VernonReporter
Jersey Valley Dam during the flood event in 2018

Vernon, Monroe and La Crosse Counties set to sign off on federal plan to remove 23 flood control dams

(Editors note: The author of this article is a board member of the Coon Creek Community Watershed Council)

VIROQUA, Wis. – This month three counties are poised to sign off on a federal plan to “decommission”, or essentially remove, 23 flood control structures in two watersheds that they determined are not worth the cost to keep them. It has been a long and winding path between the devastating floods of 2018 to where we are now. But the path seems to be set to remove the earthen flood control structures (known as PL566 dams) that have helped protect the Coon Creek and West Fork Kickapoo watersheds for about 70 years.

Decommissioning, or removal of the dams, is a monumental shift to a major part of the infrastructure in our area that will affect the lives and property of thousands of people, but many residents are unsure about what the change will mean for them once it happens.

Why were the dams built?

Vernon County has a long history with PL566 dams. The PL stands for “public law” and during the 1950s, 1960s and 1970s, the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) would build 22 dams in Vernon County to help reduce destruction to infrastructure and homes that frequently occurred in many watersheds due to flooding. That is the most dams of any county in the state. About 25 percent of the 88 dams in the whole state of Wisconsin are in one county. Monroe County has seven PL566 dams in the Coon Creek watershed and La Crosse County has two PL566 dams, bringing the total for the three counties to 32, or about 36 percent of the dams in Wisconsin. Nationwide there are about 12,000 PL566 dams with the highest concentration in the state of Oklahoma. Under the original agreement with NRCS, they agreed to build the dams and then turned them over to local units of government for them to maintain for the next 50 years. The NRCS also required the 50 percent of the land in the dam watersheds have a conservation plan in place to reduce soil erosion that could quickly fill those dams with sediment.

What changed?

For most of us, the 14 flood control structures in the Coon Creek and nine in the West Fork Kickapoo have protected us from flooding all of our lives. They seemed to have done their job and retained enough water during extreme weather events to make flooding less severe and protected lives and property as they were designed. But the dams have exceeded their 50 year life expectancy and were designed for 6.5 inches of rain in 24 hours. Many weather events in the last 15 years have far exceeded those parameters.

In August of 2018 record breaking weather events caused dams in both watersheds to “over-top”, and in some cases fail. Over-topping means there was so much water behind these dams that it was flowing over the top of the dam and not just through the emergency spillway. Rainfall amounts up to 11 inches were reported on the night of August 27 and early morning of August 28. Additional rainfall amounts up to 7 inches were reported in the afternoon of August 28, after the dam failures. In the West Fork of the Kickapoo the Jersey Valley and the Mlsna Dams failed. In the Coon Creek watershed the Luckasson, Blihovde, and Korn Dams failed.

Those dam failures caused some people at the national level to take notice. Nowhere in the country had five PL566 dams (earthen flood control dams) failed at the same time. That 2018 event spurred NRCS to invest $1.8 million to study the dams in both watersheds to determine why they failed, and if it made sense to keep investing in them.

The results of that study were that it did not make sense to keep investing in the flood control dams. What the cost benefit analysis showed was that the dams cost about as much to build and maintain as they saved in damage to property and infrastructure. And, the study concluded, that replacing the dams would not be cost effective because they would need to be built to a much higher standard to meet current design standards. The study also pointed to the fragile karst geology that caused many of the dams to leak through the hillside with the old design and would vastly increase the cost of engineering and construction for a new dam. New dams would also likely need to be built to handle a much higher weather event than the old dams that were designed to handle about 6.5 inches of rain in 24 hours.

Since 2019, NRCS staff have held public hearings to layout the scope of the study and more public meetings to gather feedback on the study results. They have gathered and documented hundreds of comments. The NRCS staff, and 40 plus people they hired to analyze the economics and hydrology, produced a 1,000 plus page report ( Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement or PEIS) for each watershed.

You can read more about those study results and the feedback from the public in our previous stories here and here.

The study concludes the dams need to go

The recommended “preferred alternative” to come out of that NRCS study was to “decommission” all to the dams in both watersheds. That is 14 dams in the Coon Creek and nine dams in the West Fork Kickapoo. The study concluded that the dams have outlived their life expectancy of 50 years and they pose a potential risk of loss of life now that some of them have failed.

The one exception is Jersey Valley Dam that was deemed worthwhile to replace because of the high recreational value the dam and lake provide. It was estimated that the dam brought in $49 million in recreation over its lifespan. NRCS has proposed rebuilding Jersey Valley at a cost of around $16-$18 million. NRCS has proposed paying for about 99 percent of the cost to rebuild that dam.

So what does decommissioning mean? NRCS has proposed “notching” or removing most of the center portion of the dam, placing the excess material along the valley wall. The study describes decommissioning as “removing a portion of the embankment at the location of the historic channel and the original stream thread would be restored to the extent practicable, using the pre-project site plans from the original project plan set for guidance. All slopes would be shaped to a safe stable angle of repose. The principal spillway pipe and riser would be hauled away as construction demolition or grouted shut. The principal spillway riser and plunge pool
would be removed.”

The NRCS plan calls for each dam to have a individual decommissioning plan design and to bid the work on a dam by dam basis. The estimated timeline for the decommissioning will take place over at least the next five years.

The timeline as presented to the county board:

  • June 30 – Watershed agreement with NRCS
  • Feb. 2026 – Final plan revised and approved for decommissioning
  • August 2026 – December 2027 – Award construction contracts for decommissioning
  • April 2027 – Final plan revised and approved for Jersey Valley Dam
  • Jan. 2028 – Feb. 2028 – Construction of Jersey Valley Dam

The decision facing three counties

The timeline for the that decommissioning process calls for all three counties to sign off on that plan by this month. Each county government will have to approve the decommissioning process. Here in Vernon County, several meetings have taken place in the last several months where that plan has been discussed.

Special County Board meeting – April 23, 2024

Following the April election, the Vernon County Board of Supervisors held a special meeting to bring the county board, and especially the six newly elected board members, up to speed on a complicated topic they will have to vote on in the next few of months. The special meeting was specifically to discuss the decommissioning and hear from board members. There was no public comment allowed at the meeting but the board did hear a presentation from Vernon County Conservationist Ben Wojahn and Resource Conservationist Mark Erickson.

Special County Board meeting on the dams – April 23 – Part 1
Special County Board meeting on the dams – April 23 – Part 2

Wojahn presented the board with the details of the NRCS study and said he knows not everyone will be happy with the plan but does see the preferred alternative of decommissioning the dams as the best option for the county.

“We have some good news and some bad news,” said Wojahn. “The bad news is that what the preferred alternative really means is the majority of the dams in the West Fork of the Kickapoo and the dams in the Coon Creek watershed are going to be decommissioned if we go with the preferred alternative. The one exception to that is Jersey Valley. That’s the one that they have determined after this $2,000,000 very lengthy study that Jersey Valley does meet the cost benefit analysis to be replaced. The other dams do not. There are downsides to removing the dams. The dams have had benefits. The dams have flood reduction. There will be property owners one way or another affected. No matter what the decision is, no one will be happy. Congratulations. …But with this preferred alternative, typically we would be offered maybe 50 percent, at most 75 percent (cost share) to do this work. Steve Becker (NRCS State Engineer) has worked very hard to make sure, they made an extra variance so we will be offered 100 percent to do the majority of this work.”

Wojahn went on to say there have been some people who have asked to delay that decommissioning decision.

“I see no benefit to delaying that decision,” said Wojahn. “We have land owners who are going to be unhappy no matter what. I lose sleep over this, and I’m not happy about that. We will lose some flood reduction capacity. We lose sleep over this. We are not happy about this.”

Vernon County Conservationist Ben Wojahn

“I see no benefit to delaying that decision,” said Wojahn. “We have land owners who are going to be unhappy no matter what. I lose sleep over this, and I’m not happy about that. We will lose some flood reduction capacity. We lose sleep over this. We are not happy about this. There have been some saying you’re removing these dams and you’re not doing anything else. That I will take issue with because we are. We are, with the support of our Land Conservation Committee and the county board and seeking more funding. We have increased staffing capacity. …. We have great partnerships with NRCS, with DATCP, with DNR, and and then we have our watershed groups who are forming and being very active. Ultimately, a lot of this relies on the private land owners in Vernon County, on the farmers. We have very great farmers here. We just need to do more of what we’ve already been doing, that takes time, that takes capacity. I have lots of ideas if this county board wants to support that, including you guys could let Phil (County Highway Commissioner Phil Hewitt) and I split an engineer. They’re saying that would greatly speed things along having an engineer on staff. Some some counties do that and it would be very wise and move things along. There are things Vernon County can do, but having giant expensive long term dams is not what I would advise Vernon County to do. Anymore, that’s where we’re at. I strongly encourage the support of the preferred alternative.”

“There are things Vernon County can do, but having giant expensive long-term dams is not what I would advise Vernon County to do anymore. That’s where we’re at and I strongly encourage the support of the preferred alternative.”

Vernon County Conservationist Ben Wojahn

County Board Supervisor Mary Henry asked what happens to communities like Coon Valley without the dams and there is nothing to hold back water in flood events.

“Whats going to happen to their park, their bridge, their baseball field?” asked Henry.

“Those are legit questions and we don’t have always the best answers,” said Wojahn. “Coon Valley’s park was not really protected with or without the dams from what I’ve seen historically. As I said, there will be impacts and downsides to not having the dams and I’m not trying to gloss over that at all. It’ll come up quicker (the water). It will come down quicker than when the dams were there. There will not be the impact of that wall of water from the dams breaching all at once, which is probably more of an impact than if there were no dams at all.”

Wojahn said the focus will have to shift to increasing efforts at land management.

“Again, land management,” said Wojahn. “The best practices possible on the farms with the land owners holding as much water back onto the land as we possibly can. I promise to not stop trying. I know my team and staff promise to not stop trying. It’s not a perfect answer, Mary. There’s a downside. All I can promise is to lose sleep over it and that we keep marching along doing the work we’re we’re doing to hold as much water on the landscape.”

Resource Conservationist Mark Erickson, who oversees maintenance of the dams said he does not see a big impact on Coon Valley with the removal of the dams.

“A lot of this all hinges on the fact that I think Monroe County is, in general, pretty on board with dam removal,” said Erickson. “So their dams are coming out, and our five in Coon Creek are very small. They’re in one tributary of Coon Creek. I don’t see a big impact at Coon Valley. As a matter of fact in the study they looked at if all the dams in the Coon Creek were out, it affected the height of the bridge (water level at the bridge) by six inches in Cool Valley. So, If we just say our five, I mean it would be a matter of maybe an inch. We’re too far below our dams to really have a big effect in Coon Valley.”

County Board Supervisor Nathaniel Slack asked if there is a plan to get farmers to adopt practices to slow water down.

“So there’s an agronomist who’s work I follow and he’s got a line about when someone asks me how much rain I got, I say all of it,” said Slack. “His whole thing is keeping water on his farm. So the dams gone and trying to incentivize private land owners to keep the water on their property. Can you go into a little bit more on how we incentivize that? I’d drive around the county a lot and with the reduction in the dairy industry, we don’t see much contour strips with hay. That’s huge for water penetration. You don’t see terraces much anymore. You don’t see retention ponds anymore. So what’s the plan then to convince that 6000 acres up upstream from the dam to start managing things in a way that maybe the damn loss isn’t so impactful?”

Wojahn said there are tools to help slow water down and keep it on the land like cover crops and buffer strips and returning contour strips just to name a few. Wojahn said the farmer led watershed groups are a valuable tool to increase participation because it is farmers talking to farmers. Wojahn went on to say last year the county designed and installed six small dam projects. But Wojahn said the bottleneck is hiring enough technicians to take advantage of the almost unlimited federal funding available to do many practices.

County Board Supervisor David Strudthoff asked if flood insurance rates will change for people in places like Coon Valley. NRCS Engineer Becker said the flood plain for those areas will not change because the current flood maps never included the dams when they were drawn.

County Board Supervisor Wayde Lawler asked if the decommissioning involves notching the dam to handle a 100 year flood what happens when there is a larger flood than that. Lawler asked if the county or the landowner would have any liability with what is still in place following the notching process.

Erickson said the goal is to design and construct something that is stable.

“Its going to be a challenge to get a site stable and to be comfortable with our final product and be able to walk away,” said Erickson.

“Not a lot of guarantees,” said Wojahn. “Especially beyond the 100 year flood. But our goal is to decommission with that V and make it as stable as possible.”

NRCS Engineer Becker said the notch will be sufficient to ensure there is enough flow in a large event.

“The notch would be such that if you got 100 year flow it would pool up less than three feet of water in order to push it through the notch,” said Becker. “I believe we’ll be taking out quite a bit more dirt than that. So it’s definitely going to be substantially less than a three foot additional impact upstream of the dam on 100 year event. But a couple of those dams are only about 250 feet across. And so when you take out a a 50 or 100 foot notch in the bottom of the dam and you slope the side slopes out of three to five to one, there isn’t going to be much of the residual dam left. The valleys just aren’t that wide to start with. And if we do get an event that’s a 200 or a 400 year event, you got to kind of put that in perspective. I mean, it’s an act of God that floods everything. An additional six inches of impoundment behind a couple of structures would be unnoticeable there.”

County Board Chair Lorn Goede asked if there is a plan for what comes after the dams.

County Board Chair Lorn Goede

I’m wondering, this is almost a foregone conclusion that for the Vernon County citizens,” said Goede. “This going to have to happen. Are we going to start working on Plan B before Plan A is completed? I mean, as far as you know, what’s the next step? Do we put in a whole bunch of little retention ponds? Do we do this? Do we do that? Or is it like we’re going to do all this get them all gone and then start? Or is it going to be a continuing project?’

Wojahn said his department has never stopped doing projects and its a matter of resources to do more.

County Board Supervisor Dave Eggen said he anticipates some difficult town meetings and he represents a township that has seven dams. Eggen said he found a Westby Times article from when the dams were built that had a headline that said “protecting lives and property”.

“So when these groups start coming to the town board meeting I need to fill in that paragraph with something different,” said Eggen. “We’re not going to protect lives and property anymore. We’re going to…let Mother Nature go and as it will, right? There’s nothing more that we can can say to people when you take the dams away.”

“Properties have been reduced in the floodplain, but not enough,” said Wojahn. “It’s real. I just don’t know what other alternatives to give them. Vernon County takes on all these dams by themselves. It’s just not financially feasible. So, unfortunately we can’t focus on these large expensive structures. We have to focus on better land management and smaller practices. You know a buckshot approach, but a very logical science informed buckshot approach rather than 22 large structures. I don’t want to be callous or insincere to landowners that are impacted. It sucks. I just know any other way around it.”

So, unfortunately we can’t focus on these large expensive structures. We have to focus on better land management and smaller practices. You know a buckshot approach, but a very logical science informed buckshot approach rather than 22 large structures.’

Vernon County Conservationist Ben Wojahn

County Board Member Frank Easterday said he was around before the dams were in place and after they were in place, and he has seen damage from both situations.

“So over the years everybody has said these dams have saved our area, but I tend to disagree with that a little bit,” said Easterday. “I think these dams help on the smaller rains. But even an engineer in your department isn’t gonna stop the 100 year flood. Now there probably are a lot of things we can do down the road here once the dams are out to help slow the water, and we’ve talked about that in committee. My farm now is all in grass. I don’t put a plow in the ground anymore, which I think it does help to have not have exposed dirt. Anyway, I’m not concerned terribly about the dams leaving as a lot of people are. They think it’s going to be the end of the world here. I was there the night the Mlsna Dam went out. And I’ll tell you those dams when they went out, it was scary. So, with them gone I don’t think it’s going to be as big a concern. You’re not gonna stop these big floods. They’re gonna come. Only God’s going to stop that.”

Vernon County Conservation and Education Committee meeting – May 9, 2024

The next county meeting that discussed the decommissioning of dams was the Conservation and Education Committee meeting on May 9. Several people gave comments during the public comment portion of the meeting.

Eric Weninger is an engineer, a maple farmer and a board member of Coon Creek Community Watershed Council. Weninger said he looks at the NRCS report on the dams and knows they do need to be decommissioned, but also looks at the dams from a business perspective and they are an asset that is getting removed.

“I think of it as a business person as a balance sheet,” said Weninger. “I see an asset and I see a liability. The asset is these dams. When they’re functional and they were designed in the 1960s, they were providing flood production. In 2018 alone we had over $14 million of damage to public infrastructure. That’s not private, right? That’s not included in the cost analysis. The asset we had is these dams. These dams can’t withstand the storms. They’re not geologically sound. I understand that. This shift that’s happening is that the asset is being taken away. The flood protection is being taken away. The liability that currently is on NRCS, it’s not being taken away. It’s being shifted to the people who live in these watersheds as well as the county. So when it’s being said that 100 percent cost share is being presented to decommission these dams, it’s true that 100 percent of the cost of decommissioning the dams is being presented. However, the liability is still there.”

“This shift that’s happening is that the asset is being taken away. The flood protection is being taken away. The liability that currently is on NRCS, it’s not being taken away. It’s being shifted to the people who live in these watersheds as well as the county. So when it’s being said that 100 percent cost share is being presented to decommission these dams, it’s true that 100 percent of the cost of decommissioning the dams is being presented. However, the liability is still there.”

Eric Weninger board member of Coon Creek Community Watershed Council

Weninger asked what the plan was to deal with that liability knowing that weather events are drastically increasing and more frequent.

“The events that took place in the 1950s and 60s and 70s that justified these dams in the first place, those events are changing,” said Weninger. “In the last 10 years how many times have we had flooding? People in these watersheds, people in Coon Valley, feel like they are being left out. There needs to be a plan moving forward. I’m coming here to say there are solutions. There is a model that shows there are land use changes that can have as much or more protection as the dams had in the first place. There are solutions outside of what NRCS is presenting, which is to do nothing with the liability on the county. ….They should come up with a plan as a part of the decommissioning.”

Nancy Wedwick is the president of the Coon Creek Community Watershed Council said the decision facing the county could have national implications given that there are about 12,000 PL566 structures in the country. Wedwick said she understood the dams do need to be decommissioned but has some concerns about how that will be done.

“You all are being asked to make a historic and unprecedented decision that is going to have ramifications on a national scale,” said Wedwick. “It just simply is. When have so many dams been decommissioned at once?”

Coon Creek Community Watershed Council President Nancy Wedwick

“You all are being asked to make a historic and unprecedented decision that is going to have ramifications on a national scale,” said Wedwick. “It just simply is. When have so many dams been decommissioned at once? Right? So I would encourage you to consider a few things. First of all, if you have not already, you may want to secure a legal opinion about who is liable for the remaining dam structures once those are removed. We know that there’s going to be some issues with stability in making them stable. So you may want to think about what is the liability when the federal government has built a structure on private land. The county has had the job of maintaining it, and now with the relinquishment of easements, who will be responsible when the rains come and the sediment flows?”

Wedwick asked for a clear plan for implementing other ways of mitigating flooding once the dams are gone.

“It is going to be critical to have a funded plan B in place,” said Wedwick. “Millions and billions of dollars committed right through the bipartisan infrastructure bill. The money is out there to address these issues and it’s going to be critical to have a plan in place as these are decommissioned. Particularly when in a time of climate change, when we are getting more and more frequent intensive rainfalls lasting for longer periods of time. We’re going to get more rain that is going to create flooding, and we’re going to have less protection at the same time. So let’s implement a plan B that can provide that protection.”

Wedwick also asked the county to consider taking the dams all the way out instead of the current proposal that calls for notching them and depositing the excess material on the valley wall. And Wedwick asked the board for increased public engagement around the issue.

“I can’t begin to tell you how important it is to engage with the public and make sure that people fully understand what is happening here,” said Wedwick. “To fully understand the decommissioning process and what that is going to mean going forward. Engagement by the board members. Engagement with the public. I encourage you, if you haven’t already, take a look at the public comments in the appendix. They are rich and full of ideas and I would encourage you to engage with experts in the field of dam removal and others who are out there who can speak to land management practices. And I also stand ready, as Eric had said, we want to work with you on this issue. We have all kinds of land owners who are very interested in Land Management practices and we look forward to being a part of creating the solution with you.”

Caroline Gottschalk Druschke is a UW-Madison professor that has been working in the area watersheds and is a member of the Coon Creek Community Watershed Council. Gottschalk Druschke said she has studied dams and challenges with dam removal. Gottschalk Druschke also encouraged the committee to look into funding for a plan to offset the loss of the dams given all the federal money available for that kind of work. She also expressed concern that the dams will not be completely removed.

“I would really encourage you thinking strongly about talking with folks who could provide expertise about the full removal of these structures,” said Gottschalk Druschke. “They have huge concerns about leaving parts of them in your watershed. Having talked with folks over the past several years recording oral histories about the impacts of those dam breaches, it scares the heck out of me that any of those structures would remain in part in place.”

Gottschalk Druschke said she disagreed with those that say the PEIS cannot include conservation practices.

“I also want to challenge the point that we’ve heard consistently that land conservation practices don’t belong in this conversation about the PL-566 flood control structures,” said Gottschalk Druschke. “That is simply not accurate. The text of the actual Public Law 566 itself states that the purpose of the law is to fund quote ‘works of improvement,’ more flood prevention, including structural and land treatment measures and agricultural phases of conservation, development, utilization and disposal of water. That’s in the law itself. Also, when these contracts were signed to build these PL. 566 structures they included, they promised that 50 percent of the land above each reservoir or flood water detention structure would be under agreement for conservation measures. These things have always gone hand in hand and it doesn’t make sense to me that they would be separated out during this decommissioning process.”

Gottschalk Druschke pointed our that some have made statements the plan can be changed after it’s signed.

“My understanding is that legally a planning PEIS cannot be changed after signature without going through this full federal process again,” said Gottschalk Druschke. “So I’m not sure if you’re referring to a different part of that agreement. Likewise, I think it’s really important to hear clarification about the issue that came up in the last meeting about the floodplain mapping, which my understanding is that those will change and that will be a necessary change of this decision. So I just want to urge, I know that this is an impossible decision in a lot of ways, but there are a lot of folks who are really invested in it and know a lot about it and would love to be involved in your watershed and beyond. And so, I just encourage you to think about some of these other alternatives.”

The committee and Wojahn would also discuss the decommissioning and the public comments later in the meeting.

“I do feel like some of the comments that I’ve heard I basically agree with, but are slightly misguided,” said Wojahn. “I’m afraid we’re talking past each other just a little bit and I do take it …anytime you villainize, maybe that’s not your intention, but villainizing NRCS, holy smokes are we lucky to have Justin (local NRCS staff Justin Olson). And whatever you think of Steve Becker, if we didn’t have him, we would be in very, very rough shape. And I don’t like hearing the words, doing nothing. And maybe that’s not directed at us. I sure hope that’s not. Or directed at Justin because that is how it feels. Because, you know, we’re adding technicians, we’ve added the watershed planner. We just know there’s better funding sources than this program that’s decommissioning the dams.”

Wojahn spoke specifically to the comments from the members of the Coon Creek Community Watershed Council and that working relationship.

“Nothing that Nancy, Caroline or Eric said was wrong,” said Wojahn. “I do believe are slightly misguided that no one is trying to quiet in any way, and hopefully you see either Samer (land and water staff) or myself at the vast minority of your meetings. And we’re there for you. And we’re there to talk to you. Could we use a ton more resources and get this done faster? Yes. And I think I really do feel you’re there to support us. I just wanna make sure that we are in fact, are doing that together and we’re not speaking past each other.”

County Board Supervisor Mary Henry asked Wojahn to address the suggestion of completely removing the dams rather than notching them. Resource Conservationist Mark Erickson addressed the comment. Erickson said there has been some misconception of what notching means. Erickson said the V will be fairly wide and go to the valley floor allowing the flow of 100 year flood to pass. The removed material will be placed along the valley walls at a natural slope to stabilize the material. Erickson said each dam will require an individual design to accomplish stabilization.

County Board Supervisor Frank Easterday asked about using berms and terraces. Wojahn said that is practice that is not used as much today but could be looked at. Wojahn said there are a lot of practices that can be tried and the land and water staff is installing about six small dams a year.

“It really does make a difference,” said Wojahn. “There’s a lot of land out there and a lot of Individual landowner choices. It takes time and it takes staff to kind of hold your hand, work through those programs and and get those things established.”

County Board Supervisor Dave Eggen again asked about what will come after the dams are removed.

” My farm drains into the these dams and they are in good shape so I am really struggling with what to do going forward. I realize all the scenarios that you’ve given us and they’re all good. But I also, at the last county board meeting I challenged you with that, that old newspaper clipping from the Westby Times when the dams were going in. And I remember when they were going in sixty years ago. To save lives. And we’re not filling in that paragraph to my satisfaction with anything substantial right now. I’d like to see a real forceful statement that here’s what we’re going to do before we decommissioned the dams to protect the property.”

County Board Supervisor Dave Eggen

“I commented on it at the last county board meeting that I represented the town Christiana for 43 years on the board and I’ve got seven dams,” said Eggen. “What little popularity they used to have is dwindling rapidly because people have owned the property, they know about it. It’s all these folks downstream that are lacking education. My farm drains into the these dams and they are in good shape so I am really struggling with what to do going forward. I realize all the scenarios that you’ve given us and they’re all good. But I also, that’s the last county board meeting I challenged you with that, that old newspaper clipping from the Westby Times when the dams were going in. And I remember when they were going in sixty years ago. To save lives. And we’re not filling in that paragraph to my satisfaction with anything substantial right now. I’d like to see a real forceful statement that here’s what we’re going to do before we decommissioned the dams to protect the property.”

“The voluntary is part of our challenge, right?” said Wojahn. “We have intentions, we have goals, and I think there is value in laying them out more specifically. You know, they’ve compared some of the number of small dams that would be helpful. There is no way to engineer your way out of a 14 inch rain event to 12 hours, right? And none of the studies are going to look at the rain events that we’ve had. They just won’t because you can’t engineer your way out of those events. You can mitigate. Make running water walk. Get as many practices on the landscape as we possibly can. But I would be lying to you if I told you would could stop flooding with the rain events that we have had.”

“There is no way to engineer your way out of a 14 inch rain event to 12 hours, right? And none of the studies are going to look at the rain events that we’ve had. They just won’t because you can’t engineer your way out of those events. You can mitigate. Make running water walk. Get as many practices on the landscape as we possibly can. But I would be lying to you if I told you would could stop flooding with the rain events that we have had.”

Vernon County Conservationist Ben Wojahn

“Since 2007 this little township has received more than $3 million from FEMA to put our roads back,” said Eggen. “Plaster them back into the hills and watch them wash away again.”

County Board Supervisor Nathaniel Slack said the dams are not stable on our geology and are past their prime and the public needs to know that.

“It’s not a question of if they go, it’s when they go,” said Slack. “And it’s not a question of if we lose people, it’s whom we lose when that happens. So that’s that’s where I think we really need to be informing people on is that. That these are going to go, it might be in two years or in 20 years, but when they go it’s going to be really bad.”

County Board Supervisor Wayde Lawler said what he hears from constituents is that they would like to see a plan about what comes after the dams are removed.

“But I don’t see yet again, what I think people are asking for is, more of a comprehensive look at that. There are three counties involved in this. It shouldn’t be up to an individual counties land and water department to pick up the pieces after these dams are gone. Despite your best efforts, that’s not going to be enough. And so people are just asking like, yeah, but what are we going to do. And I think the watershed groups, other community partners, would love to be involved in that planning.”

County Board Supervisor Wayde Lawler

“I don’t think anyone is here to argue to keep the dams,” said Lawler. “I also don’t think anybody in public comments, committee members is suggesting that the folks on staff in this room and our NRCS staff, are not doing their jobs, or are not excelling at their jobs, right? I think that there are just still a number of concerns. Some of them have been raised today. I’ve had emails from folks saying Highway 56 near the Liberty Bar where I live is now going to be closed in a 50 year event rather than a 100 year event. That’s like a primary thoroughfare. Its a huge safety issue. You can run down a laundry list of concerns … not to mention the very real concerns about life and loss of property. And I think what folks are asking for, and and I’m going to have to defer to others expertise on the appropriate vehicle for this or the appropriate agencies to get involved. I don’t know about that. We’ve got a plan for the taking the dams out, decommissioning the dams that seems to be like pretty well developed, but there doesn’t seem to be in place is a step by step articulation of what happens after that. And again, I hear you Ben, like I I fully believe that you and your folks will be working your damnedest to do what you can. … But I don’t see yet again, what I think people are asking for is, more of a comprehensive look at that. There are three counties involved in this. It shouldn’t be up to an individual county’s land and water department to pick up the pieces after these dams are gone. Despite your best efforts, that’s not going to be enough. And so people are just asking like, yeah, but what are we going to do? And I think the watershed groups, other community partners, would love to be involved in that planning. And I, and again, this is not any impeachment of your efforts or your work so far. I just think there’s still more to be done before we say yes, take the dams out.”

County Conservationist Ben Wojahn

Wojahn said the watershed program that the study was funded through and will fund the decommissioning was not funded for nearly a decade and delay a decision and delay the opportunity at funding would be “foolish”.

“I just worry once we once we commit to the preferred alternative, which I think everybody agrees is the appropriate choice, that now we’re left holding the bag,” said Lawler. “And now we don’t have that leverage with federal agencies, state agencies to say here’s what we need. The feds came in and helped plan the dams. That was a huge coordination, right? Where is that similar analogous effort now in the removal of the dams?”

“I come from a time when there were no dams,” said Supervisor Beitlich. “And we all lived here in Vernon County. My families been here for 155 years and we existed without. Not that it was nice. And we really thought we would improve and it seem like what improved is expiring. And something new is going to take its place. We aren’t sure what that is, and we aren’t sure how it will work, but I am sure we will solve it.”

Supervisor Easterday who lives below two dams said he does not think taking them out will have a big impact.

“But when these dams come out, I don’t perceive the danger being a whole lot greater. And if we can slow the water some ways, I think there are a lot of things that can be done. I’m not afraid of these dams going out, I just don’t see that that’s gonna be this panic situation. Maybe I’m wrong. I’ve been wrong about a lot of things.”

County Board Supervisor Frank Easterday

“I think everybody is in a panic thinking that the end of the world is coming if these dams come out,” said Easterday. “It’s gonna be a wait and see. The main thing is we don’t get another thousand year flood of like 20 some inches. I mean that’s only happened a couple times in my lifetime. Hopefully it doesn’t happen again. But when these dams come out, I don’t perceive the danger being a whole lot greater. And if we can slow the water some ways, I think there are a lot of things that can be done. I’m not afraid of these dams going out, I just don’t see that that’s gonna be this panic situation. Maybe I’m wrong. I’ve been wrong about a lot of things.”

Dam decommissioning will be discussed next at the Education and Conservation Committee meeting on June 13 and the the County Board of Supervisors meeting on June 20.

Oh, hi there. 👋 We are so glad you found us.

If you like our content maybe you want to sign up for our daily email. It's free and you won't miss any stories. One email a day with two or three top stories. It's like having your own personal newspaper. And we won't overload your inbox. Promise.

We don’t spam!

Tim Hundt

1 comment

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

  • How many millions spent on study so far? How many millions will be spent on removal of dams? How many dams could have been built on the ridge before the gullies going down into the valleys with the money spent on study and removal of dams which would have been a positive approach to the problem.

Support Local Journalism – Make a Donation

Upcoming Events

Support Local Journalism – Make a Donation

Upcoming Events