DNR Pier Rules Back on the Drawing Board

The DNR pier regulation debate remains in uncharted waters after board action today.

The Natural Resources Board this morning unanimously agreed to pull back the package of proposed pier regulations approved in September. Members agreed to consider a revised package toting “more clarity” at the board's Dec. 7 meeting in Madison.

The board made its decision during a teleconference meeting when members heard from Mike Staggs, the Department of Natural Resources’ top fishing management and habitat protection expert.

Staggs detailed additional research regarding the status of Wisconsin piers and how the size and location may affect aquatic plant life and fishing habitats. Through the use of a revised statistical sample, Staggs also revised the preliminary estimate of the number of existing piers on Wisconsin’s lakes from 457,611 to about 187,000. Staggs said the largest pier he found was a 1,152-square foot platform on Lake Minocqua.

“As a matter of reference, that size of a footprint is of my own personal house. … The size of somebody’s house has been placed out there.”

The revisions to the rules, which have shoved the Department of Natural Resources into a public relations battle with the Wisconsin Realtors Association and others, may include changes to suggested fees for permits and the guidelines used to determine when an existing pier is large enough to require an individual permit that may lead to suggested pier modifications.

And in cases where an owner objects, it could lead to a hearing before an administrative law judge or in a circuit courtroom.

Todd Ambs, DNR’s water program administrator, said in an interview today the question of when a pier is large enough to require an individual permit is “one of the critical questions” for the revised rule coming in December.

The Realtors, along with some Republican lawmakers, stand firm in their opposition to crafting rules that will apply retroactively. Tom Larson of the Realtors told WisPolitics.com his group is not opposed to setting standards or imposing regulations, but it is the possibility some people may be found in violation of rules that didn’t exist when their piers were constructed is troublesome.

“It is a dangerous precedent,” Larson says, adding that the precedent could theoretically allow the agency to turn its focus to homes built along waterfront areas.

Yet Larson stressed the Realtors are not opposed to regulations aimed at getting at the bad players in the state, and he remained “cautiously optimistic” about the board's move to pull the rules back for more work.