Nonpoint Source: Whose Cross Is It to Bear?
America has always brought its diversified issues to the forefront. Our nation was founded by putting the issues before the people and has always been able to engineer necessary solutions. I am not sure that history will repeat itself in the nonpoint-source pollution arena, however. The direction we have taken thus far has not demonstrated a unified effort. Our gyroscope appears to be out of balance.
How We Got Here
We have all heard the story, but sometimes I think we need to be reminded. For the better part of 200 years, and still in some instances today, Americans accepted the idea that if you could get it to the stream, "dilution would be the solution to pollution" caused by industrial development and growth. Direct discharge was once considered an appropriate way to manage the release of wastes. It was common practice to use the oceans as dumping grounds. Unfortunately, Mother Nature could not compensate; thus, the degradation of our ecosystems and the lack of a clean water supply.
The result was regulation of point-source discharges through the use of permitting, monitoring, and reporting. The cost to America for its past sins was in billions of dollars. The program met with good success, though, and the impact was profound. The development and calibration of wastewater treatment facilities demonstrated that under controlled conditions and with a lot of bucks, wastewater quality could be managed. The federal government made funds of all shapes and sizes available to local water and wastewater authorities. By the 1970s, water and wastewater authorities were charging user fees for services and products delivered to their ratepayers. We thought that, for the most part, water-quality issues were solved. But we discovered it was not just industry and wastewater creating the water-quality challenges. Nonpoint-source pollution threatened our nation's water supply for drinking, swimming, fishing, and other recreation.
What's a Nonpoint Source?
Now the problem was a thing called "stormwater runoff." Who was creating these problems in our nation's waters? Who was going to correct them? Urbanization, transportation, agriculture, and sundry other factors contributed to the deterioration of 40,000 water bodies.
New acronyms and buzzwords - such as TMDLs, BMPs, and holistic - arrived in our vocabulary. I'm not sure, but it would be a good bet that the word "holistic" received its notoriety through the development of watershed management tools.A truly holistic - meaning "treating the whole body" - approach is necessary, however.
A new discipline has evolved in the field of watershed management, requiring a new set of philosophies and a new breed of professionals. Water and wastewater professionals first attempted addressing nonpoint-source issues with traditional methods, as if it were drinking water. Nonpoint source is more of challenge than they thought. Stormwater runoff could not be captured as easily at one location. It comes from the streets, sheets across farmland, runs off yards, and shoots off parking lots to contribute to the water-quality challenge. Over the last 10 years, new innovations, devices, and gadgets have been developed to address the stormwater runoff issues. Some work better than others. Some have already gone by the wayside.
The Solution
America has met most of its challenges through people working together. Will we rise to this occasion? Over the last 30 years, I have seen America become less tolerant toward governmental services. I have traveled to many of our major cities listening and studying ways to make local government more efficient and responsive to our local ratepayers. Stockholders want a return on their investment - yesterday. Citizens want more services at yesterday's millage rate. So it goes with nonpoint-source issues: Urbanites are looking at agriculture, agriculture is looking at urbanites. Industries are looking at local government. EPA develops regulations, but Congress limits the federal monies that would help local governments meet federal mandates. State government is being delegated the responsibility to ensure that local governments carry out the programs necessary to obtain the goals of the Clean Water Act, at their own expense. Local governments are being asked to do more with less.
What's the answer? I believe it is the country's strength and its ability to pull it all together so that we might give future generations the clean water needed to survive and a quality of life that everyone desires. The finger pointing must end, and a resolution to these issues must be addressed through sound strategic planning. Part of the responsibility falls directly on Congress. If Congress truly wants clean water, then some of the tax dollars must return to our local governments. Industry and local government must embrace each other's challenges. Local government must do a better job of educating industry, and industry must be willing to do its part to address the issues. Through the practice of holistic watershed management, we can succeed in our efforts to improve the water quality in America.
Stormwater utilities, a source of steady revenue for local programs, are constantly under the microscope by lawyers, industries, and local citizens who challenge their authority. Stormwater fees are developed in relation to the benefit and service provided to the ratepayer. Water and wastewater programs, for the most part, were funded out of ad valorem taxes and then transitioned to user fees. Stormwater must also develop a fair, equitable, and stable funding source, which is imperative if we are to meet the challenges of the water world in the 21st century. It is proven historically that the success of stormwater utilities is in direct proportion to the effort and attention given to educating the entire community.
Advertisement
As sure as I'm an American, the American public will rise to the occasion and address our water-quality issues through united efforts. I challenge each professional to tell one new person a day "the water story" and see if it does not make a difference in your program. Education is the key to our success. You will not only educate the general public but also renew your commitment to the profession daily. It really does create positive, measurable results.
Whose cross is nonpoint-source pollution to bear? It's the farmers', the miners', the industries', the local governments'. It's everyone's responsibility. Education is the key.
Author's Bio: Brant D. Keller, Ph.D., is director of Public Works & Utilities for the City of Griffin, GA. He was instrumental in setting up the first stormwater utility in the state of Georgia. He is a member of Stormwater magazine’s editorial advisory board.
May-June 2003
Nonpoint Source: Whose Cross Is It to Bear?
America has always brought its diversified issues to the forefront. Our nation was founded by putting the issues before the people and has always been able to engineer necessary solutions. I am not sure that history will repeat itself in the nonpoint-source pollution arena, however. The direction we have taken thus far has not demonstrated a unified effort. Our gyroscope appears to be out of balance.How We Got Here
We have all heard the story, but sometimes I think we need to be reminded. For the better part of 200 years, and still in some instances today, Americans accepted the idea that if you could get it to the stream, "dilution would be the solution to pollution" caused by industrial development and growth. Direct discharge was once considered an appropriate way to manage the release of wastes. It was common practice to use the oceans as dumping grounds. Unfortunately, Mother Nature could not compensate; thus, the degradation of our ecosystems and the lack of a clean water supply.
The result was regulation of point-source discharges through the use of permitting, monitoring, and reporting. The cost to America for its past sins was in billions of dollars. The program met with good success, though, and the impact was profound. The development and calibration of wastewater treatment facilities demonstrated that under controlled conditions and with a lot of bucks, wastewater quality could be managed. The federal government made funds of all shapes and sizes available to local water and wastewater authorities. By the 1970s, water and wastewater authorities were charging user fees for services and products delivered to their ratepayers. We thought that, for the most part, water-quality issues were solved. But we discovered it was not just industry and wastewater creating the water-quality challenges. Nonpoint-source pollution threatened our nation's water supply for drinking, swimming, fishing, and other recreation.
What's a Nonpoint Source?
Now the problem was a thing called "stormwater runoff." Who was creating these problems in our nation's waters? Who was going to correct them? Urbanization, transportation, agriculture, and sundry other factors contributed to the deterioration of 40,000 water bodies.
New acronyms and buzzwords - such as TMDLs, BMPs, and holistic - arrived in our vocabulary. I'm not sure, but it would be a good bet that the word "holistic" received its notoriety through the development of watershed management tools.A truly holistic - meaning "treating the whole body" - approach is necessary, however.
A new discipline has evolved in the field of watershed management, requiring a new set of philosophies and a new breed of professionals. Water and wastewater professionals first attempted addressing nonpoint-source issues with traditional methods, as if it were drinking water. Nonpoint source is more of challenge than they thought. Stormwater runoff could not be captured as easily at one location. It comes from the streets, sheets across farmland, runs off yards, and shoots off parking lots to contribute to the water-quality challenge. Over the last 10 years, new innovations, devices, and gadgets have been developed to address the stormwater runoff issues. Some work better than others. Some have already gone by the wayside.
The Solution
America has met most of its challenges through people working together. Will we rise to this occasion? Over the last 30 years, I have seen America become less tolerant toward governmental services. I have traveled to many of our major cities listening and studying ways to make local government more efficient and responsive to our local ratepayers. Stockholders want a return on their investment - yesterday. Citizens want more services at yesterday's millage rate. So it goes with nonpoint-source issues: Urbanites are looking at agriculture, agriculture is looking at urbanites. Industries are looking at local government. EPA develops regulations, but Congress limits the federal monies that would help local governments meet federal mandates. State government is being delegated the responsibility to ensure that local governments carry out the programs necessary to obtain the goals of the Clean Water Act, at their own expense. Local governments are being asked to do more with less.
What's the answer? I believe it is the country's strength and its ability to pull it all together so that we might give future generations the clean water needed to survive and a quality of life that everyone desires. The finger pointing must end, and a resolution to these issues must be addressed through sound strategic planning. Part of the responsibility falls directly on Congress. If Congress truly wants clean water, then some of the tax dollars must return to our local governments. Industry and local government must embrace each other's challenges. Local government must do a better job of educating industry, and industry must be willing to do its part to address the issues. Through the practice of holistic watershed management, we can succeed in our efforts to improve the water quality in America.
Stormwater utilities, a source of steady revenue for local programs, are constantly under the microscope by lawyers, industries, and local citizens who challenge their authority. Stormwater fees are developed in relation to the benefit and service provided to the ratepayer. Water and wastewater programs, for the most part, were funded out of ad valorem taxes and then transitioned to user fees. Stormwater must also develop a fair, equitable, and stable funding source, which is imperative if we are to meet the challenges of the water world in the 21st century. It is proven historically that the success of stormwater utilities is in direct proportion to the effort and attention given to educating the entire community.
As sure as I'm an American, the American public will rise to the occasion and address our water-quality issues through united efforts. I challenge each professional to tell one new person a day "the water story" and see if it does not make a difference in your program. Education is the key to our success. You will not only educate the general public but also renew your commitment to the profession daily. It really does create positive, measurable results.
Whose cross is nonpoint-source pollution to bear? It's the farmers', the miners', the industries', the local governments'. It's everyone's responsibility. Education is the key.