REMINISCING ABOUT THE DDT DAYS FROM HIS CONDOMINium in Oconomowoc in 2011, Roy Gromme talked about how his brother-in-law, Fred Ott, was able to raise tens of thousands of dollars for the Wisconsin administrative hearing.
“The Otts were old family money,” Gromme said.1 So when Ott set about to raise the money needed to bring the Environmental Defense Fund to Wisconsin and cover a variety of expenses for witnesses and the EDF’s lawyer, he reached out to the wealthy Milwaukeeans he knew.
Tracing the Ott bloodline leads directly to that old Milwaukee money. Ott’s grandfather, Emil, had married Ida Steinmeyer in 1886.2 She was the daughter of William Steinmeyer, who had established the Steinmeyer Company, a successful carriage trade grocery business in Milwaukee.3 It employed a staff of order takers that would dispatch groceries to private homes via a fleet of delivery wagons serving all parts of the city. Upon William Steinmeyer’s death in 1894, Emil Ott and his brother, Charles, assumed control of the business. The Ott family fortune was tied to that company, which operated until 1940 when personalized grocery service became uneconomical.
Raised among the Milwaukee upper crust, Fred Ott might have taken any number of career paths. He became a salesman for Leslie Paper Company, a printing and industrial paper distribution company based in Minneapolis. But, as his daughter, Riki, an environmental activist, told the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel after his death in 2008, “His real job was his many causes.”4
Ott’s Grandpa Emil took him birding as a child. “That sparked a lifelong love of birds and conservation,” read his obituary.5
“Freddie,” as many knew him, was also fascinated with natural history. As a teenager, he began hanging out at the Milwaukee Public Museum with Charles “Chappie” Fox, the Oconomowoc author, circus aficionado, and conservationist, and Walter Pelzer, a young man from Fort Atkinson who would become chief of taxidermy at the museum. There, these “museum rats,” as Roy Gromme called them, met up with his father, Owen Gromme. Thus began an enduring friendship between Ott and Owen Gromme.
Both were strong conservationists. Owen Gromme was fiery and quick to rise to the fight once he took to a cause. Allowing that he had some of his father’s “go sic ’em dog” tendencies, Roy Gromme remembered Ott as “a little more reserved. He’d hold you on the leash and go for the jugular.”6
But there was no doubting Ott’s dedication to conservation. He would prove it time and again. He was also, “one of those guys, he could con you into anything. He had that goofy personality that worked, and he was a hard worker,” recalled Roy Gromme. It was Ott “who conned me into joining CNRA,” he added.
That ability to be convincing came in handy at a crucial moment for the CNRA and the EDF.
Citizen movements are built on guts and tenacity. They are propelled by commitment and belief in purpose. But big or small, they are fed by money. Ott brought all of these to the CNRA. He was not solely responsible for raising the money necessary to bring the EDF and scientists from near and far to Madison in 1968 and 1969. But he clearly opened more wallets than anyone else.
The National Audubon Society was funneling money to the CNRA for the Wisconsin DDT fight through its Rachel Carson Trust for the Living Environment, established for this purpose. Donations Ott solicited were directed to Audubon for legal and tax purposes, affording people the opportunity for a tax deduction.
Despite Ott’s fund-raising successes, as the DDT hearing continued longer than anyone anticipated, there was concern about whether the funds raised would be sufficient. The urgency of the situation was underscored in a February 13, 1969, letter from CNRA president Frederick Baumgartner to Dr. Elvis Stahr, president of the National Audubon Society, in which Baumgartner wrote: “In its broad context I am not convinced that we can raise sufficient funds to insure that the DDT issue can be carried to a definite conclusion. It is difficult to anticipate the length of the DDT hearing in Madison, and the costs involved. We also have no assurance that the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources will order a strict ban on the use of DDT for agricultural purposes. Court action against such a ban is a distinct possibility, perhaps a probability.”7
The CNRA president went on to emphasize the need to prepare for a “long and costly battle on this issue.” He stressed the need for advance commitment of funds to see the matter through. Baumgartner added: “To date we have employed many different approaches to raise monies. Mr. Ott has had outstanding success through his personal contacts with influential people and several foundations. The response of small conservation clubs to our bulletins and news releases has also been very good. Now we are in the process of approaching many national and regional conservation organizations asking them for financial support and more specifically for help in explaining the vital significance of this issue to foundations and individuals who are in a position to make significant financial contributions.”
Later that year, Roland C. Clement, vice president of the National Audubon Society, wrote to Baumgartner, praising Ott’s efforts: “We are particularly appreciative of the fact that CNRA and, in particular, Fred Ott, are continuing to solicit help for EDF operations, and thus helping us meet the budget we undertook to support earlier this year.”8
The list of people who gave to the cause reads like a who’s who of business and philanthropic activity in Milwaukee and beyond during the height of the fight.
Ott shared his recollections in CNRA—The First 50 Years, published by the group in 2001 and dedicated to him. “The DDT hearings cost plenty, mostly travel expenses for scientists and lawyers. We had $200, a typewriter and a list of names. Sent out letters, people sent back money. But not enough. . . . We were scratching for money from anyone and everyone. I even went to a floating crap game and broke the damn pot: came out with $1,200 to $1,500. Told everyone I was doing it for your feathered and furry friends.”9
Despite going to such lengths, Ott felt his efforts fell short. “I always thought I should ask for more,” he said. But a tally sheet showing income and expenses from the Rachel Carson Trust through June 30, 1969, tells another story, one of Ott’s hard work and many connections.10 Harry J. Nunnemacher, from a Milwaukee industrial family, gave $1,000. David Uihlein, from the Schlitz beer family, gave $100. The W. Uihlein Family gave $500. Dorothy Vallier, another Uihlein descendant, also gave $100, and her husband, Jacque Vallier, donated $473.
David Pabst contributed fifteen shares of Skelly Oil Company, valued at $940.67. The Puehlicher Foundation gave $1,000. Jack Puehlicher was president of Milwaukee’s M&I Bank.
Businesses or their foundations also donated. The Schlitz Foundation gave $1,000, the Harnischfeger Foundation $500, and the Maytag Foundation donated $100.
Not all the donations came from well-heeled Milwaukeeans. The estate of Harry Steenbock, a biochemist from the University of Wisconsin in Madison, gave $5,000. Steenbock had patented the irradiation process for producing vitamin D and conceived the idea of the Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation, a nonprofit foundation that invests the proceeds from patents to support research in the natural sciences at the University of Wisconsin. WARF would have a role in the DDT hearing.
Donations came from near and far. Some were small, others large. Some people didn’t want their names attached to the cause, but they still gave. Audubon chapters and other bird clubs chipped in. Total income on the tally sheet: $52,519.
At some point, the Godfrey Foundation provided $250. Fred Ott had reached out to Arthur Godfrey, the radio and TV personality. Godfrey had become an advocate for the environment. In a January 19, 1969, address to the Advertising Council, he had said, “Nowadays, I question any value that does not take into account the total ecology of our planet. Any personal deed, any business transaction . . . that does not carry with it all precautions against injuring the environment . . . must be promptly and vigorously challenged.”11
Lorrie Otto corresponded with Godfrey, who answered her on February 6, 1969: “Thank you very much for your letter of 1/17. I am very much aware of the DDT hearings in Wis. Mr. Fred Ott is keeping me in touch. Thanks for your interest and more power to you, Wurster and Yannacone.”12
Accounts vary about how much money was raised for the Wisconsin administrative hearing and related activities. While Gromme recalled it to be more than $250,000, Ott put the number raised through the Rachel Carson Trust at $100,000.13
When the DDT battles were over, Ott stayed engaged in an array of causes. He gave of his own wealth, too. Shortly before his death, he donated $500,000 to help keep a struggling Milwaukee Public Museum afloat. Little wonder, for Ott had his environmental awakening at the museum.