Stewardship Fund helps state, and its businesses

By JOHN TORINUS

Feb. 17, 2007

While Gov. Jim Doyle's proposal to raise the bonding level for the Stewardship Fund may not seem like an economic development issue, many business people across the state see it as exactly that and more.

The governor called for annual funding of $105 million, up from the previous level of $60 million. The increase keeps pace with the rocketing prices of Wisconsin property values, especially those adjacent to urban areas and up north in vacation country.

Environmentalists are applauding loudly, but business people are clapping, too. Many businesses in the state have a direct relationship to preservation of lands, including:

• The forest products cluster. Timber operations require large enough tracts to allow for efficient lumbering. An example is last year's purchase of 69,000 acres from International Paper for $83 million, less than half from Stewardship. Instead of being parcelized, the Wild Rivers Legacy Forest will remain as working lands, benefiting the many companies that depend on the wood as raw material.

• The papermaking cluster. While pulp is increasingly coming from foreign sources, resulting in some of the forest sell-offs, local pulp is still a major factor for our mills.

• Tourism. People come to Wisconsin for its scenic beauty, not to see endless residential and commercial development. There's a place for development, but the projects funded by Stewardship involve areas that should be kept natural for residents and visitors. At stake is our $11 billion tourism industry.

• The recreation sector. Many Wisconsin firms depend on hunters, anglers, bicyclists, off-road vehicle owners, snowmobilers, bird watchers (don't snicker, it's a big hobby), boaters and hikers. Since public funds are involved, it's appropriate that 92% of the lands preserved under Stewardship are open for hunting and 97% for fishing and other types of recreation.

If they take the time to think about it, developers have economic stakes in the preservation of Wisconsin lands, too. First, land values invariably rise in proximity to green areas. In other words, the value of their developments rise.

Second, sound development depends heavily on the availability of good water. We in southeastern Wisconsin are all becoming acutely aware of the need to preserve the sponge areas that recharge our underground water sources.

The sponge areas also mitigate flooding, essential to downstream developments.

There are many reasons why business people are members and directors of the state's 55 land trusts. In addition to direct economic payoffs, there is the effect of preservation on quality of life, which is crucial for recruiting and retaining the talented people that fuel the innovation economy.

A big part of the quality of life in the state is the access to natural areas. Wisconsin is an easy sell compared with other, less blessed states. We have our issues when it comes to recruiting, but that's not one of them.

One sector that has been overlooked in the early presentations on the reauthorization of Stewardship is the agribusiness cluster, one of the largest chunks of the Wisconsin economy.

A task force called the Working Lands Initiative recommended last year a PDR program - purchase of development rights - for prime farmlands across the state, but stopped short of recommending a funding source.

Undoubtedly, that subject will be injected into the debate as Stewardship works its way through the legislative and budget processes in Madison. But farmland may need separate funding sources, possibly from the collapse of less-effective farm subsidy programs.

A precedent-setting local initiative along those lines is going to the voters in Washington County on April 3. The ballot question is on whether to allocate $800,000 in county funds for the preservation of prime farmlands, water recharge and natural areas.

Surveys show very positive support for investing in the preservation program, but a survey is not a vote. April 3 will be a defining moment for Washington County, and, in a way, for the state.

The ballot question includes the requirement that the local funds are matched by funds from other sources. Clearly, Washington County, which has used Stewardship funds to great advantage in the past, will be looking to the state for the match.

Private and federal funds also will be sought, but the state has to be a player if the farm economy of Washington County is to be maintained. Agricultural zoning is not enough; invariably, it gets rolled over by development pressure in the absence of PDR funding for farmland easements.

Part of the strategy for economic development in Washington County is: "Stand Up for Farming." It should be a state strategy as well and serves as one more solid economic rationale for a large Stewardship Fund.

 

John Torinus is chief executive officer of Serigraph Inc. of West Bend. Contact him at torcolumn@serigraph.com.