Home > Notices

The placement and functioning of the dam at Turtle Lake Road, and more precisely the water level at Turtle Lake, has been an issue of interest for the Town Board and lake property owners since the early 1900’s.  This past year’s weather conditions and an existing breach in the outlet channel reopened speculation and a host of misinformation, blame, and threat of legal action against the Town in regards to the dam and water levels at Turtle Lake.  The Town Board directed their Attorney to review the matter and set up a meeting with the Wisconsin DNR to discuss these issues.   The Board was represented at three meetings with the DNR.  The last meeting was in October. 2011, with residents being able write out questions for the DNR and Board.  The Town Attorney served as the moderator.  Both the Board and DNR were available afterwards for further questions.  While this meeting was an attempt to clear various issues in a “public” format, further blame and misinformation has continued.  At their October meeting the Board moved to have an Engineering firm, again, look at the dam and review past and present DNR information and respond to the Board.  The Engineer inspected the site and area, consulted with the DNR, and reported to the Board in November 2011.  His recommendation appears later in this text.

 

The history of the dam and culverts under Turtle Lake Road has not been represented accurately by some individuals.   Complaints about the lake level and integrity of the dam date back to the 1960’s.  Records from 1941 show a judge’s ruling authorizing the elevation and placement of a culvert west of the dam and a 1965 letter from the Wisconsin Public Service Commission makes note of “culverts in the Town road west of the dam.”  This same letter also notes that “no water was going over the spillway and actually the water being 5 inches below the spillway.”  It continues stating “higher levels would flood and water would escape through the culverts.”  In 2002 the Town was accused of placing “new” culverts, as it was again accused of this year.  The Town “replaced” steel culverts with plastic in the late 1980’s at the same locations and depths prior to the road being chipsealed.  The DNR was consulted, and no permits were required for that maintenance work.  An engineer hired by the Turtle Lake Assoc. (TLA) stated “based upon the available information the 4 culverts do not appear to be the primary cause of the bank failure (breach).”  DNR official R. Nereng in 2002 stated “the culverts alone are not the only reason water is flowing through the breach…the integrity of the bank is suspect.”   The DNR has corrected itself in its reference to using the word “new” in regards to the culverts in the 2002 letter.  The Town has never authorized any additional boards on the spillway structure or sandbags being placed at the culverts or in the breached area of the outlet channel.  Public records show that the Town was instructed to remove extra boards which were non authorized and found in 1979, removed non authorized sandbags at culvert in 1999, and did not act to place sandbags in the breach in the summer of 2011.  The DNR removed over 100 sandbags from the breach area in the fall of 2011 and noted the placement of the sandbags was illegal and created a potential for more of a problem.

 

DNR officials visited the dam and the breach location, and surveyed the lake level in late June of 2011.   Less than a week later sandbags appeared.  At that time, the DNR determined the lake level to be about 5 inches below the ordinary high water mark.  DNR officials indicated that they were not sure anything needed to be done at this time or that there is a problem.  They concurred that the area experienced major flooding from 2008-2010 and the water level may be getting back to normal.  Records indicate that the average water level fluctuation is .68 feet and that a maximum fluctuation of 1.55 feet occurred in 1959.  An email stating that the lake level is down 2 feet since June is not true.  If so, prior to June, the stationary pier at the Town Boat Launch would have been under the water by more than one foot, which it was not.  A lake resident printed in a 2008 newsletter that springs were flowing in their yard, which were not known over the past 16 years.  According to the DNR and an engineer hired by the Turtle Lake Association, the lake’s water source is groundwater, runoff and precipitation.  At the October 2011 meeting the DNR officials and an official from Southeastern Regional Planning Commission (SEWRPC), who also answered questions regarding the formation of a lake district, stated that “a draw down of the lake would actually be healthy for the lake.” The DNR dam specialist said that repairing the breach may add 2 inches to the lake level and that removing the spillway and dam and restoring the channel may only lower the lake level by 2 inches.   The TLA engineer stated by “restoring the berm (channel bank) …the lake level will be slightly higher.”  The engineer hired by the TLA also designed a concept to repair the berm in 2006, of which the Town Board contributed $800.  An alternative analysis was not included, as required in the application, and it was determined the proposal would not meet the requirements of wetland water quality certification.  The DNR also felt that if the breached area was repaired it would eventually fail and cut its own course again.  The TLA withdrew their application.  A TLA member stated at a meeting at Snug Harbor in 2011 “there are other spots to the north that are at a lower elevation than the breach area.”  Past years’ DNR measurements at the site of the breach showed the channel bank elevation only .12 feet higher than the crest of water.  The TLA engineer also noted that lake outflow is not just the outlet water,  but also underground and evaporation.  He further stated “the lake outlet has no influence over lake levels once the lake level drops below the outlet elevation.”  Proposals to “gate” or restrict water at the culverts have also been suggested.  The Town’s engineering firm advised the Town against this in 2007.  The dam specialist at the Oct 2011 meeting mentioned this concept, but her superior noted that the integrity of the infrastructure (road) needs to be considered.  The TLA engineer did not recommend this gate or “riser” concept in 2006.   The Town’s Engineering firm did not recommend it either, as part of their task in investigating why the DNR would not approve the TLA application.

 

The location of the breach is on private property.    The DNR official in 2002 stated “the culverts and channel bank is not associated with the dam.”  The Town owns only the dam and spillway, which is within the Town road right of way.  At meetings between the DNR and Town the DNR has stated the following in regards to the dam/spillway:  

1. The DNR cannot require the Town to keep or maintain the dam.

2. The Town is not obligated to pursue any of the options outlined in a letter drafted to the Town in July of 2011.

3. It is the Town’s decision what happens.

4. The Town is not violating any law. 

The Town Attorney and Crispell-Synder’s Senior Stormwater Engineer concur with these statements.  The engineer estimated costs of improving the roadway in the dam location if a riser or gate structure was put in place to be $500,000.  He advised the Town to not spend any money determining water levels at the dam, breach, and lake, or to contract for any breach repair studies/proposals of any kind.  He said the only thing he would recommend is placement of a water level gauge at the Town boat landing to collect data and monitor the water levels.  

 

The Town has also been accused of not having “records” relating to this matter.  The Town Clerk, Chair, Board Supervisors, Attorney, and Engineer have openly answered questions relating to this matter and made available the record files.

 

To this point, the costs to the Town for the Attorney and Engineering services in regards to this matter have totaled $4,563.00   

 

Property owners along Turtle Lake Road, and the past/present Town Board members have been unjustly accused, threatened with legal action, and had their credibility damaged by the misrepresentation of information associated or perceived to be associated with Turtle Lake.  While a much more detailed response addressing point by point allegations and misrepresentations, some of which have been publicized, and the naming of those who have made these over the past 50 years could be done, the Town Board at this time chooses not to do so.