Hosted by the DNR, the informational meetings on the new rule were designed to answer questions from the public about the rule's impact and workings.  But they have also been used as a forum by the agency, environmentalists, and industry to offer their perspective on the control of mercury pollution.

Jeff Schoepke, representing WMC (the state's big business lobby), charges that the rule will cost electric users more than $1 billion.  "This is a significant impact on employers and families who will bear these costs through increased electric rates," says Schoepke.

Mercury fallout from industrial smokestacks (mostly coal power plants) has resulted in fish consumption limitations on every inland lake in Wisconsin.  Mercury, in very tiny quantities, can damage the brain and development of the nervous system in children and harm fetuses in the wombs of pregnant mothers.

State fish consumption guidelines kick in at 5 parts per million in fish.  No cooking or filleting techniques can remove mercury from fish flesh.  Typically, the older and larger the fish, the more its flesh is laced with mercury.

A DNR assessment of the rule's economic impact is gentler than WMC's.  The agency calculates that a typical family would pay about $1.25/per month on their electric bill to rein in mercury contamination of Wisconsin's lakes.  Agency officials acknowledge, however, that their cost calculations may require fine-tuning.

One overlooked cost of the rule, according to state utilities, will be disposal of power plant fly ash.  The byproduct is presently used in road construction and the manufacture of cement.  Stripping mercury from stack emissions and depositing the toxin in the ash will quite possibly make it too contaminated for its current uses and will instead require expensive landfilling.

But opponents of the mercury pollution control rule seem uninterested in the economic damage already caused by mercury's impact on the environment - poisoned fish, a despoiled aquatic environment, diminished tourism, and human injury.  The actual dollar cost of mercury pollution remains uncalculated.

According to Eric Uram of the Sierra Club, one in ten women already have unacceptable levels of mercury in their bodies.  Uram says the startling results were recently found by the national Center for Disease Control.  The cause of the mercury loading in the human body can only come from consumption of tainted fish and seafood.

Mercury, unlike all other major air pollutants, remains totally unregulated.  But instead of setting state emission standards, Schoepke argues that regulators should seek voluntary agreements with mercury emitters.  He also contends that state regulations will not solve the problem, that much of the mercury raining on Wisconsin comes from sources outside of the state.

That a significant amount of mercury enters Wisconsin from other locales is beyond question.  Still, Wisconsin sources do foul the air with thousands of pounds of mercury each and every year.

The Pleasant Prairie coal plant in southeastern Wisconsin annually emits 500 pounds of mercury - the most of any state power plant.  In Barron County, the municipal incinerator pumps 150 pounds of mercury into the atmosphere each year.  Wisconsin's top polluter, though, is the Vulcan Chemical Company at Port Edwards, which releases a whopping 1000 pounds a year into the air.

Supporters of state regulation believe a tough state standard will accomplish two goals.  It will demonstrate that the people of Wisconsin support cleaning up their own backyard and are serious about it.

They also believe that it will influence national discussions taking place at the EPA about a federal mercury regulation scheme.  Schoepke suggests that the state wait for a federal standard, rather than plow ahead on its own.  "In only a few short years," he says, "the national picture will be significantly clearer."

When the fed's might clear the air with a mercury standard has recently grown cloudy with questions.  In July, EPA Administrator Christie Whitman reacted to the concerns of mercury polluters by canceling a plan to set mercury pollution control standards by the end of 2004.  She now advocates a more flexible approach.

Members of the public will soon have an opportunity to give their views to the DNR.  Later this month, the DNR will hold 5 public hearings designed to seek public input on the nature of their proposal to regulate mercury pollution in Wisconsin.  If you are interested in attending these hearings, click here.