Kletzsch Park Dam Project Reveals Conflict of Interests

The water of the Milwaukee River cascading over the Kletzsch Park Dam in Glendale is first heard before it can be seen. One could mistake the dam for a natural waterfall rather than a man-made installation. Oak trees estimated to be more than one hundred years old stand on the west bank of the river, indicating the area’s rich history. Built in 1934, the Kletzsch Park Dam and its current overlook have become a main feature of the park.   

But after the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources ordered Milwaukee County to repair the dam in 2013 after years of sediment buildup and vegetation growth, plans from Milwaukee County not only aim to repair it but to also develop the surrounding landscape and add a fish passage.  

These plans have sparked a debate between those ready to turn the dam and the area around it into a place geared towards recreation and those who wish to preserve the area in its current state, highlighting a clash between different priorities and values in the community.  

Besides the necessary repairs to the dam’s east abutment, the proposed features to the area around the Kletzsch Park Dam include a fish passage, portage zones, an overlook plaza and an accessibility path to the water’s edge.   

“The big feature here would be the fish passage, and that would require some modifications to the dam,” said Karl Stave of Milwaukee County Administrative Services, who is managing the the Kletzsch Park Dam project.   

Stave has been involved with hiring and administrating the consultant contract while also coordinating team efforts on the design side of the project. He co-manages the project with Therese Gripentrog from the Milwaukee County Parks, who sees a need for improvements around the dam.  

“Kayaking and canoeing river systems in Milwaukee is becoming a much more popular recreational activity,” Gripentrog said. “You need a good portage around the dam, and we haven’t had a good one in the Kletzch Park area. This funding that we have provides a great opportunity for us to put in a safe and handicap-accessible portage at the dam.”  

Other than Milwaukee County, organizations like the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative and Fund for Lake Michigan are providing funding for the Kletzsch Park Dam project. Additional funds come from State stewardship and money for dam maintenance from the Wisconsin DNR.  

But at the first public information meeting regarding the proposed plan, the community objected to the fact that some of the historic oak trees would need to be removed to facilitate the improvements. Some of the oak trees that loom over the west bank of the river have been there for more than 200 years. 

“This is a very special place,” said author Martha Bergland, who is an outspoken critic of the plan. “We want these oak trees to survive, and we want them to be valued.” 

In addition to the oak trees, some community members also objected to the new land developments on the grounds that they would change too much of the natural landscape and stated that the project could encroach on land that Native Americans living today hold sacred. 

“We want this site recognized and commemorated so that people come there and realize what this was and how important it was to many Indian people who were here before us,” Bergland said.

UW-Milwaukee English Professor Margaret Noodin and four other UWM professors wrote a letter to the county board’s Parks, Energy and Environment Committee to delay the vote on the project. In the letter, Noodin and her colleagues cited concerns over how features like the portage zones and the new overlook on the west bank were designed without regard to the significance of historic American Indian activities that took place in the area, and that the designers of the project needed to consult with Native American groups.   

“Whatever you do, there’s a lot of history here,” Noodin said. 

After receiving feedback on the first plan from the community, the project team started to redesign the initial plan with a focus on protecting the oak trees. One of the most pressing problems was designing a fish passage that doesn’t conflict with Wisconsin floodplain management statutes that prevent any rise in the floodplain water elevation.   

“That’s been the biggest challenge where we’ve looked at all of these different alternatives and have had a difficult time finding alternatives that work from that regulatory standpoint,” Stave said. “You can make something work with no impact on flood elevation but then you may have difficulty having the right criteria for it to function well as a fish passage. You have to have both those things, and those have been a struggle to find alternatives that work.” 

Eventually, the project’s consultants, working with the regional planning commission and DNR, did end up finding another fish passage design that wouldn’t harm the oak trees and that would meet the state regulatory requirements.  

The team also wanted to address concerns over cultural resources and objections to the plan from Native American communities. Milwaukee County Parks state on the project’s website that project notifications and requests for comment/consultation were sent to Tribal Historic Preservation Officers.  

But Noodin explained that because the land has a long history of use by peoples and nations older than the current federally and state-recognized nations, just consulting with the federally recognized nations wouldn’t be fair to others. Most of the mounds and landmarks are gone now, but she said that native people still need to be represented and consulted before a decision is finalized. 

Archaeologists from the State Historic Preservation Office at the Wisconsin Historical Society were consulted over the possibility of burial mounds that could be disturbed by the project at the request of Milwaukee County Parks. 

“We have had the state historical society and public and private archeologists confirm that we would not be disturbing any cultural resources in that area,” Gripentrog said.   

But according to Noodin, the proposed features like the portage zones, overlook plaza and paved accessibility paths would “alter the landscape in such a way as to erase the natural sacredness of the park land” held by Native Americans living today. 

“I would be the first to say that I would like the maximum number of people of all ages and diverse backgrounds to be able to come and enjoy the river,” Noodin said. “But I wouldn’t say we would want to have that happen at the cost of the actual landscape itself.” 

The most recent iteration of the plan includes a fish passage that won’t harm the historic oak trees, but still includes all the other features like a paved walkway, overlook and portage area. 

It’s these planned developments that cause contention between those who want to see recreation thrive in the park and provide accessibility to all, and those who oppose development at the cost of the natural land. 

“We’re kind of trying to remind people that when you get in this space, we would encourage folks not to frame it with human-only priorities,” Noodin said. “It’s not as if native people think nature needs to exist untouched, in fact, native people often were pretty aggressive stewards of woodland and marshes. It’s really recognizing the equality of all of it and making a decision in that context, rather than just saying what’s the best thing for landowners and the people of Milwaukee who want to use the river.”  

Bergland said that she opposes any construction on the west bank of the river over fears that the roots of the oak trees might be damaged and said that she would rather see commemorative signs and plantings. She is working with organizations like the Milwaukee Audubon Society and the Glendale Natural Heritage Committee to develop an alternative Kletzsch Park dam proposal.  

“We have a multi-faceted plan, that we’re paying for, for a fish passage to go on the east bank of the river,” Bergland said. “We’ve got a GoFundMe to raise money to pay engineers to come up with an east side fish passage plan, and several of us are raising private money to pay another landscape architect to come up with ideas and images for a plan along the dam and at the pavilion that would not be so disruptive.”  

But that plan will face the challenge of designing a fish passage that doesn’t affect the 100-year flood elevation. Bergland was prepared to present their plan to the Parks, Energy and Environment committee on Jan. 28, but the issue was tabled.   

The future of the project is uncertain, as the results of April’s elections could change the priority this project takes.

“At this point, the project is essentially on hold,” Gripentrog said. “We won’t really have an opportunity to take this back through that process until after the election.”