The Dams

• Cedar Creek plunges over 80 feet within a short distance through our city and town. That's about the equivalence of an 8-story building. Its once existing powerful force and falling water is the reason our city is located where it is. It was once a naturally beautiful and wild stretch of river.
  
  
• Industrious businessmen saw the wildness and power of our river, and saw a way to use its force to make money and settle in a beautiful area. They did, and consequently spurred the city we all love. There was a balance once between what the dams provided and the disruption caused to the river, but that balance is no longer present. And none of those original dams remain.
  
  
• The City of Cedarburg owns two dams: The Woolen Mills dam, seen from Bridge Road, and the Columbia Mills dam, which is located on Highland Road. (The Ruck dam, seen from Columbia Road, is privately owned.) These dams were built in 1939, 1914, and 1915 respectively. 
  
  
• Wading and swimming in Cedar Creek was prohibited by local ordinance until February 2021. The Cedarburg common council repealed the ban, while no member asked about water quality testing or the safety and health of residents who might enter the water. They were unconcerned with the water quality of the impoundments.

The Effects

• These non-functioning dams create slack water impoundments where the water is unnaturally slowed and warmed. Slowing a river causes it to drop much of its sediment load behind the dams and can lead to harmful levels of contaminants and nutrients in the impoundments. These more extreme levels can lead to algal and bacterial blooms.
  The slowed water also heats up more than it would if it was allowed to keep moving unimpeded. Warmer water can hold less dissolved oxygen than cooler water can. Nearly stagnant, warmer water also promotes bacterial and algal blooms, which can further reduce levels of dissolved oxygen and become a health hazard to people.
  
  
• The recent EPA Superfund cleanup was very worthwhile, but it did not clean our water; it removed a great deal of sediment full of PCBs. The result is that about 25 years from now, an angler can keep and eat fish that do not have high levels of PCBs, and that is a very good thing. But the water quality and aquatic life in the dams' impoundments is still harmed by the dams.
  
  
• Cedar Creek was still listed with the federal government as a 303(d) impaired river, after the PCB cleanup.

The Worries of Dam Removal

• Some worry that our river would become a slow-moving trickle after dam removal. But the elevation changes of the area in and around Cedarburg cause Cedar Creek to have natural waterfalls, rapids, and probably a natural pond-like area where the elevation flattens out in Cedar Creek Park during its overall plummet. Dams were typically sited at natural waterfalls or rapids, and those would still be there. This area was chosen by dam builders because the river was swift and powerful, not because it was a slow-moving trickle.
  
  
• Another fear is that the pond in Cedar Creek Park would disappear. It would likely become smaller, but it's unlikely that it would disappear.  The areas of stagnant water in the pond would likely be lessened, but that would be an improvement over the unattractive carpet of green scum that occurs every summer. That stagnant area is warmed far too much for aquatic life to thrive, but instead encourages bacteria and algae to bloom. 
  
  
• We all love the sensory experience of hearing and seeing falling water, and the fear that we would lose that is not necessary. We would gain falling water, not lose any. The difference is that the falling water would be cleaner. Water falling over and cutting through natural rock is much more beautiful than water falling over a wall of obsolete concrete, and there is a large tourism industry for it.
  
  
• There is the concern of disputed new land that could appear after dam removal. The amount of new, dry land would be minimal compared to worries of vast new tracts of it. In the minor areas where it could occur, it would be a great improvement over the surface scum and weed-choked standing water that is there now.
  
  
• Another common concern is that property values would decrease after river restoration. Studies have found there can be a penalty against the values of homes near a dam and small impoundment. After a dam is removed and a river is restored, property values can lose that penalty, and the values can increase. 

Positions to Reconsider

• “The dams are historical.”  This is a very common claim to make, but it is not true. The City of Cedarburg requested historic designation for the dams in 2003 from the Wisconsin Historical Society. The request was denied because the dams are not historic. Yet, the current common council budgeted $800,000 tax dollars for 2021 to "preserve" the Woolen Mills dam. It's a common misconception that the Woolen Mills dam is the dam built by Hilgen and Wittenberg in 1864. It isn't. The mayor, common council, and local committees purposely perpetuate this incorrect information.
  
  The Woolen Mills dam we see today, the third dam at the site, was built in 1939 and is not at all historic. This dam never turned a wheel, was never used by the mill and was not built by or owned by the mill. The mill had stopped using the river for power by about 1896 - about 45 years before this dam was built. This dam was built to create an impoundment for swimming. Residents became sick from the impounded water and the beach was closed. 
  
  
• “The dam repairs are mandated by the state.” The repairs and compliance for those who choose to own dams are driven by state statutes, not mandates. Local officials always budget any amount of tax dollars for dam repairs under the guise that it's mandated by the state. The city is only under the state's scrutiny, repair, and compliance orders because it chooses to be. Elected City officials have for many years given the impression that their hands are tied. This is not the case at all. The taxpayers will be under this burden for as long as 4 out of 7 elected officials choose they be under it. The city has not done any research at all into alternatives, dam removal, or river restoration, and have even voted to prevent that information from reaching themselves and in turn, the residents.
  
  
• "Cedarburg wouldn't be here without these dams."  This is an often-used and incorrect claim, frequently made by local officials who have not bothered to learn the history they think they are preserving. Cedarburg was already here when these dams were constructed. These dams made no contribution to the creation or development of Cedarburg.
  
  
• "The dams have economic importance to Cedarburg."  This is claimed sometimes by a couple people, but is not ever accompanied by any explanation. It is highly unlikely that visitors ever come to Cedarburg because the City owns two obsolete, non-historic dams, one of which is a half-mile from downtown and not easily viewed.
  
  Obsolete dams prevent the economic growth gained by the recreation and tourism industries associated with restored rivers. The dams cause local tax dollars to leave the local community and never return. The river in its current state is not an asset to our city, but a hindrance. A beautiful, clean, usable waterfront is an asset to a city. Cedarburg would be able to use our river as an attraction for relocating businesses, the development of new businesses, and the support of existing businesses if it was restored. Unfortunately, local officials refuse to learn about the positive possibilities.