Environmental damage

An Environmental Impact Study (EIS) is Mandatory for this racetrack proposal.

If the racetrack proposal exceeds the threshold for a mandatory EIS for the State of Wisconsin, an Environmental Impact Statement is required of a state agency by the Wisconsin Environmental Policy Act, s. 1.11, Wisconsin Statutes, when that agency proposes a major action affecting the environment. This states "All agencies of the state shall: 

(c)  Include in every recommendation or report on  proposals for legislation and other major actions significantly  affecting the quality of the human environment, a detailed statement,  substantially following the guidelines issued by the United States  council on environmental quality under P.L. 91-190, 42 USC 4331, by the responsible official on: 

1.  The environmental impact of the proposed action; 

2.  Any adverse environmental effects which cannot be avoided should the proposal be implemented; 

3.  Alternatives to the proposed action; 

4.  The relationship between local short-term uses of the  human environment and the maintenance and enhancement of long-term  productivity; 

5.  Any irreversible and irretrievable commitments of  resources that would be involved in the proposed action should it be implemented; and 

6.  Such statement shall also contain details of the  beneficial aspects of the proposed project, both short term and long  term, and the economic advantages and disadvantages of the proposal. 

(d)  Prior to making any detailed statement, the responsible official shall consult with and obtain the comments of any  agency which has jurisdiction or special expertise with respect to any environmental impact involved.  Copies of such statement and the  comments and views of the appropriate agencies, which are authorized to  develop and enforce environmental standards shall be made available to  the governor, the department of natural resources and to the public."   

What we learned from the developer's proposal in Rice County, MN, which Pierce County/City of River Falls, WI should ensure included in an EIS for the River Falls, WI racetrack proposal:

1. The EAW did not describe how the Wolf Creek Autobahn racetrack would impact adjacent Minnesota Wildlife Management Areas (WMAs). The submitted document pays lip service to three Minnesota WMAs located within two miles of the project site with the closest, Paulson Marsh WMA, located only one-half mile from the site. Oddly, Wenck and associates make no meaningful attempt to describe impacts to these adjacent locales.
2. The EAW failed to address the impacts of the Wolf Creek Autobahn on adjacent Minnesota State Forest. Here again, Wenck mentioned the existence of adjacent state-owned properties: MN state forest located just one-half mile from the proposed project site, Minnesota State Trail (located 4.5 miles from the site, Minnesota State Park (located 9 miles from the proposed project site), but again conveniently failed to mention how these public natural resources will be denigrated.
3. The EAW assessment of water, tree, vegetation, and wildlife issues was insufficient. The EAW was completely silent on trees, which Rice County requires to be analyzed in a specific fashion. The impact on two adjoining compromised creeks was not adequately addressed. Surface water and wildlife issues were similarly dismissed with a few vague words in the EAW. The water from the project would have eventually drained to the Cannon River and the impact needed be explored further. Because of Rice County's propensity for water issues, the environmental issues require thorough investigation. An EIS would have been the next step if the racetrack proposal went further.