nd State in the Union • ERA 1861: THE LAKE SURVEY BY THE CORPS OF TOPOGRAPHICAL ENGINEERS • 1916-1920: MINNESOTA VS WISCONSIN STATE LINE COURT TESTIMONY • 1920-1921:SURVEY COMMISSION ADJUDICATED STATE BOUNDARY LINE • 1936-SUPREME COURT GEODETIC POINTS FOR CENTER OF LAKE SUPERIOR PART 4: Where was the main Boundary Line of dispute? • That part lying along the St. Louis River in what is called St. Louis Bay on local maps and charts; that part lying West of what is known as Grassy Point, being known as Upper St. Louis Bay, extending westerly to Big Island; and that part lying East of what is known as Grassy Point, being known as Lower St. Louis Bay, extending easterly to Superior Bay between Connor’s Point and Rice’s Point. • “There is a dispute between the State of Minnesota and the State of Wisconsin as to what comprises the boundary line between said States upon Upper St. Louis Bay and Lower St. Louis Bay; the State of Minnesota being to the North of said bays, and the State of Wisconsin being to the South of said bays,…” Google Earth photo showing Minnesota-Wisconsin State Line from USGS data. Where was the Center of River in St. Louis Bay? Was there a Main Channel? Minnesota and Wisconsin each had there own interpretaon for the State Line along the St. Louis River based on “Descrip_ons” enacted by the Acts of Congress. • Minnesota’s premise simplified descripon of the State Line; “.. the Stuntz Line..north of St. Croix River,.. unl the same intersects the St. Louis River; thence down said river to and through Lake Superior on the boundary line of Wisconsin . ” The line was to follow between the shore lines of each State and centered between said shore lines for purposes of equity in navigaon and commerce. Also, that the mouth of the St. Louis River should be located near the Big Island on the westerly side of Upper St. Louis Bay based upon the water elevaon with Lake Superior, etc. and not at the mouth of the river as mapped at the Superior Entry. • Wisconsin’s premise was that the line was clearly established from the Superior Entry, being the mouth of the St. Louis River, and “up the main channel of the St. Louis River to . to the first rapids . Nicollet’s map, thence due South to the main branch of the river St. Croix . .” The State Line was Surveyed by George Stuntz, U.S. Deputy Surveyor & mapped by the General Land Office plats. That there was and is a “main channel” through the Bay of St. Louis nearer the Minnesota side and the Bay is part of the river. Also, the main channels were mapped out for and along exisng navigaon areas by the Lake Survey Corps of Topographical Engineers. The State Line presump_on was to the “center” of the St. Louis River. Wisconsin said the mouth of the St. Louis River was always at the entry to Lake Superior & that Superior Bay was part of the River. Minnesota argued that the water of Lake Superior extended to Big Island & that was the mouth of the St. Louis River by scienfic facts. U.S. Supreme Court Opinion was decided March 8, 1920 -The Court addressed issue “center of bay” & “sinuous course.” -The Court addressed the issue of the “mouth of river.” -Both pares accept the 1861 Meade Chart as an accurate map, -1846 to 1890 era; depths of only 8’ were needed for naviga_on, -1893; C.O.E. dredging did set channel lines for shipping. -Condions of Bays important in 1846 for State Line prior to 1890. -Waters from Big Island to Lake Superior were broad sheets of water. -Court approved doctrine of Thalweg “naviga_on” for State Line. -a DECREE: 1] 1846 condions 2] Meade Chart 3] Navigaon Channel to Fishermans Island 4] Minnesota Exhibit 1: A, B, C 5] NW of Big Island Part of Minnesota Exhibit 1 Fisherman Island Channel Lines: Minnesota argued that the State Line was not the “sinuous” course. The Supreme Court Opinion: Decree for State Boundary described… • Equality between States must be preserved with State Line. • Consideraon of condion in 1846; which the work of 1861 Meade Chart verifies. • Superior Bay to St. Louis Bay; through the middle of Lower St. Louis Bay to deep channel lying south of Grassy Point; • Thence westerly along most direct course in water not less than 8’ deep, to the east side of Fisherman’s Island; along red trace “A, B, C,” on Mn. Exh. No. 1 to the deep channel west of bar;… thence N & W of Big Island… The 1846 Bayfield Map of St. Louis River Estuary & Naviga_on Part of Minnesota Exhibit 1 Fisherman Island Channel Lines: Minnesota argued State Line to go through center of the River or Bay. Corps of Engineers 1887 Annual Report Map of Harbor: The Court direcons were to use this map as a guide for the decided line locaon. Corps of Engineers 1891 Annual Report Map of Harbor: Once past Grassy Point head toward…Fishermans Island… and then to Big Island… main navigaon channel. PART 5 The 1921 Survey Commission: …for the Survey of the State Boundary Line in conformance with the U.S. Supreme Court decree. Commissioners appointed under decree of the Court rendered October 11, 1920, “to run, locate and designate the boundary line between the State of Minnesota and the State of Wisconsin, in and through lower St. Louis Bay, upper St. Louis Bay and the St. Louis River, from upper St. Louis Bay to the “Falls” in the said River,” have the honor to submit the following report, with accompanying maps, which maps are marked… Map Title Exhibit No. 1: …1921 State Boundary Line & Tracing of 1861 Meade Lake Survey Map Exhibit No. 1: 1921 Survey Commissioner’s “Tracing Map” for the State Line Survey. The “main” river channel was traced & triangulaon points from 1861. ..”boundary line must be ascertained…situaon exisng in 1846, [the river and bays] accurately described by the Meade Chart”.. • The Meade Chart was too small for use in transferring data to and from for line work. • The Meade Map, Wisconsin’s Exhibit was a photographic copy, with too many scaling issues from the process of producon. • A tracing of the original Meade Map was made at the U.S. Lake Survey office in Detroit, Michigan. • The Points for Soundings and Triangulaon Monuments were carefully transferred. • “An accurate copy of this tracing, showing in addion the boundary line, as fixed on said map by the Commission, is filed herewith as Exhibit No. 1.” • Original Meade map triangles shown in red. Triangulaon Points: 1861 Meade map Tracing and Coordinate Values. • Meade map triangulaon points shown in red. • U.S. Lake Survey rectangular coordinates are referenced to Minnesota Point North Base. • A copy of the coordinates was obtained from the records of the U.S. Lake Survey. • The Lake Survey coordinates from the original Meade map are given in Table No. 1 of Report. • The Meade triangulaon points have not been in existence for some years since the 1861 era. • The Corp of Engineers has established new triangulaon points and referred the same by rectangular coordinates to Minnesota Point North Base and are Table No. 2 of this Report. • With plaed triangulaon points the map data could transferred to the ground for field work. Office Procedure to follow the Court Decree • “From a point midway between Rice’s Point and Connor’s Point, through the middle of Lower St.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 2012 St. Louis River Summit Proceedings
    St. Louis River Estuary Science Summit 2012 March 8 & 9 University of Wisconsin - Superior Yellowjacket Union St. Louis River Estuary Summit (March 2012) Page 2 Acknowledgments Thanks are owed to many people and organizations for support of this very grass-roots event. Special thanks to the following organizations who provided funding and in-kind contributions: Lake Superior National Estuarine Research Reserve University of Wisconsin Extension University of Wisconsin – Superior Short Elliott Hendrickson, Inc. Barr Engineering Company US Environmental Protection Agency – Mid-Continent Ecology Division Enbridge Engineering Minnesota’s Lake Superior Coastal Program Wisconsin Coastal Management Program Wisconsin Sea Grant West Wisconsin Land Trust Limnotech Minnesota Sea Grant Organizing committee: Shon Schooler, Lake Superior NERR Sarah Johnson, Northland College John Jereczek, MN DNR Nick Danz, UW Superior Pat Collins, US FWS David Bolgrien, US EPA Rick Gitar, Fond du Lac Reservation Editors: Shon Schooler, Seth Bliss, Ralph Garono, and Patrick Collins Published by The Lake Superior National Estuarine Research Reserve, Superior, WI LSNERR Document number: 2012-R-1002 Cover photo by Sue OHalloran Interior Photos by Michel Anderson (www.singingcanoe.smugmug.com) St. Louis River Estuary Summit (March 2012) Page 3 Contents Introduction..................................................................................................................................6 Abstracts for Oral Presentations ..................................................................................................7
    [Show full text]
  • Lake Superior Lakewide Action and Management Plan (LAMP) 2015-2019
    Lake Superior Lakewide Action and Management Plan 2015 - 2019 The Lake Superior Partnership September 2016 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This document was made possible by the many individuals and organizations working to restore and protect the Lake Superior ecosystem. The document builds upon many relevant local, tribal, state provincial, national and binational plans. Special thanks to all those involved in preparing A Biodiversity Conservation Strategy for Lake Superior (LSBP, 2015); to the Great Lakes Fishery Commission’s Lake Superior Technical Committee; to the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement Lakewide Management Annex (Annex 2) Subcommittee; to the numerous stakeholder groups that helped to refine the document through their review and comments at various stages of development; and to all the individuals of the Lake Superior Partnership who contributed to the LAMP’s development and who will be collaborating during the implementation of this plan. This document was prepared by the Lake Superior Lakewide Action and Management Plan Writing Team, co-chaired by Rob Hyde of Environment and Climate Change Canada (formerly Environment Canada) and Liz LaPlante of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Writing Team members included: Jen Ballinger (GLIFWC), Marilee Chase (MNRF), Faith Fitzpatrick (USGS), John Jereczek (MNDNR), Ann McCammon-Soltis (GLIFWC), Michelle McChristie (MOECC), Henry Quinlan (USFWS), Mike Ripley (CORA), Lisa Sealock (ECCC), Stephanie Swart (MDEQ), Brent Schleck (NOAA), Amy Thomas (Battelle), Michele Wheeler (WDNR) and Laurie
    [Show full text]
  • Hawk Migration Over the Western Tip of Lake Superior1
    HAWK MIGRATION OVER THE WESTERN TIP OF LAKE SUPERIOR1 P. B. HOFSLUND INCE 1951, members of the Duluth Bird Club and the Minnesota Ornithol- S ogists ’ Union have spent slightly more than 922 hours of 201 days in counting the hawks that pass over the city of Duluth during the fall migration. In this time we have tallied 159,397 individuals, an average of 172+ hawks per hour of observation. The pattern of flight can be discerned to some extent by studying Tables 1 and 2. The 93,187 Broad-winged Hawks (Buteo platypterus) and 33,475 Sharp-shinned Hawks (Accipiter striatus) make up nearly 80 per cent of the count (actually they probably make up over 80 per cent, as the 16,852 un- identified hawks more than likely contain a great percentage of these two species). The relative position of the other 12 regular species perhaps does not express accurately the true picture of the flight. There is a bias due to an uneven distribution of observation periods through the three main months of the flight. Prior to 1961, only 28 days were given to the period following the end of the big Broadwing flights in September. Consequently, we have missed, in most years, the peak Red-tailed Hawk (Buteo jamaicemis) , Rough-legged Hawk (B. Zagopus), and Goshawk (Accipiter gent&s) flights. Prior to 1961, only 80 Goshawks were tallied; since 1961, 1,117 have graced our tally sheets. It was not at all unusual in 1963 to count more Goshawks in a single observation period than we had tallied as a total during the first 10 years of observation.
    [Show full text]
  • Lighthouses – Clippings
    GREAT LAKES MARINE COLLECTION MILWAUKEE PUBLIC LIBRARY/WISCONSIN MARINE HISTORICAL SOCIETY MARINE SUBJECT FILES LIGHTHOUSE CLIPPINGS Current as of November 7, 2018 LIGHTHOUSE NAME – STATE - LAKE – FILE LOCATION Algoma Pierhead Light – Wisconsin – Lake Michigan - Algoma Alpena Light – Michigan – Lake Huron - Alpena Apostle Islands Lights – Wisconsin – Lake Superior - Apostle Islands Ashland Harbor Breakwater Light – Wisconsin – Lake Superior - Ashland Ashtabula Harbor Light – Ohio – Lake Erie - Ashtabula Badgeley Island – Ontario – Georgian Bay, Lake Huron – Badgeley Island Bailey’s Harbor Light – Wisconsin – Lake Michigan – Bailey’s Harbor, Door County Bailey’s Harbor Range Lights – Wisconsin – Lake Michigan – Bailey’s Harbor, Door County Bala Light – Ontario – Lake Muskoka – Muskoka Lakes Bar Point Shoal Light – Michigan – Lake Erie – Detroit River Baraga (Escanaba) (Sand Point) Light – Michigan – Lake Michigan – Sand Point Barber’s Point Light (Old) – New York – Lake Champlain – Barber’s Point Barcelona Light – New York – Lake Erie – Barcelona Lighthouse Battle Island Lightstation – Ontario – Lake Superior – Battle Island Light Beaver Head Light – Michigan – Lake Michigan – Beaver Island Beaver Island Harbor Light – Michigan – Lake Michigan – St. James (Beaver Island Harbor) Belle Isle Lighthouse – Michigan – Lake St. Clair – Belle Isle Bellevue Park Old Range Light – Michigan/Ontario – St. Mary’s River – Bellevue Park Bete Grise Light – Michigan – Lake Superior – Mendota (Bete Grise) Bete Grise Bay Light – Michigan – Lake Superior
    [Show full text]
  • Water-Resources Investigations in Wisconsin, 2004
    Water-Resources Investigations in Wisconsin, 2004 Open-File Report 2004–1403 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations in Wisconsin, 2004 Compiled by Jennifer L. Bruce, Michelle M. Greenwood, and Susan Z. Jones Open-File Report 2004–1403 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Department of the Interior Gale A. Norton, Secretary U.S. Geological Survey Charles G. Groat, Director U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2004 For sale by U.S. Geological Survey, Information Services Box 25286, Denver Federal Center Denver, CO 80225 For more information about the USGS and its products: Telephone: 1-888-ASK-USGS World Wide Web: http://www.usgs.gov/ Any use of trade, product, or firm names in this publication is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. Contents iii Contents Basic Mission and Projects ...................................................................................................................vii Wisconsin District Organizational Chart ...............................................................................................ix Cooperators ................................................................................................................................................x Summary of Hydrologic Conditions .......................................................................................................xi Surface-Water and Sediment Studies Team ...........................................................................................1
    [Show full text]
  • WISCONSIN POINT TRAIL MAP CHIPPEWA BURIAL SITE Near the End of the Point Is the Sign Announcing the Chippewa Burial Site And
    CHIPPEWA BURIAL SITE THE LIGHT HOUSE WISCONSIN POINT TRAIL MAP Near the end of the point is the sign Wisconsin Point Light House sits at the announcing the Chippewa burial site entrance to Superior Harbor on a pier jutting and the stone marker. The marker from the end of a three-mile spit of land, reads: “Here was the burial ground of which protects the ore docks and the harbor. the Fond du Lac Band of the Chip- The peninsula became city park space except pewa People dating from the 17th for the tip where the lighthouse and Army century. It was removed in 1919 to St Corps buildings were constructed. Francis Cemetery, Superior.” Wisconsin Point, along with Minnesota Point, report- edly make up the largest freshwater sandbar in the world. 203 acres with 2 3/4 miles of beach Bird watching, hiking, beach use, and duck hunting Watchable Wildlife area Historical marker for a sacred Chippewa bur- ial ground Superior entry lighthouse Important Items to Note Motor vehicle traffic and parking is prohib- ited between the hours of 11:00 p.m. and 4:00 a.m. on Wisconsin Point Road, including any parking areas, beyond Lot #1, except during the spring smelt run season as defined by the Parks and Recreation Department The burial site is covered with items left Glass beverage containers are prohibited by visitors through the years, such as Fires may not be started closer than ten (10) beads and feathers, stuffed animals, feet from the nearest plant life walking sticks, coins, and tobacco. Camping is not allowed between the hours of 10:30 p.m.
    [Show full text]
  • St. Louis and Lower Nemadji River Watershed
    Wisconsin St. Louis and Lower Nemadji Watersheds River Watershed 2010 Water Quality Management Plan Update Lake Superior Basin, Wisconsin August, 2010 The t.S Louis River, the largest U.S. tributary to Lake Superior, drains 3,634 square miles, entering the southwestern corner of the lake between Duluth, Minnesota and Superior, Wisconsin. The river flows 179 miles through three distinct areas: coarse soils, glacial till and outwash deposits at its headwaters; a deep, narrow gorge at Jay Cooke State Park in Minnesota; and red clay deposits in its lower reaches. As the St. Louis River approaches Duluth and Superior, the river takes on the characteristics of a 12,000 Contents acre freshwater estuary. The upper estuary has some Watershed Details 1 wilderness-like areas, while the lower estuary is character- Population and Land Use . 1 ized by urban development, an industrial harbor, and Ecological Landscapes . 3 a major port. The lower estuary includes St. Louis Bay, Other Details . 3 Map 1: St Louis River and Lower Nemadji Superior Bay, Allouez Bay, Kimball’s Bay, Pokegama Bay, River Watershed Invasive Species . 3 Howard’s Bay, and the lower Nemadji River. Historical Note . 4 Watershed Details Watershed Condition 4 Priority Issues . 4 Water Quality Goals . 4 Population and Land Use Overall Condition . 4 The watershed is dominated by Point and Nonpoint Sources . 5 forests (65%), agriculture (9%), Fish Consumption Advice . 5 followed closely by open water River and Stream Condition . 5 and open space (8%) (Figure 1). Lakes and Embayments . 16 Wetlands . 17 In 1987, the International Joint Waters of Note: . .22 Commission, an advisory com- mission on U.S-Canadian border Watershed Actions 23 Figure 1: Land Use in the St Louis and Lower Nemadji River Partnership Activities .
    [Show full text]
  • STATE-REGION7 FUTURE Great Lakes Region
    STATE-REGION7 FUTURE -'adeavailable under NASA sponsorWip Great Lakes Region in the interc-st of early and wide dis. sominiation of Earth Resources Survey - O Program inforration and without liability for any use m-Ue thereof." ft.14 /, a / 7 1'975 NationalWater Assessment ' E91O3) STAT' -REGIZONAI ]FUTU]RE GR /- N79-30594 ,LAKES REGION: IBM 1975 NIAfIONaL WATEE ,A.SESSHENIT (Great Liakes Basin Comm'ission) , /­ / / All / Juy 97 iE 1023\t6 •TT-EII c- # - I ~ . 7 NataJaonal Ws STATE-REGIONJ FUTURE Made available under NASA sponsorWip Great Lakes Region Ithe intercst of early and wide dis. ,minat,on of Earth Resources Survey if. - 1 ­ rograril Iqfcrtion and without liability I rany use m-Ude thereof." 4 ~~44of ,~~~ I Irlrf Ii :15 7' 1975 National Water Assessment '(E7~9jI0233) STAT' -REGIONA1 , < PUTU1E GRtEAT t r N79_30594/ LAKES REGION: THI 1975 11fICNAL flER 'ASSESSMENT (Great,ftakes Basin Commission) 119 p A~C A09/MP A01 / ) /"- C\sc/8l / Inclas - /fl" 'G3/43 00233, / / 1 I \ / iiI, I I I II I - - \fj i 1 \ Ii STATE-REGIONAL FUTURE GREAT LAKES REGION 1975 National Water Assessment Great Lakes Basin Commission July 1976 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page No. INTRODUCTION......................... 1 REGIONAL GOALS ........... ............... .......... 7 LAKE SUPERIOR REGIONAL GOALS . ................. 8 LAKE MICHIGAN REGIONAL GOALS ....... .................... 15 LAKE HURON REGIONAL GOALS ........ ...................... 22 LAKE ERIE REGIONAL GOALS . .............. 25 LAKE ONTARIO REGIONAL GOALS ...... 32 SOCIO-ECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS........ ..................... 41 LAKE SUPERIOR REGION - ASA 01 ..... .. ..... 43 NORTHWESTERN LAKE MICHIGAN REGION - ASA 02 .... ........... 47 SOUTHWESTERN LAKE MICHIGAN REGION - ASA 03 . 47 EASTERN LAKE MICHIGAN REGION - ASA 04..... ........ .. 47 LAKE HURON REGION - ASA 05 .
    [Show full text]
  • Lake Superior Streams
    EPA-905/9-79-004 January 1979 RED CLAY TURBIDITY AND ITS TRANSPORT IN LAKE SUPERIOR by Michael Sydor Richard T. Clapper Gordon J. Oman Kirby R. Stortz Physics Department University of Minnesota, Duluth Duluth, Minnesota 55812 E.P.A. Grant No. R005175-01 Project Officer Anthony G. Kizlauskas U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region V Great Lakes National Program Office Chicago, Illinois 60605 GREAT LAKES NATIONAL PROGRAM OFFICE U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY REGION V CHICAGO, ILLINOIS 60605 DISCLAIMER This report has been reviewed by the Great Lakes National Program Office, Region V, -U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and approved for publication. Approval does not signify that the contents necessarily reflect the views and policies of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, nor doesmentionof trade names constitute endorsement or recommendation for use. ii FOREWORD The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) was created because of increasing public and governmental concern about the dangers of pollution to the health and welfare of the American people. Noxious air, foul water, and spoiled land are tragic testimony to the deterioration of our natural envi­ ronment. The Great Lakes National Program Office (GLNPO) of the U.S. EPA was established in Region V, Chicago, to provide a specific focus on the water quality concerns of the Great Lakes. GLNPO provides funding and personnel support to the International Joint Commission activities under the U.S.­ Canada Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement. Several water quality studies have been funded to support the Upper Lakes Reference Group (ULRG) under the Agreement to address specific objec­ tives related to pollution in the Upper Lakes (Lake Superior and Lake Huron).
    [Show full text]
  • St. Louis River Restoration Initiative
    he St. Louis River is among 43 Great Lakes “Areas THE Federal funding from the Great Lakes Restoration Tof Concern” listed through the Great Lakes Water Initiative, and new Minnesota sales tax funds give us Quality Agreement between the U.S. and Canada in unprecedented opportunities to proceed with clean-up the 1980s. These “Areas of Concern” share a history S T. LOUI S RIVER and restoration of the St. Louis River Estuary & Harbor. of past industrial uses when dumping waste on land and water was common place. These past practices left Restoration Initiative For more information on the St. Louis River Remedial innesota and Wisconsin have worked Action Plan, the Lower St. Louis River Habitat Plan Mtogether for over 20 years to improve the St. “legacy” pollutants in bottom sediment, which degraded and goals for the St. Louis River see: Louis River. Our strong partnerships have made great habitat for fish and wildlife, and contributed to human www.stlouisriver.org progress to clean up, restore, and protect our water. health risks. The Water Quality Agreement called upon However, important clean-up projects still need to be states, provinces, and the federal governments to clean completed. With these new funding sources, we can up these areas. Sustained funding, however, has not been This brochure was developed by: make major progress to restore and protect the value available to fully realize this goal. In 1992, the states of Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources of our St. Louis River, estuary, and harbor. Minnesota and Wisconsin developed a Remedial Action Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Plan for the St.
    [Show full text]
  • Park Point Small Area Plan Are Contained in Appendix a 2 Park Point Small Area Plan TABLE of CONTENTS
    P P OINT ARK SMALL AREA PLAN ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Mayor City Planning Division Staff Don Ness Keith Hamre, Director John Judd, Senior Planner City Council John Kelley, Planner II Zack Filipovich Steven Robertson, AICP, Senior Planner Jay Fosle Kyle Deming, Planner II Sharla Gardner Jenn Reed Moses, AICP, Planner II Howie Hanson Jennifer Julsrud Small Area Plan Committee Linda Krug Sharla Gardner, City Council Emily Larson Heather Rand, City Planning Commission Barb Russ Thomas Beery, City Parks and Recreation Commission Joel Sipress John Goldfine, Business Representative Jan Karon, Resident Planning Commission Sally Raushenfels, Resident Marc Beeman Dawn Buck, Resident Terry Guggenbuehl Deb Kellner, Resident Janet Kennedy Kinnan Stauber, Resident Tim Meyer Garner Moffat Heather Rand Luke Sydow Michael Schraepfer Zandra Zwiebel City Council Resolutions for the Park Point Small Area Plan are contained in Appendix A 2 Park Point Small Area Plan TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary ...................................................................................................................................... 4 Assessment ................................................................................................................................................... 5 Background ............................................................................................................................................... 5 Purpose of the Plan ...................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • May 14, 2021 DOUGLAS COUNTY LAND
    May 14, 2021 DOUGLAS COUNTY LAND CONSERVATION COMMITTEE Tuesday, May 18, 2021, 10:00 a.m. Government Center, Boardroom 201 1316 North 14th Street, Superior, Wisconsin OR JOIN BY PHONE: (US) +1 252-584-0118 PIN: 782 923 307# OR VIDEO: https://meet.google.com/ffx-amnz-oki *Due to COVID-19 concerns, members of the committee and public may attend the meeting remotely. Please call the Chair or County Clerk’s Office (715-395-1569) if you are unable to attend. MEMBERS: Sue Hendrickson, Chair Mary Lou Bergman, Vice Chair Kathryn McKenzie Larry Luostari Jim Soyring, FSA Wendy Bong AMENDED A G E N D A (Committee to maintain a two-hour meeting limit or take action to continue meeting beyond that time.) 1. Roll call. 2. Approval of minutes from the March 16, 2021, meeting (attached). 3. Presentation: Manure storage facilities – Nathan Johnstad, Stacy Dehne, Jane Anklam. 4. Action items: a. Recommend creation of committee to review Ordinance #8.15 – Douglas County Animal Manure Storage (attached); b. Support creation of agriculture enterprise area(s) in Douglas County (attached); c. Wildlife Damage and Abatement Program: 1. Report; and 2. Resolution (attached). d. Aquatic Invasive Species Strategic Plan approval (attached); e. Environmental Reserve Fund: 1. Funding requests: a. $600 for 2021 rain barrel project (attached); b. $200 for Minong Flowage drawdown, including letter of support (attached); and c. $1,002.86 for Pleasant View Road community well abandonment (attached). 2. Application revision (attached). f. Grant account creation (attached): 1. Superior Bay and Pickle Pond Yellow Iris Response – 61429; and 2.
    [Show full text]