Refuge plan draws fire
By ANNE JUNGEN | La Crosse Tribune
.
ONALASKA, Wis. — Tim Morgan of Stoddard, Wis., declared the plan the “beginning of the end of the most precious, unique thing in the world.”
Ken Visgor of La Crescent, Minn., said he thinks the plan makes “perfect sense” and adapts to the needs of a changing resource.
More than 170 people filled the Stoney Creek Inn conference room Wednesday for a public forum on the draft comprehensive conservation plan for managing the Upper Mississippi River National Wildlife and Fish Refuge.
The preferred plan, known as Alternative E, was released Dec. 5 by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for 60 days of public review. The FWS on Tuesday extended the comment period by 30 days, to March 6.
Alternative E has many of the same elements as previous proposals: growth of FWS staff and services, more river access for nonmotorized recreation, land acquisition and the creation of “closed areas” in sensitive waterfowl feeding and resting sites on the river.
But it was thought to have shed many of the more contentious issues in previous versions of the plan, such as the proposal to limit waterfowl hunters to 25 shot shells a day and require 100-yard spacing between hunting parties, launch fees at boat ramps and a fee-based hunt at the Gibbs Lake area of Lake Onalaska.
Most of those at Wednesday’s forum, which appeared heavily made up of hunters and outdoor users, still found a lot they didn’t like about the plan.
The panel of three FWS employees was forced to silently listen rather than discuss as audience members vented their frustration.
Members of the crowd criticized the proposed plan as overly restricting use of motorized watercrafts, closing off too much usable hunting land and limiting areas where dogs can be run.
They also faulted the plan for not going far enough to counter river sedimentation, water quality and pollution and the exotic species that have made their way to the upper Mississippi.
Bert Knutson, a Onalaska sportsman, said he attended the meeting because it pertains directly to what he enjoys.
“(Alternative E) doesn’t address the problems the refuge has, like erosion control and invasive species,” he said.
Morgan also noted the alternative has pitted outdoors groups against one another.
One woman demanded the public comment period be extended another 30 days.
Ed Heberlein of La Crescent, Minn., was strongly against the restricted boat zones. “It’s ridiculous, and I don’t see how they can enforce that,” Heberlein said. “There’s no way they’re going to stop me, not unless they crash their boat into the side of mine.”
Under the plan, eight areas in the refuge would change to slow, no-wake designation from March 16 to Oct. 31, and all airboats and hovercraft use would be prohibited during the same period.
David Mikrut of La Crosse said Alternative E needed only some tweaking and was “getting close, but not there yet.“
When completed, the comprehensive plan will guide management and administration of the refuge for the next 15 years. Federal law requires comprehensive plans for all national wildlife refuges.
Refuge Manager Don Hultman said public comments “matter quite a bit” and will be heavily considered.
“People don’t like restrictions,” he said. “Many people think (Alternative E) is against fishing, hunting and trapping, and I don’t think that’s the case. It’s really about balancing the needs of all the people who use the river and refuge.”
I would have to agree with everything you said. 
