Light Rain
Temp: 70 F (21 C)
Humidity: 84
Heat Index: NA F
Fog/Mist
Temp: 68 F (20 C)
Humidity: 90
Heat Index: NA F
newscasts - click to shrink
weau extended - click to shrink
If viewing with a cell phone
NewsCenter13 Poll
Who will Barack Obama chose for a running mate?

Sen. Joe Biden
Gov. Kathleen Sebelius
Gov. Tim Kaine
Sen. Evan Bayh
Other


SkyWarn Doppler Radar
Search WEAU - HomePage for:

Two Weeks Later: What Bars Are Saying About the Smoking Ban Save Email Print
Posted: 11:00 PM Jul 14, 2008
Last Updated: 10:52 PM Jul 15, 2008
Reporter: Mary Rinzel
Email Address: mary.rinzel@weau.com

A | A | A

It's been two weeks since smokers in Eau Claire had to snuff out. So far the Tavern League say no formal complaints have been filed at City Hall and the City County Health Department hasn't issued any citations. But this is a tale of two bars… in two cities.

"Business is down about 23 percent," says Tina Wesner, a bartender at the Five O’clock Club

"We've seen a large increase in business," says Brad Windeshausen, the owner of Whiskey Dicks.

Whiskey Dicks and the Five O'clock Club: They're only a few blocks apart, but owners say they're business is heading in opposite directors.

"We’re seeing a lot of different faces. A lot more people are making this their new habit,” Windeshausen says.

But, that new home is in Altoona and outside the smoking ban's reach. That's a fact Windeshausen is letting people know about with a series of radio ads aimed at bringing in smokers.

"We’re looking at a choice. Non-smokers have Eau Claire to go to. People who do want to smoke can come here," he says.

"That's definitely the kicker,” Wesner says. “You can smoke across the street."

Wesner says the outside, smoke-friendly patio at the Five O’clock Club is a plus. But, she says the ban is tearing people apart.

"Non-smokers are very upset because their friends smoke and people are getting separated. They come in as a group and they want to stay as a group," she says.

Wesner says the ban is already making it hard to make money. She says right now their hope is with the Tavern League and reversing the ban.

"That's what we're here for,” Wesner says. “Cocktails and cigarettes."

"I was hoping for a statewide ban,” Windeshausen says.

Windeshausen says he feels bad for bars caught up in a city ordinance. He says Eau Claire should've waited for the state to take action.

"You won't have that border jumping,” he says.

Windeshausen says people might stay home at first and have a beer and cigarette there. But, says they'll come out eventually for the social aspect.

And in the meantime, he says they're more than welcome at Whiskey Dicks.

More Stories
Levee Fails in Jackson County

Grenade Found in Vacant House

Encephalitis Found in the Area

BREAKING NEWS: Bomb Squad Surrounding Home

People Evacuating After Partial Dam Failure

Black Bear Camps Out In Tree In Town

DNR Reminds People To Be Safe Around Bears

BREAKING NEWS: Obama Coming to Eau Claire Sunday

Post Your Comments
First Name:
Location:
Enter Comments: characters left
Email (optional):
Email will not be displayed on site. For station contact purpose only.
Read Comments
Comments are posted from viewers like you and do not always reflect the views of this station.
Posted by: TonyP Location: St Louis on Jul 29, 2008 at 11:43 AM
Its good to see that people are starting to understand what is really going on here. The pharmaceutical industry is pushing its profit motivated agenda by taking away rights. I have no problem with companies trying to make money, but to do so by harming small business and taking away private property rights is wrong. They have tried to do this in St Louis and so far have been denied. They have a lot of money and will be back.

Posted by: HistoryBuff Location: USA on Jul 21, 2008 at 09:28 PM
The smoking bans (paid for by grants by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, a foundation formed by J&J who owns at 250-260 pharmaceutical companies, to the American Cancer Society) were designed to close businesses that serve alcohol. They bring a lot of profits back to the foundation (pharmaceuticals that make the no-smoke products). A main GOAL is to shut down those alcohol serving businesses in prep for their already announced 2009 Alcohol Ban. They are a 'Temperance Org' and paid for the start up of MADD for $84 Million, among other groups as they have done with the no smoke groups and years of negative research. The obese ban: They make Splenda. They are also behind the national health insurance push for ….. MONEY! Follow the money including the BONUS checks! You now are an official nanny state.

Posted by: Thomas L Location: Thunder Bay, Ont. on Jul 16, 2008 at 09:39 AM
It is clear that separation of smokers from non-smokers combined with air exchange technology is a complete solution to this largely artificial problem. All it takes is regulating authorities setting the standards for indoor air quality on passive smoke, and the technology does the rest. Such air quality standards are common in industrial and environmental contexts. But, to date, no country in the world has set them for smoking areas. It seems clear that the reasons are not scientific, nor are they economic or technical: they are political. The anti smoking agencies do not want safe standards that would still allow people to smoke...they simply want a ban that will push smokers outdoors like outcasts. A sign on the door,'this is a smoking venue or this is a non-smoking venue.: That gives owners and the public choices.

Posted by: Smoking Speakeasy Location: Milwaukee on Jul 16, 2008 at 08:03 AM
Prohibition never works. And even if you really, really want prohibition to work, it still doesn't work. We can't even keep illegal drugs out of prisons, yet these yahoo lawmakers think a smoking ban will keep smoking out of bars? What kind of a dreamworld do they live in?

Posted by: lawrence Location: eau claire on Jul 15, 2008 at 06:38 PM
i quit smoking the first of the year and i think the ban on not smoking in bars should not be there it is taking away rights of a person. i think this is the u.s.a. that means i have the right to smoke in a bar. next people are going to tell me i can not smpoke in my house. bull s---.

Posted by: Jason B Location: Eau Claire on Jul 15, 2008 at 06:37 PM
We live in a capitalistic market. If more people wanted bars smoke free, the bar owners would have made the bars smoke free because that would mean more money. Obviously that has not happened. Let's stop catering to the minority of bargoers and listen to what the people that actually frequent the bars want!

Posted by: Debra Location: Eau Claire on Jul 15, 2008 at 03:34 PM
DE: precisely the point....the individual establishments decided, as it should be

Posted by: Bob Location: Chicago on Jul 15, 2008 at 02:39 PM
Logical. You have a "level playing field" then create a problem where none exists, then expand the problem later to make another "level playing field" Since it's not their money, the zealots see no problem in creating problems.

Posted by: Ryan Location: St. Croix Falls on Jul 15, 2008 at 02:15 PM
If just one single business is harmed as a result of the ban, then the ban is a failure and government has gone too far by inflicting UNNECESSARY harm on small business.

Posted by: Pam P. Location: Ohio on Jul 15, 2008 at 12:38 PM
This isn't about jumping across the street or county to smoke. Those who drink, smoke. A statewide ban puts people at HOME, not out spending money. That's what the numbers in Ohio show. All these hoards of new customers? NON EXISTENT! They lied to you, folks, just like they lied to Ohio, Hawaii & all the other states stupid enough to take money from the Robert Wood Johnson foundation to create smoking bans. They own millions of shares of stock in their parent company, Johnson & Johnson and guess who sells the patches & drugs? http://www.rwjf.org/search/gsa/search.jsp?q=Wisconsin&src=sw check out the pages and pages of "grants" the RWJF has thrown at Wisconsin and see how much your freedom was sold for.

Posted by: De Location: Eau Claire on Jul 15, 2008 at 11:59 AM
If larger cities like Madison can handle a smoking ban, I am pretty sure Eau Claire can too. As someone with asthma, I was very limited in which places I could go to because of the smoke. Thankfully there were restaurants/bars like Stella Blues and Dooleys that were smart and made their own decisions about not allowing smoking when they first opened. And...they are busy any night of the week.

Posted by: Todd Location: Eau Claire on Jul 15, 2008 at 08:37 AM
Thats the city of Eau Claire board, they do not care much about small businesses.

Posted by: Bob Location: Chicago on Jul 15, 2008 at 05:08 AM
The Illinois ban is going on 9 months now. Quite a few small, local bars gave up waiting and allow smoking again. Any fines imposed are considered just another cost of doing business. If they are forced to close, it won't be without a fight.

Sponsored Headlines