5. Since there are no Federal statutes which consider scenic values in determining use of a stream, we request that our opposition to the construction of this power development be made a matter of national issue. J. J. WERNERB, Chairman. RESOLUTION OF THE DANIEL BOONE HUNTERS LEAGUE OF WISCONSIN The Daniel Boone Hunters League of Wisconsin having as its membership a group of conservation-minded sportsmen takes the following stand in opposition to the construction of a steam-electric generating plant on the lower St. Croix River. "Whereas a public announcement of plans by the Northern States Power Co. to construct a large electric powerplant on the St. Croix River; and "Whereas such powerplant in our opinion would detract from the conservation and recreation value of that river; and "Whereas the St. Croix River is one of the few remaining rivers in the North Central States that is relatively free of pollution and industrial contamination; and "Whereas the people of Wisconsin have as much equity and concern for this river as residents of Minnesota ; and "Whereas adequate studies are as yet not available to indicate how much additional damage will be done by air and water pollution to the fish and wildlife of this river. In addition there have been no feasibility studies on the location of such a plant on the Mississippi River where such a plant could serve the proposed needs as indicated by the Northern States Power Co.; and "Whereas it is not the purpose of this organization to cause undue hardship and economic privation to any group of American citizens however small, we feel that the long-range conservation and recreational values must have prece dent, particularly in this case when clean rivers are so rare in our entire Nation : Now, therefore, be it "Resolved, That the Daniel Boone Hunters League be opposed to the construction of an electric-generating plant on the St. Croix River. We suggest to all parties and persons concerned that full consideration be given to the conservation and recreational values of the St. Croix, keeping in mind that the St. Croix River is part of a broad and important recreational base for Wisconsin and Minnesota citizens and further that every possible effort be made to locate the proposed plant on the Mississippi River site." CHARLES H. BREES, Chairman, Legislative Committee. RESOLUTION OF THE WISCONSIN STATE DIVISION OF THE IZAAK WALTON LEAGUE OF AMERICA, INC. The Izaak Walton League of America has, since its inception, been dedicated to preventing new and eradicating existing pollution to safeguard human health and to assure the healthy aquatic environment for wild creatures. The Wisconsin chapter of the Izaak Walton League has similarly espoused to this dedicated purpose. The stand thus taken places the Izaak Walton League in opposition to the construction of a steam-electric generating plant on the lower St. Croix River. The following resolution presents the stand of the State Izaak Walton League: "Whereas the Northern States Power Co. plans to construct a large electric powerplant on the St. Croix River; and "Whereas said plant will require the burning of considerable amounts of coal and discharge heated water into the St. Croix River; and "Whereas said river is one of the last rivers in Wisconsin and Minnesota to be relatively free of pollution and contamination from industrial wastes; and "Whereas this river is an important recreational and tourist attraction for both Wisconsin and Minnesota ; and "Whereas data are not yet available to show what deleterious effects the proposed powerplant will have on fish, wildlife, and plants in and along the river; and "Whereas the voice of Wisconsin interests in this water resource should be heard: Now be it therefore "Resolved, That the Wisconsin chapter of the Izaak Walton League go on record as opposing the construction of such electric-generating plant on the lower St. Croix River. We trust that the Senate committee conducting these hearings will give proper consideration to the conservation and recreational values of the St. Croix River." A. J. MERTENs, President, Manitowoc, Wis. WISCONSIN RESOURCE CONSERVATION COUNCIL, SENATE AIR and Water POLLUTION SUBCOMMITTEE, SENATOR NELSON AND SENATOR METCALF: My name is John L. Franson, 150 Warner Street, Fond du Lac, Wis. Unfortunately I was not able to appear before your subcommittee hearing on December 11 with the opponents to the proposed powerplant on the St. Croix River. I am, therefore, submitting this to be added to the subcommittee's testimony as Senator Nelson indicated could be done by December 18. I am testifying as the secretary of the Wisconsin Resource Conservation Council, a group of over 30 organizations in Wisconsin interested in the protection of our Nation's resources. As secretary, I have already submitted to your committee a statement in opposition to the proposed powerplant by our group and so the statements that I shall now make may simply be considered as a supplement to our previously prepared statement. Our president, Martin Hanson, also had the opportunity of testifying before the subcommittee. I do not claim to be an expert nor am I a technician on the matter of pollution. But I speak as a citizen, as one that has to live with the polluted waters in Wisconsin. In addition to the 2 years that I have served as secretary to the Wisconsin Resource Conservation Council, I have served 4 years as secretary to the Fond du Lac County Conservation Alliance—a position which I still enjoy. I am also chairman of the resource council's pollution committee and this committee has been working diligently to try to correct and investigate pollution problems and laws in Wisconsin. So you see, I am not unfamiliar with the problems that our State faces in regard to water pollution. The people of Wisconsin are very concerned over what might happen to the St. Croix River should the proposed powerplant be constructed. We are asking ourselves not only how seriously will it damage the river in the area but we are also wondering whether or not the whole St. Croix Valley along this wild river might not become industrialized as a result of this plant. My constituents and myself feel that the St. Croix River is as much Wisconsin's river as it is Minnesota's. Many of the people of our State enjoy it and we are proud of the St. Croix. But the St. Croix is only one example of a wild river which we are concerned with. We may have a dozen wild rivers left in Wisconsin and we are concerned with them all, for they are all being endangered either by commercial exploitation on their banks or by pollution of their water. It has been stressed that Wisconsin and Minnesota have excellent pollution laws. This may be so. But I must concur with Senator Nelson that despite these laws we are losing the battle of clean water. I feel this is primarily because the public is more sensitive to local economics than it is toward the resource. In Wisconsin it happens that when large industries are threatened with action taken against their pollution, they simply threaten in return to move out of the State. This throws the local communities into an uproar and I am afraid that now, in my opinion, our State finds itself relatively helpless as far as these large industries are concerned. The only answer to this problem lies in uniform standards on a nationwide basis. I would like to say that we are strongly in need of the Federal Government's help in protecting our water resources. I feel that bill S. 649, recently defeated in the House, was the very last our Federal Government could have done in providing minimum water standards and I encourage this subcommittee to renew its efforts towards this legislation-you will be opposed. You will be opposed by industry for obvious reasons. You will be opposed by local communities that fear even the word Federal Government because they feel it is so far removed from them and their interests. You will be opposed by State agencies and bureaucrats because they abhor any imposition made upon them. But I say to you again, we need your help. We want your help. Federal help is badly needed for it is only on the Federal level that the proper perspective can be taken in regard to our water resources. I would like to close in pledging our support to your efforts and I would like to request 50 copies of the transcript of this hearing so that I may distribute them to the member organizations of the council. RON N. LINTON, Chief Clerk and Staff Director, U.S. Senate Committee on Public Works, JOHN L. FRANSON, Secretary. OFFICE OF THE MAYOR, Prescott, Wis., December 18, 1964. Subject: Committee hearing on Northern States Power Co. proposed plant on St. Croix River at Bay Port, Minn. DEAR SIR: At the last regular meeting of the Common Council of the City of Prescott, held on December 14, 1964, the above subject was discussed. The council feels that the majority of the people of this city do not want the St. Croix River to be contaminated like the Mississippi River that it joins here at Prescott. The following motion was approved by the council: "To notify the Committee on Public Works that the City Council of the City of Prescott, Wis., is on record as unalterably opposed to the location of a Northern States Power Co. plant at Bayport, Minn., on the St. Croix River." Yours very truly, E. C. MAY, City Clerk-Treasurer. RESOLUTION OF THE ST. CROIX COUNTY, WIS., BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Whereas NSP proposes to build a powerplant at the village of Bayport, Washington County, Minn., and Whereas evidence has been submitted tending to show that damage will be done to waterlife and plantlife in the St. Croix River due to heated water coming out of said plant; and Whereas evidence has further been submitted tending to show that the air will be polluted by the coal burned in the said plant, which polluted air will be harmful to people, animals, and crops in St. Croix County, which polluted air will tend to drift into St. Croix County because of prevailing westerly and northwesterly winds: Now, therefore, be it Resolved, That the Governor of the State of Wisconsin, the State department of agriculture, public service commission, industrial commission, department of health, conservation department, and the president of Northern States Power Co. be respectfully requested to inquire into the proposed project and determine whether or not any damages may be inflicted on St. Croix County and propose measures to protect the river and the environs from such damage, if any. SAVE THE ST. CROIX COMMITTEE, (Signed) ARTHUR N. OLSON. FRIENDS OF THE WILDERNESS, GENTLEMEN: Would you kindly present this statement at the hearings to be held on December 10 and 11 in the junior high school at Stillwater, Minn.? We, the Friends of the Wilderness, a nonprofit conservation organization, founded in 1949 to coordinate the efforts of thousands of individuals and hundreds of organizations in the preservation of the wilderness character of the boundary waters canoe area of the Superior National Forest, have this to say in regard to the important question in regard to the construction and locating of a generating plant on the St. Croix River. We believe that this plant should and could be located in another area, already contaminated and should not be located on the St. Croix River. There are plenty of other areas in the same State that will serve the cause of the Northern States Power Co. without additional cost. The St. Croix River, though not a wilderness, has great recreational and scenic values, not only to the State of Minnesota but to our great and good neighbor, Wisconsin. Our population is increasing at a rate that was considered fantastic 20 years ago. Our mobility and leisure are increasing even faster. The pressures that have beseiged our unique wilderness canoe country have doubled and tripled since the end of World War II and you can say the same for the lovely St. Croix River and adjacent area. It is easy and human to forget that we do not lead our lives apart, that we are all fellow citizens of a democratic community, all part of a nation that exists perilously in a savage and predatory world. But many of us think that the major and most compelling argument against this new generating plant in the St. Croix River area is that it is not good even vital for the future welfare of our country or State. This area, scenic and recreationwise as it is, will be needed by the generations of Americans that we hope and believe are to come indefinitely into the infinite future. We must all realize that we have an obligation to preserve some of our extant natural areas and our natural open spaces particularly those in accessible locations, such as the St. Croix Valley, to pass on reasonably intact to the generations to come of our prodigiously growing population. We have been faced in the wilderness canoe country, many of these same natural questions that are being raised here at this hearing, only on a much larger scale. The fact is, that so many people will be affected by this new generating plant and so many will stand to be hurt, even though it will help taxwise the county in which it is planned to be located. We do not feel that such a plant is necessary in such a location, when the Northern States Power has additional sites in locations, that have already been polluted, both air and waterwise, by other industrial activity. We, the Friends of the Wilderness, thank you for your consideration of our views and we emphatically support the efforts of the Save the St. Croix Committee. Thank you and may our wilderness canoe country-Minnesota's greatest treasure-live unspoiled forever and forever. Very sincerely, WILLIAM H. MAGIE, Executive Secretary. The following newspaper article was submitted for the record by Martin Hanson, president of the Wisconsin Resource Conservation Council: [From the Nation, Dec. 21, 1964] THE ST. CROIX-WHO OWNS A RIVER? (By Alfred D. Stedman 1) ST. PAUL, MINN.-Until it loses itself in the foul and polluted Mississippi a few miles below Minneapolis and St. Paul, everything about the St. Croix River is lovely: its source in cold northern Wisconsin springs and lakes, its long quiet southward meanderings that for 100 miles from the boundary between Minnesota and Wisconsin, its incoming trout brooks and bass streams, the overlooking hills, the gorge near its midpoint known as The Dalles, and the broad expanse called Lake St. Croix that lazes for more than 20 miles from the fine old historic Minnesota town of Stillwater to the mouth. And it is right here on this beautiful lower expanse that a fight presently centers between the onward push of industry and the stubborn defenders of a river and valley they love. More and more people among the Twin Cities' 12 million feel a sharp personal appreciation of their great luck in having so 1 Alfred D. Stedman has recently retired from the St. Paul Pioneer Press and Dispatch, where he was at various times Washington correspondent and associate editor. Mr. Stedman was for 5 years Assistant Administrator of the Agricultural Adjustment Administration; he has written widely on conservation. fine a stream so near at hand. It is called the cleanest large river left in mid-America, with Stillwater (1960 population 8,310) as the largest center on its whole course. To it come more and more visitors from Wisconsin as well as Minnesota to sail and swim and water-ski and fish and play. More and more year-around or summer homes peep from the timbered hills. Right now the upper reaches of the St. Croix and its main northern tributary, the Namekagon, are among 12 U.S. streams being studied by a team of national experts for possible designation as "wild rivers," suitable to be preserved for recreation in the years to come. That study may be extended to include the lower St. Croix. But cutting across the beginnings of plans for tomorrow's conservation needs there is today a Northern States Power Co. project that opponents say (and backers deny) would open a door to industrial degradation of the lower St. Croix Valley. At the village of Oak Park Heights on the Minnesota shore just below Stillwater, the company is petitioning to build an enormous coal-burning electric generating plant at a cost of $68 million. This would be a 550,000-kilowatt station, larger than any that had been installed anywhere in the United States prior to 1961. Later a second unit of even larger capacity would be added. It is sad that the same cool clean waters where thrive game fish like walleyed pike and smallmouth bass, and which outdoorsmen love best for boating and bathing, are also especially prized by power companies. The cooler and cleaner the water, the more efficiently it will cool electric generators. The St. Croix runs consistently cooler and far cleaner than either the Mississippi or the Minnesota that joins the murky Father of Waters near the Twin Cities. But if the power project wins official approval, the lower St. Croix Valley and Lake St. Croix will never be the same. Homes dotting the hills below Stillwater will look down on a powerplant 350 feet long and 200 feet high, flanked by a coal pile nearly half a mile in length, with the layout to be vastly expanded later. A stack 600 to 800 feet tall will belch smoke into the sky. To bring coal upstream from the Illinois coal fields, those placid waters will be plied each week through the navigation season by 3 huge tows of 15 barges per tow, or by larger numbers of smaller tows. Though the company promises to hold barge traffic to a minimum on summertime holidays and weekends, the question of barge-traffic dangers to boaters and bathers, especially children, is a live issue. In times of lowest water, when the weather can also be the hottest and natural water temperatures the highest, the amount of water to be drawn from Lake St. Croix to cool the powerplant might equal most of the river's flow into the lake. The record low-average flow for July is 783 cubic feet per second, and the maximum use by the proposed plant (first unit) is placed at 660 cubic feet. At the point of their return to the St. Croix, the waters would be warmed 10° to 17°-up to hot-weather maximums of 84° to 99°. Every major effect on aquatic life and human recreation of both the warmup of waters by the plant (thermal pollution) and of air pollution from the stack is in dispute. Scientific studies by Federal, State, and power company experts are underway. The economic push to get official sanction for the plant is tremendous. The need for additional power in the Twin Cities area has hardly been challenged, and the business and political interests of Stillwater would be more than human if they didn't thrill to the promises of a $7 million construction payroll, an annual operating payroll later for 60 employees of $500,000, and a 64 percent jump in local tax revenues. Backing the project are nearly every chamber of commerce in the immediate Washington County area of Minnesota, nearly all official governing bodies of county, towns and villages, luncheon clubs, veterans' groups, the county unit of the National Farm Organization and the Central Labor Union, AFL-CIO. But the opposition also is militant and sturdy; in number and in scope as well, it is rising. It is led by an organization called "Save the St. Croix, Inc.", made up of valley residents and people from Wisconsin, Minnesota and else where who cherish the river. Save the St. Croix now has several hundred members and is raising funds for attorneys' fees and other costs of fighting the project. More than 20 groups, including the Minnesota division of the Izaak Walton League of America and the Minnesota Society of Architects, have expressed concern about the project or have come out against it. Petitions of protest are declared to have gained more than 10,000 signatures. |