April 27, 2006, From the President's Desk:

Dear East Troy Times Editor,

Below is a message in response to the action taken April 24, 2006 by the Village of East Troy Board on proposed Village well # 7.

Subject: The Wrong Resolution
The Resolution passed by the Village Board on April 24, 2006 regarding the controversial Village Well #7 site was unfortunately a big step in the wrong direction. I along with many others had hopes we might obviate the need for using the original Well #7 site by identifying an alternative well sited outside the Lake Beulah watershed. The resolution does however indicate that "those efforts are continuing and the Village will continue to work with these groups to explore altenative sites .......".__The inclusion in the resolution to operate the pump at one third its capacity is not a major concession because accepted engineering practice is that pumps should not be operated at full capacity 100% of the time and usually are operated at their full capacity for about 8 hours each day and then allowed to rest for the other 16 hours, although in emergencies the pumping time can be increased to offset the water needs.__The monitoring proposal is fine as far as it goes but water level drop in the lake is only one concern that may or may not be a major_ factor. The larger concern is the gradual and irreversible longer term impacts likely to result from the massive groundwater diversion from the lake via well #7 that include, but are not necessarily limited to, lake temperature change, compositional change, and the impacts to aquatic plants and animals, DNR designated sensitive areas (one of which is directly below the well # 7 site) and just the overall regime change that can occur under such conditions. There's no mention either on how the Village plans to involve the affected Lake Community in their monitoring proposal once the _well becomes operational.
Even under it's reduced pumping proposal, the Village will remove close to a half million gallons per day (the 1/3 pumping rate the Village proposed in its resolution) from the Lake Beulah and Mukwonago River watersheds and distribute those waters out through the Village water supply system and then on out through its sewerage system ultimately discharging the treated waste water to Honey Creek, a tributary to the Fox/Illinois river. That's a total of some 15 million gallons per month or about 180 million gallons per year at 1/3 the Village's pumping rate that will never again be seen in the Lake Beulah/Mukwonago River watershed year in year out with a potential increase to two times that in the next two years if the monitoring program shows “no adverse impacts”. It should be interesting to see what the Village defines as "no adverse impacts"!! Groundwater and surface water level monitoring are only one component of the diverse set of impacts that could occur from this assault on the groundwater that feeds Lake Beulah.
In passing this resolution the Village is in essence proposing the construction of a “wasting” water system, as described by Prof. Cherkauer at the Town Hall Meeting last summer. This is not sustainable in the long term, and is an example of poor water management practice. The community of East Troy deserves better than this, and it is not too late to change the outcome. Your friends and neighbors at Lake Beulah are ready and willing to help develop a sustainable water management plan for our area. If you would like to help, please contact your Village Board members and tell them of your concerns (if you are a Village resident). Also, if you are interested in learning more about this important issue please visit our Website at www.lakebeulah.org . We seek only to protect the currently clear, clean and productive waters of Lake Beulah for all to enjoy including Lake residents, Village residents and all visitors and users alike for both this and future generations.
Paul Didier, P.E., President, Lake Beulah Protective & Improvement Association

The proposed Village of East Troy high capacity well #

7 continues to be the major issue for Lake Beulah and East Troy residents. On June 24th, 2005, Walworth County Circuit Court Judge James L. Carlson affirmed the earlier decision of Administrative Law Judge Boldt indicating in part that there was no evidence on the record that the proposed well would harm the lake, its related wetlands and ground waters and private wells in the area. The unfortunate part of this ruling is that we the petitioners, the Lake Beulah Management District (LBMD) and the Lake Beulah Protective & Improvement Association (LBPIA) were not given an adequate opportunity to submit scientific and engineering evidence on the impacts that can result from locating a high capacity well in close proximity to Lake Beulah. Note worthy in Judge Carlson's decision is the statement that we as petitioners have other remedies available “should there be proof of damage to the lake or private wells pursuant to Section 30.294, Wis. Stats.” Of course by then the resources may be irreversibly harmed and difficult if not impossible to correct.
That said, what are our options at this point given that the Village has stated their intent to proceed with construction of the well in August of this year?
1. Continue to negotiate in good faith with the Village on an agreement which will limit pumping volumes, include a comprehensive monitoring system of the lake and its sensitive wetlands using the USGS as a third party mediator and precluding any future high cap wells from being located within the Beulah/Mukwonago watershed.
2. Continue to evaluate and pursue alternatives with the Village, including but not necessarily limited to, alternate well sites that are outside the Beulah watershed, a well that utilizes recycling of its waters introduced back into the watershed from where they are withdrawn rather than a wasting system discharging to Honey Creek as under the current proposal and see if there is some way we could help offset the costs to the Village.
3. Pursue legal options for reconsideration by the Court providing adequate scientific evidence the court said was missing and/or appeal the latest decision to next court level.
4. Do nothing further and let the “WELL” take its own course. This in no way meets our LBPIA mission to protect and improve and will not be the chosen option as long as I am your President! I might add that none of the first three options is mutually exclusive: in fact it's possible to pursue all three simultaneously.

If you have strong views on any of these alternatives please let me know.

Paul Didier

(Paul would like to add that we have, in fact, appealed the Walworth County Court's decision to the State of Wisconsin's Court of Appeals)

For the complete message from the president which also addresses other issues of concern to Lake Beulah property owners see the LBPIA home page.

An Open Letter on the Well to Boards of The Village, Town, PLMD, and PLYC (this should be read in conjunction with this PDF file which includes a synopsis of the discussion)

Mon, 8 Aug 2005

Dear Board Members,
 
The Mukwonago community needs to evaluate environmental impacts of the proposed high capacity well.  Last week, I talked with Bob Biebel at SEWRPC.  The two year SEWRPC regional groundwater study will NOT include creation of an inset model for Phantom Lakes.  He indicated there may be a need or recommendation to perform some additional data gathering in specific critical/sensitive areas of the south east Wisconsin region to refine the regional groundwater flow model.  But, the bottom line is that we will not receive sufficient assistance in data gathering or modeling from SEWRPC’s regional study and certainly not in a time frame to help us deal with impacts of the proposed Village well.  Our community needs to find a way to fund and undertake this effort ourselves.   Initially a two dimensional model should be developed by the Village’s consultant prior to the proposed volume pumping test.  Since the regional ground water flow model is too coarse, the community should pursue developing a three dimensional water shed inset model or a series of site specific inset models.
 
PLMD, PLYC, the Town of Mukwonago, and the Village of Mukwonago have some work to do to ensure that necessary data to analyze the Well’s impacts will be collected and that we have the tools like an inset model to evaluate and manage on a going forward basis, the use and impacts of the Village’s proposed high cap well. 
 
Attached are minutes, which all of you have previously received, from a November 11, 2004 meeting with subject matter experts (Bob Biebel, Ken Bradbury, and Jeff Thornton).  Note the conclusions reached and recommendations made.  Also, note the actions that have NOT been completed.  Allow me to quote/highlight selections from these minutes:
 
The group consensus was to pursue development of a tool to measure the impacts of all potential high capacity wells in this watershed, minimally for the next ten years, and hopefully begin soon.

Realizing that there are a number of future well proposals coming, with potential well sites around the Phantom Lakes and within the Fox and Mukwonago watershed, the group endorsed the larger-scale approach as an opportunity to avoid duplicating tests every time a new site was being considered, while, at the same time, providing a tool to address the immediate issue of the proposed site and well.
 
Ken Bradbury talked more about the GFLOW and WinFLOW models.  He explained that these models are two dimensional and fairly easy to develop. They would allow a “first cut” at an assessment that could support more detailed evaluations as part of the proposed pump test. The group agreed that a two dimensional model was desirable and that Jon Jansen could develop it.
 
Ken therefore agreed with Bob’s earlier statement that there was likely to be an impact since you “do not get something with nothing in return”—referring to the interconnectedness of the surface and ground waters of the Mukwonago River Basin.
 
Ken Bradbury indicated that the best way to assess the potential impact of a high capacity well on the YMCA property would be through a ground water flow model with the lake simulated as well as the high capacity well. This could provide a pretty precise answer that could be field tested.  The USGS Modflow Model© could be used for this purpose, but it is fairly complicated.
 
The tests should be conducted for 72 hours or more—until the monitoring points reached a steady state. It was thought that maybe they shut the test down too soon at Lake Beulah, before a steady state had been reached. Ken Bradbury strongly encouraged the longer tests for better information.  The WinFLOW or GFLOW Model® tests this type of hypothesis and could provide more accurate information prior to the field test.  This should be encouraged.
Dave Dubey asked how do we encourage the Village to do these tests?  Ken Bradbury thought that running the tests longer could be done for a minimal cost.  The big cost is putting in the wells, the pump and disposing of the water from the tests.  Therefore, he suggested that the Town or District might offer to pay for the incremental cost of running the pump for a few more days and someone to measure the water depths in the wells. The additional data gained would be much more accurate and valuable and well worth the expenditure. The piezometer wells would be easy to install and this definitely should be done. He indicated that it would be reasonable to have the Lake District and Town suggest these additional steps and, if necessary, offer to pay for them or split the costs rather than pay for a separate hydrologist and testing.
 
Rather than wrestle over PLYC’s conditional use permit, the focus should be on working with hydrologists and other subject matter experts to collect all the necessary data to model and scientifically evaluate impacts of the proposed high capacity well.
 
Thank you for giving these recommendations your prompt attention.
 
Richard Jenks
Mukwonago, WI