Figure 1:  Groundwater Contamination Susceptibility in Wisconsin map (UWEX, 1989) showing the location of communities whose plans we reviewed in detail. (Click on the image to open a new window with a larger view)

The most common groundwater data include surface watersheds, soil types, and groundwater susceptibility. The least common groundwater data include impervious surface inventory, changes in water table depth, and estimated community groundwater pumping rate.

Observations
Importance of groundwater varies by community

The extent to which groundwater is addressed in comprehensive plans varies significantly. Some plans have extensive groundwater data and policies, some have little. The type of data and policies in these plans are consistent across plans done by the same plan writers.

Communities with moderate or high groundwater susceptibility had significantly higher groundwater goal scores than communities with low groundwater susceptibility. This fact suggests that communities with moderate or high groundwater susceptibility are aware of potential groundwater problems and want to protect their groundwater. However, the moderate and high susceptibility communities do not have higher policy scores. These scores suggest that communities with moderate or high groundwater susceptibility are aware of potential groundwater problems, yet they may be unsure how to achieve their goals, may perceive barriers to achieving their goals, or are unwilling to commit to policies in their plan.

Based on observations made while developing the case studies, nearly all communities that are engaged in groundwater protection efforts have had groundwater problems.

Availability of groundwater data and the ability to interpret it varies
The type, format, and extent of groundwater information in comprehensive plans is generally limited. When groundwater data or maps are included in plans, little or no attempt is made to interpret the data. This result may be explained in part by the fact that groundwater data are incomplete or inaccessible locally or on a state-wide level. Also, when data are available, plan preparers may not know how to interpret or process it.

In those communities where groundwater data are available, communities generally made an attempt to incorporate it into local comprehensive plans. We found, for example, that communities located in counties that have produced a groundwater protection plan incorporated more groundwater information in their comprehensive plans. In addition, communities with municipal water systems (and therefore at least one person responsible for water testing and reporting) included significantly more groundwater data in their plans than communities without municipal water systems.

Policy frequency depends on regulations and local land uses
Groundwater-related policies that are required by state or federal law appeared more frequently in local plans than other policies. For example, the Wisconsin administrative code Comm 83 requires inspection of POWTs every three years whereas the Wisconsin administrative code NR 216 requires larger municipalities to develop storm water plans. Conversely, policies that are resource or issue dependent, such as those related to remediation, mining, or agriculture appear less frequently. Communities that are not facing these issues are unlikely to include them in a local plan.

Weak linkages exist between data, goals and policies
The groundwater data scores did not correlate with goal or policy scores achieved by local communities. This fact suggests that communities do not consistently require a minimum level of groundwater data before developing goals and policies. We also found that the groundwater goal scores do not correlate with the policy scores. Some communities are including groundwater goals but are not taking it to the next step by developing associated policies. At the opposite end of the spectrum, some plans include multiple groundwater policies yet include no groundwater goals.

These findings may result from the very expansive nature of comprehensive planning.

Communities can easily overlook groundwater when developing their comprehensive plans, particularly if there is no local champion willing to speak out on groundwater. These findings may also be related to the fact that groundwater planning is complex and new to many communities and planners.

The following section provides recommendations for improving the groundwater components of comprehensive plans and their implementation.

Recommendations
Based on our review of comprehensive plans, development of community case studies and discussions with key players in groundwater planning, we provide the following recommendations for improving the groundwater component of comprehensive plans in Wisconsin.

Increase citizen involvement to heighten the priority of groundwater in local communities
The development of a comprehensive plan is steered heavily by local participation. The only way to ensure that a comprehensive plan addresses groundwater issues is to invite residents with a strong interest in groundwater to actively participate in the process. Community involvement that brings attention to groundwater can spark effective goals and policies.

Hire local government staff and consultants that value groundwater
Groundwater protection measures achieved by many of the communities featured in the case studies were spurred by a single individual that valued groundwater and persistently sought opportunities to provide education, funding and other resources to prevent and address groundwater issues. Groundwater protection and remediation efforts also depend on support from local government officials and their constituents.

Improve the accessibility of groundwater data to plan writers 
Data collection during a comprehensive planning process may be overwhelming (imagine collecting information on all nine elements). Groundwater data that are convenient, easily accessible and in a format that can be directly utilized in a plan will be much more likely to be included by plan writers and citizen planners to include groundwater data. Increasingly, scientists will need to find ways to better translate scientific information into jargon-free language understandable by the public.

Provide education to help plan writers better interpret and use groundwater information
Most professional planners and community members lack training in groundwater planning. Outreach workshops designed to educate professional and citizen/volunteer planners on how to interpret and use groundwater information would address this need.

Provide funding assistance to support further groundwater studies
Based on the detailed plan review, groundwater data related to groundwater time of travel, impervious surfaces, and potential contaminants are lacking. These types of information require additional funding to research and investigate.

Provide education about the costs of groundwater contamination
Based on the observation from the community case studies that groundwater protection is often not a high priority until problems become apparent, it may be beneficial to provide education illustrating the costs of groundwater contamination and associated remediation. While the case studies illustrate this to a limited extent, a study of the fiscal impacts of contaminated groundwater in Wisconsin communities may be more effective to demonstrate the cost avoidance potential of groundwater protection measures.

In summary, the Wisconsin comprehensive planning law adopted in 1999 requires plans to include goals, objectives, policies, maps and programs for the conservation and effective management of groundwater. While most of the plans we reviewed contained limited groundwater-related data and a smattering of groundwater goals and policies, much remains to be done. Specifically, all plans should include data about current groundwater quality and quantity, groundwater flow direction and potential sources of contaminants. Based on this enhanced data set, local goals and policies should be developed to address local groundwater issues. Planning for groundwater is a long-term community endeavor with many valuable and indispensable benefits.  n

The full research report, including five community case studies highlighting rural Wisconsin communities that have implemented groundwater protection and/or remediation measures, is available at: www.uwsp.edu/cnr/landcenter/groundwater/index.html