Chapter 1

Chapter 1
Introduction

In 1998, staff from the Door County Planning Department, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Door Property Owners, Inc., Door County Soil and Water Conservation Department, and The Nature Conservancy established themselves as the Door County Wetland Task Organization Partnership (Task Force) and submitted a grant proposal to the Wisconsin Coastal Management Program titled, "Efficient and Effective Wetland Protection Program." The proposal placed equal emphasis on enhancing and improving wetland management and protection, as well as reducing the level of frustration and confusion that citizens have about wetland management and the permitting process.

The purpose of this project is to begin a conversation among citizens in Door County about wetlands protection and designing a model wetland program. The study contains information that will improve wetlands permitting activities and wetland protection efforts currently underway in Door County. It is also hoped that this study will serve as a platform for building the next level of decision-making on wetlands and critical environmental area protection. The Task Force believes that the results of this study will increase understanding about how to deal with complex issues through collaborative partnerships among citizens and local, state and federal governmental officials.

Chapter 1 presents an overview of Door County and its wetlands. Chapter 2 identifies major federal, state and local regulations, laws and programs designed to protect wetlands. Chapter 3 presents the findings from the qualitative research conducted for this study. Chapter 4 offers strategies for improving wetland protection and for making regulatory processes more efficient. These strategies come from the suggestions of citizens, local, county, state and federal staff, and also from information gathered from successful programs in other parts of the state and of the country. The last chapter offers one way to evaluate various strategies and presents possible next steps for Door County to take to move closer toward a model wetland protection program.

Methodology (Back to TOC)

A number of research methods guided the study. These methods are described below:

External search for wetland information

Researchers spent 325 hours locating, cataloging, reviewing and assessing non-profit, local, state, regional and national wetland protection programs and studies of wetland protection programs. The objective was to understand what historical, current and planned wetland protection programs are underway at all levels of government and to find examples of innovative protection programs. This information appears in Chapters 1, 2, 4 and 5 of the report. Actual reports, guides and other informational items were filed and presented to the Task Force for use in its future planning efforts.

Identification of wetland regulations

Local regulations, permit requirements and ordinances that provide for protecting wetlands or regulating their use in the Door County area were identified and appear in Chapter 2. The objective was to understand what is the current state of wetland regulatory efforts, and to understand how and in what ways these statutory and regulatory programs overlap.

Qualitative research: Interviews, focus groups, case studies and surveys

A multidimensional qualitative study provided an understanding of how people in Door County view wetland protection. 55 semi-structured personal and phone interviews with members of key stakeholder groups including property owners, environmental groups, local, state and federal agency officials with wetland program responsibility, local elected officials, and real estate agents were conducted in order to assess how stakeholders feel about wetland protection, the perceptions they have about current local, state and federal efforts to protect wetlands, and their suggestions for improving the process. Interviewees were given surveys to complete and return by mail; in some situations, surveys were sent to people when interviews could not be arranged.

Four focus group meetings were held in Door County with 37 stakeholders. Focus groups helped to corroborate data gathered in the case study, survey and interview research. The sessions also prompted a conversation among diverse citizens in Door County about wetlands and gathered information about perceptions citizens have regarding wetland protection.

Five case studies of wetland alteration in the county, each with a different scenario, were also conducted. The purpose was to highlight the strengths and weaknesses of current regulatory processes and to provide recommendations for improving the process. These study results are reported in Chapter 3.

Characteristics of Door County (Back to TOC)

Located on a peninsula, Door County divides the waters of Lake Michigan and Green Bay. The county is renowned for its scenic beauty and has approximately 250 miles of shoreline. As a result, tourism is a key component of the area’s economy and results in seasonal fluctuations in the county’s population. The following sections will provide a brief overview of population and development trends in the county.

Population

According to the 1990 U.S. Census, almost 26,000 persons live in Door County, representing 0.5 percent of Wisconsin’s total population. Table 1-1 shows the county’s changing population trends. Most areas in the county have continued to increase in population, with large increases in the City of Sturgeon Bay and the towns of Gardner, Gibraltar, Liberty Grove, Sevastopol, Union and the Village of Sister Bay. Population in the towns of Brussels, Clay Banks, Jacksonport, Forestville and Washington decreased slightly between the 1950 and 1990 census.

The largest concentration of the county’s population is in the City of Sturgeon Bay which accounts for 35.7 percent of the total population. The boundary dividing the northern and southern portions of the county is the Sturgeon Bay shipping canal. The northern towns have a combined population of 8,108 while the southern towns have a combined population of 6,817. (These figures exclude the populations of the incorporated municipalities.) However, northern Door communities rely on tourism as a key economic resource and experience much larger population increases in the summer months. During peak tourism months, there are approximately 40,000 tourists and seasonal residents in the county per day (Door County Development Plan, 1995). For this reason, the county’s population often exceeds 60,000 persons during the tourism season.

Perhaps more important than actual population increases is the increase in seasonal home development. From 1970-1990, the number of seasonal housing units increased by slightly more than 50 percent (U.S. Department of Commerce, 1993b). Taken as a percent of total housing units, seasonal housing accounted for 35.4 percent of all housing units as of 1990 (U.S. Department of Commerce, 1993b). As the county’s development plan notes, "The seasonal nature of the housing stock has significant implications for development and planning in Door County. Future land decisions and policies...must consider anticipated part-time population and development patterns" (Door County Development Plan, 1995: 20).

Table 1-1: Population of Door County, 1950-1990

Development trends

Door County is undergoing constant development. One way to document this development trend is to look at the number of building and zoning permits issued in the county. Table 1-2 presents information about the number of permits issued between 1986 and 1998. County data were supplemented with town building permit data for towns that have not adopted county zoning.

The greatest number of permits are issued for the Towns of Liberty Grove, Sevastopol, and Gibraltar. Of the nearly 9,800 zoning permits issued, almost 50 percent were issued in these three towns (21.3 percent Liberty Grove, 15.6 percent Sevastopol, 12.8 percent Gibraltar). As mentioned earlier, Liberty Grove and Gibraltar also experienced significant population increases between the 1980 and 1990 census. Population in Liberty Grove increased 12.8 percent while the number of persons residing in Gibraltar increased by 21 percent (the highest population increase among all county municipalities).

The zoning and building permit data indicate a steady level of development occurring within the county. Determining the total acreage that is being developed is difficult. County zoning permit and town building permit records do not keep track of the amount of land that will be affected by the building and/or remodeling project.

Land use inventories provide an indirect means of determining the total acreage being developed. Land use inventories identify changing land use patterns. The county conducted land use inventories in 1964, 1975, 1979, and 1992. Table 1-3 compares these land use inventories. As the table shows, there has been a continued increase in developed area compared to areas used for natural/agricultural uses. While the county continues to remain largely undeveloped and rural in character, it seems clear that development pressures exist.

Since 1964, there has been a consistent increase in the percentage of land devoted to residential uses. The total amount of developed land in Door County has risen almost 5 percent (to14,488 acres) in the last 30 years. In 1964, only 1.5 percent of Door County=s land area was residential. Approximately 4,723 acres were developed out of the county=s 314,891 total acres. By 1979, the percent of land devoted to residential purposes had risen over 50 percent to 3.6 percent (11,336 acres). As of 1992, 4.0 percent (12,596 acres) of the county=s total land area was residential. During the same time period, there was a steady decline in the amount of land devoted to farmland. In 1975, 51.1 percent (162,169 acres) of the county=s land area was either active or idle farmland. By 1992, the figure had decreased to 47.2 percent (148,629 acres).

Door County is experiencing a continued decline in land-use related to agriculture as property is changed to residential uses. The data indicate that land is being converted to residential uses at a rate nearly equal to an acre a day in the last 30 years.

Table 1-2: Zoning and Building Permits, 1986-1998

Table 1-3; Door County Land Use Changes^¹

The 1995 Door County Development Plan identified the following key points:

The majority of the unincorporated areas of Door County remain undeveloped;
Nearly the entire shoreline of the county is built up with residences, except for public lands and a few other isolated areas;
Several inland areas are developing residentially, particularly areas near the City of Sturgeon Bay and along the bluffs on the Green Bay side of the peninsula;
The greatest concentration of commercial uses is located in the northern towns; and
In all towns, the sheer amount of residential acreage was considerably more than for other categories of developed land" (Door County Development Plan, 1995: 27-28).

Sharper development trends can be noted when focusing on shoreline development. Table 1-4 compares shoreline development from 1964 to1992. Over 50 percent of the undeveloped lands located along the shores of Green Bay and Lake Michigan in 1964 had been developed by 1992. Slightly less than 50 percent of inland lakes shoreline had been developed during the same time period.

As the county=s 1995 development plan noted, A...considerable undeveloped land still exists on the shoreline. A good portion of this remaining land is under protective ownership by private and public entities, or is unlikely to ever develop because of wetland designation or other development constraints... Development pressure has shifted to inland locations such as bluff property...Though some shoreline infill development and redevelopment is sure to occur, the greatest impacts from development during this planning period are likely to occur in inland rural areas@ (Door County Development Plan, 1995: 30).

Table 1-4: Door County Shoreline Development^¹

Characteristics of Wisconsin and Door County Wetlands (Back to TOC)

Introduction

This section provides an overview of wetlands acreage and wetlands permitting activities for the State of Wisconsin and Door County. In addition, Door County is compared to three northeastern Wisconsin counties: Brown, Kewaunee, and Oconto.

Wetlands in Wisconsin

Currently, Wisconsin has approximately 5.3 million acres of wetlands. This represents a decrease of 4.6 million acres of wetlands that were estimated to have covered the state in the 1780s (Dahl, 1990). Agriculture is the main reason for this 46 percent reduction in wetland acreage (U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1999). From 1954 to 1974, agriculture accounted for 81 percent of wetland conversions nationwide while only 8 percent of wetlands losses were due to urban uses (U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1999). However, from 1982 to 1992, urban uses accounted for 57 percent of all wetlands loses compared to 20 percent caused by agricultural uses (U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1999).

Coastal wetlands in Wisconsin account for approximately 23 percent of the 5.3 million acres of wetlands. Coastal wetlands are located within 15 counties that are adjacent to the Great Lakes. Two types of Wisconsin wetlands are found only in the coastal counties: red clay complex wetlands and ridge and swale complexes (Wisconsin Department of Administration, 1999). Red clay complex wetlands are located by Lake Superior and are composed of a mixture of wet and dry clay soils. Ridge and swale complexes formed parallel to Lake Michigan. Depressions (swales) are located between beach ridges and contain wetland vegetation. The ridges, though, are upland.

Wetlands permitting activities: comparing counties in Wisconsin

Table 1-5 compares the total number of wetlands acreage in four Northeastern Wisconsin counties: Brown, Door, Kewaunee and Oconto. According to DNR data, Oconto County has the greatest amount of wetland acreage with nearly 160,000 acres of wetlands, more than 3 times the wetland acreage in Door County and more than 5 times the amount of wetland acreage in Brown and Kewaunee Counties. In addition, wetlands account for the greatest amount of land area within Oconto County. 25 percent of the county is wetlands, compared to 16.2 percent in Door County, 12.5 percent in Kewaunee County, and 8.4 percent in Brown County.

Table 1-5: Comparison of Wetland Acreage in Brown, Door, Kewaunee and Oconto Counties

Given the wide variation in wetland acreage, it may be reasonable to expect variations in wetland permitting activities. Data for wetlands permitting were received from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (the Corps), the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (DNR), and the Environmental Working Group (EWG). Data discrepancies exist and vary depending upon the source.¹ However, some observations may be drawn from the data to get a better picture of how the Corps permitting activities in Door County compare across time and with the state and other counties.

From 1988-1996, EWG estimates that Corps authorized 21,022 activities to dredge or fill wetlands in the state of Wisconsin (Table 1-6). Most of these were general permits, which are permits issues at a regional or national level by the Corps for categories of activities that the agency believes have minimal impact on aquatic ecosystems. Activities that have major impacts require individual permits, and require a more stringent review. As suggested by the table, over 90 percent of the permits granted by the Corps since 1988 have undergone only a cursory review as general permits. Also of interest from the table is that the Corps has approved 99 percent of permits to dredge or fill wetlands presented to the agency.

Permitting statistics for the Counties of Brown, Door, Kewaunee and Oconto are quite similar as shown on Table 1-6. Most permits are general permits (indicating an expedited Corps review process), and the Corps has denied less than one percent of all permits in the years between 1988 and 1996.

Table 1-6: Summary of Wetlands Permitting in Wisconsin, Brown, Door, Kewaunee and Oconto Counties from 1988-1996

Since Oconto County contains the greatest number of wetlands acres among the three counties, it may be assumed that Oconto County may also have the greatest number of Corps= permits issued for wetlands activities. Table 1-7 compares the number of Nationwide Wetlands Permits issued in the four counties from 1988-1996. The Corps issues many permits on a national basis, referred to by the Corps as Nationwide Wetlands Permits. Nationwide Wetlands Permits are general permits that are issued for various categories of wetlands filling or dredging activities that the Corps considers to be minor. (See Chapter 2 for a full discussion of the Corps program.) According to EWG, Brown County had the highest number of authorized activities (461), followed by Oconto County (388), Door (259) and Kewaunee (98). EWG also estimates that authorized activities in Brown County affected 288.5 acres of wetlands, compared to approximately 220 acres in Oconto County, 161 in Door, and only 83 acres in Kewaunee (EWG, 1999). EWG estimates that the nationwide permit program affected an estimated 10,558 acres of wetlands in Wisconsin (EWG, 1999).

Table 1- 8 compares the number of Corps permits issued for activities related to water or wetland filling in the four counties from 1991-1998. According to Corps data, Brown County again had the highest number of permits issued (75). However, Corps data shows Door County had slightly more permits issued that Oconto County. Kewaunee County had significantly fewer permits issued compared to the other three counties.

Even though Corps data indicates Door County had the second highest number of permits issued, the permits affected only 17 acres of wetlands. Oconto County lost the most wetland acreage, approximately 37 acres. Interestingly, while Kewaunee County only had 31 permits issued, the county lost nearly as many acres of wetlands as Door County, which had greater that twice that number of permits issued.

Based on these comparisons, Door County does not Astand out@ as experiencing a significant wetlands loss compared to other northeastern Wisconsin counties. In fact, EWG and Corps data indicate almost the opposite is true. Considering Door County has almost double the amount of wetlands acreage compared to Brown and Kewaunee Counties, it has fewer Corps permits being issued compared to Brown County and fewer wetlands acres lost compared to both counties.

Table 1-7: Comparison of Nationwide Permits Issued in Brown, Door, Kewaunee and Oconto Counties, 1988-1996¹

Table 1-8: Comparison of Corps Permit Actions in Brown, Door, Kewaunee and Oconto Counties, 1991-1998¹

Wetlands permitting: comparing Door County and Wisconsin

Researchers for this report also requested data from the Corps District Office in St. Paul, Minnesota to get some idea how many wetland acres were affected by the issuance of permits by the agency. The data received from the Corps reveal that more than 3,000 permits were issued for water or wetlands filling activities in Wisconsin from 1989-1998. (See Table 1-9.) Although the number of permits is considerably smaller than suggested by the EWG calculations, the trends are the same: roughly 97 percent of permits granted by the Corps are Nationwide and General Wetland Permits. According to the Corps data, 2,594 wetland acres were approved for filling or dredging and 5,300 acres of wetlands were created in Wisconsin through mitigation during that same time period

Table 1-9: Corps Permit Actions in Wisconsin, 1989-1998

The analysis done using the EWG data suggests that in Door County, the Corps authorized 259 Nationwide Wetland Permits activities that affected 161.1 acres of wetlands from 1988-1996 (Tables 1-7 and 1-10). Excluding 1996, there were on average 31 authorized activities in the county that affected an average of 20 acres of wetlands per year.

Table 1-10: Summary of Nationwide Wetlands Permits in Door County, 1988-1996¹

Table 1-11shows information reported by the Corps from 1995-1998 for Door County. According to Corps field data, the agency issued 66 permits for filling or dredging wetlands affecting approximately 17 acres of wetlands in Door County. 62 of those permits were Nationwide Wetland Permits (NWPs) while the remaining 7 were general permits. Several points are noteworthy from the Corps data. First, permitting activity seems to have been increasing in Door County over the last few years. Second, Corps officials granting the permit seldom issue a permit for less than the amount requested on the permit application (17.59 acres of wetland were requested for permits; 17.44 acres were approved). Finally, it appears that the number of acres requested have also increased over the last few years.

Comparing Tables 1-10 and 1-11 also highlight the discrepancies in the two sources of data. The EWG data usually reports more acreage disturbed and more permitting activity, while the Corps data reports fewer disturbed acres and less activity. Attempts to reconcile these data with data from the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (DNR) did not allow the researchers to arrive at a definitive conclusion, as the DNR data often did not agree with the Corps or the EWG numbers. Still, the information is important for identifying trends in wetland permits.

Table 1-11: Corps Permits Actions in Door County, 1995-1998

Wetland permitting activities within Door County Towns

The EWG data can be further broken down to a town-by-town basis. The EWG database includes specific information for each permitted activity. The location of the project could be determined in most cases and provides some clues as to which communities have the most interaction with the Corps wetland permitting process. Table 1-12 summarizes EWG data on Corps activities from 1988-1996 on a town-by-town basis. The data reflect Nationwide Wetland Permits and general permits. All towns, with the exception of the Town of Brussels, had at least one activity requiring a Corps permit.

For more information about the wetlands located in Door County and the towns in the county, refer to the series of maps in Appendix A.

The greatest number of permitted activities occurred within the Towns of Gardner and Liberty Grove. Taken together, these two towns accounted for nearly one-third of all permitted activities in Door County. Towns with the least activity included the Towns of Brussels, Clay Banks, and Jacksonport.

Table 1-12: Summary of Nationwide Permits in Door County by Town, 1988-1996¹

Wetlands in Door County

According to studies done by the DNR and by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), approximately 16 percent of Door County is wetland (DNR, 1994). The 1987 DNR Wisconsin Wetlands Inventory found that Door County has 50,990 acres of wetlands. A 1992 study conducted by the FWS, known as the Special Wetlands Inventory Study (SWIS), identified 50,612 acres of wetlands in the county (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1992).

Table 1-13 details wetlands acreage by township using both the DNR and FWS data. The slight difference in total wetlands acreage between the two agencies can be explained by different interpretations of the aerial photos used to map wetlands. For the purposes of this report, the FWS data will be used because the FWS data provides more precise locational information.²

Table 1-13: Wetlands in Door County

According to the FWS data, the Town of Nasewaupee has the greatest amount of wetland acreage for all of the towns in Door County. 6,166 acres, or about12 percent of all Door County wetlands, are located in the town. Towns that have 10 percent or more of Door County=s wetlands include: Forestville (11.5 percent), Liberty Grove (11.1 percent), Sturgeon Bay (10.6 percent), and Gardner (9.9 percent). The Town of Washington has the smallest amount of wetlands for the county, only 714 acres (1.4 percent). Other towns with minimal wetlands acreage are Egg Harbor (2.3 percent), Union (3.3 percent) and Clay Banks (3.5 percent). The southern portion of the county accounts for 57 percent of the county=s wetlands while the northern portion has 43 percent of the county=s wetlands.

Wetland acreage can also be examined as the total percent of town acreage that is classified as wetlands (Table 1-14). When wetlands are examined as a portion of the town=s land area, the Town of Sturgeon Bay has the greatest percentage of land area classified as wetlands. Over 40 percent of the town is wetlands.

Table 1-14: FWS Wetlands as a Percent of Total Town Acreage

Other towns with a high percentage of their land area classified as wetlands include the Towns of Forestville (25.6 percent), Baileys Harbor (23.8 percent) and Gardner (22.7 percent). The Town of Washington has the smallest amount of land area classified as wetlands. Wetlands only account for 4 percent of the town=s total land area. Other towns with small percentages of land area classified as wetlands include Egg Harbor (4.9 percent), Gibraltar (9.9 percent) and Union (12.1 percent).

Comparing the relative concentration of wetlands in towns can be done by reviewing the series of maps in the Appendix to this report.

Wetland types

Both the DNR and FWS databases classify wetlands using a classification system that recognizes seven different classes of wetlands. These seven classes are:

aquatic bed: plants growing entirely on or in a water body;
moss: wetlands where the uppermost layer of vegetation is moss;
emergent/wet meadow: herbaceous plants which stand above the surface of the water or soil;
scrub/shrub: wood plants less than 20 feet tall;
forested: wood plants taller than 20 feet;
flats/unvegetated wet soil: exposed wet soils which do not support vegetation;
open water: lakes and ponds less than 20 acres in size, all lakes with a maximum depth of 6 feet or less, and unvegetated river sloughs (DNR, 1982).

Four of these wetland classes are found in Door County. Table 1-15 documents these four wetland classes by town. As the table shows, the major class of wetland in Door County is forested wetland. Forested wetlands account for 83.8 percent of all wetlands in the county. Emergent/wet meadow wetlands account for 8.0 percent of all wetlands and scrub/shrub wetlands account for 7.8 percent. One percent of all wetlands are classified as open water.

Door County is one of the 15 Wisconsin counties classified as a coastal county and the county has 4.2 percent of all coastal wetlands within the state. However, the county contains the majority of ridge and swale wetland complexes. Approximately 2,500 acres of wetlands in Door County are ridge and swale wetland complexes, accounting for 51.4 percent of the wetland type within Wisconsin.

Table 1-15: Total Acreage of Wetland Classes by Town

Wetlands under protective ownership

Table 1-16 details wetlands acreage held by public and/or non-profit organizations, by town. Protective owners are unlikely to sell or develop wetlands.

Table 1-16: Protective Ownership of Wetlands in Door County by Town

As the table shows, approximately 17 percent of wetlands in Door County are held in protective ownership. The amount of acreage held in each township varies greatly. No acreage was identified as under protective ownership in the Towns of Brussels and Egg Harbor, while significant portions were identified in the Towns of Baileys Harbor and Liberty Grove. The three towns with the largest amount of wetlands in protective ownership were the Towns of Baileys Harbor, Liberty Grove, and Gardner. Nature/wildlife preserves are present in each of these towns. For example, the majority of wetlands under protective ownership in Baileys Harbor are part of the Ridges Sanctuary.

The SWIS study was conducted in 1991-1992 and it is likely that this information has changed slightly in the last seven years. Property owners were identified via plat books and/or interviews. Since property is constantly being bought and sold, the list of property owners in the database is no longer completely accurate. In addition, there were many occasions where multiple owners were listed for a wetland. For example, the DNR and several private property owners may own portions of the same wetland. Using the database, it was impossible to determine which portion of the wetland was owned by the DNR and which portion by the private property owners. In these instances, all of the wetland acreage was listed under protective ownership by the DNR, even though in reality only a small portion may have been. Additionally, only easily identifiable organizations were included as Aprotective@ organizations. Examples of these organizations include the DNR, University of Wisconsin, Door County, school districts, The Nature Conservancy, YMCA, villages and towns. There may be instances where land is being held in trust by private individuals who plan to protect the wetland.

Despite the limitations of the SWIS data, it appears that some communities are protecting wetland resources at greater levels than others through the use of preservation-related organizations.

Conclusions (Back to TOC)

This chapter provided a brief overview of Door County=s population, development and wetland characteristics. Population and development trends indicate that Door County is experiencing a constant level of growth, especially in incorporated communities. Development pressures continue, with the county losing about one acre of agricultural land per day over the last 30 years. The majority of development pressure has focused on the shoreline areas, with much of this growth attributed to the county=s tourism industry. During peak tourist months, the county=s population can soar to over 60,000 people. Additionally, the number of seasonal housing units is increasing.

Despite these pressures, the county remains largely undeveloped and rural in character. This creates an opportunity to establish programs that will protect wetland resources that remain. Door County has more than 50,000 acres of wetlands, or about one acre in 6 classified as wetland. Home to over half of Wisconsin=s ridge and swale wetland complexes, Door County has unique wetland characteristics. The most predominant type of wetland is forested wetland.

Wetlands vary by community. Wetland acreage varies by town, with the Town of Nasewaupee having more than 6,000 acres of wetlands while the Town of Washington has only 714 acres of wetlands. Some towns, such as Sturgeon Bay, Forestville, Gardner, and Baileys Harbor have more than one-fourth of the town=s land area classified as wetland. Nearly 65 percent of wetlands in Bailey=s Harbor, half of wetlands in Liberty Grove and one-fourth of the wetlands in Gardner enjoy protective ownership, while other towns do not have wetland preservation efforts in place.

Wetlands permitting data provide a picture of what is occurring within the county. Data from EWG indicates that from 1988-1996, Corps authorized activities affected 161.1 acres of wetlands in Door County. Corps data indicate that less than 18 acres of wetlands were affected by Corps authorized activities from 1995-1998. Even though the data are conflicting, they provide a generalized picture of wetlands activities within the county. Wetlands loss is occurring, however, the loss appears to be at a relatively slow rate.

This relatively slow loss of wetlands may be explained by the county=s wetland zoning districts which are described in Chapter 2. The wetland zoning districts protect wetlands from development. However, the wetland zoning districts have limitations. First, they only apply to towns that have adopted countywide zoning. 8 of the county=s 14 towns have adopted countywide zoning. The remaining 6 towns are considered unzoned, with the exception of those portions of the towns that fall within the shoreland protection areas as described in Chapter 2.

Finally, a comparison of Door County to three other northeastern Wisconsin counties revealed that Door County does not seem to be losing a significant level of wetlands as to compared to those counties, despite the number of permits issued by the Corps. In fact, data indicates that Door County appears to be doing a better job at protecting its wetland resources when compared to other counties. This is tempered, however, by continued pressures for residential development in the county.

Endnotes

1.Discrepancies between EWG and the Corps data occur primarily due to two factors. First, the Corp data made available for this study focuses only on water or wetland filling activities. The data primarily included information associated with Nationwide Permits 03 (Maintenance), 12 (Utility Line Backfill/Bedding), 14 (Road Crossings), 26 (Headwaters and Isolated Waters), 27 (Wetland Restoration Activities), and 29 (Single-family Residences); general permits; and individual permits. EWG data, on the other hand, includes data for all types of permitting actions of the Corps, some of which may have no direct impact on a wetland, such as Nationwide 13 that is related to bank stabilization activities such as the installation of riprap and other shoreline erosion control measures. A second reason is due to incomplete data from the St. Paul Office. Corps data show that only two permits were issued for wetlands filling activities for the entire state during 1989Ba number likely to be in error. Due to changes in record keeping and reporting, Corps data have improved in the last few years.

2. The SWIS database includes information on over 1,000 wetlands in Door County, including town/range/section data for each wetland. This allowed each wetland to be assigned to a specific township. The DNR data only includes town/range information for each wetland. Since some townships cross town/range borders, the lack of sectional data required the DNR wetlands information to be lumped into one township since it was impossible to determine an exact township. For example, all of the wetlands acreage in T30N R27E is included in the Town of Gibraltar even though portions of T30N R27E also lie within the Towns of Baileys Harbor and Egg Harbor.

Home | Top | Back to TOC
<-Previous | Next->