As the DNR winds it way across Wisconsin holding public hearings on its proposed mercury pollution control rule, both opponents and supporters of the rule are voicing their concerns.  The DNR's proposal would cut mercury emissions from Wisconsin sources by 90% over the next 15 years.

The proposal is long in the making.  More than thirty years ago, then Attorney General Robert Warren was calling for state regulation and the DNR even announced hearings on the matter in 1971.  Three decades later, and only after a citizen's petition forced the matter, DNR regulations are being heard that would rein-in mercury contamination of the state's inland lakes and rivers.

Speaking in Eau Claire on behalf of the Wisconsin Federation of Co-ops (who represent the rural electric companies), Dave Hoopman expressed opposition to the rule.  Hoopman based his opposition on the level of mercury deemed harmful.  "It's the dose that makes the difference," Hoopman said.

Hoopman also disputed the scientific foundation upon which the DNR rule is based.  Medical studies which detail mercury's harmful effects at low doses, argued Hoopman, are inconclusive or, at best, not applicable to Wisconsin.

The assessment drew a sharp response from Sol Simon, a Fountain City resident and head of the environmental group Mississippi River Revival.  Waving a book of scientific research on mercury that the federal EPA used to develop its rationale for pending regulation, Simon called the studies "well designed."

"A very small amount of mercury can cause a great deal of problems," Simon added.  He noted that 60,000 children are born each year with a statistical risk of nervous system and brain damage from mercury.

"We have a huge health problem," Simon said," and most of it comes from coal."

Marc Looze, of Wisconsin's Environmental Decade, echoed Simon's concerns.  "Using the National Academy of Sciences estimates, we believe that more than one thousand kids born in Wisconsin may have neurological problems and trouble in school because their mothers ate mercury-contaminated fish."

Bill Skewes, representing the Wisconsin Utilities Association, questioned the rules effectiveness.  "How much environmental improvement are we going to get from the cost," Skewes asked.  Utilities are concerned that reaching the 90% reduction level will raise rates and harm power supplies.

He said utilities support reasonable rules and are willing to cut mercury pollution from their power plants by up to 40%.  But a 90% reduction, Skewes said, will lead to the closing of coal power plants.

"No amount of mercury reduction in Wisconsin will take a single lake off of the [fish consumption advisory] list," Skewes charged.

The latest state fish consumption advisory, covering all of Wisconsin's 15,057 inland lakes, advises pregnant women, children under 15, and women of childbearing age to limit their fish consumption.  No cooking or filleting techniques can remove the dangerous levels of mercury (measured in parts per million) from fish flesh.

Some of Wisconsin's top mercury polluters include the Pleasant Prairie coal plant, which annually releases 500 pounds of mercury (the most of any state power plant); the Barron County municipal incinerator, which pumps 150 pounds of mercury into the atmosphere each year; and the Vulcan Chemical Company in Port Edwards - Wisconsin's top polluter  - spewing 1000 pounds of mercury each year into the air.

At the Rhinelander DNR hearing, several paper company employees registered their opposition to the rule, complaining that it would harm their industry and hamper future productivity gains.

Sara Welch, of the Izaak Walton League, mentioned the group's concerns with economics.  "But," she added, "we need to be vocal about the negative economic impacts mercury emissions have on public health, the environment and tourism."  Mercury pollution threatens the states $1 billion annual expenditures from anglers and the 45,000 resort and tourism related jobs, Welch said.

Welch was also critical of efforts promoted by the utilities in favor of voluntary regulation.  She told the Eau Claire audience that reductions in mercury emissions in Minnesota cannot be credited to their voluntary scheme. "Minnesota's reductions so far are the result of chance, a federal level crackdown on some purposeful uses of mercury, and federal regulation of mercury emissions in other industrial sectors."

"League members are part of a great fishing tradition in Wisconsin," Welch said.  "In order to protect the health of anglers, their families and our fishing tradition, we have to start reducing mercury from coal plants today."

The DNR has three more public hearings schedule on their proposed rule.  The hearings will be held during the first week of October in eastern and southern Wisconsin.  The public also has until October 15 to submit written comments to the agency.  The comments can be directed to Jon Heinrich at HeinrJ@mail01.dnr.state.wi.us