2001-02 Scorecard

Wisconsin League of Conservation Voters

CONSERVATION SCORECARD CONSERVATION SCORECARD

Dear Scorecard Reader, Dear Scorecard Reader, Scorecard Reader, Scorecard Reader,

Welcome to the first edition of the Wisconsin League of Conservation Voters' Conservation Scorecard. The WLCV believes that the best way to assure the protection of the environment is to elect people who will enact sound environmental laws. We also believe that conservation and the environment should be non-partisan issues. Republicans, Democrats, and "third-party" voters all benefit from a clean environment.

The scorecard process began when we invited over 50 individuals active in environmental and conservation groups in Wisconsin to review our list of possible scorecard issues. Based on those suggestions, the Advisory Committee recommended a list of votes, and the WLCV Board approved the final choices.

This scorecard analyzes votes on key issues in the Wisconsin Senate, Assembly, and several legislative committees. It then presents tallies of how legislators voted on these issues. The end result is not a reflection of what party a legislator belongs to, but what values their voting record reflects.

Some people would like to separate hunters and anglers from environmentalists, insisting that these groups have different values and objectives. We don't believe that's true. We all want to breathe clean air, drink clean water, swim in clear lakes and streams, hike or hunt in unspoiled forests. We all need safe and livable communities, and we all want to leave a world that is a better place for our children than the one we came into. In short, we all have common goals.

Wisconsin has a rich tradition of being in the forefront of the conservation and environmental movements. Aldo Leopold is perhaps the best known of our homegrown conservation leaders. An avid hunter and angler, Leopold grew to understand the connection between soil and water conservation and wildlife habitat. Far ahead of his time, he saw the need to manage wildlife on a sustainable basis, recognized the role of wolves in the fabric of nature, and extolled the virtues of preserving wild places. In more recent times, many others in Wisconsin, including Governor Warren Knowles and Senator Gaylord Nelson, have carried on Leopold's legacy. We hope you will join us in using this Conservation Scorecard to assess the level of conservation leadership in Wisconsin Legislators.

The 2001-2002 legislative session opened following a U.S. Supreme Court decision removing federal protection from isolated wetlands. This court ruling led to Wisconsin's most important piece of conservation legislation of those two years. On January 9, 2001, the nation's high court ruled that federal wetland protection does not extend to "isolated" wetlands not connected to navigable water. Isolated wetlands are important for plants and waterfowl and for water quality and groundwater recharge. Only 50% of Wisconsin's original wetlands still exist, and this ruling put an important portion of those at risk.

Continued on p. 2

CLEAN AIR CLEAN AIR CLEAN WATER CLEAN WATER CLEAR CHOICES CLEAR CHOICES

How To “Read” the Scorecard

Members of the Wisconsin Legislature are scored on votes they cast on the floor of each chamber. There are 10 scorecard votes in the Senate, and 8 scorecard votes in the Assembly. Each bill or legislative proposal is listed and discussed before each chamber's scorecard. When you read the scorecards, please note that a "+" means a proconservation vote. The top of each table shows whether that is a "Yes" or a "No" vote on each item.

As the charts to the right indicate, there are a wide range of scores in the two chambers. If you view these scores like a report card, it becomes clear that many members of both chambers would receive a failing grade. It is also clear that some are "failing" more than others, while many are "passing" with flying colors!

It appears that the members of the Senate are more proconservation than the members of the Assembly. We should note, however, that many votes in the Assembly are decided in each party's caucus. When that happens, party members are expected to vote with their caucus on the floor. It is likely that some members of the Assembly would have better scores if they were allowed to vote their conscience, but that isn't apparent from the data.

WLCV Board of Directors

George E. Meyer, Chair

Walter J. Chilsen

Donald Last

Susan Mudd

William Pielsticker

Pamela Porter

Steve Schmucki

Elizabeth Wessel

Following the Senate and Assembly votes, there are additional sections for several committees that have critical roles in conservation legislation. Many critical conservation issues are worked out and decided within committees, before the issue reaches the floor. We encourage you to consider the votes members cast on these committees when you evaluate the voting record of any individual member of the legislature.

Dear Scorecard Reader (Continued from p. 1)

Scorecard Advisory Committee*

William Pielsticker, Chair

Southern Wisconsin Trout Unlimited

Todd Ambs

River Alliance of Wisconsin

Barry Ashenfelter

Former Exec. Director WLCV

Dave Cieslewicz

1000 Friends of Wisconsin

Lisa Conley

Wisconsin Association of Lakes

Bob Elliker

Isaac Walton League, Wisconsin Div.

Ray Guries

American Society of Foresters

Harald E. Jordahl

The Nature Conservancy – Wisc. Chapter

Bucky Kilishek

Wisconsin Wildlife Federation

Charles Luthin

Wisconsin Wetlands Association

George E. Meyer

Former Secretary, Wisconsin DNR

Keith Reopelle

State Environmental Leadership Project

John Schwarzmann ECCOLA

Jeffrey Smith

Wisconsin Trout Unlimited

Caryl Terrell

Sierra Club - Wisconsin

* Organizations shown for identification purposes only.

All photos by Bill Pielsticker © 1998-2002

One month after the court decision, the state Senate passed a bill to extend state protection to the "isolated" wetlands put at risk by the Court. However, the Assembly failed to take up the Senate measure. Over the next several months, the Senate and the Assembly were unable to agree on how to proceed.

While the two chambers deadlocked over an acceptable "fix," pressure mounted from a broad range of groups to return protection to these valuable pothole wetlands and other marshes not connected to a navigable waterway. Very importantly, those who attended the 2001 Conservation Congress spring hearings overwhelmingly voted in support of legislation to protect these wetlands. In the end, Governor McCallum called a special session of the legislature, which passed landmark legislation restoring nearly all the protection isolated wetlands had enjoyed before the Supreme Court decision. This was a great victory for Wisconsin's natural resources!

There were other clear victories, some mixed results, and a number of losses. Efforts to hamstring the DNR were turned back, and moves to cut back on the Stewardship fund were defeated. One disappointment was the effort by both the Assembly and the Senate to exempt a single business from Wisconsin's wetland protection laws. It remained for the Governor to veto the Budget Reform Bill provision, which would have allowed Ashley Furniture Industries, Inc. to destroy a valuable floodplain wetland along the Trempealeau River. However, the Governor's line-item veto all-but erased the minimal legislative attempt to address the impact of high capacity wells on Wisconsin's waters. Meanwhile, bills to prohibit the use of cyanide in metallic mining and to distribute a greater portion of the motor fuel tax to resource protection were defeated.

This Scorecard enables you to see how Wisconsin's legislators voted on these and other issues during 2001 and 2002. We encourage you to use it well, and to continue to refer to it during next year's legislative session. Don't be afraid to remind your representatives that this state has a long and proud conservation heritage and it is their responsibility to support good conservation legislation!

George E. Meyer

George E. Meyer

Bill Pielsticker President, Wisconsin League of Conservation Voters Past-President and Chair, WLCV 2002 Scorecard Committee

SENATE SCORECARD

Senate Floor Vote Descriptions

1) SB3 – Making the appointment of the Secretary of the DNR the responsibility of the Natural Resources Board. Since 1996, the Governor has had the authority to appoint the Secretary of the DNR. SB3 would return that authority to the Natural Resources Board, thereby reducing the likelihood that the Secretary of the DNR would be subject direct political pressure when making decisions about the state's natural resources. A "Yes" vote is pro-conservation Passed 20-13 on 2/13/01. This bill died when not taken up by the Assembly Committee on Natural Resources.

2) ASA1 to SJR2 – Creating a new section of the Wisconsin Constitution to guarantee the right to fish, hunt, trap and take game. This resolution supports amending the state constitution to protect the hunting and fishing rights that are part of Wisconsin's heritage. A "Yes" vote is pro-conservation Passed 32-1 on 5/8/01. Also passed the Assembly. Must be passed a second time by both chambers, then submitted to the public for a referendum.

3) SB370 – Creates a new regulatory structure under the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) for captive wildlife and expands the scope of certain licensing and registration requirements administered by the department of agriculture, trade and consumer protection (DATCP). Among its provisions, SB370 requires the DNR to establish rules to ensure that humane treatment and adequate and sanitary housing are provided to captive wildlife; imposes new regulatory measures on native reptiles and amphibians; prohibits the sale of gall bladders from the carcasses of captive bears, and expands DATCP authority to control diseases in domestic animals and livestock to include captive wildlife. A "Yes" vote is pro-conservation Passed 24-8 on 3/8/02. Also passed the Assembly. Signed by the Governor on 4/3/02. See Assembly Floor Vote #3 for additional discussion.

4) SB1MY2 – Enabling the DNR to regulate the feeding and method of taking of wild game to combat the spread of Chronic Wasting Disease (CWD) in the state's whitetail deer herd. Following the regular legislative session in the spring of 2002, the Governor called a special session to enact legislation to enable the DNR to pursue its plans to control CWD in Wisconsin. While individuals may oppose certain provisions of this bill, it appears to be a reasonable approach to combating CWD given the current state of knowledge about its origin and extent in the wild deer population. A "Yes" vote is pro-conservation Passed 32-0 on 5/15/02. Passed by the Assembly, signed into law 5/18/02. (Note: If CWD is found in deer outside the area near Mt. Horeb, the DNR's plans to combat the disease may need substantial revision.)

5) SB37 – Closing a loophole for isolated wetlands opened by a U.S. Supreme Court decision in January 2001. SB37 would have required the DNR to regulate isolated wetlands under state law, returning these areas to the same, protected status they had prior to the court ruling. See Senate Vote #7 for additional discussion. A "Yes" vote is pro-conservation Passed 27-6 on 2/13/01. Died in the Assembly Committee on Environment.

6) SB54 – A moratorium on the filling of isolated wetlands for which Army Corps of Engineers permits are no longer required. A measure to prohibit dredging or filling all isolated wetlands in Wisconsin until legislation is implemented returning these wetlands to the same protected status they had prior to the U.S. Supreme Court decision. A "Yes" vote is pro-conservation Passed 21-12 on 3/13/01. See Assembly Floor Vote #4 for additional discussion. SB54 was not passed in the Assembly, but see Senate Floor Vote #7 for the final legislation.

7) SB1MY1 – A compromise bill to effectively close the loophole created by the Supreme Court decision which removed federal protection from isolated wetlands. This was the most important piece of environmental legislation during this session. Despite pressure from hunters, anglers, and environmentalists, the Senate and the Assembly failed to agree on how to proceed. Following the end of the regular legislative session, the Governor called the legislature back for a special session where it took up SB1MY1, a compromise bill to protect nearly all of the wetlands the court decision put at risk. A "Yes" vote is pro-conservation Passed 33-0 on 5/1/01. Also passed the Assembly. Signed by the Governor on 5/7/01. Notwithstanding some minor exceptions written into this bill, with its passage Wisconsin became the first state to return protection to isolated wetlands in the wake of the Supreme Court decision.

8) SA3 to SSA1 to AB1JR2 – An amendment to the Assembly's budget repair bill providing an exception to current state law which would give the Governor authority to enable Ashley Furniture to fill a 13 acre wetland in Trempealeau County. The company never formally applied to the DNR for a permit to fill the wetland, and a similar provision in a previous budget bill was ruled unconstitutional by a state circuit court. A "No" vote is pro-conservation Passed 22-11 on 4/5/02. During the regular legislative session the Assembly passed a similar provision. This Senate version was included in the 2002 Budget Adjustment bill. Ashley Furniture Industries, Inc. later announced they were expanding production at another plant and no longer needed this exemption, but urged that it be signed into law. This provision was eventually vetoed by the Governor.

Continued on Page 4

5 Senators Named Conservation "Champs" Members of Senate Environmental Resources Committee

We have selected the five members of the Senate Environmental Resources Committee to designate as this year's Conservation Champs. Senators James Baumgart, Robert Cowles, Dave Hansen, Dale Schultz, and Robert Wirch stood together in resisting efforts to weaken the proposal to protect isolated wetlands.

The legislation to protect isolated wetlands under state law was needed after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that federal law did not apply to wetlands not connected to navigable waters. Just one month after the high court ruling, these five Senators approved the first bill introduced to accomplish this goal and sent it to the Senate. Over the next three months, the members of the

Senate Committee on Environmental Resources resisted concerted efforts to approve inferior proposals.

When the regular legislative session ended without a bill, the Governor called a special session. The resulting bill closely reflects the initial legislation the committee had approved three months earlier. Upon approval of SB1MY1, Wisconsin became the first state to extend protection to these isolated wetlands, and became a model for other states to follow.

Throughout the legislative session the Committee members showed strong leadership and worked in a bipartisan fashion to forge strong environmental legislation. They should serve as a model to the full legislature. For that, we salute them!

SENATE SCORECARD (Cont.)

9) SB160 – Prohibiting the use of cyanide in metallic mining in the state of Wisconsin. Cyanide is sometimes used to leach metals from metallic ore. This method can produce large quantities of toxic, cyanide-contaminated waste, which, if released to a lake or river, can destroy aquatic habitat. This bill was written to protect the headwaters of the Wolf River from possible contamination by the proposed mine near Crandon, Wisconsin. A "Yes" vote is pro-conservation Passed 19-14 on 11/6/01. Died in the Assembly Environment Committee.

10) SSA1 to SB271 – A measure to subject the mining industry to the same Wisconsin laws regarding solid and hazardous waste as other industries in the state. In addition to requiring the mining industry to treat its by-products the same as other industries, this measure would also remove the current exemption for mining operations from state groundwater law. SSA1 strengthens the language of the bill, especially regarding groundwater regulations. A "Yes" vote is pro-conservation Passed 18-15 on 11/6/01. Died in the Assembly Environment

2001-2002 Senate Scorecard Votes

Speaker: CHUCK CHVALA

* = Served only part of a term.

** = Does not include all 10 votes.

nv = not voting (if the absence caused the defeat of a pro-conservation measure, the nv is changed to a minus)

na = not applicable (usually due to serving only part of the term)

ASSEMBLY SCORECARD

Assembly Floor Vote Descriptions

1) SJR2 - Creating a new section of the Wisconsin Constitution to guarantee the right to fish, hunt, trap and take game. This resolution supports amending the state constitution to protect the hunting and fishing rights that are part of Wisconsin's heritage. A "Yes" vote is pro-conservation Passed 93-4 on 5/1/01. Also passed the Senate. Must be passed a second time by both chambers, then submitted to the public for a referendum.

2) SB370 – Creating a new regulatory structure under the department of natural resources (DNR) for captive wildlife and expands the scope of certain licensing and registration requirements administered by the Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection (DATCP). See Senate vote #3 for discussion. A "Yes" vote is pro-conservation Passed 99-0 on 3/7/02. Also passed the Senate. Signed by the Governor on 4/3/02.

3) SB1MY2 – A bill to enable the DNR to regulate the feeding and method of taking of wild game to combat the spread of Chronic Wasting Disease (CWD) in the state's whitetail deer herd. While individuals may oppose certain provisions of this bill, it appears to be a reasonable approach to combating CWD given the current state of knowledge about its origin and extent in the wild deer population. A "Yes" vote is proconservation Passed 90-6 on 5/15/02. Passed by the Senate, and signed into law 5/18/02. See Senate vote #4 for additional discussion.

4) ASA1 to SB54 – Vote on a motion to reject a time limit on a Senate-passed moratorium on the filling of isolated wetlands until legislation could be implemented to return those wetlands to the protected status they enjoyed prior to a U.S. Supreme Court decision in January, 2001. A "Yes" vote to reject the time limit is pro-conservation The rejection motion failed 40-57 on 3/20/01. The Assembly voted to allow the moratorium to expire July 1, 2001 even if new legislation had not been passed. This issue was finally resolved in a special session (see vote #5, below).

5) SB1MY1 – A compromise bill to close the loophole created by the Supreme Court decision which removed federal protection from isolated wetlands. This was the most important piece of environmental legislation during this legislative

session. See Senate vote #7 for a complete discussion. Following the end of the regular legislative session, the Governor called the legislature back for a special session where it took up SB1MY1, a compromise bill to protect nearly all of the wetlands the court decision put at risk. A "Yes" vote is pro-conservation Passed 94-0 on 5/3/01. Also passed the Senate. Signed by the Governor on 5/7/01. Despite some minor exceptions written into this bill, with its passage Wisconsin became the first state to return protection to these wetlands.

6) AB580 – An individual bill to allow Ashley Furniture to fill 13 acres of wetland on the banks of the Trempealeau River. This bill was introduced after a similar provision contained in the 1999-2001 state budget that was found to be unconstitutional by a state circuit court. Ashley Furniture Industries, Inc. never formally applied to the DNR for a permit to fill these wetlands, and appears to have never seriously examined less-damaging alternatives to their plans. Instead, the company applied to the legislature to be exempted from state law. A "No" vote is proconservation Passed 71-27 on 11/6/01. A similar provision was included in the 2002 budget fix legislation (see Senate Vote #8), but vetoed by the Governor.

7) AA5 to AA1 to ASA1 to SB55 – A motion to table (or kill) an effort to restore funds (in the form of full bonding authority) to the Stewardship Fund. This motion was prompted by a 38% cut in the Stewardship bonding authority contained in the Assembly budget bill for 2001-2003. The Stewardship Fund provides money for the acquisition of land deemed important to preserving the integrity of Wisconsin's plants, animals, and landscapes. It receives money from state bonds and does not have a direct impact on the state's budget. A "no" vote on this motion is a pro-conservation vote to restore full funding to the Stewardship Fund. Motion to table passed 5742 on 6/29/01. The final 2001-2003 budget rejected this cut and retained full bonding authority for the Stewardship Fund.

8) AB365 – Relating to the newspaper recycling fee and the recycled content of newsprint used in Wisconsin newspapers. Current law has targets for recycled content of 33% in 1998, 37% in 2001, and 40% in 2003. If those targets aren't met, the publisher pays a newspaper recycling fee based on the volume of newsprint used. This bill would cap the recycled content at 33%, the target for 1998. A "No" vote is proconservation Passed 67-30 on 11/1/01. Substantially amended by the Senate Environmental Resources Committee (Committee

2001-2002 Assembly Scorecard Votes

2001-2002 Assembly Scorecard Votes

2001-2002 Assembly Scorecard Votes

* = Served only part of a term.

** = Does not include all 8 votes.

nv = not voting (if the absence caused the defeat of a pro-conservation measure, the nv is changed to a minus)

na = not applicable (usually due to serving only part of the term)

KEY COMMITTEE REVIEWS

While one use of the Senate and Assembly Scorecard votes is to compare one legislator with another, many important votes are taken in committee. Since legislative committees do not include all legislators, these votes cannot be included in the Scorecard. However, committees frequently function as "gatekeepers," determining which bills advance to the floor and which don't, and their actions can be extremely important. In addition, some items that are voted on in committee but not taken up on the floor may return the following session. The following reviews include some of the votes taken in key committees during the 2001-2002 legislative sessions and special sessions.

Assembly Committee on Environment

1) AB215 – Enacting a moratorium on the filling of isolated wetlands for which Army Corps of Engineers permits are no longer required following a January 2001 U.S. Supreme Court ruling. This bill contains an undesirable sunset provision (July 1, 2001) after which, if no "fix" were enacted, substantial areas of wetland would be at risk. It also contains a number of exemptions not contained in an alternate bill, SB 54. A "No" vote is proconservation Passed 6-4 on 3/16/01. Passed the Assembly on 3/20/01, and referred to the Senate where it died. See Senate Floor Votes #5-7 and Assembly Floor Votes #4-5 for additional discussion and information.

2) AB322 – A bill to "fix" the loopholes opened up by the U.S. Supreme Court decision on isolated wetlands. This bill contains a number of exemptions and extraneous provisions that were not included in the Senate alternative, SB 37. A "No" vote is pro-conservation Passed 6-4 on 4/25/01. It was tabled in the Assembly on 5/3/01. A compromise bill covering isolated wetlands was passed by both houses and signed by the Governor a few days later. See Senate Floor Vote #7 for additional information.

3) AB580 - An individual bill to allow Ashley Furniture to fill 13 acres of wetland adjacent to the Trempealeau River. A "No" vote is pro-conservation Passed 6-4 on 11/1/01. Passed by the Assembly 11/6/01, died in the Senate. A similar provision in the 2002 Budget Adjustment Bill was vetoed by the Governor. See Assembly Floor Vote #6 and Senate Floor Vote #8 for additional information.

4) AB365 – A bill to roll back the current schedule to increase recycled content for newsprint used in newspapers printed in Wisconsin. A "No" vote is pro-conservation Passed 6-4 on 10/15/01. Eventually died in the Senate. See Assembly Floor Vote #8 for additional information. Also see the Senate Environmental Resources Committee Vote #10 for an alternative to this rollback.

5) AB598 – Requiring the DNR to identify oceangoing vessels in Wisconsin waters on the Great Lakes which may not be complying with ballast water practices aimed at keeping nuisance plants and animals from being introduced into the Great Lakes. These non-native species threaten commercial, agricultural, and recreational uses of these waters, as well as inland waters flowing into them. A "Yes" vote is proconservation Passed 10-0 on 1/16/02. Died in the Assembly where it never reached the floor.

Assembly Committee on Environment Votes

Chair: Neal Kedzie

Assembly Committee on Natural Resources

1) AB251 – A bill to restrict the time during which sturgeon spearing licenses may be purchased. In past years, when weather and water conditions leading up to the season were ideal, there have been last-minute rushes to purchase licenses causing the harvest to frequently exceed its annual quota on the first day of the season. AB251 stops the sale of most licenses in November. The goal is to exercise better control over the harvest numbers and extend the number of days before the quota is reached. A "Yes" vote is pro-conservation Passed 13-0 on 4/18/01 Later passed both houses by voice votes and signed by the Governor on 4/15/02.

2) AB602 – A bill to change the rules currently governing the placement of structures (piers) on the bed of most Wisconsin lakes and streams. This bill would exempt structures in place as of 1/1/01 from DNR rules, and require the DNR to rewrite the existing rules for future permits. While the current rules may need revision, simply permitting all existing structures ignores those that contravene local shore land ordinances or otherwise would not be allowed under the current rules. A "No" vote is proconservation Passed 7-4 on 1/31/02. Died without being taken up by the Assembly. This issue may be brought up again next session.

Assembly Committee on Natural Resources Votes

Chair: DUWAYNE JOHNSRUD

nv = not voting (if the absence caused the defeat of a pro-conservation measure, the nv is changed to a minus)

Senate Environmental Resources Committee

1) SB3 – Making the appointment of the Secretary of the DNR the responsibility of the Natural Resources Board. See Senate Floor Vote #1 for discussion. A "Yes" vote is pro-conservation

Passed 5-0 on 2/8/01. Passed the Senate on 2/13/01. Died in Assembly Committee on Natural Resources.

2) SSA1 to SB37 – Closing a loophole for isolated wetlands opened by a U.S. Supreme Court decision. This was the initial attempt to extend state regulation to the wetlands no longer protected by federal law. A "Yes" vote is pro-conservation

Passed 5-0 on 2/8/01. See Senate Floor Vote #5 for discussion.

3) SSA1 to SB54 – A moratorium on the filling of isolated wetlands for which Army Corps of Engineers permits are no longer required. Initial attempt to enact a moratorium on dredging or filling isolated wetlands prior to the implementation of a law to protect them. Contains no sunset provision. A "Yes" vote is proconservation Passed 4-0 on 3/12/01. Passed in the Senate. Amended in the Assembly to expire 7/1/01, then died in the Senate. See Senate Floor Vote #6 for discussion. See Senate Floor Vote #7 for the final bill to protect isolated wetlands.

4) SSA1 to SB44 – A bill to expand DNR's authority to regulate high capacity wells. This bill would enable the DNR to prohibit the use of individual wells to produce bottled drinking water, require an environmental impact statement for each permit to produce bottled drinking water, and enable the department to regulate withdrawals that adversely affect surface water. A "Yes" vote is pro-conservation Passed 5-0 on 3/8/01. Died in the Senate. Also see Joint Finance Committee Vote #4 (2001-2003 Biennial Budget) for a related item. This issue is likely to come up again next term.

5) SB159 – A bill to prohibit any person from drilling beneath the beds of the Great Lakes or bays or harbors that are adjacent to the Great Lakes to explore for or produce oil or gas. This bill expands the current limitations to any drilling beneath the Great Lakes. A "Yes" vote is pro-conservation Passed 5-0 on 6/7/01. Died in the Senate.

6) SB160 – A bill prohibiting the use of cyanide in metallic mining in the State of Wisconsin. See Senate Floor Vote #9 for discussion. A "Yes" vote is pro-conservation Passed 4-1 on 6/18/01. Died in the Assembly Environment Committee.

7) SB271 – A measure to subject the mining industry to the same state laws regarding solid and hazardous waste as other industries in the state. See Senate Floor Vote #10 for discussion. A "Yes" vote is pro-conservation Passed 4-1 on 10/31/01. Died in the Assembly Environment Committee.

8) SB468 – Revising the formula for determining how much of Wisconsin's gasoline tax receipts are paid for by the purchase of motorboat fuels, then using the additional revenue for establishing several new programs with the added revenue from that change. SB468 would provide the DNR with more money from the revenues collected from the state motor fuels excise tax (it would redistribute money already collected, not raise the motor fuel tax). With these extra funds, the bill would establish a Wetlands Protection Grant program, fund wetlands mitigation activities, provide additional funds for the Lake Management Grants and River Protection Grant programs. It would also provide counties funds for implementing the Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program and county land and water resource programs. A "Yes" vote is pro-conservation Passed 4-1 on 3/7/02. Died in the Senate. This is likely to be re-introduced next term.

Senate Environmental Resources Committee (Cont.)

9) AB251 – A bill to restrict the time during which sturgeon spearing licenses may be purchased. See Assembly Committee on Natural Resources Vote #1 for discussion. A "Yes" vote is pro-conservation Passed 5-0 on 1/29/01. Later passed both houses by voice votes (votes not recorded) and signed by the Governor on 4/15/02.

10) SSA1 to AB365 – A bill relating to the newspaper recycling fee and the recycled content of newsprint used in Wisconsin newspapers. This amendment removes the rollback of required recycled content in newsprint contained in AB365. It replaces the rollback with a waiver mechanism that the DNR may implement to reduce the recycled content requirements if, upon petition, it determines they are not economically feasible for individual publishers. See Assembly Floor Vote # 8 for discussion. A "Yes" vote is pro-conservation Passed 5-0 on 3/8//02. Died in the Senate.

11) CR00-25,26,27,28 – Administrative rules replacing the current Priority Watershed Program with a new program to reduce non-point pollution (polluted runoff) from cities, farms, constructions sites, and road building projects. These rules began with a provision in the 1997 state budget. Following years of discussion, hearings, and revisions, a compromise set of rules was forwarded to this committee for review. A motion was made to return the rules for several revisions, including reconsideration of the Board's decision not to include a requirement for vegetative buffer strips along sensitive lakes and streams. A "Yes" vote is pro-conservation Passed 5-0 on 3/7/02. A final compromise was reached in June 2002, committing the DNR to promulgate rules for riparian buffer strips by 2008.

Senate Environmental Resources Committee Votes

2001-2002 Joint Committee on Finance

The following reviews of actions taken by the Joint Committee on Finance (JFC) cover the original budget for 2001-2003, and the Budget Adjustment Bill of 2002. In general, the WLCV and many other conservation organizations feel that policy items should not be included in the budget. Often, however, that is exactly what happens, since the budget is one bill that must pass and be signed into law. That being the case, we feel we should highlight some of the more important environmental and conservation issues that JFC voted on, and let you know their ultimate disposition.

Eight members from the Senate and eight from the Assembly form the JFC. It has Senate and Assembly co-chairs. It plays its most prominent role in budget bills. At the same time, the JFC also votes on other pieces of legislation that have an impact on the state budget, including new programs and revisions to existing programs and legislation. These reviews focus only on JFC budget votes and do not necessarily reflect JFC action on other bills.

Budget Terms:

GPR – General public revenue, or tax revenue collected by the state without limits on how it is spent.

SEG – Segregated funds are taxes like the motor fuels excise tax that go to specific uses and can be used for nothing else.

PR – Program revenue is money raised by user fees that fund specific programs and services.

JFC: 2001-2003 Biennial Budget

1) Motion 171 – Family Farm Protection Act. Motion to provide $2,225,000 GPR to DATCP and $380,700 PR to establish a cost-share program and other services to assist farmers interested in, or transitioning to, managed intensive grazing or organic systems for agricultural production for small producers (fewer than 300 animal units). Its goal is to help preserve the small farms that remain a backbone to our rural economy. A "Yes" vote is pro-conservation Failed on tie vote on 5/15/01.

2) Motion 273 – Sturgeon Spearing Licenses. Motion to change the time period during which sturgeon spearing licenses can be purchased. A "Yes" vote is pro-conservation Adopted 15-1. Included in budget. Vetoed by the Governor. Taken up again in Assembly Bill 251, passed both chambers and signed by the Governor. See Assy. Comm. On Natural Resources Vote #1 for additional discussion.

3) Motion 281 – Prohibit Oil and Gas Drilling Beneath the Great Lakes. Motion to adopt the provisions of SB159. A "Yes" vote is pro-conservation Failed on tie vote, 5/16/01. See Sen. En. Res. Comm. Vote # 5 for additional discussion.

4) Motion 282 – Regulation of High Capacity Wells. Motion to adopt SSA1 to SB44 giving the authority to DNR to regulate high-capacity wells for the production of bottled water, require an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for such wells. See Sen. En. Res. Comm. Vote #4 for discussion. Would apply retroactively to 9/1/2000. Also calls for a Legislative Council study to examine the issue of groundwater usage in the state. A "Yes" vote is pro-conservation Adopted 14-2 on 5/16/01. Later amended to require the DNR to insure that such wells do not adversely affect surface water resources. This measure was included in the budget. Items regarding the EIS, surface water protection and the Legislative Council study were vetoed by the Governor.

5) Motion 619 – Pest Management by School Districts. Motion to implement standards for kindergarten through high school (K-12) schools to develop and carry out pest management plans that minimize exposure to hazardous pesticides, and provide $136,400 SEG funds in 2001-2002 and $88,000 SEG in 2002-2003 to provide personnel to help districts implement such plans. A "Yes" vote is pro-conservation Adopted 10-6 on 5/15/01. Included in the budget. The Governor vetoed a series of reporting requirements in this item.

6) Motion 625 – Arsenic in Wood. Motion to require DATCP and the Commerce Dept. to develop a comprehensive plan to phase out the purchase of arsenic treated wood (arsenic is frequently used in wood preservation treatments), a plan to keep such products from being used at K-12 playgrounds and municipal parks, and strategies to assist any Wisconsin businesses that treat wood in this manner to convert to another wood-preserving process. Report to be submitted to JFC by 12/31/02. A "Yes" vote is pro-conservation Adopted 11-5 on 5/15/01. Later amended to require DATCP and Commerce to review the scientific evidence for the likelihood that such wood treatments are harmful to health or the environment. This measure was included in budget. Requirements to report the findings to the Legislature and to the JFC were vetoed by the Governor.

7) Motion 626 – Wisconsin Grazing Lands Conservation Initiative. Motion to create the Wisconsin Grazing Lands Conservation Initiative and to provide $100,000 GPR each fiscal year through June 30, 2006. The goal of this measure is to improve and expand the use of grazing-based systems of livestock production on private land and to foster environmental stewardship. This is a less comprehensive alternative to the Family Farm Protection Act (see JFC Vote #1, above). A "Yes" vote is pro-conservation Failed 7-9 on 5/15/01.

8) Alt. 1 to Paper 635 – Re-organize the Department of Natural Resources into two agencies. Under this measure, the DNR would be split into two agencies: a conservation agency and an environmental agency. When this was done in Michigan, the result was higher costs for the two agencies, a lower level of environmental enforcement, and poor coordination between the tow agencies. A "No" vote is pro-conservation Failed on a tie vote on 6/5/01. An alternative measure to remove the forestry division from the DNR and create a separate Forestry Department was eventually included in the budget. The forestry provision was vetoed by the Governor. This veto was proconservation.

9) Motion 914 – Air Monitoring Sites. This motion would move the air monitoring sites for ozone levels at least one mile from Lake Michigan. The net effect would be to reduce the number of ozone violations simply by moving the location of the monitors (not by reducing the level of ozone). A "No" vote is proconservation Failed on a tie vote on 5/24/01.

JFC: 2002 Budget Adjustment Bill

1) Motion 184 – Redistribute proposed budget cuts between state parks and the DNR Water Division. This motion would delete the Governor's recommended cuts to the state park operations and road budgets and instead increase the cuts to the DNR Water Division operations budget ($366,800 in 2001-2002, $470,300 in 2002-2003). A "No" vote is pro-conservation Adopted 11-5 on 2/27/02. However, this provision was not included in the final budget bill.

2) SSAB-1 – Comprehensive Planning Grants. Motion to remove the Governor's reduction of $350,000 in the budget for Comprehensive Planning (Smart Growth) Grants. These planning grants are designed to assist cities and counties in their efforts to comply with the Smart Growth law. A "Yes" vote is pro-

conservation Failed on a tie vote on 2/28/02. The Assembly later voted to cut the planning grants even further, while the Senate voted to increase them beyond current law. The final budget left the Comprehensive Planning Grants at their current level, a pro-conservation outcome.

3) SSAB-1 – Use of Energy Conservation Public Benefit Funds for State Agency Fuel Costs. Motion is to rescind the Governor's proposal to remove $20 million from the energy conservation program of the Public Benefits Fund and use the money to pay for state agency energy costs. This fund was created as part of an important compromise in the 1999 omnibus energy bill. A "Yes" vote is pro-conservation Failed on a tie vote on 2/28/02.

JFC: 2002 Budget Adjustment Bill Votes

MOORE, Gwendolynne (D-4)

PLACHE, Kimberly (D-21)

SHIBILSKI, Kevin (D-24)

WELCH, Robert (R-14)

WIRCH, Robert (D-22)

DUFF, Marc (R-98)

GARD, John (R-89)

HUBER, Gregory (D-85)

HUEBSCH, Michael (R-94)

KAUFERT, Dean (R-55)

WARD, David (R-37)

CLEAN AIR CLEAN WATER CLEAR CHOICES

THE WISCONSIN LEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS

THE WISCONSIN LEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS

Is a nonprofit, nonpartisan organization dedicated to electing conservation leaders to the state legislature and encouraging lawmakers to champion conservation policies that effectively protect Wisconsin's public health and natural resources. In pursuit of its mission, the WLCV engages in voter education, lobbying, and issue advocacy. The WLCV also issues candidate endorsements and actively works for the election of candidates committed to strong and effective conservation policies.

The WLCV is affiliated with the Federation of State Conservation Voter Leagues. It is not affiliated with and receives no funds from the League of Conservation Voters located in Washington, D.C.

JOIN NOW AND BECOME A CHARTER MEMBER OF THE WLCV!

Wisconsin League of Conservation Voters PO Box 455 Waunakee, WI 53597-0455