2008AP1523 Rock-Koshkonong Lake District v. DNR

Listen to this article

Natural Resources
Target water levels

Under sec. 31.02(1), the DNR is not required to consider the economic effects of its water level determinations on residential property values, business income and tax revenue.

“As DNR observes, Wis. Stat. § 31.02(1) is one of many statutes that identify the factors DNR may take into account when making decisions affecting the environment. Comparing § 31.02(1) to these related statutes, DNR contends that, when the legislature intends the DNR to consider property values or other similar economic impacts in its decision-making, it does so explicitly. We agree.”

“For example, the statute authorizing the DNR to grant a permit to change the course of a stream requires it to consider whether the proposed change ‘will improve the economic or aesthetic value of the applicant’s land.’ Wis. Stat. § 30.195(2)(c)2. Another statute, Wis. Stat. § 285.01(12), requires the DNR to take ‘into account energy, economic and environmental impacts and other costs’ when determining whether a particular air pollution control option is the ‘best available control technology.’ Wisconsin. Stat. § 31.06(3)(b) provides that DNR may grant a permit for the construction, maintenance or operation of a proposed dam if the applicant meets certain criteria and the proposal is “in the public interest, considering ecological, aesthetic, economic and recreational values.” These statutes show that, when the legislature wants the DNR to take into account property values and other economic effects in its decision-making, it does so in clear, unambiguous language.”

Affirmed.

Recommended for publication in the official reports.

2008AP1523 Rock-Koshkonong Lake District v. DNR

Dist. IV, Rock County, Dillon, J., Higginbotham, J.

Attorneys: For Appellant: O’Connor, William P., Madison; Peranteau, Mary Beth, Madison; For Respondent: Kloppenburg, Joanne F., Madison; Sweeney, Charles V., Madison; Olson, Mitchell R., Madison

Full Text