A proposal to turn artesian groundwater that feeds Lake Superior in northern Wisconsin into a product for sale continues to run head-on into the law, the community, a tribe, and a citizens group, Lake Superior Not for Sale (LSNFS).
The most recent defeat for Kristle KLR came in June, when the Wisconsin Court of Appeals upheld a Bayfield County Board of Adjustment decision to deny the company a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) to harvest, store, and transport artesian water. The company has lost every round since it took the issue to the courts in 2022. Now the last stop in the judicial system is the Wisconsin Supreme Court, which rarely accepts appeals in such circumstances.
When Kristle KLR announced its proposal to bottle and sell the water, it said it would store the water in underground tanks on site, and transport it via tanker trucks to an off-site bottling facility in Superior, Wisconsin. Proposed markets included the Twin Cities of Minnesota, which lie outside the Great Lakes watershed.
But the proposal ran into a buzzsaw of opposition from surrounding communities, the Red Cliff Band of Lake Superior Chippewa, LSNFS, and others.
The proposal was designed to evade the Great Lakes Compact’s ban on diversions outside of the Great Lakes watershed by exploiting a loophole in the Compact that exempts diversions of water in containers under 5.7 gallons in volume.
The Red Cliff Band of Lake Superior Chippewa officially condemned the proposal with a resolution calling water “a finite resource” and adding that “societal demands to monetize fresh water supplies represent an existential threat to our culture and lifestyle,” including fisheries and wild rice. Linda Nguyen, Red Cliff Environmental Director said, “To allow for the commodification of water is to allow the theft of our sacred relative.”
LSNFS signs reading “Not For Sale,” with the image of Lake Superior in the background, sprouted up in Bayfield, Ashland, and Douglas Counties. By the end of 2022, over 3,000 yard signs had been distributed throughout the upper Midwest, throughout all 11 tribes in the State of Wisconsin and into Canada.
“This area has been fighting resource extraction threats since the land was ceded in the 1842 Treaty, so the communities are strong and relationships are deep,” said Dana Churness, one of the principals in the Lake Superior Not for Sale group. “This is what allows us to feel exhilarated and ready for what comes next. We absolutely have to be. Are some days exhausting? You bet. However, the corporate threats won’t rest, and neither will we.”
Rob Lee, an attorney for Midwest Environmental Advocates in Madison, which has represented citizens opposed to the withdrawal, says the success of the opposition to date “demonstrates what happens when regular people band together to oppose extractive industries like this, and that the people living on the shores of Lake Superior are adamant that Wisconsin’s precious water resources will not be privatized for purely monetary gain. It shows that those people can work through their local elected officials to get things done, and that local governments in Wisconsin have the authority to be responsive to their citizens’ concerns.”
The legal work takes funding, which LSNFS has raised by tabling at events and selling the signs and gear.
The threats to the water continue. Churness says citizens are wary of a bill introduced by Congressman Tom Tiffany of Wisconsin, which would redesignate Wenabozho Ominisan – currently known as the Apostle Islands Lakeshore – as a national park. Introduced without meaningful consultations with affected communities and the Red Cliff tribe, the bill has awakened concerns that it is a step toward federal takeover of water extraction.
“We can only expect that Tiffany’s legislation is preparing for future water extraction, if Trump is elected in November,” Churness says. She urges businesses or organizations interested in signing a petition or resolution against this legislation to contact lakesuperiornotforsale@gmail.com. LSNFS continues to accept donations for its defense of the Lake Superior watershed.
This article should provide the factual basis for the denial of Kristle’s permit application by Bayfield County, and why that decision has been upheld in 3 subsequent appeals by Kristle – it’s purely a matter of zoning jurisdiction. Kristle’s property is zoned residential and the proposed use is deemed incompatible.
The decisions made by Bayfield County, the circuit court, and the court of appeals weren’t based on emotional, philosophical, or political motivations; nor were they even based on scientific water resource impacts.