Billboards, Trees at Odds
By Raegan Isham  | Wausau Daily Herald  | July 10, 2001

A proposed state budget amendment would allow businesses and billboard owners to cut down trees and shrubs along any road, street or highway, but critics hope to block its passage.

If the amendment is approved, the state won�t have to issue permits.

The �result is going to be an excessive cutting to expose signage,� said Chuck Mitchell, president of Citizens for a Scenic Wisconsin. Large billboards are a nuisance, he said.

The amendment to the state�s budget, which was added by the Senate caucus, would allow businesses and billboard owners to remove or trim vegetation along public rights-of-way if certain criteria apply. That includes if the vegetation interrupts the view of the business or sign for more than six seconds if a driver is traveling at the posted speed limit, the owner pays for the trimming or removal of vegetation and the cost for cleanup and disposal and state funds won�t be used to pay for the trimming, removal or replacement vegetation.

The budget needs to be approved by the Senate and Assembly and Gov. Scott McCallum before owners can remove vegetation.

The Department of Transportation is in a difficult position, said David Vieth, director of the DOT�s Bureau of Highway Operations. The department is asked to protect vegetation and provide a pleasant experience for travelers along highways, but the visibility of signs and businesses also is important for tourism.

�Certainly we know there�s a high value to businesses being seen by traffic,� Vieth said.

When signs along highways become hidden by trees or other vegetation, it diminishes the value of the sign for the advertiser and sign owner, Vieth said.

The amendment was co-authored by Rep. David Ward, R-Fort Atkinson, and Sen. Roger Breske, D-Eland. Ward said he was contacted by outdoor advertising representatives in his district who said it was difficult to get permits from the DOT to remove vegetation in front of billboards. Most of the vegetation was naturally grown, Ward said.

If the billboard can�t be seen by drivers, it is useless, Ward said. He wants to make sure the investment of the business or billboard owner is protected and that removed trees or shrubs are replaced with similar vegetation at the owner�s expense.

Bill Mitchell, general manager of Lamar Advertising of Central Wisconsin in Marshfield, said if the amendment passes, it will help make billboards that are blocked by vegetation more visible.

�Basically all we�re trying to do is cut vegetation in most cases that�s grown up since the billboards have been erected,� he said.

The vegetation that is removed is replaced with something smaller such as a shrub that won�t block the billboard.

Right now, businesses or billboard owners can apply for a permit from the DOT to remove the trees or ask the department to remove it. The DOT will remove vegetation only if the sign or business was there first and then became blocked.

If the DOT has a crew remove the vegetation, the removal costs are charged to the person requesting the removal, Vieth said.

Cornel Hausler, a Merrill resident and a member of Citizens for a Scenic Wisconsin, said the possibility of allowing businesses and billboard owners to cut down vegetation at their choosing is �mind-boggling.�

�This is going to be devastating to the environment. ... They�ll have a right to cut down anything,� Hausler said.

Not only do trees and other vegetation give Wisconsin a scenic appeal, they prevent erosion, produce clean air and provide habitat for animals, Hausler said.

If the amendment is approved, the DOT won�t have to issue permits.

�We don�t want to see any more billboards than we have to,� Chuck Mitchell said.

The state DOT owns and manages 150,000 acres of land along highways. This helps erosion and noise control as well as scenic appeal, Chuck Mitchell said.

�We would like to see the status quo,� Chuck Mitchell said. �We think the DOT does a nice job, we think it�s their jurisdiction.

�We think it�s a travesty to see private citizens operating on public lands to suit their private purposes. Those are public lands for the use and for the aesthetic values of the public,� Chuck Mitchell said.

Home  |  Field Trips  |  Issues  |  Tree Key  |  Treevia  |  About Forestree