Limited Time Offer. Become a Founder Member Now!

Committee tables nonmetallic mining petition amid deed‑restriction and reclamation questions

October 10, 2025 | Richland County, Wisconsin


This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »

Committee tables nonmetallic mining petition amid deed‑restriction and reclamation questions
Richland County’s Natural Resources Committee discussed a petition to reopen a nonmetallic mine on property listed to Eddie and Annie Gingrich and decided to gather additional records before taking a formal vote.

Adjacent owner Corrine Hendrickson told the committee she had located deed language that, in her view, limits transfer of mining rights and requires written permission from the original holding company for third parties to operate. Hendrickson also said the reclamation called out in the packet does not appear to have been carried out; aerial imagery and site inspection show the site has not been regraded or topsoiled as described in earlier documents.

Staff and committee members questioned who would be the permittee and who would be responsible for reclamation if operations resumed. County staff noted the reclamation plan included with the petition appears to be an older plan tied to a previous owner (names such as Henrietta Johnson and Kramer Brothers appear in documents) and that the current petitioner, identified in the packet as a Green Tech representative, had not supplied written permission from the rights holder authorizing mining. Committee members asked staff to verify the chain of title, confirm whether prior reclamation work was completed and seek written authorization from the holding entity before the county proceeds.

Committee discussion also covered the county’s nonmetallic mining ordinance and the reclamation trigger points in the ordinance; staff said permits require reclamation sequencing but that there is no statutory time limit that forces reclamation absent operator action. Given the unresolved deed restriction, the incomplete reclamation documentation, and the petitioner’s absence from the meeting, the committee opted to defer the matter so staff can compile records and legal guidance for the next meeting.

View full meeting

This article is based on a recent meeting—watch the full video and explore the complete transcript for deeper insights into the discussion.

View full meeting

Sponsors

Proudly supported by sponsors who keep Wisconsin articles free in 2025

Scribe from Workplace AI
Scribe from Workplace AI